Loyalty and Rome Essay Example for Free

Loyalty and Rome Essay The Roman Empire lasted so long due to various things. These include the establishment of a hierarchical government that enabled a system of checks and balances, the implementation of laws and taxes, a strong army, creation of institutions, and many different privileges and incentives for not only the people of Rome, but also those who were conquered and wished to become Roman. Amongst these things, there was an underlying commonality: loyalty. With loyalty came many personal relationships. A loyal government, a loyal army, and loyal people equates to a great empire. When that loyalty disappears, the effects can be disasterousl. Julius Caesar one of Rome’s most notable emperors depended heavily on loyalty and personal relationships. Within Caesars War Commentaries Julius Caesar describes how his personal relationships with people within and outside played a major role within the empire and influenced many of his decisions. From â€Å"Caesar’s War Commentaries† it is clear to see that he was a very practical emperor and planned his every move carefully with a great deal of consultation. To quickly summarize, in this particular excerpt, Caesar needs to feed the army in time, but food is being held away and people within and outside the empire are resisting to aid as they would usually do. He calls a meeting and to his surprise it is revealed that someone close to him and the government has been opposing him. Being the kind of Emperor Caesar is, he made the wise decision to privately question Liscus about what he had just informed him. Liscus of course is someone close to him and that he trusts. He discovers it is Dumnorix, brother of Divitiacus. Caesar wrote about his relationship with Divitiaus. He wrote â€Å"I had come to realize the very high regard which his brother Divitiacus entertained for Rome and his personal devotion to me. He was a man of unswerving loyalty.† Caesar worried that â€Å"there was a possibility that the execution of his brother might alienate his goodwill.† Being that they were close, Caesar goes to him personally and gives him options to choose from concerning the actions to take against his brother. Divitiacus, when expressing his apologies asked for nothing to happen to him. Because of Caesar’s â€Å"high regard for him his prayer should be granted and the insult to Rome as well as my personal grievance forgiven.† If it were not for the personal relationship that Caesar with Divitiacus, and the loyalty that Divitiacus had for Rome and Caesar, surely the situation would have played out differently. Other situations to point out within this excerpt, is that with Domnorix trying to rise to power, the people who were loyal to Caesar and trusted him, were now going against him. Not only was loyalty lost, but also respect and a sense of power for the Romans. Caesar’s excerpt can be used as an example as to what can happen, when these relationships are tarnished. This is why the Romans, while conquering and expanded made sure to secure loyalty. The loyalty was secured in many different ways, which included the system of checks and balances, institutions within the Roman and non-Roman cities, and privileges for its people. To conclude, Rome as an Empire valued the loyalty and the personal relations acquired. Julius Caesar one of Rome’s notable emperors used this as he ruled and this is seen in â€Å"Caesar’s War Commentaries.†

Affirmative Action :: American Government, Race Relations, EEO

Affirmative Action In the United States, Affirmative Action is one of the government programs to overcome the effects of past societal discrimination by allocating jobs and resources to members of specific groups, such as minorities and women. The policy was put forth by federal agencies enforcing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and two executive orders, which provided that government contractors and educational institutions receiving federal funds develop such programs. The Equal Employment Opportunities Act (1972) set up a commission to enforce such plans. The establishment of racial quotas in the name of affirmative action brought the charges of so-called reverse discrimination into the late 1970s. Although the U.S. Supreme Court accepted such an argument in the case University of California v. Bakke (1978), it let existing programs stand and it also approved the use of quotas in 1979 in a case involving voluntary affirmative-action programs in unions and private businesses. In the 1980s, the federal government's role in affirmative action was considerably diluted. In three cases in 1989, the Supreme Court undercut court-approved affirmative action plans by giving greater standing to claims of reverse discrimination, voiding the use of minority set-asides where past discrimination against minority contractors was unproven, and restricting the use of statistics to prove discrimination, since statistics did not prove intent. The Civil Rights Act of 1991 reaffirmed a federal government's commitment to affirmative action, but a 1995 Supreme Court decision placed limits on the use of race in awarding government contracts; the affected government programs were revamped in the late 1990s to encompass any person who was "socially disadvantaged.

