The author’s questionable assumptions on reducing a workday leading to an increase in profits and commuting time reduction the only way to increase the morale of employees need to be substantiated with further analysis and evidence. These two assumptions can have a drastic impact on the work done by Company X in a week and thus need further evidence. The author also states that the policy is new, which makes the previous two assumptions more flawed.
To begin with, the author’s assumption that a 4-day workweek will cause increased profits has no evidence supporting it. Shutting down offices on Friday will increase work to be done per day. Productivity has a limit. Thus, increasing work hours might lead to low productivity. Leading to less work done per week. In the worst-case scenario, this might lead to deadline extension and also late delivery of products or services. Therefore, shutting down offices on Friday might lead to decreased profits which contrasts the author’s point of view.
Instead of making a sweeping statement based on insufficient data, the author needs to provide evidence that reduction in commuting time will result to increase in employee morale. It might be true that the reduction in commuting time per week might also lead to saving some money per week, which might not increase the morale of employees. Several other factors are responsible for the morale of an employee which the author has not considered. For example, one might argue that the morale of an employee depends upon the work culture or the work environment at the offices, or whether they give employees appropriate wages or sufficient raise in salary than reducing the commuting time per week. These alternatives make us think twice about the author’s assumption that reduced commuting time will lead to an increase in the morale of employees.
Lastly, the author states that the policy is new. While one can rely on a previously implemented policy that led to good results, the assumption that this new policy will work wants evidence. One cannot determine whether a new policy will work until it is implemented, testeded, compared to and verified. A change in policy might also lead to employees censuring the decision as one hardly likes change. Also, if the policy has worked somewhere else and therefore Company X wants to implement it, it is possible that what worked for some other Company Y will work for Company X. Thus, the assumption that a new policy will work is fallacious.
Briefly, this argument is weak because it depends on various assumptions about shutting down offices on Friday will lead to increased profits, reducing commute time will lead to an increase in the morale of the employees and that employees will not censure the policy. The argument is more questionable because it lacks evidence. Also, implementation of this policy might even lead to some implications which can exacerbate the profits and employee morale of Company X’s employees. Thus, in conclusion, the author’s assumptions lack crucial evidence and if the assumptions are fallacious, the implications might lead to an unexpected outcome.
- Creative artist should always be given the freedom to express their own ideas in words pictures music or film in whichever way they wish There should be no government restrictions on what they do To what extent do you agree or disagree with this option 58
- Company X has just switched to a 4 day workweek mandating that employees work 10 hours per day from Monday to Thursdaybinstead of 8 hours per day from Monday to Friday Although the policy is new Company X claims that the policy would help to increase p 68
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 24 15
No. of Words: 514 350
No. of Characters: 2575 1500
No. of Different Words: 204 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.761 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.01 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.709 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 189 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 149 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 109 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 64 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.417 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.95 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.625 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.346 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.54 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.114 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, briefly, if, lastly, so, therefore, thus, while, for example, in conclusion, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.6327345309 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 27.0 12.9520958084 208% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 13.6137724551 125% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 28.8173652695 94% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 55.5748502994 112% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 16.3942115768 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2651.0 2260.96107784 117% => OK
No of words: 513.0 441.139720559 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.16764132554 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.75914943092 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79879128153 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 211.0 204.123752495 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.411306042885 0.468620217663 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 819.9 705.55239521 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.0446952566 57.8364921388 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.04 119.503703932 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.52 23.324526521 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.84 5.70786347227 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.67664670659 192% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.19981559104 0.218282227539 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0719940930495 0.0743258471296 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0541919510423 0.0701772020484 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.123682134656 0.128457276422 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0528308986099 0.0628817314937 84% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.3550499002 106% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 12.5979740519 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.95 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 98.500998004 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.