Learn How to Delegate Responsibility to Your Employees

]Time is your most precious commodity. No matter how hard you try, you can’t do everything by yourself. Many supervisors avoid delegating responsibilities and the reasons for this vary. Those who have moved up through the ranks of a company may be uncomfortable or simply not used to delegating. Others live by the words â€Å"If you want something done right, do it yourself.† And then there are some who fear delegating may mean being outshined by their employee. Whatever your feelings, as a manager you need to realize that you are not a regular employee, you are a coach. Coaches must understand the importance of teaching, motivating, and taking pride in the performance of their charges. To do this, you must learn how to delegate efficiently and responsibly. Some Things Should Not Be Delegated Never delegate sensitive projects to your employees. If you are in charge of the project because of your expertise, you should complete it yourself. If the project is confidential in any way, be very careful about outsourcing the work. Keep in mind that some jobs need to be done by the person in charge. At the same time, try to avoid delegating only the â€Å"dirty work†. Give your employees something fun and interesting to do once in awhile. Evaluating Employee Abilities There are many things to evaluate before delegating duties. Consider your employees’ skill level, motivation, and dependability. Remember, not every employee is created equal. Certain people will be more efficient than others depending upon the facet in which they thrive. At the same time, try not to typecast your employees. Give them opportunities to broaden their horizons and become more valuable to the team. Matching the proper person to each task can be difficult. Start small and be patient. Providing Clear Instructions When you are assigning unfamiliar duties, be very specific when you explain what you need. By detailing an assignment, you leave no room for confusion and therefore, no room for error. If you have a long list of verbal instructions, type them out. This will give your employee something to refer to when they are performing a task that is unfamiliar to them. If possible, train two people to do the same thing. This way, they can refer to one another for questions, rather than coming to you. It is also essential that your employee has a clear understanding of their authority in each situation. When a decision needs to be made regarding their assignment, should they use their best judgment or should they come to you immediately for clarification? This will be one of your hardest decisions to make because it could mean the difference between success and failure. When in doubt, retain control. Once an employee had proved their capability, give them more responsibility in the decision-making department. Measuring Performance and Controlling Projects Measure the performance of employees and delegated projects. Explain to them how performance will be measured and let the employee know the level of accountability that comes with the task. Clarifying these things beforehand will make everything run much smoother. Large projects may be easier to monitor if they are broken into smaller segments. Spread the assignments throughout your staff and make them report to you after each segment of the project has been finished. Also, get feedback from your employees via meetings and reports. Do this daily, weekly, or monthly. Know what’s going on around you. Staying informed limits the possibility of failure. As a supervisor, you are responsible and accountable for your employees and their work. Coaching Your Staff One of the most important parts of delegation is coaching. When you delegate an assignment, make it clear to them that they can come to you with questions. New tasks can be confusing. Above all, be patient. You should consistently motivate your staff and commend them when they do well. If they complete an assignment, but they don’t do a good job, find out why. Pinpoint what went wrong and take steps to address the issue. On the other hand, when tasks are completed effectively, give your employee the recognition they deserve. Whether it is public recognition or one-on-one, your employee will value being given credit for their work. Doing this not only makes your employee feel good, it will also motivate them to continue their on-the-job success.

Analysis Of Mark Bowden s Black Hawk Down - 1651 Words

B.H.D. in the M.U.S.D. â€Å"A vivid, immediate, and unsparing narrative that is filled with blood and noise† (Yardley). Mark Bowden’s Black Hawk Down is amongst the most profane, gory, and explicit military pieces in history. Why should the Morongo Unified School District’s approval even be up for consideration? October 3, 1993, the Battle of Mogadishu stamped itself in American history. The intense battle between American and Somali soldiers resulted in the death of eighteen American men, as well as the severe injury of seventy and counting. Exposing students within the M.U.S.D. allows for students to learn from first hand experiences, as well as apply the book’s lessons to their own lives. Approval from the Morongo Unified School District†¦show more content†¦Somalian militia† (Anderson). By including all first-hand experiences Bowden gives students in the M.U.S.D. direct sources to help lean their decision of whether to join the military . As Morongo Unified School District students can learn about the logistics of military life, social understandings are also taught from Black Hawk Down. As proper education is essential to succeed in life, so is the adaption to social apprehension. Students within the M.U.S.D. are almost destined to have relation to someone active in military involvement. The reading of B.H.D. gives and understanding of what people in the military do for our country. â€Å"Americans watched on television an angry mob drag the body of a dead U.S. soldier through the streets of Mogadishu† (Matray). Having personal ties with soldiers active in battle allows M.U.S.D. students to connect to the intensity of the event in Black Hawk Down. Bowden’s book covers the primary importance to stay humble. Arrogance is a key to failure. As seen in B.H.D., â€Å"the over-confidence of the Americans ultimately led to more casualties† (Anderson). One must â€Å"count the cost† before going into battle with an arrogant and confident mind. Examination of all perspectives in all situations is another essential factor to success. With Bowden’s fluent change of perspective throughout the book, students

