Biology 200 words must be original APA Format all cite and ref.docx

Biology
200 words must be original APA Format all cite and reference
must be quoted properly
1.
Cystic fibrosis is a disease caused by a recessive allele, and so
it appears only as a homozygous recessive genotype. Two
parents without cystic fibrosis have a child who does have the
disease. Explain what happened and include a Punnett square in
your answer. (You can use a word-processor table with three
columns and three rows to draw the Punnett square, and watch
out for automatic capitalization. If your word-processor cannot
draw a table, then describe what is in each cell of the table.)
500 words must be original APA Format all cite and reference
must be quoted properly
2. Name the four phases of mitosis and describe the major
events occurring in each phase.

Buy-in and Commitment
Program Transcript
[MUSIC PLAYING]
NARRATOR: It is important that stakeholders actively
participate in the strategic
planning process. Such participation increases the likelihood of
achieving buy-in
and commitment. In this video program, Dr. Paul Nutt explains
how a
stakeholder analysis might be used to encourage buy-in.
DR. PAUL NUTT: Buy-in and commitment is a very difficult
thing to realize,
and process like this, oftentimes, there are choices that are—
benefit one
group and not another, and compromise is a bad word in some
ways. A

friend of mine called it, "half of a stale loaf." You don't want to
do that.
You'd like to go for "win-wins," if you can.
Typically what we do is resort to the concept called co-optation.
And
there's a connotation that as people participate in a process, the
more apt
to buy into or develop ownership with, whatever the result of
the process
might be.
Most of us, and I’m probably one of these, their process relies
heavily on
co-optation, the notion of participation is presumed to create
this result. It
doesn't always work that way.
Sometimes people are unhappy, even if the vote is 10 to 1, and
they were
the one. They feel that they should've won somehow. And
voting does not
resolve differences like this. The only way you can resolve them
is through
discussion.
And when there's limited time, there's limited opportunity
perhaps to get all
the questions and concerns in motivating differences in opinion
and points
of view.
One example of how to handle, say, a very diverse organization.
We used
to call it headquarters in field, and there are a lot of these in
state

governments in particular, where there's an enormous cadre of
people that
are working in a variety of locations that can't communicate on
a regular
basis.
We successfully use a process we called kiva, which is designed
after the
Hopi Indians. And the Hopi Indians have the following process
that I
© 2014 Laureate Education, Inc. 1

always find a little interesting—at least they're rumored to have
this
process. If you can imagine the sort of concentric rings kind of
going down
into the ground in which there is a small ring at the center.
And what Hopi used to do is organize themselves around status.
The
Chief sat in the center, one ring out, or the next lower, so to
speak,
individuals in the community and so on, until the outermost ring
are
adolescents; that is people that are not of age in the tribe.
And so what the chiefs would do would be to discuss the issue
in question.
Then they could go to the outer ring and everybody would move
down a
ring. And then the people—the next outer ring—will discuss
what they
thought they heard and what they believe was said. And the only
people
who could talk were the people in that center ring, and you
continued in this
fashion until the chiefs were back in the center again. At this
point, they're
reflecting on all the reflections. That's the goal of these kinds of
processes.
Oftentimes you can't realize that, so one of the things we've

done recently
that helped a great deal is we had a strategic management group
asking
historical context, questions, SWOT analysis, questions issues,
strategies
and implementation strategies.
As we went to this process, we had scribes on pcs, actually
typing up the
notes. People were online in their various organizations. They
could type
responses. We had—if there are 10 people around the group, we
had two
people that we called, that could step into the group at any point
in time.
They couldn't do it every week.
And we also had the opportunity for people that hand people in
the center
circle notes, and they're coming from the field. This simulated
this kiva
process to some extent, where you had online, kind of,
participation, and
the process itself. People are fully aware of discussion as it took
place.
People could comment on the discussion.
This is a huge commitment on the part—the head of this
organization, to
buy-in, cooperation, and collaboration. You oftentimes don't
find that level
of commitment, but where you do, this process might work well
for the
organization.
[MUSIC]

