Types of Consumer Behaviour and their Impacts Case Study

Types of Consumer Behaviour and their Impacts - Case Study Example There are different ways in which consumers behave when buying goods and services hence forming four classes of consumer behaviour. Some consumers are described as opportunistic stop buyers and such have no specific place of buying their products but rather they get them from any vendor or service provider they meet. In comparison to the financial sector, these consumers are not patriotic to a specific bank or microfinance but their transactions are made at any bank or financial service provider that has advertised its services in an appealing way. It has been reported that consumers exhibit this behaviour in the financial sector due to the high interest rates charged in banks. Such companies should take into consideration the fact that if interest rates charged on borrowed loans continues to raise uncontrollably the customers will flee to banks that offer manageable rates. They should also be honest and give their customers any accumulated dividends and shares. Other customers will exhibit opportunistic store buying whereby they also have no specific preference of a certain brand but their unique character is that they buy products through partnering with other stakeholders who act as intermediaries. Their difference with opportunistic spot buyer is that they buy their products in bulk whereby the intermediary subsidizes the prices.

Project Management Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words - 3

Project Management - Essay Example It cannot it should not be understood the project manager is somehow the be all and end-all of mitigating all problems; however, with regards to the firm or entity in question, they do not have purview over the means by which government bureaucracy or other aspects of the international or regional economy function. Ultimately, they are only capable of directing within their own scope and utilizing their own people as a means of effecting noticeable positive change with respect to the overruns which are to be discussed. It is hypothesized by this researcher that adequate project management within the United Arab Emirates with regards to construction projects has a noticeable effect on the means by which time and cost overruns are realized. Of course the difficulty with regards to this particular research is level and extent to which corresponding research questions can effectively be engaged and answered as a means of drawing inference upon the preceding analysis. As a function of thi s, the following research questions will be asked: What percentage of project managers have prior experience in excess of five years What percentage of project managers exhibit specialized project management training beyond mere higher education What percentage of firms operating within the United Arab Emirates utilize the mastic project managers in order to affect time than monetary constraints To what level to project managers in a given firm integrate with one another within the course of their duties? To shareholders within these companies think favorably or not favorably with regards to project management Naturally, this information will not readily available and must require a questionnaire and/or survey in which affect. Moreover, the research objective be to determine the level to which project management integrates with and positively and/or negatively affects the rate at which cost and time overruns are experienced within construction projects within the United Arab Emirate s. Is the hope of this author that through such an analysis, United Arab Emirates construction industry may experience an increase level of efficiency due to being able to understand the best means of utilization that project management can provide. Similarly, with regards the overall feasibility of the study, it must be understood that this it is only constrained by the level and extent to which the researcher is able to go in order to gain the necessary feedback and input from the stakeholders within the process. If the study is performed to a sufficiently small number of firms and/or stakeholders, the level to which inference can be drawn will necessarily be reduced due to the fact that the results will not be able to shed light upon a broad range of issues and will otherwise really focus upon the means by which if you entities without for sponsoring to the survey/questionnaire. Conversely expanding the survey/questionnaire to include a very large number of respondents will mean that the researcher will spend the majority of time gathering tabulating information without having enough time to sufficiently extrapolate based upon the inputs that are thus far been received. Accordingly, it is the

The Human Resource Environment Essay Example for Free

The Human Resource Environment Essay Section 1: The Human Resource Environment Role of Human resource management and Competitive Advantage Smit, 2006 recommends the idea of gaining competitive benefit to organizations wishing to engage in strategic activities that would be tricky for competitors to copy or reproduce fast Smit, 2006 suggest that firms can use HRM to add competitive advantage for the reason that it is tricky for contestants to duplicate. (Smit, 2006) That is, while knowledge and capital can be gained by almost someone at any-time for a price, it is tricky to obtain a ready pool of extremely qualified and very motivated staff. It is more and more difficult to plan policy in an era of irregular change. In todays intensely spirited and worldwide marketplace, sustaining a competitive benefit by becoming a low-cost leader or differentiator puts an intense premium on having a greatly dedicated and competent labor force. (Smit, 2006) Devoted workers play a strategic role in a company attaining its competitive advantage. In a growing number of corporations, Human Resources are observed as a source of competitive benefit. There is great recognition that characteristic competencies are obtained through extremely developed worker skills, characteristic organizational cultures, Management procedures and systems (Smit, 2006) Read more:  Human Resources Investigation What role does quality initiatives play in that area? Total Quality Management is a quality-initiative all-pervasive thought and spans all the purposes, procedures and activities assumed in an organization. It spotlight on Incremental and nonstop improvement that is oriented and directed towards the attainment of Customer approval. (Smit, 2006) This is of special relevance during financial Downturns when the retention and pleasure of existing clientele is of great value. TQM helps by not only growing Productivity and making