Drugs and Alcohol in the Workplace Free Essays

Use of Drugs and Alcohol in the Workplace {draw:frame} {draw:frame} Figure 2 79% of binge drinkers are members of the workforce (Drug-Free Workplace) {draw:frame} {draw:frame} Drug and/or Alcohol Use Seriously Threatens Organizations {draw:frame} Excessive absenteeism, which holds a significantly percentage of occurrences of drug users as cited above, costs an organization lower productivity, damaged moral and consequently lower product quality. The US Dept of Labor reports that annually, 500 million work days are lost solely due to alcoholism. In addition to absenteeism lowering moral, workplace theft is an experienced and related problem. We will write a custom essay sample on Drugs and Alcohol in the Workplace or any similar topic only for you Order Now Approximately 18% of cocaine users steal at work, from either the employer or their co-workers (Facts for Employers). Programs Focus on Testing to Reduce or Eliminate These Problems Reasons For and Methods of Drug Testing in the Workplace Typical drug screens detect the presence of several drugs in the body. Although tests can be specifically designed, the most typical tests are designed to detect alcohol, amphetamines, cocaine, heroin, marijuana, methamphetamines, morphine, opiates and PCP (Gottlieb). In addition to the above list of common drugs, tests can be designed to detect the use of prescription medications often usedfor recreational use. In many cases, such as the MUST Program, the consequences of positive test results often result in immediate suspension or permanent discharge (Policy; XXXX, Interview). Opposition to Drug Testing Conclusion Although not a position embraced by the American Civil Liberties Union and other various opponents, the use of drugs and alcohol in the work place has been reported to be rampant and dangerous. It is a multi-billion dollar problem to all organizations, of all sized and within all industries. The concerns associated with workplace drug use are financial, physical and safety issues. Summary Since the 1970’s, drug use in the workplace has become not only common, but rampant. The annual financial impact to the business world associated with this problematic use has beencalculated to be in the hundreds of billions of dollars. The fiscal consequences of this behavior dramatically reduce the bottom line profit of any affected organization. Higher than average insurance rates are commonplace to organizations encountering this issue, which reduces the profits for all shareholders. Certain industries are more susceptible to drug use than others. They are also the industries that realize higher safety issues and encounter more dangerous workplace conditions. Construction and manufacturing are two industries affected more than most. The Department of Labor, citing examples of dramatic results, reported that due to the implementation of comprehensive prevention programs, many companies had a turn-around in incidents and related costs. They used examples of companies ranging in size of a small local plumbing company in Washington DC to the large international group, CSX Transportation Corporation. The companies were reported to have all benefited in many ways, from drastically reduced positive test results to reduced insurance costs or ancillary problems that are inevitable with these problems. It is further suggested that drug use in the workplace can be prevented (elaws). Preventing these costly behaviors would only increase overall safety in the workplace and result in overall higher profits for the shareholders. Although deemed by opponents to be an expensive course of action, especially to smaller organizations with limited resources, employee drug testing is commonly believed to be quite effective at combating workplace drug use, thereby promoting a potentially safer worksite and a higher profit for the organization. The cost of the prevention is well worth the effort. Recommendations Appendix A Primary Research – Interview XXXX, Vice President of XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX _Do you feel the use of drugs and/or alcohol are common in your industry? Absolutely. We have a high ratio of young workers, from their mid-twenties to mid-forties, who typically are drawn to this field. These are guys who you might find at the end of a bar any given night, or might be a once occasional drug user who went bad. What is the financial impact to this industry-wide problem? Most of all, we are saddled with high insurance rates, specifically liability and Workers Compensation rates. There is a formula for determi ning rates, and those rates are based on experience modifiers, among other things. Guys who use at work in our industry are an accident waiting to happen. You can’t be safe on a construction site while you are intoxicated or high. Is the problem rampant in your company? We are pretty lucky. We haven’t had much of a problem in our company. Most of the men we have with us are family men, more concerned with going home after work and spending time with their families. They may enjoy a beer or two from time to time, but are not the kind of group who gets their paycheck and disappears for a few days. Being in this vulnerable industry, how do you combat the potential employee use of drugs