The following appeared in a report presented for discussion at a meeting of the directors of a company that manufactures parts for heavy machinery:
The falling revenues that the company is experiencing coincide with delays in manufacturing. These delays, in turn, are due in large part to poor planning in purchasing metals. Consider further that the manager of the department that handles purchasing of raw materials has an excellent background in general business, psychology, and sociology, but knows little about the properties of metals. The company should, therefore, move the purchasing manager to the sales department and bring in a scientist from the research division to be manager of the purchasing department.
Report presented for discussion at a meeting of directors of company that manufactures parts of heavy machinery stated the reason for falling revenues of company is because of delays in manufacturing and that is because of poor planning in purchasing metals. That blames goes on head to manager who is excelled in general business, psychology and sociology but lack of knowledge about mettle properties. So, company wants to tranfer manager to sales and wants to bring a scientist from research division to be manager in purchasing department. However, this report has many flaws. As it forgets to consider many unaddressed assumption and having many inconsistancies. So, this argument is deeply flawed.
A report stated the reason for decreasing revenue is delay in manufacturing and that is because of poor planning in purchasing. But what if a manufacture department give wrong message to purchase department which end up having wrong planning and gives wrong result to company. If a revenue is falling then we can't conclude that this is because of delays in manufacturing without specific evidence. If one company break a contract, poor quality from manufacture department and poor attitude from seller also leads towards same result. So, without considering other parameters and giving blame to poor planning in purchasing metals for falling revenue is not insightful by directors of company.
There is also mentioning about skills of manager in psychology, sociology and general business but he does not possess a knowledge of metal properties. So, they want to transfer him to selling department and want to bring a scientist from research department to be a manager. Though, a research division scientist does not know how to consult a supplier and how to reduce cost as old manager knows because of his knowledge of general business. In purchasing metal that much knowledge of metal properties does not required because this department just give order as manufacturer and research division wants. If a scientist comes as a manager and he failed to communicate with staff and also with supplier then that may create a chaotic situation for company and that leads towards more revenue lose. But an old manager has knowledge and good background in sociology and psychology he may handle this things differently. SO, scientist may possess knowledge of metals but does not possess a knowledge of handling unwanted situation
As director board wants to transfer manager to sells department which works perfectly and wants to remove most experience member from purchasing department then that may create some bad feeling inside employee of that department because if they are facing trouble then they need more and experienced guy not more transfer. So, choosing this option does not lead any more profit.
Above argument weakens argument made by board of directors. As they did not consider other departments' work and want to transfer experienced manager but this did not help to stop decreasing revenues. So, they have to find out proper reason and then consider proper action.
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: 23 15
No. of Words: 496 350
No. of Characters: 2550 1500
No. of Different Words: 207 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.719 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.141 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.799 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 204 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 163 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 110 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 69 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.565 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.333 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.739 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.299 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.506 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.094 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 163, Rule ID: REASON_IS_BECAUSE[1]
Message: Probably an incorrect phrase. Use 'the reason 'is that''.
Suggestion: is that
... reason for falling revenues of company is because of delays in manufacturing and that is ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 310, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...ompany. If a revenue is falling then we cant conclude that this is because of delays...
^^^^
Line 5, column 514, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[3]
Message: The verb 'does' requires base form of the verb: 'require'
Suggestion: require
... knowledge of metal properties does not required because this department just give order...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 705, Rule ID: COMP_THAN[3]
Message: Comparison requires 'than', not 'then' nor 'as'.
Suggestion: than
...icate with staff and also with supplier then that may create a chaotic situation for...
^^^^
Line 5, column 895, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
... sociology and psychology he may handle this things differently. SO, scientist may p...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, may, so, then, in general
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.6327345309 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.9520958084 39% => OK
Conjunction : 27.0 11.1786427146 242% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 28.8173652695 101% => OK
Preposition: 74.0 55.5748502994 133% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2600.0 2260.96107784 115% => OK
No of words: 496.0 441.139720559 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.24193548387 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.71922212354 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84655429563 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 213.0 204.123752495 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.429435483871 0.468620217663 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 801.0 705.55239521 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 2.0 8.76447105788 23% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 82.5064610543 57.8364921388 143% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.181818182 119.503703932 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5454545455 23.324526521 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.22727272727 5.70786347227 39% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.88822355289 174% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.184427309534 0.218282227539 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0599492179029 0.0743258471296 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.110420948715 0.0701772020484 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.108772838597 0.128457276422 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.103231277112 0.0628817314937 164% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 14.3799401198 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.41 12.5979740519 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.72 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 98.500998004 95% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.