The vice president of human resources at Climpson Industries sent the following recommendation to the company's president.
"A recent national survey found that the majority of workers with access to the Internet at work had used company computers for personal or recreational activities, such as banking or playing games. In an effort to improve our employees' productivity, we should implement electronic monitoring of employees' Internet use from their workstations. Using electronic monitoring software is the best way to reduce the number of hours Climpson employees spend on personal or recreational activities. We predict that installing software to monitor employees' Internet use will allow us to prevent employees from wasting time, thereby increasing productivity and improving overall profits."
The president of Climpson Industries received a recommendation from their human resources vice president to monitor employees’ internet use at their workstations to enhance productivity and profits. The human resources vice president has come to this conclusion based on a recent national survey that cited internet access at work has been misused for personal and recreational activities, as well as that monitoring their internet access would lead to them wasting less time and being more productive. However, before this recommendation can be properly evaluated, two questions must be answered.
First of all, would a national survey apply to Climpson Industries? In other words, can a generalised recommendation for various companies be suited to work well for Climpson Industries? It is possible that this would not apply to Climpson Industries at all - perhaps the survey was conducted for companies in the software industry, while Climpson Industries is a corporate-facing company. Further, there is a possibility that the national survey was rigged - relying on its authenticity and results would be imprudent. If either of these scenarios hold merit, the conclusion drawn in the original argument is significantly weakened.
Secondly, would preventing employees from using the internet for personal activities at their workstations be efficacious in reducing overall time wasted? The human resources vice president prematurely assumes that employees majorly waste time while using the internet for recreation. However, this may not be the case. Perhaps, the company employees would seek other sources of entertainment, such as chatting with counterparts and participating in indoor games to substitute for this lost pleasure. If the above is true, then the recommendation does not hold water.
In conclusion, the recommendation, as it stands now, is considerably flawed due to its reliance on several unwarranted assumptions. If the human resources vice president of Climpson Industries is able to answer the two questions and offer more evidence(perhaps in the form of a company-specific survey), then it will be possible to fully evaluate the viability of the proposed recommendation to electronically monitor the internet usage of Climpson Industries employees at their workstations.
Comments
e-rater score report
At least 3 arguments wanted.
======================
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 10 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 10 2
No. of Sentences: 15 15
No. of Words: 343 350
No. of Characters: 1911 1500
No. of Different Words: 165 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.304 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.571 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.287 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 140 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 123 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 102 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 67 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.867 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.811 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.867 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.334 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.539 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.083 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 17, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'would' requires the base form of the verb: 'prevent'
Suggestion: prevent
...nificantly weakened. Secondly, would preventing employees from using the internet for p...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, well, while, in conclusion, such as, as well as, first of all, in other words, as well as that
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 13.6137724551 37% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 28.8173652695 76% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 55.5748502994 72% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1962.0 2260.96107784 87% => OK
No of words: 343.0 441.139720559 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.72011661808 5.12650576532 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30351707066 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.38490167306 2.78398813304 122% => OK
Unique words: 172.0 204.123752495 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.501457725948 0.468620217663 107% => OK
syllable_count: 606.6 705.55239521 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59920159681 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => 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 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 84.4250094594 57.8364921388 146% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.8 119.503703932 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8666666667 23.324526521 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.8 5.70786347227 172% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.428451224295 0.218282227539 196% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.136412704145 0.0743258471296 184% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.114752404913 0.0701772020484 164% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.269066045592 0.128457276422 209% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0536906998618 0.0628817314937 85% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.9 14.3799401198 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 48.3550499002 67% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.197005988 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.19 12.5979740519 129% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.19 8.32208582834 110% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 98.500998004 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 11.9071856287 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.