QUESTIONS (1) Venn Diagram: Differences Identify 5 or more character traits – differences for each concept (RCA, GA, & FMA) – Root Cause Analysis (RCA), Gap Analysis (GA), and Failure Mode Analysis (FMA) (2) Venn Diagram: Similarities Identify 3 or more character traits – similarities for each concept (RCA/FMA, RCA/GA, FMA/GA & FMA/RCA/GA). INSTRUCTIONS • Use the Venn Diagram template provided and type your answers directly into the text boxes. • I will upload the Venn Diagram template. • Use bullet points or numbers to display similarities and differences. • • This assignment should be submitted with an APA title page. A reference page and in-text citations are NOT required with this assignment. • Professionalism: Template with APA title page • Use the template with the APA title page that is provided to complete the assignment. • Professionalism: Format • The Venn Diagram should be very neat and well organized. USE BULLET POINTS OR NUMBERS TO DISPLAY SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES Professionalism: Spelling/Grammar There should be no spelling and/or grammar errors. Remember in Venn Diagram, anywhere there is overlap, there is a similarity between two concepts, and anywhere there is no overlap, these are what makes the concept unique to itself. The most basic Venn diagrams simply consist of multiple circular boundaries describing the range of sets. The overlapping areas between the two boundaries describe the elements which are common between the two, while the areas that aren’t overlapping house the elements that are different. Identify 5 or more character traits – differences for each concept (RCA, GA, & FMA) – These are what make each unique to the concept itself. Identify 3 or more character traits – similarities for each tool, these are what make one analysis similar to another analysis.
Venn Diagram: Similarities – Root Cause Analysis/Failure Mode Analysis
• Both analyze failures of systems/products in depth • Use structured methods such as problem statements and causal trees • Aimed at reducing likelihood of future incidents occurring Venn Diagram: Similarities – Root Cause Analysis/Gap Analysis • Both involve comparing current vs ideal states • Look at feedback from stakeholders • Focus on proactive solutions instead of reactive fixes Venn Diagram: Similarities – Failure Mode Analysis/Gap Analysis • Identify differences between existing & potential performance • Analyze what is required to achieve target.
Vittola, first and foremost, talks about one of the noble motivations of war, above all, is when mischief is incurred however he causes notice the damage doesn’t prompt conflict, it relies upon the degree or proportionality, one more condition to jus promotion bellum (Begby et al (2006b), Page 314). Frowe, nonetheless, contends the possibility of “worthy motivation” in view of “Power” which alludes to the security of political and regional freedoms, alongside basic liberties. In contemporary view, this view is more confounded to reply, given the ascent of globalization. Additionally, it is challenging to gauge proportionality, especially in war, on the grounds that not just that there is an epistemic issue in ascertaining, yet again the present world has created (Frowe (2011), Page 54-6). Besides, Vittola contends war is essential, not just for cautious purposes, ‘since it is legitimate to oppose force with force,’ yet additionally to battle against the crooked, a hostile conflict, countries which are not rebuffed for acting treacherously towards its own kin or have unjustifiably taken land from the home country (Begby et al (2006b), Page 310&313); to “show its foes a thing or two,” yet for the most part to accomplish the point of war. This approves Aristotle’s contention: ‘there should be battle for harmony (Aristotle (1996), Page 187). Nonetheless, Frowe contends “self-preservation” has a majority of portrayals, found in Chapter 1, demonstrating the way that self-protection can’t necessarily in every case legitimize one’s activities. Considerably more dangerous, is the situation of self-preservation in war, where two clashing perspectives are laid out: The Collectivists, an entirely different hypothesis and the Individualists, the continuation of the homegrown hypothesis of self-protection (Frowe (2011), Page 9& 29-34). All the more significantly, Frowe discredits Vittola’s view on retribution in light of the fact that right off the bat it enables the punisher’s position, yet additionally the present world forestalls this activity between nations through legitimate bodies like the UN, since we have modernized into a somewhat tranquil society (Frowe (2011), Page 80-1). In particular, Frowe further discredits Vittola through his case that ‘right aim can’t be blamed so as to take up arms in light of expected wrong,’ proposing we can’t simply hurt another on the grounds that they have accomplished something uncalled for. Different elements should be thought of, for instance, Proportionality. Thirdly, Vittola contends that war ought to be kept away from (Begby et al (2006b), Page 332) and that we ought to continue conditions carefully. This is upheld by the “last resor