Comparing Ruth Prawer Jhabvalas Heat and Dust and Forsters A Passage

Comparing Ruth Prawer Jhabvala's Heat and Dust and Forster's A Passage to India Literature throughout time has contained many similarities. These similarities become even more prevalent when authors share a similar style and inspirations. Two authors that have similar experiences are Ruth Prawer Jhabvala and E.M. Forster. Both these authors have written books that are in the modernism style. Jhabvala and Forster also were fascinated by India and choose the relationships between native Indians and English colonizers as one of their themes. These similarities helped produce books that have similar characters. The women, not native to India, in both Jhabvala' Heat and Dust and Forster's A Passage to India, share many of the same attributes.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The most obvious similarities are those shared by Jhabvala's character Olivia and Forster's character Adela. Throughout the books, these two characters share many characteristics and experiences. The first experience they shared while in India is that both women are social with the native Indians. This was unacceptable to all Anglo-Indians. Olivia frequently visited the Nawab at his palace. She also entertained him and his companion, Harry at her home. For the majority of the book, Olivia's husband, Douglas is unaware of how frequently she visited the Nawab. If Douglas had been fully aware of Olivia's actions, he would have been enraged. Proper Englishwomen were not to associate with natives while unchaperoned. Adela, Forster's character, had a similar experience. She desired to see the 'real'; India. To allow her to do this, a native offered to take her to the Marabar Caves, a local landmark. Again, Englishwomen were not to associate with the natives. Her potenti al fiancà © and host, allowed her to go under the condition that his mother and an Englishman were also included in the group. Socializing with Indians is only one common experience Olivia and Adela had.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Another similar experience occurs near the end of both books. Both Olivia and Adela had relationships irreparably changed through the influence of India. If neither women was in India, their relationships probably would have remained intact. Olivia's marriage to Douglas was ruined because of her relationship with the Nawab. Olivia became very close with the Nawab. She eventually came to carry his child. Because Olivia did not believe the child ... ... this advice happened at the Bridge Party. Again, they told Adela that she was superior to the natives and should act accordingly. Despite all their attempts Adela did not adopt their opinions about the natives. She attempted to form her own. The Anglo-Indian women in both novels attempted to supply advice to the younger women.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Despite being written by different authors, the female characters in Jhabvala's Heat and Dust and Forster's A Passage to India are very similar. In spite of the similarities among characters the novels themselves are different. Not only do the novels have different themes, they were also written through different points of view. While A Passage to India is mainly written through the view of a narrator, the point of view in Heat and Dust changes from the narrator to a third person view developed through Olivia's letters. These are a few of the many differences between the novels that occur regardless of the fact that the novels have similar characters. Works Cited Forster, E.M. (1992). A Passage to India. New York: Everyman's Library, Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. Jhabvala, Ruth Prawer. (1975). Heat and Dust. New York: Harper & Row, Publishers.

Mba Human Resource

Master of Business Administration-MBA Semester 1 MB0038 – Management Process and Organization Behavior – 4 Credits (Book ID: B1127) Assignment Set- 2 (60 Marks) Note: Each question carries 10 Marks. Answer all the questions. Q. 1Write a note on classical era for evolution for Organizational behavior. In the early twentieth century, early studies in the complexities of organizational activity got underway. Initial studies were mostly mechanical. Being treated like machines, the humans were subjected to close scrutiny and study.The aspects studied were how the human behaved during regular applied testing of a person's responses to stimuli. Another stream of ideas that were part of study organizations were divided according to their political preferences, and the various levels of management throughout the entire organizations. Unfortunately there was a limitation to both of these because they did not bear in mind the interaction between the two connected streams but treat ed each as a separate entity. Parts of the History of Organizational Behavior Studies can be seen during the 1890's.During this time scientific management was viewed as the best way to run an organization. An organization that in its' course of action adheres to a set of guidelines and guides itself on findings of time and motion studies, is bound to achieve greater levels of productivity – claimed the advocates of this system. It became clear that organizations were centered on interactive groups of their members, and a more humanistic view needed to be formulated as psychology and analysis as a means of understanding human behavior became more sophisticated.By understanding and using psychology productivity will improve tremendously. The Human Relations Movement, as it was called in the beginning of the 20th century, brought focus on collaboration, influence, and the aspect of particular persons understanding the intent of the organization. By the Second World War, a paradi gm shift had occurred in the study of organizational behavior. The new buzzword was operations research, and more and more people became interested in sciences, systems theories, complexity theories and strategies.At the time, James March and Herbert Simon were leading experts in the field. Many theories were coming forth as the seventies came around. More often than not the basis for this was quantitative research and interconnected realms of psychology. By the 1980s how important the cultures of different organizations was emphasized instead of the amount