The Emerging Trends or Challenges in the Management of Organizations

The Emerging Trends or Challenges in the Management of Organizations The Emerging Trends or Challenges in the Management of Organizations INTRODUCTION Organizational Behavior studies encompass the study of organizations from multiple viewpoints, methods, and levels of analysis. Whenever people interact in organizations, many factors come into play. Modern organizational studies attempt to understand and model these factors. Like all modernist social sciences, organizational studies seek to control, predict, and explain. There is some controversy over the ethics of controlling workers' behavior.As such, organizational behavior has at times been accused of being the scientific tool of the powerful. Those accusations notwithstanding, Organizational behavior can play a major role in organizational development and success. One of the main goals of organizational theorists is, according to Simms (1994) â€Å"to revitalize organizational theory and develop a better conceptualization of org anizational life. † An organizational theorist should carefully consider levels assumptions being made in theory, and is concerned to help managers and administrators. [1] Organizational behavior is currently a growing field.Organizational studies departments generally form part of business schools, although many universities also have industrial psychology and industrial economics programs. The field is highly influential in the business world. Organizational behavior is becoming more important in the global economy as people with diverse backgrounds and cultural values have to work together effectively and efficiently. It is also under increasing criticism as a field for its ethnocentric and pro-capitalist assumptions. Views on management have changed substantially over the past century – particularly in the past few decades.Organizations have entered a new era characterized by rapid, dramatic and turbulent changes. The accelerated pace of change has transformed how w ork is performed by employees in diverse organizations. Change has truly become an inherent and integral part of organizational life. Several emerging trends are impacting organizational life. Of these emerging trends, five will be examined in this paper: globalization, diversity, flexibility, flat, and networks. These five emerging trends create tensions for organizational leaders and employees as they go through waves of changes in their organizations.These tensions present opportunities as well as threats, and if these tensions are not managed well, they will result in dysfunctional and dire organizational outcomes at the end of any change process. CHALLENGES IN THE MANAGEMENT OF ORGANIZATIONS GLOBALIZATION Organizations operate in a global economy that is characterized by greater and more intense competition, and at the same time, greater economic interdependence and collaboration. More products and services are being consumed outside of their country of origin than ever before as globalization brings about greater convergence in terms of consumer tastes and preferences.Yet at the same time, in the midst of greater convergence, there is the opposite force of divergence at work where companies have to adapt corporate and business strategies, marketing plans, and production efforts to local domestic markets. To stay competitive, more organizations are embracing offshore outsourcing. Many functions are being shifted to India, the Philippines, Malaysia, and other countries for their low labor costs, high levels of workforce education, and technological advantages.According to the 2002-2003 Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) Workplace Forecast, companies such as Ford, General Motors, and Nestle employ more people outside of their headquarters countries than within those countries. [1] Almost any company, whether in manufacturing or services, can find some part of its work that can be done off site. Communication and information sharing are occurring a cross the globe in multiple languages and multiple cultures. Global competition and global cooperation coexist in the new world economy.One major consequence of globalization is greater mobility in international capital and labor markets. This creates a global marketplace where there is more opportunity, because there are more potential customers. However, there is also more competition, as local companies have to compete with foreign companies for customers. According to Dani Rodrik, professor of international political economy at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, the processes associated with the global integration of markets for goods, services, and capital have created two sources of tensions. 1] First, reduced barriers to trade and investment accentuate the asymmetries between groups that can cross international borders, and those that cannot. In the first category are owners of capital, highly skilled workers, and many professionals. Unskilled and semiskilled workers and most middle managers belong in the second category. [1] Second, globalization engenders conflicts within and between nations over domestic norms and the social institutions that embody them.As the technology for manufactured goods becomes standardized and diffused internationally, nations with very different sets of values, norms, institutions, and collective preferences begin to compete head on in markets for similar goods. Trade becomes contentious when it unleashes forces that undermine the norms implicit in local or domestic workplace practices. [1] Professor Rodrik concluded that â€Å"the most serious challenge for the world economy in the years ahead lies in making globalization compatible with domestic social and political stability† (Rodrik 1997, p. 2).This implies ensuring