You are the Commander of the Patrol Division of a medium-sized metropolitan city. You have 33 patrols out on the 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. shift. It is by far the busiest shift for drunk driving, burglaries, domestic calls, and ATM robberies. The esprit de corps is very high. Lately, you have notice that one of the busiest sector units is dropping off in productivity. You ask around and find out that the partners in that car are a veteran officer, a married man, and a single young female rookie.The rumor among the rest of the unit is that they are more than just professional partners. Last week, the chief called you into his office and asked about the drop in activity for the club sector of the city, where the patrol unit of concern is working. He got you to admit that there may be an unconfirmed problem. The chief told you that he wanted to know the complete situation and that you were to formulate a plan for dealing with the male/female patrol situation and then to come up with ideas to keep this pattern from emerging again in the future. The department currently has no policies about off-duty relationships of partners.In a report to the chief of police, you will cite the findings of your investigation of the patrol partners concerned. You will provide at least 2 remedies for the situation so that it is discontinued. You will consider the lack of a fraternization policy in the department and suggest the minimum requirements of items that should be in a new policy for the department. You will include and indicate the types of discipline that should be applied to persons violating the new policy in the future.Assignment GuidelinesAddress the following in 3–5 pages: How can the behavior on the part of the opposite-gender police partners affect the culture of the patrol unit? Explain. What dangers could arise in an intimate relationship between partners as it pertains to the daily operations of patrol? Explain. How can these dangers act as triggers of stress? Be specific. Articulate at least 3 appropriate policy measures that should be in effect to help alleviate this type of situation. Fully justify your policy measures with regard to the survival of a traumatic event. What possible potential stressors could become present if the affair of the two officers reached the public? Explain. Remember to use research to fully support your arguments. Be sure to reference all sources using APA style.
CRJS 390 AIU Stress and Crisis Management Report
ENG 191 The Importance of The Criminal Justice System Essay
ENG 191 The Importance of The Criminal Justice System Essay.
Hello, So you have to do the following things… 1. I have already written an essay but I get feedback from my professor that I have to make some corrections. So, I will send you my essay draft and my final essay, and my professor’s feedback. And based on that you just have to make some corrections. I have attached my professor’s feedback and my paper too. so you have to work on my paper. 2. And next question is that You have to write an essay topic “Criminal justice reform”. But before you start writing a final essay you have to make an essay draft and Causes and consequences. These need to be indifferent pages. Because I have to submit the Causes and consequences and essay draft separately and final essay separately so. And I have attached the example also that my professor sends me. So based on that you have to write it…I WAS NOT BEING ABLE TO UPLOAD OTHER FILES. BUT I WILL UPLOAD THAT TO SO THAT IT WILL MAKE YOU EASIER TO UNDERSTAND.
ENG 191 The Importance of The Criminal Justice System Essay
Tasks and Materials – CAGE Assessment
term paper help Tasks and Materials – CAGE Assessment. I’m studying and need help with a Management question to help me learn.
The purpose of this assignment is to conduct a cultural, administrative, geographical and economic analysis comparing the USA to two other countries.
Select any two countries of your choice except China or India as are discussed in class as an example. Perform a CAGE analysis of the USA and the two countries.
Write an essay discussing your analysis and including a recommendation as to which country you would recommend to a U.S. based company wanting to expand in the future.
Each student will make a 5-minute Oral presentation that includes your Executive Recommendation explaining which country you would recommend to a U.S.-based company wanting to expand internationally, considering your findings in your written essay.
Must use Fortune 500 to choose company.
Your written essay must include
Four tables, one for each of the four dimensions of the CAGE analysis (Cultural, Administrative, Geographic and Economic).
Two or three paragraphs about cultural distance/commonality between USA and each country.
Two or three paragraphs about administrative distances/commonality between USA and each country.
Two or three paragraphs about geographic distance/commonality between USA and each country.
Two or three paragraphs about economic distance/commonality between USA and each country.
