In today’s world, expectation of the employers are unique. Even while recruiting, employees are considered based on different prospects by different organizations. Some companies prefer innovative and independent workers while few others prefer people who can work together as a team and follow the directions given. Both sides of this argument will be analyzed before a reasoned conclusion is drawn.
On one hand, firms give importance to people who can understand and implement cutting-edge technologies as soon as they join. Since they don’t need to spend extra time to learn the new technologies as well as they will be agile than the people who are dependent. For instance, Japanese people are more concerned to employ inventive and self-sufficient. Thus, it is no surprise that independent people are highly in demand and they are on-par with industry expectation.
On the other hand, few other companies strongly believe that only if the employees are flexible to work in a group and follow the path defined by the organization, the organization as well as the employees would be mutually benefitted. Although people are advanced and think out of box, they tend to be self-centered and will not be ready to share the knowledge or niche skillset they possess. They often prefer to enhance their career and doesn’t catalyze the organizations development. For example, when Yahoo was facing major revenue loss in the market due to its high attrition rate, they hired people who can be a team player and work together. Eventually, they recovered from the damage rapidly. It proves, how team work and following the commands of the company are effective in real time.
To conclude, the different recruiting options of the employers have strong argument for their side. However, in my opinion, even though people work together and build a strong organization, only if the employers are innovative in their work they can be a value-add to the company. As such, it is predicted that organization will seek out for these kinds of employees and treat them as an asset to the organization.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 305, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'directions'' or 'direction's'?
Suggestion: directions'; direction's
... work together as a team and follow the directions given. Both sides of this argument will...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 467, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'organizations'' or 'organization's'?
Suggestion: organizations'; organization's
...ir career and doesn't catalyze the organizations development. For example, when Yahoo wa...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, so, thus, well, while, for example, for instance, as well as, in my opinion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 13.1623246493 160% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 10.4138276553 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 24.0651302605 100% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 41.998997996 93% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.3376753507 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1769.0 1615.20841683 110% => OK
No of words: 342.0 315.596192385 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.17251461988 5.12529762239 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30037696126 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.98685176596 2.80592935109 106% => OK
Unique words: 186.0 176.041082164 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.543859649123 0.561755894193 97% => OK
syllable_count: 549.9 506.74238477 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.4984351033 49.4020404114 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.058823529 106.682146367 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.1176470588 20.7667163134 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.29411764706 7.06120827912 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
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: 0.330593909639 0.244688304435 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.097615315637 0.084324248473 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0819832268349 0.0667982634062 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.204115931115 0.151304729494 135% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0566104559214 0.056905535591 99% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.0946893788 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 50.2224549098 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.3001002004 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 12.4159519038 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.46 8.58950901804 98% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 78.4519038076 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.