procedures and Personnel more and more effective and well-organized, but also by given that cost effectual and competitively valued products to the client. (Smit, 2006) therefore Total Quality execution through Human Resource Management have an effect on the entire gamut of all activities, strategy, procedures and plans that an organization employs throughout the path of its business. It attempts to streamline and decrease redundancy, incompetence and waste. It institutionalizes the procedure of Change Management and maps a path for the company to put systems in position that will permit it to adapt itself to any shifts in the Internal or external surroundings. (Smit, 2006) Improving Capital Efficiency enhanced through Restructuring of Debt, a procedure in itself. Total Quality involves improving all procedures inside an organization. Hence, improving cost efficiency through improved utilization of Debt capital or negotiations for lesser interest rates can be distinct as a procedure development. (Smit, 2006)    Section 2: Assessment and Development Most important compensation challenges in the modern workplace Strong monetary compensation and monetary rewards is the most significant compensation challenges in the contemporary workplace. The workers compensation system in the United States, includes of independent state based and countrywide programs for federal workers, covers about 125 million workers and has evolved and developed since its inception in 1911. Coverage has considerably broadened in range to allow for the addition of most work-related injuries and illnesses. The cost of workers compensation care has also improved. Several of the cost drivers have been recognized, and many approaches have been taken to address medical cost containment. (Smit, 2006) There is a need to stability cost manage with ensuring advantage adequacy and excellence of medical care. It is probable that managing workers compensation costs will carry on to be a challenge in the predictable prospect. The cost of workers compensation care affects all stakeholders comprising workers, employers, providers, state workers compensation controllers, legislature, and insurers. A continued promise to excellence, accessibility to care, and cost repression, and being alert to rising issues that can affect these elements, will assist make sure that workers are afforded available, high quality, and cost-effective care. (Smit, 2006) Changed Compensation practices According to some description, compensation practices have freshly been undergoing marked changes, with a growing number of firms said to be alternating lump-sum payments for usual pay increases, allowing for greater changeability of remuneration across persons or groups, and making greater use of profit sharing or stock choices. Lots of these practices are outside the scope of the characteristic measures of economy-wide recompense growth. furthermore, intensified use of these schemes must to heighten the receptiveness of overall compensation costs to trade conditions and could also, in theory, increase productivity. (Smit, 2006) Section 3: Topics in Human Resource Management Corporations in U.S. will face five mainly critical HR challenges in the near future: organization talent, organization demographics, becoming a knowledge organization, managing Work-life equilibrium, and managing change and cultural change. (Smit, 2006) Talent shortages emerge, both in U.S and in fresh markets overseas, and companies must take steps now if they anticipate to address these shortages—and prevent disaster. numerous companies already have important actions   planned: Our investigate indicates that the number of   U.S companies that move to new locales such as Pakistan in order to add access to burgeoning groups of gifted workers will roughly   triple during the next eight to ten years   (Smit, 2006)    Managing the Loss of Capacity and Knowledge One of the most successful ways to reduce a company’s exposure to demographic Risk is applying a complete system of job families across the corporation. Such a system Clusters workers whose skills and exact experience generate opportunities for job exchanges Across numerous levels (Smit, 2006)    Managing the Aging of the Workforce An aging labor force will have suggestion on among other issues—productivity, the aptitude of the labor force to work in shift surroundings, the need to inspire employees in a dissimilar way, innovation probable, illness-related absenteeism and labor costs (Smit, 2006) References Smit, (2006). HR, Show me the money; Presenting an exploratory model that can measure if HR adds value. New York

Scotland Child Committee Purpose Social Work Essay

Scotland Child Committee Purpose Social Work Essay The North East of Scotland Child Protection Committee (NESCPC) has produced this Risk Assessment Framework in response to an identified need for a Pan Grampian approach. This framework is for use by all agencies located within Aberdeen City, Aberdeenshire and Moray with the aim of ensuring that there is a consistency of understanding and approach to risk assessment across all sectors. The framework is written with the additional understanding that all practitioners have a responsibility to ensure that they are familiar with and follow their own organisations child protection procedures. These should all link to the overarching NESCPC Guidelines and give advice on who to contact, how to take immediate action and how concerns should be recorded. Background Several models of Risk Assessment exist but are not used in a systematic way because they are not thought to be comprehensive enough to be used in all situations (Scottish Government: Effective Approach to Risk Assessment in Social Work: an international literature review (2007). To enable greater consistency and conformity across Scotland, the Scottish Executive (2005) proposed a programme of change: Getting it Right For Every Child, incorporating the development work undertaken on an Integrated Assessment Planning and Recording Framework (IAF). This is based on requirements to gain a thorough understanding of: the developmental needs of a child the capacity of a parent/carer to respond appropriately to those needs the impact of the wider family and wider environmental factors on parenting capacity and on the childs needs This Framework emphasises the need to treat assessment as a process rather than an event. In evaluating the assessment and planning a response, practitioners are expected to consider the totality of the childs development and any unmet needs rather than focusing too narrowly on a need for protection. This approach should make sure that: Children get the help they need when they need it; Help is appropriate, proportionate