There are both advantages and disadvantages of company workers accessing their own products and services. Discuss.
Recently the phenomenon of granting accsess to own products of company workers has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of using services by employees is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I highly believe that commercial policies can be a plus, and I will investigate that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, using productions of a company by its labors can provide the society with noticable effects that are rooted in the fact that merits, as well as advantages of the quality improvement are crucial. According to my own experience when I was a university student I performed an academic experiment that discovered the importance of a factory production management . Thus, beneficial ramifications of high-quality services are visible.
From a scientific point of view, selling goods to the factory workers can provide the community with negative impacts that are related to the reality that demerits of non-standard productions are remarkable. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university described the role of services development. Hence, predicted outcomes of outdated products are noticable.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of using products and services of a firm by its workers far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of commercial policies prove the significance of advertisement analysis, but also pinpoint its implications.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 385, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...tance of a factory production management . Thus, beneficial ramifications of high-...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, if, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.5418719212 104% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 6.10837438424 65% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 8.36945812808 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 20.9802955665 95% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 31.9359605911 106% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.75862068966 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1373.0 1207.87684729 114% => OK
No of words: 244.0 242.827586207 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.62704918033 5.00649968141 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.95227774224 3.92707691288 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.27296041643 2.71678728327 120% => OK
Unique words: 147.0 139.433497537 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.602459016393 0.580463131201 104% => OK
syllable_count: 444.6 379.143842365 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.6157635468 43% => OK
Article: 0.0 1.56157635468 0% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.5024630542 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.5910440279 50.4703680194 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.818181818 104.977214359 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.1818181818 20.9669160288 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 7.25397266985 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 6.9802955665 100% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 2.91625615764 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.255235425715 0.242375264174 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0839988534887 0.0925447433944 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0571784847312 0.071462118173 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.141095256279 0.151781067708 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0232658844164 0.0609392437508 38% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 12.6369458128 128% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 53.1260098522 61% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 10.9458128079 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.37 11.5310837438 133% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.62 8.32886699507 128% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 55.0591133005 165% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.94827586207 146% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.3980295567 104% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.5123152709 105% => 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.