Leadership In The Military

There is surely no more talent nor more hope for the future than right here in this room. I envy you and I wish I could trade places with you, but at the same time, looking at all of you I am supremely confident that here among you sit the future great captains of our military and that we can all be very confident about tomorrow. And I am convinced that if he were alive today, Gen. Marshall would be right here, for there is nothing that that great soldier loved more than to talk about service and to talk about leadership.As he himself once said on a similar occasion, looking across a room full of future leaders, â€Å"You're young,† he said, â€Å"and you're vigorous, and your service will be the foundation for peace and prosperity throughout the world. † Certainly as I look at you the same is true this morning. Truly you here in this room are our future. And it is most fitting for us to come together right here in these very halls where George Marshall once walked to h onor him and to reflect on his great contributions and to share some thoughts on leadership.If you were to think back over this century, you would realize very quickly that our Army has produced some truly remarkable military leaders. I am confident that if I were to ask all of you to take pen to paper and to write down the names of the great Army leaders of this century, you would be at it for a very long time, and when you were done, the lists that you produced would be very long. Just to name the most famous, there was, of course, Black Jack Pershing, Omar Bradley, George Patton, Dwight Eisenhower, Douglas MacArthur, Lightning Joe Collins and most recently two of my former bosses, Norman Schwarzkopf and Colin Powell.Each of these officers was remarkably gifted. But if you study them closely, you realize that each was very different, that the fame they acquired had very different roots. Omar Bradley — simple, unadorned, humble, but of them all he was the soldier's soldier à ¢â‚¬â€ loved by his subordinates and considered by Eisenhower to be the boldest and most dogged of his Army group commanders. Or there was Eisenhower himself, a leader of incalculable depth, intricacy and complexity.Some say his outward appearance and reputation were those of an officer who compromised easily, and who others thought was only thinly grounded in the knowledge of war fighting, but one with a keen sense for what it took to maintain cohesion within our W[orld] W[ar] II coalition. But if you were to look closer, you would discover that these were the traits Eisenhower wanted others to believe, for he was surrounded by huge egos, both among the talented commanders in his theater and among the nations that comprised our alliance.Quite contrary to these assertions, he held deep convictions, and he never ceded or compromised any point that he felt important. Our campaign to seize Europe from the Nazis was the very campaign he visualized at the start of the war back in 1942, a plan for which at first there was only lukewarm support among American leaders and nearly total opposition from our British allies.Yet when it was done, it was Eisenhower's approach we executed, and it was militarily brilliant. And any study of our great generals must include that incredible warrior, George Patton, a tenacious and hard-bitten fighter who felt the pulse and flow of the battlefield in his veins, who had an innate knack for inspiring soldiers to fight beyond all limits of their endurance, but also a soldier with a renowned appetite for fame and approval.And we could talk about so many others, for our Army has produced such a rich abundance of talented leaders. But there is one giant who stands above them all. That officer was, of course, George Catlett Marshall. More than any soldier of this century, I'm convinced Marshall epitomized the qualities that we want in our leaders. He had MacArthur's brilliance and courtliness. He had Patton's tenacity and drive. He had Br adley's personal magnetism, the  ability to inspire confidence and deep affection from any who came into his presence.But more than that, Marshall had the organizational skills that in a few short years converted an Army of only several hundred thousand, with only a handful of modern weapons and no modern battlefield experience, into an Army of over 8 million — the best equipped, the best fighting army in the world, an army that defeated the two most powerful empires of its time.More than that, he had a rare intuition, a nearly flawless inner sense for other men's strengths that allowed him to see the spark of leadership in others, and when he saw that spark, to place such men into key assignments and then to fully support their efforts. He did that time and again, hundreds of times, with remarkable accuracy. And as we learned after the war, he was as well perhaps the greatest statesman and visionary of his age.All of us should remember that the occupations of Germany and J apan were commanded by military officers, but we should also remember that the architect of these occupations was Marshall. But even beyond this, in 1948, with a few words uttered in a speech at Harvard, Marshall put in motion the plan that would rebuild Western Europe, that would recover its people from enormous poverty, that would reweave the entire tapestry of nations from the conflict-addicted patterns of the past to what we see today: a Western Europe poised on the edge of becoming a cohesive union of nations.What an accomplishment! It is staggering to think of what this one officer accomplished in his career of service to his nation. But most humbling is to realize that to his death Marshall remained an entirely selfless man, a man who returned to service even from a well-deserved and long-sought