Declaration of Independence and the Constitution Essay

Declaration of Independence and the Constitution Introduction   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are two major documents that changed the history of the United States of America, from that of a colonized nation to that of an impendent nation that would have its government. The Declaration of Independence was a document that was written specifically to the government of Great Britainin 1176, July 4th as a notification to the monarchy that America was a free state and no longer a colony of the British. The United States became a country on its own and had its government. The Declaration of Independence provided several reasons that had made the USA to reach a decision of not having a relationship with Britain and its rule. On the other hand, the constitution which was signed in the year 1878 provided an outline the laws, the rights as well as creation of a government that was centralized in the United States. The approval of the constitution by the states led to the formation of feder al governments, which provided the right for each state to practice its own rule under the US Constitution. The existing government of the United States was established as a result of the US constitution. The grievances as raised in the Declaration of Independence were fully addressed by the US Constitution through Bill of Rights, The US Government structure and Laws on trade in the United States. Therefore,without the constitution, the present United States would have not been in existence and the strength of the US government would have been without effect.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The Declaration of Independence outlined several grievances which the United States people had concerning the rule of the British during colonial time. From the Declaration of Independence, some of the grievances which were noted include: The British had cut out any trade relations between the United States and the outside world, something that affected the economy of the United State. Upon the enactment of the constitution, free trade was allowed whereby the Americans could trade with any country or states that they preferred without interference from the British, â€Å"For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world.†(Archives.gov, n.p). The British did not allow the Americans to trade beyond their borders and most of the trade was for the benefit of the British. The Constitution solved this issue of trade by opening up the borders of the United States to the outside world for trade and movement of people. Therefore, without the constitution, the present United States would have still remained economically undermined and unstable as a result of the restrictions on trade.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The other grievances which were raised on the Declaration of Independence include the imposing of taxes on the people of America without gaining their consent, â€Å"For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent.†(Archives.gov, n.p). Under the British colonial rule, the citizens of the United States were required to pay taxes without their consent at a rate that was decided by the British. The enactment of the constitution however resolved this issue of taxes by enacting the right of people to pay taxes while at the same time enjoy the benefits of the taxes which they pay. The constitution gives the people the right to question why they pay taxes and how much they are supposed to pay, something that did not happen during the colonial time of the British in the United States of America.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Furthermore, from the Declaration of Independence, the grievance raised by the Americans includes the deprivation of many cases such as the right to a trial by jury, â€Å"For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury.† (Archives.gov, n.p). The British colonial masters in the United States never allowed the citizen of the United States to face trial under a jury, hence promoted injustices and lack of equity within the judicial system. The enactment of the constitution resolved this injustice of being tried without a jury by making a provision in the constitution. It is provided in the constitution that every individual has the right to a trial by jury as stipulated under the constitution (Declaration of Independence ; Constitution of the United States of America ; Bill of Rights ; Constitutional Amendments, 2-10). The constitution declared that all Americans were to be accorded fair and just trial involving the ju ry and that no one should be subjected to a trial without a jury.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Furthermore, still on matters of justice and trial of people in the United States, under the Declaration of Independence, another grievance that was raised was the issue of being tried in another territory away from where one had committed an alleged offense, â€Å"For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences.†(Archives.gov, n.p). The British Colonial masters never bothered to seek for evidence or make investigations before subjecting an individual to trial in their courts way from the place where one was alleged to have committed an offense. However, this was resolved by the constitution through the enactment of law that says no one should be put to trial without sufficient investigations and evidence gathered on the matter of concern(Declaration of Independence ; Constitution of the United States of America ; Bill of Rights ; Constitutional Amendments, 2-10). Therefore, it can be observed that without the con stitution of the United States, injustices and unfairness would have continued in the current United States.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   In addition to the above mentioned grievances, the other grievance raised as per the Declaration of Independence was that on suspension of the American Legislature an instead taking of all power by the British and becoming the sole legislature, â€Å"For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.†(Archives.gov, n.p). This action by the British meant that no laws would be passed without the British having been the bones to do it. In other words, all laws in America were to be formulated and enacted according to the system of the British rule and by the British(Declaration of Independence ; Constitution of the United States of America ; Bill of Rights ; Constitutional Amendments, 2-10). To address and resolve this issue, the constitution of the United States outlined the various arms of government and ensured that every arm of government, including the leg islature had its role clearly outlined.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Last but not least, the other grievances that were raised in the Declaration of Independence by the United States to the Crown of Britain included the talking away of the charters of the United States as well as the abolishment of the valuable laws of the US, â€Å"For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments.†(Archives.gov, n.p). Furthermore, the alteration of the form of government of the United States was also part of the grievances raised in the Declaration of Independence(Declaration of Independence ; Constitution of the United States of America ; Bill of Rights ; Constitutional Amendments, 2-10). Under the US Constitution, these grievances were addressed through the provisions in the constitution which outline how the US government structure should look like and the way all arms of government should operate. Furthermore, the constitution bestowed the r ight to elect leaders on the citizens hence addressing the issue of charters that were taken away by the British. References Archives.gov, The Declaration of Independence: A Transcriptionviewed from http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html on 15th October 2014 Declaration of Independence ; Constitution of the United States of America ; Bill of Rights ; Constitutional Amendments. S.l.: Filiquarian Pub, 2007. Print. P.2-10 Source document

Olaudah Equiano’s the Interesting Narrative Essay

Olaudah Equiano’s The Interesting Narrative of the Life of Olaudah Equiano, or Gustavus Vassa, the African, Written by Himself, is the story of the eponymous real-life character, Olaudah Equiano, his life, trials, tribulations and journey from slavery at an early age to freedom. For Equiano, it seems that slavery is almost a metaphysical phenomenon. His entire life is essentially characterized by the different experiences relating slavery, from Africa to the Middle Passage to plantation life in the West Indies and United States. Equiano’s views on slavery are tough to articulate and truly complex. Throughout the novel he makes reference to different ‘degrees of slavery,’ at times condemning the practice, and at other times contradicting himself and seemingly lauding it. I believe that his conflicting views are products of his first hand experience with nearly all aspects of the practice, and near the end of the novel it is clear that he is in favor of ending slavery. See more: what is a narrative essay Although he was kidnapped at the age of eleven, Equiano’s familiarity with slavery actually begins long before that. Born in a region that is today known as Nigeria. His father a chief, (and ironically himself would eventually reach the same status if not for his kidnapping years later), Equiano’s family was considered ‘upper-class,’ and thus owned their own number of slaves. I believe that this is the beginning and serves as the basis of which he compares the slavery he experiences later in his lifetime to, and also what may serve as the beginning of his conflicting emotion towards the practice in general. He makes note that slaves in this community, while under the direction of a master and with clear distinction of a ‘lesser importance,’ are still treated in a humane way. On his own account, these slaves do a comparable amount of work to that of other members of the community. When put into perspective, with no knowledge of what’s to come (in regards to subsequent experiences in different aspects and degrees of slavery) at this point it is easy to see why Equiano has not yet condemned the idea or practice of slavery. Shortly thereafter, Equiano is kidnapped (along with his sister, though the two are eventually separated), He narrates being taken on a long, arduous voyage through a variety of African regions, during which he had â€Å"often changed masters.† He is first sold across Africa, first to a chieftain, and shortly after to a widow. After which, he is ultimately sold to the owner of a ship destined for the West Indies. Equiano dubs this Atlantic voyage himself â€Å"The Middle Passage,† and this is where I believe his journey truly begins. Equiano elaborates on his introduction and subsequent alienation to the European culture and their treatment of slaves. He details the substandard living conditions and destitution of living aboard the slave ship, and being a stark contrast to the concept of slavery he knew back in Africa, I believe this is the defining moment where his viewpoint regarding slavery is partitioned. I think it’s important to note that when Equiano is enslaved by fellow Africans, he makes note of the strong contrasts and class distinctions between himself and them. He makes direct comparisons between himself and the class he hails from, and these other Africans, going as far as to call them â€Å"barbaric† and â€Å"uncivilized.† I believe that this is worth noting, because it’s almost paradoxical how he is very quick to condemn these people and their form of slavery, while at the same time not criticizing the slavery that took place in his own village when he was a child. Though not yet acknowledging it, I believe that this is when he begins to form his own ‘tiers’ of the practice of slavery. After arriving at the West Indies and experiencing the sale of slaves firsthand, Equiano continues along with the slave ship to North America, and ultimately purchased by a naval captain, Michael Pascal to work in Virginia. Again he is subjected to cruel treatment inside the slaveholders’ homes. This is, I believe, the turning point that eventually leads to Equiano’s final resolution. He details being shocked and hurt to the point where he tries to wash the color of his skin off his face. While travelling the seas with Pascal, Equiano has many more encounters in and with Britain. With more and more exposure to Christianity and European culture, he details that he was no longer frightened and apprehensive towards it, beginning to show confluence of African and European cultures. He was eventually sent to school in Britain, educated and shortly after, baptized. It is worth noting that later in the novel he often relates his new religious standpoint to his enslavement. While becoming a Christian himself, whether or not he holds responsible God, himself, or the hypocritical Christian Europeans for his enslavement is left ambiguous. Ultimately, (and after brief stints of being purchased by other masters) Equiano is sold to Robert King. Educated and under the direction of a master treating him relatively fair, Equiano here observes another facet of slavery. He is further educated and directed along the path of Christianity, which I believe further adds more conflicting emotion, due to it being comparable to his original notion of slavery from his childhood. While working for King on shipping routes, he determines himself to save some money on the side, in order to buy his freedom from King. Interesting to note though, in the novel he explicitly states that he would like to return to Old England, not Africa. While I think this is further evidence of his confluence of English and African cultures, I believe that this is also the beginning of his plea against the practice of slavery, as later in the novel we find out that he does indeed buy his freedom, and much later returns to London and become involved in the abolitionist movement. In conclusion, it is clear to see that in the mind of Equiano, slavery is not simple a one-sided condemnation. From birth until freedom, he has lived and experienced all aspects of slavery, from his family owning slaves to being purchased himself. It’s an interesting and unique point of view that few (if any more) people who were involved in the practice of slavery experienced themselves. In the end, I think it is clear to the reader that Equiano is against the notion of slavery, but I believe that’s a conclusion he came to because of personal experience along with education and indulgement of European culture. While I don’t believe he accepts the practice of slavery, I believe that he accepts slavery as part of how he defines of himself, almost as if slavery could not be abolished were it not conceived in the first place.

