All too often, companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently. If companies were to spend more time listening to their own employees, such consultants would be unnecessary.
Do companies have to spend more time listening to their employees or should they hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently? While employees can give suggestions, it is better to take suggestions from consultants that are more experienced in company operational growth.
Firstly, it is important to understand that employees working for the company may not be particularly suited to give advice pertaining to efficient company growth based on the premise that their job description does not entail such. The employees are employed for different roles and employed to perform specific tasks based on their level of experience and area of specialization. For example, you can not possibly tell a doctor to give suggest ways to operate more efficiently as a specific consultant is more suited for that purpose, so likewise the company can not possibly take advice from an entry level employee as he or she has no basic experience yet to suggest ways to make the company operate more efficiently.
Furthermore, if the company even agrees to listen to the suggestion of its employees, there is no assurance that they will be willing to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently neither is there any guarantee that their suggesting will be practicable or implementable. Employees of the company may be holding grudges against the management for varying reasons ranging from poor welfare or inadequate salaries so therefore in this case, it will be advisable for the company to hire outside consultants to suggest ways to operate more efficiently.
In conclusion, as the bulk of the evidence shows, the employees cannot be solely relied on to give good and effective suggestions as accurate as outside consultants who are specialists in company operations will give so it can be said that the decision of companies to hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently is not uncalled for but rather necessary.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-10-15 | Aishwarya01 | 54 | view |
| 2023-09-30 | Isolus | 66 | view |
| 2023-09-23 | bacec | 66 | view |
| 2023-09-18 | Adesina Boluwatito | 83 | view |
| 2023-09-09 | Theophilus Ebuka Odoh | 50 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 426, Rule ID: SO_THEREFORE[1]
Message: Use simply 'so' or 'therefore'.
Suggestion: so; therefore
...rom poor welfare or inadequate salaries so therefore in this case, it will be advisable for ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 544, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e consultants to suggest ways to operate more efficiently. In conclusion, as t...
^^
Line 7, column 166, Rule ID: WHO_NOUN[1]
Message: A noun should not follow "who". Try changing to a verb or maybe to 'who is a are'.
Suggestion: who is a are
...ions as accurate as outside consultants who are specialists in company operations will ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, furthermore, if, likewise, may, so, therefore, while, for example, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 14.8657303371 61% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 33.0505617978 67% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 58.6224719101 77% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 12.9106741573 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1682.0 2235.4752809 75% => OK
No of words: 324.0 442.535393258 73% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.19135802469 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24264068712 4.55969084622 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9839534266 2.79657885939 107% => OK
Unique words: 147.0 215.323595506 68% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.453703703704 0.4932671777 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 546.3 704.065955056 78% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 20.2370786517 40% => 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: 40.0 23.0359550562 174% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 86.4746169405 60.3974514979 143% => OK
Chars per sentence: 210.25 118.986275619 177% => OK
Words per sentence: 40.5 23.4991977007 172% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.625 5.21951772744 242% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.2758426966 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.603284143227 0.243740707755 248% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.335868006809 0.0831039109588 404% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.158817185782 0.0758088955206 209% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.461367803763 0.150359130593 307% => Maybe some contents are duplicated.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0850036895024 0.0667264976115 127% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 23.3 14.1392134831 165% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 22.42 48.8420337079 46% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 20.1 12.1743820225 165% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.71 12.1639044944 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.08 8.38706741573 108% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 100.480337079 71% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.8971910112 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 18.0 11.2143820225 161% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
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.