Terrorism and Ordinary People Essay Example for Free

Terrorism and Ordinary People Essay How to Defeat Terrorism Terrorism is a tactic used by a small set of extremists to fight against an overwhelmingly powerful opponent while surrounded by a large population that mostly just wants peace and quiet. Terrorism can be defeated. To do this, ï ¬ rst we need to understand how terrorists are kept away in the best case, then how terrorists can ï ¬ ght against this mechanism, and ï ¬ nally what works and what doesn’t work to foil those aims. The Thin Blue Line Although terrorists are not merely criminals, it is helpful to think about what keeps criminals under control in our society. Ask any police ofï ¬ cer: it is not the police and the courts who keep criminals at bay. It is the society as a whole. It is the ordinary people who call the police when they hear a problem starting. It is the ordinary people who trust the police and cooperate with them to bring criminals to justice. The â€Å"thin blue line† only works when it is backed up by the vast majority of ordinary people. This, by the way, is why police brutality is so damaging to law and order in our society. If ordinary people lose trust in the police, they won’t call and they won’t cooperate. If they fear that calling the police to quiet down a loud party could result in their neighbors’ kids being shot dead, they won’t call. And they also won’t cooperate in more serious cases. Without community backup, the â€Å"thin blue line† starts to feel very thin indeed. And criminals become bolder. Law Enforcement Executive Forum †¢ 2006 †¢ 6(5) 189 Likewise with terrorists. Terrorists are defeated when the large majority of the community feels that they can trust the local authorities to maintain law and order and work for the common good. Then, ordinary people will turn the terrorists in to the authorities when, or even before, they strike. The Unabomber was an insane but highly intelligent man living alone in the woods, writing a manifesto, and killing and maiming people with mail bombs. After his manifesto was published, he was turned in to the FBI by his brother, who recognized the writing and made the correct but agonizing decision to be loyal to society over blood. We can only wish that a relative or neighbor of Timothy McVeigh had been in a position to make a similar decision before he struck in Oklahoma City. In even the best, most civilized, law-abiding society one can imagine, there will be small numbers of extremists tempted by terrorist tactics. Ideally, the vast majority of people will see them as marginal nut-cases and will report them to trusted authorities if they show signs of turning extreme ideas into dangerous action. Terrorist acts can never be totally eliminated, but a cohesive community that trusts its authorities can defeat a continuing terrorist movement. One Man’s Terrorist Is Another Man’s Freedom-Fighter But what if the society is not civilized? What if the authorities are hated and feared rather than trusted? Then, the true terrorist can always ï ¬ nd support and hiding places among sympathizers who are not willing to become terrorists themselves but are not willing to support the authorities either. The terrorists’ best strategy is to drive a wedge between the people and the authorities. Then, the â€Å"thin blue line† becomes thinner and weaker. The ordinary people, or at least some of them, protect and support those they see as ï ¬ ghting for freedom, religious faith, patri otism, or some other deep value, against overwhelming odds. The biggest danger to the terrorist is the trust the people have in the authorities. As that trust is weakened or destroyed, the terrorists gain strength and freedom of action. Their primary goal must be to eliminate the trust between the people and the authorities. How can they act most effectively to eliminate that trust? Here is where the meaning of terrorist violence is often misunderstood. The classic terrorist act is to blow up some innocent victims, but the actual destruction is not the goal, in a military sense. There is a symbolic goal of showing that the more-powerful enemy can be touched and deeply harmed, but even that is not the real goal. The real goal is to provoke massive retaliation. The tiny group of terrorists who actually committed the act may escape entirely, may take casualties, or may even be entirely destroyed, but the larger terrorist movement feeds on the retaliation. The important thing (from the terrorists’ perspective) is for the massive retaliation to harm many people in the general population, even among their own supporters. The point is to incite the authorities to act in a way that erodes the people’s trust in them. The people lose trust; the terrorists are seen as freedom-ï ¬ ghters; and they gain support, cover, strength, and freedom of action. From the terrorists’ perspective, the more horrible the original strike, the better, since it will provoke a more drastic retaliation. And the more horrible the retaliation, the better, since it will destroy the people’s trust in the authorities and strengthen the terrorists. From the terrorists’ perspective, the actual damage to their own people is a beneï ¬ t, not a cost, of terrorist action. Those Who Do Not Learn from History Are Condemned to Repeat It Sadly, case studies of this strange dynamic are easy to come by, once you realize what to look for. Israel-Palestine The Israeli-Palestinian conï ¬â€šict is a textbook case. There is no military beneï ¬ t to a suicide bomber killing people at a cafe, a wedding, or on a bus. The beneï ¬ t to Hamas comes from the massive retaliation, killing the innocent along with the guilty, bulldozing homes and farms, and creating major economic hardship for the large masses of Palestinians who would gladly live in pea ce with Israel. Israel pegs the price of peace to stopping the terrorists, which ordinary Palestinians have no way of doing. And the immediate impact of the retaliation is to solidify hatred against the Israelis. (We’re long past the point of talking about â€Å"trust† here.) So, Hamas has reached the successful point of being able to provoke the Israeli Army to act to build up its strength among the Palestinians. The vicious cycle in that region is that hardliners in Israel use precisely the same method. When Israeli extremists create new settlements in Palestinian territory or commit terrorist acts against ordinary Palestinians, they provoke the strongest retaliation the Palestinians are capable of, which is more suicide bombers to slaughter innocents among the ordinary people of Israel. This eliminates any trust in the Palestinian authorities (small a) and solidiï ¬ es hatred against Palestine. This elegant pair of mutually reinforcing feedback cycles strengthens terrorism on both sides and makes the chances for peace remote. Iraq Now let’s think about Iraq. Terrorists strike U.S. troops, provoking retaliation. The retaliation almost certainly involves collateral damage, eroding trust in Americans and inï ¬â€šaming hatred. By now, this cycle should look familiar. The terrorists’ goal is the erosion of trust in the U.S. authorities and our attempt to rebuild Iraq, even more than physical destruction. It’s hard to imagine Al Qaeda coming up with something more effective than the pictures from Abu Ghraib prison for destroying the trust of the ordinary Iraqi people in the civil authority of the U.S. troops. Because this abuse does such direct strategic damage to our mission in Iraq, the soldiers directly involved must be punished, of course, but so should the entire chain of command. Since our overall mission explicitly requires winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people, it is military professional malpractice to fail to anticipate the pressures on the front-line troops and put discipline in place to prevent such abuse. This abuse is due to more than â€Å"a few bad apples,† but even if it were only that, a military commander is responsible for knowing that a few soldiers may be â€Å"bad apples† and having controls in place to prevent them from acting out. The decapitation of Nick Berg was a miscalculation on the terrorists’ part. (They aren’t all geniuses either, of course!) Ordinary Iraqis were revolted and offended by having this crime done in their name. Furthermore, the decapitation took attention away from the Abu Ghraib pictures, which were doing real damage to the U.S. cause. We could still save their cookies by some sort of massive retaliation, but the responsible authorities seem to be handling this in a more controlled way. Finding and prosecuting the speciï ¬ c individuals involved and their accomplices would strengthen the U.S. position signiï ¬ cantly. There are signs that not all the news from Iraq is bad. First, there is measurable progress in restoring the Iraqi infrastructure and providing water, sewers, electricity, oil pipelines, local government, and eventually jobs. [This is where the real war is fought. The soldiers are mostly there to keep the bad guys from interfering with the engineers and t heir work.] Second, the ordinary people of Najf have demonstrated against the religious extremists and in favor of the moderates and of course in favor of peace and quiet. 9/11 This view of terrorists, retaliation, and trust also helps us understand the terrible events of 9/11 and who has proï ¬ ted from the aftermath. The destruction of the World Trade Center and the murder of 3,000 people was a horrifying act that devastated the victims’ families and shook the economy for a while. The symbolic impact on the United States and its effect on our national confidence was massive, but from a military perspective, the blow was not signiï ¬ cant. Compare it with the Pearl Harbor attack in 1941, which crippled the Paciï ¬ c ï ¬â€šeet as we entered a war with Japan. Osama bin Laden’s purpose for the 9/11 attack was (and is) to provoke massive retaliation from the United States against Islam. He hoped that our retaliation would ï ¬ nally unite Islam against the United States as a common enemy and that his vision for a fundamentalist pan-Islamic state would sweep away all the more moderate governments in the region, as well as movements toward a pluralistic culture. In the ï ¬ nal chapter of his book Against All Enemies, Richard Clarke gives an excellent description of the conï ¬â€šict we should have pursued after 9/11 and contrasts it with the wars we actually did pursue. The invasion of Iraq is not only a distraction from more important goals but a provocation that is making Osama bin Laden’s dream come true. The purpose of the original attack was to provoke our retaliation, which would affect primarily the ordinary Islamic people, destroying what trust they had for the United States, and making them more willing to give aid and comfort to the terrorists among them. To a surprising extent, we have fallen right into Osama bin Laden’s trap. The future of the world depends on ï ¬ nding our way out. How to Win the War on Terrorism When terrorists are isolated criminals, viewed with suspicion by the vast majority of the general public, and reported to the authorities when they turn violent, then the war on terrorism has been won. What weapons will it take to win this war? Just as the Maginot Line in France was impotent against Nazi blitzkrieg at the beginning of World War II, purely military tactics and strategy will fail against the terrorists and will even be exploited to their advantage. It appears to me that our current professional military leaders generally understand this point, while our hawkish civilian leaders without military experience generally do not. It’s tempting to think that a war against terrorism can be won by killing all the terrorists. In the real world, this naive plan doesn’t work. A serious attempt to ï ¬ nd and kill all the terrorists also sweeps up many ordinary people, and some of them and their relatives become new terrorists, creating more terrorists than were destroyed. The harder the authorities pursue this strategy, the more it looks like genocide, and the more effectively they recruit new terrorists. The â€Å"weapon† we need is the trust and cooperation of the general population of the country where the terrorists are based. As we have seen, terrorists understand this and use ï ¬ endishly clever strategies for eroding this trust and fomenting resentment and hatred. (Incidentally, most terrorists are not clever enough to invent this. But they read about strategy and tactics in the writings of Mao Tze Tung and Ho Chi Minh, who were. Fortunately, these same sources are required reading for our professional military leaders.) The â€Å"simple† strategy for defeating terrorism is as follows: †¢ Avoid getting killed by them; make clear that overwhelming power is available, but avoid using it. †¢ Gain the trust and cooperation of the general population. †¢ Refute the terrorists’ lies; demonstrate truth and openness to criticism. †¢ Create, publicize, enforce, and