Some feel executives in large companies should receive high salaries while others think they are paid too much compared to ordinary workers. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Sample Response
Many believe that high-ranking executive positions deserve their exorbitant salaries, while others feel they earn disproportionately compared to normal workers. In my opinion, outsized compensation is unreasonable in a vacuum but makes sense given market dictates.
Detractors often argue the ratios defy justification. Recent publications have quoted figures showing executive positions, and CEOs in particular, makes hundreds of times what the average worker does. This includes their various remuneration packages and bonuses. It is hard to claim this money is deserved. Many CEOs work longer hours and graduated from top schools but their tangible impact can be marginal relative to the key driving forces behind product development and the many hard-working employees required for a business to thrive. Even the most ardent supporters of these practices would not claim their output is hundreds of times higher than a normal employee.
Nonetheless, this practice follows basic principles of supply and demand. The simple fact is that there is a nearly endless supply of average individuals to staff entry-level positions but capable executives are rarer. These high-ranking jobs require an extraordinary commitment in terms of hours that most are unwilling to invest and exceptional character qualities ranging from leadership skills to raw intelligence. Since the top positions in a company are hard to fill and the company has the finances to pay premium wages, it is logical that executive salaries outrage many workers and their bonuses that appear unjust. In fact, these payments have little relationship with justice and more to do with the economic realities of capitalism.
In conclusion, though their salaries seem outlandish, executives are more difficult to replace and deserve higher pay. This is an uncomfortable, but crucial, truth for the average person to accept.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Refer to the people Original: high-ranking executive positions Suggested revision: high-ranking executives Why it matters: Positions do not themselves receive salaries, so the noun should refer to the executives.
- 2. Complete the comparison Original: earn disproportionately compared to normal workers Suggested revision: are paid disproportionately more than ordinary workers Why it matters: The comparison needs a comparative form and should describe how the executives are paid.
- 3. Use a clearer phrase Original: unreasonable in a vacuum Suggested revision: unreasonable when considered in isolation Why it matters: The revision expresses the intended qualification more precisely in formal writing.
- 4. Name the ratios clearly Original: the ratios defy justification Suggested revision: the pay ratios are unjustifiable Why it matters: This wording identifies the ratios directly and avoids an awkward collocation.
- 5. Clarify the reference Original: this money Suggested revision: these payments Why it matters: The plural phrase refers more clearly to the remuneration packages and bonuses in the preceding sentence.
- 6. Use precise neutral wording Original: nearly endless supply of average individuals Suggested revision: large supply of workers Why it matters: The revision conveys labour availability without the imprecise and dismissive phrase 'average individuals'.
- 7. Improve the collocation Original: character Suggested revision: personal Why it matters: 'Personal qualities' is the more natural collocation for leadership and intelligence.
- 8. Restore parallel structure Original: have little relationship with justice and more to do with Suggested revision: have little to do with justice and more to do with Why it matters: The paired construction requires the parallel forms 'little to do with' and 'more to do with'.
- 9. Remove unnecessary commas Original: , but crucial, Suggested revision: but crucial Why it matters: The paired adjectives are joined directly by 'but' and do not need enclosing commas.
- 10. Sentence rewrite Original: Recent publications have quoted figures showing executive positions, and CEOs in particular, makes hundreds of times what the average worker does. Suggested revision: Recent publications have quoted figures showing that executives, particularly CEOs, make hundreds of times what the average worker does. Why it matters: The rewrite fixes subject-verb agreement and makes people, rather than positions, the subject of 'make'.
- 11. Sentence rewrite Original: Many CEOs work longer hours and graduated from top schools but their tangible impact can be marginal relative to the key driving forces behind product development and the many hard-working employees required for a business to thrive. Suggested revision: Many CEOs may work longer hours and have graduated from top schools, but their tangible impact can be marginal compared with that of the many hard-working employees who drive product development and help a business thrive. Why it matters: The rewrite improves tense coordination, punctuation, and the clarity of the comparison while preserving the claim.
- 12. Sentence rewrite Original: Since the top positions in a company are hard to fill and the company has the finances to pay premium wages, it is logical that executive salaries outrage many workers and their bonuses that appear unjust. Suggested revision: Although executive salaries and bonuses may outrage many workers and appear unjust, premium pay is logical because top positions are hard to fill and companies can afford it. Why it matters: The rewrite restores a logical relationship between the reasons and the claim about premium pay.
Suggested Rewrites
- high-ranking executive positions high-ranking executives
- earn disproportionately compared to normal workers are paid disproportionately more than ordinary workers
- unreasonable in a vacuum unreasonable when considered in isolation
- the ratios defy justification the pay ratios are unjustifiable
- this money these payments
- nearly endless supply of average individuals large supply of workers
Why this response received Band 8.0
The response presents a clear, nuanced position and develops both sides with persuasive reasoning, supported by strong control of structure and vocabulary. Its main limitation is a small number of grammatical and syntactic lapses, including agreement and one awkwardly constructed sentence, which briefly reduce precision. The highest-priority improvement is to proofread complex sentences for clear clause relationships and accurate subject–verb agreement.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Response
Both views are directly addressed through well-developed reasoning, and the writer's nuanced position remains clear throughout.
Strengthen the discussion further with one specific, credible example illustrating how executive decisions create exceptional value.
Coherence and Cohesion
Ideas progress logically through focused paragraphs, with cohesive devices generally used smoothly and unobtrusively.
Clarify the logical connection within the sentence about salaries outraging workers so its final clauses do not compete for meaning.
Lexical Resource
A wide and precise vocabulary conveys complex economic arguments naturally, with only isolated awkward phrasing.
Refine a few expressions such as references to a normal employee to achieve consistently exact and appropriately formal wording.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
A broad range of complex structures is handled accurately overall, although occasional agreement and sentence-construction errors remain.
Check subject–verb agreement and clause coordination carefully, especially in long sentences containing several linked ideas.
Write this task while it is fresh
Try the same task now. It helps you remember the feedback and write better next time.
IELTS Writing Task 2
Some feel executives in large companies should receive high salaries while others think they are paid too much compared to ordinary workers. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.