BUSI 342 DB1 Replies
|Replies – Criteria #1
||0 to 5 points
· Sufficient word count (at least 300 words)
|Replies – Criteria #2
||0 to 5 points
Major points are supported by the following:
· At least 1 scripture reference and 1 scholarly source plus the text;
· Good examples (pertinent conceptual or personal examples are acceptable); and
· Thoughtful analysis (considering assumptions, analyzing implications, comparing/contrasting concepts).
|Replies – Criteria #3
||0 to 2.5 points
Appropriate “netiquette” manners (For example, no name calling or labeling another student’s idea a derogatory term, such as “stupid,” “dumb” even when disagreeing—See Student Expectations).
|Replies – Criteria #4
||0 to 5 points
Brings clarity to issues being discussed, relating issues to Scripture/biblical principles and experience.
|Replies – Criteria #5
||0 to 2.5 points
Spelling and grammar are correct.
Discussion Board Forum Grading Rubric
There will be 4 Discussion Board Forums throughout the course. The purpose of Discussion Board Forums is to generate interaction among students in regard to relevant, current course topics. You will submit a thread of at least 500 words in response to the provided prompt for each forum. The thread must include a Scripture reference and at least 2 scholarly sources, plus the text—all in current APA format. You will then submit replies of at least 300 words to at least 2 other students’ threads. Each reply must include a Scripture reference and at least 1 scholarly source, plus the text—all in current APA format.
Submit your thread by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Monday of the assigned modules/weeks, and submit your replies by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Monday of the following module/week, except for Discussion Board Forum 4, in which replies are due by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Friday of Module/Week 8.
19 hours ago
DB 1: Health Coverage
Top of Form
Companies that strive to be successful must take into consideration various factors that they may not realize. One of these factors includes the public appearance that the company has. Some individuals may find it impossible, or undesirable, to do business with a company that has extremely different views than themselves. This could be because of various reasons, such as a strong moral disagreement or personal belief. If an individual feels this strongly about a company’s, they may decide to no longer shop there, or even convince others to do the same. In a society that is becoming increasingly polarized, this is not that unbelievable, as individuals push to boycott companies who take opposing views on common political issues. Therefore, it would not be unreasonable that a company would look at their historical political stances and consider changing certain beliefs or public opinions to try and prevent the loss of customers.
In the question prompt, the company is deciding to extend their health benefits to domestic partners (Mathis, Jackson, & Valentine, 2017). Previously the company had primarily conservative views, but are moving away from that to try and avoid prevention of customers (Mathis, Jackson, & Valentine, 2017). Since this decision has political implications, there’s no doubt that there will be both support for and against this decision within the company. If the company had mostly conservative views previously, it is likely that there are quite a few conservative individuals within the company. This change in view will have effects on both the employees within the company and the potential customers view of the company.
The company’s diversity training may need to undergo some changes along with this shift. Individuals must be sure to understand what viewpoints other individuals have and know what may be considered offensive or inappropriate to say or do at work. Additionally, former employees may be upset with the shift in political views and have complaints or grievances with the leadership for this change. It is important for individuals to realize that the company essentially exists as its own entity, therefore they need to be able to separate themselves, and their personal views, from the company’s. Typically, it would be in the company’s best interest to remain neutral in political issues, if they are not detrimental to civil rights. Employees that cannot separate the company’s views from their own may find that they can no longer stay employed for the company. However, this political view does not have any direct impact on these individuals, so it should not escalate to such a point.
While the issue of domestic partners may not follow my Biblical Worldview, this is not a matter that would cause me to need to leave a company. The issue has no direct implications on myself or my family and does not cause us any harm for, or against, the matter. Additionally, I believe that we are not to hold non-believers to the standards of the Bible (1 Corinthians 5:12-13, ESV). While they are bound to God’s Law, it is not for us to judge them. When at work, I try to keep my focus on performing my job in a way that is honoring to God (Colossians 3:23, ESV). If what I’m being told to do does not conflict with my Biblical Worldview then I strive to do my best. Therefore, in this situation I would work with the company to transition into the new health care plans and assist the other employees in adapting to the new work environment.
Mathis, R. L., Jackson, J. H., & Valentine, S. R. (2017). Human resource management (15th ed.). Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.
Bottom of Form
16 hours ago
Top of Form
Knowledge of an organizations culture is paramount. Prior to processing any changes in a workplace, it is critical to have all the necessary information regarding the present atmosphere. A company’s organizational culture “consists of the shared values and beliefs that give members of an organization meaning and provide them with rules for behavior,” (Mathis, Jackson, Valentine, & Meglich, 2017). As of 2012, there were approximately 9 million LGBT s in the United States (Cordes, 2012, p. 112). This equates to a very large number of talented potential employees to pull from. For a business to continue to grow and make profit, changes in the organizations culture need to change to keep up with the growing population. This may, at times, affect the way current employees view their employers. When these instances arise, it becomes necessary to point out the reasons for the cultural change and explain the mindset behind the changes.
