Determinism and Compatibilism Essay Example for Free

Determinism and Compatibilism Essay It is said that one of the process of approaching the arguably tough question of determining, What is human nature? is by addressing first the simples issue of what is human choice and human freedom. This has been the central issue both for western and eastern philosophers. The traditional discussion has been whether nature, that of genetics, or nurture, that of environment, is the more primary foundation of human nature. In the end, it seems that both agree that human beings are a creation of combination of nature and nurture. A lot of of individuals are fascinated in psychology, in as much as it aids one to comprehend human behavior, delving deeper in the fundamental way of understanding this occurrence. Before going to the main topic of determining whether or not hard determinism is preferred over compatabilism, it is important to know what hard determinism is and compatibilism is. According to La Fave , the basic argument of Hard Determinism is that no action is free. This means that each event is caused in accord with causal laws that explains absolutely for the happening. Clearly, nothing is uncaused. Put into simple words, HARD DETERMINISM is premised on such a way that since determinism is true, nobody is free; nobody has neither free will nor choice, no one really acts freely. Therefore, for an act to be free it should be the outcome of a choice, desire or course of action that has no cause. That is to say, free will implies that the will or selection mechanism sets off the deed. Accordingly, for the hard determinist, individuals are not distinct from any other things. Each action is a part of an event which links it to another chain of event. Hence, though it may seem that that there is a control on the current event and rational situation, one does not actually have control. Importantly, it bears stressing that if one does not have control, he can not be made morally accountable for his action. Therefore, hard determinism, if correct, is vital in testing the very core of normative ethics that as a rule presupposes that individuals may be held answerable for their acts. On the other hand Compatibilism advances the theory that free will and determinism can go together hand in hand. Thus, all human acts are causally established, but several acts are instigated in a way that is in tune with free will whereas other acts are not. DETERMINISM is attuned with autonomy and responsibility. That is, as we ourselves are the trigger of our acts, our acts are free. An act can either be caused and uncompelled. With no controversy, it can be simply stated that, an action is free if it is voluntary, that is unforced or uncompelled, on the other hand, and an action is not free if it is involuntary, that is forced or compelled. Furthermore, under compatability, the kind of freedom which is essential for moral responsibility is the origin of action that is freedom from choosing acts and choices determined by outside conditions or events. It bears stressing that this formation of freedom is attuned with determinism. Thus, this is the theory which is necessary for moral responsibility. ISSUE: Whether or not hard determinism is preferred over Compatibilism? Based on the afore cited statements, it can be inferred that hard determinism does not categorize the cause, it simply labels that all actions are produced by cause, and that everything happens for a reason, thus there exist no free will. As for compatibilism, it is simple, an action may be forced or compelled, voluntary or involuntary. If one is to choose which is preferred over hard determinism and compatibilism, it can be said that compatibilism is much logical way of thinking. It is because the hard determinist erroneously likens the term â€Å"caused† with â€Å"forced† or â€Å"compelled†. Surely each deed is instigated one way or another; however not all act is compelled. On a much simpler approach, an act can be either caused or uncompelled. It is stated at the outset that hard determinist interprets that â€Å"No act is free if it must occur† by assuming that all actions ought to transpire in a way that all are caused, and consequently not free. Summing it up, having a reason is adequate to make an action unfree. This line of thinking is brought about by the supposition that all causes are compelling, which having a cause is precisely the similar as being forced. Meanwhile, compatibility advances the idea that unfree action is an act that is forced, compelled, or involuntary. This is ordinary people’s idea of unfree. It continued to say that not all acts are voluntary; therefore, there are also acts which are free, since free in this concept means voluntary. To see the difference, take for an instance a boy who walks because he was being pushed. In this case, the hard determinism and compatibilism both agree that the boy walks because he was pushed. But, going further, as for hard determinism, the same was still categorized as acts of free will. However for compatibilism, the act was not free because the boy was pushed, it is an involuntary act. If, the boy however walks without being pushed, still the act under the concept of hard determinism is an unfree act, while for compatibility the said act is considered as free act, falling under the category of voluntary actions. Another area where compatibilism is preferred is the theory that moral accountability of individual is attached to the one who performs a wrong act. Normally, under the existing legal systems, man are accountable for their acts if they willfully and intentionally performs a wrongfully act. However, in cases where an individual performs an act against his free will which results in commission of a felony, the said person shall be exempted from penalty. In relation to the issue, it is therefore a rational to prefer compatibilism over hard determinism. In as much as hard determinism advocates the theory of no man acts freely, this would result to chaos in the enforcement of laws. On the other hand, compatibilism is much acceptable and helpful in the existing legal system as it advocates that acts are performed voluntarily or involuntarily, thereby making the determination of accountability is much easier. Thus, enforcement of law may be implemented effectively. Lastly, it is important to note that under compatibilism, actions are also brought about, but nevertheless are free in the way that, if event had been unusual, acts may be different. This means that act may vary depending on the influences, such as environment, desires or influences, which may be brought about surrounding the act. It maybe recalled that compatibilist free denote the influence or capability to perform what one desires. Those acts that are free are not enforced, not compelled, not constrained, or not enforced. Thus, while all acts that are compelled are caused, it is not the instance that every caused act is forced. In conclusion, though it can be said that choosing compatibilism over hard determinism may be justified, still many say that hard determinism is under compatibilism or either way. Others have also the view that hard determinism is better than compatibilism. Still, only one thing is proven, that man remains a complex thing to study and understand. Reference: Sandra LaFave, Free Will and Determinism. West Valley College. ( Last updated on 08/11/2006 08:18:00) http://instruct. westvalley. edu/lafave/FREE. HTM Martha Klein, â€Å"Responsibility,† in The Oxford Companion to Philosophy, ed. Ted Honderich (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995) John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, ed. Elizabeth Rapaport (Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc. , 1978).