Executive Recommendation 2-3 paragraphs explaining which country you would recommend to a U.S.-based company wanting to expand internationally, considering your findings above.
APA style formatting (Links to an external site.), between 1500-2000 words. Make sure you use proper headings/subheadings to differentiate the four dimensions.
Tasks and Materials – CAGE Assessment
Module 2 balance scorecard
Module 2 balance scorecard.
The Balanced Scorecard is commonly used to help organizations track their performance and identify areas of weakness. It helps organizations to align their performance measures with their goals and strategic plans. The Balanced scorecard allows companies to move away from relying solely on financial measures, which effectively improves managerial decision making.The Balanced Scorecard framework consists of four perspectives:Financial: measures that address profitability growth and revenue, cost reduction, product mix, asset utilization, productivity, and investment strategies.Customer: measures that address customer satisfaction and requirements including customer satisfaction ratings, customer retention, responsiveness and reliability, new customer acquisition, customer profitability, and customer-valued attributes.Internal Business Process: focuses on the most important internal business processes of the company including new product development, quality, flexibility, time-based measures, and innovative elements of processes.Learning and Growth: focuses on the organization’s systems, people, and external environment; this includes enhancing information technology, training and retaining employees, employee safety, and environmental and health sustainability issues.This week for your design strategy project, you will be defining your organization’s strategy and completing a Balanced Scorecard.In a minimum of 3 pages, you will need to do the following:Describe how your organization should appear to your stakeholders in order to succeed financially.Describe how your organization should appear to customers in order to achieve your vision.Describe what business processes that your organization must excel at in order to satisfy both your shareholders and customers.Describe how your organization will sustain your ability to change and improve.How does ethics and ethical issues impact stakeholders and customers? What measures will you employ as CEO to ensure that your organization maintains good ethical practices?Now that you’ve outlined your strategy, click on the following link and use the Excel template to translate your strategy to a balanced scorecardMake sure to write your paper utilizing proper APA formatting guidelines, and to include an APA formatted title page.*Note: You will need to submit both your essay and Balanced Scorecard Excel spreadsheet to the drop box as separate attachments.
Module 2 balance scorecard
Application of Entropy to International Relations
In the wake of World War I, International Relations emerged as an academic area focused on studying and understanding the interconnectedness of politics, economics, and power to help navigate an increasingly globalized system. While the field has naturally developed with evolving political landscapes and societal norms, academics such as Randall Schweller find the global landscape becoming more convoluted and complex with each change of world order. The constant increase in randomness and unpredictability in International Relations replicates a process of increasing chaos observed in Entropy. This essay will seek to apply Entropy to International Relations to explain the progression of disorder in global politics from a scientific perspective. It will do so by analyzing the stability that each world power order has achieved and how it deteriorates over time. Before continuing, a few key terms must be defined. In his book “Knowledge Power”, Alan Wilson used the word ‘superconcept’ to describe a concept that derives from one discipline but can ‘cut across’ others to have ‘fruitful applications’ (Wilson 2010, p. 4). Entropy is one such superconcept that arises in physics and engineering and can be applied in an interdisciplinary way to music, biology, (Grombrich 2018) and, as will be demonstrated in this essay, International Relations. The original definition of Entropy is a measurement of the available energy in a thermodynamic system. However, it is often interpreted as the degree of disorder where all closed systems tend towards chaos (Drake 2018). While Entropy has a scientific definition in physics and engineering, in International Relations it can be applied as the ‘social uncertainty about what will happen for event sets in the social system’, which can also be reflected in the system’s stability (Stephan 1975, p. 37). In order to determine whether Entropy can be applied to International Relations, this paper will examine how world order, which is ‘the distribution of power and authority among the political actors on the global stage’ (Falk 1999), transformed over time. Subsequently, it will analyze the coinciding change in stability and uncertainty in the social system. In the discussion of world orders, power distribution is primarily discussed