Federal programs Essay Example for Free

Federal programs Essay Throughout the twentieth century, Congress has established a great number of federal programs administered by agencies within the Executive Branch. Through this process of a wide-ranging allocation of authority to the executive Branch, Congress has assisted in creating a massive Federal Bureaucracy. The relationship of Congress to the Executive Branch today must therefore be seen in terms of its relation to this Bureaucracy, as well as its relation to the Presidency. In order to gain some control over the operations of the various agencies which had been established within the Executive Branch, in 1946 congress began to develop a sequence of configurations and procedures designed to manage the Administration. This process was also known as congressional oversight. There are several methods through which congressional misunderstanding operations take place: the committee process, congressional administrative offices, casework, as well as a number of administrative practices. Where the congressional oversight functions take place, there are three types of committees: authorizations committees, appropriations committees, and governmental operations committees. The first type of committee is the functional committee which initially establishes or authorizes the program or agency. In the case of a military program, this would be the Armed Services Committees in both chambers. ‘In the case of an urban program, this would be the Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs Committee in the House and the Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee in the Senate. Similarly, each program area within the Federal Bureaucracy is related to at least one specific substantive standing committee in each chamber of Congress. ’ (Issa, 2011) In attempting to follow the oversight activities through these authorization committees, a number of complications are often encountered. One of these is the result from the fact that a particular governmental agency may fall within the authority of several different practical committees or subcommittees. As a result, the agency may play ‘one committee or subcommittee against the other in order to achieve those results in Congress which tend to benefit the agency the most. (Office of The Law Revision Counsel, 2012) Another problem is that a committee which establishes a program is often too involved with the outcome of its own efforts to be willing to investigate adequately the operations of the program it has initiated. One of the most substantial places where an amount of oversight activity takes place is in the appropriations process. The budget for an agency must be approved anew each year. ’ One might assume that this yearly appropriations process would lead to a careful annual inspection of the budgets of all the various governmental agencies. (Issa, 2011) This is not the case. The federal budget is so great and compound that it is impossible to consider carefully the budget of each agency and program on a year-to-year basis. What happens instead is that budgets are often routinely approved from year to year with general reviews only occurring sporadically. In addition, many agencies develop quite close relationships with the subcommittees of the Appropriations Committees which spe cifically deal with their agency. These agencies are therefore often able to abstract some special favors from these particular appropriations subcommittees. The Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs and the House Committee on Governmental Reform were initially established to manage congressional concern over governmental processes. Thus, many see these committees as an ideal place for maintaining congressional observation over the activities of the vast Bureaucracy located within the Executive Branch. However, because of jurisdictional differences and because of the hesitancy of most representatives and senators to provide for satisfactory independent oversight activities, the efforts of these governmental operations committees have been quite restricted. The three administrative offices within Congress are used to some extent in the congressional oversight process. The General Accounting Office, The GAO has the accountability, not simply for performing accounting audits, but also for judging how various programs are being managed. In other words, the GAO often performs the task of program assessment. The GAO plays a significant role in congressional oversight. The Congressional Research Service, while preparing reports and studies to assist members of Congress, the CRS sometimes includes some information on the activities and routines of various governmental agencies. This is another important source of oversight information for members of Congress. The Congressional Budget Office gathers information on the budgets of the various governmental agencies and to report on new budgetary requirements and propositions that are made through the Executive Branchs Office of Management and Budget. Budgetary information is an extremely important source of data upon which the various congressional committees can judge the effectiveness of specific governmental programs. Granting, the information gathered by the CBO may seem to permit for substantial congressional oversight, the fact is that it is the agencies that often use this informational link for their own purposes in pursuing their requests for additional funding directly to the congressional committee, instead of directing all their communications through the OMB. This short circuits the use of the OMB as one of the Presidents management tools. Efficiency, from an overall standpoint, we can see that these three congressional offices. The General Accounting Office, the Congressional Research Services, and the Congressional Budget Office combined with the staffs of individual congresspersons and senators and the staffs of congressional committees are able to supply our national legislators with vast amounts of information and evaluations of governmental activities. ‘In fact, the United States Congress has available to it one of the most extensive research staffs of any national legislature in the world. ’ (Issa, 2011) Nevertheless, the availability