Campbell and Bailyn’s Boston Office Essay

Executive summary: This case was about issues that Ken Winston, the regional office manager Campbell and Bailyn’s Boston Office faced with as a result of the two recent changes in organizational structure and performance management system to react to the dynamic of the industry and market. The issues created by these two changes were process complication, limitation in competitive advantages, and discouragement on internal collaboration. We recommend Winston to engage KAT and sales specialist team, define measureable goals to each individual, set up one common organizational goal and make it as part of the performance assessment and hold more company events to encourage collaboration and relationship. With this solution, Winston will be able to ease the process, build stronger sales team, maintain market share, gain sales, maintain profit and create good and healthy working environment within the organization. 1. Situation analysis Campbell and Bailyn (C & B), found in the early 1900s and based in New York, was one of the five largest investment bank in the worlds. The firm has good reputation and was doing well in all segments of the investment banking industry. Within the firm, the bond division, which had been the fastest growing unit, had eight regional sales offices around the world. After New York, the Boston office was the largest. Due to the size and the revenue volume, Boston sales group was often used as a bellwether not only for new products but also for management ideas. Ken Winston, the office head, had a long history and profound experience in bond sales, was appointed in 2003 to be the Boston regional manager with the belief by the senior manager to be the supporter and coach to build and grow the local sales team. During the past 10 years, the banking industry changed dramatically. More players came. More products were created to cope with different demands in the market place. It was harder to sell to maintain volume. It was required more bandwidth and better understanding on a more complicated debt instrument to survive. In addition, margin was shrunk due to entrance of low-service, low-price brokers. For those higher-margin products, it was required deep  knowledge and expertise to market and make the sale. In early 2007, the financial crisis and the meltdown in the mortgage-backed securities market directly impacted to the sales force in the C & B and Boston office. Winston had to make two strategic changes in order to maintain the sales growth and operate more effectively. The first move was to create the â€Å"key account team† KAT. Legacy, the five generalists in the taxable bond division sold the entire product line and managed their own list of customers. Winston had combined these generalists and assigned each of them to a specialty sub-segment of the firm’s product offerings. The goal was to enhance the sales team expertise on product details and focus each individual on just one area with in-depth knowledge. Changing from maintaining their sales on customer wise to product wise, they shared their customers, for the first time. For the past several months, there are certain number of customers enjoyed this new change as they see the new sales team more invaluable. Yet there were customers unhappy and perceived it as more complication. Also, some sales people found it complicated themselves on those large and multiproduct trades given the number of people that needed to be involved. Another bigger concern of Winston was the limitation on the natural salesmanship of his people due to this specialization. The second change was to implement new performance management system, called â€Å"multisource† appraisal. The performance review was no longer the combination of sales volume and own manager assessments. It was then a mixture of several factors which included peer review and feedback from traders, product manager, researchers, sales, profits and manager observations. This change aimed to better the collaborations between regional sales force and cross functional teams as well as encourage the sales team to improve gross margin and profit. After the several months of change, there was an up-tick in profit margin. However, there was a risk of losing sales volume with gross margin focus. Besides, the sales team expressed their frustration. They recognized the potential of being scrutinized by other functions as part of their performance management review Below was the Boston office structure before and after the change Before After 2. Problem Diagnosis: Preparing for the annual year-end meeting, Winston had to present on these  new two changes. Observing customer reactions, hearing comments directly from his sales team, he knew clearly the strength and weakness of the new changes. The new KAT team formation did provide value to some customer, yet, it created confusion, more work and complication at both customer end and C & B sales team end. Customer had to deal with multi people instead of a single contact point. More people were required to be involved in large deal. More calls and meeting were needed. The decision of introducing the KAT team had missed the engagement and input from the specialist team who were experts on specialty product. Fair process believed engagement not only communicated management’s respect for individual and their ideas but also encouraged refutation sharpened everyone’s thinking and built collective wisdom (6). There were lack of collaborations and a smooth process within the organization . In addition, the sales team spent more time in house to figure out the new process and fulfill its requirements rather than spent time to meet and entertain customers which was used to be key part of their job and potential source of generating more deals and sales. They lost their connection with customer. Callahan, who was appointed as the nominal head of KAT team, received comments from one of his major accounts, Ashland Capital, expressed the concern on the reducing engaging between the sales and customer since the change was in place. Moreover, the fact that each individual was given a specialty limited