Provide an analysis, examples and evaluation of power use as described below.
Define and describe the concept of “hard power” and the three types of this kind of power. Identify a work situation for each of these three types of power in which the use of “hard power” (coercive, reward, legitimate) might be appropriate. For each situation:
Identify and define the type of hard power used.
Provide a rationale for why the use of hard power is appropriate.
Define and describe the concept of “soft power” and the two types of this kind of power. Identify a work situation for each of these two types of power in which “soft power” (expert, referent) might be appropriate. For each situation:
Identify and define the type of soft power used.
Provide rationale for why the use of soft power is appropriate.
Please read Chapter 11 in the textbook.
In Chapter 11, Daft refers to Employee Affinity Groups and Minority Sponsorship as programs companies have used to encourage a culture of personal diversity. View the TedTalk of Mellody Hobson, Color Blind or Color Brave.
Ms. Hobson speaks about the importance of being “color brave” and that meaningful and intentional dialog is critical to stop discrimination in the workplace. She highlights work done by ESPN president John Skipper that personifies being “color brave” to ensure diversity hiring and workplace practices at ESPN. (https://www.ted.com/talks/mellody_hobson_color_bli…)
As a new leader, you have been tasked with creating a new diversity program. The program should embrace a culture of inclusiveness, provide a platform for “color brave” and allow individuals an opportunity to network with all levels within the organization.
- Provide an overview of a program that you would develop at your organization.
- What obstacles do you think you would face and who would you need to involve to obtain the appropriate support?
but will have a larger administrative workload from fact-checking employee hours for the work requirements. Medicaid covers approximately forty percent of adults with opioid addiction, making demonstration waivers that adequately address opioid addiction a necessity.13 New Mexico’s waiver to treat enrollees with opioid use disorders with federal funding was recently extended for five years.16 In this waiver were authorizations to increase copayments for inappropriate emergency department use or high-cost drug utilization, to increase premiums, to terminate coverage for failure to pay premiums after a three-month period, and to eliminate retroactive coverage for new enrollees. 16 Stakeholders include Medicaid beneficiaries, the state of New Mexico, and Medicaid beneficiaries with opioid or other substance abuse disorders. Medicaid beneficiaries without a substance abuse disorder will lose substantial coverage if unable to consistently pay premiums and spend higher percentages of their total income on copayments if unable to meet new requirements; these stakeholders will only benefit from health coverage if they are able to meet the new requirements. Medicaid beneficiaries with opioid addiction or other substance abuse disorders will be harmed in the same way, but will receive an additional benefit for coverage of treatment of their substance abuse disorder. The state of New Mexico will benefit if beneficiaries are unable to meet the new requirements by controlling costs if coverage is terminated, if premiums and copayments are raised, and if beneficiaries are able to meet the requirements by choosing less costly drugs and by appropriately using emergency departments. In addition, the state of New Mexico will also benefit from a healthier population by treating opioid-dependent beneficiaries in their state. Overall, this waiver favors the state of New Mexico and may have some negative implications for Medicaid beneficiaries if they are unaware of or unable to meet new requirements. Although these demonstration waivers are designed to address very different issues affecting the Medicaid population and can be difficult to compare, I would not recommend either waiver for either issue because their implementation has a vast number of negative impacts on the populations it is designed to help. While states must include requirements to ensure sustainability of Medicaid funding, many of these requirements unfairly disadvantage an already disadvantaged population and do not seem appropriate. Ultimately, these waivers demonstrate a value system that I do not agree with nor support, and I could not recommend either waiver based on the downstream impacts it has on its beneficiaries.>GET ANSWER