Change Management and Communication Plan Essay Example for Free

Change Management and Communication Plan Essay Riordan Manufacturing has decided to make a change to company’s customer management system. The company does not currently have any formal system for managing their customer information and has traditionally left this up to individual employees. This new system will require all employees to use one customer management system. Your team is now working to help Riordan implement this planned change. Your team must do the following in your role as consultants: †¢ Review the intranet site for Riordan Manufacturing including Human Resources – Organizational Charts, Employee Files, etc. , and Sales Marketing – Marketing Information Systems. †¢ Create a change management plan and communication plan of 1,050- to 1,400-words. Your plan should include the details from section I and section II outlined below. Section I: Change Management Plan Identify the current formal and informal power structures in the organization. How might the power and political structure of the organization affect employee behavior? Identify the most appropriate and effective organizational structures for Riordan Manufacturing that will help them accomplish their planned changes. Section I: Change Management Plan Riordan Manufacturing formal leaders consist of the chief executive, presidents, vice-presidents, high-level managers, middle-level managers and low-level managers. Each person is responsible for implementing changes that will benefit the structural system for the company. According to the organizational charts, the organization is separated by various departments into functional areas. According to the organizational charts, the organization is separated by various departments into functional areas. For example, in the Human Resource they are responsible for benefits, policy and procedures, job classification, annual reviews and survey results just to name some of the functions within the Human Resource Department. Informal leaders have non-official positions like secretaries, maintenance people, auditors and others who are less important but carry out the vision and mission of the company. A gatekeeper does not hold a position of authority, but they usually work closely with the formal leaders of the company. The power and political structure of the organization may frustrate employees when decisions are made that are unclear or not communicatedand lack vision or reasoning behind the decisions. The system relies on clear and concise communication at all times. It is important that chief executive officer is given accurate information at all times. Riordan Manufacturing discovered some problems with their employees; such as an inability to motivate employees and how to reduce the high turnover rate within the company. This was discovered through the Riordan human resources department structure which does not allow employee empowerment and as a result is delaying potential growth due to the unbalanced profits, and reduction in sales. The human resources department needs to revisit some of their decisions to strength their portion of the structure and better the company for the future. The high turnover rate has caused lack of employee motivation, low morale and with pay levels below their competitors’standards; there is lack of structure in the performance review process within the entire company. These issues can be corrected by creating a coaching, feedback process, and planning career development programs by either creating or improving their current performance reward systems. Riordan Manufacturing has selected a structure that will require all employees to use one customer management system. In doing so, Riordan has adopted a structure that closely resembles a bureaucratic nature. Standardization is the key concept in manufacturing. The formal leaders within the Riordan Manufacturing are each responsible for implementing changes that will benefit the structural system for the company. Organizations structures can have significant effects on its members. Potential effects of a bureaucratic structure on employee behavior are attributed to its formalized, mechanistic model where fairness in policy and procedures is a large indicator of job satisfaction. The bureaucratic environment in which Riordan Manufacturing adopts high levels of work specialization contributes to higher levels of productivity, but may sacrifice in areas of lower job satisfaction. This could be connected to the high turnover rate at Riordan in addition to the low pay levels when compared to similar markets. Management needs to consider the organizational structure and its effects on employees on an individual basis. In a bureaucratic environment management may consider looking into characteristics of employees that help determine their potential in working in such a structure and train employees through coaching and training to help them adapt to the vision Riordan management would expect from its employees, employing those that that prefer routine and security of specialized jobs may perform better in a manufacturing organization like Riordan. Riordan Manufacturing culture can be described in a descriptive term. The current structure and management operations would like to reverse some of the current trends in the workplace that affect its organizational culture. Recent discoveries have uncovered problems influencing culture at Riordan such as levels of motiv ation and tenure at the company. It was discovered that Riordan human resources department structure does not allow employee empowerment and are delaying potential growth because of the unbalanced profits and reduction in sales. The new system aspires to create a new culture where management motivates its employees through a reward system and competitive pay, where workers find management approachable with ideas to improve work processes, while following the idea that helping to implement change will benefit the structural system of the company. Riordan human resources department reassessment of its structure can positively impact Riordan’s overall organizational culture by focusing on pay and its incentive packages. Management at Riordan can consider news ways in which to improve its culture. Ideally, upper management would encourage mid-level management to allow feedback from employees to improve work processes while still following the chain of command to create improvement. Though there are more stringent rules in a manufacturing plant, Riordan management wants to instill its trust in its workers, making them feel they are trusted and that their individual judgment is supported. The new operations at Riordan involve team work that encourages positive interaction, collaboration, goal setting, and a reward system that supports its desires for improved culture at Riordan Manufacturing. †¢ Recommend a strategy to implement the changes over the next 12 months. †¢ Describe how you will evaluate the success or failure of the planned change. Section II: Communication Plan Create a Communication Plan for the proposed change covered in the Change Management Plan. In the Communication Plan, complete the following: Select the most appropriate channels to communicate the change to the employees, and explain why you selected these channels. Identify the potential barriers to effective communication and strategies for overcoming the barriers. Develop a message for one of the selected communication channels. In the message, complete the following: †¢ Identify those areas affected by the change. †¢ Establish the need for the change. †¢ Create a sense of urgency around the change. †¢ Outline next steps in the change process.

