Korematsu v. United States Free Essays

Introduction Toyosaburo Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. We will write a custom essay sample on Korematsu v. United States or any similar topic only for you Order Now 214 (1944), is considered to be the most important of the Japanese-American cases because it upheld the forced exclusion of loyal citizens. The case was decided by a 6 to 3 majority vote by the Justices to sustain Korematsu’s conviction for exclusion order violation. Justice Hugo Black authored the majority opinion. The dissenter in the decision among others was Justice Frank Murphy. If situations arise in which legal reasoning overrides the value of a narrative, it may be time for the decision makers to reformulate the law. The Justices in Korematsu, in making their decision had the authority to use the law as they did, but they also had the authority to go the other direction and strike down the wrongful actions of the government. The following opinions of the Court fully explain the facts of the case. Majority Opinion: Justice Black Justice Black, considered at the time to be the civil libertarian of the Court, delivered the majority opinion in Korematsu v. United States, upholding the conviction of Fred Korematsu. He began by stating that â€Å"all legal restrictions which curtail the civil rights of a single racial group are immediately suspect† (Korematsu 216). He then qualified this statement by asserting that not all such restrictions are unconstitutional, but that they should be subject to the most rigid scrutiny (216). Black then laid the legal groundwork for the case by reciting the Congressional Act, which Korematsu is accused of â€Å"knowingly and admittedly† violating. Korematsu is convicted of violating the Congressional Act sanctioned via Executive Order No. 9066, requiring ‘every possible protection against espionage and sabotage’ through national defense, and then applied via military Exclusion Order 34, requiring the exclusion of all those of Japanese ancestry from designated military zones (216). Justice Black then revealed the case context by explaining the precedent on which Korematsu would rely. In the series of military orders, the first violation was the curfew order. The Supreme Court upheld this conviction in the preceding case of Kiyoshi Hirabayashi v. United States, 320 U.S. 81 (1944). Black explained that the both the Hirabayashi conviction and the Korematsu conviction are upheld by the same Act of Congress, aimed at protection against sabotage and espionage. The Act was disputed as unconstitutional by the petitioner in Hirabayashi because it was beyond the war powers of the government, and that the curfew order was aimed at only citizens of Japanese ancestry, and therefore discriminatory (217). Justice Black contended that these arguments were seriously considered, but that the curfew order was upheld as necessary government prevention of sabotage and espionage threatened by Japanese attack (217). Acknowledging that exclusion is a â€Å"far greater deprivation† than the curfew, Black remained supportive of the military authorities because the Court was unable to prove that exclusion of those of Japanese ancestry was beyond the war power â€Å"at the time† that it occurred (218). He claimed the exclusion â€Å"has a definite and close relationship† with the prevention of sabotage and espionage (218). The petitioner disputed the assumptions on which the Hirabayashi opinion rested and contended that by May, when the exclusion was ordered, there was no longer danger of invasion (218). Black flatly rejected these contentions, reciting Hirabayashi, â€Å" ‘†¦we cannot reject as unfounded the judgment of the military authorities and of Congress that there were disloyal members of that population, whose number and strength could not be precisely and quickly ascertained’†¦most of whom we have no doubt were loyal to this country† (218-219). To the petitioner’s charge of group discrimination, Black answered that the Court sustained exclusion of the whole group because it could not reject the military’s contention that immediate separation of the loyal from disloyal was impossible (219). The next portion of the majority opinion speaks to the petitioner’s and dissenters’ arguments against the government by giving an account and explanation of the pertinent dates that were in question as ill-fitting of the military’s assertions and the decision of the court. One of the counter arguments to the Majority opinion was that on May 30, 1942, when Korematsu was charged with remaining in the prohibited area, there were conflicting orders forbidding him both not to leave and to remain in the area (220). Justice Black refuted this argument by stating that the March 27, 1942 order stated that it was in effect until further direction from a subsequent order. The exclusion order was that subsequent order, which was given on May 3, 1942 and was to be enacted by May 9. Citing more important information concerning the dates, Justice Black explicitly conceded that before the exclusion was to take place on May 9, an instruction to report to an assembly center upon evacuation was issued, â€Å" ‘to insure the orderly evacuation and resettlement of Japanese voluntarily migrating from military area No. 1 to restrict and regulate such migration’ † (221). On May 19, 1942, before Korematsu was arrested, the military issued an order that â€Å"provided for detention of those of Japanese ancestry in assembly or relocation centers,† and so it was argued that the exclusion order could not be considered separately from the detention order (221). Justice Black refuted the notion that the Court must pass on the â€Å"whole detention program† when only the exclusion charge is before them (221). The majority asserted that since Korematsu was not convicted of failing to report to or remain in an assembly center, that they could not determine the validity of the separate order (222). Speaking on the issue, Black stated that, â€Å" It will be time enough to decide the serious constitutional issues which [the] petitioner seeks to raise when an assembly or relocation order is applied or is certain to be applied to him and we have its terms before us† (222). Justice Black’s opinion spoke to the argument of racism in consideration of the fact that there had been no evidence of Korematsu’s disloyalty. Black denied that the order was based on racial prejudice. He implied a more complex situation, due to wartime, by stating that the Court’s task would be â€Å"simple† and its â€Å"duty clear were this a case involving the imprisonment of a loyal citizen in a concentration camp because of racial prejudice.