Take Home Final Exam Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Take Home Final Exam - Research Paper Example The limits of closeness are defined in one’s life through the relationships that were established. According to Marshall (2003), â€Å"a relationship is the mutual sharing of life between two or more persons† (p. 163). In explaining the nature of relationships, Marshall (2003) actually begun explaining the concept of mutuality, as a crucial facet in defining explicit contribution of knowledge, skills, or abilities to the interaction. One strongly believes that the aspect of mutuality and the class or category of the relationship would define the extent of closeness or intimacy that is applied. For instance, the classes of relationships, as discussed by Marshall (2003) distinguished between instrumental or cooperative, versus social or consummatory (p. 167). Likewise, the characteristics of relationships clearly included aspects of intimacy or closeness; and scope or extent (Marshall, 2003, p. 167). One is convinced that in social or consummatory relationships, there are more opportunities to establish greater intimacy and closeness. Interpersonal relationships that have been effectively established in one’s life include relationships with family members (parents and siblings), peers (friends and acquaintances), special loved ones (third parties who one developed close or intimate relationships with during one’s life span), and colleagues in the work setting. Within these relationships, one could assert leadership skills and related specifically defined limits of closeness, depending on the role in the relationship that is assumed. For instance, within the family circle, one could assume the role of an eldest sibling and therefore evidentenly assume a legitimate power by virtue of one’s position of birth. As such, one could exemplify leadership role as an authority in delegating tasks or in providing guidance and direction to the next siblings. Likewise, the limits of closeness in this type of social relationship is extended on ly insofar as familial bonds are established. Thus, as a sibling and a child to one’s parents, it is expected that there is a comfortable level of closeness where private information are assumed to be known and exchanged only within the members of the nuclear family. At the same token, despite sharing similar information regarding family matters or relevant issues concerning each family member, each member also expects a level of privacy and confidentiality that is still maintained. Thus, although a certain level of closeness and intimacy is a given fact within the family circle, there is still a limit to the closeness in terms of matters pertaining each of the member’s personal life. The role of relationships within the work setting is more challenging in terms of establishing and defining limits of closeness or intimacy. This concept was clearly explained by Marshall (2003) when he asserted that â€Å"leaders are therefore generally advised not to have personal frie nds among their congregation, because such friendships cause problems† (p. 173). Leaders or managers at work are expected to delineate their role as a superior to that of being a personal friend, for instance, to one or two of office colleagues. Any preferential attention or affectionate behavior manifested by the leader to a subordinate could be construed as an action of favoritism and is therefore a violation of the policy of avoiding conflicts of interests. Thus, there should be a limit to the closeness that is exhibited within a work environment to abide by the standards of professionalism, as well as conform to ethical, moral and legal standards. It was therefore appreciated from Marshall’s (2003) affirmation that â€Å"the question of intimacy in personal relationships can be something of a

War in Vietnam Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words - 1

War in Vietnam - Essay Example It is not the actual military defeat that hurt. It was the emotional defeat, the defeat of intelligence, the political defeat, the defeat of calculation, the defeat of the entire plan and purpose of the war that so staggered the nation that it is still trying to come to terms with the questions of the war to which different analysts are providing different answers (Mackubin Thomas Owens). Probably the best person to answer the Vietnam question was Ngo Dinh Diem who capably led the charge of South Vietnam. Like John F Kennedy, Diem too was a Roman Catholic. He successfully kept communism under control, sometimes brutally. However, in the process he angered the Buddhist monks who were part of the majority in Vietnam. He was seen as a protg of the Americans and he behaved like one. Nevertheless, as time went on, he was becoming increasingly isolated because of fears by some including the United States ambassador to Vietnam, Henry Cabot Lodge that he was leading a corrupt regime. The failure of the American intelligence to track the correct course and keep at it grated the final nail to the coffin with a very big hammer. Now the Americans are coming to realize that Diem was not such a bad fellow after all (Mackubin Thomas Owens). Journalists David Halberstam and Neil Sheehan depicted Diem in the most debilitating terms. Their account of Diem was so horrifying and unpleasant that a 1963 congressional mission described them as "arrogant, emotional, unobjective and ill-informed." One cannot fault Halberstam and Sheehan though. They were only faithfully and unwittingly reproducing what was fed to them through obliging Vietnamese sources who were secretly communist agents themselves (Mackubin Thomas Owens). Diem depended on the Americans to carry out his agenda of blocking the communists. He signed a joint communiqu with President Eisenhower condemning communism (Dr. Penelope Nicholson). Diem complemented the policies of the United States quite well in Vietnem. However, the American politicians were not happy with Diem. They did not want a Catholic running amok amidst the predominant Buddhist population. They found fault with his government capturing and killing communist insurgents. They wavered in backing him on long term basis fearing he was increasingly becoming a liability and must be isolated. The fault lines in the American intelligence were undermining a factor that was actually providing them positive results in the war. The intrigue took its toll. Diem was assassinated in a coup by his senior military officers in 1963. Kennedy was unnerved by the assassination of Diem although he approved of the coup. Post Diem After the assassination of Diem the question of leadership haunted Vietnam. Any leader who took up the reins had to have the backing of the Americans. But the policy decisions for Vietnam came from