The Bill Finch Case

To: Robert Hansen
District Supervisor, Network Design

From: Sharon Brainard
Human Resource Manager

Date: June 29, 2009

Re: Recommendation for Second Line Engineer

______________________________________________________________

In regards to the position available for a Second Line Engineer for your company Network Design, I would like to recommend Bill Finch.

Bill's customer report rate is above-average, his crew is the best in the company for attendance and has also met safety objectives for the company.

Although at the present time Bill is going through a difficult time in regards to a personal health issue with his wife, I can personally attest to the character of Bill Finch as I have served on many community committee's with him.

If you wish to contact me regarding any further information about this recommendation please do not hesitate.

Locker Analysis

One of the most frustrating group projects that I worked on was during my Small Group Communication class two summers ago at Uhart. fThere were five students total in the group and I the only one of non-traditional age. Conflict arose because there were no team boundaries. One student who needed this class to complete his graduation course cared nothing about the goal of the group although he felt he should supervise because he lived on campus and knew where the group projects should be. When he had to complete or revise his drafts for the final paper, he acted like Jim in Locker, antagonistic in trying to block the intentions and goals of the group. His work was not organized, researched and therefore not accurate. I had hoped that this group would have brought out competition that energized all members involved bringing out the very best ability in us all. I am not sure if his behavior was a carry over from other outside groups he had been involved in but it was very obvious that because he was not the leader he made it difficult to communicate effectively and there was definatly a communication breakdown. Although the work was completed on time, the amount of power play was exhausting. Prior to starting the group, dates were established for group meetings and minutes were taken and an agenda addressed. If we did not start the group under this format I am not sure if all members would have communicated.

mary lay assignment

This picture of the Case, Lockwood & Brainard Co., Printers and Bookbinders clearly describes what it does and lets the reader aware of the text. The size of the building also lets viewers aware of the amount of authors publishing their work. I would insert this picture on page five before the second paragraph.

A short step leads us from Fichte to the Romantics, whose assertions of originality all the more striking because their contrast was the increasing alienation and loss of independence catalyzed by the Industrial Revolution helped further establish this new view of the writer as author.

Rene Descartes' wrote "Cogito ergo sum." Jean A. Perkins states that withot Descartes, the whole development of individualsim would be unthinkable. I chose this picture to represent Perkin's statement of authorship. This picture and article should be inserted before the second paragraph on page 2.

The Renaissance represents a critical period of transition that witnessed the development of printing, a crucial pre-condition of modern authorship and the gradual transformation of the patronage system. I thought this picture of the first printing presse fit well into this assignment of authorship. This is the beginning of structuring many laws to regarding ownership, censorship and copyright laws. This picture would be placed above paragraph three on page two.

Harart notes, "'The text offers a new economy in which no one language is privileged over any other. It is the utopian meeting place of subject and language, a working space where meaning is in permanent flux.'" I choose this photograph to portray what Harart feels that text is a meeting place and space and meaning are in permanent flux. I feel this picture would be best placed on page 7 between paragraphs two and three.

I would like to talk about the collaboration regarding the toy paper plane. In reading Debs, yet again, I know that my partner and I did not have a hierarchial mode of collaboration, there were no rigidly structured, driven by specific goals and carried out by people playing clearly defined roles. I felt the collaboration was cycling; passing the document to and from, to and from. If we disagreed on the directions for the project we would be document driven, spendng time revising a draft rather than planning the document. We had no problem there. Although now, oddly enough we may be having a conflict from different interpretations or rhetorical situations which passed between us. I guess we all learn from different group settings. I am so glad this project is done.

I just sent in the completed project of the Paper Toy Assignment and am reviewing the Debs article to see how I was challenged in working in a group of two people. First, I am glad that the assignment is done, seemed simple enough, communicating in a timely fashion needs to be worked on. When I was going over the Debs article again re-reading "' A Division of Labor or Integrated Teams: A Crux in the management of Technical Cmm?"' M. Jimmie Killingsworth and Betsy Jones outline ways that the modern business divide production through the breakdown of stages and add specialists into the group. I can see this working with business especially when the end result will be read by public, members, etc. and is somewhat the "face" of what people will see of the company, group, etc. Although I had just one partner, I thought cmm would be simple, back and forth, back and forth. It just was not so. I think to set the stage for further cmm between groups in and outside of this class what should be done is to have a time or days to know that your partner(s) will have access to the computer, quality time to collaborate with other members needing their input. I did have an email problem up until the 7th of June and it should have been fixed prior to class. this will never happen again. I guess all in all my partner liked the presentation of the project, made one change which was incorporated, we both signed off and that was that. It was getting to this point that my frustration led me to send an email to Prof. Richards comparing the scenario to having a textbook in front of me but am unable to get the cover open. It does not matter how large or small the group but cmm with a timeline for responses should help all in the end.

Responding to Debs

After reading Debs, it was hard not to immediately focus my journey in writing in a small group cmm class I had two summers ago. Four people, one team. In the beginning our small group knew that one team member needed this course to graduate and was off on a cruise one week shy of finishing the course. What one team member received for a grade, we all received so it did end up that one person chose to have all input mailed to her, in finished form, to make all font, etc. look alike and for basic spelling errors. The other chose to do the footwork, take pictre and make the powerpoint presentation. The other two showed up in class for the presentation and was handed a script of what they were to say. This is small group work in a classroom, I do not think it would fly in the workplace. In Debs, Bosley defines collaborative writing '"as two or more people working together to produce an end result.'" Yes, this is true, but that is where I agree strongly with Elizabeth Malone in having a group leader to change directions. When writing in a small group for the classroom, all names will go on the finished product. Did all members put in equal time, effort and research? No. Some are never finished and will change right up until it is time to deliver the finish product, others simply coat tail on the group. Allen et al offers three distinguishing features (1) production of a shared document; (2) substantive interaction among members; and (3) shared decision-making power over and responsibility for the document. Killingworth and Jones state that computer systems enhance collaboration in the production process rather than further isolate authors. I agree. In the small group setting poor conflict management, personality differences and unresolved emotional issues create havoc in finalizing the finished product equally. I am looking forward to reading what other members of this class have to say.

sharonbclassblog

Hello everyone, the last thing I thought I would be doing is creating a blog, thanks Prof. Richards. I am a senior at Uhart and my major is Communication. I will update my post after I finished reading Debs. Hope everyone is enjoying their summer and is more computer savvy than I.