What Is Elitism And Anti Elitism Politics Essay

What Is Elitism And Anti Elitism Politics Essay Elites derive from a fundamental and universal fact of social life, namely, the absence in any large collectivity of a robust common interest. While it is true that most large collectivities rest on a base of social and cultural understandings, these tend to be ambiguous and rough. The satisfactions some of their members seek are only partly compatible with the satisfactions sought by other members. Members constantly claim statuses and other valued goods for themselves, their kin, friends, and allies that other members do not accept as fully legitimate. Acceding to these claims is often more a matter of judging that it is dangerous or inexpedient to resist them than of recognizing that the persons and groups making the claims have some right to do so. In large collectivities common interest is fairly minimal and must always be supplemented by authoritative decisions that dissenters and opponents dare not or find it inexpedient to resist. Elites may be defined as persons who, by virt ue of their strategic locations in large or otherwise pivotal organizations and movements, are able to affect political outcomes regularly and substantially. Put differently, elites are persons with the organized capacity to make real political trouble without being promptly repressed. They consist not only of prestigious and established leaders top politicians, important businessmen, high-level civil servants, senior military officers but also, in varying degrees in different societies, relatively transitory and less individually known leaders of mass organizations such as trade unions, important voluntary associations, and politically consequential mass movements. Counter-elites are subsumed by this definition because they clearly have the organized capacity, although perhaps mainly through negation, to affect political outcomes regularly and substantially. It is important to stress that this is a limited and specifically political definition of elites. It is restricted to perso ns who are at the top of the pyramid or pyramids of political, economic, and social power (Putnam, 1976). It does not consider all those in a society who enjoy high occupational, educational, or cultural statuses to be elites in a political sense. As defined, national political elites are not large in number. Geraint Parry (1969/2005) has observed that the entire British elite could be seated with ease in a soccer stadium. Using strict organizational and positional criteria, as well as data about sizes of elite networks, some researchers have estimated that the national political elite in the United States numbers perhaps ten thousand persons (Dye, 2002), maybe half this number in medium-sized countries like France (Dogan, 2003), Australia (Higley, Deacon Smart, 1979) or Germany (Hoffmann-Lange, 1992), and about fifteen hundred in small countries like Denmark (Christiansen, Mà ¶ller Togeby, 2001) and Norway (Gulbrandsen and Engelstad, 2002). This last estimate of fewer than two t housand persons is probably the most plausible for all countries during the early modern historical period and all but the most populous developing countries today Elitism: Elitism is the belief or attitude that those individuals who are considered members of the elite a select group of people with outstanding personal abilities, intellect, wealth, specialized training or experience, or other distinctive attributes are those whose views on a matter are to be taken the most seriously or carry the most weight; whose views and/or actions are most likely to be constructive to society as a whole; or whose extraordinary skills, abilities or wisdom render them especially fit to govern [1]. Alternatively, the term elitism may be used to describe a situation in which power is concentrated in the hands of the elite. Opposed to elitism are anti-elitism, populism, and the political theory of pluralism. Elite theory is the sociological or political science analysis of elite influence in society elite theorists regard pluralism as a utopian ideal. Elitism may also refer to situations in which an elite individual assumes special privileges and responsibilities in t he hope that this arrangement will benefit humanity. At times, elitism is closely related to social class and what sociologists call social stratification. Members of the upper classes are sometimes, though inaccurately, known as the social elite. The term elitism is also sometimes misused to denote situations in which a group of people claiming to possess high abilities or simply an in-group or cadre grant themselves extra privileges at the expense of others. This debased form of elitism may be described as discrimination (1) The belief: that government ought in principle, always and everywhere, to be confined to elites. Rarely a worked-out doctrine in its own right, more often a piece of unexamined value judgement, or a view which follows from some more general argument in political philosophy, as for example in Platos Republic. (2) The belief: that government is in practice confined to elites; that, following a maxim of Hume, ought implies can (in other words, that there is no point in saying that government ought to be controlled by the people if in practice it cannot); and that we might just as well accept what we are bound to have anyhow. These views are especially associated with Mosca and with Pareto in the early twentieth century, and with Schumpeter in mid-century. All three writers shade into elitism in sense 1 because they go on to produce normative justifications of rule by elites in a democracy. However, their earlier arguments do not in themselves imply that if democratic control of the government were somehow achievable it would be undesirable. (3) The belief: that government is in practice confined to elites; that this has often been justified by arguments from Plato or Schumpeter; but that this is undesirable because elite rule is in practice rule on behalf of the vested interests of (usually economic) elites. Defining of elite (Elitism): There is no single definition of the concept of elite. What the literature reflects is divergent array of definition of the term. The lack of a unified meaning of elite emanates from the scope an limit of those include in the spectrum of elite rank, given the universality of the accepted meaning of the term itself. Therefore, various definitions arise and different models and constructs develop as frames of analysis. Despite the differences in definitions, all elite theorists seem to agree on one thing: the powerful position of a small group of individuals or groups who either shape or influence decisions that affect national outcomes. Thus, all actors occupying key positions in the political, economic, military, governmental, cultural, and administrative institutions and organizations are considered members of the elite because they affect the national outcomes. According to Mosca (1939), In all societies, from less developed to the most advanced, tow classes of people appear, a class that rules and a class that is ruledà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ The class that rules is few, whereas the more numerous class, is directed at and controlled by the first, in a manner that is now more or less legal, now more or less arbitrary and violent. (50) The few elites acquire a stake in preserving the organization and their position in it. This motive gives leaders a perspective different from that of the organizations members. An elite is then inevitable in any social organization Dye an zeigler,1993: 2-3) To Michels (1959), he who says organization, says oligarchy (70), and government is always government by the few, whether in the name of the few, the one, or the many(Lasswell and Lerner, 1952:7) According to Gwen Moore (1979), the term political elite refer to persons who by virtue of their institutional positions have a high potential to influence national policy making therefore, it includes politicians, government officials, and the leaders of various interest groups, which attempt to influence the allocation of values in socity(Moore,1979;see also Parry, 1969:13) more clearly, Higley and Burton (1989) define national elites as persons who are able, by virtue of their authoritative positions in powerful organizations and movements of whatever kind, to affect national political outcomes regularly and substantially(18) In defense of elite theory, and signifying the importance of the organizational context of elites, Higley, Burton, and Field (1973) maintain that they have consistently followed Weber and Movement leaders are elites only to the extent that the movements are bureaucratically structured and thus powerful on a sustained basis. Those leaders then can affect political outcomes regularly and substantially (Higley, Burton, and Field, 1990) Dogan and Higley (1996) define elites as the few hundred or at most few thousand persons who head the major institutions, organizations, and movements in a society and who are therefore able to impel or impede political decisions on a regular basis. Elites consist, therefore, of the top leaders of political parties, governmental bureaucracies, large and /or pivotally located business firms and large unions, the military, the media, professional, religious, educational, and other major organizations, as well as the leaders of powerful interest groups and mass movements. Because these definitions are too broad, inclusive, and confusing, they are subject to interpretations and challenges, such as the one offered by Alan Knight (1996) in his extensive and provocative analysis of elite theory. To Hunter (1959), elites are the top leaders who shape and control the power structure, whereas to Mills (1956), they are the power elite, Composed of men whose positions enable them to transcend the ordinary environments of ordinary men and women: they are in positions to make decisions having major consequences Whether they do or do not make such decisions is less important than the fact that they do occupy such pivotal positions: their failure to act, their failure to make decisions, is itself an act that is often of greater consequence than the decisions they do make, for they are in command of the major hierarchies and organizations of modern society. They run the big corporations. They run the machinery of the state and claim its prerogatives. They direct the military establishment. They occupy the strategic command posts of the social structure, in which are now centered the effective means of the power and the wealth and the celebrity which they enjoy. The power elite are not solitary rulers. Advisors and consultants, spokesmen and opinion makers, are often the captains of their higher thought and decision. Imme diately below the elite are the professional politicians of the middle levels of power, in the Congress and in the pressure groups, as well as among the new and old upper classes of town and city and region Mills definition of the concept of power elite is both clear and comprehensive in that it includes not only the macro elites, but also the micro elites who operate the organizations and institutions controlled by the power elite. This view is shared by the more contemporary elite theorists who focus in their studies on interlocking organizational networks of the elites. Despite the common tenets emphasized in these definitions, the following perspectives on elite theory may be discerned. Types of Elite: Following the ideas of Machiavelli, he distinguished two main types of elite group: a. Lion elites who were able to rule by force (for example, military regimes). b. Fox elites who were able to rule by manipulation (for example, liberal democratic regimes) Characteristics of the elite Attributes that identify elite vary; personal achievement may not be essential. Elite attributes include: Rigorous study of, or great accomplishment within, a particular field of study A long track record of competence in a demanding field An extensive history of dedication and effort in service to a specific discipline (e.g., medicine or martial arts) A high degree of accomplishment, training or wisdom within a given field An elite fighter, for example, is one whose training, resolve, and experience in combat place him at the top of his field. Most nations employ some kind of Special Forces made up of elite soldiers whose training goes far beyond what is typical for the average soldier. The academic elite, on the other hand, comprises only those professors whose studies are likely to shape their respective disciplines for years to come. One synonym for elite might be world class, indicating that the individual in question is capable of participating effectively at the very highest levels of his or her chosen discipline. Anti-elitism Elitism as a pejorative term The term elitism or the title elitist can be used resentfully [2] by a person who is not a member of an elite, or is a member but resents the elite position or uses it in a condescending or cynical manner in order to ridicule or criticize practices which discriminate on the basis of ability or attributes. Often, accusing someone of being an elitist is used as a pejorative remark meant to imply that the person in question does not in fact belong to an elite, but is merely a hanger-on. Sometimes, particularly in political circles, it is used simply as a generic insult, with little to no literal basis for the terms use beyond a general animosity towards the target. Elitism versus egalitarianism Elitism can be interpreted as encouraging the exclusion of large numbers of people from positions of privilege or power. Thus, many populists seek the social equality of Egalitarianism, Populism, Socialism, or Communism. They may also support affirmative action, social security, luxury taxes, and increasingly high progressive taxes for the wealthiest members of society. All of these measures seek to reduce the gap of power between the elite and those who are not elite. Elitism versus pluralism Pluralism is the belief that public policy decisions should be (or, descriptively, are) the result of the struggle of forces exerted by large populations (workers, consumers, retirees, parents, etc.) directly or indirectly in the policy-making process. This is contrasted with elitism which is the belief that decisions should be (or are) being made essentially according to the interests or ideas of elites. There is a difference, however, between the idea of being more able to fulfill a political task and the actual knowing of the specialization and specifications of each corporation or other group among the general population and its particular hopes and needs, which suggests a way of cooperation which has been recently put into practice in some countries between politicians and groups of citizens which have some remote resemblances to Corporatism. Elitism and education Elitism in the context of education is the practice of concentrating attention on or allocating funding to the students who rank highest in a particular field of endeavor, with the other students being deemed less capable of achievement or as holding less promise for the societys future. For example, a politician who promotes specialized biochemistry classes for highly intelligent students in an effort to cure diseases might be accused of elitism. Elitism in education could be based upon learning ability, knowledge, or other abilities. An elite school could merely be a wealthy school or an old school. Power elite: A Power Elite, in political and sociological theory, is a small group of people who control a disproportionate amount of wealth, privilege, and