Stakeholders frequently have different and/or opposing agendas

 

Stakeholders frequently have different and/or opposing agendas. In your opinion, how can a correctional leader
maintain a working relationship with stakeholders if satisfying the needs and desires of one group requires a
decision and/or action that is contrary to the needs and desires of another group?

Sample Solution

In order to be a successful correctional industries operation, it is imperative that the agency educate and communicate with stakeholders to gain support for its programs. Correctional industries maintain many complex relationships with their stakeholders, and can lose valuable support if these relationships are not properly managed and nurtured. The underlying value inherent to each individual stakeholder must be identified and reinforced. In any correctional facility, reliable security is essential to protect the safety of offenders, staff, and the public. As a major internal stakeholder, it is essential for correctional industries to develop and maintain positive working relationships with security personnel for the mutual benefit of the facility’s security and to support CI’s mission.

From all the specifications of the risk-taking construct reviewed so far, we can state that risk taking is not an isolated construct but is closely related to other fundamental learner variables such as classroom participation and willingness to communicate in a second language. What should be highlighted from the literature on risk taking is that this term requires interplay between the learner and the decisions that he makes, his willingness to participate, and the educational setting.

Definitely the definitions of risk taking have also caused research to account for the particular traits that a risk taker should have. In regard to the requirements that learners have to meet in order to be assumed risk takers, one of the most powerful reports corresponds to Ely’s dimensions. According to Ely’s (as cited in Alshalabi, 2003) first dimension, risk takers are not suspicious about utilizing a newly encountered linguistic component. The second dimension refers to risk takers’ willingness to use linguistic components perceived to be complicated or difficult. According to Alshalabi (2003) this dimension clarifies why risk takers expand levels of tolerance towards vagueness and ambiguity to the extent in which a complex or new situation does not really demonstrate an issue of concern for them. The third and fourth dimensions explain respectively how risk takers become tolerant toward possible incorrectness or inaccuracy in utilizing the language and how they are inclined to rehearse a new component silently before attempting to use it aloud. Hongwei (1996) mentions that this rehearsal issue, nevertheless, is further discussed by other\g researchers who believe that prior preparedness before producing utterances may hamper risk taking. Indeed, mental preparedness is said to be a specification of more cautious students who on special opportunities spend so much time preparing to talk that they decide not to take the risk of speaking in front of others.

Risk Taking should be a central issue in foreign Language learning particularly with respect to speaking exercises. As indicated by Beebe (1983) “you take a risk every time you open your mouth in a foreign Language, or for that matter in any learning situation where you are called on to perf

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.