More companies have open working areas without walls and barriers in their desks.
Do the disadvantages of open-plan offices outweigh the advantages?
At the status quo, numerous methods and development have been taken place to encourage the productivity of employees. Open-plan offices are one of them. Associated with its beneficial results are the detrimental downsides of working in an open space. Both of them will be discussed elaborately in this essay.
On the one hand, concentration can be enhanced significantly due to the invisible pressure that workers put them under. In detail, sitting in a place where everyone is all busy with their tasks, and assignments, an untold rule will be created by the workers that they should also pay attention to their works. Furthermore, this environment is the best condition for bonding activities. Without any walls or barriers, interaction between colleagues would burgeon brilliantly.
On the other hand, distraction is the most prominent issue when it comes to open workplaces. For instance, in this working scheme, every sound made by all the officers would negatively influence their performances, even the smallest sounds such as typing, flipping papers to the noise from photocopying. Another drawback arising from that is privacy deprivation. Individual offices are operated based on the need for privacy which is one of the most basic needs of every employee. Consequently, underperforming would possibly occur when they are not able to work under the belief that every movement of them can be acknowledged by the others which usually does not true.
In conclusion, while an open workplace does provide workers with plenty of experiences, it is undisputed that it can not be applied for all due to the impossibility to tackle the enormous distraction and shortage of privacy. From my perspective, communal office’s demerits do outweigh its advantages and a traditional workplace would be more appropriate for everyone.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-12-16 | lennie.butera | 84 | view |
| 2021-11-29 | dinhphuonglinh | 55 | view |
| 2021-11-28 | lennie.butera | 61 | view |
- The plans below show the site of an airport now and how it will look after redevelopment next year Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant
- The graph below shows average carbon dioxide CO2 emissions per person in the United Kingdom Sweden Italy and Portugal between 1967 and 2007 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
- The map below is the town of Garlsdon A new supermarket S is planned for the town The map shows two possible sites for the supermarkets Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 67
- The plans below show the site of an airport now and how it will look after redevelopment next year Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
- The graph shows the percentage of visiting the cinema once a month or more between 1984 to 2000 4 age groups Summarise the information and make comparisons where relevant 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 417, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...tivities. Without any walls or barriers, interaction between colleagues would bur...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, furthermore, if, so, while, for instance, in conclusion, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 13.1623246493 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 24.0651302605 96% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 41.998997996 95% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1551.0 1615.20841683 96% => OK
No of words: 288.0 315.596192385 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.38541666667 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11953428781 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.09139141919 2.80592935109 110% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 176.041082164 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.611111111111 0.561755894193 109% => OK
syllable_count: 484.2 506.74238477 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.8817096164 49.4020404114 115% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.4 106.682146367 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.2 20.7667163134 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.86666666667 7.06120827912 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.189679234962 0.244688304435 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0623581473149 0.084324248473 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0686132682535 0.0667982634062 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111732927419 0.151304729494 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0409127571627 0.056905535591 72% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 13.0946893788 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 50.2224549098 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.98 12.4159519038 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.62 8.58950901804 112% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 78.4519038076 117% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => 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.