Select a theoretical view/model of problem solving (e.g., Gestalt psychology, information processing approach, etc.)

Select a theoretical view/model of problem solving (e.g., Gestalt psychology, information processing approach, etc.).

1. Watch the video, Rory Sutherland: Sweat the Small Stuff (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site., on how simplicity can benefit problem solving.

Topic: Laypersons and scientists alike often report that after having tried to solve a problem for an entire day, “sleeping on it” led to a solution. Does sleep indeed promote problem solving?

Theoretical view/model of problem solving

  • 1. Select a theoretical view/model of problem solving (e.g., Gestalt psychology, information processing approach, etc.). What is the evidence that supports it? What evidence, if any, does not fit the model?
  • 2. Are experts better at solving problems than non-experts? If so, what is responsible for experts’ superior performance? Is their superiority general or limited to their field of expertise?
  • 3. Are there individual differences in problem-solving abilities? For instance, is working memory’s capacity linked to one’s ability to solve problems?

After you select a topic, access the Ashford University Library and Google Scholar and review the literature on problem solving. Then select a research article that answers the questions related to the selected topic. Finally, share the evidence you have uncovered and your critical examination of such evidence with the class. Your initial post must be a minimum of 300 words.

Source:

Select a theoretical view/model of problem solving (e.g., Gestalt psychology, information processing approach, etc.)

Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount.

Simple Steps to get your Paper Done
For Quality Papers

The Critical Management Studies Approach Versus The Mainstream Approach

The Critical Management Studies Approach Versus The Mainstream Approach 

Executive Summary

This report compares and contrasts the CMS approach and the mainstream approaches when managing organisational culture. This involves highlighting the scope of organisational culture management as well as the arguments made by critical management theorists and mainstream management theorists in regards to the management of organisational culture. Specifically, the report narrows its scope on 

Lunenburg (2007) organisational socialisation seven-step cycle and Ackroyd and Crowdy (1990) Casterton slaughter house case study. 

To achieve this, the report utilises a range of relevant academic and professional resources including textbooks, textbook chapters, peer reviewed articles, and conference papers. The selection of these resources was guided by the course module as well as the authors’ personal engagement with the report topic.

The report finds that the major point of contention between critical management theorists and the mainstream management theorists is the level of autonomy and democracy at the workplace. Specifically, the CMS approach contend that the HRM department is unable to manage organisational culture because, workplace culture is oppressive, a mental prison, and a totalitarian institution. On the other hand, the mainstream approach contends that indeed the HRM department can effectively management organisational culture particularly the task culture, power culture, role culture, and person culture. 

Nevertheless, the report finds some similarities between the two approaches. It is argued that the elements leading to organisational culture sometimes overlap hence diluting the sweeping differences championed by critical theorists. Specifically, both approaches agree that management of organisational culture is subject to paradigm change and that organisational culture undergoes the same change cycle. 

 

 

 

Table of Contents 

Executive Summary. 2

1.0 Introduction. 4

2.0 Understanding Organisational Culture. 5

3.0 Differences between CMS and the Mainstream Approaches. 7

4.0 Similarities between the Two Approaches. 11

5.0 Conclusion. 13

References. 15

Appendices. 17

Appendix 1: Organisational Socialisation (Management) Cycle. 17

Appendix 2: The Change Cycle of Organisational Culture. 18

 

1.0 Introduction 

The study of organisational culture (both as an academic and professional discipline) has undergone phenomenal changes over the years. According to Prichad (2009) and Sulkowski (2012), these changes can be broadly categorised into two schools of thought – the critical management studies (CMS) school of thought or simply the left wing and the mainstream school of thought or the right wing. The CMS approach perceives organisational culture as a tool of oppression since the management of contemporary firms is guided by the core aim of making profits and not on the interests of the society or those of the employees (Adler, Forbes and Willmott, 2007). On the other hand, the popular school of thought posits that organisational culture entails the collective behaviours and assumptions of human beings who make the organisational workforce as well as the set of meanings that these human beings attach to their behaviour (Schein, 2011). Arguably, the mainstream approach contends that employees should willingly subscribe to the collective organisational habits, procedures, rules, beliefs, systems, values, and norms. 

Nevertheless, both CMS and mainstream approach are critical for the successful management of human capital. This argument conforms to the diversity in contemporary workplaces where the workforce is made up of people from all corners of the globe and from diverse cultural backgrounds (Schein, 2011). Arguably, a culturally diverse workforce demands new responsive HRM strategies. The CMS approach, for instance, imparts into HRM, the necessary skills for managing organisational culture not only based on internal factors such as mission, vision, and values but based on external factors too. According to Lunenburg (2011) this reduces employees’ pains and suffering.  

This report critically evaluates the differences and similarities existing between the CMS approach and the mainstream approach to organisational culture. Specifically, the report will limit itself to how organisational culture can be managed. While using Lunenburg (2011) organisational socialisation seven-steps cycle and Ackroyd and Crowdy (1990) Casterton slaughter house gang members case study, the report will shed light on the extent to which the HRM department can manage organisational culture as per the set organisational goals and objectives. 

