Recently, the phenomenon of many companies involve employees in decision making policy and its corresponding impacts have sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of complex procedures is highly
beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and consequently positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that some people think that involving employees in decision making policy is important for the progression of the company can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a general standpoint, progression of the company can provide the society with some noticeable effects
which are rooted in the fact that crucial issues, as well as ultimate outcomes, are
inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university
student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered current policies. Thus,
beneficial ramifications of both this common phenomenon and accordingly complicated
procedures apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of a public arena, involving employees in decision making policy with companies might increase the consequences of critical
needs. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious
university has asserted that the downside of creative processes is correlated negatively
with vital issues. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of this
remarkable phenomenon.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly
believe that the benefits of Many companies involve employees in decision making policy. Some people think that it is important for the progression of the company far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages
of this unique phenomenon prove the significance of total outcomes, but also pinpoint
thorny issues’ potential implications.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, apparently, but, consequently, hence, if, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.5418719212 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 6.10837438424 82% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 5.94088669951 185% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 20.9802955665 105% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 31.9359605911 106% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.75862068966 52% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1638.0 1207.87684729 136% => OK
No of words: 282.0 242.827586207 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.8085106383 5.00649968141 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09790868904 3.92707691288 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.19339580569 2.71678728327 118% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 139.433497537 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.595744680851 0.580463131201 103% => OK
syllable_count: 520.2 379.143842365 137% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.65517241379 164% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.5024630542 112% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.8527672258 50.4703680194 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 136.5 104.977214359 130% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5 20.9669160288 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.83333333333 7.25397266985 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 17.0 4.12807881773 412% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 6.9802955665 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.315187264566 0.242375264174 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.110877086464 0.0925447433944 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.110578291214 0.071462118173 155% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.071397951376 0.151781067708 47% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.124816116735 0.0609392437508 205% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.7 12.6369458128 140% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.21 53.1260098522 59% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 10.9458128079 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.71 11.5310837438 145% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.43 8.32886699507 125% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 55.0591133005 183% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.94827586207 146% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.3980295567 108% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.5123152709 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum five paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 84.4444444444 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 76.0 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.