Michael Evanoff English 3302 Tom Akbari Unit 1 Final Draft 23 September 2013 hetorical Anal!

sis of "#$blic %lo$& A&option' (f all the tren&s in the technolog! in&$str! to&a!) clo$& comp$ting is *$ickl! becoming one of the most +i&el! &ebate& an& &isc$sse&, -n short) a transformation to the clo$& involves storing files) fol&ers) an& other compan! information on the -nternet via a clo$& service provi&er) rather than on local har& &rives, .hile potential cost savings are one of the main attractions to+ar&s a shift to the p$blic clo$&) some companies are oppose& to the transformation) concerne& +ith integration complications an& sec$rit! threats, As the &ebate becomes more heate&) some in&$str! lea&ers have opte& to voice their tho$ghts abo$t p$blic clo$& integration, The &ifferent formats in +hich corporations choose to organi/e these t!pes of articles can range from a blan&) te0t1heav! &oc$ment) to *$ite the opposite, Deloitte) a national acco$nting) a$&it) an& cons$lting firm) emplo!s a ver! $ni*$e content la!o$t for their "Deloitte Debates' series, These Deloitte Debate articles discuss at least three point-counter point arguments, provide an in depth discussion with one of Deloittes actual consultants, who gives his or her thoughts and recommendations, as well as an opportunity for the audience to respond. The specific Deloitte Debates article I chose to examine is title&2 "#$blic %lo$& A&option2 Are -ntegration %oncerns 3ali&4' As the article5s intro&$ction s$ggests) the implementation of p$blic clo$& sol$tions has *$ickl! become a tren& across all b$siness sectors, The a$thor begins in a positive) kno+le&gable tone) s$ggesting that companies +ho have a&opte& s$ch sol$tions have notice&) "improving sales an& reali/ing operational efficiencies) agilit! an& cost benefits' 16#ar, 27, The res$lt is a market e0pecte& to reach over 819: billion +ithin

Evanoff 2

the ne0t seven !ears, ;o+ever) the a$thor contin$es) the a&option of clo$& soft+are is not necessaril! a clear c$t sol$tion for all companies, The call to +rite becomes apparent as the a$thor s$ggests that "some %-(s remain skeptical' 16#ar, 27 an& that the! m$st +eigh the benefits an& &ra+backs of s$ch an implementation to &eci&e +hether the clo$& is appropriate for their organi/ation, .hereas most technical articles maintain a ver! &efine& stance abo$t a given pro&$ct) sol$tion) or technolog!) this Deloitte Debates article remains $nbiase&) hoping to inform the a$&ience rather than pers$a&e them, The a$&ience can safel! ass$me at this point) that the passages that follo+ +ill &isc$ss both the pros and cons of the topic, Fort$natel!) the +a! in +hich Deloitte has set $p this article has taken some of the leg+ork o$t of that &ecision, The most significant rhetorical &evice that the article $tili/es is the three large b$ttons belo+ the intro&$ction) +ith the message2 "E0plore all si&es belo+ b! clicking on each b$tton'
16#ar, 37

, These b$ttons appropriatel! batch the information of the article) rather than provi&ing the

information as a single block of te0t) as man! articles seem to &o, The a$&ience) +ho is likel! a %-( or other in&ivi&$al str$ggling to &eci&e if the a&option of p$blic clo$& technolog! is appropriate for their firm) can e0plore the iss$es from a broa& perspective first) an& then choose to &ive &eeper into the iss$es the! act$all! care abo$t, (n m! last co1op at <oston %ons$lting =ro$p) - fo$n& that man! %-(s) as +ell as other &ecision makers in a firm) alrea&! have plent! of +ork on their plate an& are often looking for a so$rce that takes them right to the facts, The rhetorical &evice $se& here) allo+s the rea&er to &o >$st that, The first b$tton) ";ere5s the Debate)' offers an informative) !et informal tone that &isc$sses three points an& co$nter1points abo$t integration) sec$rit!) an& technical architect$re of a clo$& s!stem, ather than length!) &iffic$lt1to1rea& sentences) the main points an& co$nter1 points are formatte& in a bol& t!peface an& remain straight to the point) emphasi/ing the format

as an informal conversation, -n fact) the secon& t+o points2 "M! &ata co$l& be compromise&,'
16#ar, 97

an& ".on5t this limit m! abilit! to e0ten& service la!ers4' 16#ar, ?7 are voice& in first person)

