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.
The companies need to be consulted to implement changes that is obvious. But that consultancy is provided by whom is the main question of the issue. It could be debated that inside employees are more efficient in deciding the best outcome for to company to take. But another aspect has to be taken into consideration. Still the former option is considered as it has a high probability of the same outcome by spending less resources.
The decision of selecting the decision maker is based on many factors. If the company is going to hire outside consultants then they need to make sure that they are capable of evaluating their methods. The outside consultants are not usually aware of the norms by which a company works as each and every company is different in their actions and their results. So before making the evaluation the consultants need to study a company's procedure of working and according to that suggest changes in it. This increases the time required to evaluate the process and make it inefficient.
On the other hand, the company's employees are adapted to the rules and all the workings of their company's way of work. They could more efficiently provide a feedback which could save the company the money it spends on hiring the external consultants. Take an example of an employee who is working on a project and faces a difficulty in the processing of the company side. That employee could suggest exact changes required for the company to overcome their barriers and lead to a swift processing. So it is highly recommended in this issue that a company should pay heed to their employees.
But the above conclusion can be made only by considering that the employees whom the company is going to ask for the review, are eligible to suggest a descent and progressive feedback. It could be possible that the company goes to the outside consultants because all the company's employees are not inclined to do an extra work or are not able to suggest any productive changes. Though small, but this could be the only reason a company would pay consultants over their own employees.
But this is not a common factor as there is a huge possibility that at least a small number of employees are present who are capable of suggesting of making any changes. So considering this fact, the option of opting for external consultants should be deemed unnecessary as the same output can be achieved internally by organizing sessions where the employees could suggest changes in the working of the company.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 319, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Still,
...ect has to be taken into consideration. Still the former option is considered as it h...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 72, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ecision maker is based on many factors. If the company is going to hire outside co...
^^
Line 9, column 78, Rule ID: SMALL_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, use 'a few', or use 'some'
Suggestion: a few; some
...ere is a huge possibility that at least a small number of employees are present who are capable o...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, so, still, then, as to, at least, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 29.0 19.5258426966 149% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.4196629213 121% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 14.8657303371 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 11.3162921348 150% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 33.0505617978 97% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 58.6224719101 102% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 12.9106741573 31% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2090.0 2235.4752809 93% => OK
No of words: 431.0 442.535393258 97% => OK
Chars per words: 4.84918793503 5.05705443957 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55637350225 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72864679299 2.79657885939 98% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 215.323595506 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.452436194896 0.4932671777 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 661.5 704.065955056 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.8467828751 60.3974514979 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.5 118.986275619 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.55 23.4991977007 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.0 5.21951772744 57% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 10.2758426966 68% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 11.0 4.83258426966 228% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.41902602043 0.243740707755 172% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.137017046276 0.0831039109588 165% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0869063870731 0.0758088955206 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.246161688326 0.150359130593 164% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0865175188078 0.0667264976115 130% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 14.1392134831 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 48.8420337079 120% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.1743820225 85% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.85 12.1639044944 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.87 8.38706741573 94% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 100.480337079 87% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 11.8971910112 55% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => 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.