[On-screen Text: Involving Strategic Personnel]
We have, on one hand, people that are going to be responsible
for the
implementation of the process. People are going to have to—

will take grief
if things aren't done the way perhaps their constituents wished
them to be
done. And oftentimes we involve these individuals in the group.
They tend
to dominate the group.
In other words, politics won't be tends to swamp quality results.
This is a
very pragmatic consideration. And all the facilitation I've done,
this has
always been a major issue. One possibility is develop a different
set of
people to deal with it.
At this point, the issues have been identified. This is difficult to
do, the
change of team, so to speak, although firms do that quite often.
Platform
teams at ford, the dream room at Disney, for example, don't
allow any
accountants.
The idea of the platform team is you're coming up with a brand
new
design, something totally new and different, therefore you're
allowed to
reject everything that's happened in the past.
To reject everything that's happened in the past creates this—
saves space
and opens the door to a new space that people could go into. If
you have
nothing, then it frees the mind to think about what might be.
You
oftentimes have to discredit the past or you can't get people to

think
creatively about what might be, what might fill that space.
If for example I’ve—say we've got a corrections issue where the
mental
health treatment people have always been a part of the mental
health
organization and they've kind of provided on a contractual basis
based on
whatever budgetary limitations corrections apply.
The person I went with, and the budget shortfalls, says, "I’m
going to give
you the staff. I'm going to transfer these budget lines to your
organization."
It's almost unheard of the public sector to do that. It's thinking
outside the
box. It's thinking about, you know, the best interests of the
organization as
a whole, and also is based on the notion of collaboration that we
talked
about earlier. Very difficult to initiate, but very—it has
enormously positive
results if you can. The facilitating change can often be difficult.
One way to think about this is a phrase called exemplary
followers.
Basically, these are the high act—the very highly active people
on
organizations have also the best skills. And what studies have
shown is

that 80 percent of the positive things that happen are promoted
by or
developed by five percent of the total population and falls into
this
exemplary follower category.
And exemplary followers are people that say—recognize the
fact that
everybody is a follower. The head of the organization takes

walking orders
from someone, so everybody is really a follower.
Exemplary follower is one that is constantly prepared to be high
on the
action and high on trying to think of new and better ways of
doing things.
Now, some organizations can stifle this by emphasizing what's
called the
pragmatist—those are people right in the center of the diagram.
They do a little, they are somewhat proactive and somewhat
creative but
they'll only go so far. You have to liberate that circumstance.
You have to
create a situation in which it's legitimate to be an exemplary
follower, where
it's legitimate to offer new ideas.
Now, if you're running a board of directors meeting and
someone offers a
new idea and that idea is squelched as being impractical,
inappropriate,
whatever, you can be assured that hat person won't offer ideas
in the
future. Furthermore, everybody in the room has got the
message—okay.
“Don't speak up; don't offer ideas.” They're not wanted.
So there's a—it's a very fragile situation. Create change or you
have to
create this kind of environment in the organization. The
organization will
not change otherwise. To do that, oftentimes it's very difficult.
I used an example of Harley-Davidson and got to the point

where Harley’s
quality was so bad people were buying Kawasakis—same group.
It's hard
as it is to imagine that—new CEO comes into Harley and says,
"Well,
there's a new sheriff in town. Things are going to change."
Well, the organization had run forever on the notion of keeping
cost down.
That was a key issue. Make the production line run, and in
order—it took
months for a new scheme of things to be initiated.
But the CEO said, "Any time you see a quality problem, stop
the production
line." Nobody stopped the production line. That just wasn't a
part of how
the organization functioned, and it took six months before
someone did.
A little old lady did it just before retirement, apparently, and
the CEO
rushed in and gave this individual a check. Then things changed
and

production line didn't turn out a motorcycle for six months.
But Harley turned their product quality problems around. That's
a case in
point, you know? Once you change the way things are going, it
takes a
long time to get that reinstituted into the culture and
organization. And it's
very easy for that to change and go south on you.
[MUSIC]
[On-screen Text: Dissenters]
Dissenters are extremely difficult—in organization. Sometimes
you'll have
dissenter strategic management group. One individual that
constantly

