Answer:
One of my most passionate belief is "Fail Better". This is the belief which I developed since childhood, my family kept on saying this me when I was just 10 years old. Since then, It has been deeply rooted and firmly suited in my mind. It has influenced me from my childhood, I never felt hesitated in taking risks, trying new ideas, things and adventures in my whole life. This has definitely impacted the way I think, behave and communicate with others. This belief was then further been transformed and translated into "Fall seven times, Get up eight". I have followed these rules very strongly in my whole life. I have started many small businesses when I was in college, almost I failed in them but I learnt so many things which none could have taught me.
Answer:
The question is incomplete, the options are missing. The options are the following:
a) Suggest to Patrice that spreading negative information learned from eavesdropping is not healthy for the workplace.
b) Thank Patrice for speaking up and forward the item to a neutral third party for handling.
c) Immediately fire the team members who made the comments.
d) Contact the team member who was the subject of the comments to see if he or she was offended.
e) Thank Patrice for her input, but based on the harmlessness of the situation, take no further action.
And the correct answer is the option B: Thank Patrice for speaking up and forward the item to a neutral third party for handling.
Explanation:
To begin with, these kind of situations are most common than expected in the workplace so that is why that nowadays exist a lot of seminars about certain subjects that involves the behavior in the organization and furthermore there is the regular action of the Human Resources Department that takes cares of all the penalties and the solutions when it comes to subjects regarding the employees of the business and their relationship both with each other and with the company. So the correct way to act in this scenario would be to thank Patrice and tell her that the manager would inform to the Human Resources Department about it, being this last one a third party in the situation itself.
Answer:
No.
Explanation:
The market should determine the price of goods and services only. The commercialization of human organs would increase the existing social inequality. This is because poor people would only be able to sell their organs, meaning they would not have the ability to buy a kidney if they needed it. On the other hand, it would increase the sale of kidneys for material survival itself, which is morally reprehensible.
