Week 8 Discussion HMGT 400 · Specific Rules for Discussions 1.Each post must be at least 130 words long or it receives no credit. Only the first initial postings   and the first response postings meeting the 130-word requirement will be graded. 2.The initial posting must be submitted by Thursday night at 11:59 pm EST. The response’s    postings are due Sunday night at 11:59 pm. 3. First Initial & response’s postings must include at least two references – one internal (course readings, course modules, primers,     webliography, etc.) and one external (other authoritative sources beyond our course material) Note: No wiki or blog references Topic: Bottom of Form · Week 8 Discussion: Case Study -2 Discussion Topic Updated I'm Done Top of Form Starts Oct 8, 2016 11:59 PMEnds Oct 30, 2016 11:59 PM Bottom of Form Case Study-2, Challenging questions Dr Jones and Dr Smith are researchers based in the same department at a UK university. They have been working on a joint research project for several years, publishing a number of articles on their work in peer reviewed journals. The two researchers are now producing a book about their research. The research was conducted under the auspices of their university. The final manuscript was submitted to the publishers a while ago and Dr Jones contacts the firm for an update. He is surprised and very upset when the publishers tell him that the book is to be published with Dr Smith as the sole author. Dr Jones is informed that his role in both the research and the book itself will be acknowledged in the list of contributors to the project, nothing more. The publishers’ decision is based on information supplied by Dr Smith. As far as Dr Jones is concerned, he wrote the book with Dr Smith and should also be credited as an author of the work. Indeed, he is convinced that he and Dr Smith had previously agreed that the book was a joint work and that they would each receive co-authorship. He does not remember having any written record of this agreement or of any discussions regarding authorship. Dr Jones speaks to Dr Smith in an attempt to reach some sort of agreement on the matter but the position remains unchanged. He then tries speaking to the publishers of the book. They say that they have received reassurances from Dr Smith which they accept and they have no plans to change the attribution of authorship. Prior to this dispute, Dr Jones believed that he had a good working relationship with Dr Smith. As well as wanting to resolve the issue of authorship, he is also concerned how his career may be affected by the dispute with Dr Smith. Please pick up two questions and submit your response - What could Dr Jones do? - What ‘evidence’ or other information might shed some light on the matter? - How might the situation be resolved? - Could anything have been done to prevent this situation from occurring in the first place? 0 BUS 4951- Unit 5 Course Textbook: David, F. R., & David, F. R. (2015). Strategic manag.

1. Week 8 Discussion HMGT 400
· Specific Rules for Discussions
1.Each post must be at least 130 words long or it receives no
credit. Only the first initial postings and the first response
postings meeting the 130-word requirement will be graded.
2.The initial posting must be submitted by Thursday night at
11:59 pm EST. The response’s postings are due Sunday night
at 11:59 pm.
3. First Initial & response’s postings must include at least two
references – one internal (course readings, course modules,
primers, webliography, etc.) and one external (other
authoritative sources beyond our course material)
Note: No wiki or blog references
Topic:
Bottom of Form
· Week 8 Discussion: Case Study -2
Discussion Topic
Updated
I'm Done
Top of Form
Starts Oct 8, 2016 11:59 PMEnds Oct 30, 2016 11:59 PM
Bottom of Form
Case Study-2, Challenging questions
Dr Jones and Dr Smith are researchers based in the same
department at a UK university. They have been working on a
joint research project for several years, publishing a number of
articles on their work in peer reviewed journals. The two
researchers are now producing a book about their research. The
research was conducted under the auspices of their university.
The final manuscript was submitted to the publishers a while
ago and Dr Jones contacts the firm for an update. He is
surprised and very upset when the publishers tell him that the
book is to be published with Dr Smith as the sole author. Dr