obey a simple â€Å"Bill of Rights†; demonstrate evenhandedness in local disputes. †¢ Demonstrate justice, even when treated unjustly; avoid massive retaliation, even when taking casualties. †¢ Visibly work for economic justice for the oppressed. The people will turn the terrorists in for trial and prosecution. Obviously, implementing this strategy is far from simple. There are trade-offs between the actions required to avoid getting killed and the ones needed to gain trust. Since gaining trust is building the â€Å"weapon† that wins the war, however, it takes priority, and one can’t be absolutely safe. Whether you call it nation-building or peace-making, it’s a dangerous line of work, actively opposed by unfriendly people. Avoid Getting Killed Aside from the obvious personal motivation to stay alive, the strategic reason to prevent terrorist attacks is to foil their attempt to provoke massive retaliation. Impotence is the worst-case outcome for a terrorist, not death. We need good enough intelligence to detect and prevent terrorist acts, but this cannot take absolute priority since it trades off against being a free and trustworthy society. Therefore, some attacks will occur, and there will be casualties. It is important for both the terrorists and the general population to understand clearly that terrorist acts cannot possibly defeat our forces militarily. Failing to attend to this point led to disastrous errors by Reagan in Beirut and Clinton in Somalia. Currently in Iraq, terrorists can reasonably conclude that the United States will leave under sufï ¬ cient pressure. They may or may not be correct, but their ability to draw that conclusion is dangerous to us in itself. The hardest part about a war on terrorism comes when a terrorist attack succeeds. The whole point of the attack is to do something horriï ¬ c to provoke massive retaliation. The right response must be measured, deliberate, and appropriate. President Bush’s speech on September 20, 2001, was a brilliant example of the correct response to a successful terrorist attack. (Sadly, he did not stay that particular course, as he and his administration demonstrated their obsession with Iraq.) Gain Trust and Cooperation A measured, deliberate, and appropriate response gains the trust and the cooperation of the people. To do this, we must be trustworthy. It also means that the training of our troops for this kind of war must be very different from past wars. Our soldiers must be more than warriors who kill people and destroy things. They must also serve as community police, and even as social workers and political advisors. News reports from Iraq make it clear that our soldiers are vividly aware of this dual role, and they are vividly aware of the fact that they are well-trained and equipped as warriors but not as community police. Above, I’ve outlined some of the speciï ¬ c methods for building trust and cooperation from the people. †¢ Refute the terrorists’ lies; demonstrate truth and openness to criticism. †¢ Create, publicize, enforce, and obey a simple â€Å"Bill of Rights†; demonstrate evenhandedness in local disputes. †¢ Demonstrate justice, even when treated unjustly; avoid massive retaliation, even when taking casualties. †¢ Visibly work for economic justice for the oppressed. There are surely many other effective methods to be identiï ¬ ed, improved, evaluated, and applied. The People Will Turn in the Terrorists If the people trust the authorities and respect the efforts taken to make their lives secure and safe, they will turn in suspected terrorists, knowing that they will receive fair trials. The Unabomber’s brother turned him in because he was willing to trust the government’s pledge not to seek the death penalty. Terrorists are not merely criminals. Their extremist ideological motivation makes them far more dangerous than even large organized criminal gangs. Even so, to win against terrorism, in the end they must be treated as ordinary criminals. They must be tried and punished, with full legal rights and protections, not for their extremist beliefs, but for their terrorist actions that disrupt the safe conduct of society for ordinary citizens. The Unabomber sits in federal prison for his bombs that killed and maimed. Timothy McVeigh was executed for murder many times over. Their public trials and the public safeguarding of their rights were not out of soft-heartedness or compassion for criminals. They are public ceremonies, reafï ¬ rming the value of law and order in our society. They both represent and cultivate the trust that the people have in their government. That trust is the weapon that defeats terrorism. They cannot stand against it. We must not throw it away. What Should We Do? If we understand which weapons actually work against terrorists and if we understand how terrorists try to destroy our weapons, we can see what we need to do and what we need to avoid doing. We can see why the Abu Ghraib prison photos are so damaging to us. Traditional war is not easy or certain. And the new ways are not easy or certain either. The â€Å"simple† strategy above for defeating terrorism requires great knowledge, cleverness, and wisdom to put into action. War requires discipline. War requires sacriï ¬ ce. War requires restraint at certain times and carefully planned action at others. A war against terrorism is unlike the major wars of the past. If we try to ï ¬ ght like we fought wars in the past, we will lose, and we won’t understand how or why. We need to learn how to ï ¬ ght with new weapons. The alternative is a world of perpetual conï ¬â€šict between opposing groups of extremists, locked in a deadly embrace in which each side conï ¬ rms the beliefs of the other and helps in recruiting more extremists. The ordinary people in the middle, who just want peace and law and order, are repeatedly savaged to cultivate more recruits for one side or the other. This is indeed a â€Å"clash of civilizations† but not between Islam and the West. The clash is between extremists of all kinds on the one side and the forces of pluralism, tolerance, peace, and law and order on the other. Identifying Terrorists as a Diagnosis Problem Consider the problem of identifying terrorists as a problem in diagnosis. Out of a large population, you want to diagnose the very few cases of a rare disease called â€Å"terrorism.† Your diagnostic tests are automated data-mining methods, supervised and checked by humans. (The analogy is sending blood or tissue samples to a laboratory.) This type of diagnostic problem, screening a large population to look for a rare disease, has some very counter-intuitive properties. Suppose the tests are highly accurate and speciï ¬ c: †¢ 99.9% of the time, examining a terrorist, the test says â€Å"terrorist.† †¢ 99.9% of the time, examining an innocent civilian, the test says â€Å"innocent.† Terrorists are rare: let’s say, 250 out of 250 million people in the United States. †¢ When the tests are applied to the terrorists, they will be detected 99.9% of the time, which means that almost certainly 249 will be detected, and with only a 25% chance of missing the last one. Great! †¢ However, out of the remaining 249,999,750 innocent civilians, 99.9% accuracy means 0.1% error, which means that 250,000 of them will be incorrectly labeled â€Å"terrorist.† Uh, oh! (These are called â€Å"false positives.†) The law enforcement problem is now that we have 250,250 people who have been labeled as â€Å"terrorist† by our diagnostic tests. Only about 1 in 1,000 of them is actually a terrorist. If we were mini ng for gold, we would say that the ore has been considerably enriched, since 1 in 1,000 is better than 1 in 1,000,000. There’s still a long way to go, though, before ï ¬ nding a nugget. But we are talking about people’s lives, freedom, and livelihoods here. The consequences to an innocent person of being incorrectly labeled a â€Å"terrorist† (or even â€Å"suspected terrorist†) can be very large. Suppose, out of the innocent people incorrectly labeled â€Å"terrorist,† 1 in 1,000 is sufï ¬ ciently traumatized by the experience so that they, or a relative, actually becomes a terrorist. (This is analogous to catching polio from the polio vaccine: extremely rare, and impossible with killed-virus vaccine, but a real phenomenon.) In this case, even after catching all 250 original terrorists, 250 new ones have been created by the screening process! The numbers I’ve used give a break-even scenario, but 99.9% accuracy and speciï ¬ city is unrealistically high. More realistic numbers make the problem worse. Nobody knows what fraction of people traumatized as innocent victims of a government process are seriously radicalized. One in 1,000 is an uninformed guess, but the number could be signiï ¬ cantly higher. A mass screening process like this is very likely to have costs that are much higher than the beneï ¬ ts, even restricting the costs to â€Å"number of free terrorists† as I have done here. Adding costs in dollars and the suffering of innocents just makes it harder to reach the break-even level. Ask your neighborhood epidemiologist to conï ¬ rm this analysis. It is applied routinely to public health policy and applies no less to seeking out terrorists. There are alternative ways to detect and defend against terrorists. Mass screening for something very rare is seriously questionable in terms of costs and beneï ¬ ts, exactly because the true positives can be completely swamped by the false positives. The Seeds of War (A Parable) I offer a parable to illustrate the seeds of war. The point of this is not to say that the West is somehow responsible for terrorism. Obviously, the terrorists are responsible, and they must be brought to justice; however, we need to understand the mechanisms in place that feed terrorism and that would be invoked by certain types of retaliation. It makes no sense to act without understanding the context. The purpose of this parable is to provide intuition about one such mechanism. Written 10/2/2001 in the aftermath of September 11. Think about the aftermaths of Afghanistan and Iraq, too. To ï ¬ ght terrorism, you must know where it comes from. Imagine that you and your family live in a really bad neighborhood. You struggle every day to make ends meet. You try to keep your children safe from the criminals who live in your area. You work hard to teach your children to be good people, and to live right, even though they are surrounded by examples of people who get rich through immoral ity and crime. You go to church with your neighbors and try to support each other in the same struggle, since the odds against each of you are overwhelming, but together you may have a slightly better chance. You watch TV, and you see rich people in the suburbs who have everything you ever wanted, who worry about crabgrass in the lawn instead of gunï ¬ re in the street. You work two jobs at minimum wage, hating the fact that your children are home alone, while the people on TV complain about the high cost of gas for the SUV to take the kids to soccer games. You and the members of your church tell each other and try to believe that different people have different lots in life, and each follows his or her own path to salvation. Meanwhile, on TV, you hear the people in the suburbs complaining about how all the people in your neighborhood are criminals and lazy and should be run out of town. You try hard to remember that they don’t understand and to forgive them. Then, one day, a really terrible crime is committed by a gang from your neighborhood. A bomb goes off in the suburbs, and many innocent people are killed. You are shocked, and your heart goes out to the families who are suffering. A few of your meaner-hearted neighbors say that they are glad that the suburbs now know what it’s like. You shut them up, telling them to have compassion for anyone who suffers. A few particularly foolish kids dance in the street and show up on the evening news. Your church holds a prayer service for the victims of the bomb. The police barricade the streets around your neighborhood and won’t let any of you out, though a few sneak past. On TV, you hear some of the rich people in the suburbs say they want to bomb your entire neighborhood to kill the whole gang. If that also kills innocent people like you and your family, well, that’s too bad, they say. How do you feel? What do you do? Now, suppose the police actually do bomb your neighborhood. The bombs kill your parents, your wife, your daughters, and your sons. In your family, the only survivors are you and your youngest son. How do you feel? What do you do? Benjamin Kuipers, PhD, holds an endowed professorship in computer sciences at the University of Texas at Austin. He investigates the representation of commonsense and expert knowledge with particular emphasis on the effective use of incomplete knowledge. He received his BA from Swarthmore College, and his PhD from MIT. He is a fellow of AAAI and IEEE and has served as department chairman.

