Discussion questions | Operations Management homework help

Essay Help

1)”Connecting Strategically with BCBSF’s Employee” states that “there’s nothing like successfully tying communication to achieving results [as one way] to institutionalize communication behaviors.” Referencing the module readings, evaluate this statement in 150-200 words.

2)In the medical unit of the Northeastern Medical Center, Leah Hernandez is an insuranceclaims specialist who works with one nurse, one certified nursing assistant, and one medicalassistant/receptionist. The physician and administrator are located in a separate building of themedical center. The administrator, Dan Jules, spends 3 hours a day in the clinic, from 9 to 10:30every morning, and 2 to 3:30 every afternoon. He never varies the times that he is in the clinic.One morning at 9 AM, Dan was in the clinic with nurse Kate Williams, addressing the concernsof the patient in room 2, when the phone rang. A second phone line rang a few seconds later, andthis was followed by a third line ringing. The nursing assistant was in room 1 with the physician,and the medical assistant was in room 3 with another patient. The only available staff member toanswer the phone was Leah, who was holding on the line with an insurance company. She yelled,“Anybody? Somebody, pick up the phone already! It’s driving me crazy!” Everyone in the clinic,including the patients, heard her shouting. Nurse Kate rolled her eyes and told Dan that it waslike this every day. Dan excused himself and rushed into the reception area to pick up the phone.Later on, Dan asked Leah why she couldn’t pick up the phone. Leah answered, “It’s not my job.I’m too busy with the insurance company.”DISCUSSION QUESTIONS1.What should Dan do to address the problem?2.Should Dan meet with Leah individually or communicate with all staff?3.Because Dan works in a different building, who should have communicated this ongoing prob-lem to Dan?

3)Comfort Zone is a 60-bed, for-profit intermediate care facility in northern California. The reha-bilitative department manager, Jamie Richards, has been working at Comfort Zone for only 6months. She holds monthly staff meetings, as well as additional individual meetings with staff toaddress specific patient-related issues. On most days, she eats lunch in a quiet corner of the cafe-teria so that she can catch up on her paperwork at the same time.Catherine Williams, one of her staff members who has been working at the facility for morethan 25 years, spotted her in the cafeteria one day and sat down uninvited. Catherine has neverattended any of the monthly meetings and always has an excuse for not attending. Catherinesaid, “I’ve been waiting to tell you this ever since you began working here, but I wanted you to getadjusted first. Now we can finally talk. I have been here for a long time and have seen all kinds ofcomings and goings.”Catherine proceeded to tell Jamie about her staff who were constantly tardy or absent. Shealso told Jamie about the things the staff had been doing behind her back, such as using the Inter-net for personal matters, going shopping during lunch hour and coming back late, and going homeearly without permission. Catherine concluded with, “At your monthly meetings, the staff show LACECOMMUNICATIONup to tell you that everything’s just fine, when I know differently. I’m too busy working to attendthese meetings. If you want my opinion, I would fire them all since they are incompetent.”DISCUSSION QUESTIONS1.How should Jamie deal with the information that Catherine provided?2.What do you think of Jamie’s methods of communicating with her staff?3.Do you think that she should use a different form of communication with Catherine?.

4)Watch this short video on communication breakdown and share your thoughts :

Continue to order Get a quote

July 1, 2023

Distinguishing Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

Required Resources
Read/review the following resources for this activity:

· Textbook: Chapter 8, 9, 17 (Introduction)

· Lesson

· Minimum of 1 scholarly source (in addition to the textbook)

Click on the following tabs to review the concepts that will be addressed in this activity:

A valid structure is the way in which an argument is put together that assures it will pass the test of logical strength.

Deductive: In deductive arguments, the speaker asserts that her premises are true and, therefore, her conclusion must be accepted. Remember that in a deductive argument, logical strength does not depend on the literal truth of the premises. When we test for logical strength, we assume the premises are true. Once we determine that the argument is logically valid, we can then look at the actual – not presumed – truth of the premises.

Inductive: In inductive arguments, the speaker presents evidence that she claims support the probable truth of her conclusion – that her conclusion is the most likely true – and so you should accept it.

The Basic Structure of Deductive and Inductive Arguments
Argument examples:

Deductive Argument Example: “Tightening laws restricting the use and possession of firearms does not protect average law-abiding citizens; it only puts them at greater risk. Enforcing licensing restrictions, trigger locks, and waiting periods makes it more difficult for law-abiding citizens to defend themselves, and, as a result, encourages criminal activity. Only criminals benefit when ordinary citizens are deprived of their right to own a firearm and protect themselves, their homes, and their families" (Lott, 2000, p. 169)

Lott, J., (2000). More guns, less crime: Understanding crime and gun-control laws. University of Chicago Press.

The argument boils down to this:

· Laws that are obeyed by ordinary citizens and not obeyed by criminals are laws that put ordinary citizens at risk.

· Tight gun laws are laws that are obeyed only by ordinary citizens.

· Tight gun laws put ordinary citizens at risk.

However, the argument itself is composed of three intertwined syllogisms:

Only ordinary citizens are persons who respect tight gun laws.
Criminal persons are not ordinary citizens.
Therefore, criminals do not respect tight gun laws.

Tight gun laws restrict only ordinary citizens.
No criminal is an ordinary citizen.
No criminal is restricted by tight gun laws.

Laws that disfavor the good are laws that favor the bad.
Tight gun laws favor the bad.
Therefore, tight gun laws disfavor the good.

Notice that you cannot remove any of the “legs” and maintain the claim. Notice, also, that the reasons are closely connected and depend on or follow from each other. Notice, also, that the first premise (called the major premise) must be accepted as true, or the entire argument fails.

Inductive Argument: The United States is too dependent upon foreign oil. According to the U.S. Department of Energy, we rely on imported foreign oil for about 45% of our needs. Of the imported oil, most comes from Canada, but 22% comes from countries in the Middle East. Undeniably, this dependence shapes our foreign policy. We have vast oil reserves that could make us energy independent. Development of these resources would produce much-needed jobs, many of them in areas of the country suffering most from the recession. We should be developing an energy policy that makes us energy independent.

· Reason: We import 45% of our oil.

· Reason: Middle East oil imports shape our foreign policy.

· Reason: Our vast oil reserves could make us energy independent.

· Reason: Development of oil reserves could produce much needed jobs.

· Conclusion: For any or all of the above, independent reasons, we should become energy independent.

Notice that any one of these reasons, standing alone, could support the conclusions; they are not logically related to one another as they would be in a syllogism.

Initial Post Instructions
For the initial post, address the following:

· Find and post examples of deductive and inductive arguments. Do NOT use an argument example which clearly indicates it is an example of an inductive/deductive argument.

· For each example, evaluate its logical strength, using the concepts and ideas presented in the textbook readings, the lesson, and any other source you find that helps you to evaluate the validity (deductive) or strength (inductive) of the argument. You can use examples from the text, or you can find examples elsewhere.

oEditorials and opinion columns are a good source, as are letters to the editor. Blogs will also often be based on arguments.

oUse mapping and evaluative techniques to make sure it is an argument.

· Is it inductive or deductive? Explain why.

· Does it pass the tests of validity and strength? Explain.