12 Angry Men

2. At the beginning of this movie the jurors vote 11 to 1 to convict the defendant and send him to death for murder; yet by the end of the movie they vote to acquit him, to set him free. What are the events that led the jurors to change their minds so radically and set the defendant free ? Describe the process. 1)The knife could be bought or have been found by anyone 2)The murderer knew how to use a pocket knife and the count have known. 3)When they re-enact the old man walking/limping from his bed to the door outside it takes them more then 15 seconds to get to the outside door. And the old man swore it had taken him 15 seconds. 4)The old man and the lady say that they heard the boy screaming at his father saying â€Å"I’ll kill you† but that doesn’t really mean he actually killed him since people say that phrase all the time but don’t really mean it and that was proved when juror number three has and outburst and say’s â€Å"I’ll kill you† to juror number eight. 5)How could the old man and the lady have heard the boy screaming when you can’t even hear yourself thinking over the el train. )The jurors start doubting the lady’s eyesight since she did not have her glasses on and maybe just assumed that it was the boy staying his father. 3. Why is juror number nine (old Man) a real hero ? Explain this using examples. 1)Because he is the first to agree with juror number eight , deciding that there is not enough evidence to sentence the young boy to death. 2)He openly describes juror number ten’ s racist attitude. 3)When he agrees that the old man could have maybe justified to what he heard and saw the night of the murder so he’s name could be recognized. 4. Explain number three’s anger against the accused. He’s anger towards the accused is because he’s relationship whit his son was very similar to the accused and the defendant. So based on the fact that he hasn’t seen his son in the past two years and the negative relationship he’s had with him he decides to declare the accused guilty because he thinks that the boy dose not deserve to live because he killed his own father. 5. Explain the impact of the closing scene in the jury room between number eight and three. Juror number three breaks down after his outburst while every one is leaving juror number eight stays back and tries to console him without communication. . Explain the following (refers to the play). a) â€Å"Innocent until proven guilty† Until you have no strong evidence against the accused, the accused is declared guilty. b) â€Å"Reasonable doubt† Something that could possibly prove the accused guilty. c) â€Å"Burden of proof† The biggest/important proof to prove the accuse d guilty or not guilty. 7. Explain the title. The title explained how these twelve men are frustrated and stressed and have this burden of declaring the accused guilty or not guilty. 12 Angry Men After hours of deliberation, the jurors reached the decision that the boy is not guilty, due to the fact of reasonable doubt. While few jurors are motivated by their respect and determination for the justice system, Juror 10 is motivated by his personal prejudice. Juror 10 is clearly motivated by his prejudice. He uses his intolerance to determine his vote for the accused defendant. For instance, in the beginning of Act I, Juror 10 haphazardly said, â€Å" Look at the kind of people they are, you know them,† (13) without even digging deep into the case. It is quite obvious that Juror 10 is generating an â€Å"opinion† of the defendant based on the color of his skin and his background. He does not refer to them as regular people, but as â€Å"they† and â€Å"them† on certain pages. In the courtroom though, no juror is to have any judgments, they are supposed to bring the facts to the table, not their opinions. Juror 10’s outlook of the defendant is blinding him from thinking of any reasonable doubt. Further more, when Juror 10 said, â€Å"†¦I lived among em’ all my life, you can’t believe a word they say. You know that,† he yet again was referring to the defendant’s people as â€Å"em† and â€Å"they†. You can clearly infer that while Juror 10 was living amongst them, he must have experienced or witnessed situations which has caused him to have judgments on these specific people. These same judgments he brings to the courtroom just add difficulty into solving the case. Following Juror 10’s views further, when Juror 5 was explaining how the person who did stab the father was un-experienced, but the defendant was indeed experienced and Juror 3 stated he didn’t believe it, Juror 10 responded with, â€Å"Neither do I. You’re giving us a lot of mumbo-jumbo. † (56) His racist views of the one accused once again got in the way and made him think differently on what Juror 3 had said. Juror 10 didn’t even bother thinking the idea through! A reasonable person would have at least deliberated instead of just shutting down the thought completely. In addition to that thought, as the other jurors are realizing that there is reasonable doubt and changing their votes from guilty to not guilty, Juror 10’s temper begins to rise. His reaction to the other jurors for not agreeing with his opinion results to him throwing a rampage. He ends up screaming at the top of his lungs and thinking of everything he can possibly say to make the rest of the jurors side with him. But the only response he receives from the jurors is as they turn away from him in disgust. After Juror 10 gets his racist opinions across, he realizes he simply cannot win this fight. His judgmental views of the defendant blocked any potential thought Juror 10 would have had if he went in to the courtroom with an open mind. Juror 10 stands out to the reader for his extreme prejudice look at the defendant and his culture. With out giving the case a glance, he already created an unchangeable opinion. From his view, Juror 10 doesn’t think of â€Å"them† as regular people, but as these animals who get away with every crime they commit. Also his extremely prejudiced opinions made him resistant from â€Å"separating the facts from the fancy. † One of the largest issues in our justice system is when jurors already have generated an opinion on the defendant, where as Juror 10 clearly did, which then causes the final vote to be affected. All in all, if the members of the court went into the jury room with an open mind we would most likely have more proved innocent cases in today’s society. It has been at least 60 years since the drama â€Å"Twelve Angry Men† was written. And even today, do we really believe all men and women were created equal? 12 Angry Men 12 Angry Men 2. At the beginning of this movie the jurors vote 11 to 1 to convict the defendant and send him to death for murder; yet by the end of the movie they vote to acquit him, to set him free. What are the events that led the jurors to change their minds so radically and set the defendant free ? Describe the process. 1)The knife could be bought or have been found by anyone 2)The murderer knew how to use a pocket knife and the count have known. 3)When they re-enact the old man walking/limping from his bed to the door outside it takes them more then 15 seconds to get to the outside door. And the old man swore it had taken him 15 seconds. 4)The old man and the lady say that they heard the boy screaming at his father saying â€Å"I’ll kill you† but that doesn’t really mean he actually killed him since people say that phrase all the time but don’t really mean it and that was proved when juror number three has and outburst and say’s â€Å"I’ll kill you† to juror number eight. 5)How could the old man and the lady have heard the boy screaming when you can’t even hear yourself thinking over the el train. )The jurors start doubting the lady’s eyesight since she did not have her glasses on and maybe just assumed that it was the boy staying his father. 3. Why is juror number nine (old Man) a real hero ? Explain this using examples. 1)Because he is the first to agree with juror number eight , deciding that there is not enough evidence to sentence the young boy to death. 2)He openly describes juror number ten’ s racist attitude. 3)When he agrees that the old man could have maybe justified to what he heard and saw the night of the murder so he’s name could be recognized. 4. Explain number three’s anger against the accused. He’s anger towards the accused is because he’s relationship whit his son was very similar to the accused and the defendant. So based on the fact that he hasn’t seen his son in the past two years and the negative relationship he’s had with him he decides to declare the accused guilty because he thinks that the boy dose not deserve to live because he killed his own father. 5. Explain the impact of the closing scene in the jury room between number eight and three. Juror number three breaks down after his outburst while every one is leaving juror number eight stays back and tries to console him without communication. . Explain the following (refers to the play). a) â€Å"Innocent until proven guilty† Until you have no strong evidence against the accused, the accused is declared guilty. b) â€Å"Reasonable doubt† Something that could possibly prove the accused guilty. c) â€Å"Burden of proof† The biggest/important proof to prove the accuse d guilty or not guilty. 7. Explain the title. The title explained how these twelve men are frustrated and stressed and have this burden of declaring the accused guilty or not guilty. 12 angry men 12 Angry Men tells the story of twelve jurors thrust together in a hot and humid room on a New York summer evening to deliberate on the guilt or innocence of an eighteen year old Hispanic boy with a troubled past.   He is accused of stabbing his father; a man with whom he has had a contentious relationship for years.   