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.
Blood is thicker than water, they say. In other words, familial relations trump all others, when it comes to choosing sides. Thus, an organisation or a company, which is a one big family, needs to give considerately more importance to what their "own" have to say, instead of outsiders.
The issue here, that companies look towards external consultants and agencies to improve their operations, instead of devoting more time to redress the issues facing its own employees, is ubiquitous in this era. If one may be bold enough, one can say that the authorities of most of the organisations feel that "their own employees are mostly querrulous" and thus they need to look elsewhere for "ompartial" suggestions.
In their defence, this may be true to an extent. Several studies have betrayed that majority of the employees are not happy with their workplaces. Some are not happy with their emoluments and perks, while others are not happy with their boss or team and still others feel the working conditions such as in and out time or break needed to be more flexible, to name a few. In this context, if a company asks its own employees about suggestions for improving their efficiency, it may get a biased response, where employees demand all facilities for their personal gains, and little for the overall productivity of the company.
In this context, a distant perspective may bring in an unbiased view, for the benefit of the company. It is said that if one stands to close to a mountain, it looks huge, unmountable and unassailable. However, the farther you keep moving, the smaller it gets, and from thousands of miles away, or from the sky, it just looks like another speck on this earth. Thus, consultants who are not directly concerned with the company, may give some unbiased suggestions for smoothening the operations of a company.
However, this is not always true. The consulting firm is an outsider, and is definitely not aware of the intricacies of the company. One may argue, that they dig into the background, but how deep they dig and how germane it is to the overall requirements, is questionable. What one is saying here is that since they do not know the local conditions and problems and employees may not be willing to open up completely to them, by making suggestion which do not take these things into consideration, they may do more harm than help.
It is the employees of a company who ar the nuts and bolts of its functioning and thus know it best. They are better suited to provide the best feedback, if sought honestly and perhaps anonymously (for those who fear their jobs). Several studies have shown that companies where employees' job satisfaction is higher, is more productive when compared to those where it isn't. If the employees are content, they are bound to give back in the most efficient manner. If their issues are mitigated, their efficiency will automatically enhance, and for listening to their problems, no company requires third-party consultants. After all, the company hired employees for the worth it saw in them.
Thus in conclusion, one may say that before looking out, a company needs to look inside to address its issues. Encourage honest feedback, with a word that criticism will not be taken otherwise, and organisations will not have the need to look beyond their own. This will not just save their time and resources, but also make their employees feel that they are valued.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 6, column 96, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'bests', 'wells'?
Suggestion: bests; wells
...lts of its functioning and thus know it best. They are better suited to provide the ...
^^^^
Line 6, column 366, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...ductive when compared to those where it isnt. If the employees are content, they are...
^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...ployees for the worth it saw in them. Thus in conclusion, one may say that before ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, honestly, however, if, look, may, so, still, then, third, thus, while, after all, in conclusion, such as, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 29.0 19.5258426966 149% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.4196629213 129% => OK
Conjunction : 24.0 14.8657303371 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 21.0 11.3162921348 186% => OK
Pronoun: 64.0 33.0505617978 194% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 66.0 58.6224719101 113% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 12.9106741573 54% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2880.0 2235.4752809 129% => OK
No of words: 585.0 442.535393258 132% => OK
Chars per words: 4.92307692308 5.05705443957 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.9180050066 4.55969084622 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8880674501 2.79657885939 103% => OK
Unique words: 280.0 215.323595506 130% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.478632478632 0.4932671777 97% => OK
syllable_count: 878.4 704.065955056 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 16.0 6.24550561798 256% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 8.0 4.99550561798 160% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 3.10617977528 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 9.0 1.77640449438 507% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 10.0 4.38483146067 228% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.2370786517 128% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.3652490175 60.3974514979 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.769230769 118.986275619 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5 23.4991977007 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.03846153846 5.21951772744 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 7.0 4.97078651685 141% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 10.2758426966 156% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
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: 0.276682474791 0.243740707755 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0756859220407 0.0831039109588 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0623579577911 0.0758088955206 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.136024598038 0.150359130593 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0706531963088 0.0667264976115 106% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 14.1392134831 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.8420337079 118% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 12.1639044944 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.02 8.38706741573 96% => OK
difficult_words: 122.0 100.480337079 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
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.