Monthly Archives: March 2023

if you were to conduct a research study, you would have to choose between an experimental method or a correlation method. explain he differnce between the two. which one would you choose to utilize, and why? 

 Using an acronym, create your own coaching model, and define the meaning of each letter as it relates to performance management.

• Specify the primary reasons that you believe your model would be effective. Justify your response.

see notes below

Option #2: Self-Managing Teams in S.C. Johnson & Son

Many have strong views on self-managed teams (SMTs) – they are either perceived as great resources or viewed as a complete waste of time and detrimental to an organization. With this in mind, evaluate the SMT process put together by S. C. Johnson Companies South America as explained in Chapter 31 (Rainieri, 2018) and its potential for success in other parts of the globe. As part of your evaluation, explain the considerations or adjustments that were made for the implementation of these teams at company’s location in Chile, and how these differed from processes in other locations. Conclude your evaluation with recommendations for SMT processes or components that could contribute to greater success of SMTs throughout the world.
Your paper should be:

1. Three to four pages in length (not including cover and reference pages).
2. Formatted according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing and APA (Links to an external site.).
3. Supported by the course text and a minimum of three additional scholarly articles.

CASE 9: THE OUTSTANDING FACULTY AWARD 

By David J. Cherrington, Brigham Young University; revised by Steven L. McShane, Curtin University (Australia) and University of Victoria (Canada) 

I recently served on the Outstanding Faculty Award committee for the College of Business. This award is our college’s highest honor for a faculty member, which is bestowed at a special reception ceremony. At the first meeting, our committee discussed the nomination process and decided to follow our traditional practice of inviting nominations from both the faculty and students. During the next month, we received six completed files with supporting documentation. Three of the nominations came from department chairs, two from faculty who recommended their colleagues, and one from a group of 16 graduate students. At the second meeting, we agreed that we didn’t know the six applicants well enough to make a decision that day, so we decided that we would read the applications on our own and rank them. There was no discussion about ranking criteria; I think we assumed that we shared a common definition of the word “outstanding.” 

During the third meeting, it quickly became apparent that each committee member had a different interpretation of what constitutes an “outstanding” faculty member. The discussion was polite, but we debated the extent to which this was an award for teaching, or research, or service to the college, or scholarly textbook writing, or consulting, or service to society, or some other factor. After three hours, we agreed on five criteria that we would apply to independently rate each candidate using a five-point scale. When we reconvened the next day, our discussion was much more focused as we tried to achieve a consensus regarding how we judged each candidate on each criterion. After a lengthy discussion, we finally completed the task and averaged the ratings. The top three scores had an average rating (out of a maximum of 25) of 21, 19.5, and 18.75. 

I assumed the person with the highest total would receive the award. Instead, my colleagues began debating over the relevance of the five criteria that we had agreed on the previous day. Some committee members felt, in hindsight, that the criteria were incorrectly weighted or that other criteria should be considered. Although they did not actually say this, I sensed that at least two colleagues on the committee wanted the criteria or weights changed because their preferred candidate didn’t get the highest score using the existing formula. When we changed the weights in various ways, a different candidate among the top three received the top score. The remaining three candidates received lower ratings every time. Dr. H always received the lowest score, usually around 12 on the 25-point range. 

After almost two hours of discussion, the Associate Dean turned to one committee member and said, “Dolan, I sure would like to see Dr. H in your department receive this honor. He retires next year and this would be a great honor for him and no one has received this honor in your department recently.” Dolan agreed, “Yes, this is Dr. H’s last year with us and it would be a great way for him to go out. I’m sure he would feel very honored by this award.” I sat there stunned at the suggestion, while Dolan retold how Dr. H had been active in public service, his only real strength on our criteria. I was even more stunned when another committee member, who I think was keen to finish the meeting, said, “Well, I so move” and Dolan seconded it. 

The Associate Dean, who was conducting the meeting, said, “Well, if the rest of you think this is a good idea, all in favor say aye.” A few members said “Aye,” and, without calling for nays, the Associate Dean quickly proceeded to explain what we needed to do to advertise the winner and arrange the ceremony. During my conversations with other committee members over the next two weeks, I learned that everyone—including the two who said “Aye”—were as shocked as I was at our committee’s decision. I thought we made a terrible decision, and I was embarrassed to be a member of the committee. A few weeks later, we were appropriately punished when Dr. H gave a 45-minute acceptance speech that started poorly and only got worse. 

1) Assignment: Read Case Study 9, The Outstanding Faculty Award, Selected Cases, in the textbook. Answer, discuss, and examine the following questions: 

1. What is your diagnosis of the situation in the College of Business, Outstanding Faculty Award Committee? Use 4 theories from chapters 5-7 in the textbook to diagnose the situation.

2. Based on the information provided in the scenarios and the case, using the groupthink theory in your textbook, analyze the group decision-making process. 

3. Based on the information provided in the scenarios and the case, using the motivation theories in your textbook, analyze the committee’s decision. 

4. What do you see as the key issues that could be changed to produce a better outcome? 

Case Study assignment will be 4 pages in length (exclusive of title page, reference page, etc.) and include two levels of headings. Required questions should serve as headings. Each paper will contain a minimum of four scholarly sources, one reference may be the textbook. 