Terrorism and Ordinary People Essay Example for Free

Terrorism and Ordinary People Essay How to Defeat Terrorism Terrorism is a tactic used by a small set of extremists to fight against an overwhelmingly powerful opponent while surrounded by a large population that mostly just wants peace and quiet. Terrorism can be defeated. To do this, ï ¬ rst we need to understand how terrorists are kept away in the best case, then how terrorists can ï ¬ ght against this mechanism, and ï ¬ nally what works and what doesn’t work to foil those aims. The Thin Blue Line Although terrorists are not merely criminals, it is helpful to think about what keeps criminals under control in our society. Ask any police ofï ¬ cer: it is not the police and the courts who keep criminals at bay. It is the society as a whole. It is the ordinary people who call the police when they hear a problem starting. It is the ordinary people who trust the police and cooperate with them to bring criminals to justice. The â€Å"thin blue line† only works when it is backed up by the vast majority of ordinary people. This, by the way, is why police brutality is so damaging to law and order in our society. If ordinary people lose trust in the police, they won’t call and they won’t cooperate. If they fear that calling the police to quiet down a loud party could result in their neighbors’ kids being shot dead, they won’t call. And they also won’t cooperate in more serious cases. Without community backup, the â€Å"thin blue line† starts to feel very thin indeed. And criminals become bolder. Law Enforcement Executive Forum †¢ 2006 †¢ 6(5) 189 Likewise with terrorists. Terrorists are defeated when the large majority of the community feels that they can trust the local authorities to maintain law and order and work for the common good. Then, ordinary people will turn the terrorists in to the authorities when, or even before, they strike. The Unabomber was an insane but highly intelligent man living alone in the woods, writing a manifesto, and killing and maiming people with mail bombs. After his manifesto was published, he was turned in to the FBI by his brother, who recognized the writing and made the correct but agonizing decision to be loyal to society over blood. We can only wish that a relative or neighbor of Timothy McVeigh had been in a position to make a similar decision before he struck in Oklahoma City. In even the best, most civilized, law-abiding society one can imagine, there will be small numbers of extremists tempted by terrorist tactics. Ideally, the vast majority of people will see them as marginal nut-cases and will report them to trusted authorities if they show signs of turning extreme ideas into dangerous action. Terrorist acts can never be totally eliminated, but a cohesive community that trusts its authorities can defeat a continuing terrorist movement. One Man’s Terrorist Is Another Man’s Freedom-Fighter But what if the society is not civilized? What if the authorities are hated and feared rather than trusted? Then, the true terrorist can always ï ¬ nd support and hiding places among sympathizers who are not willing to become terrorists themselves but are not willing to support the authorities either. The terrorists’ best strategy is to drive a wedge between the people and the authorities. Then, the â€Å"thin blue line† becomes thinner and weaker. The ordinary people, or at least some of them, protect and support those they see as ï ¬ ghting for freedom, religious faith, patri otism, or some other deep value, against overwhelming odds. The biggest danger to the terrorist is the trust the people have in the authorities. As that trust is weakened or destroyed, the terrorists gain strength and freedom of action. Their primary goal must be to eliminate the trust between the people and the authorities. How can they act most effectively to eliminate that trust? Here is where the meaning of terrorist violence is often misunderstood. The classic terrorist act is to blow up some innocent victims, but the actual destruction is not the goal, in a military sense. There is a symbolic goal of showing that the more-powerful enemy can be touched and deeply harmed, but even that is not the real goal. The real goal is to provoke massive retaliation. The tiny group of terrorists who actually committed the act may escape entirely, may take casualties, or may even be entirely destroyed, but the larger terrorist movement feeds on the retaliation. The important thing (from the terrorists’ perspective) is for the massive retaliation to harm many people in the general population, even among their own supporters. The point is to incite the authorities to act in a way that erodes the people’s trust in them. The people lose trust; the terrorists are seen as freedom-ï ¬ ghters; and they gain support, cover, strength, and freedom of action. From the terrorists’ perspective, the more horrible the original strike, the better, since it will provoke a more drastic retaliation. And the more horrible the retaliation, the better, since it will destroy the people’s trust in the authorities and strengthen the terrorists. From the terrorists’ perspective, the actual damage to their own people is a beneï ¬ t, not a cost, of terrorist action. Those Who Do Not Learn from History Are Condemned to Repeat It Sadly, case studies of this strange dynamic are easy to come by, once you realize what to look for. Israel-Palestine The Israeli-Palestinian conï ¬â€šict is a textbook case. There is no military beneï ¬ t to a suicide bomber killing people at a cafe, a wedding, or on a bus. The beneï ¬ t to Hamas comes from the massive retaliation, killing the innocent along with the guilty, bulldozing homes and farms, and creating major economic hardship for the large masses of Palestinians who would gladly live in pea ce with Israel. Israel pegs the price of peace to stopping the terrorists, which ordinary Palestinians have no way of doing. And the immediate impact of the retaliation is to solidify hatred against the Israelis. (We’re long past the point of talking about â€Å"trust† here.) So, Hamas has reached the successful point of being able to provoke the Israeli Army to act to build up its strength among the Palestinians. The vicious cycle in that region is that hardliners in Israel use precisely the same method. When Israeli extremists create new settlements in Palestinian territory or commit terrorist acts against ordinary Palestinians, they provoke the strongest retaliation the Palestinians are capable of, which is more suicide bombers to slaughter innocents among the ordinary people of Israel. This eliminates any trust in the Palestinian authorities (small a) and solidiï ¬ es hatred against Palestine. This elegant pair of mutually reinforcing feedback cycles strengthens terrorism on both sides and makes the chances for peace remote. Iraq Now let’s think about Iraq. Terrorists strike U.S. troops, provoking retaliation. The retaliation almost certainly involves collateral damage, eroding trust in Americans and inï ¬â€šaming hatred. By now, this cycle should look familiar. The terrorists’ goal is the erosion of trust in the U.S. authorities and our attempt to rebuild Iraq, even more than physical destruction. It’s hard to imagine Al Qaeda coming up with something more effective than the pictures from Abu Ghraib prison for destroying the trust of the ordinary Iraqi people in the civil authority of the U.S. troops. Because this abuse does such direct strategic damage to our mission in Iraq, the soldiers directly involved must be punished, of course, but so should the entire chain of command. Since our overall mission explicitly requires winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people, it is military professional malpractice to fail to anticipate the pressures on the front-line troops and put discipline in place to prevent such abuse. This abuse is due to more than â€Å"a few bad apples,† but even if it were only that, a military commander is responsible for knowing that a few soldiers may be â€Å"bad apples† and having controls in place to prevent them from acting out. The decapitation of Nick Berg was a miscalculation on the terrorists’ part. (They aren’t all geniuses either, of course!) Ordinary Iraqis were revolted and offended by having this crime done in their name. Furthermore, the decapitation took attention away from the Abu Ghraib pictures, which were doing real damage to the U.S. cause. We could still save their cookies by some sort of massive retaliation, but the responsible authorities seem to be handling this in a more controlled way. Finding and prosecuting the speciï ¬ c individuals involved and their accomplices would strengthen the U.S. position signiï ¬ cantly. There are signs that not all the news from Iraq is bad. First, there is measurable progress in restoring the Iraqi infrastructure and providing water, sewers, electricity, oil pipelines, local government, and eventually jobs. [This is where the real war is fought. The soldiers are mostly there to keep the bad guys from interfering with the engineers and t heir work.] Second, the ordinary people of Najf have demonstrated against the religious extremists and in favor of the moderates and of course in favor of peace and quiet. 9/11 This view of terrorists, retaliation, and trust also helps us understand the terrible events of 9/11 and who has proï ¬ ted from the aftermath. The destruction of the World Trade Center and the murder of 3,000 people was a horrifying act that devastated the victims’ families and shook the economy for a while. The symbolic impact on the United States and its effect on our national confidence was massive, but from a military perspective, the blow was not signiï ¬ cant. Compare it with the Pearl Harbor attack in 1941, which crippled the Paciï ¬ c ï ¬â€šeet as we entered a war with Japan. Osama bin Laden’s purpose for the 9/11 attack was (and is) to provoke massive retaliation from the United States against Islam. He hoped that our retaliation would ï ¬ nally unite Islam against the United States as a common enemy and that his vision for a fundamentalist pan-Islamic state would sweep away all the more moderate governments in the region, as well as movements toward a pluralistic culture. In the ï ¬ nal chapter of his book Against All Enemies, Richard Clarke gives an excellent description of the conï ¬â€šict we should have pursued after 9/11 and contrasts it with the wars we actually did pursue. The invasion of Iraq is not only a distraction from more important goals but a provocation that is making Osama bin Laden’s dream come true. The purpose of the original attack was to provoke our retaliation, which would affect primarily the ordinary Islamic people, destroying what trust they had for the United States, and making them more willing to give aid and comfort to the terrorists among them. To a surprising extent, we have fallen right into Osama bin Laden’s trap. The future of the world depends on ï ¬ nding our way out. How to Win the War on Terrorism When terrorists are isolated criminals, viewed with suspicion by the vast majority of the general public, and reported to the authorities when they turn violent, then the war on terrorism has been won. What weapons will it take to win this war? Just as the Maginot Line in France was impotent against Nazi blitzkrieg at the beginning of World War II, purely military tactics and strategy will fail against the terrorists and will even be exploited to their advantage. It appears to me that our current professional military leaders generally understand this point, while our hawkish civilian leaders without military experience generally do not. It’s tempting to think that a war against terrorism can be won by killing all the terrorists. In the real world, this naive plan doesn’t work. A serious attempt to ï ¬ nd and kill all the terrorists also sweeps up many ordinary people, and some of them and their relatives become new terrorists, creating more terrorists than were destroyed. The harder the authorities pursue this strategy, the more it looks like genocide, and the more effectively they recruit new terrorists. The â€Å"weapon† we need is the trust and cooperation of the general population of the country where the terrorists are based. As we have seen, terrorists understand this and use ï ¬ endishly clever strategies for eroding this trust and fomenting resentment and hatred. (Incidentally, most terrorists are not clever enough to invent this. But they read about strategy and tactics in the writings of Mao Tze Tung and Ho Chi Minh, who were. Fortunately, these same sources are required reading for our professional military leaders.) The â€Å"simple† strategy for defeating terrorism is as follows: †¢ Avoid getting killed by them; make clear that overwhelming power is available, but avoid using it. †¢ Gain the trust and cooperation of the general population. †¢ Refute the terrorists’ lies; demonstrate truth and openness to criticism. †¢ Create, publicize, enforce, and