as one of three types: unipolarity where one state actor possesses the majority of power in the system, bipolarity for two, and multipolarity for four or more centers of power where actors are entities able to influence the field of International Relations (Jiang 2013). Even though International Relations emerged after World War I, the scope of this essay is limited to time periods following World War II. It was around the start of the Cold War (1945) that countries possessed the capacity to become superpowers, with Russia and the United States being the first states to achieve “enormous capabilities under their control, a reach that was truly global, and allies who were entirely dependent on their protection” (Baylis, et al. 2017, p. 547). With the birth of superpowers came the first polar world order – bipolarity. As the analysis of global systems requires the existence of polarity and superpowers, it is restricted to after World War II. Additionally, the Cold War ushered in a new method of restoring order. Previously, militant conflicts were used to determine dominance over other states and establish hierarchies. However, after 1945, physical warfare became less frequent mainly due to their increasingly dangerous nature (Gaddis 1992). The invention of nuclear weapons dissuaded countries from physically engaging with one another as there were far more dire consequences and repercussions for both sides. Thus, post-World War II nations are unable to exploit warfare as a methodology to establish dominance amongst themselves. This makes those state actors incomparable with their predecessors as the nuclear technology and weaponry make them ‘significantly different from those of past multipolar systems’ (Schweller 2010, p. 158). With these developments in mind, the argument of Entropy being applied to International Relations is limited to the era after World War II. Despite high tensions between the United States and Russia throughout the Cold War (1947-1991), the bipolar world order created from the clash of the two superpowers was quite stable and easily predictable (Cox 1990, p. 25). Leading scholar Kenneth Waltz argued that by reducing the number of international actors to only two, the Cold War had formed its own organized structure. Cold War historian John Lewis Gaddis largely agreed and added that the world became separated into two blocs that reduced the sporadic nature of Post-War Europe (Baylis, et al. 2017, p. 69). There was a fear that the European countries would continue to compete and consequently, war conflicts would appear anew at the end of World War II. Bipolarity served as an anchor that reduced rival alliances amongst inferior powers, as smaller countries were forced to choose between either the United States or Russia (rather than other smaller states like themselves) (Baylis, et al. 2017, p. 69). International Relations academic John Mearsheimer even postulated that after the Cold War and the fall of the bipolar order, the ‘long peace’ and stability the world had been enjoying would fall apart due to the rebirth of old aggressions and numerous alliances (Mearsheimer 1990, p. 36). Bipolarity is a demonstration of low Entropy. The world order established a significant amount of stability and predictability for academics and actors alike. Yet the low Entropy state would not last for long, as after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the United States ascended as the singular world superpower and bipolar gave way to unipolar. Unipolarity increased the overall instability and randomness in the world system. While one might expect having only a single actor to analyze would make everything more predictable, ‘its apparent lack of general properties’ frustrated academics and ‘it does not behave in predictable ways like […] bipolar systems’ (Schweller 2010, p. 145). Bipolarity separates the world into two blocs which regulate themselves through a balancing act with strong constraints where actors are either on one superpowers’ side or the other. Thus, allies are limited, and the two competing superpowers are restrained as they must be weary how their actions affect their competitors’ actions. In contrast, Unipolarity has weak structural constraints. As there are no rivals or competing ideologies, the singular power can choose their allies and how close they are at will. On the opposite side, the potential allies have ‘less need for a polar-power patron’ than they would in a bipolar system (Schweller 2010, p. 146). Not only are allies ambiguous, the ‘boundless freedom’ in unipolarity ‘breeds randomness’. The structure ‘neither constrains the choices of the unipole nor solely determines the degree of constraints on anyone else’ as there is no other superpower to be mindful of (Schweller 2010, p. 150). The shift from bipolarity to unipolarity indicates an increased level of Entropy as there is more social uncertainty and instability in the power distribution. Yet perhaps the most unstable part of unipolarity is that it is difficult to predict when it will end. Having a single actor in power is not durable whatsoever. Waltz predicts that ‘other great powers’ will soon ‘challenge the United States and reestablish