and timely; Agencies work together to ensure a co-ordinated and unified response to meeting the childs needs; The plan is used to put in place arrangements to manage risk and to co-ordinate help for the child or young person; The plan is based on assessment and analysis of the childs world, including the risks, needs and resilience factors. What is Risk Assessment? Risk Assessment is a frequently used term without practitioners always being clear about what is meant. Risk assessment is merely the description of good methodical practice to risky situations (Jones, 1998). Risk Assessment is a critical element of the integrated assessment process pulling together, as it does the identified strengths within a family as well as those areas of concern or risk that need to be addressed. It is a complex, continuous and dynamic process, which involves the gathering and weighting of relevant information to help make decisions about the family strengths, needs and associated risks and plan for necessary interventions. Good systematic assessment confirms what may have happened, how this may affect the immediate and future safety of the child or young person, places this in context and informs what needs to be done. Risk assessments can also be used to predict the escalation of the presenting behaviour as well as the individuals motivation for change. Assessing risk is not an exact science; prediction involves probability and thus some errors are inevitable. Basic Principles when assessing risk. The welfare of the child is paramount. Risk assessment should be based on sound evidence and analysis Risk assessment tools should inform rather than replace professional judgement All professionals involved in risk assessment should have a common language of risk and common understanding of information sharing to inform assessment Risk assessment is influenced by professionals own personal and professional values, experiences, skills and knowledge The judgement and experience of practitioners needs to be transparent in assessment No tool, procedure or framework can adequately account for and predict human behaviour Effective communication and information sharing is crucial to protecting children Children, young people and family views should be sought, listened to and recorded with clear evidence of their involvement in decision making where possible. A good risk assessment process should elicit and highlight both commonalities and differences in professional and family perspectives Good risk assessment requires the best possible working relationship between worker and family members All staff must always be alert and aware to situations where children may be at risk and address any potential concerns through their own agencys child protection policy / NESCPC child protection guidance. Risk Assessment Framework This framework is adapted from the work undertaken by Jane Aldgate and Wendy Ross (A Systematic Practice Model for Assessing and Managing Risk, 2007) and is structured in 9 different stages: Using the SHANNARI well-being indicators (Safe, Well, Active, Nurtured, Achieving, Respected, Responsible and Included). 2. Getting the child and familys perspectives on risk. Drawing on evidence from research and development literature about the level of risk and its likely impact on any individual child. 4. Assessing the likely recurrence of harm. 5. Looking at immediate and long-term risks in the context of My World triangle. Using the Resilience Matrix to analyse the risks, strengths, protective factors and vulnerabilities. 7. Weighing the balance of that evidence and making decisions. 8. Constructing a plan and taking appropriate action. 9. Management of Risk 1. Using the SHANARRI well-being indicators: The Scottish Executive (2004) agreed a vision for Scotlands Children. They should be: Safe Healthy Active Nurtured Achieving Respected Responsible Included Using these SHANARRI indicators, professionals consider the childs holistic needs. In any assessment professionals should ask themselves the following key questions: What is getting in the way of this child being safe, healthy, active, nurtured, achieving, respected, responsible and included? Why do I think that this child is not safe? What have I observed, heard, or identified from the childs history that causes concern? Are there factors that indicate risk of significant harm present and is the severity of factors enough to warrant immediate action? What can I do? What can my agency do? Do I need to share / gather information to construct a plan to protect this child? What additional help may I find from other agencies? 2. Getting the child and familys perspectives on the risk. The involvement and partnership with children, young people and their families is integral and essential to successful risk assessment and management. Information is incomplete and a good understanding of the risks of harm and needs of the children cannot be reached without families perspectives on the risks to their childrens difficulties. An open and transparent approach that actively involves all involved, including the children and families is of clear benefit in that: Children, young people and families can understand why sharing information with professionals is necessary; Children and families can help practitioners distinguish what information is significant; Everyone who needs to can take part in making decisions about how to help a child; Everyone contributes to finding out whether a plan has made a positive difference to a child or family; Professionals behave ethically towards families; Even in cases where compulsory action is necessary, research has shown better outcomes for children by working collaboratively with parents. 3. Drawing on evidence from research and developmental literature about the level of risk and its likely impact on any individual child. Risks need to be seen in the wider context of short and long term risks to childrens wellbeing and development. Core factors can be identified in relation to abuse or neglect but these should not be used as predictors for current and future abuse without being considered in the context of the childs own nature and environment. In all cases of child abuse, parenting capacity should also be considered and this involves taking account of historical information as well as assessing the here and now. Protective factors need to be weighed up against risk factors and vulnerability to determine the level of risk to the individual child or young person and the likelihood of future harm. The factors should be used as a knowledge base to underpin more detailed assessments of strengths and pressures based on the My World triangle. (See Section 5). Factors to be considered: (This list is not