Rhetorical Analysis Memo Assignment

Shull 1

Memorandum

To: Laurel Phillips, Professor From: Lisa Shull LS Date: March 8, 2020 Subject: Rhetorical Analysis of “Recruitment and Introduction” Instructional Guide The purpose of this memo is to assess the effectiveness of the recruiting instructional guide and training material developed for employees at the Georgian Foundation for Strategic and International Studies. Markel's "Measures of Excellence in Technical Documents" guidelines (p.8) serve as a baseline to evaluate and identify the areas of improvement of the instructional guide. As a result, the analysis of the document will help to recognize and learn the characteristics of technical writing.

Summary Overall, the training does not deliver direct and useful content to guide the end-user adequately. The material lacks a visual appeal and design, and the instructions do not follow a clear organizational structure. The inconsistent page layout detracts from the overall professionalism of the material. Inadequate use of wording and grammatical errors persuades the reader to question the accuracy and legitimacy of the training. Also, the training was hard to follow and does not connect with, engage, or empower the student. Ultimately, the work is not a good representation of the author or the company and does not meet Markel's standards of excellence.

Accessibility, Professional Appearance, and Usability At first glance, the document’s appearance stood out for its lack of inspiration and plain instructional design. In addition, the course material lacked the company's name and logo, causing a disconnect with its brand identity and making it challenging to create an association with the company. The graphic models were not well-designed and did not draw the attention of the reader. The document’s design does not adhere to the readability measure and influences the user’s perception of the training. A formatting style was not applied to the document, which prevented in creating consistency. As an example, the page layout includes significant use of white space gaps throughout the page. The negative, blank space makes the document look and feel incomplete instead of creating a balanced design. The line spacing between the text and graphics vary significantly. The spacing issue is also apparent between the headings and the adjacent text, making the information run together. The reduced margins, specifically the right margin, create an unbalanced paper. Lastly, the inconsistent use of list styles and space indentations do not emphasize the information and only add awkward spacing. In this case, the variations of the white space make the document difficult to read.

Shull 2

Accuracy and Honesty In reviewing the document, some of the content appears correct. However, the unorganized information does not establish trust in the accuracy of the material. The training structure is confusing. Consequently, unclear information may cause a recruiter not to learn the necessary skills to comprehend the significance of ethical recruitment. Also, the wording used to indicate the removal of poor performers within the company suggests a negative culture and environment in the organization. The use and positioning of the phrase “intelligence” also illustrates poor word choice. The expression evokes a negative connotation and sounds derogatory and judgmental. Choosing to use other words such as aptitude testing instead of intelligence, and phrases like effective strategies to manage low performers instead of getting rid of employees establishes a more professional and respectable approach. Uncarefully written expressions can produce an inaccurate interpretation of the content and promote discrimination in the company’s recruiting techniques.

Clarity and Conciseness The recruiting guidelines do not offer clear direction for executing the tasks the training is expecting to meet. The writing has a lot of short sentences that seem abrupt and choppy. The choice of sentence structure is confusing and distracting to the reader. As a result, the instructions do not successfully guide the reader through the recruiting process. Paragraphs do not flow between some of the topics and their supporting sections. Most importantly, the purpose of the document is overlooked and leaves the reader without understanding the goal of the training. The introductory paragraph is also vague and does not give clear instructions or guidelines for the training.

Comprehensiveness and Correctness The document lacks a recruitment strategy and does not embody the framework and the components of an effective instructional action plan. Grammatical errors, along with an incomplete table, produce unsuccessful instructional guidance for recruiters. The text also includes incomplete sentences and grammatical errors. Several sentences do not have closing punctuation, while others end with a comma instead of a period. Furthermore, some of the sentence arrangements include passive voice and lack strong verbs. Subsequently, the training does not make a professional connection with the student.

Conclusion In conclusion, the document lacked aesthetic appeal. The alignment principle is not incorporated in the design of the paper. It does not represent a sophisticated or professional-looking document. Overall, the unsatisfactory quality of the design gives the reader the perception the author did not carefully plan or give thought in creating the training. The sloppy formatting reflects poorly of the writing ability of the author; thus, the audience loses confidence in the message. The document is poorly constructed and

Shull 3

does not accomplish the goal it intends to achieve. Therefore, the training does not meet Markel's “Measures of Excellence in Technical Documents.”

Shull 4

Works Cited

“Recruitment and Introduction.” Georgian Foundation For Strategic and International

Studies, December 2, 2016,

https://www.gfsis.org/media/download/cbgl_training/RECRUITMENT_AND_INTRODUCTION.pdf

Markel, Mike. “Practical Strategies for Technical Communication.” 3rd ed., Bedford/St.

Martins, Macmillan Learning, 2019.