Large companies should pay higher salaries to CEOs and executives, compared to other workers. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

In the world market, large companies often offer higher salaries to CEOs and executives than other workers. I totally agree with this practice for numerous compelling reasons, and this essay will explore several convincing causes for that.

Firstly, it is worth considering being responsible, CEOs and executives in enterprises bear higher responsibilities than other employees. Moreover, they are tasked with high oversight, management, and strategy thinking to ensure corporate coherence with the schedule of work. For example, CFOs not only manage sales departments but also join directions in the market to research, check products, and build strategies to ensure revenue, and they should also be given the best answers about revenue and performances in meetings. While each employee has specific responsibility for their department, directors face a much broader range of tasks. Directors have to work with heavy workloads that require a high level of professional expertise with extensive knowledge, diverse skills, and experiences, which helps them have a higher level of income than other workers. In addition, directors are talented people, and companies want to retain them by giving high salaries to top talents in leadership positions. For instance, in the Big4 of audit sectors, they are willing to pay salaries up to $1,000 per hour for director audit positions. They have to operate and ensure the success of the audit missions while at the same time being directors responsible for managing the budget and ensuring revenue.

From my perspective, this practice is suitable compared to the contributions of CEOs and executives to companies. However, it is important that salaries remain within a suitable limit, avoid a source of conflict that is not worth it, and be a source of balance in companies. Correspondingly, high wages should be based on a review of reality, performance, revenue, and responsibility, which are gradually aligned with the overall financial health of enterprises. CEOs and executives should be working for the high wage they receive.

In conclusion, paying higher salaries to CEOs and executives is justified due to their extensive contributions, which retain top talent and recognise dramatic efforts for company success. However, it is important for companies to maintain a balance between effective reality and attractive salaries. Thereby, businesses can motivate their leadership, indicate long-term development, and attract top talents while maintaining employee satisfaction.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"In the world market" -> "In the global market"
Explanation: "In the world market" is vague and informal. "In the global market" is more precise and commonly used in academic contexts to refer to the international market.
"I totally agree" -> "I strongly agree"
Explanation: "Totally" is informal and can be seen as overly emphatic. "Strongly" is a more formal and academically appropriate intensifier.
"numerous compelling reasons" -> "several compelling reasons"
Explanation: "Numerous" implies a large but unspecified number, which can be vague. "Several" is more precise and suitable for academic writing, indicating a specific number of reasons.
"it is worth considering being responsible" -> "it is essential to consider responsibility"
Explanation: "It is worth considering being responsible" is awkward and unclear. "It is essential to consider responsibility" is clearer and more direct, enhancing the formal tone.
"bear higher responsibilities" -> "shoulder greater responsibilities"
Explanation: "Bear" is less formal and can be vague in this context. "Shoulder" is a more precise and formal verb that fits better in an academic essay.
"high oversight, management, and strategy thinking" -> "high-level oversight, management, and strategic thinking"
Explanation: "High oversight, management, and strategy thinking" is awkward and lacks precision. "High-level oversight, management, and strategic thinking" uses more formal vocabulary and is clearer.
"join directions in the market" -> "direct market strategies"
Explanation: "Join directions in the market" is unclear and grammatically incorrect. "Direct market strategies" is grammatically correct and more precise.
"check products" -> "evaluate products"
Explanation: "Check" is too informal and vague for academic writing. "Evaluate" is more specific and appropriate for formal contexts.
"build strategies to ensure revenue" -> "develop strategies to ensure revenue growth"
Explanation: "Build strategies" is somewhat informal and imprecise. "Develop strategies to ensure revenue growth" is more specific and aligns with formal business language.
"have to work with heavy workloads" -> "must manage heavy workloads"
Explanation: "Have to work with" is informal and less precise. "Must manage" is more formal and appropriate for describing responsibilities in an academic context.
"talented people" -> "highly skilled professionals"
Explanation: "Talented people" is informal and vague. "Highly skilled professionals" is more specific and formal, suitable for academic writing.
"pay salaries up to $1,000 per hour" -> "offer salaries up to $1,000 per hour"
Explanation: "Pay" is less formal and can imply a direct payment, whereas "offer" is more appropriate for describing compensation packages in a formal business context.
"avoid a source of conflict that is not worth it" -> "avoid potential conflicts that are not justified"
Explanation: "Avoid a source of conflict that is not worth it" is informal and unclear. "Avoid potential conflicts that are not justified" is clearer and maintains a formal tone.
"be a source of balance in companies" -> "promote balance within companies"
Explanation: "Be a source of balance" is awkward and less direct. "Promote balance within companies" is more direct and formal.
"high wages should be based on a review of reality" -> "compensation should be based on a thorough review of performance"
Explanation: "High wages" is informal and vague. "Compensation" is more precise and formal, and "a thorough review of performance" is clearer and more specific than "a review of reality."
"dramatic efforts for company success" -> "significant contributions to company success"
Explanation: "Dramatic efforts" is informal and imprecise. "Significant contributions" is more formal and appropriate for academic writing.
"effective reality" -> "actual performance"
Explanation: "Effective reality" is unclear and awkward. "Actual performance" is a clearer and more formal term that fits the context better.

