The correct answer is "Criterion validity."
The option that determines this relationship is <em>criterion validity.</em>
When using criterion validity, Patagonia tries to assess a potential employee’s capability within the standards of the organization. The managers of the company want to determine how well they predict a potential employee’s actual job performance based on scores on the employee’s selection procedure.
This statistical method -criteria validity- tries to identify how well a measure validates or predicts an outcome of another measure. In a company, the Human Resources Department applies this test to a candidate as part of the interview mechanism to confirm that he/she would be the right candidate for the job.
1. <span>It let people ride to work so they could live further away from their jobs.
</span><span>
2. </span>Disease, fire, and crime.
3. It's a tricky question but this refers to majority, so the answer is "<span>They came through Ellis Island on the East Coast."
4. This is also a tricky one, but the answer is "</span>It established the idea of "Separate", but equal."
Answer:
b. social distinctions were more blurred than in europe.
Explanation:
<u>British taxes practically caused the revolution of the colonies</u>, therefore option "A" is not the correct answer.
That various religious and ethnic groups coexisted in the American colonies was no reason for colonists to tend to support British royalty (D).<em> In fact, diversity and immigration were one of the reasons why the thirteen colonies flourished so quickly.</em>
The colonists didn´t feel that British royalty did anything for them as they had to survive on their own, dedicating themselves mainly to agriculture. <u>The difference in wealth between the inhabitants of England and the colonists was very large, therefore the colonists did not feel entitled to the rights of English citizens (C). Not because the American colonies had a great diversity of religious and ethnic groups.</u>
Because the American colonies were home to diverse religious and ethnic groups, social distinctions were more blurred than in Europe (B). In New England, diversity was ironically the point in common that its inhabitants had and that would lead them to fight for their independence.
I would say A they believed in hindu gods and the caste system
I honestly don't know sorry
Answer:
Social responsibility is an ethical framework and suggests that an entity, be it an organization or individual, has an obligation to act for the benefit of society at large.[citation needed] Social responsibility is a duty every individual has to perform so as to maintain a balance between the economy and the ecosystems. A trade-off may exist between economic development, in the material sense, and the welfare of the society and environment,[1] though this has been challenged by many reports over the past decade.[when?][2][3] Social responsibility means sustaining the equilibrium between the two. It pertains not only to business organizations but also to everyone whose any action impacts the environment.[4] This responsibility can be passive, by avoiding engaging in socially harmful acts, or active, by performing activities that directly advance social goals. Social responsibility must be intergenerational since the actions of one generation have consequences on those following.[5]
Businesses can use ethical decision making to secure their businesses by making decisions that allow for government agencies to minimize their involvement with the corporation.[6] For instance if a company follows the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) guidelines for emissions on dangerous pollutants and even goes an extra step to get involved in the community and address those concerns that the public might have; they would be less likely to have the EPA investigate them for environmental concerns.[7] "A significant element of current thinking about privacy, however, stresses "self-regulation" rather than market or government mechanisms for protecting personal information".[8] According to some experts, most rules and regulations are formed due to public outcry, which threatens profit maximization and therefore the well-being of the shareholder, and that if there is not an outcry there often will be limited regulation.[9]
Some critics argue that corporate social responsibility (CSR) distracts from the fundamental economic role of businesses; others argue that it is nothing more than superficial window-dressing, or "greenwashing";[10] others argue that it is an attempt to pre-empt the role of governments as a watchdog over powerful corporations though there is no systematic evidence to support these criticisms. A significant number of studies have shown no negative influence on shareholder results from CSR but rather a slightly negative correlation with improved shareholder returns.[11]
Explanation:
plzz mark me as brainlist