† Black added that, â€Å"regardless of the true nature of the assembly and relocation centers†¦we are dealing specifically with nothing but an exclusion order.† (223). Finally, the majority opinion ended with the issue of military deference. Due to the military’s fear of invasion, â€Å"they [the military] decided† that the situation demanded segregation of the citizens of Japanese ancestry, and Congress determined that â€Å"they should have the power to do this† (223). Ironically Black stated that, â€Å"Korematsu was not excluded from the Military Area because of hostility to him or his race. He was excluded because we are at war with the Japanese Empire†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (223). Black ended by asserting that from the â€Å"calm perspective of hindsight,† the Court cannot â€Å"say that at that time these actions were unjustified† (223). Dissenting Opinion: Justice Murphy Justice Murphy’s opinion can be referred to as the most scathing criticism of the three dissents, with his argument based on the charge of racism. First, Justice Murphy mentioned that the plea of military necessity for the exclusion came â€Å"in the absence of martial law,† and so should have been approved (233). He asserted that such exclusion goes beyond constitutional power into â€Å"the ugly abyss of racism† (233). Justice Murphy acknowledged the need to consider the reasoning of Military authority during war, and stated that their judgments should â€Å"not be overruled lightly† by those who may not have access to all of the military intelligence (233). He believed, however that there should be limits where martial law has not been declared (233). He claimed that individuals could not be stripped of their rights by â€Å"military necessity that has neither substance nor support† (233). Murphy explicitly reserved the right of the judicial branch to judge the validity of military discretion. Murphy cited the traditional judicial test of military discretion in depriving rights in various Court precedents: â€Å"Whether the deprivation is reasonably related to a public danger that is ‘so immediate, imminent, and impending’ as not to admit of delay and not to permit the intervention of ordinary constitutional processes to alleviate the danger† (234). He then pointed to the verbiage of the exclusion order having used the phrase ‘all person of Japanese ancestry, both alien and non-alien,’ and declared it insufficient to meet the immediate danger criteria, calling it â€Å"obvious racial discrimination† (234). The order deprived those within its scope of their Fifth Amendment rights of equal protection (235). The order also deprived them of due process, because it excluded them without hearings and deprived them of being able to live and work where they choose and move about freely (235). Justice Murphy found no correlation between the exclusion and immediate danger, citing it as a â€Å"racial restriction† that brought about more â€Å"sweeping and complete deprivations of constitutional rights in the history of this nation in the absence of martial law† (235). Justice Murphy conceded that there was a fear of invasion, sabotage and espionage at the time on the Pacific Coast, and that reasonable military action would have been appropriate; however, the â€Å"exclusion, either temporarily or permanently, of all persons with Japanese blood in their veins has no such reasonable relation† (235). The military reasons, he states, relied on the assumptions that all those of Japanese ancestry have â€Å"a dangerous tendency to commit sabotage and espionage and to aid our Japanese enemy in other ways† (235). Justice Murphy’s opinion specifies the incongruent relationship of military necessity and immediate danger by reviewing the text of General DeWitt’s final report. He found that the report erroneously assumes â€Å"racial guilt† rather than military necessity. Murphy used as an example the words of DeWitt, who â€Å"refers to all individuals of Japanese descent as ‘subversive,’ as belonging to an ‘enemy race’ whose ‘racial strains are undiluted,’ and as constituting ‘over 112,000 potential enemies†¦at large today’ along the Pacific Coast† (236). In the report, Murphy found no reliable evidence of disloyalty, using either general or menacing conduct of the Japanese aliens and citizens (236). Murphy claimed that â€Å"justification is sought, instead, mainly upon questionable racial and sociological grounds not ordinarily within the realm of expert military judgment† (236-237). He proceeded to cover and dispute the evidence provided by General DeWitt. Justice Murphy’s opinion continued with more â€Å"unverified† information used in the General’s report to the Government. He methodically included footnotes behind each of DeWitt’s assertions, which cited studies that refuted assimilation claims, clarified reasons for dual citizenship and other claims, and also pointed out statements made that were based on pure speculation. Justice Murphy thereby disproved a â€Å"reasonable relation between the group characteristics of Japanese-Americans and the dangers of invasion, sabotage and espionage† (239). Acknowledging the long-standing racial discrimination of the group, Justice Murphy chastised the military for having based its decision on racial and sociological judgments when â€Å"every charge relative to race, religion, culture, geographical location, and legal and economic status has been substantially