complete but is a general guide). Adapted from City of Edinburgh Risk Taking Policy and Guidance (2004). Consideration of significant harm (link to Safety Threshold considerations, Section 3 NESCPC guidelines for further explanation); Current injury/harm is severe: the more severe an injury, the greater the impairment for the child/young person and the greater the likelihood of reoccurrence; Pattern of harm is escalating: if harm has been increasing in severity and frequency over time, it is more likely that without effective intervention the child/young person will be significantly harm; Pattern of harm is continuing: the more often harm has occurred in the past the more likely it is to occur in the future; The parent or care-giver has made a threat to cause serious harm to the child/young person: such threats may cause significant emotional harm and may reflect parental inability to cope with stress, the greater the stress for a person with caring responsibilities, the greater the likelihood of future physical and emotional harm to the child/young person; Sexual abuse is alleged and the perpetrator continues to have access to the child/young person: if the alleged perpetrator has unlimited access to the child/young person, there is an increased likelihood of further harm; Chronic neglect is identified: serious harm may occur through neglect, such as inadequate supervision, failure to attend to medical needs and failure to nurture; Previous history of abuse or neglect: if a person with parental responsibility has previously harmed a child or young person, there is a greater likelihood of re-occurrence; The use of past history in assessing current functioning is critical. Factors relating to the child or young person Physical harm to a child under 12 months: very young children are more vulnerable due to their age and dependency. Any physical harm to a child under 12 months should be considered serious and the risk assessment should not focus solely on the action and any resultant harm, but rather that the parent has used physical action against a very young child. This could be as a result of parenting skill deficits or high stress levels. Child is unprotected: the risk assessment must consider parental willingness and ability to protect the young child. Children aged 0-5 years are unable to protect themselves, as are children with certain learning disabilities and physical impairments. Children, who are premature, have low birth weight, learning disability, physical or sensory disability and display behavioural problems are more liable to abuse and neglect. The child/young person presents as fearful of the parent or care-giver or other member of the household: a child/young person presenting as fearful, withdrawn or distressed can indicate harm or likely harm. The child/young person is engaging in self-harm, substance misuse, dangerous sexual behaviour or other at risk behaviours: such behaviour can be indicators of past or current abuse or harm. Factors relating to the parent or care-giver The parent or care-giver has caused significant harm to any child/young person in the past through physical or sexual abuse: once a person has been a perpetrator of an incident of maltreatment there is an increased likelihood that this behaviour will re-occur. The parent or care-givers explanation of the current harm/injury is inconsistent or the harm is minimised: this may indicate denial or minimisation. Where a parent or care-giver fails to accept their contribution to the problem, there is a higher likelihood of future significant harm. The parent or care-givers behaviour is violent or out of control: people who resort to violence in any context are more likely to use violent means with a child or young person. The parent or care-giver is unable or unwilling to protect the child/young person: ability to protect the child/young person may be significantly impaired due to mental illness, physical or learning disability, domestic violence, attachment to, or dependence on (psychological or financial) the perpetrator. The parent or care-giver is experiencing a high degree of stress: the greater the stress for a parent or care-giver, the greater the likelihood of future harm to the child or young person. Stress factors include poverty and other financial issues, physical or emotional isolation, health issues, disability, the behaviour of the child/young person, death of a child or other family member, divorce/separation, and large numbers of children. The parent or care-giver has unrealistic expectations of the child/young person and acts in a negative way towards the child/young person: this can be linked to a lack of knowledge of child development and poor parenting skills. Parents or care-givers who do not understand normal developmental milestones may make demands which do not match the child/young persons cognitive, developmental or physical ability. The parent or care-giver has poor care-giving relationship with the child/young person: a care-giver who is insensitive to the child or young person may demonstrate little interest in the child/young persons wellbeing and may not meet their emotional needs. Indicators of poor care-giving include repeated requests for substitute placement for the child/young person. The parent or care-giver has a substance misuse problem. Parental substance misuse can lead to poor supervision, chronic neglect and inability to meet basic needs through lack of money, harmful responses to the child/young person through altered consciousness, risk of harm from others through inability to protect the child/young person. The parent or care-giver refuses access to the child/young person: in these circumstances it is possible that the parent or care-giver wishes to avoid further appraisal of the well-being of the child. Highly mobile families decrease the opportunity for effective intervention, which may increase the likelihood of further harm to the child/young person. The parent or care-giver is young: a parent or care-giver under 21 years may be more likely to harm the child through immaturity, lack of parenting knowledge, poor judgement and inability to tolerate stress. The parents or care-givers themselves experienced childhood neglect or abuse: however caution has to be exercised here; parenting skills are frequently learned/modelled but later positive experiences can counteract an individuals own childhood experiences. Factors relating to the Environment The physical and social environment is chaotic, hazardous and unsafe: a chaotic, unhygienic and non-safe environment can pose a risk to the child/young person through exposure to bacteria/disease or through exposure to hazards such as drug paraphernalia, unsecured chemicals, medication or alcohol. Conversely, an environment with overly sanitised conditions, where the childs needs are not recognised or prioritised is also harmful. 