TPO 42- Workers are more satisfied when they have many different types of tasks to do during the workday than when they do similar tasks all day long.

Big enterprises have been focusing on improving worker's satisfactory level since the expansion of their sizes. Creating an environment that makes employees of those enterprises feel accomplished enables their passion and motivation on achieving more. The managers of the workers may ask themselves daily: Would employees be more satisfied working on varied or repetitive tasks? While repetitive works tend to develop mastery of one skill, I personally would commit to a job with diversified duties.

In work settings, people are more satisfied after conquering works that challenge them. Solving different problems and multitasking at the same time tremendously increase the challenging aspect of a job. I discovered an intriguing phenomenon during my past internship. In my team, people who spent significantly more time developing features of a product never complained, whereas people writing simple documentations of the same product easily got tired. Ironically, the documentation work typically put a lot less pressure on workers than the feature task which always requires a person to switch focus from one sub task to another. However, those simple and repeated writing tasks did not challenge the workers enough to give them a sense of accomplishment, the source of satisfaction, leading to their suboptimal attitudes toward works in a long run.

Furthermore, performing varied tasks at work equips a person multiple skill sets. In such a rapidly developing world, the more knowledge you have, the more competitive you are. Given that prestigious companies nowadays raise their bar in their interviews every year, it's easy to see that people have a tendency to learn more during their work just to have a smooth experience in the competitive job market. In the psychological point of view, works involving different types of tasks make workers feel more achieved, because in addition to their income, they gain an edge over their potential rivals on the job market as a result of the nature of their work.

It is without doubt that workers have great potentials to develop extraordinary and unique skills after devoting themselves to a single task in their whole life. However, they may also suffer from not having adequate social interactions, thereby often feeling lonely and more importantly, lacking collaboration skills. Statistics show that the vast majority of enterprises value best individual contributors much less than terrific team coordinators. No matter how efficiently a single person can make progress in a task, that person can hardly compete with a team. On the other hand, having different duties empowers individuals to actively seek help from others and support their collages in need. The social aspect of team work satisfies employees in terms of both communication and productivity.

In conclusion, workers tasked with different types of work not only face more challenges, push their limits to acquire more knowledge, but also expected to be more collaborative. Consequently, in such work environment, the pressure they deal with motivates them, the skills they develop benefit them, and the collaboration they have empowers them, all contributing to great amount of their satisfaction.

Votes
Average: 9 (3 votes)
Essay Categories

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 374, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[4]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'value the best'.
Suggestion: value the best
...w that the vast majority of enterprises value best individual contributors much less than ...
^^^^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, furthermore, however, if, may, so, whereas, while, in addition, in conclusion, as a result, on the other hand

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 15.1003584229 40% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 9.8082437276 71% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 13.8261648746 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.0286738351 82% => OK
Pronoun: 42.0 43.0788530466 97% => OK
Preposition: 71.0 52.1666666667 136% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.0752688172 149% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2734.0 1977.66487455 138% => OK
No of words: 501.0 407.700716846 123% => OK
Chars per words: 5.45708582834 4.8611393121 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.73107062784 4.48103885553 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.02026942545 2.67179642975 113% => OK
Unique words: 283.0 212.727598566 133% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.564870259481 0.524837075471 108% => OK
syllable_count: 848.7 618.680645161 137% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 9.59856630824 83% => OK
Article: 8.0 3.08781362007 259% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.0925468841 48.9658058833 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.272727273 100.406767564 124% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.7727272727 20.6045352989 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.09090909091 5.45110844103 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 18.0 11.8709677419 152% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.85842293907 52% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88709677419 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.224036865219 0.236089414692 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0673624838404 0.076458572812 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0441132815143 0.0737576698707 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.140851757681 0.150856017488 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.038289949621 0.0645574589148 59% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.7 11.7677419355 133% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 58.1214874552 70% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 10.1575268817 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.68 10.9000537634 135% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.01 8.01818996416 112% => OK
difficult_words: 136.0 86.8835125448 157% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.002688172 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.

Even better after adding one more paragraph.
---------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 28 in 30
Category: Excellent Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 501 350
No. of Characters: 2667 1500
No. of Different Words: 270 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.731 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.323 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.949 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 195 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 144 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 110 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 83 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.773 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.878 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.455 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.279 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.492 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.076 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5