Nowadays, a lot of offices have open-space designs instead of separate rooms. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?
In recent years, open- space offices have grown in popularity as a replacement for traditional divided offices. Although there are some disadvantages of this change that should not be overlooked, I still believe that their benefits are more significant.
On the one hand, working in open-areas can be problematic which can lead to an increased level of distractions and adverse effects on employees’ productivity and emotion. Firstly, the absence of separate rooms may make employees feel constantly supervised without individual privacy. Moreover, in an open-space setting, not only are all conservatives likely overheard, but all actions also observed by colleagues, causing discomfort while working. In addition, a high level of noise from communal space easily disrupts the ability to concentrate and the engagement in work, leading to reduced productivity and efficiency. All these problems, in turn, can result in lower satisfaction and even resignation, causing talent loss for many companies.
Despite those disadvantages, I believe that an unobstructed layout is much more beneficial for the company. To begin with, having no physical barriers, such as dividing walls, encourages not only frequent interaction but also seamless communication between colleagues. Such unity of the staff, as a result, might strengthen and build the company.Furthermore, work in close proximity, employees can easily exchange ideas and foster great inclusion, creating mutual understanding between them. Additionally, in shared areas, they can quickly gain considerable knowledge and experience from each other. A typical of this is that designs allow staff to be adjacent to their bosses, helping them acquire valuable soft skills such as financial management or communication from their bosses . Besides that, financial savings is another significant benefit of these designs. Working in open-space reduces construction and utility expenses because there is no need to build walls and cubicles or buy much equipment. As a result, the company can save money for other important purposes like training and development programs.
In conclusion, I believe that the pros of open-plan offices overshadow their drawbacks. Based on the human and financial benefits that open-space brings to a company, this trend may continue to gain popularity in the future of workspace design.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-28 | An14042006 | 78 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 625, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...reduced productivity and efficiency. All these problems, in turn, can result in l...
^^
Line 3, column 346, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Furthermore
... might strengthen and build the company.Furthermore, work in close proximity, employees can...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 367, Rule ID: CLOSE_SCRUTINY[1]
Message: Use simply 'proximity'.
Suggestion: proximity
... build the company.Furthermore, work in close proximity, employees can easily exchange ideas an...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 783, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...ement or communication from their bosses . Besides that, financial savings is anot...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, firstly, furthermore, if, look, may, moreover, so, still, then, while, in addition, in conclusion, such as, as a result, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 7.0 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 1.00243902439 1097% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 16.0 6.8 235% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 8.0 3.15609756098 253% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 23.0 5.60731707317 410% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 45.0 33.7804878049 133% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 3.97073170732 378% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2016.0 965.302439024 209% => Less number of characters wanted.
No of words: 354.0 196.424390244 180% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.69491525424 4.92477711251 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.33761313653 3.73543355544 116% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.18007584259 2.65546596893 120% => OK
Unique words: 227.0 106.607317073 213% => Less unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.641242937853 0.547539520022 117% => OK
syllable_count: 632.7 283.868780488 223% => syllable counts are too long.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.45097560976 124% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 1.53170731707 326% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 10.0 3.36585365854 297% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 8.94146341463 190% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.1617617961 43.030603864 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.588235294 112.824112599 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8235294118 22.9334400587 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.47058823529 5.23603664747 181% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 1.69756097561 236% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 3.70975609756 297% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 1.13902439024 351% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.09268292683 49% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.146932769362 0.215688989381 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0448576267854 0.103423049105 43% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0482015254934 0.0843802449381 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.106528595807 0.15604864568 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0445587082089 0.0819641961636 54% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.8 13.2329268293 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.26 61.2550243902 56% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 6.51609756098 172% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.5 10.3012195122 131% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.72 11.4140731707 138% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.2 8.06136585366 127% => OK
difficult_words: 125.0 40.7170731707 307% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 11.4329268293 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.0658536585 145% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.