Corporations and other businesses should try to eliminate the many

Hi,
I have a humble request. If possible, could you please rate my AOI?
I shall be extremely grateful.

Thanking in anticipation
Saarthak.

“Corporations and other businesses should try to eliminate the many ranks and salary grades that classify employees according to their experience and expertise. A ‘flat’ organizational structure is more likely to encourage collegiality and cooperation among employees.”

Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons
and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.

Whether a flat organisational structure ecourages collegiality and cooperation among employees depends on the whether this structures solves the purpose of the organisation and of its employees. Majority of the organisations in world follow heirarchial structure. Therefore, in my view, flat organisational structure does not be supposed to solve purposes of organistaions and its employess.

The chief reason for my view is that ranks classify employess on the basis of their expertise and knowledge of their industry and work. Rank wise classification helps overall distribution and management of the work of the organisation. The higher ranked person manages a task by coordinating with people working under. In such a structure, responsibilities can be given to people who can ably manage the work, handle risks invovled and take affirmative actions. Since everybody is not capable of handling such a demanding role, people who have been ranked on the basis of their experience and knowledge are best suited for this role.

Another reason for my view is that every employee needs a motivating reason to do his or her job in the best possible manner. For many employees, earning more money is a very strong motivating factor, which makes them perform better. If, on performing better, an employee becomes more likely to rise higher in rank and thereby draw more salary, then, most employees will prefer grwoing like this. And, when an employee grows, the company grows and vice versa. In a flat structure, there is no scope of money being a motivating reason, therefore, in my opinion, employees won't put efforts to do their jobs in the best possible way.

However, people who oppose my view might say that in heirarchial organisations greed and competitive spirit is stronger and employees in such organisations are self centered and have less regard for equality. It might be true, but does it help in growth of the organisation? Does it help in growth of an individual?

In sum, I concur that the merits of rank and grade based organisational structure outweigh the merits of a flat organisational structure. Therefore, rank and grade based organisational structure must remain and continue.

A few observation points from my side

-The last two paragraphs seem to be a little small. This makes the whole essay a little short of words.
-The chief or primary reason given in the second para should be given in the end, before conclusion.
-The use of word "my" & "I" is a bit awkward. Try to avoid these words.

I hope you have followed the great chineseburned guide of AWA. If not, kindly do so at your earliest. how-to-get-6-0-awa-my-guide-64327.html

Best of luck for tomorrow & keep in touch.

Good Luck!
Don't worry about AWA too much. Let us know how it goes.

Got 700. Q50, V36.
I forgot to keep a check on time in verbal, so had to attempt final 10-12 questions in a little hurry. That cost me probably 2 questions. else the score would have been 710 or 720. Anyways. that's it.

AWA went fine, didn't have any problems attempting essays. Had a good look at the templates and duplicated them

In the hope you still lurk around the forum, which templates are you talking about? Chinesebured ones?

By the way you've got a nice score, yet I would not recommend anyone to be under such pressure as you were one day before the test.

Best regards,

Could someone please rate my AWA ?

In the statement above, the author argues that the corporations and other businesses should try to eliminate the many ranks and salary grades that classify employees according to their experience and expertise. By making the organizational structure flat, it is more likely to encourage collegiality and coperation among employees.
My opinion stands on the opposite side stressing more that the ranks and grades are indeed required in smooth functioning of an organization.

Ranks and salary grades helps an organisation to manage it better. They filter employees based on different segments with different experience and expertise. This helps the organization to create policies specific to particular grades and ranks. Example a manager might be allowed to approve leaves of his subordinates. So his grade only gets the kind of approval rights required. He might be given higher allowances based on his rank as a manager.

In addition to the above paragraph, grades and ranks allows an employee to understand the kind of responsibility and position he has within an organization. It helps him to understand the kind of contribution he or she makes at that level of employment.

Since employees can have different experience and expertise, they would like to have themselves differentiated from his subordinates. A lot of employees take pride in the kind of senior ranks and grades they have. This also ensures that his juniors give him the kind of respect he deserves at an organizational level. In a professional organization, the cooperation amoung employees comes automatically irrespective of the rank people hold. Cooperation and collegiality is a part of the attitude one posseses and is not respective with his grade and rank.

To sum, the argument seems to be flawed and unconvincing since the cooperation and collegiality being a part of the attitude are separate from the ranks and grades employees hold. Also, ranks and grades form a very basic part of a professional organization providing it with the right structure for day to day working. It provides the organization with a concrete hirearchy and helps make the reporting structure more transparent.

“In some countries, television and radio programs are carefully censored for offensive language and behavior, in other countries, there is little or no censorship.”

In your view, to what extent should government or any other group be able to censor television or radio programs? Explain, giving reasons and/or examples to support your position.

