The following appeared in a memo from a vice president of Quiot Manufacturing
"During the past year, Quiot Manufacturing had 30 percent more on-the-job accidents than at the nearby Panoply Industries plant, where the work shifts are one hour shorter than ours. Experts say that significant contributing factors in many on-the-job accidents are fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers. Therefore, to reduce the number of on-the-job accidents at Quiot and thereby increase productivity, we should shorten each of our three work shifts by one hour so that employees will get adequate amounts of sleep."
The argument refers to a memo from the Vice President of a company named Quiot Manufacturing stating that in the past one year that there had been 30% more on the job accidents in comparison to the nearby Panoply Industries Plant where there are shifts with one hour less compared to Quiot Manufacturing. On the experts view he attributes these increase in accidents to fatigue and sleep deprivation and comes to the fleeting conclusion that to reduce accidents there there should be a reduction of one hour in the working hours of each shifts, thereby leading to increased productivity. The reasons and assumptions of the Vice President seems to be very impulsive. There are various flaws in his decision and are hence indefensible.
The first and foremost flaw is the comparison of the two industries - Quiot Industries and Panoply Industries Plant. There is no mention of the nature of the company if they are involved in the same business. It would be naive to compare one Oil and gas Company with the another company in the textile industry. Further the stated statistics of 30% increase in on-job accidents of the Quiot Industries compared to the Polyply Industries never states the number of employees in both the organisation. If the number of employees in the first company is very large compared to the second compared company then a 30% more than the second shall be infinitesimal.
The second flaw is the direct attribution of more accidents is to less working hour and sleep deprivation. The argument never talks about the safety standards of the companies. It is quite likely that the more accidents in the Quiot Industries may be due to poor safety standards and ethics which has led to more accidents and not the more number of working hours.
The third flaw is regarding the sweeping conclusion of reducing the number of working hours in each of the shifts. It is quite possible that the accidents may have taken place in the night shifts which may have been of longer duration. Further , the accidents may have taken place due to the shortage of staff and the less skilled staff in that particular shift. Reducing the working hours in each of the shift may prove to be counterproductive for the company in the long run.
Hence it can be reasonable asserted that due to the above stated flaws, the authors sweeping conclusion do not stand the test of scrutiny and are hence indefensible. The author must do due diligence ascertaining the exact cause of accidents before coming to the stated conclusion. Further, one years statistics is not enough to prove a certain assumption.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-06-05 | Sushant5386 | 83 | view |
- We can usually learn much more from people whose views we share than people whose views we contradict our own 66
- College students should base their choice of a field of study on the availability of jobs in that field. 50
- When old buildings stand on ground that modern planners feel could be better used for modern purposes, modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings. 66
- A nation should require all its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college 66
- The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a television station.“Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news. During this time period, most of the co 77
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 442 350
No. of Characters: 2120 1500
No. of Different Words: 182 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.585 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.796 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.698 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 140 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 109 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 77 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 54 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.263 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.997 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.579 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.323 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.558 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.096 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 463, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: there
...ing conclusion that to reduce accidents there there should be a reduction of one hour in th...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 501, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... of employees in both the organisation. If the number of employees in the first co...
^^
Line 7, column 244, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...ay have been of longer duration. Further , the accidents may have taken place due ...
^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...ve for the company in the long run. Hence it can be reasonable asserted that due ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, hence, if, may, regarding, second, so, then, third
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 28.8173652695 52% => OK
Preposition: 68.0 55.5748502994 122% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2163.0 2260.96107784 96% => OK
No of words: 442.0 441.139720559 100% => OK
Chars per words: 4.89366515837 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.58517132086 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77577914869 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 185.0 204.123752495 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.418552036199 0.468620217663 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 674.1 705.55239521 96% => 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: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.4329194437 57.8364921388 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.842105263 119.503703932 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2631578947 23.324526521 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.26315789474 5.70786347227 57% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.323737628734 0.218282227539 148% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0906692721947 0.0743258471296 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.123168402402 0.0701772020484 176% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.173263010292 0.128457276422 135% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.130980548809 0.0628817314937 208% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 48.3550499002 117% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.38 12.5979740519 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.49 8.32208582834 90% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 98.500998004 77% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 28.5 12.3882235529 230% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.