Peace and order Essay Example for Free

Peace and order Essay Maintenance of public order is a core function of governance. The Indian Constitution, while according a pre-eminent position for the fundamental rights of citizens, recognizes the importance of public order, by providing for legislation imposing reasonable restrictions in the interest of public order. Under the Constitution of India, the Union and the federating units, that is, the States have well-defined areas of responsibility. Public Order and Police are essentially the responsibilities of State Governments. However, the Central Government assists them by providing Central Paramilitary Forces (CPMFs) as and when required. The Administrative Reforms Commission is looking at ‘Public Order’ with a view to suggest a framework to strengthen administrative machinery to maintain public order conducive to social harmony and economic development. And also to build capacity for conflict resolution. ARC is looking into all aspects of the subject therefore the focus is on studying the causes of public disorder, how early symptoms of disorder should be detected and addressed well in time, what should be the role of various stakeholders in maintenance of public order, how the enforcement machinery should be made more effective to deal with public disorder. The Commission is examining the subject by focusing on its components namely causes of conflicts and their resolution, secondly the role of civil administration, media, society, Judiciary and NGOs in maintaining public order, and thirdly the role of police and the need for reforms. Accordingly each one of these is being discussed in great length in t hree separate workshops. In the first workshop which is being organized jointly with the Centre for Policy Research (CPR), the role of civil administration and other stakeholders would be discussed, in the second workshop, which is being organized jointly with CPR and the Kannada University the different types of conflicts in the Indian Society would be discussed, and in the third workshop being organized jointly with the National Police Academy the Role of Police would be discussed. The aim of the first workshop on public order is to identify the salient  lessons we can learn from a variety of experiences in dealing with public disorder. The workshop will help the ARC to think through some of the challenges posed for the maintenance of public order by the role of the four agencies namely the civil administration, the judicial interventions, the civil society and the media. How can these agencies be strengthened to make them promoters of a more humane public order? What are some of the difficulties that actors in these different domains face? What are some of the commonly leveled criticisms of these agencies? Do these criticisms need some administrative or legal response? What explains the success of failure of these agencies on some occasions. Although the focus of the workshop will be on reforms that can be implemented, this workshop would like to discuss these issues in the widest possible perspective so that new and innovative ideas can be countenanced. The main task of the workshop will be to identify problems and challenges in these domains, and to recommend possible solutions. The purpose of the second workshop that is on ‘Conflict resolution† is to (a) engage in free and frank discussions about the causes of conflicts in India, (b) arrive at some conclusion about the role and importance of different ethnic factors in the origin and continuance of these conflicts so that (c) fundamental solutions can be proposed to address the deep-rooted causes for the sustainable maintenance of public order. The emphasis will be on coming up with specific recommendations pertaining to administrative reform. Similarly the third workshop, which is being organized jointly with the National Police Academy, would focus on the role of police and police reforms.   Before I go into the role of various stakeholders, I would like to clarify the meaning of the word public order. Any violation of Law is a problem of Law and Order, but every such violation is not a case of disturbance of public order. The dividing line between ‘Public order’ and ‘Law and Order’ is very thin. The Apex Court has explained the concept of public order.   It is the potentiality of an act to disturb the even tempo of the life of the community which makes it prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. If the contravention in its effect is confined only to a few  individuals directly involved, as distinct from a wide spectrum of public, it would raise the problem of law and order only. It is the potentiality of the act to disturb the even tempo of the life of the community which makes it prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. Importance of maintaining public order: India today is poised to emerge as a global economic power with all its high growth rate of economy and all-round economic development. For realizing our legitimate aspirations of economic development, it is essential that the problems of peace and order are managed efficiently in the country. No developmental activity is possible in an environment of insecurity and disorder. Failure to manage the multifarious problems arising out of violent conflicts based on religious, caste, ethnic, regional or any other disputes, can lead to unstable and chaotic conditions. Such conditions not only militate against realization of our economic dream, but also would jeopardize our survival as a vibrant democracy. We have to look at the problem of public order management and the role of law enforcement in that regard, in this perspective. We should not forget that it is the weaker sections which suffer the most in any public disorder. Whose responsibility is to maintain public order-role of civil administration: Undoubtedly, it is the role of the police, as the principal law enforcement agency to preserve public order. The magistracy and the judiciary also have a vital role in preserving public order. But there are other agencies within the governmental set up which have to contribute towards preserving public order. It is the police which bears the brunt of violations of the Laws and also the ensuing violence. But in a large number of addressing the root cause is much beyond their purview. The case of recent demolitions in Delhi is an example. The main cause there has been the non enforcement of the building regulations by the officials who were entrusted this task. Another example is the ‘Ulhasnagar demolitions’. If one looks at the causes of public disorder, there are a host of reasons. These may be broadly classified into socio-economic, political, historical  and administrative. I am not going into the details of each one of these but I would like to highlight that a large number of public disorders have administrative reasons as their root cause. Therefore we have to bring in change in our mindset. Our response to public disorder should commence at the very initial stage, and it is here that the role of entire civil administration including both regulatory and developmental becomes important. The period after independence has seen a tremendous increase in spread of education and alongside has increased the awareness among the people and so also the aspirations. And when these aspirations are not met, tensions prevail within the society, which if not redressed have the potential of erupting as a problem of public disorder. Increasingly, and rightly so, administration is not being perceived as a ruling class. People are realizing that they are service providers. The administration must also realize this role. Wrong doings of administration, which in the past may have got muted acceptance, are no longer being tolerated by the civil society. We have to provide an administration which is fair, objective and transparent. How to achieve this is a challenge before us. Role of the Judiciary: Access to justice is fundamental to the ‘Rule of Law†. If the citizens feel that access to justice is delayed or is not effective, they get alienated. If they feel that punishment is meted out to the wrong doers only in a few cases, they have a tendency to disassociate them with the judicial process and stop taking interest as a complainant, a witness or a pancha. Sometimes a landlord looking to get a recalcitrant tenant out, a tenant seeking protection from an avaricious landlord, families involved in property