Proposal Peer Review for mate Research Proposal Email communication training is vital to every organization especially in this era of globalization. However, with the assumptions made that email communications is basic, many organizations ignore it. Or this reason, the proposal topic is important and rational too. However, the writer did not include a captivating introduction necessary to change this mentality. Notably the author elaborates the efficiency brought about by email communication as well as its challenge, but does not precisely mention the optimal use of email communication. Although this could induce suspense, provoking the reader to continue reading, the adverse effect of terming the authors suggestion void outdo the former. Possibly, mentioning the best time period for emailing could have positively impacted the message. Moreover, the author makes a contradictory argument in paragraph two. It sounds ambiguous to discourage emailing during both working hours and non-working hours. So, when employees should sent and/or receive emails?
As mention earlier, the topic is vital. The author clearly represents the proposal portraying precise sense of purpose. According to the author email communication is essential and can improve organizations effectiveness. However, due to misuse email communications impact negatively on companies and manger still assume that email communication is basic. This challenge is clearly represented elaborated and so is the solution
Notably, the solution is kept clear. there are several modes of offering the training hence leaving the manager to rationally choose the best. Notably, the author makes a commanding request to managers to incorporate email training in the organizations operations, by not giving any other option to solve the problem. Moreover, by elaborating how training induces email etiquette, a driver of effectiveness in email communication, the solutions make a lot of sense.
Forlornly, the author made the proposal sound as purely personal opinion. No sources were included in the text. Despite including the reference page, the author failed to acknowledge borrowed content and ideas.
The paper is standard, but could still make more impact if improved. Grammar mistakes were minimal and possibly negligible though they can still be corrected. To improve the papers reputation, it’s recommended that the author adjusts the introduction, making it more captivating. Possibly, the author might avoid generalizing the idea but instead develop an optimal amount of time to dedicate to emailing. The timing decision lays in the management, but precise periods could eliminate the ambiguity mentioned in paragraph two.
Secondly, additional research needs to be done both on the adverse effects of the problem as well as the solutions. Its worthy noting that advocating for email training sounds frivolous as the author mentioned. Therefore, to create sense in the proposal, the author needs to provide evidence that the current use of email communication does not only lack etiquette but also negates organizations efficiency. This would ally well with the fact that email communication training is the only solution.
Lastly, incorporation of in-text citations adds value to the message, as their absence triggers the recipient to consider the entire proposal as a personal opinion. Either way, non-cited work will always be treated as hearsay (Miner & Miner, 2008)
Miner, J. T., Miner, L. E., & Miner, L. E. (2008). Proposal planning & writing. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press.