THE KING COMPANY BACKGROUND The King Company experiences man.docx

THE KING COMPANY BACKGROUND The King
Company experiences many of the difficulties common in
today’s business climate. In response to declining sales, the
company must transform itself from a strategy of expansion and
high profit to one of cost containment and staff reductions.The
case discusses the organization and provides details of the
human resource department. Also presented are e-mails from
various staff members. The e-mails identify specific problems
that need to be addressed by the HR department and provides a
look at King’s overall culture. You may find the tone of some e-
mails to be unprofessional. This is a good lesson for us all--As
much as we enjoy informality in the workplace, all documents
and correspondence— including e-mails—can be retained and
are discoverable in litigation. Managers must be cautious in
their writing because inappropriate language may be impossible
to defend in court.
Employees In the Case:
Amera, Argonta---Accounting employee
Andreas, Gary---employee on workers’ comp
Call, Jake---Compensation & Benefits Manager
Dean, Don---C.E.O.
Dugas, Karla---Benefits Coordinator
Folkner, Meg---Supervisor, CAD Design
Grant, Alan---Current HR Director
Honduras, Margo---Previous HR Director
Jones, Lyle---Production Employee
Madison, Charles---Senior V.P.
Petersen, Matt---Production Supervisor, Team 3
Planky, Burt---fishing buddy
Putt, Tonia---CAD Designer
Rey, Dave---Production Foreman
Sanders, Tomas---Design Manager
Scholl, Karmen---HRD Manager

Simms, Bertie---Designer
Smith, Mike---V.P.
Songun, Amy---Accounting Supervisor
Stone, Guy---Production Supervisor
Tu, Kevin---Staffing Manager
Varn, Juan---Safety & Security Manager
Warner, Salty---union promoter
White, Shaun---Employee Relations Manager
COMPANY BACKGROUND:
The King Company is a small manufacturing company located
in a mid-sized city in the upper Midwest. King manufactures
high-quality specialty components for the computer industry.
The company was founded in 1994 by current CEO, Don Dean.
Dean was a talented young engineer in Silicon Valley. When
the industry hit the skids in the early 1990s, he found himself
out the door with little more than an entrepreneurial spirit and a
small severance. Dean left California, moved back to his home
state and used his severance to finance The King Company,
starting the company in small rented quarters in a nearly vacant
strip mall. He brought in Cliff Madison early on as chief
financial officer. Dean was smart enough to know that he had
no head for figures, but Madison did. Madison was an old
college buddy, a super accounting wiz, and somebody Dean
could trust to squeeze as much mileage as possible out of his
severance money. It was a good match. Madison managed the
business, and Dean was the idea man and designer of the
specialty components, patents of which were the backbone of
King’s success. Today, the low-rent strip mall is a part of
company history, and King employs 835 full-time workers in
its own contemporary facility built in 2002.
So far, King has not been significantly affected by the latest
downturn in the industry. Its market niche continues to be high-
quality, specialized equipment. The company is proud that its
products continue to be made in the United States and also
proud of its ISO quality certification granted by the

International Organization for Standardization. Dean believes
this is what has kept his company in business while others in
the industry shipped jobs offshore or went by the wayside.
King sells its own products and has a small customer base
scattered throughout the United States and Asia, but this
generates only a small percentage of King’s revenue. Eighty-
three percent of King’s sales come from building original
specialty components for one manufacturer. This has been a
steady income source for King, but heavy reliance on one
customer is a significant source of worry for King’s
management team, especially because sales of finished
products are down for this customer and cutbacks are expected.
If the rumor proves true, King will not escape unscathed.
Consequently, the push is on for belt-tightening in the
organization.
King instituted a hiring freeze, and marketing and sales budgets
were directed to increasing the company customer base.
Canadian and European markets are being explored, and while
there is some interest, there are no solid contracts. King
employees are understandably jittery.
Though King remains non-union, three years ago the
organization went through a difficult period of employee unrest.
There were complaints of poor management, inconsistently
enforced policies and unfair practices regarding job changes and
movement of employees within the organization. Because of the
company’s standing as a respected employer in the community,
it was a significant public relations black eye when an
anonymous employee wrote a scathing letter to the editor of the
local paper. This brought in union organizers who distributed
leaflets and circulated authorization cards. To address employee
concerns, The King Company responded with management
training and reorganization of lower-level supervisory positions.
A companywide “Talk-to-the-Boss” program was implemented,
allowing employees to bring issues to any level of management
without fear of reprisal. It seemed to help. The authorization

