The following appeared in a memo at XYZ company When XYZ lays off employees it pays Delany Personnel Firm to offer those employees assistance in creating r sum s and developing interviewing skills if they so desire Laid off employees have benefited gr

In the memo at XYZ company, the author concludes that the company should stick to working with Delany Personnel Firm instead of switching to the less expensive Walsh Personnel Firm in order to assist its laid-off employees in creating a resume and developing interview skills. The writer reaches this conclusion based on the previous not-well-satisfied experience of the company with Walsh Personnel Firm and some evident superiorities Delany maintain over Walsh. Nonetheless, while the conclusion drawn by the writer might hold water, it rests on several unfounded assumptions that, if not substantiated, dramatically weaken the persuasiveness of the argument.

First of all, the author assumes that Walsh Personnel Firm has not improved in recent eight years. It probable that Walsh company has been improved over the last years, and because it has innumerable clients, they offer the same service far cheaper than Delany does. Moreover, maybe other companies eight years ago did not have much trust in clients who were introduced to them by Walsh company since Walsh was not reputable at that time. If either of these scenarios has merit, the author's assertion that Walsh company's inability to find a job for the laid-off workers eight years ago indicates that this company is inferior to Dleany is significantly hampered.

Secondly, the author must provide information regarding the number of workers that currently use Delany and the proportion of them who found a new job. Also, the number of workers who used Wlash eight years ago and its corresponding proportion of workers who found a job. Maybe eight years ago, the number of 1000 workers used Walsh, and half of them, which equals to 500 could find a job within the year. On the other hand, currently, 100 workers use Delany, and 25 of them are able to find a job with even less than six months. If this is true, both the finding job rate and the number of workers trusting Walsh are greater than Delany. The argument does not hold water if the above is true.

Finally, the author must provide evidence about the clients of Walsh and Delany companies. It is probable that Walsh company accept clients not having very strong resume as well as those having strong resumes. This results in a relatively higher average time per person to find a job. However, Delany only admits clients who have a very powerful resume to ensure that they will find a job for them as soon as possible. If the author could find a client that uses both Walsh and Delany companies, he or she can provide more valid data to compare these two companies. If it is true that Delany company only accept clients with a strong resume, but Walsh company accept any clients with any level of knowledge or experience, the credibility of the author's claim decreases substantially.

To recapitulate, it is possible that if XYZ company continue its cooperation with Delany company, it will make sure that its laid-off client will find a job at an appropriate time after being laid off. Nevertheless, as it stands now, the argument relies on several groundless assumptions, three of which are mentioned above.

Votes
Average: 6.8 (2 votes)
Essay Categories

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 484, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ither of these scenarios has merit, the authors assertion that Walsh companys inability...
^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, may, moreover, nevertheless, nonetheless, regarding, second, secondly, so, well, while, as well as, first of all, it is true, on the other hand

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 21.0 13.6137724551 154% => OK
Pronoun: 42.0 28.8173652695 146% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 63.0 55.5748502994 113% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2618.0 2260.96107784 116% => OK
No of words: 526.0 441.139720559 119% => OK
Chars per words: 4.97718631179 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.78901763229 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65239310328 2.78398813304 95% => OK
Unique words: 251.0 204.123752495 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.477186311787 0.468620217663 102% => OK
syllable_count: 799.2 705.55239521 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.271520302 57.8364921388 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.666666667 119.503703932 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.0476190476 23.324526521 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.71428571429 5.70786347227 153% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => 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: 0.174978842392 0.218282227539 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0528957144478 0.0743258471296 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0815477455708 0.0701772020484 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.116079214181 0.128457276422 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0810749261187 0.0628817314937 129% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 48.3550499002 113% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.9 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.03 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 98.500998004 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 12.3882235529 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => 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.

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 526 350
No. of Characters: 2555 1500
No. of Different Words: 233 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.789 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.857 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.585 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 177 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 125 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 79 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 54 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.048 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.127 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.762 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.353 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.574 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.197 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5