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.
What Susy says of Sally says more of Susy than of Sally. A simple maxim which can be used to explain why most companies should opt for the option of using consultants rather than listening to the recommendations of their employees. The author suggests that consultants would not be required if more companies listned to the suggestions of their employees. A statement I disagree with as I elucidate my three reasons why in the following paragraphs.
Firstly, recalling the maxim I used. It is true, for a fact, that what one person says of another always elevates themselves and not so much the other person. That's why there is usually the need for a third person to settle disputes. You may ask why I am stating this? In a situation where a comapny were to be undergoing crisis and employees were given the baton to help the company ameliorate this circumstance. Those employees would look within themselves and come to the concluion that they aren't part of the problems the company is facing, whereas, they could possibly be the root cause. It is neccesary to call the help of a third person, in this case the "consultant", in resolving and attempting to make better the crisis of these companies find themselves in. The consultants would always have a more objective view. It is thus necessary that companies call on these heroes of impartiatlity to help grow their businesses.
Furthermore, human beings have a natural inclinement to be political and for this reason alone this suggestion fails to hold water. In the case where a business looks within itself for further growth and employees are requested to submit their individual set of professional recommendation along with team members who they want in their team to accomplish these objectives. All employees would opt for people who they feel they can work with and not necesarily the right people for those jobs. Thus, the need for a third-party i.e consultants would always be fundamental in either trying to move businesses forward or keep their heads above water.
However, as with everything on the surface of the earth. There are certssn anomalies or situations where employees of certain organizations can give valid insights as to how a business should chase porgressive growth. Certain organizations get so political that an outsider who has no fundamental understanding or acute knowledge of the history of said organisations can suggest a reasonable course of action. There are also cases where outstanding employees coupled with their years of experience in said organisations can give adbice that surmounts that of an external factor. For this reason alone I do not completely disagree with the prompt.
Nonetheless, companies should more often than not opt for the option of employing external bodies to root out agents of indolence or internal factors that are worsening the conditions of these businesses. I understand looking outside for help when you have people on the inside can be considered as bad practice, yet, the objective insights external factors bring is self-evident in its positive impact. The maxim in the beginning of this text won't be a dillema if there was a third-party - "Peter" - who knows Susy and Sally.
| 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 |
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position 50
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. 58
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. 50
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. 66
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the pos 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 160, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: That's
...elves and not so much the other person. Thats why there is usually the need for a thi...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 496, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: aren't
...ves and come to the concluion that they arent part of the problems the company is fac...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 560, Rule ID: MAY_COULD_POSSIBLY[1]
Message: Use simply 'could'.
Suggestion: could
...ms the company is facing, whereas, they could possibly be the root cause. It is neccesary to c...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, look, may, nonetheless, so, third, thus, whereas, as to, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.5258426966 108% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.4196629213 145% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 11.3162921348 159% => OK
Pronoun: 51.0 33.0505617978 154% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 66.0 58.6224719101 113% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 12.9106741573 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2712.0 2235.4752809 121% => OK
No of words: 532.0 442.535393258 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.0977443609 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.80261649409 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03518482566 2.79657885939 109% => OK
Unique words: 263.0 215.323595506 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.494360902256 0.4932671777 100% => OK
syllable_count: 834.3 704.065955056 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.2370786517 124% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.6832038615 60.3974514979 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.48 118.986275619 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.28 23.4991977007 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.6 5.21951772744 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.83258426966 207% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.270934467284 0.243740707755 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0764655992671 0.0831039109588 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0858292481877 0.0758088955206 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.157868332361 0.150359130593 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.090272846866 0.0667264976115 135% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.1392134831 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.8420337079 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.3 12.1639044944 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.06 8.38706741573 96% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 100.480337079 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.