People work more productively in teams than individually Teamwork requires cooperation which motivates people much more than individual competition does GRE Issue 34

Essay topics:

People work more productively in teams than individually. Teamwork requires cooperation,which motivates people much more than individual competition does.- GRE Issue 34

The speaker asserts that because teamwork requires cooperative effort, people are more motivated and therefore more productive working in teams than working individually as competitors. My view is that this assertion is true only in some cases. If one examines the business world, for example, it becomes clear that which approach is more effective in motivating people and in achieving productivity depends on the specific job.

In some jobs productivity dearly depends on the ability of coworkers to cooperate as members of a team. For businesses involved in the production of products through complex processes, all departments and divisions must work in lock-step fashion toward product roll-out. Cooperative interaction is even essential in jobs performed in relative isolation and in jobs in which technical knowledge or ability, not the ability to work with others, would seem to be most important. For example, scientists, researchers, and even computer programmers must collaborate to establish common goals, coordinate efforts, and meet time lines. Moreover, the kinds of people attracted to these jobs in the first place are likely to be motivated by a sense of common purpose rather than by individual ambition.

In other types of jobs individual competition, tenacity, and ambition are the keys to productivity. For example, a commissioned salesperson's compensation, and sometimes tenure and potential for promotion as well, is based on comparative sales performance of coworkers. Working as competitors a firm's individual salespeople maximize productivity-in terms of profit--both for themselves and for their finn. Key leadership positions also call, above all, for a certain tenacity and competitive spirit. A finn's founding entrepreneur must maintain this spirit in order for the firm to survive, let alone to maximize productivity. Moreover, in my observation the kinds of people inclined toward entrepreneurship and sales in the first place are those who are competitive by nature, not those who are motivated primarily by a sense of common purpose.

On balance, however, my view is that cooperation is more crucial for an organization's long-term productivity than individual competition. Even in jobs where individual competitiveness is part-and-parcel of the job, the importance of cooperation should not be underestimated. Competition among sales people can quickly grow into jealousy, back stabbing, and unethical behavior all of which are counterproductive. And even the most successful entrepreneurs would no doubt admit that without the cooperative efforts of their subordinates, partners, and colleagues, their personal visions would never become reality.

In sum, individual competitiveness and ambition are essential motivating forces for certain types of jobs, while in other jobs it is a common sense of mission that motivates workers to achieve maximum productivity. In the final analysis, however, the overall productivity of almost every organization depends ultimately on the ability of its members to cooperate as a team.

Votes
Average: 8 (2 votes)
Essay Categories

Comments

flaws:
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.291 0.35
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.028 0.07

Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 459 350
No. of Characters: 2544 1500
No. of Different Words: 239 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.629 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.542 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.261 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 193 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 166 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 123 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 94 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.95 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.507 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.6 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.291 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.51 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.028 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5