Stakeholder Analysis Model of Change Essay Example for Free

Stakeholder Analysis Model of Change Essay There are several models of change available for use when organizations begin the process of implementing change. The stakeholder analysis model focuses on the position of key stakeholders in regard to the planned change. Stakeholders in a company include individuals or groups inside or outside the company who can influence the success of the change (Palmer, Dunford, and Akin, 2006). This review involves a six step process and includes identifying stakeholders, recognizing the capacity to influence change, checking stakeholder track record, interest in change, ability to affect change, and determine position on change. The main purpose of the stakeholder analysis is to inform the change manager of the likelihood of the change being successful and widely accepted. As a supplement to the analysis, the change manager may use the power-interest matrix to plot the level of stakeholder interest against stakeholder power. The matrix can identify specific action to be taken based on the classification of specific stakeholders. Upon concluding the analysis and power-interest matrix, if the change manager determines weak favorability by key stakeholders, steps can be taken to improve the projection of the change initiative (Palmer, Dunford, and Akin, 2006). The change manager can take action by adding agreeable stakeholders, removing oppositional individuals, or modifying the proposed change to address stakeholder concerns without compromising the initiative. As with all things, there are pros and cons of the stakeholder analysis. A pro is that this analysis is a thorough way to review the business and needs of stakeholders. In addition, it helps to determine the appropriate changes that would benefit the majority. This detailed approach to implementing a change may lead to better results with respect to stakeholder acceptance of the change. A con to this study is that it seems very involved and time-consuming. Depending on the timeline of the company to implement and train stakeholders on the change in processes and systems, the stakeholder analysis model of change may not be the best option.  Something to consider when determining the best model of change for an organization is to assess if the costs outweigh the benefits. Often this will be the deciding factor in regard to which model to use and what changes are advantageous for the business. Six-Box Model Organizational Development is an important aspect along with the culture of the business. The Six-Box Model proposes is six broad categories that can be broken down into purposes, structures, relationships, leadership, rewards, and helpful mechanisms. The organization’s mission and goals defines how the structure in which the organization is organized and the purposes. Goals include programs or projects where teams work together to meet an objective weather it be sales or implementing change. Relationships are the interaction among individuals in the organization or the way employees interact with technology. Rewards are also a fundamental way to get motivation among employees to meet goals. The typical management tasks include balancing the other boxes. The mechanisms include, scheduling, monitoring, budgeting, and information systems that aid to meet organizational goals. The external environment depicted in by the model is represented by the box surrounding these key compon ents. Inputs defined in his model include money, people, ideas, and machinery. Outputs are merchandise and services. Employees buy in is used to determine if the organizational members agree with and support the organization’s mission and goals. Structuring everything correctly will get the purpose and the internal structure of the organization to coincide with one another. This can be achieved by forming the key relationships between individuals in different departments to avoid conflict. Rewarding the organizational members feel, they are rewarded within the environment. Leadership defines the purposes and embodies it in their programs. â€Å"Helpful Mechanisms can help or hinder the accomplishment of organizational objectives, (Organizational Development Models Weisbord’s Six-Box Model, 2009).† The model has guidelines that focus on internal issues in the organization. Primarily the six-box model poses many interconnections in the organization. The biggest down fall is concerning the impact of the external environment in the model, which is vaguely described. References Organizational Development Models Weisbord’s Six-Box Model. (2009, July 31). Retrieved 5 17, 2014, from every one a leader: http://everyonealeader.blogspot.com/2009/08/organizational-development-models.html Palmer, I., Dunford, R., Akin, G. (2006). Managing organization change: a multiple perspectives approach. New York, NY: Mcgraw-Hill Irwin.

