truman leadership thinking
This is a leadership report – this needs to critique your leadership style and create a development plan
Using topics 7, 8 and 9 and contemporary leadership research, critique your leadership style and create a development plan.
The report should:
Demonstrate an understanding of contemporary leadership debate.
Demonstrate critical evaluative reflection upon your current leadership strengths and development areas.
Provide a solid actionable and specific plan to better utilise your strengths and further develop or ameliorate your development areas.
Utilise theory and frameworks to support all your assertions and analysis.
Provide details of current leadership style and strengths weaknesses as well as current working environment in which to contextualise the leadership development plan
Advise of personality type (Myers Briggs) and other reference points for use within leadership reflections and critique.
Additional instructions –
The leadership is relevant to the public sector of Australia, specifically Western Australia. The context is law enforcement/ police and management of people in a period of uncertainty, budget cuts, demand for more service focussing on being leaner, focussing on proving service to the public.
As an agency we have strategic priorities –
Leaner – delivering value for money by optimising resources, balancing cost versus benefit, and bring more effective, efficient and productive.
Reducing demand – this is about problem solving, collaboration, proactive policing, diversion and prevention and about developing innovative ways to manage interactions and provide services.
Locally focussed – an emphasis on being better connected to local communities, more engaged with them and more accessible to them, with a priority on doing things that make a positive difference in their everyday lives.
Greater control – improving out ability to direct our effort where it is more needed – having the right people, in the right place, at the right time, doing the right thing.
As a leader you have to encourage other to support the corporate
Goals and work towards achieving these. For you it’s all about the customer, the public who we service as public sector employees. you would probably best fit into the category of contingency leadership where you have to respond to dynamic situations and make snap decisions this was very relevant in operational policing environment dealing with high risk fast paced situations sometimes with life or death consequences resting on your decision and leadership. Over time however you have probably favoured a more transformation stewardship leadership which is more aligned to a business support area/corporate services environment (not front line operational policing) such as strategy and performance ( looking at ways to improve performance and developing strategies to assist) or strategic HR, developing programs to support the workforce such as performance management tools. you don’t believe an iron fisted approach gets the best results from people.
The myer Briggs personality type indicator (MBTI) is ENTJ although this differs to one you did severalYears ago and you believe you are more ISFP in person but situationally you adapt to the context/environment.
The big 5 personality traits – the five factor model. The big 5 model of personality commenced with research of FISKE (1949) which allows us to reliably categorise most of the known traits into one of five dimensions. (judge, heller & mount)
Sugency: also known as self confidence, the need for power and extraversion
Agreeability: empathy and need for affiliation)
Adjustment: emotional stability and self control
Conscientiousness: also known as dependability or prudence
Openness to experience: also known as curiosity, intellect and learning approach.
you completed a personality profile exercise for the above traits – source Lusser, R and Achua, C, leadership: application, skill Development, 2nd edition, pp. 28-29, South Wester, a part of Cengage learning/Nelson, Inc. reproduced by permission <www.cengage.com/permission>
Openness to experience 30
They are all pretty close, however you have a high degree of empathy and emotional intelligence so you are Not sure the lower score for agreeableness is accurate. It would certainly be the last area you would feel a need to develop.
you know that you are a very passionate person and that passion can be perceived as emotion. you feel morally obligated to the role you perform and the work you do which should contribute towards providing a safer community for the public – therefor you are passionate about what you do and expect others to display the same core values in regards to personal drive and commitment, customer focus, integrity and taking responsibility.
you embrace change and like to empower other to achieve the best they can. you recognise all abilities and create An environment where everyone has a say and can contribute. you encourage open and honest feedback and you like people to have the courage to stand up and question decisions, and come up with solutions.
you like things done the right way first as this avoids inefficiency and customer dissatisfaction.
you strive to be an authentic leader and want the respect as a leader who is reliable, honest, knowlegable, committed, innovative, and gracious.you don’t want to forget where you have come from or the people who work hard as a team to make things work.
you want shape strategic thinking, achieve results, build productive relationships, communicate with influence, exemplify personal drive and integrity, as per the austrlian public sector commission leadership capability profiles level 7. – class 4.
Minimum 20 sources – credible journal articles from reliable and credible leadership sources.