access to decision-making of global consequence. The term was coined by Charles Wright Mills in his 1956 book, The Power Elite. The Power Elite (1956) describes the relationship between political, military, and economic elite (people at the pinnacles of these three institutions), noting that these people share a common world view, 1) the military metaphysic- a military definition of reality, possess 2) class identity- recognizing themselves separate and superior to the rest of society, have 3) interchangeability: i.e. the move within and between the three institutional structures and hold interlocking directorates 4) cooptation/socialization: of prospective new members is done based on how well they clone themselves socially after such elite. Further these elite in the big three institutional orders have an uneasy alliance based upon their co mmunity of interests driven by the military metaphysic, which has transformed the economy into a permanent war economy. In critical work, the US Power elite consists of members of the Business/Corporate Community, Academia, politicians, media editors, military service personnel, and high-profile journalists. From here on, a general form of consensus building and homogenesing of elite members views is eventually achieved. Social Structure forming Power Elite the American way and the American Dream can be defined as that dream of a land in which life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement. It is a difficult dream for the European upper classes to interpret adequately, and too many of us ourselves have grown weary and mistrustful of it. It is not a dream of motor cars and high wages merely, but a dream of social order in which each man and each woman shall be able to attain to the fullest stature of which they are innately capable, and be recognized by others for what they are, regardless of the fortuitous circumstances of birth or position ([James Truslow Adams, The Epic of America]). However, it has been argued that a relatively fixed group of privileged Americans shape our economy and government solely because of their higher wealth and social status. This idea goes against the original American way, and begins a new one. This new American way involves a fixed group of Americans, called the power elite. The power elite stems from many groups forming into one: Corporate Community: This group includes rich corporations, banks and agribusinesses. These tend to dominate the federal government in Washington. Growth Coalitions: This group includes real estate, construction and land development companies. These tend to dominate the local governments. Both the corporate communities and growth coalitions sometimes will have conflicting ideas and competition between each other over profits and investment opportunities. However, they tend to have the same policies affecting their general welfare. These groups have the ability to organize and defend their interests due to their large wealth and income. The owners and managers of these large income producing properties hold a great share of all of the income and wealth in the US. This is more than any other industrial democracy (they are 1% of the entire US population). By holding this share of income, these groups clearly create the dominating class in the US. This dominating class has name of its own: Corporate Rich: This group becomes more of a common social group. They belong to the same social clubs, they vacation at the same summer and winter resorts and they send their children to the same private schools. They create the [social upper class]. Place Entrepreneurs: This group tends to be filled with members of the growth coalition. They sell locations and buildings. By doing this, they become the local upper class in their respective cities. Because of this, they tend to mingle with the corporate rich in vacation/resort settings or educational settings. Policy Formation Network: This group tends to be filled with members from both the corporate rich and the place entrepreneurs/growth coalition. They develop and direct non-profit organizations, charity foundations and policy discussion groups. As these non-profit groups join at a national level, they are able to create policies for local communities and national level city development organizations. All of these group s take a part in creating the ultimate power elite, the leadership group for the corporate rich as a whole. Power Elite: This group tends to have corporate owners join with top level executives in the corporate community and the policy formation network. This group tends to be the wealthiest in the US and use this group title to create policies for the US to use on a national level. However, it is clear that not all people in the power elite group are involved in governance. Some simply enjoy the lifestyle wealth can bring. Characteristics of the Power Elite: According to C. Wright Mills, among the best known power-elite theorists, the governing elite in the United States draws its members from three areas: (1) the highest political leaders including the president and a handful of key cabinet members and close advisers; (2) major corporate owners and directors; and (3) high-ranking military officers. Even though these individuals constitute a close-knit group, they are not part of a conspiracy that secretly manipulates events in their own selfish interest. For the most part, the elite respects civil liberties, follows established constitutional principles, and operates openly and peacefully. It is not a dictatorship; it does not rely on terror, a secret police, or midnight arrests to get its way. It does not have to, as we will see. Nor is its membership closed, although many members have enjoyed a head start in life by virtue of their being born into prominent families. Nevertheless, those who work hard, enjoy good luck, and demonstrate a willingness to adopt elite values do find it possible to work into higher circles from below. If the elite do not derive its power from repression or inheritance, from where does its strength come? Basically it comes from control of the highest positions in the political and business hierarchy and from shared values and beliefs. Elite approach in politics: Those who disagree with pluralism such as C. Wright Mills argue that a few people in all societies manipulate the levers of government to their benefit. As a review of the pluralist approach, Elite theory suggests that focus should not be on individuals and the freely formed groups based on interests but that society breaks down into two groups the few on top who hold power and rule (the ones Plato referred to as philosopher kings) or the Oligarchy The many below who are governed by them. Elite theory acknowledges that human society is not all the same and that the differences among people in society make elite rule or the rule of the oligarchy inevitable elites straddle both the public and private realms. For example different political elites and corporate elites become bureaucratic elites over time and influence the direction of state policies in their different public and private capacities elites of different groups in society political, corporate, workers, ethnic, regional, an d other groups of common bond tend to find what is called Elite Accommodation elites also tend to reproduce them selves as they come to rely on each other for advice and action. They come to share a common world view and defend their common interests some have suggested that the state elites can become autonomous from society through this process of elite accommodation. What emerges is what is called the Embedded Stat Critics of elite theory have pointed to it over-emphasis of the cohesion of the elites or oligarchy and lack of attention to the competition within the ruling elites. Further, that in modern society political constraints