The following appeared in a memo at XYZ company.
"When XYZ lays off employees, it pays Delany Personnel Firm to offer those employees assistance in creating résumés and developing interviewing skills, if they so desire. Laid-off employees have benefited greatly from Delany's services: last year those who used Delany found jobs much more quickly than did those who did not. Recently, it has been proposed that we use the less expensive Walsh Personnel Firm in place of Delany. This would be a mistake because eight years ago, when XYZ was using Walsh, only half of the workers we laid off at that time found jobs within a year. Moreover, Delany is clearly superior, as evidenced by its bigger staff and larger number of branch offices. After all, last year Delany's clients took an average of six months to find jobs, whereas Walsh's clients took nine."
The argument presented in the memo at XYZ company for finding a new job using a service company like Delany and Walsh for laying off employees is provided. The argument has relied on a few unwarranted assumptions. In order to prove its credibility author has to provide an answer to the following three questions.
Firstly, the author mentioned that the last year those employees who used Delany's services found a job more quickly than those who did not take these services. The author relied on assumption that there is only way to find a quick job is to join Delany's services. However, it might happen that those employees who got a job using Delany's service might have a very strong skillset and outstanding resume hence they got a new job quickly. Therefore, the author's assumption does not hold water.
Secondly, the author provided evidence from eight years back when XYZ used Walsh service which result in only half of the laid workers finding jobs. It is not a correct way of comparing the current circumstance with the eight years back. Many changes happened in technology and marketplaces. There may be a chance that the Walsh services improved their quality of services nowadays. Hence, this comparison stands null and void.
Moreover, the author assumed that the service company should have a bigger staff and a larger number of branches in order to provide quality services. But, the author needs to check whether this bigger staff is more productive than Wash's staff or not, in order to bolster his opinion.
In Conclusion, the memo depends on some unwarranted assumptions. So, the writer needs to find an answer to the above three questions for choosing the best service company from the two mentioned companies.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-27 | okazaki11 | 66 | view |
| 2023-07-19 | s.sim | 60 | view |
| 2023-02-21 | HSNDEK | 68 | view |
| 2022-10-14 | predatoros | 55 | view |
| 2022-09-05 | Lara Clarie | 68 | view |
- The real talent of a popular musician cannot accurately be assessed until the musician has been dead for several generations so that his or her fame does not interfere with honest assessment 50
- Professors are normally found in university classrooms offices and libraries doing research and lecturing to their students More and more however they also appear as guests on television news programs giving expert commentary on the latest events in the w 86
- The following is a recommendation from the business manager of Monarch Books Since its opening in Collegeville twenty years ago Monarch Books has developed a large customer base due to its reader friendly atmosphere and wide selection of books on all subj 62
- People learn things better from those at their own level such as fellow students or co workers than from those at a higher level such as teachers or supervisors 60
- The following appeared in a memo at XYZ company When XYZ lays off employees it pays Delany Personnel Firm to offer those employees assistance in creating r sum s and developing interviewing skills if they so desire Laid off employees have benefited greatl 55
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 2 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 291 350
No. of Characters: 1412 1500
No. of Different Words: 154 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.13 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.852 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.486 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 102 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 77 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 49 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 26 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.188 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.97 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.625 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.316 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.316 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.066 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 452, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...y got a new job quickly. Therefore, the authors assumption does not hold water. Second...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, hence, however, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, as to, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 19.6327345309 31% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 12.9520958084 31% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 28.8173652695 59% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 55.5748502994 56% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 6.0 16.3942115768 37% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1441.0 2260.96107784 64% => OK
No of words: 291.0 441.139720559 66% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.95189003436 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13022058845 4.56307096286 91% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.56753239054 2.78398813304 92% => OK
Unique words: 156.0 204.123752495 76% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.536082474227 0.468620217663 114% => OK
syllable_count: 440.1 705.55239521 62% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 42.7456138101 57.8364921388 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.0625 119.503703932 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.1875 23.324526521 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.5625 5.70786347227 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 6.88822355289 15% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.67664670659 214% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.163709324165 0.218282227539 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0443107324446 0.0743258471296 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0666775347737 0.0701772020484 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0870812231282 0.128457276422 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0675785982853 0.0628817314937 107% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.0 14.3799401198 76% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 48.3550499002 128% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.197005988 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.43 12.5979740519 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.73 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 59.0 98.500998004 60% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.