Question1
Do you believe that it’s better to start with a ‘fresh’ employee or an experienced employee when trying to train them to do things your way? Explain.
Classmate answer
I believe it is better to start with a “fresh” employee. This employee will be trained without any previous knowledge or experience making it able for the company to train exactly how they want. An experienced employee will always have previous procedures of doing things that may be against your policy. Having previous knowledge and experience can lead to the employee doing things their way. Their way may or may not be the way you want employees to operate. There are some industries where it’s better to have an experienced employee though. For example, a cashier at Publix may be able to work as a cashier at Walmart. The only difference would be the operating system the cashier uses at Walmart. It would still be the same concept of checking customers out, but on a new system that is very similar
Question 2
Is the forced distribution (forced ranking) method a fair way of doing performance evaluations? Why or why not?
Try to look at from both the perspective of an employee and the perspective of the organization.
Classmate answer
I believe this to be a fair method or performance evaluation for big business and not so fair for smaller ones. From both employer/employee perspectives it is hard to deny the data the numbers on the list that clearly show performance, and for administration and those who meet their goals it is reliable information. For a bigger business this method may set clear goals and even raise incentives with friendly competition or rewards. A smaller business employee may view this method to be not as fair. In a situation with less employees this may prohibit opportunities for employees to learn from one another. It would sour relationships and build a hostile environment. I believe for a smaller business there are better methods when it comes to performance evaluation.
Question 3
There is a saying, “Many hands make light work”.
If this is the case, then why is it so difficult sometimes to work in groups? What are some remedies for these difficulties?
On class projects, would you rather work by yourself or in a group?
Start a New Thread
There are certain activities that can be done more productively as a group. When it comes to group activities I believe the important variable for success is clear goals, evaluation, management and leadership. Even many individuals of different skills and opinion can come together when they have these key factors.
It is up to the supervisor to set these goals and appoint a leader. To periodically evaluate, manage and act upon performance of the group and the individuals. Building an efficient team will sometimes take change and a supervisor may need to replace or remove a certain individual for the sake of the group.
On a class project I would rather work alone, depending if it was on line or not is also a factor but I rather my work stand on its’ own when it comes to my individual grade.
Sample Solution
rchers, an improvement in making fair and clear school approaches and trains may be useful to minor harassing avoidance in schools (Refered to in Gerlinger and Wo, 2016). While some explores exhibit worries on schools with zero resistance and more management and there are expected adverse results because of the unreasonable discipline to review, yet explanation and guideline to harassing in school approaches are significant on the grounds that it signs to understudies and staff the right disposition toward harassing. This answer for harassing counteraction includes changing school strategy for a consistency with state regulation and regard to varieties and discipline and preparing school staff to convey the composed school codes reasonably and productively. The discoveries in Gregory et al. tell that schools have less exploitation, yet without clear composed codes or fair authorization of disciplines, understudies couldn’t perceive the upsides of school teaches and neglect to regard solid associations with different understudies, which is the objective of correcting school disciplines (Refered to in Gerlinger and Wo). The information from Gerlinger and Wo’s review demonstrates that safety efforts emphatically affect forestalling serious actual tormenting, which appears to be legit on the grounds that the metal identifier and storage check could guarantee that nobody could bring risky items into schools so deadly maltreatments scarcely occur in extensive. In any case, this strategy shows no tremendous impact on forestalling verbal and social tormenting. Gerlinger and Wo expect that the blend of safety technique and school discipline will diminish a wide range of tormenting as the understudies in example schools with the two measures have better relations with others and live in a more prosocial climate, as oneself report overview shows higher normal evaluations on the difference of companions, grades and extracurricular. Moreover, the review investigation of Kupchik and Farinia, the schools with corrective strategy has a lower level or harassing report, while understudies in those with merciful strategy have a higher propensity to menace. Both two investigations notice that the fair and clear authorization of disciplines is the essential of forestalling tormenting by underlying scaffolding. Also, since the school discipline is implemented by educators and school staff, the preparation is basic for wellbeing study hall the board (Gorman and Pauken, 2003). Understudies who experienced unjustifiable however severe discipline have a more noteworthy inclination in testing authority after pre-adulthood (Losen, 2011). To raise positive model for rudimentary understudies, educator and staff ought to be cautious when conveyed school discipline which couldn’t be excessively permissive or excessively correctional, and identifying circumstance from casualties, spectators, and the domineering jerk is essential for authorization. Also, initiative preparation is gainful to homeroom the executives too. An educator with better relational abilities and well known picture from understudies can lead understudies to get more engaged with figuring out how to act in prosocial ways, as the youthful populace is convinced simpler by a reliable and definitive figure (Adeogun and Olisaemeka Gift, 2011).>
GET ANSWER
rchers, an improvement in making fair and clear school approaches and trains may be useful to minor harassing avoidance in schools (Refered to in Gerlinger and Wo, 2016). While some explores exhibit worries on schools with zero resistance and more management and there are expected adverse results because of the unreasonable discipline to review, yet explanation and guideline to harassing in school approaches are significant on the grounds that it signs to understudies and staff the right disposition toward harassing. This answer for harassing counteraction includes changing school strategy for a consistency with state regulation and regard to varieties and discipline and preparing school staff to convey the composed school codes reasonably and productively. The discoveries in Gregory et al. tell that schools have less exploitation, yet without clear composed codes or fair authorization of disciplines, understudies couldn’t perceive the upsides of school teaches and neglect to regard solid associations with different understudies, which is the objective of correcting school disciplines (Refered to in Gerlinger and Wo). The information from Gerlinger and Wo’s review demonstrates that safety efforts emphatically affect forestalling serious actual tormenting, which appears to be legit on the grounds that the metal identifier and storage check could guarantee that nobody could bring risky items into schools so deadly maltreatments scarcely occur in extensive. In any case, this strategy shows no tremendous impact on forestalling verbal and social tormenting. Gerlinger and Wo expect that the blend of safety technique and school discipline will diminish a wide range of tormenting as the understudies in example schools with the two measures have better relations with others and live in a more prosocial climate, as oneself report overview shows higher normal evaluations on the difference of companions, grades and extracurricular. Moreover, the review investigation of Kupchik and Farinia, the schools with corrective strategy has a lower level or harassing report, while understudies in those with merciful strategy have a higher propensity to menace. Both two investigations notice that the fair and clear authorization of disciplines is the essential of forestalling tormenting by underlying scaffolding. Also, since the school discipline is implemented by educators and school staff, the preparation is basic for wellbeing study hall the board (Gorman and Pauken, 2003). Understudies who experienced unjustifiable however severe discipline have a more noteworthy inclination in testing authority after pre-adulthood (Losen, 2011). To raise positive model for rudimentary understudies, educator and staff ought to be cautious when conveyed school discipline which couldn’t be excessively permissive or excessively correctional, and identifying circumstance from casualties, spectators, and the domineering jerk is essential for authorization. Also, initiative preparation is gainful to homeroom the executives too. An educator with better relational abilities and well known picture from understudies can lead understudies to get more engaged with figuring out how to act in prosocial ways, as the youthful populace is convinced simpler by a reliable and definitive figure (Adeogun and Olisaemeka Gift, 2011).>
