"It is always an individual who is the impetus for innovation; the details may be worked out by a team, but true innovation results from the enterprise and unique perception of an individual."
This topic raises the controversial issue of whether, it is always an individual who is striving for innovation and the team is only as a mere subordinates who helps for that. Indisputably, there is always an individual is more perceptive than the others in the team, who leads them through the project. Nevertheless, the team always provides both the moral and the technical support for the completion of the project. Thus, I generally disagree with the opinion that it is always an individual who is stimulating for the innovatoin and would agree that there is a team effort for the succession of the project.
First of all, team work is always more reliable and less onerous. Also, in team work the errors are expected to be minimum as there is a particular task assigned to a person which is perused by another. To illustrate, let us take an example of basketball or football. There is a player who plays better than the others, but that player alone can't win the match. There is also an example of the current methods of working in the industries; task is assigned to the team and together they are supposed to complete in the required time. In this circumstance, obviously the team also plays an important role and not only the one who is more stimulated.
Furthermore, if individual only were impetus for the innovation than only one with higher uniqueness would had been declared the winner in the example stated above instead the whole of the team is declared winner and not the only one person. Both common sense and personal experience have told us that the innovations are more possible because of the team work. Hence, all the evidence above demonstrates that there might a person with high stimulus than the others in the team but that dosen't mean that he is the only reason for the innovation there is always team work.
Admittedly, the individual is very perseptive and his enterprise and uniqueness might be the very reason for the innovaton to see the light. Because if it had not been the individual with the different approach the innovation might not had occured. However, the above argument does not constitute a sufficient support to claim that only the individual is responsible for the innovation and the team as a whole.
In conclusion, although the individual provides the flow and direction for the innovation; team as a whole is considered the worhty of the praise. As long as some measurements are performed, or some areas involved, the team that has worked for the innovation holds on to the applause that is deemed worthy.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 343, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
... than the others, but that player alone cant win the match. There is also an example...
^^^^
Line 3, column 108, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'would' requires the base form of the verb: 'have'
Suggestion: have
...n only one with higher uniqueness would had been declared the winner in the example...
^^^
Line 4, column 141, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Because” 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.
...son for the innovaton to see the light. Because if it had not been the individual with ...
^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'first', 'furthermore', 'hence', 'however', 'if', 'nevertheless', 'so', 'thus', 'in conclusion', 'first of all']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.202928870293 0.240241500013 84% => OK
Verbs: 0.15690376569 0.157235817809 100% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0690376569038 0.0880659088768 78% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0794979079498 0.0497285424764 160% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0209205020921 0.0444667217837 47% => OK
Prepositions: 0.125523012552 0.12292977631 102% => OK
Participles: 0.0439330543933 0.0406280797675 108% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.74978257124 2.79330140395 98% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0167364016736 0.030933414821 54% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.0016655270985 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.165271966527 0.0997080785238 166% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.010460251046 0.0249443105267 42% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0188284518828 0.0148568991511 127% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2558.0 2732.02544248 94% => OK
No of words: 441.0 452.878318584 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.80045351474 6.0361032391 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.58257569496 4.58838876751 100% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.308390022676 0.366273622748 84% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.238095238095 0.280924506359 85% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.192743764172 0.200843997647 96% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.124716553288 0.132149295362 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74978257124 2.79330140395 98% => OK
Unique words: 190.0 219.290929204 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.430839002268 0.48968727796 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 47.0115399864 55.4138127331 85% => OK
How many sentences: 18.0 20.6194690265 87% => OK
Sentence length: 24.5 23.380412469 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.6036670066 59.4972553346 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 142.111111111 141.124799967 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.5 23.380412469 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.666666666667 0.674092028746 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.94800884956 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.21349557522 58% => OK
Readability: 48.3095238095 51.4728631049 94% => OK
Elegance: 1.44715447154 1.64882698954 88% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.534497459564 0.391690518653 136% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.178974727723 0.123202303941 145% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0901000310502 0.077325440228 117% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.672290980122 0.547984918172 123% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.169998248658 0.149214159877 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.273510774916 0.161403998019 169% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100608437081 0.0892212321368 113% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.577046397117 0.385218514788 150% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0435198195135 0.0692045440612 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.404232849728 0.275328986314 147% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0664775114449 0.0653680567796 102% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.4325221239 96% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.30420353982 38% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.88274336283 123% => OK
Positive topic words: 8.0 7.22455752212 111% => OK
Negative topic words: 1.0 3.66592920354 27% => More negative topic words wanted.
Neutral topic words: 4.0 2.70907079646 148% => OK
Total topic words: 13.0 13.5995575221 96% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.