2.0 Understanding Organisational Culture 

As Appendix 1 portrays, organisational culture can be conceptualised into seven cyclical steps. According to Lunenburg (2011), these steps are selecting qualified staff, conducting orientation, mastering the job, developing a reward and control system, enhancing adherence to values, creating reinforcing folklores, and identifying, moulding consistent role models. The central premise behind this model is that developing (managing) a stable organisational culture should be carried out in a gradual and successive manner (Prichad, 2009; Schein, 2011). Though, the composition of this gradual methodology differ across the CMS and the mainstream approaches, it is applicable in both approaches (Sulkowski, 2012). Nonetheless, the CMS approach contends that the HRM department cannot control employees’ behaviour and that organisational culture is a form of corporate hegemony (Adler et al., 2007), while the mainstream approach agree that these steps are meant to effectively control employees’ behaviour (Lunenburg, 2011). In essence, the organisational socialisation model only highlights how organisational culture can be managed without taking sides.   

Lunenburg’s seven-step model acknowledges that organisational culture is a humanistic affair. This affair begins right from the time when new employees are engaged. Tellingly, organisations only engage employees whom they can successfully mould to fit in with their unique organisational culture (Sulkowski, 2012). For example, the Casterton slaughter house only engages physically endowed employees with the ability to slaughter and dress as many animals as possible in a single working day (Ackroyd and Crowdy (1990). However, this just marks the beginning of the long journey as the selected employees must be oriented. To this effect, both the CMS and the mainstream approaches to organisational culture contend that the process of managing organisational culture begins with orientation of the selected workforce (Lunenburg, 2011). Here, the new employees are taken through the organisation’s mission, vision, values, and goals. As Schein (2011) posits, this is meant to impart the unique organisational values into the employees’ behaviour systems. 

The next cyclical step, job mastery, is meant to transform the employees into productive entities as per the set organisational production goals. When they are hired, new employees are expected to be in a position as to comfortably carry out their tasks (Luhman, 2006). For example, the slaughter house gang members are expected to maximise production by slaughtering and dressing animal carcasses in the most time-efficient manner (Ackroyd and Crowdy, 1990). Here, all organisational activities including the actual job tasks assigned to individuals or group of employees are expected to be performed within the set organisational behaviour pattern. Here, the role of the HRM department is to ensure this culture is upheld at all times (Luhman, 2006). To facilitate this, the HRM department develops a reward and punishment system where good behaviour/performance is rewarded with job promotions or increased compensation as was in the case of the Casterton slaughter house (Ackroyd and Crowdy, 1990), while bad behaviour is punished by way of suspension, salary decrease, harassment, degradation, and demonstration.

The next cyclical step assumes that the more employees continue to work for a specific organisation, the more their behaviour conforms to the set organisational value system. This takes the form of sacrificing personal values in exchange for a smooth work engagement and trust in the organisational values (Lunenburg, 2011). For example, new gang members at Casterton slaughter house adjust very quickly to the independent and hardworking culture as soon as they are engaged. As Ackroyd and Crowdy (1990) posit, these new gang members are subjected to immense pressure and harassment during their initial days at the slaughter house but they look upon the independent, hardworking culture to justify them. 

Nevertheless, an organisation needs to reinforce its folklore so as to achieve high levels of adherence to organisational values. The process of organisational socialisation is continuous and the organisation needs to constantly expose its members to the unique traditions that differentiates it with others (Lunenburg, 2011). This could take the form of stories passed on by the HRM department or as was the case of the Casterton slaughter house, told by older gang members to newer gang members (Ackroyd and Crowdy, 1990). The stories should however, be told in a manner that highlights the unique organisational philosophy, say, a philosophy of hard work. 

Lastly, Lunenburg (2011) argues that an organisation must provide good and consistent role models in order to maintain a stable organisational culture. While drawing from the Casterton slaughter house gangs, it is the most experienced, hardworking gang members who can effectively inspire new gang members to work harder. Arguably, though the slaughter house HRM department has the responsibility to inspire new gang members through training, reward and punishments, Ackroyd and Crowdy (1990) strongly feel that, a CMS approach to organisational culture allow the gang members to inspire, motivate and improve their overall performance. 

3.0 Differences between CMS and the Mainstream Approaches 

A critical analysis of the management of organisational culture reveals a number of problematic arguments that differentiate the CMS and the mainstream approach to culture. According to Sulkowski (2012), these problematic issues include the assumption that in an organisational setting, culture is used as a tool of oppression, as “…hypostasis and ideology, as a pseudoscientific trend and fashion, [and] as [a] mental prison” (p.92). Further, according to Grey and Willmott (2005) and Prichad (2009), these criticisms represent a range of ideas gleaned from neomarxism, postmodernism, poststructuralism, as well as from the Frankfurt School which together advises the notion of CMS. Specifically, this critical school of thought bases its argument on the contention that managing organisational culture requires a major input from the employees. Typically, this approach agree that the workplace culture can never by neutral and that some section of the employees, more so the management team wield much power. Since the management team represents the interests of the organisation (Bunting, 2004), it is wise to reason that organisational culture favours some sections of the employees. Further, and according to intepretivist perspective, a theory sometimes employed by critical researchers to explore organisational dynamics (Knights and Willmott, 2007), organisational culture “is what an organisation is and not what it has” (Sulkowski, 2012: 92). Arguably, this illusionary culture makes organisations agents of repression.   