HARVARD referencing style
English UK NOT American
Arial 12 font double spacing
Use leadership theory and frameworks
Order Messages Revision Instructions (0) « Back to list
Order code: 72934550
You will submit a 5 – 6-page paper summarizing one week of ethical decision-making observations. Starting on Monday of Module/Week 2, begin making notes of 1) specific situations at your job in which decision-making was or was not based on ethical principles, 2) your participation in or response to the situation, 3) whether you think the situation was handled correctly, and 4) suggestions for how the situation could be better addressed in the future. Keep track of the days, times, and circumstances surrounding the situations in question. Continue to record this information until Friday of Module/Week 2.
At the end of the workweek, use your journal notes to write the ethical analysis paper. Include anecdotal information and critical analyses of the situations in your paper. In order to respect the privacy of others, refrain from including names or other identifying information in your paper. Format the paper in correct APA style and submit it by the end of Module/Week 2. Sunday 3/31/2012
Review the Ethical Analysis Paper Grading Rubric in order to improve the quality of your paper.
PLACE YOUR ORDER WITH SIMILAR OR RELATED INSTRUCTIONS NOW
You are now entering the “application” section of the course. You have studied eight different ethical theories, five different principles of biomedical ethics, and several tools of logical analysis. For the remainder of the course, you will be applying those ideas and tools to dilemmas raised by various topics in biomedical ethics. Please listen to the lecture that is linked to this session because it gives a framework for what you will be asked to do for the remainder of the course, and it also tells you what you will be responsible for by the final exam. I have started each of the remaining sessions of the course with a “thinking question”. You will see that each question involves whether or not we have certain “rights”. I think that it is a useful way to organize the topics, and it might give you a starting point as you read each of the articles. Each section also includes a “Social Context” section, which is a couple of pages that give you updates, statistics or case studies that involve the issues discussed in the articles. Please read the thinking question and the social context section before you read the articles, and that will give you some good background for thinking about each issue. If you have any questions, feel free to get in touch with me, and I hope you enjoy using the tools you’ve acquired to think about some of these issues.
Thinking Question: Is there a “right to life”? If so, what is it, who has it, and when do they get or lose it?
READING ASSIGNMENT, Social Context: “A Statistical Profile of Abortion in the US”, pages 435-439.
READING ASSIGNMENT, Articles: Noonan, Thomson & Warren. Pages 469-490.
Read Decision Scenario 7 on pages 501-502. Then answer questions 1 & 2 that follow the scenario. For each answer, please give me a page number reference each time you use an idea or an exact quotation from the author you are discussing. For example, in question 1 you need to contrast Noonan and Warren’s responses to the dilemma in the scenario. When you say what you think Noonan’s response would be, that should include some support with page reference(s) from his article. Likewise, when you say what Warren’s view would be, it should include ideas or quotations from her article plus page references which show why you believe that she would think that way. Please label and answer each of the two questions separately: 1______________________, 2_______________________. Each author is worth 5 points for a total of 15 points.
Helen and John Kent waited nervously in the small consulting room while Laurie Stent, their genetic counselor, went to tell Dr. Charles Blatz that they had arrived to talk to him.
“I regret that I have some bad news for you”, Dr. Blatz told them. “The karyotyping that we do after amniocentesis shows a chromosomal abnormality.” He looked at them, and Helen felt that she could hardly breathe. “What is it?” she asked.
“It’s a condition known as trisomy 21, and it produces a birth defect we call Down Syndrome. You may have heard of it under the old name of mongolism.”
“Oh, God,” John said. “ How bad is it?” “Such children are always mentally retarded,”
Dr. BLatz said. “Some are severely retarded and others just twenty or so points below average. They have some minor physical deformities, and they sometimes have heart damage. They typically don’t live beyond their thirties, but by and large they seem happy and have good dispotions.”
Helen and John looked at each other with great sadness. “What do you think you should do?” Helen asked. “Should I have an abortion, and then we could try again?”
“I don’t know, John said. “ I really don’t know. You’ve had a hard time being pregnant these last five months, and you’d have to go through that again. Besides, there’s no guarantee this wouldn’t happen again.” “But this won’t be the normal baby we wanted,” Helen said. “ Maybe in the long run we’ll be even unhappier than we are now.”
1. Explain the nature of the conflict between the positions taken by Noonan and Warren that arises in this case.
2. If one accepts Thomson’s views, what factors are relevant to deciding whether an abortion is justifiable in this instance?