discredited by independent studies made by experts in these matters† (240). Justice Murphy then directed his opinion to a discussion of individual guilt, which is recognized by the United States, as opposed to group guilt. He stated that there are some disloyal individuals who are among those of Japanese ancestry, just as there are among those of German and Italian ancestry, but to cite examples of individual disloyalty as indicative of group disloyalty is discriminatory (240). This process, he continued, denies our legal system that is based on deprivation of rights for individual guilt (240). There were no â€Å"adequate reasons† given by the military not to treat Japanese-Americans like German-Americans and Italian-Americans, and hold investigations and hearings on an individual basis in order to separate the loyal from the disloyal (241). Murphy cited the inconsistency between the claim that â€Å" ‘time was of the essence,’ † and the time period it took for the enactment of orders. The exclusion order was issued four months after Pearl Harbor, the last order was issued eight months later, and the â€Å"last of these ‘subversive’ persons was not actually removed until almost eleven months had elapsed† (241). â€Å"Deliberation† was more â€Å"of the essence than speed† (241). Murphy emphasized the suspect representation of urgency when â€Å"conditions were not such as to warrant a declaration of martial law† (241). Murphy held that within this time period and in these circumstances it would have been possible to hold loyalty hearings for at least the 70,000 American citizens â€Å"especially when a large part of this number represented children and elderly men and women† (242). As evidence to this, Murphy cited the fact that during a six-month period the British set up hearing boards and summoned and examined 74,000 Germans and Austrians (Korematsu Footnote 16). Finally, Justice Murphy ends his opinion in a declaration of dissent: I dissent, therefore, from this legalization of racism. Racial discrimination in any form and in any degree has no justifiable part whatever in our democratic way of life. It is unattractive in any setting but it is utterly revolting among a free people who have embraced the principles set forth in the Constitution of the United States. (242) Discussion and Summary The decision set one of the gravest precedents in history for the United States. Since then, efforts at redress have been made in the form of minimal monetary compensation, congressional acts allowing Asian immigrants to become naturalized citizens, and Presidential apologies. Fred Korematsu received the Presidential Medal of Freedom in January of 1998 for his courage in standing up to an unjust deprivation of liberty. The Korematsu case is a constant reminder to Americans that civil liberties for all citizens must be especially protected under adverse conditions, even in the face of public opposition and wrongful government action. Korematsu vs. United States is one of the best examples of the Supreme Court deferring to military and government authority, even under conditions that the Court itself realizes are suspicious. The Majority Court purposely avoided ruling on the whole process of exclusion, evacuation, and internment set by the military and sanctioned by the government before Fred Korematsu’s arrest. The narrow parameters in which they ruled were highly questionable because Fred Korematsu along with the rest of the ethnic Japanese were mandated to abide by the whole process intended by the military and the government to be a program. The Justice Black’s opinion make it clear that Majority do not intend to question the reasoning of the government and military, but only to suppose that they have one and therefore that the order is valid. The Majority leans on the context of war to legitimize their decision. The Justice Murphy’s opinion targets distinct and relative issues. He comments on the racial nature of the decision while focusing separately on the indivisibility of the exclusion order from the program, the lack of evidence to back the military’s report, and the danger of constitutionally endorsing the Majority decision. The Korematsu Court, acting as final judge of the entire episode, allowed those with power to decide the prevailing value in its ruling. Their decision was not consistent with their duty. Justice Black, in the majority opinion, makes two strong references that reveal the Court’s intent not to question the values of those in power. In the first reference, they reject Korematsu’s arguments and rest on precedent by quoting Hirabayashi: â€Å" ‘†¦we cannot reject as unfounded the judgement of the military authorities and of Congress that their were disloyal members of the population†¦Ã¢â‚¬â„¢Ã¢â‚¬  (Korematsu 218). The Court never answers why they cannot reject the military’s assertions, which were weak and lacking in any concrete evidence. In the second statement, Justice Black says on the Court’s behalf that, â€Å"we cannot-by availing ourselves of the calm perspective of hindsight-now say that at that time these actions were unjustified† (Korematsu 224). Again, no plausible explanation was provided. The nature of trials is such that many times they are conducted in the calm perspective of hindsight and their duty and purpose is to determine whether or not there is justification for the actions of those involved. Justice Murphy dutifully reviewed the military findings, and in doing so found: No reliable evidence is cited to show that such individuals were generally disloyal, or had generally so conducted themselves in this area as to constitute a special menace to defense installations or war industries, or had otherwise by their behavior furnished reasonable ground for their exclusion as a group. (Korematsu 236) Public opinion and political pressure were the initiators of the government actions, however, government and military officials were the ones who made the decisions to act on those pressures. Worse yet, in the face of this influence and power, the 1944 Supreme Court displayed the same negative value of racism as the populace by shamefully failing in their duty to remain impartial and pass judgment based on the constitutionality of the individual’s conviction. From the perspective of the Majority of the 1944 Supreme Court, the issues involved in the Korematsu case were based purely on their own and the government’s motives. The Supreme Court Majority completely lacked consideration for the value of the Japanese person perspective in the United States. References Toyosaburo Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (1944). Available at: laws.findlaw.com/us/323/214.html How to cite Korematsu v. United States, Essay examples