The issue of government or any other group be able to censor television or radio programs
is a controversial one. On the one hand. Some people support that government and some groups should be responsible for censoring the tv and radio program because it could help to create a harmonious society, on the other hand, others refute such opinion, they think that freedom speech and commercial value of TV and radio programs are priority. However, in the final analysis, I believe that government or any other group should be responsible for censor tv or radio programs.
One reason for my belief is that tv or radio programs censorship is good for young children. Some reports say that children spend twice as much time as adults on watching tv or listening radio programs. Without proper supervision on what programs young children watch, children are more likely go astray in some way. For example, if children watch too much violent tv program, he or she will become violent among others and become brutal and unreasonable which is bad for child’s development at early age.
Another reason for my belief is that censorship on tv or radio programs could prevent social turbulence. Every day we assimilate a lot of information that coming from tv or radio programs, if these information is distorted or perhaps lead some people to do bad things, for instance, committing a crime or robbing a bank, etc. Advertisement or information with such slight bad misleading behavior should be totally banned.
Perhaps the best reason is that every country has its own way of conducting supervision on tv or radio programs. It is obvious that for some countries they tend to open violence or sexual invasion on some condition while some countries don’t, for the countries who are unlikely want their citizen to be so democratic, we need government or any other groups to regulate some of commercial conduct, because it is not commercial value is priority, it is exactly people social value or moral value matters most
For all these reasons, I therefore believe that government or any other group should censor television or radio programs based on three reasons I stated, besides censorship on tv or radio program not only help us city become more peaceful but also bring more important education or knowledge to people in the society.

Good effort.

Please find my comments inline. Of course these are just my thoughts on what I found difficult to understand.

Hope it helps.



1. Minor - The period is not required for "On the one hand. Some...", it should be "On one hand, some..."
2. The second sentence is really long and difficult to follow through. Something simpler would have been better. e.g. "There are people on both sides of this debate. Some support government censoring the programming on TV and radio with the justification that it would help create a harmonious society whereas others refute the idea in favor of freedom of speech."
3. Minor - "However, in the final analysis..." makes it sound like you are reaching a conclusion right away. Personally, at this point I would suggest (not conclude) what you agree with and state the actual conclusion in the final passage. e.g. "However, there are several examples that justify the opinion that censorship by government is in fact the better approach."



1. Minor - There are some grammatical errors in the last sentence. e.g. "he or she will become violent among others" should probably be just "he or she will become violent"



1. Minor - There several grammatical errors in this paragraph e.g. "information that coming from", "these information".
2. I think I understand the point you are trying to make but it is not clear. The second sentence is in desperate need of rewriting



1. I'm not really sure I get the point you are trying to make here.



1. You should split this paragraph in multiple sentences.

how may rates will you give?

How many rates will you give me?

I would say around 2-3. Of course, this is just my opinion, and I am no expert

1) I rectify my issue, pls give some comments on this one and see whether it is better now?

(2) Do you have some advice to improve on AWA writting? Should I recite all the passages occured in GMAT tests?

Following is my correct issue essay, pls give some comments, thank you!

The issue of government or any other group be able to censor television or radio programs is always a controversial one. On one hand, some people believe that government or some groups should be responsible for censoring tv or radio programs with justification that it would help to create a harmonious society, on the other hand, some refute such idea in favor of free speech and commercial value of tv or radio programs. However in final analysis, following are several examples that justify the opinion censorship by government is in fact the better approach.

One reason for my belief is that tv or radio program censorship is good for younger generations' mental development. Reports say that children spend twice as much time as adults on watching tv or listening to radio programs during their spare time. Without proper supervision on what programs children watch, children are more likely to go astray in certain way. For example, if children are too much exposed to violent tv programs, he or she will have higher probabilities of committing crimes or robbing a bank, etc.

Another reason for my belief is that obscene and offensive behavior is indeed harmful to society. Censorship on tv or radio programs could prevent such social chaos or disorder. For instances, shanghai currently rapped up its 2010 expo event which highlights city makes life better. People are trying to create a peaceful environment nowadays, therefore if too much side effect information or advertisement happen around us, you could probably imagine what kind of our lives will become, what kind of city will be like. The only consequence is that we will be inflicted from those tv or radio programs which generate offensive languages and obscene regardless of moral principles.

Thirdly, although the right of free speech is intrinsic to democracy and necessary to its own survival, the interests served by restricting obscenity in the broadcast media are, on balance, more important to the survival of a country. With rapid global economic growth, one nation with strong and good reputation of foreign affairs and quality of its citizen will get higher attention from other countries and easy to develop itself. Thanks to government or other groups censoring on tv or radio programs.

For all these reason, I therefore believe that government or any other groups should hold total obligation on television or radio programs based on above three statements. Censorship on tv or radio programs not only help us to create more harmonious city but also bring us spiritual wealth and rich social knowledge.