disputes, start by thinking that gangsters (goondas) can settle their problems which the courts are going to take ages to do. If this becomes common, criminality will be a substitute for ‘Rule of Law’. We have to ensure that we do not reach such a precarious situation. Criminals should be intimidated by what Shakespeare called The awful majesty of the law, other wise they will become a law unto themselves. Various Law Commissions  have suggested reforms in the criminal and civil justice administration system, which need to be acted upon. Role of the media: The importance of a free press, for a healthy democracy cannot be overemphasized. More importantly, it is a sort of check and balance that keeps the authorities on their toes on the one hand and a type of mirror that enables people in authority to get a continuous reality check, on the other. This remains an important role for the media, despite the increasing pressures of commercialization. The fact that democratic India could avoid famines, Amartya Sen has suggested, was almost entirely due to the role of the media in sensitizing authorities to the urgency of providing relief. Indeed our free and energetic media is, in fact, our best early warning system. But what is essential is that the media should play a responsible role. It has been observed that at times, a part of the media has not been quite objective in their reporting. Sometimes the media also plays a role in spreading prejudices, as they needless to say, are more interested in sensational news than sensible constructive news. We may deliberate as to how the potential of media can be tapped in maintaining public order. Role of the Society, NGOs: A democratic society cannot function properly if everything in it is left only to the State or even to statutory bodies. Because of the increasing complexities of societies everything cannot be taken care of by the Governmental institutions. The gap has to be filled up by the civil society. Government intervention itself will be in fructuous if it is not underpinned by voluntary action. Moreover the exercise of political power through civil society opens the way for democracy in real sense of the term. Civil society consists of open and secular institutions that mediate between the citizen and the State. In the absence of civil society, the State machinery and civil servants becomes the dominant and the only repository of power. The modern idea of civil government requires emergence  of civil society which would make people self-reliant rather than remain dependent on State institutions. Participation by the civil society makes the citizens active agents instead of becoming merely passive recipients of welfare. We, especially in the government need to realize that in a healthy growth model of a free democratic society, the Government is just one of the participants. The Government exists as one of the servitors in the service of the society. Indeed the awareness that government alone can neither solve all the problems of the society nor it is the only crucial actor in addressing major societal issues has dictated the need to look beyond Government. Interdependence and need to find solutions to societal problems call for greater collaboration between the government and civil society. A large number of Non Governmental organizations (NGOs) are working in the developmental fields. But the number of such NGOs dedicating themselves to preservation of public order is limited. We can perhaps learn from experiences of some of these NGOs and recommend measures to pave the way for their greater involvement. Role of the Police: I should have taken up the role of police first, as they are the main actors in this process. But as I have mentioned that we will be discussing this issue at great length in the third workshop, which we are organizing at the National Police Academy. But I would suggest that aspects of police administration which require interaction with other governmental agencies and stakeholders may be discussed in this workshop. Conclusion: Development and security are truly mutually inter-related. We need therefore, to evolve a combined strategy to deal simultaneously with the twin challenges of development and security within the framework of a democratic polity committed to respect for all fundamental human freedoms and also committed to upholding the rule of law. Internal conflict management is the key to the success of participative democracy, strengthening national  solidarity and cohesion and firming up the nation’s resolve and capability to meet any external threats to its security and territorial integrity. The deficiencies in this vital area need to be plugged through judicial and police reforms, better citizen participation in governance, transparency and more effective and integrated approach to public order maintenance. Violations of public order, given their socio-economic, political and administrative causes demand a concerted response from different wings of the civil administration. When this is done at the nascent stage itself, minor discords can be prevented from turning into major public disorders. The challenge lies in institutionalizing a mechanism so that all wings of the civil administration as well as other stakeholders work in a coordinated fashion. I hope that these two workshops would be able to come up with substantial recommendations for a framework and a roadmap for maintaining public order.

Changing Role of HRM: The NHS

Changing Role of HRM: The NHS The Changing Role of Human Resource Management within the National Health Service: Feeling at Home in an Increasingly Complex Environment. Abstract In the context of a widespread programme of reform of the English National Health Service (NHS) this paper considers the changing role of Human Resources Management (HRM) within the service, and reports a study of the changing role of HRM in a large teaching hospital. Empirical research suggests that whilst the perception of the role and effectiveness of the HRM function remains varied, if managed correctly it is potentially capable of having a direct and beneficial impact upon service delivery. Introduction The reforms and changes within the National Health Service (NHS) and its management of staff and services has clearly been well documented, however research into the evaluation of these initiatives remains a neglected area. Walshe suggests that the reason behind this is that researchers do not have time to ‘painstakingly document and measure the progress and impacts of reform due to constant change caused by the initial ‘bright ideas having been poorly thought out (2002:106). Empirical research can though attempt to offer an understanding into the ‘complex relationships that exist between individuals and how they interpret policies within a wider social and cultural organisational context (Clarke 2006:202) and provide insight into the NHS managerial culture to examine how it ‘supports and facilitates the implementation of the recent wave of NHS reforms (Merali 2003:550). Through incorporating a review of the literature that surrounds the changing role of HRM w ithin the NHS and empirically based qualitative research, a comprehensive insight into the current context and position of Human Resource Management within an NHS Trust is given. Whilst such research will hopefully be of academic interest, perhaps more importantly in order for the NHS and other public services to be aware of the impact of reforms upon employees and thus on subsequent service delivery, an awareness of HRM practices and their implementation should be a necessity for practitioners (Edgar and Geare 2005). The Current Context of the NHS â€Å"†¦the NHS is unique. To name but a few of its characteristics, it is in the public sector, exceptionally large in terms of its resources, activities and numbers employed; domestic not international in its operations; its tasks are infinitely varied, complex and difficult; its goals are unclear; it is subject to an exceptionally wide range of political and economic influences; and it is an organisation uniquely and specially close to the hearts (metaphorically), minds and bodies (physically) of British people. It is run by ‘special kinds of people too: dedicated, yet often ambitious, highly qualified and skilled, often bloody-minded and usually tough-minded, yet also caring and even tender.