The context of Reward management

The context of Reward management In 1960s and 1970s the main cause behind introducing incentive schemes was to build path of giving workers wages and salaries at a time of government controls (Bowley et al 1982). Due to lack of proper strategy and policies, some of employers gain reduced cost and even below 50% of increased outcomes; in 1980s and 1990s the concept of paying people was changed where worker were paid for their performance rather than attendance; similarly taxation policy was slightly changed as lower rate in income tax(Marchington and Wilkinson, 2005). Payment system has been drastically changed in Britain over the last twenty years and lots of concepts are emerged in relation to compensation and remuneration which are directly in control of management; similarly, in USA, a new concept of payment has emerged under the rubric of the New Pay. This new pattern has great influence on Britains management practice and government as well (White, G and Druker, J, 2000). The new pattern of thinking about New P ay in Britain is reward management (term used by Armstrong and Murlis 1988) has same management concern. Then, these concepts fall upon two ground; 1) rewarding employees for work done and 2) remuneration system to be conditional upon business policy. Furthermore, the interest in reward system concept had been boosted by IPD professional syllabus which includes lots of unit and title on employee reward and a specific text book (Armstrong, M, 1999). The new syllabus by IPD provides higher emphasis on rewarding employees and employees satisfaction towards job. However, this holistic approach of payment has not, to date, reflected in academic literature, where controversy arises between micro-economics literature of labor economists and human resource literature. The former concern was about effect of pay on whole economy and impact on inflation, productivity and employment. Afterward, in contrast, draws both upon the industrial with regulation with employment relationship and organiza tional behavior (White, G and Druker, J, 2000). Now, the existing textbook focused largely realistic than imaginary, which ignore collective bargaining and employee voice, continue to play in lots UKs organization (Armstrong, M, 1999).The parallel employee relation also include title to describe pay bargaining systems (Gennard, J and Judge, G, 1997). Most importantly, the impact of control relation with in the work area and its impact on reward management plans and policies are polished over IPD texts. Core personnel and Development text (Marchington, M and Wilkinson, A, 1966) being an honorable exemption to this approach. Reward management has fascinated increased attention in recent years. Pay structure and system of payment are collectively determined and influenced by context of society in which they implemented (Steven, J, 1996). For most of the work is, in the main, a source of disutility, and they therefore require payment to compensate them for the time they devote to it. (Elliott R.F, 1991) Reward management is not only about money. It is also concerned with those non-financial rewards which provide intrinsic or extrinsic motivation (Armstrong, M and Murlis, H 1988) Reward is about how staffs are rewarded and valued in return of their performance towards organization which may includes both financial and non financial rewards and embrace the plan, policies , strategies, and reward layout prepared by an organization to maintain smooth reward system (Armstrong, M, 2009).It signifies one of the vital factors supporting the employment relationship (Kessler, 2005). It can be defined as fundamental expression of job relationship. It is concerned with the formulation, and implementation of plans and policies to reward employees fairly, equitably and consistently on the basis of their performance. The development, maintenance, designs and implementation of reward system is done to fulfill needs of both organization and employees (Armstrong, M, 2009). Both organizational and employees values are significant for align reward practices (Brown, D, 2001). It can influence a number of human resource policies, processes and practices which have great impact on organizational performance(Lawler, 2000a).It becomes an essential tool to coordinate, communicate and reinforce the organizational goal because it incentivizes staffs to achieve objectives and apply required capabilities and skills supporting them (Brett, S, 2006). As a result employee feels that they are considered as valuable asset of an organization (Jaques, E, 1961). All the organization has their own reward system without that employee would not join, come to work and perform less than they are supposed to perform with the mission statement of organization (Wilson, T, B, 2002). Reward system is a system which contains various interrelated process and activities done effectively in order to fulfill organizational goal and maintain employees value (Armstrong, M, 2009). It consists of monetary reward (Fixed and variable) and non monetary (employee benefits) which together mixed and form total remuneration. The main sections of reward system are process, practice, structure, scheme and procedure. Process includes job evaluation, market rate analysis and performance management, Practice includes financial benefits and non financial benefits provided to employees, Structure describe level of rewarding people on the basis of structure and their performance, Schemes explain financial rewards and incentives provided to employees, Procedure for maintaining system and ensuring that worker work according to standard and value of money. Reward system provides systematic way to deliver positive consequence (Wilson, T, B, 2002). Cost is the vital factor in reward and for service oriented organization, labor cost have important proportion on overall cost; however, lower labor cost doesnt always minimize cost , some time high labor cost leads towards increased turnover because of excellent performance due to motivation(Pfeffer, 1998). The proper implementation of strategic reward management helps to change employees behavior and attitude towards organization due to effective reward strategy; there are number of factors which mix along these type of straight-forward cause effect relationship; therefore, there is high possibility that reward strategy might helps in organizational change (Marchington and Wilkinson, 2005). Reward Issues Boardroom pay has been brought back under the attention after it emerged that CEO of FTSE100 companies receive around  £3.2 m in 2006 where analysis also emphasize that there is narrow gap between American and