My Dream in Field :: miscellaneous

My Dream in Field When I was young, I of ten told to myself that when I grew up I could be anything I wanted to be and I always took for granted that this was true. I knew exactly what I was going to be, and I would spend hours dreaming about how wonderful my life would be when I grew up. One day, though, when did I grew up I realized that things had not turned out the way I had always expected they would. When I was little, I always played with boys. I rarely played with girls, and I often hung out a bang of boys; I was very interested with them. We would play soccer and go swimming. Al most every summer afternoon, all the boys in my neighborhood and I would meet on the field to get a soccer game going. Surprisingly, I was always to be favored by all my friends, boys. I was very fast and I could kick the ball far and exactly. I loved soccer more than anything, and I would not miss a game whenever it was showed in television. My brother played soccer too, and I would go the field with my friends to watch him play. It was just like the big leagues, with lots of people, the lights that shone so high and the bright you could see other fans sitting far away. I loved to go to my brother’s game. I would sit and cheer on my brother and his team. My attention was focused on the field, and my heart would jump with every shoot straight toward the both of goals. And more much exciting when the world cup seasons came. I would spend lot of time to sit in front of television to watch with whole of my family. The favorite team that we favored was the England. When the England won, I would be so excited I could not sleep; when they lost, I would go to bed angry just like all my brothers and parents. I have never forgotten the first time my dad and I went to watch the major league soccer game where I decided to be a major league soccer player. The excitement began from my house to the stadium and during the time of game. Now, I was six years old, and almost people in my country would use bicycles to move or travel around.

Organization Learning and Development Essay

Organizational performance depends upon human resources, knowledge and skills of employees. Organization learning and development determine overall success of organizational performance and market position of a company or firm. Changes occurred in technology, marketing, and numerous management techniques, some of which are concerned with human problems. Most of the changes are made in a rather disjointed or piecemeal manner. Following Revans (1980) learning in an organization must be greater than or equal to the rate of change in the environment. The approach emerging today is to use the growing body of ideas and systematic thought to consider innovatory ideas on organization and to adopt a more systematic comprehen ¬sive look at problems, so that we look at the whole instead of looking at separate parts. In modern environment, individuals have a lot of freedom, apart from certain laws of society, but when they join an organization their freedom is restricted and their effort must be joined with those of others to achieve organizational goals through learning and development practices. Change cannot occur if employees do not have sufficient knowledge and skills necessary for new organizational environment. Following Argyris (1977) â€Å"organizational learning as the process of detection and correction of errors† In his view organizations learn through individuals acting as agents for them† (cited Malhotra 1996). In this case, organizational learning becomes a change agent for the organization. Following Polanyi, Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) identify two types of knowledge, â€Å"tacit knowledge† and â€Å"explicit knowledge†, which influence organizational learning and development. Employees need to acquire tacit knowledge and explicit knowledge in order to meet individual and business goals. Some administra ¬tive apparatus is needed through which managerial authority is exercised. Therefore a hierarchy is formed which issues policy statements to ensure any discretion that individuals may have in their work is exercised in the spirit or attitude of the organization. Without tacit and explicit knowledge, an organization is not able to meet rapidly changing environment. This requirement is somewhat, although not exclusively, dependent upon the first. The level of involvement of employees in the learning process will be necessarily substantial. For the innovation of new ideas to be successful a high degree of integration is needed between all concerned (e. g. engineering, production management and marketing). Organizations that are too rigidly structured may find integration of all necessary activities very difficult (Armstrong 2001). Nick Bontis et al (2002) states that stock and flow of knowledge affect three level in organizations: personal, team and organizational. Direct business needs, which have been identified from the study of the organizational situation might best be met in part by some form of training which cascades down the organization. Selection in such cases is likely to be on