All too often, companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently. If companies were to spend more time listening to their own employees, such consultants would be unnecessary.Write a response in which you discu

Essay topics:

All too often, companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently. If companies were to spend more time listening to their own employees, such consultants would be unnecessary.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with these statements and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statements might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.

I disagree with the statement that companies who listen more to their own employees would not need outside consultants. Although listening to one's own employees and hiring outside consultants are two different approaches to company betterment, they are not mutually exclusive, and one approach would not necessarily eliminate a need for the other.

Companies generally hire outside consultants to increase profit by boosting overall efficiency. These outside consultants take a 'big picture' stance when viewing what the company should change. The suggestions from outside consultants are important because they come from an objective and knowledgeable source, and companies often need the advice of others who are not involved in the day-to-day aspects of the company itself.

In addition to receiving suggestions from hired outside sources, companies should also be sure to listen to their employees. The human resources side of business is certainly important in its own way, and ensuring the satisfaction of employees helps to keep up productivity within the company. This intra-business, individual-focused approach to company efficiency is certainly one important aspect, but it is certainly not the only necessity to run a successful business.

One example of this multi-pronged approach in action involves the National Institutes of Health (NIH). At the NIH, outside contractors are hired to evaluate the quality of data analysis, assess both ethical and practical aspects of research proposals, and even provide a quadrennial review of the use of funds for research and the related outcomes. In addition to all these quality controls and efficiency checks that are necessary to keep the research on-track and of the highest possible quality, there are ample opportunities for employees themselves to make suggestions and express their own opinions on how to improve both the research itself and the work environment generally. This truly holistic approach allows employees to be heard in addition to utilizing the expertise of objective outsiders to improve the company as much as possible. Because employees are involved in very specific tasks or research areas, it would not make sense to only rely on individual suggestions. Especially in such a large, diversified work environment, it is important to have some suggestions from consultants who know how to remain detached and to assess the overall efficiency of such a large-scale environment.

In some cases, such as with small start-up businesses, it may be true that employee opinions are the only ones necessary to increase efficiency, especially if there is a smaller budget with which to work. Given the cost of hiring outside consultants, it is certainly true that some of these smaller businesses would not benefit enough from the advice to justify the hiring, and that in-house assessment of efficiency could provide high quality suggestions for improvement. In these cases, the original statement could hold true. However, it is often the case that a multi-pronged, multi-level approach involving both subjective inside and objective outside suggestions provide the best assortment of suggestions for how to increase a company's efficiency.

Votes
Average: 6.6 (1 vote)
Essay Categories

Comments

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, may, so, in addition, such as, in some cases

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

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.5258426966 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 14.8657303371 114% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 33.0505617978 88% => OK
Preposition: 78.0 58.6224719101 133% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2728.0 2235.4752809 122% => OK
No of words: 493.0 442.535393258 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.53346855984 5.05705443957 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.71206996034 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.09656928954 2.79657885939 111% => OK
Unique words: 234.0 215.323595506 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.474645030426 0.4932671777 96% => OK
syllable_count: 866.7 704.065955056 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 1.77640449438 338% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 23.0359550562 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 70.6811873621 60.3974514979 117% => OK
Chars per sentence: 151.555555556 118.986275619 127% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.3888888889 23.4991977007 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.77777777778 5.21951772744 72% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.318740194928 0.243740707755 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.107405520651 0.0831039109588 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0826396631293 0.0758088955206 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.199081274362 0.150359130593 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0680628463708 0.0667264976115 102% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.3 14.1392134831 129% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 27.15 48.8420337079 56% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.2 12.1743820225 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.09 12.1639044944 124% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.08 8.38706741573 108% => OK
difficult_words: 128.0 100.480337079 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.2143820225 114% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => 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.