makes it impossible for rulers to ignore the interests of the masses. Elite approach focuses on elites domination of political life with an alienated majority accepting their role in society, while the class analysis approach suggests that social classes arise in society because of the nature of the organization of the economy and exist in antagonism against each other Elite theory: Elite theory is a theory of the state which seeks to describe and explain the power relationships in modern society. It argues that a small minority, comprised of members of the economic elite and policy-planning networks, hold the most power no matter what happens in elections in a country. Through positions in corporations or on corporate boards, and influence over the policy-planning networks through financial support of foundations or positions with think tanks or policy-discussion groups, members of the elite are able to have significant power over policy decisions of corporations and governments. The theory stands in opposition to pluralism in suggesting that democracy is a utopian ideal. It also stands in opposition to state autonomy theory. Classical and New Elite Theory Although the idea probably always has been present in some form, elitism emerged as a recognizable and clearly defined part of Western political thought in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The leading contributors to the theory were Gaetano Mosca, Vilfredo Pareto, and Robert Michels. These writers attacked classical democratic thought and also Aristotle and Karl Marx. Majority rule, they insisted, is impossible. Every society is divided into those who rule and those who are ruled; and the rulers constitute only a small minority of any society. Aristotles classification, which divided political systems into three types (rule by one, rule by a few, and rule by the many), does not fit reality either, for no man is capable of ruling by himself, and the many, too, lack the ability to govern. It is the few, under any political system, who exercise effective control. And Marx, with his emphasis on a class struggle that in the end (following the victory of the working class ) leads to social harmony in a classless society, was also wrong. History features a continuing struggle among elites. That struggle will never end, and a classless society cannot be created. Moreover, to the pioneers in the development of elitist theory, Marx placed too much emphasis on economics and not enough on politics, which could be autonomous. Classical elitist theory did not maintain merely that the active, socially recognizable people in a country made its important decisions-whether from within offices of government, from somewhere behind the scenes, or from completely outside the state apparatus. It emphatically asserted that the common man, however numerous within a society in absolute or relative terms, did not. Analysts of elites, who generally focus on the distribution of power rather than on the allocation of values, or on property and other wealth forms, differ somewhat over the degree of participation in government or, more generally, the political process that is necessary for a member of the elite accurately to be judged a member of what Mosca characterizes as the ruling class. A societys elite is usually thought to be a stable entity, self-sustaining and constant over time. Yet the actual group that is in office can change markedly and very quickly. The concept of an elite therefore may need to be understood as encompassing all those who might govern as well as those who in fact do govern. However elite is precisely understood, elitist theory is clear in the basic point that a minority, rather than the masses, controls things. The general population of a country-the common man-is ineffective. Even in societies with elections and other democratic mechanisms, it is posited, the ruling elite functions in a way that is largely independent of control by a popular majority. However, it made need a justifying doctrine. That the elite ordinarily functions according to a political formula, in Moscas term, is what makes its rule effective and acceptable to the masses Thus, in theory, there can be a democratic elitism, however paradoxical that may seem. A new elite paradigm, building on the work of Mosca and other classical theorists, emerged in the 1980s and 1990s among comparative political sociologists. It drew attention to the occurrence, and the important effects, of divisions that may arise within the elite of a society. Its central proposition, as stated by John Higley and Michael Burton (1989), is as follows: A disunified national elite, which is the most common type, produces a series of unstable regimes that tend to oscillate between authoritarian and democratic forms over varying intervals. A consensually unified national elite, which is historically much rarer, produces a stable regime that may evolve into a modern democracy, as in Sweden, or Britain, or the United States, if economic and other facilitative conditions permit. In the United States, normally, internal and external conditions have favored consensual unity within the nations elite. Of course, the American Revolution and, later, the Civil War, are the major exceptions to this generalization. During those periods, divisions ran so deep as to produce counter-elites. As the political sociologist Barrington Moore, Jr., and the political historian C. Vann Woodward have shown, the reconciliation between North and South that occurred following post-Civil War Reconstruction was in significant part a result of a complex bargain between the elites in formerly opposed geographical sections. After the late nineteenth century, issues of foreign policy have on occasion divided the American elite as well. A by-product of this has been a widening of participation in the national debate over foreign policy. That this amounts to a democratization of American foreign policymaking, however, is highly disputable. Elite theorists: Wright Mills C. Wright Mills published his book The Power Elite in 1956 claiming a new perspective on systems of power in the USA. He identified a triumvirate of power groups political, economic and military who form a distinguishable, although not unified body, wielding power in the American state: He proposed that this group had been generated through a process of rationalisation at work in all advanced industrial societies where by the mechanisms of power became concentrated funnelling overall control into the hands of a limited, somewhat corrupt group (Bottomore 1993). This reflected a decline in politics as an arena for debate and relegation to a merely formal level of discourse (Mills 1956). This macro-scale analysis sought to point out the degradation of democracy in advanced societies and the fact that power generally lies outside the boundaries of elected representatives. Floyd Hunter The elite theory analysis of power was also applied on the micro scale in community power studies such as that by Floyd Hunter (1953). Hunter examined in detail the power relationships evident in his Regional City looking for the real holders of power rather than those in obvious official positions. He posited a structural-functional approach which mapped the hierarchies and webs of interconnection operating within the city mapping relationships of power between businessmen, politicians, clergy etc. The study was promoted to debunk current concepts of any democracy present within urban politics and reaffirm the arguments for a true representative democracy (Hunter 1953). This type of analysis was also used in later, larger scale, studies such as that carried out by M. Schwarz examining the power structures within the sphere of the corporate elite in the USA (Schwarz 1987). James Burnham James Burnhams early work The Managerial Revolution sought to express the movement of all functional power into the hands of managers rather than politicians or businessmen separating ownership and control (Bottomore 193). Many of these id