cards failed to generate enough interest for an election, and
things settled down. Unrest, though, never goes away entirely.
Employees became cynical about “Talk-to-the-Boss,” and “the
union buzzards,” as Dean calls them, never completely went
away.
Things have certainly changed for King from the old days of
the store-front location and a handful of employees. Dean
remains the CEO, but he no longer manages the day-to-day
operations, spending time instead at his family’s summer retreat
on the Maine coast or in the Caribbean during the winter
months. Decision-making is primarily in the hands of Madison,
who is now the organization’s senior vice president, and a
second vice president, Mike Smith. Smith came to King eight
years ago with an MBA/ HR concentration from TUI and a
successful military career.
With a history that has known only growth and strong revenue,
it will be a major culture change for King to respond to the
eroding economy and a possible decline in sales. In addition to
the hiring freeze, Madison directed managers to cut waste and
improve productivity across the board. Employees were
reminded that every department would be affected and that
nothing was sacred.
The Human Resources Department
Margo Honduras was HR director at King for eight years before
her departure in 2007. The official word was that she had taken
early retirement to spend more time with her family, but what
everyone really believed was that Smith finally got fed up and
gave her the boot. Of course, there was the official retirement
party where everyone said how much they would miss her, but
really, most employees in the department raised a toast to her
departure and gave a collective sigh of relief. Her management
style—when she managed at all—was divisive. She had her
favorites, especially Karla Dugas, King’s benefits coordinator,
for whom no perks were ever too many. Consequently, the
compensation and benefits staff fared well under Honduras
because it was Dugas’s area. Other employees in the HR

department found Honduras to be unfair and abrasive even on
the best of days.
With approval from Madison and Smith, Honduras and
compensation manager, Jake Call, had established a merit
bonus plan early in Honduras’s tenure at King. Though
Honduras continued to champion the bonus plan as a success in
accomplishing objectives and controlling costs, it has been a
bone of contention across the organization, particularly in the
HR department. The bonus plan required everyone to have
annual performance goals. Honduras allowed Call’s
compensation and benefits staff to set their own goals, but for
everyone else in the department, Honduras alone set the goals
with no input from those expected to carry out the activities.
The result was hard feelings and perceived inequity that
continues today. There is grumbling that even with Honduras’s
departure, things never changed. Dugas still offloads most of
her work on others and is never dependable for project
completion, yet she and her staff members receive top-tier
bonuses year after year. Even Call seems to look the other way.
Other HR department employees feel their work is not
supported by management and that there is little feedback on
progress toward goals. For them, bonuses, if paid at all, are
based on unknowns controlled arbitrarily by Call. As a result,
the HR department is rife with animosity and there is little
cooperation across functional areas. Certainly things couldn’t
get worse.
When Honduras retired, Smith promoted Alan Grant, manager
of safety and security, into the director’s position, even though
he had only been with King for a year before his promotion.
Though Grant had reported directly to Honduras, his good
track record at safety and security kept him below the radar of
many of the problems in the HR department. As manager of
safety and security, he focused primarily on increasing wellness
activities. Establishing an active wellness team across the
organization, he became the most visible member of the HR

department, and with his positive upbeat attitude, many
employees thought of him as the organization’s “cheerleader.”
Best of all, his management style was the polar opposite of
Honduras’s. Where she micromanaged and criticized, Grant
believed in encouragement and responsibility. Smith thought
Grant would bring a breath of fresh air to the HR department,
and he gave Grant free reign to make the changes necessary to
turn the department around.
When Grant moved into Honduras’s old office, he set a big jar
of candy on the desk and invited everyone to stop by and chat
with him whenever they wanted. Of course, Dugas was first in
the door.
The King Company, Inc.
CEO
Don Dean
Vice Pres. Mike Smith
Sr. Vice Pres. Cliff Madison

Operations
Human Resources Alan Grant
Finance
Sales and Marketing
Human Resource Development
Compensation and Benefits
Staffing
Safety and Security
Employee Relations
HR Director: Alan Grant
HRD Manager: Karmen Scholl
Compensation and Benefits Manager: Jake Call
Benefits Coordinator: Karla Dugas
Staffing Manager: Kevin Tu
Safety and Security Manager: Juan Varn

Employee Relations Manager: Shaun White
Current Situation
Three months ago, Alan Grant, director of HR, resigned
unexpectedly because of a family emergency. Despite the hiring
freeze, a quick but thorough selection process was conducted,
and you were hired as the new director of human resources.
You’ve come to King with an HR degree from a respected
university and with several years of experience as an HR
generalist in a large organization. This is an outstanding career
opportunity for you. You will be a member of the management
team, and this is a chance for you to make a real difference in
the organization. Congratulations on your new position and
welcome to The King Company.
It’s your first day on the job. You hang your diploma on the
wall, arrange a few personal mementos on your desk and settle
into Grant’s old chair. You notice his in-basket is overflowing.
You reach for the top file, open the bulging folder and start to
read the stack of e-mails Grant printed out before he left. You
notice that the emails are numbered, with the oldest one first.
Email 1:
To: Mike Smith, Vice President
Alan Grant, Director, HR
From: Charles Madison, Senior V. P.
It has come to my attention that our sales numbers were
misrepresented for the last two quarters. A number of
unconfirmed sales anticipated for January were pre-booked into
our accounting system between September and December of last
year. These sales were entered without signed purchase orders
or confirmed contracts. Most of them did not come to fruition,
and this significantly inflated our sales totals for the last fiscal
year. As you know, pre-booking of sales without confirmation
is a violation of company policy.
First, I want an immediate accounting of all bonuses paid to the
sales staff. Any bonuses paid on fictitious orders must be
returned to the company, and disciplinary action will follow for

