Some people think that only staff who worked in a company for a long time should be
promoted to a higher position.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
One of the reasons why companies choose to promote some staff is seniority. While the length of
service is undoubtedly an important factor, my belief is it should certainly not be the only
criterion for deciding who should be promoted. Rather it would be better for companies to have a
more varied policy in this area.
There are without question sound arguments for promoting employees who have been working
for a company for a number of years. The first of these is that these more experienced employees
would be able to adapt themselves to be in a higher position, as they would understand the
culture and policies of the company better. Again, on a practical level, if they were not promoted,
they might well leave the company to find a higher position and earn a larger salary. This could
have serious consequences for the company, which might lose a significant amount of business
to its competitors.
Despite these reasons, there is a strong argument in favour of also promoting staff because of
their performance. This can be seen by how some multinationals use annual performance and
development reviews when deciding on promotion. Under this system, a supervisor can set
targets for an employee and if those targets are met, then the employee can be promoted, even if
they are relatively junior. The benefit of this approach is that it encourages staff to work harder
and rewards merit and not just long service.
In conclusion, there is no doubt a case for implementing a policy of promoting long-serving
members of staff, but I believe that it is also wise to take account of the performance of more
junior members of staff.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 48, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Rather,
...on for deciding who should be promoted. Rather it would be better for companies to hav...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, so, then, well, while, in conclusion, no doubt
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 13.1623246493 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 24.0651302605 104% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 41.998997996 76% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1398.0 1615.20841683 87% => OK
No of words: 280.0 315.596192385 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.99285714286 5.12529762239 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09062348924 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78544870529 2.80592935109 99% => OK
Unique words: 158.0 176.041082164 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.564285714286 0.561755894193 100% => OK
syllable_count: 432.9 506.74238477 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => 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: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.9238859164 49.4020404114 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.5 106.682146367 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.3333333333 20.7667163134 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.66666666667 7.06120827912 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 19.0 4.38176352705 434% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.201044653019 0.244688304435 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0756813372829 0.084324248473 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0451589537968 0.0667982634062 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0589629639806 0.151304729494 39% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0368236120004 0.056905535591 65% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 13.0946893788 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 50.2224549098 113% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.3001002004 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.96 12.4159519038 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.56 8.58950901804 100% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 78.4519038076 85% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum five paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.