Production Management Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Production Management - Essay Example According to Hill (1991), ‘The production/operations management (POM) task is concerned with the transformation process which takes inputs and converts them into outputs, together with the various support functions closely associated with this basic task’ (cited Brown, 2000; p.7). Such transformation processes can be applied to three main categories, materials, customers and information. Brown (2000) describes that Production Management encompasses the most vital activities of production, beginning from and including, planning and design, production processes of goods and services, and also effective integration of marketing, finance, human resources management and strategy in order to enable a business to enter and compete with both new and existing markets. In other words, a business’s success and sustainability largely depend on the operational capabilities, including efficiency and quality. Production management is a comprehensive phenomenon including distinct and complex activities that need to be performed in order to achieve a firm’s goals. Besides the processes itself, there is a strategic aspect linked to the production management process, without which aligning production processes with the firm’s actual goals, tracking performance of the firm and its processes, and gaining profits become difficult or even impossible. The entire production management can be illustrated in the following manner: Each of these activities requires planning in great detail. The present discussion will be focused on production process in a normal readymade clothes manufacturing unit. Although the focus is on production process, it should be noted that production process is further dependent on the other functions, i.e. strategic planning and tactical planning. For instance, the raw materials required for the production process are procured from

Fire Protection Engineering in the 21st Century Essay Example for Free

Fire Protection Engineering in the 21st Century Essay Abstract Fire protection engineering is the application of scientific and engineering principles to protect people, their property, and their environment from the destructive effects of fire. Fire protection engineers are involved in almost all aspects of fire safety and fire prevention. Among their function is the design, review and recommendation of fire prevention systems, which has two classifications: active and passive. Active fire protection systems react to conditions created by fire, such as increase in temperature or smoke, and act to extinguish the flame. Passive fire protection systems are incorporated in the structural design of the building to prevent spread of fire or smoke, and to prevent structural collapse. Fire protection engineers also adhere to building and fire safety codes. They also participate in the development of these codes, as well as review and enforce them. Fire protection engineers also predict fire behavior by simulating fire conditions through modeling. By this process, certain characteristics of the fire can be predicted. Models may simulate the development of a fire inside an enclosure, look at activation times of output systems such as thermal and smoke detectors, simulate egress situations, or measure the ability of a building to withstand fire. Risk assessments are also done by fire protection engineers and involve hazard analysis, consequence analysis and likelihood analysis. Fire investigation nowadays also involves fire protection engineers that can construct the scene before and during the fire. Fire Engineering 5 I. Introduction Fire protection engineering, the application of scientific and engineering principles to protect people, their property and their environment from fires, is used interchangeably with fire engineering and fire safety engineering. Although this paper uses â€Å"fire protection engineering† to simplify terminologies, it should also be understood that it likewise refers to the two latter terms, except in instances wherein there is a need for differentiation. Several centuries ago, the primary aim of fire protection engineering is to prevent fires, which in those days, has the possibility to devastate entire cities (Hurley 2006). In the 1900’s, the objective of fire protection engineering is to contain a fire in its building of origin. As technology advances, this objective has evolved to containing the fire in the room or object of origin. Towards the end of the twentieth century however, fire protection engineering has evolved to become a professional discipline having its own set of principles (Lucht 1989 cited in Hurley 2006). II. Professional Definition of Fire Protection Engineering Fire protection engineering is the employment of science and technology to protect people and their environment from destructive fires. Some of these principles include design of fire protection systems, analysis of fire hazards, carrying out of risk assessment, fire modeling and post-fire investigation and analysis. Fire protection engineers also review fire protection systems, participate in third-party review of fire protection designs, as well as participate in development of codes that would protect life and property from fire. Furthermore, they may also be called upon to interpret and enforce existing building and fire codes (Koffel 2003). During the design phase of a building, fire protection engineers may work with architects and other engineers to ensure