We all work or will work in our jobs with many different kinds of people. In your opinion, what are some important characteristics of a co-worker (someone you work closely with)?
Use reasons and specific examples to explain why these characteristics are important.
The author of the above statement is suggesting that everyone has or will work in a job with many different kinds of people. Yet, the use of the word ‘everyone’ suggests that these words do not mean the same. First, the author uses the word ‘everyone’ four times in the sentence. This word choice, coupled with the lack of specificity in the statement, suggests that the author does not know how many different kinds of people there are in the world or how many different kinds of employees there are at a company. The employer may have 100 employees, but how many different kinds of jobs do those employees have? Does he mean everyone in the office, or does he mean that the employees at that company work with a wide variety of individuals? Clearly, the author has not considered all possibilities.
In addition to this, the word ‘everyone’ has several other meanings. One meaning, as used by the author, is ‘all. While the author could claim that everyone does his or her job well, it is unlikely. Employers have a vested interest in making certain that their employees do their jobs well, but there are always exceptions to the rule. The exception might be the one who, instead of performing his or her job well, spends all morning watching TV, or the one who is so lazy that despite having the required skills, he or she simply does not bother to learn them and thus is unable to perform his or her job. Another meaning of ‘everyone’ is ‘some. While the author could claim that everyone works hard, this is unlikely as well. Some employees work harder than the rest, but to what extent? Some people work just enough to get by, while others put in 100 percent of their effort. Another meaning of ‘everyone’ is ‘some. While the author could claim that everyone works with different kinds of people, this is unlikely as well. Some employees like working with certain types of people, while others do not.
This ambiguity of the word ‘everyone’ is confusing, but its meaning is not particularly meaningful. However, the word ‘many’ may be significant, since the author uses the word three times in the sentence. Implicit in the statement is the statement that there are many different kinds of people in the workplace. However, the author has provided no evidence to support this claim. If the author had, his statement would be more accurate. To prove his point, the author could have provided specific examples of different types of co-workers. Then, the reader would have been able to evaluate the claim. For example, if the author had said that architects and engineers work, on average, with 10 different kinds of people, the reader would have a better understanding of how many people actually work in the kind of environment that the author describes. The number of times the author uses the word ‘many’ is not significant. The writer could have used the word ‘many’ ten times and still been correct.
The author has also said that co-workers have many different characteristics. Some co-workers are shy, while others are outgoing. Some co-workers are pleasant and easy to get along with, while others are rude and obnoxious. Some co-workers are gossipy, while others are quiet. Some co-workers are disorganized and messy, while others are organized and tidy. Some co-workers are detail-oriented, while others are careless. The variety of characteristics that makes up a co-worker is vast. The co-workers that the author describes are average. There are those who are better or worse than these co-workers, but not every co-worker possesses all of the characteristics. Therefore, the author’s statement that co-workers have many different characteristics is misleading.
The author is correct. Everyone does his or her job well, but whether the co-worker works with many different people, may vary greatly. In addition, it is clear that the author has not considered all of the possibilities. Given that this statement lacks substance, it is invalid.