Is this confusing The company responsible for an epidemic of insanity in its employees who grew more agitated with each day was less than effective in achieving its goals which were largely ambiguous?

Answer 1

Though largely correct, the sentence, "The company responsible for an epidemic of insanity in its employees who grew more agitated with each day was less than effective in achieving its goals which were largely ambiguous" is also largely confusing in how it is written!

Though it contains a subject (company) and verb (was), the number of clauses and their separation from the noun they address makes it difficult to understand the meaning. Even with commas, the full sentence remains difficult to understand.

As well, the lack of specifically named nouns (using common collective nouns) makes readers have to stop, reread, and try to understand the points being made. When using generic nouns, you need to make your point sooner and closer to the noun that the clause modifies.

It would be much better to separate it into two sentences, using a transitional cue between the two ideas. For example:

The company was less than effective in achieving its goals, which were largely ambiguous. As a result, the employees, who grew more agitated with each day, felt an epidemic of insanity spreading through their ranks.