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.
While hiring outside consultants is a tactic used by many companies over and against listening to their own employees, the dichotomy set up by this prompt is a false one. Companies do not have to choose between listening to their own employees or hiring consultants, because each way has its own benefits and deficiencies for increasing efficiency within a company. In order to increase efficiency in a company, it will likely be most beneficial to use both consultants and employee feedback.
With respect to listening to employees, one finds insight from within the company. The manager of a company will hopefully know everything under his or her care, and for that reason be able to give good feedback whether something is inefficient. The secretary will have his or her own perspective, and, if a company uses all of these variegated perspectives from within the company, the company should get a well rounded understanding of the company in each part as well as for the whole. While a consultant is supposed to be able to understand the company very well, the one who has been working at the company for decades will likely know the ins and outs better. There is another important benefit that is easily missed, however. When one requests feedback from the employees themselves and not from a consultant, the gives the employees opportunity to be heard and to vent their frustrations with certain methods or regulations that seem redundant. Even if their complaints are wide of the mark, the very fact that a company requests their own employees to give them honest feedback is itself helpful for two reasons. Firstly, this will make the employees feel more respected and make them feel like they are part of an organized team rather than part of a coldhearted corporate America. Secondly, having the employees reflect on the companies methodologies and cotidian activities will give them the ability to think through whether something they are doing is inefficient; however, if they were never asked about their activities (or worse, if it were imposed upon them in a patronizing and paternalistic way), then it would be less helpful for the individuals in the company. Ultimately, asking the employees will be helpful, but it cannot be the full picture of a company's review of itself.
With respect to hiring consultants, one finds a holistic and broad approach. A consultant's job is to review the efficiency of a company, and so a good consultant will know exactly which parts of the company to probe and where common parts of the company fall short usually. This background in looking at company efficiency will help bring in one more piece of the puzzle. Furthermore, the consultant will be able to scour the whole company rather than just one small part, and this broader understanding of the company will help balance out the understanding of better and worse apsects of the company; this is in contradistinction to the individual employee who might find a certain form redundant and inefficient because he or she does not know that this particular form leads to something important the he or she just does not know about. Consultants also have a fresh perspective on the company which can be very helpful, becuase things which should be changed can become commonplace for employees who are in a very solidified routine. However, The consultant, not having a personal stake in the company, will also not be able to appreciate the implementations that were put in based on the consultation. This, of course, could lead to incorrect implementation.
When one considers an organism, one must consider the parts and the whole. The individual employees will be able to look at the individual parts and the consultants will be able to look at the whole. Analogously, the defense system of a body does not render a doctor's help unwarranted, while the doctor does not render the immune system irrelevant. Consultants are not inimical to feedback of employees -- both are beneficial in helping run the company. In order to ultimately help the organism of a company, one must consider all aspects from all angles, and two helpful way to do that are through employee feedback and through consultants.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-02-16 | malachi1malachi2 | 16 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1488, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... they are doing is inefficient; however, if they were never asked about their act...
^^
Line 5, column 803, Rule ID: DT_PRP[1]
Message: Possible typo. Did you mean 'the' or 'he'?
Suggestion: the; he
...cular form leads to something important the he or she just does not know about. Consul...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, look, second, secondly, so, then, well, while, as for, of course, as well as, with respect to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 34.0 19.5258426966 174% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 24.0 12.4196629213 193% => OK
Conjunction : 28.0 14.8657303371 188% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.3162921348 141% => OK
Pronoun: 43.0 33.0505617978 130% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 93.0 58.6224719101 159% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 12.9106741573 31% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3510.0 2235.4752809 157% => OK
No of words: 703.0 442.535393258 159% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.99288762447 5.05705443957 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.14918898149 4.55969084622 113% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91329236508 2.79657885939 104% => OK
Unique words: 295.0 215.323595506 137% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.419630156472 0.4932671777 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 1092.6 704.065955056 155% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 12.0 4.99550561798 240% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 10.0 3.10617977528 322% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.2370786517 124% => OK
Sentence length: 28.0 23.0359550562 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 92.5092341337 60.3974514979 153% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.4 118.986275619 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.12 23.4991977007 120% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.84 5.21951772744 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 20.0 10.2758426966 195% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0477829000291 0.243740707755 20% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0167668949532 0.0831039109588 20% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0224724600489 0.0758088955206 30% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0319468322605 0.150359130593 21% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0147468168851 0.0667264976115 22% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.1 14.1392134831 114% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.06 48.8420337079 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.1743820225 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.96 12.1639044944 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.95 8.38706741573 95% => OK
difficult_words: 130.0 100.480337079 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 11.2143820225 118% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
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.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.