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.
Consulting as a profession is a big field, with consultants in every industry for which businesses exist. The prompt states that if companies engaged in a lot more listening with their employees, consultants would be necessary. I disagree with this statement for two reasons.
Firtsly, consultants are specialists trained to solve problems and smooth out inefficiencies. Employees on the other hand, while they may be trained on the job, may lack the necessary requisite problem-spolving and critical thinking skills to enable efficient operation. For example, an engineer may be highly skilled at operating production equipment and machinery. However, he may not have the skills required to identify bottlenecks in the production process, especially if it falls outside of his specialisation. Hence, it is important for companies to employ the services of consultant who are solely trained for this purpose, and are able to give insight, as well as provide solution to the problems the company may face.
Also, when solving a problem, it is usually necessary to have an external insight into the problem. That is, a person isn't in the thick of the situation will be able to give an eagle-eye view of the entire situation and point out the inefficiencies that may be embroiled in it. An analogy of this is a person in a burning house. He will find it arduous to tell where the fire started from. However, a firefighter who isn't in the fire can more easily predict the origin of the fire. This is the same reason why consultants can better give insight into the origin, as well as provide solution to inefficiencies in a company's operational processes.
I understand there may be a contention that employees have a first-hand experience of the problems they face and are better positioned to give a solution to their own problems. However, this position assumes that employees are not given the opportunity to express themselves. If the position were true, then as companies in recent times have started to adopt flatter organisational structures and more open communication policies, we should have seen a fall in the patronage of these consultants' services. However, the use of external consultants has only continued to grow. Based on these points, I disagree with the statement that if companies were to spend more time listening to their employees, external consultants will be unnecessary.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 118, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...ght into the problem. That is, a person isnt in the thick of the situation will be a...
^^^^
Line 3, column 417, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...tarted from. However, a firefighter who isnt in the fire can more easily predict the...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, hence, however, if, may, so, then, well, while, for example, as well as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.5258426966 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.4196629213 113% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 33.0505617978 94% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 58.6224719101 85% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 12.9106741573 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2007.0 2235.4752809 90% => OK
No of words: 391.0 442.535393258 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.13299232737 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44676510885 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.07892275117 2.79657885939 110% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 215.323595506 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.503836317136 0.4932671777 102% => OK
syllable_count: 639.0 704.065955056 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 6.24550561798 176% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.1788390214 60.3974514979 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.631578947 118.986275619 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5789473684 23.4991977007 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.42105263158 5.21951772744 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.2758426966 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.320160360232 0.243740707755 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0935319114449 0.0831039109588 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0970695832963 0.0758088955206 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.203713124903 0.150359130593 135% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0819242879973 0.0667264976115 123% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 14.1392134831 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.8420337079 105% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.1743820225 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.47 12.1639044944 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.59 8.38706741573 102% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 100.480337079 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 11.8971910112 59% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 70.83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.25 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.