Many business owners find that their staff lacks sufficient interpersonal skills such as the ability to cooperate with their coworkers. What are the causes? Can you suggest some possible solutions?
A question has been raised over whether employees nowadays are insufficient in necessarily soft skills, especially team-working. This appears to be the consequence of technology’s growth and stability job. To dwindle the trend of this problem, some action should be taken by companies.
The first aspect to consider regarding the reason for the limitation in coordination among colleagues concerns the appeal of technology. Obviously, more people prefer looking down to their phone, tablet or computer screen to update news to communicating with their partners. Thanks to this, people eventually get no interest in sharing their problems, which can gradually lead to the low efficiency in work and leave a gap in relationship among them. Furthermore, competitiveness makes people hide away their secret principles or know-how in working since they are nervous if their coworkers can imitate or do better than they do. As a consequence, they minimize working with others in order to prevent their position from being replaced.
On that basis, in order to encourage team cooperation among staff, companies should renew their policies or working environment. Firstly, they can take into account the control of using technology in the working space and create more teamwork-oriented events. Having meals together is one of the best ways to connect people, for instance, companies can promote eating time together activities such as happy lunch or dinner, where using phones to swipe social media are prohibited. In that way, people can find more time to connect to their partners and feel involved in their companies. One day, they might change their mind that coworkers are their friends and working together can help to improve not only each other but also their company as well.
In conclusion, due to the increasing fourth industrial revolution and the importance of job security, people tend to ignore the ability to cooperate with their colleagues. As long as this still happens, companies should change their way of connecting and inspire their staff in the workplace.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, furthermore, if, look, regarding, so, still, well, for instance, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 28.0 24.0651302605 116% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 41.998997996 131% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1757.0 1615.20841683 109% => OK
No of words: 328.0 315.596192385 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.35670731707 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25567506705 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88639337775 2.80592935109 103% => OK
Unique words: 204.0 176.041082164 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.621951219512 0.561755894193 111% => OK
syllable_count: 528.3 506.74238477 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.5933800319 49.4020404114 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.133333333 106.682146367 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.8666666667 20.7667163134 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.6 7.06120827912 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.246355095157 0.244688304435 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0841913825036 0.084324248473 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0627033579867 0.0667982634062 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.142984117237 0.151304729494 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0740175846861 0.056905535591 130% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 13.0946893788 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 50.2224549098 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.81 12.4159519038 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.2 8.58950901804 107% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 78.4519038076 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.