When meeting with your team members to discuss your bridge construction project schedule, the listening style that will help you achieve your goals is the time-oriented style.
<h3 /><h3>Listening styles</h3>
Four listening styles were developed by Barker (1971) and Watson (1995) that should be used according to the individuals' purposes. Are they:
- People oriented
- Content oriented
- Action oriented
- Time oriented
Therefore, as there has been a change in the schedule with the shortening of the deadline for the completion of the bridge, it is necessary that the time-oriented listening style will assist in the development of the best strategy for meeting the deadline.
In this style of listening, the focus is on time management, in search of objective and quick answers that go straight to the point and generate faster processes.
Find out more information about listening styles here:
brainly.com/question/10237797
Answer:
Explaination given below:
Explanation:
The Permanent School Fund distributes money to school districts across the state based on the two factors as follows:
* student attendance
&
* guaranteed bonds issued by local school boards
The Permanent School Fund was organized in the year around 1854. The central goal of the Permanent School Fund is to support primary as well as secondary schools in the state.
It’s C) The geocentric orientation
I hope this helped out, have a nice day! :)
Answer:
D
Explanation:
This will help her develop journalism skills at a younger age
Answer:
B) the uneven distribution of gains and losses from free trade.
Explanation:
One of the most important reasons why governments impose trade barriers is to protect domestic jobs (and domestic industries). We are part of a society (country), and society's most important component is people, not money. Generally the economic gains of free trade are larger than the economic losses, but the economic losses hurt the most.
Imagine if no trade barriers actually existed, how many millions of jobs would be lost in the US. Trade barriers are nothing new, the current president didn't invent them. He just incinerated them.
How does a leader tell the people that 10 or 20 million must lose their jobs and probably will not be able to find any similar jobs in the future just because the rest of society will benefit from cheaper products. The lives of 20 million households (50-80 million people) would be destroyed, while 280 million people would benefit.
The amount of harm done to the people that lose their jobs is much greater than any individual benefit.
