Some people think that only staff who worked in the company for a long time should be promoted to higher positions.
What is your opinion on this?
Give reasons and relevant examples for your answer.
Working our way up the career ladder is one of everyone’s primary goals and being promoted is the sweetest dream of every single employee. Companies adopt a vast variety of policies to promote staff fairly and productively and to keep them constantly motivated. Some believe that an individual who has spent more time in a company deserve preferential treatment when it comes to promotions, while some argue that other factors are equally important and should be taken into account. As an employee who has gone through ups and downs of working in an International corporation, I sincerely believe that although commitment to the company is an appreciable feature of a workforce, it should not be its only reason.
Working for a corporation for a long time is usually interpreted as a commitment notion to the company’s values and culture and is a representation of being well-adapted to its core values. It is commonly believed that employees who have spent a considerable amount of time in a place, usually develop a sense of dedication to the company and are more willing to scarify a thing or two to contribute more. Employees with such attribute are the potential candidates for a promotion and if they experience being constantly ignored in such opportunities for some time, may start to gradually lose their extremely-valuable dedication to the company. Therefore, it is fair to say that for the company’s own benefit, keeping old committed staff happy is a win-win deal. Yet, having a legacy in a system is not the only qualification which should be highlighted in such decisions.
An employee’s job may be challenging on various aspects and requires a great deal of knowledge and skills, yet after a promotion, that individual might need to handle some human-interactions difficulties that every manager or supervisor needs to deal with and it’s not where everyone shines at. Promoting an employee may have consequences on the office dynamics and, consequently, must be decided carefully. Therefore, in a condition where there are two candidates with the equally-good skills and knowledge, the one that is working for a longer period of time might deserve the preferential treatment; otherwise, we could end up having a demotivated employee that no longer holds the company’s best interest in heart.
In the decision-making process, it is crucial to be a fair judge of employees’ contribution, knowledge, experience, and their attributes. Promoting an employee is an acknowledgment of their shining contribution to the system and will keep them happy and motivated. Deciding whether an individual deserves to get one is a challenging process that put equal emphasis both on one’s skills and one’s background in the corporation.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 558, Rule ID: PERIOD_OF_TIME[1]
Message: Use simply 'period'.
Suggestion: period
...e, the one that is working for a longer period of time might deserve the preferential treatmen...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, if, may, so, therefore, well, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 13.1623246493 198% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 10.4138276553 202% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 17.0 7.30460921844 233% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 27.0 24.0651302605 112% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 41.998997996 121% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 8.3376753507 204% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2351.0 1615.20841683 146% => OK
No of words: 443.0 315.596192385 140% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.30699774266 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.58776254615 4.20363070211 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.41471201442 2.80592935109 122% => OK
Unique words: 232.0 176.041082164 132% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.523702031603 0.561755894193 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 742.5 506.74238477 147% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 29.0 20.2975951904 143% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 65.5450989777 49.4020404114 133% => OK
Chars per sentence: 156.733333333 106.682146367 147% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.5333333333 20.7667163134 142% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.6 7.06120827912 51% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.218642303187 0.244688304435 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0811781844431 0.084324248473 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0534359224981 0.0667982634062 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.138549721587 0.151304729494 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0900196581162 0.056905535591 158% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.3 13.0946893788 140% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.58 50.2224549098 67% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 11.3001002004 140% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.11 12.4159519038 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.17 8.58950901804 107% => OK
difficult_words: 115.0 78.4519038076 147% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.78957915832 148% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 10.1190380762 134% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 Out of 9
---------------------
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.