that international economic integration does not lead to domestic social disintegration. Organizations that are confronted with this challenge will have to manage the tension created by the globa l integration versus local disintegration dilemma. The overall picture as a consequence of globalization is one of turbulence and uncertainty, in which a variety of contradictory processes present a wide range of both opportunities and threats that defy established ways of doing business and working in organizations. Integration and exclusion coexist uneasily side-by-side in organizations.For example, many apparent dichotomies or paradoxes—competitions versus collaboration, market forces versus state intervention, global actions versus local solutions—are losing their sharp edges as contradictory forces appear to converge and reinforce each other in organizations across the globe. Companies that compete fiercely in some markets form strategic alliances in others; government guidance and regulation are required to make markets work effectively; and â€Å"think globally, act locally† has been adopted as business strategy (or as a mantra) to deal with the challenge s of doing business in the globalize economy.As organizations transform themselves to stay competitive, they will need to confront and resolve some, if not all, of these dichotomies or paradoxes. [1] On another level, because of globalization, the fates of people living and working in different parts of the world are becoming intertwined. Global events may have significant local impact. September 11, 2001 has been called the â€Å"day that changed the world†. Heightened security concerns are changing expectations for people in organizations, and the role of organizations themselves.The threat of terrorism continues to be an ongoing concern worldwide. It has created a renewed focus on workplace security as employees experience a heightened sense of vulnerability in the workplace. Employee monitoring and screening are occurring more frequently. Concern over travel for business purposes is resulting in the increased use of alternate forms of communication such as teleconferencin g and videoconferencing. [1] DIVERSITY Globalization is impacting how organizations compete with each other.In combination with changing demographics, globalization is causing a rapid increase in diversity in organizations. Never before have people been required to work together with colleagues and customers from so many different cultures and countries. Diversity is moving American society away from â€Å"mass society† to â€Å"mosaic society†. Organizations reflect this â€Å"mosaic society† in their more diverse workforce (in terms of not only race, ethnic or culture but also in terms of age, sexual orientation, and other demographic variables).More than ever, people have to interact and communicate with others who come from diverse backgrounds. This in turn has meant that employees need new relational skills to succeed. An emerging stream of research in international management has called these new relational skills â€Å"cultural intelligence†. Cultu ral intelligence is defined as the capability to adapt effectively across different national, organizational and professional cultures (Earley, Ang and Tan, 2005). More managers take up global work assignments in industries around the world.They learn how to work with people who not only think and communicate differently but also do things differently. Managers will need to develop their cultural intelligence to manage greater diversity in organizations. [1] Diversity in organizations will continue to increase. The world population is growing at a high rate in developing countries, while remaining stable or decreasing in the developed world. The result will be income inequities and economic opportunity leading to increased immigration and migration within and between nations.More temporary workers will be used for specific tasks, and there will be a greater demand for highly skilled workers. People of different ethnic and cultural backgrounds possess different attitudes, values, and norms. Increasing cultural diversity in both public and private sector organizations focuses attention on the distinctions between ethnic and cultural groups in their attitudes and performance at work. This greater focus can result in the tension between finding similarities and accentuating differences in the face of greater diversity in organizations.There is an on-going debate between the heterogenists and the homogenists concerning the impact of greater diversity in organizations. The heterogenists contend that diverse or heterogeneous groups in organizations have performance advantages over homogeneous groups while the homogenists take the opposing view—that homogeneous groups are more advantageous than heterogeneous or diverse groups in organizations. [2] According to the heterogenists, organizations with greater diversity have an advantage in attracting and retaining the best available human talent.The exceptional capabilities of women and minorities offer a rich labo r pool for organizations to tap. When organizations attract, retain, and promote maximum utilization of people from diverse cultural backgrounds, they gain competitive advantage and sustain the highest quality of human resources. [2] Organizations with greater diversity can understand and penetrate wider and enhanced markets. Not only do these organizations embrace a diverse workforce internally, they are better suited to serve a diverse external clientele.Organizations with greater diversity also display higher creativity and innovation. Especially in research-oriented and high technology organizations, the array of talents provided by a gender- and ethnic-diverse organization becomes invaluable. Heterogeneous or diverse groups display