"In an effort to improve our employees' productivity, we should implement electronic monitoring of employees' Internet use from their workstations. Employees who use the Internet inappropriately from their workstations need to be identified and punished if we are to reduce the number of work hours spent on personal or recreational activities, such as shopping or playing games. Installing software on company computers to detect employees' Internet use is the best way to prevent employees from wasting time on the job. It will foster a better work ethic at Climpson and improve our overall profits."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
The author of the argument purportedly highlights that the company should adopt electronic monitoring of their employees in order to develop productivity and prevent workers from spending too much time on entertainment and recreation by the internet. However, the premises upon which he puts his claim are fallacious. For the support of which some critical, yet ignored question need to be addressed.
The first assumption that lacks some semblance of truth and can be overtly impugned is the fact that electronic monitoring would improve employees' productivity in the workplace. However, it does not lend credence to the argument since a question that might arise is whether electronic monitoring could be useful to enhance productivity. One point that should be considered is that the author does not show how this monitoring will work in the working environment and how it will increase the productivity. In fact, there is a possibility that it represents a reverse outcome. Arguably, the mutual trust between employees and employers might diminish if employees become cognizant of electronic monitoring. So, it might create a negative effect on employees, which does not allow them to work precisely and properly.
The author also embraces the idea that employees use the internet for recreation and play should be identified and punished. Although it might seem tenable in a face, it has some defects since you can always ask this question if punishment and identification can improve the working quality of the employees. One of the main, if not the only, problem with the premise is that the author does not provide any information about whether employees start to play during their working hours or in their leisure time. Indeed, there is a possibility that workers use the internet for recreation after working hours when they finish their tasks completely. Moreover, if the company sets specific punishment and enact strict rules, employees might drop out of the company.
Putting the two previous assumptions aside, there is still room for doubt. As set forth by the author in order to prevent employees from wasting time on their jobs, the company should install a software on the computers. Nevertheless, the rationale behind this premise could be challenged owing to unsettled question if install software could prevent employees from wasting time. One point that should not go unnoticed is that at a first sight it might work properly but, what if employees waste the time by other activities like going to different place at their works or play with their own device and so forth. These are problems that the software is not able to handle and solve successfully.
Having scrutinized all the premises, a logical conclusion that can be drawn is that there are a number of questions having been ignored while the answer of which could add to the logic of each premise.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 471 350
No. of Characters: 2370 1500
No. of Different Words: 222 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.659 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.032 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.689 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 164 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 137 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 94 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 63 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.55 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.319 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.7 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.303 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.52 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.079 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 203, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...could add to the logic of each premise.
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, moreover, nevertheless, so, still, while, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 23.0 12.9520958084 178% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 11.1786427146 143% => OK
Relative clauses : 20.0 13.6137724551 147% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 28.8173652695 132% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 52.0 55.5748502994 94% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2428.0 2260.96107784 107% => OK
No of words: 471.0 441.139720559 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.15498938429 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65859790218 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76581961815 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 230.0 204.123752495 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.488322717622 0.468620217663 104% => OK
syllable_count: 733.5 705.55239521 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.0673864063 57.8364921388 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.4 119.503703932 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.55 23.324526521 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.0 5.70786347227 70% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.278545876556 0.218282227539 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0825034241259 0.0743258471296 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0700010120696 0.0701772020484 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.147589195177 0.128457276422 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0705453096607 0.0628817314937 112% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.89 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.13 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 98.500998004 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.