retirement because a president requested him to do so, a man who never, ever exploited his reputation for any personal gain. If we were to ask a sculptor to produce a bust of a great leader and  described to that sculptor all of the traits and qualities that that bust should reflect, I have absolutely no doubt that that bust would look exactly like Gen. George C. Marshall.And so for those of us like you and I, who make soldiering our way of life, it is always instructive to take the time to reflect on Gen. Marshall's career, for by so doing we are reminded of much that we should try to emulate. But you are here for a different reason. You are here because I think you worry about these next steps for you, which will lead to a gold bar of a second lieutenant.I doubt very much that you are searching for answers about how to mobilize for war, how to free an enslaved Europe or how to rebuild a destroyed nation, although some day your country may ask just that from you. If you are like I was when I waited to pin on my lieutenant's bars, your thoughts are more about the challenges of a platoon leader than those of a general. The other week while a guest on Larry King 's show, Larry asked me when I first thought of becoming a general and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs. The answer was very simple.I told him that when I was a private my ambition was to become a good one so someday I could become a good corporal. And when 36 years ago, in 1959, the year that Gen. Marshall died, I was commissioned a second lieutenant and shipped off to Fairbanks, Alaska, and became a platoon leader in the mortar battery of the 1st Battle Group of the 9th Infantry, my thoughts were certainly not on becoming a general or colonel or major or even a captain!My thoughts were on becoming a good platoon leader, about being up to the challenge of leading my soldiers, about not making a fool of myself in front of Sgt.1st Class Grice, the platoon sergeant of that first platoon of mine. And I was right to concentrate on the job at hand, for the job of a lieutenant is a tough one — in many ways, perhaps, the toughest one — but it is without a doubt also the most important, and if you take to it, also the most rewarding. I was very fortunate, because I had Sergeant Grice to guide me and to teach me. And teach and guide me he did, without ever making me feel inadequate and without ever permitting me to be ill-prepared, because he was the best!And if there is one thing I wish for each and every one of you, it is a Sergeant Grice to teach you about soldiers, about leaders, and the responsibilities and joys of soldiering together. Not everyone is as blessed as I was; not everyone finds his Sergeant Grice, and many don't not because he isn't there, but because unknowingly and foolishly they push him away. Don't do that. Look for your Sergeant Grice; NCOs have so very much to teach us. Well, what did I learn from Sergeant Grice?Certainly more than I have time to tell you here, and also because many helpful hints have probably by now faded from my memory. But what I learned then and what has been reinforced in the 36 years since is that good leader ship, whether in the world of a lieutenant or in the world of a general, is based essentially on three pillars. These three pillars he taught me are character, love and care for soldiers, and professional competence. Oh, Sergeant Grice didn't exactly use these terms, but what he believed and what he taught me fit very neatly into these three pillars.He used to say that if the platoon ever sensed that I wasn't up front with them, if they ever believed I did something so I would look good at their expense, I would very quickly lose them. How right he was. Often he would say, â€Å"Look down. Worry about what your soldiers think. Don't worry about looking up, about what the captain thinks of you. † He never said it, that's not the kind of relationship that he and I had, but I knew that if I ever said something to the platoon or to him that wasn't the absolute truth, he would never trust me again and I would be finished as a platoon leader.I would be finished as a leader. Someone once said that men of genius are admired, men of wealth are envied men of power are feared but only men of character are trusted. Without trust you cannot lead. I have never seen a good unit where the leaders weren't trusted. It's just that simple. And it isn't enough that you say the right things. What counts in a platoon is not so much what you say, but what they see you do. Gen. Powell, speaking here a few years ago, put it this way: â€Å"If you want them to work hard and endure hardship,† he observed, â€Å"you must work even harder and endure even greater hardship.†Ã¢â‚¬Å"They must see you sacrifice for them,† he said. They must see you do the hard things, they must see you giving credit to the platoon for something good you did, and they must see you take the blame for something they hadn't gotten just right. But Sergeant Grice also understood that hand in hand with character, with this inner strength that soldiers will want to see, they will also want to know and see that you really care for them, that you will sacrifice for them, that you simply enjoy being with them. Words won't get you through there, either.If you don't feel it in your heart, if you don't love your soldiers in your heart, they will know it. How often Sergeant Grice would prod me to spend the extra time to get to know the members of the platoon better, to know who needed extra training and coaching so he could fire expert on the rifle range the next time around; to talk to Pvt. Taylor, who just received a â€Å"Dear John† letter; to visit Cpl. Vencler and his wife, who had a sick child. Every day you will have soldiers who will