The Change Agent role is essential for a successful implementation of any project whether it is a small procedural change or a large transformational one. Given the importance of this role, it's critically important to build a network of local Change Agents with the skills and characteristics you need.
To help determine if an individual is a good fit for the Change Agent role, IMA developed the following checklist of criteria.
Does the potential candidate have:
A successful personal and organizational history
Success and credibility with key Sponsors
Trust with key Targets
Awareness of culture and sub-culture differences
Belief in the project
Knowledge of the business unit and strategy
Ability to translate the Sponsors' Frame of Reference (FOR) to the Targets' and vice versa, without their own FOR interfering
Ability to develop teamwork among Sponsors, Change Agents, and Targets by creating common goals and inter-dependence for success
Comfort level with ambiguity
Courage – (Why courage?<span> Because the Change Agent must be willing to ask Sponsors for what they need, </span><span>even when it becomes difficult or uncomfortable!)</span>
<span>
</span>
<span>
</span>
<span>hope that helps :) </span>
Society was organized into a feudal system, which was based on the allocation of land in return for services to the king
Answer:
The correct answer is C, <em>to form a stronger government</em>.
Explanation:
It was during the Shays' Rebellion (1786-1787) that became evident for conservatives that the Articles of Confederation had to be changed.
This rebellion attacked many courts and was widely feared as a moment where masses took for themselves the values of freedom in a way that endangered property and order in the newly born country.
That's why in this context figures like Alexander Hamilton argued for a strong government: to deal with situations like this that threatened the status quo. According to him and other Federalists, the Articles did not have tools for this kind of situation as it was a document where the central government barely had any power.
Answer:
The correct answer is D. It is not correct to try to convince the other person to agree with you when having a meaningful political conversation.
Explanation:
When talking about political issues, they often deal with controversial issues that can turn friendly talk into heated discussion. Therefore, as a way to prevent this, there are certain guidelines that must be taken into account.
Thus, not shouting, speaking personally and contemplating the opinion of the other party are fundamental criteria when it comes to having a serious and friendly political debate. In this way, cordiality regulates the content of the talk, and the acceptance of the thought different from the other (without the need to share it) gives legitimacy to the idea of the other person.
On the other hand, if in the conversation one of the parties tries to convince the other of its ideology, the conversation will most likely fail. This is so because when trying to convince, the other person's belief or conviction is discredited, a question that many people can take as a personal insult. Therefore, it is totally inadvisable to carry out this type of actions.