In response to this position, the mainstream approach contends that organisations must wield some substantial level of power culture. Based on Bunting (2004) arguments, this power culture gives organisations the leeway to control, make decisions, and implement such decisions in relation to the set organisational goals. For example, a line manager may draw out standard operating procedures for a certain production line. In turn, the line manager expects the line charges to follow these procedures without or with minimal fail. According to Ezzy (2001) and Luham (2006), this hastens the pace with which decisions are made and implemented. In extension, this increases the chances of organisational success in the market place. Though this approach is mostly in small organisations with smaller workforce, sometimes even large organisations utilise it especially when they appoint employees’ representatives who together with the management team are charged with the process of making and implementing work related decisions (Lunenburg, 2011). Nevertheless, this approach may kill innovation and creativity especially when employees develop negative feelings of being unappreciated and not consulted when core organisational decisions are made (Adler et al., 2007). In the long run, and as McCabe (2004) posit, the mainstream approach to managing organisational culture may contribute to high staff turnover especially in organisations that exercise high-handedness or in small organisations with less professional HRM department.    

The CMS approach contends that the HRM department cannot generate a culture of excellence at the workplace without the express support from the subordinates who are in actual sense the determinants of organisational success. From a postmodernist approach espoused by CMS proponents, it is arguable that organisational culture is far from the set of collective beliefs and assumptions shared by employees at the workplace (Adler et al., 2007; Collinson and Hearn, 1997). In essence, organisational culture should comprise of all aspects of the employees’ informal experiences picked within and beyond the organisation’s physical walls and the HRM department has nothing to do with its management (Luhman, 2006). This postmodernist approach dismisses the modernist perception of organisational culture as something that can be managed and controlled by the HRM department. It contends that contingencies related to organisational culture cannot be effectively controlled by way of myths but by embracing serendipity and diversity (Adler et al., 2007). Arguably, this gives audience to the most marginalised elements of culture such as the forgotten hunting culture practised by Casterton slaughter house gang members who in their free time like going in groups to trap game meat for family consumption (Ackroyd and Crowdy, 1990). Moreover, the slaughter men were noted to have a kind of independent organisational culture characterised by immense commitment to work and independence at their workplace. Ackroyd and Crowdy (1990) argues that not even the Casterton slaughter house management could exercise a direct control over the slaughter gangs’ performance. The gangs were controlled by informal leaders occupying very junior positions in the organisational hierarchy but who commanded much respect among the gang members. Arguably, these gangs portray a form of sub-culture whose control is beyond the HRM department capabilities. 

In response, the mainstream approach to managing organisational culture contends that indeed the HRM department can successfully manage a culture of excellence at the workplace. Specifically, the task culture espsoused by the mainstream approach can help organisations to accomplish complex tasks (Collinson and Hearn, 1997; McCabe, 2004). This involves establishing project teams to complete specific tasks within a specific time frame. The best thing about task culture is that staff members are motivated as they can make decisions on their own within their team. Again, team members develop a strong sense of belonging and compete with other teams in accomplishing tasks assigned to them. As Wilson (2004) asserts, task culture is most effective when teams are given the leeway to develop, create and innovate. In essence, the concept of task culture very important since organisations get to strengthen their overall competiveness through product and service differentiation. This is true since the core of the HRM is to manage employees’ behaviour so as to guarantee high performance, reduce redundancy, and enhance efficiency (Bunting, 2004). Again, task culture is very helpful especially among employees with low self initiative or who take a lot of time to learn basic procedures and who sometimes may feel pressured by the management or even by their colleagues to quickly master their jobs. 

The CMS approach considers organisational culture as a “total institution” in itself and that it is unmanageable by the HRM department. According to Adler et al. (2007) and Knights and Willmott (2007), large institutions that operate independently in the market place have powerful control mechanisms whose aim is to completely destroy employees’ individualities in order to build collectivism. For example, large public institutions such as penal institutions and health facilities have very strong control mechanisms which monitor how their employees engage each other. This results into a culture of oppression which even labour unions find hard to penetrate when they call for mass demonstrations. As Ackroyd and Crowdy (1990) and Adler et al. (2007) warn, this surmounts to undue oppression especially when employees are not allowed to internalise and shape their own workplace culture. For instance, if employees are not given the opportunity to structure and restructure their job tasks, to internalise their job tasks or even to choose the specific job tasks they are most suited to fulfil, they may develop an inner revolt that may be detrimental to the set performance goals. Moreover, and as Sulkowski (2012) posit, strong control and self-censorship systems amounts to building a totalitarian system that bears cultural characters and whose ultimate goal is to homogenise culture. Arguably, when culture at the workplace is homogenised, then employees may become apprehensive and unproductive as they are unable to fully exploit their intellectual faculties.

