How was the Declaration of Independence organized? What practical purpose did this organization serve? What did each part seek to accomplish?
What are the reasons that William Murray, Earl of Mansfield says that Parliament has the right to tax the colonies? Take a position as to whether his arguments were reasonable and justify your stand
Answer:
Part 1: Organization of the Declaration of Independence
The Declaration of Independence is divided into three main parts: the preamble, the list of grievances, and the conclusion.
1. Preamble: The preamble states the reasons why the Continental Congress felt it was necessary to declare independence from Great Britain. It starts with the famous phrase "When in the course of human events" and goes on to explain that it is necessary for the colonies to dissolve their political ties with Great Britain.
2. List of Grievances: The list of grievances outlines the specific complaints that the colonists had against the British government. It includes a long list of abuses and violations of their rights, such as taxation without representation, the quartering of troops in private homes, and the denial of trial by jury.
3. Conclusion: The conclusion asserts the colonies' right to be free and independent states and declares that they are "absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown." It also announces the formation of a new nation, the United States of America.
Part 2: Practical Purpose of the Organization
The organization of the Declaration of Independence served a practical purpose by laying out a clear and concise argument for why the colonies were justified in declaring independence from Great Britain. By starting with the preamble, the document establishes the philosophical basis for independence, while the list of grievances provides specific evidence to support the colonists' claims. The conclusion then wraps up the argument by asserting the colonies' right to self-determination and announcing the formation of a new nation.
Part 3: William Murray, Earl of Mansfield and the Right to Tax the Colonies
William Murray, Earl of Mansfield, was a British jurist who argued that Parliament had the right to tax the American colonies. Mansfield believed that Parliament had the power to tax the colonies because they were represented in Parliament through their British representatives. He argued that the colonists were "virtually" represented in Parliament, even though they did not have direct representation.
While Mansfield's argument may have been legally sound, it did not take into account the colonists' perspective on the issue of taxation without representation. The colonists believed that they should not be taxed by a government in which they had no direct representation, and they felt that they were being denied their basic rights as English citizens.
In my opinion, Mansfield's arguments were not reasonable because they ignored the colonists' legitimate grievances and failed to take into account the practical realities of colonial life. While the colonists may have been "virtually" represented in Parliament, they had no real say in the decisions that affected their lives and communities. The colonists' objections to taxation without representation were a key factor in the decision to declare independence and establish a new nation based on the principles of democracy and self-determination.
How does individual change, team change, and organizational change play into this case?
What could Daisy have learned through leading change? How could she have achieved better buy-in and institutionalized a faster recruitment process?
What role would a change agent play?
Individual change: Daisy was frustrated in the kind of tactics that were being planned by Elsie. She creates a team of recruiters that are in charge of quickly recruiting the prospects, as opposed to using external agents to handle the entire hiring process. Daisy organised a series of brainstorming meetings with operational managers who needed people, as well as internal and external recruiters at various levels. Daisy's initiatives in this example demonstrate how she has changed herself.
Team change: Daisy divided the hiring procedure into the following phases: identifying prospects, document gathering, initial reviews, interviewing, background and reference checks, offer distribution, and the holding period before the new hire can begin. She chose the ideal time frame for each stage after consulting the team and heavily drawing on the external recruiter's expertise. A project team was formed with an operations manager (Mike), an internal recruiter (Abdel), and an external recruiter (Marissa). They were asked to record the actual timeline for each candidate during the recruitment process, and they all agreed and were eager to try it out. The group got to work on the strategies, which helped to reduce the amount of time needed. Organizational change: The recruitment process took 50 days instead of the 80 days that the team had previously taken after putting the methods that Daisy and her team had set into action. This indicates the company's organisational transformation.
Daisy must have discovered through her experience as a change agent that while some people are absolutely in favour of change and would accept it if it were to occur, others are utterly opposed to it and would never support it. She might have discovered how to deal with opposition to change and what plans need be made for it in order to successfully implement the change. She could have improved buy-in and institutionalised the quicker hiring process by incorporating all of the staff in the change process and giving training to all of the important stakeholders about why the change is necessary.She needs to explain to the stakeholders in the organisation the benefits and drawbacks of the move. As a result, the organization's diverse stakeholders would be more likely to accept the change.
An internal change agent is typically a team member who is knowledgeable about organisation development, behavioural sciences, and human intervention. The fact that internal change agents are aware of the organization's history of change initiatives and social politics is noteworthy in this case. They will work assiduously to build strong connections to strengthen attitudes and cultural views towards change - even after the implementation process is complete. To assist their project, organisations must choose external change agents if they don't have an inside employee with the necessary expertise. Although external change agents offer a different viewpoint, their presence can endanger the current workforce, and their hiring can add a significant cost to long change initiatives.
Learn more about individual, here:
https://brainly.com/question/14060482
#SPJ4