obey a simple â€Å"Bill of Rights†; demonstrate evenhandedness in local disputes. †¢ Demonstrate justice, even when treated unjustly; avoid massive retaliation, even when taking casualties. †¢ Visibly work for economic justice for the oppressed. The people will turn the terrorists in for trial and prosecution. Obviously, implementing this strategy is far from simple. There are trade-offs between the actions required to avoid getting killed and the ones needed to gain trust. Since gaining trust is building the â€Å"weapon† that wins the war, however, it takes priority, and one can’t be absolutely safe. Whether you call it nation-building or peace-making, it’s a dangerous line of work, actively opposed by unfriendly people. Avoid Getting Killed Aside from the obvious personal motivation to stay alive, the strategic reason to prevent terrorist attacks is to foil their attempt to provoke massive retaliation. Impotence is the worst-case outcome for a terrorist, not death. We need good enough intelligence to detect and prevent terrorist acts, but this cannot take absolute priority since it trades off against being a free and trustworthy society. Therefore, some attacks will occur, and there will be casualties. It is important for both the terrorists and the general population to understand clearly that terrorist acts cannot possibly defeat our forces militarily. Failing to attend to this point led to disastrous errors by Reagan in Beirut and Clinton in Somalia. Currently in Iraq, terrorists can reasonably conclude that the United States will leave under sufï ¬ cient pressure. They may or may not be correct, but their ability to draw that conclusion is dangerous to us in itself. The hardest part about a war on terrorism comes when a terrorist attack succeeds. The whole point of the attack is to do something horriï ¬ c to provoke massive retaliation. The right response must be measured, deliberate, and appropriate. President Bush’s speech on September 20, 2001, was a brilliant example of the correct response to a successful terrorist attack. (Sadly, he did not stay that particular course, as he and his administration demonstrated their obsession with Iraq.) Gain Trust and Cooperation A measured, deliberate, and appropriate response gains the trust and the cooperation of the people. To do this, we must be trustworthy. It also means that the training of our troops for this kind of war must be very different from past wars. Our soldiers must be more than warriors who kill people and destroy things. They must also serve as community police, and even as social workers and political advisors. News reports from Iraq make it clear that our soldiers are vividly aware of this dual role, and they are vividly aware of the fact that they are well-trained and equipped as warriors but not as community police. Above, I’ve outlined some of the speciï ¬ c methods for building trust and cooperation from the people. †¢ Refute the terrorists’ lies; demonstrate truth and openness to criticism. †¢ Create, publicize, enforce, and obey a simple â€Å"Bill of Rights†; demonstrate evenhandedness in local disputes. †¢ Demonstrate justice, even when treated unjustly; avoid massive retaliation, even when taking casualties. †¢ Visibly work for economic justice for the oppressed. There are surely many other effective methods to be identiï ¬ ed, improved, evaluated, and applied. The People Will Turn in the Terrorists If the people trust the authorities and respect the efforts taken to make their lives secure and safe, they will turn in suspected terrorists, knowing that they will receive fair trials. The Unabomber’s brother turned him in because he was willing to trust the government’s pledge not to seek the death penalty. Terrorists are not merely criminals. Their extremist ideological motivation makes them far more dangerous than even large organized criminal gangs. Even so, to win against terrorism, in the end they must be treated as ordinary criminals. They must be tried and punished, with full legal rights and protections, not for their extremist beliefs, but for their terrorist actions that disrupt the safe conduct of society for ordinary citizens. The Unabomber sits in federal prison for his bombs that killed and maimed. Timothy McVeigh was executed for murder many times over. Their public trials and the public safeguarding of their rights were not out of soft-heartedness or compassion for criminals. They are public ceremonies, reafï ¬ rming the value of law and order in our society. They both represent and cultivate the trust that the people have in their government. That trust is the weapon that defeats terrorism. They cannot stand against it. We must not throw it away. What Should We Do? If we understand which weapons actually work against terrorists and if we understand how terrorists try to destroy our weapons, we can see what we need to do and what we need to avoid doing. We can see why the Abu Ghraib prison photos are so damaging to us. Traditional war is not easy or certain. And the new ways are not easy or certain either. The â€Å"simple† strategy above for defeating terrorism requires great knowledge, cleverness, and wisdom to put into action. War requires discipline. War requires sacriï ¬ ce. War requires restraint at certain times and carefully planned action at others. A war against terrorism is unlike the major wars of the past. If we try to ï ¬ ght like we fought wars in the past, we will lose, and we won’t understand how or why. We need to learn how to ï ¬ ght with new weapons. The alternative is a world of perpetual conï ¬â€šict between opposing groups of extremists, locked in a deadly embrace in which each side conï ¬ rms the beliefs of the other and helps in recruiting more extremists. The ordinary people in the middle, who just want peace and law and order, are repeatedly savaged to cultivate more recruits for one side or the other. This is indeed a â€Å"clash of civilizations† but not between Islam and the West. The clash is between extremists of all kinds on the one side and the forces of pluralism, tolerance, peace, and law and order on the other. Identifying Terrorists as a Diagnosis Problem Consider the problem of identifying terrorists as a problem in diagnosis. Out of a large population, you want to diagnose the very few cases of a rare disease called â€Å"terrorism.† Your diagnostic tests are automated data-mining methods, supervised and checked by humans. (The analogy is sending blood or tissue samples to a laboratory.) This type of diagnostic problem, screening a large population to look for a rare disease, has some very counter-intuitive properties. Suppose the tests are highly accurate and speciï ¬ c: †¢ 99.9% of the time, examining a terrorist, the test says â€Å"terrorist.† †¢ 99.9% of the time, examining an innocent civilian, the test says â€Å"innocent.† Terrorists are rare: let’s say, 250 out of 250 million people in the United States. †¢ When the tests are applied to the terrorists, they will be detected 99.9% of the time, which means that almost certainly 249 will be detected, and with only a 25% chance of missing the last one. Great! †¢ However, out of the remaining 249,999,750 innocent civilians, 99.9% accuracy means 0.1% error, which means that 250,000 of them will be incorrectly labeled â€Å"terrorist.† Uh, oh! (These are called â€Å"false positives.†) The law enforcement problem is now that we have 250,250 people who have been labeled as â€Å"terrorist† by our diagnostic tests. Only about 1 in 1,000 of them is actually a terrorist. If we were mini ng for gold, we would say that the ore has been considerably enriched, since 1 in 1,000 is better than 1 in 1,000,000. There’s still a long way to go, though, before ï ¬ nding a nugget. But we are talking about people’s lives, freedom, and livelihoods here. The consequences to an innocent person of being incorrectly labeled a â€Å"terrorist† (or even â€Å"suspected terrorist†) can be very large. Suppose, out of the innocent people incorrectly labeled â€Å"terrorist,† 1 in 1,000 is sufï ¬ ciently traumatized by the experience so that they, or a relative, actually becomes a terrorist. (This is analogous to catching polio from the polio vaccine: extremely rare, and impossible with killed-virus vaccine, but a real phenomenon.) In this case, even after catching all 250 original terrorists, 250 new ones have been created by the screening process! The numbers I’ve used give a break-even scenario, but 99.9% accuracy and speciï ¬ city is unrealistically high. More realistic numbers make the problem worse. Nobody knows what fraction of people traumatized as innocent victims of a government process are seriously radicalized. One in 1,000 is an uninformed guess, but the number could be signiï ¬ cantly higher. A mass screening process like this is very likely to have costs that are much higher than the beneï ¬ ts, even restricting the costs to â€Å"number of free terrorists† as I have done here. Adding costs in dollars and the suffering of innocents just makes it harder to reach the break-even level. Ask your neighborhood epidemiologist to conï ¬ rm this analysis. It is applied routinely to public health policy and applies no less to seeking out terrorists. There are alternative ways to detect and defend against terrorists. Mass screening for something very rare is seriously questionable in terms of costs and beneï ¬ ts, exactly because the true positives can be completely swamped by the false positives. The Seeds of War (A Parable) I offer a parable to illustrate the seeds of war. The point of this is not to say that the West is somehow responsible for terrorism. Obviously, the terrorists are responsible, and they must be brought to justice; however, we need to understand the mechanisms in place that feed terrorism and that would be invoked by certain types of retaliation. It makes no sense to act without understanding the context. The purpose of this parable is to provide intuition about one such mechanism. Written 10/2/2001 in the aftermath of September 11. Think about the aftermaths of Afghanistan and Iraq, too. To ï ¬ ght terrorism, you must know where it comes from. Imagine that you and your family live in a really bad neighborhood. You struggle every day to make ends meet. You try to keep your children safe from the criminals who live in your area. You work hard to teach your children to be good people, and to live right, even though they are surrounded by examples of people who get rich through immoral ity and crime. You go to church with your neighbors and try to support each other in the same struggle, since the odds against each of you are overwhelming, but together you may have a slightly better chance. You watch TV, and you see rich people in the suburbs who have everything you ever wanted, who worry about crabgrass in the lawn instead of gunï ¬ re in the street. You work two jobs at minimum wage, hating the fact that your children are home alone, while the people on TV complain about the high cost of gas for the SUV to take the kids to soccer games. You and the members of your church tell each other and try to believe that different people have different lots in life, and each follows his or her own path to salvation. Meanwhile, on TV, you hear the people in the suburbs complaining about how all the people in your neighborhood are criminals and lazy and should be run out of town. You try hard to remember that they don’t understand and to forgive them. Then, one day, a really terrible crime is committed by a gang from your neighborhood. A bomb goes off in the suburbs, and many innocent people are killed. You are shocked, and your heart goes out to the families who are suffering. A few of your meaner-hearted neighbors say that they are glad that the suburbs now know what it’s like. You shut them up, telling them to have compassion for anyone who suffers. A few particularly foolish kids dance in the street and show up on the evening news. Your church holds a prayer service for the victims of the bomb. The police barricade the streets around your neighborhood and won’t let any of you out, though a few sneak past. On TV, you hear some of the rich people in the suburbs say they want to bomb your entire neighborhood to kill the whole gang. If that also kills innocent people like you and your family, well, that’s too bad, they say. How do you feel? What do you do? Now, suppose the police actually do bomb your neighborhood. The bombs kill your parents, your wife, your daughters, and your sons. In your family, the only survivors are you and your youngest son. How do you feel? What do you do? Benjamin Kuipers, PhD, holds an endowed professorship in computer sciences at the University of Texas at Austin. He investigates the representation of commonsense and expert knowledge with particular emphasis on the effective use of incomplete knowledge. He received his BA from Swarthmore College, and his PhD from MIT. He is a fellow of AAAI and IEEE and has served as department chairman.

