Essay on Tragic Flaws in Oedipus the King - 3561 Words

Oedipus the King, Sophocles’ classical Greek tragedy, presents tragic flaw(s) as the cause of the near-total destruction of the life of the protagonist. This essay examines that flaw. In his essay â€Å"Sophoclean Tragedy† Friedrich Nietzsche agrees that there is an â€Å"error† within the protagonist, but refrains from specifying exactly what it is: The most pathetic figure of the Greek theatre, the unfortunate Oedipus, Sophocles takes to be a noble man called to error and alienation in spite of his wisdom, yet called too, in the end, through monstrous suffering, to radiate a magic power rich in a blessing which works even after he passes on. . . . these very actions attract a higher, magical circle of influences which ground a new world†¦show more content†¦In Aristotle’s view, then, Oedipus’ misfortune was directly ocasioned by some serious hamartia. . . . The word hamartia is ambiguous: in ordinary usage it is sometimes applied to false moral judgments, sometimes to purely intellectual error - the average Greek did not make our sharp distinction between the two(18-19). This view of a tragic flaw, moral or intellectual in nature, within the protagonist is not shared by all literary critics. Robert D. Murray, Jr. in â€Å"Thought and Structure in Sophoclean Tragedy† gives a formalist’sperspective on the issue: For the formalists, A. J. A. Waldock answers the moralists with appealing indigantion, in his discussion of the Oedipus Tyranus: We know little of Sophocles’ religion. . . . He believed that there are ups and downs in fortune, and that men are never secure. . . . There is no meaning in the Oedipus Tyrannus. There is merely the terror of coincidence, and then, at the end of it all, our impression of man’s power to suffer, and of his greatness because of this power. Now Waldock’s reaction is surely a needed response to the ultramoralistic notion that Sophocles was driven by an urge to warn his contemporaries that they should not be rash or proud lest a vengeful heaven strike them down. . . .(24-25) Waldock’s interpretation runs counter to that of Charles Segal in Oedipus Tyrannus: Tragic Heroism and the Limits ofShow MoreRelatedThe Tragic Flaws Of Oedipus The King1352 Words   |  6 Pagesbecome their greatest weaknesses. Their strongest traits can turn into their tragic flaws. A tragic flaw is a trait viewed as being favorable to a character at first, but it leads to their later downfall. It was often used in ancient Greek tragedies to show that mankind was susceptible to flaw. This was present in Sophocles s tragedy, Oedipus the King. The protagonist of the tragedy, Oedipus, was not exempt from his own flaws. Oedipus’s traits of excessive pride and desire for knowing the truth wereRead MoreThe Tragic Flaw Of Oedipus The King1310 Words   |  6 Pages The Unfortunate Fate of a Tragic Flaw An individual’s strengths can eventually become their greatest weaknesses. A tragic flaw is a trait viewed as being favorable to a character at first, but it leads to their later downfall. It was often used in ancient Greek tragedies to show that mankind was susceptible to flaw. This was present in Sophocles s tragedy, Oedipus the King. The protagonist of the tragedy,Oedipus, was not exempt from his own flaws. Oedipus’s traits of excessive pride and desireRead MoreOedipus the King: The Tragic Flaws of Oedipus Essay852 Words   |  4 Pagesmarry his mom, and discover it all in Oedipus Rex, Sophocles’ tragedy. Oedipus was so determined to save Thebes from the plague bestowed on them by Apollo. But little did he know that he was the source of it all. His constant reversal of fortune, neutrality, and suffering make him the perfect example of a classic Greek tragic hero. One moment, Oedipus is brimming with hope; the next, he’s sure that he is the killer of his father, King Laius. Every time Oedipus thinks that it can’t possibly be himRead More tragoed Essay on the Tragic Flaws of Oedipus the King (Oedipus Rex)696 Words   |  3 Pages The Tragic Flaws of Oedipus Rex nbsp; At one time in our lives there is a moment that we may think of ourselves as better than someone or something else. There may also be a point when making a decision leads to a great error in judgment. In the play Oedipus Rex, written by Sophocles, both of these characteristics can be seen in the main character. These characteristics are known as tragic flaws. These flaws are known as hubris meaning excess pride, leading to overconfidence, and hamartiaRead MoreOedipus As A Tragic Hero1094 Words   |  5 PagesIn the play Oedipus the King, Oedipus struggles to accept the truth and lets his temper over power him. He can be displayed as a tragic hero. His refusal to accept the truth led to Oedipus’ down fall. A tragic hero, as defined by Aristotle, â€Å"is a literary character who makes a judgment error that inevitably leads to his/her own destruction.