a fire-safe structure. They make Fire Engineering 6 recommendations for cost-effective fire protection solutions to guarantee that the building and its occupants are adequately protected (Society of Fire Protection Engineers 2008). According to a roundtable discussion by fire protection engineers from all over the globe regarding the international practice of fire protection engineering, such a description is true of fire protection engineers in the United States wherein fire protection engineering and fire safety engineering is taken to be the same. According to Koffel (2003), who facilitated the discussion, such a broad definition is differentiated in Australia where fire protection engineers and fire safety engineers offer distinct services. Fire protection engineers are those that design active fire protection systems such as sprinklers, and fire detection and alarm systems according to the appropriate standards. This task is usually done by mechanical engineers who have specialized in active fire protection systems. The design of passive fire protection systems, which are usually incorporated as part of the structural design of a building, is specified by structural engineers and architects. Fire safety engineers, on the other hand, are those that develop fire safety strategies for a building or facility. The same is true in the United Kingdom where â€Å"fire protection engineering† is not a common term. That term is also generally used for those who design and install active fire protection systems. Fire safety engineers are those that assist in the design of buildings and structures in order to meet the life safety requirements of the law. Such requirements in the design include means of escape, structural fire resistance, internal and external fire spread, fire spread through cavities and internal openings, and access and facilities for fire service. Let it be reiterated, however, that for the rest of the paper, fire protection engineering refers to the broad description used in the United States. By training, education and experience, a fire protection engineer is expected to be familiar with the nature and characteristics of fire, analyze how fire starts, how it grows and Fire Engineering 7 affect people, buildings and property, and how it can be detected, controlled and extinguished (Hurley 2006; Society of Fire Protection Engineers 2008). Furthermore, they should be able to anticipate the behavior of buildings, structure and apparatus so as to better prevent life and property from fire. III. Fire Protection Systems In the event of a fire in a building, the protection of the occupants as well as of property is accomplished by a combination of active and passive means. Active fire protection systems are only used when fire is already present. Such systems are usually activated by a combination of sensors or mechanical means (Evans et al. 2005). A sprinkler system, a smoke alarm and a fire defence are just a few examples of active fire protection systems. Passive fire protection systems, on the other hand, insulate a structure by increasing its fire resistance. These systems become an integral part of the building layout and construction materials, and include (but not limited to) compartmentation and fire barriers, stairways for rapid evacuation, and spray-on fire proofing. Both systems are complimentary, not competitive (Cafco International 2007). The law recognises them as being able to (and should) work together to ensure safety in the event of fire. A. Active Fire Protection Systems The most common active fire protection systems used inside buildings are fire alarm systems, smoke control systems, water sprinklers, and portable fire extinguishers and hose reels. Each of these will be discussed in detail in the succeeding discussion. A. 1 Fire Detection and Alarm Systems The purpose fire alarm systems is to detect fires, alert the occupants, send for emergency rescue, and provide information that will facilitate emergency response (Evans et al. 2005). These systems have several main functions depending on the fire scenario, the type Fire Engineering 8 of building, the number of occupants and criticality of content and mission (Artim 2007). First, they provide a means to recognize a developing fire, either by manual or automatic means. Second, they notify building occupants to the fire condition and the necessity of evacuation. Third, they may also transmit signal to emergency responders such as the fire station to alert them of the building’s condition. They may also be used to shut down electrical and air handling equipment, and may be used to set off automatic suppression systems. The control panel is considered the fundamental component of any fire detection and alarm system. Its function is to monitor the â€Å"input† devices, such as the components that detect smoke and fire and then activates the alarm â€Å"outputs† such as horns, bells, warning lights, emergency telephone dialers, and building controls (Artim 2007). Although human beings are excellent fire detectors as they are normally equipped with senses that can detect smoke, heat, flame and odor, they can, in some cases, become an unreliable detection method. A person may not be present during the fire, may not raise an alarm effectively or may not be in perfect health to perceive fire signals. It is for these reasons that automatic fire detectors have been developed. There are many kinds of automatic fire detectors; the most commonly used are thermal detectors, smoke detectors and flame detectors.

