Identifying one’s power to change

 

 

 

 

ASSIGNMENT
Purpose
You demonstrate that you’re able to work through all stages of the writing process to produce persuasive writing. To accomplish this assignment, you apply skills and rules taught in the first five study units.
Background
Ten years ago, you started working as a clerk for DMD Medical Supplies.
Six months ago, Liz Jakowski, the human resources director, promoted
you to office manager. You manage two employees: Jack Snyder and
Ruth Disselkoen. Your office provides secretarial support for the four
members of the executive team. Two years ago, Liz had assigned Jack to
support Ralph Alane and Jessica Hilo. Ruth was assigned to Samuel
Daley and Frank Daley. The work flow was equally balanced.
You’ve noticed that in the last three months Ruth has cut her breaks
short to complete her work, complains of being tired, and at least twice
a month requires overtime hours costing the company an additional
$200 a month. In the last three weeks, Frank Daley has complained to
you a few times about the poor quality of Ruth’s work.
On the other hand, over the last three months, Jack frequently seems to
have little to do. He has begun coming in late a
couple times a week and taking more than the allotted break times.
What work he does have, however, is always professionally completed.
Clearly, you must investigate to determine what is causing this change
and how to improve the situation. Since nothing has changed in the personal lives of either Jack or Ruth, you conclude you must focus on the
in-office work situation. You learn the following facts:
• Samuel and Frank Daley share a part-time administrative assistant who works only 15 hours a week.
• Ralph Alane and Jessica Hilo share a full-time administrative
assistant.
• Jessica Hilo has been on medical leave for the last four months,
and Liz Jakowski isn’t sure whether Jessica will be able to return
to work.
Examination
• Jessica’s duties have been temporarily reassigned to Ralph and
Frank.
Although you don’t have the authority to change who Jack and Ruth are
assigned to work for, you clearly need to change the work the two do so
that both Jack and Ruth work regularly without requiring overtime.
Process
Adhere to the following outlined process when writing your exam.
Planning
1. The background explains the primary cause of the workflow problem and the negative effects resulting from it. Your task is to make
up a realistic plan which solves the uneven productivity between
Jack and Ruth. Use prewriting tools like brainstorming, cluster or
webbing diagrams, and freewriting to outline the cause-effect situation and to develop a specific solution that best solves the problem.
Also ask yourself the following questions to expand your prewriting.
• How long has this situation been going on?
• Why did the problems begin when they did?
• Am I able to solve the problem at its root cause or am I only
able to manage the impact of the problem?
• Is this a temporary or permanent problem?
• How has the company been affected?
• How have the employees been affected?
• What’s in my power to change? What must stay the same?
• What are two or three ways to improve the efficiency of my
office?
• How much work, time, and money would be required to implement each solution?
• Does each solution stop all the negative effects?
• Are there any benefits to the change beyond stopping what is
occurring?
Examination
• How exactly would each change affect Jack, Ruth, and the executive team?
• What would I have to do to make sure each change goes
through as planned and to monitor the situation once the solution is in place?
2. From your prewriting, develop the single best solution to the situation described in the background. Obviously, you won’t be able to
use everything you’ve prewritten, so your first step is to choose
what’s most important for the purpose and audience. As you outline a solution, you may need to make up more specific details that
define the steps of the plan and describe particular benefits of the
plan.
Drafting
3. Next, sort your details and information about the problem and the
plan into one of the two sections given below. Don’t worry about
complete sentences for this sorting stage; merely list the information under the appropriate section. Use information from both the
background and your prewriting.
Section 1
• Facts and figures that define the problem (the cause)
• Details that show the impact of the problem (effects) on Jack,
Ruth, and the company
Section 2
• The steps needed to change the situation
• Reason to implement each step, including the benefits to your
employees, your supervisor, and the company
• Information about your role in the change
4. After sorting the information, draft a first-try, rough paragraph for
Section 1 and another paragraph for Section 2. Your goal is to
place the listed information in the most logical order using sentence
and paragraph format. Leave all spelling, grammar, punctuation,
and other mistakes exactly as they are. Don’t do any editing as you
write this first draft. The worse it looks at this stage, the better
your final product will appear in contrast.
Examination
5. Set your rough draft aside and don’t work any further on this
assignment for at least 24 hours.
6. After your break, reread the background information and the questions guiding your prewriting in Step 1. Then reread the rough
paragraphs you drafted for Section 1 and 2 to refresh your memory. If you came up with new ideas since you wrote the draft, add
your thoughts before you go further.
Revising
7. Focus on the rough draft of Section 2, which you wrote in Step 4.
Divide the paragraph into two main ideas and reorganize your
information accordingly to develop two separate paragraphs based
on Section 2. The paragraphs must first describe your solution and
then persuade your supervisor to implement that solution. Each
paragraph must have one main idea related to this purpose and
audience.
Note: Don’t revise Section 1. Revise only the rough draft you wrote
for Section 2, expanding the single paragraph into two paragraphs.
8. Prewrite further if needed to develop more details and explanation
to flesh out the two paragraphs based on Section 2. Next, apply
the drafting and revising strategies taught in this and previous
study units to produce two properly developed paragraphs.
Together these two paragraphs must total between 200 to 300
words.
9. Once again, set your work aside for at least 24 hours.
10. Read the evaluation criteria given on the next page, which will be
used to score your work. Continue to revise, edit, and proofread
the two paragraphs from Section 2 to meet each of the criteria.
11. Once you have a final, polished version of the two paragraphs
based on Section 2, open a new document on your computer’s
word-processing program and type your work. Format the document to double space, using a standard font, size 12, left justification (also called align left and ragged right). Set 1-inch or
1.25-inch margins for both left and right sides of the page. Indent
the first line of each paragraph by 0.5-inch tab. Hit Enter only once
after the first paragraph to begin the second paragraph. Don’t use
any other type of format, such as a letter or memo. Merely type
the two paragraphs.
Examination
12. After typing your work, make sure you edit and proofread at least
one more time. Use the computer’s grammar and spell checks cautiously. Not everything the computer suggests is correct, particularly for the purpose and audience.
EVALUATION CRITERIA
Name: Skill Skills
ID: Realized Developed
Content and Development: the writer
included two balanced paragraphs outline
step-by-step plan and persuasive benefits;
correct scenario details and appropriate
added details
Para. 1: Describes step-by-step plan to 10 9 8 7 solve workload imbalance
Para. 2: Offers persuasive benefits of the
solution and identifies the supervisor’s role 10 9 8 7
in its implementation
Organization and Coherence: the writer
used a topic sentence to introduce the
main idea of each paragraph ; content 25 23 22 20
shows clear, logical organization and flow
of ideas both between and within paragraphs.
Audience and Tone: the writer use the
correct point of view, active voice, and
informal business tone and appealed to 25 23 22 20
the correct audience. Sentence types are
varied and follow natural rhythm .
Grammar and Mechanics: the writer
employed correct sentence structure,
grammar, punctuation and other conventions of standard American English. The 20 18 17 16
writer revised, edited and proofread to
present an accurate, professional final
draft free of slang, cliches and jargon.
Length and Format: 200-300 words;
double spaced; correct font and font size; 10 9 8 7
correct header placement and content.
Examination
Skills SI
N Emerging Shi
6 5
6 5
19 18
19 18
15 12
6 4

