American Labor Evolution

post has three assignments

A Doll House analysis

Order Description

Choose a common theme such as marriage, death, conflict, male/female relationships, reality vs. illusion, freedom/oppression, or justice, and use that theme to analyze the topic using A Doll House with a debatable, analytical thesis statement with key points.Locate at least three academically valid sources to support the main points in your essay. This essay must be formatted using MLA Style and contain a Works Cited page. The expected length is approximately five to seven pages. Remember, your analysis also needs to include the following elements: An introduction with thesis statement; a body of points explored; and a conclusion. Close reading of passages from the play to support your analysis. Three secondary sources to further reinforce your points. Development and organization of analysis within 5-7 pages. Clear grammar and style. Adherence to MLA format.
A Works Cited page.

2: The American Labor Evolution

Order Description

Research paper on how american labor laws and practices have evolved to present date.

3: Organizational Change

Order Description

Discuss organizational change and how leaders can accomplish double-loop learning in their organizations. Provide a biblical example of double-loop learning. How does being intellectually conscious of your own worldview help you understand the worldview of others? What impact does this have on organizations?

RESPOND WITH 3 REFERENCES. THE REFERENCES CAN NOT BE FROM THE UK, BRITISH, OR LONDON.
REFERENCES:
• Argyris, Chris. 1997. Initiating change that perseveres. (Initiating Change: Theory and Practice). American Behavioral Scientist 40, no. 3 (Jan): 299-310. (12 pages) Link to Argyris_Article.pdf
• Sire (2009). The universe next door. (Chapters 5-6)
• Daft (2012). Organization Theory and Design (Chapters 12 and 13)
• Double-loop Learning in Higher Education: https://www.csus.edu/indiv/s/shulockn/Executive%20Fellows%20PDF%20readings/Tagg-double%20loop%20learning.pdf
• https://bible.org/seriespage/21-double-loop-learning (Double-Loop Learning and the Bible).

CHARLES ORIGINAL POST:

At its core, organizational change is essential to maintain a competitive edge against the competitors. It reviews and modifies management structure and business processes (Basu, n.d.). To be more competitive, companies need ways to conduct business more efficiently and with less expenditure. Most people have fears, but there is no need for fear. By embracing change, the company lays down a foundation for success. Those that do not accept change may falter and fail; moreover, change, at times, could be difficult because it involves employee’ behavior. This illustrates a chain of events: change that causes uncertainty, uncertainty that leads to fear.
We are created in God’s image and uniquely designed with billions of DNA. What one person perceives or experiences is entirely different from another person. God is not a God of fear, but of love. We read in 1 John 4:8 that “God is love.” Furthermore, Paul wrote in 2 Timothy 1:7 that “for God gave us a spirit not of fear, but of power and love and self control.” As believers of Christ, we see this dynamic worldview that changes everyday, but we have confidence that God is fully in control. How does our perspective translate into the business world?
“Argyris (1976) popularized the term single-loop learning to describe error catching and correcting activities that do not involve a change in foundational assumptions. Double-loop learning, on the other hand, he says, is that deeper change involving a questioning of the basis on which decisions are made” (Bochman & Kroth, 2011, p. 329).
The differentiation between the two loops boils down to the organizational change and learning. As leaders, if we begin to shift away from how to change isolated issues and concentrate more on the underlying root of why things are done the way they are, an insidious mental change slowly seeps in and we become part of the organizational culture (Stone, n.d.).
References
Basu, C. (n.d.). What Is the Meaning of Organizational Change? | Chron.com. Retrieved from https://smallbusiness.chron.com/meaning-organizational-change-35131.html
Bochman, D., & Kroth, M. (2010). Immunity to transformational learning and change. The Learning Organization, 17(4), 328-342.
Stone, S. (n.d.). The Value Proposition for Change. Retrieved from https://www.regent.edu/acad/global/publications/rgbr/vol5iss2/RGBR-Vol5Iss2-stone-4.pdf

SIMON’S ORIGINAL POST:
Invariably, organizations need to change over time to produce desired outcomes (Tagg, 2007). Nevertheless, substantive and enduring organizational change does not come easy (Argyris, 1997). Double-loop learning is a process described by Argyris and Schon that effectively addresses this paradox.
Double-loop learning differs from single-loop learning, which involves changing methods and improving efficiency to achieve prescribed outcomes (Cartwright, 2002). Single-loop learning is common; it relates to functioning habitually to produce anticipated results. “Double-loop learning has to do with reflecting on the theory when results do not meet expectations” (Maccoby, 1996, p. 2). In this case, the governing values (assumptions, norms and objectives) that undergird organizational theory and practice can be challenged (Tagg, 2007). Leaders can accomplish double-loop learning by examining the values built into their organization’s operations, and prioritizing them over expected results (Tagg, 2007).
Following his resurrection, Jesus used double-loop learning when he restored Peter (Jn 21: 15-19). Under intense pressure during Jesus’ arrest, Peter had denied the Lord three times. Now, walking with Peter on the beach, Jesus does not rebuke him, focus on his failure, or preach about faithfulness. Instead, by asking Peter three times “do you love me?”, he challenges Peter to focus on the core (underlying value) of the problem. The ensuing dramatic and life-long change in Peter’s life and ministry was possible because the root problem was addressed when Jesus’ simple inquiry comprehensively questioned Peter’s heart issue (Argyris, 1977).
By intellectually examining my own worldview (theism, specifically a believer in the God of the Bible), I can evaluate other worldviews from a standpoint of where they differ to mine. For example, Sire (1997) notes that it is with “the understanding of history and of doctrine that theists most find fault with their existential counterparts” (p. 115). Being intellectually aware of my worldview, allow me to fairly critique others.
Initiating organizational change is more likely when organizational leaders are cognizant of their own underlying values (“worldview”), and, if desired results are not forthcoming, are willing to adjust (Tagg, 2007).
References
Argyris, C. (1977). Communication: Double-Loop Learning in Organizations. Harvard Business Review.https://hbr.org/1977/09/double-loop-learning-in-organizations
Argyris, C. (1997). Initiating Change that Perseveres. (Initiating Change: Theory and Practice). American Behavioral Scientist40, no. 3 (Jan) 299-310.
Cartwright, S. (2002). Double-Loop Learning: A Concepts and process for Leadership Educators. Journal of Education. Volume 1, Issue 1.
Maccoby, M. (1996). Resolving The Leadership Paradox: The Doctor’s Dialogue. Research Technology Management, Vol. 39, No. 3 May-June, 1996, pp. 57-59.
Sire, J. W. (2009). The Universe Next Door: A Basic Worldview Catalog. 5th Edition. IVP Academic. ISBN-10: 0830838503; ISBN-13: 978-0830838509
Tagg, J. Double-Loop Learning in Higher Education. CHANGE. July/August 2007.

American Labor Evolution