A controversy is often raised about the qualities of a good leader. Some groups of people hold the view that a good leader should implement is own ideas and thoughts. However, others may hold a different view and feel that a good leader should listen to others before taking action. From my vantage point I concur the latter groups and feel that leaders should listen to others because of the following reason.
The first exquisite point to be mentioned is that a good listener leader increases employees' productivity. An active listener leader can understand what the fierce conservation author Susan scott describes as " the ground truth" which enables leader to understand what is going on behind the scene. Without active listening leaders may lose connection with the employees.This will ultimately results in loss of trust, low employees engagement, and eventually loss of productivity. A vivid example which illustrate by view the experience I had in my previous job, Because of the wisdom of my manager and his open minded personality, I was able to excel in my work.
However, there are many other benefits to listening. No one person including the manager has all the answers, especially in today complex business environment, but the one thing that everybody agrees on is that active listener leaders enhances cooperation between team members. In other words, active listening can create synergy between team members. Thus, instead of every employee work on his own to solve problems, the whole organization would benefit to reach its goals.
Although the aforementioned reasons are the first to cross my mind at a glance, they are by no means the only reasons available. In fact, there is another subtle reason available. The noteworthy, refreshing, intelligible results of the study published in the American business Journal which showed that active listener leaders bring significant profits to their organizations. The study was conducted on 120 organization of different sectors inorder to prevent bias.
Contemplating the aforementioned reasons, one soon realizes that organizations without active listener leaders have a lot to lose. Loss of employees productivity, loss of profits, and loss of team work are only a few examples.
- Ethanol is not a good replacement for gasoline. 73
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Governments should spend more money in support of the arts than in support of athletics such as state-sponsored Olympic teams. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 70
- In some organisations, promotions are based on seniority, while in other organisations, promotions are based on performance.Discuss advantages of each position. Then indicate which position you think is best and why. 80
- using vessels as electric batteries in ancient times 71
- Some students like to work in groups with other students when doing assignments and projects Other students prefer to work independently Which do you prefer 87
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 381, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: This
... may lose connection with the employees.This will ultimately results in loss of trus...
^^^^
Line 2, column 402, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'result'
Suggestion: result
...with the employees.This will ultimately results in loss of trust, low employees engagem...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 432, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'employees'' or 'employee's'?
Suggestion: employees'; employee's
...ltimately results in loss of trust, low employees engagement, and eventually loss of prod...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, may, so, thus, in fact, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 15.1003584229 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 9.8082437276 92% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 13.8261648746 51% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 43.0788530466 51% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 52.1666666667 92% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.0752688172 111% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1910.0 1977.66487455 97% => OK
No of words: 359.0 407.700716846 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.32033426184 4.8611393121 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.35284910392 4.48103885553 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94356621402 2.67179642975 110% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 212.727598566 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.548746518106 0.524837075471 105% => OK
syllable_count: 592.2 618.680645161 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 9.59856630824 31% => OK
Article: 8.0 3.08781362007 259% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.6003584229 87% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.1344086022 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.3396160176 48.9658058833 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.111111111 100.406767564 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.9444444444 20.6045352989 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.5 5.45110844103 64% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 11.8709677419 101% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88709677419 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.231740445753 0.236089414692 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0731911763294 0.076458572812 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0654336239347 0.0737576698707 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.119372442284 0.150856017488 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0945971930779 0.0645574589148 147% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 11.7677419355 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 58.1214874552 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 10.1575268817 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.58 10.9000537634 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.32 8.01818996416 104% => OK
difficult_words: 85.0 86.8835125448 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.002688172 80% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.0537634409 95% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.247311828 137% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 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.