Some employers reward members of staff for their exceptional contributions 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?
Are there better ways of encouraging employees to work hard?
Chairpersons of the companies are using a massive number of methods to motivate their employees to achieve the organizational missions by providing them financial rewards. Firstly, this essay will outline the possible consequences of discriminating management and will recommend a more powerful method - the competitive environment to motivate personnel to work hard.
On the one point, giving financial bonuses for only the part of the staff members also would discourage others. If, for instance, employers provide any additional payment for those workers who exhibit an incredible output, as a result, it will lessen the performance review and appraisals of others. In addition, those people will have a sense of discrimination which then can end with a propensity to superficial for the organizational mission and reluctant for career progression. Some research papers, including the paper of “Fairy Labour in the 21st century” claim that discriminating management in the workforce has a weird impact not only in the company but also in society. Accordingly, this type of practice should be removed from the organization`s agenda.
From another point of view, company leaders have to create a competitive environment among the staff members in order to measure the softly-walking development. In comparison with discriminating management, it has effective outcomes because it provides a variety of rewards excluding money, such as a perk, a free lounge, and a travel ticket or monthly awards for hard workers and day release programmes. Undoubtedly, companies working in this motivational way, as soon as possible will improve target-related job satisfaction and performance reviews. For example, YARAT Contemporary Art Space annually gives a chance for hard-working employees to get professional courses or international travel which contributed them to develop the range of projects in the cultural education sector. So, it clears that money is not always as successful as our needs.
To summarize, in order to improve company satisfaction, employers have various creative method chooses to encourage the workers for extraordinary contributions and sustainable productivity. Therefore, it is clear that the idea of rewarding an employee completely by non-financial awards would be supportive. After a thorough analysis, the subject supports that the general requirements have more beneficial effects than the unequal behaviour over the personnel.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-11-24 | Humoyun Rahimov | 81 | view |
| 2021-10-27 | sheep | 89 | view |
| 2020-09-01 | nirav24 | 61 | view |
| 2017-02-09 | ganuongtoi | 87 | view |
- Some employers reward members of staff for their exceptional contributions 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 development of tourism contributed to English becoming the most prominent language in the world Some people think this will lead to English becoming the only language to be spoken globally What are the advantages and disadvantages to having one langua 89
- In some countries governments are encouraging industries and businesses to move to regional areas outside the big cities Do the advantages of this trend outweigh the disadvantages 78
- some people believe that allowing children to make their own choices on everyday matter such as food clothes and entertainment is likely to result in a society of individuals who only think about their own wishes Other people believe that it is important 73
- Some people feel that it is always wrong to keep animals in captivity for instance in zoo Other people say that there are benefits for the animals and for humans Discuss both sides of this debate and give your personal view 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 164, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[2]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: comparison,
...sure the softly-walking development. In comparison with discriminating management, it has ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, but, first, firstly, if, so, then, therefore, for example, for instance, in addition, such as, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 13.1623246493 38% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 41.998997996 105% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 8.3376753507 192% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2104.0 1615.20841683 130% => OK
No of words: 366.0 315.596192385 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.74863387978 5.12529762239 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37391431897 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.39218125381 2.80592935109 121% => OK
Unique words: 225.0 176.041082164 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.614754098361 0.561755894193 109% => OK
syllable_count: 665.1 506.74238477 131% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.7776815995 49.4020404114 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.266666667 106.682146367 131% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.4 20.7667163134 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.33333333333 7.06120827912 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
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: 0.292466577117 0.244688304435 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0829489925385 0.084324248473 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0367543801738 0.0667982634062 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.157022494368 0.151304729494 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0673136539707 0.056905535591 118% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.9 13.0946893788 137% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 30.2 50.2224549098 60% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 11.3001002004 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.37 12.4159519038 132% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.22 8.58950901804 119% => OK
difficult_words: 125.0 78.4519038076 159% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.78957915832 148% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => 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.