need your care, your concern and your help.They expect and, I tell  you, they have the right to expect, 150 percent of your time and best effort. And how well I remember those evenings in the field when Sergeant Grice and I would stand in the cold, with a cup of coffee in our hands trying to warm our frozen fingers, watching the p latoon go through the chow line. Grice taught me that simple but long-standing tradition that officers go to the very end of the chow line, that the officer is the last one to eat, that the officer will take his or her first bite only after the last soldier has had a chance to eat.This tradition, as you so well know, is founded in the understanding that leaders place the welfare of their people above their own, that the officer is responsible for the welfare of the troops; that if mismanagement results in a shortage of food to feed the entire unit, that the officer will go without; that if the food gets cold while the unit is being served, that the officer will get the chilliest portion. It is a tradition that surprises many officers from other nations, but it goes to the core of the kind of leadership we provide our soldiers. But caring for our soldiers does not stop at the chow line.Nor, for that matter, does it stop with the soldiers themselves, for you know that our units are fa milies, and a soldier must have the trust that you will take care of his family, particularly when he's away from home. But caring for soldiers actually starts with making them the best possible soldiers they can be. Their satisfaction with themselves, their confidence in themselves and in the end, their lives will depend upon how well you do that part. And that perhaps is your greatest challenge as a lieutenant. It is hard work, and make no mistake about it, there are no shortcuts.But what a joy it is to watch or to talk to young men and women in uniform, who know that they are the best because a Sergeant Grice and his or her lieutenant cared to teach them and to work with them and to make them reach for the highest standards. Which brings me to the third pillar I spoke of, and that is your professional competence. As we look back on Marshall and on Patton and on MacArthur and all of the others, we realize that the skills and qualities and knowledge that made them great generals to ok decades of training, of experience and of evolution.For all of the differences between these leaders there is one thing that they had in common. Their careers were marked by a progression of difficult assignments and intense study. Always they were a snapshot of a masterpiece still in progress, still in motion. From the beginning of their careers to the end, each of them was continually applying new brushstrokes to their knowledge and to their skills. And Grice understood that very well, although he had different words for it.He knew that if our platoon was going to be good at occupying a position and firing our mortars, at hastily leaving our position should enemy artillery have found our location, at the countless things that would make us a finely honed war-fighting machine, then he had to show me, he had to teach me and to practice with me, so that when I walked that gun line the soldiers would know that I knew more than they; that if I asked them how to cut a mortar fuse, th ere was no doubt that I would know the answer, just as I would know if there was too much play in the sight mount on that mortar.And I had to feel confident that knew before they would feel confident with me. In every good leader I have met in my years of service there always was the evidence of these three qualities: character, love for soldiers and professional competence. And because they possessed these qualities, they managed to inspire their soldiers to have confidence in them. And you know, the truly great ones like George C. Marshall did not only inspire soldiers to have confidence in their leaders, but they also inspired their soldiers to have confidence in themselves.With that, let me close. As I told you in the beginning, I am deeply envious of each of you. Since the days when I first put on my uniform, I fell in love with soldiering and with soldiers, and it has been for me, by any measure, a great passion. If I could start all over today, I would not hesitate for a sing le second. I would go out and I would find old Sergeant Grice and we would be ready tomorrow morning! Good luck to you all. I envy you. Leadership in the Military There is surely no more talent nor more hope for the future than right here in this room. I envy you and I wish I could trade places with you, but at the same time, looking at all of you I am supremely confident that here among you sit the future great captains of our military and that we can all be very confident about tomorrow.And I am convinced that if he were alive today, Gen. Marshall would be right here, for there is nothing that that great soldier loved more than to talk about service and to talk about leadership.As he himself once said on a similar occasion, looking across a room full of future leaders, â€Å"You're young,† he said, â€Å"and you're vigorous, and your service will be the foundation for peace and prosperity throughout the world.