British pay(The Times, 29 October 2007).Employees of the largest UK companies are ultimately starting to contribute the decent amount of defined contribution and pension; Employers are tends to put much less defined into the defined payment pensions that has largely replace salary scheme for new employees- only 6-7% of salary, Paul Macro, senior consultant with the firm saidà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦approximately 15% of the salary that generally accepted as being the level of contribution needed to provide a decent income in retirement (Financial Times, 14th November 2007). Employee compensation, remunerations and reward (terms that may be used interchangeably in the literature, although compensation tends to predominant US commentary) may be defined as all forms of financial returns and tangible services and benefits employees receive (Milkovich and Newman, 2004:3). Reward Theory Labor Market Theory The term labor market implies that, the struggle on labor in capitalist society where product and services are traded in market; employee tries to spend their labor in maximum best prices and similarly employer bargain to purchase labor in minimum best price (Perkins, J.S and White, G, 2008). Classical labor Market Theory The concepts of constant choice by the groups to effort-reward relationship emphasize classical labor market theory; the demand of labor meets supply of labor exactly where pay will be determine in labor market is known as market clearing'(Black, J, 2002). The only effective policy is to pay what other do (Garhart, B and Rynes, S.L, 2003:15). Fig: According to above figure, the supply of labor is equal to demand of labor where employee will accept the job at the price that offer by employer: it is a value of marginal productivity of labor. This theory explain that there is tough competition among employer in term of paying their employees but finally every employer has to pay same as everyone pays. This theory indicates that paying strategy always leans toward symmetry where demand and supply of labor meets. This model of the employment system address the famous classical economist Adam Smith and its neo classical restatement by other neoclassical economists like: Jevons, Menger and Walrus; every one is free to choose their best price either employees or employers, employee compete with other employee for wages and similarly employer compete with other rivals for labor(Watson, M, 2005). Logically looking for Maximum utility, worker will accept work after comparing overall benefit of different works; thus work that are less satisfying, include more threat and hard to achieve mastery will require higher amount of wages compare to other work whose feature are opposite (Perkins, J.S and White, G, 2008). However, the concept of labor market was changed form middle of twentieth century, number of research indicate that the real situation of labor market doesnt run according to previous assumption given by classical economists; the paying system might effect in market force whereas some economists argues that it needs to remove market distortion'(Garhart, B and Rynes, S.L, 2003). Whether or not, labor supply by employees to employers is not the single economic issues; it is the effort employed by employees when employed (Rees, 1973) Stand as alternative economic theory of classical labor market theory, institutional Labor Economic Theory describes the different wage level and dependent on organizational issue; employees and employers anticipation will be rest on maximizing in their financial concern (Perkins, J.S and White, G, 2008). In term of strategic initiative, higher level executive plan the contract in such a way that it minimizes the economic cost by putting labor satisfaction in effective and efficient ways; in other word, both employees and employers make a decision about work relationship comparing all the economic issues and interest; rationality between both party and their interest and wants remain significant Transaction Cost Theory Assumption (Williamson, O, 1975). Similarly, Resource Based Theory of Firm explains that economic effectiveness and efficiency will be increase through subsidiary scheme to take benefits of organizational resources; employee reward are parallel to HRMs other features a nd is arranged to maintain organizational culture (Kessler, I, 2001; Purcell, J, 1999). Whereas, new institutional approach strategy theory describes the number of political and social issues tackling employees in an organization; organizational system (both internal and external) helps to design better employees reward system (Perkins, J.S and White, G, 2008). Human Capital Theory Human Capital Theory makes an assumption that individuals gather human capital by investing both time and money in training and development, education, and other various opportunities based program in order to increase their efficiency and productivity and as a result employees value to employers (Abercrombie, N et al, 2000). Human Capital Theory (developed by Schultz and Becker in the 1960s) differentiates between expenditure made on human capital and employees consumption; market are for the service of capital, not the reserve capital itself. In order to achieve HRM objectives of motivating employees and get work done through them, manager must balance between cost and skills (Hendry, C, 2003). Exchange Theory explains the relationship between production, employees and employers enter into the contract that employees are willing to accept work and perform their best; similarly, employers are agreed to pay extrinsic rewards and working environment; then employers change hired labor power into labor economic values where employer are likely to invest more in permanent workforce than in temporary workforce (Atkinson, 1984; Kalleberg, 2003). Efficiency Wage Theory According to theory, the managerial policy to gain more efficient employment agreement in medium term; worker will employ their capita; to secure optional work boost pay rate but it cause loss to the employer so, paying higher reward levels is a logical employers reaction in order to hold skilled employees (Perkins, J.S and White, G, 2008). This theory also describes a possible corrective aspect, concentrating on what economists do to labeled soldiering on the part of worker; more optimistically, this theory theoretically introducing a sorting effect'(Perkins, J.S and White, G, 2008). Those organization who needs more and skilled human capital to operate their business use above-market wage levels in order to attract expected employees; where close supervision will be reduced; this relates to Responsible autonomy policy (Friedman, A.L, 1984). Paying above-market reward for skilled workforce might be suitable option than to employ additional supervision; this concept will be attractiv e in case of knowledge workers (Rubery, J, 1997). Principle Agent Theory Principle Agent Theory is also known as Agency Theory with the concept the deferred payment method; it emerged as dominant theory on economics and management in term of pay determination process and results; according to this theory, reward system must be design in the way that it satisfies the employees in term of pay and internal ladder of advancement; employees need full payment of their work and effort in short term, in other hand if job length is long then employees stay beyond the below market rate in early phase of employment (Garhart, B and Rynes, S.L, 2003). This theory emphasize result based deferred reward such as profit sharing, gin sharing, incentive plans, stock ownership etc designed for high level staffs; the size of deferred reward depends upon job complexity; Employees potential total earning and career opportunity will determine the risk sharing behavior of employees (Perkins, J.S and White, G, 2008). Role of employees and employers should be designed effectively t hat it simply explain the characteristics of individual represent that position; thus role theory simply explain how behavior and attitude are socially influence (Perkins, J.S and White, G, 2008). Internal Labor Market Internal labor market where organization search for a constant association with their workforce; structured internal labor market may be created and maintained few or all the employees from external labor force effecting on organizations ability to preserve its worker (Keer, 1954, cited in Hendry, C, 2003). The theoretical construct of the labour marketà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦may be more precisely defined as an administrative unit within which the market functions of pricing, allocating and often training labor are performed. It is governed by the set of institutional rules which delineate the boundaries of the internal market and determines its internal structure. These or administrative hiring and work rules defines the ports of entry into the internal market, the relationship between jobs for purpose of internal mobility, and privilege which accrue to worker within the internal Market (Doeringer, 1967:207, cited in White, G, 2000) In united state, after the First World War the development of internal market emerged where demand of both products for equity from trade union and modern personnel management was emphasized in long-term planning (Cappelli, P, 1995). In contrast, most British entrepreneur didnt build internal labor relation but depends upon market mechanism for obtaining labor (Gospel, 1992). Under ILM, wages and salaries was attached with work rather than employees (Williamson, O, 1975). Workers are rewarded through long-term benefits and advantages rather than monetary reward where pricing and allocation of labor are determined by organizational rules and policies (Garhart, B and Rynes, S.L, 2003). Wage Gap Theory Another neo-institutionalist approach was Wage Gap Theory which indicate the same dominant power exercise by employers on their product market to distribute higher part than the normal profit with the employees and employees commitment towards organization for enduring of production (Heery, E, 2000). Wage rate across six OECD nation remained almost equal and controlling labor quality and effectiveness. (i.e. USA, Canada, Sweden, Australia, Norway and Germany); the wage paid to employees in return of their effort seems less considerable comparing with rate of trade union and collective bargaining (Zweimuller, J and Barth, E, 1992). Criticism of neo institutionalist arguments The practical role of employees reward construction and level of typical social science whether at national level or organizational level; management has required employment relationship on more flexible pattern in order to transfer risk from employer to employee and to facilitate organizational product market or to enhance return on shareholder investment. (Rubery, J, 1997).During 1980-1990, the institutional approach of designing fair wage and arrangement with reward enjoy by employees were reduced, supported by government policies that pay should be based upon organizational ability to pay which reduce the power of trade union and popularity of the collective bargaining (Beaumont and Hunter, 2000) The existing reward determination theory was found ineffective in its overruling importance on stability and mutuality building where as majority of interest is on employment relationship thats why labor market policies should be reconsider; more attention should be given for disputes that profit values are redistributed between organizational stakeholders to privilege economic capital over human capital; the expectation between groups, balance of policies have courageously transfer in the side of management (Rubery, J, 1997). Reward Objectives The success of any reward system fully depends upon clear and concise objectives; the first step in consulting a strategic corridor through the reward jungle is to set achievable objectives, basically, to make employees satisfied and get work done from them is a primary objective of reward system (Brown, D, 2001). Organizations are starting to understand that pay should not de considered in term of particular job and financial results; the compensation should be inextricably being attached to employees, their performance and organizational vision and goals as well as most valuable and important tools for communicate, coordinate and reinforce the attitude and behaviors for results (Flannery et al, 1996). Reward management aims to support the achievement of organizations strategic and operational objectives, helps to communicate, drive and support expected attitude and behavior, promote continuous development, compete in employment market, enhance teamwork, and promote flexibility, gai n fairness and equity (Armstrong, M and Murlis, H, 1998). Similarly, support culture management and change through matching pay and organizational culture as a whole, where as it cannot drive change or lead change process, cannot define change, cannot establish values and cannot establish effective leadership (Flannery et al, 1996). Furthermore, the European study under total rewards underpinned the following as a objectives and themes of rewards: introducing more flexible and changeability reward rather than control oriented and highly structured, market driven rewards, more flexible employee based, focused on variable pay, promoting boarder