All too often, companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently. If companies were to spend more time listening to their own employees, such consultants would be unnecessary.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with these statements and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statements might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
I completely agree with these statements. I strongly believe that if companies allotted time to receive feedback directly from their employees, then not only would they get the most first-hand responses, they would also be saving money. Granted, sometimes hiring a professional consultant who is well-versed in such matters might be a great strategy, so also is being attentive to employees who are literally dedicated to creating an efficient and productive work environment.
An employee, for example, who has been working for Company X for 12 years would have gathered so much intel, experience, and knowledge of the inner workings of the company in a way that a consultant who has been at Company X for 5 days does not know. That employee has had more experiences under the management to know where they lack and where they can improve upon and if listened to, they have the ability to make a positive impact on the company. One may disagree with this point stating that if said employee has all this information, they may not want to discuss it with executives because they fear that they may lose their jobs or be despised by coworkers and seen as obnoxious. Although this is a strong argument, I believe that if the company is willing to listen rather than take offence at what the employee suggests, then they will be better off.
Also, just as a group member in a college project can easily point out which other member of the group is very active in research and solving problems versus another who is so lazy and never does any work, so also will an employee be able to instantly identify the inefficient workers. He has had time to build work relationships with his coworkers and he may know where the inefficiency might be originating from, so, rather than higher a consultant, i think it would be better to hold a forum where employees can freely speak.
Lastly, it probably costs a lot of money to hire a consultant so it is better to gather feedback from people who already work for you than spending more money to get information that you could easily obtain at any time from your current employees.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-26 | Arpit Sahni | 58 | view |
| 2020-01-24 | shamitha | 66 | view |
| 2020-01-18 | JENIRSHAH | 50 | view |
| 2020-01-17 | caseya5 | 66 | view |
| 2020-01-14 | Siddiqur Rahman | 50 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...cient and productive work environment. An employee, for example, who has been w...
^^^
Line 5, column 97, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...sily point out which other member of the group is very active in research and sol...
^^
Line 5, column 454, Rule ID: I_LOWERCASE[2]
Message: Did you mean 'I'?
Suggestion: I
...m, so, rather than higher a consultant, i think it would be better to hold a foru...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, if, lastly, may, so, then, well, for example, i think
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.4196629213 129% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 14.8657303371 61% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 11.3162921348 159% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 33.0505617978 109% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 58.6224719101 67% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 12.9106741573 46% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1756.0 2235.4752809 79% => OK
No of words: 370.0 442.535393258 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.74594594595 5.05705443957 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38581623665 4.55969084622 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65575989656 2.79657885939 95% => OK
Unique words: 204.0 215.323595506 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.551351351351 0.4932671777 112% => OK
syllable_count: 540.9 704.065955056 77% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.740449438202 135% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.38483146067 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 20.2370786517 49% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 37.0 23.0359550562 161% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 64.5093016549 60.3974514979 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 175.6 118.986275619 148% => OK
Words per sentence: 37.0 23.4991977007 157% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.6 5.21951772744 126% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.223389031872 0.243740707755 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0856411723995 0.0831039109588 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0664815345004 0.0758088955206 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.138076559033 0.150359130593 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0528296151698 0.0667264976115 79% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.4 14.1392134831 137% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.38 48.8420337079 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.5 12.1743820225 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.86 12.1639044944 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.93 8.38706741573 106% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 100.480337079 81% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 16.8 11.2143820225 150% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 11.7820224719 144% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 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: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.