† Certainly as I look at you the same is true this morning.Truly you here in this room are our future. And it is most fitting for us to come together right here in these very halls where George Marshall once walked to hono r him and to reflect on his great contributions and to share some thoughts on leadership.If you were to think back over this century, you would realize very quickly that our Army has produced some truly remarkable military leaders.I am confident that if I were to ask all of you to take pen to paper and to write down the names of the great Army leaders of this century, you would be at it for a very long time, and when you were done, the lists that you produced would be very long.Just to name the most famous, there was, of course, Black Jack Pershing, Omar Bradley, George Patton, Dwight Eisenhower, Douglas MacArthur, Lightning Joe Collins and most recently two of my former bosses, Norman Schwarzkopf and Colin Powell.Each of these officers was remarkably gifted. But if you study them closely, you realize that each was very different, that the fame they acquired had  very different roots. Omar Bradley — simple, unadorned, humble, but of them all he was the soldier's soldier â⠂¬â€ loved by his subordinates and considered by Eisenhower to be the boldest and most dogged of his Army group commanders.Or there was Eisenhower himself, a leader of incalculable depth, intricacy and complexity. Some say his outward appearance and reputation were those of an officer who compromised easily, and who others thought was only thinly grounded in the knowledge of war fighting, but one with a keen sense for what it took to maintain cohesion within our W[orld] W[ar] II coalition.But if you were to look closer, you would discover that these were the traits Eisenhower wanted others to believe, for he was surrounded by huge egos, both among the talented commanders in his theater and among the nations that comprised our alliance. Quite contrary to these assertions, he held deep convictions, and he never ceded or compromised any point that he felt important.Our campaign to seize Europe from the Nazis was the very campaign he visualized at the start of the war back in 1942, a p lan for which at first there was only lukewarm support among American leaders and nearly total opposition from our British allies. Yet when it was done, it was Eisenhower's approach we executed, and it was militarily brilliant.And any study of our great generals must include that incredible warrior, George Patton, a tenacious and hard-bitten fighter who felt the pulse and flow of the battlefield in his veins, who had an innate knack for inspiring soldiers to fight beyond all limits of their endurance, but also a soldier with a renowned appetite for fame and approval.And we could talk about so many others, for our Army has produced such a rich abundance of talented leaders. But there is one giant who stands above them all. That officer was, of course, George Catlett Marshall. More than any soldier of this century, I'm convinced Marshall epitomized the qualities that we want in our leaders. He had MacArthur's brilliance and courtliness. He had Patton's tenacity and drive. He had Bradl ey's personal magnetism, the  ability to inspire confidence and deep affection from any who came into his presence.But more than that, Marshall had the organizational skills that in a few short years converted an Army of only several hundred thousand, with only a handful of modern weapons and no modern battlefield experience, into an Army of over 8 million — the best equipped, the best fighting army in the world, an army that defeated the two most powerful empires of its time.More than that, he had a rare intuition, a nearly flawless inner sense for other men's strengths that allowed him to see the spark of leadership in others, and when he saw that spark, to place such men into key assignments and then to fully support their efforts. He did that time and again, hundreds of times, with remarkable accuracy.And as we learned after the war, he was as well perhaps the greatest statesman and visionary of his age. All of us should remember that the occupations of Germany and Japa n were commanded by military officers, but we should also remember that the architect of these occupations was Marshall.But even beyond this, in 1948, with a few words uttered in a speech at Harvard, Marshall put in motion the plan that would rebuild Western Europe, that would recover its people from enormous poverty, that would reweave the entire tapestry of nations from the conflict-addicted patterns of the past to what we see today: a Western Europe poised on the edge of becoming a cohesive union of nations. What an accomplishment!It is staggering to think of what this one officer accomplished in his career of service to his nation. But most humbling is to realize that to his death Marshall remained an entirely selfless man, a man who returned to service even from a well-deserved and long-sought retirement because a president requested him to do so, a man who never, ever exploited his reputation for any personal gain.If we were to ask a sculptor to produce a bust of a great leade r and described to that sculptor all of the traits and qualities that that bust should reflect, I have absolutely no doubt that that bust would look exactly like Gen. George C. Marshall.And so for those of us like you and I, who make soldiering our way of life, it is always instructive to take the time to reflect on Gen. Marshall's career, for by so doing we are reminded of much that we should try to emulate.But you are here for a different reason. You are here because I think you worry about these next steps for you, which will lead to a gold bar of a second lieutenant. I doubt very much that you are searching for answers about how to mobilize for war, how to free an enslaved Europe or how to rebuild a destroyed nation, although some day your country may ask just that from you.If you are like I was when I waited to pin on my lieutenant's bars, your thoughts are more about the challenges of a platoon leader than those of a general.The other week while a guest on Larry King's show, L arry asked me when I first thought of becoming a general and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs. The answer was very simple. I told him that