concept of reward in relation to contribution in their organization, implementing variety of reward tools, involving managers and staffs in those rewards cases and so on(Perrin,T, 1999). Total Reward Reward that include not only traditional, financial component (salary, wage, pay, benefit etc) but also non-financial component (job responsibility and accountability, career opportunities, training and development etc) provided by an organization in order to motivate its employees (Thumpson, 2002). Reward that covers not only tangible pay like pay and benefits, but also intangible factors, such as opportunity to work flexibly, career development, trainings and environment where employees feels respect and valued (Brett, S, 2006). It includes direct as well as indirect and intrinsic as well as extrinsic (Manus and Graham, 2003), which embrace everything that employee values in employment relationship (Oneal,Sandra 1998). The combination of both monetary and non-monetary reward which helps to address every staff whether they want financial or non financial; the tools that are used to attract, retain, motivate and satisfy employee in order to increase efficiency and effectiveness that drive desired attitude in workplace (World Bank, 2000). Total reward is vertically integrated organizational strategy and horizontally integrated with HR strategies to gain internal consistency (Armstrong, M, 2009). The success of totals reward strategy is almost all depends upon monetary and non-monetary rewards provided to employees by employers (Davis, M.L, 2007). an approach to providing a package of reward to employees in the way that optimize employee satisfaction with reward from their work, and which does this in such a fashion that the employees contribution to employer is optimized at an acceptable cost -Vicky Wright, CIPD vice president (CIPD National Conference 2001) It is fairly simple to understand but very complex in operation owing to the wide -ranging implications forà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦..reward management (Richards and Hogg, 2007:4) All the employers available tools that may be used to attract, retain, motivate and satisfy employees, this encompasses every single investment that an organization makes in its people, and everything its employees value in the employment relationship. (World Bank, 2000) The termà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦adopted to describe a reward strategy that brings additional component such as learning and development, together with aspects of the working environment into the benefit package. It goes beyond standard remuneration by embracing the company culture, and is aimed at giving all employees a voice in the organization, with the employers in return receiving and engaged employee performance. (Richards and Hogg, 2007:1) Whistling the initial definition on offer, the relationship might be distinguish between total reward and various thoughts and ideas like employee well-being and psychological contract (Guest and Conway, 2004); similarly, emotionally intelligent leadership (Brown et al, 2006; Goleman, 2002; Palmer et al, 2001); mutual gain'(Bacon and Blyton, 2006); as well as employee involvement program (Cox et al, 2006) and high involvement work practice'(Huselid, 1995) and so on. Therefore, adopting the wide concept of reward, everything that employees get in return of their efforts is total reward (Davis, M.L, 2007). Therefore, the total reward component of World at Work can be summaries as follows: compensation, benefits, work-life, performance and recognition and development and career opportunities (Perkins, J.S and White, G, 2008). In USA, both old and new style organization are taking on board total reward strategy. In other hand, same author comment that too often, when companies talk about total reward they simply mean providing generous benefits and positive workplace. Guaranteeing jobs, supporting an attractive work-life balance, adding benefits and pay- scale, encouraging development and opportunities and making work area appealing all makes poor business sense without understanding the needs of high performance. They also told they feel most existing solutions ignore performance and encourage entitlement (Zingheim, P and Schuster, J, 2000). Transactional (tangible) Rational (intangible) Communal Individual Work Environment Core value of the organization Leadership Employee voice Recognition Achievement Job design and role development( responsibility, autonomy, meaningful work, the scope to use and develop skills) Quality of work life Work-life balance Talent management Benefits Pension Holiday Health care Other perks flexibility Learning and Development Work place learning and development Training Performance management Career development Pay Base pay Contingent pay Cash bonuses Long-term incentives Shares Profit sharing Figure: 2 Towers Perrin model of Total Reward Source: (Armstrong, M, 2009) In the above given figure, upper two boxes (i.e. Pay and Benefit) indicate transactional reward which are financial in nature. In other hand, lower two boxes (i.e. Learning development and work environment) indicate rational reward which are non financial in nature The effective reward is the one which consist of both transactional and rational rewards (Thompson, 2002). The success of organization depends upon its staffs. If staffs are satisfied and loyal towards organization than overall goals can be achieved. However, some business organization fails to motivate their employees in aspect of reward. So, considering the fact, organization should apply both financial and non financial reward (i.e. Total reward). Financial/ Extrinsic Reward Rewards like pay, benefit, salary, incentive are financial or extrinsic reward; various kinds of benefits and perks provided to employees in non-cash as a benefits and helps to motivate employees to perform better, similarly it also shows employers interest in employees well being(Perkins, J.S and White, G, 2008). Non-Financial/ Intrinsic Reward Intrinsic reward can be divided into two parts; Environmental reward and Development oriented reward (Kessler, I, 2001). Environmental rewards are like employees value shown by senior supervisor, managers in work place, sensitivity of supervision and leadership excellence; similarly, development oriented reward are individually targeted to enhance career development and opportunity as well as helps to built sense of accomplishment in employees(Milkovich and Newman, 2004). Intrinsic reward is also regarded as psychological reward which indicate psychological contract in work relationship (à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦.).

