Some people think a good relationship between coworkers is good for business. What do you think about it?
It is a common belief that a nice connection of colleagues is the pledge of success for a corporation. Nevertheless, From my point of view, I am of the opinion that close relationships in the work environment have their own advantages and disadvantages. This essay will discuss both sides of it.
On the one hand, there are many compelling reasons why the strong interconnection of employees puts the company at risk of remaining backward without a break. First, It has been proved that the essential being for a triumph business is healthy competition in the employment workplace. However, In order to avoid offending their peers, people often choose to minimize their workability, which leads to lost opportunities to boost the company's potentials. Second, Being too close-knit to their coworkers will make it easy for them to overlook each other's fault, even hiding mistakes at work. In a restaurant, for instance, although most of the staff are aware of one who unintentionally made a strange object drop in food, they hardly point out this person because of their neighborly relations; so, the business owner is losing control of their labor force.
On the other hand, Despite the drawbacks mentioned above, many people are still in favor of the usefulness of forging friendships in the office, and justifiably so. First of all, it is hugely beneficial to build warm relationships with those who are in the same department. As we have seen, A harmonious workplace will ensure effective collaboration on a project, which maximizes the productivity of the firm's jobs. Secondly, good interpersonal relations are crucial in getting job satisfaction, which is a factor that makes employees strive to contribute in the proceeding complete the task-work. Furthermore, unlike the pressure atmosphere of individualism, getting closer to colleagues are allowed all crew side by side to develop their proficiency and their potential skills; hence, The company's staff will be more increasingly professional.
To sum up, while it is apparent that the negative affectively of having close relationships in the workplace is still existing, It is undeniable that being on good terms with colleagues are enable us to decrease working pressure and increase productivity.
- In their advertising businesses nowadays usually emphasize that their products are new in some way What is this Do you think it is a positive or negative development 89
- do you think it s easier to work on the project by yourself or with a group of people 56
- Some people say that we do not need a printed newspaper anymore To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion 89
- Some people think it is better to drive a car than to ride a bike What do you think 73
- Some people think a good relationship between coworkers is good for business What do you think about it 89
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 19, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...f their labor force. On the other hand, Despite the drawbacks mentioned above, m...
^^
Line 3, column 179, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ffice, and justifiably so. First of all, it is hugely beneficial to build warm re...
^^
Line 3, column 292, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...in the same department. As we have seen, A harmonious workplace will ensure effec...
^^
Line 3, column 662, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...he pressure atmosphere of individualism, getting closer to colleagues are allowed...
^^
Line 4, column 191, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'enabled'.
Suggestion: enabled
...being on good terms with colleagues are enable us to decrease working pressure and inc...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, look, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, still, while, for instance, first of all, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 13.1623246493 160% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 10.4138276553 38% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 24.0651302605 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 55.0 41.998997996 131% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1901.0 1615.20841683 118% => OK
No of words: 360.0 315.596192385 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.28055555556 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.35587717469 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.17277067646 2.80592935109 113% => OK
Unique words: 219.0 176.041082164 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.608333333333 0.561755894193 108% => OK
syllable_count: 591.3 506.74238477 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.2975951904 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 60.3189228102 49.4020404114 122% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.785714286 106.682146367 127% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.7142857143 20.7667163134 124% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.2142857143 7.06120827912 159% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.01903807615 100% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.103563952996 0.244688304435 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0329853114452 0.084324248473 39% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0253488392538 0.0667982634062 38% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0612909935205 0.151304729494 41% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.014687029014 0.056905535591 26% => 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: 16.3 13.0946893788 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 50.2224549098 92% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 11.3001002004 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.64 12.4159519038 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.44 8.58950901804 110% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 78.4519038076 133% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.