Get help from the best in academic writing.

Morgan State University Trends in Strategic Management Discussion

Morgan State University Trends in Strategic Management Discussion.

During this course you have learned that the business environment is in a state of constant change and new circumstances will require new strategies and new approaches to implementing those strategies. Apply what you have learned as you discuss the following questions.Describe the global business environment that is likely to develop in the next ten years.Based on your scenario, how can companies in Saudi Arabia prepare to engage opportunities and avoid threats?What strategies will firms need to adopt to prosper in the environment you foresee? Are there companies today whose strategies, structures, and approaches to management you think will provide leading examples for other companies in the futureDirection:writing standards and APA style guidelines.Be sure to support your statements with logic and argument, citing all sources referencedWrite 4 paragraph essays (Introduction, body and conclusion)sincre Regards,
Morgan State University Trends in Strategic Management Discussion

Question: What do Stanley Milgram and Philip Zimbardo’s experiments on obedience and compliance teach us about nature of authority? The Milgram Obedience experiment, which is also known as the Obedience to Authority Study, is a very well known scientific experiment in social psychology. The concept of the experiment was first discussed in 1963 in the Behavioral Study of Obedience in the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology by Yale university psychologist Stanley Milgram and later in his 1974 publication Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View. The purpose of this experiment is to test the power of human nature to resist the authority of an authority who gives an order against their conscience. This experiment was regarded as a typical one about the obedience experiment, and it had strong repercussions in the social psychology circle. The following is some basic processes of the experiment:Milgram first advertised in the newspaper for participants and paid them $4.50 for each trial. Forty people, ranging in age from 25 to 50, were recruited to take part in the experiment. They were told they would take part in an experiment to study the effects of punishment on students’ learning. In the experiment, two people were paired, one as a student and one as a teacher. Who shall be the student and who shall be the teacher shall be determined by lot. The teacher’s task is to read the paired related words. The students must remember the words. Then the student need to choose the correct answer from four opinions after teacher presents a word. If the choice is wrong, the teacher pushes the button and gives the students an electric shock as punishment. Due to prior arrangement, each group actually had only one participant, and the other was an assistant of the experiment. As a result, the participants were always teachers and the assistants were always students. At the beginning of the experiment, an assistant and a participant were placed in two rooms separated by a wall. Electrodes were attached to the students’ arms so that they could be given an electric shock if they made a bad choice. Moreover, the experimenter strapped the “student” to a chair, explaining to the “teacher” that it was to prevent him from escaping. “Teacher” and “student” cannot see each other directly, they use the telecommunication transmission way to keep in touch. There were buttons on a total of 30, imposing electric penalties are marked on the each button it controlled by the voltage, starting from 15 volts, increased to 450 volts in turn. In fact, no shock was actually implemented, in the next room, the experimenter turned on a tape recorder, which played a pre recorded scream paired with the action of a generator. However, to make the participants convinced, they first received a 45-volt electric shock as an experience. Although the experimenter said the shock was mild, it was too much for the participants to bear. During the experiment, the “student” made many mistakes intentionally. After the “teacher” pointed out his mistakes, he gave electric shock immediately. The “student” groaned repeatedly. As the voltage rises, the “student” shouts and scolds, then begs, kicks and hits the wall, and finally stops yelling, seemingly fainting. At this point, many of the participants expressed a desire to pause the experiment to check on the students. Many participants paused at 135 volts and questioned the purpose of the experiment. Some went on to take the test after receiving assurances that they were not liable. Some laughed nervously as they heard the students scream. When a participant indicated that he wanted to stop the experiment, the experimenter responded in the following order: Please continue. This experiment needs you to continue. Please continue. It is necessary that you go on. You have no choice, you must go on. If, after four times of prompting, the participants still wanted to stop, the experiment stopped. Otherwise, the experiment will continue until the punishment voltage applied by the participants increases to the maximum 450 volts and continues for three times. In this case, 26 participants (65% of the total) obeyed the experimenter’s order and persisted until the end of the experiment, but showed varying degrees of nervousness and anxiety. Fourteen others (35% of the total) rebelled and refused to carry out the order, saying it was cruel and immoral. After the experiment, Milgram told the truth to all the participants in order to eliminate their anxiety. Surprisingly, before the experiment, Milgram had asked his fellow psychologists to predict the outcome of the