Elementary, Middle and Highschool Boy-Girl Relationship Essay

Is it too soon to talk about boy/girl relationships in elementary school? Of course it is, you say! Well, you may not want to hear about it, or you may choose denial over reality, but the fact remains that children are playing out the cultural role that they are being taught as early as 2nd grade. Therefore, the relationship between boys and girls at every school (Christian and non- Christian) is a topic that needs to be discussed from a Biblical standpoint. Recently I have observed an increase in the level of interaction between some of the boys and girls at the elementary school level with the boyfriend/girlfriend relationship in mind. There have been some phone calls made and notes passed, and yet nothing really serious has happened. Even so, the fallout from this kind of interest and behavior has been clearly seen, as some of the kids are rejecting others, breaking off friendships, and making â€Å"who likes whom† a focus of attention. The pattern becomes more sophisticated as it continues in the middle school years and is in full bloom by the time the children hit high school. I would like to attempt to persuade you that the elementary level of â€Å"who likes whom,† and the middle school level of â€Å"who is going out with whom,† are not simply innocent and cute stages of life through which everyone must go. As informed Christians professing to glorify the Lord in all things, we need to see if any of this behavior brings glory to God and evaluate the effects of it on our kids. A brief look at the teen dating model and its consequences will show that it is the world’s model, not Christ’s, that we are so accustomed to. Dating is more for a boy and a girl than just spending time together. It’s a lifestyle that involves attitudes and values. It’s a heart thing! Matthew 22:37 says, â€Å"And He said to him, ‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and wit h all your soul, and with all your mind.’† The first love for our kids is to be Jesus. Our Creator’s plan for our lives is really what we should be directing our kids to focus on; the chief end of man is to glorify God by enjoying Him forever! Romantic male-female relationships are designed by God to be special and singular. The world’s model of dating is one in which you try out many opportunities until you find the one that makes you happy. This type of dating results in a pattern of many broken hearts and bad memories – some of which are detrimental to the intimacy intended for marriage later in life. Interestingly, even the non Christian world is beginning to realize that frequent dating is not healthy. The following are excerpts from an article in the September 8, 2005 Wall Street Journal1 that cites two studies not written from a Christian worldview but nonetheless conclude: * Teens who date a lot don’t have a higher likelihood of developing healthy adult relationships. Instead, their romances in their 20s are likely to be more troubled. * Teens who dated only one or a few people, and formed relationships of more than a few weeks, emerged in their 20s with closer and more-trusting romantic ties than those who had more numerous and fleeting dates. * Unmarried teen girls who settled down with just one partner at 16 or 17- and were still unmarried at 21- are more likely to be eventually married by ages 22-25. Many, including Christians and non Christians, think that dating is just part of the teenage experience. However, putting adolescent boys and girls together leads not only to the emotional experiences that often tear at our children’s hearts but also to sexual experimentation. Think back to your teen years: were you told by a boyfriend or girlfriend in your teen years that he/she loved you? Did he/she eventually marry you? Where did that relationship lead? God wants us to act and think differently. These are matters of the heart. Philippians 1:9-10 says, â€Å"And it is my prayer that your love may abound more and more, with knowledge and all discernment, so that you may approve what is excellent, and may be pure and blameless for the day of Christ.† The goal for most kids in boy/girl relationships is that they are primarily interested in what they are going to get out of the relationship. Sometimes popularity, comfort or pleasure is what a teen gains emotionally or physically. That’s not the kind of love that God would have us live out. That’s choosing what feels good for self rather than what is good for others and pleases God. Parents must be honest and Biblically discerning about the real motivation that lies behind the thoughts and actions of our children. Do love and sincerity motivate the boys in these relationships? Matthew 22:39 says, â€Å"And a second is like it, you shall love your neighbor as yourself.† There is a great book on the subject entitled I Kissed Dating Goodbye, written by Joshua Harris. I have little space here, so I will make a few points and urge you to buy the book. The book is about waiting and preparation, and it debunks and rejects the typical idea of dating and applies a Biblical grid to it. You don’t have to agree with all of his points, but it would behoove you to take a good look at them. Josh Harris says, â€Å"Let’s not do what feels good, but instead do what is good.† He encourages us to look at all of the damage caused by typical worldly dating in the lives of teens and to replace that energy and time with a time of focused preparation for all of life, including preparing for the special relationship of marriage. The book challenges our teens to realize they have no business taking another person’s heart if they are not ready to make a lifelong commitment to that person. He says that if you really love someone, you’ll be interested in that special person’s long-term needs rather than your short-term desires. He exhorts the teen to look at the big picture: serving others and glorifying God. That way, the person is positioned to receive God’s best for them. God has something better for a teen than futile worldly dating! I have two lists for you from the Josh Harris book that are without the further explanation that is needed, but due to lack of space, you’ll just have to get the book to learn more. The seven habits of highly defective dating are: 1. Dating leads to intimacy, but not necessarily commitment. 2. Dating tends to skip the â€Å"friendship stage† of the relationship. 3. Dating often mistakes a physical relationship for love. 4. Dating often isolates a couple from other vital relationships. 5. Dating, in many cases, distracts young adults from their primary responsibility of preparing for the future. 6. Dating can cause discontentment with God’s gift of singleness. 7. Dating creates an artificial environment for evaluating another person’s character. If you are like me, you read those and said amen, I’ve done that before and amen, I see that over and over again. Now here is the refreshing Christian view – five important new attitudes: 1. Every relationship is an opportunity to model Christ’s love. 2. My unmarried years are a gift from God. 3. Intimacy is the reward of commitment; I don’t need to pursue a romantic relationship before I am ready for marriage. 