It is much better now! Your passages are much easier to comprehend. I get the points you are trying to make. I see shorter, more effective sentences.

I would easily give it somewhere between 3.5-4.5.

Keep practicing!

Hi, here is my another issue essay I wrote for pratice. Pls help to rate and give some advice. thank you.


It is unrealistic to expect individual nations to make, independently, the sacrifices necessary to conserve energy. International leadership and worldwide cooperation are essential if we expect to protect the world’s energy resources for future generations.

Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations or reading.


Different people have different views due to their own respective angles. On the one hand, as is well known and has often been advocated that individual nations should make independently sacrifices to conserve energy. On the other hand, others probably insist that International leadership and worldwide cooperation are essential if we want to protect the world’s energy resources for future generations. We do not have to look very far to see the valid standpoint of this matter. In the final analysis, I am prone to hold the position that both individual nations and international leadership or worldwide cooperation are essential to protect energy resources. My conclusion which is based on the subsequent grouds and considerations.

One reason for my belief is that individual nations should hold the responsibility of protecting world’s energy resources. History has it that too much oil exploit and envoirnment damage casuse people to suffer in life. Under this circumstance, it is obvious that individual nations should take an active action on protecting energy not only for their countries but also for the whole mankind. It is wise to acknowledge that this idea, although suffer from some obvious drawbacks, nourish some merits primary because the implicit rationale behind the speaker’s assertion according with common sense and our everday experience as human being, hence is fundamentally indisputable.

Another equivalently crucial ground that would have to be presented to develop my viewpoint is that individual nations are suppose to lead such energy conservation campaign which calls for everybody to discipline himself, it is essential for individual nation to make independently sacrifice to conserve energy resources. For example, if we spend out all the energy in some day, then what else can we use replace energy resources? If we don’t pay much attention to our envoirnment protection, who knows when might be our end of world? If we don’t self examine constantly, who to blame when critical moment occurs – high oil prices and tremendous oil leakage in middle east or incident of gulf of mexico. So as far as I am concerned, individual nations should make sacrifice to the world energy conservation which is a sagacous action.

Thirdly, it is probably true that in certain conditions that individual nations couldn’t afford do this by themselves. Nonetheless, this alone does not generate a sufficient support to advocate that individual nations can drop off their obligation to world energy protection. As a matter of fact, these cases are not common and hence too weak to boost this conclusion. When the advantages and disadcantage are carefully weighed, more striking conclusion is obvious that both individual nations and International leadership and worldwide cooperation should work together to solve this energy protection problem. It is also the hot issue in G20 summit when president obama highlights that we should all put our best endevor to protect our world’s energy resouces which means that both individual nations and international leadership work together hand in hand to protect world’s energy resources for future generations.
Consequently, if all the factors above are considered, we will find out that advantage of cooperation of both individual nations and international leadership to protect world’s energy outweights those of individual nations to do it alone. Therefore from what we have discussed, we may safely come to conclusion that choosing both individual and worldwide cooperation protect energy resources benefit all and create happy ending as we all wish for.

Pls help to grade my another essay


Corporations and other businesses should try to eliminate the many ranks and salary grades that classify employees according to their experience and expertise. A “ flat ” organizational structure is more likely to encourage collegiality and cooperation among employees.

Discuss the extent to which agree or disagree with opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and / or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.


Different people have different views due to their own respective angles. On the one hand, as is well known and has often been advocated Corporation and other business should try to eliminate many ranks and salary grades that classify employees according to their experience and expertise. Noting that a “flat” organization structure is more likely to encourage collegially and cooperation among employees.. On the other hand, others probably refute such idea. We do not have to look very far to see the valid standpoint of this matter. In the final analysis, I am prone to hold the position that corporations and other business shoudn’t try to eliminate the many ranks and salary grades. A “vertical” organization should be suggested. My conclusion which is based on the subsequent grounds and considerations.

One reason for my relief is that a “vertical” organization originates high productivity and yields huge profits and causes lively workplace. History has it that the global 500 listed companies’s organizations’ structures are all vertical and in their websites, many profiles and annual income lists of top executives and manging directors are totally reflected for admiraion. Those little corporations who want to grow bigger and stronger should follow this business strategy creates a more clear and fair ranks and salaries systems among their employees. Under this situation, it is sagacious that corporation and other business become successful eventually. It is wise to acknowledge that this idea, although suffer from some obvious drawbacks, nourish some merits primarily because the implicit rational behind the speaker’s assertion according with common sense and our everday experience as human beings, hence is fundamentally indisputable.

