Interviews form the basic criteria for most large companies. However, some people think that the interview is not a reliable method of choosing whom to employ and that there are other better methods. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Interviews play an intergral part to choosing staff in many huge firms. Some people, however, believe that the traditional approach to obtain human resources is untrustworthy and other strategies are more reliable. I somewhat disagree to the view as the benefit from interviews is enormous, even though some people may take advantage of the occasions to supply recruiters with inaccurate information.
It is thought that interviews facilitate the selection of workers in many dimensions. The first merit worth mentioning is that it allows companies to have very initial face-to-face contacts with applicants. This enables recruiters to observe the potential workers' outfit options, body languages, and manners. The first impression implies one's characteristics that may be covered behind the cloak of etiquette and profession. More importantly, interviews are a great chance for recruiters learn more about potential applicants. The first meeting between interviewers and interviewees provides a great chance for business owners acknowledging job candidates' knowledge, beliefs, and even visions. The factors are of primary importance for employers to decide whether the candidates possessing qualities that suit companies' requirements and culture.
Admittedly, some job applicants have a tendency to tell lies in the interviewing process. This may spell trouble for employers to evaluate and opt for suitable job applicants. Under the formal atmostphere of interviews, however, few job seekers are able to exaggerate their academic credentials or hands-on experience. The role of interview is therefore significant in most cases.
In sum, I mostly object to the view that interviews are ineffective. The process helps moguls find people looking for jobs through observation of their appearances, and knowing their thoughts. Albeit certain individuals may exploit interviews to lie about their conditions, the issue is alleviated in formal settings.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 47, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to staff'
Suggestion: to staff
...iews play an intergral part to choosing staff in many huge firms. Some people, howeve...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 339, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...d manners. The first impression implies ones characteristics that may be covered beh...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, look, may, so, therefore, in most cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 24.0651302605 66% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 41.998997996 86% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1678.0 1615.20841683 104% => OK
No of words: 286.0 315.596192385 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.86713286713 5.12529762239 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11236361783 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.15399345321 2.80592935109 112% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 176.041082164 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.615384615385 0.561755894193 110% => OK
syllable_count: 509.4 506.74238477 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 7.0 2.52805611222 277% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.2975951904 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.5681214025 49.4020404114 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.7058823529 106.682146367 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.8235294118 20.7667163134 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.47058823529 7.06120827912 49% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.204953298907 0.244688304435 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0653485807031 0.084324248473 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.040379819403 0.0667982634062 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.123487028623 0.151304729494 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0179610575352 0.056905535591 32% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 13.0946893788 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.31 50.2224549098 76% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.47 12.4159519038 133% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.17 8.58950901804 118% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 78.4519038076 133% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.1190380762 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.