Offering Incentives - IELTS Essay

Hey guys,

I wrote another one!

Sorry, I never paid attention in my English class or appreciate the comments my teacher gave me. So now I'm desperate for your help! (AKA Sean and Simone, LOL)

The question is:
Some employers reward members of staff for their exceptional contribution to the company by giving them extra money. This practice can act as an incentive for some but may also have a negative impact on others.

To what extent is this style of management effective?
Are there better ways of encouraging employees to work hard?

My essay is:

In a world where competition is as great as ever, companies are constantly thinking of new ways to motivate their employees, but at the same time keeping their cost down. Many companies started to offer their employees cash bonuses, as an incentive for their contribution to the company. People have argued that by doing so, it seems to create a negative impact on other employees. But in the case of offering cash bonuses to employees, the pros seem to outweigh the cons.

It has been proven in many different situations that with incentives often come along motivation and commitment. If one broadens the scope of this case from companies to governments, one can see that democracy plays the role of companies that offers extra rewards while communism is against it, believing that everybody should be paid equally. The result of the communist government is evidently an unsuccessful concept as people do not have the motivation to work. In the other hand, countries that adopted democracy became quite successful.

Even though offering incentives seems to be an effective way to operate a business, it is not the only way to motivate the employees. There are also other ways to encourage employees to work harder; providing a better working environment, allowing the employees to make decisions on their own, and many others. As more and more companies are gradually realizing the importance of human resource management, far more ways of encouraging employees will be introduced.

As one can see that there are a lot of ways other than incentives that companies can offer their employees. But one have to ask oneself, which way is the most effective and cost-friendly? In this case, offering incentives seems to be the most effective way. Although the effectiveness of this method may vary from companies to companies, but a great percentage of companies should find it helpful. It is extremely important to find the right concept to operate one's company at the most efficient level and people should make this decision wisely.

Ouch! The opposite of communism is capitalism, not democracy. The opposite of democracy is totalitarianism. And the use of incentives by companies within a democratically capitalist society, or the lack of use of them, has nothing to do with the validity of the systems themselves.

Also, you might want to do some research on what sort of incentives work best. Generally, cash incentives work worse than merchandise incentives. The idea is that cash incentives often become viewed as merely an extension of compensation, and that they lack "trophy value" as a result. Here are some sites you can look at:

hrleader.net.au/articles/0c/0c02590c.asp
incentivesmotivate.com/art_cash_vs_merchandise.shtml

Do some research, then try again, crafting an essay with a bit more depth to it.

First, your writing is not bad at all for someone who never paid attention in English class! Next, I understand that it's not possible to do research for an IELTS essay, but it is important to be careful in one's thinking, in order to avoid the kinds of errors Sean pointed out. In general, you want to stay as close to the prompt as possible, avoiding the urge to sprawl into wider subjects, such as communism versus capitalism.

As for grammar, you have few errors, so you really need to focus on writing coherent, well-organized arguments. Here are a couple of corrections, though:

Many companies have started to offer their employees cash bonuses [omit comma] as an incentivesfor their contribution to the company .

There are also other ways to encourage employees to work harder; these include providing a better working environment, allowing the employees to make decisions on their own, and many others.

or
There are also other ways to encourage employees to work harder: providing a better working environment, allowing the employees to make decisions on their own, and many others.

In general, watch out for a tendency to add commas where they aren't needed. Commas signal pauses. So, read out what you have written, pausing everywhere you have a comma. If a comma makes you pause in an awkward place, probably it is not needed.

Why not just 'started' ? It might sound a stupid question but it seemed right when I was reading the essay.

"Started" is pure past tense and thus would refer to a process that is already complete. But, this process is ongoing. Some companies have already started doing this, some are starting right now, and others may start tomorrow.

Examples:
In response to government regulation of the 1960s, cigarette companies started placing warning labels on their products.
--refers to a past process
In response to consumer concerns about genetically modified organisms, some food companies have started placing "No GMO" notices on their products.
--refers to an ongoing process

Noticing that he was failing, John began to study more frequently.
--refers to a past process
Noticing that he is coughing every morning, John has begun to quit smoking
--refers to an ongoing process

Thanks a lot Simone. I just noted down your explanation. : ) I thought I knew the difference but in some cases I get confused.

Thanks Sean and Simone! Great help, and yes, I wrote down the explanation from Simone also=)

hey Simone,

I'm still a bit confused about when to put have, like sometimes people put:

I have just bought the groceries

what's the difference between:

I just bought the groceries?

Sorry, have is just way confusing for me..thanks in advance!

It would depend on the time relation you wanted to emphasize, though in this case, without context, either could be correct. Normally, though, the sentence without the 'have' would be preferred for a stand alone statement.

Hey Sean,

This is something I read at another forum:

Usually I pay using credit card but this time I decided to pay in cash as I have not purchased a lot of goods . Paying a total of $75 got me abit suspicious for my rough calculation showed excess than expected . restudying my bill as soon as having arrived home , I found 2 items ; a shampoo ,worth $12, and a hair conditioner ,worth $13, added to my bill while not buying them.

An "IELTS teacher" corrected to:
...after restudying my bill as soon as having arrived home , I (!) have found 2 items: a shampoo ,worth $12, and a hair conditioner ,worth $13, added to my bill while not buying them.

So why add the have? What does that change the sentence to? This is where i get confused...thanks!

I don't see that the "have" is particularly necessary or even desirable here, but to be fair to your teacher, the grammar overall is rough enough that making sense of your writing requires a bit of effort.

"I just bought the groceries" puts the emphasis on "just," meaning very recently.

Example:
"Where have you been?"
"I have just bought the groceries."

"We're out of coffee."
"I can't believe that. I just bought the groceries!"

Alternatively, you could avoid the issue altogether by replying "The grocery store." :)

thanks guys...i've been thinking about this..but i'm still confused...like this example below from BBC news: "US forces have "likely killed" a top al-Qaeda suspect during a US military raid in Somalia, a US official has told the BBC."

Why use have in "US forces have 'likely killed'" or has in "a US official has told the BBC."

Is it fine to just go with US official told the BBC? By putting has into the sentence, what does it change?

Thanks for the help but really confused here!!