The effectiveness of employee performance appraisal

The effectiveness of employee performance appraisal Performance Appraisal and Reward system is viewed as the systemic model that correlates supervisory feedback with the employee behaviour, attitude and motivation (Gomez-Mejia, 2007: p. 21-24). Historically, the Performance Appraisal and Reward system has been viewed as the feedback and critics framework to help the employees in enhancing their productivity and performance by virtue of constructive feedbacks, reviewing and rewarding past performance, setting the future goals, employee motivation, training and growth planning and problem solving/grievance handling (Hall et al. 1989: p. 54-67). However, the Performance Appraisal and Reward system in the modern world has been viewed as the tool for evaluation of productivity and efficiency of employees to determine their standing against the salary increments, bonus, promotions and layoff policies (Andres et al., 2010: p. 1599-1607). This has resulted in very narrow viewpoints about the system by employees (Reinke, 2003: p. 23-27) whereb y some take it negatively as well (Daley, 2007: p. 290-293). But Cook and Crossman (2004: p. 526-541) explained that the satisfaction with the Performance Appraisal and Reward system is better in employees that play the role of both appraiser and appraisee. They further explained that best results are obtained when 360 degree feedback system (appraising the managers) system is practiced by the organisation. This is the problem that the author proposes to address in this research. In the modern era when employees exhibit pessimism about the Performance Appraisal and Reward system (Daley, 2007: p. 290-293) because they consider it as the mere tool for deciding increments, bonuses, promotions and continuity in the company (Andres et al., 2010: p. 1599-1607), what makes it so vibrant in companies like KFC resulting in high employee motivation and reduced attrition (Huck, 2010: p. 1-3)? The proposed topic is: The effectiveness of Employee Performance Appraisal System (EPAC): A case study on KFC. 1.2 Background of the Organisation Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC) is the highest revenue earning chain restaurant of Yum! Restaurants which is ranked at number 239 on the Fortune 500 list that exceeded global revenues of 11 Billion US Dollars in year 2008. KFC is regarded as the fastest growing brand in chain restaurant segment in the world that operates like a Quick Service Restaurant (QSR) producing good Chicken dishes under the name finger lickin good. (Huck, 2010: p. 1-3) The company was founded as Kentucky Fried Chicken by Colonel Harland Sanders in 1952, though the idea of KFCs fried chicken actually goes back to 1930 (Shuker, 2008: p. 8-11). In UK alone, KFC employs more than 22000 people in more than 780 stores across the nation (Huck, 2010: p. 1-3). KFC was regarded as the second best employer on the Britains Top Employers 2010 list. It achieved 3.5/5 stars in Pay and Benefits, 4.5/5 stars in Training and Development and 5/5 stars each in Career Development, Working Conditions and Company Culture in the five attributes rated by CRF Institute in the Britains Top Employers 2010 survey. (Huck, 2010: p. 1-3) KFC has an excellent employee performance measurement system, promoted by parent company Yum! Restaurants. The Champ Card peer rewarding system has been elementary in achieving high motivation and reducing employee turnover. (Corporate Executive Board, 2006: p. 4) 1.3 Purpose of Research Employee Performance Appraisal System (EPAS) is the mechanism of longitudinal (over a period of time) performance management of employees (Smither, 2001: p. 1-7). If designed appropriately, it can result in effective bonding between supervisors and subordinates by virtue of open discussions, appraising strengths and weaknesses of subordinates and the work systems in which they operate, identification of trainings requirements, awareness of future goals, confidence boosting, rewards and recognitions, motivation, etc (Smither, 2001: p. 1-7). The end result can be boost in organisational productivity (Gomez-Mejia, 2007: p. 21-24) and even enhancement of the revenues and profits (Boice and Kleiner, 1997: p. 197-201). But the Performance Appraisal system needs to be designed very effectively and efficiently to ensure that the desired outcomes supporting boost in productivity and hence the revenues and profits can be tangibly achieved (Boice and Kleiner, 1997: p. 197-201). Gabris and Ihrke (2000: 41-44) argued that ineffective measurement systems are going to be questioned by the employees and hence may be unacceptable to them. If ineffective measurement systems are followed, the EPAS will not be perceived to be useful and hence the relationship of participants in review meetings will determine the results and not the actual performance of the employees (Bradley and Ashkanasy, 2001: p. 83-85). In this research, the author wants to learn about how exemplary performance appraisal systems, like the one practiced by KFC, are designed and how are they accurately linked with employee motivation, productivity, and the overall organisational performance. The rewards and recognition system studied by Corporate Executive Board (2006: p. 4) emphasised on the peer relationships, spot reward system for quick wins and celebrating individual and group successes in vibrant ways (like clapping for colleagues, announcing quick wins, giving away Champ Cards, etc.). These attributes are highly advocated by Gabris and Ihrke (2000: 41-44). 1.4 Research Questions Following are the proposed Research Questions for the study: What are the areas of employee performance evaluated by KFC in their EPAS? What are the criteria and performance measures applied in KFCs EPAS? How effective is KFCs EPAS in measuring employees performance? How KFCs EPAS affects motivation and future growth of the employees? What are the scope of improvements in KFCs EPAS? 1.5 Research Objectives Following are the proposed Research Objectives of this study: To study the features of KFCs EPAS and learn the underlying causal factors that contributed to its phenomenal success across the world. To map the learning points from KFCs EPAS with empirical evidences in academic literatures and understand how the academic world have been advocating about such causal factors. Identify new learning points that has not yet been identified by the academic world and discuss about them. Present the value additions from KFC case study to already existing theoretical background in the academic literatures. Present a critical analysis of how KFC can further improve their EPAS by identifying the traits advocated by academic literatures but not prevalent in KFC EPAS. 2.0 Literature Review 2.1 Introduction Gomez-Mejia (2007: p. 21-24) explained that supervisors feedback through performance appraisal systems can result in two types of responses of the employees Cognitive response and Behavioural response. He analysed that dysfunctional feedbacks (ambiguous, one way, inconsistent, judgemental, misdirected, coinciding with salary increments, etc.) can cause uncooperative cognitive response and reduced employee performance and functional feedbacks (job related, two way, explicit, consistent, clear, not linked with salary increments, etc.) can result in goal oriented cognitive response and improved employee performance Gomez-Mejia (2007: p. 22). Hence, the most effective systems of appraising performance are: functional, relevant, uniform and consistent. Pragmatism is important because it helps to ensure that the system will be easily understood by employees and effectively put into action by managers (Gomez-Mejia (2007: p. 22-24). Drawing upon arguments by Briscoe Schuler (2004: p. 5-57) performance can be viewed as a combination of several factors, such as motivation, ability, working conditions and expectations. It has been established that there are certain factors that affect employees performance more than others. These factors, according to Dowling et al (1999: p. 4-29), include the compensation package, the nature of task, support from higher management, the working environment and the overall corporate culture. In this chapter, the author has presented an organised literature review to analyse how the case study of KFC can be supported by the theoretical foundation already established by empirical theories. In essence, the research instrument can only be designed with the help of such theoretical foundation as explained by Saunders et al. (2007: p. 44-50). 2.2 Elements of Employee Performance Evaluation Traditionally, performance appraisal of employees has been viewed as the psychological test bed for employees that comprises of critics ratings, decision making on rewards and recognitions, deciding amount of salary increments, deciding future expectations, deciding continuity in the company, deciding promotions, measuring the alignment with departmental and organisational goals, etc (Elmuti et al., 1992: p. 42-48). The modern performance appraisal system is linked with quality improvement philosophies of the organisation that was originally conceptualised by Deming (Elmuti et al., 1992: p. 44-45). However, Levy and Williams (2004: p. 881-889) argued that the modern performance appraisal theories have travelled a long way to transition from mere enforcement tool of organisational objectives and quality targets to the system that influences the overall corporate culture and social system. This shall be very much evident in the case study of KFC where the EPAS is viewed to be contribut ing positively to the congenial and highly vibrant work environment in the organisation (Huck, 2010: p. 1-3). 2.3 Link between EPAS, Performance Measures and Staff Motivation EPAS can directly contribute to staff motivation if it is perceived to be fair, transparent, clear, consistent, continuous, bilateral and development oriented (Kavanagh et al., 2007: p. 132-137; Boice and Kleiner, 1997: p. 197-201). As reiterated by Boice and Kleiner (1997: p. 197-201) and Gomez-Mejia (2007: p. 21-24), discrete, one-sided, ambiguous, misdirected, and judgemental appraisals are perceived to be unfair and result in negative cognitive response, demotivation and reduced performance of employees. Boice and Kleiner (1997: p. 198-199) argued that surprises during annual performance reviews may result in retaliation by employees given that they deserve the right to avail continuous feedback. OConnor et al. (2010: p. 729-735) described that performance measures need to be realistic, practical and transparent to the employees such that positive cognitive and behavioural responses can be achieved. The objective of performance appraisal system should be to motivate the employees to achieve highest performance levels against the measures and not get threatened by the measures perceiving that they may be used against them if supervisor is not happy OConnor et al. (2010: p. 729-735). 