his/her natural salesmanship. This specialization might also lead to a siloed organization structure which was definitely not the strategy. Michael Goold and Andrew Campbell stated that in formulating a strategy and organizational design, a company had to address two factors which were identifying the right market and defining the right methodology to gain the an advantage over competitors in those market (6). Many companies ended up with impeding the market strategy rather than furthering it while doing the organizational design changes. One of the failures was to create divisions among units that make it difficult to operate and increase competitive advantages (6). As the members of the KAT team could not sell other product lines outside their assigned specialty, it was difficult for them to expand their customer base. This was not helpful to compete with other competitors. With new compensation system, the organization faced the risk of losing volume sales as well as creating an inner warfare among the team me mbers and unhealthy working environment  between cross functional teams. Since the performance was based on profit, the sales team would rather choose to close a small deal with high gross margin rather than large deal with moderate margin. Peer feedback was part of the review narrowed the information sharing between coworkers. People were more conservative. This failed the purpose of bridging the knowledge gap between sales and product. Besides, since inside relationship and performance were then important, the sales people cared less about their clients and ignore the element of customer service that was a prior differentiator. The new KAT team and performance management system created process complication for both customer and sales people, risk of losing sales volume, risk of losing competitive advantages, and failure to foster the sales team expertise and build an effective operation process within the organization. These issues had to be fixed in order to win customer satisfaction, gain market share and build a well-organized and well-functional org anization. 3. Alternative solutions Solution #1: Merge key account team and specialist team Team up KAT and specialist into one small team. Move sales specialist from specialist team to be pair with each KAT member to create team for product specialization. Table below shows the new suggested structure. Pros: This combination will create more energy and synergy for each specialty sub segments product. KAT team will receive additional supports from sales specialist especially specialist can provide insight in term of how to handle deal from product specialization perspective. It also allows sales KAT team to have more time and bandwidth to target new customer and maintain relationship with key customer accounts. Sales specialist will have an opportunity to deal with bigger accounts which helps them to better their account managing skill and build relationship with major customers. Cons: Changes after changes will create more confusion to both customer and internal team. KAT member and sales specialist will need to spend a lot of time together in order to understand both side and become team. This change requires an absolute support and alignment between the two teams which is  hard to guarantee. Just like every merger, it may run into the risk of having resistance from inside. Sales specialist may not be willing to provide support to KAT because it creates more work for them. They will have to spend time and effort to learn about the new major accounts. If this change does not come with clear direction and well-defined implementation plan, it may make the situation worse. Solution #2: Add more resource to KAT and increase engagement from both team and customer Hire more people to provide the team more support and help. One sub segment product can have one main specialist and one helper. Implement regular inspection and feedback sessions from both the team and majo r clients. Pros: With the helper, the main KAT specialist like Callahan, Jenifer, and John can spend more time on customer relationship building and find new customers. Regular feedback within internal team and from customer side will ensure smooth process and customer satisfaction Cons: Hard to find the right bond sales people. At that time of the economics, it was difficult to recruit bond sales people. This type of job required very unique skill set and characteristics. Candidates had to be outgoing, extremely self-motivated and street smart. Take time for new members to learn and adopt the new environment. It would be a while before these new people, if they can be found, can be on board and helpful. This is not a good timing as these issues need be immediately addressed Solution #3: Multi approaches Engage specialist to support KAT member in term of process. Improve the performance management system by defining more measurable goals for each individual. Add one common team goal to encourage collaboration and information sharing. Hold more internal events to build the teamwork environment and bridge the gap of internal relationship. Pros With the help of sales specialist, KAT member can reduce some time on the process and administrative work to spend time on building relationships with their clients above and beyond the details of the job. Measurable goals for each individual will reduce the risk of inner warfare. Weigh the sales  volume and sales profit equally will boost the sales volume again. Common team goal will present the threat of sales member keep information for herself/himself because he/she is afraid of others will take the chance and perform better. If 20% of the compensation will be depended on the whole organization financial performance, the sales people will help each other, sharing information and customer relationship so that they can all earn this metric. This is a great methodology to inspire people to contribute to one common goal. Additional internal events such as summer outing, weekend retreat, team informal get together help to bring people together. They can talk, share and reduce the re sistance between employee when it comes to time of asking for help or support from each other. Cons Challenge of getting support from sales specialist. They can refuse due to lack of bandwidth. This may very well happen because supporting KAT is not one of their performance metrics. Winston will need to work very closely with his team on defining those measureable goals in order to prevent confusion. Employee needs to understand clearly the details of their goals, the benefit on achieving them and how to get there. Additional events add cost to expense. If the employee can not get the benefit from them, it is just wasting time, money and efforts. 