those involved.
Second, because our staffing forecast is based on sales numbers,
this indicates that The King Company has a surplus of labor.
The hiring freeze may not be sufficient.
Email 2:
To: Alan Grant, Director, HR
From: Charles Madison, Senior V.P.
Alan,
I know you have already put in place a hiring freeze, but
considering the news that has come out of sales, we believe that
it will not be enough. You are directed to design a
comprehensive plan to reduce labor costs across the board. You
should plan for a 10% reduction in labor force by the end of this
fiscal year. We have scheduled a meeting with you in two
weeks to go over your plan and finalize decisions.
Email 3:
To: All staff
Like all of you, I have watched the ups and downs in our
national economy, and I worry about reports of declining sales
in our industry. The business news is greeted with increasing
concern each time we hear of yet another company that moves
jobs off-shore and shuts down its U.S. facilities. Throughout it
all, King remains steadfast in our policy of American-made
products, and it is the quality of our workforce that has
garnered our success. Each of you is to be commended for the
good work that you do.
However, we must recognize that business cannot be sustained
today with policies of the past. We must be proactive and
anticipate change. Though the company remains healthy, our
revenue has been flat for the last two quarters, and sales
projections indicate a downturn going into next year. This
necessitates cost-saving measures throughout our organization.
Mike Smith (V.P.) and I will be meeting with all department
managers to determine specific goals and plans for the future.

All departments will be involved.
With falling sales, there will be significant cuts in staffing
expenses because our hiring freeze did not sufficiently reduce
labor costs. We cannot continue to build and stockpile
inventory without sales. Effective immediately, all areas of the
organization must plan for a 10% reduction in costs. I know
this will be a difficult time for all of you, but know that this is
for the health of the organization and not a reflection of the
quality of your work. As in the past, we will work together, and
the good work that you do will sustain us during these difficult
times.
Email 4:
From: Jake Call, Compensation & Benefits Manager
Alan—
I am sending this on to you because I don’t know what to tell
her. Do we have a policy on this?
Jake
Forwarded message:
To: Jake Call, Compensation & Benefits Manager
From: Karla Dugas, Benefits Coordinator
Hey Jake—
I just got back from vacation today, and I wish I could say I had
a great time and was well-rested and ready to hit the ground
running. But, unfortunately, I was sick for 10 days of my two-
week vacation. What a bummer and a lousy way to burn up all
my vacation time! Since I have unused sick time available, can
I change the 10 days of vacation to 10 days of sick leave so I
can take a vacation when I’m not sick? Thanks in advance for
doing the paperwork for me!
Email 5:

From: Shaun White, Employee Relations Manager
Hi Alan,
Hey, sorry to bring all these problems to you when I know you
have your hands full with the pending staff reduction, but we
had another issue with Guy Stone (Production Supervisor) on
the production floor this week. You know he’s hot under the
collar most of the time. He gets production out of his staff, but
he certainly has issues as a supervisor. I don’t think he’s
learned even one thing from all the management training
Karmen’s HRD group has provided. He had a run-in with Lyle
Jones (production employee) yesterday. I guess he and Lyle
really got into it—a real shouting match. In front of the whole
shop. Guy fired Lyle, marched him right over to his locker,
dragged out all his personal stuff and hauled it out the front
door. Granted, Lyle’s kind of a bad apple and having him gone
might be for the best, but I had a call this morning from some
junior lawyer at Ness, Terry and Smith saying he was
representing Lyle in his employment lawsuit. I thought you’d
want a heads up.
Hey, look at the bright side—one less person to downsize!
Email 6:
To: Karmen Scholl, HRD Manager
From: Alan Grant, Director, HR
Karmen,
As you know, upper management is looking for areas to cut
costs. In light of Shaun’s memo regarding the termination of
Lyle Jones, it looks like the supervisors aren’t getting much
benefit from your management training program. I hate to be
the bearer of bad news, but Charles Madison (Senior V.P.) has
management training on the chopping block. If you want to
save your training programs, you need to get a report to Charles
that demonstrates a clear ROI for training expenditures. Better
get to it ASAP before your whole department disappears.