2.4 KFCs EPAS in measuring performance and motivating their staff KFC has highly congenial and highly vibrant work environment. KFCs EPAS is designed on peer recognition model in which employees can recognise each other by giving away champion cards against quick wins. This is also carried out vertically in which juniors can reward seniors and vice versa. Such on the job recognitions are mapped with the corporate goals and values. This system in KFC meets the SSMART objectives: supports organisational goals and values, simple and sincere, meaningful, adaptable, relevant and timely. (Huck, 2010: p. 1-3; Corporate Executive Board, 2006: p. 2-4) 2.5 Effects of KFCs EPAS on KFC performance and competitive advantages The reports by Huck (2010: p. 1-3), KFC Holdings (Malaysia) Annual Report (2009: p. 8-9) and Corporate Executive Board (2006: p. 2-4) revealed that the key competitive advantage of KFC is the high employee retention and productivity against close rivals like McDonalds. KFC has been rewarding their high performing employees consistently and have been able to retain talents by virtue of their on-the-spot recognition scheme. 2.6 Conclusions The EPAS system should ensure congruence between organisational goals and employee performance and hence cannot be achieved in discrete form (like annual reviews). It has to be continuous and on-the-job. The model by KFC is closely linked with the theories presented by Gabris and Ihrke (2000: 41-44), Kavanagh et al. (2007: p. 132-137) and Boice and Kleiner (1997: p. 197-201) that advocated transparency, consistency, bidirectional, fostering trust relationships, strengthening the colleagues on-the-job, setting of good examples, celebration of quick wins, heart to heart recognition by individuals, and celebration of group success as the key objectives of EPAS that can finally result in high employee motivation and corporate productivity. 2.7 Conceptual Framework The author proposes to conduct interpretive study in which the outcomes of the primary research shall be categorised, classified, and tagged appropriately such that wise interpretations can be drawn and compared with the theoretical foundation of past empirical studies. The author shall compare responses to all questions with the literature review, one-to-one, such that close correlation with the past theories can be framed. Gaps in KFCs EPAS against past theories and vice versa will be identified such that the conclusions and recommendations can be drawn. This approach is called qualitative interpretive study as described by Saunders et al. (2007: p. 44-107). Also Wolcott et al. (2002: p. 85-90) termed this approach as critical thinking research. This is further explained in the next chapter. 3.0 Research Design 3.1 Introduction AERA (2003: p. 2-11) emphasised that Research Design is the collection of various attributes of conducting the research that helps in making the study more focussed, purposive, unbiased, valid, reliable and ethical. Further to this, Bryman and Bell (2003: p. 3-45) described that Research Design begins with the philosophical approach that the author wants to take and leads to appropriate choices of methodology, approach, methods, instruments, sampling methods, data collection and analysis methods, pilot design and ethical considerations. The discussions follow. 3.2 Research Philosophy and Methodology Bryman and Bell (2003: p. 3-45) described that two philosophies are most prevalent in social and business research studies positivism and interpretivism. Positivists try to prove theories through research whereas interpreters try to learn theories through research. Hence, positivists always begin with hypotheses formulation and try to accept and reject them based on outcomes of study whereas interpreters begin with research questions and try to address them through learning from research. Hence, positivists always prefer scientific and objective research whereas interpreters prefer observational research, action research, descriptive research and critical thinking research. (Bryman and Bell, 2003: p. 3-45) Saunders et al. (2007: 44-107) described that positivists normally prefer quantitative research because it only takes numbers as inputs and comprises of scientific methods (like mathematical modelling, experimentation, statistical analysis, etc.) (Bryman, 2004: p. 59-77) whereas interpreters prefer qualitative research because it can take any form of inputs (text, numbers, pictures, etc.) and comprises of interpretive, analytical thinking and observational methods (Bryman and Bell, 2003: p. 3-24). The author perceives that positivists can frame hypotheses because they are seasoned experts in their respective subject matters and are very confident about what they want to prove. The author is an amateur in performance appraisal and hence wants to conduct this research to learn the best practices of EPAS from KFC and map them with literatures. Keeping this approach in mind, the author has selected interpretive philosophy with qualitative research. 3.3 Research Approach 3.3.1 Inductive Approach Qualitative researchers welcome any form of valid inputs (like text, numbers, pictures, voice recording, observations, experiences, etc.) and hence carry out inductive approach of learning (Bryman and Bell, 2003: p. 21-45). Given that the author has selected qualitative research, he wants to adopt inductive learning approach. 3.3.2 Deductive Approach Quantitative researchers only entertain numerical inputs that are applied in experimental setups or mathematical and statistical models to derive the outputs. The model of learning is in the form of P à   Q, where P is independent variable and Q is dependent variable and à   denotes the processor between P and Q. This is called deductive approach of learning. (Bryman and Bell, 2003: p. 21-45) The author has not adopted this approach because the methodology chosen is Qualitative. 3.4 Research Methods 3.4.1 Techniques and instruments Qualitative research is conducted using grounded theory, ethnography, phenomenology and action research techniques. Grounded theory employs learning from past theories, ethnography employs human observation and analysis, phenomenology employs learning from human experience and action research employs learning by participation and involvement. Grounded theory doesnt employ any specific instrument, ethnography employs observation charts, phenomenology employs structured and semi structured questionnaire and action research employs cause-effect charts. (Thompson and Walker, 1998: p. 63-69) The author wants to study EPAS by capturing human experiences (employees at KFC) and hence has proposed the choice of phenomenology with structured questionnaire. As described by Thompson and Walker (1998: p. 63-69), structured questionnaire helps in reducing bias and improving validity because the respondents are closely tied to the context of the questions. These reasons supported the authors choice of structured questionnaire. 3.4.2 Data Sampling, collection and analysis The author has chosen purposive sampling against quota sampling, convenience sampling and snowball sampling. Purposive sampling deals with mapping each possible candidate with pre-determined qualification criteria. Quota sampling deals with purposive sampling for multiple populations with different pre-determined criteria sets, convenience sampling deals with choosing respondents by virtue of ease of access and snowball sampling deals with testing purposive sampling against multiple pre-determined criteria sets and expanding the one that is most relevant. The data collection shall be cross sectional (not tagged with historical significance) and the data analysis shall be interpretive with critical thinking approach. This is further explained in the Reflections chapter. (Cooper and Schindler, 2003: p. 34-109). 3.4.3 Pilot Study As reiterated by Saunders et al. (2007: p. 52-63), pilot study can be very useful to enhance the quality of the instrument and test the interpretations of respondents and validity of the questions asked. It also helps in measuring time taken in conducting interviews. The author proposes to conduct pilot study among few friends and request for constructive feedback to enhance the questionnaire. 3.5 Conclusions The author has proposed to conduct the study employing interpretive philosophy, qualitative methodology, inductive learning approach, phenomenology technique, purposive sampling, cross sectional data collection and interpretive data analysis with critical thinking approach. 3.5.1 Validity and Reliability The validity and reliability shall be assured by carefully designing the structured questionnaire instrument and conducting pilot study to test and enhance it. The structured questionnaire instrument shall be based on the review of most relevant literatures and will be aligned with the research questions and objectives. 3.5.2 Generalisability Although the findings shall be applicable to KFC (due to case study approach), the author shall closely map the findings with the outcomes of the literature review to achieve generalisations. 4.0 Access and Resource Implications 4.1 Access to Subjects The author has access to employees in KFC given his association with the organisation. The study shall be conducted on selected employees of KFC outlets in London after obtaining permission from the Restaurant Managers. 4.2 Ethical Considerations The research shall be conducted in transparent manner keeping the rationale of study very clear to all respondents and the Restaurant Managers. The willingness to participate will be obtained from all respondents prior to starting the study. No deception shall be carried out in any form or shape. In addition, the author shall ensure that the emotional aspects, beliefs and ethnic/religious origin will be highly respected in the process of conducting the study. Moreover, the author shall honour the intellectual properties of literature sources by using Harvard referencing. 4.3 Resources The author proposes to conduct the study alone although volunteers are always welcome. The author plans to conduct face to face interviews and hence will have to bear travel expenses to all outlets and distribute the questionnaire in printed format. The theoretical foundation established from literature review shall be the primary resource that will help in accurate mapping with primary research and critical thinking. 