 

 

 

 

 

Sample Solution

 

A Leader, or for our situation a Masters Career and the destiny of his vessel and Bridge group are dictated by the viability of his conduct. Administration is viewed as significant for progress and has been considered by most specialists to be the most basic fixing (Lussier and Achua 2009). I would depict a pioneer as being somebody who coordinates and controls a gathering of individuals to play out an errand. For this situation the Master controls and guides his Officers to securely explore the vessel, wellbeing of the group and the payload. Not at all like different organizations who will have numerous pioneers, the Master is the sole head on a vessel whereupon all duty lies on. The manner in which the Master manages every one of his obligations is to delegate to his Officers. Every one of his Officers basically likewise become chiefs of perhaps their own gathering of laborers. The Master drives his supervisors (Officers) to play out the assignments required to keep up the vessel.

A significant differentiation is made between being a supervisor and being a pioneer. To be an administrator intends to coordinate and to achieve. To lead intends to persuade and motivate. Pioneers who are successful, rouse their group to endeavor and seek after greatness. It has been said that administrators are individuals who do things right and pioneers are individuals who make the best choice (Peter F.Drucker 1955).

For a Master to be a decent pioneer he should have the option to spur his officials adequately. An experts individual components will impact how well he/she rouses the group. I have worked with a couple of Captains each with their very own distinctive initiative styles. No two heads work similarly, every pioneer builds up their own individual style. A portion of the elements that influence a Master may create after some time and experience, while some may create because of their condition for example sort of vessel or extension group. A few Masters may even need to adjust their initiative style to the encompassing condition and to organization necessities.

Clearly one of a Masters fundamental individual factor is his/her character. The administration style might be an expansion of the character. I found that two of the four Masters I worked with tend not to impart legitimately to a few. The two Captains that favored the technique for conveying to his group legitimately or up close and personal were all the more cordial and decisive. These Captains additionally appeared to confide in their official more, for instance they once in a while did any of the moves when coming all through port, they permitted the lower positioned officials to take control and were quick to lead and educate. The other two Captains appeared to need to show others how its done as they were progressively held and once in a while came up to the scaffold other than when required. These Captains consistently did moves themselves and favored the progressive strategy. They favored gathering with the following in order as a strategy for correspondence to the lower positions, rather than tending to the whole group.

Another individual factor is the degree of control a Master likes to have, which impacts the administration style. The Master has generally control of all choices made on his vessel yet some are more laid back than others. A Master that has an elevated level of control will need to be associated with the entire everyday activities and the basic leadership process. An all the more believing Master may not need the weight of the basic leadership and will make a stride back and delegate duty. As this is the situation on most vessels a Master that delegates his duties will ordinarily need to make another layer of the executives, this duty is typically given to the main mate or second in direction.