2. Jones is informed that his role in both the research and the book
itself will be acknowledged in the list of contributors to the
project, nothing more. The publishers’ decision is based on
information supplied by Dr Smith.
As far as Dr Jones is concerned, he wrote the book with Dr
Smith and should also be credited as an author of the work.
Indeed, he is convinced that he and Dr Smith had previously
agreed that the book was a joint work and that they would each
receive co-authorship. He does not remember having any
written record of this agreement or of any discussions regarding
authorship.
Dr Jones speaks to Dr Smith in an attempt to reach some sort of
agreement on the matter but the position remains unchanged. He
then tries speaking to the publishers of the book. They say that
they have received reassurances from Dr Smith which they
accept and they have no plans to change the attribution of
authorship.
Prior to this dispute, Dr Jones believed that he had a good
working relationship with Dr Smith. As well as wanting to
resolve the issue of authorship, he is also concerned how his
career may be affected by the dispute with Dr Smith.
Please pick up two questions and submit your response
- What could Dr Jones do?
- What ‘evidence’ or other information might shed some light
on the matter?
- How might the situation be resolved?
- Could anything have been done to prevent this situation from
occurring in the first place?
0
BUS 4951- Unit 5

3. Course Textbook: David, F. R., & David, F. R. (2015). Strategic
management: A competitive advantage approach, concepts and
cases [VitalSource Bookshelf version] (15th ed.). Retrieved
from
https://www.vitalsource.com/textbooks?term=9780133740356
Question 1
Briefly explain the seven guidelines to follow in developing an
organizational chart. Your response should be at least 200
words in length. 25 points
Question 2
Strategy formulation focuses on effectiveness, whereas strategy
implementation focuses on efficiency. Which is more
important—effectiveness or efficiency? Give an example of
each concept, and explain your answer. Your response should be
at least 200 words in length.
Question 3
Describe a conflict situation that requires you to use 1)
avoidance, 2) defusion, and 3) confrontation in order to solve
the problem.
Question 4
Describe the relationship between annual objectives and
policies. Your response should be at least 200 words in length.
****** YOU CAN COMPLETE THIS BY FRIDAY, 14,
21016!!!!!!!!! ****** Not due til Friday****** just update
answer on friday!!!!
Wk 7 peer response
Rules: Please thoroughly respond to post but not too wordy or
lengthy. Include reference.
HMGT 400· Week 8 Daugherty

4. Will Daugherty posted Oct 11, 2016 3:46 AM
In research, academics face increasing stress to receive
publication ("Authorship: Difference between "contributor" and
"co-author", 2016). It is evident why Dr. Jones would be
concerned about his contribution to the research and book and
his recognition for his role in both. According to Cigliano,
Parsons, and Primack, issues often occur in research when one
author submits a finished product without acknowledging the
author author or contributors (Cigliano, Parsons & Primack,
2014). This issue can be resolved with open communication
between partners in research and scholarly writing.
Dr. Jones should definitely stand his ground and request legal
assistance to help claim his portion of the research and book.
The lawyer could mediate for Dr. Jones and Dr. Smith and help
the two parties reach an agreement regarding their roles in the
publications.
Open communication between Dr. Smith and Dr. Jones
throughout the whole process could have prevented much of the
confusion. Dr. Jones and Dr. Smith should have discussed how
each would be acknowledged in the final product before writing
the book.
Dr. Jones might also provide evidence to the publishers, such as
rough drafts, research documents, etc., that would reveal to the
published the extent of his contribution. This would hopefully
allow Dr. Jones to receive the credit he deserves in the book.
Respond to Will here:
· Week 8
Leizl Simeon posted Oct 10, 2016 3:33 PM
What could Dr Jones do?
Dr. Jones and Dr. Smith should resolve the dispute issue among
themselves; however, if the disputes persist regarding
authorship, Dr. Jones must provide a description or record to
the publisher that he made a substantial intellectual contribution
to a published work. According to Brodrick (2013), “Everyone
making a substantial intellectual contribution to the work

