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.
Over the decades, the growth of companies are dependent on the effectiveness and competence of their employees. This can either mar or break the success of any growing company. The prompts addressed this issue by proposing that external consultants should be kept at bay and pay attention to the opinions of their employees. I mostly disagree with the position for the following two reasons. However, I do concede that the biased nature of employees could be an issue.
First of all, employing the hands of an external consultant would remove any element of bias. They would literally give their candid opinion of what needs to be done or ways in which the company can improve productivity. For instance, consider a food manufacturing company experiencing a low sales rate for five years. How do they improve since they have been using the same method without knowing what other options to explore? This company would need the hands of an external consultant who can view the lens from another point of you and profer solutions to help grow the company.
In addition, external consultants are known to have been more experienced in the field, probably after acquiring lots of qualifications to suit and bolster their career. According to the popular adage "the new broom sweep cleaner, but the old broom knows the corners", external consultants are known for their competence and experience in the field, which makes them credible for proferring opinions towards the needs of their clients.
Some people might argue that employees could be trained to execute such job descriptions owing to the fact that they have more insights into every nook and cranny of the company.
However, these could lead to procurement of cost on the company, as training employees will demand more cost accretion. Also, bias nature of the employees would not allow them to frankly give opinions and would rather be dishonest in requests and budgets for consultancy.
In conclusion, companies who would want to improve their overall performance would require an external consultant to profer candid opinions on how they could achieve their objective more successfully.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, frankly, however, if, so, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 19.5258426966 51% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.4196629213 145% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 33.0505617978 79% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 58.6224719101 80% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1815.0 2235.4752809 81% => OK
No of words: 350.0 442.535393258 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.18571428571 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.32530772707 4.55969084622 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74620182976 2.79657885939 98% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 215.323595506 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.551428571429 0.4932671777 112% => OK
syllable_count: 545.4 704.065955056 77% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => 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: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.4040831187 60.3974514979 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.4375 118.986275619 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.875 23.4991977007 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.125 5.21951772744 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 10.2758426966 68% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.290142650221 0.243740707755 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0928497849082 0.0831039109588 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0541175385031 0.0758088955206 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.149618799968 0.150359130593 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0451392603709 0.0667264976115 68% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 14.1392134831 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.8420337079 103% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.82 12.1639044944 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.38 8.38706741573 100% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 100.480337079 82% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 11.8971910112 55% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.