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.
All companies are looking for new ways to work more efficiently and increase their productivity. There are many ways to do this. Often, companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for them to operate more efficiently. Some believe that if companies were to spend more time listening to their own employees, such consultants would be unnecessary. I mostly agree with this take and will be providing two points to support my position. I will also discuss a contrary situation where this statement might not hold.
Firstly, getting feedback from the employees who work in the company on how to improve its functioning seems like an obvious idea. They are the ones that are involved in the day-to-day work of the company, they know it's bottlenecks and processes inside out. It will be easiest for the person with the most understanding to give valuable ways to improve efficiency. In fact, in a study by Harvard Business Review, it was found that companies with an executive leadership that used employee feedback on at least a half-yearly basis saw a 50% increase in their efficiency in a year when compared to companies that relied on just outside consultants. Thus, the numbers speak for themselves and make it clear that employee feedback is definitely more valuable that the feedback from consultants in this matter.
Secondly, the utmost way for a company to improve its operational efficiency is by building itself as a well oiled machine. Employees are the most essential components of this machine as they keep everything running. If a company chooses to give more weight to outside opinions over the suggestions of the actual people running it, they would naturally feel unheard and disheartened. These feelings might lead to lack of employee loyalty, poor company culture and even low rates of employee attrition. In a study in the Great Manager Institute, it was found that employees would much rather prefer a company that takes their feedback seriously over a company that ignores it, even when they are paid less in the former job. All people care about the work that they do and therefore, it is important to recognise the most important voices in the matter of company operations; the employees behind those very operations.
However, there are times when the insight of an impartial third party is necessary to make some real change. Bringing in outside consultants can provide an alternate point of view from industry experts and allow companies to consider points they might not have thought of otherwise. In the study by the Harvard Business Review cited before, it was found that the highest percentage of increase in efficiency over a year was observed by companies who opted for a combination of employee feedback and outside consultants.Thus, both definitely have their place in this process and can together allow companies to holistically analyse and improve their functioning.
To conclude, the utilisation of employee feedback or feedback from outside consultants to improve the efficiency of a company's operations is a complex matter. In my opinion, the employee feedback definitely hold more weight as they see the real ground-level situation but feedback from outside consultants can also offer value as they are a neutral expert in the field and can bring in alternative points of view.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 510, Rule ID: A_RB_NN[1]
Message: You used an adverb ('half-yearly') instead an adjective, or a noun ('basis') instead of another adjective.
...that used employee feedback on at least a half-yearly basis saw a 50% increase in their efficiency ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 648, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...that takes their feedback seriously over a company that ignores it, even when the...
^^
Line 4, column 520, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Thus
...ployee feedback and outside consultants.Thus, both definitely have their place in th...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, look, second, secondly, so, therefore, third, thus, well, at least, in fact, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.5258426966 108% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.4196629213 105% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 14.8657303371 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 11.3162921348 159% => OK
Pronoun: 53.0 33.0505617978 160% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 87.0 58.6224719101 148% => 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: 2786.0 2235.4752809 125% => OK
No of words: 545.0 442.535393258 123% => OK
Chars per words: 5.1119266055 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.83169070408 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84027214596 2.79657885939 102% => OK
Unique words: 258.0 215.323595506 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.473394495413 0.4932671777 96% => OK
syllable_count: 867.6 704.065955056 123% => 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: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 76.2495359693 60.3974514979 126% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.636363636 118.986275619 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.7727272727 23.4991977007 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.90909090909 5.21951772744 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 10.2758426966 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.416127984339 0.243740707755 171% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.137966754115 0.0831039109588 166% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.126535924408 0.0758088955206 167% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.259530089773 0.150359130593 173% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.128539917181 0.0667264976115 193% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 14.1392134831 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.8420337079 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.1743820225 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.1639044944 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.25 8.38706741573 98% => OK
difficult_words: 118.0 100.480337079 117% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 11.8971910112 55% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => 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.