5.0 Proposed Action Plan The author proposes the following action plan for the study. The weeks are proposed to be counted from the day the author gets a go-head from his supervisor to proceed with the study. The overall project shall be completed in eight weeks including weekends whereby the author has planned to dedicate about four hours per day to the study except the Week 6 in which the author may have to work for eight to ten hours a day to secure access to all respondents and conduct the interviews. The author has planned to conduct this entire research alone although volunteers to extend helping hand will always be welcomed. Activity Weeks WK1 WK2 WK3 WK4 WK5 WK6 WK7 WK8 The chapter 1 comprising of research context, aim and objectives, research questions and research structure design will be completed. The author shall conduct extensive research on various journal articles, past research reports, peer reviewed internet sites, books etc. and prepare the list of relevant literatures that shall be included in the References section. The author shall complete Literature Review Chapter (2) and Research Design and Methodology chapter (3). The author shall conduct purposive sampling to select respondents, design the questionnaire and conduct the interviews. (parts of chapter 4) The author shall interpret the responses, map with literature review, discuss the mappings critically and them present the conclusions and generalisations. (Parts of Chapter 4 and the entire Chapter 5). 6.0 Reflections on Learning As explained by Evans (2007: p. 1-4), the research is closely implicated with the ethics, values and cultural identity of the researcher. The philosophical considerations of the research is closely linked with what the researcher wants to achieve out of the study. Evans (2007: p. 104) and Cornish et al. (2007: p. 1-16) further described that the researcher may like to conduct research to study a problem area in depth that he/she wants to address in future, to closely study and understand the subject matter where he/she wants to build his career, discover the solutions to problems that has been bothering him/her for a long time, prove the existence of some theories or correlations between some variables that he/she has discovered during his/her experience in this world, to promote the light of education and learning, etc. The learning methods in research has often clashed in the past like the epistemological oppositions between Interpretivism and Positivism that has been prevailing f or ages (Lorenz, 1998: p. 309-316). The interpreters have been largely depending upon human analytics skills and positivists have been largely depending upon scientific evidence of existing phenomena in natural sciences (Lorenz, 1998: p. 309-316). But Bowden (2005: p. 4-52) and Irez (2007: p. 17-27) presented very unique reflection that can diminish all conflicts and standoffs among different believers. He explained that every researcher wants to know the truth and hence it doesnt matter how he/she knows the truth as long as he is able to get to it. The truth always more important than beliefs of individuals (Irez (2007: p. 18-19). If this is the case then why shouldnt we forget all the conflicts and employ the best of all philosophies and methodologies? He analysed that this thought approach may be correlated with the philosophy of Realism which is neither linked with positivism nor with interpretivism. Every research is in fact the relationship between subjects and aspects of the world. This is what comprises of the truth. One may like to know the truth by engaging with the subjects (interpretivism) or with the aspects of the world (positivism) or with both (realism). This can be understood from the following figure presented by Bowden (2005): Figure 1: The concept of Realism presented by Bowden (2005) The outcome may be descriptive, analytical or critical thinking. In descriptive outcome, the researcher may like to describe the outcomes to build a new theory, in analytical outcome the researcher may like to analyse the outcomes with respect to past theories and in critical thinking outcome the researcher may like to critically think on existing perceptions or existing ways of thinking and compare with the research outcomes to evolve the similarities and differences. (Bowden, 2005: p. 4-52; Wolcott et al., 2002: p. 85-103) As described by Wolcott et al. (2002: p. 85-103), critical thinking is a human skill that is developed by cognitive thinking and analysis (learning from the tangible evidences with a wider out of box thinking approach). It neither involves open ended interpretations nor a blind belief on experimentation or simulation results. The researcher applies cognitive thinking to all the outputs by comparing with multiple valid evidences (inputs) without showing any bias towards a particular type of input. The author has adopted critical thinking approach in this study. In this approach the author shall first develop theoretical foundation about the EPAS framework by browsing through various research reports, journal articles, books, peer reviewed Internet sources, etc. and short-listing the most relevant resources with respect to the research questions and research objectives. The structured questionnaire shall be an outcome of the theoretical foundation formed with the help of the literature review and shall be closely aligned with all the research questions. The responses of structured questionnaire will be closely mapped with the literature review by interpreting and analyzing the outcomes of each question independently and comparing with the theoretical foundation. The differences and similarities between the literature review outcomes and the structured questionnaire outcomes will be evolved by following critical thinking approach and finally the conclusions, recommendations and generalisations will be presented. The author believes in knowing the truth and hence is highly influenced with the realism philosophy. However, interpretivism has been selected in the research design because the author is not a subject matter expert of EPAS and hence wants to learn it by following the inductive learning approach. In future, the author wants to develop his career as human resources manager and hence wants to learn the best practices of EPAS thoroughly given that the author perceives it to be the most difficult challenge in human resources management given that the recipients are the agents that are highly impacted by the EPAS framework. In general, the author wants to develop his skills pertaining to focussed research, discovering the sources of information, finding the truth, critical analytics and deriving specific and general conclusions. These skills are very important in human resources management field because all policies and procedures (like the EPAS framework) are results of reflections from the employee surveys and measurement of their performance at work (Bradley and Ashkanasy, 2001: p. 83-96). The framework itself is meaningless if the criteria of measurements, evaluations and decision making is not understood and accepted by both the parties the appraisers and the appraisees. If the author achieves the role of Human Resources Manager, he perceives that two way communications based on research efforts and fact finding efforts will be key to success and accurate data and information will be the key driver to successful HR planning and implementation, especially in designing the EPAS framework. These skil ls can be generated with the help of this study. Finally, the author wants to reiterate that he will take the learning to his professional world and apply them as actionable outcomes, not only to practice his profession efficiently and effectively but also conduct more academic research studies in future. This study is expected to be very useful for students as well as professionals.

Personal Narrative - Hit by a Car Essay -- Injury Disability

The Living Shadow I want a lot, and there's a lot I don't. But I'd rather I not want at all. To want - such a human thing to do! You know, a trait of those organic markers who demarcate and deface—then there are those gray areas. Like an epidemic, the smears spread from one to another.. I apologize. I'm making the murky waters murkier. To elucidate: A yellowing calendar page materializes before my own eyes. As I ponder above the black-and-white chessboard splashed with gray, I glance as an inexplicable draft flattens the page momentarily over a dusty dividing line. The page reads, "August 18, 2008." Immediately, the sheet transmutes into a pane of glass. Nonchalant, I stare as the pane rises up over me, and shatters against my head. The glass pieces disintegrate upon impact, and I stand among showering particles, examining my new environment. The board has become a garden, one partially teeming with life and mixed with utter death and destruction. I reach out and lightly grasp a blurry leaf. Did I touch it? Did I imagine it? As if in answer, I feel it—and then, it's gone. I went into a coma on that day. At least, that’s what they say. They say I was crossing a street near my school on the way to my home. I was jay-walking. More correctly, I was breaking the law. Yes, the irony soaks that calendar page. Yes, a car hit me, sending me flying. No, the actual impact wasn’t that damaging. Two fractured clavicles, I think. But obeying the laws of gravity, I fell. Apparently, my head landed on a concrete edge. More correctly, the back of my head collided with stone. Yes, that was damaging. A debilitated cerebellum, I think. Since my brain stem incurred damage, it meant that I would possess a physical disability for... ...I raise my pen and jerk it downward. Paint is a temporal dress at best, right? At the moment before the knife-like tip strikes a knife-like slab, my movement is halted. Flabbergasted, I try again. What else if not the same end that meets me? I relax the utensil. It’s an unspoken rule: I can’t know some constitutions. A draft inexplicably evinces, and as a reminder, a page materializes: ‘What matters,’ it states. â€Å"Life matters,† I retort. What I believe is life, is what I see—what humans see—and what they see defines what they choose to do: it’s the human way. I choose to believe what is important. And what a human thing to do! So be it, I am an organic marker. I spread the epidemic. Just an organic marker, scribbling and smearing. The murky waters stay the same, as I run my course. Like an unspoken rule, physical constraints run with me. It’s the human way.