a broad basis, because the judgment has already been made that most people need this training. Although there might be discussion with line managers, particularly on who should attend first, selection ul ¬timately should be a central decision, and should be compulsory (Senior, 2001). Following Flood (1999) knowledge and learning allow employees to be better positioned in organization and give them a chance to survive and prosper in different environments. Revans (1980) is right stating that learning in an organization must be greater than the rate of change because learning and development open new opportunities for organizations and allow the staff to meet the criteria set down: persistence and great personal desire to master this knowledge. On the other hand, knowledge develops such important skills as the ability to analyze and synthesize information about the clanging environment. In this situation, employees take into account universal concepts and experience of other people trying to solve his/her life problems or trying to find solution to these troubles (Schuler 1998). Without new knowledge, employees depend upon their own life experience and are limited by prejudices and life scope. Learning cultivates human creativity and helps it to flourish. Organizational learning and development help to create new practical knowledge on the basis of the existing one making employees free from old technologies and views of their peers. Following Weick (1991): â€Å"organizations are not built to learn. Instead, they are patterns of means-ends relations deliberately designed to make the same routine response to different stimuli, a pattern which is antithetical to learning in the traditional sense† (cited Malhotra 1996). Without organizational learning and development, organizations could not benefit from outside worlds depending on their limited world perception. Freedom of choice is the main priority given by education and knowledge. They can choose without knowledge but their choice would be accidental and cannot guarantee the best solution to the problem you are faced with. Organizational learning and development help organizations to get in touch with the society and others which also a key to freedom (Mayo 1998). In the book â€Å"The Fifth Discipline†, Senge (1995) explains organizational development and performance through system theory. Organizations are affected by environment and have a structure which has both formal and informal elements. The analysis of structure will cover how activities are grouped together, the number of levels in the hierarchy, the extent to which authority is decentralized to divisions and units, and the relationships that exist between different units and functions. Senge states that systems thinking method helps organizations to transform their activities and become a learning organization (Organizational Learning and Information Systems 2007). Five disciplines include â€Å"building shared vision, mental models, team learning, personal mastery, systems thinking† (Senge 1995, p. 56). These principles are crucial because these factors allow organizations adapt to changing environments. So, without active learning and development organizations will not be able to compete on the market and adapt changes. Learning process should be prier to change. Bearing in mind the need to take an empirical and contingent approach to organizing, as suggested above, the aim of learning could be defined as being to optimize the arrangements for conducting the affairs. â€Å"A systems orientation is evidenced through common language producing thinking that encourages greater interdependency thus allowing for cross-functional thinking and abilities to be drawn into a productive whole† (Barker, Camarata, 1998, p. 4). To do this, it is necessary, as far as circumstances allow, to: clarify the overall purposes of learning – the strategic thrusts that govern what it does and how it functions; define as precisely as possible the key activities required to achieve that purpose; group these activities logically together to avoid unnecessary overlap or duplica ¬tion. Following Goh (1998) â€Å"Learning organizations not only encourage these practices but also have mechanisms or systems that allow them to happen. Part of this knowledge transfer involves learning successful practices from other organizations and competitors as well† (p. 5). As Katz and Kahn (1964) wrote: ‘Systems theory is basically concerned with prob ¬lems of relationship, of structure and of interdependence. As a result, there is a considerable emphasis on the concept of transactions across boundaries – between the system and its environment and between the different parts of the system† (Katz and K ahn, 1964, p. 48). According to this theory, all organizations have some learning and development which influence market position and innovative approach to performance. Structures incorporate a network of roles and relationships and are there to help in the process of ensuring that collective effort is explicitly organized to achieve specified ends (Mayo 1998). Most employees require much practice to create professional skills and