Symbolic Interactionism Essay Example for Free

Symbolic Interactionism Essay Living in the modern feverish world with its unprecedented level of change which is generating new developments in social, political, cultural, technological, and other spheres of our life, one may easily become engulfed by the dynamics of our social environment but remain ignorant of the actual mechanisms and hidden driving forces behind social processes. In their turn, various branches of social science have never abandoned attempts to establish and elaborate proper accounts that would explain how societies function, and what laws govern them. This ambitious task is on one hand made more difficult by the mentioned ever accelerating dynamics of our modern social environment, as the rapid pace of changes produces new phenomena that social theories must accommodate or be amended. On the other hand, the modern dynamic world serves as a kind of a laboratory that can test the validity of some fundamental and influential theoretical perspectives. One such major school of sociology is symbolic interactionism, the theoretical perspective which suggests that attention to the subjective aspects of social relationships is necessary to understand that people are pragmatic players who have to correlate their actions with behaviour of other people, and that such adjustment is done through assignation to our actions, actions of other people, and even to ourselves of symbolic meaning that influences not only our behaviour and attitudes but existing social structures as well (Gingrich, 2000). However, despite the firm place that this perspective holds in the field of social sciences, it has been suggested that explanations that symbolic interactionism gives for the influence of social structures on behaviour and attitudes are unconvincing. In this regard, let us take a closer look at the basic postulates of symbolic interactionism, and try to find out whether it indeed is incapable of proving itself out. For this purpose we should establish in what ways social structures can influence our behaviour and attitudes from the point of view of symbolic interactionism, and then critically examine whether symbolic interactionist’s explanations are always adequate. Symbolic interactionism has a long history of development that can be traced to the German sociologist Max Weber (1864-1920), and to the American scholar George H. Mead (1863-1931). Both of them accentuated the importance of pragmatism as the factor that influences social processes, and of subjective meanings ascribed to social processes and human behaviour. In 1902 Charles Cooley (1864-1929) detailed the way people tend to perceive themselves, and introduced the concept of the looking glass self under which people construct self-images as if through eyes of others. In 1934 George H. Mead in frames of his investigation of deviance proposed a theory that was focused on processes of differentiation of the conventional and denounced behaviour. One of the important conclusions of Mead was that our self-perception is always placed in the larger social context, and that the self has to be treated as the product of processing of social interactions and symbols by an individual mind (Denzin, 1992, pp.2-21). In fact, the further studies of deviance greatly contributed to the development of symbolic interactionism. For example, another influential social theorist Howard Becker (born 1928) also elaborated the view of deviance as of not merely some type of behaviour, but as of a product of social interaction. Becker criticised theories of deviance that conformed to the commonly accepted values, and pointed out that it was not that crucial to examine concrete individual deviant actions because deviance is only a behaviour that breaks rules and leads to the attachment of labels by opinions of the majority (Becker, 1997). Finally, the very term symbolic interactionism was introduced by Herbert Blumer (1900-1987), who also formulated one of leading versions of this perspective (Gingrich, 2000). In general terms, symbolic interactionists are devoted to microsociology and mostly explore interpersonal everyday interaction. The symbolic interactionist perspective is concerned with the task to understand how people behave individually, and how they influence one another in the social environment. Naturally, for this perspective macro elements of society like government and the economy are not interesting. For interactionists, their attention to the interaction of individuals and groups is the tool to obtain new useful perspectives, to confirm or disprove expectations, and to define the boundaries of that pertaining to an individual and to a group. Simply put, this sociological perspective, in contrast to macro perspectives, analyses societies from bottom up, as for it society emerges out of interaction between individuals and small groups, which makes society inherently dynamic and constantly changing. Thus, for the interactionist perspective it is constant change, instead of fixed patterns, that defines the true nature of society, and these are acting people who constitute the true social basis. All other formations present in societies are simply human creations that emerge out of the mentioned interaction. What adds dynamics to this perspective is the ensuing conclusion that society is actually permanently being re-created, which makes symbolic interactionist perspective indeterministic. In many cases interaction that is interesting for symbolic interactionists is occurring in the so-called reference groups – various professional organisations, like for example doctors or teachers, groups based on friendship, groups united by education, groups formed within communities we live in, etc. While some groups are more cohesive, and others do not last long, dynamics and change that emerge when people communicate is what is common between them. When taken together, such reference groups represent society. In this connection, a branch of symbolic interactionism termed ethnomethodology raises a relevant question of how it is possible that interaction between people, who do not always have a complete understanding of each other and who have different world views, can produce what is seen as a social order. Harold Garfinkel highlighted problems that ethnomethodology deals with by conducting series of the so-called breaching experiments, when students, among other things, were for instance trying to essentially prevent the possibility of maintenance of common conversations as they refused to accept as fact that they could be sure that they understood what their conversational partners were saying (Garfinkel, 1985, pp.35-75). This demonstrates that what is normally viewed as a routine