Can you please analyse the essay I wrote in response to one of Manhattan GMAT mock test's Analyse the Issue question?
I'd be grateful if you can also provide a score out of 6 and suggest way to improve it:
ESSAY QUESTION:
"Employees should expect no privacy while on the job, even when engaging in personal communication via telephone or e-mail. Employers are paying for their employees' time and have a reasonable expectation that this time is spent solely on work-related activities."
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the position stated above. Support your views with reasons and examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
Please assess this Essay
This topic has expert replies
-
ChessWriter
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 54
- Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 4:24 am
-
ChessWriter
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 54
- Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 4:24 am
This is what I wrote in response to the question:
I strongly disagree with the position stated above. The argument assumes that limiting an employee's privacy improves his productivity. There are many why reasons why this cannot be true.
Firstly, An employee needs an open environment to say what he/she likes. No growth is possible unless free speech is encouraged, and criticism of superiors is one of the important components of free speech. By watching over an employee, a company might keep itself oblivious to its own faults for too long. In the long run, this can prove counterproductive
Secondly, To work at his best, an employee needs to feel valued. If an employee feels "monitored", instead of "valued", one can only imagine the effect it will have on employee morale. Fear is never a good way to motivate anyone, be it a child or be it an employee. A company must find other ways to motivate an employee to produce the goods, this might, for example, include incentives like promotions, pay raises or simply commendation and praise from his peers and superiors.
Thirdly, It has been proven conclusively, that in most industries, the productivity of a company is directly proportional to the bond that employees feel among themselves. Sharing secrets, Joking about superiors and Criticising others are important components of comunication which enhance a feeling of togetherness. Once a company begins monitoring such communication, it closes one of the most important avenues that employees use to bond with other employees.
Apart from the above 'human' concerns, there are also concerns whether limiting employee privacy is cost effective. If we weigh the cost of monitoring employee privacy plus the short-term gain in productivity against the long-term loss in productivity that would result from stifling free speech, limiting bonhomie and limiting honest feedback; The companies that limit employee privacy, might actually lose more than they gain.
So, While I can sympathise with the employers and understand their concerns about employees' who waste their time - I'd wager that the employer would derive greater benefit from motivating employees to not waste time by offering incentives, rather than by limiting their privacy.
To offer an example, I'd suggest that you look at the United States vs the erstwhile USSR. A country is but a large corporation. It is sometimes underappreciated, One of the most important factors that led to the fall of the USSR and other regimes before it, has been lack of privacy. In contrast, countries where free speech has never been limited have never suffered a collapse of the kind that police states did. To return to the example of USSR : The citizens of USSR initially recieved everything fom the state, from free food and shelter to resources to conduct scientific research. However, the lack of free speech meant that the mistakes were never reported even when they were detected, there was very little bonding between people. Consequently, the faults that would have been corrected long ago, were allowed to persist for too long; In facts, over a period of time, these fault multiplied and culminated in the fall of the USSR.
Take another example, this time consider a smaller corporation, a family. A family in which the husband watches the wife or vice versa is already on its way to failure. Similiarly, children who feel their parents intrude into their privacy too much, are not likely to become healthy adults. This is almost similiar to an average corporation and illustrates the point beautifully - That limiting employee privacy is not the best way to enhance productivity.
In Summary, I would re-emphasis that limiting employee privacy is akin to limiting positive criticism, limiting oppurtunities for employees to bond, limiting any growth that might be possible in employee self esteem. Rather than loooking to enhance employee productivity by seeking to stop employees from wasting time, a company should look to offer them incentives to use their time productively, of their own accord, without being monitored.
I strongly disagree with the position stated above. The argument assumes that limiting an employee's privacy improves his productivity. There are many why reasons why this cannot be true.
Firstly, An employee needs an open environment to say what he/she likes. No growth is possible unless free speech is encouraged, and criticism of superiors is one of the important components of free speech. By watching over an employee, a company might keep itself oblivious to its own faults for too long. In the long run, this can prove counterproductive
Secondly, To work at his best, an employee needs to feel valued. If an employee feels "monitored", instead of "valued", one can only imagine the effect it will have on employee morale. Fear is never a good way to motivate anyone, be it a child or be it an employee. A company must find other ways to motivate an employee to produce the goods, this might, for example, include incentives like promotions, pay raises or simply commendation and praise from his peers and superiors.
Thirdly, It has been proven conclusively, that in most industries, the productivity of a company is directly proportional to the bond that employees feel among themselves. Sharing secrets, Joking about superiors and Criticising others are important components of comunication which enhance a feeling of togetherness. Once a company begins monitoring such communication, it closes one of the most important avenues that employees use to bond with other employees.
Apart from the above 'human' concerns, there are also concerns whether limiting employee privacy is cost effective. If we weigh the cost of monitoring employee privacy plus the short-term gain in productivity against the long-term loss in productivity that would result from stifling free speech, limiting bonhomie and limiting honest feedback; The companies that limit employee privacy, might actually lose more than they gain.
So, While I can sympathise with the employers and understand their concerns about employees' who waste their time - I'd wager that the employer would derive greater benefit from motivating employees to not waste time by offering incentives, rather than by limiting their privacy.
To offer an example, I'd suggest that you look at the United States vs the erstwhile USSR. A country is but a large corporation. It is sometimes underappreciated, One of the most important factors that led to the fall of the USSR and other regimes before it, has been lack of privacy. In contrast, countries where free speech has never been limited have never suffered a collapse of the kind that police states did. To return to the example of USSR : The citizens of USSR initially recieved everything fom the state, from free food and shelter to resources to conduct scientific research. However, the lack of free speech meant that the mistakes were never reported even when they were detected, there was very little bonding between people. Consequently, the faults that would have been corrected long ago, were allowed to persist for too long; In facts, over a period of time, these fault multiplied and culminated in the fall of the USSR.
Take another example, this time consider a smaller corporation, a family. A family in which the husband watches the wife or vice versa is already on its way to failure. Similiarly, children who feel their parents intrude into their privacy too much, are not likely to become healthy adults. This is almost similiar to an average corporation and illustrates the point beautifully - That limiting employee privacy is not the best way to enhance productivity.
In Summary, I would re-emphasis that limiting employee privacy is akin to limiting positive criticism, limiting oppurtunities for employees to bond, limiting any growth that might be possible in employee self esteem. Rather than loooking to enhance employee productivity by seeking to stop employees from wasting time, a company should look to offer them incentives to use their time productively, of their own accord, without being monitored.
-
jenniferpass
- Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 2:43 am
75% i agree with the above statement, but 25% not.Because each employer have their own rights.But they don't take the advantage of employment.You can go to open forums to discuss more about this topic.
