The Human Resource manager sticks to <u>C) A structured interview</u> method of selection.
<u>Explanation</u>:
A structured interview means conducting the interview for the candidates in a standardized way. This kind of interview is conducted based on the specific needs of the job. The candidates are reviewed with the same set of questions and compared on the same scale.
The structured interviews are better to conduct as it focuses on talents. It helps in effective selection of talented candidates.
The major disadvantage of structured interview is it is not flexible, as the interview was conducted with the pre-decided questions.
Answer: i love dragons and i think they would be great if they were real. we can probaly ride them to fly places
The chaining procedure best for Patrick to deal with problems in displaying and watching others is forward chaining.
<h3>What do you mean by forward chaining?</h3>
Chaining refers to the process of teaching to make people learn new things by dividing them into small numbers and using the reinforcement method in every step to encourage them.
In the case of Patrick, the forward chaining method is used, where support and praise are provided to the learner on each step of task accomplishment. These will follow in a series of task where the second task is given only once the first task is finished.
Therefore, the forward chaining method is used to solve the issue of Patrick and to deal with multiple task alignment.
Learn more about forward chaining, here:
brainly.com/question/10636761
#SPJ1
There is no objective answer to this question, as both sides have arguments that support their views.
If you believe that you are bound by Hobbes' argument, it is because of tacit consent. Tacit consent means that, even though you have not explicitly agreed to follow laws, you have indicated your agreement through other means, for example, by using the public services of the government or by remaining within the limits of your country. Also, you could argue that any rational person would prefer to follow the rules of the government than to live in the state of nature. Therefore, if you are rational, your consent is assumed. Finally, you could also argue that while you did not explicitly agreed, maybe your ancestors did, which still binds you as a member of the same society.
On the other hand, if you believe that you are not bound by Hobbes' argument, you could argue that any contract that is not freely agreed upon is not valid. As the government uses force to make you act according to the law, you cannot be considered to be freely consenting. Also, you can argue that agreeing to follow some rules does not imply following <em>all</em> of the laws of the country. Finally, a common argument against Hobbes is the lack of empirical data. As we do not know if the state of nature is actually bad, or if the contract ever happened, the government cannot gain its legitimacy in that way.
