In this day and age, integrating employees in the decision-making process of their goods and services has become a debatable issue among people from all walks of life all around the world. Although, such operations that involve working people is regarded as thoroughly both positive and constructive by many individuals, there are a number of people hold an opposite view. My opinion is to strongly believe that associating workers in critical choices is quite beneficial for nations since it results in greater engagement within the organisation.
To begin with, there are a number of reasons why I support the idea of considering the opinion of workers in the decision-making practice. First and foremost is that it results in nicer outcomes. Secondly, it causes improved productivity. From my personal experience, implementation of such practices in my organisation it resulted in good engagement within the organisation. Consequently, it is quite conspicuous that associating workers in critical choices is a good thing.
However, there is no doubt that the decision-choosing process that involves workers can produce various negative outcomes. Despite this possibility, it is highly claimed that naive choices can slow down the growth of a company. By way of example, recent academic research conducted by Oxford University researchers in 2012 has shown that such decisions are less feasible economically. Thus, it is quite obvious that the decision-choosing practice that involves working people can be negative too.
To put it in a nutshell, while there are several persuasive arguments on both sides, my opinion depicts that the integration of employees in the decision-making process of their goods and services is beneficial for the employers. Not only due to better decisions but also due to improved productivity.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, thus, while, no doubt, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.5418719212 142% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 6.10837438424 49% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 8.36945812808 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 5.94088669951 185% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 20.9802955665 133% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 44.0 31.9359605911 138% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.75862068966 139% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1552.0 1207.87684729 128% => OK
No of words: 283.0 242.827586207 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.48409893993 5.00649968141 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10153676581 3.92707691288 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.31491329098 2.71678728327 122% => OK
Unique words: 152.0 139.433497537 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.537102473498 0.580463131201 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 491.4 379.143842365 130% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.57093596059 108% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.6157635468 130% => OK
Article: 0.0 1.56157635468 0% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.71428571429 58% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.931034482759 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 3.65517241379 164% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 12.6551724138 111% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.5024630542 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.7137430911 50.4703680194 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.857142857 104.977214359 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.2142857143 20.9669160288 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.35714285714 7.25397266985 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 6.9802955665 143% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 2.75862068966 72% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 2.91625615764 69% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.233110476524 0.242375264174 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0693341677589 0.0925447433944 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0850633787751 0.071462118173 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.145271331907 0.151781067708 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0565941900867 0.0609392437508 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 12.6369458128 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 53.1260098522 80% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.9458128079 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.5 11.5310837438 126% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.04 8.32886699507 109% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 55.0591133005 143% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.94827586207 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.3980295567 96% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.5123152709 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 76.5 Out of 90
---------------------
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.