says, “I don't understand why we're doing this. I don't think this
is of any
value.”
If you're teaching a class, you got the same issues. Sometimes
there's
one student that says—constantly objecting to what's being said
and
creating a disruption. When you're teaching a class, what you
have to do
is manage the issue without attacking the individual.
The same thing would be true in this setting. In between
sessions, we
might have a neutral party approach the individual and say, "It's
really
necessary for us to move these questions along. Can we get a
list of the
things that we need to attend to so that you can participate more
fully in
the process?" – words to that effect. Sometimes a third party
negotiating
with someone and trying to find out what the real issues are can
be helpful
in this regard.
[MUSIC]
[On-screen Text: Stakeholder Analysis]
Many are very interested in the question of, “What is a
stakeholder
analysis, and how does one conduct a stakeholder analysis?”
Stakeholders are an important part in any process.
And most strategic management processes go through a serious
and

systematic effort of identifying who has stakes in the outcome,
on the one
hand, and classifying them in some way to find their relative
importance.
The process that I recommend will—is go through an

identification process
typically with a strategic management group or some other body
in the
organization that's familiar with this, and that's when we have a
strategy.
And we ask the question as, who can win and who can lose, so
to speak,
by this strategy? Who are the winners and who are the losers?
We need
to get—identify both groups. Who have an important interest in
this in
some fashion? There are service providers, there are service
receivers, et
cetera.
We make a list of almost individuals, sometimes agencies that
are going to
be players when we try to make these changes. And then we try
to sort
them by what I call certainty and importance.
How certain is that these individuals are going to be players in
the future
and what is the relative importance in the strategy we're trying
to
implement?
And basically, we sort ourselves into these two categories.
There's the supportive of the antagonistic stakeholder. And the
supportive
stakeholders, you mobilize to try to work with the antagonistic
stakeholders.
That is the people that believe that the organization is going to

benefit their
constituency by the actions that are being proposed work with
people that
might oppose it. This can be very difficult.
An example that might be useful here is we had a closure taking
place in
Cincinnati and the representative, state representative, in
Cincinnati was
also the speaker of the house, the most powerful politician in
Ohio history.
This individual—of course—was approached by his constituents
and say,
you know, "We're losing another resource here locally." You
know, "Step
up and try to save this for us." And the head of the department
was, you
know, had to deal with this. Here are two stakeholders. His
view was, "I
want to save $6 million if I close this facility and I have to do
that according
to state law."
And the speaker of the house is saying, "Not in—N-I-M-B-Y,
not in my
backyard." How are we going to do that?
So—sat down and met with the individual, and pointed out the
amount of

money that would be lost and then showed how they could
merge this
mental health agency or hospital, actually, with a community
hospital that
was grossly overbuilt.
And in the process, get mental health reimbursement for the
third parties
because unless the mental health is provided in a hospital, you
can't get
third party reimbursement of those—so what we're able to do is

come up
with a win-win for all concerned that also facilitated more
treatment within
people in the area and eliminated $6 million on the budget. It
was
absolutely essential, you know, to make this plan work. That's
an example
of stakeholders.
The point is you had to understand that by the action of
closing—that
would be the strategy. The action of closing that plant, it would
this
antagonistic stakeholder. This antagonistic stakeholder was
extremely
important in the total scheme of things.
Therefore, it had to be tended to on a priority basis. So
stakeholder
analysis tries to identify these kinds of glitches, manage them
ahead of
time. It is not to say that this process is going to move on
quickly. In the
case of the downsizing I'm talking about, it took eight years. It
took eight
years. You can't do these things quickly and have them be
effective.
So when the real dilemma is in the public sector because
oftentimes, the
expectation is within a very short period of time, at least less
than a year,
major changes are going to be produced. That's just not realistic
and it's
not going to happen.

[MUSIC]
[On-screen Text: Resource Analysis]
Another issue that's very important that goes along with
stakeholder
analysis concerns resources. You have a strategy; you're in a
resource-
poor organization, oftentimes in public sector organizations or
in nonprofits.
And the real question is, “What resources do you have that'll
help you
facilitate this plan?” I'm trying to make some major change,
trying to create
a new service environment. What am I going to do, or where are
these
resources going to come from?
So we inventory our resources and treat them just like
stakeholders. We

say, "What are the most important resources we have and what's
the
likelihood of retaining or maintaining those resources into the
future."
For instance, do we have the opportunity to do more paid-for
service?
Oftentimes in the public sector, we can bill for a portion of the
total cost of
the service or we can bill a third party for portions, particularly
in health
care, there's that kind of billing.
One of the real dilemmas—I use mental health example a lot
because I
know a good deal about that. That one of the dilemmas is the
sickest
patients are the ones that require the most care and going to
have the least
amount of resources after disposal.