Another factor that may influence the administration of a Master is simply the Organization or organization. There is a various leveled structure on vessels while there is a divisional structure inside an organization. The organization’s structure and working techniques may direct the initiative style that the Master must embrace. The Master must actualize all arrangements that the organization set out and keep up them as checked by evaluators.

A Masters understanding, both as a pioneer and time span with a specific organization can influence his administration. A Master who has as of late been elevated might need to lead by the book and pursue all methods to the spot, while they are as yet unpracticed as Masters. A Master who has more involvement with the activity advertisement with the organization may have more certainty by following their own understanding of the guidelines set out by the organization. The more experience a Master has and progressively comfortable they are with the organization will bring about the Master being increasingly open to settling on choices thusly being a viable and certain pioneer.

Another hierarchical factor in influencing a Masters authority is his groups’ ethnic decent variety. Particularly on traveler vessels which can hang overall more than 1000 team, which can have 55+ various ethnicities. Fortunately for the Masters on traveler vessels an office framework is run so he doesn’t need to legitimately manage all 1000+ group. He/She just needs to straightforwardly manage the Deck office and will just need to address his group in any disciplinary activity. Indeed, even on the scaffold there can be a scope of nationalities (from individual experience) To be a fruitful pioneer of numerous nationalities the Master may adopt a hireling strategy, where they give the worker’s all that they need with the goal that the group remain spurred and make for powerful cooperation. Maslow’s hypothesis shows these requirements in better detail. A Master as a pioneer can just give such a great amount to his group before following the organizations arrangements, which is additionally set out in the ISM code.

To finish up there are numerous variables on which a Master needs to adjust to be a powerful pioneer, he/she should consider the necessities of the group (Maslow’s hypothesis) while likewise keeping the Organization cheerful by conforming to their principles and strategies. As far as I can tell I have discovered that Masters with successful administration additionally prefer to make a stride back and enable his official to be the principle part of the basic leadership process and believe in his group.

Correspondence is a key factor when attempting to finish an activity easily and securely. We impart constantly, it comes normal to us like breathing, yet having the option to convey obviously and with a touch of artfulness is very troublesome, particularly when you may have a worldwide team installed.

Locally available the boats I was dealing with we had this issue of an immense assortment of nationalities. Taking a shot at journey ships implies you can have more than 1000 other group to manage. To defeat the issue of language and correspondence the organization set out the approach that the working language be English, and all team must have a decent comprehension of the English language, this incorporates officials too.

Working a ton with the deck team who were all either Philippine or Indonesian, I encountered a considerable amount of a language obstruction among them and the Bosun who was Italian. The Bosun was not enthused about communicating in English and attempted to maintain a strategic distance from it however much as could reasonably be expected. In this piece of the work I found that solitary verbal correspondence was utilized to give the employments to the deck group for the afternoon. Under the most favorable circumstances I could scarcely comprehend the Bosun. To enhance this it would be a smart thought to have work rotors posted on a notification board in the workshop so the deck group can without much of a stretch allude to perceive what their employments are for that day and who they are working with.

On the scaffold the Officers comprised of British and Italian speakers. Again anything identified with work for example crash evasion promotion crises must be spoken in English. By and by I found that correspondence on the scaffold between the group during activities and moving were without issue. We utilized the shut circle specialized technique, where the individual accepting the requests rehashed them so the official realized he had comprehended the request. While the Captain had by and large charge of the activity, our staff Captain played the job of Operations executive. His activity was to speak with the officials down in the securing stations, who utilized the equivalent shut circle strategy.

As there is a chain of command on the extension I found that correspondence between the lower positions and cadets was negligible. I found ordinarily that I would get a vocation or a request from the staff skipper that had advanced down the positions. The issue with this was the activity would get confounded and not the same as the first the more individuals it experienced. This was not purposeful, yet would result at times in the activity being done inaccurately. The undeniable method to improve this issue is for the higher positioning officials to legitimately give the work. Along these lines inquiries can be posed if the errand isn’t completely comprehended.

While being a piece of securing activities I saw that on occasion there would be a great deal of yelling from either the Officer or the bosun. The explanation behind this was they didn’t have the foggiest idea about the name of people in the group, which would bring about the words ‘hello’ or ‘you’ being yelled. This caused immense perplexity between the deck team and disappointment for the Bosun or Officer. I saw and proposed to the Officer that perhaps it is great to get familiar with the names of all the deck group. I set aside the effort to get familiar with every one of their names and saw what amount valued it really was. In addition to the fact that they respected you more, correspondence to an individual was far more clear as the individual knew when they were being told. From investing a ton of energy with the deck group I discovered that having their regard is a key factor concerning having the option to give them employments and keeping up inspiration.

In end the manner in which I would improve correspondence on my vessel is for the higher positions to be more agreeable and straightforwardly issue orders/work to the lower positions. With regards to correspondence between the deck teams and bosun in securing activities, straightforward things like learning the deck group’s names can avert any perplexity and any yelling.

 

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.