Productivity and Rewards
The article discusses a fascinating topic pertaining to Productivity and Rewards and provides three reasons of support that they are positively linked. However, the professor explains that they may affect each other negatively or may show no relationship and opposes each of the author’s reasons.
First, the reading passage discusses that when behaviour is rewarded it is repeated and this management principle is used in many businesses in order to achieve great productivity by rewarding employees. In contrast, the professor provides information that employees don’t like rewards but instead they need to get paid off for their work in the form of respect and sound work place. He states that there is study which proves that the reward counters the productivity by reducing it. Clearly, a disparity exists between the article and the evidence exhibited by the professor.
Second, the article pushes forth the idea that regardless of the type of reward it improves employee attitude, motivation, and productivity. However, the classroom discussion contends that by often rewards are perceived as punishment and employees feel that they are being manipulated or controlled. According to professor, if rewards are not achieved it might show negative impact on the relationship of employees with their supervisor.
Finally, the reading posits that employees require external motives to achieve ahead and work better. Reward must be within the reach of employees in order to achieve increase in productivity. The professor refutes this point by explaining that if employees are not able to achieve the reward they expected then the productivity might reduce.
In summary, while both the reading passage and classroom discussion provide interesting information with regards to Productivity and Rewards, a significant amount of evidence supports that rewards might reduce quality of work in employees. Therefore, the reading passage fails to justify the claims towards positive effect of rewards.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, may, second, so, then, therefore, while, in contrast, in summary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 7.30242825607 192% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 30.3222958057 129% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1714.0 1373.03311258 125% => OK
No of words: 305.0 270.72406181 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.61967213115 5.08290768461 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17902490978 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9438058721 2.5805825403 114% => OK
Unique words: 165.0 145.348785872 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.540983606557 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 526.5 419.366225166 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.3514941013 49.2860985944 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.428571429 110.228320801 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7857142857 21.698381199 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 7.06452816374 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 4.33554083885 254% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.27373068433 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.370949861393 0.272083759551 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.1426309029 0.0996497079465 143% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.120381228955 0.0662205650399 182% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.217588156457 0.162205337803 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0755499871908 0.0443174109184 170% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.9 13.3589403974 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 53.8541721854 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.0289183223 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.32 12.2367328918 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.49 8.42419426049 113% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 63.6247240618 146% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 10.7273730684 140% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.2008830022 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.