Email 7:
To: Shaun White, Employee Relations Manager
From: Dave Rey, Production Foreman
Hey Shaun, I don’t know what’s the matter with people these
days. The rumor mill is crazy, and I know everybody’s nervous
about possible layoffs, but we’ve got some real problem
employees down here on the production floor. Salty Warner
and his gang are stirring things up with the unions again. He’s
getting quite a following, and there’s a group that meets in the
cafeteria at lunch and the talk is they are calling the union to
get out here again with the authorization cards. Attitudes are
terrible, production damage is up, and production’s hitting the
skids. I’m trying to put a stop to it. I changed everybody’s
lunch schedule to break up the group, and I transferred Salty to
a different shift. Frankly, I’m looking forward to some good
layoffs. You’d think they’d listen up and think about what’s
good for them.
Email 8:
To: Shaun White, Employee Relations Manager
From: Dave Rey, Production Foreman
Hey Shaun.
Some guy in a suit was here today, said he’s legal counsel for
the union. Gave me a bunch of lip service about switching
around employee lunches. Said it was an unfair labor practice.
I told him to get his fanny outta here. I’m the boss; I can make
lunch schedules any way I want, and besides, we aren’t even a
union shop. Can you believe the nerve of those guys? He also
said something about your employee involvement teams, but I
don’t know what he was talking about. He said he’ll be around
to see you later. I just thought I’d give you a heads up. When
do we start the layoffs?
Email 9:
To: Jake Call, Compensation & Benefits Manager

Alan Grant, Director, HR
Hi Jake and Alan,
I’m forwarding this on to you. I don’t know how this happened,
but it looks like we’ll have to do something about it. It must
have happened while I was on vacation. Thanks a bunch.
Karla Dugas
Forwarded message:
To: Karla Dugas, Benefits Coordinator
From: Meg Folkner, Supervisor, CAD Design
Karla--
As you must be aware, Tonia Putt in CAD design went on
approved family medical leave on the first of last month.
Somebody in your department messed up the paperwork and put
it through as a termination instead of FMLA leave. She should
have continued to get her regular salary because King policy
allows her to use sick leave and vacation pay under FMLA.
Because it was a termination, though, her salary was cut off.
She has direct deposit and didn’t even know it was cut off until
her checks started bouncing. Now she has overdraft fees, she
says her credit’s ruined, and her mortgage company is
threatening foreclosure. She is hopping mad, and I don’t blame
her. She wants the mix-up fixed right now. She wants all the
fees reimbursed, and you need to do something about her credit
score and her mortgage company. She says she’ll get an
attorney if need be. It’s crazy. Why would anybody think she
was terminated? She’s my best CAD designer!
Email 10:
To: Juan Varn, Manager, Safety and Security
Cc: Alan Grant, Director, HR
From: Matt Petersen, Production Supervisor, Team 3
Hey Juan—
You know we’ve got Gary Andreas out on workers’ comp for a
back injury, but the scuttlebutt is that it’s not a King Company

work injury. Burt Planky went fishing with Gary last
weekend, and after a few beers, Gary tells Burt he hurt his back
moving his sister’s refrigerator. The guys on the floor think it
is a big joke. Seems everybody but management knows that old
ankle injury that kept Gary off work a few years back was a
motorcycle accident and not a pallet that fell in the warehouse.
I suggest you cut off his workers’ comp and put him at the top
of the reduction list.
Email 11:
To: All Employees
Mike Smith, V.P.
In light of the economic difficulties we are experiencing, the
following actions will become effective immediately. In
addition to the hiring freeze already in place, compensation paid
to all hourly and salaried employees will remain at the current
level until further notice. Accrual to the merit bonus system
will end at the close of this quarter, and the bonus system will
be eliminated at the end of this fiscal year. All travel
expenditures will be strictly scrutinized and must be approved
by Charles Madison (Senior V.P.). All equipment purchase
orders will be delayed by 90 days and must then be approved by
the Senior V.P.’s office. Tuition reimbursement is
discontinued, effective today.
In light of the importance of health care and retirement savings
to the well-being of employees, The King Company will, for the
present time, continue its current level of employee health
insurance coverage and King’s contributions to employee
retirement accounts. We are hoping these efficiencies will get
us through these difficult times and sincerely appreciate your
understanding and cooperation.
Email 12:
From: Amy Songun, Accounting Supervisor