and quality of the research. Anthropology was but one of many fields being added into studies about organizational behaviors. Presently any managerial course has organizational behavior studies as its integral part.As part of the curriculum many business schools now include this and related courses in fields such as industrial psychology. The name of the person who runs the History of Organizational Behavior Studies internet site is Patricia Jones. com. See more on Organizational Behaviors. This article may only be used if the author bio and links are included. Q. 2what is groupthink. Explain. Groupthink is â€Å"a deterioration of mental efficiency, reality testing, and moral judgment resulting from in-group pressures†. Thus, the overemphasis on consensus and agreement leads members to be unwilling to evaluate group members’ ideas critically.This hinders decision-making and becomes an obstacle to group productivity. Certain conditions favor the development of groupthink. i) The first condition is high cohesiveness. Cohesive groups tend to avoid conflicts and to demand conformity. ii) The second is other antecedents including directive leadership, high stress, insulation of the group and lack of methodical procedures for developing and evaluating alternatives. A group suffering from groupthink displays recognizable symptoms. Symptoms of Groupthink and how to Prevent It Illusions of invulnerabi lity: Group members feel they are above criticism. This symptom leads to excessive optimism and risk taking. * Illusions of group morality: Group members feel they are moral in their actions and therefore above reproach. This symptom leads the group to ignore the ethical implications of their decisions. * Illusions of unanimity: Group members believe there is unanimous agreement on the decisions. Silence is misconstrued as consent. * Rationalization: Group members concoct explanations for their decisions to make them appear rational and correct.The results are that other alternatives are not considered, and there is an unwillingness to reconsider the group’s assumptions. * Stereotyping the enemy: Competitors are stereotyped as evil or stupid. This leads the group to underestimate its opposition. * Self-censorship: Members do not express their doubts or concerns about the course of action. This prevents critical analysis of the decisions. * Peer pressure: Any members who expre ss doubts or concerns are pressured by other group members, who question their loyalty. * Mind guards: Some members take it upon themselves to protect the group from negative feedback.Group members are thus shielded from information that might lead them to question their action. Guidelines for Preventing Groupthink * Ask each group member to assume the role of a critical evaluator by actively voicing objections or doubts. * Have the leader avoid stating his or her position on the issue prior to the group decision. * Create several groups that work on the decision simultaneously. * Bring in outside experts to evaluate the group process. * Appoint a devil’s advocate to question the group’s course of action consistently. Evaluate the competition carefully, posing as many different motivations and intentions as possible. * Once consensus is reached, encourage the group to rethink its position by re-examining the alternatives. 1. Social Loafing:  Social loafing occurs whe n one or more group members rely on the efforts of other group members and fail to contribute their own time, effort, thoughts or other resources to a group. This may create a real drag on the group’s efforts and achievements. When a group carries out a task, it is harder to attribute the group’s output to individual contributions.Some group members may engage in social loafing, or doing Less than their share of the work on the assumption that group’s results will not indicate the individual’s failure to contribute. A number of methods for countering social loafing exist, such as having identifiable individual contributions to the group product and member self-evaluation systems. For example, if each group member is responsible for a specific input to the group, a members’ failure to contribute will be noticed by everyone. If members must formally evaluate their contributions to the group, they are less likely to loaf. . Production Blocking:  Pro duction blocking is limiting another person’s output by getting in his or her way. Production blocking occurs when too many employees are trying to work in a given amount of space or when the organization has poorly planned the use of its facilities. It can also occur when the organization assigns more than the optimal number of employees to carry out a task. Q. 3Explain the process of negotiation. We can identify four basic steps in the negotiation process. They are: 1. Preparation:  Preparation for negotiations should begin long before the formal negotiation begins.Each party gathers information about the other side – its history, likely behavior, previous interactions and previous agreements reached by the parties. Each party polls its members to determine their wishes, expectations, and preferences regarding a new agreement. 2. Evaluation of Alternatives:  The two sides attempt to identify the bargaining range (i. e. , the range in which both parties would find an agreement acceptable). The bargainers determine the alternatives acceptable to them and also identify their best alternative if a negotiated settlement is not reached.Identifying a set of alternatives, including the best one, helps individuals determine whether to continue the negotiation or seek another course of action. Both the parties Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA) needs to be determined. BATNA determines the lowest value acceptable to you for a negotiated agreement for both the parties. 3. Identifying Interests:  Negotiators act to satisfy their own interests, which may include substantive, relationship, personal or organizational ones. The person or group must assess the other party’s interests and then decide how to respond to those interests in their offers.Effective negotiations call for satisfying interests by identifying and exploring a range of possible positions on specific issues. 