Write My Essay We are the most trusted essay writing service. Get the best essays delivered by experienced UK & US essay writers at affordable prices.
We can work on Achieving Organization Goals
Assess strategic planning approaches and models used to achieve organizational goals.
View the grading rubric for this deliverable by selecting the âThis item is graded with a rubricâ link, which is located in the Details & Information pane.
Scenario Healthy Dynamics have been around for 25 years and has a company-wide strategy in place, but the old strategy has proven to be ineffective of late in generating new ideas and revenue streams. The current plan provides wellness strategies for their clients and a commitment from the staff of Healthy Dynamics to deliver high quality, effective customer service and comprehensive wellness strategies. Currently Healthy Dynamics offer its clients the following wellness program components: smoking cessation, health risk assessment, biometric screening, nutrition education, cooking demonstration, and chronic disease prevention education.
The company is considering either a merger or acquisition to prevent bankruptcy. Both options will result in layoffs, and your department will be affected with an anticipated 80% reduction in staff. You have been assigned to produce a strategic planning model to prevent either of these possibilities. Should Healthy Dynamics take a leap and dive into other healthcare services, such as medical equipment and digital health, or add new components to their wellness program offerings to make it more comprehensive for their clients? Your first steps are to figure out where you think the company should go (vision), what you are hoping to achieve (mission), and then identify how you will move forward (objectives).
Sample Solution
This leads to question of what qualifies to be a combatant, and whether it is lawful to kill each other as combatants. Combatants are people who are involved directly or indirectly with the war and it is lawful to kill âto shelter the innocent from harmâ¦punish evildoers (Begby et al (2006b), Page 290).However, as mentioned above civilian cannot be harmed, showing combatants as the only legitimate targets, another condition of jus in bello, as âwe may not use the sword against those who have not harmed us (Begby et al (2006b), Page 314).â In addition, Frowe suggested combatants must be identified as combatants, to avoid the presence of guerrilla warfare which can end up in a higher death count, for example, the Vietnam War. Moreover, he argued they must be part of the army, bear arms and apply to the rules of jus in bello. (Frowe (2011), Page 101-3). This suggests Frowe seeks a fair, just war between two participants avoiding non-combatant deaths, but wouldnât this lead to higher death rate for combatants, as both sides have relatively equal chance to win since both use similar tactics? Nevertheless, arguably Frowe will argue that combatant can lawfully kill each other, showing this is just, which is also supported by Vittola, who states: âit is lawful to draw the sword and use it against malefactors (Begby et al (2006b), Page 309).â In addition, Vittola expresses the extent of military tactics used, but never reaches a conclusion whether itâs lawful or not to proceed these actions, as he constantly found a middle ground, where it can be lawful to do such things but never always (Begby et al (2006b), Page 326-31). This is supported by Frowe, who measures the legitimate tactics according to proportionality and military necessity. It depends on the magnitude of how much damage done to one another, in order to judge the actions after a war. For example, one cannot simply nuke the terrorist groups throughout the middle-east, because it is not only proportional, it will damage the whole population, an unintended consequence. More importantly, the soldiers must have the right intention in what they are going to achieve, sacrificing the costs to their actions. For example: if soldiers want to execute all prisoners of war, they must do it for the right intention and for a just cause, proportional to the harm done to them. This is supported by Vittola: ânot always lawful to execute all combatantsâ¦we must take account⦠scale of the injury inflicted by the enemy.â This is further supported by Frowe approach, which >
GET ANSWER
Share on Facebook
Tweet
Follow us
This leads to question of what qualifies to be a combatant, and whether it is lawful to kill each other as combatants. Combatants are people who are involved directly or indirectly with the war and it is lawful to kill âto shelter the innocent from harmâ¦punish evildoers (Begby et al (2006b), Page 290).However, as mentioned above civilian cannot be harmed, showing combatants as the only legitimate targets, another condition of jus in bello, as âwe may not use the sword against those who have not harmed us (Begby et al (2006b), Page 314).â In addition, Frowe suggested combatants must be identified as combatants, to avoid the presence of guerrilla warfare which can end up in a higher death count, for example, the Vietnam War. Moreover, he argued they must be part of the army, bear arms and apply to the rules of jus in bello. (Frowe (2011), Page 101-3). This suggests Frowe seeks a fair, just war between two participants avoiding non-combatant deaths, but wouldnât this lead to higher death rate for combatants, as both sides have relatively equal chance to win since both use similar tactics? Nevertheless, arguably Frowe will argue that combatant can lawfully kill each other, showing this is just, which is also supported by Vittola, who states: âit is lawful to draw the sword and use it against malefactors (Begby et al (2006b), Page 309).â In addition, Vittola expresses the extent of military tactics used, but never reaches a conclusion whether itâs lawful or not to proceed these actions, as he constantly found a middle ground, where it can be lawful to do such things but never always (Begby et al (2006b), Page 326-31). This is supported by Frowe, who measures the legitimate tactics according to proportionality and military necessity. It depends on the magnitude of how much damage done to one another, in order to judge the actions after a war. For example, one cannot simply nuke the terrorist groups throughout the middle-east, because it is not only proportional, it will damage the whole population, an unintended consequence. More importantly, the soldiers must have the right intention in what they are going to achieve, sacrificing the costs to their actions. For example: if soldiers want to execute all prisoners of war, they must do it for the right intention and for a just cause, proportional to the harm done to them. This is supported by Vittola: ânot always lawful to execute all combatantsâ¦we must take account⦠scale of the injury inflicted by the enemy.â This is further supported by Frowe approach, which >
Is this question part of your Assignment?
We can help
Our aim is to help you get A+ grades on your Coursework.
We handle assignments in a multiplicity of subject areas including Admission Essays, General Essays, Case Studies, Coursework, Dissertations, Editing, Research Papers, and Research proposals