These changes enhance the formality, precision, and clarity of the essay, aligning it more closely with academic writing standards.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 8

Band Score for Task Response: 8

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively addresses the prompt by clearly stating a position of agreement with the notion that large companies should pay higher salaries to CEOs and executives compared to other workers. The writer presents several compelling reasons to support this stance, such as the higher responsibilities and expertise required for these roles. However, while the essay acknowledges the necessity of maintaining a balance in salary structures, it could benefit from a more explicit discussion of the potential downsides or counterarguments to the practice, which would provide a more nuanced response to the prompt.
- How to improve: To enhance the response, the writer should consider incorporating a brief discussion of the opposing view, such as the potential for income inequality or the impact on employee morale. This would demonstrate a more comprehensive understanding of the topic and strengthen the overall argument.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear position throughout, consistently advocating for higher salaries for CEOs and executives. The introduction sets a strong tone of agreement, and the body paragraphs reinforce this stance with relevant examples and reasoning. However, the transition to discussing the need for salary limits could be clearer, as it introduces a slight ambiguity about the writer’s overall position.
- How to improve: To maintain clarity, the writer should ensure that any counterpoints or conditions (like salary limits) are clearly framed as supporting the main argument rather than undermining it. Using transitional phrases that reinforce the primary position will help maintain a consistent voice.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents several well-developed ideas, such as the responsibilities of CEOs and the need for companies to attract and retain top talent. The use of specific examples, like the salaries in the Big4 audit sectors, adds credibility to the argument. However, some points could be further elaborated. For instance, the discussion on the responsibilities of directors could benefit from more concrete examples or data to illustrate the extent of their contributions.
- How to improve: To strengthen the support for ideas, the writer should aim to include more detailed examples or statistics that quantify the impact of CEO and executive decisions on company performance. This could involve referencing studies or reports that link executive compensation to company success.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay largely stays on topic, focusing on the justification for higher salaries for CEOs and executives. The writer does a commendable job of linking their points back to the central argument. However, the mention of maintaining a balance in salaries introduces a slight deviation from the main argument, which could confuse readers about the writer’s ultimate stance.
- How to improve: To ensure that the essay remains tightly focused on the prompt, the writer should clearly connect any additional points back to the main argument. For instance, when discussing salary limits, it would be helpful to explicitly state how this balance still supports the overall agreement with higher salaries, reinforcing that the core argument remains intact.