The Relevance of Edith Wharton’s Roman Fever to the Modern World Essay

The Relevance of Edith Wharton’s Roman Fever to the Modern World According to the World Health Organization, â€Å"of the 75 million children under five in Africa a million and a half die each year of pneumonia.† As distressing and sad as this statistic is, it points out the great danger pneumococcus still is to young people in the developing world. It’s in the developed world, but at a time before antibiotics, at a time when acute respiratory ailments posed an even greater but still preventable threat to the younger set that concerns us here and that inspires a deeper look at the full implications of respiratory disease. The WHO goes on to say that acute respiratory infection (ARI) â€Å"is one of five conditions which account for more than 70% of child mortality in Africa.† So not only is pneumonia prevalent, it is still deadly. The danger it poses to young people has life-influencing ramifications, ones with an incredible emotional content. Though more treatable now, as we’ll see later, the persistence of pneumonia f its in with the puzzle as it presents itself, since it is linkable to a much more fundamental human ailment. In Edith Wharton’s â€Å"Roman Fever† we also see ailments of a pulmonary and life-changing import. Indeed, the entire story seems shot-through with infection. Wharton writes of Mrs. Slade and Mrs. Ansley, both widowed, both taking their daughters to Rome on holiday as they had been. Their own intertwined histories Wharton describes at the story’s onset as â€Å"all of the movings, buyings, travels, anniversaries, illnesses† (emphasis mine) (751). Wharton then begins the tale with illness. It is only as the narrative progresses that we get a sense of how important illness is to become: Yes; being the Slade’s widow wa... ...an be treated with antibiotics, it can be treated with aversion therapy or the simple addition of marriage. Other love preventatives such as war and country music are both quite feasible and can actually be very profitable for Western nations, though they seem a little cruel, especially the latter. Wharton’s â€Å"Roman Fever† at the very least points the way; it is a warning that love and pneumonia are inextricably linked, an idea that we’d do well to pay more attention to today when the ease of a high technology lifestyle fosters an arrogance that all the world’s problems have been solved. Works Cited Wharton, Edith. â€Å"Roman Fever.† Edith Wharton: Collected Stories 1911-1937. New York: Literary Classics 2001. 749-62. World Health Organization. â€Å"Childhood Diseases in Africa† Fact Sheet N 109. March 1996. 14.3.2003 http://www.who.int/inf-fs/en/fact109.html

A Comparison between the Moral Philosophy of John Stuart Mill and Immanuel Kant

The discussion on Moral Philosophy and ethics has always been a controversial and very debatable topic, especially if we are to discuss each and every philosophy or ideology of every philosopher starting off from Greece up to the Post Modernists.   In relation to this particular philosophy, the author would like to compare two of the philosopher’s moral philosophies and how each come to have similarities and contrast with each.To be more specific, the author would like to dwell on the similarities and differences between the moral philosophies of Utilitarianism proponent John Stuart Mill and Idealist Immanuel Kant and to answer the question What are the key concepts in the moral theory of John Stuart Mill and Immanuel Kant?   Furthermore, to be able to answer the specific question: What are the similarities and differences in the moral ideologies of Mill and Kant?The school of Utilitarianism had John Stuart Mill as one of its leading proponents.   Mill speaks of morality in the sense of desire versus desirable but he contradicts that of Jeremy Bentham.   He further states that the true utilitarian interprets the greatest happiness principle to mean not my greatest happiness but the greatest happiness of the greatest number.[1] Contrary to the first utilitarian philosophy of Jeremy Bentham, Mill posits through this principle the concept of greater good for the greater whole.Mill further states that utility would enjoin first, that laws and social arrangements should place the happiness or the interest of every individual, as nearly as possible in harmony with the interest of the whole; and secondly, that education and opinion which have so vast a power of human character, should so use that power as to establish in the mind of every individual an indissolvable association between his own happiness and the good of the whole†¦so that a direct impulse to promote the general good maybe in every individual one of the habitual motives of action.[2] We can see arising from this argument that Mill was giving more emphasis on the quality of pleasures and not just our personal pleasure and turns towards the good of the whole which we must seek.   This therefore gives Mill ground morality not just on personal pleasure but more on our obligation towards the people or on others.This, according to Mill does not at all contradict with the Utilitarian doctrine / teaching where one aims to seek for happiness or pleasure.   According to Mill, happiness is the center of moral life and the most desirable goal of human conduct.   