when I was a private my ambition was to become a good one so someday I could become a good corporal. And when 36 years ago, in 1959, the year that Gen. Marshall died, I was commissioned a second lieutenant and shipped off to Fairbanks, Alaska, and became a platoon leader in the mortar battery of the 1st Battle Group of the 9th Infantry, my thoughts were certainly not on becoming a general or colonel or major or even a captain!My thoughts were on becoming a good platoon leader, about being up to the challenge of leading my soldiers, about not making a fool of myself in front of Sgt. 1st Class Grice, the platoon sergeant of that first platoon of mine.And I was right to concentrate on the job at hand, for the job of a lieutenant is a tough one — in many ways, perhaps, the toughest one — but it is without a doubt also the most important , and if you take to it, also the most rewarding.I was very fortunate, because I had Sergeant Grice to guide me and to teach me. And teach and guide me he did, without ever making me feel inadequate and without ever permitting me to be ill-prepared, because he was the best!And if there is one thing I wish for each and every one of you, it is a Sergeant Grice to teach you about soldiers, about leaders, and the responsibilities and joys of soldiering together. Not everyone is as blessed as I was; not everyone finds his Sergeant Grice, and many don't not because he isn't there, but because unknowingly and foolishly they push him away. Don't do that. Look for your Sergeant Grice; NCOs have so very much to teach us.Well, what did I learn from Sergeant Grice? Certainly more than I have time to tell you here, and also because many helpful hints have probably by now faded from my memory.But what I learned then and what has been reinforced in the 36 years since is that good leadership, wheth er in the world of a lieutenant or in the world of a general, is based essentially on three pillars.These three pillars he taught me are character, love and care for soldiers, and professional competence.Oh, Sergeant Grice didn't exactly use these terms, but what he believed and what he taught me fit very neatly into these three pillars.He used to say that if the platoon ever sensed that I wasn't up front with them, if they ever believed I did something so I would look good at their expense, I would very quickly lose them. How right he was.Often he would say, â€Å"Look down. Worry about what your soldiers think. Don't worry about looking up, about what the captain thinks of you.†He never said it, that's not the kind of relationship that he and I had, but I knew that if I ever said something to the platoon or to him that wasn't the absolute truth, he would never trust me again and I would be finished as a platoon leader. I would be finished as a leader.Someone once said that men of genius are admired, men of wealth are envied men of power are feared but only men of character are trusted. Without trust you cannot lead. I have never seen a good unit where the leaders weren't trusted. It's just that simple.And it isn't enough that you say the right things. What counts in a platoon is not so much what you say, but what they see you do.Gen. Powell, speaking here a few years ago, put it this way: â€Å"If you want them to work hard and endure hardship,† he observed, â€Å"you must work even harder and endure even greater hardship.† â€Å"They must see you sacrifice for them,† he said. They must see you do the hard things, they must see you giving credit to the platoon for something good you did, and they must see you take the blame for something they hadn't gotten just right.But Sergeant Grice also understood that hand in hand with character, with this inner strength that soldiers will want to see, they will also want to know and see that you really care for them, that you will sacrifice for them, that you simply enjoy being with them. Words won't get you through there, either. If you don't feel it in your heart, if you don't love your soldiers in your heart, they will know it.How often Sergeant Grice would prod me to spend the extra time to get to know the members of the platoon better, to know who needed extra training and coaching so he could fire expert on the rifle range the next time around; to talk to Pvt. Taylor, who just received a â€Å"Dear John† letter; to visit Cpl. Vencler and his wife, who had a sick child. Every day you will have soldiers who will need your care, your concern and your help. They expect and, I tell you, they have the right to expect, 150 percent of your time and best effort.And how well I remember those evenings in the field when Sergeant Grice and I would stand in the cold, with a cup of coffee in our hands trying to warm our frozen fingers, watching the platoon go through the chow line. Grice taught me that simple but long-standing tradition that officers go to the very end of the chow line, that the officer is the last one to eat, that the officer will take his or her first bite only after the last soldier has had a chance to eat.This tradition, as you so well know, is founded in the understanding that leaders place the welfare of their people above their own, that the officer is responsible for the welfare of the troops; that if mismanagement results in a shortage of food to feed the entire unit, that the officer will go without; that if the food gets cold while the unit is being served, that the officer will get the chilliest portion. It is a tradition that surprises many officers from other nations, but it goes to the core of the kind of leadership we provide our soldiers.But caring for our soldiers does not stop at the chow line. Nor, for that matter, does it stop with the soldiers themselves, for you know that our units are families, and a soldier must have the