experiment, and they all agreed that only a few people — 1 in 10 or even 1 percent — would be willing to continue punishing until the maximum volt. As a result, in Milgram’s first experiment, 65 percent of the participants (more than 27 out of 40) reached the maximum 450 volts of punishment — even though they all showed discomfort. Everyone paused and questioned the experiment when the volts reached a certain level, and some even said they wanted to give their money back. None of the participants persisted in stopping before reaching 300 volts. Milgram himself and a number of psychologists around the world have since done similar or different experiments, but with similar results. Dr Thomas Blass of the university of Maryland, Baltimore county, repeated the experiment many times and came up with the result: Regardless of the time and place of the experiment, a certain percentage of participants — 61 percent to 66 percent — were willing to apply a lethal voltage to each experiment. As Philip Zimbardo recalled, due to little awareness about the experiment, participants who didn’t reach the highest volts didn’t insist that the experiment itself should end, didn’t visit the “student” in the next room, and didn’t ask the experimenter for permission to leave. Milgram stated in his article The Perils of Obedience (1974) that the legal and philosophical views of obedience are very significant, but they say little about the actions people take when confronted with practical situations. He designed this experiment at Yale university to test an ordinary citizen’s willingness to inflict much or little pain on another human being just because of the orders given by a scientist assisting the experiment. When the authority that led the experiment ordered the participant to harm another person, even more so than the screams of pain the participant had heard, the authority continued to order the participant most of the time, even though the participant was so morally disturbed. Experiments have shown how willing adults are to submit to almost any measure of power, and we must study and explain this phenomenon as soon as possible. The experiment itself has raised ethical questions about the science of the experiment, which puts extreme emotional pressure on participants. Although the experiment led to valuable discoveries in human psychology, many scientists today would consider such experiments unethical. A later survey found that 84% of the participants at the time said they felt “happy” or “very happy” to have taken part in the experiment, that 15% of the participants chose to be neutral (92% of the participants did the post-survey), and many of them later thanked Milgram. And Milgram kept getting calls from former participants who wanted to help him with his experiments again, or even to join his research team. However, the experience of the experiment did not change every participant for life. Many participants were not told the details based on modern experimental standards, and exit interviews showed that many participants still did not seem to understand what was going on. The main criticism of experiments is not the ethical controversy of their methods, but the significance they represent. A participant from Yale university in 1961 wrote in the magazine of the Jewish Currents: when he wanted to stop in the middle of as a “teacher”, is a suspect to “the whole experiment may be just designed, in order to test an ordinary americans will follow orders against conscience – like Germany during the Nazi period” and this is one of the purpose of the experiment. Milgram, in his book The Perils of Obedience (1974), said, “the question we face is how the conditions we create in the laboratory to bring people to power are related to the Nazi era that we deplored.” An ordinary person, just to get his work done, without any personal malice or enmity, can actually be a tool for a horrific process of destruction. Moreover, when their work makes the destruction process obvious, when the tasks they are asked to perform do not conform to their own moral values, most people are unable to resist the orders of leaders. On the basis of the first experiment, Milgram further discusses what factors are involved in the generation of obedience behavior. He explored the manipulation of experimental conditions from the subjective and objective dimensions of obedience. The objective conditions of Milgram’s operation include many. Firstly, it is the distance between “teacher” and “student”: The distance between teachers and students is divided into four grades, with 40 participants participating in each grade. After analysing the data, the result shows that the closer the “student” is to “teacher”, the more the participant refuses to obey, and the farther the distance is, the easier the participant is to obey. Secondly, it is the relationship between the experimenter and the participant. The relationship was divided into three situations: the experimenter and the participant were face to face together; the experimenter left after explaining the task and kept in touch with the participant by telephone; the experimenter was not present, and all instructions were played by a tape recorder. The results showed that in the first case, the participants obeyed three times more than in the other cases. Thirdly, it is the status of the experimenter. The results showed that the higher the status of the experimenters, the higher the number of the “students” who were tested with the strongest electric shock. In addition, there are many factors affecting obedience, which can be summarised into three aspects: (1) the sender of the order. His authority, whether he supervises the execution of orders, affects obedience. (2) the executor of a command. His moral level, personality characteristics and