1
8. Companies top-level authorities should include their employees in the decision-making process. What is your opinion on this?
Currently, controversy exists regarding whether companies’ top-level executives should involve their lower-level workers when making decisions. From my perspective, workers must be involved in decisions that directly relate to their wellbeing and department. However, it hinders the company’s effectiveness if low-level workers are involved in higher-level decisions of which they have no knowledge or skills.
In large corporations, it is necessary to encourage employee input if the issue directly pertains to the worker, as this creates a cooperative workplace culture. For instance, if staff cannot contribute their opinion regarding desired work hours, when sudden roster changes are made, they may hold protests or seek alternative employment because they cannot commit to the timetable. This change would also damage manager-employee relations, and thus staff feedback produces an effective company.
Low-level staff must also be included in meetings that discuss each section’s progress, as they can enlighten management of any issues within their department. Without accepting this vital information, top-level authorities might make foolish decisions, such as company Merck Sharp and Dohme who did not heed information regarding medication that employees believed caused heart attacks, leading to over 80 million people consuming this medicine before it was prohibited.
However, it is ineffective to include employees in meetings that have no relevance to their position, as in situations where top-level managers are discussing plans to expand globally, lower-level employees may hinder this decision process as they would have little insight into the company’s broader vision.
Therefore, lower-level staff must be included in decisions that affect their welfare and to provide insight into their department, yet including these employees in other higher-management decisions will impede the decision-making process.
2
4) Explain the pros and cons of extreme/adventure sports:
Countless positives of extreme sports exist including mental exhilaration, overcoming fears, and improved physical coordination. However, these exciting activities also present awful dangers such as lifelong physical impairment, and emotional stress upon loved ones.
Adventurous activities inspire many humans, as they provide the wondrous adrenaline rush, which diffuses any physiological tension. For instance, the exhilarating activity of Bungee Jumping is likened to flying, as an individual initially freefalls to great depths. This wonderful feeling experienced also helps the participator to overcome prior fears, as evidenced by many adventurers who excitedly continue the sport.
Furthermore, extreme sports also enhance a person’s coordination as the risk involved causes enthusiasts to listen intently to their instructor, leading to them accurately performing the required physical movements. For instance, when Parachuting, individuals must ensure they pull the cord at the perfect time so that they land in the correct area. This requires participants to coordinate their body correctly; if this is not achieved, they must always fly with an instructor. However, despite the pros, several cons for adventure sports must be considered. For example, in a non-extreme activity such as Netball, the player only risks receiving cuts and bruises, yet in the extreme activity of Base-Jumping, the risk of fatality exists as the individual must open their parachute during a low-altitude flight, and any mistakes could incur lifelong injuries such as quadriplegia. Furthermore, extreme activities also can place great strain upon relatives and friends who worry about their loved one’s safety.
When considering extreme sports, the individual must weigh up the pros of physical exhilaration and experience against the great risks of family stress and life-threatening injuries before making their decision.
3
9. The environment we live in is in danger due to various problems. What are the underlying causes? Who is responsible to combat this? What measures should be taken?
The rapid deterioration of the environment I believe stems from two causes; human negligence and lack of environmental education. To combat these issues, it is the government’s role to provide environmental policies and awareness programs, whilst it is every individual’s responsibility to make eco-friendly choices.
From the very beginning, it has been humans’ responsibility to care for their environment, yet individuals have either chosen protection or destruction of their planet. Concerning the latter, many individuals are aware of the damaging effects of littering, where millions of sea creatures perish annually due to ingesting plastic waste, yet humans still dispose of their waste negligently. Garbage left in parks constantly despite bins being readily available highlights this.
A lack of environmental education is also a primary cause, for lower socio-economic individuals especially, are not aware of basic sustainable actions that reduce their carbon footprint. An example is limiting car usage, as road traffic directly increases global warming by expelling CO2. Whilst most upper class citizens are aware and thus act negligently, it is apparent that the rest of society drives vehicles frequently without realising the damaging effects.
Primarily, the government is responsible to provide environmental solutions, for their strong influence can cause immediate change as shown by the plastic bag policy, where overnight all consumers started using eco-friendly bags. However, every human also must implement sustainable practices to reduce the worldwide environmental problem, such as limiting usage of daily utilities.
Therefore, it is apparent that both human behaviour and lack of knowledge is to blame for these environmental issues, and by both governments and individuals conducting environment-protecting measures, this will greatly reduce the current negative situation.
相关推荐：
loading