All categories

3 years ago

Define democratic manner of conflict management

2 answers:

5 0

Answer:The democratic management style involves managers reaching decisions with the input of the employees but being responsible for making the final decision. ... As employees are being taken into account before the manager makes decisions, the employees feel valued which increases motivation and productivity.

rusak2 [61]3 years ago

3 0

Answer:

Democratic leadership, also known as participative leadership or shared leadership, is a type of leadership style in which members of the group take a more participative role in the decision-making process. 1 This type of leadership can apply to any organization, from private businesses to schools to government.

Explanation:

You might be interested in

What kinds of help did the New Deal provide to Louisianans?

lisabon 2012 [21]

Answer:

ew Deal (literalmente en español: «Nuevo trato») es el nombre dado por el presidente de los Estados Unidos Franklin D. Roosevelt a su política intervencionista puesta en marcha para luchar contra los efectos de la Gran Depresión en Estados Unidos. Este programa se desarrolló entre 1933 y 1938 con el objetivo de sostener a las capas más pobres de la población, reformar los mercados financieros y redinamizar una economía estadounidense herida desde el crac de 1929 por el desempleo y las quiebras en cadena.

Comúnmente, se distinguen dos New Deals.nota 1 Un primero, marcado particularmente por los «Cien Días de Roosevelt» en 1933,1 que apuntaba a una mejoría de la situación a corto plazo. Se pueden encontrar, pues, leyes de reforma de los bancos, programas de asistencia social urgente, programas de ayuda para el trabajo, o incluso programas agrícolas. El Gobierno realizó así inversiones importantes y permitió el acceso a recursos financieros a través de las diversas agencias gubernamentales. Los resultados económicos fueron moderados, pero la situación mejoró.2 El «Segundo New Deal» se extendió entre 19353 y 1938, poniendo por delante una nueva distribución de los recursos y del poder en una escala más amplia, con leyes sindicales de protección,3 la Ley de Seguridad Social,3 así como programas de ayuda para agricultores y trabajadores ambulantes.nota 2 No obstante, la Corte Suprema determinó como inconstitucionales numerosas reformas legales, pero algunas partes de los programas fueron reemplazadas rápidamente, a excepción de la National Recovery Administration. El segundo New Deal fue mucho más costoso que el primero, y aumentó el déficit público. Por otro lado, a pesar de programas como la Public Works Administration, el desempleo todavía alcanzaba a 11 millones de estadounidenses en 1938.4

La lucha contra la crisis perduró hasta que Estados Unidos movilizó su economía con la Segunda Guerra Mundial.5 El éxito del New Deal es innegable en el plano social. La política llevada por el presidente Franklin D. Roosevelt cambió el país mediante reformas y no mediante una revolución.6 Por otra parte, los programas del New Deal eran abiertamente experimentales, manifiestamente perfectibles,7 y dados los costes de este proceso, se podría haber preferido un programa de cambio más completo. Sin embargo, el carácter imperfecto del New Deal permitió una crítica constructiva y una reflexión más pausada que abrió la vía a un mejoramiento de la democracia estadounidense en los años siguientes y que perdura hasta la actualidad.7 En materia sindical, la adopción de la llamada Wagner Act permitió hacer de los sindicatos unos colectivos poderosos.

Numerosos programas del New Deal todavía permanecen activos, entre los que han mantenido su nombre original están la Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), la Federal Housing Administration (FHA), la Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), pero también el Social Security System, la primera experiencia estadounidense de estado del bienestar así como la Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) en el ámbito de la regulación financiera.

Explanation:

4 0

3 years ago

2. What are two changes made to Texas's constitution while Texas was part of the Confederacy?

Rudik [331]

Explanation:

In many ways, the U.S. and Texas Constitutions are similar documents. They both embody the principles of representative democratic government, in which sovereignty emanates from the people. Both contain a bill of rights that protects civil liberties from government infringement… both provide for a bicameral legislature with a House of Representatives and a Senate… both seek a system of checks and balances and separation of powers between legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government… and both divide government power between upper and lower levels of government. In the U.S. Constitution the states are subordinate to the federal government, and in the Texas Constitution the counties are subordinate to the state government. But beyond these general features, the two constitutions could not be more different. These differences result from the fact that the two documents arose out of very different historical circumstances and for radically opposite complaints with the document each was meant to replace. With the U.S. Constitution, the problem with the earlier Articles of Confederation was that government was too decentralized and not powerful enough. The U.S. Constitution was designed to overcome these weaknesses and offer a degree of centralization and increased government power. But this is precisely what the Texas Constitution was designed to reverse and avoid. The framers of the U.S. Constitution wanted to enable government action; the framers of the Texas Constitution wanted to paralyze government action.

Length and Language

Whereas the U.S. Constitution is brief and vague and thus allows the federal government to broadly interpret the constitution and claim implied powers to meet specific public policy challenges, the Texas Constitution is long, detailed, and contains many statutory provisions that specify precisely what the government is allowed to do…or not do. When public policy challenges arise, Texas’ public officials do not have the option of interpreting the constitution in a manner that would allow them to deviate from the specific language of the document. Instead, public officials must amend the constitution if they wish to act outside of the detailed language set forth in the basic law. The location of language in each document is also revealing. Whereas specific civil liberties in the U.S. Constitution are mostly listed in amendments known as the Bill of Rights, a Bill of Rights forms the very first article of the Texas Constitution.

The Executive Branch

Governor Rick Perry signing a billWhereas the U.S. Constitution creates a unitary executive that concentrates executive power in the president, the Texas Constitution creates a plural executive that disperses executive power across multiple elected offices, thereby fragmenting the executive branch of government and preventing power over the executive branch from concentrating in any one individual or office. One point of interest, however, concerns the chief executive’s power to veto bills passed by the legislature. The line-item veto in the Texas Constitution allows the governor to veto specific items contained within appropriations bills passed by the legislature. At the federal level, however, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled the line-item veto unconstitutional, arguing that it violates the separation of powers between the legislative and executive branches. The fact that the Texas Constitution provides for a line-item veto demonstrates an affinity for limited government and limited spending, even if it comes at a cost of granting power to the governor in a way the rest of the constitution is designed to avoid.

The Legislative Branch

Interior photo of the Texas House of RepresentativesLegislatively, there is very little in the U.S. Constitution that limits the tax and spending policies which U.S. Representatives and Senators may write into law. In Texas, however, detailed restrictions on tax and spending policies significantly restrict what state legislators are actually allowed to write into law. For example, legislators are constitutionally forbidden from implementing a tax on personal income or allowing the state government to go into debt, and the constitution mandates that specific percentages of the state budget be spent on specific policy areas, most notably for public schools and universities as stipulated in Article 7. Furthermore, the U.S. Congress is a full-time, professional legislature that meets annually; members of Congress make their living as elected officials. But the Texas legislature is a part-time, non-professional legislature that meets every two years for 140-day sessions. The constitutionally mandated salary of $7,200 per year compels members of the Texas legislature to earn a living outside politics.

6 0

3 years ago

Help help help last quiz questions

ladessa [460]

Answer:

Explanation:

6 0

3 years ago

_____ is defined as a philosophy and collection of planned change interventions designed to improve an organization's long-term

NISA [10]

I believe "<span>organizational development" is the answer that you are looking for.</span>

4 0

3 years ago

What is the definition to <br> Method or way

inna [77]

Answer:

Method is a particular form of procedure for accomplishing or approaching something, especially a systematic or established one.

way is a typical manner in which something happens or in which someone or something behaves.

3 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Define democratic manner of conflict management￼

Define democratic manner of conflict management