In response, the mainstream approach view organisational culture as humanistic and sensitive to employee interests. The role culture, for instance, enables individual employees to choose specific tasks that they can best accomplish. If they make the right decision, such employees can then become specialists in those tasks. The very beginning of the organisational socialisation cycle depicted in Appendix 1 and as argued by Lunenburg (2011), requires that the HRM department should select persons with the necessary potential to carry out tasks they were selected to accomplish. Therefore, when the HRM department assign specific roles to specific persons it does not amount to undue totalitarianism as argued by critical theorists, but amounts to the mere allocation of jobs to the right persons (Hunting, 2004). Even in the Casterton slaughter house case study, members were organised into gangs, each gang specialising in a specific organisational task and gang members did not move from one gang to another. Actually, the most experienced (specialists) gang members were given the most challenging tasks such as stunning and sticking animals (Ackroyd and Crowdy (1990). In essence, such role culture allows the HRM department to effectively manage human capital as each task is audited to determine the correct number of employees that can effectively perform it (McCabe, 2004). In essence, large organisations with large workforce should exercise role culture as this increases productivity while reducing undue redundancy. 

4.0 Similarities between the Two Approaches 

Though CMS and the mainstream view of culture at the work place are very different, there are areas where the two approaches agree with each other. According to Sulkowski (2012), both the CMS and the mainstream approaches agree on the nature of elements that influence organisational culture. For instance, and as Adler et al. (2007) argue, the CMS approach to management is in acknowledgement that a paradigmatic change is critical to the way organisations handle their core responsibilities whether as profit making or non-profit making entities. Here, proponents of CMS argue that the management of organisational culture depends on the prevailing paradigm (see for example, Burrell and Morgan, 1979; Brewis and Wray-Bliss, 2008). For instance, the management of organisational culture at the Casterton slaughter house was shaped by the piecework arrangement where employees were given competitive bonuses to enhance their overall job attachment and commitment (Ackroyd and Crowdy, 1990). Similarly, proponents of the mainstream organisational culture contend that organisational culture is subject to a paradigmatic shift where organisational purpose, mission, and vision are at the centre of such paradigm (Bunting, 2004). Arguably, these paradigm shifts are shaped by a number of factors including industry, external environment, workforce size, available technology, and the organisation’s ownership structure. 

Both the CMS and the mainstream approach of organisational culture management agree that organisational culture undergoes similar change cycle. This cycle comprises of nine steps. According to Lunenburg (2011: 9) and as Appendix 2 shows, these are, “external enabling conditions, internal permitting conditions, precipitating pressures, triggering events, cultural visioning, cultural change strategy, culture change action plans, implementation of interventions, and reformulation of culture.” As Sulkowski (2012) and Knights and Willmott (2007) argue, this cross-cutting organisational culture change cycle takes into consideration that the employees external environment must be considered when managing culture at the workplace. The Casterton slaughter house case study, for example, underscores this argument. Specifically, Ackroyd and Crowdy (1990) argue that despite the largely dirty tasks they carry out in their workplace, the gang members seemed very happy and satisfied with their workplace culture chiefly because they perceived it as exceptional but sensitive to their masculinity. Arguably, the mainstream approach confirms this position especially the requirement that HRM department should ensure that all the divergent cultures represented in the organisation should be respected and addressed. 

Further, and what seems to be an agreement with the mainstream approach to managing organisational culture, Ackroyd and Crowdy (1990) argue that an organisational culture that epitomises reality is crucial for the building of a strong self-mage and work attachment. Similarly, the mainstream school of thought contends that since organisational culture is a valuable organisational resource that organisations employ to build long-term competitive advantages, organisations are always willing to socialise their employees (Lunenburg, 2011). Moreover, Collinson and Hearn (1997), contend that the elements of both CMS and mainstream approach to managing organisational culture such as folklores, symbols, structures, control systems and rituals may at times overlap. This happens along the power and control systems especially when HRM department exploit unresponsive rituals and folklores that are not in tandem with employees social experiences. This is in tandem with the critical argument that the main reason why organisations develop and nurture specific cultures is to adapt to the prevailing external environment (Knights and Willmott, 2007). Interestingly, adapting to the external environment requires a purposeful integration of the internal environment. Since the adaptation to external environment is evolutionary in nature, the HRM department should be at the central position in integrating the internal environment (Ezzy, 2001). This brings out the close link (albeit illusionary) between the CMS and the mainstream approaches.  

5.0 Conclusion

This report has presented evidence to the effect that the main difference between the CMS and the mainstream approaches to the management of organisational culture is the level of autonomy and/or democracy at the workplace. Specifically, the CMS approach considers that mainstream approach to the management of organisational culture is oppressive and does not encourage employees’ creativity, innovativeness and hard work. This is because it is largely built around long-term profitability goals and it does not give much emphasis on unique employees’ socio-cultural interests such as hunting, as was in the Casterton slaughter house gang members. Further, the discussion has revealed that unlike the mainstream approach to organisational culture, the CMS approach to organisational is critical, pro-employees’ welfare, anti-establishment, and anti-capitalism. 