The accused is fighting an uphill battle towards an acquittal: the eye witness account of his neighbors, a court appointed public defender whose apathy towards this case is mirrored by more than one of the jurors and his race which seems to be a major strike against him in the mind of some of the jurors, specifically juror #10. From the onset, it seems like an open and shut case with the accused being sentenced to death for the murder of his father. But if that were the case, 12 Angry Men, with its study of human contrasts, inconsistencies and prejudices, would have been long forgotten. Instead, 12 Angry Men is a testament to the notion that standing up for ones beliefs that have come from an unbiased and methodical overview of the facts, even if those beliefs are contrary to the vocal majority, is honorable and that such prejudices which cloud those facts are an impediment to every citizen in a democratic society. Being forced to listen to six days of testimony while at the same time being paid only three dollars a day for their services, it is easy to see how some or most of the jurors at the beginning of deliberations, seemed apathetic towards the great responsibility they have to give the accused their undivided attention while deciding his guilt or innocence. This is the case for a number of jurors; specifically juror #7 who is preoccupied with making the Yankee/Indians game later that day. He feels rushed by the proceedings and desires quick deliberations followed by a unanimous guilty vote. He feels that the accused is guilty but most likely would have voted the way of the majority if that meant that he could have gone to the game, gone home or just been anywhere other than in the courtroom for any additional length of time.   He does not see and cannot be affectively reminded about the awesome power he has to either put a man to death or to set him free. The issue of the guilt or innocence of the accused should be paramount in his mind but sadly, it is not. Juror #5 is not the only one who shrinks from his responsibility. Juror #12, the well dressed and jovial salesman feels that the accused is guilty but when pressed to explain his reasoning, cannot and quickly changes his mind when pressured to do so. Juror #12 is preoccupied with his job and maintaining a light atmosphere in the jury room; almost oblivious to the matter at hand.   Juror #2 is in many ways, the same as juror #12 except for the fact that his personality is not nearly as outgoing but in the same way, lacks convictions and is content to go with the crowd. He does not take his civic duty seriously and is afraid to stand up against the crowd unlike juror #8; the lone dissenter at the beginning of the film. Also, juror #2 does not seem to be able to explain why he feels that the accused is either innocent or guilty. This is contrary to jurors #3,#4 and #10 who at the start of the movie, have no qualms about putting the accused to death and detailing exactly whey they feel that the boy should be worthy of such a fate. The remaining three holdouts all have different reasons why they think the boy is guilty; some are legitimate concerns while others are rooted in prejudice against the poor and minorities. Although misguided, the above mentioned jurors had the conviction to state specifically why they thought what they did and to be perfectly willing for a time and to stand up to what is becoming a numerous and vocal majority as the movie progresses. Jurors #2, and #10 are either too preoccupied to be bothered by the tremendous power they have over the accused, or are too timid and will go with the majority. For that reason, he is among the jurors that did not take their civic responsibility as seriously as they needed to. Jurors #5, #9 and of course #8 are polar opposites of the above mentioned jurors.   At the beginning of the film, only juror #8 votes for the innocence of the accused.   Or rather there is reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the accused in his mind. But juror #8, by his own admission, reluctantly stands alone in defiance to the other eleven jurors. He does not do this while void of fear. It is seen on his face, in his mannerisms and even when he is willing to vote with the majority if after a short deliberation and a second vote, he is still the lone dissenter. Juror #8 is skeptical about many aspects of this boy’s life; his childhood and especially the system that would allow such a boy to fall through the cracks and almost invite this type of behavior (had be been guilty) and feels that an intense and methodical discussion is warranted before he is to vote for the guilt and subsequent death of a fellow human being. This type of moral fortitude, courage and attention to duty goes rewarded by juror #9; the oldest juror who once he has a companion, has no trouble standing up to the intense verbal ridicule of the majority, specifically juror #3,#7,#10. By this act, the group process’s momentum slowly starts to shift away from rendering a guilty verdict to instead empowering those timid jurors who have doubt as to the guilt of the accused but were too afraid to speak as they knew that they could not handle the onslaught levied against them by jurors #3 and #10. The jury room consists of polar opposites when it comes to their fulfillment of their duty in this matter. It is not the specific vote that they cast that makes them the most different, but in the way that they came to that decision. Each juror possessed a different decision making process concerning how they voted, how quickly they changed their vote and how resistant others were to let â€Å"one of them† go free. It is very rare for twelve different people to be completely impartial and void of any prejudices. This was the case especially for juror #3. He is the last of the jurors to change his vote to not guilty and in order for him to do so, a great deal of internal and personal problems and frustrations must be overcome for him to change his vote. Juror #3 is a traditional, hard nosed individual who taught himself to be tough as well as his son, remarking that when his only son was nine and walked away from a fight, it make him sick and he resolved to make a man out of his son. At the time of the trial, his son is twenty two and it is safe to say that they have a contentious relationship for the past few years. The son, most likely, resisted the intense tactics of his father and they have not spoken in years.   This has caused the father a great deal of pain and this pain served as the main source of the father’s hatred for the accused.   Juror #3 sees a correlation between the accused and his son and exerts little effort to disguise that bias. The accused had a troubled relationship with has father as well. Juror #3 sees both the accused and his son as being ungrateful to their fathers and feels that there should be consequences for this disrespect. He seems to have no power over his son for if he did, they would be reconciled or at least there would be visits between them. But he does have power over the accused to put him to death for what his hatred tells him that the boy must obviously be guilty.   The accused stands for everything that juror #3 hates and coupled with his tough exterior, is the last to submit to letting the accused go free. On the opposite end of the spectrum are jurors #11, 5 and 8. Juror #11 is a watch maker from Eastern Europe. Even though he is Caucasian, he is conscious of his ethnicity and the prejudices that come with being from a different country. He sympathizes with the accused and how his ethnic background puts him at a disadvantage in almost every aspect of daily life in 1950’s America. At the beginning of the movie, he agrees with the majority regarding the guilt of the accused but the racist generalizations made by jurors #7 and 10 are very effective in showing   juror #11 that there are certain prejudices in play that need to be examined. Along with the methodical explanation by juror #8, the watchmaker changes his vote to not guilty and does not waver for the rest of the movie despite intense pressure from juror #7 and #10 to convince him of the contrary and to play on the fears the watchmaker has of being different. Also motivated by the obvious shift in the group process away from the ideology that encourages a guilty verdict, the above mentioned jurors do all that they can to slow the momentum.   The way in which the watchmaker comes to his decisions in a non biased, sympathetic and dutiful process and is willing to absorb ridicule against the prejudices of jurors # 3 and 10; some of the same prejudices which force them to be the last to change their vote, is honorable and worthy of mention; second only to that of juror #8, the lone dissenter. The movie wastes no time in pointing out who will emerge the leaders in the jury room. One would think that naturally, the foreman would be selected as the leader and that the proceeding would be run under his watchful eye.   But that is not the case. The foreman has no such ambition and is quick to offer his seat to anyone who thinks that they might be able to do a better job once an argument arises on how the deliberations would be conducted. By the simple yet courageous action of juror #8 to vote not guilty by a show of hands, while knowing that such an action would be the source of ridicule, quickly makes him as one of the leaders in the jury room. Juror #8 becomes the leader by not only being the sole dissenter in the face of ridicule but in the way that he reacts to that ridicule; through a quiet, confident and respectful resolve which earns him not only respect from people who are not used to such treatment, but also converts to his call for a complete examination of the facts. It is this unbiased and caring demeanor that helps his argument to have legitimacy unlike the boisterous juror #3 and #10 whose demeanor steadily helps them to lose converts until they are the only ones left. On the other end of the spectrum are jurors #3 and #10. It is obvious that they have ulterior motives in seeing the accused gets the electric chair.   