the systemic balance of power’ (Waltz 1993). In International Relations, the Balance of Power Theory postulates that if one state is stronger than others, then it will take advantage of its strength and exploit weaker nations. This provides an incentive for the threatened to create alliances and increase their competitive abilities. In other words, other nations will seek to accrue power due to the outrageous power discrepancy between themselves and the United States. Such overreach by the United States has already been witnessed in their invasion of the Middle East and interference in the governmental systems in foreign countries. Already academics such as Monetiro postulate the ending of unipolarity, but no one actually knows when the United States’ reign will collapse in totality (Monteiro 2011, p. 3). The difficulty to predict the collapse, adding a large level of social uncertainty and indicating increasing Entropy. If we truly do end up transitioning from unipolarity to multipolarity, there will still be an instability. Richard Haass claimed that ‘Entropy dictates that systems consisting of a large number of actors tend toward greater randomness and disorder in the absence of external intervention’ where the actors denote superpowers (Haass 2008). It is now more than ever that International Relations is witnessing the competition between the United States and other state actors. Presently, China has the second largest economy with other nations such as Japan and Russia close behind, and all three are already considered superpowers (Mead 2017). With more countries on the rise in economic, political, and influential strength, there is evidence of a shift in power from the United States to a larger group of states. The emerging world order of the twenty-first century is one of multipolarity where the power in the international system is distributed amongst several countries (Wade 2011). Unlike bipolarity, once there are more than two superpowers vying for world dominance, there is a tendency towards large levels of uncertainty, randomness, and Entropy (Haass 2008). One discrepancy in the application of Entropy to International Relations is the constant addition of new state and non-state actors to the system. Throughout time, countries have been recognized (e.g. Hungary in 1989 and Kosovo in 2008), and in the days of the digital revolution, more non-state actors (e.g. Terrorists, celebrities, and the media) are also joining the global stage (Stratton 2008, p. 3). With more actors in International Relations, there is a larger power distribution among themselves. For example, each member of the UN security council gets one vote. As more states become recognized by the UN, a vote loses value and you need more of them to achieve a majority. Entropy can solely exist in a closed system, as in, one where there is no exchange of energy or material with an external environment (Prigogine 1950). The addition of new actors that share power implies that there is an increase of material, insinuating that Entropy cannot be applied to International Relations because it does not possess a closed system. Even though the addition of actors implies that there is an increase of material in the International Relations system, they are not significant enough to affect the polarity and power dynamics of superpowers. There is an oligarchic rule over the International system ‘rooted in the notion that international politics are shaped by vast inequalities among states; that only a few powerful actors matter’ (Schweller 2010, p. 149). It is near impossible to become part of the polar membership as ‘there is a finite amount of ‘useful’ or ‘free’ energy in the system’ (Schweller 2010, p. 149) that has mostly been snatched up by preexisting states. Additionally, an actor must be considered a superpower to affect polarity. To become a superpower requires enormous economic capabilities, a global reach, and political influence such that allies are ‘entirely reliant on their protection’ (Baylis, et al. 2017, p. 69). Only a few states have the capability to overcome those high barriers of entry, thus making the addition of non-state and state actors obsolete. They do not indicate an increase of material as they are not part of the polarity International Relations system. Therefore, Entropy can again be applicable to International Relations. To conclude, International Relations is a closed system where you can apply Entropy to describe the increasing chaos and randomness in the system. The world order since the Cold War has shifted from bipolar, to unipolar, and now to multipolar. With each change in polarity, there has been an increase in randomness and instability that matches the definition of Entropy when applied to International Relations. While some might consider International Relations as an open system due to the creation of new actors, only a select few can participate in polar system, with none of the newcomers having the capability of infiltrating that group. Therefore, International Relations remains a closed system where the superconcept Entropy is applicable and will presumably continue to increase as time progresses. Bibliography Baylis, J., Smith, S.