Case Study # 2 Lounge Talk Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

# 2 Lounge Talk - Case Study Example The way each of them handled issues were different and aligned to the leadership styles they used as stated earlier. A classical example presents itself when Dr. Werner helps Delores with planning skills and classroom management unlike Mr. Calbo, who covered the teacher up. For a fact, Dr. Warner is more interested with the professional development of the teachers and the students, which is coupled to the realization of the schools goals and objectives. Essentially, the students and teachers expect a different kind of treatment from the principles. Some of the teachers and students expect to have a loving and caring principal while the others expect the principles to be very decisive and dynamic. The differences in the way the teachers expect the principal to react bring about the difference in reaction to Dr. Werner. The teachers demonstrating excellence in their fields have a problem with the principle for the fact that they do not get the praises and reward as it were before with Mr. Calbo. Instead, the principle spends more time with the students and teachers with a few shortcomings. The approach is important and advantageous for the fact that there is development of the individuals involved. They gain better skills and self-management which works towards achieving the goals of the institution. For instance, the fact that the principle took time with Delores, there has been improved performance and increased productivity. At the same time, the students attending the trip with the teacher are likely to change their character and work towards excelling. This wholesomely works towards the individual level development and achieving of the organizational goals (Yang, 2008 P2 L 26-36). Mr. Calbo used the transactional leadership style while Dr. Werner used transformational leadership style. Mr.Calbo promoted the rewarding of the staff member. The staff members were paid for any activity they were involved in. Moreover, he lacked the vision and

Results section Statistics Project Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Results section - Statistics Project Example Table 1 presents the descriptive statistics obtained for the guilty rating and prescribed punishment as chosen by witnesses and non-witnesses. As can be seen from table 1 and figure 1, the mean value for the guilt rating for witnesses was 5.1825 with a standard deviation of 1.54058 and a standard error for the mean for of 0.19410. For non-witnesses, the mean guilt rating was 4.0317 with a standard deviation of 1.76862 and a standard error for the mean for of 0.22282. The mean value for the punishment for witnesses was 3.2581with a standard deviation of 1.43647 and a standard error for the mean for of 0.18243 as can be seen from table 1 and figure 2. Non-witnesses had a mean of 2.1452 with a standard deviation of 1.34099 and standard error of the mean of 0.17031 in regard to the punishment to be ascribed to the defendant. Based on the crosstabulation of results regarding whether or not the defendant was guilty, 42 witnesses believed that the defendant was guilty against 16 who believed that he was not guilty. Thirty one non-witnesses believed that the defendant was not guilty while 27 of them believed that he was guilty. Of the 116 respondents that presented their views regarding whether or not the defendant was guilty, 69 stated that they believed that he was guilty. Results indicate a significant difference between the views of witnesses (M = 5.1825, SD= 1.54058) and non-witnesses (M= 4.0317, SD = 1.76862) in regard to the guilt rating of the defendant, t(124) = 7.788, p= 0.05. Since the calculated the calculated value of t is greater than 1.9793, we reject the null hypothesis. Results further indicate a significant difference between the views of witnesses (M= 3.2581, SD= 1.43647) and non-witnesses (M= 2.1452, SD=

Project Management Organizational Structures paper Essay

Project Management Organizational Structures paper - Essay Example The functional structure is often referred to as classical or traditional organizations which were developed from Marx Weber’s classical theory (Braden). In these types of organizations the power structured follows a vertical chain of command that is clearly defined. The general manager has control over the entire operations. All the division bosses report to him and the employees within each department report to the division managers. Employees working within this structure have a clear understanding of the power system. This is beneficial and it enhances loyalty among the workers since they understand who will help them move up in the corporate chain. The system itself is very organized and this simplifies the budgeting and control duties. A company establishing a new operation oversees would benefit from this model. In such a scenario management does not have a clear understanding on how the culture affects the employee’s productivity. A tight control is necessary to gear the employees into becoming a synergic unit with its unique corporate culture. Another situation in which the traditional corporate structure is beneficiary is in very large companies with lots of human resources. There are some disadvantages to a functional corporate structure. The model is not good at responding to the needs of the customers since no one in particular within the organization is focusing on their needs. Each department focuses in their particular task and the model does not allow effective communication between departments. The lack of communication makes the structured not suited for efficient project teams. There is very little project planning, reporting and practically no project authority. Innovation is not encouraged in this system. The different departments concentrate their efforts on their specific work tasks and do not visualize the importance of project teams. A pure product or projectized organizational structure is a