social procedure of communication is based on sets of social instructions that govern our behaviour, and that violation of such rules may break social order and prevent meaningful interaction between people. Considering the interest of symbolic interactionists in immediate communication, in their investigations they favour the methodology of participant observation instead of traditional sociological surveys. They believe that to properly comprehend actions of people and of social situations it is necessary to get immersed as much as possible in lives of subjects of studies. On ground of what we have observed, it is not surprising then that the notion of symbolic interaction holds a very important place within the field of social sciences because it draws our attention to the fact that the interaction between people and groups takes place via symbols and symbolic representations of social reality. In fact, what forms the basis of symbolic interactionism is the concept of symbol. In this case symbol can be defined as something that can properly represent some other element of reality. In this way, symbolic interactionist perspective introduces into the social life a set of widely spread conventional traditions and customs, and thus deals not only with the immediate interaction between people and groups, but at the same time studies common meanings that people instill in society as they interact. Therefore, one of the key features of symbolic interactionism is its interpretation of social structures, which in the general sense can be defined as social formations and groups that stand in a certain relation to each other, as growing out of the symbolic perception of reality by human beings. The importance of this quality of human interaction is hard to overestimate, as symbolic part of social life often substitutes reality, as exemplified by an observation of W. I. Thomas that if people define situations as real, then consequences of those situations are real (Denzin, 1992, pp.16,18). And as Erving Goffman (1922-1982) put it, there can be no ultimate truth but only its interpretations. Goffman also viewed humans as actors, thus turning the adoption of social roles into a principal means of symbolic interaction between people that enables us to share alternative perspectives and understand how our actions might be construed by other actors in our field of communication. This justifies Goffman`s view of society as an inhomogeneous theatre-like formation in which we have to behave differently in different situations, so that there is no one grand context that society is placed in, but a lot of specific contexts (Goffman, 2004, pp.238-252). Now, I believe that our above considerations should somewhat change our perception of possible accusations of symbolic interactionism in its inability to provide a convincing explanation of the influence of social structures on behaviour and attitudes. Indeed, as long as we agree that it is the propensity of human beings to attachment of widely accepted symbolic meanings not only to material object but as well to patterns of social behaviour that underlies social structures which are being constantly recreated from bottom up, then symbolic interactionism is clearly a perspective that seems to confirm on the micro level the existence of inseparable link between social structures and behaviour of people. In fact, it places actions of human agents prior to formation of social structures, and is mostly focused on the influence of the immediate interaction between people on larger social formations that emerge from it. Thus, this perspective tips the scale of macro-micro opposition in soc ial sciences towards the micro sociological methodologies. However, if we agree with Goffman`s comparison of society with a theatre, we should also not forget that as there is something behind the scene there equally is a larger context behind symbolic interaction between people. So, symbolic interactionism may be rightfully accused in overemphasising subjective factor, which deprives this perspective of the traditional methodological strictness of social sciences. Moreover, the ascription of pragmatic, and hence rational, qualities to human actors by symbolic interactionism cannot fully interpret new developments that open possibilities for conflicts. For instance, culture shocks that happen in the modern globalised world demonstrate that there are incompatible elements of social and cultural structures symbolically transmitted by each participant of intercultural communication that interfere into the face-to-face communication between people and shape its patterns, but which can be rationally modified by communicating pragmatic agents only to a limited degree. This observation may be construed as demanding the return of social studies to macrosociological theories as in this case the problem is not only to explain how social structures are re-created in symbolic interaction, but what types of symbols and social and cultural structures that correspond to them interacting agents should make sense of in the first place to be able to interact effectively at all (Ward, 2001, pp.61-63), which commands the reversal of the direction of symbolic interactionism`s research from bottom up. Still, I suppose that even though the doubts about the persuasiveness of symbolic interactionism`s explanation cannot be completely disproved, this perspective is very effective within its realm of microsociological studies, so all the difficulties that symbolic interactionism experiences may be attributed to the difficulties in bridging the conceptual gap between micro and macro views of society. Finally, coming back to the mentioned dynamics of social environment that has become the hallmark of modernity, the attention that symbolic interactionism pays to change as an inevitable and natural consequence of interaction between agents within societies, in any case makes this perspective especially urgent for our better understanding of the complex social world we live in. Sources Becker, H., S., (1997), Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance, Free Press Blumer, H., (1986). Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method, University of California Press Denzin, N., K., (1992), Symbolic Interactionism and Cultural Studies: The Politics of Interpretation, Blackwell Publishers Garfinkel, H., (1985), Studies in Ethnomethodology, Polity Press Gingrich, P., (2000), â€Å"Symbolic Interactionism†, University of Regina Department of Sociology and Social Studies, viewed 11 May, 2006, http://uregina.ca/~gingrich/f10 0.htm. Goffman, E., (2004), The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, Gardners Books Ward, C., (2001), Psychology of Culture Shock, Routledge