5. should be an author”, and “Everyone making other substantial
contributions should be acknowledged”, which means if Dr.
Jones had made a substantial intellectual contribution, the
publisher must award Dr. Jones as an author of the
book. Finally, Dr. Jones should review the drafts with Dr. Smith
and approve the final version (Brodrick, 2013).
Could anything have been done to prevent this situation from
occurring in the first place?
Before starting the research, they should discuss and agreed
upon in a formal written agreement to avoid misunderstanding
and later disputes. Also, they should have a policy and
guidelines regarding authorship (Washington University in St.
Louis, 2009).
Respond to Leizi here:
HMGT 495· Walker_Week 8
Brittney posted Oct 10, 2016 9:32 PM
Teamwork is important in healthcare for a number of reasons.
Clinical care is becoming more complex and specialized which
forces the staff to learn new methods for performing
complicated health services. The aging population is also a
factor because of the increase of chronic diseases such as
diabetes, cancer, and heart disease. One of the major challenges
associated with teamwork in healthcare is the lack of
communication or miscommunication. Workers often not used
to communication at work have to coordinate and control by
self-regulating and are so obliged to communicate more than
before (Valentine, 2015). Therefore, superiors who are afraid of
losing their influence, status, power and their jobs have to treat
workers as experts and not as recipients of orders.
Benefits of Teamwork
1) It saves time in that the team members are allocated work
into different sections where they bring out the final result as
one.
2) Teamwork brings out creativity

6. 3) It ensures the quality of work because one person can focus
in the field he or she is most confident
Costs of Teamwork
1) The waste of time when a team cannot come to an agreement
2) The cost it takes for training, seminars, and career
development
3) There may be personality clashes which could lead to an
unproductive effort
Respond to Brittney here
· Week 7 Discussion
Neema Malya posted Oct 3, 2016 2:27 AM
· Hello class,
What are some challenges associated with teamwork in health
care? Describe three benefits and three costs of working as part
of a team in a health care organization.
Regardless knowing that teamwork in healthcare is very
important key for success, still there are some challenges
associated with it like: lack of accountability and flexibility
which will lead to laziness of some group members. Since it is
the group effort, some people will take advantage of that and
use it as a loop hole for them not to accomplish the task by
thinking that others will do it. Also, in case of any mistakes,
some people will never admit they did it and make everyone
else pay for their mistakes. Also, it can lead to inefficiency of
work if members of the team do not challenge each other and as
a result, in steady of moving forward, the organization will be
static.
When people working as a team it is very easy to get things
going well in any organization using healthcare organization as
an example. There are numerous benefits of working as a part of
a team in a healthcare organization like: it will help
people/members of the team to respond easier in any changes
that may occur on the way because all members coordinate with
each other and help each other even though the change is
difficult for some people to cope with. Also, working as a part
of the team will cause people to work effectively and efficiently

7. as a result to produce quality care simply because everyone will
be participating fully on working towards reaching
organizational goals. Finally, working as a part of the team
leads to customer satisfaction. All these is because people are
working as one team and doing their best to produce good
quality services, as the result customers will be happy receiving
great care.
Despite of all these advantages of working as a part of a team in
a healthcare organization, there are some costs of working as
part of a team in a health care organization as well, which are:
limiting creativity, longer process to meet to a conclusion on
issues, and may lead to division or creating a conflict among the
team members of that healthcare organization.
Respond to Neema here
HMGT 495 Week 8
· General Rules for Discussions
· Comply with customary rules of online etiquette
· Do not repeat thoughts already posted by a classmate or your
faculty member. Repetitive comments may be deleted and not
count toward your participation grade.
· Do not get off topic
· Relate your posts to the course content
· No word count maximum or minimum, brevity is appreciated
· Do not upload a document in a discussion thread
· If referring to a link, please embed it in your post, don’t
expect your classmates or faculty to copy/paste the link to see it
Topic:
Question 3) What are the five stages of team development?
Describe each stage and what might be involved in a health care
setting.