Pricing decisions as a management strategy

Pricing decisions as a management strategy Supply and demand is an economic model of price determination in a market. It concludes that in a competitive market, price functions to equalise the quantity demanded to the quantity supplied. This results in an economic equilibrium. The Pricing decisions, deciding what to charge the customers may be based on the Marketing or Cost and management accounting. Pricing is one of the most difficult decisions faced by organisations. It is possible for management to foresee a profit squeeze (Horngren, Datar Foster, 2003). Pricing decisions are based on what to charge for the products and services organisations offer. These decisions have major impacts on the revenue an entity earns. This study is focused on pricing decisions as a management strategy. It will then discuss about costing (subset of management accounting) and its influence in pricing. Major changes have occurred in the business world in recent years, including deregulation, privatisation, the growing expectations of share holders and the impact of new technology (Atrill McLaney, 2009). These changes have led towards a fast changing and competitive environment, and this has radically changed the way that entities need to be managed. Managers must approach pricing decisions with care because of the significant impact they can have on the profitability of business (Drury, 2008). Management must approach pricing decisions with care because of the significant impact they can have on the profitability of an entity. Managers consider three main influences on pricing decisions: customers, competitors and costs. Managers tend to see the pricing issues through the customers eyes. Any increase in price may cause customers to reject an entitys product and switch to its competitors. In the current business environment, understanding customers prices and product preferences are a competitive advantage to any entity. Management can price dynamically to respond to demand, to create demand, to reduce waste and to turn over stock immediately. The reactions of competitors influence pricing too. Many companies globally, have established departments to search out information on its competitors financial performance, patents, technology and operating policies (Bhimani, 2008). Most companies price products to exceed the production costs (Alan, 2002). The surveys and case studie s reveal that executives weigh customers, competitors and costs differently. Price taking and price making Most entities need to make decisions about setting or accepting selling prices for their products or services. An entity will have to accept the market price under few circumstances. If there are entities in an industry and there is little to distinguish their product or service from each other then the management needs to consider price taking. Entities in commodity markets can be quoted as examples. Any small entity operating in an industry where there are dominant entities that influence prices then small entities will have to accept those prices. In contrast, if the entity is selling highly customized or differentiated products then they can influence the prices and be a price setter. Time horizons Short run and Long run Pricing decisions have both short run and long run implications. Pricing decisions in short run Short run pricing decisions include pricing for a onetime special offer. This can be an opportunity where an entity will have to bid against its competitors. In such a situation incremental costs of undertaking the order should be taken into account. Product mix could be adjusted where the incremental sales revenue exceeds incremental short run costs and will provide a contribution towards fixed costs. Pricing decisions in long run Long run decisions could include pricing a product in a major market where price setting has considerable leeway. Long run time horizon is mostly of a year or longer. Organisations are supposed to consider the long run implications since they commit their resources for a lengthy period of time. Long run decisions have a profound effect on the firms future position (Drury, 2008). Pricing decisions are more prominent since that is how organisations earn their revenues. Target costing and Life cycle costing are two of the strategies used by organisations in pricing. Target costing is the estimated price for a product or service that potential customers will pay. In other words, firms determine the allowable cost for the product or service, given a competitive market price, so the firm can earn a desired profit (Target cost = Competitive price Desired profit). Firms have two options to cut down costs to the level of target cost. It could be either by redesigning the product or service and or by integrating new manufacturing technology. While once managers focused only on manufacturing costs, they now look at cost upstream (before manufacturing: Research and development and design) and downstream (after manufacturing: marketing, distribution and customer service) in the product life cycle to get a complete analysis of product cost and profitability. Another long term pricing strategy is Life cycle costing. Typically, product or service costs are calculated and reported for shorter periods, such as a month or a year. Unlike the typical strategies Life cycle costing provides a long term perspective.

Warfare and its Psychological Impact Essay -- War Psychology Disorders

Warfare and its Psychological Impact Warfare causes many people to suffer from psychological problems. Many times, these problems come in the form of mental illness. According to the DSM-VI, which is the fourth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, a mental disorder is "a clinically significant behavioral or psychological syndrome or pattern that's associated with current distress (a painful symptom) or disability (impairment in one or more important areas of functioning) or with a significantly greater risk of suffering, death, pain, disability, or an important loss of freedom. This syndrome or pattern mustn't be merely an expected, culturally sanctioned response such as grief over the death of a loved one. Whatever the cause, it must be considered a sign of a behavioral, psychological, or biological dysfunction."("Diseases") Mental disorders are diseases. However, according to the Director of the National Institute of Mental Health, mental disorders are treatable diseases. Mental illnesses have been proven to be illnesses of the brain. These illnesses can often be treated with medication and psychological therapy. Depression is the leading cause of disability in the world. Some believe that depression is a weakness in character, but it is a real disease with real symptoms. More people suffer from depression than heart disease. Mental illness is a serious disease. Mental disorders are serious problems with serious effects. In war there are three main groups affected by war: soldiers, non-combatants, and society. There are negative psychological consequences caused by war, both culturally and individually, these make war more costly than we realized previously. If we take these negati... ...nd there would be a lot less psychologically injured people in the US and Vietnam today. Our newfound resistance to war will prove to provide a psychologically healthy environment for not only us, but our children as well, for they are our treasure and our future. Our children are more important than any amount of oil or gold. It is our duty to create a positive environment for children in this world. Their well-being should be our first concern. They are not responsible for the conflict, but they suffer severely. They are particularly vulnerable. (Otunnu par 2) According to The Encyclopedia of Violence, Peace and Conflict "there is no escaping the conclusion that combat, and the killing that lies at the heart of combat, is an extraordinarily traumatic and psychologically costly endeavor that profoundly impacts all who participate in it." (Grossman and Siddle par.2)

