Company’s top level authorities should get their employees in decision making process. Discuss your viewpoint on this and support your answer with examples.
Although such topics, in all likelihood, never will yield a consensual agreement, a constructive dialogue on company's top level authorities should get their employees in decision making process can lead to thought-provoking discussions. My view is that irrespective of the numerous arguments that exist on either side, top level authorities should involve employees for efficient decision making. Through the course of this essay, I shall put forth my points and calculations by considering both sides of the argument.
There are several number of reasons in favor of my viewpoint. One of them is that employees are much more involved in the core process which management is not even aware of. This is because management has other responsibilities to work on. It is important to note that as employees came from different technical backgrounds and are indulging themselves with the critical projects, their decision is mandatory one. It can also be observed that employees are dealing with various issues like risk management and so their intervention is must.
There are a few aspects about top level authorities that need special mentioning. Firstly, it is said that they don't have enough time to look into the basic process . Then there are cases where they are completely ignorant about what is going at employees level. For example, if management need to make decision on closing of some project it is only the employee working on the same project will give the clear picture about the same.
I see that there is equally potential evidence to support the arguments I have provided and hence my opinion is that top level authorities should intervene employees in their decision making.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 42, Rule ID: ADVERB_WORD_ORDER[10]
Message: The adverb 'never' is usually put between 'will' and 'yield'.
Suggestion: will never yield
...lthough such topics, in all likelihood, never will yield a consensual agreement, a constructive ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 11, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun number seems to be countable; consider using: 'several numbers'.
Suggestion: several numbers
...oth sides of the argument. There are several number of reasons in favor of my viewpoint. On...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 113, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...ntioning. Firstly, it is said that they dont have enough time to look into the basic...
^^^^
Line 5, column 165, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...ough time to look into the basic process . Then there are cases where they are com...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, hence, if, look, so, then, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 10.5418719212 190% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 6.10837438424 180% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 8.36945812808 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 5.94088669951 185% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 20.9802955665 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 36.0 31.9359605911 113% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.75862068966 139% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1424.0 1207.87684729 118% => OK
No of words: 274.0 242.827586207 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.19708029197 5.00649968141 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0685311056 3.92707691288 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91829453195 2.71678728327 107% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 139.433497537 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.598540145985 0.580463131201 103% => OK
syllable_count: 441.9 379.143842365 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.57093596059 102% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.6157635468 173% => OK
Article: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.71428571429 117% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.931034482759 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 3.65517241379 55% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 12.6551724138 103% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.5024630542 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.5112442485 50.4703680194 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.538461538 104.977214359 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0769230769 20.9669160288 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.61538461538 7.25397266985 64% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.33497536946 75% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 6.9802955665 100% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 2.75862068966 109% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 2.91625615764 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.336995566462 0.242375264174 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.103928408754 0.0925447433944 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0761024280215 0.071462118173 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.198150459755 0.151781067708 131% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.059312969115 0.0609392437508 97% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 12.6369458128 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.1260098522 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.54236453202 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.9458128079 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.88 11.5310837438 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.37 8.32886699507 100% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 55.0591133005 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.94827586207 116% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.3980295567 100% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.5123152709 114% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.5555555556 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 72.5 Out of 90
---------------------
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.