Hi Karla,
You know Argonta Amera in accounting has been taking MBA
classes at the university using tuition reimbursement. She’s
already enrolled in a class for this term on a program we
approved last fall. We’ve paid her tuition reimbursement in the
past and she told me yesterday she would be turning in another
reimbursement form at the completion of this term, and she
expects to be paid because she was enrolled before the
cancellation of the policy. Her reimbursement is $1395. I’m
assuming it’s ok.
Email 13:
To: Amy Songun, Accounting Supervisor
Re: Tuition reimbursement for Argota Amera
Sorry Amy. No can do! I checked with Charles Madison
(Senior V.P.) and he said “No Way”! The reimbursement
benefit has been cancelled effective immediately.
Email 14:
Karla—
I passed your message on to Argonta and she was pretty huffy
about it! She said Charles had approved Tomas Sanders’
reimbursement, and he’s in the same MBA class as she. You
know Tomas, he’s the manager over in Design. Argonta said
you couldn’t discriminate in benefits if one gets it, it has to be
available equally to all. I don’t know where that comes from,
but she acts like she knows everything since she’s been taking
those classes.
Email 15:
To: Amy Songun, Accounting Supervisor
Re: Tuition reimbursement for Argonta Amera

Wow! Now Charles is hopping mad! He said he didn’t have to
reimburse anybody after the policy had been cancelled. He said
he’d pay her $500 and that’s all she’s going to get. She can
take it or leave it. Besides, he said The King Company doesn’t
need an MBA at her level in the company.
Email 16:
Re: Tuition reimbursement for Argonta Amera
Charles is not the only one that’s mad. You should have seen
Argonta! She said if her choice was to take it or leave it, she’d
leave it. But, I don’t think we’ve heard the end of this.
Email 17:
Juan Varn, Manager Safety and Security
From: Mike Smith, Vice President
Re: Wellness Activities
I’ve gotten word from Charles Madison (Senior V.P.) that the
budget committee is about to ax our wellness program. I know
you both feel strongly about wellness, but it doesn’t seem
appropriate in this climate to pay people for fitness activities or
to stop smoking. You know Charles’ attitude has always been
that wellness is just a lot of expensive fluff anyway and not the
company’s responsibility. If you want to save the wellness
program, you’ve got a hard sell. You need to convince the
budget committee that there is a real return on investment for
wellness activities.
Charles is also looking at health insurance coverage for
nonsmokers only. Seems the company could save on premiums
if our entire workforce was nonsmokers. He is considering
giving our smokers 90 days to quit or lose their health
insurance. Can we do that here in Michigan?

Email 18:
To: Alan Grant, Director, Human Resources
From: Shaun White, Employee Relations Manager
Re: Pending Lawsuit
Hi, Alan. It looks like we’ve got a bad one here. I received a
letter from the law firm representing Bertie Simms. You
remember Bertie; she’s that girl who used to work in Design. I
thought she left The King Company to go back to school, but I
guess not. Looks like she’s got a chip on her shoulder. Her
attorney claims she reported sexual harassment twice, and
nothing was done about it. In fact, he says that somebody in
HR told her to stop complaining. I can’t imagine who would
say such a thing, but looks like we’ve got to answer for it. He
also claims when our HR people ignored her, she called our HR
Answers hotline, and all she got was somebody with a strong
accent she couldn’t understand and who didn’t help her at all.
I don’t expect this to amount to anything, but the attorney wants
to meet with us. I suspect they’re trying to strong-arm us for a
settlement. When are you available? We should keep this off
V.P. Mike Smith’s desk if possible. Agree?
In the HR’s Office:
You frown as you close the file and set it back on top of the in-
basket. There is a lot of work to be done here. There may be
more to The King Company than you thought.
As director, you must help resolve the organizational issues
confronting The King Company and develop solutions for the
issues facing the HR department.
Good Luck!
Source: The King Case is adapted from SHRM 2014 education
documents.

1
Final Research Paper Assignment: Detailed Guidelines
For your final research paper, you are asked to write a paper of
1700-words (minimum word count—any
paper more than 150 words short of this minimum will not be
accepted as a complete paper) to 2000-words
(maximum word count—you may exceed this without penalty
only if it essential to attaining the purpose of
your paper). Your paper must cite the work of at least four
philosophers studied during the course; there
is no upper limit on the number of sources you may use. You
have the option of writing a position paper
or a comparison essay, depending on whether your plan is to
argue in favor of an original position
regarding the work and thought of at least four philosophers
covered in the course or to comparatively
evaluate the work of four or more philosophers. The topics
below may be approached using either strategy;
you may find that some will better lend themselves to a position
paper (also known as an argumentative
essay) and some will work better as a comparison essay. Choose
the topic that most interests you and the
strategy that works best for you.
Topic Areas
1) Plato, Hume, Kant, and Russell: What is human knowledge?