Clues for assignment…
I think almost all of you understood both Noonan and Warren’s views about abortion, and you did a nice job contrasting their ideas about whether or not the fetus is a person and the implications of this for the permissibility or impermissibility of abortion. Most people who lost points on this first question were the couple of you who didn’t give any page references or didn’t mention the Kents or the scenario (meaning that you were correct about Noonan and Warren’s views but didn’t take that next step of applying their views to the case in order to say whether or not they would think an abortion was permissible for the Kents). Think of this as “closing the loop” of the argument – you need to state the author’s view, mention the circumstances of the case, and then say how that author’s view applies to the case – what would that author say was right or wrong in that case? A couple of you spoke about Thomson’s view saying it was Warren’s, and another couple didn’t summarize Warren’s view at all (instead you quoted something from part one of her article, where she summarizes and then rejects Noonan & Thomson’s positions – that’s why I have you read these three together, but you have to be careful about what the author is saying is his/her own view and what the author is summarizing as someone else’s view but which later gets rejected). Arguments are sort of like a game of chess or checkers in that sense – you have to watch each move carefully to be sure you understand the author’s own position and what are other views that he/she states but the argues against). However, most of you did very well with these first two authors.
For question 2 about Thomson – most of you did very well here too, and this was the most difficult article of the three. The two places where some of you lost points are as follows: if you said that Thomson thinks “life begins at conception”, that is actually NOT her view (as she demonstrates with the acorn analogy at the beginning of her article and which she states clearly at the end). However, she says that she will assume, for the sake of argument, that life begins at conception and still show that she thinks there are many cases where abortion is permissible. The other place that you might have lost points is if you said that Thomson only allows abortion in the case of rape or a threat to the woman’s life. She DOES believe that those are situations where abortion should be permissible, but her position is a bit more liberal and also includes exceptions for failed birth control or cases where having the child would require “large sacrifices”. What she does not approve of is having an abortion for “trivial” reasons. Of course, in using her argument, you have to define “trivial” or “large” (which many of you did nicely), and different people will define them differently, and that’s fine.
However, some of you clearly again were reading something other than what I assigned – you spoke about Ruth & Carl or Dr. Savano or utilitarianism or addressed questions about whether or not abortion should be legal. I don’t know if you were using different versions of the text (which would have different page numbers – that’s why you need the 9th edition, as I have said before). So, PLEASE, for your own sake, be careful to read and respond to the the specific scenarios in the instructions, because I can’t give you points for essays about something I didn’t assign.
PLACE YOUR ORDER WITH SIMILAR OR RELATED INSTRUCTIONS NOW.
This is my supplementary exam so I have to pass this time.
I will upload the following:
1. Case study question
2. Criteria sheet(please focus in column 7 )
3. Also I will upload negotiation lecture because the case study about negotiation.
4. The case study genre ( useful for case study structure so please have a look at it )
5. References file
1. 600 words solution for this case study.
2. 6 quotations from 6 references ( and must be from the references file that I uploaded , the 6 quotation and references should be written in separate page as in the model that I uploaded ).
Use these 6 quotation in the text, 2 of them as a direct quotation and paraphrase the other 4(please highlight them in the text )
If you have any question ask me and even if you want to take 24 hours that is fine .I need high quality work.
PLACE AN ORDER WITH SIMILAR OR RELATED INSTRUCTIONS NOW.
As one of the �applied� ethics, Biomedical Ethics is neither simply a theory to be learned in philosophy books nor a set of codes to be learned in a technical training course � it is a discipline that moves between theory and practice. Thus, one of the key methodologies in Biomedical Ethics is the method of �Case Studies,� which presents an analysis of the ethical questions arising from real-world situations as they are faced by healthcare professionals, patients, and families. This approach requires a careful foundation in ethical theories and concepts, and a careful
exploration of the ethically relevant facts of the case at hand. Indeed, theories often arise from the attempt to systematize our intuitions of what is right and wrong in particular cases, and reciprocally new cases require that we re-evaluate our theories! Your first written assignment will thus be an analysis of a case.
In this assignment, you are required to include 4 sections corresponding to the following list:
A) Introduction: Identify the main topic of concern using the terminology, concepts, and arguments learned from our course videos, readings, podcasts, and website. Also, clearly identify the �morally relevant
facts� of the case, and any key concepts or facts that are important.
B) Argument(s) for side #1: Identify the strongest argument(s) you can think of for ONE side of the debate.
Be sure to include the reasons supporting the argument(s).
C) Argument(s) for side #2: Identify the strongest argument(s) you can think of for the OTHER side of the
debate, or the best objections to side #1. Again, give reasons and go beyond simply repeating the story.
D) Recommendation/Conclusion: In your opinion and based on your reasoning and arguments, what
ought to happen in this particular case, and what general policy should be supported? Be �objective� and find the best way between the two sides, or give a reason to choose one over the other. This is your �considered� or �critical� opinion, not just your unreflective beliefs.