of information and study alone is not sufficient for effective congressional oversight. The desire to follow through on this available information is another necessary ingredient and it is this ingredient which is often lacking. Many times congressional oversight is limited by the worries of various congressional committees and subcommittees over their particular jurisdictions and in a substantial number of instances, the burdens of organized special interests also interfere with the ability or wishes of members of Congress to significantly oversee governmental operations. Aside from these problems, there are also the boundaries of time. Congresspersons are loaded with extremely dense schedules. They have a large number of often conflicting responsibilities to perform. Representatives and senators must therefore place priorities on the use of their time. Often oversight activities lose in this shamble of priorities to legislative activities, to the creation of new programs to deal with current problems, and to casework concerns. Representatives and senators, themselves, do not usually become directly involved in much casework or fundamental services. It is their staff that deals with these matters. However, representatives and senators are usually informed by their staffs of many of these problems, and it is through these specific interactions that these legislators often get the most intense impression as to the effectiveness of many governmental programs. Casework thus provides an important source of direct, specific information which proves very useful in congressional oversight activities. Congress has also passed some major reforms and reconnoitered a number of major legislative techniques, many of which have had the effect of enlightening congressional oversight. Sunshine Laws. During the 1970s, Congress attempted to open up many facets of governmental operations to the general public. This was done through the Freedom of Information Act and the Government in Sunshine Act. By making information more broadly available to the public, these acts also increase the amount of information available to Congress. The Congressional Veto. Very often Congress passes rather broad pieces of legislation. It is then up to specific agencies to fill in the details of these laws, both with regard to the building of governmental agencies and the processes which they follow. One might note for example that while Congress passes general tax laws, the details of the regulations regarding the payment of federal taxes is to be found not in the tax law itself but rather in the Internal Revenue Code which is developed by the Internal Revenue Service, which is an executive agency. The problem that were presented by the executive agencies developing a great many regulations or codes is that the only way Congress is able to affect these details is through the passage of new legislative acts. As we have seen, this is often a burdensome and prolonged process. In order to avoid this, Congress now writes into some authorization bills requirements for a congressional veto. According to this procedure, when an agency disseminates rules filling in the details of congressional legislation, Congress automatically has the power within a specific time period to veto some of these rules and to demand that the agency fill in the details in a different way. The important thing is that Congress can do this without having to go through the process of passing a new law. Although this procedure is rarely used, it does offer the prospective for a far greater legislative control over the procedures by which the Bureaucracy operates. Sunset Legislation. In starting governmental programs or agencies, Congress usually sets no time limit on the functioning of the program or agency. Since the 1970s, a practice developed by which Congress authorizes the existence of a program or agency for only a inadequate amount of time. In other words, Congress specifies a date by which the agency or program will conclude to function. In order for the agency to continue its operations after that time, a new bill must be passed allowing its continued existence for another specified period of time. This practice is obviously intended to avert the continued existence of agencies or programs which no longer meet a legitimate need or which fail to meet a legitimate need effectively. A dissimilarity on sunset legislation is the procedure of annual authorization. According to this procedure, the continued existence of governmental agency must be approved on a year-to-year basis. While this practice obviously creates tremendous difficulties in the ability of such an agency to engage in long-term planning, it does suggestively increase the potential effectiveness of congressional control. ‘Zero Based Budgeting (ZBB). Zero Based Budgeting is a technique through which administrators must carefully justify their entire agencies budgets. Zero based budgeting requires a continual top-to-bottom assessment of all agencies programs designed to insure their cost effectiveness. ’ (Issa, 2011) We can see that many structures and techniques have been developed to allow Congress to be more effective in its oversight activities. However, jurisdictional disputes and pressures from various well organized special interests continue to prevent these new techniques and sources of information from being used effectively. In many occurrences, the actual nature and effect of government policy depends less on the actions of our elected officials than it does on the activities of non-elected bureaucrats who often remain totally immune from the pressures of the general publicalthough not necessarily from those of well-organized special interests. One of the major political issues determining our national future is the question of how well our government is able to represent effectively the needs and desires of the American people. As we have noted, the role of Congress as a representative of the people was one of the most important functions of this first branch of government envisioned by the Founders when they drafted the Constitution. However, the many new needs which our national government has had to meet in this century have placed this role of representation under great stress.