4. Assessing the likely recurrence of harm. When assessing how safe a child is consideration must be given to likelihood of recurrence of any previous harm. Factors for consideration: The severity of the harm (How serious was it? How long did it continue? How often?) In what form was the abuse / harm? Did the abuse have any accompanying neglect or psychological maltreatment? Sadistic acts? Was there any denial? This could include absence of acknowledgement, lack of co-operation, inability to form a partnership and absence of outreach. Are there issues with parental mental health? This could include personality disorder, learning disabilities associated with mental illness, psychosis, and substance/alcohol misuse. These also link to consideration of additional family stress factors, the degree of social support available to the family, the age of the children and number of children and the parents own history of abuse. Other agencies may be able to add additional knowledge and expertise to inform an effective risk assessment. Looking at immediate and long-term risks in the context of the My World triangle. The Assessment Triangle Being healthy Everyday care and help Learning and achieving Keeping me safe Being able to communicate Being there for me Confidence in who I am Play, encouragement and fun Learning to be responsible Guidance, supporting me to make the right choices Becoming independent, looking after myself Knowing what is going to happen and when Enjoying family and Friends Understanding my familys background and beliefs Support from School Work opportunities family, friends and for my family other people Enough money Local resources Belonging Comfortable and safe housing An important principle underpinning the evidence-based planning in Getting it Right for Every Child is that there are many positive and negative influences in the world each child experiences. Each child is unique and will react differently to these influences but all children will react to what is going on in different parts of the family and the wider world in which they are growing up. This is why recent thinking in child development urges that we take a look at all the different influences in a childs whole world when assessing childrens development. This is called a childs ecology and is encapsulated in the My World triangle. Each domain of the My World triangle provides a source of evidence that enable a full developmental holistic assessment of any individual child. The domains can be used to identify strengths and pressures, which balance risk and protective factors. 6. Using the Resilience Matrix to analyse the risks, strengths, protective factors and vulnerabilities. The Resilience Vulnerablity Matrix As defined by Daniel and Wassell, (2002). RESILIENCE Normal development under difficult conditions eg.secure attachment, outgoing temperament, sociability, problem solving skills. High Support / Low Concern PROTECTIVE ENVIRONMENT Factors in the childs environment acting as buffer to the negative effects of adverse experience. ADVERSITY Life events / circumstances posing a threat to healthy development eg. loss, abuse, neglect. Low Support / High Concern VULNERABILITY Those characteristics of the child, their family circle and wider community which might threaten or challenge healthy development eg. disability, racism, lack of or poor attachment. Low Support / High Concern Families assessed to be in this category are the most worrying. Low Concern / High Support. Families in this group have a network of support and are generally more able to cope with advice and guidance from standard services. Resilience includes the protective factors that are features of the child or their world that might counteract identified risks or a predisposition to risk such as: Emotional maturity and social awareness. Evidenced personal safety skills (including knowledge of sources of help). Strong self esteem. Evidence of strong attachment. Evidence of protective adults. Evidence of support networks (supportive peers / relationships). Demonstrable capacity for change by caregivers and the sustained acceptance of the need to change to protect their child. Evidence of openness and willingness to co-operate and accept professional intervention. Protective factors do not in themselves negate high risks, so these need to be cross-referred with individually identified high risks and vulnerabilities. Vulnerabilities are any known characteristic or factors in respect of the child that might predispose them to risk of harm. Examples of these include: Age. Prematurity. Learning difficulties or additional support needs. Physical disability. Communication difficulties / impairment. Isolation. Frequent episodes in public or substitute care. Frequent episodes of running away. Conduct disorder. Mental health problems. Substance dependence / misuse. Self-harm and suicide attempts. Other high risk behaviours. The more vulnerabilities present (or the more serious one single vulnerability is) then the greater the predisposition to risk of harm. The presence of vulnerability in itself is neither conclusive nor predictive. These must be set alongside identified risk factors to be properly understood as part of an assessment process. 7.Weighing the balance of that evidence and making decisions. Decisions now need to be made about what to do to address the needs relating to the childs safety. These decisions lead to a plan to protect the child. This plan should also address the childs broader developmental needs. Stages of decision-making: Data gathering Weigh relative significance Assessment of current situation Circumstances which may alter childs welfare Prospects for change Criteria for gauging effectiveness Timescale proposed Childs plan (child in need plan, child protection plan or care plan, depending on the status of the child). What Factors Reduce the Effectiveness of Risk Assessment? Poor integrated working practices between agencies and individuals. Lack of holistic assessment. Inadequate knowledge of signs, symptoms and child protection processes. Information that has not been shared. Difficulty in interpreting, or understanding, the information that is available. Difficulty in identifying what is significant. Difficulty in distinguishing fact from opinion. Difficulty in establishing linkage across available evidence. Working from assumptions rather than evidence. Over confidence in the certainty of an assessment. A loss of objectivity. Making Effective Risk Assessments Assess all areas of potential risk Define the concern, abuse or neglect Grade the risks Identify