†(Glover and Leopold 1996:256) The NHS is the largest employer in Europe, employing over a million clinical, infrastructure and support personnel (The Information Centre 2006). Whilst remaining close to the peoples heart in terms of its founding values of a universal and comprehensive health care with its service delivery freely and equally available to all in society (Rivett 1997; Talbot-Smith and Pollock 2006), it is also close to the peoples pockets, with billions of pounds having been invested into the NHS in the last ten years (Appelby 2007). In addition to providing a health service to the population, it is also claimed that ‘health and healthcare play a key role in generating social cohesion, productive workforce, employment and hence economic growth (Harrison 2005) and for this reason, as Bach notes, the means to reform health care systems effectively is an issue that confronts policy makers worldwide. (2001:1) As such, the challenges facing the NHS in terms of management, change and efficiency are i mportant to an audience far wider than the UK and those who use and work within the organisation. In consuming around  £50 billion per annum it is no wonder that successive British governments have attempted throughout the history of the NHS to dictate from the centre the ‘minutia of the NHSs activities. A key problem however is that due to the complexity of the organisation itself and the politics that surround it, the methods used are considered by many to consist merely of ‘a plethora of complicated targets and initiatives that confound those who are charged to implement them (Bradshaw 2003:90). In recognising the obvious public concern over the management, and expenditure, of the NHS both the previous Conservative and Labour governments and current New Labour invest considerable time, and tax-payers money, into attempting to improve the service. Yet it is considered increasingly apparent that in responding to health deficiencies ‘by throwing money at them to see the quick, comfortable resolution of the political conflict that these inevitably cause (Duncan -Smith 2002), continual change ‘for changes sake has become the focus at the expense of the ultimate ‘telos that created the health service (Kelly and Glover 1996:31). Changes in Management of the NHS Since its conception, it is clear that the NHS has undergone many changes, both structurally and ideologically, but it is since the reforms of the early 1980s that the focus of NHS management has attempted to move away from obvious ‘command and control techniques and towards local management with local responsibility and accountability not only to the government but to the public that ‘experience the service. It was subsequent to these reforms and as a result of the Griffiths Report and policies such as ‘Promoting Better Health, that ‘Working for Patients'(1989) was introduced which further emphasised the NHSs aims of better health care, choice, complaints procedures, patient information, and overarching quality. Currently a number of policy and management initiatives are transforming the structure and organisation of the NHS (Truss 2003). New Labour are heralding the benefits of ‘choice within the public services as a whole and many of the recent initiatives focus upon the ‘customer and the need for services to attract these customers and the money that they bring, to the extent that within the NHS ‘individual patient preference [is] determining where business will be placed (Bradshaw 2003:87). The logic behind this is claimed to be one of providing a new incentive for ‘providers to improve customer responsiveness, for if money follows patients and patients have a choice of service the power is with the people rather than in the hands of a previous monopolistic service provider (ibid). Such market incentives are driving NHS hospital trusts to perform more like businesses, with a corporate focus based upon meeting the demands of all the various stakeholders, and thus r equiring distinct business strategies which will account for all aspects of the organisation and services provided and ultimately ‘enhance their cash flow (Pollock 2004:218). With the establishment of Foundation Trusts, NHS Trusts which are perceived as high performers can gain Foundation Status, thus becoming corporate bodies, free from the controls of the strategic health authorities and accountable only to those whom they represent their own managers, staff, patients and local residents (Pollock 2004). The thinking behind this is seemingly one of moving away from what has been perceived as a ‘monolithic, inefficient bureaucracy to a system of individual services which are autonomous healthcare provider organisations that could be flexible, responsive and innovative (Walshe 2002:109). As the Department of Health states: â€Å"The Health and Social Care (Community Health and Standards) Act 2003 establishes NHS Foundation Trusts as independent public benefit corporations modelled on co-operative and mutual traditions. Public benefit corporations are a new type of organisation, specially developed to reflect the unique aims and responsibilities of NHS Foundation Trusts. NHS Foundation Trusts exist to provide and develop services for NHS patients according to NHS principles and standards and are subject to NHS systems of inspection. Transferring ownership and accountability from Whitehall to the local community means that NHS Foundation Trusts are able to tailor their services to best meet the needs of the local population and tackle health inequalities more effectively.†(DoH 2007) Walshe considers the introduction of Foundation Trusts as providing organisational stability due to them reducing the ability of ‘future Secretaries of State for Health to reorganise the NHS every two or three years and thus allowing ‘meaningful service improvements to take place (2002:109). However, it is also recognised that this in turn could potentially cause problems as there will be ‘no guarantee of good management and governance resulting in the replacement of ‘one set of dysfunctional behaviours with another (ibid). Many interpret Foundation Trusts as forcing NHS trusts into having to respond flexibly to market forces similarly to private sector organisations, due to the public and political interest in the service it must also contend with the constant barrage of audits, inspections, monitoring, league tables and an increasingly demanding and knowledgeable public (Talbot-Smith and Pollock 2006). The NHS today can therefore be seen as remaining seemingly attached to the ideologies of the business world, and current government emphasis towards ‘modernisation suggests that the premise remains dominantly that: â€Å"†¦no organisational context is immune from the uncertainties of unrelenting change and that, as a result, all organisations public, private and voluntary need to develop similar norms and techniques of conduct: if they do not do so, they will not survive. Thus all organisations need to look to current ‘best practice†¦Government services are brought forward using the best and most modern techniques, to match the best of the private sector.†(Du Gay 2003:676) These government initiatives reflect notions that by improving management and employee satisfaction, the NHS could become both an efficient and effective business, able to satisfy these consumerist needs of the customer. For example, the policy ‘Improving Working Lives aimed to encourage NHS employers to ‘develop a range of policies and practices which support personal and professional development and enable employees to achieve a healthy work-life balance (DH 2000). These management strategies have been labelled within this sector as New Public Management (NPM) and are considered to mark a clear differentiation from the previous strategies of ‘an administered service to a managed service'(Bach, 2000:928). Flynn argues that NPM clearly incorporates all of the changes that have occurred within the NHS following the reorganisations and new rhetorics of the 1980 reforms and the essential components that NPM consists of are clearly visible: â€Å"†¦more active and accountable management; explicit standards, targets and measures for performance; a stress on results, quality and outcomes; the break-up of large units into smaller decentralised agencies; more competition and a contract culture; more flexibility in the terms and conditions of employment; increased managerial control over the workforce and efficiency in resource allocation.