integrated task- reward

Essay topics: integrated task- reward

nargess1981's picture

The passage explains that encouraging employees by different types of rewards promotes the productivity of the work force. However, the professor introduces some flaws in the idea that cast doubt on the efficacy of the reward systems.

First of all, he mentions that the reward is actually perceived as a kind of punishment because those who are not rewarded feel disappointed. In fact, rewarding in response to productivity of the workers is considered as a manipulative approach. Thus, it spreads an unhappy atmosphere rather than a happy productive one. It is in contrast to the passage saying that rewarding improves the attitude of the employees.

Secondly, the lecturer indicates that bigger rewards which are not achieved result in greater disappointment. This casts doubt on the point in the passage that suggests tight links between performance and rewards lead to greater improvement in motivational effects.

Finally. he argues that the rewarding affects the quality and the quantity of the produce. The employee who eagerly desires for the reward has a lesser tendency to report a problem to his or her supervisor than an employee who is not concerned with rewards. This is not in agreement with the passage that says a correctly structured system of rewarding convinces people to achieve remarkable productivity.

Essay Categories: 
Average: 8 (1 vote)
More essays by this user:


Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 25 in 30
Category: Very Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 11 12
No. of Words: 211 250
No. of Characters: 1095 1200
No. of Different Words: 125 150
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 3.811 4.2
Average Word Length: 5.19 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.939 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 89 80
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 77 60
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 51 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 32 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.182 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.042 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.636 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.357 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.605 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.087 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 4