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 nimbers 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 the lecture talks about approach of doing a project in a company in a group rather than individually. The reading mentions various methods that justify working in group is really productive and can help the company overall growth but, the lecture opposes all of these methods.
Firstly, the passage mentions that if there is a group then the responsibility for any decision is not of a single individual but of the whole group. However, the professor in the lecture contends this because the people with good influence will see to it that the decision is taken according to them and they will not be responsible for the decision solely.
Secondly, the passage states that a group can help all of the people to voice their opinions and ideas and that can result in something very creative. On the other hand, the professor in the lecture argues that this will not help the company in fact (infact) it will decrease the amount of productivity as the group won't be able to finalize on a decision as everyone will have different ideas that will lead to the group not having a consensus (concencus) on an idea.
Finally, the passage mentions that if the project is successful the whole group will be praised equally for their work and their effort will be recognized as a group. Nevertheless, like the previous two points, the professor in the lecture opposes this because the people who worked in a group saw that some people didn't work at all and just were carried by the group and they were appreciated for the work they never did. On the other hand, the ones (one’s) who did the work received the same appreciation and later when asked were not in support of working in a group.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 52, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...he passage states that a group can help all of the people to voice their opinions and idea...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 316, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
... worked in a group saw that some people didnt work at all and just were carried by th...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 475, Rule ID: DID_PAST[1]
Message: Did you mean 'receive'?
Suggestion: receive
...r hand, the ones one’s who did the work received the same appreciation and later when as...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, firstly, however, if, nevertheless, really, second, secondly, so, then, in fact, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => 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: 1399.0 1373.03311258 102% => OK
No of words: 301.0 270.72406181 111% => OK
Chars per words: 4.64784053156 5.08290768461 91% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16525528304 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.47299294121 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 138.0 145.348785872 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.458471760797 0.540411800872 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 433.8 419.366225166 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 33.0 21.2450331126 155% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 57.6753365352 49.2860985944 117% => OK
Chars per sentence: 155.444444444 110.228320801 141% => OK
Words per sentence: 33.4444444444 21.698381199 154% => OK
Discourse Markers: 13.2222222222 7.06452816374 187% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 4.45695364238 22% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.183723010526 0.272083759551 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0870036792372 0.0996497079465 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0354592779301 0.0662205650399 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.115338800416 0.162205337803 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0216536504604 0.0443174109184 49% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.2 13.3589403974 129% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.9 53.8541721854 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.0289183223 125% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.28 12.2367328918 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.26 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 57.0 63.6247240618 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 15.2 10.498013245 145% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 65.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 19.5 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.