The Problem of Constant Arguments in the Workplace
I will be attaching the checklist for this paper as well as examples and the Source paper graded and wanted needed to be fixed for this paper. I have to use the same topic that was used on my source paper that is attached. Thank you
In this paper, you tell about a problem and how to solve it. Most people use the same problem they wrote about in the topic paper. However, if you want to change problems, you can. You also include research that supports your solution. One way to think about this paper is you include:
* more about your problem
* what will solve your problem
* what backs up or supports your solution
To do these things, you need to do some research. And at this point doing research really is the crucial thing, for you will need it to write your progress report, which is the next paper.
SO WHAT SHOULD YOU RESEARCH?
Good question. I imagine that the things to research are information about
* the problem
* the solution
* support for the solution
So if the problem were that we didn't know where to have our end-of-the-semester party, you may do the following research:
* the problem
It can doubled spaced 4-5 pages
Why can't we just have our party anywhere?
Are some places too costly?
Are some places not big enough?
Do some places have a noise ordinance?
What helps define the problem for the reader?
* the solution
What will solve our problem?
* support for the solution
Perhaps your solution is that we should have our end-of-the-semester party at the Jimmie Cone in Damascus. What have you learned that says the Jimmie Cone is the right place? What says that having the party there will solve our problem?
So work on that research! A number of things go into this paper, including
* research
* writing
* revising
WRITING THE PROGRESS REPORT
One of the major problems with the progress report is often that the evidence, or the information researched, does not support the recommendation, or the solution. I'm here to help.
A good way to make sure the evidence supports the recommendation is to
a) repeat the recommendation at the beginning of the evidence section.
b) then use the recommendation to organize the evidence.
And always be sure to tie in your evidence with why this is good for you. In other words, don't just say what you learned but tell how that helps you reach your goal. For instance, if we had a problem and I recommended that we follow three steps to fix it, I could use that to organize my paper.
Here's an example:
RECOMMENDATION
In order to save for retirement, I should
1) invest some of my money in stocks
2) invest some of my money in bonds
3) invest some of my money in real estate
Then, in the evidence section, you repeat the recommendation and use that to organize your evidence:
EVIDENCE
In order to save for retirement, I should
1) invest some of my money in stocks
2) invest some of my money in bonds
3) invest some of my money in real estate
Here's what I learned that supports each these steps:
WHY I SHOULD INVEST SOME OF MY MONEY IN STOCKS
Over every sixteen-year period, stocks have returned...blah, blah, blah...and so on, and so on. If I invest $25.00 a month into stocks, then in 20 years I should have...blah, blah, blah...and so on, and so on. This will help me reach my goal for retirement...blah, blah, blah...and so on, and so on.
WHY I SHOULD INVEST SOME OF MY MONEY IN BONDS
Though stocks have a high rate of return, they can be risky. That is why I should deposit some of my money in bonds. Bonds are a more secure way of investing...blah, blah, blah...and so on, and so on. If I invest $10.00 a month into bonds, then in 20 years I should have...blah, blah, blah...and so on, and so on. This will help me reach my goal for retirement...blah, blah, blah...and so on, and so on.
WHY I SHOULD INVEST SOME OF MY MONEY IN REAL ESTATE
Over the past 3 years, the most secure investment has been real estate. Since 2000,...blah, blah, blah...and so on, and so on. If I invest $35.00 a month into real estate, then in 20 years I should have...blah, blah, blah...and so on, and so on. This will help me reach my goal for retirement...blah, blah, blah...and so on, and so on.
If you have no steps in your recommendation, you can organize your paper another way. First, you tell you recommendation:
RECOMMENDATION
I recommend that I transfer to the University of Maryland, College Park, when I graduate. My research says that this university will best meet my needs.
Then, repeat the recommendation at the start of the evidence.
After that, use the research you did to organize your evidence:
EVIDENCE
I recommend that I transfer to the University of Maryland, College Park, when I graduate. My research says that this university will best meet my needs. In order to make my decision, I
* visited the University of Maryland, College Park
* talked to friends at the University of Maryland, College Park
* read about the University of Maryland, College Park
Here's what I learned from each source:
WHAT I LEARNED BY VISITING THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND AT COLLEGE PARK
Prospective students can arrange to visit the University of Maryland, College Park. On this visit, they will tour the campus and meet with a professor. On September 10, 2018, I visited the University of Maryland, College Park. While touring the campus I learned...blah, blah, blah...and so on, and so on. This will work really well for me, for I am...blah, blah, blah...and so on, and so on.
