Journal #5 and 6 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Journal #5 and 6 - Essay Example Later in the afternoon, my preceptor told me that she had to go for a couple of urgent leadership meetings that had just come up that I could not attend. She informed me to review my learning objective and she would review and sign it as soon as she came back from the afternoon meeting. We also had a discussion on a new yearly State quality reviews that would begin the following week for all her programs. She told me she would have me review the PREP program and gave me copies of forms with the items that Illinois State would be considering. We discussed the learning objective, and she gave me a couple comments and I was able to complete it by the end of the day. Based on my observations, I can say without any fear of contradiction that my preceptor played an important leadership role as a resourceful person in the program. She coordinated all the activities diligently and effectively. She remained composed as the meeting progressed and took control of events. By the end of the week, I had selected and finalized the project topic with both my faculty advisor and my preceptor. I reviewed some old postpartum EDPS from old records, and was still doing online research to find evidence based studies for my paper and project. On the following Monday, I will be meeting with the PREEP group and my preceptor to assess the quality review. The meetings with my preceptor are usually scheduled for Thursdays. However, this particular one was an exception and we met on Monday, 2/17/2013 since Thursday would be her day off. Besides, she wanted me to join her in her meeting with the PREP group to discuss the upcoming quality review in March. Therefore, we had a very lengthy and fruitful meeting with the PREP program facilitators. There were three other members totaling to five present in the meeting. She kicked off the meeting by introducing me to the group. She informed them of my purpose in the meeting with regards to observation and

Corporate Social Responsibility in Mitsubishi Essay

Corporate Social Responsibility in Mitsubishi - Essay Example However, Kotler and Lee (2004) defined CSR as the â€Å"commitment to improve community well-being through discretionary business practices and contributions of the corporate resources† (Kotler &Lee, 2004, p.3). In any case, the importance of CSR was established in the corporate world only at the beginning of the twenty first century. Big companies realized that profit making is no more an easy task, if they fail to contribute something to the community in which it operates. Some companies have good track record of exhibiting their social responsibility whereas some other companies are still neglect the needs of the community in which they operate. Mitsubishi Company is a reputed Japanese company as far as corporate social responsibility is concerned. â€Å"The origin of Mitsubishi goes back to 1870, when the founder, Yataro Iwasaki, started a shipping firm with three aging steamships† (Mitsubishi: Origin, 2010). After Second World War, the original Mitsubishi Company d isbanded to become separate independent companies as we witness today. The growth of Mitsubishi Company was along the growth of Japan. Whenever, Japanese economy faced troubles, Mitsubishi Organization also faced problems and vice versa. Mitsubishi selected London for opening its first international office in 1915 because of Japan’s better relationships with Britain at that time (Rudlin, 2000, p.8). Since then Mitsubishi opened many international offices at different parts of the world. â€Å"Mitsubishi International Corporation (MIC) conducts business in accordance with the three Corporate Principles established by its parent, Mitsubishi Corporation: corporate responsibility to society, integrity and fairness, and international understanding through trade†(Mitsubishi international corporation: Corporate Social responsibility, n. d). Even though, Mitsubishi is contributing heavily to the communities in which it operates, there are certain allegations also against them. This paper briefly analyses the case in favor and against Mitsubishi Company as far as corporate social responsibility is concerned. The case against Mitsubishi Robert Guest, British free-lance writer based in Hiroshima who contributes business and other articles to The Far Eastern Economic Review and The Independent, has mentioned that an Indian Worker Sue against Mitsubishi citing racial discriminations. The plaintiff alleged that â€Å"whereas Japanese employees at Mitsubishi are given English-language lessons at company expense, and Caucasian staff are provided with the best Japanese-language teaching available, he has been given no assistance whatsoever in his efforts to learn the Japanese language†(Guest, n. d). Racial discrimination is one of the major problems existing in the premises of most of the international companies. Globalization has brought many opportunities to the corporate companies to for international businesses; however, most of the companies like Mits ubishi, try to give more preferences to their local workers even while operating in overseas countries. Such business practices will always cause severe problems to a company if it decides to operate internationally. On 9 April 1996, the US Equal Employment Opportunities Commission (EEOC) filed a class action lawsuit in federal court in Illinois against Mitsubishi Motor Manufacturing of America Inc which claimed that over 300