Dynamic Leadership and Organizations

Question: Discuss about the Dynamic Leadership and Organizations. Answer: Introduction: Leadership is a continuous process. In course of time, an ordinary person can become an extra ordinary leader, with the help of his traits, skills, behaviors and decision-making power. This reflective essay is dedicated to explore and discuss the leadership journey of the writer. From a short sighted, autocratic decision maker, the author has gradually become a democratic and transformational leader. It is a journey, which is continuously evolving and developing the leadership skills of the author. A leader can inspire and motivate others to identify their own goals (Dvir et al. 2015). The author is also striving to achieve the greatness of an inspirational and transformational leader in the course of his journey of being a leader. Reflection: Leadership can best be identified as a journey. As mentioned by Avolio and Walumbwa (2014), it is an art of motivating, inspiring and persuading people to act towards achieving a goal. My own leadership pattern has been evolving with my life. A number of situations, challenges and peoples have made me enrich myself with the qualifications of a good leader. in the initial years of my career, I had an idea that a leader need to make his followers do the tasks set by him. However, with the course of time and experiencing failure in leading people I have realized that it is the task of a leader to inspire people to set their own goal and achieve it with their own motivation. In the initial years of my professional career, I have tried to control all my employees, but it led me to experience employee dissatisfaction and loss in profitability. I have also found the employees, who were adaptive to the control I exercised, but in course of time, I have found that it as being impossible to challenge the status quo and experience growth in the company with them. Here, I realized that it is important for a leader to be democratic and let people communicate and express their views. As mentioned by Trivellas and Drimoussis (2013), unlike a manager, a leader strives to achieve innovation to grow farther. For achieving this goal a leader, needs to make the employees come up with their ideas and communicate in an open manner. MBTI Assessment: Self-awareness is typically needed for the growth of my leadership style and personality. As mentioned by Furnham and Crump (2015), self-assessment provides better insight into the personal and leadership style of an individual which is helpful in improving (Bales 2016). A number of strategies can be used for executing a self-assessment. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) can be used to identify my own personality or leadership style. As mentioned by Bales (2016), based on the type theory of Carl G Jung, Katherine Biggs and Isabel Myers developed the MBIT model of self-assessment. As per the dichotomies set by the model, I can place myself in the ISTP level. As per my own sense and exercised leadership style, it can identify me as an introvert, as I focus on the thoughts, emotions and experiences of others and myself. With the course of time, I have realized that it is important for a leader to concentrating on listening that speaking. On the other hand, I prefer sensing dichotomy. For the decision-making, I prefer using experience and the learned skills. I believe on to be realistic even while being visionary for the future. Hence, while opting for a new strategy, I love to be democratic, as it helps me in looking at the big picture, which is hard for me as a sensing personality. I know, I need to develop the N dichotomy while making decision. Moreover, in the T-F dichotomy, I can place myself in the thinking position. I prefer to make decision based on the logic or situation. I like to be truthful in my interaction with the followers. I consider impartiality and fairness as the utmost value of life. Lastly, for the J-P dichotomy I found myself as perceiving. I love to take challenges and I do not fear the unpredictable odds. It helps me in growing for future and provides me the confidence to implement new things in life and in the context of my career. Hence, I can count myself as an ISTP leader. According to the MBTI chart, it makes me open to face challenges (Bales 2016). Feedback: One of my partners has identified that I am being too much calculative while making decision as a leader. It is hampering my risk taking capability. Moreover, as mentioned by Chemers (2014), it is important for the leaders to take risks sometimes. It helps them discovering future. Moreover, as per my partners feedback, my ability of taking risks and the behavior of being too much logical and responsible, it is being contradictory. Hence, I need to make a subtle choice, between them, so that it helps me in actualize my leadership goals. Providing Feedback: While mentoring my partners leadership style, I have identified that he is a situational leader, which helps him to modify his approach as per the situational requirements. However, in order to maintain good organizational culture, a leader should maintain one particular approach (Trivellas and Drimoussis 2013). Therefore, I have mentioned that he must identify his leadership approach and organizational requirement in order to avoid risk. For my partner, I can suggest