4. I cannot â€Å"own† someone outside of marriage. 5. I will avoid situations that could compromise the purity of my body or mind. Some of you won’t agree. Some of you agree but are saying, â€Å"My child would never go for this.† You are absolutely right. If they have been trained by the world to think like a worldling, they will not want to kiss dating goodbye. But, you are the parent, so†¦.. be the parent! I can’t tell you how often parents tell me what their child will or will not do, so that’s what they (the parents) do. We parents have to take a stand for the Lord and teach the tough things that need to be taught! God will honor that. Some of you are happy that you don’t have teens yet, so you think you don’t have to be concerned. Wrong!!!!!! The reason that we are struggling with our teens and worl dly dating and relationship views isbecause of what they have been taught since Kindergarten. How foolish is it of us parents to allow our child to be taught worldly thinking about male/female relationships and then go to God when our child is 16 years old to beg that He will help our child behave like a Christian when he/she is alone! God will not be mocked! Boys must be taught that they are not to get physical with the girls and that, instead, girls are to be honored and respected. Little things such as holding open a door or helping carry something for a girl are proper and good. The children need to be taught that having an opposite sex relationship is something that is for later in life as you get ready for marriage – something that is also extraordinarily special to people and to God. Boys and girls calling each other on the phone (especially in elementary school) is inappropriate in most cases. We need to teach that people are not possessions that you can trade. Instead, we need to teach them to show real love to one another by helping one another to succeed where they are in life (a student) and to honor God. What are our kids being taught through what they see and hear daily? What are they watching on TV? How about the movies? You and I both know that women are often portrayed as sex objects and trophies. What about at home? Dads, do you treat your wife as the queen of the household? Do your kids see you treating her with great care and affection? Do you realize that everything they see is teaching them how to treat their wives one day? Every year of our lives we are learning and recording permanent records in our minds. I played the worldly relationship and dating game when I was young and things may seem to have worked out OK. My wife and I have been married for 27 years and have a great marriage – but there is more to the story than what you see. Frankly, I am ashamed of many things that I have recorded in my memory regarding male/female relationships from many years ago before I was married. I have prayed that God would remove some of those memories, and He has been gracious, but some remain. In God’s purposes, He often allows us to experience and remember things so we can learn from them and pass the lessons on to others. If you went through the same pattern of worldly dating when you were young, you don’t have to pass it on. You can start afresh with your children. By God’s grace, you have the power to go against the tide of our culture and raise up children who are truly happy and bring glory to God. We have great promises from God that He will be faithful if we will trust and obey Him. I hope that this article has given you some food for thought. Better yet, I hope that you have been convinced that boy/girl relationships in the third, fourth, or fifth grade are yet another battleground for the spiritual struggle for our kids’ hearts. In life, the devil is not kept out of your child’s life by locking a door. We must get after him with all we’ve got and then root out the unbiblical thinking in our kids. 1Shellenbarger, Sue (2005) The Case for Going Steady: Studies Say Teen Dating Habits Affect Marriage Skills. Wall Street Journal, 9/8/2005.

President Kennedy as the person who saved the west from nuclear war Essay

Section 1 The Cold war, which existed between the Soviet Union and the United States following World War ll, and the constant threat of nuclear devastation, which it presented, evolved throughout its history. The relationship between these two super powers was strained at the best, at its worst; it was hostile and came near the unleashing of the devastating nuclear arsenal both countries possessed. The term ‘cold war’ was used first by an American banker relating to the tension between the U.S.S.R and the USA, when he said cold he was referring to the fact that both countries were doing there best to stop direct fighting and for it to become a ‘hot’ war. The reason these two super powers fought were over their ideologies on how to live in each others country where as America was run by Capitalism, this was the system that gave common civilians the right to vote for which ever government party they wanted to run the country it also gave the press freedom of speech where government scandals were hardly censored, unlike The Soviets who ran a one party state consisting of only the Communist party called Soviets, but because most of the soviets were Communist the government was really run by the one party. Also there was mass government run industries like the media as this was run by them, the news was censored strictly throughout covering up any government scandal. The other major difference was the distribution of wealth and the line between the rich and the poor as this was very low in Russia however in the U.S average living standards where much higher as wealth was dispersed more unevenly throughout business Tycoons and their estate s. All these factors lead to nuclear war and the cold war between Russia and America, America was the first to release a nuclear attack and used, the first nuclear atomic bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima, on 6th August 1945 showing the world what lengths America would go to, to win a war. Source 1a A concluding sentence The relationship also evolved over time, and the emergence of Fidel Castro in Cuba was a catalyst for a change in the relationship between these powers. The threat he and his Communist party presented to his American neighbours would change the way the Americans dealt with their Cold War enemies. In the same way, Castro’s Communists also gave Nikita Khrushchev and the Soviets an entrance into North and Central American affairs. Section two Prior to the revolution in Cuba, during Batista’s brutal regime there was a period of time describes as ‘an easing of tensions’ in relationships between the East and the West. These tensions were eased because many of the potential conflicts between Eastern and western sides had been resolved, such as the 1956 Hungarian Revolution. During Batista’s regime as dictator over Cuba the Americans had been its main