The Project Termination Process Overview Women’s Rights History Essay Help

Leadership versus Management Concepts history assignment ideas: history assignment ideas

Leadership versus Management

Name

Institution Affiliation

Course Name

Instructor

Date

Discussion 1

Change in organizations is inevitable due to various factors such as increased competition, advancements in technology, and so on. The organization have to either apply change management or change leadership depending on which suits its situations. Change management is viewed as a linear process and it usually reactionary, characterized by a single goal and checkpoints (Hechanova et al., 2018). On the other hand, change leadership views change is a chance for development and improvement but not a finite project making it rigid to adopt the new change. The leaders build an inspiring vision and advocate for vision across the organization. The leaders are more concerned about how this change will affect the employees, their tools, and their process. Therefore, leadership is the best method to apply since it is likely to face all cultural issues that are likely to hinder the implementation of the new change.

In performing work perspective, there are some notable differences between leadership and management constructs. The managers are concerned with implementing actions that are closer to achieving the strategic choice. Generally, these tactical actions are short-term and easy to change, and they are mostly outlined before implementation. The manager ensures that the employees stick to the plan, and if they do something different, the manager views it as a fault. On the other hand, leaders paint the picture of what they see as achievable for the organization and work to inspire and engage employees in turning that into reality. In addition, unlike managers who see individuals as just particular skills, leaders think beyond what they do and activate them to part of something greater. In this case, leaders are well aware of how high-function teams can achieve more while working together rather than independently. In this regard, it can be concluded that leadership is about inspiring, while management focuses on planning. It is important to note that for successful implementation of an action, the organization must use both leadership and management strategies.

Discussion 2

There are many leadership behaviours that sustain and improve performance in the organization. One of such behaviours is that which is employee-oriented. The leaders are focused on the needs of the employees, their dignity, and approach them with an emphasis on human relations (Bratton, 2020). The second leadership behaviors that sustain performance is initiating structure. Leaders with this behavior define roles, ways of completing a task and establishes clear patterns of communication. Another necessary behavior is a consideration where the leader is more focused on developing warm working relationships and advocating for mutual respect and trust in the organization. All these behaviors sustain and improve both performance and job satisfaction in the organizations.

Product innovation is a term used to refer to the introduction of a new product. The term can also imply the product that has been significantly improved in relation to its use or characteristics (Antonelli & Fassio, 2016). This might comprise improvements in technical specifications, materials or components, user-friendliness, incorporated software, and many others. One good example of new products is digital cameras and microprocessors that used the latest technologies in their making. Also, the first portable MP3 player is another product that was created by combining existing technologies. An example of new uses of a product is introducing new detergent that was made by was initially used as intermediary for coating production only.

Concerning process innovations, it is implementing a new delivery or production method such as changes in techniques or equipment. This comprises of changes in equipment, delivery methods, software, or practices. In most cases, process innovation is geared to decrease the cost of production or delivery. Other reasons that influence process innovation include the need to improve quality and increase the quantity of products. Delivery methods concern the firm’s logistics and comprise software, techniques, or equipment to source inputs, allocate the supplies within the organization, or deliver finished goods.

Reference

Antonelli, C., & Fassio, C. (2016). The role of external knowledge (s) in the introduction of product and process innovations. R&D Management, 46(S3), 979-991. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12159

Bratton, J. (Ed.). (, 2020). Organizational leadership. SAGE Publications Limited. https://books.google.co.ke/books?hl=en&lr=&id=nLTRDwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=Organizational+Leadership&ots=hW85SZjbDH&sig=ib_XLGj_4JjzYK3M2RsT7U9_c5M&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=OrganizationalLeadership&f=false

Hechanova, M.R.M., Caringal-Go, J.F. and Magsaysay, J.F. (2018), “Implicit change leadership, change management, and affective commitment to change: Comparing academic institutions vs business enterprises”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 39 No. 7, pp. 914-925. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-01-2018-0013

Japanese series which is written by Natsume Akatsuki. art history essay help

Konosuba Season 3

It involves a Japanese series which is written by Natsume Akatsuki. It was initially serialized on Shosetsuka in Naro as a web novel. Later on, Kadokawa Shoten published it as a printed light novel. The series acquired great acceptance from the viewers upon watching its first season. It involves a boy, Kazuma Sato, who is led into a fantasy world where he makes a dysfunctional party with a wizard, a goddess, and a crusader. Konosouba season 1 was aired on January 14th, 2016.

