Understanding the past is of little use to those in current positions of leadership.
<span style="color: rgb(75, 80, 78); font-family: Menlo, Monaco, Consolas, "Courier New", monospace; font-size: 16px; white-space: pre-line; background-color: rgb(247, 247, 249);">Due to advancement of internet and free media access, it has been seen that, new ideas spread dramatically fast.
In the technology industry, it is possible to change the direction of industry in the span of couple of years. Walmart once leading the shopping industry is lacking behind, since the rise of Amazon through online shopping. Leadership at Wlamart failed to see the rise of online shopping and kept trusting the traditional way - investment in shopping center. Hence current leaders have to be proficient in identenfying new oppotunities and believing in them. Same is applicable to other industries as well.
Leaders of once industry leading cell phone company, Nokia, kept on trusting the traditional way of selling cell phones, which includes the studry nature of the personal cell phone did not lead to success when beautifully designed touch screen iphones came in the market. The cell phone industry always comes with new innovations which could overnight shift the momentum of the industry. The leaders of the industry should be very well aware with the on going rearch which can be commercialized. Otherwise loosing the oppotunity could cost to bankrupcy of the compony. This shows that success in the past does not confirm success in the future with the same methods.
Similar trend has been seen in the politics. The current generation has access to free information like social media, free news and access to free video websites like YouTube. Also the increase in internet connectivity through WiFi and cellular connection has made people to access free information. Recent presidential election shows how technology and new solutions can be use to win elections. Hillary Clinton failed to understand the importance of the new techniques through the use of technology, which cost her to lose the presidential election. On the other hand Trump could bale to use the techniques which changed the results significantly.
Since the technological advancement in the 21th century, industry, poitics leaders should not rely on past and look for new techniques and</span><br>
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 359, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...al way - investment in shopping center. Hence current leaders have to be proficient i...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 452, Rule ID: ON_GOING[1]
Message: Did you mean 'ongoing'?
Suggestion: ongoing
...stry should be very well aware with the on going rearch which can be commercialized. Oth...
^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 497, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Otherwise,
...ing rearch which can be commercialized. Otherwise loosing the oppotunity could cost to ba...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 507, Rule ID: LOOSING_EFFORTRECORDSEASON[1]
Message: Did you mean 'losing the'?
Suggestion: losing the
... which can be commercialized. Otherwise loosing the oppotunity could cost to bankrupcy of t...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 177, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...ss to free video websites like YouTube. Also the increase in internet connectivity t...
^^^^
Line 13, column 376, Rule ID: BE_USE_TO_DO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'used'?
Suggestion: used
...how technology and new solutions can be use to win elections. Hillary Clinton faile...
^^^
Line 13, column 376, Rule ID: USE_TO_VERB[1]
Message: Did you mean 'used'?
Suggestion: used
...how technology and new solutions can be use to win elections. Hillary Clinton faile...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, hence, if, look, so, well, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 19.5258426966 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.4196629213 56% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 14.8657303371 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 7.0 33.0505617978 21% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 58.6224719101 97% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1952.0 2235.4752809 87% => OK
No of words: 353.0 442.535393258 80% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.52974504249 5.05705443957 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.33454660006 4.55969084622 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.08425939337 2.79657885939 110% => OK
Unique words: 198.0 215.323595506 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.560906515581 0.4932671777 114% => OK
syllable_count: 572.4 704.065955056 81% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 6.24550561798 48% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 64.8524441033 60.3974514979 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.444444444 118.986275619 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.6111111111 23.4991977007 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.77777777778 5.21951772744 53% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 7.80617977528 90% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0823353928666 0.243740707755 34% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0247077848909 0.0831039109588 30% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0299854105499 0.0758088955206 40% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0408355913336 0.150359130593 27% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0327680541689 0.0667264976115 49% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 14.1392134831 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.8420337079 107% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.79 12.1639044944 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.5 8.38706741573 113% => OK
difficult_words: 110.0 100.480337079 109% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.