In many organizations, perhaps the best way to approach certain new projects is to assemble a group of people into a team. Having a team of people attack a project offers several advantages.
First of all, a group of people has a wider range of knowledge, expertise, and skills than any single individual is likely to possess. Also, because of the members of people involved and the greater resources they possess, a group can work more quickly in response to the task assigned to it and can come up with highly creative solutions to problems and issues. Sometimes these creative solutions come about because a group is more likely to make risky decisions that an individual might not undertake. This is because the group spreads responsibility for a decision to all the members and thus no single individual can be held accountable if the decision turns out to be wrong.
Taking part in a group process can be very rewarding for members of the team. Team members who have a voice in making a decision will no doubt feel better about carrying out the work that is entailed by the decision than they might doing work that is imposed on them by others.
Also, the individual team member has a much better chance to “shine”, to get his or her contributions and ideas not only recognized but recognized as highly significant, because a team’s overall results can be more far-reaching and have greater impact than what might have otherwise been possible for the person to accomplish or contribute working alone.
The lecture cast doubts on team work as the reading supports on few aspects.
The reading believes that through team work, the projects can be process better than work alone. Nonetheless, the lecture points out some disadvantages brought by team work.
Firstly, the lecture mentioned free rider in a team. Albeit the reading gave us the idea of wider experiences, better performances, and greater skills when the project is processed by team work, people who did not contribute at all can still be rewarded if the project goes well cannot be ignored. Also, when there is one person who worked excellent and solved many problems, what he has done can be seen as done by the whole group.
Secondly, the lecture opposed the concept of taking part in a group process can make team members feel better advocated by the reading. Group work can be not efficient easily since it takes many meetings to reach a single agreement.
Finally, the lecture brought forward that group work can lead people with accurate opinions to not to speak out because the advice can be ignored by the other group members while the reading convinced members can shine in a team.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 80, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...pt of taking part in a group process can make team members feel better advocated ...
^^
Line 4, column 168, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...reading. Group work can be not efficient easily since it takes many meetings to r...
^^
Line 5, column 124, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...opinions to not to speak out because the advice can be ignored by the other group...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, firstly, if, nonetheless, second, secondly, so, still, well, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 7.30242825607 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 12.0772626932 50% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 5.0 22.412803532 22% => OK
Preposition: 21.0 30.3222958057 69% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 957.0 1373.03311258 70% => OK
No of words: 198.0 270.72406181 73% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.83333333333 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.75116612262 4.04702891845 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.40843435985 2.5805825403 93% => OK
Unique words: 118.0 145.348785872 81% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.59595959596 0.540411800872 110% => OK
syllable_count: 286.2 419.366225166 68% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => 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: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.2179929403 49.2860985944 130% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.333333333 110.228320801 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 21.698381199 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.3333333333 7.06452816374 146% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.27373068433 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.190167685881 0.272083759551 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0863568564154 0.0996497079465 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0380082002501 0.0662205650399 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.11147832636 0.162205337803 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.040224137397 0.0443174109184 91% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.3589403974 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 66.07 53.8541721854 123% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.73 12.2367328918 88% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.16 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 43.0 63.6247240618 68% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.