cultural background will also affect his obedience to orders. (3) situational factors. For example, whether someone supports his refusal behavior, what is the example behavior of those around him, how is the reward structure set, how is the feedback of his refusal or execution of orders, etc., will also affect the individual’s obedience behavior. In conclusion, just like some social psychologists believe that there are two main reasons why individuals obey behaviors. The first is legal power. We usually think that in certain situations, society has given certain social roles more power, and it is our duty to obey them. For example, students should obey teachers, patients should obey doctors, etc. In the laboratory, participants should obey the experimenter, especially the unfamiliar situation strengthens the participants’ readiness to obey the orders of the experimenter. The second is the transfer of responsibility. In general, we have our own sense of responsibility for our own behavior, but if we think that the responsibility for a certain behavior is not our own, especially when a commander takes the initiative to take responsibility, we will think that the leader of the behavior is not our own, but the commander. Therefore, we don’t have to be responsible for this behavior, so there’s a transfer of responsibility, and people don’t think about the consequences of their behavior. References Milgram, S. (1963). ‘Behavioral Study of obedience.’ The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(4), pp. 371-378, [Online]. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0040525 (Accessed: 4 January 2019). Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to Authority; An Experimental View. New edn. London: Pinter
BMS-3033 SPORT NUTRITION URN6041693 Choose a sport of your choice. Critically discuss the nutritional requirements of this sport. Give examples where appropriate to illustrate your answer Swimming is a very competitive sport worldwide with different events like 50 to 1500 meters with time duration of 22s to 16 minutes respectively. Moreover, with four different strokes freestyle, butterfly, breaststroke and backstroke. With typical training programs with the aim to increase lean body mass, and decrease body fat levels over the season Petersen et al. (2006). Sport nutrition plays a very important role especially for elite athletes. The goal of this essay is to discus more specifically the dietary needs for athletes that compete in the 50 and 100 meters distance events. In the 50 and 100 meters events in particular event swimmers relies on the production of large power outputs with highly coordinated and efficient technique in a short range of time. This power output rely on the anaerobic glycolysis and high energy phosphates. Therefore, the main type of muscle fibre developed in athletes in training for 50 and 100 meters event is Type2 a and 2 b of muscle due to the speed of contraction, short length of time, anaerobic capacity using high energy phosphates (ATP and creatine phosphate) and glycogen as fuel, however due to the nature of the high intensity aerobic activity with training sessions from 1.5 up to 4 hours a day there is no question that type 1 fibres muscle is developed. Training Overall training programs for elite swimmers are based on experience of successful coaches rather than scientific evidence of superior performance outcomes. There seems to have difference in opinions among coaches regarding to training sessions. Some opt for training only in the pool and others use less sessions in the pool (more specific training) but add cycling and running sessions to improve aerobic capacity. Generally the pool workouts consist of aerobic warm-up and cool downs, training aims to improve techniques in starts and turns, and sets of repeated bouts of swimming at different intensities depending on the goal wanted, in this case sprint. Moreover, generally 40% of the training intensity less than 80% of VO2max, from 40% to 60% at intensities of 80% vo2max, and less than 5% at >100% Vo2max. Sherman and maglischo (1992) have estimated the energy requirement of swimming training at approximately 16.8 to 22.6 MJ.day-1(4000-5400 kcal.day-1) for males working 4 hours a day and between 14.2 to 16.8 MJ .day-1(2400-4000kcal.day-1) for females working 4hours a day, although these factors will vary within each athlete physical condition and technique performance. Nutritional Chalenges The nutritional issues and challenges for swimmers are to prepare a nutrition strategy to provide fuel to cope with large energy demand, promote recovery for each session, achieve optimal levels of lean body mass and body fat as well as keep the vitamins and minerals within normal levels during the different phases of training in the season (E.g. high volume training, taper or off-season). However, swimmers struggle to cope with large energy needs not only for training but for competition some common issues are presented below: Training High energy requirements due to fluctuations in growth patterns (growth spurt in adolescents), changes in training volume or simply active gain of muscle mass. Irregular eating patterns due to a busy time table. Social and cultural issues. Poor nutritional knowledge. Adjusting energy intake Competition Adjusting energy intake during taper to prevent excessive gain of weight and body fat. Adequate fuel stores for the day of competition. Postrace recovery between different competitions or between heats, semifinals, and finals. Training program vs. competition nutritional requirement Therefore the nutritional requirement in order of priority for pre-training, training and post training (same for competition) are: rehydration, refuelling and recovery. Pre-training Training Post training Consideration in use of supplements.