The Casterton slaughter house case study, for example, underscores the sweeping conclusion that no matter the effort, the HRM department cannot manage organisational culture since, like the case in many other workplaces, employees tend to create a strong attachment to their tasks and a good self-image when they are given the space to voluntarily utilise their skills and knowledge without undue pressure from the management. Overall, the report has argued that oppression of any kind kills motivation, innovation, and the inner drive to work hard for both personal and organisational interests. Interestingly, both the CMS approach and the mainstream approach support a democratic workplace where employees have the autonomy to engage and lobby within themselves in order to come out with the best informal or even formal arrangement for sharing and executing tasks amongst themselves. As a matter of fact, the piecework arrangement at the Casterton slaughter house registered high success because the employees worked within informal gangs headed by informally elected and experienced members. 

Nevertheless, this report concludes in a pessimistic tone by asserting that, though the CMS approach to organisational culture has overwhelming benefits, not many organisations are willing subscribe to it. Majority of contemporary organisations are out to build long-term competitive advantage, fulfil their corporate profitability goals and maximise the utility of their employees. This leaves a very small room, if any, for inculcating CMS practices when building organisational culture. Arguably, this leaves the impression that the HRM department only succeeds in controlling organisational culture but does not succeed in managing it. 

 

 

References

Adler, P.S., Forbes, L.C. and Willmott, H. (2007) ‘Critical management studies’, Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 1, London: Routledge. 

Brewis, J. and Wray-Bliss, E. (2008) ‘Re-searching ethics: Towards a more reflexive critical management studies’, Organization Studies 29(12), 1521-40. 

Bunting, M. (2004) Willing slaves: How the overwork culture is ruling our lives. London: Harper Collins.

Burrell, G. and Morgan, G. (1979) Sociological paradigms and organisational analysis. London: Heinemann. 

Collinson, D. and Hearn, J. (1997) ‘“Men” at “Work”: Multiple masculinities/multiple workplaces,’ In M. Mairtin (ed.), Understanding masculinities. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Ezzy, D. (2001) ‘A simulacrum of workplace community: Individualism and engineered culture’, Sociology, 35(3), 631-650. 

Grey, C. and Willmott, H.C. (2005) Critical management studies: A reader. Oxford:Oxford University Press.

Knights, D. and Willmott, H. eds. (2007) Introducing organization behaviour and management. London: Thomson Learning.

Luhman, J.T. (2006) ‘Theoretical postulations on organisation democracy’, Journal of Management Inquiry, 15(2), 168-185. 

Lunenburg, F.C. (2011) ‘Understanding organisational culture: A key leadership asset’, National Forum of Educational Administration and Supervision Journal, 29(4), 1-12. 

McCabe, D. (2004). ‘A land of milk and honey’? Reengineering the ‘past’ and ‘present’ in a call centre’, Journal of Management Studies, 41(5), 827-856. 

Prichard, C. (2009) ‘Three moves for engaging students in critical management studies’, Management Learning 40(1), 51-68.

Schein, E.H. (2011) Leadership and organizational culture. New York, John Wiley & Sons.

studies’, Journal of Intercultural Management, 4(4), 91–101. 

Sulkowski, L. (2012) ‘Organizational culture and the trend of critical management

Wilson, F.M. (2004) Organisational behaviour and work: A critical introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 

Appendices

Appendix 1: Organisational Socialisation (Management) Cycle 

 

Source: Lunenburg (2011: 6). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix 2: The Change Cycle of Organisational Culture

 

 

Source: Lunenburg (2007: 9). 

 

 

 

Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount.

Simple Steps to get your Paper Done
For Quality Papers

Nursing Services Delivery Theory: An Open System Approach Paper

Nursing Services Delivery Theory: An Open System Approach Paper

  • Reflect on your organization or one with which you are familiar. Within a particular department or unit in this organization, identify a problem the staff is encountering.
  • Using Table 1 in the Meyer article as a guide, analyze the department or unit, identifying inputs, throughput, output, cycles of events, and negative feedback. Consider whether the problem you have selected relates to input, throughput, output, cycles of events, and/or negative feedback.
  • Think about how you could address the problem: Consider what a desired outcome would be, then formulate related goals and objectives, and translate those goals into policies and procedures.
  • Research professional standards that are pertinent to your identified problem.
  • Reflect on the organization’s mission statement and values. In addition, consider how addressing this problem would uphold the mission and values, while improving the organizational culture and climate.