and/or alcohol in your workplace? _ Like I said, we have a good group of guys working for us. But we hire smart. We screen our guys through a drug test and extensive referrals. A lot of our workforce recommends their family or friends to us as well. Are you contractually obligated to drug test? In some cases, yes. Several of the big General Contractors in the area, such as Turner, O’Neal, they all have a section in their standard contract requiring a written safety and drug-free program. Also, being union, we are all required to tet once a year, even management. What are your procedures for drug testing? We prescreen test, and random test throughout the year. Annual physicals and accident testing isn’t uncommon. We send the guys to Kroll, through the MUST program. What do you test for? The typical, marijuana, cocaine, meth, etc. We don’t typically test for alcohol unless there is a problem and we need to protect ourselves. How do your employees feel about this policy? What are the consequences of positive test results? We have the right to terminate immediately. Unfortunately, we have exercised that right in the past. Usually, though, if we send a guy to the clinic for an unannounced test, and he knows he is dirty, we usually don’t see him again. But once again, the majority of our guys have been with us for a while, and we know them well, so it hasn’t been too much of a problem. Appendix B Primary Research – Interview _Do you feel the use of drugs and/or alcohol are common in your industry? _ Unfortunately yes. Construction has always had this problem. What are the specific concerns associated with this problem? _ Most importantly are the safety concerns. Someone using drugs could potentially cause the loss of life of him or other guys around him. We deal with a lot of equipment that can be hazardous under the best of conditions, and we need to have our faculties around us. Are there other costs or consequences that are a concern? There sure are. High Workers Comp rates, high liability rates, high cost of equipment that could be damaged due to miss-use, these are just some of the costs. That is why we have such a comprehensive drug policy. Does having a drug-free workforce help you in the industry? Sure. We are known as a safety conscience company, and our EMR rating proves it. Plus, some of the places where we do work won’t let us onsite without one. Motor City Casino, General Motors, Henry Ford Healthcare Systems, they all require written drug-free policies in our safety manual. Are the costs incurred due to your drug testing policy fiscally efficient? Yes, very much so. To send a guy in for a test is a heck of a lot cheaper than dealing with injuries or lawsuits. How do your employees feel about this policy? The ones who don’t like it are the ones who don’t last too long. What are the consequences of a positive test result? We have been pretty lucky in that regard. We haven’t had too much of a problem. But I will say, if a guy shows up on a jobsite high or drunk, the foreman or the other laborers will toss him out. One guy we sent to the clinic for a random test seemed nervous about it. He left the jobsite but never went to the clinic. He just quit and never came back. He was only with us for a few months by that time, and we were glad he never returned. Appendix C Primary Research – Interview Ms. Wendy Richardson, MUST Program Administrator How long has the MUST Program been around? Since 1988. We were the first in the XXXX Area. What is your most important focus? Primarily workplace safety, with drug-free workplace policies. _What is your _circle of industries? We have several unions and trade associations in our membership. We also have a lot of Owners such as Ford, GM, Chrysler, DTE, Servistall, all the hospitals in the area, DPS and the Airport (NW Terminal) Would you say the drug testing portion of the programs works? Yes, certainly. We had about 6% of the drug tests come back positive 6 years ago, and now we are seeing less than 2. 5% Are certain drugs more common than others? Although I am not privy to the test results, the typical positive tests are mostly positive across the board. Sometimes it is higher for one drug than another. Cocaine and marijuana are pretty popular, unfortunately. Appendix D The United States Constitution The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Appendix E Executive Order 12564 of September 15, 1986 Drug-Free Workplace Attached Works Cited XXXX, XXXX Personal Interview 4/1/09 â€Å"Drug Testing – A Bad Investment†. American Civil Liberties Union. 4/8/09 http://www. aclu. org/drugpolicy/testing/10842res20021021. html. Drug Testing in the Workplace†. ACLU. 3/17/09 http://www. lectlaw. com/files/emp02. htm. â€Å"elaws – Drug-Free Workplace Advisor†. US Department of Labor. 4/11/09 http://www. dol. gov/elaws/asp/drugfree/benefits. htm. Gottlieb, Mark. â€Å"Drug Testing – An Industry Standard†. MSG Accountants, Consultants Business Valuators. 3/17/09 h ttp://www. msgcpa. com/general. php? category=Industry+Libraryheadline=Drug+Testing. â€Å"How Drug Testing Works†. Prevention Not Punishment. 3/16/09 http://www. preventionnotpunishment. org/howsdt. html. Menzo, XXXX PersonalInterview 4/13/09 Richardson, Wendy Telephone Interview, 4/14/09 How to cite Drugs and Alcohol in the Workplace, Papers