Railroad Westward Expansion from 1860 to 1890

Railroad Westward Expansion from 1860 to 1890 The history of America is grounded in the concepts of immigration, expansion, and economic empowerment. European settlers along the East Coast developed a new doctrine called the manifest destiny that would guide their path. This ideology posited that the United States was destined to expand across the continent, displacing the indigenous communities. The project to join the East and West Coast was pursued on different fronts. Development of the railroad network spearheaded the process as it opened up new lands, connected major cities, and also enabled agricultural and economic growth (Borneman 14). The railroad not only served as a means of transport but also marked the route for the dissemination of inventions, culture, and knowledge gained over the years. Although the railroad is mainly recognized for enabling agriculture, transport, and industrialization, it also played a significant role in facilitating administration. The settlers often faced violent resistance from the natives (Wolmar 18). In fact, several Red Indian communities openly attacked and even sabotaged settler activities to scatter the expansion. Thus, there was a need to set down rules of engagement (Wilhelm 40). The railroad played its role by opening up transportation into the interior allowing for the colonizers to establish administrative frameworks. Mapping out the rail routes also required collaboration with the native tribes. Therefore, settlers negotiated and signed treaties with native chiefs in their respective territories. For instance, the native tribes of Osage, Cheyenne, Arapaho, and Pawnee occupied the plains of Kansas, Colorado, and Nebraska. The government negotiated a battery of treaties largely dealing with the transfer of land either of settlement o r rail tracks. Famous ones include the Sturges Osage (1868) and Drum Creek Treaties among others (Wilhelm 46). After signing the agreements, administrative posts would be established mainly along the railroads. With time, the posts turned into settlements and small towns. These small rural towns served by the railroad attracted increasingly larger populations that transformed them into cultural hotspots and centers of learning (Hagger 29). Around the 1870s, Cincinnati and St. Louis had attracted a significant population including workers and farmers (PBS Map). Individuals from different cultural backgrounds mingled and interacted to form a unique culture. Various types of food, music, folklore, literature, language, dressing, farming, buildings, and relationships all combined to create the American identity. By 1890, over ten cities with populations of over 100, 000 people had emerged on the westward expansion route along the railway tracks (PBS Map). Cities also served by waterways experienced more rapid growth economically and population-wise (Borneman 191). With time, these cities and rail transport became core elements of the American identity. The westward expansion also tallied with increased agricultural and industrial inventions. Some of the key discoveries in the century included the reaper (invented 1831), the combine harvester (1834), and the steel plow (1837). These implements were essential to agriculture and allowed the expansion of the railroad to spread and disseminate the technology. For instance, the McCormicks reaper was bulky and required to be transported from Virginia where it was manually assembled into the farmlands located further westward in the states of Kentucky, Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska, and Ohio (Borneman 119). Railroads offered the best method to transport them. Increased agricultural output resulting from the enhanced technology further increased transportation needs. Laying rail tracks was considerably cheaper than digging out roads and or water canals (Wolmar 14). As such, inventions and railroads had a mutual relationship in that the new creations distributed by the railroad further increase d demand for transportation. Furthermore, increased agricultural production spurred invention of more efficient industrial processes to serve the growing masses. This necessitated the railroad to connect not only major farming areas that supplied raw materials but also industrial cities. Many industries in the food processing sector would emerge driven by inventions in that direction. The mass production of steel, glass and other products stimulated other industries. For instance, availability of steel allowed for new approaches in architectural designs, more so, in multi-story buildings. Buildings such as the Trinity Church in Boston and the Philadelphia City Hall were designed and constructed in the 1870s. The railroads allowed for convenient transportations of construction materials such as steel and bricks. Consequently, inventions in the architectural industry and building and construction would follow the rail tracks westward. Although New York introduced the skyscrapers, the invention would be mastered in Chicago in the 1880s and 90s led by pioneer architects such as William L. Jenney (1832-1907) and Daniel H. Burnham (1846-1912) at the Chicago College of Architecture and the Arts (Hagger 101). As the rail extended further westward, so did the skyscraper design. By 1890s, other cities such as St Louis and San Francisco had their skyscrapers as the railroad connected the East and West Coasts. To summarize, one can say that the railroad has played an integral part in the growth of America. Specifically, between 1869 and 1890, it hastened the westward expansion that allowed the creation of more settlements in the Midwestern plains all through to the West Coast. The rail route also served a significant role in designating administrative posts and even urban settlements that later evolved into the major cities. The majority of the factors that make America what it is today including technology, democracy, and a vibrant culture can all be linked to the railroad network created by the westward expansion policy. Word count: 870 Works Cited Borneman, Walter, Iron Horses: Americas Race to Bring the Railroads West. New  York: Little Borneman. 2014. Print. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?id=R0oeAwAAQBAJlpg=PP1dq=Americas%20Race%20to%20Bring%20the%20Railroads%20Westpg=PT20#v=onepageqf=false Hagger, Nicholas, The Secret American Dream: The Creation of a New World Order with the  Power to Abolish War, Poverty, and Disease. New York: Duncan Baird. 2013. Print.  PBS Map, Westward Expansion 1860-1890. WGBH Educational Foundation. 2010.  https://www.pbslearningmedia.org/asset/akh10_int_expansion/. Accessed.  23 Feb. 2017. Wilhelm, Robert, The Bloody Century: True Tales of Murder in 19th Century America. Night  Stick Press. 2014. Print. Wolmar, Christian, The Great Railroad Revolution: The History of Trains in America. New  York: Public Affairs. 2013. Print.