4. Recommended solution: Solution #3: Multi approaches This solution is a combination of several approaches to tackle those different issues caused by the new two changes. Support from sales specialist will better the business process and ease the workload for both KAT and customer. Loss of sales volume and inner warfare are addressed by defined measurable goals. Setting one common goal as part of individual performance metrics establishes win-win situation. It builds the connection among all sales people and prevents the risk of loss sales due to self-performance competition. In addition, this step will solve the issue of limitation on salesmanship when converting to sell on specialization. The sales people can still discuss and work with customer on other product line and then pass the opportunity on to the right person. Again, one member win also means the whole team wins. Winston needs to work closely with both KAT and sales specialist team to ensure the willingness to support from the  sales specialist team. He needs to make sure both side can see the benefit and agree on the future path. Individual goals for each member have to be a compromised. Each of employees needs to agree on goals set up for them. Winston also needs to communicate clearly on the goal and approach. There should be also an action plan for each member set up between Winston and each team member clearly defined how and what to reach the goals. The important factors of this change are good decision making on what needs to be done and good implementation plan on how to get it done. Paul Rogers and Marcia stated that decisions that drive the business execution are as crucial as strategic decisions (8). Making sure the organization operates effectively is as important as wining more customers and beating competitors. How organization is run will determine how many sales it can get and how well it can sustain and grow. Lastly, company events are best practice, create family-like working environments and foster the company culture. According to Rob Goffee and Garet Jones, some of the best ways to increase sociability within organization are to hold employee gatherings inside and outside office (147). It is important to make sure these events enjoyable so that they can create own positiv e, self-reinforcing dynamic. 5. Implementation plan Hold meeting to communicate the new plan to whole bond sales division. There will need to be a formal meeting to announce the plan, as well as communicate what employee may expect from the manager and what manager will expect from the employee Schedule individual meeting with each of KAT team member to set up measurable individual goals Set up the common company goal and formally announce it the whole team After the first meeting, schedule one on one meeting to follow up. One on one meeting is very important since it keep the connection between manager and employee. Also, it keep track with employee status and also provide chance for both to raise and hear feedback from each other Identify event calendar and publicly communicate. Determine major company event days such as summer outing, end of year party, etc†¦ and put it up as company calendar. Preference: 1. Michael Goold and Andrew Campbell Blenko. Do you have a well-designed organization. March 2002. Boston MA: Harvard Business School Publishing 2. Cham Kim, W and Mauborgne, (2003) Fair process. Harvard Business Review 3. Paul Rogers and Marcia Blenko (2006). Who has the â€Å"D†, January 2006. Boston MA: Harvard Business Review 4. Rob Goffee and Garet Jones (1996). What holds the modern company together. Harvard Business Review

Massengill’s Department Store Essay

1. The utilitarian approach seems to best describe Marv Heimlers turnaround strategy at Massengills. I think so because his decisions would result in the majority of employees keeping their jobs although a smaller amount would be laid off. This shows he is doing what’s best for the company and still seeks the interest of the greater number of people. To him, if he had not made the decisions he made, everyone would be out of a job. a) Individual approach was not applied b) Moral approach was not applied: employees weren’t given reasons why they were being terminated and the way in which termination process was done was very harsh and inconsiderate. c) Justice approach was not applied, employees weren’t treated fair and equal. Example people with long years of services were treated the same as new workers . 2. I would place Heimler at the post conventional level of moral development because he implemented his plan for change knowing that there would be persons with different views. He justified his actions by his personal beliefs and put the future of the company first. His actions showed that he was firm in his decisions, looked at the greater good of the company as a whole and and sets his own principles. 3. To avoid the problems he was facing, Marv Heimler could have met with employees and informed them about the state of the company and that layoffs were inevitable. This would have given the employees sufficient notice to seek out other jobs. If I were in his position after the company started doing well again I would give some kind of financial compensations to employees that were laid off. Also, if there are positions available in the company I would train and rehire them as they were loyal employees to the company throughout the years. New employees coming into the company should get some kind of training before being fully employed.

Is Our Constitution Still Relevant?