knowledge. Organizations are continually dependent upon and influenced by their environments. The basic characteristic of organizational learning is that it transforms inputs into outputs within its environment. The components of organizational learning include the importation of energy, the throughput, and the systems as cycle aspects of organizations (McNamara 2007). Organizational learning and development include key organizational processes – an organization’s ‘task’ environment includes suppliers, markets and competitors; the wider environment includes factors such as public attitudes, economic and political systems, laws etc; employees and other tangible assets – people, plant, and equipment; formal organizational requirements – systems designed to regulate the actions of employees (and machines); the social system – culture (values and norms) and relationships between employees in terms of power, affiliation and trust; technology – the major techniques people use while engaged in organizational processes and that are programmed into machines; the dominant coalition – the objectives, strategies, personal characteristics and internal relationships of those who oversee the organization as a whole and control its basic policy making (Reed 2001). If organizations are unable to prepare their staff to a coming change, they will be inevitably left behind. Revans is right stating that learning in an ‘organization must be greater than or equal to the rate of change in the environment’ because organizations depend upon the learning and development as a part of change. Following â€Å"as the relationship changes and becomes more complex, the need increases for a relation-based learning organization using communication at all levels and through its various forms† (Barker, Camarata 1998, p. 4). The overall purpose of organizational learning and development is to ensure that the staff is able to achieve success in changing environments. In this case, organizational learning and development can be the source of the organizational capabilities that allow it to learn and capitalize on new opportunities. Ensure that the staff obtains and retains the skilled, committed and well-motivated workforce it needs. This means taking steps to assess and satisfy future people needs and to enhance and develop the inherent capacities of people – their contributions, potential and employability – by providing learning and continuous development opportunities (Nonaka, Takeuchi 1995). It can also involve the development of high performance work systems which enhance flexibility and include â€Å"rigorous recruitment and selec ¬tion procedures, performance-contingent incentive compensation systems, and management development and training activities linked to the needs of the organization† (Mayo 1998, p. 49). An understanding of organiza ¬tional processes and skills in the analysis and diagnosis of patterns of organizational behavior are therefore important. Organizations need to be able to understand the patterns of behavior that are observed to predict in what direction behavior will move (particularly in the light of managerial action), and to use this knowledge to control behavior over the course of time. Effective managerial action requires that the manager be able to diagnose the system he or she is working in. According to Goh (1998): Skill and knowledge acquisition are obviously useless unless they can be transferred to the immediate job by the employee. It is even better if this knowledge can also be transferred to other parts of the organization to solve problems and energize creative new ideas. Part of this knowledge transfer involves learning successful practices from other organizations and competitors as well† (15). Barker and Camarata (1998): underlines that: â€Å"personal mastery is the continual process of growth and development needed for creative work for both the individual and organization. Learning in organizations occurs only through the learning that individuals acquire â€Å"(4). The organization must do all it can to explain why change is essential and how it will affect everyone. Moreover, every effort must be made to protect the interests of those affected by change. Resistance to change is inevitable if the individuals concerned feel that they are going to be worse off – implicitly or explicitly. Management of change will produce that reaction. In an age of global competition, technological innovation, turbulence, disconti-nuity, even chaos, change is inevitable and necessary (Senior, 2001). In sum, learning in an organization must be greater than the rate of change in the environment, because only in this case organizations able to compete on the market and create skilled workforce. Organizational learning and development can be seen as a part of change process which allows organizations to foreshadow coming changes and possible problems. Learning should be greater than the rate of change, because organizations welcome the challenges and opportunities if they have strong human resources and skilled workforce. They are the ones to be chosen as change agents. Reference http://www.brint.com/papers/orglrng.htm