Hamlet 10 :: essays research papers

The Real Tragedy Of Hamlet In the play Hamlet, by William Shakespeare, the death or murder of a character becomes very freuquent. Although many people die. It is a result of their own wrong-doing. You could almost say they deserved what they got. But there were deaths of people, that were due to the manipulation from the royalty. A good example can be found in the family of Polonius’. The real tragedy of Hamlet is not that of Hamlet or his family but of Polonius’ family because their deaths were not caused by their own, sinful actions, but rather by their small instigation of Claudius and Hamlet’s battle. The first character to die in the play is Polonius. Eventhough Polonius often acted in a deceitful manner when dealing with Hamlet, it is only because he was carrying out plans devised, and ordered by the King and/or Queen, in order to discover the nature of Hamlet’s madness. Being the King’s right hand, it was his duty to obey the King and Queen’s wishes, and it was indeed his loyalty that eventually proved to be fatal for him. An example of how Polonius’ innocent involvement with the royal family resulting to his death can be found at the beginning of Act III, scene iv, when Hamlet stabs him while he is hiding behind the Curtained Wall in Gertrude’s chamber. This is a great example of how Polonius, a man unknowing of the true nature of the situation that he was in, is killed by a member of the royalty during the execution of one (Hamlet) of their schemes. This makes Polonius’ death a tragedy. But he was asking for it, come on. The next member of the Polonius clan to die is his daughter Ophelia. Ophelia’s death is also tragic, because of her complete innocence in the situation. You can argue that Polonius deserved his fate because of his handling with Hamlet while he was mad. But Ophelia was entirely manipulated, and used by Hamlet and the king for their own selfish reasons, and games. An example of how Ophelia is used by Hamlet is seen in Act II, scene i, when Hamlet uses her to convince his family that he is truely mad. Ophelia explains to her father, how Hamlet has scared her, causing Polonius to draw the conclusion that Hamlet has an "antic disposition"(He is quickly losing his mind).

The Value Of A Jury System Essay -- essays research papers

The Value of a Jury System The Founders of our nation understood that no idea was more central to our Bill of Rights -- indeed, to government of the people, by the people, and for the people -- than the citizen jury. It was cherished not only as a bulwark against tyranny but also as an essential means of educating Americans in the habits and duties of citizenship. By enacting the Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Amendments to the Constitution, the Framers sought to install the right to trial by jury as a cornerstone of a free society. The Framers of the Constitution felt that juries -- because they were composed of ordinary citizens and because they owed no financial allegiance to the government -- were indispensable to thwarting the excesses of powerful and overzealous government officials. The jury trial was the only right explicitly included in each of the state constitutions devised between 1776 and 1789 . And the criminal jury was one of few rights explicitly mentioned in the original federal constitution proposed by the Philadelphia Convention. Anti-federalists complained that the proposed constitution did not go far enough in protecting juries, and federalists eventually responded by enacting three constitutional amendments guaranteeing grand, petit, and civil juries. The need for juries was especially acute in criminal cases: A grand jury could block any prosecution it deemed unfounded or malicious, and a petit jury could likewise interpose itself on behalf of a defendant charged unfairly. The famous Zenge r case in the 1730s dramatized the libertarian advantages of juries . When New York's royal government sought to stifle its newspaper critics through criminal prosecution, New York grand juries refused to indict, and a petit jury famously refused to convict . But the Founders' vision of the jury went far beyond merely protecting defendants. The jury's democratic role was intertwined with other ideas enshrined in the Bill of Rights, including free speech and citizen militias. The jury was an essential democratic institution because it was a means by which citizens could engage in self-government. Nowhere else -- not even in the voting booth -- must Americans come together in person to deliberate over fundamental matters of justice . Jurors face a solemn obligation to overlook personal differences and prejudices to fairl... ... jury service. If the jury system is to remain a central institution of democracy and citizenship, it must be refined. Jury trials must attract engaged and thoughtful citizens; the rules of the courts must treat jurors as sovereign, self-governing citizens rather than as children. To this end, we suggest a number of reforms. In many instances, these changes would require no new laws, but merely a willingness on the part of the courts to unleash the common sense of the ordinary citizen. References Alschuler, Albert, "Our faltering jury.," Public Interest, Jan 1996, pp. 28. Culp, Douglass, "Do criminal juries let too many defendants loose?," Vol. 12, Birmingham Business Journal, 18 Dec 1995, pp. 15. Curriden, Mark, "Jury reform.," Vol. 81, ABA Journal, Nov 1995, pp. 72. McElhaney, James, "Jury instructions.," Vol. 81, ABA Journal, Nov 1995, pp. 91. Savage, David., "A jury of your peers.," Vol. 81, ABA Journal, Oct 1995, pp. 40. Zobel, Hiller, "The jury on trial.," Current, Nov 1995, pp. 8.

