Type of paper: Critical Thinking
Do the advantages of bureaucratic organizational structure outweigh the disadvantages?” The author’s purpose is to answer that particular question. He does this by describing the various advantages and disadvantages of bureaucratic organizational structure and their impacts. His conclusion shows what side of the bureaucratic structure his evidence supports. This critique will analyze the essay, paying attention to the chronological arrangement of ideas, presentation of points, discussion of the ideas, and the general formatting of the essay.
For starters, the author has a clear purpose of the essay. He has the relevant material meant to answer the research question. He presents the ideas in an organized manner in the first three paragraphs. However, the fourth paragraph seems misplaced, as it fails to flow with the other paragraphs. It would have been better if the ideas presented in it were merged with those in the last paragraph to form the conclusion. The third paragraph is also too long as compared to the rest. The writer should have explained the ideas presented in it in such a way that they amounted to a maximum of seven lines (Fawcett 2010). The extra ideas would have formed another paragraph, which would have made the essay more organized.
Although the writer has all the points required to analyze the thesis components, he only presents them in point form, and does not go into detail to explain them. This has resulted in the sentences failing to connect as they should. The ideas have therefore been presented with no interrelation. The writer should have utilized transitional verbs such as ‘therefore’, ‘moreover’, ‘consequently’, ‘nevertheless’, and ‘in addition to that’ between sentences and paragraphs to enhance flow within the essay. This would have improved the general form of flow of ideas, instead of presenting the ideas in an apparent point form (Frechette & Collins 2002).
The writer relies too much on external sources to put his points across. This is quite evident in the second paragraph, where almost every idea presented is from a different author. Although this presents the writer with concrete evidence to support his ideas, he should have tried to be a little bit more original (Neville 2007). He would have increased his originality by presenting more of his own words to explain the points that he was putting across. Moreover, the disadvantages section does not have any outside information, which would have helped make the points put across seem more real. This shows that the writer has over-utilized on outside sources in the second paragraphs, but under-utilized them in the third paragraph. He should therefore try to balance on his use of outside sources.
In addition to that, the in-text citations for the extra information are from different citation styles. Instead of the writer using just one citation style (Harvard), he has used others (such as APA), which goes against the rules of in-text citing. For example, in the second paragraph, “Robbins et al 2006” is an in-text citation of a direct quote, yet it does not have the page numbers, which should be included. His use of direct quotes is also incorrect, as he fails to include the necessary page numbers in the in-text citations (Choy 2004). The writer therefore needs to correct the improper use of the various styles, while sticking to one style at a time.
Although the writer has clearly outlined the components for evaluation, their presentation does not seem strong enough to convince the reader that bureaucratic disadvantages outweigh its advantages. This is mainly because the writer does not provide any arguments to support them; he just gives the points and their results. There is also a clear absence of emotional appeal, which would have been of more influence to the reader (Swovelin 2006). In the conclusion paragraph, the writer should have gone into length to show exactly how these disadvantages outweigh the advantages before making the conclusion. Moreover, the inclusion of his thoughts and ideas would have made the conclusion more appealing and convincing.
Therefore, the writer should try to improve on his general presentation of ideas in the essay. He can do that by ensuring that he includes his own ideas in the arguments he presents, as this will help him improve on his originality. Moreover, he should incorporate the use of transitional verbs between sentences and ideas to improve on the flow of ideas. In addition to that, he should also ensure that he does not overdo in-text citations or over-use external sources in his presentation of ideas. Although using supporting information is important, over-using it is also not appropriate. Lastly, the writer should ensure that he uses the correct citation format in his in-text citations.
Choy, R 2004, Using Harvard referencing, Curtin Business School, Sydney.
Neville, C 2007, The complete guide to referencing and avoiding plagiarism, McGraw-Hill International, London.
Swovelin, B.V 2006, Cliffs English Language and Composition, Edition 3, John Wiley and Sons, New Jersey.
Fawcett, S 2010, Evergreen: A Guide to Writing with Readings, Edition 9, Cengage Learning, London.
Frechette, E, & Collins, T 2002, McGraw-Hill’s GED Language Arts, Writing, Edition revised, McGraw-Hill Proffessional, New York.