The said argument of Mill gives us a gray area in asking what would be the basis or sole basis of desirable?Mill answers that that which is desirable is that we ought to choose.   Happiness is something that we desire and it is our moral duty to pursue happiness.   Mill’s moral principle evolves in the concept that an act is good in so far as it produces happiness.   Mill was trying to build a mor al system that was based on duty, by stating that which ought to do upon what in fact we already do.   Happiness for him is still the ultimate of human conduct.When Mill posited happiness as something that man should sought for out of duty, it cannot but prevent people from raising their counter-arguments with the query how can we prove that happiness is the true and desirable end of human life and conduct?To answer the query, Mill posits and states that the sole evidence it is possible to produce that anything is desirable is that people does desire it.[3] The answer that Mill provided though has not completely settled his detractors because Mill has made an analogy wherein he compared visible to that which is desirable.According to him, that which is visible means that something is capable of being seen, thus, that which is desirable automatically makes us desire it.   Such a conclusion falls under one of the logical fallacies because that which is seen, by means of the facult y of the mind means it is visible to our senses but that which is desirable, cannot and does not automatically become an end that we would ought to desire.The fact lies that the human mind, man, as a person may desire a thing which is not desirable in the first place.   Mill proposes that our pursuit is not limited to happiness alone but the pursuit of duty.   According to him, a sense of duty directs our moral thought.   For him, the basis of morality is a powerful natural sentiment, a subjective feeling in our own minds and the conscientious feelings of mankind.[1] Stumpf, Samuel Enoch.   Socrates to Sartre: A History of Philosophy.   Singapore: Mc Graw Hill Inc. 1991. p. 348. [2] Ibid. [3] Ibid. p. 349.

Martha McCaskey The Seleris Associates Industry Analysis Case Study

For the past 18 months Martha McCaskey has been an exemplary performer with high integrity and been assigned as a project leader to a crucial high profile project named Silicon 6. Upon successful completion of Silicon 6, McCaskey has been promised a promotion to group manager. McCaskey is being pressured by senior management to finish the project and have an action plan to present to the client. Now she has some options to weigh in order to complete the project. What McCaskey must decide is where she draws the line on compromising her values in order to complete Silicon 6. She will have to decide what constitutes proprietary information or is she engaging in â€Å"gentleman’s industrial espionage† McCaskey has also realized she might have to pay someone off to finish her project in order to attain her promised promotion. She felt she has always maintained a high degree of integrity until now. There were some warning flags McCaskey should have noticed. The focus this paper is to examine specific reasons underlying McCaskey’s situation, what the warning flags were and what tactics she should employ concerning her involvement in the Silicon 6 project and her future with Seleris. Martha McCaskey Seleris Associates Industry Analysis Division Case Study Martha McCaskey has been assigned as the Project Leader of the Silicon 6 Project with Seleris Associates Industry Analysis Division (IAD). She is facing some real tough decisions that can be career threatening and possibly have legal ramifications. Silicon 6 has become a crucial project for IAD. Silicon 6 will account for 20% of IAD’s revenues. If successful for IAD’s client then more lucrative projects would follow. This should have been a warning sign to McCaskey, a high profile project given to a new hire would not happen. McCaskey has been promised a promotion to Group Manager with a substantial increase in pay if she performs well. This was a warning sign. How could McCaskey be promoted to Group Manager? There were only 2 groups who was going to go? Was it just â€Å"lip-service† to entice her further to obtain the needed information on Silicon 6? Selersis’s client is a semiconductor manufacturer based in California. The client has retained IAD to identify cost structure and manufacturing processes for a new chip being manufactured by a competitor. Selersis’s client has offered to double the consulting fees if the required information could be obtained. McCaskey has been tasked by her management to formulate an action plan to present to senior management of the client and IAD. McCaskey is struggling with how she must decide what constitutes proprietary information and what is public knowledge. McCaskey wonders if she is engaging in â€Å"gentleman’s industrial espionage†. She has always maintained a high degree of integrity, until now. McCaskey now has some different approaches for finishing the Silicon 6 project to ponder. The Events Leading Up To Martha’s Situation Martha McCaskey has the right pedigree; Electrical Engineering (EE) degree from CalTech, and Harvard MBA. Shortly after finishing her MBA she became an associate with Seleris Associates Industry Analysis Division. This division specializes in clients in the computer component manufacturing industry. McCaskey’s offer was generous plus she received