Choice of Topics:
� Please choose ONE of the following case studies. Make sure to discuss the issues clearly and critically. Cite all sources as you proceed (by a number referring to an endnote or footnote) and do not ignore points made in the textbook, course notes and video presentations, etc. related to this course.
� REMEMBER: This is a biomedical ethics course. Be sure to include the relevant ethical content for your paper from an ethical perspective, which goes beyond legal considerations, is more �objective� than �subjective,� and is critically aware of the bias or assumptions in unreflective discussions of these topics.
1) Freedom of Medical Information? McInerney v. Macdonald
In the case from the early 1990s between Margaret McDonald of New Brunswick and her physician Dr. Elizabeth McInerney, the patient requested a copy of her medical file. Dr. McInerney promptly provided Mrs. MacDonald with all of the contents related to her own reports and practice, but withheld any documents that had been issued or inserted by other health care professionals. Her thought was that each physician had an ownership over the documents, and would each have to be contacted for consent for their release. This burden is one she placed on the patient to find and request this release. Mrs. MacDonald filed a lawsuit for the immediate release of all the documents, and was granted the request because the initial judge believed the contents to be subject to the patient�s property interests. On appeal, it was asserted by the courts that the physician-patient relationship is a contractual one, and the Supreme Court upheld this reasoning. However, they suggested that if a physician deems it �not in the patient�s best interest� to disclose the information, then they may invoke a necessity to deny access. Explore the reasoning in this case about the doctor-patient relationship and the rights of the patient, as well as in relation to our course materials related to �truth-telling.�
2) The Case of Scott Starson
In 1999, Scott Starson was involuntarily committed to a psychiatric hospital in Ontario after he had been found �not criminally responsible� for two counts of uttering death threats. Starson had a history of psychiatric disorders, and had recently been diagnosed with bipolar disorder. Starson recognized his disorder and voluntarily underwent psychotherapy, but he refused any medication for the condition. Starson, a gifted theoretical physicist, believed the medications would destroy his ability to pursue his research, which in his opinion was the only thing
that gave his life meaning. Physicians and officials believed Mr. Starson was unable to genuinely appreciate the value of treatment, so they petitioned to have his treatment decisions transferred to a surrogate. The petition was granted, but Mr. Starson appealed in a case that made its way up to the Supreme Court of Canada, which overturned the decision and asserted that Mr. Starson was not incompetent to make medical decisions. A patient, they argued, is not required to make a decision that is in their �best interests� as determined by the physician, and therefore they are allowed to disagree with a treatment recommendation. Mentally ill patients, then, must also be allowed to make medical decisions that disagree with doctors unless a clear inability has been demonstrated. Explore this case and the consequences it represents for the concept of informed consent and the notion of competence in Canada. Should
doctors be allowed to impose treatments in such cases?
PLACE AN ORDER WITH SIMILAR OR RELATED INSTRUCTIONS NOW.
"Social Media and Genetics"Please respond to the following:
From the e-Activity, discuss how current or potential employers might be able to use the information you found and possible steps that could be taken to help ensure your privacy. Provide specific examples to support your response.
Analyze the issues involved in the privacy of genetic information and anticipate what additional issues will most likely arise in the next 10 to 20 years, as well as how those issues should be addressed
PLACE AN ORDER WITH SIMILAR OR RELATED INSTRUCTIONS NOW.
Below are the directions I was given for the essay:
A. Explain the originality and uniqueness of Kants ethical theory by:
1. Explaining Kants general criticism of previous ethical theories.
2. Defining how Kant distinguishes between autonomy and heteronomy.
3. Explaining Kants formulation of the `categorical imperative.`
4. Explaining how adherence to the categorical imperative provides for autonomous ethical choice.
B. Reflect on Kants ethical theory by:
1. Supporting a position on how Kants theory on ethical decision making is correct or incorrect with personal thought.
2. Supporting your position with evidence from the text.
Select one of the following options, and compose an
essay of 6–8 pages in length.
1. Select an issue from current events relevant to ethical inquiry.
(a) Analyze the issue for 4–5 pages from either a Kantian perspective
(using Immanuel Kant’s Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals) or
from a utilitarian perspective (using J. S. Mill’s Utilitarianism).
(b) If you chose Mill as your focus, write an additional 2–3 pages
considering what Kant might say about the issue. If you chose Kant as
your focus, write an additional 2–3 pages considering what Mill might
say about the issue.
• Indicate in the introduction the essential features of the ethical
theory, problem, or issue you will be discussing. You should then
establish the details in the body of the essay.