The Low Involvement Product

The Low Involvement Product In the current easy we will described the high involvement product a good food, and the low involvement product a household cleaning product. The good food can be considered a high involvement product because it is extremely important to ensure that a person eats healthy food. When I choose the food, I am able to choose only after long and careful consideration what product will be the most essential. Important purchases require more time, attention and efforts. Low involvement product is a household cleaning product, because there is no need to pay a lot of attention to what I am buying. To the low involvement products there is not paid a lot of attention, because people know the specifics of what they have already bought and that the condition of the low involvement product is not so important. This product is not vital, as to buy it is a every month routine. As a rule, when a person considers buying the low involvement product, he does not pay a lot of attention to it, he just takes it and pays for it. For a person the low involvement product is not important or vital, it is just a basic need that does not require the additional attentions and a lot of time to think. The differences between the ways I went through the purchase decision processes for the two products. When choosing the high involvement product good food, I have devoted all my attention and knowledge to choose it. As a fact, when buying the good food, I was highly involved in the purchase, as there were significant differences between brands. I had to choose the food carefully, because I know that this product is vital for me and very important for my family. Spending extra time on choosing it, was worth it, because I was able to choose the newest product, see the best before date, see the quality and choose the best price among the different amounts of it. Choosing the good food is a complex task. When choosing the low involvement product- a household cleaning product, I have chosen it and did not think about outcome, as I was familiar with this product and decided to buy it, as I have been doing this for years. When visiting the supermarket, I have made a list of what I had to buy. With the help of the list, I was able not to forget about each thing I need, even if it is basic. Choosing the household cleaning product was easy, as I have done it for many times and I like its quality and price. All in all, low involvement products, as a rule, do not have complications or cause any problems. IT is easy to choose them and to buy them. Being the marketer of both of the two products, it will be essential to explain the understanding of the Model of Consumer Buying Behavior for the two products. Under the purchasing behavior (including buyer behavior, consumer behavior), it refers to the behavior of the buyer regarding the sale of goods. The behavior of the sale of goods, from the purchase planning, purchase negotiation, makes the purchase; to post-purchase behavior is highly variable. According to Marketing strategy (2010), the buying behavior among merchants that also do business with the solicitation of offers and / or long negotiations and possibly also in buying bodies, is connected, and sometimes differs significantly from the purchasing behavior of non-traders, be they government agencies, often on the basis of tenders to decide, or whether they are consumers with very different behavior patterns. More generally, however, characterizing the concept of consumer behavior is encompassing all the individual actions can be associated with the purchase or consumption of economic goods observed, according to Business plans and marketing strategy (2010). As a fact, the post purchase behavior is much more active of those, who purchased the high involvement goods. The behavior models are reflected in the purchasing of low involvement and high involvement goods. The first model, the stimulus-response model (RS model), comes from the early behaviorism, which is located in the black box model of psychology as a basis. It is greatly simplified in a direct link between a stimulus and the response, which is, therefore, a cause-effect relationship. This model was then extended in meaning by the Environmental neo behaviorists of psychological behavioral model, and the SOR paradigm for the human factor, the organism, according to Marketing strategy (2010). This particular extension is often expressed through the intervening variable. It is admitted that an individual and his personality through his many influences and environment, has been characterized. This was manifested in the individual environmental study, and must be targeted in order to be effective again ultimately affecting behavior. There are distinguished four classic types of purchasing behavior: extensive buying behavior, real purchasing decisions, cognitive participation and information needs are great, and the decision-making takes a long time; These are mostly high-quality, durable goods; habitual buying behavior. Habitual behavior, the search for alternatives is to be avoided, not responding to stimuli practically and this was included primarily to consumer goods; limited purchasing behavior; a limited selection of products, without favoritism; impulsive buying behavior; spontaneous affective reactions at the point of sale. In addition, a fifth special type of purchasing behavior is known: Variety-seeking consumer behavior this can be related to the high involvement goods. It is considered rare, because it has unclear transitions, because the change request often results in impulsive, so in some ways it is not real. This classification of purchasing behavior is not analogous transfer on the consumer as a whole. A decision maker could be forced by external circumstances, in a very short time to make choices, as can also happen in the case of purchasing high involvement goods, such as good food. The determinants of the consumers behavior have intrapersonal or psychological factors and interpersonal and social factors influencing the decisions. In case with the low involvement goods- household cleaning product it can be seen, that a person, having chosen the appropriate product thanks to the effective commercial and true results, does not want even think about any other product and spend his time of doing research in the low involvement products, as the particular household cleaning product meets all the requirements, according to Business plans and marketing strategy (2010). All in all, marketing influences the personal decisions a lot, as people who take into consideration the useful advertisements, in future choose the low involvement goods automatically. And considering the high involvement goods, in this case there will always be certain preferences and the commercials not always will be able to influence effectively on the choice of a customer. Some people can not be influenced by the marketing and promotion of the goods.

