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.
Both the reading and lecture dicusses about group work in organization. Reading states that there are so much advantages to do work as a team in any organization. However, the lecture refutes this advantages by explaing reasons.
First of all, the author of the reading says that team members provide wider knowledge and insight to the project works. That will help the project to complete better than indiviually. But the lecturer counters this by saying that lots of insight might provides by team members but that don't contribute always. He gives an example, where a company found that after six months of group work, lots of insight actually don't help much.
Secondly, the reading states that it will give solutions more quickly due to team with great resources. On the other hand, the lecturer counters this, and says that team member might take long time to come in agreement beacause of diffrents responses from team members. And also might need lots of meetings to take decision.
Finally, the author states that indiviual can be rewarded through team work, where individual can shine out among others members. In contrast to readind lectures opposes this by saying that very influencial might be rejected by others team members. Also, influencials team members highly creative idea might be completely ignored by rest of others who didn't come out with any idea. As a result, individual will not be rewarded.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 5, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
Both the reading and lecture dicusses about g...
^^
Line 1, column 107, Rule ID: MUCH_COUNTABLE[1]
Message: Use 'many' with countable nouns.
Suggestion: many
...ation. Reading states that there are so much advantages to do work as a team in any ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 288, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...might provides by team members but that dont contribute always. He gives an example,...
^^^^
Line 3, column 417, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...of group work, lots of insight actually dont help much. Secondly, the reading sta...
^^^^
Line 7, column 353, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...ompletely ignored by rest of others who didnt come out with any idea. As a result, in...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, in contrast, as a result, first of all, in contrast to, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 10.4613686534 48% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1191.0 1373.03311258 87% => OK
No of words: 235.0 270.72406181 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.06808510638 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.91531732006 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.48221924974 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 132.0 145.348785872 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.56170212766 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 351.0 419.366225166 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.2959062232 49.2860985944 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 85.0714285714 110.228320801 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.7857142857 21.698381199 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.3571428571 7.06452816374 147% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.140232099356 0.272083759551 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0542737224835 0.0996497079465 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.049211845603 0.0662205650399 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0894739747779 0.162205337803 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0366587085221 0.0443174109184 83% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.8 13.3589403974 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 53.8541721854 118% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 11.0289183223 76% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.83 12.2367328918 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.19 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 56.0 63.6247240618 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.