Author: admin

Assessment Criteria:
Read the following case study and then answer the questions that follow. Be sure to directly relate your answers to the specific details given in the case study. You are asked to produce a written report. It is vital that in the composition of this report, you supplement any arguments you make with appropriate references. PLAGIARISM WILL BE HEAVILY PENALISED, please don’t waste your time and ours by copying from books or the Internet – it is invariably detected.

Make sure you provide a full and comprehensive list of references.

MOD (Ministry of Defence) Main Assignment Case Study
Military Systems tend to involve large numbers of widely dispersed people who need to be ready within moments to perform difficult functions within life threatening military battlefield context of use. Even when the initial system meets the client’s requirements at the outset, the service design is not always thought through. That is, when tested under “real” conditions of war such systems fail to perform adequately, due to the fact that no given simulation can optimally match what is known as the chaos of war. Supporting novel technologies can also prove to be problematic in theatre. Obviously IT systems are embedded within many MOD operations and these systems are particularly prone to a lack of quality and robustness due to the harsh conditions under which these systems are required to operate. One major MOD contractor of biometric technologies to the MOD, Steria has learnt that it is essential to build as complete a picture as possible in order to ensure that these systems are robust, usable and deliver within battlefield conditions. “We have a very good understanding of the environmental, operational and cultural issues that have to be taken into consideration when delivering leading edge IT services. In particular we have to fully understand the users of the system and their operational needs if the systems are to perform and continue to perform as expected under battlefield conditions.
One specific example of Steria’s work in support of military operations is the biometric access control – a successful example of the Urgent Operational Requirements Process supported by reference to ITIL (Information Technology Infrastructure Library). Steriadeveloped an deployed the first UK biometric access control system for the UK MOD in 2006. This was known as the biometric Identification Verification (BIV) System. The BIV leverages facial and fingerprint biometrics and was designed to be fully supportable by the military user. Steria deployed CONDO (Contractors on Deployed Operations) to carry out significant changes to the system and to support continuous improvement. Steria evolved BIV into a more complex solution called the Biometric Data Capture System (BDCS) in 2009 through a continuous improvement process.
The fully evolved system leverages facial, iris, fingerprint as well as leading edge palm biometric capabilities. BDCS uses multiple biometric criteria to check and guarantee the identity of an individual. Specifically, the user biometrics are captured through an enrolment process based on mobile as well as fixed line technology components that can be interconnected to suit heterogeneous deployment contexts and communications availability.
Steria provides engineering, service management and support back in the UK, and critically, provides training and support, deploying to operational (i.e. battlefield contexts of use) anywhere in the world as required. The system is currently operational across 22 military sites with a core, forensic level, biometric database that can be extended as required. The system is designed to provide a reliable, high availability security solution.

KEY POINTS:

 The BDCS project combines identity checking, biometric site access control and mobile biometric capabilities; with HRS responsible for working with global biometric partners, L1, to integrate a number of additional key functions within the mobile platform.

 The system identifies individuals as they enter UK Controlled Bases and provides confirmation of identity via multi-modal biometric enrolment and search capabilities. Individuals enroll both iris’, 10 fingerprints, facial image and biographic data.

 Viewed by the MoD as essential to help secure and control access to military facilities in the field; BDCS is currently operational across a number military sites, and provides an integral mobile biometric capability that can be scaled to meet requirements.

 BDCS is the second successful project delivered by HRS to the MoD. In 2006, HRS worked with Steria to deliver a Biometric Identity Verification (BIV) project which provided the foundations for the BDCS program.

“This was a highly complex and challenging project to deliver. HRS were involved from the early design stages, through development to delivery. HRS took a pragmatic approach to really understand the users and their environment, ensuring the delivered system met the requirements and all functionality.” – Tim Lammers, Biometrics Project Manager for the MoD
____________________________________________

Assessment Criteria:

General guidance

Quality of ideas, evidence of literature review, demonstration of up to date knowledge, together with appropriate comprehensive referencing is of more importance than the precise length of submission. The ability to critically analyse a case-study and /or setting and ability to apply knowledge so as to identify solutions to potential problem is essential. Length of submission should be between 1500 and 2000 words.

Further Guidance: [100 marks available/pass mark = 40]

The dangers of getting the balance right as between security, easy access and reduction of risk in demanding military contexts of use are to be the main focus of your response to the following tasks. All arguments presented are expected to be supported by evidence. You should answer each question in the order given below. Full citations (referencing) are needed for any information sources you identify.

a) Steria states a significant cost savings of a dedicated biometric solution over traditional password administration for the MoD case. One feasible solution might be the combination of PKI with biometrics for a set of security systems within MoD. Critically discuss benefits and limitations of such an approach to encrypt and digitally sign network traffic in that particular context.

