The following appeared as a memorandum from the Human Resources director at Dexter Gorman Instruments, a company that manufactures saxophones.
"On this year's survey about work habits, our employees tended to strongly agree with the idea that if they took less time to complete their assigned work, the quality of their work would suffer. However, we recently conducted an internal study that proves this idea wrong. Managers across several divisions identified an overtime group: the employees who worked an average of 48 or more hours per week over the past year instead of the expected 40 hours per week. We then looked at the number of documented work errors produced by all of our employees during the past year and found that the overtime group was responsible for significantly more work errors overall than their fellow employees. On the basis of these findings, our recommendation to the company president is to require employees at Dexter Gorman Instruments to complete their work during the regular 40-hour work week and allow overtime only for urgent circumstances."
The memorandum from the Human Resources director at Dextor Gorman Instruments recomments the president of the company to pursuade employees to complete their work duing the regular 40 - hour week and allow overtime only when the situation demands. However the prediction is contingent upon several questions that must be answered to properly evaluate the validity of the argument.
First the argument begins with how the quality of work is being effected by the employees who take less time to complete their assigned work. However there might be other data taken along with this survey which revolves around why does he/she agree so and if this was asked why isn't the related data not presented in the argument. The survey informations seems incomplete as it is important for each survey to mention how many employees have they asked for inputs and do these employees represent each and every sector of the company. If it represents every sector of the company then only the survey is valid and considerable.
In furtherance, the only justification attached which mentions that the overtime group identified by several managers who work for more than 48 hours unlike other who work less that 40 hours tend to produce more documented errors. However this doesnt assure the argument completely. Perhaps a comparison of documented errors made by the group while working overtime than the same group working in time coul strengthen the argument. As it clearly justifies the relation between hours of working and the errors made unlike the justification presented in the argument which is banal and can be misunderstood due to different group of employees involved in comparison.
Additionally the justification just includes documentation erros but what about other errors. The argument begins with how the yearly survey about people's perspective of work habits is wrong which claims that the quality of work is negative effected by the employees who take less time to complete the assignmed work. However the quality of the work is not merely determined by documentation. It inculcates factor like the management, production depending on which department the employee belongs to, which is missing in the argument. Hence a bar chart which includes three field of a group working with lesser number of hours than expected, is working as much as reuired and working overtime for every department or sector in the company could help the decision making team to measure the severity of this recommendation for implementation.
In conclusion, despite the study which presents that overtime groups produce more documentation errors than the fellow employees the recommendation based on the study given is rife with unwarranted study and open to the question stated above questions that must be answered satisfactorily to prove the plausibility of such presentments.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 9 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 13 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 458 350
No. of Characters: 2374 1500
No. of Different Words: 219 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.626 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.183 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.819 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 169 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 135 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 102 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 60 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 28.625 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.999 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.625 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.352 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.579 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.105 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 249, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...ertime only when the situation demands. However the prediction is contingent upon sever...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 143, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...s time to complete their assigned work. However there might be other data taken along w...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 244, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[1]
Message: The pronoun 'she' must be used with a third-person verb: 'agrees'.
Suggestion: agrees
...y which revolves around why does he/she agree so and if this was asked why isnt the r...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 279, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
.../she agree so and if this was asked why isnt the related data not presented in the a...
^^^^
Line 6, column 232, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...tend to produce more documented errors. However this doesnt assure the argument complet...
^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 245, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...ce more documented errors. However this doesnt assure the argument completely. Perhaps...
^^^^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Additionally,
... employees involved in comparison. Additionally the justification just includes documen...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 319, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...ss time to complete the assignmed work. However the quality of the work is not merely d...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 536, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...s to, which is missing in the argument. Hence a bar chart which includes three field ...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 575, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'field' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'fields'.
Suggestion: fields
... Hence a bar chart which includes three field of a group working with lesser number o...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, hence, however, if, so, then, while, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.9520958084 39% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 13.6137724551 140% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 55.5748502994 103% => OK
Nominalization: 27.0 16.3942115768 165% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2416.0 2260.96107784 107% => OK
No of words: 456.0 441.139720559 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.29824561404 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62105577807 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87448573549 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 220.0 204.123752495 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.482456140351 0.468620217663 103% => OK
syllable_count: 753.3 705.55239521 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => 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: 28.0 22.8473053892 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 79.7619260283 57.8364921388 138% => OK
Chars per sentence: 151.0 119.503703932 126% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.5 23.324526521 122% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.875 5.70786347227 68% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 10.0 5.25449101796 190% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.209956957045 0.218282227539 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0708571632819 0.0743258471296 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0588327511929 0.0701772020484 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.119472857058 0.128457276422 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0605563525548 0.0628817314937 96% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.8 14.3799401198 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.6 48.3550499002 72% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 12.197005988 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.76 12.5979740519 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.73 8.32208582834 105% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 98.500998004 109% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 11.1389221557 119% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.