The following appeared as a memorandum from the Human Resources director at Dexter Gorman Instruments, a company that manufactures saxophones.
"On this year's survey about work habits, our employees tended to strongly agree with the idea that if they took less time to complete their assigned work, the quality of their work would suffer. However, we recently conducted an internal study that proves this idea wrong. Managers across several divisions identified an overtime group: the employees who worked an average of 48 or more hours per week over the past year instead of the expected 40 hours per week. We then looked at the number of documented work errors produced by all of our employees during the past year and found that the overtime group was responsible for significantly more work errors overall than their fellow employees. On the basis of these findings, our recommendation to the company president is to require employees at Dexter Gorman Instruments to complete their work during the regular 40-hour work week and allow overtime only for urgent circumstances."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
In the memorandum, the human resources (HR) director of Dexter company recommends that employees at Dexter should work their regular 40-hours work week and on the urgent situations, they should be allowed to work overtime. The HR director adopts some unwarranted assumptions in his recommendations, and to evaluate this recommendation, the HR director should answer to some questions.
First of all, the survey about work habit shows that employee believe that if they work overtime, they would more productive and their work’s outcomes will be better. There is no sufficient information about the survey demographic and methodology. What were the survey’s questions? How many employees took part in that survey? Was the survey totally about the work’s hours and its relation to the work’s outcomes? Without answering to these questions, the assumptions used by the HR director will be unwarranted and the recommendation would not be valuable.
Moreover, the HR director claims that based on an internal study, the identified groups of overtime employees from several divisions made more errors that regular 40-hours workers. The HR director naively assumes that these groups of overtime employees are comparable. What are their divisions? How many employees were selected from various divisions? If one division is accounting, and another is quality controlling, it’s possible that long hours of work affected accountants more than the quality controllers due to their hard and detail-oriented job. The HR director should consider answering to these questions about the various groups of employees selected before reach the recommendation.
Finally, the HR director simply assumes that the overtime working of employees is responsible for their poor work. What if other factors are the reasons for their poor outcomes? Are they great and powerful employees? Are they satisfied by their jobs and salaries? If they believe that their income is not sufficient, they may not work hard to prevent errors. Also, it’s likely that the manager did not recruit strong employees and their work despite their consuming time would be awful and making errors is their routine jobs. In this case, the recommendation will be unsound.
All in all, the argument, as it stands now, is flawed due to the considerably unwarranted assumptions. The HR director of Dexter company must answer to the pointed questions to be able to state a recommendation about the overtime employees’ productivity.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-13 | mana000 | 58 | view |
| 2023-07-19 | M1randa | 68 | view |
| 2022-09-21 | sir alex yadav | 60 | view |
| 2022-08-10 | Funmibeccy | 58 | view |
| 2021-10-27 | amyabt | 58 | view |
- Evidence suggests that academic honor codes which call for students to agree not to cheat in their academic endeavors and to notify a faculty member if they suspect that others have cheated are far more successful than are other methods at deterring cheat 43
- Two years ago radio station WCQP in Rockville decided to increase the number of call in advice programs that it broadcast since that time its share of the radio audience in the Rockville listening area has increased significantly Given WCQP s recent succe 63
- Summarize the points made in the lecture being sure to explain how they respond to the specific concerns presented in the reading passage 3
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Providing Internet access is just as important as other services such as building roads so governments should offer Internet access to all of their citizens at no cost Use specific reasons and examples 70
- Summarise the points made in the lecture being sure to explain how they case doubt on specific points made in the reading passage 86
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 8 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 387 350
No. of Characters: 2040 1500
No. of Different Words: 171 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.435 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.271 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.84 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 154 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 120 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 90 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 54 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 16.826 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.923 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.304 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.308 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.308 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.087 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, if, may, moreover, so, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 28.8173652695 135% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 40.0 55.5748502994 72% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 16.3942115768 49% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2108.0 2260.96107784 93% => OK
No of words: 387.0 441.139720559 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.44702842377 5.12650576532 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.43534841618 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.98229949253 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 184.0 204.123752495 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.475452196382 0.468620217663 101% => OK
syllable_count: 615.6 705.55239521 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.8473053892 70% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 57.6718439787 57.8364921388 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.652173913 119.503703932 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.8260869565 23.324526521 72% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.47826086957 5.70786347227 43% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.244387838809 0.218282227539 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0776978377384 0.0743258471296 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0600641379054 0.0701772020484 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.147343014418 0.128457276422 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0535809422104 0.0628817314937 85% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 14.3799401198 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 48.3550499002 114% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.03 12.5979740519 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.1 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 98.500998004 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.1389221557 75% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => 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.