4. Making Trade-offs and Creating Joint Gains:  Bargai ners use trade-offs to satisfy their own and others’ interests. Either position would meet the interests of maintaining a certain standard of living. One way to assess tradeoffs is * Begin by identifying the best and worst possible outcomes. * Next, specify what impact trade-offs will have on these outcomes. * Finally, consider whether the changed outcomes will better meet the parties’ interest.Negotiators need to overcome the idea that a fixed pie of outcomes exists, avoid non-rational escalation of conflict, pay attention to others’ cognitions and avoid devaluating the others’ concessions while overvaluing their own. Issues in Negotiation Some of the most important issues have been discussed below. 1. The role of personality traits in negotiation –  Overall assessments of the personality-negotiation relationship finds that personality traits have no significant direct effect on either the bargaining process or negotiation outcomes (Wall ;amp; B lum, 1991). . Gender differences in negotiations – Men and women do not negotiate differently. A popular stereotype is that women are more cooperative, pleasant, and relationship-oriented in negotiations than are men. The evidence does not support this. The belief that women are â€Å"nicer† is probably due to confusing gender and the lack of power typically held by women. (Stuhlmacher ;amp; Walters, 1999). 3. Cultural differences in negotiations – Negotiating styles clearly vary across national cultures (Adler, 2002).The cultural context of the negotiation significantly influences the amount and type of preparation for bargaining, the emphasis on task versus interpersonal relationships, the tactics used, etc. Q. 4 The environmental stressors have a great impact on work performance and adjustment of the individual in an organization. Discuss the different categories of environmental stressors. Environmental and internal conditions that lie beyond an individualâ €™s control are environmental stressors. Such stressors can have a considerable impact on work performance and adjustment. We can organize environmental stressors into the following categories: . Task Demands: Task demands are factors related to a person’s job. They include the design of the individual’s job, working conditions and the physical work layout. Changes and lack of control are two of the most stressful demands people face at work. Change leads to uncertainty, a lack of predictability in a person’s daily tasks and activities and may be caused by job insecurity related to difficult economic times. Technology and technological innovation also create change and uncertainty for many employees, requiring adjustments in training education and skill development.Lack of control is a second major source of stress, especially in work environments that are difficult and psychologically demanding. The lack of control may be caused by inability to influence th e timing of tasks and activities, to select tools or methods for accomplishing the work to make decisions that influence work outcomes, or to exercise direct action to affect the work outcomes. 2. Role Demands: The social-psychological demands of the work environment may be every bit as stressful as task demands at work.Role demands relate to pressures placed on a person as a function of the particular role he or she plays in the organization. Role conflict results from inconsistent or incompatible expectations communicated to a person. The conflict may be an inter role, intra-role or person-role conflict. a. Inter role Conflict: is caused by conflicting expectations related to two separate roles, such as employee and parent. For example, the employee with major sales presentation on Monday and a sick child at home is likely to experience inter-role conflict. b.Intra-role conflict: is caused by conflicting expectations related to a single role, such as employee. For example, the man ager who presses employees. c. Person-role Conflict: Ethics violations are likely to cause person-role conflicts. Employees expected to behave in ways that violate personal values, beliefs or principles experience conflict. The second major cause of role stress is role ambiguity. Role ambiguity is created when role expectations are not clearly understood and the employee is not sure what he or she is to do. Role ambiguity is the confusion a person experiences related to the expectations of others.Role ambiguity may be caused by not understanding what is expected, not knowing how to do it, or not knowing the result of failure to do it. 3. Inter-personal Demands: are pressures created by other employees. Lack of social support from colleagues stress, especially among employees with a high social need. Abrasive personalities, sexual harassment and the leadership style in the organization are interpersonal demands for people at work. a. The abrasive Person: May be an able and talented e mployee, but one who creates emotional waves that others at work must accommodate. b.Sexual Harassment: The vast majority of sexual harassment is directed at women in the workplace, creating a stressful working environment for the person being harassed, as well as for others. c. Leadership Styles: Whether authoritarian or participative, create stress for different personality types. Employees who feel secure with firm, directive leadership may be anxious with an open, participative style. Those comfortable with participative leadership may feel restrained by a directive style. 4. Physical Demands: Non-work demands create stress for people, which carry over into work environment or vice versa.Workers subject to create role conflicts or overloads that are difficult to manage. In addition to family demands, people have personal demands related to non-work organizational commitments such as religious and public service organizations. These demands become more or less stressful, dependin g on their compatibility with the person’s work and family life and their capacity to provide alternative satisfactions for the person. Q. 5 Given below are certain instances observed by a summer trainee – Ritu, while making an observational study at Global Green consultants.An organization dealing with recycling of plastic products waste etc. She makes the following observations about two key people in the organization. 1) Mr. Patnayak – He is a very friendly person and encourages his team members by giving those recommendations and appreciation. This helps HR to decide about giving a bonus or promotion to employees. 