a good reference from a former CalTech associate who was employed there. The division was divided into 2 units. One unit was under Group Manager Bud Hackert called the â€Å"Old Guard† which worked mainly on independent projects and the other unit under Group Manger Bill Davies comprised of newer associates or â€Å"New Guard† where McCaskey was assigned. The New Guard group worked predominately on team projects. McCaskey’s first project received high praise from Tom Malone the division’s vice president stating her performance was the best the division had ever seen. The second project was very challenging. Under heavy pressure McCaskey was successful. After presenting successfully to the client, the president of IAD Ty Richardson asked McCaskey what her delay was on this project in writing the clients report. McCaskey was so outraged she finished the report in 10 days. Malone established her report as the new benchmark for IAD projects. This behavior by Malone should have been a warning sign as well. McCaskey had been with IAD a short time and already her work was a bench mark? There is no easier way to gain loyalty then by praise. McCaskey felt Richardson and Malone disapproved of her handling of the project. It was during this period that Malone suggested McCaskey ask advice of 2 members of the Hackerts’ group; Dan Randall and Chuck Kaufmann concerning obtaining sources of information. Hackert’s group was involved in gathering detailed information about competitors. This McCaskey quickly ascertained that Kaufmann and Randall were the real producers of this group. Before she was done on her current project McCaskey was asked by Richardson to talk with the rest of the members of Davies Old Guard group on the Silicon 6 Project. Randall was cold and unapproachable and Kaufmann was unavailable. McCaskey did work later with Kaufmann on some team projects and she found him to be approachable and fun to work with. The Atmosphere At IAD Several senior associates had left the firm in the last few months. McCaskey over the months has discovered was that IAD had some severe ethics issues. The president Ty Richardson is very sharp as well as a convincing salesperson with plenty of charm and charisma. He was very driven, mostly by money. The defacto Chief Operating Officer (COO) Tom Malone was the type of leader who was another great talker and salesman who once stated to Kauffman that he did not care about the turnover at IAD because he could just put an ad in the paper and hire all the staff he needed. Richardson and Malone stated to the staff about being part of the management team. However both would go on a client visit without involving the staff. The staff felt left out and perceived themselves as being non-contributors. McCaskey had been given the freedom by Richardson to perform her work as she wished and her work was also recognized by Richardson. Her bonus that year was $25,000 while the other associates bonuses were much smaller. This should have been a warning sign to McCaskey, special attention by senior management, to include a large bonus in excess of co-workers share. McCaskey And Silicon 6 McCaskey had been asked to work on Silicon 6 because of her EE degree and coursework on chip design. Richardson had stated the project was behind schedule and her expertise would be valuable. McCaskey was informed she would be working with Chuck Kauffman. Kaufmann was hard working but was taken advantage of by both Richardson and Malone. He was paid less than any other associate and felt the company needed his expertise to run the business. Kaufmann could not step back and see his situation. When trying to obtain information from industry sources McCaskey would identify herself as a representative of a trade journal. McCaskey thought that was a little more above board than visiting a target company and pretending to be interviewing for a job, as a consulting friend of hers does. Richardson spends more time with Randall, McCaskey and Kaufmann often making impromptu visits to see McCaskey and Kaufmann. McCaskey was still struggling with obtaining credible information on the target company. Seleris’ client had also placed a stipulation that the target company was not to be contacted, to avoid the appearance of price fixing. Malone had queried McCaskey on whether she had been able to contact any former employees of the target company. On other projects she had found former employees of target companies a valuable source of information. Kaufmann had confided in McCaskey he had paid a former employee of a target company a $5,000 consulting fee for spreadsheets and a business plan for a new product line. He mentioned Randall had done this on a regular basis on Seleris projects. IAD had no written formal policies concerning solicitation guidelines and rules of engagement working for a client. McCaskey confirmed with a coworker that members of Hackerts’ Old Guard group routinely paid off ex employees of target companies to obtain sensitive and proprietary information for Seleris’ clients and the Group Manager Hackert condoned and encouraged this behavior. Desperate for information McCaskey considered using former employees of the target company to complete Silicon 6. When she learned of the bribes McCaskey should have known what Seleris was all about, ethics not being an attribute. This was another warning sign she chose to ignore. Enter