factors that may increase risk of harm Consider the nature of the risk its duration / severity Set out and agree time scales for the assessment to be carried out Specifically document the identified risk factors Gather key information and evidence Has all the required information been gathered? Assess the strengths in the situation Check if any risk reducing factors exist? Build a detailed family history and chronology of key events/concerns Assess the motivation, capacity and prospects for change? What risk is associated with intervention? Be aware of potential sources of error Identify the need for specialist supports Plan your key interventions. Constructing a plan and taking appropriate action. Constructing the childs plan is a fundamental part of the Getting it Right for Every Child (Scottish Executive, 2005) initiative. This specifies that there will be a plan for a child in any case where it is thought to be helpful. This can be in both a single agency and a multi-agency context. The assessment of risk and the management of risk is incorporated into the childs plan. This also includes an analysis of the child or young persons circumstances based on the My World triangle and should cover: How the child or young person is growing and developing (including their health, education, physical and mental development, behaviour and social skills). What the child or young person needs from the people who look after him / her, including the strengths and risks involved; The strengths and pressures of the child or young persons wider world of family friends and community; and Assessment of risk, detailing: The kind of risk involved; What is likely to trigger harmful behaviour; and In what circumstances the behaviour is most likely to happen. The plan should note risk low, medium or high as well as the impact of the child or young person on others. (Guidance on the Child or Young Persons Plan, Scottish Executive. 2007, page 13). The plan should address key questions: What is to be done? Who is to do it? How will we know if there are improvements? The Childs Plan should be monitored and reviewed and amended as need, circumstances and risks change. (Scottish Executive, 2007). Child Protection Case Conferences play a key role in the management of risk. A Child Protection Case Conference will be arranged, where it appears that there may be risk of significant harm to children within a household and there is a need to share and assess information to decide whether the childs name needs to be placed on the Child Protection Register and be subject to a Child Protection Plan. (Link to Part 4 NESCPC guidelines) 9. Principles for Risk Management There is a need to ensure that the ongoing shared plan: Manages the risk Puts the decisions into a recorded form that clearly shows how and why decisions were reached. Makes the risk management an ongoing process that links with all areas of agreed and informed professional practice and expertise. Ensures that the decisions made have actions with named persons, clear timescales and review dates. Ensures that any agreed timescales can be reduced if new risks / needs become apparent. Ensures that new risk assessments and analysis inform reviews. Lessons from Significant Case Reviews. Significant Case Reviews repeatedly describe warning signs that agencies have failed to react to which have should acted as indicators that children and young people at risk of serious harm. Examples include: Children and young people who may be hidden from view; are unavailable when professionals visit the family or are prevented from attending school or nursery. Parents who do not co-operate with services; fail to take their children to routine health appointments and discourage professionals from visiting. Parents who are consistently hostile and aggressive to professionals and may threaten violence. Children and young people, who are in emotional or physical distress, but may be unable to verbalise this. Children and young people who are in physical pain (from an injury) may be told to sit or stand in a certain way when professionals visit the family or may hide injuries from view. Children and young people who have gone missing / run away (with or without their families). Workers should adopt an enquiring and investigative approach to risk assessment and not rely on parents or carers statements alone. Further corroboration of statements and challenging of parental views and perceptions is essential if to effectively determine the risk to the child or young person. Interventions should not be delayed until the completion of an assessment, but they have to be carried out in accordance with what is required to ensure the child or young persons safety, taking account of any indications of accelerated risks and warning signs. The type and level of intervention, irrespective of when it is made, must always be proportionate to the circumstances and risks faced by the child. Workers should pay particular concern to the rule of optimism. Many significant case reviews have illustrated that practitioners views can be strongly influenced by factors such as seeing indicators of progress or apparent compliance and co-operation. This does not, however, always mean that the child or young person is safe and such factors need to be balanced against the overall balance of evidence and actual risks. It is essential that those exercising professional judgement in relation to child protection take account of all multi-agency skills and expertise. This is of particular importance in relation to understanding of child development and the impact of child abuse and/or neglect on children and young people, both in the immediate and long term. Thus whilst immediate safety provisions have to be put in place, consideration must also be given to the longer term outcomes as a result of abuse or neglect. Significant case reviews highlight the importance of communication between all agencies that work either directly, or indirectly with children and/or their families. Thus it is imperative that: Adult services MUST ALWAYS consider any potential risks for any child linked to their adult clients. Childrens services MUST ALWAYS ascertain whether any adult services may be involved with their child clients. All services MUST ALWAYS ensure there is effective communication where there are concerns about the protection of a child. Concerns relating to actual or potential harm should never be ignored and are an indication that immediate intervention might be needed to ensure the protection of the child from future harm. Decisions to protect children and young people should never be delayed and where applicable, emergency measures should be considered. (see Part 3 of NESCPC Guidelines).

