There are some who think that salaries that are paid on the basis of the number of sale and production. However, there are a number of other performance indicators which can be applied and the not the heads under discussion. I strongly disagree with the contention that numbers should be the basis.
On the one hand, there are many professions which do not involve making or selling something. As such, in that area, it will be an impossible task to assess the income of the person. For instance, the teachers only teach the students and there is no head to calculate the figures as stated. In addition, in some professions, there are different motivating factors like respect and recognition that one receives from the people. As such, the income cannot be directly calculated solely on the basis of a hypothetical formula.
On the other hand, even if the gains are to be calculated on the basis of the numbers in those circumstances, there are many factors which ought to be considered. Further, there are many external factors which are not within the control of the people and as such in case of any act of god it would mean that the person would have no remuneration. For example, in case of a war of one country with another or an earthquake would tantamount that the employee will take home nothing. Thus, this should not be allowed.
In conclusion, the management has many heads to keep make sure that there is a level of job satisfaction and a love towards the work undertaken by them. Furthermore, every employee should be hired on basis of a fixed pay with an advantage of performance-related pay as an extra.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 190, Rule ID: THE_EXACTLY_THE[1]
Message: Duplicated 'the' in the phrase: 'the not the'. Did you mean 'not the'?
Suggestion: not the
...nce indicators which can be applied and the not the heads under discussion. I strongly disa...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, however, if, so, thus, for example, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 13.1623246493 144% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 7.30460921844 178% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 41.998997996 95% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1345.0 1615.20841683 83% => OK
No of words: 285.0 315.596192385 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.71929824561 5.12529762239 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10876417139 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82240519203 2.80592935109 101% => OK
Unique words: 147.0 176.041082164 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.515789473684 0.561755894193 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 433.8 506.74238477 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.1862384025 49.4020404114 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.0714285714 106.682146367 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3571428571 20.7667163134 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.71428571429 7.06120827912 109% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => 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: 0.0735659708591 0.244688304435 30% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0266397596264 0.084324248473 32% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0303604042739 0.0667982634062 45% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0481813114772 0.151304729494 32% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.022594512738 0.056905535591 40% => 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: 11.0 13.0946893788 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 50.2224549098 119% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.3001002004 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.1 12.4159519038 81% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.01 8.58950901804 93% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 78.4519038076 78% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 9.78957915832 77% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => 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: 11.2359550562 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.