Tia Hyman Exercise 1.3
Tia Hyman
Exercise 1.3
1. This letter does not seem to be very effective. The approach was very unprofessional. I assume the needs of the reader was met: he or she will receive a replacement. However, I do not recall the reader asking who or what caused the defective shipment. The tone of the writer and the writer him/herself is both selfish and improper. There is no need to mention the fact that the new employee who apparently caused the damaged shipment was fired. It somewhat shows or portrays that new employees are not receiving proper training, which is a bad representation of the business whether true or false. The statement, “although it will cost our company several hundred dollars,” is completely unnecessary. Was it supposed to
be …show more content…
And after basically insulting and ridiculing by implying that the reader is ignorant and incompetent, the writer ends with “we look forward to your future orders,” which is even more out-of-line. The only thing the writer would be looking forward to is finding a new job. The writer did not at all establish goodwill. (The salutation/greeting should have been written as “Dear Pat Sykes:,” since the gender is unknown.)
4. This letter is altogether trivial and ineffective. The letter does not in any form or fashion save the reader any time. The writer is writing as if he or she is presenting this letter to a judge or lawyer with all of those technical terms. The letter does not build goodwill, probably created a headache, but not goodwill. (The salutation/greeting should have been written as “Dear
Pat Sykes:,” since the gender is unknown.)
5. This letter was very effective and reassuring. The writer showed that he or she cared about to the reader’s complaint. The writer seemed to be nurturing. The letter was clear, complete, and correct. The organization seemed to be correct. The writer both saved time and established goodwill. This letter would make me want to continue to order from
Exercise 1.3
1. This letter does not seem to be very effective. The approach was very unprofessional. I assume the needs of the reader was met: he or she will receive a replacement. However, I do not recall the reader asking who or what caused the defective shipment. The tone of the writer and the writer him/herself is both selfish and improper. There is no need to mention the fact that the new employee who apparently caused the damaged shipment was fired. It somewhat shows or portrays that new employees are not receiving proper training, which is a bad representation of the business whether true or false. The statement, “although it will cost our company several hundred dollars,” is completely unnecessary. Was it supposed to
be …show more content…
And after basically insulting and ridiculing by implying that the reader is ignorant and incompetent, the writer ends with “we look forward to your future orders,” which is even more out-of-line. The only thing the writer would be looking forward to is finding a new job. The writer did not at all establish goodwill. (The salutation/greeting should have been written as “Dear Pat Sykes:,” since the gender is unknown.)
4. This letter is altogether trivial and ineffective. The letter does not in any form or fashion save the reader any time. The writer is writing as if he or she is presenting this letter to a judge or lawyer with all of those technical terms. The letter does not build goodwill, probably created a headache, but not goodwill. (The salutation/greeting should have been written as “Dear
Pat Sykes:,” since the gender is unknown.)
5. This letter was very effective and reassuring. The writer showed that he or she cared about to the reader’s complaint. The writer seemed to be nurturing. The letter was clear, complete, and correct. The organization seemed to be correct. The writer both saved time and established goodwill. This letter would make me want to continue to order from