† Sophocles’ Oedipus exemplifies Aristotle’s definition of a tragic hero. In the play, Oedipus unknowingly has cursed the entire town of Thebes. He was cursedRead MoreOedipus Rex : The Tragic Hero735 Words   |  3 Pagesa hero must possess a tragic flaw that leads to his or her ruin. An example that backs up this argument is Sophocles’s tragedian play, Oedipus Rex, in which its protagonist was a victim of such fatal flaws that caused ruination in his life. In this case, Oedipus tragic flaws were both his anger and his pride. Furthermore, the fate that Oedipus suffered because of such flaws not only caused his downfall, but also the death of those he cherished. The tragic flaws that Oedipus possessed made fate andRead MoreThe Tragic Hero Of Sophocles Oedipus The King1518 Words   |  7 Pagesaudiences so well. A tragic hero plays the most essential role in this. Tragic heroes can be defined differently for whoever is trying to force a character into the tragic hero mold. However Aristotle, the great Greek philosopher, established an outline of th e requirements a tragic hero has to meet in order to be considered one. These requirements include a downfall, a hamartia, and recognition of said tragic hero’s condition. Oedipus, the protagonist of Sophocles’ play Oedipus The King fits the mold.Read MoreA Comparative of Shakespeares Othello and Oedipus Rex1511 Words   |  6 PagesShakespeare’s Othello and Oedipus Rex In Shakespeare’s work Othello: The Moor of Venice, Othello’s over trusting nature was revealed when his trust in false accusations about his wife Desdemona’s unfaithfulness causes him to kill her and himself, conveying Othello as a tragic hero. Oedipus, the main character in Oedipus Rex, is characterized as a tragic hero when he tries to run away from his fate and finds out that the cause of his fate was his attempt to escape it. Oedipus Rex and Othello share aRead MoreJocasta as a Tragic Hero Essay1222 Words   |  5 Pages2012 Upholding Jocasta as the Tragic Hero What makes a tragic hero? Aristotle lays down groundwork of a tragic hero as being essentially good. They are neither villain nor saint because they have flaws. Several elememts are nevcesary to have a tragic hero, they are the tragic flaw, the reversal, recognition, and hubris. These generally make up the story of the tragic hero, and in the case of Jocasta, the wife and mother of Oedipus in Sophocles’ Oedipus the King, she posses all three. Yet sheRead MoreHamlet vs. Oedipus Essay898 Words   |  4 Pagesby William Shakespeare and Oedipus in Oedipus King by Sophocles In Aristotles literary discourse, Poetics, he discusses his theory of tragedy, wherein he introduces the concepts of tragic flaw or hamartia, which serves as the catalyst for the protagonists downfall or the tragedy of the story to happen. He determines a tragedy as a drama that brings about a sorrowful conclusion, arousing fear and pity in the audience (Roberts and Jacobs, 1998:1189). Tragic stories are identified through

Organisation Culture Free Essays

string(49) " that lie at the heart of the corporate culture\." Introduction Social scientists and researchers delved into the idea of organisational culture as an important component of organisational theory in the past. Brown (1998) identified four different sources of organisational culture which stems from climate research, national cultures, human resources management, and from conviction approaches. This piece of work critically evaluates organisational cultures in the Early Years settings. We will write a custom essay sample on Organisation Culture or any similar topic only for you Order Now The first part looks at the theoretical background to the evolution of organisational culture its importance and types. The second part examines the link between leadership, organisation culture and change management with analysis from experience as an EYP. It also looks at key factors that influence change, problems with change and techniques for implementing change in Early Years settings. The final part is a conclusion and a suggestion of possible measures to effect change in Early Years settings. What is organisational Culture? It is important for one to understand what culture means. The elementary definition is by (Martins and Martins 2003) who defined culture as ‘a system of shared meaning held by members, distinguishing the organisation from other organisations’ Again