The United States Constitution is a very important piece of document for the American people and especially immigrants. There are many reasons for this, but the main one is that the Constitution gives freedom to people who enter America. These freedoms are not in many other countries and that’s why immigrants flee to America to pursue the American Dream. Our Constitution is still relevant today because of two things: Freedom of Speech, and Freedom of Religion.The first reason why the Constitution is relevant is because of freedom of speech the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights. This gives the American people the right to voice their opinion whether it’s good or bad. In some countries, for example China does not allow freedom of speech because they are communists, they have a law saying anyone can protest against the government, as long as they get a permit first, But if you take the risk to get a permit you’re probably going to be shipped off the a â€Å"re- education camp â€Å"this is why our Constitution is relevant.Free speech allows you to say whatever you want without being judged or held against your will by law enforcements. The second reason main reason why the constitution is important is freedom of religion the American people having the right to worship whoever they want even if it’s a dog. People believe in whatever and whoever and it lets them live their life without getting discriminated against by mostly people and/or the government. All in all I believe the Constitution is still relevant today because

Sasmsung Poter 5 Forces

CHM1022 Lab Report 1 Rate Law of an Iodine Clock Reaction Name: Sashini Naomi Wijesekera Student ID: 23877847 Lab Partner: Zahiya Imam Lab Session: Monday 9. 00am Aim The aim of the experiment is to determine the factors that affect the rate of a reaction, by performing the iodine clock reaction and repeating it changing different initial conditions in order to measure and compare the rate of reaction for each experiment and experimentally determine the rate law. MethodRefer CHM1022 Laboratory Manual, Semester 1 2013. Results and Calculations- Part A- Calculations of rate for one set of conditions 1. n(S2O32-)=CV =0. 0025M*(10/1000)L =2. 50*10-5mol Molar ratio of I2 : S2O32- = 1 : 2 n(I2)=0. 5*n(S2O32-) =0. 5*(2. 50*10-5mol) =1. 25*10-5mol Mean time taken for blue colour to appear = (131sec+135sec+145sec)/3 =137seconds Rate of reaction=n(I2)/t =(1. 25*10-5mol/137sec) =9. 12*10-8mols-1 [H2O2]: C1V1=C2V2 0. 8*1=C2*99 C2=8. 8*10-3M [I-]: C1V1= C2V2 0. 025*10=C2*99 C2=2. 53*10-3M [H30+] : C1V1= C2V2 0. 36*35=C2*99 C2=0. 127M [S2O32-]: C1V1= C2V2 0. 0025*10=C2*99 C2=2. 53*10-4M Part B-Results and calculations B4 (i) n(S2O32-) = 0. 0025*(5/1000) = 1. 25*10-5mol Molar ratio of I2 : S2O32-=1: 2 n(I2)=0. 5*n(S2O32-) n(I2)= 0. 5*(1. 25*10-5) =6. 25*10-6mol B4 (ii) n(S2O32-)= 0. 0025*(20/1000) = 5*10-5mol Molar ratio ofI2: S2O32-=1:2 n(I2)=0. 5*n(S2O32-) n(I2)=0. 5*(5. 0*10-5) =2. 5*10-5mol Part B-Results and calculations | | | | | | |Time/s |n(I2)/mol |Rate/mol s-1 |Concentration/M | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |1 |2 |3 |4 |5 |6 |Mean time/s | | | | |B1[H202] (i)higher (ii)lower | 66 | 63 | 61 | 67 | 69 | 60 | 64 | 1. 5*10-5 | (1. 25*10-5)/64=1. 95*10-7 |[H2O2]: C1V1= C2V2 0. 8*2=C2*99 C2=0. 016 | | | 249 | 287 | 242 | 262 | 252 | 260 | 259 | 1. 25*10-5 | (1. 25*10-5)/259=4. 83*10-8 |[H2O2]: C1V1= C2V2 0. 8*0. 5=C2*99 C2=4. 0*10-3 | |B2[I-] (i)higher (ii)lower | 78 | — | 78 | 87 | — | — | 81 | 1. 25*10-5 | (1. 25*10-5)/81=1. 54*10-7 |[I2]: C1V1= C2V2 0. 025*20=C2*99 C2=5. 1*10-3 | | | — | 252 | 288 | 261 | — | — | 267 | 1. 25*10-5 | (1. 25*10-5)/267=4. 68*10-8 |[I2]: C1V1= C2V2 0. 025*5=C2*99 C2=1. 26*10-3 | |B3[H30+] (i)higher (ii)lower | 91 | — | 92 | 94 | — | — | 92 | 1. 25*10-5 | (1. 25*10-5)/92=1. 36*10-7 |[H30+]: C1V1= C2V2 0. 36*70=C2*99 C2=0. 55 | | | 206 | 226 | 221 | 207 | — | — | 215 | 1. 25*10-5 | (1. 25*10-5)/215=5. 81*10-8 |[H30+]: C1V1= C2V2 0. 36*17. 5=C2*99 C2=0. 064 | |B4[S2032-] (i)lower (ii)higher | 61 | 67 | 71 | 69 | — | — | 67 | 6. 25*10-6 | (6. 25*10-6)/67=9. 33*10-8 |[S2032-]: C1V1= C2V2 0. 0025*5. 0=C2*99 C2=1. 26*10-4 | | | 230 | 245 | — | 244 | — | — | 240 | 2. 5*10-5 | (2. 5*10-5)/240=1. 04*10-7 |[S2032-]: C1V1= C2V2 0. 0025*20=C2*99 C2=5. 05*10-4 | |B5(Temp) (i)warmer (ii)colder | 65 | 60 | 58 | — | — | — | 61 | 1. 25*10-5 | (1. 25*10-5)/61=2. 05*10-7 | T=450C | | | — | 288 | 310 | 303 | — | — | 300 | 1. 25*10-5 | (1. 25*10-5)/300=4. 17*10-8 | T=150C | |

Barack Obama - Oval Office Speech to the Nation on BP Oil Spill Disaster