Asians Looking Again At Comercial Real Estate :: essays research papers

\ Commentary on the article: Asian looking again at Commercial real estate In the beginning of the last year, Taiwanese and Singaporeans came to Vancouver with a lot of money looking for prospects in the real estate market. These business people were looking for rental building, which were the "hot ticket" in real estate according to Vancouver relater John Gee The part of the city, which is attracting these buyers, is the West End of Vancouver, where the vacancy rate is about 1%. Even though some people feel real estate is really strong, others are trying to sell their buildings citing that the real estate market is stagnant. After reading this through I think that the Asians are doing the wrong thing by getting in to the real estate business because it is slow. It may take along time to recover their investment off the rental buildings. I also that the property value could decrease in price because most of the properties in Vancouver, especially commercial real estate, are overpriced. However, factors attracting overseas investors include low vacancy rate, low interest rates, and a future increase in the cost of rent. For investors who want security and a modest return the commercial real estate market offers great opportunities. On the other hand Asian investors can receive larger returns in their homeland. In summary, the real estate market in Vancouver provides a secure investment climate for Asian investors, however they should be wary of the market stabilizing over the short term. Commentary on the article: Asian looking again at BC Commercial real estate In the beginning of the last year, Taiwanese and Singaporeans came to Vancouver with a lot of money looking for prospects in the real estate market. These business people were looking for rental building, which were the "hot ticket" in real estate according to Vancouver relater John Gee The part of the city, which is attracting these buyers, is the West End of Vancouver, where the vacancy rate is about 1%. Even though some people feel real estate is really strong, others are trying to sell their buildings citing that the real estate market is stagnant. After reading this through I think that the Asians are doing the wrong thing by getting in to the real estate business because it is slow. It may take along time to recover their investment off the rental buildings. I also that the property value could decrease in price because most of the

Essay --

ley Mack Ms. Barr English 9 Honors December 11, 2013 The Morality of It All â€Å"A system of morality which is based on relative emotional values is a mere illusion, a thoroughly vulgar conception which has nothing sound in it and nothing true†; this Socratic idea demonstrates a very distinct concept of morality. It shows that morality is not to be based on emotion, but on logic. If a person chooses to use their emotions to fuel a system of morality, things could go downhill quickly. Just like Socrates had to choose between emotions and logic, in Homer’s epic poem, The Odyssey, the protagonist Odysseus struggles between emotions and logic as he tries to get his crew back safely after the Trojan War has ended. As he embarks on his journey home, he is faced with many obstacles and options that question his ethical beliefs. As time goes by and more and more of his crew eventually die off, he successfully moves on past his setbacks and finds himself back in his kingdom of Ithaca, only to discover it crawling with suitors attempting to woo his wife , Penelope. Odysseus is mostly construed as a tragic war hero with many flaws. He finds himself in many life-threatening situations as a direct result of his actions, he is characterized by having too much pride, and he is unfaithful to his wife. However, Odysseus is very much so still a hero because he perseveres and has an internal drive that gets him home no matter what, despite the fact his hubris is one of his biggest hindrances, his pride gets his men out of many dangerous situations, and even though he is physically adulterous to his wife, he emotionally longs for her then entire time he tries to reach home. Particularly, Odysseus is challenged with many treacherous obstacles, yet he finds... ...pon himself. As well. He reveals that he blinds the son of a god, and he falls to temptation. Throughout this experience, though, Odysseus tries to better himself, as you can see when he moves past Circe and Calypso to try to get home to his wife. He may still make a mistake now and then, but he is better than he was before. Odysseus is very much like people today. He tries his hardest to be the best he can, but sometimes fails to reach his goal and makes and error. Just like modern-day people, Odysseus is flawed. He had his hindrances, just like them. Newer generations most likely learn to make mistakes because they grow up watching their elders make mistakes. It is human nature to do something wrong now and again. Just because someone has flaws does not make them a bad person and Odysseus demonstrates how a good person could have imperfections through their values

Is Play Learning Essay

Learning through play is a vital part of your Childs development. It includes playing with different toys or activities for different areas of development in order to help them develop. According to Squire. G (2007), play is pleasurable and enjoyable, has no extrinsic goals, play is spontaneous and voluntary, involves some active management. Not only is it fun and interactive for both children and parents, but it enhances the development of all aspects needed including social, Physical, Intellectual, communication and emotional development. Why? Although it seems like your child is simply playing with a toy or object, the child is actually developing and learning so much. That simple teddy bear that you first bought them as a baby, can actually develop their intellectual and emotional development by helping to create an imaginative mind and if the child is talking to the teddy bear, then it’s developing speech and language. 0-3 years old. Your child, from aged 0—3 are learning so much already, even though you might not know it. Your child needs to develop socially, physically, intellectually, their communication and their emotions. This is actually done through play. For a child aged 0-3 you should be encouraging development through play. Toys such as hanging mobiles actually increase your Childs physical development by giving them a target to reach for, stretching out their arms. This increases their hand-eye co-ordination and gross motor skills. Reading your child books every day, whether it’s just to calm them down before bed or for bonding time can influence their learning. This encourages their intellectually development as children pick up different words by listening and being involved. If you involve the child, there is more possibility they will learn more as well as enjoy it more. If you’re reading a colourful, touchy-feely book to an under 1 year old, this can stimulate their development to different textures, colours and making them more aware. Reading topical books can also influence their knowledge of the world, such as books about shopping or religions. Early years settings are good at providing opportunities for children to develop. Nurseries play groups and mum and toddler groups develop your child, not only socially by interacting with other children and adults, but in all other aspects as well. By allowing them to play on, for example, a slide, cars, push trolleys/cars/bikes, they can practice moving around, walking, crawling etc, as they should provide stimulating activities, developing their physical skills and their fine and gross motor skills. Early years settings for this age will develop your child intellectually by giving them an understanding as well as developing knowledge by watching different scenarios, such as having a role play â€Å"home area† which allows them to copy things they might have seen at home such as ironing, play kitchens, etc. Their communication will increase as they are constantly interacting with others and being spoken to as well as listening to others interact. Emotion development will be promoted in the way that children can develop friendships and bonds with other people and start to develop feelings such as empathy as they can offer group activities, play dates and just by being around other children. 3-5 years old. At the age of 3-5 years old, as a parent, you should be offering them a wide range of activities through play. Your child has come on a lot already but the development continues with encouragement from you. Your child will be walking and needing to develop their physical development and gross motor skills (larger muscles such as throwing and catching etc. ) Outside activities are good at encouraging physical development. This can just involve rolling a ball to your child and encouraging them to catch it, kick it, pick it up or chase it. It’s involving for you and the child has fun whilst playing. Their hand eye co-ordination improves and their gross motor skills. As they get older, you could decrease the size of the ball, making it smaller to a tennis ball for example so it becomes harder for the child to catch so they develop their fine motor skills with a pincer grip and tests their hand eye co-ordination. Games such as piggy in the middle, football or just a simple game of throwing and catching. If this isn’t possible, or even if you can, taking your child to a park or play area is fun for them and if you get involved, it can be fun too. Apparatus such as monkey bars and climbing ropes strengthen the Childs muscles and balance. They develop their physical development by allowing them to exercise and experience new activities that they might not get too at home. It’s also a good way to socialize with other children and adults in a public place. This can teach them life skills such as sharing and turn-taking. Your child will start to talk in full and extended sentences around this age. They would have picked up their vocabulary from listening and copying so far. Play can often encourage talking by getting them to communicate their ideas on the game such as role play, but literacy games can extend vocabulary and help with phrasing. Games such as â€Å"I went to the shop and I bought†¦ † This is a good memory game and helps them think about every day things that they could get from a shop. Alphabet games, jigsaws and activities can encourage a child to use their knowledge and extend it. 5-8 years old At this age, your child should be attending school full time. Just because their learning and developing at school, doesn’t mean you have to stop! You should continue to play with your children and encourage them to develop physically, intellectually, socially and emotionally. It might be easy to just to sit them in front of the TV or computer. Statistically, Kidshealth. com (1) shows that; â€Å"As kids get older, too much screen time can interfere with activities such as being physically active, reading, doing homework, playing with friends, and spending time with family. † Also kidpointz. com (2) suggests â€Å"ADD or ADHD was 2 times as likely to have been diagnosed in children addicted to video games. † So if you’re going to give your child computer time, you should use learning game websites such as the BBC or ask the school teacher for resources. This will help build intellectual development and also ITC skills of how to use a computer. Before allowing the children, read and teach the children E-Safety and how to stay safe on the internet. You should also monitor what your children are doing on the computer. You should be encouraging your child to develop socially. Although they are communicating with children at their school, you should encourage them to have a social life outside of school too. Arranging play dates or allowing them to join after school clubs or other activities such as a dancing school, gymnastics, karate or swimming. Making these physical activities will increase development even further, and they might even find a hidden talent! At 5-8 years old, children will want to be reading books, even if they can’t and to be read too. When reading a book to a child, the best ones to choose are ones with extended vocabulary. Choose books with a range of new words, good and interesting illustrations and obviously, a good story line. Children will enjoy talking about the book also, so ask them lots of questions and get them to think about the book. Questions such as â€Å"why is that character doing what they’re doing? † Or â€Å"what do you think is going to happen next? † this allows children to develop their thoughts and imagination. This also allows you to assess the child’s understanding of the book, for example if they don’t understand it, you can do more on the story and allow them to learn about it and why. This is good bonding time for you and the child too, so it’s enjoyable for both of you. Another fun activity for 5-8 year old children, that parents, siblings, friends and other family could be involved in, is making dens. Making dens extend a child’s imagination and creativity, by allowing them to think about different objects to use and ways of creating it. Offer them a range of materials to use so they can experiment. This can teach them patience and trial and error. In fact, although you might not realise it, dens can increase a child’s knowledge on a range of subjects. The maths aspect of teaching them measurements and how much they material they need, how big it’s going to be. Their creative development is obviously supported and to extend even further, it could help with knowledge of the world. For example, ask your child to make a tee-pee. And extend their cultural knowledge by explaining and teaching about the cultures that live in huts like what they’ve just made. Or extend it even further by doing it outside in a woodlands area. This makes them think about the natural resources available and how best to do it, using harder, heavier logs for support. Make this a fun day out and take a picnic to share under your den/shelter. Role of the Adult As a parent or guardian for children, you should be involved in playing with your children to encourage development. If adults are involved and engaged in play, it influences the child to be involved too and shows them the value of play. You can have the power to make a difference to your child by teaching them how to play correctly and properly by offering praise and discipline. Supporting your child with praise such as â€Å"you’re playing with that so well! † This can help a child build their self-esteem and feel good about them self whilst playing and having fun. You can just be someone to play with to a child. Acting as a friend and just company whilst they play, accourding to Lindon J. 2001 (3) â€Å"Children often invite adults to join in or may direct them to take a particular action or support play. This is positive reinforcement because you can observe their play whilst they’re having fun and learning. You being there actually encourages social development and their communication. They can pick up words they ask you and are forced into situations where they might have to speak to you such as wanting you to do something. Adults can often model how to play correctly and sensibly. Children will copy adults and try to do things themselves, such as drawing the same thing as you, making the same thing with playdough or role play games like cooking, which they will have seen you do. You can give them instructions to help them with an activity, such as a arts and craft activity that perhaps you’ve found in a book. The childen can’t yet read the instructions so you read it for them, telling them the best thing to do and rephrasing so they can understand. Even doing it with them to make a model for them, allowing them to copy what and how you do the activity. This encourages fine motor skills because it’s an arts and crafts activity, often including scissors and cutting or colouring with a pincer grip. It encourages creative development and imagination. Interlectually, you’re helping them develop their instructions and about the order and general knowledge. However, you could just be there to ensure your Childs safety. Watching over them on a park or play area. The play equipment will encourage their physical aspects of their learning and development as well as intellectually, often having to problem solve such as finding out the best way to get across to a different area, or how best to play with this object. If you take your child to a public area, social skills are improved as they are around children and come into contact with other. Morally, children learn the values of turn-taking and sharing whilst playing in a public area. You also teach them safety regarding how to play correctly as well as giving them independence. This is a good idea for a play date idea or a group activity as you get some socialising done with other parents whilst your children are safely learning and constantly developing through fun. Your child will often come into conflict. This is where you, as a parent, can act as a mediator. You can teach those morals such as sharing, turn-taking and ensure that these are put in place through play whilst ensuring your child is developing socially as well as other aspects that the activity may focus on. You can be involved with your children’s play just as much as they are in different ways; either hands on approach or just a sit back and relax activity. Your children will learn through play with your help as you are the people they look up to and are influenced by the most. And finally, enjoy your children and their company. They won’t be young forever.