Write a 3- to 5-page Nursing Services Delivery Theory: An Open System Approach Paper that addresses the following:

  • Describe a department or unit within a health care organization using systems theory terminology. Include a description of inputs, throughput, output, cycles of events, and negative feedback.
  • Describe the problem you identified within the department or unit using an open- systems approach, and state where the problem exists using the systems theory model (input, throughput, output, cycles of events, or negative feedback).
  • Based on this information, explain how you would address the problem as follows:
    • Formulate a desired outcome.
    • Identify goals and objectives that would facilitate that outcome.
    • Translate those goals and objectives into policies and procedures for the department or unit.
    • Describe relevant professional standards.
  • Explain in your Nursing Services Delivery Theory: An Open System Approach Paper how your proposed resolution to the problem would uphold the organization’s mission and values and improve the culture and climate.

 

Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? We have qualified writers to help you. We assure you an A+ quality paper that is free from plagiarism. Order now for an Amazing Discount!
Use Discount Code “Newclient” for a 15% Discount!

NB: We do not resell papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

The post Nursing Services Delivery Theory: An Open System Approach Paper appeared first on Top Premier Essays.

Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount.

Simple Steps to get your Paper Done
For Quality Papers

Assignment 3: Philosophical and Practical Approach for Balancing Issues

  • Students, please view the “Submit a Clickable Rubric Assignment” in the Student Center. Instructors, training on how to grade is within the Instructor Center.
  • Assignment 3: Philosophical and Practical Approach for Balancing Issues
  • Due Week 10 and worth 200 pointsBefore writing your position statement on Philosophical and Practical Approach for Balancing Issues, you should read Chapters 1 through11 in your textbook. Then, research at least three (3) peer-reviewed articles about individual rights, morality, ethics, individual rights, duty, or codes of conduct for criminal justice professionals.Write a three to five (3-5) page paper in which you:1. Create a philosophy and approach for balancing the issues of individual rights and the public’s protection. Provide one to two (1 to 2) examples illustrating how you will balance the two issues in your own career in law enforcement.2. Determine a philosophy and approach for balancing the use of reward and punishment in criminal justice. Provide one to two (1-2) examples illustrating how you will use this philosophy in your own career.3. Select a philosophy and approach that addresses the use of immoral means (e.g., torture or lying in interrogation) to accomplish desirable ends. Provide one to two (1-2) examples illustrating how you will use this philosophy in your own career.4. Explain what you believe the Ethics of Care and Peacemaking Criminology presented in your textbook should mean for law enforcement professionals.5. Support your position statement with three (3) relevant and credible references, documented according to latest edition of APA. (Note: Do not use open source sites such as Ask.com, eHow.com, Answers.com, and Wikipedia.)Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:
    • Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA format (latest edition). Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
    • Include a cover page developed in accordance with the latest edition of APA, including a running head, page number, the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page, revision of the previous assignment, and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.

    The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:

    • Analyze the issues pertinent to codes of conduct and / or the ethics of duty.
    • Recommend ways to use ethics to improve decision making in the criminal justice system.
    • Analyze various philosophical approaches for ethical decision making, and the effectiveness and limits of each approach for making ethical choices.
    • Analyze the ethical issues involved with balancing means and ends in the criminal justice field.
    • Examine the key elements of virtue and character.
    • Examine reasons for and effective ways to apply critical ethical thinking to criminal justice issues.
    • Use technology and information resources to research issues in ethics and leadership in criminal justice.
    • Write clearly and concisely about ethics and leadership in criminal justice using proper writing mechanics.

    Click here to view the grading rubric for this assignment.

 

Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? We have qualified writers to help you. We assure you an A+ quality paper that is free from plagiarism. Order now for an Amazing Discount!
Use Discount Code “Newclient” for a 15% Discount!

NB: We do not resell papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

The post Assignment 3: Philosophical and Practical Approach for Balancing Issues appeared first on Top Premier Essays.

Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount.

Simple Steps to get your Paper Done
For Quality Papers

Apply a compassionate and holistic approach to the assessment of clients’ health history

Apply a compassionate and holistic approach to the assessment of clients’ health history

Taking a thorough patient history is an important role of a Nurse Practitioner. This assignment will help provide a deeper understanding of how to complete comprehensive patient history.

Upon successful completion of this assignment, you will be able to:

  • Apply a compassionate and holistic approach to the assessment of clients’ health history.
  • Identify the appropriate subjective information to include with a detailed history.

Instructions

  1. Review the rubric to make sure you understand the criteria for earning your grade.
  2. Complete a comprehensive health history on a family member, friend, or patient. Select someone who knows their family history. Do not select someone who was adopted and does not have information about their family health history. The patient must also have at least one active diagnosis (asthma, depression, diabetes, hypertension, etc.) and some level of complexity.
  3. Include evidence-based resources for the last section (see rubric).
  4. The assignment is due by the end of Day 7 of the workshop.

Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount.

Simple Steps to get your Paper Done
For Quality Papers

In a 6- to 7-page paper in APA format describe your personal approach to professional nursing practice. Be sure to address the following

In a 6- to 7-page paper in APA format describe your personal approach to professional nursing practice. Be sure to address the following:

Which philosophy/conceptual framework/theory/middle-range theory describes nursing in the way you think about it? Discuss how you could utilize the philosophy/conceptual framework/theory/middle-range theory to organize your thoughts for critical thinking and decision making in nursing practice.
Formulate and discuss your personal definition of nursing, person, health, and environment.
Discuss a minimum of two beliefs and/or values about nursing that guide your own practice.
Analyze your communication style using one of the tools presented in the course. In your paper, discuss the strengths and weaknesses associated with your style of communication and the impact on your ability to collaborate as part of an interdisciplinary team.
On a separate references page, cite all sources using APA format. APA format

Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount.