Barack Obama Oval Office Address to the Nation on BP Oil Spill Disaster delivered 15 June 2010, Washington, D.C. Good evening. As we speak, our nation faces a multitude of challenges. At home, our top priority is to recover and rebuild from a recession that has touched the lives of nearly every American. Abroad, our brave men and women in uniform are taking the fight to al Qaeda wherever it exists. And tonight, I’ve returned from a trip to the Gulf Coast to speak with you about the battle we’re waging against an oil spill that is assaulting our shores and our citizens. On April 20th, an explosion ripped through BP Deepwater Horizon drilling rig, about 40 miles off the coast of Louisiana. Eleven workers lost their lives. Seventeen others were injured. And soon, nearly a mile beneath the surface of the ocean, oil began spewing into the water. Because there has never been a leak this size at this depth, stopping it has tested the limits of human technology. That’s why just after the rig sank, I assembled a team of our nation’s best scientists and engineers to tackle this challenge a team led by Dr. Steven Chu, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist and our nation’s Secretary of Energy. Scientists at our national labs and experts from academia and other oil companies have also provided ideas and advice. As a result of these efforts, we’ve directed BP to mobilize additional equipment and technology. And in the coming weeks and days, these efforts should capture up to 90 percent of the oil leaking out of the well. This is until the company finishes drilling a relief well later in the summer that’s expected to stop the leak completely. Already, this oil spill is the worst environmental disaster America has ever faced. And unlike an earthquake or a hurricane, it’s not a single event that does its damage in a matter of minutes or days. The millions of gallons of oil that have spilled into the Gulf of Mexico are more like an epidemic, one that we will be fighting for months and even years. But make no mistake: We will fight this spill with everything we’ve got for as long as it takes. We will make BP pay for the damage their company has caused. And we will do whatever’s necessary to help the Gulf Coast and its people recover from this tragedy. Tonight I’d like to lay out for you what our battle plan is going forward: what we’re doing to clean up the oil, what we’re doing to help our neighbors in the Gulf, and what we’re doing to make sure that a catastrophe like this never happens again. First, the cleanup. From the very beginning of this crisis, the federal government has been in charge of the largest environmental cleanup effort in our nation’s history an effort led by Admiral Thad Allen, who has almost 40 years of experience responding to disasters. We now have nearly 30,000 personnel who are working across four states to contain and clean up the oil. Thousands of ships and other vessels are responding in the Gulf. And I’ve authorized the deployment of over 17,000 National Guard members along the coast. These servicemen and women are ready to help stop the oil from coming ashore, they’re ready to help clean the beaches, train response workers, or even help with processing claims and I urge the governors in the affected states to activate these troops as soon as possible. Because of our efforts, millions of gallons of oil have already been removed from the water through burning, skimming and other collection methods. Over five and a half million feet of boom has been laid across the water to block and absorb the approaching oil. We’ve approved the construction of new barrier islands in Louisiana to try to stop the oil before it reaches the shore, and we’re working with Alabama, Mississippi and Florida to implement creative approaches to their unique coastlines. As the cleanup continues, we will offer whatever additional resources and assistance our coastal states may need. Now, a mobilization of this speed and magnitude will never be perfect, and new challenges will always arise. I saw and heard evidence of that during this trip. So if something isn’t working, we want to hear about it. If there are problems in the operation, we will fix them. But we have to recognize that despite our best efforts, oil has already caused damage to our coastline and its wildlife. And sadly, no matter how effective our response is, there will be more oil and more damage before this siege is done. That’s why the second thing we’re focused on is the recovery and restoration of the Gulf Coast. You know, for generations, men and women who call this region home have made their living from the water. That living is now in jeopardy. I’ve talked to shrimpers and fishermen who don’t know how they’re going to support their families this year. I’ve seen empty docks and restaurants with fewer customers even in areas where the beaches are not yet affected. I’ve talked to owners of shops and hotels who wonder when the tourists might start coming back. The sadness and the anger they feel is not just about the money they’ve lost. It’s about a wrenching anxiety that their way of life may be lost. I refuse to let that happen. Tomorrow, I will meet with the chairman of BP and inform him that he is to set aside whatever resources are required to compensate the workers and business owners who have been harmed as a result of his company’s recklessness. And this fund will not be controlled by BP. In order to ensure that all legitimate claims are paid out in a fair and timely manner, the account must and will be administered by an independent third party. Beyond compensating the people of the