him to be more considerate before acting. As a leader, the team and his followers are his responsibility. It is good to use the trial and error in life, but with the responsibility of others, it cannot be counted as a good step. Moreover, I would suggest him from my own experience that is important to look at the big picture for future growth in life. As mentioned by Tourish (2014), most of the eminent and popular leaders were intuitive in their personal lives. It helped them to create future for their own rather walkin g on the path carved by someone else. It was their intuition that made them memorable even today. Hence, I would suggest my partner to be more intuitive in his leadership style and personal life as well. Influence of culture: I accept that the national and various organizational cultures have developed my leadership pattern for today. Hence, I believe that the national and the organizational culture have a deep influence on a leader and his leadership style. As mentioned by Trivellas and Drimoussis (2013), culture is about values, norms, and practices. Hence, by identifying what is right and what is wrong, the national and the organizational culture can influence a leadership pattern. According to my own idea, an effective leader needs to be democratic. It is important for them to make people aware of the decisions and include them within it. It helps in creating faith and a sense of security within the followers. National democracy fundamentally induces people to be democratic in their personal dealing. Moreover, as mentioned by Erkutlu (2012), an organization, which believes in autocratic decision-making, no future leader will come up with a democratic attitude. Moreover, I personally like a transformational leadership pattern. As mentioned by Girma (2016), a transformational leader welcomes the idea of others, which helps them to be innovative. However, in a core bureaucratic organizational culture it is hard to exerciser this leadership pattern. Moreover, a nation, which is orthodox it its culture, innovation is not much supported and encouraged. Hence, it is important for the organizations to be democratic and participative in its decision making process to support the transformational leadership style. The communication skills: Communication skills obtain a significant role in the effectiveness of a particular leadership pattern. As mentioned by Mikkelson et al. (2015), only a good communicator can be a great leader. Listing: As mentioned by Martins et al. (2013), to be an effective leader, it is important to be a great listener. With listing, commitment from the followers can be gathered. Trust and respect can be interacted via active listing. Moreover, with this skill, the concerns and idea of the followers can be gathered which will be helpful in transformational leadership. Non-judgmental attitude: As opined by Hackman and Johnson (2013), an effective leader is open to all emotional possibilities. I need to be apt in putting my own emotions and paying focused attention. It will help me in obtaining confidence of my followers. Open communication channel: It is important for the leaders, to uphold an open horizontal and liner communication channel. With an open communication channel, it will be helpful for me to collect feedback from my followers about my leadership and they will be directed in a better manner (Martins et al. 2013). One to one communication: As mentioned by Martins et al. (2013), by observing one to one communication I will be able to understand each of my followers and it will help me to know the motivating factors for them. Thus, a one to one communication strategy will be helpful for me to be a successful transformational leader. Theories and analysis: There are a number of leadership theories and models, which can be discussed for analyzing my own leadership pattern. As mentioned in the trait theory, there are a certain qualities, which make a leader different from his/ her followers (Chemers 2014). As mentioned by Trivellas and Drimoussis (2013), the trait theory considers honesty and integrity as one of the major traits of an effective and successful leader. It makes them different from his followers as people often find it difficult to be honest. I have this particular quality within myself. It has helped me to gain confidence from my followers. My quality of maturity and intelligence can be considered as the traits those will be helpful in lead people. On the other hand, Avolio and Walumbwa (2014) stated that the behavioral theory the pattern of actions of a leader differentiates him/her from their followers. As discussed by this particular theory, the inner traits of a leader will not be helpful for him to be an effective leader, if the behavioral part of him does not make him different from the others. As per the Ohio State Studies, the behavior of a leader can be dignified as two different characters: initiating structure and consideration. As discussed by Trivellas and Drimoussis (2013), in initiating structure, the leader is concentrated on supervising the activities of the employees. On the other hand, the in consideration, a leader focuses on supportiveness, welfare of the employees and respect. As mentioned in the Michigan studies, the behavior of the leaders can be identified as employee centered vs. task centered (Avolio and Walumbwa 2014). As opined by Girma (2016), an employee-oriented leader emphasizes on the interpersonal relation and accepts the individual differences among the members. On the other hand, a task-oriented leader emphasizes on rigid work standard and considers the employees as the tool of accomplishing goals. Here, my democratic leadership behavior will make me different from the others. I personally believe that a democratic leader is more likely to gain the confidence and ideas from the employees. It helps them in encountering various contingent situations. Moreover, my employee centric approach will make me a considerate and employee centered leader. The theories of leadership talk about