†(1991:28) With the introduction of this managerialist emphasis in the NHS it has been suggested that there has been an investment of ‘faith in managers. This faith has been based on the supposition that the ‘language, techniques and values of managerialism were, and are, ‘the only way actually to deliver change; thus an ‘unparalleled position of ‘power and authority has been placed upon public managers (Exworthy and Halford 1999:5-6). Such managerialism, and its values and beliefs is based upon the assumption that ‘better management will prove an efficient solvent for a wide range of economic and social ills (Pollitt 1993:1), and in the case of the NHS these ‘ills are well documented in terms of a lack of capital and thus a shortage of resources yet with a need to provide an increasingly efficient and ‘quality driven service. However, the notion of managerialism must be used with caution. ‘Faith in managers can be perceived as politicians having faith in their own management in that they have failed to ever relinquish control, instead taking even more tight control through the implementation of numerous health policies and operational procedures. Such a need to keep close reigns on the management of the NHS suggests a deep mistrust in the capabilities of the public servants within it rather than a desire to allow it its freedom. Overall it is clear that the NHS is very complex for a range of reasons not least because of its complexity and variety of its duties, the range of skills it needs to draw on, the difficulty of reconciling competing priorities, the cost of healthcare, and the way the NHS has been stitched into the political fabric of England. From an organisational perspective too it is a hybrid mix of hierarchy, bureaucracy, market and network. To efficiently manage such an organisation is therefore a highly complex and unrelenting challenge. HRM in the NHS The role of HRM pre-reforms was mainly focused on administration and support with a lack of defined responsibility. Named Personnel rather than HR, the function was used to deal with general staffing issues of terms and conditions of employment, payment and holiday options, individual and local staffing issues and the well known ‘hiring and firing that it remains renowned for. From Personnel Managers came HR professionals, HR departments, and increasingly HR directors with voting rights on the Executive Boards of NHS Trusts. This has been considered a result of the changes that stemmed from the Griffiths reforms and continue today, and due to a particular focus on corporate business ideals, from which a clear, but nonetheless controversial role was carved out for a function that dealt with the management of the increasingly important resource of people. ‘†¦the effect of the reforms was to stimulate management to review custom and practice and historical staffing patterns, with a view to achieving better value for money. In this context the HR function was caught up in the continuing tension between those health care professionals who focused primarily on patient care, and those managers responsible for cost-effective use of resources but constrained by a lack of clinical knowledge'(Buchan 2000:320). The current role of HRM in the NHS, its status within the service, and its success as an effective function has become especially important at this time where ‘human resources are considered the key to not only improved staff performance but also competitive advantage (Bach 2001; Clarke 2006). Despite the managerialist rhetoric that clearly surrounds the drive for increasing the role of HR, on a more simple note it is little wonder that such an emphasis has been placed upon the HR function considering the cost of staffing in the NHS of the  £19 billion cash increase in the NHS from 2004/5 to 2007/8 the increases in staff pay ‘swallowed up around 34% (Appelby 2007). To add to this, the growing importance of the function is particularly clear in situations where individual NHS trusts are being granted greater financial and operational independence within the increasingly competitive, consumer driven market that the government is creating through such initiatives as Found ation Trust Status. Barnett et als research demonstrated that the HR function within a Trust evolved through these changes in political and organisational focus and ‘generated a new focus on labour productivity and on value for money from which ‘a new and strategic approach to the management of the workforce was required and as a result they decided to ‘embrace the principles of human resource management'(1996:31). So with the acknowledgement that service funding follows customers, customer satisfaction is linked to quality of service, and quality of service is linked to ‘the skills, motivation and commitment of service staff, within such a ‘labour intensive human service industry the role of HRM is imperative (Bach 2001:1; Pollock 2004). The Changing Role of HRM in the NHS Yet HRMs move from an administrative role to a function that potentially impacts upon corporate strategy has been my no means plain sailing. Ham succinctly locates a key basis for conflict within the NHS in his suggestion that ‘there is continuing tension between the role of doctors in deciding treatment†¦and the attempt by managers and politicians to influence priorities at a national and local level (1996:96). There is much literature on the dominance of professionals and the conflict with managers within public sector organisations and in particular the NHS (Kember 1994; Skjorshammer 2001; Atun 2006; Hoggett 2006) and it is clear that their dominance remains not only because of their unique skills and knowledge but also because of their obvious importance within the service (Kelly and Glover 1996). However, within the changing NHS, the dominance of the professionals is subject to more and more management constraints, both on their resources and their autonomy and whilst some acceptance of management expertise is recognised by the professional groups their patience reaches a limit when this becomes encroachment on their ‘professional competence, resulting inevitably in conflict (Ackroyd 1996). Managers within the NHS are marked by a poor image, often both within the organisation and by members of the public. Meralis study found that the ‘majority of the managers were convinced that the general public believed that doctors and nurses were the only professionals in the NHS who are motivated by a desire to serve/provide care to society (2003:558) and similarly within this research the public perception of management within the NHS was consistently negative: ‘Theres too many [managers] as it is, ‘The NHS should swap most of the managers for doctors and nurses, then there wouldnt be waiting lists, â€Å"If you can find out what the management do then thats an achievement in itself. Overall it seems that management, especially in a context of attempting to rationalise the NHS and incorporate business ideals of value for money and efficiency which often results in cost-cutting through redundancies and closing services, are deemed by non-managers to hold an enti rely different ideology that is a far cry from caring for people. Yet the function of ‘management is well placed within the NHS, and its conflict with the medical professionals whilst often cited can appear over-emphasised. However with HRM now shifting in its role from administration and support to management and strategy at the same time as organisational change that is producing a complex and uncertain environment for many within the NHS, the HRM function faces a hostile crowd. This symmetry between the focus upon business and private sector ideals and the rise in HR as a function in its own right, can begin to explain perhaps the antagonism that many within the NHS express towards the HR departments. Those within the NHS who hold close to their hearts the original ideals of the NHS and their role within it rather than fighting against government initiatives and the corporate business world influence instead could hold to account the one group which was ‘created out of these initiatives the HR function. Bryson et al in acknowledging both the power struggle between doctors and management and the increasing role of HRM note that, with a complex organisational strategy that seemingly has no clear direction and with few colleagues from the traditional management functions to align with, HRM are far from being seen as any part of the ‘NHS tribal club (1996:53). Through becoming part of the ‘Corporate Business