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.
With the fierce competition between companies and firms in the contemporary day and age it always of cardinal importance to stay at the top of one's game and performance. Time to time these companies nees to review their operations and functioning to ensure their operational efficacy and their potential to maintain their solvency in the market. The claim suggests that the companies rely more on outside consultants hired for making observations and to accordingly come up with ways for the efficient of the company, than their employees. It states that had the views and opinions of the company's employees were considered the requirement of outside consultants would never arise at the first place. In my opinion, the issue is being potrayed as two completely contrasting possibilities and thus miss out to consider the intricate details or focus on the grey area.
Firstly, an employee of any company is an valuable asset to the company and must have their opinions and views regarding the efficient functioning of the company be considered. For example, an employee who has been working in a company for a considerable amount of time has much more first-hand experience regarding the operations and quotidian functioning of the company than any other outsider consultant. The employee might aware of certain details and minutia about the company and its work force that plays a significant factor in the company's overall performance. He might know which teams headed by which team leaders have highest efficiency and success rates at their tasks and what were the key reasons behind their acheivements. This goes to show that the opinions of a company's employee delineate the intricacies regarding the company's fucntioning where if ameliorations are made might result in significant enhancement in the efficacy.
Secondly, It can also be stated that the outside consultants play an equally impotant role in providing a perspective regarding the company's functioning from an outsider point of view. The outsider consultants would help the company to comprehend what they project to their consumer-base and to their competitors in the market. For example an outsider consultant can suggest improvements to the company's functioning and operation based on the final appearance of the product the company is selling. They might suggest improvements to the appearance and accessibility of the service or the product that the company sells, even though the product or service might have no faults or lapses in their execution or quality. Thus, the outsider consultants are equally important to the company as they help the company to take into consideration the apparent improvements that the company should focus on based on the consumer-base view point and their appearance or appeal in comparison to rival companies selling similar products and services.
In sum, the issue must not have an extremen answer of relying on either employees or outsider consultants completely, rather the company must consider allocating commenurate weightages on the opinions and consults provided by both employees and outside consultants to get a comprehensive view regarding the possible improvements the company can make to increase its efficiency.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 144, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...rdinal importance to stay at the top of ones game and performance. Time to time thes...
^^^^
Line 3, column 40, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
... Firstly, an employee of any company is an valuable asset to the company and must ...
^^
Line 3, column 626, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'have the highest'.
Suggestion: have the highest
...hich teams headed by which team leaders have highest efficiency and success rates at their t...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, first, firstly, if, regarding, second, secondly, so, thus, for example, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.5258426966 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.4196629213 113% => OK
Conjunction : 29.0 14.8657303371 195% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 33.0505617978 94% => OK
Preposition: 76.0 58.6224719101 130% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2734.0 2235.4752809 122% => OK
No of words: 509.0 442.535393258 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37131630648 5.05705443957 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.74984508646 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03724422121 2.79657885939 109% => OK
Unique words: 238.0 215.323595506 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.467583497053 0.4932671777 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 859.5 704.065955056 122% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.99550561798 160% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.2370786517 79% => 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: 60.6552437449 60.3974514979 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 170.875 118.986275619 144% => OK
Words per sentence: 31.8125 23.4991977007 135% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.5 5.21951772744 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.482547680227 0.243740707755 198% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.185750386802 0.0831039109588 224% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0902189474665 0.0758088955206 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.316986803011 0.150359130593 211% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0600017859963 0.0667264976115 90% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.8 14.1392134831 140% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.55 48.8420337079 65% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.6 12.1743820225 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.46 12.1639044944 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.83 8.38706741573 105% => OK
difficult_words: 118.0 100.480337079 117% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 11.8971910112 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.4 11.2143820225 128% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => 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: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.