various kinds of leadership styles. I personally prefer the transformational leadership style. According to Dvir et al. (2015), a transformational leader initiates change within the followers. As discussed by Chemers (2014), these leaders highly self motivated. I have this particular quality within myself. It helps me in motivating others. Moreover, as mentioned by Hackman and Johnson (2013), a transformational leader is inspirational. They do not confine in providing formal acknowledgments but treat each employee as a valued individual and understand what motivated them. I need to grow this quality within myself. It will help me in creating motivation among the employees within themselves. Last but the most importantly, a transformational leader leads with vision. As discussed by Chemers (2014), they then communicate the vision effectively to their followers, and also inspire a sense of commitment and purpose. I want to develop this power of int uition within me. Being an ISTP leader, I lack this quality. However, a transformational leadership can be counted as the best for modern day career approaches. Hence, I need to develop this particular leadership quality within me. Conclusion: Hence, from this above discussion, it can be noted that my leadership journey can be considered as a journey from an autocratic to democratic transformational leader. However, I have not achieved the inclusive qualities of a transformational leader, but I am trying to be one. My leadership journey has made me understand that by exercising effective leadership skills, success can be achieved. With a personality assessment, I have found that I have the qualities of a successful leader. However, it is needed for me to develop certain behavioral pattern to be successful in inspiring and motivating others. References: Avolio, B.J. and Walumbwa, F.O., 2014. 16 Authentic Leadership Theory, Research and Practice: Steps Taken and Steps that Remain.The Oxford handbook of leadership and organizations, p.331. Bales, R., 2016. Using the Myers-Briggs type indicator for personal and professional development in the Miller Business Honors Program. Chemers, M., 2014. An integrative theory of leadership. Psychology Press. Dvir, T., Eden, D., Avolio, B.J. and Shamir, B., 2015. The impact of Transformational Leadership. Erkutlu, H., 2012. The impact of organizational culture on the relationship between shared leadership and team proactivity.Team Performance Management: An International Journal,18(1/2), pp.102-119. Furnham, A. and Crump, J., 2015. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and Promotion at Work.Psychology,6(12), p.1510. Girma, S., 2016. The relationship between leadership style, job satisfaction and culture of the organization.IJAR,2(4), pp.35-45. Hackman, M.Z. and Johnson, C.E., 2013.Leadership: A communication perspective. Waveland Press. Martins, A., Donald Ah, P. and Martins, I., 2013. Communication and leadershipDialectical tensions in virtual communities of practice.Management,68, pp.23-30. Mikkelson, A.C., York, J.A. and Arritola, J., 2015. Communication Competence, Leadership Behaviors, and Employee Outcomes in Supervisor-Employee Relationships.Business and Professional Communication Quarterly,78(3), pp.336-354. Tourish, D., 2014. Leadership, more or less? A processual, communication perspective on the role of agency in leadership theory.Leadership,10(1), pp.79-98. Trivellas, P. and Drimoussis, C., 2013. Investigating leadership styles, behavioural and managerial competency profiles of successful project managers in Greece.Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences,73, pp.692-700.

The Unmanaged Heart Essays - Emotion, Life Skills, Social Psychology

The Unmanaged Heart George Rusinak Graves Essay 9\16\99 The Managed Heart: Emotional Management vs. Emotional Labor Can a person's heart be controlled? Do all people go have some form of emotional management or emotional labor in their lives? In the book, The Managed Heart, written by Arlie Hochschild , discusses the issues of emotional labor and emotional management. In the book, it describes the difference between the two issues and gives Hochschild's opinion on those issues. The first issue is emotional management. This is where the fight attendants learn how to deal with certain situations that they might encounter. Basically, they are taught to manage their emotions and look at their situation from the other side. By doing this, the flight attendants can create a happy and more comfortable setting for the passengers. On page 113 in the book, it states that the fight attendants should imagine a reason to excuse an obnoxious or unruly passenger. This is what Delta teaches: emotional management. The other issue is emotional labor. The use of emotional management is emotional labor. They flight attendants use surface acting in everyday work life. They are there to make the passenger feel comfortable and happy. This is a cover sheet for the flight attendants emotions. They are in a way bottling up their feelings to produce another feeling. The problem with emotional labor and surface acting are they become a part of that person. Hochschild thinks that this is a bad thing because one will never break away from the emotional labor and in turn have trouble expressing their inner feelings, (deep acting) in their private lives. In summary, emotional management is emotional labor. Emotional management is the learning how to deal with situations. Emotional labor is the actual use of the emotional management. Learning emotional management is helpful, but can affect that person's lifestyle. When they use emotional labor, they are hiding their inner feelings to create are better atmosphere for others. People using this might never be able to distinguish the difference between their surface acting and deep acting. Hochschild's sees this as a problem for the people affected by this emotion manipulator. This will affect their friend's, family, and the rest of society. Bibliography Hockschild,The Unmanaged Heart, conseni 1978.

