Issue Essay - GRE
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 would disagree with the above statement because it devalues the expertise and knowledge that the outside consultants have. The work of a consultant involves being an expert in a particular area, so much so that the sole purpose of their job is to give advice to companies in that said field. Consultants are trained professionals. Before they can obtain a consulting position, they have to have reached a particular degree in education (i.e. Masters or above) and have a large amount of real-life experience within their field of work outside of consulting (more than 5 years working in the field). Consultants are often much older, more experienced members of the professional world that have stopped working in the field themselves to pass down their knowledge to the younger generation or either highly ranked professional of their field. These consultants have massive amounts of knowledge and probably have experienced the same efficiency errors that the inquiring company has. Through their experience, consultants can provide an abundance of guidance. Deeming consultants unnecessary would totally disregard the value that they could provide for a company.
The part of the statement that is true is the value of the employees. For a company to be as efficient as possible, it must take into account the opinions and suggestions from those who work their on a daily basis. For if the changes to the company do not benefit those who work for the company, it will not benefit the company as a whole.
The use of consulting does not disagree with this. In fact, the process of consulting heavily involves the employees.
The statement suggests that consultants disregard the employees completely. But in actuality, consultant is very hands on with the company they are working with. The reason why the statement is false is because the statement disregards the process in which consulting work flows. Consultants do not walk into a company and assume they know everything about it and force the company to listen to guidance. Their goal is to create an efficiency plan through collaboration. Before any guidance is given, consultants must study and observe how the company runs. They usually do this by interviewing current employees and going through the day-to-day routines. They take their observations and what they learned from the employees and create an action plan of goals and actions that they would suggest to become more efficient. This statement is not true just because of their skewed understanding of consultants, but also because the statement does not fully acknowledge the process of consulting. Part of the work of a consultant is to "listen to the employees". The entire process of using consultants to suggest ways for a company to operate more efficiently stems from listening to employees and moves forward from the thoughts and suggest of them as well.
All in all, when it comes to improving a company, consulting work can be very valuable in the growth of a company.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 790, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'suggest becoming'.
Suggestion: suggest becoming
...an of goals and actions that they would suggest to become more efficient. This statement is not t...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, so, well, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 14.8657303371 114% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.3162921348 115% => OK
Pronoun: 42.0 33.0505617978 127% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 75.0 58.6224719101 128% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 12.9106741573 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2517.0 2235.4752809 113% => OK
No of words: 493.0 442.535393258 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.10547667343 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.71206996034 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91323935407 2.79657885939 104% => OK
Unique words: 217.0 215.323595506 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.440162271805 0.4932671777 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 774.9 704.065955056 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.740449438202 135% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.2370786517 124% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 56.0299348563 60.3974514979 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.68 118.986275619 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.72 23.4991977007 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.28 5.21951772744 25% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.83258426966 186% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.325156443268 0.243740707755 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.10115635802 0.0831039109588 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0571884377467 0.0758088955206 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.170684295272 0.150359130593 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0716648755995 0.0667264976115 107% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 14.1392134831 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.8420337079 107% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 12.1639044944 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.75 8.38706741573 92% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 100.480337079 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.8971910112 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 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.