jackie robinson :: essays research papers

The Immigration Act of 1924 declared this, â€Å"the number of each nationality who may be admitted annually is limited to 2 per cent of the population of such nationality resident in the united states according to the census of 1890† (A). There are many reasons why this was passed. Those Reasons being; the loss of American jobs, the inability to easily assimilate immigrants, and the prejudice of the groups and people of the time.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  One reason for the passing of the Immigration Act of 1924 is the loss of American jobs. Immigrants of the time came to the United States looking to increase his lot in life, to become a better more wealthier man. â€Å"The standard of living of the working classes of the United States has been and still is superior to that of the nations which have furnished the bulk of the immigrants† (C). The only problem with the immigrants coming to America to work was the fact that there simply was not enough jobs for both the unemployed American workers and the immigrants. This causes a problem for the Americans as the immigrants take lower wages than that of the average worker. Naturally the business owners will hire the cheaper labor thus leaving the American worker unemployed. Many labor organizations such as the American Federation of Labor and the Junior Order of United American Mechanists (H) backed the act for just this reason; American jobs were going to immig rants fresh off the boat.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The immigrants getting these ‘American jobs’ were not, and did not in some cases want to be easily assimilated. â€Å"These alien peoples are temperamentally and racially unfitted for easy assimilation; that they are living in an age two or three centuries behind ours. They are white, they can read a few lines, and they have a few dollars - so in they come. We need three generations to educate, to crossbreed with Western strains and to assimilate a large number of those that we have here now† (F). Education seemed not to be the only problem. Many educated second generations immigrant men were still, racially and temperamentally, part of their nationality. Therefore the conclusion of this is that the United States needs to limit the amount of immigrants it lets in every day, week, month, and year. â€Å"The rank and file of these unassimilated aliens still live mentally in the ghetto or as peasants on the great estates.

Implementing Change

Implementing change in a department of organization can be difficult. Management must have a plan before implementing the change. The manager’s role and responsibility in implementing change within a department is very important. The manager’s role is to assess the change that needs to take place, come up with a plan to implement a change, implement the change, and evaluate the change in a timely order. To have a successful implementation of a new process, the manager must be involved in each step. The manager must keep the staff involved and let the staff know why the change is taking place and how it will affect the work process. The manager faces many challenges such as meeting the organizations goals and working with staff members who might resist the change. This paper will focus on the manager’s role and responsibility in implementing change, the way a manager should successfully handle staff resistance to change and define each step of the change process such as assessment, planning, implementation, and evaluation. When there is a change in the work process within the department, the manager’s role and responsibility is to make sure the implementation of the changes takes place smoothly with the help of the staff. According to Sullivan & Decker (2009), the manager must be able to communicate openly and honestly with the staff, support the staff if they are resisting the change, emphasize the positive outcomes from initiating change, find solutions to problems that are obstacles to change and accept the constancy of change. The manager must be able to identify the change, collect and analyze data, develop a plan, help the staff prepare for the change, prepare to handle resistance, provide feedback, and evaluate effectiveness of the change. The manager should involve the staff in the implementation of the new work process. According to Knoer (2011), communication is one of the most