-12-point Font; New Times Roman; Double Spaced; 1” Margins

-APA Format with regard to citations; Reference page required. APA Running Head or Abstract are not required. 

-Development of Main Points – Quality of Writing 

Unit 1 Case study : Nike (pp. 30–31) 

1. How has the industry in which Nike resides been doing over the last 5 years? 

2. What are the pros, cons, and risks associated with Nike’s core marketing strategy? How have they managed to develop a strong customer relationship with their target market? 

3. Who are the top three competitors of Nike, and what are their advantages/disadvantages with respect to their product/service development? 

4. Looking at the competitors you discussed in question #3,what would you recommend as being the next steps for these competitors and, subsequently, the next steps for Nike to combat these competitors?

In formatting your case analysis, do not use the question-and-answer format; instead, use an essay format with subheadings. Your APA-formatted case study should be a minimum of 500 words in length (not counting the title and reference pages). You are required to use a minimum of three peer-reviewed, academic sources that are no more than 5 years old (one may be your textbook).All sources used, including the textbook, must be referenced; paraphrased material must have accompanying in-text citations.

Organization Survey 

For the needs assessment, you will want to consider potential sources of information that may help you in your analysis. This assignment is a building block toward compiling the information for the project. You will create a survey or questionnaire to be used for gathering the data.

Assessment Questionnaires: Questionnaires can be created that probe for areas in which systems, structures, or processes are not functioning as intended. They can be used to look toward group, departmental, or individual issues. See the information below regarding ideas for your Assessment Questionnaires. Remember to place the paper in the Week 3 Organization Survey Dropbox by end of day Sunday MT of the Week 3.

This the Museum that I choose.

 The Modern Museum of Art
https://youtu.be/0oly6d0zlZM 

Note: This assignment has been adapted to adhere to the current guidance from the CDC for social distancing because of the COVID-19 pandemic.  

For this assignment, you will choose a virtual cultural venue from the instructions below to visit online and write a short 500-800 word report about your visit.  

Purpose
The purpose of this assignment is to introduce you to the process of engaging with the cultural venues and communities. This will inform you personally of the Humanities and groups that support it. 

Skills
This assignment will help you practice the following skills that will be useful to you in your professional and personal life beyond school. 

• Identify cultural venues and inform you with deeper knowledge about the art form chosen. 
• Organize reflections about engaging with a cultural experience and community 
• Use concepts and skills learned in class to describe and interpret cultural experiences and communities 
• Use appropriate and proper grammar, organization, and academic-style formatting in order to communicate 

Knowledge
This assignment will help you become familiar with the following important content knowledge in the Humanities. 

• Available virtual cultural venues and communities 
• Methods of interpretation within the Humanities 

Instructions
For your report, choose one virtual venue from this pre-approved list that most interests you, or contact your professor for approval of your own online choice. If your choice below has both a website and a video, make sure you examine both. If you need special accommodations to complete this assignment, please inform your instructor and contact the Accessibility Accommodations office for guidance.  

Create a 10- to 15-slide presentation in which you:

• Identify the principles of internal control.
• Explain the use of cash and internal controls to prevent fraud.
• Explain why corporations invest in stocks and debt securities.
• Describe how debt and stock investments are reported in financial statements.
• Evaluate the effects of unusual or irregular items on financial statements.

Create a 1-page handout to accompany your presentation.

Cite 3 peer-reviewed, scholarly, or similar references to support your presentation.

Format your citations according to APA guidelines.

For this Capstone assignment, you will research what motivates employees to perform. Then, you will assess how management type and rewards can improve employee motivation. A motivated workforce is integral to organizational success and profitability.

For this CTA, you will create a workforce management and rewards model using a specific motivation philosophy/theory. A rewards plan that does not stem from a strong motivation core will not be sustainable. When constructing the plan, examine how organizational structure and culture impact the types of compensation, benefits, and other opportunities offered.

Develop a well-written report that addresses the following:

• Explain the main reasons that employees are motivated to perform in the workplace. In other words, what are the strategies or actions that motivate a typical organizational employee?
• Describe the role of compensation in the workplace, including its effect/impact on employee performance.
• Create a workforce management and rewards plan that takes into consideration the culture of the organization, can help attract and retain talented employees, and is not cost prohibitive to adapt. Your plan should reflect aspects of your selected motivation philosophy/ theory.

Your paper should meet the following requirements:

• Be 5-7 pages in length.
• Incorporate a table or figure that visualizes the strategies.
• Include at least two different scholarly sources not utilized previously.

HA3110D – Quality Improvement and Risk Management

 LP07.1 Assignment: Chronic Disease Management

 Chronic disease management is a key factor in healthcare and is truly a team effort. Using the CDC website “Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion,” click on your state and apply quality management practices to your findings.

Directions

Measurement:

Describe “how your state is doing.” What are the top five public health priorities for your state. Are there any disease-specific priorities? If so, what?

Assessment:

Identify:

Tobacco Use (see Chronic Disease Indicators)  

Select you state and category of tobacco.

Determine the “all available years of smoking” for women aged 18-44 years.

Has the crude prevalence % gone up or down?

Improvement:

Identify one funded program and provide a detailed report on their focus, resources they offer.

Identify one program and provide a detailed report on their focus, resources they offer, and how you might use this information for future projects. 

How might you use this information for future projects?