Ministerial responsibility is the cornerstone

Ministerial responsibility is the cornerstone In medieval times, the royal will was signified in documents bearing royal seal and was applied by one of the King’s ministers. Maitland has described this practice as being â€Å"the foundation for our modern doctrine of ministerial responsibility – that for every exercise of the royal power some minister is answerable†[1]. This essay will consider the modern doctrine of ministerial responsibility and examine the extent to which it forms, in modern political times, the cornerstone of accountability in the UK constitution. The convention of ministerial responsibility has been described by Loveland as â€Å"perhaps the most important non-legal rule within our constitution†[2]. The convention may be said to be concerned with regulating the conduct of government activities, both in respect of Ministers’ relations with each other, and with the two Houses of Parliament[3]. Ministerial responsibility comprises of two branches: collective responsibility and individual responsibility[4]. Collective ministerial responsibility may be further reduced into three main rules: the confidence rule; the unanimity rule, and; the confidentiality rule[5]. Through the operation of these rules, Ministers of the Government all appear to others to share the same policy opinions, whatever their own personal views. They are therefore collectively responsible for any decisions made by the Government and the Government as a whole should resign if it loses confidence. The doctrine of collective responsibility was stated in 2005 in the following form: â€Å"Collective responsibility requires that Ministers should be able to express their views frankly in the expectation that they can argue freely in private while maintaining a united front when decisions have been reached. This in turn requires that the privacy of opinions expressed in Cabinet and Ministerial Committees should be maintained.†[6] It therefore follows that where a Minister does not wish to be publicly accountable to Parliament and the electorate for a Governmental decision, he should resign from the Government. This occurred, for example, when Robin Cooke resigned over the Labour Government’s decision to invade Iraq in 2003[7]. Collective ministerial responsibility allows all members of Government to be accountable as a whole, thus avoiding arguments and blame-shifting between different Ministers and Departments. In this way, collective responsibility enhances the accountability of Government. Individual ministerial responsibility is the convention that a Minister answers to Parliament for his department, with praise and blame being addressed to the minister and not civil servants[8]. It has been said that â€Å"the fundamental purpose of the convention of individual ministerial responsibility is that it provides an important means of drawing information into the public domain†[9] The principle has often been associated with the idea that ministers must resign in cases of official wrongdoing[10] but it also encompasses Ministers’ on-going obligations to account to Parliament for their departments’ work[11]. However, in 2000, Jowell and Oliver suggested that ministerial responsibility to Parliament had been â€Å"significantly weakened over the last ten years or so†¦ so that it can no longer be said, in our view, that it is a fundamental doctrine of the constitution†[12]. Their opinion may have been influenced by the structural changes in government. During the 20th century tasks of the state expanded and vast Whitehall departments were created, with the effect that ministers could not oversee all aspects of the departments’ work[13]. Executive ‘Next Steps’ agencies created since 1988 had the specific purpose of delegating managerial power. Indeed, as Turner states: â€Å"Ministerial responsibility, however, is a different matter in the modern era. It has shrunk, it seems, almost to nothing, thanks, in no small part, to the creation of â€Å"independent† agencies to undertake the work of government.†[14] Where civil servants have great authority, the question arises as to what extent a Minister is responsible for any acts of maladministration, and whether maladministration results in a duty to resign. Is it fair to hold the Minister responsible? If not, who should be and how does this affect accountability? As Tomkins notes, during the Major Government’s office from 1990 to 1997 â€Å"Ministers and senior civil servants†¦ proposed a number of initiatives that sought significantly to undermine the tenets of individual responsibility†[15]. It was claimed that Ministers were responsible only for those decisions in which they were directly and personally involved. Michael Howard claimed, after serious failings leading to Prison escapes, that Ministers were responsible to Parliament only for policy matters, with â€Å"operational† failings falling outside the scope of individual responsibility[16]. Furthermore, it was argued that where Ministers had misled Parliament, they should resign only if they had done so knowingly rather than inadvertently[17]. In this way Ministerial responsibility