Implied Warranties Case Study

Implied Warranties Case Study Implied Warranties FACTS: Peter and Tanya Rothing operated Diamond R Stables near Belgrade, Montana, where they bred, trained and sold horses. Arnold Kallestad owns a ranch in Gallatin County, Montana, where he grows hay and grain, and raise Red Angus cattle. For more than twenty years, Kallestad has sold between 300 and 1,000 tons of hay annually, sometimes advertising it for sale in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle. In 2001, the Rothing’s bought hay from Kallestad for $90 a ton.They received a delivery on April 23. In less than two weeks, at least nine of the Rothings’ horses exhibited symptoms of poisoning that was diagnosed as botulism. Before the outbreak was over, nineteen animals died. Robert Whitlock, associate professor of medicine and the director of the Botulism Laboratory at the University of Pennsylvania concluded that the Kallestad’s hay was the source. The Rothing’s filed a suit in a Montana state court against Kalle stad, claiming in part, breach of the implied warranty of merchantability.Kallestad asked the court to dismiss the claim on the grounds that, if botulism had been present, it had been in no way foreseeable. ISSUE: Should the court grant this request? Why or why not? [Rothing v. Kallestad, 337 Mont. 193. 159. P. 3d22 (2007)] DECISION: The court should not grant Kallestad’s request for dismissal because he breached his contract with the Rothings and failed to honor the implied warranty of merchantability. In addition, Kallestad should be ordered to reimburse or compensate the Rothings for the goods and products they’ve lost due to the defective product they received from Arnold Kallestad’s ranch.REASONS: From a personal standpoint, Arnold Kallestad may have not known the true conditions of the hay he sold to Peter and Tonya Rothing. For more than two decades Kallestad provided quality alfalfa hay at a competitive price. This, from what the facts tell us, is the fi rst major incident to occur within their business relationship. All the other purchases of hay were perfectly fine and free of disease and toxins. This isolated incident could be viewed as an unforeseeable accident. From a legal standpoint, Peter and Tonya Rothing have the law on their side.The Rothings claimed Kallestad breached the implied warranty of merchantability which is defined as â€Å"a warranty that goods being sold or lease are reasonably fit for the general purpose for which they are sold or leased, are properly packaged and labeled, and are of proper quality. The warranty automatically arises in every sale or lease of goods made by a merchant who deals in goods of the kind sold or leased† (Miller and Gaylord 360). The goods in question would be the alfalfa hay Kallestad harvested from his property annually.For the purpose of this case, goods are defined as â€Å"at  Ã‚ §Ã‚  Ã‚  30-2-105(1), MCA, to mean:  Ã‚  all things (including specially manufactured goo ds)  which are movable at the time of identification to the contract for sale  other than the money in which the price is to be paid, investment securities †¦ and things in action† (asci. uvm. edu). Kallestad would be considered a merchant of these goods because he has sold 300 to 1,000 tons of hay every year and advertises his product in the local newspaper on a regular basis.Therefore, it is established In Arnold Kallestad’s testimony, he admitted the hay the Rothings received were second cuttings and properly treated and dried. He also admitted â€Å"the hay was exposed to moisture during the winter months and that, one winter, a ditch near the stacked hay overflowed causing water to go along the west side of the stack of hay and then onto the road† (asci. uvm. edu). During this possible exposure, the overflow of water could have contained toxins from the soil or standing water located on Arnold Kallestad’s ranch, and contaminated the hay sold to Peter and Tonya Rothing.According to the U. S. National Library of Medicine, â€Å"Clostridium botulinum  is found in soil and untreated water throughout the world† which may be where the botulism came from (nlm. nih. gov). As for the compensation for the goods and products lost due to the defective hay sold to the Rothings, Kallestad is held liable refunding all monies paid for the purchase of the hay. In addition to the refund, he must also remit monies for the clean-up of infected areas on Diamond R. Stables, veterinary bills for services rendered, and compensation for the 19 animals killed as a result of the hay infected with botulism. Botulism: MedlinePlus Medical Encyclopedia. †Ã‚  U. S National Library of Medicine. Ed. Linda J. Vorvick, MD and Jatin M. Vyas, MD, PhD. U. S. National Library of Medicine, 24 Aug. 2011. Web. 05 Mar. 2012. . Miller, Roger LeRoy. , and Gaylord A. Jentz. Business Law Today: The Essentials: Text & Summarized Cases: E-commerce, Legal , Ethical, and International Environment. 9th ed. Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning, 2011. Print. â€Å"Rothing v. Kallestad. †Ã‚  Department of Animal Science (ASCI): University of Vermont. The University of Vermont. Web. 04 Mar. 2012. .