trust that you will take care of his family, particularly when he's away from home.But caring for soldiers actually starts with making them the best possible soldiers they can be. Their satisfaction with themselves, their confidence in themselves and in the end, their lives will depend upon how well you do that part. And that perhaps is your greatest challenge as a lieutenant. It is hard work, and make no mistake about it, there are no shortcuts.But what a joy it is to watch or to talk to young men and women in uniform, who know that they are the best because a Sergeant Grice and his or her lieutenant cared to teach them and to work with them and to make them reach for the highest standards.Which brings me to the third pillar I spoke of, and that is your professional competence. As we look back on Marshall and on Patton and on MacArthur and all of the others, we realize that the skills and qualities and knowledge that made them great generals took decades of training, of experience and of evolution. For all of the differences between these leaders there is one thing that they had in common. Their careers were marked by a progression of difficult assignments and intense study. Always they were a snapshot of a masterpiece still in progress, still in motion.From the beginning of their careers to the end, each of them was continually applying new brushstrokes to their knowledge and to their skills.And Grice understood that very well, although he had different words for it. He knew that if our platoon was going to be good at occupying a position and firing our mortars, at hastily leaving our position should enemy artillery have found our location, at the countless things that would make us a finely honed war-fighting machine, then he had to show me, he had to teach me and to practice with me, so that when I walked that gun line the soldiers would know that I knew more than they; that if I asked them how to cut a mortar fuse, there was no doubt that I would know the answer, just as I would know if there was too much play in the sight mount on that mortar. And I had to feel confident that knew before they would feel confident with me.In every good leader I have met in my years of service there always was the evidence of these three qualities: character, love for soldiers and professional competence. And because they possessed these qualities, they managed to inspire their soldiers to have confidence in them.And you know, the truly great ones like George C. Marshall did not only inspire soldiers to have confidence in their leaders, but they also inspired their soldiers to have confidence in themselves.With that, let me close. As I told you in the beginning, I am deeply envious of each of you. Since the days when I first put on my uniform, I fell in love with soldiering and with soldiers, and it has been for me, by any measure, a great passion.If I could start all over today, I would not hesitate for a single second. I would go out and I would find old Sergeant Grice and we would be ready tomorrow morning!Good luck to you all. I envy you.

Life Span Consideration Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Life Span Consideration - Case Study Example The other topic is the pharmacokinetics which is all about the dosage of her drugs based on her body weight, age and body surface area. Lastly, the other topic that will be covered will be on the measures to be taken to reduce the intake of drugs, the reduction of her health problem and lastly on ending her purchase of over the counter drugs without prescription from her primary physician which is really important based on her age which is sensitive. R. M has a history of deep vein thrombosis which makes her take Warfarin every evening which is a high dosage. She however also has a history of hypothyroidism and is constantly taking thyroid replacement hormones. The hormone treatment drugs however do not mix well with Warfarin and require a patient taking the therapy to reduce the dosage or even completely stop taking Warfarin to minimize the side effects to the patient. R. M therefore should stop purchasing her drugs without consultation with her primary physician who will advise her on which drugs to take for her deep thrombosis problem what will not affect her hypothyroidism treatment (Lilley, Collins, Harrington & Snyder, 2014). Some of the negative effects of the thyroid hormone treatment are increases heart rate and pulse as well as chest pains which are symptoms of hypertension and which she is trying to reduce with the hypertension medication. If the drug therapy for hypothyroidism treatment will increase her hypertension problem, she should seek alternative therapy rather than increase the risk of heart attack that can cause immediate death to the patient (Kahn & Olshaker, 2014). The alternative therapy will also assist with the earlier mentioned problem of deep thrombosis. In order to reduce the above discussed health risks caused by her medication intake, R. M should seek alternative therapy techniques for her different health problems other than fully relying on