The assignment is a short paper written in the style of a letter to

The is a short paper written in the style of a letter to the editor in the Wall Street Journal - Assignment Example The previous type of acquiring Pentagon’s projects through bidding has been keeping bidders away since complex projects led to (extra) impulse spending. Relying on contractors, as was the case in the past, can be termed as the reason why emerging nations such as Russia and China have been overshadowing our military. The reasons behind this include unnecessary expenditure, longer research times, and an overall lagging military force. This move concurs with the 2010 initiative titled â€Å"Better Buying Power† which sought to incorporate more military research in evaluating which resources were required, and how much they cost. This task was previously mandated to other contractors. If this trend is furthered, we are bound to experience lesser violation of federal performance and costs. I agree that as the United States, we possess sufficient reasons to expand our weapons research programs, and this will be achieved by decreasing our reliance on ‘other† contractors and encouraging more military

Philosophy and Ethics Essay Example for Free

Philosophy and Ethics Essay What is Ethics? Ethics is a branch of philosophy, which is the study of what is right and wrong. Ethics is an action of feeling. If you are walking on the street and you see a homeless person, you would ask yourself questions like this: How should I act? Should I help or ignore? When making decision how to ask and listen to your feelings what is wrong or right to is called â€Å"Ethics†. There are many examples that can describe ethics, but people like to explain ethics in an easy way in which everyone can be talking and everyone can be involved in this topic, such as law. By asking questions like: Can laws be wrong? Do laws apply to every citizen in Canada? Why do we need laws? Can laws be changed? These are the kind of questions that can explain ethics. Ethics come from a Greek word â€Å"Ethos†, which means character. This tells that ethics study the action that can be good or bad. The term â€Å"ethics† is often call â€Å"morals†, which comes from a Latin word â€Å"mores†, which means character, habit or custom. Ethics is identifying as morality in philosophy. Why ethics is important to study? Ethics is very important for human life. Ethics teach you how to act. Without ethics, our actions would be unplanned and pointless. If we want to be successful in our life we can do this in only one way and this way is learning about ethics. Everyday people are dealing with ethics and moral issue. For example, you didn’t do your homework last night what should you do should you tell your teacher the truth or should you lie say that you forgot your homework at home or do a bit of both, if your not sure what to do, then this a good chance to learned it study in class. If we study ethics deep it will help are know better for the future and will help us to be successful in life by knowing what right and wrong. What is Metaphysics? Metaphysics comes to us from Ancient Greece meta, meaning higher beyond earth physics or invisible physics. Metaphysics is the branch of philosophy, which study what is reality. It answers the question What is?†. American philosopher Wilfrid Sellars said that metaphysics is the study of how things hang together, and many other philosopher have called it as the first philosophy. So, metaphysics study reality, what can be meaning of life, and if we can talk about the thing that don’t exist. Why is Metaphysics important? Metaphysics is the heart of philosophy. Without a clarification or an interpretation of the world around us, we would be helpless to deal with experience Metaphysics tells if the reality is absolute. It has a specific kind self-regulating of our thoughts or feelings. The world around us is real. Metaphysics is very I important to be study in class because it makes you think more and tells you what reality what should you know or believe that it true. What is Epistemology? Epistemology is the study of knowledge. It answers the question, How do we know? it can be concepts, logical reasoning, as well as thoughts, ideas, memories, emotions, and all things mental. It is describe how mind is related to reality, and whether these relationships are usable or unacceptable. Why is Epistemology important? Epistemology is the clarification of how we think. It is needed in order to be able to decide the true from the false. It is needed in order to use and find the knowledge of the world. Without epistemology, we could not think. We would not be able to distinguish truth from error. Epistemology is correct is the step to which we could understand reality. We all go to school to get some education which means knowledge is have knowledge you are a genius why not studying in class this discipline and learned why do we need to know things why do they help to know more. How does knowledge make our lifes easier. What is Aesthetics? Esthetics is the study of art, and beauty. It also, tells the meaning of art and the importance of art. Why is Aesthetics important? It is important to know what is Aesthetics because it is everywhere in everyday life. You see e person you will say is the person is beautiful or not, if so, what makes it beautiful. It makes you think more, and it also teach you how to judge art and beauty. What is social and Political Philosophy? Is the study of how people can regulate and organized their selves. Social philosophy talks about variety of subjects, from individual meanings to legality of laws. Political philosophy is the study of questions about the city, government, politics, liberty, justice, property, rights, law a legal code and explain how do they work. Why is Social and Political Philosophy Important? It is important to know about Social and Political Philosophy because the main point of a country that maintain regulation is politic such as law, rights, freedom every Canadian citizen should have knowledge on this topic and see how they affect people. What is the Philosophy of Science? The Philosophy of Science is the study of science and how science work and why do we need it to know it and explains what is science, it also tells if there is any science or there is just philosophy. Why Philosophy of Science is important? As we know since has changed people lifes and has make a better life for everyone, so it is important to know we came till here and what can we do for future to make it better, as we all use computers has been having a big affect in our lifes why not trying to know how it is important for us.