Analytical Essay: Riddle Of Inequality :: essays research papers

Analytical Essay: "The Riddle of Inequality" The riddle of inequality, as Tillich explains, "...Cannot be solved." This inequality is the divider of people, of the have's and have-nots. It seems that this riddle has confused people since the beginning of time and was even discussed in the bible. People always wonder why some have more than others do; they wonder why this happens and how it can change. I believe that this riddle is natural and cannot be changed despite he best efforts of people. Tillich attributes this mystery of have's and have-nots to many factors. First is that if you were granted with inherited talents then you should use them in life to the best of your ability. But if you let them go to waste, then these talents will ultimately be taken away. It is unfair when things are taken away that we might have taken for granted due to lack of attention, such as, "...[the] intense joy and the presence of the mystery of life through the freshness of the young day or the glory of the dying day..." These things are only taken away because we do not pay enough attention to the simple beauty in life and in nature. Although all of these are examples of inequality, I do not agree with Tillich when he claims that this is due to the presence of the divine, by the choice of God. I believe inequality comes from ourselves. We may embrace, or else let it slip away. It is through our lack of conscientiousness that life becomes unequal. I attribute the basic inequalities in nature as an effect of true nature, almost as far as survival of the fittest. Inequality is unfair but it is an aspect of life that people must deal with without an answer, without justification. When looking to God or any religious aspect for an answer you can only possibly answer the question yourself. When you pray or ask God a question you propose this question clearly to yourself. When you finally find an answer or solution it is not through the light of God, but through yourself and through your own learning and understanding of the world. Analytical Essay: Riddle Of Inequality :: essays research papers Analytical Essay: "The Riddle of Inequality" The riddle of inequality, as Tillich explains, "...Cannot be solved." This inequality is the divider of people, of the have's and have-nots. It seems that this riddle has confused people since the beginning of time and was even discussed in the bible. People always wonder why some have more than others do; they wonder why this happens and how it can change. I believe that this riddle is natural and cannot be changed despite he best efforts of people. Tillich attributes this mystery of have's and have-nots to many factors. First is that if you were granted with inherited talents then you should use them in life to the best of your ability. But if you let them go to waste, then these talents will ultimately be taken away. It is unfair when things are taken away that we might have taken for granted due to lack of attention, such as, "...[the] intense joy and the presence of the mystery of life through the freshness of the young day or the glory of the dying day..." These things are only taken away because we do not pay enough attention to the simple beauty in life and in nature. Although all of these are examples of inequality, I do not agree with Tillich when he claims that this is due to the presence of the divine, by the choice of God. I believe inequality comes from ourselves. We may embrace, or else let it slip away. It is through our lack of conscientiousness that life becomes unequal. I attribute the basic inequalities in nature as an effect of true nature, almost as far as survival of the fittest. Inequality is unfair but it is an aspect of life that people must deal with without an answer, without justification. When looking to God or any religious aspect for an answer you can only possibly answer the question yourself. When you pray or ask God a question you propose this question clearly to yourself. When you finally find an answer or solution it is not through the light of God, but through yourself and through your own learning and understanding of the world.

Discretionary Use Of Police Authority

Police officers enjoy the much-envied monopoly of instruments of force. Only a state armed force has recognized legal rights to wage violence against the citizenry and employ all manner of force in the name of maintaining law and order. A look at a number of police actions leaves a doubt whether all might be provided for by the law. The police are permitted to use a certain level of force in enforcing the law and while making arrests and maintaining order.The force used in this case is supposed to be reasonable; this reasonableness is not measurable and is at the discretion of the police or to a large extent to the court of law. In their day to day activities, police follow scripted rules and guidelines, guided by the law and their professional ethics, but rarely is all that they do contained in the written codes. Majority of what they go through depends on their personal intuition and judgment of what is right.They are supposed to make a split judgment on the most appropriate decisi on in a certain situation, whereas such a provision may not be provided in the rules. The legality of such decisions sometimes is in question. It is not possible for the law to contain all the likely scenarios that the police can come across. The unpredictable nature of their work makes it hard to do that and it is only through effective training and a high level of discipline that proper judgment and sound decisions can be made; even in an extremely uncertain environment.This however is an ideal situation and most of the time police officers have been noted to go to the extreme ends and making unreasonable decisions that are inconsistent with the publics’ expectations. In carrying out their duties, the police sometimes seem to be following their own discreet codes, codes that cannot be fathomed by civilians. Their rules are paternalistic in nature and may not be in line with