better problem solving ability as they are more capable of avoiding the consequences of groupthink, compared to highly cohesive and homogeneous groups that are more susceptible to conformity. [2] On the other hand, greater organizational diversity ha s its drawbacks.With the benefits of diversity come organizational costs. Too much diversity can lead to dysfunctional outcomes. Diversity increases ambiguity, complexity, and confusion. Organizations with greater diversity may have difficulty reaching consensus and implementing solutions. In many organizations, diversity can produce negative dynamics such as ethnocentrism, stereotyping and cultural clashes. [2] The homogenists argue that homogeneous groups often outperform culturally diverse groups, especially where there is a serious communication problem.Cross-cultural training is necessary to enable culturally diverse groups to live up to their potential and overcome communication difficulties. The diversity movement, according to the homogenists, has the potential to polarize different social groups and harm productivity while breeding cynicism and resentment, heightening intergroup frictions and tensions, and lowering productivity, just the opposite of what managing diversity is intended to accomplish. 2] The challenge therefore is for management to manage the tension produced by heterogeneity versus homogeneity. If properly managed, organizations can reap the benefits of greater diversity. Aside from proper management, organizations need to learn to appreciate and value diversity before the benefits of diversity can be fully realized. To achieve this, diversity training programs may help people in organizations understand and value diversity. FLEXIBILITY Globalization and diversity trends are forcing organizations to become more flexible and adaptable.To be able to function globally and to embrace diversity, leaders and employees in organizations have to become more flexible and develop a wider repertoire of skills and strategies in working with diverse groups of people in the workplace as well as in the marketplace. The response to increased diversity has, in many cases, been increased organizational flexibility. Some organizations allow workers to hav e very different work arrangements (e. g. flex-time) and payment schedules. Some organizations (and workers) have found it convenient to treat some workers as independent consultants rather than employees.In certain occupations, advances in communication and information technologies have enabled telecommuting —working at home via computer. One consequence of this is the blurring of boundaries between work and home, and where and when work occurs. The benefits of greater flexibility may be countered by the negative consequences of working 24/7 including higher stress and burnout. The response to increased competition, however, has resulted in a tension generated by the demands to be flexible and yet maintain some stability as changes are implemented in organizations.To stay competitive, organizations are constantly changing and restructuring to increase flexibility and decrease costs. Business process reengineering, business process out-sourcing, job redesign, and other approa ches to optimize business processes have been implemented to increase operational and process efficiency while reducing the costs of doing business. Changes in business and operational processes need time to stabilize for employees to learn the new processes, become familiar with them, and be able to operate effectively and efficiently.Yet, competitive pressures can cause organizations to go through a series of changes without giving employees adequate time for learning and training, and for the benefits of the change to be fully realized in the organization. FLAT In a greater competitive marketplace, speed or response time is critical. How organizations response to customers and other stakeholders or be the first to market may make a significant difference as time is at a premium. Organizations that can develop new technologies faster or can adapt to changes in the market faster are the ones that will survive the competition.To maximize response time, organizations have been flatte ning their hierarchies and structures, in addition to other initiatives such as downsizing and networking. Flat organizations make decisions more quickly because each person is closer to the ultimate decision-makers. There are fewer levels of management, and workers are empowered to make decisions. Decision-making becomes decentralized. However, flat organizations create a new tension between decentralization and centralization. Among the drivers of decentralization are communications technologies that allow companies to push decision-making away from the core.Proponents of decentralization emphasize the idea that less hierarchical organizations mirror the efficiencies of the networks that enable them: they are faster, more resilient, more responsive, more flexible and more innovative. Also, they argue, people who work within decentralized organizations feel empowered and energized. They do not need to focus on the chain of command and they do not feel constrained by it. Organizatio ns are caught between the opposing forces of centralization and decentralization.They want to leverage the opportunities offered by decentralization and create more nimble and forceful organizations, but they cannot always do so because the forces of centralization come into play. There are obvious benefits to centralization as control is comparatively tighter and accountability is clearer compared to a flatter, more decentralized organizational structure. Take the example of IT operations. The key to a centralized organization's success is its responsiveness. If the centralized operation can be responsive to the needs of