Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: Cooperative ability is more important than leadership in today’s world?
As the old saying goes, none of us is as smart as all of us. In our today's vigorous world, it takes numerous talents to yield exceptional far-reaching success rather than limited super leaders. The age of the one and only mighty leader is far gone. In my opinion, I reckon that being capable of a cooperative work style is, indeed, far more beneficial than being a leader for two reasons.
First and foremost, diversified skills are crucially necessary for a contemporary business to solve obstacles that they might face. For instance, last year, my company Novartis Pharma faced a steep decline in sales volume in the first quarter, and the competition was increasing its market share. Although all my sales teammates worked independently as diligence as we could, neither I, as a sales manager nor any of my coworkers, were able to get near enough of the target sales' goal. The CEO held a meeting; therefore, we all shared our perspectives, which collectively highlighted weak and powerful points that enabled us to visualize the panoramic picture of the crisis. The marketing manager suggested a promotion plan, the purchasing department built on it, and the CFO approved. We organized a well-articulated action plan. Ultimately, we achieved unprecedented sales figures by the end of that year. As you can see, I, like other managers, cannot accomplish success and tackle problems unless we share our skills and work cooperatively.
Another potentially significant reason is the higher likelihood that the collaborative work model builds competencies and leaders of the future. Take Steve Jobs, for example, the founder of Apple, who created his formidable company not solely on the base of his genius character, but also on the contribution of highly skilled talented people. Apple is an incredibly collaborative company. He did have a strong faith in the teamwork setting throughout his company and that every team has his specialized field where they can make their own decisions not according to the hierarchy, yet the best idea wins. After he had died, the experts of Apple joined hands to make it even more thriving and progressing. If it had not for the collaboration of teamwork leaders, Apple would have fallen apart after the death of Steven Jobs.
In conclusion, I believe it is better to be cooperative rather than to be a leader; otherwise, you would not be able to defeat crises you might encounter or make leaders for the future.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...than being a leader for two reasons. First and foremost, diversified skills a...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 1052, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...hare our skills and work cooperatively. Another potentially significant rea...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...part after the death of Steven Jobs. In conclusion, I believe it is better to...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 192, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...counter or make leaders for the future.
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, so, therefore, well, for example, for instance, i reckon, in conclusion, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 15.1003584229 93% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 9.8082437276 82% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 13.8261648746 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.0286738351 82% => OK
Pronoun: 42.0 43.0788530466 97% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 52.1666666667 75% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.0752688172 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2052.0 1977.66487455 104% => OK
No of words: 407.0 407.700716846 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04176904177 4.8611393121 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49157444576 4.48103885553 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92030840777 2.67179642975 109% => OK
Unique words: 251.0 212.727598566 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.616707616708 0.524837075471 118% => OK
syllable_count: 650.7 618.680645161 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 9.59856630824 94% => OK
Article: 6.0 3.08781362007 194% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.51792114695 171% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.86738351254 214% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.6003584229 92% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.1344086022 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.6618334096 48.9658058833 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.0 100.406767564 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.4210526316 20.6045352989 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.68421052632 5.45110844103 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.5376344086 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 11.8709677419 67% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.85842293907 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.88709677419 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0746488725043 0.236089414692 32% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.019378487655 0.076458572812 25% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0363612088368 0.0737576698707 49% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0577630649815 0.150856017488 38% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0475099048992 0.0645574589148 74% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 11.7677419355 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 58.1214874552 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.1575268817 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.95 10.9000537634 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.18 8.01818996416 114% => OK
difficult_words: 116.0 86.8835125448 134% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.002688172 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.0537634409 103% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 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: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.