On the other hand, season 2 was released on the screens on January 12th, 2017. In 2019, there was also a release of a movie on Konosuba, which won many people’s hearts. Its season 3 has therefore been anticipated by the fans worldwide.

Is the season renewed or canceled

There are so many questions concerning whether the series has been renewed or canceled. The truth is that the series has not been canceled. However, there is no information from the showrunner on when season 3 will be released. Therefore, we remain optimistic that with time the anime will be back on our screens to air season 3.

Release date of the season

Most fans worldwide are much awaiting the release of season 3.  There have been several rumors on the internet by the fans on when it will be released.  However, there are no set dates on its possible release. With consideration of several factors, you can be assured that it will be back soon. These aspects include; sales and profit, and popularity. With sales and profit, everything related to Konosuba, whether light novels, games, or movies, makes a tremendous amount of money.

On the other hand, with popularity, there is a growing number of its searches and having numerous followers. Therefore, there are high chances of its release even though we cannot predict which month it may be. Its possible release may be in late 2021

The cast of the season

The anime has numerous characters who have unique qualities. The chances are high that most of the previous season’s actors will feature in this new season. It will be a great joy to see your favorite actor back on the screen. The characters include; Kazuma Sato, who is the protagonist, Aqua, the goddess of the water, and Megumin, the arch wizard. Additionally, Chris, an experienced thief; Yunyun, an arch wizard-like Megumin; Wiz, a wizard ready to help those in need and Darkness, who always try to seduce Kazuma. There may be new characters in the next season as it will bring about new occurrences.  However, it has not been stated whether there will be new faces on our screens.

Plot

Even though season 3 is not yet released, there are several assumptions on what the fans expect. The new season will be a continuation of where the previous season ended. Season 3 is likely to cover the plot according to volumes 5 and 6 of Manga, as season 2 covered volumes 3 and 4. In this season, Megumin admits to having feelings for Kazume, the protagonist in front of her friends. She however denies it later which brings about great tension between the two of them. Therefore, season 3 will have interesting incidences which may be better than the preceding seasons.

When should we expect

No information has been released on when specifically season 3 will be aired on the screens. There is great possibility of its release as the crew did not hint on season 2 being the final and the anime was never canceled as well.  It is rumored to be released later in 2021. However, once we get the information on when it will be released, we will inform you immediately.

Update

The new season may have new characters although it is not stated. The season will include more interesting episodes. There are great chances of having release of season 3 soon. This is in accordance to interviews and social media handles of the director and producers. According to the producer, Junichiro Kadokawa, the chances are significantly high that fans may be able to see season 3 of Konosuba in 2021.

Conclusion

The Konosuba anime firstly received mixed reviews and later acquired significant acceptance from the fans. On IMDB, it has a rating of 7.8, having more than 17 volumes. Many people worldwide are eagerly waiting for the release of season 3 which seems to have taken long. The creators have not confirmed on the possible release date of Konosuba season 3. However, there is a sequel film which was released lately. It to some extent, informs us the movie is alive and will be released soon. You can wait for the release of the great film probably with the fall of 2021.

Lifetime Appointment of the U.S. Supreme Courts System ap american history essay help: ap american history essay help

Lifetime Appointment of the U.S. Supreme Courts System

Student’s name

Institutional affiliation

Introduction

In the United States, the appointed of justices to the Supreme Court us among the most decisions a president can ever make. This is because, in line the U.S. Constitution, Supreme Court justices are allowed to serve a lifetime and are only separated from office if they retire, resign or removed from office. This is an aspect that makes the U.S. democracy distinct from other democracies that strict term limits or mandatory retirement ages for high court judges. For instance, in the United Kingdom, justices undergo mandatory retirement at 70 years as do justices in Australia High courts. Most justices in the United States history retire but a few died in office including Justice Ruth Ginsburg who died in September 2020 after serving at the Supreme Court for 27 years (Kearney, 2019). In 1787, at the time of the ratification of the United States’ constitution, the average life expectancy for white males was 38 years; today, the life expectancy in the US stands at 79 years. This means that the average justice serves the court for 28 years. There is an argument that the framers never intended justices to serve as long as they do now since life expectancy was considerably shorter at the time of the drafting of the constitution. I This essay points out the pros and cons of lifetime appointment of judges and asserts that the tenure of Supreme Court Justices should have strict age limits rather than lifetime appointment.

