Businesses should hire employees for their entire lives. Do you agree or disagree?
Some people believe it is better to hire workers for their whole life, in contrast other believe this policy is wrong and generate some problems. In my point of view, first attitude is completely wrong and I disagree with that. This essay will support this idea by providing some reasons and representing disadvantages of that in following paragraphs.
First of all, hiring someone for his entire life will create some sentimental problems. One of the most significant demerits of this kind of hiring is that employee will lose his motivation after a while. Because he knows and confirm about his job and his position. In other words, he knows that his career were guaranteed forever. Another disadvantage of this sort of hiring method is losing creativity, which has the key role in progress and innovation. Some other issues stem from losing creativity and incentive such as boring, less efficiency, firm collapse, reduce profit etc. According to the recent research which published by job satisfy institution (JSI), 85 percent of people who worked in a static place had less efficiency than who work for short time in a certain profession.
Furthermore, working in one place can generate conflict between employees. As employees meet each other for long terms and this relationship is isolated, thus the management hierarchy will vanish after a while and people will not respect to each other anymore. For instance, when I hired as system analyzer in a famous company that controlled in traditional way –hired employee for entire life. I realized old employee did not care to managers and did not do their task well. When I asked about the reason, most of them believe this attitude of hiring.
In conclusion, I believe hiring employee for long term is not proper decision. I used some reasons and presented my personal experience to indicate my idea and support it.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, furthermore, if, so, thus, well, while, for instance, in conclusion, in contrast, kind of, sort of, such as, first of all, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 15.1003584229 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 9.8082437276 61% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 13.8261648746 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 43.0788530466 77% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 52.1666666667 69% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.0752688172 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1564.0 1977.66487455 79% => OK
No of words: 311.0 407.700716846 76% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.02893890675 4.8611393121 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.19942759058 4.48103885553 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69153537063 2.67179642975 101% => OK
Unique words: 180.0 212.727598566 85% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.578778135048 0.524837075471 110% => OK
syllable_count: 492.3 618.680645161 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 9.59856630824 52% => OK
Interrogative: 2.0 0.994623655914 201% => OK
Article: 0.0 3.08781362007 0% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.6003584229 83% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.1344086022 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.2291016907 48.9658058833 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 92.0 100.406767564 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.2941176471 20.6045352989 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.47058823529 5.45110844103 155% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 11.8709677419 51% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.88709677419 123% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.192045270778 0.236089414692 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0620416906107 0.076458572812 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0721206858038 0.0737576698707 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.119730377933 0.150856017488 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0474340215725 0.0645574589148 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.4 11.7677419355 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 58.1214874552 92% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.1575268817 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.89 10.9000537634 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.9 8.01818996416 111% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 86.8835125448 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.002688172 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.0537634409 92% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 Out of 30
---------------------
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.