Some people argue that successful leaders in government, industry, or other fields must be highly competitive. Other people claim that in order to be successful, a leader must be willing and able to cooperate with others.
Concerning the efficiency and proficiency of a worker, disparate opinions tend to bifurcate: one that weighs on harsh competition, while the other on collaboration and cooperation. Notwithstanding the availability of some contumacious arguments, it is never clear whether one factor champions over the other, unless vigilant consideration in terms of the context and fields is gone through. As in fields that focus on skill-oriented inquiries, a competitive environment is beneficial to participants, while in others, cooperativeness is more important. Acknowledging the fact that leaders of a group tend to endow much impact to such an environment, this essay will demonstrate the importance of contextual consideration in terms of discussing whether competition or collaboration should be emphasized.
Firstly, in parts in which the elements of discerning the ability or achievements are relatively objective and prominent, competition may allow a clarified perspective in developing the competence of a group. A representative example is the sports field in which requirements are universal, clearl, and visible. Recently, the Tokyo Olympics 2020 has attracted numerous sports fans and illuminated sports players in various fields who had conspicuous skills and proficiencies, winning medals and new records. One analysis discussed why there are so many sports fans and advocates of sports events, and discovered that such events do not have any ambivalence in displaying one’s proficiency in skills. That is, discernable elements of competition allow a fair and valid process, which contradicts other fields in which external factors such as cultural, financial, and social resources are the decisive elements. Thus, in such fields, leaders, coaches, or trainers shall be more reliable in playing their roles when encouraging the players to be competitive.
However, on the other hand, cooperative skills may be more desired when collectivity is crucial for acquiring achievements and when competition only causes more conflicts which hamper the proficiency of the given task. Especially, as most fields such as industries, large corporations, and projects are being done in groups, the ability of being collaborative can never be neglected. Take, for instance, a research project that is implemented to urbanize a rural town. Several experts in various fields would be assembled in order to achieve the shared goal. We may notice in such a case that leaders, who are obliged to make proper progress, will likely focus on scrutinizing cooperative skills of each player rather than putting them into a competitive atmosphere. Focusing on sound communication and high response ability, each player may be able to facilitate their specified skills and come out with unexpected results due to the joint venture. That is, leaders in team work shall be equipped with understanding of respective positions and conciliate the players in harmony.
In conclusion, it depends on the social context and perspectives of factors that determine the efficiency and success of fields of inquiry. That is, one may be aware of the specific elements that determine successful results and discern the factors that a leader has to pertain.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-24 | Technoblade | 70 | view |
| 2023-04-09 | nimagm | 83 | view |
| 2023-04-09 | nimagm | 79 | view |
| 2021-11-22 | allang9501 | 50 | view |
| 2021-10-27 | Lucas13 | 33 | view |
- Claim We can usually learn much more from people whose views we share than from people whose views contradict our own Reason Disagreement can cause stress and inhibit learning 83
- As we acquire more knowledge things do not become more comprehensible but more complex and mysterious 66
- Government officials should rely on their own judgement rather than unquestioningly carry out the will of the people whom they serve 66
- The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them not by their contemporaries 83
- In this age of intensive media coverage it is no longer possible for a society to regard any living man or woman as a hero 70
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, however, if, may, so, thus, while, as to, for instance, in conclusion, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.5258426966 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 23.0 14.8657303371 155% => OK
Relative clauses : 22.0 11.3162921348 194% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 33.0505617978 57% => OK
Preposition: 64.0 58.6224719101 109% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 12.9106741573 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2738.0 2235.4752809 122% => OK
No of words: 491.0 442.535393258 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.57637474542 5.05705443957 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70728369723 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.26961497286 2.79657885939 117% => OK
Unique words: 267.0 215.323595506 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.543788187373 0.4932671777 110% => OK
syllable_count: 848.7 704.065955056 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.2040617889 60.3974514979 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 144.105263158 118.986275619 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.8421052632 23.4991977007 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.94736842105 5.21951772744 114% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 10.2758426966 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.279956492601 0.243740707755 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0803439050607 0.0831039109588 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0524528829861 0.0758088955206 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.167518382478 0.150359130593 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0585060109389 0.0667264976115 88% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.8 14.1392134831 126% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 48.8420337079 77% => OK
smog_index: 13.0 7.92365168539 164% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.1743820225 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.38 12.1639044944 126% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.89 8.38706741573 118% => OK
difficult_words: 156.0 100.480337079 155% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 17.0 11.8971910112 143% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => 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: 70.83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.25 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.