2) Kant, Mill, Aristotle, and Kierkegaard: What is the ethical
life?
3) Sartre, James, Kierkegaard, and Nietzsche: What is an
authentic, autonomous individual?
4) Descartes, Hume, Searle, and James: What is consciousness?
5) Plato, Kant, Kierkegaard, and Nietzsche: What is truth?
6) Plato, Descartes, Hume, and Nietzsche: What is the soul or
self (conceived as an entity that is
purely mental, spiritual, or nonphysical)?
7) Sartre, James, Kierkegaard, and Nietzsche: What is the role
and value of religious faith?
8) Descartes, Kant, Sartre, and Nietzsche: What is free will and
why does it matter?
9) Socrates/Plato, Russell, Sartre, and Nietzsche: What is the
role and value of philosophy?
This assignment is broken into two parts:
Part I includes the following elements:
Special note: DO NOT title your paper,
"Final Paper." Your title is important; it should give the reader
an immediate snapshot of what the
paper will say and attempt to draw the reader in.
2

important part of the paper--it should
not be too short or too long (but probably at least five
sentences). Begin by introducing the general
topic and providing the reader with some rationale for why this
topic, and what you will say about
it, is worth thinking and reading about. Good writers usually
begin with a "hook" in the first line to
draw the reader in. You might pose an interesting or intriguing
question, bring in an apposite quote,
or make a controversial or surprising claim—even one that
seems to go against your thesis. You will
soon bring the reader around to what your position is when you
state your thesis, which is usually
very near the end of the first paragraph. The introductory
paragraph should also provide some
background on the topic in question that leads into the purpose
of the paper. Make sure that the
issue that your paper calls into question is crystal clear. Your
thesis statement (your position on the
issue) may be simple and straightforward, with all development
following in body of the paper, or
you may choose to forecast in the thesis itself the claims your
will bring forward in support of the
thesis in the argumentation sections.
about precise formatting here; this will
be expected in the final draft, but here, the point is just for the
instructor to see if you are headed in
the right direction and possibly recommend additional resources
that will be useful to you.
Part II, which is your completed final draft (that is, the finished

version), should include the
following:
the issue’s two or more sides, and
makes an explicit claim (thesis) that the position paper or
argumentative essay will support.
paragraphs, which will present your sustained
argumentation in support of your thesis. In a
comparison essay, you will be mainly concerned with first
summarizing and explaining the various
philosophical views or positions you are comparing and
contrasting, and then showing why the
comparative claim you make in your thesis is true, or at least to
be preferred over others. In a
position paper, you will be concerned to address at least one
opposing or alternative claim to what
your thesis states and to both show why your position is right
and the opposing view is wrong, or at
least less acceptable than the position asserted in your thesis.
(See below for more details.
the future.
e and properly formatted works-cited page or list of
references.
Whether you choose to write a position paper or a comparison
essay, your thesis is an essential element of
the paper. Focus in on the specific and significant issue you
wish to address within your selected topic area
(an issue is any claim that may be called into question). Your
thesis should state a specific and significant
point of view or position on the issue (or set of related issues)

you have chosen to write about. In a position
paper, the thesis will make an argumentative claim (that is, a
debatable or even controversial claim); in a
comparison essay, the thesis will make a comparative claim.
Your paper should include analyses and
discussion of terms, concepts, principles, theories, arguments,
etc., that are importantly related to your topic
area.
Remember that you will need at least four citations from four
different Required Readings (works by the
four philosophers in your selected topic area). You may include
citations from other works by your selected
philosophers or by other authors in addition to the four course
readings, but you do not need more than the
four course readings for full credit. The point of this research
paper is to go deeper, not simply to sample
more relevant reading selections. The goal here is to
demonstrate your grasp of the particular philosophical
ideas you are addressing as well as your overall attainment of
course learning outcomes.
3
How to Write a Position Paper
This is a research paper in which you will address a particular
issue related to a more general topic area. The
paper should be written in a formal style, in the third-person
voice, and it will present your original,
considered solution or unique approach to solving the problem

or settling the issue in question. It will be
your considered opinion, but the main point of writing a
position paper is not only to let others know your
opinion or point of view on an issue or particular topic, but also
to lay out, in a clear and logical manner, the
reasons why you hold this point of view. The presentation of
your “reasons why,” in other words, the sum
total of evidence you can bring forward to support your
position, plus a statement of the position itself,
comprises what philosophers call an “argument.” A position
paper is also known as an “argumentative
essay.” As a quick reminder: A philosophical argument is
simply giving reasons (the premises of the
argument) for why a particular claim (the conclusion of the
argument) should be taken as true.
The introductory paragraph should present the issue in question
and include a clear and precise statement
of your thesis, which is your position on the issue. Another
essential element of the position paper or
argumentative essay is a consideration of at least one alternative
position on the same issue, and this is
typically an opposing view. So in this paper, you will assert and
defend your own position, and you will
also consider at least one opposing or alternative position on the
issue and the argument(s) in
support of that view. Finally, you will show why you reject any
opposing or alternative position and instead
hold the one you do. For this assignment, if you do a position
paper, you will be taking a stand that in some
way connects all four of the philosophers you are covering. For
example, you may think that only one of the
four thinkers gets it right on some important philosophical
question. In this case, your thesis might assert
your agreement or approval of a particular theory or account,
and your arguments will provide the reasons