[40 marks]

b) Give a full rational behind the alternatives to biometric templates MoD can use. What are the limitations and risks of template(s) usage in that particular case? Fully discuss their suitability and any inherent dangers or other weaknesses applied.
[30 marks]

c) Discuss the optimal means of protection at the end-user level (PC) that Steria can employ as part of the security policy imposed. Critically present your findings and give full arguments on their suitability in that particular scenario.

[30 marks]

MARKING GRID

A70-100% Outstanding/Excellent quality of ideas arguments. Very good grasp of technical aspects such as cryptographic methods, passwords and biometric techniques. Fully referenced submission. Clear and consistent demonstration of ability to relate arguments to the specifics of the case-study.

B60-69% Very good grasp of arguments and cryptographic methods, passwords
and biometrics. Well referenced submission. Consistent demonstration
of ability to relate to the specifics of the case-study.

C 50-59% Adequate grasp of arguments. Well referenced submission. Clear demonstration of ability to relate arguments to the specifics of the case-study.

D40-49% Barely adequate grasp of the arguments and weak but acceptable supportive evidence. Citations are adequate and some evidence of the ability to relate arguments to the specifics of the case study.

Below 40% Failure to meet the standard as specified above

 

The Norton Introduction to literature
Base on what your read on the attach file answer the following questions with your own personal opinion. In Amy Tan’s “A Pair of Tickets,” how is the

external setting (China) important in relation to what happens internally to the narrator, June May? Max word: 240 word (paragraph) only source allowed

to use: (The Norton Introduction to Literature Kelly J. Mays.) attached to this file.

http://writerslabs.com/download/839046739_support_a_pair_of_tickets_qSyXvU75FBEz2gT.pdf/a_pair_of_tickets.pdf

 

 

 

USGlobalEcon
1. What is a Free Market Economy? Give an example of how goods and services are distributed. (5 points)

 

2. What is a Command Economy? Give an example of two countries that has/had this type of economic system? (5 points)

 

3. What is a Mixed Economy? Why is the US considered mixed? (5 points)

 

Critical Thinking – (2 parts) 15 points
Read about North Korea’s economy at: http://www.heritage.org/index/country/northkorea
a. How does a Command or Planned Economy affect the citizens of a country that maintains this type of economy?
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/rick-newman/2013/04/12/heres-how-lousy-life-is-in-north-korea

 

b. With the information you have found, which type of Economic System do you think would work the best: Free Market, Command or Mixed? Please

support your answers and use your own words. Make me believe your opinion.

 

 

 

 

 

Education
1. Pick only one week’s topic from Module 1 (Either COOPERATIVE LEARNING, TALK, and DISCIPLINE -or- LEARNING STYLES: Multiple Intelligences, Meeting

Needs of Diversity)
2. Write a 1-2 page critical takeaway from the week’s readings
Please note:
You will prepare a one page/double spaced/ Times 12 pt font written response to the weekly readings, which are “critical takeaways,” which will be

graded based on the extent to which you analyze the text. A summary or description of the text will result in an unsatisfactory grade.
Choose an issue from the readings; develop the issue as well as your own point of view towards the issue.
Ask yourself as you do the weekly readings: is this reading causing me to think differently about this issue and if so how?
Refine, expand or refute the author’s position.
Include any questions that the reading has raised for you.

Which is bigger, The Big One or Oblivion?
Using differentiation find the difference between maximum and minimum heights for both the roller coasters.

The height of the Oblivion coaster can be determined for 10 seconds after the coaster comes out of a loop by this polynomial

Calculate maximum and minimum heights using differentiation then draw the graph (by hand)
Confirm the factors of the Oblivion Coaster using factor theorem.

The brochure for The Big One coaster says that the height of the coaster can be determined by this polynomial model for the first 10 seconds

Calculate maximum and minimum heights using differentiation then draw the graph (by hand)

Compare the underground areas using the Trapezium rule and then confirm the areas using definite integration.

 

Internship Reflective Paper

One of the most useful tools in your learning is to reflect on your actual experience and integrate this into your personal growth as an education professional.
Now that you have completed your internship, reflect on the following questions.

1. What were your responsibilities at your site? Did you think you were prepared to manage them?
2. What were the positive and negative aspects of your internship?
3. What impact did the internship have on your personal philosophy of education?
4. What was the most important thing you learned about yourself during this internship? What can/will you do with this information now?