Team and gaining responsibility and a potential role of ‘power within the new NHS environment the HRM function has run into conflict. Starting off on the wrong-foot, as Bach explains, HR within the NHS must struggle with the constant accusation that it is illegitimate as its role does ‘not obviously contribute to patient care'(Bach 2001:12). It would also be expected that any role within the NHS service that had the role of scrutinising staff and reviewing quality of care when they were not medically knowledgeable would come to blows with the medical professionals, especially when the latter has enjoyed far-reaching autonomy and control in the service since its beginning (Buchan 2000). However, to also find few compatriots within the rest of management due to its timely rise with organisational change which has rationalised and constrained many other departments, many HR departments have been left in a no-mans land. There are few who would debate the continued dominance of the medical profession within the NHS, nor the importance of it remaining in such a position. However, their importance within the NHS as a business is becoming more complex. Management are increasingly holding the power to dictate for example the working patterns of doctors and they have the ability to withhold or reward resources depending upon clinicians abilities to achieve targets. And, with the introduction of Foundation Status, Trusts are running a competitive business within which all are dispensable, as Pollock describes: â€Å"†¦in the past, doctors were free to speak out in fact they were under a moral obligation to do so if they felt it was in the interests of their patients. In a business culture, however, loyalty is said to be due above all to the shareholders. Where the survival of the hospitals depends on massaging the figures and performance ratings, doctors who expose the inadequacies in the system or rail against underfunding or lack of resources are seen to be criticising their own hospitals†¦Ã¢â‚¬ (2004:203) With performance targets increasingly dominant in the NHS, to the extent that funding, resources and ‘Foundation Status can be given or taken away accordingly, accountability not only for service provision but also initiatives such as ‘Improving Working Lives have meant that HRM can also take a large piece of the managerial high-ground (Givan 2005). In addition, with the record investments in staffing and government focus upon improving service delivery through effective people management, HRM has been given legitimacy within the NHS through the Governments ‘HR in the NHS Plan (DoH 2002) which represented the NHSs ‘first generic HR strategy'(Truss 2003:49) and more recently ‘NHS Foundation Trusts: A Guide to Developing HR arrangements which highlighted the importance of the HRM function within Foundation Trusts (DoH 2006). With these initiatives in place the effective functioning of HRM is a measurable target it matters not whether the medical professio nals or other managers accept or value the role of HRM. This not only provides the HRM function with a place within the NHS, it gives it the opportunity to ‘adopt a more strategic role within the ‘new public management: ‘it is no longer consigned to a reactive and administrative role, interpreting and applying national rules, and can be proactive (Corby 1996 cited in Truss 2003:49). A number of commentators have assumed that changes in the role and status of HRM in the public sector merely follow orientations developed in the private sector (Buchan 2000; Thomason 1990). Just as the NHS as an organisation can be seen to have taken on private, corporate business strategies, so too it is considered that private sector HR management techniques were established (Buchan 2000:320). Distinct similarities can indeed be seen between the developments of HRM in the private sector and what is currently expected of the HRM function within the NHS as Begley and Boyd summarise: â€Å"The declining relevance of the command-and-control approach to business has extended into the roles played by HRM. Many companies regard their employees talents as providing a significant competitive advantage. they expect their HR professionals to formulate creative, flexible programs and policies to woo, develop, and retain that talent.†(2000:12) This apparent mirroring of private sector HR techniques within the public sector environment has met with various hostile reactions, with accusations of public managers being forced to adopt private sector HRM styles with the possible ‘dangerous result that such language will cause the public domains to ‘neglect their values (Boyne, Jenkins et al. 1999:411). Yet others, and especially some senior HR professionals within the NHS, take a different view. For them, the introduction of more efficient people management is an important and necessary development, one that is sorely needed in an environment where people are not only the service providers, but also the product and customer of healthcare services. The following empirical research and analysis demonstrates that far from being left out in the cold, the HRM function is capable of rising through an NHS Trust, effectively implementing government initiatives as well as producing its own, and finally reaching the position of designing and directing corporate strategy. Whilst the perceptions of HRM by other Trust members may vary, this is not necessarily a hindrance, but perhaps an organisational necessity that must be negotiated. Methodology The paper reports a research project that has followed the changing role of the HRM function within a large teaching NHS Trust (herein called ‘The Trust) in the UK. It reports on in-depth interviews and observations of a number of meetings involving staff from across the hospital hierarchy. The Trust is facing many changes, both in its financial governance and organisational practices. Recently it was granted â€Å"Foundation Trust† status and, as a result, a competitive drive for value for money and the need to develop efficient recruitment and retention practices have become key issues. Despite only requiring access to staff, rather than patients, researching an NHS Trust proved more difficult than originally anticipated. Currently researchers wanting to interview NHS staff are required to gain NHS Ethics Committee approval to the same degree that clinical researchers must do when requesting clinical trials on patients. This can be seen as associated with the increased awareness of the importance and value of hospital staff and their working lives at all levels of the organisation, requiring the researcher to ensure that the research is valid and that staff will not be adversely affected. It could be suggested that by not distinguishing between staff and patients and the need for ethical approval in research the NHS has adopted the understanding that to ensure quality of service and patient care staff must also benefit from an improved working life.[1] The empirical research took place over a period of nine months within the one NHS Trust and included in-depth interviews with twenty-two members of The Trusts staff and observations of key meetings with staff from across The Trusts hierarchy in attendance. A Trust Executive P.A. provided a list of thirty-five potential participants for the interviews, ranging from Assistant Service Managers, Junior Doctors, Ward Managers, Nurse Specialists and Senior Staff (including members of the Trust Executive) who were contacted via email communication. Assurances were given that these participants had not been ‘cherry picked for their perceptions of HR or management initiatives (which was reflected in interview content at times). The interviews were conducted either within an office provided by The Trust or at a location convenient to the interviewee, often a staff room or their office. Each interview was recorded, with the participants consent, and transcribed in full, with all distinguishing information such as names, exact details of roles and personal information destroyed to ensure anonymity, in accordance with the Ethics Approval criteria. The Director of Workforce and Corporate Affairs was interviewed twice, before subsequent interviews took place and again once interviewing was completed. The three meetings observed (Patient and Staff Experience Meeting; Executive Governance Committee for Clinical Effectiveness; and Strategy Advisory Group) were chosen through knowledge of the different staffing