the spirit of democracy. This and more is what this paper hopes to look at. It will scrutinize the po lice use of discretionary authority and note whether sometimes this authority is extremely and unreasonably overstretched.Discretion can simply be referred to as that power or freedom accorded to individuals, or the police for that matter, to make judgment or decisions that they think are appropriate to a certain situation. It is the judgment of police on how to bridge the gap that exists between what the stipulations in the law contain and the challenges on the ground (Seumas M. , et al, 2006). The laws governing the police forces are not specific and should under no certain terms be specific. They leave gaps and spaces that can only be filled through individual intuition.Most of these laws are said to be ambiguous and clearly requiring the reasoning of a well trained police officer to enforce (M. L. Dantzker, 2005. ). While it is prudent to say that almost all state or public departments and agencies use discretionary powers, it is in the policing agencies that they are most often applied and with major consequences. It is the legislature that determines the nature of laws that exist in a certain region, but it is up to the people on the ground, who are the police officers, that determine how those legislations are to be enforced and in what manner.The law sometimes is strict on certain issues but it is up to the law enforcement agents in touch with the public to make it more flexible while at the same time making it less or more punitive depending on the situation. Question stands on whether such discretion cannot be abused. For example whereas the law categorically prohibits the arresting of individual on mere suspicion with no form of evidence, the police in most case will arrest people and claim it is on ‘reasonable grounds of suspicion’. This suspicion is based on subjective judgments of a person’s behavior at the moment.Some officers are trained to believe that if one moves away hastily after seeing the police, he or she is likely t o be guilty of something. This is what some would call ‘behaving in a suspicious manner’. This might not be true as there is no law against hastening ones pace upon coming across the police officers, but the forces discretionary powers allow them to hold such person and search him or her. â€Å"Reasonable suspicion† becomes an ambiguous term that is hard to define or quantify. It is not measurable and at the same time not disputable.Interestingly though, contrary to what one would expect, discretionary powers in the police force decrease as one goes up the ladder while increasing down the cadre and hierarchy. This is because the officers up in hierarchy rarely come face to face with the public. Theirs is mostly limited to the boardroom meetings, strategy laying and maybe dealing with the ever-inquisitive media. This is not to mean that they top chiefs do not possess discretionary powers. On the contrary they do, but it is the lower ranking officers that have more opportunities of exercising this authority due to their daily contacts with the pubic.This discretionary authority turns them into policy makers, only this time it is at the ground or street level. This is because the most important decisions are made at the point of contact or encounter. It is here that the police officers make the most vital decisions regarding the step to take after a wrong has been committed. Depending on the weight of the crime, the officer on the ground will know what action to take. He might decide to warn, book or jail depending on the gravity of the situation. This may not be what the law has provided for.It is these powers to make such discretions that raise tension and discontent from the public, as they lead to discriminate and disproportionate application of laws. The general characteristic of discretionary authority is that in one way or another it has to be applied selectively. The prejudices that are held by the society have also been imported into the police force and must in a way impede upon the judgment of the police officers especially when they are exercising their discretionary authority.To most people in today’s world, where vehicles are prevalently used as the single most preferred means of mobility. Peoples’ contact with the government is through the police. Interactions with the citizenry is most likely to be with the traffic police officers, and it is them that are likely to make decisions based on their own judgments. This most likely emanates from the fact that most of the traffic offenses committed by motorists are but of small consequence, they are minor and one can escape with a verbal warning.The traffic laws prohibit over speeding or any other reckless driving that might be injurious or inconveniencing to other motorists. The patrol officers are always on the look out for such characters and can flag down any motorist they suspect is under the influence of alcohol. Police here use their discret ionary authority in making the kind of decision to be taken upon a motorist who commits such an offense. A traffic offense that is not serious would carry a number of penalties ranging from citing, booking or ticketing in accordance with the dominant traffic policy.Most people would like the law enforcement officers make lenient decisions in regard to such minor offenses and make hard stances on the major crimes such as kidnappings and bank robberies. More police discretionary powers should be extended towards passing lenient judgments on traffic offences rather than creating friction on their relationship with the motorists (Peak, K. J. , 2006). Most police agents have strict laws and policies in relation to traffic rules and tend to have punitive attitudes towards these offenses.Most traffic officers end up citing motorists rather than letting them go off with verbal warnings. This is the ethical and professional dilemma facing most police officers, their discretionary authority n ot withstanding, even where the law is very clear on traffic offenses and the nature of penalties imposed. This how the