Multicast routing in mobile networking Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Multicast routing in mobile networking - Essay Example MAODV is the best in communicating from the sender to the receiver nodes. Packet delivery ratio for MAODV and AODV This is the ratio between the packet of data that are actually delivered and those sent by the source.AODV been a multicast routing protocol it performs slightly better than MAODV in terms of packet delivery ratio. The ratio increase as the number of receivers decreases. These are very shocking a result since MAODV is designed to handle multiple receivers. Magld (2007) This is a ratio measured against the pause time. It also used in measuring mobility. The results are expected because this is the testing a mobile ad hoc network environment.MAODV is seen to deliver more packets as long as time is not increased .It works better than AODV and FDQA. AODV and FDQA vary slightly overtime but they are much lower in terms of success rather than MAODV. Magld (2007) FDQA is designed to deal with one QoS requirement delay .FDQA has high end-to-end delay over time. In comparison to MAODV and AODV, which has lower latency in short, term .FDQA algorithm, this is based on Fanos algorithm. The simulation I have conducted is testing the effect change in the node delay that has the success ratio. I have also tested the node delay effect on the average message overhead. The result shows the node delay positively affects both FDQA and A0DV success ratios and it has much of an effect on average message overheads for FDQA. MAODV and AODV are compared in relation to three parameters namely; Throughput, latency and packet delivery ratio.MAODV has performed slightly better but not in all of them. It has generally works better in a multicast ad hoc network environment than AODV does despite having same similarities. In comparing MAODV, AODV and FDQA I have found that MAODV has a higher performance that FDQA in relation to packet delivery ratio.FDQA algorithm has been designed to address

The Posthuman Condition by Bill McKibben Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

The Posthuman Condition by Bill McKibben - Essay Example Bill McKibben has implied in his arguments that most of the technologies such as life extension strategies, nano-medicine and choice technology that are proposed or sustained by trans-humanists are actually not humanist approaches. He has claimed that it is morally wrong for human beings to experiment with the basic aspects of life in attempts to achieve objectives that are higher than what is imposed by universally acknowledged human limitations. Human beings have no moral or ethical right to experiment with the gift of life relative to aspects such as susceptibility to aging, maximizing life span and biological limitations pertaining to cognitive and physical abilities. If humans make attempts to improve their conditions through manipulating with the natural process, they would remove the boundaries providing the essential basis relative to experiencing meaningful human choices. Bill McKibben has logically raised issues and explained that human life cannot be perceived as being mea ningful in an environment in which such restrictions could be removed through technology. He goes to the extent of claiming that even the objectives of utilizing germinal choice technologies relative to only therapeutic objectives should be done away with because such practices invariably create temptation whereby unwarranted tampering is done with issues such as the cognitive capacity of human beings. In supporting his contentions, Bill McKibben has provided credible evidence in terms of the examples of the Amish, the Tokugawa in Japan and the Ming in China. He has satisfactorily put forth arguments in holding that societies can benefit a great deal by relinquishing some particular technologies, which was done by the Amish, the Tokugawa in Japan and the Ming in China. The author is focused in claiming that tampering with genetics has threatened to put an end to so many important things that give meaning to life. He is in agreement that the meaning in human life has been declining s ince long, from the early ages. However, in regard to the modern world, the quality of human life and the meaning attached with it started declining more rapidly in the last five centuries. Bill McKibben is a very strong critic of trans-humanism and has argued on the possible socio economic adversities that may occur in societies whereby disparities and gaps amongst the rich and the poor will start increasing rapidly. In appealing to human emotions he has suggested that the human enhancement technologies that are now making many to feel excited; will actually be available on a disproportionate basis to only those that have higher levels of financial resources. This will obviously increase the gaps amongst the rich and the poor, thus leading to a genetic divide. Thinking further, as per logic, it is apparent that such methods will lead to the creation of a two tier society in which there will be divisions in terms of haves and have-nots because under such circumstances there is every likelihood that social reform initiatives will not be taken up in the true spirit and human enhancement technology will be allowed to be implemented in widening the gaps. The basic issues raised by Bill McKibben pertain to whether the laboratory will take the place of nature. Here, Bill McKibben has

ACCOR Group's Expansion Strategy Research Paper

ACCOR Group's Expansion Strategy - Research Paper Example 8,121 + 6.8 EBITDAR 2,321 11.4 EBITDAR margin 28.6% 1.2 Operating profit Before tax 907 24.8 The growth rates for the company in revenues for year 2007 were as per the following: Revenues + 6.5% Expansion + 4.3% Impacts of the currency (decline of dollar against Euro) - 2.7% Disposals - 1.3% Growth rate + 6.8% Analysis Amnt In m 9000 - 8000 -7000 - 6000 - - 5000 - 4000 - 3000 - 2000 - 1000 - Revenue EBITDAR Profit (before tax) Graph of the two financial statements; Revenue, EBITDAR, profit (before tax) Year 2004 Year 2007 11 -10 - 9.0 - 8.0 -7.0 - 6.0 - - % 5.0 - 4.0 - 3.0 - 2.0 - 1.0 - Revenue EBITDAR Profit (before tax) Graph of the two financial statements; Revenue (reported change), EBITDAR (reported change), profit before tax (reported change) Year 2004 Year 2007 i. Before implementation of the new strategies As per the above table, the company's profit