Affirmative Action :: essays research papers

World War One  Account for the feelings of hostility towards the Austria-hungry Empire by Serb nationalists in 1914:  Austria was what stood in the way of progress of the Serbian nation. Serbia was a direct threat to the survival of the multinational Austrian Empire and for that reason Austria felt it necessary to thwart Serbia’s plans for growth and development. The Serbs desired more land, especially a coastline with an all important sea port, Austria denied them this by, in the peace treaty of 1912, creating a new country between Serbia and the coast, Albania. Austria also had Imperial control over several Slavic states, to which she denied national self-determination. The annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina by Austria in 1908, and the subsequent threat of war by the Empire had also been a major factor in creating the hostility between the two sides.  Assess the extent to which Germany provoked the war of 1914:  The Actions and policies of Germany before 1914 were largely provocative towards the other powers of Europe and thus a major factor in the build-up to war. With the Accent of a new Kaiser, Kaiser William II to the throne and the retirement of Chancellor Bismarck Germany embarked on a series of aggressive reforms and developments to her foreign policies. Kaiser Bill himself was threatening to the other leaders. His proud, militarist and power-hungry features, caused him to be viewed in a questionable light and the policies he instigated for Germany caused the same reaction. Central to the foreign policies of Germany was Weltpolitik (world policy), which involved the move from a continental power to a world power through colonial and naval expansion. Chancellor Bismarck had prevented Germany from threatening the other Empires by her foreign policies but it wasn’t long before Germany’s determination for a ‘place in the sun’ drew the attention of Britain and France. Her aggressive grabs for colonial acquisitions, her rapid naval expansion and increasing military strength were seen as, not only a direct threat to their own individual positions within Europe but as an attempt at world domination, particularly as Germany’s international position was already strong. This created enormous tension that spread through all other nations and caused them to alter their own foreign policies and military status in answer to the threat from Germany. Thus Germany was largely responsible for the stress of the arms race and desperate desires for colonial expansion in the other powers, which created tension that largely, contributed to the outbreak of war in 1914

