In many organizations, perhaps the best way to approach certain new projects is to assemble a group of people into a team. Having a team of people attack a project offers several advantages.
First of all, a group of people has a wider range of knowledge, expertise, and skills than any single individual is likely to possess. Also, because of the nimbers of people involved and the greater resources they possess, a group can work more quickly in response to the task assigned to it and can come up with highly creative solutions to problems and issues. Sometimes these creative solutions come about because a group is more likely to make risky decisions that an individual might not undertake. This is because the group spreads responsibility for a decision to all the members and thus no single individual can be held accountable if the decision turns out to be wrong.
Taking part in a group process can be very rewarding for members of the team. Team members who have a voice in making a decision will no doubt feel better about carrying out the work that is entailed by the decision than they might doing work that is imposed on them by others.
Also, the individual team member has a much better chance to “shine”, to get his or her contributions and ideas not only recognized but recognized as highly significant, because a team’s overall results can be more far-reaching and have greater impact than what might have otherwise been possible for the person to accomplish or contribute working alone.
The author presents an idea about teamwork and supports it with three reasons. On Contrast, the lecturer provides a real-time experience of a firm and challenges all the reasons provided by the writer.
To begin with, the text holds that a hardworking individual can grab good attention when the team succeeds. However, the professor denies this statement and exemplifies a team project situation in a company, where the results after 6months were in contrast to the statement from the writer. He says that few people got a free ride and didn't produce as much as the hard-working people. However, when the team got successful, no individual names were taken and people who really worked hard were not recognized.
Secondly, according to the writer with the wide knowledge expertise, creative solutions in a small time frame are achievable. Again, the speaker rebuts this thought. He contends with an example where a project got delayed because the team members could not get to a common ground which resulted in multiple meetings to move forward.
Finally, the reading passage claims that an individual would feel rewarding when his idea is accepted by the team. On the other hand, the speaking rules out this idea. He negates showcasing an incident in a team that some influencers tried to push their ideas as being more creative and also put down some ideas stating that they had flaws. He adds that even when some people in the team tried to warn the other team members they were not considered.
To sum it up, as you can see, the author and speaker hold differing ideas on working as a team.
- It is more important for governments to spend money to improve Internet access than to improve public transportation 87
- In the United States employees typically work five days a week for eight hours each day However many employees want to work a four day week and are willing to accept less pay in order to do so A mandatory policy requiring companies to offer their employee 73
- In many organizations perhaps the best way to approach certain new projects is to assemble a group of people into a team Having a team of people attack a project offers several advantages First of all a group of people has a wider range of knowledge exper 66
- It is more important for governments to spend money to improve Internet access than to improve public transportation 76
- alternative energy sources 60
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 335, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...ays that few people got a free ride and didnt produce as much as the hard-working peo...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, however, if, really, second, secondly, so, in contrast, in contrast to, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1327.0 1373.03311258 97% => OK
No of words: 273.0 270.72406181 101% => OK
Chars per words: 4.86080586081 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06481385082 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.54213509831 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 161.0 145.348785872 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.589743589744 0.540411800872 109% => OK
syllable_count: 397.8 419.366225166 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.1736028674 49.2860985944 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.7857142857 110.228320801 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5 21.698381199 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.85714285714 7.06452816374 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 4.33554083885 208% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.148384942977 0.272083759551 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0486430501334 0.0996497079465 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0419487253443 0.0662205650399 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0717783858238 0.162205337803 44% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0405921307527 0.0443174109184 92% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.2 13.3589403974 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 53.8541721854 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.91 12.2367328918 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.51 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 63.6247240618 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 20.0 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.