The patients that are the most difficult, forensic in-patients, for
example, it's
N-G-R-I, not guilty by reason of insanity, which are committed
to an
institution, you get resource support, although these people
aren't
necessarily the most treatable and aren't necessarily—aren't
going to—
obviously going to fit with your patient population. You're
going have to
separate them in some ways. So there's lots of cost associated
with it.
The resource issue then is if we deal with a particular strategy
to manage,
say, that patient population, what resources will be made
available to us,
and how do we balance those?
Say, the next strategy has to do with the seriously ill patient
that we can
treat effectively if we have drugs and other forms of therapies.
Good
results, you can actually create a positive net benefit because
you're
putting—you're taking them off the welfare role and putting
them, hopefully,
into a job or at least the situation where they're not costing you
anything in
terms of the total cost of the treatment process.
And on the other hand, you have these people that you're not
going to be
able to do much—not be able to help, but they pay you. So how
do you
trade that off? And resource analysis helps you do that.

Basically, you try to differentiate between what's core support
and what's
additional supports that's necessary to deal with that particular
strategy
you're trying to implement.
In addendum to the resource question has to do with how the
cost in
revenues of the organization sort out. These typically come
from clients,
and there are included types and excluded types. And the
included types
are those that are typically served by this organization.

The excluded types are those that could be served, but may be
eligibility
requirements or just budget limitations have made it such that
they can't be
managed. Oftentimes, the organizations don't really have a good
idea
about who the excluded types are, what their needs are. So
inventorying
those needs are usually very useful.
[MUSIC]
[On-screen Text: Services]
A second question here has to do with services. It is also—in a
particular
organization, there's a set of services that are kind of expected.
If some states, for example, are organized in such a way that the
Bureau of
Motor Vehicles is actually a part of a larger organization that
provides a
variety of services, such as license plates, license suspensions,
maybe the
state highway patrol, and a few other activities are all bundled
together in
one area.

In other states, there would be a different profile of services. If
you look at
it that way, you'll see services included, services excluded in
your
particular area.
The question is, “Is that mix make sense for your organization?”
You may
want to include—are excluded and exclude some that are
included,
depending on what your strategy looks like.
When you analyze things in from revenue and cost, services
included,
services excluded, clients included, clients excluded, you get a
pretty good
idea of what the mix ought to be in your organization that you
can get.
Also, oftentimes budget that and try to go to the state
legislature, perhaps,
or some oversight body and argue for a budget, with a much
more rational
approach than oftentimes one sees.
In terms of process, implementation has to do with getting
people on board
that are necessary, either to implement the plan, that is the—
Either control
resources or points of view that need to be managed
intelligently if you're
going to move ahead with a change.
And we're talking about people outside the organization,
stakeholders, that
also need to be aware of the organization strategy or where are

the
reasons why this strategy was identified and oftentimes told
what the
benefits are going to be sometimes to a larger group and where
they may
not get any benefits.
There are benefits for the citizens in general that need to be
realized.
Oftentimes, if you make that point, you can facilitate buy-in and
ownership
through persuasion argument. However, participation is always

going to
be more effective in doing that.
Additional Content Attribution
Creative Support Services
Los Angeles, CA
Dimension Sound Effects Library
Newnan, GA
Narrator Tracks Music Library
Stevens Point, WI
Signature Music, Inc.
Chesterton, IN
Studio Cutz Music Library
Carrollton, TX

Chapter 7 Copy 1Chapter 7 Copy 2Chapter 7 Copy 3Chapter 7
Copy 4Chapter 7 Copy 5Chapter 7 Copy 6Chapter 7 Copy
7Chapter 7 Copy 8Chapter 7 Copy 9Chapter 7 Copy
25Chapter 7 Copy 26Chapter 7 Copy 27Chapter 7 Copy 28
Summary

Biology 200 words must be original APA Format all cite and ref.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Biology 200 words must be original APA Format all cite and ref.docx

Similar to Biology 200 words must be original APA Format all cite and ref.docx (20)

More from hartrobert670

More from hartrobert670 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Biology 200 words must be original APA Format all cite and ref.docx