Gulf in the short term, it’s also clear we need a long-term plan to restore the unique beauty and bounty of this region. The oil spill represents just the latest blow to a place that’s already suffered multiple economic disasters and decades of environmental degradation that has led to disappearing wetlands and habitats. And the region still hasn’t recovered from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. That’s why we must make a commitment to the Gulf Coast that goes beyond responding to the crisis of the moment. I make that commitment tonight. Earlier, I asked Ray Mabus, the Secretary of the Navy, who is also a former governor of Mississippi and a son of the Gulf Coast, to develop a long-term Gulf Coast Restoration Plan as soon as possible. The plan will be designed by states, local communities, tribes, fishermen, businesses, conservationists and other Gulf residents. And BP will pay for the impact this spill has had on the region. The third part of our response plan is the steps we’re taking to ensure that a disaster like this does not happen again. A few months ago, I approved a proposal to consider new, limited offshore drilling under the assurance that it would be absolutely safe that the proper technology would be in place and the necessary precautions would be taken. That obviously was not the case in the Deepwater Horizon rig, and I want to know why. The American people deserve to know why. The families I met with last week who lost their loved ones in the explosion these families deserve to know why. And so I’ve established a National Commission to understand the causes of this disaster and offer recommendations on what additional safety and environmental standards we need to put in place. Already, I’ve issued a six-month moratorium on deepwater drilling. I know this creates difficulty for the people who work on these rigs, but for the sake of their safety, and for the sake of the entire region, we need to know the facts before we allow deepwater drilling to continue. And while I urge the Commission to complete its work as quickly as possible, I expect them to do that work thoroughly and impartially. One place we’ve already begun to take action is at the agency in charge of regulating drilling and issuing permits, known as the Minerals Management Service. Over the last decade, this agency has become emblematic of a failed philosophy that views all regulation with hostility a philosophy that says corporations should be allowed to play by their own rules and police themselves. At this agency, industry insiders were put in charge of industry oversight. Oil companies showered regulators with gifts and favors, and were essentially allowed to conduct their own safety inspections and write their own regulations. When Ken Salazar became my Secretary of the Interior, one of his very first acts was to clean up the worst of the corruption at this agency. But it’s now clear that the problem there ran much deeper, and the pace of reform was just too slow. And so Secretary Salazar and I are bringing in new leadership at the agency Michael Bromwich, who was a tough federal prosecutor and Inspector General. And his charge over the next few months is to build an organization that acts as the oil industry’s watchdog not its partner. So one of the lessons we’ve learned from this spill is that we need better regulations, better safety standards, and better enforcement when it comes to offshore drilling. But a larger lesson is that no matter how much we improve our regulation of the industry, drilling for oil these days entails greater risk. After all, oil is a finite resource. We consume more than 20 percent of the world’s oil, but have less than 2 percent of the world’s oil reserves. And that’s part of the reason oil companies are drilling a mile beneath the surface of the ocean because we’re running out of places to drill on land and in shallow water. For decades, we have known the days of cheap and easily accessible oil were numbered. For decades, we’ve talked and talked about the need to end America’s century-long addiction to fossil fuels. And for decades, we have failed to act with the sense of urgency that this challenge requires. Time and again, the path forward has been blocked not only by oil industry lobbyists, but also by a lack of political courage and candor. The consequences of our inaction are now in plain sight. Countries like China are investing in clean energy jobs and industries that should be right here in America. Each day, we send nearly $1 billion of our wealth to foreign countries for their oil. And today, as we look to the Gulf, we see an entire way of life being threatened by a menacing cloud of black crude. We cannot consign our children to this future. The tragedy unfolding on our coast is the most painful and powerful reminder yet that the time to embrace a clean energy future is now. Now is the moment for this generation to embark on a national mission to unleash America’s innovation and seize control of our own destiny. This is not some distant vision for America. The transition away from fossil fuels is going