Simple Steps to get your Paper Done
For Quality Papers

What are the classical empirical and subjective approaches to probability and when is it appropriate to use each approach?

What are the classical, empirical, and subjective approaches to probability, and when is it appropriate to use each approach?

FIRST POST HA

 

Probability is a numerical value that describes the chance that something will happen. Probability can be expressed as a decimal, fraction, or whole number. There are three types of probability including: classical, empirical, and subjective. The classical and empirical probabilities are objective approaches. (Lind, Marchal, & Wathen, 2015)

 

Classical probability is based on the assumption that the outcomes of an experiment are equally likely. The probability of an event is found by dividing the number of favorable outcomes by the number of possible outcomes. It is only appropriate to use classical probability when all events are equally likely. A business example would be that there are seven males and three females that are interviewing to work at your same place of employment. The probability of your boss choosing a female is 3/10 or .3. (Lind, Marchal, & Wathen, 2015)

 

Empirical probability is based on the number of times an event occurs as a proportion of a known number of trials. Empirical probability is found by deciding the number of times the event occurs by the total number of observations. Empirical probability should be used to determine future events. (Lind, Marchal, & Wathen, 2015) For example, your research indicates that seventy-five out of one hundred small businesses fail within their first year. You can conclude that 75/100 or 3/4 of small business fail within one year. Therefore, you should make smart business decisions so that you do not fail as well. (Writer, 2013)

 

Subjective probability is when there is little or no experience or information on which to base a probability. There is no mathematical equation to calculate subjective probability. Subjective probability should be used for estimations based on your beliefs or feelings. For example, you can estimate the likelihood that your business will profit 10% more in 2017 than it did in 2016. (Lind, Marchal, & Wathen, 2015)

 

 

 

 

 

Lind, D. A., Marchal, W. G., & Wathen, S. A. (2015). Statistical techniques in business & economics. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.

 

Writer, L. G. (2011, October 13). What Is the Importance of Probability Rules in a Business? Retrieved March 20, 2017, from http://smallbusiness.chron.com/importance-probability-rules-business-31263.html.

 

 

SECOND REPLY AS

What are the classical, empirical, and subjective approaches to probability, and when is it appropriate to use each approach? Give business examples to support the different parts of your answer.

 

Even though there are different approaches to probability such as the ones listed in the topic question.  I do feel it is important to know what probability is.  The book states that probability is a value between zero and one, inclusive, describing the relative possibility an event will occur (Lind, Marchal, & Wathen, 2015). Some important terms that are associated with probability are experiment, outcome and event.  Experiment is process that leads to the occurrence of one and only one of several possible outcomes while the outcome is a particular result of an experiment.  An event is a collection of one or more outcomes of an experiment. (Lind, Marchal, & Wathen, 2015).

 

The classical approach to probability based on an assumption that the outcomes of the experiment are equally likely (Lind, Marchal, & Wathen, 2015).  When using this approach, you divide the number of favorable outcomes by the number of possible outcomes.  Business use the classical approach when they do not know the likelihood of certain events.  For example, if a business is making a decision that has X amount of outcomes that are equally likely, even though they are not affected by the number of times you try.  You can cut the number in half with the classical approach (Chrone).  The book gives us the example that this approach is appropriate when used for lotteries and finding out the probability of winning when picking X amount of numbers (Lind, Marchal, & Wathen, 2015).

 

Empirical probability is the probability of an event happening is the fraction of the time similar events have happened in the past.  Solving this approach requires taking the number of times the event has occurred and dividing it by the total number of observations (Lind, Marchal, & Wathen, 2015). This event is based on what is called the “law of large numbers”.  Empirical probability is closely related to relative frequency.  Therefore, this approach has been used with the capital asset pricing model even though the results turn our slightly mixed (Investopedia).  One of the best examples for empirical probability is tossing a coin in the air.  This approach will help determine the relative frequency of the coin landing on heads or tails (Lind, Marchal, & Wathen, 2015).

 

The third and final approach is subjective probability.  Subjective probability is the likelihood of a particular event happening that is assigned by an individual based on whatever information is available.  Examples for this approach include outcomes of sporting events, automobile accidents and for cuts or gaines in the U.S. economy (Lind, Marchal, & Wathen, 2015).

 

 

 

References:

 

Lind, D.A., Marchal, W.G., & Wathen, S.A. (2015). Statistical Techniques in Business and Economics. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.

 

 

 

Staff, I. (2007, May 28). Empirical Probability. Retrieved March 21, 2017, from http://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/empiricalprobability.asp

 

 

 

 

Writer, L. G. (2011, October 13). What Is the Importance of Probability Rules in a Business? Retrieved March 21, 2017, from http://smallbusiness.chron.com/importance-probability-rules-business-31263.html

Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount.