groups that would be in attendance in order to attempt to gather information as to how different groups interacted. By chance observation of the RCN Clinical Leadership Programme Presentation to the Patient and Staff Experience Group was also possible. Notes were taken during the meeting regarding staff interaction, comments about policies and Trust issues, though individual names and some meeting content was not recorded due to either anonymity or irrelevance. Due to the highly qualitative nature of this research and in valuing the need to attempt to provide an accurate and indepth understanding into the perceptions of those interviewed and how these relate to the role of HRM and its effectiveness, the following presentation and discussion of the research will use direct quotations, some at length, to highlight issues. It is felt that it is important to allow these views to be expressed clearly and as distinct from over interpretation thus enabling as honest a reflection of the current context as possible. In order to ensure the anonymity of participants they will usually be identified only by their generic role within The Trust. Discussion of Empirical Research The research demonstrates that perceptions of HRM within The Trust remain varied, a stance that is not unknown to those within the role: â€Å"I think lots of different people have lots of different perceptions. I think †¦a lot of managers are starting to see the value of HR and what HR can actually offer them†¦Other managers would probably just think we are only here to make their lives difficult and not let them get on with the job but those are the people who perhaps have never really had any involvement or used HR to its capacity† (Human Resources Staff #1) This suggests that HRM within the NHS remains in a similar situation to when Currie and Procter researched the role of personnel within the NHS and highlight the differing perceptions that the personnel department, and its subsequent human resource strategies, had within a trust: â€Å"Both executive directors and middle level managers see an advisory role as appropriate†¦They differ in their views as to whether the emphasis of the personnel department should lie with operational or strategic issues in an advisory role†¦middle managers view the personnel department unfavourably because it is distant from the operational aspects of health care†¦Ã¢â‚¬ (1998:383-384) Indeed, many of the participants found it difficult to summarise the role of HRM and during the research the role was often described as ‘personnel or ‘medical staffing. This lack of clearly defined role for some within The Trust may, as suggested by the HR staff, stem from minimal contact with the HRM department, other than in specific situations such issues with recruitment and pay-role[2]. â€Å"†¦lower grade staff will still see the HR as a sort of mini police force within the organisation and if you do anything naughty you get disciplined and I guess a lot of the lower grade staff dont have a real idea of what the HR department does†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ( Human Resources Staff2) Perhaps another reason could be the constantly changing title of the head of the HR department. Initially The Trust employed a Director of HRM but as the Director developed and expanded the remit and function of the HR departments role his title developed to one of Director of Workfor

Analysis of the Dark Side of the Internet :: Exploratory Essays Research Papers

The Dark Side of the Internet    Statement of the Problem The Internet has changed lives. It's fulfilling prophecies to be better than books, better than traditional reference material, and the next best thing since sliced bread. However, as with every other technological miracle, there are always drawbacks. I wanted to find out what people use the Internet for and the common problems that they have. I did this by making numerous observations, conducting interviews, and distributing questionnaires.    After encountering repeated difficulties both on my home computer and at school, I decided to find out what other people thought about the Internet. I heard many friends and family members frequently complain about their difficulties with the Internet. Because of these factors, I decided to conduct this study. Perhaps the answer to these problems lies in the activities or habits of users. I set out to find the answer to these questions in this study. There are evidently many problems and errors associated with Internet use. People also frequently associate the Internet with a bunch of so-called computer geeks and teenagers illegally searching for pornography. I wanted to dispel this theory with my research. It was my hypothesis that the Internet, while having many worthwhile uses, also has many problems, and a lot of progress still to be made.    Procedures My first step in researching Internet activities and behavior was to conduct observations of various people using computers and the Internet. I made these observations on three different dates. I watched fellow students in the high school library twice and observed my father using the Internet at home on one occasion. I watched to see what the subjects were doing, any problems or difficulties they had, or any comments they made.    My observations took place mainly in the library of Hempfield Area High School. During two of my study halls, I observed students in the library for other classes. During my first observation, most of the students around me were seniors. Most of the subjects of the second observation were sophomores. I looked to see what sorts of problems they had on the computers, what comments they made, their body language when dealing with teachers and friends, and what exactly they were looking at on the computers.

The Difficulty with Defining Feminism Essay -- Definition Feminism Fem

The Difficulty with Defining Feminism In Feminist Theory: from margin to center, bell hook states on the first page what she believes to be the problem with feminism. In her opinion the biggest problem with feminism is that there is no real definition of what feminism is. The definition many people have formulated for feminism is having the goal of making woman socially equal to men. hook’s problem with this is the fact that all men are not socially equal. If women are to be the social equals to men then another question would be which men women will be socially equal to. While many white middle and upper class women accept this definition, the lower socioeconomic classes can not because it does not take race and its disadvantages into account. One concern of hooks is the fact that many women do not wish to be associated with feminism. With the amount of women that do not wish to be associated with the term it will be hard to make any sort of real transformation socially. She points out that the root of this is that there is no real definition for feminism. While she views it as the struggle to end sexist oppression, many women view it as a lifestyle or associate feminism with lesbianism. In addition, many women view feminism as a white women’s rights group. This excludes oppressed ethnic groups of women. She makes a good point with this issue because before any further goals can be reached, feminism must become something that women want to be a part of. If the very women that would be benefiting from the goals that the group has do not want to be associated with the term, then it makes mainstream society dismiss the group even more than it already does. It is hard to understand how hook intends to take action as a fem... ... solution for the oppression of women in society, hook feels like it would not make any progress in the real goal of eliminating sexist oppression. After reading the essay I find myself siding more with hook on this issue. Rich’s solution for oppression of women seems to be to create more valuable relationships between women. While this may be a good idea for part of a solution it seems as though nothing would be accomplished by this in the long run due to the fact that men are not changing behavior in this solution. Nothing seems to be done about the real problem in Rich’s ideas. After reading a few different readings on feminism and what needs to be done about oppression I have found that I most agree with the direction hook is going. She seems to be very aware of what needs to be done in what order to make feminism strong enough to approach the issues at hand.