why you made the choice you did and why you rejected the
alternative views. You might agree with a point
on which all four agree, and your thesis would indicate this; you
might also disagree with all four, and then
your thesis would be that they all get it wrong, and your
argumentation shows why, and so on. In a position
paper, you will likely be arguing in favor of the view or views
with which you agree most.
There are several different ways of organizing a position paper,
but, after you have introduced your topic
and given some background on why this topic is worth thinking
and writing about, and then stated your
thesis in the introduction, often the opposing view(s) are fairly
presented first, and then your understanding
of the issue follows. You own position is then asserted and
shown to be superior to the opposing view(s).
This can be done in “block” or “point-by-point” fashion: use the
organization style that best suits your
purposes. You may also choose to present your positive
argumentation first; just use the strategy that works
best for your purposes. The conclusion of your paper will re-
state your “expanded” thesis, setting it back
into its more general framework with a look forward toward
related concerns. Your conclusion should be
brief, but it should leave the reader with the belief that your
position satisfactorily settles the issue, solves
the problem, and leads to a better state of affairs. You may also
want to use descriptive headings for each of
the major sections of the paper. But don't use the section
heading, “Introduction” above your introductory
paragraph: the title of your paper serves that purpose. And for
the conclusion, don't just use the word,
“Conclusion”; instead, just as in any other section heading,
encapsulate the essence of the content of that
section. Section headings are optional (but in a paper like this,

which includes discussion of four different
thinkers, it might help the organization of the paper).
Note that this is quite different from an informational report, an
expository essay, or even a commentary or
critique of a report or informative essay. You will be writing
about at least two sides of an issue (usually
the “pro” and the “con” positions), developing supporting
evidence for both sides, analyzing, evaluating,
and refuting competing arguments, and showing and explaining
why your argument and the conclusion it
supports (your thesis) is superior. So, for example, if your
thesis is the assertion that Philosophers A and B
get it right but Philosophers C and D get it wrong, you must
consider at least one credible opposing side to
this claim, and show why it may be safely rejected. For an
excellent and detailed explanation (with
4
illustrative examples) of how to write a position paper or
argumentative essay (the document uses the term
“argument essay”), please read Pearson Publishing’s chapter on
“Position Papers,” which is linked in the
Final Research Paper module. It tells you everything you need
to know, and if you follow the instructions
here to the letter, you are sure to get a high mark on the paper,
and you will have gained valuable knowledge
about to construct an important and respected style of academic
essay. Also linked in the course are two
shorter documents, “Writing a Position Paper,” from Simon
Fraser University (6 pages), and
“Argumentative Essays,” (2 pages) from Purdue Online Writing

Lab, a website that provides a wealth of
helpful information about all aspects of academic writing.
How to Write a Comparison Essay
The method of comparison and contrast may be used to analyze,
understand, and evaluate the ideas,
theories and arguments of a philosophical thinker. In a
comparison essay, you will consider both similarities
and differences between different philosophies. You will begin
with a brief formal analysis of the four views
or philosophical approaches you are comparing and contrasting.
Then add another level to the discussion by
pointing out, analyzing, and interpreting relevant similarities
and differences between or among the ideas
and theories in question. Remember that the comparisons you
make should make a point--the comparison
is headed toward establishing something you observe or
interpret about the ideas, theories, and approaches
in question. You will also be stating your thesis in the
introduction, but in this case, your thesis will make
some claim (which is, of course, debatable) that relates the
work of the four thinkers included in your topic
area in terms of how they compare to each other on some
specific issue. Your comparative thesis may focus
more on the specific similarities and differences in the work and
thought of each of the four philosophers in
relation to a specific issue or philosophical idea or problem
without deciding who “gets it right” or with
which view you most agree.
In the body of the paper, you will be arguing for your
comparative thesis. This means that you will be
providing grounds (your evidence or support) for the
comparative claims you make. A successful

comparative essay will be strong in two areas in particular: (1)
the originality and depth of the comparative
claim(s) and (2) the quality of argumentation you bring forward
to support those claims. A comparison
essay that presents little more than a “laundry list” of features
attributable to each of the four philosophers’
views will not receive high marks. You must go beyond this to
say something specific and significant based
on the comparative evidence. Please note that comparison
essays often compare and contrast only two
things; the challenge in this assignment, should you decide to
use the comparison essay strategy, is to
compare and contrast FOUR things—the views and ideas of four
different philosophers. That said, it may
make sense for you to put the four thinkers you are discussing
into two categories (and this could mean that
the four divide into two neatly divided positions, with two
philosophers on one side and two others on the
other side, or it may make sense to divide the four into a one-to-
three ratio, with one philosopher on one
side of things and three others on more or less the same page. It
is possible that all four philosophical views
are so disparate that there can be no less than four sides to the
issue in question. If the four thinkers you are
considering are all this different, it would likely be better to use
the position-paper strategy.
Comparisons may be organized in block (also called “text-by-
text”) or point-by-point style, sometimes
called "lumping" and "splitting." In using the block, or lumping,
method, you will discuss all the details and
aspects of interest in the work of one of your four philosophers,
then move on to the work of the other
three you are including in your comparison. As you move from
the work of one thinker to another in the
discussion, be sure to refer back to those already discussed. You