They are tough on crime, short on compassion and frequent on racist generalizations which cloud their mind and sour their soul with such hatful rhetoric. These prejudices come busting out towards the end of the movie when jurors #3 and #10 are the most desperate as they are now left alone with the intense eyes of jurors who at the beginning of their deliberations, supported their discriminatory ideology by voting for the guilt of the accused. Once the support has been eroded, their actions, like the actions of juror#3, set them apart as they infamously emerge as the other leaders in the jury room. The fact that juror #3 allows his frustrations with his son to come into play with his judgment towards the guilt of the accused and that he his mannerisms are so over the top, helps him emerge as the other main leader in the jury room. His prejudice lies in the age of the accused being close to that of his own son with whom he has had a troubled relationship and a troubled past. Juror #3 may or may not hate his son but he is very discouraged and displeased with the way that things have gone in their relationship and vents his frustration towards the accused. The prejudice of juror #10 lies not in the age of the accused by rather in his race. The accused is a Latino who grew up in the poor tenements of New York where crime runs rampant and juror #10 feels that the accused is guilty by association since he came from such squalor and with a troubled past. However, juror #10 is not nearly as vocal in his suspicion of juror #5 who grew up in a similar atmosphere simply because the juror is white. It is more the race of the accused than where he grew up that seems to motivate juror #10 into the assumption that the boy is guilty. At first, it is the outspoken demeanor of juror #10 that helps to set him apart from the other jurors in a leadership role. But his leadership emerges in more infamous ways as he vocalizes his racist assumptions of the accused in one final and desperate outburst as he desperately tried to win back converts to his cause. He uses such words as â€Å"those people† and â€Å"you know how they are† and finally, the accused is â€Å"one of them.† The phrases are used at the beginning of the movie and assumed as fact in the mind of juror #10 mostly due to the fact that his only opposition is from juror #8 who is not being taken seriously and is no threat to him. However, when the group process shows that juror #10 is in a shrinking majority and will soon be a lone standout, along with juror #3, the same phrases are used desperately but to no avail. The main source for the drama in the jury room is the requirement that their decision must be unanimous. If for the simple fact that everyone must be in agreement in either sending the accused to his death or setting him free, there would have been no screenplay to begin with. The jurors might have argued the merits of the case but with there being no need for a unanimous decision, juror #8 would have known that unless he could win six more converts in what would have to be a short amount of time, the deliberations would soon be over. The ulterior motives of jurors #3 and #10 would never have seen the light of day. The lack of conviction displayed by jurors #1 #2 and #12 would never had been recognized and the heroic actions of juror #8 and to a lesser extent juror #9, would never had sparked such heated yet important and necessary debate within the jury room. Every man left the jury room a little different than when they first came. Jurors #2, #5, #11 and #12 may have been emboldened in their private lives and to let future injustices not slide as easily as they may have had in the past. Jurors #3, #10 and to a lesser extent #7, recognized their prejudices and may have exerted some effort to confront these problems. The phrase â€Å"group process† refers to the behavior of people in groups, such as task groups that are trying to solve a problem or make a decision. 12 Angry Men has numerous and obvious examples of group process. It is the fact that twelve men must come to a unanimous decision that such examples can be shown. If there were only one or two jurors and/or a unanimous decision did not have to be achieved, any aspect of group process would have been absent. The jurors can be grouped into three main groups: those who are strongly in favor of giving the accused the electric chair, those who are willing to go along with the majority and those who are strongly in favor of being oblivious from the glaring prejudices and racist assumptions and quickly latch onto the moralist; juror #8 and then #9. Jurors #2 #5 and #11 are beneficiaries of group process.   They cannot do alone what is made easier in a group once jurors #8 and #9 have voted for the innocence of the accused. Alone, they could never have done what #8 and #9 had done: stand up to vocal ridicule and to do it alone. But once the first step has been made towards an attempt to judge the facts and not the race, age or background of the accused, jurors #2, #5 and #11 are relieved to vote their consciousness instead of giving into the pressure levied against them by specifically jurors #3 #4 and #10. The negative aspects of group process would have been guilty for defective decision making if it hadn’t been for the fact that juror #8 has the courage to vote for the innocence of the accused. 12 Angry Men will continue to stand the test of time since it speaks eloquently on many different areas: that prejudices are an impediment to everyone in a democratic society and that standing up for a belief, despite knowing the dangers of such a stand, is honorable and should be recognized as courageous. But also, people do in groups what they wouldn’t do in private. Individuality within a group of strong opinions comes at a price and that price is most often ridicule and misunderstanding. If at the beginning of the movie, the foreman had taken a secret vote, juror #8 may not have been the lone dissenter. The jurors that did not put a great deal of value in the democratic process of trial by jury and didn’t feel that a daily salary of $3 was not worthy of their methodical analysis of the facts, were content to go with the majority, no matter what that decision said. But for the jurors who made it a point to shift group process away from a guilty verdict based on racist assumptions and in light of strong ridicule and little monetary compensation, this movie will continue to be studied and appreciated for years to come. 12 angry men 12 Angry Men tells the story of twelve jurors thrust together in a hot and humid room on a New York summer evening to deliberate on the guilt or innocence of an eighteen year old Hispanic boy with a troubled past.   He is accused of stabbing his father; a man with whom he has had a contentious relationship for years.   The accused is fighting an uphill battle towards an acquittal: the eye witness account of his neighbors, a court appointed public defender whose apathy towards this case is mirrored by more than one of the jurors and his race which seems to be a major strike against him in the mind of some of the jurors, specifically juror #10. From the onset, it seems like an open and shut case with the accused being sentenced to death for the murder of his father. But if that were the case, 12 Angry Men, with its study of human contrasts, inconsistencies and prejudices, would have been long forgotten. Instead, 12 Angry Men is a testament to the notion that standing up for ones beliefs that have come from an unbiased and methodical overview of the facts, even if those beliefs are contrary to the vocal majority, is honorable and that such prejudices which cloud those facts are an impediment to every citizen in a democratic society. Being forced to listen to six days of testimony while at the same time being paid only three dollars a day for their services, it is easy to see how some or most of the jurors at the beginning of deliberations, seemed apathetic towards the great responsibility they have to give the accused their undivided attention while deciding his guilt or innocence. This is the case for a number of jurors; specifically juror #7 who is preoccupied with making the Yankee/Indians game later that day. He feels rushed by the proceedings and desires quick deliberations followed by a unanimous guilty vote. He feels that the accused is guilty but most likely would have voted the way of the majority if that meant that he could have gone to the game, gone home or just been anywhere other than in the courtroom for any additional length of time.   He does not see and cannot be affectively reminded about the awesome power he has to either put a man to death or to set him free. The issue of the guilt or innocence of the accused should be paramount in his mind but sadly, it is not. Juror #5 is not the only one who shrinks from his responsibility. Juror #12, the well dressed and jovial salesman feels that the accused is guilty but when pressed to explain his reasoning, cannot and quickly changes his mind when pressured to do so. Juror #12 is preoccupied with his job and maintaining a light atmosphere in the jury room; almost oblivious to the matter at hand.   Juror #2 is in many ways, the same as juror #12 except for the fact that his personality is not nearly as outgoing but in the same way, lacks convictions and is content to go with the crowd. He does not take his civic duty seriously and is afraid to stand up against the crowd unlike juror #8; the lone dissenter at the beginning of the film. Also, juror #2 does not seem to be able to explain why he feels that the accused is either innocent or guilty. This is contrary to jurors #3,#4 and #10 who at the start of the movie, have no qualms about putting the accused to death and detailing exactly whey they feel that the boy should be worthy of such a fate. The remaining three holdouts all have different reasons why they think the boy is guilty; some are legitimate concerns while others are rooted in prejudice against the poor and minorities. Although misguided, the above mentioned jurors had the conviction to state specifically why they thought what they did and to be perfectly willing for a time and to stand up to what is becoming a numerous and vocal majority as the movie progresses. Jurors #2, and #10 are either too preoccupied to be bothered by the tremendous power they have over the accused, or are too timid and will go with the majority. For that reason, he is among the jurors that did not take their civic responsibility as seriously as they needed to. Jurors #5, #9 and of course #8 are polar opposites of the above mentioned jurors.   At the beginning of the film, only juror #8 votes for the innocence of the accused.   