the business, then that approach can make sense.Several companies, such as DaimlerChrysler and PepsiCo, have migrated back to centralizing IT operations after attempts at decentralization. [3] The debate over the centralization versus decentralization of operations in organizations is an enduring one. It is an age-old battle of standardization versus autonomy, corp orate efficiency versus local effectiveness and pressure on costs and resources versus accommodation of specific local needs. [4] Vacillation between centralization and decentralization is both non-productive and unnecessary.Organizations, as they desire to become flatter, will need to be clear about how they need to respond to the tension between centralization and decentralization. [4] NETWORKS Organizations that flatten tend to encourage horizontal communication among workers. Rather than working through the organizational hierarchy, it is often faster for workers who need to coordinate with each other simply to communicate directly. Such organizations are highly networked. Another meaning of networked organizations refers to their relations to other organizations.Organizations that have downsized to just their core competencies must then outsource all the functions that used to be done in-house. To avoid losing time and effort managing contracts with suppliers, organizations hav e learned to develop close ties to their suppliers so that social mechanisms of coordination replace legal mechanisms, which are slow and costly. Networked organizations are particularly important in industries with complex products where technologies and customer needs change rapidly, such as in high technology industries.Close ties among a set of companies enables them to work with each other in ways that are faster than arms-length contracts would permit, and yet retains the flexibility of being able to drop the relationship if needed (as opposed to performing the function in-house). The trend towards networked organizations and structures create a new tension between interdependence and independence. The forces of aggregation and disaggregation throw up new challenges for organizations, for example, the use of independent contractors, joint ventures, strategic partnerships and alliances even with competitors. 1] One advantage of networks is that organizations have greater flexib ility and thus they can become more competitive in the global marketplace. Another advantage is that organizations do not require that many resources such as employee benefits, office space, and financing for new business ventures. [1] On the other hand, networks have distinct disadvantages. Organizations may find it more difficult to control quality of goods or services as they now have to depend on their partners in the networks to deliver the quality that is desired.Legal and contracting expertise as well as negotiation expertise will also be important for networks. Alternative forms of control may need to be developed to control quality. Alternative mechanisms for coordination may also need to be developed to manage the growing constellation and sometimes tenuous nature of other partner organizations in the network. [1] CONCLUSION All the five trends – Globalization, Diversity, Flexibility, Flat, and Network and the tensions they produce result in greater organizational o r system complexity for both leaders and employees in organizations. The tensions produced by these trends cannot be solved.They have to be managed. Effective approaches in organizational change will involve not one strategy but many alternatives and will require leaders and employees to develop greater resilience in confronting these tensions. Change–Trends and Tensions in Organizations |Trends |Tensions | |1. Globalization |Global versus Local | |2. Diversity |Heterogeneity versus Homogeneity | |3.Flexibility |Flexibility versus Stability | |4. Flat |Centralization versus Decentralization | |5. Networks |Interdependence versus Independence | Planning and managing change, both cultural and technological, is one of the most challenging elements of a leader in an organization. Obviously, the more a leader can plan in anticipation of a change, the better he/she serves her subordinates or employees and the organization.Diagnosing the causes of change and structuring a program to promote a smooth transition to the new process, structure, and so on, is critical to the leader as well as the management’s success.BIBLIOGRAPHY [1] -No Author– â€Å"Trends in Organizational Change†. Available at http://www. referenceforbusiness. com/management/Tr-Z/Trends-in-Organizational-Change. html

The Media And Its Influence On Society - 1096 Words

It is normal for humans to be egocentric, even when we do not realize that we are acting in this fashion. Merriam Webster’s defines egocentric as being â€Å"concerned with the individual rather than society.† This means that a short and simple definition should be something like, only being concerned with what you want, and not caring about the wants of those around you. A similar word sociocentrism means â€Å"a tendency to assume the superiority or rightness of one’s own social group.