 

 

1). Be sure to identify your one or two sentence conclusion by changing the font to blue.
2). Find an outside Media, Government or Academic source that makes an argument that agrees with your point of view. You will need to cite this source.

When you do very briefly outline their argument changing the font to pink.
Remember that this outline should include BOTH THE CONCLUSION OF THE OTHER AUTHOR BUT ALSO SOME OF THE REASONS THEY GIVE. Point out a reason they give

for their argument that is not in yours but with which you agree.
3). Include this argument within the overall argument you make and be sure to give some evidence for this overall argument as well.

Assignment:

The argument of this week’s documentary is that our economy has caused us to become addicted to plastic because plastics play a critical role in our

consumption economy. Do you agree or disagree with this thesis? Why or why not?
Addicted to Plastic:
https://topdocumentaryfilms.com/addicted-plastic/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74VsQMtphBU (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

 

 

Discuss how the mnemonic “DIAPPERS” helps with assessing an elderly patient experiencing incontinence.

 

 

I. Definition – How To Do the Developmental Readings Assignment:
Complete a developmental reading log that is a special kind of annotated bibliography “developmental” by having each reading include 3 elements:
A. Quote/Paraphrase: A direct quote citation from a source in quotation marks, ending with a page number (p. #); or a paraphrase of the author’s idea in the student’s own words.
B. Additive/Variant Analysis: Evaluate the author’s idea either as additive, or adding to the student’s worldview and perspective on the topic; or variant, meaning adding to the student” s knowledge but disagreeing with the student’s worldview or perspective on the topic. Give support for your analysis to demonstrate critical thinking.
C. Contextualization: Apply the idea to your profession, calling, or personal life explaining how you can use the new idea to develop as a scholar and world changer. You can also include continuing questions you have.

II. Requirements:
At least 5 of the sources must be from journals dated within the last 3 years.
Readings may include new ideas, concepts, constructs, assumptions, operational definitions, and subject jargon which add to the counter/knowledge or challenge present understanding.
Example:
Source 1
1. Reading
2. Reading
Source 2
3. Reading
4. Reading
Source 3
5. Reading, Etc.

500 word speech which follows this structure:
– identifying the problems and challenges of leadership within the case
– defining leadership and discussing theory and a model whilst making a link to the case
– providing recommendations (very important)

Files uploaded:
“Case” – is the physical case itself
“Case Facts” – are what I’ve drawn out of the case to be important facts
“Leadership theory” – is all the theory, definitions and models provided about leadership and are crucially important to be used in the second

point i made about structure above
Case Facts

Chip Brownlee – CEO and chairman of Galvatrens
Harry Mart – COO of Galvatrens
Arch Carter – lead director of Galvatrens
Terry Samples – Mike’s boss vice president of sales
Mike Fields – Plaintiff (accuser)

Arch calls chip and says he received his voice mail. Chip responds that former divisional sales manager has filed a lawsuit against the company,

claiming he was wrongfully terminated for trying to report an illegal scheme to increase sales.

After reading through the lawsuit copy Chip had gotten a perspective on the multiple departures in Sales during the past 4 weeks.

The plaintiff was Mike Fields, who left Galvatrens 3 weeks earlier. He claimed that he came across a plan developed by another divisional sales

manager Greg Wilson.

Mike states that Greg Wilson had proposed shipping goods to a few of his bigger customers, billing them and booking the sales but with a side

agreement that they wouldn’t have to take ownership. They could also return the shipments at any time, and would get a 2% discount on any goods

they accepted and paid for in the following quarter. The purpose of this scheme was to meet quarterly sales targets and trigger bonuses.

Chip further explains to Arch that Mike found out accidentally and since he didn’t know who else might be involved he confidentially contacted

Harry the COO of Galvatrens. He said Harry never followed up with him and instead referred the matter to Mike’s boss Terry Samples.

Until a week ago before Terry left abruptly to take another job he was vice president of sales. Mike alleges that Terry told him his performance

was not up to snuff and that he’d have to accept a demotion and a transfer to Indianapolis if he wanted to stay with the company.

Mike believes that the demotion was because of exposing the illegal scheme and Terry knew as a divorced father with joint custody of his kids

that Mike couldn’t leave time.

So, was Terry involved?

Chip states that at that point they didn’t know whether Terry was involved and whether Greg followed through with the scheme.

Greg resigned about a month ago. He took a job in California.

