Stalin wanted to destroy Germany so that they loud never be a threat again, but Truman didn’t wanted to make the same mistake made in the Treaty of Versailles. Moreover, Stalin wanted Germany to pay compensations for all the death that Were left because Of the war, but Truman was convinced they shouldn’t repeat the same mistake. Furthermore, they disagreed over Soviet policy in eastern Europe, Stalin wanted to set up pro-Soviet governments and unite all the people so that no one would dare to attack them, Truman wasn’t happy at all with this. ) It was very unlikely that countries like the USA and the USSR had an alliance since they were totally efferent countries, the only thing that kept them together was the war. Both Stalin and Roosevelt had different beliefs and ideas, they had never trusted each other, and between the countries in general there had never been in a trustworthy relationship, after all the USSR was Communist and the USA was Anti-Communist and totally capitalist and democratic.
Even though this differences weren’t new, there was one change in the Americans beliefs, they didn’t wanted to make the same mistake as in the ass of their policy of isolation, they decided that they will take responsibilities for the world’s inflicts or it might result into a new war, so they decided that every Communist action would have an American reaction. 3) Some people say that the Truman Doctrine was more responsible for increasing the Cold War tension that the Berlin Blockade.I partly agree with this statement. On the one hand, I think that the Truman Doctrine was definitely a great factor which increased the tension in the Cold War. Truman wanted to make sure that the Communism of eastern Europe wouldn’t spread and for this, he decided that he would send money, equipment and device to any country which was threatened by a Communist invasion. His aim was to stop or to limit Communism in there, that is why this policy is known as “containment’.This created a lot of tension, since Truman basically said that any country which feared a Communism take over they would receive Americans help.
This could also be seen as a way of Truman trying to make people think that Communism was evil and that being with him is better but they had to be against Communism. So there was always this tension that if Stalin tried any attempt of spreading Communism there was always the possibility that a war between the USSR and the USA would start.On the other hand, the Berlin Blockade was also a tense conflict during the Cold War. Britain, France and American’s zones of Germany were united (western Germany) while the zone of the USSR was left by his own. Stalin thought that the western Germany was being too controlled by the USA so he thought that if he blockaded his zone from Berlin, cutting off all the supplies and communications to the other side of Berlin, the other would decide to leave their zones to him and stay with the western Germany.This situation as very tense, since the US couldn’t send tanks because the USSR would seen it as an act of war, so Truman figured out that the only way into Berlin was by plane, so they decided to send planes with supplies. This moments were very tense because people was afraid that the soviets would shoot them down.
Finally, nothing happened, they could keep sending their supplies till 1949 when Stalin decided to bring up communications again. All in all, don’t think that any of this two was more responsible than the other for increasing the tension, I think it was the mixture of things which produced higher tension.
Impact Motivation Has on Organisational Effectiveness
Impact Motivation Has on Organisational Effectiveness.
Assessment Description
Length: 1200 words
Description: Employees are an organisation’s best asset and without motivated employees,
organisations cannot achieve their overall strategies. Your essay is to analyse and discuss the
impact motivation has on organisational effectiveness.
Essay Structure:
Your essay should include the following:
• Introduction
• Research & Analysis: A thorough research of the literature critical analysis of the research
applied to the question.
• Conclusion
• References
You must use a minimum of 10 references:
• Text books: At least 4 text books
• 5 different academic journal articles
• 1 other source of your choice: Blog, newspaper, magazine or other Internet source
• No more than 1 reference may be general Internet based sources.
• Wikipedia is not to be used and does not count as an academic reference.
KBS assessment guidelines:
Font: Arial, size 11.5, 1.5 spacing
Referencing: Harvard – refer to ‘Harvard Referencing Concise Guide
Assessment Information
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA Copyright Regulations 1969
This material has been reproduced and communicated to you by or on behalf of Kaplan Business School pursuant to Part VB of the Copyright Act 1968 (‘Act’). The material
in this communication may be subject to copyright under the Act. Any further reproduction or communication of this material by you may be the subject of copyright protection
under the Act. Kaplan Business School is a part of Kaplan Inc., a leading global provider of educational services. Kaplan Business School Pty Ltd ABN 86 098 181 947 is a
registered higher education provider CRICOS Provider Code 02426B.
Assessment Marking Rubric
Assessment rubrics: Language and presentation 20%
Marks Grade Evaluation criteria
85 – 100%
17-20
marks
High
Distinction
• Sentences and paragraphs are well structured and clear so the reader can focus on
what is written.
• Vocabulary is professional, appropriate and extensive
• Grammar, spelling and punctuation are flawless, which allows the reader to focus
on the message.