† A simple definition for this would be, the view that your social group is better than others. So now that we have these two concepts and their definitions, how are they promoted throughout the media? The media today is as expansive as it has ever been. Stretching from Television, movies, radio, newspapers, magazines, and the internet. Most of these sources are bursting with either egocentric thinking, or sociocentric thoughts. Let’s start with television and movies , the basic formula for an action filled presentation is fairly straight forward. They introduce a strong, independent, and usually attractive individual, usually a male but not always, who is the only individual in that universe who is capable, or competent, enough to either stop the villain, or save the day, though usually both. This individual usually has everything planned out already and has a plan so full proof that it’s impossible for them to be anything but confident. This can have an effect on the audience who in a way looks up toShow MoreRelatedMedia And The Influence On Society958 Words   |  4 PagesThe Media and the Influence it has on Society Media plays a significant role in the way it can influence our culture. The media can produce positive and negative impacts on our society. It has the power to produce messages that can manipulate the way people think as well as influencing attitudes and actions taken towards the opposite sex. In the video Tough Guise: Violence, Media, and the Crisis in Masculinity Jackson Katz discusses that the rampant of male violence that affects American societyRead MoreThe Influence of Media on Society1266 Words   |  5 PagesThese ideologies are so prevalent in recent society that they have swayed the minds of those who were not interested enough to take a side on an issue, and this has caused a large increase in the amount of people who still believe in unlikely conspiracies or hoaxes. This has caused a large uproar and scepticism of the government, and with more evidence proving the governments secrecy, and conspiracy theories coming true, the citizens of countries are getting more par anoid of their own country andRead MoreMass Media Influence on Society1476 Words   |  6 Pagesï » ¿ Media’s Influence on Society Over the last 500 years, the influence of mass media has grown exponentially with the advance of technology.  First there were books, then newspapers, magazines, photography, sound recordings, films, radio, television, the so-called New Media of the Internet, and now social media.   Today, just about everyone depends on information and communication to keep their lives moving through daily activities like workRead MoreThe Media s Influence On Society1462 Words   |  6 PagesThe media s the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that s power. Because they control the minds of the masses† (Ruddy, 2002). Malcolm X, a prominent African American human rights activist, strongly believed that the media played a vital role in how they make society perceive events and people. An issue that is present, historically and currently, is media contributing to racism. When news is reported involvingRead MoreThe Influences Of Mass Media On Society864 Words   |  4 PagesThe Influences of Mass Media on Society For the greater majority of the American society, the presence of mass media is a normal part of everyday lives. With the purpose of mass media being to educate, entertain and inform, the excessive violence, self imaging, and lack of full detail on world events, is having negative influences and unhealthy impacts on society. As early as the 1920s, a form of the media has been present in the American society. Although broadcasted content wasRead MoreMedia s Influence On Society901 Words   |  4 PagesMedia plays an important and influential role in society. The media effects so many different institutions throughout a society that researchers have began to wonder how the media is really effecting these processes. Over the years many models have been developed to explain this process. The models that I will look at, include the hypodermic model, the mass society theory, the minimal effects model, and the agenda setting and priming model. Before looking at these models, we must first look atRead MoreMedia s Influence On Society1269 Words   |  6 Pages The media is full of countless things, it has completely changed the world and is now a part of our everyday lives (Bookman, 64). With television, radio, newspapers, books, etc†¦ working their way into our everyday lives it is impossible to live without the media today. Along with it being persuasive, informational and a great so urce for entertainment it also has a large binding influence on societies all over the world. Media aspects are radically reshaping the world (Marina 240) and though someRead MoreMedia s Influence On Society1256 Words   |  6 PagesThe media are full of countless things, they have completely changed the world we live in and are now a part of our everyday lives (Bookman, 64). With television, radio, newspapers, books, etc†¦ working their way into our everyday lives it is almost impossible to live without the media. Along with it being persuasive, informative and a great source for entertainment, it also has a large binding influence on societies all over the world. Media aspects are radically reshaping the world (Marina 240)Read MoreThe Media s Influence On Society1167 Words   |  5 Pagesassociating with the media can make you believe differently. While the media commence to advance and develop an incomprehensible factor, the appearance of civilization begins to mold and sh ape as a reflection to equally match. Despite the element of using false advertisement or infringement, society is charmed by the sense of exhilaration that is generated by the media. Yet civilization remain uncomprehending to the natural effect that the media leaves printed on them. The media is one of the largestRead MoreMedia s Influence On Society1293 Words   |  6 PagesMedia is a major contributor of how social groups are perceived in today’s society. Mediais around us every day almost all day, and it constantly sends messages about the world’s environment. There are many indicators shown pertaining to how media really affects society. One of the most prominent explanations of those questions is the way media influences stereotypes. There has been previous research linking media sources and biased attitudes. This research paper explores articles supporting media