You have three minutes to read the following passage and take notes.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 that 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.
Now listen to part of a lecture on the topic you just read about.
(Professor) Now I want to tell you about what one company found when it decided that it would turn over some of its new projects to teams of people, and make the team responsible for planning the projects and getting the work done. After about six months, the company took a look at how well the teams performed. On virtually every team, some members got almost a “free ride” … they didn’t contribute much at all, but if their team did a good job, they nevertheless benefited from the recognition the team got. And what about group members who worked especially well and who provided a lot of insight on problems and issues? Well…the recognition for a job well done went to the group as a whole, no names were named. So it won’t surprise you to learn that when the real contributors were asked how they felt about the group process, their attitude was just the opposite of what the reading predicts. Another finding was that some projects just didn’t move very quickly. Why? Because it took so long to reach consensus…it took many, many meetings to build the agreement among group members about how they would move the project along. On the other hand, there were other instances where one or two people managed to become very influential over what their group did. Sometimes when those influencers said “That will never work” about an idea the group was developing, the idea was quickly dropped instead of being further discussed. And then there was another occasion when a couple influencers convinced the group that a plan of theirs was “highly creative.” And even though some members tried to warn the rest of the group that the project was moving in directions that might not work, they were basically ignored by other group members. Can you guess the ending to *this* story? When the project failed, the blame was placed on all the members of the group.
Directions
You have 20 minutes to plan and write your response. Your response will be judged on the basis of the quality of your writing and on how well your response presents the points in the lecture and their relationship to the reading passage
The article states that working as a team or group is the best and it offer more advantages than working in person, the article provides three reasons of support. However, the professor explains that it is better to work in person and refutes each of the author's reason.
To begin with, the reading claims that team offers a broad range of expertise and skills because it is a combination of different people, with different ideas and specialization. The professor refutes this point by saying that some members of the group gets free rides, they do not put in much effort in the project but will still get the same recognition as all the team members. He states that the real workers do not get deserved accolades for their contribution and work, hence they will surely not be happy.
Furthermore, The article posits that a group of people works more quickly or swiftly because there is more number of manpower. However the professor says that the project tends to be performed more slowly when done in groups because of several meetings before taking decision.
Lastly, the reading states that in a group work there is better decision making and the team members all have equal chances of shining. The professor refutes this point by saying there is more chances to have people of great influence in the group, the influencers gets more shine than other group members. Also we learnt that the influencers makes decisions in the group because other are not ready to counter them, and if a low population counters the influencers decisions they are not heard. The decisions made by these influential people in the group can go wrong and if it does everybody takes the blame.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 71, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'offers'?
Suggestion: offers
...g as a team or group is the best and it offer more advantages than working in person,...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 128, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...cause there is more number of manpower. However the professor says that the project ten...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 180, Rule ID: THERE_S_MANY[4]
Message: Did you mean 'there are more chances'?
Suggestion: there are more chances
... professor refutes this point by saying there is more chances to have people of great influence in th...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 308, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...ts more shine than other group members. Also we learnt that the influencers makes de...
^^^^
Line 7, column 595, Rule ID: DOES_NP_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'take'?
Suggestion: take
...p can go wrong and if it does everybody takes the blame.
^^^^^
Line 7, column 595, Rule ID: DOES_X_HAS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'take'? As 'do' is already inflected, the verb cannot also be inflected.
Suggestion: take
...p can go wrong and if it does everybody takes the blame.
^^^^^
Line 7, column 612, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...d if it does everybody takes the blame.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, hence, however, if, lastly, so, still, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1395.0 1373.03311258 102% => OK
No of words: 289.0 270.72406181 107% => OK
Chars per words: 4.82698961938 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12310562562 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.46547016224 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 148.0 145.348785872 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.512110726644 0.540411800872 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 421.2 419.366225166 100% => 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: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => 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: 26.0 21.2450331126 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 29.6494672649 49.2860985944 60% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.818181818 110.228320801 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.2727272727 21.698381199 121% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.90909090909 7.06452816374 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 4.19205298013 167% => 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: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.197255949633 0.272083759551 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0765966307634 0.0996497079465 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0492766882431 0.0662205650399 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.113473896524 0.162205337803 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0216230870852 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: 14.5 13.3589403974 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.55 53.8541721854 99% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.0289183223 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.03 12.2367328918 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.77 8.42419426049 92% => OK
difficult_words: 52.0 63.6247240618 82% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.498013245 118% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25 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.