Population Density Information and Statistics

Population Density Information and Statistics Population density is an often reported and commonly compared statistic for places around the world. Population density is the measure of the number of people per unit area, commonly represented as people per square mile (or square kilometer). The population density of the planet (including all land area) is about 38 people per square mile (57 per sq km).  The population density of the United States is approximately 87.4 people per square mile, according to the 2010 U.S. Census. Computing Population Density To determine an areas population density, divide an areas total population by the land area in square miles (or square kilometers). For example, Canadas population of 35.6 million (July 2017 estimated by the CIA World Factbook), divided by the land area of 3,855,103  square miles (9,984,670  sq km) yields a density of 9.24 people per square mile.   Although this number would seem to indicate that 9.24  people live on each square mile of Canadian land area, the density within the country varies dramatically; a vast majority lives in the southern part of the country. Density is only a raw gauge to measure a populations disbursement across the land. Density can be computed for any area,  as long as one knows the size of the land area and the population within that area. The population density of cities, states, entire continents, and even the world can be computed. What Country Has the Highest Density? The tiny country of Monaco has the worlds highest population density. With an area of three-fourths of a square mile (2 sq km) and a total population of 30,645, Monaco has a density of almost 39,798 people per square mile. However, because  Monaco and other microstates have very high densities due to their extremely small size, Bangladesh (population 157,826,578)  is often considered the most densely populated country, with more than 2,753 people per square mile. What Country Is the Most Sparse? Mongolia is the worlds least densely populated country, with only five people per square mile (2 per sq km). Australia and Namibia tie  for a close second with 7.8 people per square mile (3 per sq km). These two countries are further examples of density being a limited statistic, as Australia may be huge, but the population resides mainly on its coasts. Namibia has the same density figure but a much smaller total land area. Most Tightly Packed Continent Perhaps not surprisingly, the most densely populated continent is Asia. Here are the population densities of the continents: North America - 60.7 people per square mileSouth America - 61.3 people per square mileEurope - 187.7 people per square mileAsia - 257.8  people per square mileAfrica - 103.7 people per square mileAustralia - 7.8 people per square mile Most Densely Populated Hemisphere About 90 percent  of the Earths people live on 10 percent of the land. Additionally, about 90 percent of the people live north of the equator in the Northern Hemisphere.

Self reflection paper Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Self reflection paper - Essay Example Situations in both life and case study issues become ethical when they involve matters within our control that might either disrespect or respect us as human beings (DuBois, 2010). Based on my personal insights and views, I believe that good discussions on ethics are due to situations that challenge our abilities to determine the right thing to do (DuBois, 2010). Besides, in all situations we should carry out effective ethical action, or lay out an effective strategy for avoiding ethical obstacles in the future (DuBois, 2010). As human beings, we have code of conducts that guide our relations with fellow human beings and our approach to various critical life issues. I believe that we should adhere to these laid down code of conducts to help us coexist as necessitated with fellow human beings in a peaceful and cordial manner (DuBois, 2010). Learning ethical issues have proved to be helpful to me as a learner. These appear in three distinctive ways, which are volitional, cognitive and social (DuBois, 2010). Repeatedly, we always know the right thing but usually a dilemma arises in some instances, which is volitional (DuBois, 2010). The latter usually occurs when individuals have competing interest other than doing what is right (DuBois, 2010). In addition, an ethical matter is cognitive especially when the concerned does not to know what to do. They always find that the decisions they are about to take might affect others in different degrees (DuBois, 2010). At some times, the issues appear easy and we are certain on the decisions we make. These matters only appear socially problematic as the stake holders do not agree on the decision unanimously (DuBois, 2010). In the class discussion, I learned that case studies are standard methods of teaching philosophy, law and a little of social sciences (DuBois, 2010). These cases usually appear accompanied by ethical issues that become a big dilemma for the participants. A big lesson that I learned in my participation in the class is that these ethical issues are there to help us acquire critical thinking as skill, which usually requires practice, learning and experience. This is evident especially in the Automobile Workers v. Johnson Controls Inc case study where I cited various ethical issues that were dilemma especially to the involved participants (Rehnquist, Kennedy & Scalia, 2003). For example, suppose a company is applying the necessary professional work ethics and fair gender opportunities stated by law due to its policy mean to bar women from working in lead related departments (Rehnquist, Kennedy & Scalia, 2003). Besides being just an ethical matter, the issue became a big dilemma for the company or whether to uphold the issue and save workers’ health or get rid of it and put women of childbearing capacity at risk (Rehnquist, Kennedy & Scalia, 2003). This leads to divisions among the work whereby one side deem the corporation purposely implements strategies with an intention of segr egating them. Hence, it does not hold to the international policies that bar corporations from engaging in any form of gender-based marginalization. This is despite corporations availing workers with adequate information regarding reasons why they are against women especially those who have the child bearing capacity working in situations that may be risky to their health. From this we learn, many case studies come

Definition of The Bermuda Triangle Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Definition of The Bermuda Triangle - Essay Example What actually makes this specific region of the Atlantic Ocean primarily fascinating and the reason why this region has amassed such immense worldwide attention over time is based on the fact that word of mouth has played a significant role in this issue which is discussed in this essay. People have rushed to associate supernatural explanations with the Bermuda Triangle due to which this region gained a mysterious aura in a short span of time. Along with contemplating the mystery of the Bermuda Triangle historically, some majorly important characteristics related to it are also discussed and explained in the essay. Beginning with the important accidents that occurred in the Bermuda Triangle due to which it attracted massive attention, the disappearance of an entire troop of bombers and planes without leaving behind a single trace are worth mentioning. Unexplained disasters led people to believe in the myths that there ought to be something deadly, monstrous, and heinous in the ocean due to which people, planes, and ships disappear to never get recovered. After the big incident of plane crashes in the Bermuda Triangle, the gateway to disasters opened up and myriad other disappearances began to be reported due to which this specific area became a highly talked about, riveting, and enthralling topic around the globe and research began on a large scale with no concrete facts revealed and ambiguity, confusion, and mystery ensued. Over time, headlights continued cropping up about more flights and ships along with hundreds of innocent people vanished in the deep waters and no explanation was ever presented publicly other than the dark doubtful statements which led people to speculate that there had to be some supernatural phenomenon in action in that specific area of the Atlantic Ocean, never once stopping to consider the probable role played by natural calamities or human errors. One stark similarity among all the casualties which played a major role in spreading bla ck doubts among the public was that the ships, planes, and aircraft which vanished in the ocean never showed up after some months as wreckage. Now wreckage forms important indicators of where actually the accident took place in case of sea crashes and as for the reported cases of aircraft, if they ever actually did happen, never any oil slicks were found in the ocean by the trackers which put a blind end to the search for authentic facts. It is not like the reasons for all the disasters which occurred in the Bermuda Triangle in the past were left uncovered, rather natural calamities and technical errors accounted for some accidents but, a large proportion of people still remained intent on relying on the supernatural explanations. UFOs and natural reasons form the widely speculated reasons for the disappearances occurring in the Bermuda Triangle of the Atlantic Ocean since the beginning. UFOs are unexplained anomalies which many people have claimed to witness though there is no conc rete fact which can be associated with it.

Critical Thinking Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Critical Thinking - Essay Example Other rhetoric surrounding senior citizens in terms of stereotypes include such things as they are ‘forgetful’, ‘childish’, ‘bad tempered’, ‘frigid’ (women), ‘dirty old men’, ‘cantankerous’, and ‘stubborn’. Stereotypes assigned to tattooed people usually involve bad images such as ‘promiscuity’, ‘aggressiveness’, ‘drug addicts’ and ‘toughies’ or ‘louts’, and they are very much associated with ‘bikies’ (a bad element who ride motor bikes). Feminists inspire numerous stereotypes that continually change as they go in and out of fashion. The derogatory stereotypes generally relate to women who are ‘ball breaker’s and ‘lesbians’ because they strive for equality with men. Many women do not identify themselves as feminists because of fear of reprisal created by stereotypical connotations attributed to them (Weibust & Miller, 2007). Politicians are considered as ‘liars’ and ‘benders of truth’, ‘manipulative’, ‘liners of their own pockets’ and ‘full of their own conceit’. They are probably the most highly stereotyped group of all and the only group that invent stereotypes against each other using negative rhetoric against their opponents.