Phil Devon McCaskey’s best lead came via some random events. During her research she came across a professor at a small east coast engineering school who actively consulted with European semiconductor manufacturers. After contacting him McCaskey discovered he could not provide her with any information. Malone then suggested McCaskey fly out and interview him in person indicating he might have some â€Å"gossip† on the new chip. The face to face interview provided no new information that McCaskey could use. The professor suggested she contact Phil Devon a consultant in southern California who had been involved in the design and start up of one of the European chip manufacturers. The lead for Devon came about under such obscure circumstances. Malone told her to fly out to see the professor for â€Å"gossip† and then she discovered Devon? Did he know of Devon and intended to use McCaskey as a patsy? This was another set of warning signs for McCaskey. McCaskey set up an interview with Devon and discovered he was a former employee of the target company at the vice president level. This was large warning sign for McCaskey. You should never approach an executive of a target company, they are not ignorant. Your true intentions will be figured out in no time. McCaskey felt uneasy with Devon from the start. Devon was almost too forthcoming with information. McCaskey felt certain that Devon could provide her with all the information she needed to complete Silicon 6. She felt he might be leading her on in order to find out who she was working for. This should have been a red flag warning for McCaskey. Devon was way too anxious to give up information. What were his motives? Just a nice guy who wanted to help for the right price? A disgruntled ex-employee? Was he working for the target company? Was he part of a sting operation ? She did not listen to her â€Å"gut† on this one. McCaskey was an intelligent person she should have gone with what she felt (Welch Jack: Straight From The Gut) When McCaskey debriefed Malone she informed him of her meeting with Devon and how she felt Devon could have provided her with all the information she required had she just asked. She then informed Malone she had come away empty handed with the needed information. She also informed him about how uneasy she felt about Devon’s demeanor to the point that he might call the authorities or inform the target company’s plant Silicon 6 of her interest if she pressed him for the target company’s information. Malone told her not to contact Devon anymore and just go through her client presentation with him. Malone informed McCaskey that Seleris would present the data as though it represented the actual Silicon 6 plant. When McCaskey objected Malone informed her no one would notice when they presented. Another warning sign, Malone was going to lie to the client. What McCaskey thought was to be a dry-run of her presentation turned out to be held in front of the client’s senior plant management. The plant managers stopped her within 15 minutes of her presentation stating it provided no new information. In a closed door session with Malone and McCaskey the client plant management stated their displeasure in Seleris’s handling of the Silicon 6 project stating how much business they had given Seleris and how they hope to continue the trend. However, given what they had just witnessed they had doubts. Malone then brought up how Seleris had just made contact with an former employee of the Silicon 6 plant who could provide them all the information required given the proper â€Å"incentives† were provided. The attitude with the client senior management immediately changed. The client senior management doubled the consulting fee for IAD stating the additional funds could be used for â€Å"incentives†. The client stated they did not care how IAD obtained the information as long as they got it. Malone was delighted in the turn of events and how delighted Richardson would be. When Malone briefed Hackert, he suggested that the consulting fee paid to Devon should be $7,000 not the usual $4,000 or whatever would make it worthwhile. Malone then informed McCaskey to think about how she handle Devon and not rule out the idea of using Kaufmann to meet with Devon. McCaskey realized she was in the middle of paying Devon off to complete Silicon 6 and receive her promised promotion. This was a huge warning sign. Malone was shooting from the hip and he succeeded. Plus he had the perfect patsy; McCaskey or Kaufmann. Strategies Martha McCaskey Could Have Taken One strategy McCaskey could have taken was to stand up and define herself as a person and an employee (Jack Welch Video: Define Yourself or Others Will). If you allow people to think that you condone certain behavior, as in McCaskey stating to Malone â€Å"You’re Amazing! † after the presentation she and Malone made to the Silicon 6 client. She seemed to admire him for his dishonesty. When she learned that Seleris was bribing former employees of target companies she further failed to define herself in not speaking up for ethics and distancing herself form the situation. Her co-workers could only assume she approved of such behavior. Being new McCaskey desired to excel and seek approval of her management; however bribery to succeed is not the way to differentiate or advance yourself. Differentiation is a way to manage your people and your