Company management should conduct routine monitoring of all employee e-mail correspondence. Such monitoring will reduce the waste of resources such as time and system capacity, as well as protect the company from lawsuits.
According to the proposed policy, the company regular monitoring of employee e-mail correspondence will reduce the waste of resources such as time and system capacity and will also protect the company from lawsuits. There were certain underlying assumptions that were considered in order to propose the policy and if those assumptions do not hold in all circumstances, then the policy might not be able to achieve its desired goal.
At first, it is assumed by the policymakers that only monitoring the e-mail correspondence will shed light on the factors that should be should be held responsible for the waste of resources. It is assumed that time and system capacity discrepancies can be visualized through e-mail correspondence. However, it might be possible that some employees are working from home and they are using their home network to access the company e-mail server and doing their job from home and thus they are taking unnoticed leave from office whereas other employees are using their office's system to access the e-mail and thus using the system capacity. Therefore, evaluation of employee efficiency can be crucial only based on time and system capacity.
Secondly, it is assumed that employees might use their official e-mail in order to share the company's confidential data with other rival companies or some outsiders. There might be a possibility that employees can use some other fake email account to share confidential data or they can even meet some outsider during the office break and pass on the information through verbally or in a written format. Therefore, the employee official e-mail correspondence will not highlight the act of that particular employee and thus the employee can easily get away with the act of violation of code of conduct.
Finally, it is assumed that employee e-mail correspondence monitoring will not break the law of protection of personal information. There is no mention in the policy that permission will be taken from the employee to access their official e-mail account and moreover it is assumed any kind of information extracted from the e-mail will result in the association of lawsuits with the company.
To sum up, there are some underlying assumptions that were made in the policy and if those questions are answered with evidence then the policy might fail to achieve the desired effect.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-03 | himanshu mardikar | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-18 | Chayank_11 | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-06 | chapagain08 | 58 | view |
| 2019-11-28 | Walia Farzana | 50 | view |
| 2019-11-03 | anusingh | 75 | view |
- The best way to solve environmental problems caused by consumer-generated waste is for towns and cities to impose strict limits on the amount of trash they will accept from each household. 66
- People should question the rule of authority as opposed to accepting them passively. 66
- Company management should conduct routine monitoring of all employee e-mail correspondence. Such monitoring will reduce the waste of resources such as time and system capacity, as well as protect the company from lawsuits. 50
- The following appeared in a memo from New Ventures Consulting to the president of HobCo, Inc., a chain of hobby shops."Our team has completed its research on suitable building sites for a new HobCo hobby Shop in the city of Grilldon. We discovered th 55
- The following is a letter from the parent of a private school student to the principal of that school:Last year, Kensington Academy turned over management of its cafeteria to a private vendor, Swift Nutrition. This company serves low-fat, low-calorie meal 49
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 128, Rule ID: PHRASE_REPETITION[1]
Message: This phrase is duplicated. You should probably leave only 'should be'.
Suggestion: should be
...nce will shed light on the factors that should be should be held responsible for the waste of resou...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, whereas, kind of, such as, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.5258426966 118% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.4196629213 153% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 14.8657303371 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 33.0505617978 85% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 58.6224719101 82% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1993.0 2235.4752809 89% => OK
No of words: 383.0 442.535393258 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.20365535248 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.42384287591 4.55969084622 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81379779363 2.79657885939 101% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 215.323595506 76% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.42819843342 0.4932671777 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 631.8 704.065955056 90% => 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: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 20.2370786517 59% => 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: 31.0 23.0359550562 135% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 64.5096891947 60.3974514979 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 166.083333333 118.986275619 140% => OK
Words per sentence: 31.9166666667 23.4991977007 136% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.5 5.21951772744 201% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 10.2758426966 29% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.338537684542 0.243740707755 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.140452690211 0.0831039109588 169% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.136567128589 0.0758088955206 180% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.18051630328 0.150359130593 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.116289582702 0.0667264976115 174% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.0 14.1392134831 134% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.01 48.8420337079 82% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 12.1743820225 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.47 12.1639044944 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.43 8.38706741573 101% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 100.480337079 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 20.0 11.8971910112 168% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.4 11.2143820225 128% => OK
text_standard: 20.0 11.7820224719 170% => 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.