Describe two (2) outcomes of the 3/5ths Compromise, Missouri Compromise of 1820, Compromise of 1850, Kansas-Nebraska Act, and the Dred Scott Decision. Note: Be sure to provide two (2) outcomes for each legislation. Suggest three (3) reasons why slavery was, and is, incompatible with our political and economic system. List three to five (3-5) driving forces that led to the Civil War. Use at least three (3) academic references besides or in addition to the textbook. Note: Wikipedia and other similar websites do not qualify as academic resources. Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements: This course requires use of Strayer Writing Standards (SWS). The format is different than other Strayer University courses. Please take a moment to review the SWS documentation for details. The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are: Recognize the main factors that led to America’s early development. Identify and discuss the different ways that the heritages of slavery, the Civil War, and Reconstruction have shaped America’s history. Summarize and discuss the ways that formal policies of government have influenced the direction of historical and social development in the United States. Examine how changes in social and economic conditions and technology can cause corresponding changes in the attitudes of the people and policies of the government. Specify ways that women and minorities have responded to challenges and made contributions to American culture. Use technology and information resources to research issues in American History to 1865. Write clearly and concisely about American History to 1865 using proper writing mechanics.
Basic issues The huge house manufacturers have utilitarian network structure and the little firm ltd has an undertaking grid structure. The little firm should work extremely difficult to accompany the structure of the substantial house manufacturers. The extensive house manufacturers have an extremely efficient formal structure where as the little firm has a casual structure. Social issues The Large house developer has a Role culture in which each administrator has a specific part alloted on which he is responsible for his work to the best administration though the little firm has control culture in which entire power is focused on the pioneer or single individual. Such issues may deliver a conflict between two gatherings. Key issues The Large House Builders have embraced the analyzers procedure where they are quick to grow their organization as per given advertising conditions and react to showcase changes. Then again, Small firm embraces protectors system in which they carry out the activity in their own particular field of ability sparing themselves fro outside dangers as a result of having family culture. Such issues may cause an obstacle towards progress between the two organizations. To adapt up to such challenges a multi year change administration plan will be setup with the goal that the way toward incorporating two organizations of various culture, structure and technique can run easily. TWO YEARS CHANGE MANAGEMENT PLAN To realize change in the association, important two change administration plan is to be setup for the correct ramifications of parts and occupations of the two distinct groups i.e. the Large House Builder plc and the Small Firm ltd. Lewin's (1947) three phase change administration plan for the people of the association can be setup as: Unfreeze Change Re-solidify Kottar's (1996) eight phases change administration plan will be utilized to execute an effective change in the association. The eight phase plan is: Setting up a feeling of direness Making the managing alliance Building up a dream and methodology Correspondence the change vision Enabling expansive based activity Producing here and now wins Union gains and delivering more change Tying down new methodologies in the way of life The two change administration methodologies will be incorporated so that an appropriate setup over a time of two years will be built up which will improve the organization's execution. FIRST YEAR The primary year of the mergence of Small Firm ltd into the Large House Builders plc will be extremely pivotal the same number of complaints and errors are probably going to be experienced. In spite of the fact that the foreseen results of the mergence is probably going to produce a ton of advantage to both the organizations yet the underlying couple of months are viewed as extremely touchy for the Small Firm Ltd. The change administration plan is separated in Quarters of a year and conceivable arranged exercise is dissected as takes after: FIRST QUARTER (Q1): Amid the primary quarter of the main year the Small Firm Ltd will be in the learning stage and would consider approaches to defeat the obstructions which would oppose their way towards the change. As per Greenberg (1996), an association can experience with two unique kinds of obstructions in change. Authoritative Barriers to Change Singular Barriers to Change 1. Authoritative BARRIERS TO CHANGE In some cases terms and conditions are such set in an association which boundaries a change to happen (Katz and Kahn, 1978). Following are the authoritative hindrances to change in the perspective of Greenberg (1996): a) Structural idleness The Small Firm Ltd and the Large House Builders plc fundamentally contrast concerning the association structure they have worked in previously. The Small firm ltd will figure out how to embrace the divisional structure of the huge house manufacturers by blending their chief with the divisional directors of expansive house developers. b) Work aggregate latency The substantial house developers and the little firm have their own specific manners to finish the alloted assignment. An errand isn't simply finished as it a piece of the activity truth be told, it is on the grounds that the individual gain from his social qualities to finish a specific undertaking as doled out Greenberg (1996). So to handle the weight of fulfillment of undertaking at the two closures is diverse which should be considered when allocating errands. c) Threats to existing parity of intensity This issue is critical with regards to change inside two associations as the overseeing intensity of the two firms is altogether not the same as each other. For instance the Large manufacturers have an administration board and a CEO who is accountable for settling on enter choices though in Small firm there is a solitary power or a pioneer who takes key choices. After mergence, a contention would be raised up amid the assignment and distribution of forces inside the association. d) Previously unsuccessful change endeavors. Both the organizations are very comfortable with the way that change administration hypotheses as of late received by firms haven't ended up being effective yet both will balance out themselves with firm inspiration and diligent work. 2. Singular BARRIERS TO CHANGE The Small firm being in the underlying phase of mergence will confront awesome trouble to adapt to the individual boundaries to change. As indicated by an examination done by Nadler (1987), there are numerous variables that obstacle the method for individuals towards a change. These variables are: an) Economic instability A critical point which comes into one's psyche amid a change at any level of work is that whether my activity is anchored? Am I getting the correct pay? Such issues when mulled over amid a change in such a period of Credit crunch may modify the brains of the representatives of the Large developers as well as in actuality the little firm ltd too. The reason being that both the organizations are going to re-find and re-allocate the undertakings to the people which my intrude on the coveted execution of individuals. b) Fear of obscure While following indistinguishable routine of work from taken after by the staff for a significant long time, the staff felt anchored that they had a decent level of understanding created between other staff individuals and chiefs. Converging with somebody you haven't worked with before will set up a dread of obscure and everybody will be in an express that something can turn out badly whenever Greenberg (1996). c) Threats to social relationship Because of a change the individuals from the firm feel un-loose and unreliable as they had great connection ships with the individuals they were already working with. Because of this an absence of correspondence would be produced which would oppose the familiarity of work. d) Habit By completing a comparative sort of work for past numerous years builds up a characteristic marvel for an individual and the individual winds up ongoing to it. Any adjustment in type of a change/new occupation, can result in mental disappointment coming about is low execution. e) Failure to perceive requirement for change In circumstances where the people of the association can't comprehend the need of progress can result in an entire catastrophe. To beat this, vital advances, for example, mindfulness crusades are raced to set up a level of comprehension among the laborers with the goal that they are very much aware of the upsides of progress. Amid the First Quarter (Q1) of the main year, the Small firm Ltd will adapt up to the underlying challenges of settlement in the association. With the further upgrade of the Multi year change administration plan, there would not be any inconsistency left inside both the associations after>GET ANSWER