Comparing Development of the King in Richard II, Richard III, Henry IV,

Shakespeare’s Development of the King  in  Richard II, Richard III, Henry IV, Henry V   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Shakespeare's plays beginning with Richard II and concluding with Henry V presents an interesting look at the role of a king. England's search for "the mirror of all Christian kings" provided the opportunity to explore the many facets of kingship showing the strengths and weaknesses of both the position and the men who filled that position. Through careful examination, Shakespeare develops the "king" as a physical, emotional, and psychological being. By presenting the strengths and weaknesses of these characteristics, Shakespeare presents a unified look at the concept of "kingship" and demonstrates that failure to achieve proper balance in "the king versus the man" struggle, leads to the ongoing bloodshed examined in this tetralogy and the next.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Richard II demonstrates the extreme of the conceit of divine right. He abuses his power and position caring only for the regal image he projects. His desire is for the physical, majestic appearance accompanied by the power and wealth of royalty. Richard desires to "look" the part which he succeeds in doing. In Richard II III.iii, York says of Richard in line 68, "Yet looks he like a king!" Richard does not care if he truly is a king with regard to responsibility for his subjects. He has interpreted divine right to be an agreement from God to him with no obligations to the subjects over whom he has dominion. This is exemplified in his attitude toward his ailing uncle, John of Gaunt, when he says to his friends, "Come, gentlemen, let's all go visit him. Pray God we may make haste and come too late (RII I.iv.63-64)." Richard's only interest is in the estates Gaunt's ... ...: Yale UP, 1990. 6. Chapman, George. All Fools. [1605.] Ed. Frank Manley. Lincoln: U of Nebraska P, 1968. 7. Council, Norman. When Honour's at Stake. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1973. 8. Craig, Horace S. Dueling Scenes and Terms in Shakespeare's Plays. Los Angeles: U of California P, 1940. 9. Edelman, Charles. Brawl Ridiculous: Swordfighting in Shakespeare's Plays. New York: Manchester UP, 1992. 10. Kiernan, V.G. The Duel in European History. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1988. 11. Marlowe, Christopher. The Jew of Malta. [1633.] Ed. James R. Siemon. New York: W W Norton, 1994. 12. Seldon, John. Table-Talk. [1689]. Ed. Edward Arber. London: Alex, Murray & Son, 1868. 13. Shakespeare, W. "The Tragedy of King Richard the Second." The Complete 14. Signet Classic Shakespeare. Toronto: Harcourt Brace Johanovich, Publishers, 1972   

