Dear relevant,
I was wondering if you could correct my assay with following topic
Successful sports professionals can earn a great deal more money than people in other important professions. Some people think this is fully justified while others think it is unfair. Discuses both these views and give your opinion.
Best Regards,
Mahdavian
It goes without saying, over long years, rewarding has been used as a powerful tool for arousing individual in variety jobs and professions. Meanwhile, averagely, the sport professionals earn noticeable money which is great more than other professionals in other fields. In so doing, one argument put forward is whether that is faire or not? I must say that is unfair. I support my idea through three points. Definition of fair, society developing and balance, and unsubstantial and epidemic willing to be a sport professional.
First of all, on my reckoning, all professionals in different categories should be encouraged in a justified manner. Inconvertibly, justified behavior brings more motivation and satisfaction among individuals. So, that is important to define the justified manner. Awarding has to be according to people's performance and the value of their results, that is, when two individuals or two groups are comparing with each other, the amount of division of outputs to inputs for both individuals or group has to be identical which inputs are the efforts and the value of the results and output is the amount of rewards.
Secondly, the progressing of a country depends on considering all different dimensions of society like research, industry, agriculture as well as sport. Extra attention toward a special sector leads a decline and dissatisfaction in other sectors. Subsequently, advent of leeway in country would come up. Developed countries try to allocate their annual budget to all sectors in a moderate way.
The last but not least, the more attention toward a particular field the more nominees who choose that filed without considering their talents and interests. Therefore, after a while it would be seen an epidemic but unsubstantial willing among the whole country toward a special groups like sport groups. According to statistics, inasmuch as persuading each other, nearly 40 percent of people are not sour about their selected way. The results would be waste of money and time and most of the time depressing for them.
In conclusion, on my opinion, although, compensating like giving money is a prominent mechanism for gratuity, it has to be related to people's performance and the value of the results and their efforts. It cases satisfaction of people who belong to different groups and developing all sectors and dimensions of country which makes a more sustainable balance in entire society.
Written by mahdavian
I was wondering if you could correct my assay with following topic
Successful sports professionals can earn a great deal more money than people in other important professions. Some people think this is fully justified while others think it is unfair. Discuses both these views and give your opinion.
Best Regards,
Mahdavian
It goes without saying, over long years, rewarding has been used as a powerful tool for arousing individual in variety jobs and professions. Meanwhile, averagely, the sport professionals earn noticeable money which is great more than other professionals in other fields. In so doing, one argument put forward is whether that is faire or not? I must say that is unfair. I support my idea through three points. Definition of fair, society developing and balance, and unsubstantial and epidemic willing to be a sport professional.
First of all, on my reckoning, all professionals in different categories should be encouraged in a justified manner. Inconvertibly, justified behavior brings more motivation and satisfaction among individuals. So, that is important to define the justified manner. Awarding has to be according to people's performance and the value of their results, that is, when two individuals or two groups are comparing with each other, the amount of division of outputs to inputs for both individuals or group has to be identical which inputs are the efforts and the value of the results and output is the amount of rewards.
Secondly, the progressing of a country depends on considering all different dimensions of society like research, industry, agriculture as well as sport. Extra attention toward a special sector leads a decline and dissatisfaction in other sectors. Subsequently, advent of leeway in country would come up. Developed countries try to allocate their annual budget to all sectors in a moderate way.
The last but not least, the more attention toward a particular field the more nominees who choose that filed without considering their talents and interests. Therefore, after a while it would be seen an epidemic but unsubstantial willing among the whole country toward a special groups like sport groups. According to statistics, inasmuch as persuading each other, nearly 40 percent of people are not sour about their selected way. The results would be waste of money and time and most of the time depressing for them.
In conclusion, on my opinion, although, compensating like giving money is a prominent mechanism for gratuity, it has to be related to people's performance and the value of the results and their efforts. It cases satisfaction of people who belong to different groups and developing all sectors and dimensions of country which makes a more sustainable balance in entire society.
Written by mahdavian