was weakened, with accountability becoming more prominent. A minister may be said to be accountable to Parliament for everything which occurs in a department, having a duty to inform Parliament about the policies and decision of the department and to announce when something has gone wrong. However, this does not bring with it responsibility in the sense that the Minister takes the blame. In 1997 the Ministerial Code reformulated ministerial responsibility to the effect that: Ministers must uphold the principle of collective responsibility; (b) Ministers have a duty to Parliament to account, and be held to account, for the policies, decisions and actions of their departments and agencies; (c) it is of paramount importance that Ministers give accurate and truthful information to Parliament, correcting any inadvertent error at the earliest opportunity. Ministers who knowingly mislead Parliament will be expected to offer their resignation to the Prime Minister; (d) Ministers should be as open as possible with Parliament, refusing to provide information only when disclosure would not be in the public interest†¦; (e) Ministers should similarly require civil servants who give evidence before Parliamentary Committees on their behalf and under their direction to be as helpful as possible in providing accurate, truthful and full information†¦[18] This new formulation would suggest that it is now ministerial accountability rather than responsibility which forms the cornerstone of accountability in the UK constitution. Unless there is fully open Government, there may be situations which arise where no person will take responsibility for actions and Ministers’ relationship with the Civil Service will be fundamentally changed. As Hennessy points out: â€Å"For the Civil Service the buck-stopping question is of crucial importance. Under the doctrine of ministerial responsibility, ministers are the ultimate can-carriers for everything done by the civil service in their name†[19]. This will no longer be the case where a Minister’s responsibility ends with alerting Parliament to a problem. Bibliography Allen, M. Thompson, B., Cases and Materials on Constitutional and Administrative Law, 9th Edition, (2008), OUP Bamforth, N., â€Å"Political accountability in play: the Budd Inquiry and David Blunkett’s resignation†, (2005), Public Law, 229 Bradley, A.W. Ewing, K.D., Constitutional and Administrative Law, 14th Edition (2007), Pearson Longman Brazier, R., â€Å"It is a Constitutional Issue: Fitness for Ministerial Office in the 1990s†, (1994), Public Law, 431 Cooke, R., The Point of Departure (2003), Simon and Schuster Hansard, HC cols 31-46 (January 10, 1995) Hennessy, P., Whitehall, (1989), Secker Warburg Hough, B., â€Å"Ministerial responses to parliamentary questions: some recent concerns†, (2003), Public Law, 211 Jowell, J. Oliver, D., The Changing Constitution, 4th Edition, (2000), OUP Lewis, N. Longley, D., â€Å"Ministerial Responsibility: The Next Steps†, (1996), Public Law, 490 Loveland, I., Constitutional Law, Administrative Law, and Human Rights: A Critical Introduction, 4th Edition, (2006), OUP, Maitland, Constitutional History, Marshall, G., Constitutional Conventions, (1984) Ministerial Code: a Code of Ethics and Procedural Guidance for Ministers (reissued, July 2005) Tomkins, A., The Constitution after Scott: Government Unwrapped, (1998), Clarendon Tomkins, A., Public Law, (2003), OUP Turner, A., â€Å"Losing heads over the lost data†, (2007), 171, Justice of the Peace, 841 1 Footnotes [1] Maitland, Constitutional History, pg 203 [2] Loveland, I., Constitutional Law, Administrative Law, and Human Rights: A Critical Introduction, 4th Edition, (2006), OUP, pg 306 [3] Loveland, ibid, pg 306 [4] Allen, M. Thompson, B., Cases and Materials on Constitutional and Administrative Law, 9th Edition, (2008), OUP, pg 251 [5] Marshall, G., Constitutional Conventions, (1984), pg 55-56 [6] Ministerial Code: a Code of Ethics and Procedural Guidance for Ministers (reissued, July 2005), para 6.17 [7] Cooke, R., The Point of Departure, pg 115 [8] Bradley, A.W. Ewing, K.D., Constitutional and Administrative Law, 14th Edition (2007), Pearson Longman, pg 114 [9] Hough, B., â€Å"Ministerial responses to parliamentary questions: some recent concerns†, (2003), Public Law, 211 [10] See e.g. Lewis, N. Longley, D., â€Å"Ministerial Responsibility: The Next Steps†, (1996), Public Law, 490; Brazier, R., â€Å"It is a Constitutional Issue: Fitness for Ministerial Office in the 1990s†, (1994), Public Law, 431 [11] Bamforth, N., â€Å"Political accountability in play: the Budd Inquiry and David Blunkett’s resignation†, (2005), Public Law, 229 [12] Jowell, J. Oliver, D., The Changing Constitution, 4th Edition, (2000), OUP, p. viii [13] Bradley Ewing, ibid, pg 114 [14] Turner, A., â€Å"Losing heads over the lost data†, (2007), 171, Justice of the Peace, 841 [15] Tomkins, A., Public Law, (2003), OUP, pg 140-141 [16] Hansard, HC cols 31-46 (January 10, 1995) [17] Tomkins, A., The Constitution after Scott: Government Unwrapped, (1998), Clarendon, pg 41-45 [18] HC Deb, 19 March 1997, col 1046 [19] Hennessy, P., Whitehall, (1989), Secker Warburg, pg 502