North Central College Leadership for Improvement Paper

North Central College Leadership for Improvement Paper.

Assignment: Evaluate Organizational Culture and Leadership Style Within a School or Organization
Previous Next 
Instructions
Understanding the culture of a school or organization and the impact various leadership styles may have on that culture is the first step to making positive change within an organization. This week’s assignment has two parts: a short paper and a survey. Please combine both parts into one document for submission.

Write a 2- to 3-page paper that addresses the following points:

Define organizational culture
Explain three or four different types of organizational culture.
What are the various ways leaders can gather data about their organization’s culture?
What attributes should be considered when evaluating organizational culture? Consider things like leadership influence, work group effectiveness, worker accommodations/physical environment, communication, and job satisfaction.

Review several samples of organizational culture surveys. Start by conducting a search for organizational culture surveys in the Educational Leadership LibGuide (a link is in Course Resources > Supplemental Resources). If necessary, you can conduct a general Internet search for examples. Either way, do not copy any of these surveys. Use them only as a guide to producing your own original survey for your school or learning organization.
Using an online tool designed to deliver surveys, develop a 20-question survey that could be used to evaluate organizational culture and leadership impact in your own setting. Include the link to your survey in the paper.

North Central College Leadership for Improvement Paper

Inventory Inaccuracy

python assignment help Inventory Inaccuracy. Paper details Use the following format: 1. Title Provide a clear working title for your research which is made up of key words that are relevant to your research project. The title should inform the reader about the intention of the project and the central issue(s) that it will address. [Not included in word count] 2. Research OverviewInventory Inaccuracy

Career in Finance (2 Parted Assignment) Essay + Resume

Career in Finance (2 Parted Assignment) Essay + Resume.

Please follow info carefully! I will fill out my name later. Thanks. Update & email your resume per the sample attached below.Write a short essay (2-3 paragraphs, 11-12 point font) on how you plan to updated your LinkedIn profile with your updated resume information, and how you will use LinkedIn to network with key LMU alumni and professionals in the companies and industries of your choice. The networking is to learn more on what they do, and conduct informational interviews as well.Select 3 LMU alumni you will connect with via LinkedIn, and explain briefly for each why they profiles appeal to you (company, LMU major, industry, and/or things you have in common)
Career in Finance (2 Parted Assignment) Essay + Resume

The Analysis of Economics Essay

In this paper, we intend to analyze three articles, published in New York Times, The Economist and Newsweek. Each of them focuses on such topic as the development of the US economy and its struggle against the ongoing recession. Our main task is to evaluate the arguments, put forward by the authors and determine whether there they are evidence-based and objective. The first article to be discussed is called Across the US, Long Recovery Looks Like Recession. It was written by Michael Powell and Motoko Rich and was issued in New York Times on the twelfth of October[1]. The authors argue that the US economy will not be able to recover from the recession in the near future. In particular, they say that the aftereffects of the crisis can be overcome in at least nine years. Their prognosis is based on the fact that current rate of job creation is rather slow (Powell