customer of Cuba’s main resource, Sugar cane, this made relationships between Cuba an America quite friendly and Cuba was full of American influence with Gentlemen’s Clubs, Brothels and Casino’s it was nick named the rich Americans playground, also on the island were strong Mafia connections, yet the police did little to stop them as they could easily be bribed and were often dealing themselves. The easing of tensions and the apparent lack of interest from either of the two cold war powers in aggression against one another would be brought to an end following Castro taking over Cuba in early 1959, but at this time the relationship between Fidel Castro and the Cuban Communist was not entirely clear. During the Cuban revolution that saw Fulgencio Batista’s brutal regime overthrown and come to an end, Castro had been at the fore of the uprising. He sold all the American owned business’s the mere presence of a ‘Communist’ island within 100 miles of the United States drew much attention to Cuba, both to the Soviet Union and their American rivals. The real cold war evolution did not have its beginnings in the working relationship, which was to be established between Havana and Moscow, but rather in the deteriorating relationship between the Cuban capital and Washington. American business interests in Cuba were being threatened by Castro’s policy of nationalisation of lands, and the U.S. was begging to feel that they â€Å"could not ‘do business’ with Castro’s government† this feeling was the reason for the beginnings of an action against the Castro Regime approved by President Eisenhower, and late adopted by John Fitzgerald Kennedy when he was elected to office in November 1960. This program consisted of political action, propaganda and military operations† and was behind the infamous Bay of Pigs invasion, although this program was directed against Cuba it may also have sent another message to the soviet Communists that the Americans were not prepared to tolerate communism so near their own borders. In any case, Source 2b Concluding sentence This policy, a direct reaction to Fidel Castro himself and the communist regime, which he had brought to power, could not have any positive effect on relations between the Capitalist Americans and the communists. The real advantage of Cuba to the Soviets was in the form of gaining leverage in negotiations over Berlin, which was of far more importance to the communist than the small, poor island ruled by Castro. Tensions over Berlin came about after Khrushchev demanded the western powers, which occupied Berlin, evacuate the city. Khrushchev, â€Å"alarmed at the growing military and economic strength of West Germany† otherwise, the soviets would turn the administration of Berlin to the East German government, with which the west had no agreements and under the rule of which the western powers would have no access whatsoever to Berlin. By removing the western influences from the area, Khrushchev hoped to â€Å"Weaken ties between the United States and West Germany and provoke disunity among NATO allies† The NATO powers however did not back down, however there came to be a dà ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½tente over the question of administration of Berlin. This still existed in 1962, and Fidel Castro would prove to be a willing pawn in a move by Khrushchev to gain the upper hand in the negotiations over the administration of Berlin. Prior to the events of 1962, which made up the Cuban missile crisis came the infamous Bay of Pigs invasion, this great American failure showed to which lengths the Americans were prepared to go to remove the influence of Castro and communism from the island of Cuba. On 16th April 1961, 1,300 â€Å"CIA- trained Cuban exiles in American-surplus planes and boats left to invade Cuba and liberate their countrymen† this so called liberation was unsuccessful the Cuban people had been prepared for such an invasion and in fact the Cuban Military forces and Castro himself also knew of the plans of the invasion. One hundred and fifty invaders were killed, the rest taken prisoner and the American attempt to overthrow Castro and his regime had failed. There were several crucial outcomes to this invasion however, all affecting the relationship between the eastern and western powers. The soviets, due to the ability of the island nation to withstand the invasion, became convinced of the value of Cuba in gaining the upper hand over the U.S. enough so that the Castro’s regime would now be â€Å"worthy of a major military and diploma. But while the Soviet Union now considered Cuba a worthy ally, it became evident to Castro that he also needed to pursue a relationship with the Soviet Union for protection because his island was very much within the U.S. sphere of influence. The invasion, while unsuccessful, showed that the Americans were willing to go to great lengths to remove him from office, and at this point, the best solution for Castro appeared to be the pursuit of an alliance with Moscow, directed against his American neighbours. The strengthening of ties between Cuba and the Soviet Union, as a result of this Bay of Pigs invasion, led directly to the Cuban Missile Crisis. As much as that conflict resulted from Khrushchev’s design to take advantage of Cuba’s proximity to the U.S. to install missile sites, it was the American policy towards Cuba, that which sought, by any means necessary, to remove Fidel Castro’s influence over Cuba, which pushed the new Communist allies into each other’s arms. The mere presence of Fidel Castro was responsible for the heightening of tensions between the Soviet Union and John F. Kennedy’s United States leading up to the crisis. There was a strong Soviet presence in Cuba prior to the Cuban Missile Crisis. The sanctions, which followed Castro’s rise to power placed a large burden on the Cuban economy, as the U.S., naturally, had been the island’s primary trading partner. This burden was eased by the Soviets who, in 1960, agreed to buy out Cuba’s U.S. sugar share, and later made the promise to provide ‘necessary aid’ in the case of armed intervention. In fact, United States sanctions against Fidel Castro and his government â€Å"provided the rationale and the catalytic action which accelerate close economic, military and political relations between Cuba and the USSR.† But the gravity of the Soviets economic pursuits in Cuba is far less than the deal made which allowed the Soviets to build missile sites on the island. Due to the deadlock over the Berlin question, Khrushchev felt he needed to gain the upper hand in military might to have his way. Because the USSR was falling behind in the arms race, a creative solution was needed which would achieve equality and the â€Å"cheapest and fastest way †¦ was to install shorter-range missiles on Cuba.