• Document professionally presented in terms of KBS guidelines and assignment
instructions
• In-text referencing and reference list format correct
• No plagiarism
75 – 84%
15-16.5
marks
Distinction
• Sentences and paragraphs are consistently well structured
• Vocabulary is comprehensive
• Minimal errors in grammar, spelling and punctuation
• Document professionally presented in terms of KBS guidelines and assignment
instructions with minimal exceptions
• In-text referencing and reference list format correct with limited errors
• No plagiarism
65 – 74%
13-14.5
Marks
Credit
• Sentences and paragraphs are mainly well structured
• Vocabulary is sound
• Some errors in grammar, spelling and punctuation
• Document professionally presented in terms of KBS guidelines and assignment
instructions with some exceptions
• In-text referencing and reference list format correct with some errors
• No plagiarism
50 – 64%
10-12.5
marks
Pass
• Sentences and paragraphs are readable but with grammatical errors
• Vocabulary is limited
• Substantial errors in grammar, spelling and punctuation
• Document professionally presented in terms of KBS guidelines and assignment
instructions with a number of exceptions
• In-text referencing and reference list format contains significant errors
• No apparent incidents of plagiarism
0 – 49%
0-9.5
marks
Fail
• Meaning is unclear
• Comments are poorly structured and unclear
• Many grammatical, vocabulary and spelling errors
• The main points and new technical terms are not explained, or are ambiguous
• Document poorly presented and does not comply with KBS guidelines and
assignment instructions
• In-text referencing and reference list format incorrect or omitted
• Evidence of plagiarism
Assessment Information
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA Copyright Regulations 1969
This material has been reproduced and communicated to you by or on behalf of Kaplan Business School pursuant to Part VB of the Copyright Act 1968 (‘Act’). The material
in this communication may be subject to copyright under the Act. Any further reproduction or communication of this material by you may be the subject of copyright protection
under the Act. Kaplan Business School is a part of Kaplan Inc., a leading global provider of educational services. Kaplan Business School Pty Ltd ABN 86 098 181 947 is a
registered higher education provider CRICOS Provider Code 02426B.
Assessment rubrics: Research and analysis 50%
Marks Grade Evaluation criteria
85 – 100%
42.5-50
Marks
High
Distinction
• All aspects of the discussion are relevant
• Analysis demonstrates comprehensive understanding and valid judgement
• Discussion is supported by a substantial range of credible and current sources
• Argument is persuasive and is ordered logically
75 – 84%
37.5-42
Marks
Distinction
• Most aspects of the discussion are relevant
• Analysis demonstrates an in-depth understanding and sound judgement
• Discussion is supported by a wide range of credible and current sources
• Argument shows some persuasion and is ordered logically
65 – 74%
32.5-37
Marks
Credit
• Some aspects of the discussion are relevant
• Analysis demonstrates a sound understanding and judgement
• Discussion is supported by a range of credible and current sources
• Argument is ordered logically in most sections
50 – 64%
25-32
Marks
Pass
• Aspects of the discussion are sometimes relevant
• Analysis demonstrates some understanding and judgement
• Discussion is supported by a some sources but not always credible and current
• Argument could be more persuasive and logically ordered
0 – 49%
0-24.5
Marks
Fail
• Many of the aspects of the discussion are not relevant
• Analysis does not demonstrate an understanding and provide judgement
• Discussion is not supported by credible and current sources (does not use
minimum or identified resources)
• Argument is not persuasive and not ordered logically
Assessment rubrics: Literature Review structure 30%
Marks Grade Evaluation criteria
85 – 100%
25.5-30
Marks
High
Distinction
• Introduction concisely introduces the topic and outlines literature review structure
with an emphasis on the importance of the topic
• Discussion is well structured into a coherent, logical argument
• Conclusion accurately and concisely summarises the literature review
• Literature review structure is effective and appropriate with all sections clearly
linked
75 – 84%
22.5-25
Marks
Distinction
• Introduction clearly introduces the topic and outlines literature review structure
• Discussion is well structured and has a logical argument
• Conclusion clearly summarises the literature review
• Literature review structure is effective and appropriate with most sections clearly
linked
65 – 74%
19.5-22
Marks
Credit
• Introduction introduces the topic and outlines literature review structure
• Discussion is well structured
• Conclusion summarises the literature review
• Literature review structure is effective and appropriate with some sections linked
50 – 64%
15-19
Marks
Pass
• Introduction introduces topic with some omissions
• Discussion is well structured with some exceptions
• Conclusion summarises literature review but needs more detail/content
• Literature review structure is appropriate
0 – 49%
0-13.5
Marks
Fail
• Introduction does not clearly introduce topic and literature review structure
• Discussion is not well structured
• Conclusion does not summarise literature review content
• Literature review is not clearly or appropriately structured
Essay Help “>Essay Help
https://onlinecustomessaywriting.com/