2) Mr. Dutta- He is an aggressive person. He frequently loses his temper. Ritu observes that he frequently punishes the non-performers and also gives them warnings regarding suspension etc. Now explain what base of power Mr. Patnayak and Mr.Dutta belong to. Explain the type of power they use often Ten Types of Power 1. Position. Some measure of pow er is conferred on the basis of one’s formal position in an organization. For example, a marketing manager can influence the decisions that affect the marketing department. However, the marketing manager has little power to influence the decisions that affect the finance department. 2. Knowledge or expertise. People who have knowledge or expertise can wield tremendous power. Of course, knowledge in itself is not powerful. It is the use of knowledge and expertise that confers power.Thus, you could be an incredibly bright person and still be powerless. 3. Character or ethics. The more trustworthy individuals are the more power they have in negotiations. The big issue here is whether they do what they say they are going to do—even when they no longer feel like doing it. 4. Rewards. People who are able to bestow rewards or perceived rewards hold power. Supervisors, with their ability to give raises, hold power over employees. Money can have power. But money, like anything else, holds very little power if it is not distributed. 5.Punishment. Those who have the ability to create a negative outcome for a counterpart have the power of punishment. Managers who have the authority to reprimand and fire employees hold this type of power. State troopers and highway patrol officers who have the ability to give out speeding tickets also have this power. 6. Gender. Dealing with someone of the opposite sex can confer power. We have videotaped many negotiation case studies in which the turning point came when a woman casually touched a man’s hand or arm to make her point. 7. Powerlessness.In some instances, giving up all power can be very powerful. If a kidnapper threatens a hostage with death enough times, the hostage may just challenge the kidnapper to go ahead and kill him. At the point that the hostage gives up power, or control over his own death, the kidnapper actually loses power. 8. Charisma or personal power. When we ask participants in our seminar s for examples of leaders who have had charisma or personal power, invariably the names of Mother Teresa, John F. Kennedy, and Ronald Reagan come up. When we ask, â€Å"What do all three of these leaders have in common? participants usually respond, â€Å"Passion and confidence in what they believe in. † 9. Lack of interest or desire. In negotiations, as in many other areas of life, the side with the least interest in what is being negotiated holds the most power. If you are buying a house and you really do not care if you purchase the house you are currently negotiating for or the one down the street, you will most likely hold more power in the negotiation—unless, of course, the sellers could care less if they sell the house today or live in it for another ten years! 10. Craziness.This may sound funny, but bizarre or irrational behavior can confer a tremendous amount of power. Every organization has someone who blows up or behaves irrationally when confronted with pr oblems. Those who have been exposed to this type of behavior tend to avoid such individuals. As a result, these individuals are not given many tasks to accomplish because others are afraid to ask them. Leadership style influence level of motivation. However, throughout a lifetime, man’s motivation is influenced by changing ambitions and/or leadership style he works under or socializes with.Command-and-control leadership drains off ambition while worker responsibility increases ambition. Leadership Style versus Motivation| Leadership Style| Motivation Type| Motivation is Based on:| Personality Type| Efficiency| Limited supervisionWorker with decision making responsibility| Self motivated| Creativity| Leader of ideas or people. Independent AchieverThrives on change| High| | Team motivated| | | | Mixed styles| Goal motivated| Opportunity| Personality type and efficiency depends on leader's skill and/or the work environment he's created. | | Reward motivated| Materialism| | Recog nition motivated| Social status| | High level of supervisionCommand-and-control| Peer motivated| To be like others| Status quo DependencyResist change| Low| | Authority motivated| Follows policy| | | | Threat, fear motivated| Reacts to force| | | * Self-motivated or visionaries will not accept authority controlled environments. They will find a way to escape if trapped. * In a team-motivated environment, dependency types will become inspired and strive to be acceptable with independent thinking coworkers. * Associates influence the level of individual motivation. Reaction to ChangeCommand-and-control leadership is the primary style in our society. It is accepted because efficiency is created by repetitive action, teaching people to resist change. Once acquiring a skill, they do not want to learn another. The worker adapts to level three with an occasional trip to level two. Worker responsibility is just the opposite; it motivates people to thrive on change by seeking challenges, fin ding ways to achieve goals. Level one is the leader of changing technology, finding ways to create efficiency. Reaction to Efficiency The efficiency of advancing technology is forcing change.It is up to the individual or business to decide which side of change they want to be on, the leading edge or trailing edge. The leading edge is exciting while the trailing edge is a drag. Playing catch-up drains motivation while leaders of change inspire motivation. With today’s changing technology, an individual must be willing to abandoned old skills and learn new ones. The ability to adapt is achieved through self-development programs. Because level one thrives on change, they adapt to whatever methods gets things done with the least amount of effort.This brings us to work habits. In level one, management and front line workers, together, are searching for ways to solve and prevent problems. Decisions are made on the front line where alternative methods are analyzed. Being able to pre vent problems