Christmas as a Federal Holiday Essay -- Religion Holidays

The most collectively celebrated holiday of the year is undeniably December 25th, Christmas. Most people acknowledge that the â€Å"Christ† in Christmas is representative of Jesus Christ, Son of God, and for Christians, the day is set aside as a celebration of his birth. Many people in the United States (and world) however, either do not believe in the Christian view of Christmas, have different non-Christian religious beliefs or celebrate for other reasons, if at all. Because of the multi-cultural differences that incorporate our country, Christmas should be declared by Congress as simply a Federal Holiday. This would be achieved if the dominant â€Å"Christ† aspect from â€Å"Christ†-mas was removed by renaming the holiday to The Winter Holiday, which is more inclusive to all cultures. The United States is comprised of a very diverse group of people with different beliefs and celebrations in winter including Hanukkah celebrated by Jews, Ramadan celebrated by Islam’s, Kwanzaa celebrating African culture, Bodhi Day celebrated by Buddhists, Diwali celebrated by Hindu’s, and Christmas celebrated by Christians. Also, there are the secular celebrations of Christmas, those traditions not specifically or overtly religious, celebrated by atheists, many other non-religious people as well as incorporated into most Christian celebrations. According to the Pew Forum, 4.7% of the population is a religion other than Christian and 16.1% claim â€Å"unaffiliated† (U.S. Religious Landscape). Between the 1990’s and 2008, the number of Christians dropped from 86.2% to 76% and the number of non-theists almost doubled in the same time frame (American Religious Identification). In most ways, Christmas is no longer a â€Å"religious† holiday and sh ould reflect all ... ...ous beliefs: peace on earth, goodwill toward all. Works Cited American Religious Identification Survey. N.p., Mar. 2009. Web. 28 Nov. 2010. . Mount, Steve. â€Å"Jefferson’s Wall of Separation Letter.† US Constitution Online. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Nov. 2010. . â€Å"Thomas Jefferson: Life; Liberty: Our Sacred Honor.† Ken Burns American Stories. PBS. KQED, n.p., 28 Oct. 2002. Television. U.S. Religious Landscape Survey. N.p.: n.p., n.d. N. pag. The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. Web. 28 Nov. 2010. . The White House. N.p., 6 Apr. 2009. Web. 30 Nov. 2010. .

US Citizenship by Natural :: essays papers

US Citizenship by Natural The United States is a nation of Immigrants. For centuries people have come to the U.S. in search of prosperity, freedom and financial success. By definition of the Microsoft Bookshelf Encyclopedia an immigrant is a person who leaves one country to settle permanently in another country or region to which one is not native. People immigrate for different reasons -- A group of people may immigrate to another country because of some conditions which make it difficult for them to live in their home environment. According to Microsoft Bookshelf Encyclopedia, the reason for immigration is often social for example, population increases, defeat in war, desire for a better life through material gain and the search for religious or political freedom. These reasons have usually prompted many more immigrants to the U.S. than natural causes have. The website of the Federation for American Immigration Reform explains how the first great wave of immigrants came to the U.S. In the early 19th century, large numbers of people from Western Europe left their countries to escape poverty. Many of the immigrants also came to escape religious persecution and political oppression. By the end of the 19th century, the majority of the immigrants were from Southern and Eastern Europe. After 1921, immigration declined due to new and better conditions in Europe and to limitations established by the U.S. government. The first law was passed by the United States Congress in 1862, restricted immigration to the U.S.. This law forbade American vessels to transport Chinese immigrants to the United States. Later, in the 1800s, the U.S. Congress passed acts which prevented convicts, polygamists, prostitutes and persons suffering from contagious diseases to enter the U.S. In 1917, Congress passed an immigration law that required a literacy test. Aliens unable to meet minimum mental, moral, physical and economic standards were excluded form the U.S. as well. In 1921, a congressional enactment created a quota system for immigrants, by which the number of aliens of any nationality admitted to the United States in a year could not exceed three percent of the number of foreign-born residents of that nationality living in the United States. It would seem that the number would be quite small, however, the year was 1919 and the majority of the U.S. population was foreign born. In 1924, the basic immigration quotas were changed to a system based on the desirability of the different nationalities. A congressional act of 1943 repealed the laws keeping the Chinese from entering the United States. (Microsoft Bookshelf Encyclopedia) One will probably agree that it is

Welch Case Study

This particular case discusses whether General Electric fulfilled its Corporate Social Responsibility under the leadership of Jack Welsh or if it just met basic obligations. It also displays the evolving idea of social responsibility in a corporation by contrasting the corporation’s actions during Welsh’s leadership and after Welsh retired. It is shown that Welsh had a classical economic view of social responsibility. General Electric followed a traditional business model while Welsh was working and a progressive business model after he retired. He used a cutthroat ranking system based off of social Darwinism in order to sort out the â€Å"best† of his employees. Lastly, it displays that norms and principles are always changing according to corporate social responsibility and that corporations should act in response to those changes.1. I do not believe that GE in the Welch era fulfilled their duty of corporate social responsibility. They did not avoid harming the environment because they dumped toxins into the Hudson River. During the Welch era, GE did not make any efforts to enhance any societal assets; they only supplied the minimum of what they needed to create wealth for the company. They did not try to protect their employees or go beyond what is necessary. Many pressures, including the vitality curve evaluation system, were purely performance driven.Though job cuts are necessary for the survival for a business, it seemed like they treated their employees as a resource instead of human beings. For example, the GE Pension Fund could have provided retirees and their unions with more benefits but instead Welch wanted to leave the pension plan overfunded to benefit the corporation. He failed to attribute any credit to GE’s former employees for the company’s success.General Electric’s corporate social responsibility could have been done in a much better way. First, they could aim to prevent environmental damage caused b y their company. If they could not prevent environmental