important tools that a leader must utilize to successfully implement. If the manager does not involve the staff, the staff might think their input is not important or their employment will be affected. This can lead to resistance from staff and have a negative affect in the department. The staff can give managers their input on what areas should be focused on and raise concerns that management might look over. By having the staff involved the manager can prevent them from resisting the change or have a better understanding of why the staff might be resisting and work on ways to lower the staff resistance. With change comes resistance. According to Fiedler (2010), resistance is considered to possibly have positive and/or negative impact on a change, and to be exerted by internal or external environments. The department manager must be able to successfully handle resistance from staff members. Some reasons why a staff member might resist the change is because he or she might not trust the manager, have a fear of failure, believe the change is unnecessary, staff may think if a certain change did not work in the past it will fail again, and the number one reason is the staff member might think he or she will lose their job. Resistance can also come in the form of poor work habits, not showing up to work on time, calling in sick, and lack of interest in the change. The department manager can manage resistance by talking to staff members who are opposed to the change. By talking to the staff, the manager will understand the staff’s concerns and clarify any misunderstanding. The manager must be willing to listen to the staff’s ideas but explain to the staff why the change needs to take place and the positive changes the implementation will bring to the department. The manager must keep open communication, support, and maintain trust of the resisting staff. A manager can be successful with resisting staff if he or she is flexible, confident, realistic, staying focused on the big picture, by combining ideas, energizing the resistors with interests, and solves problems. The change process should be taken in steps of assessment, planning, implementation, and evaluation. The first step assessing the change requires collecting and analyzing important data. Assessing the department will help the manager learn what changes are needed, how to improve the quality of work, stay ahead of the competition, and how to approach the implementation. The plan is the second step and involves gathering the resources needed to implement the change. According to Lombardi & Schermerhorn, â€Å"planning is the process of setting performance objectives and determining what actions should be taken to accomplish them† (p. 7). By having a plan management can prevents mistakes and accidents from happening, without a plan the new change can become a chaos. Employees will be doing what they think is right and this can cause many problems between the staff and management. When management has a plan employees know what is expected of them and know how to achieve the depart ments goals. The next step is to implement the change, where the plan is put into action. The manager has to make sure the staff has the resources needed for the change. If the staff needs to be trained they should receive all trainings before the implementation of the change. This can help the manager keep employees focused and energized. The last step is the evaluation of the change. In this step the manager will evaluate the new step after a set amount of time. The evaluation allows the manger to see how the change has affected the department, whether the change is working, and meeting the goals required in the plan. When implementing change, the manager must knows his or her roles, responsibilities, and how to approach the staff. The manager should not decide what changes needs to take place without assessing the departments needs. The manager must take into consideration how the new change will affect the employees work process, productivity of the department, the morale of the department. Employees concerns should be taken into consideration as well as the expectation of resistance from some employees. At each phase of the change the manager must refer to the plan and must be able to evaluate the change in a timely manner. Implementing change can be difficult but if the manager follows the change process they will be successful.

