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.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with these statements and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statements might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
Because of the unique nuances of the inner-workings of each company, I somewhat agree with the premise that consultants would be unnecessary if companies spent more time listening to their own employees. However, outside consultants do bring in a fresh perspective and may have some useful insights into solving common problems.
It is generally accepted that greater experience with a company increases your value as an employee. This is evidenced through pay-raises as an employee continues on with a company, and many incentives to keep employees on such as promotions, bonuses, etc. The reason behind this is that more experience with a company allows one to understand all the inner-workings of the company and to have firsthand knowledge of which problems frequently pop up and why certain policies are in place. There are a plethera of anecdotal stories of the new manager who comes in and immediately beginning to make changes with out first asking why said procedures exist in the first place, leading to disasters that were foreseeable to everyone with prior experience at the company. For instance, say a lawncare company has worked at a given property for years and always follows the same procedure of unloading the fertilizer around the corner of the property first thing in the morning then moving the dirt to the front in the afternoon. An outside consultant comes in and sees the wasted man hours spent moving the fertilizer between two locations and orders everyone to unload directly in the front yard. The workers comply and unload everything to the front yard at 7 am only for the sprinklers to come on at 8 am, as they do every day, and wash the majority of the dirt away. This example is a bit on the simplistic side as this issue could be easily explained to the consultant but in reality these issues can be much more complex.
Despite the advantage of job-specific experience and knowledge workers have, outside consultants are not worthless. Oftentimes when something has always been done a certain way people can grow complacent and have difficulty considering any other way something can be done. The consultant has the advantage of bringing in a fresh perspective without the biases of the status quo. He or she may be able to innovate and increase efficiency. Furthermore, employees are not incentivized to spend time and energy learning an entirely new system when they have perfected the old one--even if doing so could save them time in the long-run. Additionally, employees may feel the need to avoid criticizing their higher ups in order to maintain a positive work environment and favorable reputation. Outside consultants have no such concerns and can call out supervisors on their mistakes. The consultants also have experience of their own in that they devote their entire careers specifically to solving issues of efficiency and thus have seen some issues time and time again. The benefit of this is twofold: it means they have no other responsibilities and can focus solely on coming up with solutions to inefficiency and it means they know tried and true methods of boosting efficiency that others may not.
The advantages of each party lead me to conclude that employees should be the first to be asked how efficiency can be improved and it is crucial that management takes the time to ask what difficulties they face that are slowing them down. However, for a major boost in productivity consultants can be a valuable tool, so long as they work in conjunction with employees who can explain the implications of each solution they implement and tailor it to fit the intricacies of the company.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-08-10 | Bholuchand | 58 | view |
| 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 |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 606, Rule ID: WITH_OUT[1]
Message: This word is usually written together. Did you mean 'without'?
Suggestion: without
...d immediately beginning to make changes with out first asking why said procedures exist ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...ing efficiency that others may not. The advantages of each party lead me to con...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, may, so, then, thus, for instance, such as, in the first place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.5258426966 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.4196629213 137% => OK
Conjunction : 25.0 14.8657303371 168% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.3162921348 124% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 33.0505617978 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 92.0 58.6224719101 157% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3038.0 2235.4752809 136% => OK
No of words: 609.0 442.535393258 138% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.98850574713 5.05705443957 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.96768813016 4.55969084622 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88942560668 2.79657885939 103% => OK
Unique words: 310.0 215.323595506 144% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.509031198686 0.4932671777 103% => OK
syllable_count: 962.1 704.065955056 137% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 29.0 23.0359550562 126% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 58.8354483056 60.3974514979 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 144.666666667 118.986275619 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.0 23.4991977007 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.04761904762 5.21951772744 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 10.2758426966 136% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.83258426966 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.275400981631 0.243740707755 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0794302450284 0.0831039109588 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0620694715349 0.0758088955206 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.174543592073 0.150359130593 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0589591196033 0.0667264976115 88% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 14.1392134831 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.04 48.8420337079 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 12.1743820225 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.25 12.1639044944 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.76 8.38706741573 104% => OK
difficult_words: 142.0 100.480337079 141% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 11.2143820225 121% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => 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: 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.