In many organizations, perhaps the best way to approach certain new projects is to assemble a group of people into a team.
Having a team of people attack a project offers several advantages. First of all, a group of people has a wider range of knowledge, expertise, and skills than any single individual is likely to possess. Also, because of the numbers of people involved and the greater resources they possess, a group can work more quickly in response to the task assigned to it and can come up with highly creative solutions to problems and issues. Sometimes these creative solutions come about because a group is more likely to make risky decisions that an individual might not undertake. This is because the group spreads responsibility for a decision to all the members and thus no single individual can be held accountable if the decision turns out to be wrong.
Taking part in a group process can be very rewarding for members of the team. Team members who have a voice in making a decision will no doubt feel better about carrying out the work that is entailed by the decision than they might doing work that is imposed on them by others. Also, the individual team member has a much better chance to "shine", to get his or her contributions and ideas not only recognized but recognized as highly significant, because a team's overall results can be more far-reaching and have greater impact than what might have otherwise been possible for the person to accomplish or contribute working alone.
The reading and lecture discuss whether teaming of people is best to approach for project success. The article states that a group of people can achieve a wide array of benefits to the new project in contrast with working independently. However, the professor refutes all the arguments in the reading passage and presenting counter-arguments for each of the assertions.
First of all, the professor illustrates a study held in a company in which for a project, a set of individuals are appointed, and the outcome is valued after 6 months. He points out some members unvirtually got a free ride by not contributing much to the plan. In contrast, those who put a lot of insides were not recognized well. The credit goes to the entire group rather than individual members of the group. Therefore, in the survey, the members feel the opposite reaction mentioned in the reading. This point contradicts the key point of the passage. It shows group thinking has advantages like a wide range of knowledge, resources, and people for success and problem-solving.
Next, the reading posits that taking part in a team is much rewarding for the members because they will get the opportunity to talk and contribute their opinions as well as critics. On the other hand, the lecturer tells that the project may not move quickly due to the regular meeting and discussions as they have to make a consensus between the group members. In addition, some may not join with other claims which in turn ruin the relationship in the team.
Also, those who have creative ideas can get ignored, and if the project fails the blame will be persecuted to the entire group, not the individual.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, so, therefore, well, in addition, in contrast, as well as, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 10.4613686534 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 11.0 22.412803532 49% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1385.0 1373.03311258 101% => OK
No of words: 284.0 270.72406181 105% => OK
Chars per words: 4.87676056338 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10515524023 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82959069746 2.5805825403 110% => OK
Unique words: 165.0 145.348785872 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.580985915493 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 418.5 419.366225166 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.5650459009 49.2860985944 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.9285714286 110.228320801 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.2857142857 21.698381199 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.0 7.06452816374 127% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.263713881162 0.272083759551 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0810116808813 0.0996497079465 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0815137798736 0.0662205650399 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.150944031846 0.162205337803 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0639998090467 0.0443174109184 144% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 13.3589403974 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.02 12.2367328918 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.58 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 63.6247240618 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 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.