business. It’s about getting the best players on your team in order to have everyone pull together and win. (Jack Welch; Winning; Chapter 3) You do not win by being dishonest. When McCaskey discovered her management was basically unethical she needed to have a face to face meeting with them immediately. McCaskey was not in a situation of good boss vs. bad boss (Welch Podcast: Good Boss vs. Bad Boss) with someone who was just a jerk or a bully, she was dealing with 2 people who were blatantly dishonest and unethical who were condoning and encouraging bribery and industrial espionage. They were crossing a line that could land them or McCaskey or Kaufmann in jail. More than likely it would have not been Richardson and Malone as they were the â€Å"know it all† types of mangers who would let subordinates take the fall. (Welch Podcast: Bosses Who Get It All Wrong). At this point McCaskey has realized both of her managers were dishonest. You cannot trust dishonest people. Trust is the fiber of good peer to peer relationships, once gone it’s hard to win back. Trust is like the stock market you can lose it overnight (Fiener Chapter 3 Law of Trust). McCaskey should have confronted both Richardson and Malone both with their behavior and asked to be moved off of the project. Better to be moved off or moved out than go to jail. McCaskey did not give herself a lot of options to improve her or change her situation as she went along with the status quo. She chose not to stand up and do her job the right way. She more than likely is going to be cannon fodder for her management. (Feiner Chapter 8 Law of Conscientious Objector). A culture change needed to take place at Seleris from top to bottom and bottom to top. However, the persons you had running the company Richardson and Malone were not about to inspire any change that would interfere with their personal cash flow. The main problem with Richardson and Malone is that while both were bright and charismatic, but they were the wrong type of leaders, they were not inspiring the right attributes. Feiner Chapter 2). They were not taking control of the situation for the good of the company or employees, they were doing for themselves. The burning bridge technique might have worked (Fiener Chapter 9 The Law of the Burning Bridge). For change to end it right the process must start right. Malone and Richardson were not about to upset their empire by admitting they were wrong and begin a dra stic change process. It is not in their moral fiber to do so. There was no way for McCaskey to have changed their behavior. A painful end is waiting for them. Three Emails McCaskey Should Write Ty: After some thought and soul searching I feel I should be removed from the Silicon 6 Project. I realize I have not produced well on this project and I sincerely regret my less than stellar performance. I would like to stay on with Seleris IAD and perhaps work on less high profile projects in order to give myself a much needed break. I feel very stressed and overwhelmed at this point. I would like to meet face to face with you in your office to personally discuss my options with you. I would also like to take a 2 week vacation to recover from the last few months as well. I notice your calendar is clear form 1300-1400 would that be convenient for you? Tom: Due to the tremendous stress I have been under I will be taking a couple of weeks vacation to recover. I would like to remove myself form the project. I will let you decide who should meet with Phil Devon, as I know you know the right person to speak with Devon. I have cleared this with Ty Richardson and he agrees that I need some time off. I will be moving on to some less high profile projects. Head of Human Resources: I have enjoyed my tenure Seleris IAD where I feel I have grown personally and professionally. I feel I have worked with some of the industry’s best consultants. It is a decision that I have thought about for a while and I feel it is the best option for me at this point. I will be terminating my employment within 2 weeks from receipt of this email. A certified letter confirming the same will be coming to you forthwith. Conclusion Martha McCaskey has painted herself into a corner. She can pay Devon off take her promotion and hope for the best with her future. Her situation is this; she is considering bribery and has engaged in industrial espionage. McCaskey should run not walk away from this situation. She should run; self terminate her employment and cut all ties with her co-workers. She should have seen the warning flags and listened to her â€Å"gut†. As soon as possible McCaskey should quit Seleris IAD and retain an attorney. She needs to provide him or her with complete details of her dealings on Silicon 6. McCaskey should act on the advice of her legal counsel to protect herself if Seleris IAD chooses to come after her if the dealings with Devon take a turn for the worse. Call it what you want; incentive, consulting fee, gift, it’s still bribery and illegal. I wonder what Jack Welch would have done?ReferencesWelch, Jack with Suzy, (2005). Winning, Harper Collins. Welch, Jack with John A. Byrne. (2001). Jack: Straight From The Gut, Warner Books Inc. Feiner, Michael, (2005) The Feiner Points of Leadership. Warner Business Books. Welch, J., Welch, S. (2009). Define Yourself or Others Will Retrieved from The Welch Way Website. http://www.welchway.com/