is a motivating force. In level three management makes all decision, as a result, management must find ways to solve all problems and find alternative methods. Front line employees may be aware conflicts, but they don’t have the authority to take action and have learned not to be concerned.Supervisors are only concerned with elements that management thinks are important. Under command-and-control leadership, management considers the opinions or concerns of people on the front line to be trivial. As a result, management takes action only when problems become too big to ignore. If workers have conflicts with their supervisors, they will find ways to increase the magnitude of problems, creating a combative environment. A downward spiral of management implementing more control and workers resisting control develop.Under worker responsibility, management and workers unite to prevent or solve problems. Team MotivatedElementary problems are prevented or solved at the s ource. Getting the job done is the primary goal of management and workers. | Dependency of AuthorityElementary are dealt with by management when large enough to be recognized. | Abused WorkersLack of leadership skills and the desire for power creates elementary problems. Managers focus on worker control. Getting the job done is down the list. Workers goal is to find ways to do little as possible.   | Command and Control Leadership – Problems are always out of control. | Reaction to Learning Habits In level two, young workers are establishing work habits, developing attitudes and learning a professional skill. Out of training and on the job, motivation level will depend on the leadership style they work under. Under command-and-control leadership, ambitions will be associated with maintaining the status quo. Under worker responsibility, ambitions will be associated with opportunity. They will continually expand their skills as the need or as opportunity arises.Reaction to Go als Self-motivated people are goal motivated. Once they conquer one goal, they establish another. Every goal is a learning process that requires all the elements in level one. Companies that attract and keep this type of person stay on the leading edge of technology. The CEO is a visionary in customer service and employee leadership. The employees' goals are the same as the CEO’s. If the CEO desires control, then he will lead in such a way that trains subordinates to lead by control. As a result, the employees' goals are quitting time and payday. Reaction to RecognitionRecognition is important; it builds positive self-esteem. By itself, its benefits are short lived. Long-term benefits are achieved when the employee feels the job could not have been done without them. This means they were faced with a challenge, which means, they had the responsibility and authority to take action. This environment is found in level one. Self Motivated Projects Self-motivated projects' is the ability to start and finish what one has started. Most people, working alone, do not finish what they start. The ability to finish challenging projects is the secret to being a winner.First requirement is interest, then asking questions which inspires' the learning process. With information, a challenge is presented and a goal set. When action is taken, the barriers of persistence, risk, fear and failure become a challenge by itself. Self-motivated projects are difficult because no one cares if they succeed, which is another barrier. This is why most people quit before they get a good start. People, who find ways to overcome barriers and hang in there, are the winners. They develop skills and confidence, which are required steps to larger projects.Team Motivated Projects Everyone can be inspired to achievement in a team-motivated environment. With a common goal, team members support each other until success is achieved. In this environment, others do care and team members are needed for achieving the goal. For this reason, team motivation is extremely powerful. The exchange of ideas, information and testing the results, adds to the motivating force. As a result, each member seeks to be a leader of quality input. Q. 6 â€Å"Fashion4now† is a famous and old magazine. The top management decides to start the e- edition of the magazine.They also decide the redefine the policies and culture of â€Å"Fashion4now† To start implementing this change, they frequently call meetings of employees. They have also formed groups at different levels to clarify doubts and explain the perspective of change. Analyze the situation in the context of organizational change and elaborate why the top management is following the discussed practices and what approach is most evident in the context. Typically, the concept of organizational change is in regard to organization-wide change, as opposed to smaller changes such as adding a new person, modifying a program, etc.Examp les of organization-wide change might include a change in mission, restructuring operations (e. g. , restructuring to self-managed teams, layoffs, etc. ), new technologies, mergers, major collaborations, â€Å"rightsizing†, new programs such as Total Quality Management, re-engineering, etc. Some experts refer to organizational transformation. Often this term designates a fundamental and radical reorientation in the way the organization operates. The levels of organizational change Perhaps the most difficult decision to make is at what â€Å"level† to start.There are four levels of organizational change: First let's describe these levels, and then under what circumstances a business should use them. Level 1- shaping and anticipating the future At this level, organizations start out with few assumptions about the business itself, what it is â€Å"good† at, and what the future will be like. Management generates alternate â€Å"scenarios† of the future, defin es opportunities based on these possible futures, assesses its strengths and weaknesses in these scenarios changes its mission, measurement system etc.More information on this is in the next article, â€Å"Moving from the Future to your Strategy. † Level 2 – defining what business (as) to be in and their â€Å"Core Competencies Many attempts at strategic planning start at this level, either assuming that 1) the future will be like the past or at least predictable; 2) the future is embodied