damage entirely then they could at least perform actions to decrease any harm previously done. Then they change the evaluation system by â€Å"loosening the reigns† and making the system less callous. This would prevent any  unnecessary pressure from being forced onto employees. This change would improve teamwork and decrease backstabbing.It will also allow for more diversity at the top and would help prevent any once middle range managers from being cut. GE could have evaluated employees and then restructured their hierarchy by placing the more talented managers at the top instead of solely using a â€Å"firing† system. Finally, Welsh should have also kept his personal opinions separate from his business world. Though Welsh could have disliked overweight people, he should not have treated overweight people differently in the workplace.2. Yes, I think that GE under Welsh displays a view of corporate social resp onsibility that is closer to Friedman’s view. Welsh shared Friedman’s view that spending corporate funds on social projects diverts shareholder’s dollars to programs they may not even favor. Welsh consistently gave back to GE’s shareholders but neglected to create any funds for social projects. GE under Welsh’s era only focused solely on the first inner circle of responsibilities.The inner circle includes responsibility for efficient execution of the economic function resulting in products, jobs, and economic growth. GE clearly executed this inner circle of responsibility by being extremely profitable, paying taxes, enriching shareholders, and making many of its directors and managers multimillionaires in GE stock. In GE Welsh did not practice an intermediate circle of responsibility because it did not exercise its economic function with a sensitive awareness of changing values and priorities, especially in relation to environmental damage.During t his time there were many changing values of incorporating diversity in the workplace, protecting the environment and preventing damage, and the change of business ethics. The view of corporate social responsibility was changing to a model more similar to the progressive business model yet Welsh adhered to a strict traditional business model. GE especially ignored the outer circle of social responsibility because it did not try to improve the social environment by any means.3.Overall, Welsh’s GE met less than half of the general principles of corporate social responsibility. GE religiously followed the principle that corporations are economic institutions run for profit. Welsh’s highest  concern was economic and he was not afraid to suffer short run costs to society if they promised long-term benefits.The only aspect they did not meet for this principal is that they did not seek ways to solve social problems at a profit. They simply did not seek to solve any social pr oblems at all. The only principle that was generally highlighted by GE was that managers should try to meet legitimate needs of multiple stakeholders. The corporation always tried to bring in the largest gains for their shareholders.Welsh’s GE failed to follow the principles of multiple bodies of law, act ethically, to correct adverse social impacts they caused, to vary social responsibility according to company characteristics, to comply with a social contract, or to be transparent and accountable. GE encountered a pattern of criminal cases during this time and therefore did not follow multiple bodies of law, act ethically, or be transparent and accountable. Since GE caused the pollution to the Hudson River and Welch refused to fund the dredging, they did not correct adverse social impacts they caused. Welsh neglected to comply with the social contract because he did not treat retirees or employees fairly and acted as if they were a disposable component of the corporation us ed solely to bring in profits.Lastly, GE did not vary its social responsibilities with the company characteristics. GE was a very large corporation and because of that they should have rewarded their retirees and employees generously with benefits. Because they were a very large corporation that can affect the environment, they should have tried to prevent any damage done to the earth.4.The pros of ranking shareholders over employees and other stakeholders would be that there is more money and profits. Because Welsh had a classical economic view of corporate social responsibility, the shareholders were his primary concern. The cons would be that employees and other stakeholders would become discouraged due to the shareholders being put first and ultimately they would not want to be associated with that company. If the employees feel worthless to the company then they could become unmotivated and hurt GE’s profits. Another con would be that they are not fulfilling their underl ying social contract and could lose the public’s  support.I do not think that it is specifically wrong to view employees as costs of production, because technically they are a resource to the company and are contributing human and physical capital. On the other hand, I believe that â€Å"these sources of capital† should be handled with care and that the employees should be seen as human beings as well. Ignoring the fact that employees are human beings could lead to unethical acts and violation of GE’s social contract. Overall, it is okay to view employees as costs of production, but acting unethically because of this belief is wrong. I think that GE should have rebalanced some of its priorities.They should have viewed their shareholders, employees, and other stakeholders with equal importance. Their employees and other stakeholders should not be viewed as less significant in the company because they represent a large portion of it. Even though they do not dire ctly bring in as much money as GE’s shareholders, they deserve to be treated fairly and ultimately help create profits in the long run.5. GE was much more socially responsible in the Immelt aftermath. The Immelt era offered more benefits to society. Immelt benefitted the environment enormously in comparison to Welch by agreeing to a clean up of the Hudson River, by cutting GE’s emissions, and by launching GE’s â€Å"eco-imagination† initiative.Immelt also benefitted his employees and society much more than Welsh. He loosened Welch’s guidelines for the ranking process, putting less unnecessary pressure and stress on employees. He also showed appreciation for diversity in the top management positions by promoting the progress of women in management through research on sexism. He was more responsive to GE’s social and environmental impacts and the company became the second most socially responsible company under his leadership.One advantage tha t Welch had over Immelt was his popularity with the shareholders. Though shareholders viewed Immelt’s leadership negatively at first, in the end they still gained on their investments throughout the course of 9 years. It was not a large amount of growth but it was 82 percent better than GE’s return alone. This showed that GE could be lead differently, without the use of Welch’s harsh tactics, and still continue to profit.