In this instance, the element of adding health benefits for domestic partners, can alter the way current employees view not just their employers but the product in which they are contributing sales to. What needs to be understood is that whatever view a person has regarding domestic partner benefits, the fact remains that it is merely a view; a personal belief that one harbors in their own mind. “Since talent is indifferent to sexual orientation, to attract and retain the best and the brightest, an employer needs a reputation for having an inclusive and supportive culture,” (Cordes, 2012, p. 113). This means thinking outside he current cultural box at times and recruiting from resources that can be considered taboo by some individuals.
It is deadly for a business to stagnate due to bias. “Although there are many potential reasons why some companies have not fully embraced progressive policies for these [LGBT] employees, there is little empirical evidence to suggest what factors contribute to organizational decisions to adopt LGBT-friendly policies,” (Everly & Schwarz, 2015, p. 368).
As the workforce continues to grow with new and variant types of employees, so too does the consumer market. “The LGBT population is a customer market with purchasing power estimated at $743 billion – and is more likely to purchase from a company with a reputation for supporting LGBT causes,” (Cordes, 2012, p. 114). Basically – it is just good business.
Employees may be concerned by such a culture change, and that is fine. There is nothing wrong with having varied viewpoints on topics. Differences keeps conversations moving. Moving conversations keep businesses in line with current affairs. Employees need to understand that it comes down to simple factors when making decisions that affect the entire culture of an organization; the climate and the bottom-line. These go together. Without one, the other suffers. Poor work climates do not help the bottom-line. In fact, they do the opposite. When an organization suffers from a poor climate, employees report “a greater desire to leave the organization; poorer job and career satisfaction; higher reported levels of job anxiety, role ambiguity and role conflict; greater difficulty concentrating; higher levels of absenteeism; greater mental and physical health complaints; lower levels of organizational commitment and fewer promotions opportunities,” (Cordes, 2012, p. 113). In stark contrast, climates that are favored as good report, “coworkers and the organization are perceived as being supportive and accepting, employees report higher levels of satisfactions, greater loyalty to the organization, productivity and effectiveness, higher levels of creativity and innovation, less role ambiguity, less role conflict and less work-home conflict,” (Cordes, 2012, p. 113). When everyone works together everyone profits.
Change is not an overnight process and it should not be considered an “easy” move to adopt radical changes to an organizational culture. Small steps need to be taken to ease the transition for the benefit of all parties. Cues should be taken from larger organizations where the transition has been made or is at least in full-swing. The federal government should be a starting point. Though not perfect, it does establish a strong foundation for the necessary steps to promote change in a strongly considered staunch environment opposed to non-traditional beliefs and values.
As a Veteran of the United States Army, I have seen my fair share of cultural changes. I can name every year’s recruitment slogan like a General Order. The military does not differ from any other organization. It too needs to adapt and grow to meet its quotas and that includes pulling from groups of people that are not “traditional”. I served with, alongside and right next to members of the LGBT community and one thing held true – despite their orientation or way of life, they held a rifle the same I did, fought as I did, had my back and, unfortunately, bled the same color as I did, sometimes to the point that there was no life left. There was no rainbow that emerged from their veins. There was no devil that drug them down below the dirt for eternity. There was a man. There was a woman. There was a Soldier.
As a Christian, I understand my Bible and its teachings and I accept the ways and laws of my God; but I also understand tolerance and acceptance.
“When the Pharisees heard that he had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered together, and one of them, a lawyer, asked him a question to test him. ‘Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?’ He said to him, ‘“You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.” This is the greatest and first commandment. And a second is like it: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets,’” (NRSV Matthew 23:34-40, 1989).
From this, my balance is simple. I live Matthew 23:34-40.
Cordes, C. L. (2012). The Business Case for Offering Domestic Partner Benefits. Compensation and Benefits Review(44), 110-16.
Everly, B. A., & Schwarz, J. L. (2015, April-May). Predictors of the Adoption of LGBT-Friendly HR Policies. Human Resource Management, 54, No. 2, 368-83.
Mathis, R. L., Jackson, J. H., Valentine, S. R., & Meglich, P. A. (2017). Human Resource Management (Vol. 15th). Boston , MA: Cengage Learning.
New Revised Standard Version Bible (Catholic Edition, Anglicized Text ed.). (1989). San Francisco, CA: HarperOne.
Click here to order this paper @Superbwriters.com. The Ultimate Custom Paper Writing Service