Or rather there is reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the accused in his mind. But juror #8, by his own admission, reluctantly stands alone in defiance to the other eleven jurors. He does not do this while void of fear. It is seen on his face, in his mannerisms and even when he is willing to vote with the majority if after a short deliberation and a second vote, he is still the lone dissenter. Juror #8 is skeptical about many aspects of this boy’s life; his childhood and especially the system that would allow such a boy to fall through the cracks and almost invite this type of behavior (had be been guilty) and feels that an intense and methodical discussion is warranted before he is to vote for the guilt and subsequent death of a fellow human being. This type of moral fortitude, courage and attention to duty goes rewarded by juror #9; the oldest juror who once he has a companion, has no trouble standing up to the intense verbal ridicule of the majority, specifically juror #3,#7,#10. By this act, the group process’s momentum slowly starts to shift away from rendering a guilty verdict to instead empowering those timid jurors who have doubt as to the guilt of the accused but were too afraid to speak as they knew that they could not handle the onslaught levied against them by jurors #3 and #10. The jury room consists of polar opposites when it comes to their fulfillment of their duty in this matter. It is not the specific vote that they cast that makes them the most different, but in the way that they came to that decision. Each juror possessed a different decision making process concerning how they voted, how quickly they changed their vote and how resistant others were to let â€Å"one of them† go free. It is very rare for twelve different people to be completely impartial and void of any prejudices. This was the case especially for juror #3. He is the last of the jurors to change his vote to not guilty and in order for him to do so, a great deal of internal and personal problems and frustrations must be overcome for him to change his vote. Juror #3 is a traditional, hard nosed individual who taught himself to be tough as well as his son, remarking that when his only son was nine and walked away from a fight, it make him sick and he resolved to make a man out of his son. At the time of the trial, his son is twenty two and it is safe to say that they have a contentious relationship for the past few years. The son, most likely, resisted the intense tactics of his father and they have not spoken in years.   This has caused the father a great deal of pain and this pain served as the main source of the father’s hatred for the accused.   Juror #3 sees a correlation between the accused and his son and exerts little effort to disguise that bias. The accused had a troubled relationship with has father as well. Juror #3 sees both the accused and his son as being ungrateful to their fathers and feels that there should be consequences for this disrespect. He seems to have no power over his son for if he did, they would be reconciled or at least there would be visits between them. But he does have power over the accused to put him to death for what his hatred tells him that the boy must obviously be guilty.   The accused stands for everything that juror #3 hates and coupled with his tough exterior, is the last to submit to letting the accused go free. On the opposite end of the spectrum are jurors #11, 5 and 8. Juror #11 is a watch maker from Eastern Europe. Even though he is Caucasian, he is conscious of his ethnicity and the prejudices that come with being from a different country. He sympathizes with the accused and how his ethnic background puts him at a disadvantage in almost every aspect of daily life in 1950’s America. At the beginning of the movie, he agrees with the majority regarding the guilt of the accused but the racist generalizations made by jurors #7 and 10 are very effective in showing   juror #11 that there are certain prejudices in play that need to be examined. Along with the methodical explanation by juror #8, the watchmaker changes his vote to not guilty and does not waver for the rest of the movie despite intense pressure from juror #7 and #10 to convince him of the contrary and to play on the fears the watchmaker has of being different. Also motivated by the obvious shift in the group process away from the ideology that encourages a guilty verdict, the above mentioned jurors do all that they can to slow the momentum.   The way in which the watchmaker comes to his decisions in a non biased, sympathetic and dutiful process and is willing to absorb ridicule against the prejudices of jurors # 3 and 10; some of the same prejudices which force them to be the last to change their vote, is honorable and worthy of mention; second only to that of juror #8, the lone dissenter. The movie wastes no time in pointing out who will emerge the leaders in the jury room. One would think that naturally, the foreman would be selected as the leader and that the proceeding would be run under his watchful eye.   But that is not the case. The foreman has no such ambition and is quick to offer his seat to anyone who thinks that they might be able to do a better job once an argument arises on how the deliberations would be conducted. By the simple yet courageous action of juror #8 to vote not guilty by a show of hands, while knowing that such an action would be the source of ridicule, quickly makes him as one of the leaders in the jury room. Juror #8 becomes the leader by not only being the sole dissenter in the face of ridicule but in the way that he reacts to that ridicule; through a quiet, confident and respectful resolve which earns him not only respect from people who are not used to such treatment, but also converts to his call for a complete examination of the facts. It is this unbiased and caring demeanor that helps his argument to have legitimacy unlike the boisterous juror #3 and #10 whose demeanor steadily helps them to lose converts until they are the only ones left. On the other end of the spectrum are jurors #3 and #10. It is obvious that they have ulterior motives in seeing the accused gets the electric chair.   They are tough on crime, short on compassion and frequent on racist generalizations which cloud their mind and sour their soul with such hatful rhetoric. These prejudices come busting out towards the end of the movie when jurors #3 and #10 are the most desperate as they are now left alone with the intense eyes of jurors who at the beginning of their deliberations, supported their discriminatory ideology by voting for the guilt of the accused. Once the support has been eroded, their actions, like the actions of juror#3, set them apart as they infamously emerge as the other leaders in the jury room. The fact that juror #3 allows his frustrations with his son to come into play with his judgment towards the guilt of the accused and that he his mannerisms are so over the top, helps him emerge as the other main leader in the jury room. His prejudice lies in the age of the accused being close to that of his own son with whom he has had a troubled relationship and a troubled past. Juror #3 may or may not hate his son but he is very discouraged and displeased with the way that things have gone in their relationship and vents his frustration towards the accused. The prejudice of juror #10 lies not in the age of the accused by rather in his race. The accused is a Latino who grew up in the poor tenements of New York where crime runs rampant and juror #10 feels that the accused is guilty by association since he came from such squalor and with a troubled past. However, juror #10 is not nearly as vocal in his suspicion of juror #5 who grew up in a similar atmosphere simply because the juror is white. It is more the race of the accused than where he grew up that seems to motivate juror #10 into the assumption that the boy is guilty. At first, it is the outspoken demeanor of juror #10 that helps to set him apart from the other jurors in a leadership role. But his leadership emerges in more infamous ways as he vocalizes his racist assumptions of the accused in one final and desperate outburst as he desperately tried to win back converts to his cause. He uses such words as â€Å"those people† and â€Å"you know how they are† and finally, the accused is â€Å"one of them.† The phrases are used at the beginning of the movie and assumed as fact in the mind of juror #10 mostly due to the fact that his only opposition is from juror #8 who is not being taken seriously and is no threat to him. However, when the group process shows that juror #10 is in a shrinking majority and will soon be a lone standout, along with juror #3, the same phrases are used desperately but to no avail. The main source for the drama in the jury room is the requirement that their decision must be unanimous. If for the simple fact that everyone must be in agreement in either sending the accused to his death or setting him free, there would have been no screenplay to begin with. The jurors might have argued the merits of the case but with there being no need for a unanimous decision, juror #8 would have known that unless he could win six more converts in what would have to be a short amount of time, the deliberations would soon be over. The ulterior motives of jurors #3 and #10 would never have seen the light of day. The lack of conviction displayed by jurors #1 #2 and #12 would never had been recognized and the heroic actions of juror #8 and to a lesser extent juror #9, would never had sparked such heated yet important and necessary debate within the jury room. Every man left the jury room a little different than when they first came. Jurors #2, #5, #11 and #12 may have been emboldened in their private lives and to let future injustices not slide as easily as they may have had in the past. Jurors #3, #10 and to a lesser extent #7, recognized their prejudices and may have exerted some effort to confront these problems. The phrase â€Å"group process† refers to the behavior of people in groups, such as task groups that are trying to solve a problem or make a decision. 12 Angry Men has numerous and obvious examples of group process. It is the fact that twelve men must come to a unanimous decision that such examples can be shown. If there were only one or two jurors and/or a unanimous decision did not have to be achieved, any aspect of group process would have been absent. The jurors can be grouped into three main groups: those who are strongly in favor of giving the accused the electric chair, those who are willing to go along with the majority and those who are strongly in favor of being oblivious from the glaring prejudices and racist assumptions and quickly latch onto the moralist; juror #8 and then #9. Jurors #2 #5 and #11 are beneficiaries of group process.   