Organizing slp Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Organizing slp - Essay Example The process of organizing requires the collective efforts of all stakeholders in an organization, from top management to the most junior of employees. In other terms, managers and employees must work together to come up with the objectives of an organization and create systems that would assist in the achievement of these objectives in an efficient manner (Stephen & Coulter, 2005). A systematic approach that involves critical thinking is required in this process since it creates the executive plan of a company. The Organizing Function The organization design process starts with identification of a strategy from with a clear statement of purpose and vision for an organization. Such a strategy is important as it unites all employees towards achieving their personal and organizational goals. It also encourages actions that are geared towards attaining these goals and discourages activities that go against these objectives (Stephen & Coulter, 2005). Though creating a strategy is a planni ng process and not organizing, it is essential since it brings together all employees and defines roles clearly. Organizational structure is vital since it defines the relationship between people while at the same time defining their roles and responsibilities (Stephen & Coulter, 2005). ... First is work specialization or job enrichment, which refers to the extent to which a business divides its job into distinct tasks (Stephen & Coulter, 2005). By this division, an organization aims at ensuring that demanding jobs are not done by an individual; instead, a job is broken into smaller parts, each handled by different workers (Stephen & Coulter, 2005). Hence, each employee specializes in doing his/her part, which results in reduces job duplication, improved the productivity of every employee, and reduced conflicts among employees where roles are not clearly defined. Work specialty hence improves the overall performance of an organization. The second and third factors are departmentalization and chain of command respectively. Departmentalization, which could be functional, product or geographical, depending on the needs of an organization, should form the basis on which tasks are grouped together. On the other hand, chain of command implies the continuous line of authority, which extends from the top management to the lowest-level employees. In essence, it dictates who reports to who in an organization hence refers to the authority, responsibility and unity of command in an organization (Stephen & Coulter, 2005). The other organizing factors are span of control and centralization or decentralization. Whereas span control defines the number of ranks and managers that an organization has and indicates the number of employees under every manager or supervisor, centralization and decentralization determine the type of control in an organization (Stephen & Coulter, 2005). That is, whether control is by a few people or a large group. There are different designs

Cultural Relativism- Critical Analysis Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Cultural Relativism- Critical Analysis - Essay Example Argument in standard form Premises 1. According to cultural relativists, there are no universal moral principles. 2. Each society has its own different codes of conduct 3. Each moral or code of conduct applies only to the society in question. 4. We should adopt an attitude of tolerance towards the custom practices of other cultures Conclusion There is no objective truth in morality; it is nothing more than socially approved customs in a given culture. Discussion Cultural relativism is where each culture or ethnic groups is to be viewed on its customs, behavior on values and norms and not on the basis of those of other cultures or ethnic groups. Cultural relativists see moral norms as a result of culture. They see that many cultures disagree widely on moral norms and values, and there is no way which is clear to solve the differences therein. They, therefore, conclude that there are no accepted objective truths. Cultural relativists see other cultures, not as different not as â€Å"w rong†. According to premise one above, it wrong to say that there are no universal moral principles, according to cultural relativists. ... The Cultural relativism does not conclude that it is not possible to have a universal system of moral values to guide humans from a universal perspective. Rather, it explains that every society has its own moral norms and values to guide members of that society, but these values are of worth to those who abide by them, but they may differ from those of other, different society members (Herskovits 31). This failure to understand the differences between intra and cross cultural relativism is the one which led ethicist like Abraham Edel to write â€Å"If cultural relativism is a sociological truth, then your morality judgment of good and bad, right and wrong) is a function (cause) of your domicile. If moral norms and values assertions are expressive (subjective), it all depends on your feelings†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Edel 27-28). Cultural relativism only has relevance between cultures and not within a specific culture. It is a cross-cultural principle, not an intra-cultural principle. The firs t premise thus does not make the conclusion that morality is nothing more than socially approved customs to be true since it is evident that cultural relativism does not advocate ethical or individual relativism. In premise 4 if we abide by cultural relativism, then we will not be able to judge other cultures. We would no longer see other customs as inferior to our own, judging other societies merely because they are â€Å"different†. This will be good but only in some cases but not in a case where a society is anti-Semitic and waged a war against a Semite society. Cultural relativism would stop us from interfering, and we cannot even judge on the society which tolerant of Semites and one which is anti-Semites it would be