Overall, the essay demonstrates strong reasoning and a clear position, but addressing the suggestions above could elevate it further, potentially leading to an even higher band score.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 7

Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear argument in favor of higher salaries for CEOs and executives, and it follows a logical structure. The introduction effectively outlines the writer’s stance and previews the main points. The first body paragraph discusses the responsibilities of CEOs and executives, providing relevant examples to support the argument. However, the transition between ideas could be smoother; for instance, the shift from discussing responsibilities to the need for high salaries could be more explicitly connected to enhance the logical flow.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider using clearer topic sentences that directly relate to the thesis statement. Additionally, employing transitional phrases (e.g., "Furthermore," "In addition," "Consequently") can help guide the reader through the argument more seamlessly.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay is structured into clear paragraphs, each focusing on a specific aspect of the argument. The first paragraph introduces the topic, the second elaborates on the responsibilities of executives, and the conclusion summarizes the main points. However, the second body paragraph could benefit from being split into two distinct paragraphs: one focusing on the justification of high salaries based on responsibilities and another discussing the implications of these salaries on company performance and employee satisfaction.
- How to improve: To improve paragraph structure, ensure each paragraph has a clear main idea and supporting details. Consider starting a new paragraph when introducing a new point or when the focus shifts significantly. This will help maintain clarity and allow the reader to follow the argument more easily.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs some cohesive devices effectively, such as "Firstly," "Moreover," and "In addition," which help to connect ideas. However, there is a limited range of cohesive devices used throughout the essay. For example, while the use of "for instance" is appropriate, it appears only once, and other devices like "on the other hand," "however," or "therefore" could be utilized to create more nuanced connections between contrasting ideas or to indicate cause and effect.
- How to improve: To diversify the use of cohesive devices, practice incorporating a wider variety of linking words and phrases. This can include using synonyms for previously used devices or introducing new ones that fit the context. Additionally, ensure that cohesive devices are used appropriately to clarify relationships between ideas, which will enhance the overall coherence of the essay.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the topic and presents a coherent argument. By focusing on improving logical organization, refining paragraph structure, and expanding the range of cohesive devices, the essay can achieve a higher level of coherence and cohesion.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Lexical Resource: 7

Use a Wide Range of Vocabulary:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a good range of vocabulary relevant to the topic, including terms like "responsibilities," "oversight," "management," and "corporate coherence." The use of phrases such as "high oversight," "diverse skills," and "top talents" indicates an attempt to vary language and express complex ideas. However, there are instances where vocabulary could be more varied or sophisticated. For example, the phrase "high wages" is somewhat repetitive and could be replaced with synonyms like "elevated salaries" or "substantial remuneration."
- How to improve: To enhance vocabulary range, the writer should incorporate more synonyms and varied expressions. For instance, instead of repeatedly using "high salaries," they could explore alternatives like "lucrative compensation" or "premium pay." Additionally, integrating idiomatic expressions or collocations related to business and finance could further enrich the lexical variety.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally uses vocabulary accurately, but there are moments of imprecision. For instance, the phrase "join directions in the market" is unclear and could confuse readers. The term "directions" does not appropriately convey the intended meaning, which seems to relate to strategic decision-making. Furthermore, the phrase "avoid a source of conflict that is not worth it" is somewhat vague and could be articulated more clearly.
- How to improve: To improve precision, the writer should ensure that each term accurately reflects the intended meaning. In the case of "join directions in the market," a more precise phrase could be "develop strategic initiatives in the market." Additionally, the writer should aim for clarity by avoiding vague expressions. Instead of "not worth it," they might specify what type of conflict they are referring to, such as "avoid unnecessary disputes over salary discrepancies."
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The spelling throughout the essay is generally accurate, with no glaring errors that would impede understanding. Words like "responsible," "strategies," and "performance" are spelled correctly, reflecting a good command of spelling conventions. However, there are minor issues, such as the use of "coherence" in the context of "corporate coherence," which could be misinterpreted as "alignment" or "consistency."
- How to improve: To enhance spelling accuracy, the writer should engage in regular practice, such as reading extensively and using spell-check tools. Additionally, it would be beneficial to create a list of commonly misspelled words and practice them. For instance, ensuring that terms like "performance" and "responsibility" are consistently spelled correctly will help maintain a professional tone.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a solid command of lexical resource with a band score of 7, there are clear areas for improvement. By expanding vocabulary range, enhancing precision in word choice, and maintaining spelling accuracy, the writer can elevate their performance in this criterion.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 7

