In modern society, when interviewers interview candidates, sometimes they use other sources to get information of the candidates. Which of the following do you think is a better solution?
1. Talk to the former boss of the candidate
2. Check the online profile of social media
3. One month probation to see if the candidate fits the job
Personally, I believe that talking to the former boss of the candidate is a better option to obtain the information of a candidate. My reasons are as follows.
To begin with, companies focus on acquiring knowledgeable employees, and asking former supervisors for more information of a candidate can make sure that the interviewers are skillful. To elaborate, take my father's organization as an example. My father's company asked my father's college professors whether he was able to write a news report that is both comprehensible and concise in less than an hour. As a result, they found out that my father had enough skills and the potential to become a journalist, so he was hired. Apparently, inquiring former boss can help interviewers understand the candidate better. However, if his manager judged his knowledge by viewing his profiles on social media like Facebook, he could not determine whether my father is knowledgeable in journalism, since it is relatively easy to lie and brag about one's skill on these social media. Clearly, judging a candidate's skill by profiles cannot help interviewers understand whether a candidate is suitable for his job.
In addition, companies place an emphasis on reputation, and querying the interviewer's former boss can help them procure a better reputation. To elaborate, take my brother's company as an example. My brother's company always filed an email and asked a candidate's former supervisors several essential information, including "Does the candidate always dresses properly to work?", "Is the candidate always polite to his supervisors or subordinates?", etc. By doing so, the company can prevent rude employees from damaging the company's image. Nonetheless, if the company use one month probation to test if the candidate is suitable for the job, the candidate can definitely pretend and conceal his awful characteristic during this period. If this is the case, the company cannot tell whether the candidate is a courteous man or not. As a result, the company might accidentally hire a worker with a terrible personality.
Last but not least, interviewers care about efficiency, and talking to the former supervisors of a candidate can increase their efficiency. Take my company as an example. When I participated in the interview of the company, they required me to participate in a probation program to examine my skills and knowledge. In brief, they demanded me to assemble a computer in a single day. Moreover, they told me to write a functioning operation system kernel module, and it took me nearly a week to finish the whole program. As a result, it took them nearly two weeks to do the program. Nevertheless, had they asked my former boss about my skills, they could save a great amount of time organizing such program. Evidently, this could prevent the company from wasting too much time examining a candidate's particular knowledge.
In short, I maintain that talking to the former boss of the candidate is the best way to obtain data about the candidate. This is because companies care about efficiency, reputation, as well as employees' skills.
- Which one do you think is the most important factor for a student to succeed in college 1 Having access to university tutors who can provide one to one instruction for students with difficulties in college study 2 The help and encouragement from the famil 83
- If you were given a short period of time to learn something what would you choose 1 learn to play a new sport you never played 2 learn to cook food in a different way 3 learn to do some hand made work like clothes 70
- Some high school teachers spend most of class time lecturing while the students listen and take notes Other high school teachers spend most of class time on discussion and projects that students are highly involved in and exchange their ideas Which of the 83
- Which of the following is the best way to deal with homesickness 1 do activities or eat food back home 2 keep in touch with family and friends back home 3 do activities and eat food in your new home 4 make new friends 90
- Movies and television programs should present stories of good people being rewarded and bad people being punished Do you agree or disagree with the statement 76
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 836, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...s relatively easy to lie and brag about ones skill on these social media. Clearly, j...
^^^^
Line 3, column 889, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'candidates'' or 'candidate's'?
Suggestion: candidates'; candidate's
... these social media. Clearly, judging a candidates skill by profiles cannot help interview...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 785, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a candidate' or simply 'candidates'?
Suggestion: a candidate; candidates
...ny from wasting too much time examining a candidates particular knowledge. In short, I ma...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
apparently, but, however, if, moreover, nevertheless, nonetheless, so, well, in addition, in brief, in short, as a result, as well as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 15.1003584229 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 9.8082437276 122% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 13.8261648746 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.0286738351 54% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 50.0 43.0788530466 116% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 52.1666666667 105% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.0752688172 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2632.0 1977.66487455 133% => OK
No of words: 505.0 407.700716846 124% => OK
Chars per words: 5.21188118812 4.8611393121 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.74048574033 4.48103885553 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.12530457294 2.67179642975 117% => OK
Unique words: 240.0 212.727598566 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.475247524752 0.524837075471 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 850.5 618.680645161 137% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 14.0 9.59856630824 146% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 9.0 3.51792114695 256% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.86738351254 214% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 8.0 4.94265232975 162% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.6003584229 126% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.1344086022 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.5117834287 48.9658058833 122% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.230769231 100.406767564 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4230769231 20.6045352989 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.69230769231 5.45110844103 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8709677419 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.88709677419 205% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.264348838523 0.236089414692 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0822688454564 0.076458572812 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0858670871304 0.0737576698707 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.171081882717 0.150856017488 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.034604837724 0.0645574589148 54% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 11.7677419355 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 58.1214874552 75% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.1575268817 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 10.9000537634 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.14 8.01818996416 102% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 86.8835125448 131% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.002688172 90% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.0537634409 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.