Pros of Lifetime Appointment of Judges

Permanency in Office Contributes to independence and Firmness of Supreme Courts

The point of guaranteeing justices a seat on the benches for a lifetime or until they retire, is to guard the court from fighting partisan battles. The Supreme Court represents the highest court in the entire U.S. justice system which makes it susceptible to external influences hence preventing it from functioning fairly and independently. The Supreme Court acts as a point of reference against the president’s office as well as congress. Life time appointment is deemed helpful as it is designed to ensure that the corridors of justice are insulated against political pressure and that they serve truly independent of arms of government. This way, justices are protected from being fired if they make unpopular decisions. In theory, life time appointment allows justices to concentrate on the law enforcement rather than politics. Additionally, while a president might nominate an individual to the position of a justice because they view them as an ideological or political ally; upon getting to the bench, they cannot be recalled even if political alignment or ideologies change. Noteworthy, there is data to suggest that as they age, ideologies of many justices drift leftward. This shows that article III of the constitution is timely as it prevents wrangles that can arise from having justices that are unbiased or with personal interest in Congress, the Public, or the elected president. According to Alexander Hamilton who wrote in Federalists No.78, lack of term limits of federal justices “is the best expedient which can be devised in government to secure a steady, upright, and impartial administration of the laws”.

Life Time Appointment of Justices Protects Courts’ Legitimacy

In this case, legitimacy is the ability of a court to resolve disagreements using ways that are acceptable by the citizens even when they do not like the decision. Critiques of the ideology of having term limit maintain that having a life-time appointment policy is viable as it insulates judges form political pressure hence protecting the Court’s legitimacy (McMillion, 2017). Worth noting, if citizens do not view Courts as legitimate, they are less likely to trust and follow its opinion. On the other hand, having term limits to justices’ tenure for say about 18 years would only cushion judges from politics from a given amount of time hence tarnishing the Courts legitimacy.

Cons of Lifetime Appointment of Federal Justices

Lifetime Appointment is a Barrier to Combating Partisan Imbalance in the Courts System

As is, there is no political balance when it comes to giving each president equal nominations of justices through their terms in office. To date, presidential appointments are unevenly distributed between Republican presidents and Democrats. Of the past 18 justices, only 4 were adopted by democrats despite the fact less than 50% of presidents in the last 50 years were republicans (Black, & Owens 2016). Worth noting, ideally about 50% of justices should have been appointed by democratic presidents and 50% by republican presidents to reflect the political ideologies for majority of the population at the time of the vacancy. Life time appointment of judges does not solve the imbalance as there is no stipulated time as when a judge should serve. If there was a term limit, it would solve the imbalance by limiting presidents’ appointment to two per term. This would allow future democratic presidents to appoint more justices to the Supreme Court than they have had thus far.

Life Time Appointment Exacerbates Divisiveness Following the Confirmation Process

Allowing federal justices to serve a life time reinforces the division which follows the process of appointing these individuals. For instance, although Justice Scalia was confirmed in 1986 98-0 very few Democrats would agree with him, Notably, since then, no justice has been confirmed unanimously. Instead, nowadays, justices are being confirmed with narrow margins at high rates.  Moreover, votes are now aligned with political party lines; for instance, Justice Kavanaugh and Justice Gorsuch confirmed with 50-48 and 54-45 votes respectively. It is important to note that augmented partisanship of the process paints judges as mere political figures rather than unbiased interpreters of the Constitution. In turn, this affects the citizens’ viewpoint towards the courts and the entire justice system. If there was law to limit the age of service for justices, it would balance the number of justices nominated by each president, thus helping the confirmation process become less partisan.

Conclusion

The issue of nomination of Supreme Courts’ Justice by the present elect in the United States is an important decision to the state and the citizens. This is because, in line with their constitution, federal judges are permitted to serve a life time and are allowed to leave office only if thy resign, retire or are impeached. I maintain the position that there is need to put strict age limits that restrict justices to serve until they a particular age. The first reason for supporting this notion is that incorporating age limits would solve the imbalance by limiting presidents’ appointment to two per term. This follows the fact currently there exists no political balance when it comes to giving each president equal nominations of justices through their terms in office. Additionally, if there was law to limit the age of service for justices, it would bring balance to the number of justices nominated by each president thus helping the confirmation process become less partisan. The division is evidenced by the narrow margins experienced during the confirmations of justices in the appointment and confirmation process. As such, there is need to cross examine how viable article III of the constitution and if need be, amendment in line with the legal processes.

