Imagine that you are in a classroom or a meeting. The teacher or the meeting leader says something incorrect In your opinion, which of the following is the best thing to do?
•Interrupt and correct the mistake right away.
•Wait until the class or meeting is over and the people are gone, and then talk to the teacher or meeting leader.
•Say nothing.
By and large, suitable reaction has had a paramount effect on the outcome of the meeting. People can hurt others hearts or make good impression on others by means of their reactions. Its importance leads to some controversy; some people want to know how to react against a mistake in a meeting. One statement in this case that is often brought up is that people can say nothing or react after finishing the meeting when they heard a mistake statement by speaker, in contrast, I personally believe that people should let the others know about the mistake instantly. In the lines to follow, I will investigate some reasons to shed light on my response.
One of the paramount reasons which deserves to be mentioned is saving time. It goes without saying that when people react after meeting and all members gone, the speaker need to touch on the last speak or even hold and another meeting. Explaining about last meeting causes wasting time and holding another meeting wasting cost. Take, for example, in a meeting that I has had the speaker gave n mistaken information about the company's revenue. I wasn't there and no one reacted. Later on, when they told the boss about this mistake, boss decided to hold another meeting. Not only do this meeting wasted time, but also costed for the company.
Another reason coming to my mind is getting correct information. Take, for example, when I was in a meeting one years ago, speaker said a mistaken number about the company's supporting services for workers family. They were happy because they thought that boss considered 1000 dollars for having a baby. However, I promptly asked the boss if it is true. Boss refute his statement and said it was 100 dollars. If not for reacting instantly, all employees would be upset and disappointed.
In conclusion, to sum both reasons up, let apply the Pareto rule which also known as 80/20 rule. In a nutshell, when come to making a decision based on the Pareto rule, availing 20 percent of reasons could fulfil 80 percent of the solution. Consequently, both discussed reasons outweigh other potential reasons and are sufficient to substantiate the contention that the better reaction regard a mistake in meeting is reacting instantly.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 368, Rule ID: NON3PRS_VERB[1]
Message: The pronoun 'I' must be used with a non-third-person form of a verb: 'have'
Suggestion: have
... Take, for example, in a meeting that I has had the speaker gave n mistaken informa...
^^^
Line 2, column 446, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wasn't
...formation about the companys revenue. I wasnt there and no one reacted. Later on, whe...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 109, Rule ID: ONE_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use the numeral 'one' with plural words. Did you mean 'one year', 'a year', or simply 'years'?
Suggestion: one year; a year; years
...e, for example, when I was in a meeting one years ago, speaker said a mistaken number abo...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 487, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...loyees would be upset and disappointed. In conclusion, to sum both reasons up, l...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, however, if, so, for example, in conclusion, in contrast, by and large, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 15.1003584229 79% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 9.8082437276 71% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 13.8261648746 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.0286738351 127% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 43.0788530466 65% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 52.1666666667 86% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.0752688172 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1844.0 1977.66487455 93% => OK
No of words: 378.0 407.700716846 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.87830687831 4.8611393121 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.40933352052 4.48103885553 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.56156249558 2.67179642975 96% => OK
Unique words: 204.0 212.727598566 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.539682539683 0.524837075471 103% => OK
syllable_count: 558.0 618.680645161 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 9.59856630824 73% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6003584229 102% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.1344086022 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.6873721462 48.9658058833 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 87.8095238095 100.406767564 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.0 20.6045352989 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.09523809524 5.45110844103 93% => 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: 7.0 4.88709677419 143% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.131076278245 0.236089414692 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0375842984686 0.076458572812 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0351863097652 0.0737576698707 48% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0755491052516 0.150856017488 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0398287576567 0.0645574589148 62% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.6 11.7677419355 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 58.1214874552 106% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 10.1575268817 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.73 10.9000537634 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.95 8.01818996416 99% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 86.8835125448 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.002688172 130% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.0537634409 92% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => 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: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 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.