Interview Essays - A Local Rock Star -- Interview Essays - A Local Roc

Local Rock Star Sitting at the table with long, thick, blonde hair and a hint of Brad Pitt’s facial features sits Brian. He is a 17 year old high school junior, a guitarist in a local band, and he is my interview. He will begin nearly all his sentences with â€Å"uhh†¦Ã¢â‚¬  but then proceeds to long, interesting answers. I started by asking him about when he became interested in music, and who his influences were. â€Å"I’ve always listened to music,† he said, â€Å"my first album ever was Nirvana’s Nevermind; it was a cassette tape. I also listened to a lot of Michael Jackson—don’t laugh, I mean like Thriller and stuff.† What inspired you to play an instrument? â€Å"The Red Hot Chili Peppers’ CD Blood, Sugar, Sex, Magic was the first time I realized I wanted to play an instrument.† What instruments do you play? â€Å"I’ve played guitar for the last four years, saxophone for the last two—though only in the school band,† he said. â€Å"The keyboard, bass and drums I can ‘musically understand,’ though I don’t usually play them.† So tell me about the band. What’s the significance of the band’s name, No Name Charlies? â€Å"Uhh†¦ well we had, like, 100 names that we had gone through and we didn’t really like. Then Greg, our former trombone player, said that whenever his teacher in elementary school would get an essay without a name on it, she’d call it a ‘no name Charlie.’ We all kind of liked it; it’s definitely grown on us since then.† He told me the band came together in November 2001, and their first show was in spring 2002. There has been a lot of movement in terms of the band members: some have come and gone, some have come, gone and come back again, some switch instruments, and others have stepped in. The configuration, as i... ...ur first one,† he says, referring to their 2003 demo Shut Up and Listen! They met Pat Kays, bassist for the band Catch 22, when they opened for his band last year. Kays told the boys he liked their sound, and was interested in engineering and, to an extent, producing. â€Å"It was mutual,† Brian said, â€Å"because we had been wanting to record, and he had wanted to engineer. It all kind of fell into place.† Youthful endurance, continuing optimism and a small—but steadily growing—fan base have all contributed to the No Name Charlies’ local success. When asked whether the band would take the chance to become famous—if the chance was given—Brian said they would take it without question. However, he thinks balance is important, and would not sacrifice a college education for it. When asked if he thinks the band will make it big, Brian replied, â€Å"I’d like to think so.†

Diversity talking

When we are talking In relation to diversity, we talk about the group who possess individual qualities that are diverse from our traits. Diversity is the uniqueness which every employee brings to the workplace in an organization or establishment. Examples of differences include nationality, belief, disabilities, physical appearance, race, gender, age, educational background, sexual orientation, and work experience, social and family status, At workplace, valuing diversity means creating a work environment that respects and includes variation Indlvldudl by maxlmlzlng the otential of all employees or in which every employee feels included.It means acknowledging that other people, other races, other voices, and other cultures have an equal claim on the world. Valuing diversity is the recognition that there are many ways of viewing the world, solving problems, and working together workplace diversity Is the differences people bring In an organization. It encompasses learning and Interact ing with people who share different opinions, backgrounds from us and creating an environment w†¦ _ middle of paper _ †¦ ployees should be open-minded and treat others with dignity, respect, courtesy and onsideration and not tolerate harassment or discrimination.This creates a workplace that encourages learning and associating with people from diverse groups. With a diverse working environment and an equally diverse opportunity, the sky is the limit to what you can achieve during your career. In addition to a very Important requirement when people deal with diversity Is when there Is a promotion of d â€Å"safe† place for people to communicate (Koonce, 2001 Diversity is the essence of evolution. Right from the ancient times, it has been clearly evident that various races of the world interacted and traded with each other.Calling diversity as one ot the leading survival tactics ot the human race wont be an anomaly. It opens up the mind and dlmlnlshes the boundaries d efined by set of authoritarians. Diversity Is eminent In nature. The diverse colours of Mother Nature, seasonal variations, existence of solar, lunar and planetary movements in harmony and in coordination are nothing but diverse expressions of the same. The myriad hues sync up in reverence and carve a picture so nice. Man Is a small constituent of this colossal cosmos. And as stated earller, diversity Is dn essence of the existence.Therefore It becomes Imperative to respect and greet the great variation present around. People hailing from different cultures, ethnicity, race, country or religion should be considered as a part of the ‘one society' only. and unjustified behaviour expressed by a particular race towards the others. This behaviour is a denial of the God's creation. In his infinite wisdom, he created people of all colours and creeds. On a scientific basis the colour of the skin depends upon the geographical and environmental factors. And in deeper introspection, it i s the pigment melanin that determines the colour of skin.So, the main point is that nowhere in the description lies any factor that makes a particular race better than others. The anatomy and physiology of a human body are similar all over the world. Hence discrimination on any basis is unjustified and unacceptable. There are various cultures and religions that are followed in the present society set up. Everyone has the right to follow and express his religious beliefs in solidarity. Instead of making prejudices and demeaning people, try to embrace the goodness of each. No religion spread the message of hatred or communalism.It is the followers r the conservatives who modify the teachings according to their maligned thoughts. In the modern world the international boundaries are already shrinking. The increasing trade among the countries and the outsourcing of Jobs is an example. No country can survive on its own. Mutual collaboration among all parts of the world is mandatory. Even, those who claim to belong to first world have to depend upon the third world countries for a better market and manpower. The oil and gasoline needs are satiated by the gulf countries. In turn, all the modern facilities and exposure to evelopment is best in the developed countries only.Accepting the diversity is not only an option but compulsory for the sustenance of humanity. Accepting the diversity gracefully will help in building a congenial environment. It is the imminent duty of the older generation to understand and teach their younger ones the importance and acceptance of diversity present around. The base line is to warmly embrace the diverse cultures and religions and their teachings prevalent in the world. It will help to improvise the human race as a whole and will lead towards a better future for generations to follow.

