Some people think a job not only provides income but also social life. Others think it is better to develop social life with people you do not work with. Discuss both views and give your opinion?
People hold divergent views whether employees should build their social circle based on their working relationships or avoid to involve their colleagues in daily life. Both views will be discussed in this essay, followed by my own opinion that both aspects are vital for people’s development.
There is no doubt that both individuals and companies could derive substantial benefits by developing a sound relationship with their co-workers. First of all, through talking with like-minded colleagues, employees are more likely to inspire innovative ideas related to their work. For example, Jack Ma, the most successful businessman in China, attributes his tremendous success to the conversation he had with his co-workers. In addition, liaising with colleagues in some social occasions establishes a bonded and closed relationship between employees. If people are able to work in a harmonious and cohesive environment, their work productivity will increase, which promotes the development of the company.
However, people who support the idea that individuals should develop their social life without the influence of their jobs also possess some sound reasons. To begin with, it reduces the potential competition between people. As social life is supposed to provide emotional support to individuals, building social relationships with those who work in different areas is more likely for people to feel fulfilled and secured. Moreover, socialising with different background people expands people’s social network. This is because by talking with these people, individuals could acquire essential information about other industries so that they can find a better employment opportunity to realise their personal development.
In conclusion, from my point of view, both socialising with colleagues and with other peoples are important to a person’s development. Therefore, they should be valued equally in this respect.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
avoid to involve their colleagues
avoid involving with their colleagues //Avoid is always followed by a gerund.
between employees
between two employees
among employees
so that they can find a better employment opportunity
so that they can find better employment opportunities //they
building social relationships with those who work in different areas //it is not clear for 'in different areas'
building social relationships with those who do not work with
----------------------
flaws:
Sentence Length SD: 6.618 7.5 // it means The average length of all sentences are relatively same.
No. of Grammatical Errors: 4 2
----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 6.5 out of 9
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 4 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 14 15
No. of Words: 285 350
No. of Characters: 1600 1500
No. of Different Words: 170 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.109 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.614 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.922 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 127 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 103 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 70 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 56 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.357 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.618 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.786 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.335 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.556 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.067 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 120, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'avoid involving'.
Suggestion: avoid involving
...based on their working relationships or avoid to involve their colleagues in daily life. Both vi...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, moreover, so, therefore, for example, in addition, in conclusion, no doubt, first of all, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 24.0651302605 108% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 41.998997996 107% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1654.0 1615.20841683 102% => OK
No of words: 285.0 315.596192385 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.80350877193 5.12529762239 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10876417139 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.08569311511 2.80592935109 110% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 176.041082164 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.60701754386 0.561755894193 108% => OK
syllable_count: 496.8 506.74238477 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => 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: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.3546754754 49.4020404114 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.142857143 106.682146367 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3571428571 20.7667163134 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.57142857143 7.06120827912 136% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => 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: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.365316373718 0.244688304435 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.126034917595 0.084324248473 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0745829687914 0.0667982634062 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.224224908389 0.151304729494 148% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0685766595598 0.056905535591 121% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.1 13.0946893788 123% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 50.2224549098 85% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.36 12.4159519038 132% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.84 8.58950901804 115% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 78.4519038076 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.