WHAT I LEARNED BY TALKING TO FRIENDS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND, COLLEGE PARK
I have three close friends who attend the University of Maryland, College Park. I spoke with each of them and learned...blah, blah, blah...and so on, and so on. This type of experience is just what I am looking for...blah, blah, blah...and so on, and so on.
WHAT I LEARNED BY READING ABOUT THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND, COLLEGE PARK
The University of Maryland, College Park, publishes a wealth information on its programs and classes. I read the college's course catalog and found...blah, blah, blah...and so on, and so on. In other words, I won't have to choose a major until I'm in my third year, which works really well for me because...blah, blah, blah...and so on, and so on. You get the picture.
ANOTHER WAY TO WRITE CLEARLY: PASSIVE VOICE
We've discussed how removing dead wood and son of dead wood from your writing are a couple of ways to write more clearly. Today we begin another: watching out for passive voice. The tricky thing is that, similar to dead wood, you usually want to get rid of it, but sometimes passive voice is OK. You'll find all of this easy to understand once you have read the files on passive voice. You'll find them where you have found the other handouts. The files are titled:
Professors name
Course code and name
Date
Progress Report
Overview
The problem in this scenario is how constant arguments between co-workers hinder effective communication and workplace productivity. The rate of employee productivity highly depends on the level of workplace interactions. When employees are constantly fighting, the atmosphere becomes toxic. In such a case, it becomes challenging for employees to pass across important information that could affect the completion of set goals (Hussain 2780). Constant arguments also lead to conflicts, thus hindering teamwork. Teamwork is essential in organizational productivity, and if the employees cannot work in teams, they compromise the organization's objectives.
Among the factors I have learned about constant arguments in the workplace are their causes and effects. Constant arguments have varying causes, some that are avoidable and some unavoidable. Some causes include too much work pressure, ineffective communication, lack of teamwork, and disagreement resulting from incompatible personalities. There are also some effects, such as increased employee stress levels, negative attitudes towards co-workers, and reduced job performance due to poor physical health. I have also learned various ways of dealing with these arguments, and the information would help me write the proposal.
I am yet to learn about multiple solutions to such problems because I have only identified a few. However, I understand that constant arguments could lead to conflicts amongst employees, thus reducing their efficiency in performing duties. Furthermore, the constant disagreements among co-workers impair the level of communication within the organization, and this would end up affecting how fast the organization can achieve its objectives. Thus, I plan to mitigate these arguments and try to find a way of maintaining smooth workplace interactions among co-workers.
Problem/Background
The problem in this scenario is how constant arguments between co-workers hinder effective communication and workplace productivity. The workplace environment has become increasingly competitive and thus more hostile, as people are constantly under pressure. Constant arguments in the workplace create conflicts which, in turn, result in less productivity. When arguing, people lose track of their objectives, and therefore they can no longer work towards meeting deadlines and, ultimately, not fulfilling the job's requirements. Therefore, constant arguments lead to internal conflicts, leading to lower productivity and affecting overall employee performance. Furthermore, the inability of employees to get along with co-workers hinders their ability to communicate effectively and correctly execute procedures.
Studies show that a common characteristic of productive employees is that they are more satisfied with their co-workers and more able to work well across departments. Such can be seen in the workplace as if there were no problems and productivity would increase drastically. However, researchers have shown that employee performance drops when there are arguments in the workplace. Therefore, the problem needs solutions to make it less challenging for employees to meet the organizational goals.
The causes of constant arguments between employees vary depending on the argument's nature and scope. There are major causes or factors which determine the reason for employees constantly arguing in the workplace. For example, when an employee is not getting along with co-workers and constantly arguing, this could be due to organizational challenges, leading to constant disagreements. The cause of these conflicts depends on the different departments' workplace cultures and work styles. There are different workplace cultures, including an open office environment where employees can easily hear each other or a more traditional style where employees work in cubicles (Ogbonnaya, Chidiebere, and Jake 521). In an open office environment, one can easily argue with co-workers because they interact a lot. If the working culture is to share and discuss problems openly, there is no need for arguing as these problems get discussed and resolved. If a more traditional style is the norm, there are fewer chances of arguing as employees do not perceive arguing as a solution to problems.
If an employee does not get along with co-workers due to personality, it will hurt workplace productivity. The lack of harmony between employees may be due to personality ...