The following appeared in a memo at XYZ company.
"When XYZ lays off employees, it pays Delany Personnel Firm to offer those employees assistance in creating résumés and developing interviewing skills, if they so desire. Laid-off employees have benefited greatly from Delany's services: last year those who used Delany found jobs much more quickly than did those who did not. Recently, it has been proposed that we use the less expensive Walsh Personnel Firm in place of Delany. This would be a mistake because eight years ago, when XYZ was using Walsh, only half of the workers we laid off at that time found jobs within a year. Moreover, Delany is clearly superior, as evidenced by its bigger staff and larger number of branch offices. After all, last year Delany's clients took an average of six months to find jobs, whereas Walsh's clients took nine."
In the memo presented by the author, it is stated that XYZ should not switch from Delany Personnel to Walsh Personnel. This conclusion is made by the author based on the evidence that Delany is of superior quality than Delany. However, before this decision can be properly made, we must analyze three aspects.
Firstly, is the economic environment similar to the one found 8 years ago? In other words, generally, do personnel firms match companies to employees with the same ease? Perhaps 8 years ago circumstances did not allow for such quick matching since the economy was in a bad shape and, as of right now, the country may be experiencing an economic boom that makes finding a job an easy and quick quest. If this scenario holds truth, the conclusion may be seriously weakened.
Secondly, even if the job market is in the same shape it was 8 years ago, and Walsh truly was slower to get fired employees new jobs, is Walsh in the same condition now or has it made efforts to improve their quality? It may be the case that administrators within Walsh noticed their serious lack of competitiveness and wanted to improve their quality in between those eight years. It is even possible that because of that same lack of quality, Walsh was under such a pressure that if it did not improve their services bankruptcy would surely follow. Thus focusing all their efforts in making Walsh a top notch company was the only way that the administrators found to clean their bad reputation, such efforts paying big and making Walsh the most eminent personnel firm in the area. If either of these cases is true, the conclusion made by the author might not hold water.
Lastly, is the number of employees and branches truly a good indicator of quality of service? In other words, is there a correlation between number of employees and quality? Perhaps Delany has such an amount of workers and branches that they are unable to assess and maintain their service’s quality. Or it may even be the case that Delany has an administrator that hires more employees than he should for the workload they have, thus making work of some employees redundant, which makes the number of workers a poor indicator of quality. If either of these cases holds truth, the author’s conclusion may become undermined
In conclusion the argument, as it stands right now, is seriously flawed due to its unwarranted assumptions. Therefore, only if the author is able to answer these questions and provide evidence to support them are we apt to evaluate the viability of switching from Delany to Walsh.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 602, Rule ID: EN_COMPOUNDS
Message: This word is normally spelled with hyphen.
Suggestion: top-notch
...ing all their efforts in making Walsh a top notch company was the only way that the admin...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, however, if, lastly, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, in conclusion, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.5258426966 123% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.4196629213 89% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 33.0505617978 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 52.0 58.6224719101 89% => 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: 2141.0 2235.4752809 96% => OK
No of words: 443.0 442.535393258 100% => OK
Chars per words: 4.83295711061 5.05705443957 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.58776254615 4.55969084622 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64665538704 2.79657885939 95% => OK
Unique words: 214.0 215.323595506 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.483069977427 0.4932671777 98% => OK
syllable_count: 662.4 704.065955056 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: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 3.10617977528 225% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.6716380469 60.3974514979 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.944444444 118.986275619 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.6111111111 23.4991977007 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.11111111111 5.21951772744 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
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: 0.105590070729 0.243740707755 43% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0381081525869 0.0831039109588 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0437866688308 0.0758088955206 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0593625227594 0.150359130593 39% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0352687453013 0.0667264976115 53% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 14.1392134831 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 48.8420337079 114% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.03 12.1639044944 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.0 8.38706741573 95% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 100.480337079 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => 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.