They cannot do alone what is made easier in a group once jurors #8 and #9 have voted for the innocence of the accused. Alone, they could never have done what #8 and #9 had done: stand up to vocal ridicule and to do it alone. But once the first step has been made towards an attempt to judge the facts and not the race, age or background of the accused, jurors #2, #5 and #11 are relieved to vote their consciousness instead of giving into the pressure levied against them by specifically jurors #3 #4 and #10. The negative aspects of group process would have been guilty for defective decision making if it hadn’t been for the fact that juror #8 has the courage to vote for the innocence of the accused. 12 Angry Men will continue to stand the test of time since it speaks eloquently on many different areas: that prejudices are an impediment to everyone in a democratic society and that standing up for a belief, despite knowing the dangers of such a stand, is honorable and should be recognized as courageous. But also, people do in groups what they wouldn’t do in private. Individuality within a group of strong opinions comes at a price and that price is most often ridicule and misunderstanding. If at the beginning of the movie, the foreman had taken a secret vote, juror #8 may not have been the lone dissenter. The jurors that did not put a great deal of value in the democratic process of trial by jury and didn’t feel that a daily salary of $3 was not worthy of their methodical analysis of the facts, were content to go with the majority, no matter what that decision said. But for the jurors who made it a point to shift group process away from a guilty verdict based on racist assumptions and in light of strong ridicule and little monetary compensation, this movie will continue to be studied and appreciated for years to come. 12 Angry Men 12 Angry Men 5%) Task B To what extent could prescriptive models of strategy be used to explain the strategic success of Facebook? (1500 words, 12. 5 %) Total weighting for Assignment 1: 25% Individual Assignment: Marking Guidelines 100 marks = 25% weighting †¢ Critical discussion and application of relevant models and concepts on strategic capabilities to understand the competitive advantage of Facebook (25 marks) †¢ Critical examination of conventional strategic management models to explain the success Facebook (25 marks) Discussion of contemporary models/ studies such as complexity theory, chaos and positive returns economics that may give an insight into Facebook’s explosive growth (25marks) †¢ Academic protocol – quality of academic references, the presentation of these and the overall structuring and format of the business report (25 marks) (Total 100 marks=25%) ————————————†”——————————————————————————– Group Assignment Assignment Brief Task A Using relevant strategic management concepts, conduct an analysis of the film: â€Å"12 Angry Men† ( Dir. Sidney Lumet. Orion-Nova, 1957. Film) and discuss the implications of your findings for decision making in a business organisation. (Max: 1000 words or 5 slides) Task B The Board of Directors of a medium-sized company of your own choosing have recently attended a conference on contemporary developments in strategic thinking. They were particularly impressed by the Blue ocean concept. As consultants, critically discuss the ways in which the Board could shift its current strategy in oder to open up new market possibilities and to create sustainable value for its current and new stakeholders. 2000 words or 10 Slides) . Group presentation guidelines †¢ Students are required to fully participate in and contribute to the development of the Group Presentation. Non-participation and/or non-attendance will result in restriction of marks for this aspect of assessment †¢ The group size will be determined by the module leader and module teaching team and will normally be in the range o f 6-8 group members (normal maximum). In specific circumstances this may be varied. †¢ The formal Group Presentation will be delivered by a maximum of three members of the group. The other group members will be required to answer questions put them by assessors at the end of the presentation. †¢ The absolute maximum presentation period is 20 minutes. This will be timed and there will be NO extensions to this time period. Student Groups are strongly advised to rehearse their presentation to ensure that the time period is strictly adhered to. †¢ Presentations will be stopped by the lecturer/assessment team at the end of 20 minutes †¢ Presentations are followed by Questions which are required to be fielded by/responded to by all the members of the group. The absolute timed period for questions is 10 minutes. †¢ Both times are required to be strictly adhered to. †¢ There is a stipulated Maximum of 15 power point slides in the 20 minute presentation. †¢ Students are required to be aware and are formally advised of all maximum times which will be cut off times with no exceptions. †¢ Power Point printouts with the individual texts provided for the presentation by each student are required to be handed in to the assessment team/lecturer at the time of the presentation immediately before the commencement of the presentation and will be retained by the lecturer/assessment team. The contribution to the Group Presentation is deemed to be equivalent to 3000 words from each student. †¢ The Assessment Weighting for this aspect of the group assessment is 25% (all students in the particular group are awarded the same percentage) Group Presentation Evaluation Criteria 100 marks= 25% weighting Organisation †¢ Topic clea rly stated †¢ Structure and scope of presentation clearly stated †¢ Topic developed in order stated †¢ Speakers summed up main points in conclusion 10 marks Content Knowledge of subject (background of company and storyline of film and their relevance to module) †¢ Application and discussion of relevant conceptual models †¢ Clarity of business concept for Blue Ocean †¢ Implications of analysis for strategic decision-making and company selected †¢ Speakers in control of subject matter 30 marks Confidence †¢ Speakers look relaxed and confident †¢ Professionally dressed †¢ Maintain eye contact †¢ Engage with audience and display awareness of audience response 10 marks Speech †¢ Varied paced †¢ Use of conversational style avoiding jargon and long-winded â€Å"bookish† xplanation of relevant concepts †¢ Appropriate volume †¢ Clear pronunciation and articulation †¢ Accurate grammar 10 marks Visual Aids à ¢â‚¬ ¢ Clear and legible †¢ Introduced at right time †¢ User-friendly, easy to follow and not too much information †¢ Impact on audience †¢ Creativity and novelty 10 marks Timing †¢ Well-timed presentation †¢ Time divided appropriately between tasks 10 marks Discussion management and handling of questions †¢ Respond confidently to questions †¢ Deflect difficult or irrelevant questions 20 marks (Total 100 marks= 25%) Students are required to fully participate in and contribute to the development of the Group Presentation. Marks will be restricted for non-participation and/or non-attendance. Module Learning Outcomes to be Assessed:- Upon successful completion of the assessment, students will be able to: Assignment 1 (Individual): †¢ analyse the aims, concept and role of strategic management Assignment 2 (Group Assignment) †¢ critically analyse how the different perspectives of social science disciplines inform strategic management †¢ evaluate the debates surrounding contemporary strategic issues 12 Angry Men 5%) Task B To what extent could prescriptive models of strategy be used to explain the strategic success of Facebook? (1500 words, 12. 5 %) Total weighting for Assignment 1: 25% Individual Assignment: Marking Guidelines 100 marks = 25% weighting †¢ Critical discussion and application of relevant models and concepts on strategic capabilities to understand the competitive advantage of Facebook (25 marks) †¢ Critical examination of conventional strategic management models to explain the success Facebook (25 marks) Discussion of contemporary models/ studies such as complexity theory, chaos and positive returns economics that may give an insight into Facebook’s explosive growth (25marks) †¢ Academic protocol – quality of academic references, the presentation of these and the overall structuring and format of the business report (25 marks) (Total 100 marks=25%) ————————————†”——————————————————————————– Group Assignment Assignment Brief Task A Using relevant strategic management concepts, conduct an analysis of the film: â€Å"12 Angry Men† ( Dir. Sidney Lumet. Orion-Nova, 1957. Film) and discuss the implications of your findings for decision making in a business organisation. (Max: 1000 words or 5 slides) Task B The Board of Directors of a medium-sized company of your own choosing have recently attended a conference on contemporary developments in strategic thinking. They were particularly impressed by the Blue ocean concept. As consultants, critically discuss the ways in which the Board could shift its current strategy in oder to open up new market possibilities and to create sustainable value for its current and new stakeholders. 