We have learned from an employee of Windfall, Ltd., that its accounting department, by checking about 10 percent of the last month’s purchasing invoices for errors and inconsistencies, saved the company some $10,000 in overpayments. In order to help our clients increase their net gains, we should advise each of them to institute a policy of checking all purchasing invoices for errors. Such a recommendation could also help us get the Windfall account by demonstrating to Windfall the rigorousness of our methods.
The author proposes to recommend a policy of checking all purchasing invoices for errors to all their clients. He rests his reasoning on the data obtained from an employee at Windfall, Ltd., that its accounting department saved $10,000 by checking 10% of the invoices. He also claims that such a recommendation would help them get the business from Windfall, Ltd., as it demonstrates the rigorousness of their methods. However, the author fails to include many important considerations to make his argument solid.
First of all, the author needs to obtain the intent behind checking only 10% of the invoices. He needs to make sure that the invoices checked are random or only the ones most prone to errors are checked. If the selection is random then there is a fair chance that there may be errors in the rest of the invoices. But if the checked invoices constitute all that had a margin of error, then checking the rest of the invoices is not the best decision. This will apply to his recommendation that all his clients need to check all of their invoices. If there are clients whose purchase invoices have a low probability of error, instituting this recommendation is not a sound decision.
Second, the author needs to validate the cost of checking all the invoices, to the gains that can be recovered from instituting this policy on a case by case basis rather than recommending all the clients to do so. For example, if a particular client has thousands of purchase invoices a month that can cost way more than what can be recovered from checking them, then it may not increase their net gains as claimed by the author.
Finally, the author needs to evaluate the effect of such a policy in Windfall, Ltd., before assuming that the rigorousness that the policy reflects can help them get the account. For Example, if the company has already implemented such a policy in the past and not seen significant results or if the reason behind sticking to 10% of the purchase invoices is that it is the optimal value for its net gains, then it is highly unlikely that the company will be impressed by this policy.
In a nutshell, the author needs to provide more address his assumptions that an action continues to produce the same results if continued to increase its frequency. and the assumption that what works for a certain company can work for all the others as well. The author also needs to investigate further if the policy recommended can actually benefit the target company before claiming that it can help them get its business. Without addressing these assumptions and doing further research the recommendations are merely rendered wishful thinking rather than data backed recommendations.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-11-21 | Lokesh1998 | 63 | view |
- The following appeared in an article in a health and fitness magazine Laboratory studies show that Saluda Natural Spring Water contains several of the minerals necessary for good health and that it is completely free of bacteria Residents of Saluda the sm
- The following appeared in the editorial section of a corporate newsletter The common notion that workers are generally apathetic about management issues is false or at least outdated a recently published survey indicates that 79 percent of the nearly 1 20 66
- We have learned from an employee of Windfall Ltd that its accounting department by checking about 10 percent of the last month s purchasing invoices for errors and inconsistencies saved the company some 10 000 in overpayments In order to help our clients 63
- The following appeared in the editorial section of a corporate newsletter The common notion that workers are generally apathetic about management issues is false or at least outdated a recently published survey indicates that 79 percent of the nearly 1 20 60
- We have learned from an employee of Windfall Ltd that its accounting department by checking about 10 percent of the last month s purchasing invoices for errors and inconsistencies saved the company some 10 000 in overpayments In order to help our clients
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 1 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 2 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 461 350
No. of Characters: 2193 1500
No. of Different Words: 192 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.634 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.757 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.706 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 157 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 115 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 83 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 37 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 27.118 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.039 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.706 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.367 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.598 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.204 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 205, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... ones most prone to errors are checked. If the selection is random then there is a...
^^
Line 9, column 166, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: And
...if continued to increase its frequency. and the assumption that what works for a ce...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, first, however, if, may, second, so, then, well, for example, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 45.0 28.8173652695 156% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 53.0 55.5748502994 95% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 16.3942115768 43% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2250.0 2260.96107784 100% => OK
No of words: 461.0 441.139720559 105% => OK
Chars per words: 4.88069414317 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.63367139033 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76327993512 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 204.123752495 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.427331887202 0.468620217663 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 684.0 705.55239521 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.528606636 57.8364921388 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.0 119.503703932 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.6111111111 23.324526521 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.77777777778 5.70786347227 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.246067220546 0.218282227539 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0866537931824 0.0743258471296 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0689426133378 0.0701772020484 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.147937730585 0.128457276422 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0580136968438 0.0628817314937 92% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 14.3799401198 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 48.3550499002 113% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.32 12.5979740519 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.1 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 98.500998004 95% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4 Out of 6
---------------------
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.