Ethics Bank Bailout

This paper explores the ethics of bank executives receiving large bonuses despite the fact that they received a bailout. I identify the utilitarian and deontological implications of these executives’ actions. This paper also examines if the executives deserved the bonuses, did the banks need a bonus, and how the banks should have been regulated by the banks.Keywords: bailout, utilitarian, deontologyEthics of Bank Bailout BonusesCurrently the economy is still in â€Å"The Great Recession† largely due to the fallout caused by banks. Banks caused this fallout by giving out home loans to unqualified borrowers.  The banks approved loans they know could not be repaid by the borrower because of the terms such as adjustable rates.These home loans started defaulting; which started a domino effect of bank failures, further driving the economy into a downward spiral. In came the government, armed with astronomical sums of money determined to rescue these large financial institut ions. Enrich, Hilsenrath, and Solomon (2009) state that 700 billion dollars of taxpayer money was used to bailout these banks under the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP).It wasn’t long after these bailouts that these banks continued to reward the executives with large bonuses. Should have these top executives of these major banks that received the bailout money been allowed to receive large bonuses? I say definitely not because it was wrong under the provisions of utilitarian ethics which I believe should have been applied in this situation. These executives were at the helm when these banks failed. Bonuses should be rewards for success not compensation for a title or position. If these banks had enough money to give bonuses then the question of do they really need a bailout should be asked.Furthermore, this bailout money did not belong to the banks to give out as they pleased, it belonged to the taxpayers and the money should have been accompanied by stringent regulation s imposed by the government. A bonus is normally given as a reward for production or as an enticement for favored behavior or performance. On Wall Street a bonus is an equivocal right with no strings attached. Success or failure does not matter. Being an executive in the country’s most powerful financial firms is justification enough to entitle them to a bonus. This is the methodology that these institutions follow.Executives used deontological ethics because they focused on their rights and entitlements as executives. They decided their rights to large bonuses outweighed the importance of righting the economy which affected the entire country. Meanwhile, these are the same executives that were in charge when many American’s retirement plans and investments were depleted or completely wiped out. These were the same executives that oversaw an industry that gave out home loans with impossible repayment terms. It can be argued that the banks caused the entire financial wo es that are still present today.Instead of the institutions terminating their executives for not stopping their organization’s misdeeds they were rewarded. These bank executives drove their institutions to the brink of demise. Yet, they were still rewarded with multi-billion dollar bonuses. How could this be justified or ethical? According to Freifeld (2009), Citigroup Inc. , Merrill Lynch & Co. and seven other U. S. banks paid $32. 6 billion in bonuses in 2008 while receiving $175 billion in taxpayer funds through TARP. That means that almost 20% of the government’s bank bail-out to these banks was used on bonuses for their institution’s executives.The question has to be asked, â€Å"Could the bank bailout have been 20% less to these banks? † An even more interesting question would be, â€Å"Did these banks really need the bank bail-out money? † These executives took an ethical egoistic approach by accepting these bonuses. Andre and Velasquez (198 9) explain that three steps to apply utilitarianism to any situation to decide a moral course of action. The first step is to identify all the course of actions that are available in a situation. The second step is to determine all the beneficial and harmful consequences of each course of action for everyone affected by the action.Finally, the third step is to select the course of action that provides the greatest benefits after the costs have been taken into account. Let’s apply this theory to the bank executives and their choice to receive a large bonus. First step would have them identify all their course of actions available to them, which was to take or leave the massive bonus. Secondly, was to determine all the beneficial and harmful consequences for each course of action for everyone affected by taking or refusing the bonus. Those affected by the taking or leaving the bonus include the executive, the financial institution, and the taxpayers.The beneficial consequence o f taking the bonus for the executive is a very large sum of money. The benefit to the financial institution and the taxpayer is none. The harmful consequence to the executive would be obvious, which would be the loss of a tremendous amount of money. The harmful consequences for the financial institution would be loss of capital that could be used somewhere else more productive and the loss of the government’s confidence. The harmful consequence of the executive taking the bonus would be an increased budget deficit which may lead to higher taxes and loss of federal program funding.Finally, weighing the consequences using the utilitarian theory the greatest benefit would be for the executives to refuse the bonus. The right decision for these bank executives would have been to take a utilitarian ethical approach and not accepted their bonuses. These bonuses hurt the government and the people of the United States by costing the bailout more money than necessary and creating a lar ger deficit. Thus, the act of the executives taking their bonuses was morally unethical under the theory of utilitarian ethics because the consequences were more harmful for the greater population.Instead, these executives prioritized their needs and wants higher than the needs and wants of the people. Financial executives were following the ideology of deontology when they made their decision to take their multi-billion dollar bonuses. According to Alexander and Moore (2008) deontology is based from the word â€Å"duty. † I believe that these bank executives felt it was their duty and entitlement to take the bonus. Also deontologists believe in following the rules even though the act may be considered the right thing to do even if it produces bad consequences (Alexander & Moore 2008).They were not breaking the rules or law when they took their bonuses because there were no regulations or rules against them doing so. They followed the rules and it produced the bad effect of c reating a larger than necessary bailout amount. On the other hand however, the government made the bank bailout loan on good faith. Utilitarian ethics were applied in the decision to give out the loan because they feared the banks would ultimately fail without the money. The choice was made out of consequence. The consequence of failing banks would be a country with an even worse economy and completely ruined financial sector.Thus, the government acted and followed utilitarianism’s theory of the greatest good, for the greater amount of people. The government should have not rushed to give the money to the banks without devising stricter regulations. Restrictions were placed on some executive compensation for participating banks, but did not limit salaries and bonuses (Despite Bailout 2008). If the government had placed limitations regulating excessive bonuses this could have been avoided. Executives would have been able to follow either consequential or deontological ethics b y following these limits imposed.Instead the government through legislation did not impose sanctions against bonuses as part of TARP. By failing to do so they left the door open for banks and executives to make ethical choices on their own. I explored the utilitarian and deontology implications of the bank bailout bonuses. I found that the bank executives should not have taken the bonuses after receiving bailout money from the government by using the utilitarian theory because ultimately the consequences were more harmful than good for greater population. I also explained why executives should not have received the bonuses based on their and their institution’s performance.I also questioned whether the bank bailout money was necessary because the banks had enough money to give out large bonuses. Also discussed was the idea of the government imposing stricter sanctions with the TARP legislation forbidding large bonuses. I also stated that the bank executives could have been et hically right under the pretense of deontology. Deontology’s theories revolve around duties, rules, and obligations (Waller B. , 2008). Therefore, the bank executives felt they had the right and duty to an enormous bonus as heads of multi-billion dollar financial institutions. They also followed the rules by accepting the bonuses.