rosa parks :: essays research papers

Rosa McCauly Parks was born in Tuskegee, Alabama, in 1913 and grew up on a small farm. When her mother had saved enough money to pay for it, Rosa had began to attend a private school when she was 11 years old. But, while she was attending high school, her mother had become ill so she had to quit. After quitting high school, she got a job as a house servant and began sending money back to her family. When she married Raymond Parks, she returned to high school and graduated. In 1943 she joined the NAACP and worked to ensure voting rights for blacks. One evening shortly after 5:00 PM on Thursday, December 1, 1955 while coming home from work, she boarded a bus and sat down. According to Montgomery law, blacks had to sit in the back of the bus, and give up their seats to whites when they came on the bus. When she was asked to give up her seat, she refused. Immediately, the driver stopped the bus and called two policemen. Mrs. Parks was arrested and taken to jail. Edgar Daniel Nixon, head of the NAACP in Montgomery, posted a $100 bond to get her released. Although Mrs. Parks was not the first black person to get arrested for refusing to give up her seat on the bus, Mr. Nixon decided that she wouldn't be the last. He called a meeting of black leaders to see what action they should take. By the end of the meeting, the leaders agreed to call a one-day boycott of all the city buses for Monday Dec.5. On Monday, the buses began their run through the black neighborhood and came back empty. The boycott was a sucess. They set up the Montgomery Improvement Association (MIA) and named Martin Luther King Jr., it's leader. Rosa Parks went to court and was charged with violating a 1947 segregation law. She was found guilty and fined $10 plus $4 in court costs.