Themes of Mary Shelleys Frankenstein :: essays research papers

There are many themes in the story Frankenstein by Mary Shelley. Some of them are abandonment, neglect, revenge, and scientific knowledge, which are all related to each other in this novel. Throughout the story you discover that a man named Victor Frankenstein wants to create a human life. He does not think through the repercussions of his desire only that he wants the power to create. After Frankenstein creates his creature, he is so frightened and disgusted by the creature?s appearance that he abandons it. In conclusion, Frankenstein abandons his creature because of its appearance. To the creature, Frankenstein is his father and when he left him, he felt neglected and abandoned. The creature did not know how to take care of himself and was given no direction or leadership. He left not knowing where he would go or how he would survive. Frankenstein abandoned his creature as if it were an animal. When Frankenstein abandoned his creature, he didn't even think how the creature felt, he just deserted him. In other words, the creatures abandonment was neglect to its best interest. The creature?s hatred grew from neglect and abandonment. Every person he came in contacted with immediately shunned him. Nobody could look past his horrifying appearance to see what was inside. His hatred then turned into revenge against his creator. The creature wanted Frankenstein to feel what he felt. This is where the revenge takes place and the creature killed everyone Frankenstein loved. The way people treated the creature just by his outwardly appearance is the way society in general views and treats people even today. Society is unjust and cruel at times to people who are less pretty, less thin, less attractive in general. The creature felt this every day of his life and lost the love of his creator and never found a suitable life partner all due to society shunning the less outwardly beautiful. Basically, the treatment from not only Frankenstein but also society led the creature to seek revenge on the one who created him. Knowledge can be both good and bad. Frankenstein felt that the study of science was greater than another other subject because you can go further than the scientist before you had gone. What Frankenstein failed to understand is just because one becomes knowledgeable in science and has the ability to create something or do something new does not mean it is morally right to proceed with the knowledge.

Book

Oliver Stone used a Logical appeal making the reader to think about the case by his/ her mind and trying to convince the reader and to clarify that whatever Inside the person will motivate he/she in either ways good or evil; â€Å"It is likely that, whether they had seen Natural Born Killers or The Green Berets or a Tom and Jerry cartoon the night before their first crime, Ben and Sarah would have behaved In exactly the way they did†.Stone logically argued back with a valid point. All teenagers around Hanna 2 the world have seen the movie and they weren't affected by It like Ben and Sarah ere; the problem seems to be in Ben and Sarah, not the movie. â€Å"1 500 hours of mostly violent TV programming might have slightly more effect on these two youngsters than two hours of Natural born killers? â€Å".Ben and Sarah could have never been affected by a two hours movie and motivated them to attempt a crime; as millions of people saw the movie and they never heard about somebody who attempted a crime from just watching a violent movie, as Natural born killers was not and won't be the last violent movie. The whole problem comes from the inner of Ben's and Sarah's, both of them had a bad life where the family was not there nor taking are of them or watching out their teenage children.We can tell that both of Sarah and Ben came out from a separated and different families where the love bond was not there; but they did share similarities in their personalities as both of them were drinking, doing drugs and as they don't have any source of Income eventually they will need money to continue living; That's what actually motivated them to attempt the crimes they did, not the movie. When a person is good and have pure thoughts his/her actions will be good and useful for others too, if that person is not, probably his/her actions will hurt others.And that is actually what happened with Ben and Sarah, both of them turned to be bad and do evil actions from what they sa w In their lives not from what the movie they saw. 1 OFF Using logical appeal was not enough to Oliver Stone clarifying and defending himself against Gresham, therefore he used ethical appeal; as Stone build up his argument talking about Gresham himself â€Å"A lawyer in search of a client could see in this an indictment of the entertainment industry and not of the teenage killers and those who reared them†.Oliver Stone trying to tell us that a lawyer who is Just looking for none and does not care about lives and the safety of people is not a person to trust; how can you trust a person who doesn't care about people lives and about how those teenagers had been raised up are not a responsible people. As we should care about this generation who's coming up to this world and help them to be better people for our country not to use them Just to get clients and make some money, Oliver here is trying to defend himself by blaming Gresham and everybody who's supporting those youngster s as it's not logical that.What can control a person ? A movie or the person himself !? How can Gresham blame a movie for attempting two murders ? Ben and Sarah are eighteen and nineteen years old, they are mature enough to control their actions and it's really a childish thing to blame a movie for motivating them to attempt two murder crimes one each. What gives a man a value than any others organism is the MIND which we can use to control our actions.Hanna 4 â€Å"If Dan White, the killer of San Francisco supervisor Harvey Milk and Mayor George Nosecone, could claim that Twenties made me do it† Oliver is continuing using ethical appeals by saying that a person can not do whatever he wants then blame it to other people or things and say that it was not his/her fault as somebody else or something motivated him/her to do a crime.Watching a movie is not the big thing that can motivate you, and if it's what about those people who are losing their families in the wars, and we nev er heard about any of them turned to be a murder, even us and our friends we all watch horror movies and play violent video games and it never turned us to violent people who can go and kill the others or even Jump into somebody else car and steal it, it is Just because there is no need to do that. But Ben and Sarah had their reasons to attempt the crimes but that is not an excuse to do a crime even when you have reasons.Artists should never be blamed for societal violence; in most cases, they are merely holding a mirror up to the reality that already exists or providing catharsis for emotions we are already suppressing. Violence is there and it does exist in the movies and we can not deny that but one who's watching is the one who decides what to do and how his/her actions will look like. One should use his/her mind before going for an action and then regret it later.