law is, it is supposed to be comprehensive and touching on almost everything. However, the scarce resources allocated may not cater for this. The meager financial resources cannot facilitate the strict following of the law to the letter.If all the provisions of the law are strictly adhered to, the courts would be clogged with cases and jails would be overcrowded. It is hence important that the police officers use their discretionary powers to sort these people out (Seumas M. , et al, 2006). As mentioned before, due to the subjective nature of the police duties, selective application of discretionary powers is probable and very common. Racial, religious, gender and ethnic profiling becomes real. For the traffic police officers, it is very likely to let of an elderly person off with over speeding than with a teenager or a middle age.This is because it is not common t o see aged people over speeding; the officers will tend to believe that there has to be a reason for such an action. The provisions of the law on over speeding not withstanding, most police officers are bound to make the same decision. A study of police application of discretionary powers also would reveal that it all depends on the behaviors and attitude of the subject under consideration. For those who are very confrontational and rude when addressed by police officers over their mistakes, they might not enjoy any leniency.Those who are orderly and remorseful of their actions are likely to receive a lighter treatment. Police discretionary powers are likely to be applied favorably mostly when the subject displays a sign of respect. These powers may also be extended to the unpopular laws in the society. Police would shun taking action against offenders of some minor offences. This is if there has been a public uproar against such laws. They would not want to be dragged into a row, a nd hence opt to turn a blind away to such offenders.There are exceptions however to this; no matter how unpopular some of these laws might be, discretionary powers might have applied harshly. The issue of police discretionary powers is dogged with controversy. There are those who claim that these powers are okay as they give the police an opportunity to apply their own judgment in meting out justice rather than waiting for the strenuous and elaborate process of the law. It gives the law a human face and gives the police a chance to act with compassion. The police sometimes are faced with situations where if they strictly adhere to the laws, catastrophes might happen.A police arresting a driver for over speeding might result to a implication if for example such a driver was rushing a patient to hospital. It is important that discretionary powers be extended to allow police officers make decisions that are appropriate to a specific situation at hand rather than blanket application of the law just because the stipulations state so. This leniency in the discretionary powers is also a kind of public relations. As afore mentioned, contact of the public and the police in today’s world is mostly limited to the traffic.Most people’s attitudes and perceptions of the police might to a great extent be shaped by this limited interaction. Any harshness towards motorists may be interpreted to mean that the police are all harsh and inconsiderate. The law contains a mesh of provisions that cannot all be applied, as most likely they would turn the citizens into slaves of rules. Discretionary powers are hence important to sort these laws out and enable the police to make the best decisions possible at that instance depending on the prevailing circumstances (John Blackler, Seumas Miller, 2005).However, opposition to discretion emanates to the discriminate application of justice. As said before, it is a highly subjective practice that embodies the incorporation of pe rsonal and emotional values. Issues such as racism, ethnics and other discrimination based on creed, socio-economic statues and gender will come into play. Personal prejudices might have an upper hand when a police officer is making the decision in regard to who will get what punishment, who will get a booking and who is to be released. A motorist may get away with over speeding, or driving under the influence just because he or she looks innocent or is remorseful.Police have been known to apply leniency to people who look remorseful after giving them a stern warning and arresting those that they think are disrespectful and self-righteous. This however should not be a criterion to be used while deciding who is to booked and who is to be let go. The law is clear on this and should be applied non-selectively. Allowing the use of discretionary powers by police officers is jut but breeding ground for corruption and bribery. Police officers are likely to take in bribes from criminals or petty offenders so that they may look the other way and apply discretionary powers.It may also lead to a breeding ground for more hardened offenders. A motorist who has escaped once with an over speeding offense may make it a habit of repeating the same mistake and preying on officer’s leniency. People might not be vigilant enough in regard to the petty offenses because there will be a likelihood of them getting away with such mistakes. A high number of people would be in favor of controlling the use of police discretionary authority, mostly as it is likely to be abused by police officers.This emanates from the image that most people have of the police; an image imparted through their interactions with the police, who most of the time are found to hostile and unreasonable. The police are not trained in psychiatry and should not base an individual’s guilt on ones behavior, remorse or lack of it thereof. It should be left to the court or tribunals to pass a verdict. If t he law states that a certain offense is finable then be it and this fine should be applied across the board and not selectively. The police are governed and bound by the law and all its comprehensive principles.The law is dynamic but it is also very clear on many issues. It is predictable and outcomes in many cases