When Terry left last week, Chip was wondering whether the confusion in sales was a coincidence
Mike also says the company’s channels for confidential reporting of misconduct don’t work very well as the company made it easier for Terry to

retaliate.

A board meeting was to be planned.

The board was delighted when Chip agreed to be CEO of Galvatrens in Jan 1997. He previously led Paloreq a pharmaceutical and medical devices

company during a period of tremendous growth. He attracted a team of stellar managers through the same sorts of “people” initiatives he would

launch at Galvatrens.

The year before Galvatren hired Chip it reached a deadlock with CEO Walter Nickels. Nickels ran in an authoritarian hierarchical style. As the

company grew the board urged he delegate more and instil fresh blood into the executive team and he resisted.

With the company deteriorating Chip stepped in. he expanded on Galvatrens core businesses in home health and personal beauty to nutritional and

wellness products, products for infants and the home. Revenues, earnings and share price increased steadily.

Chip sought a COO who could focus on the company’s day to day operations. Harry Mart who Chip lured away from a competitor fit the role nicely.

Chip also worked hard to change the company culture. Early in his tenure, he announced an ambitious initiative to make Galvatrens an

organization that excelled in listening to and learning from its employees to achieve preferred employer status in the consumer products

industry.

Chip replaced the general counsel with Sydney Baydown. She was Chip’s general counsel atPaloreq. At her urging Chip upgraded procedures for

uncovering misconduct and solving conflicts in the workplace. Chip gave Sydney approval for a firm to review Galvatrens existing system.

Following the consultants’ advice Galvatrens instituted wan open-door policy for raising workplace concerns. While the policy encourages

employees to go to their immediate supervisors, it emphasises that they could approach any manager at any level for assistance. The police

included a specific ban on retaliation.

The company also included a toll-free 24-hour hotline for reporting violations of the code of conduct, added an ethics officer to its ranks and

launched an ethics awareness campaign.

After the Sarbanese Oxley Act, the company mandated that the ethics officer inform the board’s audit committee of any allegation of financial

wrongdoing or other possible code violations that involved company executives

Two of the consultant’s recommendations weren’t followed: one was that the company should hire an ombudsman and that the board should make a

director or committee of directors responsible for overseeing ethics. Focus groups and interview reveal that many employees don’t feel

comfortable raising concerns through formal management. Having a truly impartial ombudsman who reported to the CEO and board would make

employees more likely to come forward. The ombudsman allows people to report issues confidentially and offers informal means for helping resolve

issues.

These ideas were opposed by Dale Willis the senior vice president of HR at the time.

Chip also agreed to Dale’s request of delaying training needed for the new open-door policy until HR completes existing programs. Other

priorities arose and this initiative was forgotten.

Three days after Mikes lawsuit had been filed chip opened a conference call with the 8 directors he could round up. Harry and Dan Richardson

were away.

Syd was asked to brief the group. She said, “we’ve confirmed that Greg Wilson pitched a channel-stuffing scheme to two of his biggest customers.

However, at this point it isn’t know if it got further than that. We’ve also determined Mikes performance declined considerably in his last 10

months here. Records show that his team missed sales targets by a growing amount during that period. He had been unreachable during business

hours with increasing frequency and had missed important meetings. Prior to that though he was a solid producer. Mike’s lawyer hadn’t disputed

the change in performance claims but claimed it was due to a nasty custody battle between him and his ex-wife. Terrys reaction to the slide in

performance had been brutal contributing to Mikes emotional stress. ‘

Given the above info the company intend to deny the charges in the charges of Mikes lawsuit and have an independent investigation on the

channel-stuffing allegation. Syd was asked to be the liaison between the outside investigators and the board

Shelia the chair of the board’s audit committee asked what should the board’s role be in the investigation? To who should the investigators

report? Do we need a special committee for something like this?

Arch the lead director said that should be sorted out but first there need to be a focus on responding to the lawsuit on how does battling a guy

who attempted to raise some allegations square with our missions and values? There are giant reputational risks on every front in this

situation. If this isn’t handed well we could hurt ourselves, with employees, customers and stakeholders.

A board meeting was scheduled for six weeks where more facts would be available and they would be in a better position to weigh their options

The board met six weeks later and Harry the COO was absent again because of continuing problems at factories damaged by hurricanes.

The independent investigators had reported back stating that the customers had simply ignored Greg Wilson’s channel stuffing proposal. Terry had

forced Greg out when he learned about the plan, but he allowed Greg to resign and hadn’t told anyone else about the scheme. Greg has not

responded to the investigators and Terry’s reply was through his lawyer saying he’d review the questions and respond appropriately.
Investigators also confirmed that Mikes performance had declined and Terry role in it was Murky. Mike had done his best to raise alarm on the

scheme. The judge had allowed discovery to begin and the company had initiated settlement discussions with Mike.