Another equivalently crucial ground that would have to be presented to develop my viewpoint is that eliminate ranks and salaries grades among employees will discourage employees’ willingness and confidence of fulfilling certain some tasks. For example, the personal value of employees will be decreased. The company’s environment will become more bureaucratic and political. People will be unwilling to help each other. Work become unchallenging. Companies become unprofitable and face many upcoming financial problems, etc. So, as far as I am concerned, Corporations and other businesses shouldn’t try to eliminate the many ranks and salary grades that classify employees according to their experience and expertise.

Thirdly, it is probably true that in certain conditions elimination of ranks and salary grades would promote some good results. Nonetheless, this alone does not produce a sufficient support to advocate that a “flat” organization structure is more likely to encourage collegiality and cooperation among employees. As a matter of fact, these cases are not common and hence too weak to boost this conclusion. When the advantage and disadvantage are carefully examined, more striking conclusion is obvious that corporation shouldn’t eliminate ranks and salary grade among employess because ambiguous corportaion sturctures are more likely to go bankrupcy, corporate managers may probably avoid responsibities heavy duties in every day work and talented employeed are wasted.

Consequently, if all the factors above are considered, we will find out that advantage of putting ranks and salaries as prior meansurement for judging employees’ value and company’s success outweigh eliminating those ranks and salaries grades among employees. Therefore from what we have discussed, we may safely come to conclusion that orporations and other businesses shouldn’t try to eliminate the many ranks and salary grades that classify employees according to their experience and expertise. A “ vertical ” organizational structure is more likely to encourage collegiality and cooperation among employees which is rather a wise decision.

Corporations and other businesses should try to eliminate the many ranks and salary grades that classify employees according to their experience and expertise. A “ flat ” organizational structure is more likely to encourage collegiality and cooperation among employees.

Discuss the extent to which agree or disagree with opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and / or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.


Different people have different views due to their own respective angles. On the one hand, as is well known and has often been advocated Corporation and other business should try to eliminate many ranks and salary grades that classify employees according to their experience and expertise. Noting that a “flat” organization structure is more likely to encourage collegially and cooperation among employees.. On the other hand, others probably refute such idea. We do not have to look very far to see the valid standpoint of this matter. In the final analysis, I am prone to hold the position that corporations and other business shoudn’t try to eliminate the many ranks and salary grades. A “vertical” organization should be suggested. My conclusion which is based on the subsequent grounds and considerations.

One reason for my relief is that a “vertical” organization originates high productivity and yields huge profits and causes lively workplace. History has it that the global 500 listed companies’s organizations’ structures are all vertical and in their websites, many profiles and annual income lists of top executives and manging directors are totally reflected for admiraion. Those little corporations who want to grow bigger and stronger should follow this business strategy creates a more clear and fair ranks and salaries systems among their employees. Under this situation, it is sagacious that corporation and other business become successful eventually. It is wise to acknowledge that this idea, although suffer from some obvious drawbacks, nourish some merits primarily because the implicit rational behind the speaker’s assertion according with common sense and our everday experience as human beings, hence is fundamentally indisputable.

Another equivalently crucial ground that would have to be presented to develop my viewpoint is that eliminate ranks and salaries grades among employees will discourage employees’ willingness and confidence of fulfilling certain some tasks. For example, the personal value of employees will be decreased. The company’s environment will become more bureaucratic and political. People will be unwilling to help each other. Work become unchallenging. Companies become unprofitable and face many upcoming financial problems, etc. So, as far as I am concerned, Corporations and other businesses shouldn’t try to eliminate the many ranks and salary grades that classify employees according to their experience and expertise.

Thirdly, it is probably true that in certain conditions elimination of ranks and salary grades would promote some good results. Nonetheless, this alone does not produce a sufficient support to advocate that a “flat” organization structure is more likely to encourage collegiality and cooperation among employees. As a matter of fact, these cases are not common and hence too weak to boost this conclusion. When the advantage and disadvantage are carefully examined, more striking conclusion is obvious that corporation shouldn’t eliminate ranks and salary grade among employess because ambiguous corportaion sturctures are more likely to go bankrupcy, corporate managers may probably avoid responsibities heavy duties in every day work and talented employeed are wasted.

Consequently, if all the factors above are considered, we will find out that advantage of putting ranks and salaries as prior meansurement for judging employees’ value and company’s success outweigh eliminating those ranks and salaries grades among employees. Therefore from what we have discussed, we may safely come to conclusion that orporations and other businesses shouldn’t try to eliminate the many ranks and salary grades that classify employees according to their experience and expertise. A “ vertical ” organizational structure is more likely to encourage collegiality and cooperation among employees which is rather a wise decision.

According to me.Its fairly a good one to support your viewpoint. However, I feel there can be improvement in the way of Grammar- The most critical element . Appropriate usage of grammar can really make a lot of difference. Also I suggest you to refer to 800 score awa guide,an excellent one to get the strategies to tackle the AWA section. All the best!