are not simply writing a series of
descriptions here; you are showing that something is the case
about the ideas, arguments, or theories in
question by comparing and contrasting them. In the point-by-
point, or splitting, method, you alternate your
discussion to focus on, for example, what each of the four has
to say on a particular point or aspect of the
issue in question. So you will be going through what each one
has to say on a particular point in the same
paragraph, and then move on to cover how each of the four
weigh in on another point or element integral
5
to the issue in question.. Use whichever method works best to
accomplish your expressive and analytical
goals. It is crucial to keep in mind why the comparison
contained in your thesis is revealing or illustrative of
something important you have to say that relates the work and
thought of the four philosophers in your
topic area. There are three documents linked in the course that
provide more details and helpful guidelines
and suggestions for writing a comparison essay or comparative
analysis: “How to Write a Comparative
Analysis,” (2 pages) from Harvard College, “The Comparative
Essay,” (2 pages) from the University of
Toronto, and “Comparative Analysis” (14 pages) from
Mississippi State University.
Organization and Formatting
It is important for you to state your thesis clearly and

unequivocally at the beginning of the paper. Note that
if you are doing a position paper, you may adopt some sort of
“middle-ground position,” as opposed to
taking a strictly “pro” or “con” stance, but you will have to
carefully explain and delineate such a position
since simply saying that both sides get some things right and
hence they also get some things wrong could
lead to your supporting a logically inconsistent view. It also
risks being an insignificant thesis. A strong
thesis is one that is both specific and significant: this means
that the claim you are making, the position you
are defending, is one with which an informed thinker may
disagree. If your thesis merely states the obvious,
or asserts what most people accept as common knowledge, it is
not significant. This is a relatively short
paper, so be sure to appropriately narrow the focus of your
thesis so that you can accomplish what you need
to do in the space allowed.
As noted above, the paper should be somewhere between 1700
and 2000 words, or about 5-6 typewritten,
double-spaced pages (not including title page and works
cited/references page). Also, to reiterate what is
said above, to earn full credit for this assignment, your position
paper or comparative essay must include at
least one citation (probably more than this) from each of the
four philosophers in your selected topic area,
and this citation must be from the course Required Readings. So
this is a minimum of four sources that
must be cited in the paper for satisfying the basic assignment
requirements. There is no upper limit. Just be
sure you use credible and clearly traceable sources.
In addition, you are free to bring in personal experience if it is
relevant to your argument. This means that
you may use the first-person voice if it makes sense in your

exposition. Otherwise, stick to the third-person
voice; avoid use of the second person (“you,” “your,” etc.—note
that these assignment guidelines do use the
second-person voice, which is appropriate for such
purposes).The paper should be typewritten and double-
spaced, using MLA, APA, or CMS documentation style, with a
type font similar to Times New Roman, 12
point. Be sure to cite all sources both within the text of the
paper as well as on a works-cited page (MLA),
list of references (APA), or bibliography (CMS). Avoid fancy
fonts and flashy document-template formats,
but you may include images, graphs, charts, or diagrams if they
help establish a point. Be sure you have
included all of the elements essential to writing strategy you
have selected.
Review Rubric and Proofread before Submitting
It is essential that you carefully review the Final Research
Paper Rubric (link is provided in course) both
before you begin writing the paper and again, once you have
completed it. It lays out, in specific detail, the
criteria your paper must meet to achieve the highest possible
score. If you fulfill all of the criteria in the
“Outstanding” column, you will have written an “A” paper. If
you feel that what you have written fails to
meet the criteria you are attempting to satisfy, then it is time to
go back and think things through more
carefully and edit your paper accordingly. Finally, do not
submit your paper without proofreading it. It is
indeed a rare occasion when the first draft is perfect, or even
the best one can do. An experienced writer
will tell you that the paper gets better with every review and
revision.

THE KING COMPANY BACKGROUND The King Company experiences man.docx

THE KING COMPANY BACKGROUND The King Company experiences man.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to THE KING COMPANY BACKGROUND The King Company experiences man.docx

Similar to THE KING COMPANY BACKGROUND The King Company experiences man.docx (20)

More from jmindy

More from jmindy (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

THE KING COMPANY BACKGROUND The King Company experiences man.docx