2000 words or 10 Slides) . Group presentation guidelines †¢ Students are required to fully participate in and contribute to the development of the Group Presentation. Non-participation and/or non-attendance will result in restriction of marks for this aspect of assessment †¢ The group size will be determined by the module leader and module teaching team and will normally be in the range o f 6-8 group members (normal maximum). In specific circumstances this may be varied. †¢ The formal Group Presentation will be delivered by a maximum of three members of the group. The other group members will be required to answer questions put them by assessors at the end of the presentation. †¢ The absolute maximum presentation period is 20 minutes. This will be timed and there will be NO extensions to this time period. Student Groups are strongly advised to rehearse their presentation to ensure that the time period is strictly adhered to. †¢ Presentations will be stopped by the lecturer/assessment team at the end of 20 minutes †¢ Presentations are followed by Questions which are required to be fielded by/responded to by all the members of the group. The absolute timed period for questions is 10 minutes. †¢ Both times are required to be strictly adhered to. †¢ There is a stipulated Maximum of 15 power point slides in the 20 minute presentation. †¢ Students are required to be aware and are formally advised of all maximum times which will be cut off times with no exceptions. †¢ Power Point printouts with the individual texts provided for the presentation by each student are required to be handed in to the assessment team/lecturer at the time of the presentation immediately before the commencement of the presentation and will be retained by the lecturer/assessment team. The contribution to the Group Presentation is deemed to be equivalent to 3000 words from each student. †¢ The Assessment Weighting for this aspect of the group assessment is 25% (all students in the particular group are awarded the same percentage) Group Presentation Evaluation Criteria 100 marks= 25% weighting Organisation †¢ Topic clea rly stated †¢ Structure and scope of presentation clearly stated †¢ Topic developed in order stated †¢ Speakers summed up main points in conclusion 10 marks Content Knowledge of subject (background of company and storyline of film and their relevance to module) †¢ Application and discussion of relevant conceptual models †¢ Clarity of business concept for Blue Ocean †¢ Implications of analysis for strategic decision-making and company selected †¢ Speakers in control of subject matter 30 marks Confidence †¢ Speakers look relaxed and confident †¢ Professionally dressed †¢ Maintain eye contact †¢ Engage with audience and display awareness of audience response 10 marks Speech †¢ Varied paced †¢ Use of conversational style avoiding jargon and long-winded â€Å"bookish† xplanation of relevant concepts †¢ Appropriate volume †¢ Clear pronunciation and articulation †¢ Accurate grammar 10 marks Visual Aids à ¢â‚¬ ¢ Clear and legible †¢ Introduced at right time †¢ User-friendly, easy to follow and not too much information †¢ Impact on audience †¢ Creativity and novelty 10 marks Timing †¢ Well-timed presentation †¢ Time divided appropriately between tasks 10 marks Discussion management and handling of questions †¢ Respond confidently to questions †¢ Deflect difficult or irrelevant questions 20 marks (Total 100 marks= 25%) Students are required to fully participate in and contribute to the development of the Group Presentation. Marks will be restricted for non-participation and/or non-attendance. Module Learning Outcomes to be Assessed:- Upon successful completion of the assessment, students will be able to: Assignment 1 (Individual): †¢ analyse the aims, concept and role of strategic management Assignment 2 (Group Assignment) †¢ critically analyse how the different perspectives of social science disciplines inform strategic management †¢ evaluate the debates surrounding contemporary strategic issues

The Role of the Internet and Crime Research Paper

The Role of the Internet and Crime - Research Paper Example Such information attracts criminals. Moreover internet is the fastest way for information transfer. It is very important for criminals. Also such types of criminal activity as computer viruses and malicious codes, cyber stalking and information warfare can damage our personal information. All these criminal activities are greatly influenced by the Internet, because it is the world of a great amount of information, in many cases unprotected information, and it is the place where person can stay incognito (Johanna Granville). Let’s take a closer look how the Internet aids criminal activity. â€Å"Work-at-home† schemes. In this scheme victim finds a job opportunity or receive an e-mail from fake company. The job is part-time and has a generous salary. The main â€Å"job† responsibilities are to rewrite articles or translate texts or to be middleman for charity organization that collects donations for victims of a natural disaster. Then the scammer asks the person for her personal information such as bank account numbers, Social Security number and date of birth. As the fraudsters says all these personal information is needed for hiring process, but in fact with these information they can monitor the victim’s account balances. When a big amount of money appears, the fraudster drains the account. Drug trafficking is another example of the Internet influence on criminal activity. Cyber world has become very popular among drug dealers. They use the Internet cafes to arrange their deals and courier web sites to track the drugs. They even create chat rooms with restricted access in order to swap recipes for amphetamine. One more example worth of remembering is changing information among terrorists through the Internet. They can easily plan their actions no matter where they are. It is better than phone, because you can stay incognito longer and it is harder to find such kind of information. As the Internet is World Wide it

European Convention on Human Rights Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 4500 words

European Convention on Human Rights - Essay Example In explaining the proceedings of Mike Russell against Wicket World in the High Court alleging that his right to privacy was infringed various provisions of the law in the Convention and Human Rights Act provide an important pieces of reference for consideration as a basis on which both parties would argue out their case. Basis on which Mike Russell would bring his claim according to the Convention on Human Rights and Human Rights 1998 is grounded on Article 8 on Right to Privacy. Basically, this Article stipulates the respect for private or family life. In this respect then, the privacy of Mike ought not to have been infringed especially when the confidential information about his health status was leaked to the Wicket World by the Cloisters private clinic. The prevention or disclosure of information received in private (Article 10) was overstepped and it justifies the claim. This is therefore outright that his privacy on health matter became public creating an argument that he and h is fellow team mates failed to show case a standard and successive competition in South Africa. Article 12 Protocol 1 stipulates about possessions enjoyment. This Article argues that every individual can peacefully enjoy his possessions and no party can curtail the enjoyment of the same. The Claimant took to account that it was his sole right to enjoy and make himself happy while engaging in cricket action while in South Africa as the law explains. Regardless in whichever way of enjoyment as far as it does not override any other law of the land had a right to enjoy in any way he wished and with any person. Mike Russell having partied with local prostitute during the night passion was just enjoying his right. This also infringed his right to privacy where it was revealed the caliber of the class type that he enjoyed with. The basis on which Wicket World would defend the claim would be founded on a number of provisions of the law as enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act, 1998.1 The claim according to Article 8 on right to privacy is however limited by Article 18 that limits on use of restriction of rights. This therefore overrides the limits to the privacy of the individual (Mike Russell) where exercising his privacy in a manner that resulted to moral decadence while on a public activity .Wicket World was meant to cover and provide information on the activities engaged to the cricket team and its their role to report in the best interest of the public even where the participants actions are in question. According to section 6 of Human Rights Act 1998, it is unlawful for a public authority to act in a way which is incompatible with conventional rights but the Cloisters was a private clinic and it was not bound by this section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 hence it exercised discretion to release information on the health status of Mike Russell Article 12 provides that individuals enjoy rights to peaceful possessions enjoyment but this right is not absolute and hence qualified. It is imperative to establish that the ri ght to private life for enjoyment is qualified in the sense that infringement in this basic right may be justified necessary in order to protect some important general public interest. It therefore explains that it was in the interest of the citizens of England to be represented in the best way possible by the cricket team in the competitions rather than the poor performance that the team produced. 1European Commission on Human Rights and Human Rights Act, 1998 Playing without sober mind due to alcohol influence cannot be merely assumed that it was their absolute rights to enjoy in the expense of the country that needed them to

Critical Rhetorical Analysis Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 2

Critical Rhetorical Analysis - Essay Example In Ted Talks: Making Global Labor Fair, Auret Van Heerden, uses several technical devices to make his speech. He uses rhetorical questions like â€Å"How come the U.S. Food and Drug Administration allowed this to happen? How did the Chinese State Agency for Food and Drugs allow this to happen?† (Auret, 2010). He uses rhetorical questions to make the audience aware of the government’s responsibility, as well as its failure in protecting worker’s human rights. The rhetorical questions he poses, he answers. He uses this persuasive technique to both inform and rouse the interest of the audience. Auret also uses contrast to pass his message across. For example, â€Å"We all love chocolate. We buy it for our kids. Eighty percent of the cocoa comes from Cote dIvoire and Ghana, and its harvested by children. Cote dIvoire, we have a huge problem of child slaves. Children have been trafficked from other conflict zones to come and work on the coffee plantations.† He uses the rhetoric strategy to draw a sharp contrast between the severities of the abuse of children’s human rights of those used as slaves to harvest the cocoa used to make the chocolate. The technique may fail due to its inclination to evoke emotions of the listeners. It is, however, a good strategy to show the difference between the children harvesting in the cocoa farms and those consuming the chocolate. The employment of these two rhetorical devices is valid because they are used in appropriate instances. For example, before Auret asked the question as to why the governments in America and China do not stand to protect the rights of its citizens, he had already laid out facts that show a violation of human rights. He used the technique to bring to light the inadequacies of the state laws in the international policy fields. He also used the technique to introduce his new argument about how the multinationals can be the solutions to the problem by employing a

