Some businesses find that their new employees lack basic interpersonal skills, such as cooperative skills. What are the causes and suggest some possible solutions?
In recent decades, there has been a growing concern for lacking basic interactive skills in new graduated employees. Given that the trend has its potential for several negative impacts, identifying the reasons could definitely be the key to find solutions.
There are a variety of reasons why interpersonal ability is not mastered by new employees. First, due to the knowledge-based education system in several nations, a huge amount of emphasis would be placed on delivering knowledge to students. Therefore, it would act as an incentive for excelling their major through theoretical subjects instead of those which require interpersonal skill, resulting in the shortage of that skill in numerous pupils after their universities graduates. Second, by putting high pressure and expectation about academic results measuring by personal performance, a number of students would tend to be shown the carrots of high wages and status to achieve top scores in their education process. According to a recent survey carried out by Vinh University, about 60% of interviewed students reported that achieving high grades in academic examination would be the most crucial factor leading to their employment in top-notch companies.
Nevertheless, there are also a myriad of solutions in order to tackle with this issue. First, it is obvious that transforming the teaching approach could be an efficient way to provide teamwork-oriented skills to students. In particular, by focusing on developing employability skills, including interpersonal ability, as a priority, it could act as an incentive for students to acquire numerous teamwork skills through curriculum in their education process. Second, the interaction between universities and corporations should be improved, as pupils could be provided useful work experience placement before entering the workforce. For example, several companies have offered tuition for talented students in top-notch universities in Hanoi in order to ensure their accomplishments in examination, and therefore become employees in those corporations.
In conclusion, the fact that theoretical education systems and high expectation on academic results could explain the pattern. By changing the teaching methods and strengthening the bond between universities and companies, the number of interpersonal ability-mastered employees could significantly increase.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-01-06 | hi.nguyn91 | 78 | view |
| 2021-09-24 | HuynhHoa | 78 | view |
| 2020-08-01 | 9ngóntay | 84 | view |
| 2020-04-19 | Oanh Pham | 56 | view |
| 2020-04-13 | Thu Phuong Dang | 56 | view |
- In most successful organisations some people believe that communication between managers and workers is important while other people said that other factors are more significant What is your opinion 84
- Today many people do not realise how important the natural world is Why is this How can people learn more about the importance of the natural world 84
- Some employers reward members of staff for their exceptional contribution to the company by giving them extra money This practice can act as an incentive for some but may have a negative impact on others To what extent is this style of management effectiv 73
- Some businesses find that their new employees lack basic interpersonal skills such as cooperative skills What are the causes and suggest some possible solutions 84
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, if, nevertheless, second, so, then, therefore, for example, in conclusion, in particular
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 41.998997996 136% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2039.0 1615.20841683 126% => OK
No of words: 348.0 315.596192385 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.8591954023 5.12529762239 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31911543099 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.31214405726 2.80592935109 118% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 176.041082164 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.560344827586 0.561755894193 100% => OK
syllable_count: 630.0 506.74238477 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.7363346099 49.4020404114 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 145.642857143 106.682146367 137% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.8571428571 20.7667163134 120% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.21428571429 7.06120827912 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.14885670995 0.244688304435 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0545518682101 0.084324248473 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0525173165372 0.0667982634062 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.092110954083 0.151304729494 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.032741763443 0.056905535591 58% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.6 13.0946893788 142% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 30.2 50.2224549098 60% => OK
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 11.3001002004 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.0 12.4159519038 137% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.41 8.58950901804 121% => OK
difficult_words: 123.0 78.4519038076 157% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.