Some people believe that corporations a responsibility to promote the well-being of the societies and environment in which they operate. Others believe that the only responsibility of the corporations, provided they operate within the law, is to make as much money as possible.
The argument stated are divided into two parts – the first part describe the groups that believe the organization and large corporation should run by undertaking social and ecological accountability and responsibility, on the other hand the second part talks about the people who supports the only responsibility of organizations is to operate legally to make money that would strengthen the economy. Though I could agree with the first part, most of the time, but also believe that leaving the environmental and social well-being factors all in the hands of organizations themselves won't be helpful enough.
As the first part stresses that an organization and companies should operate in a way that will not hinder environment and social lives, I could not agree more with the statement. From a personal observational vantage point, I could say that how an organizational accident(s) could produce deadly consequences and catastrophic results to thousands of its employees and furthermore to their families. For instance, we can take the India’s most infamous “Bhopal gas tragedy” incident of 20th century. How a deadly gas leakage from an industry, in the Bhopal, was the cause of mass death. Thousands of people died in their sleep, since the accident happened after midnight so hardly anyone could know or/and could take any actions against it. Moreover, the gas was so deadly that just 3 intake of it could result in death. Very few survivors still faces mental anxiety while recalling about the incident and to say the least about the loss of lives of dear ones and neighbors are irreparable. In such cases organizational authority is in complete fault and should take responsibility and furthermore, they should compensate to the victims. If the industry would have conducted the thorough and regular maintenance of their gas purifiers, equipment or gadgets, these unfortunate incident could have be avoided.
The other aspect of this is that we could not just simply leave everything up-to the hands of these organizations, whose main motto are just simply to earn profits and expanding their businesses. The public groups involvements or governmental supervision and regulation is essential in this area. These rules and regulation will help to scrutinize the malpractices of the organizations and the proper law would help them to keep in check and held them accountable if of any unfortunate happening and help victims to redeem proper compensations.
To sum up, I would agree the organization agreement and involvement to work in positive manner which would be beneficial for environment and society but still the external reinforcement of governmental law and regulations and public group’s supervision is also essentially required.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 265, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'accident'?
Suggestion: accident
... I could say that how an organizational accidents could produce deadly consequences and c...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1169, Rule ID: IF_WOULD_HAVE_VBN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'had conducted'?
Suggestion: had conducted
...pensate to the victims. If the industry would have conducted the thorough and regular maintenance of...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1311, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'been'.
Suggestion: been
..., these unfortunate incident could have be avoided. The other aspect of this...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, if, moreover, second, so, still, then, well, while, for instance, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 21.0 12.4196629213 169% => OK
Conjunction : 29.0 14.8657303371 195% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 33.0505617978 91% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 58.6224719101 92% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2348.0 2235.4752809 105% => OK
No of words: 436.0 442.535393258 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.38532110092 5.05705443957 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56953094068 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.15553906232 2.79657885939 113% => OK
Unique words: 237.0 215.323595506 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.543577981651 0.4932671777 110% => OK
syllable_count: 723.6 704.065955056 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 20.2370786517 74% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 29.0 23.0359550562 126% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 81.401228492 60.3974514979 135% => OK
Chars per sentence: 156.533333333 118.986275619 132% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.0666666667 23.4991977007 124% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.33333333333 5.21951772744 160% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 10.2758426966 39% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 5.13820224719 175% => OK
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: 0.139204322849 0.243740707755 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0379729785231 0.0831039109588 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0486937470135 0.0758088955206 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.084048299431 0.150359130593 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0582972785505 0.0667264976115 87% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.5 14.1392134831 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.58 48.8420337079 69% => OK
smog_index: 13.0 7.92365168539 164% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 12.1743820225 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.57 12.1639044944 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.35 8.38706741573 111% => OK
difficult_words: 118.0 100.480337079 117% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 20.5 11.8971910112 172% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 11.2143820225 121% => OK
text_standard: 21.0 11.7820224719 178% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 79.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.75 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.