Answer:
- If they really want to go together, Pat and Mark could make a one-week trip to the beach, and spend the second-week hiking in the mountains. They could also choose to go on separate trips, so each can spent the entire vacation in their desired destination. Or they could go together to one of those places and agree to let the other person choose the destination in a future trip.
- Given that it´s Pat´s money, She should be able to decide, and Mark can enjoy the result of whatever she chooses. Pat could accept Mark´s choice by making sure he brings something to the table, like being in charge of organizing the vacation, and make it to a place Pat really would like to go. They could also split the money and make a small trip as well as buying either the computer or the printer, but not both.
- Pat could try to change her behavior and use the opportunity to ask Mark to change something she dislikes about him. Or, they could just accept that Pat is just not an organized person, find something Mark is not good at as well. Let´s say, ironing his own clothes. They could agree that each of them will take charge of what the other person won´t do.
- It´s difficult to find a win-win resolution to this case because workers have a legal right to assemble and fight for fair wages. Management could concede on a lower raise as long as they can offer some other perks, like providing food for their employers.
Explanation:
Personally, win-win strategies help me understand that when resolving conflicts one must consider the other side´s needs and be willing to compromise. I usually become a little stubborn when in such a situation, focusing on how I´m right and others should accept that. Trying to come with win-win solutions will probably help me get better results and keep relationships healthy.
The factor that led to shifts in the supreme court decisions over time is that
- The ideological composition of the justices on the Supreme Court shifted to become less liberal over time.
<h3>
How the supreme court Justices became less liberal</h3>
The supreme court justices became less liberal due to the fact that a lot of these judges were conservatives.
The conservative judges were the ones that were in favor of keeping the ideals and the traditions that the country was built on.
<u>complete question:</u>
Which of the following factors most likely led to shifts in Supreme Court decision making over time?
The ideological composition of the justices on the Supreme Court shifted to become less liberal over time.
After 1960, the Supreme Court deferred to the wishes of state and local governments rather than voting to expand the authority of the federal government.
Rather than pass new legislation, Congress was inclined to refer civil rights legislation to the Supreme Court.
Constitutional amendments enabled the Supreme Court to issue more liberal decisions.
The ideological composition of the justices on the Supreme Court shifted to become less liberal over
Read more on conservatives here:brainly.com/question/8668324
Answer:
Option C
Explanation:
According to the case given in the question, the competitive force as seen from the Porter's Five Forces Industry Analysis Structure, is the Supplier's bargaining force.
This competitive force in the industry is the perfect representation of the haggling intensity of purchasers and alludes to the weight providers can put on organizations by raising their costs, bringing down their quality, or lessening the accessibility of their items.