Dan was furious that they didn’t hear about the scheme earlier from Terry or their customer and was wondering whether other people in Sales knew

about it. He stated that it doesn’t seem we have a handle on these kinds of problems.

Syd pointed that in many cases employees that see misconduct in their organisations don’t come forward and that the company has come a long way

since Chip took over.

Shelia said but clearly the good things already put in place like the open-door policy and the code of conduct aren’t working. Harry didn’t take

the original complaint seriously and just passed the buck. Nothing came in through the hotline. And no one contacted the ethics officer or HR.

Arch stated that is it realistic to expect Harry to deal with this after all he’s responsible for?

Shelia stated it is not expected of him to personally investigate issues that come to him but he should follow up and refer this issue to the

ethics officer.

Chip states that he’s kept Harry plate full and has asked Syd to think about how we can ensure that things like this don’t fall through the

cracks again.

Shelia and Arch met for breakfast the next morning.

Arch said he’s thinking they need a board retreat. I don’t think we’ve met our oversight responsibilities. We were not ready for something like

this.

Shelia agrees and said once we got into this thing it seemed clear we as a board didn’t know what our role was supposed to be. And I certainly

took it for granted that Chip and Syd had established the board for anonymous reporting that the audit committee and the full board for that

matter needs to provide oversight.

Arch said it’s got to show up in our self-evaluation this year. And several aspects must be considered when evaluating Chip and deciding what we

should ask of him in the future. he also says after putting all these procedures in place why did only one guy come forward – and he ends up

suing us? When the new surveys come out I’ll be curious to know if were really improving morale especially in Sales where there’s been so much

turnover.

Shelia said she agrees about Chip but the person who worries her is Harry. Harry may be technically strong but he has got to be able to take

care of people, and he’s just not good at it. I think there need to be consequences for Harry and new expectations for Chip

Leadership

Skills of a leader
Skill 1: Tuning in to the environment: Sensing needs and opportunities
Skill 2: Kaleidoscope thinking: Stimulating breakthrough ideas
Skill 3: Setting the theme: Communicating inspiring visions
Skill 4: Enlisting backers and supporters: Getting buy‐in and building coalitions
Skill 5: Developing the dream: Nurturing the working team
Skill 6: Mastering the difficult middles: Persisting and persevering
Skill 7: Celebrating accomplishments: Making everyone a hero

Key triggers of leadership development
1. Significant leadership challenge at an early age
2. Positive role models
3. Being ‘thrown in at the deep end’
4. Mentoring, coaching and consultant relationships
5. Experiential leadership development courses
6. Negative role models
7. MBA and professional qualifications
8. International or multicultural exposure
9. Voluntary and community work
10. Team sports

Change leadership
Different to ‘formal’ leadership
• involves specific interventions aimed at motivating behavioural change among employees
• Focuses on actions and behaviours rather than formal ‘positions’
• Judged by the impact those actions and behaviours exert on the change process

Core tasks of a change leader
1. Develop and articulate clear and consistent sense of purpose and direction for the organisation
2. Establish demanding performance expectations
3. Enable upward communication
4. Forge an emotional bond between employeesand the organisation
5. Develop future change leaders

Core roles of a change leader
1. Energising and instilling a readiness for change
2. Crafting a vision and setting direction
3. Leadership commitment & involvement
4. Reinforcing the message and institutionalising the new behaviours.

Change Leadership & Phases of Change Burke (2008)

Stace&Dunphy contingency model of change

Beyond the charismatic leader Nadler and Tushman (1990)

A change agent is …
1. a person who seeks “to reconfigure an organisation’s roles, responsibilities, structures, outputs, processes, systems, technology or

otherresources” (Buchanan, D. &Badham, R. (1999) Politics and organizational change: the lived experience. Human Relations, 52 (5): 609‐629)
2. the people responsible for directing, organising andfacilitating change in organisations (Burnes, B. (2004)Managing change: a strategic

approach to organisational dynamics. Financial Times Prentice Hall)

Change agents:
• Manager/ consultant/ project manager 
• Understand they impact people as well astechnology, resources, structures
• Continually observe and search for new ways of making change happen‘change begins with me’
Roles of a change agent
Change strategist (change leader) 
Change implementer
Change recipients

‘Consultant’ style Waddell et al (2011)