Tim OBriens Zeugmatic Novel, The Things They Carried :: Things They Carried Essays

Tim O'Brien's Zeugmatic Novel, The Things They Carried An early example of zeugma comes from Quintilian, the ancient Roman rhetorician, who cites the following from Cicero: "Lust conquered shame, boldness fear, madness reason," where the verb "conquered" is understood to also govern the final two phrases in the sentence (Crowley 203). The 18th century, an age of great rhetorical knowledge on the part of writers and preachers (and at least one writer-preacher, Laurence Sterne), is the heyday of zeugma. In "The Rape of the Lock" Alexander Pope speculates what may happen to Bellinda on a particularly ominous day: Whether the Nymph shall break Diana's Law, Or some frail China Jar receive a Flaw, Or stain her Honour, or her new Brocade, Forget her Pray'rs, or miss a Masquerade, Or lose her Heart, or Necklace, at a Ball.... (Butt 225) Pope does a beautiful job of contrasting the serious and the superficial in these five lines-will her chastity or her jar become flawed, will she forget her prayers or the masquerade? My paraphrases here fill out an implied zeugma in these lines, but it is in the third and fifth lines where he actually employs zeugma: will she "stain her Honour, or her new Brocade"? Will she "lose her Heart, or Necklace, at a ball"? In these "stain" and "lose" branch out to include (or to be more etymologically correct) YOKE quite different things: lace and a necklace being a bit more easily replaced than a stained honor and a lost heart, as those of you who have been in love may perhaps attest to. Richard Lanham, in a Handlist of Rhetorical Terms, defines zeugma as follows and again cites an example in Pope: "One verb governs several congruent words or clauses, each in a different way, as in 'The Rape of the Lock': Here thou, great Anna! whom three realms obey Dost sometimes counsel take-and sometimes tea." (Lanham 104-5)

5 Senses Effects Food Essay

Food is not a want it is a necessity. However, in today’s society we have evolved beyond eating to survive and progressed to eating for pleasure. We no longer limit ourselves to family meals at home. Instead the majority of the population tends to enjoy gathering family and friends and going out for a dining experience. When dining out, the food itself is not the only factor to determining whether or not the meal was pleasing. The atmosphere, the visual, the taste, and the smell have all become key components in deciding whether or not a mean out is enjoyable. With these things in mind, on a rain Saturday afternoon two of my friends accompanied me to the casual dining restaurant, Applebee’s. I was there for one simple reason and for one simple mission, and that was to evaluate how Applebee’s smell, taste, and visual surroundings effected my meal. If one were to venture hungrily into an eating establishment and were greeted by an unpleasant smell, such as molding rotten eggs, your stomach would churn. Regardless of my location or my reason for being there, the first thing I notice is the smell. If an unpleasant odor ventures it’s way into my nose my immediate reaction is to flee the premises. Thankfully, when I opened the heavy oak doors and stepped into the restaurant my nose was instantly filled with the smell of a sizzling steak as a young waiter whisked past me carrying it in his palm. After our hostess had seated us in a squishy booth that reminded me of beanbag, I took note of the raw smell of Applebee’s. The best and most accurate way to describe it would be to parallel it to the smell of my grandmother’s kitchen. See more: Recruitment and selection process essay My grandmother is quite secretive in what she puts in her recipes so when you walk into her kitchen you are greeted by an assortment of smells. Freshly rising bread sitting cozily in the oven, an essence of Italy captured in a pot of pasta bubbling over, and an assortment of spices is just what you get in one whiff. Surprisingly, Applebee’s filled my nose with the same assortment of smells. It wouldn’t be Applebee’s if they went around revealing their recipes, similar to my grandmother. The scent gave me a feeling of comfort, regardless of the fact that I was eating out, I felt at home. Needless to say by the time my waitress approached the table, I was quite ready to  order. My nose had projected my hunger to new heights. Once my food had arrived I was ready to commence my meal. I ordered a 12 oz sirloin steak cooked well done to perfection. The dark brown, nearly black strips running horizontally across the steak let me know my order was followed precisely. I doused it with A1 steak sauce and cut myself a small, rectangular piece. I chewed it slowly and felt the juices and steak sauce ooze into my mouth with every bite. It was so chewy and tenderly delicious that for a moment it was nearly forgotten that I had ordered an additional side dish. I took a sip of my Sierra Mist, which was losing it’s carbonation because it was beginning to taste watered down. My attention had now been turned to the steaming baked potato. The baked potato was searing to the point that I could view the heat emitting from it. Loaded with bulky sour cream and shredded yellow cheddar cheese, it was an eyeful. I sprinkled enough salt on it to make anyone with high cholesterol nervous. Greedily I plunged my fork into the potato and began mashing the contents together, the bulky sour cream, the shredded cheddar cheese, and the salt. By the time I was done mashing the condiments together, if it were not for the skin of the potato, one might have imagined that they were originally mashed. Ready to eat, I loaded my fork and shoved it into my mouth. My mouth slightly watered in pure satisfaction. The eclectic tastes within my mouth molded together to serve as the perfect combination. Once I had completely finished my meal I began to take note of the surroundings. Throughout my meal my friends and I sang along to several of the songs playing within the restaurant. A few of the songs were older and took us back to our childhood, to the days of playing tag and jump rope in the schoolyard, such as â€Å"Hit Me Baby One More Time,† by Britney Spears, and â€Å"Wannabe,† by the Spice Girls. Other songs were a bit more recent and were current hits, and a few more were songs that were not memorable. As mentioned before the restaurant style in itself is homelike in the dining section. It is very apparent that customer satisfaction is a high priority of the restaurant. The bar area however, is sports orientated. I took note of the fact that every television set that was on within the restaurant had a sports event on. On the television set directly in front of me a Tampa Bay  Ray’s game was on and in the bar area it seemed to be the game that was drawing the most attention. An assortment of Ray’s jersey’s could be seen from my seat, and there was absolutely no doubt about the fact that you indeed were in Tampa. With the slightly dimmed lighting it gave an overall tranquil frame of mind. At the beginning of time it can be inferred that man did not eat for the taste, but ate just to manage to subsist. In the contemporary day of 2008, you will be hard pressed to get an individual to consume something that they find less than desirable. Furthermore, if you are in the food industry it will take a lot more than just superior cuisine to sway consumers to eat at your establishment. Restaurant owners must take into consideration not only the taste but the smell, atmosphere, and visual. While eating at Applebee’s I was able to have a pleasurable experience because the smell, taste, and visual experience within the eatery was delightful. I would recommend this establishment to anyone who would enjoy an inexpensive, but high quality meal.