References

Black, R. C., & Owens, R. J. (2016). Courting the president: how circuit court judges alter their behavior for promotion to the Supreme Court. American Journal of Political Science, 60(1), 30-43.

Kearney, M. (2019). When to Step Down: Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the Supreme Court. Women Leading Change: Case Studies on Women, Gender, and Feminism, 4(1).

McMillion, B. J. (2017). Supreme Court Appointment Process: President’s Selection of a Nominee. Congressional Research Service.

Leader-Member Exchange Theory and the Political Frame history homework help

Leader-Member Exchange Theory and the Political Frame

In organizational psychology exploration, the dyadic connection between a leader and supporters in an organization setting is called leader-membership exchange (LMX) relationship. The LMX can be separated into low- and high-quality associations. To that matter, supporters or followers are incentivized to participate in high-quality LMX relations with their overseer since the member of this association enjoy positive aspects like favorable position, liking, and trust towards each other. The LMX can impact the overseer’s assessment of juniors to performance ratings. Precisely, LMX can influence overseers’ rater answerability since raters tend to assess rates that are involved in high-quality association with them. As a result, the juniors try to make high-quality associations by practicing upward impact strategies like self-promotion ingratiation. On the other hand, the political frame can be referred to as a term used to describe an organization that competes from within for limited resources and time. William Haga, George Graen, and Fred Dansereau introduced the LMX theory that reflects the vertical dyadic relations between members and leaders. In the essay at hand, I will examine the Leader-Member Exchange Theory in terms of its effect on an organization’s day-to-day activities.

Criticism

Some restrictions characterize LMX theory. To start with, leader-member exchange in its original preparation (upright dyad connection theory) runs counter to the uncomplicated social value of equality. In our entire life, starting when we are toddlers, we are trained to treat everybody equally and attempt to get along with everyone we come across in our daily lives. We have been taught that it is not right to form clique or in-groups since they are injurious to those who cannot become part of them. Since LMX theory splits the job unit into two collections, and one group gets exceptional consideration, it offers the presence of discernment against the out-group. Our culture is complete with cases of individuals of diverse abilities, cultures, and gender who have been victimized as far as discrimination is concerned. Even though the LMX theory was not intended to act in such a manner, it aids in reinforcing the development of privileged groups in an organization. In doing so, it seems discriminatory and unfair.

On top of that, out-groups and in-groups may have objectionable impacts on the entire group. It has not been ascertained whether the LMX theory creates inequalities or not. If a leader does not keep out-group members “out” intentionally and if they can access the membership of in-group, then LMX theory might not be in a position of creating inequalities. On the other hand, the idea is not intricate in tactics for getting access to the in-group if one decides to do so. Additionally, LMX theory does not give attention to other fairness issues like subordinates’ insights of promotion and pay rises communication of issues (interactional justice), procedural justice (decision-making rules), or distributive justice (opportunities). Another criticism of LMX theory is that fundamental concepts of the theory are not developed completely. For instance, the theory does not explain in detail the way high-quality leader-member exchanges are made. Previous studies assumed that they were created when a leader found that the supporters were more well-matched concerning job competencies, interpersonal skills, or personalities. However, the studies did not describe the relative significance of the factors or the way the procedure worked.

The LMX theory’s objective is to describe the impacts of leadership on organizations, teams, and members. The theory asserts that leaders for healthy respect, emotional, and trust-based relation with some team members but not with others. Additionally, it claims that leaders do not treat their subordinates equally. LMX theory progressed from vertical dyad linkage theory. The potential impact of LMX theory in an education setting is that teachers are expected not to treat the students equally. On top of that, the LMX theory affects communication in the workplace significantly. Employees who are favored by supervisors tend to appear superior to their peers to the extent of breaking contact with them altogether. This feeling also affects the working relationship. Those who are favored by the administration do not like to be associated with the rest, thus killing the spirit of teamwork at the end of the day.

In summing up, LMX theory refers to leaders’ dyadic relation and their subordinates in an organization. On the other hand, the political frame refers to the situation where organizations compete for limited resources and time. The study has found that subordinates are not treated equally by their supervisors. Such a move can be harmful to an organization’s day-to-day activities since leaders end up favoring some employees at the expense of others. This can lead to a halt of operations, which leads o a decline in productivity. The notion is attributable to the fact that those employees who feel favored may end up cutting bonds with their peers and killing the spirit of teamwork at the end of the day.