in the CEO's â€Å"vision for the future†; or 3) management doesn't know where else to start; 4) management is too afraid to start at level 1 because of the changes needed to really meet future requirements; or 5) the only mandate they have is to refine what mission already exists.After a mission has been defined and a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analysis is completed, an organization can then define its measures, goals, strategies, etc. More infor mation on this is in the next article, â€Å"Moving from the Future to your Strategy. † Level 3 – Reengineering (Structurally Changing) Your Processes Either as an aftermath or consequence of level one or two work or as an independent action, level three works focuses on fundamentally changing how work is accomplished.Rather than focus on modest improvements, reengineering focuses on making major structural changes to everyday with the goal of substantially improving productivity, efficiency, quality or customer satisfaction. To read more about level 3 organizational changes, please see â€Å"A Tale of Three Villages. † Level 4 – Incrementally Changing your Processes Level 4 organizational changes are focusing in making many small changes to existing work processes. Oftentimes organizations put in considerable effort into getting every employee focused on making these small changes, often with considerable effect.Unfortunately, making improvements on how a buggy whip for horse-drawn carriages is made will rarely come up with the idea that buggy whips are no longer necessary because cars have been invented. To read more about level 4 organizational changes and how it compares to level 3, please see â€Å"A Tale of Three Villages. †   Some General Guidelines to Organization-Wide Change 1. Consider using a consultant. Ensure the consultant is highly experienced in organization-wide change. Ask to see references and check the references. 2. Widely communicate the potential need for change.Communicate what you're doing about it. Communicate what was done and how it worked out. 3. Get as much feedback as practical from employees, including what they think are the problems and what should be done to resolve them. If possible, work with a team of employees to manage the change. 4. Don't get wrapped up in doing change for the sake of change. Know why you're making the change. What goal(s) do you hope to accomplish? 6. Plan the chang e. How do you plan to reach the goals, what will you need to reach the goals, how long might it take and how will you know when you've reached your goals or not?Focus on the coordination of the departments/programs in your organization, not on each part by itself. Have someone in charge of the plan. 7. End up having every employee ultimately reporting to one person, if possible, and they should know who that person is. Job descriptions are often complained about, but they are useful in specifying who reports to whom. 8. Delegate decisions to employees as much as possible. This includes granting them the authority and responsibility to get the job done.As much as possible, let them decide how to do the project. 9. The process won't be an â€Å"aha! † It will take longer than you think. 10. Keep perspective. Keep focused on meeting the needs of your customer or clients. 11. Take care of yourself first. Organization-wide change can be highly stressful. 12. Don't seek to control change, but rather to expect it, understand it and manage it. 13. Include closure in the plan. Acknowledge and celebrate your accomplishments. 14. Read some resources about organizational change, including new forms and structures

Utilitarianism Or Deontology - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 9 Words: 2575 Downloads: 1 Date added: 2019/08/08 Category Ethics Essay Level High school Tags: Utilitarianism Essay Did you like this example? Moral theories evaluate morality typically on the following factors: the agent, or the persons reasoning behind the action; the action and whether the action is good or bad; or the consequences, or results of the action. Moral theories can evaluate one, two, or all three of the optionsit is all up to the theory itself in what it evaluates. Consequentialism is a broad theory that evaluates morality based on the consequences of our actions (Shafer-Landau, 122). Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Utilitarianism Or Deontology" essay for you Create order Utilitarianism is like a branch on the tree of consequentialism, or a much more specific sub-theory of consequentialism (Shafer-Landau, 123). John Stuart Mills classic form of Utilitarianism aims for the greatest amount of good for the greatest number of people. Utilitarianism focuses on actions being good if they are for the greater good; if they bring about the most possible happiness for the greatest amount of people. (Shafer-Landau, 123). The Principle of Utility is the only moral principle that utilitarians judge ethical matters with. The Principle of Utility states that actions are right if and only if they bring about the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest amount of people, and they are wrong if they do not (Shafer-Landau, 123). In Utilitarianism, the end justifies the means. Utilitarianism does not care what the action is or what your intentions were for the action. This means that no matter what action you took, your actions morality only depends on the results (Shafer-Landau, 126). According to utilitarianism, you can use whatever means to get to an end that benefits the greater good. It looks at the consequences of your actions, not the actions and not the reasoning behind your actions; only at the results. If the results are good, then it was a morally good choice. If your results are bad, then it was a morally bad choice. This means that if you set out to murder an innocent person but missed your a im and killed a terrorist that was about to set a bomb off in a building and kill fifty people, then your action was morally good. It also means that if you tried to save someones life who was drowning, but both of you ended up dying, then your actions would be morally wrong. The result is what matters in Utilitarianismif the results of your actions bring about a greater good, then you are doing the right thing. That means that you can use whatever you wanteven peopleas a