Jsbmha and Hipaa Case Study

JSBMHA and HIPAA Case Study Appendix C University of Phoenix Axia College Week 5 How does HIPAA serve to protect patient rights? HIPAA protects any individual’s past their present and future information whether it be physical, mental or any other condition that affects that person. It also protects anything that identifies the individual involved, that would their name, address, birth date and Social Security number. Nothing should be discussed about any individual that an agency is helping. It should not be discussed with anyone who is not directly involved with the case even if that person works for the agency. If they are not involved then it should not be discussed. What areas of the JSBMHA did HIPAA compliance impact? HIPAA has a great impact on patients rights, all areas of the JSBMHA were affected by these two individuals. They affected the patients, and put the agency in an awkward position. They affected the agency, the grandmother could make others aware about what happened and this could affect the agency negatively. People who are involved with the agency could be made to feel uncomfortable about giving them any information. It would mean that information at the JSBMHA is not secure, the trust has been violated. What actions should the JSBMHA director take about the HIPAA violation? Explain your answers in detail. I feel that both individuals should be suspended, this is a serious violation. The have put the agency in a very bad situation and have lost the trust of the family. Jim knew better, he has been with the agency much longer then Betty, he should have advised her that she should not be talking about these people outside of the office. I think maybe Jim should get fired because he does no better, 20 years is a long time to be with a company and it is more then enough time to understand and know the rules. He was supposed to be an example to Betty, someone who she can learn from. Maybe the agency should make an example of him. They both violated the HIPAA law, but I think Jim’s punishment should be more severe.