Simple Steps to get your Paper Done
For Quality Papers

While it is the basis of human cloning, and its purpose clear for that approach, there is much debate in healthcare about where to stop with stem cell research.

The Ethics of Stem Cell Research and Human Cloning

 

While stem cell research and human cloning are often interrelated, there are differences in these two approaches. Stem cell research has many medical inclinations for the treatment of disease. While it is the basis of human cloning, and its purpose clear for that approach, there is much debate in healthcare about where to stop with stem cell research.

 

Describe your current position on stem cell research and human cloning. What ethical issues are involved in stem cell research and human cloning? Do you think that any concerns are outweighed by potential benefits? Explain.

 

 

Human Subject Research

 

The National Institutes of Health sets the standard for the protection of human research subject by defining regulation, policies and providing guidance. This information provides a basis for what is right and wrong in Human Subject Research. Refer to this government site.

 

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/hs/index.htm

 

Consider research that is conducted using human products or human subjects and respond to the following questions:

 

  • What do you see as the ethical implications to this type of research and what might assure protection?

Do you think it is ethical to allow a family to overrule the wishes of a patient to be an organ donor? Why or why not?

Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount.

Simple Steps to get your Paper Done
For Quality Papers

Describe the psychological motivational approach to curriculum development

Describe the psychological motivational approach to curriculum development

Need by : February 11, 2022
$15 NOW/ $15 COMPLETE
Curriculum Foundations
Scenario for the Three Assignments
Assume that you are the curriculum designer for a school district. The school board has
requested that several teams develop proposals for new curricula to meet newly established state
standards. You and your team must develop the first proposal to provide as a pilot or model for
the other teams. You have to first identify a specific curriculum area not currently used in the
school district that would greatly benefit the students in the district. Use the Internet or the
Strayer Library as well as your textbook to develop a pilot curriculum for a specific discipline area
such as reading, math, science or grades K–12 at a local school district.
Refer to the scenario for the three assignments. Build on the same pilot curriculum you identified
in the Curriculum Inception assignment for this assignment.
Instructions: Curriculum Foundations

Describe the psychological motivational approach to curriculum development

psychological motivational approach to curriculum development


Write a 6–7 page paper in which you:
● Summarize the following aspects of the Curriculum Inception assignment: (a) Describe the
specific curriculum area and grade level or levels for the pilot curriculum. (b) Provide four core
instructional goals for the curriculum.
● Describe the approach to curriculum development (that is, behavior, systems, humanistic) you will
use to shape curriculum design, providing a rationale for your selected approach that is
consistent with the core instructional goals of the planned curriculum.
● Describe the philosophical/theoretical approach to curriculum development (for example, idealism
or realism) you will use to shape the curriculum design, providing a rationale for your selected
philosophy that is consistent with the core instructional goals of the planned curriculum.
● Describe the psychological motivational approach to curriculum development you will use to
shape the curriculum design, providing a rationale for your selected approach that is consistent
with the core instructional goals of the planned curriculum.
● Discuss one cultural influence that has the greatest impact on the school district and recommend
one way to integrate the cultural influence into the planned curriculum that is consistent with its
core instructional goals.
● Provide and justify a strategy for incorporating critical thinking skills (appropriate to grade level)
into the planned curriculum using Bloom’s Taxonomy of cognitive objectives.
● Use at least six relevant, scholarly references published in the last seven years (that is, three new
references in addition to the three identified in the Curriculum Inception assignment). (Note:
Wikipedia and other nongovernment websites do not qualify as scholarly resources. Review the
supplementary readings list on the first page of the course guide for possible references.)
This course requires the use of Strayer Writing Standards. For assistance and information,
please refer to the Strayer Writing Standards link in the left-hand menu of your course. Check
with your professor for any additional instructions.
The specific course learning outcome associated with this assignment is:
● Propose an approach to developing a curriculum that is informed by the audience and needs
analysis

Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount.

Simple Steps to get your Paper Done
For Quality Papers

Identify a practice issue in nursing that would benefit from utilizing a mixed methods approach.

1- Identify a practice issue in nursing that would benefit from utilizing a mixed methods approach.

2- Discuss how the quantitative and qualitative data would complement one another and add strength to the study.

3- Discuss the challenges that you might encounter in using a mixed methods approach. Support your discussion using current mixed methods research articles.

Following is the article that uses a mixed method, and I would like to use for my homework :

Eaton, L. H., Meins, A. R., Mitchell, P. H., Voss, J., & Doorenbos, A. Z. (2015). Evidence-based practice beliefs and behaviors of nurses providing cancer pain management: a mixed-methods approach. Oncology nursing forum, 42(2), 165-73.

We have to use the text book :

Tappen, R. (2015). Advanced Nursing Research: From Theory to Practice. (2. Ed., Ed.) Jones & Bartlett Learning

Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount.

Simple Steps to get your Paper Done
For Quality Papers