are certain. The same case should apply to the police force; their decisions should be predictable and consistent. The police force is in the executive arm of the government, its function is to implement the laws passed by the legislature, allowing it to make decision regarding the law is superseding the authority and can be a recipe for chaos. Unlimited use of police discretionary powers can to a greater extent be said to be undermining democracy.Laws under the tenets of democracy are a preserve of the legislature which is just but a of group of individuals representing the citizenry, who are democratically elected. The police represent the executive and in most cases wi ll be furthering the sitting government’s interests. They do not consult before passing the extra judicial pronouncements. The public has no room to scrutinize these decisions. Had there been an opportunity to review some of these discretionary powers, the system could work out efficiently (John Kleinig, 1996).However, as much as the public may wish to demonize the use of discretionary authority by the police, they are more than necessary. The law, despite being broad, is not comprehensive; it does not provide solutions to all the possible case scenarios likely to be faced by the police. Discretionary powers by the police come into play to bridge the gap between what the stipulations contain and what the situation on the ground is. The bone of contention is the likelihood of these powers being abused and applied selectively to favor a certain group of individuals over others. There is no provision in the law on how these powers are to be utilized.They are mainly subjective an d depend on a specific officer’s personality and orientation towards many issues in life. It would also depend on the nature of the mood of an officer at the time of the incident. It is unpredictable and lacks in consistency. It is apparent though that these discretionary powers cannot be done away with completely, effort hence should be geared towards curtailing them to a level that is acceptable to the public. Police should be well trained to ensure that their use of discretionary authority does not deviate from the law and is not applied discriminately. References John Kleinig, 1996. The ethics of policing. Cambridge University Press. John Blackler, Seumas Miller, 2005. Ethical issues in policing. Ash gate publishing Ltd. Seumas Miller, John Blackler, Andrew Alexandra, 2006. Police ethics. Waterside Press. Peak, K.J., 2006. Policing America: Methods, Issues, and Challenges. 5th Edition. Pearson Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ. M.L. Dantzker, 2005.Understanding today’s Police. Criminal Justice Press.

Essay on Generations Boomers and Echos and Nexters †Oh My!

Generations: Boomers and Echos and Nexters – Oh My! Contents Overview 3 Critical Analysis 4 Suggested Implementation 5 Potential Problem with Implementation 7 Current Article:â€Å"10+ ways to minimize generational differences in the workplace† 7 Value of the Hankin Article 9 Important Takeaways 9 References 11 Overview The article â€Å"Generations: Boomers and Echos and Nexters – Oh My!† written by Harriet Hankin deals with generational diversity in the workplace. The main focus of the article is the differences of several generations of workers currently trying to thrive, or at least survive, together in today’s workforce. She discusses the different characteristics of each generation,†¦show more content†¦Another area we think she is not as strong in her argument is when she states â€Å"understanding generations is a useful tool for recognizing what motivates individuals because members of a generation share some of the same experiences that influence their perception and priorities.† (1) Then she brings up that some people argue for other factors playing a role and having an impact on a person, such as â€Å"upbringing, education, affluence or lack of it, and even geography†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (1) While she states that she agrees with this viewpoint, she len ds little credence to it, still falling back to believing the birth year is more important. We do not necessarily agree with this viewpoint. We also believe the events that happen in history shape a person, but not more so than actual events and circumstances that happen to that individual. If you believe that every person in a generation is impacted the same way by the same event, you will never manage to diverse backgrounds. Just because a person grew up in a certain time period, they did not have the same experiences as everyone else in that period. Case in point, Ms. Hankin brought up drug use being very popular in the 60’s, the hippy generation, as it were. But there were many people in that generation that did not follow along and experiment with drugs, so it would be irresponsible to believe everyone in that generation had the same experience because they wereShow MoreRelatedA Leader Is One Who Or That Which Leads Or Conducts? Essay2381 Words   |  10 Pagessub ject of organizational behavior has enhanced my understanding of what constitutes effective versus ineffective leadership. Learning about the various leadership styles and traits that influence the behavior of individuals in leadership roles revealed the significant influence that leaders have on organizational performance. Participating in this class also helped me to identify the strengths and shortfalls that I bring to bear as a leader. As my perspective evolved over the duration of this courseRead MoreDissertation Proposal on Managing Diversity of Workforce18916 Words   |  76 Pagesthe multi-generation workforce. The specific focus is upon Generation ‘X’ and the Millennium Generation which are the two primary groups comprising the new workforce. Lawsson R.D. - Identifying and Managing Diversity of Workforce 216 Business Intelligence Journal January OBJECTIVE The objective of this work is to complete a research proposal on the comparison of work values for gaining of knowledge for management of the multigeneration workforce. The specific focus is upon Generation ‘X’ and