† The role of Castro in this affair was to accept the missiles from the USSR, but for his own set of reasons. Castro felt that some protection was needed from the threat of any more American invasions, and the addition of missile sites to his island would strengthen his position considerably. The military installations instilled confidence and would be a tremendous asset given any aggression by the Americans or their Western allies. In any case, both nations had interests in the missiles being installed in Cuba, so Castro gave the plan his blessing. By this time, it had become clear to the Soviets that their high expectations of Castro were warranted, as this revolutionary leader had given them the opportunity they thought they needed to tip the scale in their favour where there real interests lay, Berlin. For someone who had so critical a role in bringing about the Cuban Missile Crisis, Fidel Castro played only the smallest role once it began. When an American U-2 first spotted evidence of the construction of a missile site in Cuba on 14 October 1962, the crisis began. While negotiations to end the crisis were underway between Kennedy and Khrushchev, Castro was left out and â€Å"did not take the exclusion lightly† Castro even went so far as to make a speech, on 23 October 1962, denying that â€Å"either the Cubans or the Soviets would ever consider withdrawing their missiles† While the Soviets and the Americans were negotiating a peace, while still on the brink of launching an all-out nuclear attack, Castro was still trying to extract some political gain from the conflict. He imposed a set of conditions on the removal of missiles from his island, which called for the end of the U.S. blockade of the island, which had resulted when the crisis began, and for the end of subversive acts on the part of the U.S. against Cuba. All of these were ignored when a final agreement was hammered out between the U.S. and the USSR. Castro’s stubborn refusal to admit that he had been the real loser in the entire crisis was brought into focus when he refused entrance into Cuba to UN observers who were to assure that the missiles were dismantled, as had been agreed upon by Kennedy and Khrushchev. Castro’s reaction to his personal failure in the affair would signal the lesson he learned, as he made it known that â€Å"never again in the chess game of power† would his country play â€Å"the docile pawn† While Castro was involved in conflicts in Africa in the 1960s, and supported the communism of Vietnam, his involvement in the Cuban Missile Crisis left the greatest of marks upon relations between the Cold War powers. What Castro may not have realized in all his bitterness over the results of the crisis is that, unwittingly, he had the effect of easing tensions between the U.S. and the USSR. His mere presence and his part in bringing about the crisis were instrumental in beginning a new era in the relationship between East and West. Prior to this point, any move by one side was met by an equally strong move by the other. Under such a system, no peaceful end could be sought to any conflict, only the escalating of tensions to a breaking point. The breaking point in the Cold War was the most undesirable, nuclear conflict, the implications of which were most destructive and grave. Indeed, during the Cuban Missile Crisis, while Castro was dreaming of power and prestige for his native Cuba, the Americans were reportedly minutes away for launching their nuclear arsenal against Russia, and likely the Soviets were in a similar position. But the diplomatic resolution to the problem, in spite of Castro’s designs, represented a turning point in the way problems were dealt with between the United States and their nuclear rivals. In a game of such high stakes, no longer could move be met with countermove because in such a case both would be losers. The value of diplomacy was realized and, in a way, Fidel Castro and his regime were facilitators for this lesson. After the crisis, relations once again eased into detente between the U.S. and the USSR and Castro, standing by his assertion that he would no longer be the pawn for any other, no longer wielded much influence in Cold War politics. And the relations between the two powers eased, that existing between Castro’s Cuba and the USSR grew more strained. These were restored somewhat later, but no longer were they of particular military or international significance. Cuba has continued to be a source of frustration to the United States, but this mainly from an ideological or philosophical point of view. While Cuba â€Å"gradually began to pursue a pro-Moscow course† their alliance with Moscow no longer posed any real threat to America in the way of future military aggression. Through the Cold War, the Americans had developed a great hostility towards anything perceived as being communist, Marxist, or socialist and Cuba has retained this aspect, but to have had any great fear of Castro and what he might do after the resolution of the missile crisis would not have been warranted. Castro’s role in the relationship between East and West, therefore, was played out over a short period of a few years, but on the largest of stages. His initial contribution to the evolution of this relationship was to cause it a large degree of strain. When the revolution of Castro became successful, he infuriated the Americans whose businesses and lands were being revoked by Castro’s policy of nationalization. The U.S. would accept this treatment at the hands of so insignificant a neighbour and launched the Bay of Pigs invasion. The reaction of the Cubans to this was the strengthening of ties with the USSR and inevitably the tensions between the USSR and the U.S. were raised as well. The USSR had one foot in the door, intolerably close to the American border and when the Soviets but this played this strategic card but installing the missile sites, the tensions were raised further. Castro’s role in the evolution of East/West relations ended soon after this point as both the Americans and Russians began to ignore him and pursue their own solutions to the conflict Castro brought about. Because of this exclusion, Castro no longer wielded any influence and faded into the background. Nevertheless, the Americans had been humiliated by seeing an island nation, which they had once dominated fall under the influence of the Russian communists, and this was Castro’s own accomplishment. It brought the prominence and importance to his country, which he desired and did fulfil some of the more immediate goals such as removing the economic stresses placed on his country by the U.S. sanctions. While the new tensions he brought about between the Soviet Union and the U.S. were alleviated following the crisis, Castro undeniably brought the world one step closer to witnessing nuclear war. It could therefore be said of Castro that his role and influence in Cold War politics was twofold. Firstly, it was largely his doing that the two powers came closer to clashing than they had ever come before, and it was largely in spite of him that this clash never took place. Instead, what followed was a detente, which, while still filled with suspicion and mistrust of one another, never again came so close to a boiling point as during the early days of Castro’s regime in Cuba.

Melanie Zoltan - ThoughtCo