means to an end, as long as that end brings about good results that promote the most well-being of the most people. (Shafer-Landau, 126). The ethical issue here is Iceland claiming to have cured Down Syndrome. Of course, any claim to have cured Down Syndrome will draw much attention. If you investigate the claim, though, youll realize that Iceland has requiring expectant mothers to be informed about the option to screen their unborn babies for Down Syndrome and other genetic disordersand giving her the option to abort the baby if she wishes, and upwards of eighty percent of women make the decision to do so (CBS News, What Kind of Society do You Want to Live in?). This has stirred up controversy on two sidesthose who think it is morally acceptable for babies with Down Syndrome to be aborted, and those who think it is morally unacceptable for babies with Down Syndrome to be aborted. For those who are utilitarians, they believe it is morally acceptable to abort babies with Down Syndrome. Utilitarianists justify their standpoint by listing some positive aspects to aborting babies with Down Syndrome. With Down Syndrome bein g at the top of the list of the ten most expensive diseases, and Icelands pride in their state-funded health care, the abortions of unborn babies with Down Syndrome is seen to save resources and money (American Magazine, Iceland Isnt Eliminating Down Syndrome). Doing so saves limited and valuable resources, spares the parents from having to raise children with genetic disorders and saves the time, money, and energy of the parents. It also gives the mother the right to do as she wishes with her own body and life (Iceland Magazine, Fact Check). Aborting babies screened positive also avoids people with Down Syndrome living low quality lives and spends less money from healthcare and insurance. The arguments against aborting babies with Down Syndrome are that it denies babies with genetic disorders the right to life and could be a gross violation of human rights. This makes it comparable to genocide, or the targeting of removing specific groups of people from the world (Psychology Today, Iceland ?Cures Down Syndrome). Some argue that it isnt an actual cure (Psychology Today, Iceland ?Cures Down Syndrome). Another argument is that it violates Gods command of protecting innocent life and being commanded to not commit murder, though pro-abortionists argue that it is not murder. Aborting babies with Down Syndrome also reduces the status of the unborn baby, or unborn person, to the that of an item, or a thing that has ended. (The Washington Post, Whats the Real Down Syndrome Problem). While Utilitarianism does consider happinessthe happiness of all, to be specificas a part of ethics, Deontology doesnt include happiness in the evaluation of morality (Shafer-Landau, 126). Deontology is the study of moral duties, or moral commands (Shafer-Landau, 160). In Deontology, the aim is not happiness, making others feel good, doing good because it feels good to help others, etc. The aim of Deontology is to do good because it is good (Shafer-Landau 169). Deontologys moral duties are unconditional, which means that doing the right thing for the right reasonbecause it is a good thing to dois the only acceptable reason to do something (Shafer-Landau 169).. This means that if you save someones life because it makes you feel good, because you would want someone to save your life someday, etc.; then youre not making the right moral decision, because you arent doing it for the right reason. The only acceptable reason that makes an action morally good or acceptable is if youre doing something simply because its the right thing to do. Weve covered that in Deontology, our moral duties must be treated as ends in themselves. But what does Deontology say about people? People must be treated as ends in themselves as well, and never as a means only (Shafer-Landau, 176). The Principle of Humanity explains this in detail. According to the Principle of Humanity, we can only use people as a means to an end if they are aware of it and consent to it (Shafer-Landau, 176-177). An example of this would be asking someone if you can borrow five dollars from them and they agree to it only if you pay them back later. However, if you steal five dollars from someone, then that would be using them only as a means to an endtreating them as an item, an ATM machineand it would therefore be immoral. The Principle of Humanity states that people are not thingspeople are people and should be treated as so, worthy of respect and inherent dignity. In other words, people are ends in themselves and should not be used as items or reduced to the status of an item. Deontology has a very opposing moral view compared to Utilitarianism on the ethical issue of Down Syndrome abortions in Iceland being claimed as a cure. According to Deontologists, it would be morally wrong to abort the unborn baby for having Down Syndrome because it would be using the unborn baby as a means to an end. Some positive aspects of the Deontology standpoint are: first and foremost, it protects all human l ife, innocent life, and doesnt violate human rights to life. It makes it clear where the line is drawn for who is qualified for human rights to lifewhich is everyone. Deontologys ethical reasoning in this situation avoids future psychological pain parents could endure like regret, guilt, anguish, or loss (CBS News, What Kind of Society do You Want to Live in?); and physical pain or complications from abortion procedures that parents could endure. Deontology, while not on a religious level, also obeys Gods commands to protect innocent life and to not commit murder. Another positive aspect of this standpoint is that it doesnt target a specific group of people. Deontology allows the unborn baby a chance to life without others deciding for them. However, there are some negatives to Deontologys standpointit violates womans right of doing as she wants with her own body (Iceland Magazine, Fact Check), which is a controversial issue when it comes to abortion as some will argue that it is not only her body involved but also another humans. While parents are allowed to make choices medically for their own children until the child is a certain age, but pro-abortion arguments justify this by calling the unborn baby a fetus and reducing it to be an item: which brings the argument back around to where the line is drawn in Utilitarianism. Not aborting the unborn baby uses more resources, and forces parents to raise an unwanted child, result ing in more time, money, and energy on the parents and taxpayerss part. The child could have also had a low quality of life from the different health issues and treatments they may receive (The Washington Post, Whats the Real Down Syndrome Problem). Lastly, more children could end up for adoption or in the foster home system if less children are aborted. Iceland, while screening for babies with Down Syndrome and aborting them, may not be forcing the parents or mother to abortbut giving her the option could be persuading enough to compromise the autonomy of the patient. (CBS News, Behind the Lens). The first issue here is the autonomy of the patientsthe pregnant mother and the unborn child. Kacy Cherry emphasizes that, That question alone, according to Ingadottir, pushes women to view Down Syndrome negatively, as something to be screened out (CBS News, Behind the Lens). If the mother is in any way being persuaded â€Å"with the option of being able to have the screening for her baby, or by being told that most women do it (CBS News, What Kind of Society do You Want to Live in?)the autonomy of one of the doctors patients could be under some influence. Also, the baby does not have any choice or voice for itself and its rights to l ife when it comes to abortion under current laws and medical procedures. Wouldnt having a right to live be better than having no life at all? Some argue that it would avoid misery and a low quality of life for people with genetic disorders to be aborted. But how are we to judge the quality of someone elses life? Quality of life varies from person to person, no matter the circumstances. Not to mention, the Average life expectancy is now around 60 years, up from around 25 years four decades ago, when many Down Syndrome people were institutionalized or otherwise isolated, denied education and other stimulation, and generally not treated as people (The Washington Post, Whats the Real Down Syndrome Problem). We cannot judge someone elses life and the amount of happiness they have in it, only our own life. Aborting unborn babies with genetic disorders draws a very shaky line of the rights of human life and who is qualified for those rights. The rules of abortion should be very clear and consistent. The unborn human should have the same rights to lifeand their own bodyas the mother does. Aborting unborn humans on certain conditions could also qualify as genocide, targeting a specific group of people (Psychology Today, Iceland Cures Down Syndrome). Using Deontology protects innocent life for the right reasonbecause it is the right thing to do. Deontology treats human beings as human beings, regardless of age, gender, genetic abnormality, etc. Deontologys standpoint on the ethical issue going on in Iceland is one that I can agree withthat all human beings are inherently valuable. While I agree with Deontologys standpoint on an ethical level all by itself, I also agree with this on a moral l evel from my own personal beliefs and religion. Firstly, I agree with the view of human beings having inherent value because every person should have the right to life. Deontologys moral theory protects any future children I may have and protects all of the people around me from being killed, aborted, or screened out (CBS News, Behind the Lens) of society. It protects my personal life decisions and medical situations from being manipulated by any doctors or government parties. With this standpoint, I am denied the right to have an abortion. In this situation specifically, I side with Deontology because it prevents unnecessary and grey area abortions, though I do disagree on all abortion being ruled out completely. In my view, abortion should only be allowed if it is a survival situation in which both the mother and child could die or the mother could die if she continues her pregnancy. Deontology does have some negatives for me as well. Out of the two, I would be happy to oblige with its rules because I feel it is the lesser of tw o evils. My viewpoints on this are also from a Christian perspectiveGod has told me that I should never commit murder. As Deontology clearly defines what or who qualifies as a human, I have a clear understanding that by doing the right thing and valuing human life inherently, then I am morally doing the right thing. God has also assigned inherent value to human life, and by following Deontologys perspective, I am not only doing the right thing because it is the right thing to do but also following my religion and the commandments of God. God has given us free will to make whatever choices we want in life, but he wants us to make the right choice because it is the right thing to do. In the Bible, there is a passage that I feel explains my previous sentence much more solidly, I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live. (Deuteronomy 30:19). There is a wide variety of opinions and beliefs in any culturally diverse society. According to Deontology, women would not be permitted to have an abortion period. I find this a better option than allowing women to decide whether their childanother human beingshould have the right to live or not. However, there is some shaky ground hereI do believe that women should have the right to abortion if her life is in danger. Deontology does not give us this option, but overall, I find Deontologys theory a much better approach for everyones moral evaluation than Utilitarianisms theory as Deontology protects all human lives. We all have a secure right to live. No one would be allowed to use anyones life as merely a means to an end. It protects all innocent lives and unborn lives. Lastly, Deontology protects the autonomy of patients without doctor or government influence. These are all matters that should be respected no matter a persons age, gender, race, religion, disability or not, etc. Ul timately, when deciding between Deontology and Utilitarianism, Deontology is the lesser of two evilsand in the long run, it protects all of us, no matter our age, gender, race, religion, whether we have a disability or not, etc. for the long run, and grants us more solid rights that cannot be bent against others opinions.