s$ggesting that these co$l& ver! +ell be *$estions that the rea&er has aske& themselves or their team members +hen contemplating this &ecision, ather than offering a one1si&e& arg$ment on the benefits or &ra+backs of implementing s$ch a sol$tion) this "&ebate' $ltimatel! serves as a mo&erator of sorts) leaving the final &ecision $p to the a$&ience, The secon& b$tton) "M! Take@#erspectives)' then provi&es a more a$thoritative tone) as the Deloitte cons$ltant) Aohn #eto) prepares to offer his recommen&ations an& tho$ghts on the topic, #eto5s statement provi&es a more in1&epth arg$ment than the ";ere5s the Debate' section) +hile still &isc$ssing the three main iss$es at han&2 integration) sec$rit!) an& technical architect$re, ;is intro&$ction) +hich states2 "integration challenges an& sec$rit! capabilities are $n&erstan&able)' 16#ar, B7 ass$ages the likel! &istresse& rea&er) contin$ing the theme of a one1on1 one conversation bet+een the cons$ltant an& a$&ience) rather than a general +rite1$p, For each iss$e) #eto also provi&es an e0ample that a %-( or similar in&ivi&$al ma! have enco$ntere&, -n these e0amples) he provi&es in&$str!1relevant lang$age an& verbiage s$ch as) "activit! management s!stem' 16#ar, C7) "SaaS applications' 16#ar, :7) an& "encr!ption ke!s' 16#ar, 107 to reinforce the notion that he is familiar +ith the topic being &isc$sse&, Dot onl! &oes having an a$thoritative voice a&& to the cre&ibilit! of the article) b$t it also serves to s$ggest that Deloitte5s emplo!ees are +ell1informe& abo$t c$rrent technical topics, At <oston %ons$lting =ro$p) fo$n& that +hile helping clients in their &ecisions ma! be one p$rpose of an article) companies $n&o$bte&l! place even more val$e on the opport$nit! to a&vertise their cons$lting services for free, -n this +a!) the article5s p$rpose is t+o1fol&2 both e&$cating their c$stomers an& p$blici/ing the e0pertise of Deloitte5s cons$ltants,

Evanoff 4

Finall!) the thir& b$tton) "Aoin the %onversation)' invites the a$&ience to become more involve& an& len& their o+n opinions to the iss$e, The tone shifts once more) this time from a$thoritative to inviting, Altho$gh seemingl! insignificant) this section of the article brings the &ebate f$ll circle) rela!ing the initial opening *$estion) +hether in&ivi&$als sho$l& be concerne& +ith the &iffic$lt! in a&opting a p$blic clo$& architect$re) back to the rea&er, For the rea&er) this is a chance to vote on their final tho$ghts an& even provi&e comments if the! have an! remaining *$estions, For the +riter) it5s both an opport$nit! to &etermine if their article +as effective an& also a +a! to connect +ith their a$&ience, All together) this article brings a $ni*$e st!le to e&$cate the a$&ience, .hile on co1op) m! boss al+a!s reinforce& that t+o e0tremel! important aspects of cons$lting are collaboration bet+een emplo!ees) an& comm$nication +ith the client, The sample reall! echoes both of these concepts, The b$ttons) +hich break&o+n the te0t into &ifferent sections an& perspectives) e0emplifies +hat cons$ltants often &o in the office, .hen +orking on a case) the! m$st look at a proposal from several &ifferent aspects) $n&erstan&ing that there is almost never a &efinitive ans+er that can be applie& to ever! client, -nstea&) >$st as this article &oes) cons$ltants m$st +eigh vario$s points an& co$nter1points an& often &o so in a team environment to ens$re a +i&e range of positions are anal!/e&, The ne0t piece to cons$lting is ho+ the cons$ltant then comm$nicates their i&eas +ith the c$stomer, A$st as Aohn #eto &oes in the article) a cons$ltant almost al+a!s offers their "take' or recommen&ation rather than forcing a sol$tion $pon a client, Each sit$ation is $ni*$e) an& +hile implementing a p$blic clo$& sol$tion ma! be effective for one compan!) this &oes not necessaril! mean it +o$l& be effective for all companies, #eto offers the a$&ience his tho$ghts on the matter) an& then $ltimatel! leaves the final &ecision $p to the a$&ience b! allo+ing them to vote on +hether integration concerns are vali&, Ultimatel!) the

+riter is effective in mimicking Deloitte5s o+n cons$lting process) an& &oes so in an $nbiase&) informative) a$thoritative) an& inviting manner,

eference 1, Deloitte, Deloitte Debates E-nternetF, #$blic %lo$& A&option2 Are -ntegration %oncerns 3ali&4G 9 September 2013 Ecite& 19 September 2013F, Available from2
http2@@+++,&eloitte,com@vie+@enHUS@$s@-nsights@<ro+se1b!1%ontent1T!pe@&eloitte1 &ebates@&09:f99?:3ac0I103gn3%M200000339?fB0a % D,htm