to take some time, but over the last year and a half, we’ve already taken unprecedented action to jumpstart the clean energy industry. As we speak, old factories are reopening to produce wind turbines, people are going back to work installing energy-efficient windows, and small businesses are making solar panels. Consumers are buying more efficient cars and trucks, and families are making their homes more energy-efficient. Scientists and researchers are discovering clean energy technologies that someday will lead to entire new industries. Each of us has a part to play in a new future that will benefit all of us. As we recover from this recession, the transition to clean energy has the potential to grow our economy and create millions of jobs but only if we accelerate that transition. Only if we seize the moment. And only if we rally together and act as one nation workers and entrepreneurs; scientists and citizens; the public and private sectors. When I was a candidate for this office, I laid out a set of principles that would move our country towards energy independence. Last year, the House of Representatives acted on these principles by passing a strong and comprehensive energy and climate bill a bill that finally makes clean energy the profitable kind of energy for America’s businesses. Now, there are costs associated with this transition. And there are some who believe that we can’t afford those costs right now. I say we can’t afford not to change how we produce and use energy because the long-term costs to our economy, our national security, and our environment are far greater. So I’m happy to look at other ideas and approaches from either party as long they seriously tackle our addiction to fossil fuels. Some have suggested raising efficiency standards in our buildings like we did in our cars and trucks. Some believe we should set standards to ensure that more of our electricity comes from wind and solar power. Others wonder why the energy industry only spends a fraction of what the high-tech industry does on research and development and want to rapidly boost our investments in such research and development. All of these approaches have merit, and deserve a fair hearing in the months ahead. But the one approach I will not accept is inaction. The one answer I will not settle for is the idea that this challenge is somehow too big and too difficult to meet. You know, the same thing was said about our ability to produce enough planes and tanks in World War II. The same thing was said about our ability to harness the science and technology to land a man safely on the surface of the moon. And yet, time and again, we have refused to settle for the paltry limits of conventional wisdom. Instead, what has defined us as a nation since our founding is the capacity to shape our destiny our determination to fight for the America we want for our children. Even if we’re unsure exactly what that looks like. Even if we don’t yet know precisely how we’re going to get there. We know we’ll get there. It’s a faith in the future that sustains us as a people. It is that same faith that sustains our neighbors in the Gulf right now. Each year, at the beginning of shrimping season, the region’s fishermen take part in a tradition that was brought to America long ago by fishing immigrants from Europe. It’s called â€Å"The Blessing of the Fleet,† and today it’s a celebration where clergy from different religions gather to say a prayer for the safety and success of the men and women who will soon head out to sea some for weeks at a time. The ceremony goes on in good times and in bad. It took place after Katrina, and it took place a few weeks ago at the beginning of the most difficult season these fishermen have ever faced. And still, they came and they prayed. For as a priest and former fisherman once said of the tradition, â€Å"The blessing is not that God has promised to remove all obstacles and dangers. The blessing is that He is with us always,† a blessing that’s granted â€Å"even in the midst of the storm.† The oil spill is not the last crisis America will face. This nation has known hard times before and we will surely know them again. What sees us through what has always seen us through is our strength, our resilience, and our unyielding faith that something better awaits us if we summon the courage to reach for it. Tonight, we pray for that courage. We pray for the people of the Gulf. And we pray that a hand may guide us through the storm towards a brighter day. Thank you, God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America. Source: WhiteHouse.gov

Financial Management in Nonprofit Organizations Research Paper - 1