Pest Analysis of Italy

PEST analysis of Italy 1) Political Environment From the political point of view Italy is an ideal country where to export our product. It has good international relationships, especially with other EU countries where we are already present and with the USA. There are no restrictions to the importation or the exportation of capitals and goods. The accounting system follows the International Accounting Standards (IAS), the same adopted by all EU countries, and quite similar to the American’s General Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).There is a stable political regime with a multi-party system, which can ensure the certainty of law and the respect of contractual rights. However lawsuits tend to be lasting and expensive, and this could represent a risk in case of a contractual breach. 2) Economic Environment The Italian Economic Environment is also quite good for our project. Italian economy is based on services and industry. The per capita GDP is $30. 200, that is not high a s in the United States ($44. 00), but which is however enough to ensure the population with the possibility to save some of their budget for the acquisition of expensive products. In addition income is better distributed than in the US: looking at the Gini Index, Italy has a 36 and US have a 45 (where 0 means equally distributed and 100 means unequally distributed). If we bear in mind the different dimensions of the two countries all the other economic indicators can be considered similar. Just the Unemployment rate is a little bit higher in Italy, 7% against 4. 0%, but it is not very relevant. 3) Cultural and Social Actually Italy has a population of 58. 147. 733 inhabitants. The 98. 4% of them are literates, and the 66. 4% of them are aged between 15 and 64 years. It must be highlighted the fact that in Italy are present 72. 200. 000 mobile telephones: Italians have a strong culture of always being locatable, and for this reason they in average hold 1,25 mobile phones. 4) Technolo gical Environment We are not interested in assembling our product directly in Italy, but just n importing it from the countries where we have already established some plants. For such reason, from a technological point of view, we are mainly interested in the level of transportation and telecommunication infrastructures, rather than in the research intensity or in the university system. Italy actually has 19. 459 km of railways (16th in the world), 484. 688 km of roadways (11th in the world), and 133 airports distributed on the territory. The telephone system is modern and well developed, fax is widely used and mobile signal covers almost all the italian territory.