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.
Companies these days have always been concerned over their performance and sought better ways to improve it. Indeed, these days we can find that companies hire outside consultants to suggest them ways to operate more efficiently. However, the author here asserts that if the companies spent more time listening to their employees for improvement of their performance then such consultants would be unnecessary. In my view, I somehow agree with the author but not fully.
Companies always have its full-time employees who have been working for years and known their company better than the outside consultants. Those employees have been actually more associated with the operations and functioning of the company. As a result, they will always know better the advantages and the drawbacks of the daily activities of the company. They can identify the real life problems and limitations which they face during their routine activities and hence, suggest us better the areas in which they are actually lagging and need to improve to enhance their performance and efficiency. Moreover, the employees are working since years in these and are loyal to their company. Hence, they will always work for the betterment of the company and help their company to achieve greater heights.
Also, certain decisions related to its operations and activities cannot be taken by the outside consultants as they are not fully associated with the company. Like, the decisions related to improvement of production of oil and gas in petrochemical company can be better taken by its employees rather than seeking suggestions from the outside consultants. Moreover, the consultants demand a considerable amount of time and money for their services to the company. This could be saved if they rely on this full-time employees for improvement of its performance.
However, the outside consultants have wide range of knowledge and expertise. They have been associated with various big corporations and have a huge experience in various areas of work. They can bring better suggestions from the outside world for enhancing the efficiency of the company. Like, they can suggest better pay and incentives for the employees of a company in order to improve their performance, they can develop better training programs for its employees and also, they can suggest some better projects which the company should undertake in order to improve its performance and efficiency.
In sum, the full time employees working in the company can definitely help their company to enhance its efficiency but they have a limited scope of knowledge and expertise and therefore, they can't suggest in some of the areas or fields where only consultants can better serve.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 13, Rule ID: EN_COMPOUNDS
Message: This word is normally spelled as one.
Suggestion: fulltime
...formance and efficiency. In sum, the full time employees working in the company can de...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 193, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...ledge and expertise and therefore, they cant suggest in some of the areas or fields ...
^^^^
Line 9, column 209, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...ise and therefore, they cant suggest in some of the areas or fields where only consultants ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, hence, however, if, moreover, so, then, therefore, as a result, in my view
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.5258426966 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.4196629213 129% => OK
Conjunction : 23.0 14.8657303371 155% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 46.0 33.0505617978 139% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 57.0 58.6224719101 97% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2297.0 2235.4752809 103% => OK
No of words: 434.0 442.535393258 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.29262672811 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56428161445 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78393367219 2.79657885939 100% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 215.323595506 81% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.403225806452 0.4932671777 82% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 711.0 704.065955056 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 6.24550561798 208% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 67.7818318674 60.3974514979 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.894736842 118.986275619 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8421052632 23.4991977007 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 5.21951772744 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 10.2758426966 156% => 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: 0.313056695964 0.243740707755 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.123686804548 0.0831039109588 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.108298050484 0.0758088955206 143% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.22479388547 0.150359130593 150% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.111233897001 0.0667264976115 167% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 14.1392134831 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.8420337079 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.7 12.1639044944 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.35 8.38706741573 88% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 100.480337079 72% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.