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.
The choice of getting outside consultants or not shouldn't be treated as a trivial one. Most common than not, companies are often faced with such dilemma and the decision made at such instances goes on to either make or mar the company's efficiency. The prompt suggests that if companies spend more time listening to their employees, outside consultants would be unnecessary. In my opinion, I strongly agree with this suggestion and argue than company looks inside rather than outward to drive efficiency for three reasons.
First, many consultants have a different opinion of things which might be different from the orientation in the company's area of operation, and they are always eager to impose their methodology on the company. For instance, in the 1980s the Nigeria Water Corporation invited a set of consultants to Nigeria, to drive better efficiency. The consultants came with approaches that were not parallel to the behavioural pattern of the citizens of Nigeria. This resulted in cultural instability and even much lower efficiency.
Secondly, aside from the fact that consultants come with different mindset and dynamism, they are over very expensive to manage. Some consultants need to travel very far distances before arrival and as such will require a lot of money from the company in terms of feeding, hostel management etc. It would be better for the company to invest such money on already existing workers by sending them to focus driven and result-oriented training. This will also build trust amongst the workers and make them willing to work better. Research has shown that an employee that is happy and highly motivated will work better and produce greater efficiency.
Lastly, companies listening to their employees will drive better efficiency as such employee will give suggestion based on their experience of the Job. Experience, as we all know, is the greatest teacher. When one makes a mistake, such experience will teach him how not to make that mistake again. Tell me how an employee will improve if he is not allowed to air his own opinion. Tell me how he will improve if he is not allowed to try things differently.
Of course, some might argue that with the current situation of things where dynamism is key, it is better to bring outside consultants. However, is that not the reason why companies need to focus inward? is that not the reason why companies need to listen to their employee? is that not the reason why companies to build trust among workers? Companies looking outward rather than inward do such at their peril.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 50, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: shouldn't
...e of getting outside consultants or not shouldnt be treated as a trivial one. Most commo...
^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 205, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Is
...son why companies need to focus inward? is that not the reason why companies need ...
^^
Line 9, column 276, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Is
...anies need to listen to their employee? is that not the reason why companies to bu...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, lastly, look, second, secondly, so, for instance, of course, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.4196629213 121% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.3162921348 115% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 33.0505617978 106% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 58.6224719101 101% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2149.0 2235.4752809 96% => OK
No of words: 426.0 442.535393258 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04460093897 5.05705443957 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54310108192 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67618503109 2.79657885939 96% => OK
Unique words: 219.0 215.323595506 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.514084507042 0.4932671777 104% => OK
syllable_count: 658.8 704.065955056 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.1320127816 60.3974514979 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.4347826087 118.986275619 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5217391304 23.4991977007 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.34782608696 5.21951772744 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 10.2758426966 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.390298821467 0.243740707755 160% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.109810288223 0.0831039109588 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.110346467013 0.0758088955206 146% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.21087638091 0.150359130593 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.105797279719 0.0667264976115 159% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.6 14.1392134831 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 48.8420337079 126% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.1743820225 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.95 12.1639044944 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.98 8.38706741573 95% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 100.480337079 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.