Corporate Attribution And A Directing Mind †Myassignmenthelp.Com

Question: Discuss About The Corporate Attribution And A Directing Mind? Answer: Introducation A company is deemed as a legal person although it has to act through the natural persons and so, there is a need for the rules to govern the attribution of the companies for the state of mind and the act of the individuals. In simple words, directing mind and will, for a company refers to the identification of the natural person who has the management, as well as, control, with regards to the act in question. Lord Ried, in the criminal case of Tesco Supermarkets Ltd v Nattrass [1972] A.C. 153 HL, associated the directing mind and will test with the requirement of identification of the living person who could be deemed as the companys embodiment. This was the leading case in the matter of this theory, in which the court held that the store manager was not the one who was directing the will and mind of the company (Bailii, 2017). In the civil case of El-Ajou v Dollar Land Holdings Plc [1994] 2 All E.R. 685, the Court of Appeal members favoured a flexible interpretation of this test as the natural persons who had the control, as well as, management regarding the omission or the act in question and this is to be deemed as directing mind and will. So, the directors or the other key members of the board, or any other person for such purposes, who steers the company in a particular direction, towards the particular act, would be identified through the use of this concept (Ferran, 2012). The company form of business structure has been given the status of separate legal entity, whereby they are given a distinguished status from the individuals who run its operations and daily activities. And so, for the actions of such individuals, the company is not liable, and the same is true, the other way round. However, the concept of piercing the corporate veil is a concept, whereby the separate legal entity status of the companies is set aside and the court, in needful cases, pierces the veil of a corporate, which is being used in an unfair manner by the individuals (Wibberley et al. 2017). The conception of piercing of corporate veil was established through the case of Salomon Co Ltd [1897] AC 22, in which Salomon was the shoe manufacturer who used the company as a shield to incur debts for the company. The court stated that from the very date on which a company is incorporated, it becomes legal persona and has distinctive rights and liabilities from its shareholders and members; though, in extraordinary cases, the veil can be pierced. And so in this case, the case pierced the corporate veil of the company and held Salomon liable for the debts which were undertaken (McLaughlin, 2015). Thus, when the corporate veil of the company is pierced, it treats the rights and duties of the company as that of the shareholders. And for the purpose of piercing the corporate veil, the quoted case is cited quite often. References Bailii. (2017) Tesco Supermarkets Ltd v Nattrass [1971] UKHL 1 (31 March 1971). [Online] Bailii. Available from: https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1971/1.html [Accessed on: 19/09/17] Ferran, E. (2012) Corporate Attribution and the Directing Mind and Will. [Online] University of Cambridge. Available from: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2025884 [Accessed on: 19/09/17] McLaughlin, S. (2015) Unlocking business Law. 3rd ed. Oxon: Routledge. Wibberley, J., Chambers, G., and Gioia, M.D. (2017) Lifting, Piercing And Sidestepping The Corporate Veil. [Online] Guildhall Chambers. Available from: https://www.guildhallchambers.co.uk/uploadedFiles/PiercingtheCorporate%20Veil.JW,MDG.pdf [Accessed on: 19/09/17]