Behavioral study of obedience

This article represents a detailed account of the research carried out by Stanley Miligram at Yale University. The study was set to investigate the negative / destructive side of obedience. It involved more than 40 grown-up American volunteers representing diverse professions that ranged from laborers to great scholars. They were briefed on the research main objectives and selected to either play the role of experimenter, subject (teacher) or victim (learner).The experiment carried out in Yale’s laboratory required a naive subject to administer electric â€Å"shock† gradually as a form of punishment to a victim each time the victim answered wrongly to a question. The shock generator was graded in intervals of 15 volts with thirty such grades. Each time the victim answered wrongly the subject was under instructions from the experimenter to press a button that connected to the graduated shock generator system that increased the voltage by a margin of 15 volts. The purpose of the study as explained by Milgram was to investigate how human beings respond to authority (power).Though naturally it is difficult for immorally upright person to administer electric shock to another innocent person, it was interesting when milligram’s subjects went on to administer fatal shocks to the victims. This confirms that human beings are powerless and are likely to succumb to authority by obeying its orders even if they are against the fundamental moral standards. Answers to reflection question about the study. The Milgram experiment consisted of three key players i. e. the experimenter, the subject, and the victim.Out of these three players it is the subject who plays the core part of the experiment. The subjects’ behavior is what Milgram was looking for in his bid to study the behavior of human obedience. For instance, if a subject chooses to obey the experimenters’ orders and go on with administering the electric shock then he or she is being ob edient but if not he or she is defying orders.According to (psychology 101, chapter 8, section 3) on obedience and power Milgram’s subjects behaved obediently because of the force of following the legitimate power i. e. they are under authority from the experimenter to administer electric shocks to their victims. Therefore when compared to Nazi’s extermination of Jews in death camps and gas chambers during the holocaust, their behavior is certainly not different.They both knew that it is against the basic human morals to apply electric shock, or murder people by gassing but they play obedient to authority. Ethically any act that brings suffering/ uncomfortability to a human being is considered inhuman; however, this was not the case with Milgram’s experiment.It would have been unethical if the subjects were in the first place forced to take part in the experiment, secondly the subjects were initially briefed on the authenticity of the electric shock –the shocks could not cause permanent tissue damage. Again, though the experiment was painful its discomfort was momentary compared with its worthy scientific gains. The subjects although paid to participate in the experiment, they were assured that the money was just for their coming to the laboratory and not what they did afterwards.This research though carried out before establishment of Ethics Review Committees it drew numerous questions regarding its effects to the basic ethics and morals of human beings. But going by the previous brutal actions committed to people out of blind adherence to orders, a controlled study was needed to investigate the reasons as to why German police cops contrary to their conscience murdered millions of Jews under the command of Hitler. The research was purely based on willing volunteer basis; the participants were briefed on the effects of the electric shock to the victims.It is therefore inclined to the advancement of worthwhile knowledge about learnin g and memory. It was conducted by reputable personnel (Yale University). The selection of participants was done fairly, and lastly the study was concluded by â€Å"debriefing† the participants in order to iron out any feelings of hatred on the part of the subjects and their victims. On the other hand the study had its dark side, the fact that subjects were ordered to administer electric shock to their victims which to them was morally degrading is one of the reasons many Ethics Review Committees would give out in trying to bar such an experiment.Again, the screams and groans made by victims due to extreme tension are another reason these committees would give out. The research was most successful because the participants were deceived into believing that the selection of who plays subject or victim was fairly done. This was one of Milgram’s trump cards of making sure that the naive participants play the part of the subject in order to increase the credibility of the fi ndings. Further the shock generator was not a real one; it was designed to cheat the public that indeed the victims were being shocked.However the experiment can be conducted in a more â€Å"real† way in order to eradicate any element of doubt. This research could have been made real by using real teachers and real learners; a teacher is required to first give out strict instructions to the learners on the real consequences of answering wrongly to the given quiz. Real punishment (real electric shock or any other ethically acceptable punishment) may be administered to any wrong answer given, by doing that the learners will therefore try to obey (answer correctly or else get punished).The act of â€Å"debriefing† after the experiment was necessary to eradicate any ill feelings towards the subjects. They were made to believe that no real shock was administered to the victims. However this was an exercise in futility because the subjects were free to discontinue with the s hock administering, if they felt it was against their morals but the majority continued with the exercise. Therefore making them believe they had not administered real shocks was adding more psychological stress because they had already broken their morals and hence it was meaningless to convince them into believing.According to (Sojourners magazine, by MacNutt, Francis 2004) also based on Milgram’s experiment, many ordinary people are afraid of being disapproved and therefore carry out acts which are incompatible with the basic moral standards. Therefore the chances of any subject defying experimenter’s orders are slim and therefore if I were one of the experimenters I would not hesitate but would have carried on with the electric shocking business. A more solid explanation to this is the case a confident businessman who almost succumbed to tension went ahead and executed all the experimenter’s orders.Psychology generally deals with people’s behavior; so me extreme behaviors were exhibited by morally upright people e. g. the perpetration of mass slaughter of Jews during the holocaust, the Hoffling hospital case whereby nurses ejected lethal doses of a â€Å"fictional† drug to their patients (Hofling C. K et al, 1966). Such behaviors needed to be studied in order to arrive at a generalization, therefore Milgram’s study was fundamental to social psychology, a study that investigates how people influence the beliefs, feelings, and behaviors of others.The study findings gave a basis to many generalizations that makes up the core pillars of psychology. Again, the findings of this study are of great relevance to today’s human beings actions; other studies continue to be done with great reference to this study. For instance, obedience and power – a sub section of greater social psychology branch of psychology, draws its relevance from Milgram’s findings (psychology 101, chapter 8, section 3).This carefull y executed study send a very loaded message to numerous questions asked by people of sound reasoning on morals on why German corps unquestioningly obeyed Hitler’s orders by gassing millions of Jews, whether Germans are different from other people, why catholic bishops stressed obedience to Caesar and Christ among other questions. The answer to these questions was that human being are bound to behave obediently to orders given by people whom they identify with, and whom they perceive to hold a legitimate position higher than them.Conclusions Milgram’s research on obedience to power is a milestone to the general study of psychology; however the study was purely based on a volunteer and wiling basis. This serves to discredit the study’s credibility, because the experimenters, subjects and victims are under no imminent consequence should they choose to defy the orders. For instance 14 subjects defied orders after their victims literally refused to respond to questio ns.However, the major objective of the research was adequately achieved, although those participants who failed to play obedience negatively affected the full achievement of those objectives. Further deceiving the participants was not a strong point towards the overall credibility of the study; Milgram could have provided a more â€Å"real’ study with a morally acceptable punishment e. g. the case of Hoffling hospital (Hofling C. K et al, 1966).ReferencesPsychology 101, Obedience and power, available at: http://allpsych. com/psychology101/obedience_power. html, accessed on October 17, 2008Sojourners magazine, by MacNutt, Francis 2004, available at; http://findarticles. com/p/articles/mi_qa4010/is_200410/ai_n9441346, accessed on October 17, 2008.Behavior Study of obedience, by Milgram, Stanley, available at; http://www. wadsworth. com/psychology_d/templates/student_resources/0155060678_rathus/ps/ps01. html, accessed on October 17, 2008.Hofling CK et al. (1966) â€Å"An Exper imental study of Nurse-Physician Relationships†. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 141:171-180.