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 the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
Does using consultants provide a company with better advice on improving efficiency over simply listening to their own employees? I believe there are merits to relying on both employee feedback and consultant advice, and this depends on the nature of the company's work and the precise issues they are facing, since an employee would be more familiar with the technical details of their work and overall company objectives while a consultant would be able to offer a broader perspective that is informed by the best practices of other companies and is free from biases or limitations employees may have.
Consider the example of a integrated circuit manufacturing firm that is unable to meet its ambitious production quotas. Speaking to the employees, who are well versed with the manufacturing process, would be the best way for a company to understand if a better production technique could be available, if the raw material they are getting is subpar, or if the company's goals are not clearly conveyed to the employees. However, other issues like the production goals being too high, dealing with stiff competition, or the company having an overall poor organizational structure or policies, are all issue that are better solved by a consultant looking at the bigger picture without being mired by the company's conventions. Thus, it is in the firm's best interest to both set up channels for their employees to communicate with them and hire consultants.
However, when either relying on the employees or consultants, there are several considerations that need to be accounted for. An employee is very close to their work and will bring personal biases into the picture. They may advocate for shorter working hour or higher pay for "motivation", which may not be in the company's best interests. Additionally, their assessments of organizational strucutre may be influenced by personal grudges with their bosses or suboordinates, which is inappropriate and detrimental to improving company efficiency. Finally, the employees will have a limited persepctive that advocates the importance of their work in particular, so they would all vie for higher funding and resources allocated to their teams. All of these factors and biases will need to be acknowldged and removed while making organizational change.
However, focusing on employee opinions over external consulatants gives employees a greater sense of responsibility over their work and attachment to the well being off the company as a whole, which would be better for solving issues like employee retention than following consultant suggestions. Additionally, it is significantly cheaper in both time and resources to speak to employees rather than hire consultants. Finally, it will be necessary to acknowledge that suggestions from consultants may contain errors due to a lack of technical know-how, incomplete knowledge of the particular situation, or false connections drawn to previous successes.
Thus, I believe that a mix of consultant advice and listening to employees is the right way for management to amass suggestions on operational policies, though they will always have to weigh the suggestions they receive with considerations of possible biases, errors, cost, and motivations. In general, consultant advice will be more appropriate for big picture and overall structural issues, while employee advice will work better for motivation issues and technical.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 25, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...s may have. Consider the example of a integrated circuit manufacturing firm t...
^
Line 3, column 742, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[4]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'firms the best'.
Suggestion: firms the best
...ompanys conventions. Thus, it is in the firms best interest to both set up channels for th...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, however, if, look, may, so, thus, well, while, in general, in particular
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 31.0 19.5258426966 159% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 12.4196629213 161% => OK
Conjunction : 25.0 14.8657303371 168% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 33.0505617978 94% => OK
Preposition: 70.0 58.6224719101 119% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2918.0 2235.4752809 131% => OK
No of words: 535.0 442.535393258 121% => OK
Chars per words: 5.45420560748 5.05705443957 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.80937282943 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.1888748878 2.79657885939 114% => OK
Unique words: 255.0 215.323595506 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.476635514019 0.4932671777 97% => OK
syllable_count: 895.5 704.065955056 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.2370786517 84% => 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: 31.0 23.0359550562 135% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 99.2308482563 60.3974514979 164% => OK
Chars per sentence: 171.647058824 118.986275619 144% => OK
Words per sentence: 31.4705882353 23.4991977007 134% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.76470588235 5.21951772744 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.377680467867 0.243740707755 155% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.123187516827 0.0831039109588 148% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0721441801361 0.0758088955206 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.228185113394 0.150359130593 152% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0563143845681 0.0667264976115 84% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 20.0 14.1392134831 141% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.55 48.8420337079 65% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.6 12.1743820225 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.92 12.1639044944 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.28 8.38706741573 111% => OK
difficult_words: 139.0 100.480337079 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 27.0 11.8971910112 227% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 14.4 11.2143820225 128% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => 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.