The lecturer talks about an experiment conducted by a firm, that regarded human behavior and interaction when working in a team. He considers that some aspects of the stated theory do not correspond with the reality.
First, some coworkers benefited from a free-ride. So, even though their contribution to the project was minimal or non-existent, they got recognition for the results. Consequently, those who were responsible for the success of the work, were ranked on the same position with the passive ones. Therefore, the hard-working people did not have the possibility to show their abilities. This situation is in contradiction with the passage's ideas.
Second, the team activity was not advancing fast. According to the passage, when working in a team, people are more likely to decide about the directions they have to follow, because the risk is equally shared. Nevertheless, the lecturer states that the opposite has happened. Reasons such as the lack of similar views and plenty of meetings, has conducted to the delay of the decision-making process. This second argument contravenes the article too.
Third, some became more vocal, gaining a certain influence among the other members, inducing the idea that they are right all the time. This situation is a sword with two blades. On the one hand, if these influential people's ideas are good enough to go to the right direction, all the members will benefice from the success of the project. They will all be stardom. On the other hand, if their vision is not right, all of them will have to face the consequences. Actually, this kind of attitude, would change the equality principle that defines the concept of being a “team”.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 567, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...ciple that defines the concept of being a 'team'.
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, consequently, first, if, nevertheless, second, so, therefore, third, kind of, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.01324503311 219% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1430.0 1373.03311258 104% => OK
No of words: 279.0 270.72406181 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.12544802867 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.08696624509 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8781116511 2.5805825403 112% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.605734767025 0.540411800872 112% => OK
syllable_count: 440.1 419.366225166 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 3.25607064018 276% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 4.0 8.23620309051 49% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.25165562914 399% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.0714899164 49.2860985944 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 79.4444444444 110.228320801 72% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.5 21.698381199 71% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.61111111111 7.06452816374 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.27373068433 211% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.263179653811 0.272083759551 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0662986111636 0.0996497079465 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0524655649913 0.0662205650399 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.138609876641 0.162205337803 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.038778399851 0.0443174109184 88% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.5 13.3589403974 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 53.8541721854 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.18 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.08 8.42419426049 108% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 63.6247240618 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.5 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.