All too often, companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently. If companies were to spend more time listening to their own employees, such consultants would be unnecessary.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with these statements and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statements might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
Companies always try their best to become better in this competitive world even going as far as to hiring consultants which will help them become more efficient and productive in their management and workflow. From a capitalistic standpoint, this is expected given that every company tries to get an edge over its peers as a way to attract customers thereby gaining more profit. This at times might seem unnecessary given that the employees who have been working at that company, understand the workflow and the culture of the company can provide such consultancy for no additional cost. Also, depending on their experience at the company, the level of depth in their suggestions for making the company more efficient is high, a consultant might take a few weeks to reach that level of knowledge regarding the company and then provide his/her consultancy.
Even though this is true, I would still argue that for a company it is beneficial to hire a consultant for outside than to rely on employees. Firstly, an outside consultant can interview the employees of the company, listen to their ideas and give his final consultancy with factoring the employees' inputs. This can be done in an impartial way, since an consultant hired from another company will be unbiased towards the company being it the management or the working employees. The consultant being paid for the services to be put in an unbiased way will try his/her best to be unbiased. An employee on the other hand may be biased to give the employees an upper hand in the negotiations given that they are the part of the company. This specific idea as well can be a key selling point for the consultancy companies, that is the consultants giving the most unbiased views and thinking primarily about making the company more efficient will get promoted and more desired by their clients and thereby promoting development and employment opportunities in society.
But if we assume that the employees are unbiased, then would consultants be unnecessary? Well, there's more to it. Consultants being in the field of consultancy have tremendous experience and knowledge regarding locating the specific cues which would be the hot-spots for improving the efficiency of the companies. Hot-spots that employees may not consider or even may not be aware of, since their field of work is much different from consulting. An experienced consultant may find these prime efficiency hot-spots in a few days while the employees may not even think of them for months. Overall, we can expect a person to be experienced in a specific field to do better than someone who is new to that field. Also, given that the consultancy firm from where the hiring is done, often wants to have their image kept to a high standard and have their consultants to be professionals and be impartial about their consultancy. Therefore, the client company can expect them to do their work properly and diligently while your own employees' opinions can be biased and they have nothing to lose for that. The consultancy company however has a reputation to hold and will make sure that malpractices do not occur by the hands of their consultants.
All in all, having a consultant to help you with your company is just one of the many ways you can improve your company in a capitalistic society. Yes, you have to pay the consultant meaning reduced profits however the efficiencies the consultant is able to make do, ultimately pays well in the long term. Having your employees suggest that does save money, but may or may not work in the long term. It is the perfect example of 'Short term pain but a long term gain'.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 325, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in an impartial way" with adverb for "impartial"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
... the employees inputs. This can be done in an impartial way, since an consultant hired from another...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 352, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
... can be done in an impartial way, since an consultant hired from another company w...
^^
Line 3, column 533, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in an unbiased way" with adverb for "unbiased"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...t being paid for the services to be put in an unbiased way will try his/her best to be unbiased. A...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 96, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: there's
...would consultants be unnecessary? Well, theres more to it. Consultants being in the fi...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, may, regarding, so, still, then, therefore, well, while, as to, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.5258426966 154% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 25.0 12.4196629213 201% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 21.0 14.8657303371 141% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 11.3162921348 168% => OK
Pronoun: 58.0 33.0505617978 175% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 74.0 58.6224719101 126% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 12.9106741573 54% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3021.0 2235.4752809 135% => OK
No of words: 618.0 442.535393258 140% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.88834951456 5.05705443957 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.98594081286 4.55969084622 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76723299906 2.79657885939 99% => OK
Unique words: 266.0 215.323595506 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.430420711974 0.4932671777 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 930.6 704.065955056 132% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.99550561798 160% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 23.0359550562 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.4983291684 60.3974514979 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.347826087 118.986275619 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.8695652174 23.4991977007 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.26086956522 5.21951772744 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 17.0 10.2758426966 165% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.44398245194 0.243740707755 182% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.140544064086 0.0831039109588 169% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0722623127462 0.0758088955206 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.285888847938 0.150359130593 190% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.059155506279 0.0667264976115 89% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 14.1392134831 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.55 48.8420337079 110% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.38 12.1639044944 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.56 8.38706741573 90% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 100.480337079 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.2143820225 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.