Financial Management in Nonprofit Organizations - Research Paper Example In fact, such regulative provisions aim to ensure that the organization’s funds are properly used for the stated purpose. As compared to for-profit organizations, a nonprofit enterprise is not allowed to keep huge amount of surpluses with it. Since a nonprofit organization’s financial management is not liable to take any level of risk, it can operate freely with greater degree of certainty. In contrast, for-profit organizations bear some levels of business risks including debt financing. Generally, both nonprofit organizations and for-profit organizations use the incremental budgeting technique. Undoubtedly, restricted financial management operations can reduce nonprofit organizations’ probability of failure. Introduction The term financial management simply refers to the process of planning toward the future of an individual or a business organization so as to ensure a positive inflow and outflow of cash. To be more specific, â€Å"financial management pertains to the optimal sourcing and utilization of financial resources of a business enterprise†; and the two key processes including resource management and finance operations constitute this process (Sofat & Hiro, 2011, p.20). Theoretical frameworks suggest that the application of financial management techniques in non-profit organizations is entirely different from its application in for-profit organizations. This paper will discuss the financial management practices in nonprofit organization. It will also compare and contrast the applications of financial management techniques in nonprofit organizations with that of for-profit organizations. Core Concepts of Financial Management Core concepts of financial management encompass capital budgeting, cash management, cost of capital, capital structure planning, and dividend policy. Capital budgeting is a financial tool used to analyze whether an organization’s long term investments like new plants, machinery, research and develo pment projects, and other new products are worth pursuing. Cash management activities try to maintain an effective balance between inflow and outflow of cash. From the management view point, cost of capital represents the cost of a firm’s funds including debt and equity. The concept of capital structure refers to the way an organization uses particular combinations of ‘equity, debt, and hybrid securities’. Dividend policy refers to a strategic measure that an organization uses to decide the level of returns to be paid to its shareholders. The application of these financial management concepts depends on a number of factors in addition to the size and nature of the organization. Among them, the firm’s efficacy in applying these concepts is vital in order to exercise a control over the organization’s future cash flows. Therefore, firms usually establish separate finance departments so as to deal with their day to day financial operations. Financial Ma nagement in Nonprofit Organizations Unlike for-profit organizations, the p ­rimary goal of a nonprofit organization is not shareholder value maximization; instead, it intends to meet specific socially desirable needs. As Griswold and Jarvis (2011) point out, nonprofit organizations lack financial flexibility as such institutions heavily depend on resource providers that are not engaged in exchange transaction. The resources provided are

The nurses' responsability in the prevention of medication errors Essay - 1

The nurses' responsability in the prevention of medication errors - Essay Example egarding medical malpractices, the quality of care needs not be assumed and must at all times be considered as a crucial aspect in medical practice (Reason, 2000). The author continues to argue that medical practitioners have faced disciplinary issues, shame, and threats due to malpractices. Since nurses are major players in offering medical care, they are concerned with the health of an individual from the onset of medication till the end (Cohen, 2007). In light of this argument, it is argued that nurses play the major role of ensuring that they understand the major factors that lead to errors in the medical provision. This role of prevention of errors is crucial in the prevention of medical errors (Cohen, 2007). These errors include incorrect calculations of medical dosages, improper consultations, inexperience, and failure to adhere to the set protocols amongst others (Cohen, 2007). With these avenues of medical errors in place, the quality of medical service is then jeopardized. In this case, the nurse should play the major role of ensuring that they minimize the avenues of cropping up of medical errors as possible. A good example is that of the nurses’ conversance with the FEMA (Failure Mode and Effect Analysis) that has been instrumental in alleviating chem otherapy errors (Hartranft, Sheridan-Leos, & Schulmeister, 2006). Nurses are able to come up with thoughts on how to safeguard the safety of the patient care. Despite the fact that Cohen (2007) indicates that the nurses are mostly forced by the management to cause some of these errors, they should be on the frontline to ensure that they minimize as many challenges as they can. Secondly, in the medical setting, they must have vast experimental knowledge in the concerned field (Cohen, 2007). This allows the nurses have a big picture of the entire case, always countercheck the medical history of a patient prior to making any form of conclusion (Cima, ‎2011). This means that the nurse is able to offer