Use a Wide Range of Structures:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a good variety of sentence structures, including complex sentences and a mix of simple and compound sentences. For example, the use of phrases such as "it is worth considering being responsible" and "which helps them have a higher level of income" showcases an ability to construct more intricate sentences. However, there are instances where sentence structures could be more varied. For example, the sentence "Moreover, they are tasked with high oversight, management, and strategy thinking to ensure corporate coherence with the schedule of work" could be simplified or restructured for clarity.
- How to improve: To enhance the variety of sentence structures, the writer could incorporate more conditional sentences, questions, or even passive voice constructions where appropriate. For instance, instead of always starting with the subject, the writer could begin with an adverbial phrase or a subordinate clause to create more dynamic sentence openings. Additionally, varying the length of sentences can help maintain reader interest and improve flow.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay shows a generally good command of grammar and punctuation, but there are notable errors that detract from clarity. For example, the phrase "being responsible, CEOs and executives in enterprises bear higher responsibilities" is awkwardly constructed and could be misinterpreted. Furthermore, there are punctuation issues, such as the lack of commas in compound sentences, which can lead to run-on sentences. For instance, "While each employee has specific responsibility for their department, directors face a much broader range of tasks" is correctly punctuated, but the following sentence could benefit from clearer separation of ideas.
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, the writer should focus on subject-verb agreement and the correct use of articles. For example, the phrase "the best answers about revenue and performances in meetings" could be revised to "the best answers regarding revenue and performance in meetings" for clarity and correctness. Additionally, reviewing rules for comma usage in complex sentences and ensuring that each clause is properly punctuated will enhance the overall readability of the essay. Regular practice with grammar exercises and seeking feedback on written work can also help in identifying and correcting recurring mistakes.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of grammatical range and accuracy, focusing on diversifying sentence structures and refining grammatical precision will help elevate the writing to a higher band score.

Bài sửa mẫu

In the global market, large companies often offer higher salaries to CEOs and executives than to other workers. I strongly agree with this practice for several compelling reasons, and this essay will explore these convincing causes.

Firstly, it is essential to consider responsibility; CEOs and executives in enterprises shoulder greater responsibilities than other employees. Moreover, they are tasked with high-level oversight, management, and strategic thinking to ensure corporate coherence with the work schedule. For example, CFOs not only manage sales departments but also direct market strategies to research, evaluate products, and develop strategies to ensure revenue growth. They should also be given the best answers about revenue and performance in meetings. While each employee has specific responsibilities for their department, directors face a much broader range of tasks. Directors must manage heavy workloads that require a high level of professional expertise, extensive knowledge, diverse skills, and experience, which helps them earn a higher income than other workers. In addition, directors are highly skilled professionals, and companies want to retain them by offering high salaries to top talent in leadership positions. For instance, in the Big Four audit sectors, they are willing to pay salaries up to $1,000 per hour for director audit positions. They have to operate and ensure the success of the audit missions while simultaneously being responsible for managing the budget and ensuring revenue.

From my perspective, this practice is justified compared to the significant contributions of CEOs and executives to companies. However, it is important that salaries remain within a suitable limit, avoid potential conflicts that are not justified, and promote balance within companies. Correspondingly, high wages should be based on a thorough review of actual performance, revenue, and responsibility, which should gradually align with the overall financial health of enterprises. CEOs and executives must manage their roles effectively to earn the high wages they receive.

In conclusion, paying higher salaries to CEOs and executives is justified due to their extensive contributions, which help retain top talent and recognize their dramatic efforts for company success. However, it is important for companies to maintain a balance between effective reality and attractive salaries. Thereby, businesses can motivate their leadership, indicate long-term development, and attract top talent while maintaining employee satisfaction.