Which is more important for a leader:
the ability to win an argument about an issue or the ability to help others come to an agreement about an issue?
Being a leader is not an easy job. In order to address the followers, a leader must understand the scenario and work accordingly. The subject whether a leader should win an argument or get to agreement about an issue is quite debatable. In my opinion, a leader should assist others come to an agreement. I believe this for two reasons which I will explore in the following essay.
First, when a leader tries to reach an agreement, he also succeeds to content everyone. That is, reaching an agreement makes everyone feel satisfied. As B.P Koirala has said, “the work of a leader is not just to move in-front of the followers but also to show right direction.” My personal experience is a great example of this. The argument whether the school should allow students bring mobile phones at school became a hot topic when some of my friends used the violent way to express their opinion to the head teacher. I, being students’ representative had a duty to address both sides and reach to the conclusion which should have satisfied both parties. Hence, I called for the meeting of administration and students and the meeting got to the conclusion to let students use mobile phones at school but under the surveillance of teachers. For this reason, a leader should try reach an agreement to satisfy others.
Second, a leader when attempts to reach an agreement, he/she can know the issues of both debating parties. To be more specific, being a leader and listening to the arguments between both parties, the positive and negative sides of the argument can be known and the decision can be made accordingly. Drawing from my personal experience, our municipality once had debate on to which contractor the contract to build school building should be given. Among two proposing contractors, one had an idea to build modern building with high tech equipped features whereas other one had an idea to build a traditional style of building with earthquake resistant structure. Listening to both parties, analyzing each party’s concept, the municipality reached to the conclusion to build high tech equipped building. Hence, it is clear to see that a leader when tries to reach an agreement, can analyze the aspects of both debating parties.
In conclusion, I strongly believe that a leader should develop an ability to come to an agreement about an issue which serves positively for everyone. By doing this, he/she can satisfy everyone and at the same time, he/she can listen to overall aspects of the issue. Therefore, if I were a leader, I would definitely choose to reach an agreement to an issue without winning an argument.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 150, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “As” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...greement makes everyone feel satisfied. As B.P Koirala has said, “the work of a le...
^^
Line 2, column 155, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: P
...ent makes everyone feel satisfied. As B.P Koirala has said, “the work of a leader...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, but, first, hence, if, second, so, therefore, whereas, in conclusion, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 15.1003584229 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 9.8082437276 163% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 13.8261648746 80% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 43.0788530466 63% => OK
Preposition: 61.0 52.1666666667 117% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 8.0752688172 223% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2187.0 1977.66487455 111% => OK
No of words: 444.0 407.700716846 109% => OK
Chars per words: 4.92567567568 4.8611393121 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.5903493882 4.48103885553 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77261949026 2.67179642975 104% => OK
Unique words: 215.0 212.727598566 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.484234234234 0.524837075471 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 673.2 618.680645161 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 9.59856630824 115% => OK
Article: 8.0 3.08781362007 259% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6003584229 102% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.1344086022 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.6022777851 48.9658058833 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.142857143 100.406767564 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.1428571429 20.6045352989 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.85714285714 5.45110844103 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 11.8709677419 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => 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: 0.427521374944 0.236089414692 181% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.159076139566 0.076458572812 208% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.171105327367 0.0737576698707 232% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.334997206256 0.150856017488 222% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.172763752784 0.0645574589148 268% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 11.7677419355 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 58.1214874552 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.1575268817 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.31 10.9000537634 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.2 8.01818996416 102% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 86.8835125448 114% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 5.5 10.002688172 55% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.0537634409 103% => 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: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.