Some employers reward members of staff for their exceptional contribution to the company by giving them extra money. This practice can act as an incentive for some but may also have a negative impact on others.
To what extent is this style of management effective? Conscious
Are there better ways of encouraging employees to work hard.
Normally, employees having extraordinary performances are rewarded by extra money in most organization. There is an argument about the efficiency of this convention. In my opinion, money is the most reserved reward for outstanding staffs when the managements know how to distribute them in the proper way.
To begin with, money plays a pivotal role in everyone’s lives, which makes it become the most desirable award. The fact that, a huge applause or compliment has no sense of material needs, while money has ability to fulfill both material and spiritual sectors. Moreover, other in-kind rewards such as vouchers, gift-card, foods or souvenirs do not have highly flexible functions in comparison with money. For example, the owners have freedom to use the money depending on their intentions, whereas, a cosmetic voucher can only be consumed by purchasing cosmetics. Therefore, with money, the rewarded staffs are allowed to satisfy his personal demands, which further motivate his working passions.
However, some people believe that, the additional money would create competition between staffs, which lead to a reduction in group working spirit. They think that the bonus money for the highest efficient staff has detrimental effects on the others. In term of this problem, the management needs to consider the social networking between partners and make conscious judgments for all well-deserved accomplishment. Otherwise, the production will be affected because the final results are accumulated and built-up by a team, not only one individual.
In conclusions, the effectiveness of extra money rewarded for significant contributions of hard-working employees cannot be altered by any other means.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-06 | Sái Đức Lộc | 89 | view |
- Report for a university lecturer 11
- The graph below shows the number of enquiries received by the Tourist Information Office in one city over a six month period in 2011 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant
- The graph below shows the number of enquiries received by the Tourist Information Office in one city over a six month period in 2011 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant You should writ
- Some employers reward members of staff for their exceptional contribution to the company by giving them extra money. This practice can act as an incentive for some but may also have a negative impact on others.To what extent is this style of management ef 89
- The graph below shows the number of enquiries received by the Tourist Information Office in one city over a six month period in 2011 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, moreover, so, therefore, well, whereas, while, for example, in conclusion, such as, in my opinion, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 7.48453608247 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 4.92783505155 81% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 5.05154639175 99% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 3.03092783505 231% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 12.0 32.9175257732 36% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 26.3917525773 129% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 3.85567010309 233% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1463.0 937.175257732 156% => OK
No of words: 260.0 206.0 126% => OK
Chars per words: 5.62692307692 4.54256449028 124% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.01553427287 3.78020617076 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05321636598 2.54303337028 120% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 127.690721649 139% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.680769230769 0.622605031667 109% => OK
syllable_count: 445.5 290.88556701 153% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.41237113402 120% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 9.13402061856 11% => OK
Article: 9.0 0.824742268041 1091% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 1.83505154639 54% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.463917525773 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 1.44329896907 346% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 12.6804123711 103% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 16.3608247423 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 27.2976146085 44.8134815571 61% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.538461538 76.5299724578 147% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0 16.8248392259 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.0 4.34317383033 230% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.29896907216 93% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 2.54639175258 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 7.41237113402 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 1.49484536082 134% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.94845360825 25% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.253312451056 0.216113520407 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0839906514721 0.0766984524023 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0487407593615 0.0603063233224 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.153504716446 0.12726935374 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0402683868164 0.0580467560999 69% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 8.37731958763 180% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 70.7449484536 60% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 3.82989690722 230% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 7.45979381443 165% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.37 8.71597938144 176% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.28 7.59969072165 135% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 41.2886597938 225% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 8.62886597938 99% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 8.54432989691 117% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 8.15463917526 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.