Romantic Poetry Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Romantic Poetry - Research Paper Example The Romantic Movement thus became a revolutionary phase in the history of English poetry. Keats once said â€Å"I think I shall be among the English poets after my death†. Mathew Arnold commenting upon this statement said† He is with Shakespeare â€Å".T. S Eliot in spite of his reservations and qualifications about romantic poetry, in general, conceded that the kind of poetry which Keats wrote seems â€Å"much more the kind of Shakespeare†. He also said that Keats had, like Shakespeare, a philosophic mind†. It is indeed a credit to Keats that he has been compared to Shakespeare by some of the most eminent critics of our time. The essential quality of Keats as a poet is his sensitiveness to beauty. With singleness of aim he seeks for â€Å"the principle of beauty in all things. Poets like Milton, Wordsworth and Shelly also worshipped, but they had secondary moral intentions. He worships beauty with the unreasoning rapture of a child or a lover. Keats poetr y has a sensuous richness. All that appeals to the senses is vividly described in his poems. In early poems, the sensuous richness is too great. This is merely the eager lavishness of youth rejoicing in its abundance, and not yet disciplined by good taste. Once Keats expressed his love of sensuousness and delights by preferring sensation to thought, â€Å"O for a life of sensation rather than of thought†. None of Keats predecessors had the same keen eagerness as had Keats to taste all earthly delights to burst joy’s grape against his palate fine† and to convey in verse the wealth of his sensations. By describing life as it impinged upon the sensuous, Keats greatly widened the sensuous realm of poetry. The finest of the four odes written in the spring of 1819the ‘Ode to A Nightingale’ is the passionately human and personal. He did not think about the particular bird of Hampstead but of its song which had been beautiful and delightful for centuries. Th e poem as we know was composed in the morning and but in the ode, the Queen moon is on her throne and the Nightingale is a type of the race imagined as singing in a far-off scene of woodland mystery, of verdurous gloom and winding mossy way. The poet would like to escape from the woes of the world,†Where youth grows pale and specter-thin, to the fairy land, to the †¦melodious plot, Of beeches green and shadows numberless†. Ode to the nightingale, though not so classic in its perfection, is richer in emotion and is truly romantic in haunting suggestiveness and melody. It might even be said that the ‘ode to autumn is to the Nightingale, what the poetry of Pope is to Keats. The Nightingale has true romantic spirit, attempts the impossible and like all romantic poetry pleases us by its very glorious failure. This ode is deeply charged with human feeling and the mood here is very intense. Crushed down by a personal loss, the poet is tortured by the thought of insta bility of man’s estate on earth and his continual suffering and decay in the world. The enjoyed sensuous experience is shown in the poem ‘The Ode To Nightingale’. Sidney Colvin regards it as â€Å"one among the glories of English poetry†. The song of the nightingale is the first experience that gives him

Training Module Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Training Module - Assignment Example With regard to project management timeline, it can be apparently observed that there pertain numerous scopes as well as risks relating to the development of the training plan. In this regard, the scopes might encompass generation of greater customer value and employee motivation among others. On the other hand, the risks might comprise having negative attitude towards the organization and unwillingness of the leaders among others. It is to be stated that different sorts of activities like interactive learning, demonstrations and analysis of case studies can be executed in order to make the training plan more effectual for Tesco. 2. Identification and Rationale of the Goals/Objectives Goals/objectives in the training module are the major considerations that can support an organization to accomplish its desired expectations (Gullett & Bedi, 2007). Therefore, following are the major objectives that require to be undertaken in order to build an effective training module. Increasing Produ ctivity Increasing productivity will be a primary objective of the overall training module which can eventually enable Tesco to strive the capability of each individual employee within the organization. The main reason behind this objective is to maintain and develop the present brand position along with long-term sustainability of the organization in the highly competitive retail industry (Koller,Harvey, & Magnotta, 2010). Establishing Communication between Employees and Working Environment The objective of establishing effective communication between the personnel and the working environment can deliver adequate support to an organization towards developing the performance level of each individual. The rationale of this particular objective is to increase the amount of coordination amid the employees and raise operational effectiveness by a greater level (Wilson, Stine & Bowen 2009). Minimizing Cost and Time Cost and time minimization is often regarded as the major goals of traini ng module that can enable an organization to increase its revenue and accomplish superior competitive position over its chief business market participants. In terms of rationale, it can be affirmed that the objective of minimizing cost and time has been taken into concern for Tesco due to the augmentation of extreme business market competition in the respective industry and alterations in the business environment (Wilson, Stine & Bowen 2009). 3. Outcomes and Rationale of the Training Module In relation to the proposed training module for Tesco, it can be anticipated that three major outcomes can significantly reinforce the performance of the organization. The potential outcomes from the training module have been discussed in the following section. Adequate Control of the Process The training module concerning electronic and online technological aspect can improve the capability of Tesco to obtain greater control and efficiency in its overall operational as well as functional process (Ellis, 2009). Increase Knowledge and Capability The training module concerning electronic and online technology can emphasize upon providing greater scope for innovation and also formulating effective ways to meet the ultimate objectives of the organization at large (Ellis, 2009). Productive Working Environment The nature of the proposed training module can be recognized as that it has been designed to make aware the employees to become much

Wells Cathedral Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Wells Cathedral - Essay Example The site was founded as a church in about 705 A.D., and the beginning of the present cathedral originated under Bishop Reginald de Bohun, who died in 1191 (ed. David Nash Ford, 1924). The building of the present cathedral continued until 1239, under Bishop Jocelyn of Wells. The decoration of the West Front was completed in about 1260. The entire West Front is a three-dimensional storyboard, even marking major liturgical holy days and seasons. The open space of the walkway leading to the West Front with wide swaths of green grass gives one the chance to gain a perspective from distance or close proximity. There is a feeling of freedom in this area, but also one of magnificence and reverence. On the exterior, the eyes lift to the many statues of saints and angels; each wall depicts the honor or story of biblical figures in intricate detail. The closer one gets to the cathedral, the more awe-inspired one is at the sheer majesty of this building; one can feel the presence of the hundreds of masons and stone carvers that crafted each detail. The sounds and smells of the street market close to the cathedral fade as all attention is drawn to the sheer magnitude of the West Front, invoking powerful feelings of being in the presence of master stone masons by the hundreds whose spirits still stand guard. Upon entering the nave, the sight of inverted arches within is almost shocking. These innovative arches were installed in the 14th century when it was discovered that the massive 160-foot central tower was causing its supporting pillars to sink into the ground under its weight. The inverted arches solved the problem of supporting the tower and have held up for seven hundred years. The arches give the interior of the cathedral a sense of being alive, observing pilgrims, visitors, students and worshippers as much as they are observing it. One immediately gets the feeling that the cathedral has recorded the presence and movements and activities of every person who has passed through its doors. The eyes are immediately drawn to the choir with its massive organ pipes and welcoming open space at the end of what feels like a narrow and demanding passage through the nave; walk through the center and you will be rewarded, it seems to say. Walk the good path. Looking up, the fan vaulting gives a sense of solace and praise. There is gentleness amongst the power expressed in the architecture. Shadows move across the fan vaulting from the hundreds of stained and leaded glass windows, and it is difficult sometimes for the eyes to discern whether the carvings are moving in relation to the observer or the other way around. The acoustics are masterfully executed in the placement of each stone and arch; footsteps echo, voices, even hushed, can be heard clearly. When the massive pipe organ begins to play, one can feel the vibrant sound through the body and the church seems to come alive. Upon descending the staircase to the Chapter House, the stone stairs reflect centuries of use; they can be slippery, and having to slow down while descending brings attention to the incredible acoustics in the stairwell. One recording was done there already, a haunting song sung in Gaelic with no sound effects needed. The natural acoustics of this particular stairwell provide an ethereal echo to the voice, making it a natural attraction to singers. Here one lingers, the sense of being still in a place of movement and the chill of retracting from the sunlight