before taxation amounted to 592 million which was13.2% for that year. In the same year, the company's consolidated revenues shot up by 4.3% which were the same as moving from 295 million to 7,123 million. Not including...While carrying out the research regarding ACCOR group of companies, importance of selecting the appropriate paradigm is emphasized. This includes the opinions on how to carry out the research as well as the necessary approach of data collection and analysis. The methods used to collect the appropriate data included a quantitative data collection approach: getting the relevant data from the company's management information systems where it has provided its financial reports before the implementation of the strategies and after this period. The collected data is then analyzed using tables and charts in order to draw conclusion on whether the strategies made any changes to the company. There is also analysis of the strategies used by two other major rivals of ACCOR group of companies which are used to corroborate the hypothesis to be deductive. Roy 1995As per the above table, the company's profit before taxation amounted to 592 million which was13.2% for that year. In the same year, the company's consolidated revenues shot up by 4.3% which were the same as moving from 295 million to 7,123 million. Not including the effects of transitions in scope of exchange rates and consolidation, the revenues went up by 4.6% for the same year as well as 5.1% in the fourth section of the year. This indicated the company's demand in the group's activities.

Critique of Strategic Thinking for Information Technology Essay

Critique of Strategic Thinking for Information Technology - Essay Example line that requires study and preparation† as well as â€Å"a discipline that enables one to develop deep and far reaching conclusions about the information age and IT fighting.† Strategy is seen as an essential factor in the success of a business organization especially in an IT company where alignment is highly required. He also stressed that alignment is not a point-in-time concept and that IT must change in response to the changes that the organization faces. The chapter also presents the scenario of the information age where bits become source of value and where IT intensifies rivalry among industry players. In response to this, the traditional sustainable advantage is replaced with throwaway temporary advantage. Boar stresses that in order to keep up with the current competition, business organizations need not capitalize on long-term capacities but on short term competitive advantage. The main idea is to keep up with the competition by manoeuvring across time. An important point that Boar discuss is the importance of having a strategy in order to propel a business organization to its expected end (Boar 62-63). The author furthers his point by stating that business organizations can strategically position themselves by acquiring advantages both competitive and sustainable. In the end, his emphasis is on acquiring temporary competitive advantage that building on long-term sustainable advantage. This point is in direct contrast with what is taught by strategic management theorists Thomson and Strickland. In their book entitled Strategic Management, these thinkers recognize the importance of turning competitive advantage into sustainable advantage. They argue that business organizations should focus on the long-run and thus, find ways to sustain the competitive advantage that they have. The ideas presented by Boar contrasts that of Thomson and Strickland. While Boar favors competitive advantage, Thomson and Strickland are advocating sustainab le advantage. These

The Red Tent Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

The Red Tent - Essay Example Leah, Dinah, and Rachel find the tent as a safe haven, which caters for their emotional needs. It is in this tent that the women had an opportunity to share feelings, thoughts, and ideas. This way, they were able to continue with life and feel unified and strong at the same time despite the challenges they were facing (Finding 49). The tent can also be regarded as significant since it serves as a birthplace where the women bring new lives into a society where the male gender is dominant. Thus, the Red Tent acts as a support system that brings the women together for their own well-being. Each woman in the tent is supported by the rest in times of giving birth. In the tent, some women gain experience of helping others with childbirth. For example, Dinah and Leah become midwives and assist their fellow women during childbirth. The tent also reveals the tribulations that women went through in the past, as well as the role of the ancient women (Finding 49). The setting of the book explores the traditions and customs that subjected women to suffering. Traditionally, women did not take part in meaningful activities in the society, as they were only expected to give birth, take care of their children, and provide household services to men. It was men who ruled over women and the female members of society had an obliga tion to be submissive. The Red Tent is also a symbol of the common problems that women used to face during the ancient times. This is because women are sent in this tent when they experience their menstrual cycle, as well as during the times when they are nearly giving birth. Although men consider this as a form of isolation, women take this as an opportunity to share amongst themselves and address the issues affecting them. Since they sit privately in the absence of men, such an experience enable them to talk freely and help one another (Finding 50). There are certain rituals taking place in the Red Tent, the most significant of them being