In many organizations, perhaps the best way to approach certain new projects is to assemble a group of people into a team.
Having a team of people attack a project offers several advantages. First of all, a group of people has a wider range of knowledge, expertise, and skills than any single individual is likely to possess. Also, because of the numbers of people involved and the greater resources they possess, a group can work more quickly in response to the task assigned to it and can come up with highly creative solutions to problems and issues. Sometimes these creative solutions come about because a group is more likely to make risky decisions that an individual might not undertake. This is because the group spreads responsibility for a decision to all the members and thus no single individual can be held accountable if the decision turns out to be wrong.
Taking part in a group process can be very rewarding for members of the team. Team members who have a voice in making a decision will no doubt feel better about carrying out the work that is entailed by the decision than they might doing work that is imposed on them by others. Also, the individual team member has a much better chance to "shine", to get his or her contributions and ideas not only recognized but recognized as highly significant, because a team's overall results can be more far-reaching and have greater impact than what might have otherwise been possible for the person to accomplish or contribute working alone.
The reading talks about the most efficient way to approach a project, which is in the opinion of the writer, creating groups of work. however, the lecture presents a counter position about that, and refute each reason presented, casting doubts in the author's beliefs.
Firstly, the reading points out that a team finish the tasks swifter than a person, and the solution are more appealing because it includes the knowledge of all members. Notwithstanding, the professor disproves this position by stating that in a company, which applied that modality, received the opposite results. that happened, not only owing to groups took a lot of time to reach an agreement, but also because the solution was hardly influenced by the leader of each group. even when some members called the attention about possible mistakes, those opinions were discarded.
Secondly, the reading argues that when each member participate in the decision-making process, they feel more appreciated and are more willing to realize the tasks assigned. Nonetheless, the orator contradicts this point saying that when the company tested the opinion of the workers, they notice that, the feeling was the contrary. Beside, some member even not contributed to the solutions, and those who did an excellent work did not receive the deserved recognition.
Finally, the writer remarks that each member of the group have more possibilities to excel, because the outcomes of a team job are more impactful. however, the lecturer deftly points out the weakness of this point, noting that the experience obtained by the company was that, those workers who did a remarkable job, did not get any individual reward, since the merits were for the group. On the other hand, when the projects failed, the blame was shared for everyone, even those who worked correctly.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-14 | Md Lutfor Rahman | 73 | view |
| 2019-12-30 | supergirl20 | 76 | view |
| 2019-11-20 | bishoy | 80 | view |
| 2019-10-20 | fofty | 60 | view |
| 2019-09-15 | aldovega0516 | 3 | view |
- The best way to approach certain new projects is to assemble a group of people into a team 3
- In an effort to encourage ecologically sustainable forestry practices, an international organization started issuing certifications to wood companies that meet high ecological standards by conserving resources and recycling materials. Companies that recei 3
- Car manufacturers and governments have been eagerly seeking a replacement for the automobile's main source of power, the internal-combustion engine. By far the most promising alternative source of energy for cars is the hydrogen-based fuel-cell engin 76
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Television advertising directed towards young children (aged two to five) should not be allowed. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 73
- Endotherms are animals such as modern birds and mammals that keep their body temperatures constant. For instance, humans are endotherms and maintain an internal temperature of 37°C, no matter whether the environment is warm or cold.Because dinosaurs were 80
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 135, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: However
...of the writer, creating groups of work. however, the lecture presents a counter positio...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 316, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: That
...odality, received the opposite results. that happened, not only owing to groups took...
^^^^
Line 5, column 479, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Even
...influenced by the leader of each group. even when some members called the attention ...
^^^^
Line 9, column 429, Rule ID: DID_PAST[1]
Message: Did you mean 'do'?
Suggestion: do
...ns, and those who did an excellent work did not receive the deserved recognition. ...
^^^
Line 13, column 148, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: However
...comes of a team job are more impactful. however, the lecturer deftly points out the wea...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, firstly, however, if, nonetheless, second, secondly, so, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 20.0 12.0772626932 166% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1540.0 1373.03311258 112% => OK
No of words: 295.0 270.72406181 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.22033898305 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14434120667 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66776861269 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 145.348785872 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.562711864407 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 466.2 419.366225166 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.51434878587 264% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.2380352175 49.2860985944 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.333333333 110.228320801 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.5833333333 21.698381199 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.41666666667 7.06452816374 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0906712360665 0.272083759551 33% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.035892331991 0.0996497079465 36% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0446827718634 0.0662205650399 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0608550521562 0.162205337803 38% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0360396177652 0.0443174109184 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 13.3589403974 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 53.8541721854 87% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.0289183223 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 12.2367328918 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.38 8.42419426049 111% => OK
difficult_words: 85.0 63.6247240618 134% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.