Arnold (2005, p 625) explains that ‘organisational culture is the distinctive norms, beliefs, principles and ways of behaving that combines to give each organisation its distinct character’. From the above two definitions culture therefore refers to the underlying values, beliefs and codes of practice that makes an organisation what it is. The way of life of that organisation, the self-image of its members, the things that make it different from others, are its culture. Importance of Organisational Culture The main reason for organisational cultures is to stipulate the way of doing things in order to give meaning to organisational life (Arnold 2005). This is important because the staff members need to benefit from lessons of previous members. Organisational culture also determines organisational behaviour by identifying principal goals, work methods, how members should interact and address each other; and how to conduct personal relationships (Harrison 1993) Furthermore, (Brown 1998 p. 89-91) states the functions of organisational culture s follow: * Conflict reduction- A common culture promotes consistency of perception, problem definition, evaluation of issues and opinions, and preferences for action. coordination and control- Because culture promotes consistency of outlook it also facilitates organisational processes of coordination and control * Reduction of uncertainty- Cultural mindset reduces anxiety which makes the work place a simple, choices easier and rational actions possible * Motivation- An appropriate and cohesive culture offers workers a focus of identification and loyalty foster belief and values that encourages workers to perform. Types of Organisational Culture Organisational culture has been classified into different categories by researchers of which the most commonly used one is Handy (1993). He noted four main category of organisational culture namely, power culture, role culture, task culture and person culture. Power culture There are some organizations where the power remains in the hands of only few people and only they are authorized to take decisions. They are the ones who enjoy special privileges at the workplace. They are the most important people at the workplace and are the major decision makers. These individuals further delegate responsibilities to the other employees. In such a culture the subordinates have no option but to strictly follow their superior’s instructions. The employees do not have the liberty to express their views or share their ideas on an open forum and have to follow what their superior says. The managers in such a type of culture sometimes can be partial to someone or the other leading to major unrest among others. Task Culture Organizations where teams are formed to achieve the targets or solve critical problems follow the task culture. In such organizations individuals with common interests and specializations come together to form a team. There are generally four to five members in each team. In such a culture every team member has to contribute equally and accomplish tasks in the most innovative way. Person Culture There are certain organizations where the employees feel that they are more important than their organization. Such organizations follow a culture known as person culture. In a person culture, individuals are more concerned about their own self rather than the organization. The organization in such a culture takes a back seat and eventually suffers. Employees just come to the office for the sake of money and never get attached to it. They are seldom loyal towards the management and never decide in favour of the organization. One should always remember that organization comes first and everything else later. Role culture Role culture is a culture where every employee is delegated roles and responsibilities according to his specialization, educational qualification and interest to extract the best out of him. In such a culture employees decide what best they can do and willingly accept the challenge. Every individual is accountable for something or the other and has to take ownership of the work assigned to him. Power comes with responsibility in such a work culture. Organisation Culture as evidenced in Early Years Setting From the above discussions so far it is eminent that organisation culture is inevitable way of life that can be found in every institution. This section focuses on how organisation culture influences the effective running of nurseries and infant schools in other words, how successful these types of culture mentioned in our earlier discussion positively or negatively affects the day to day running of nurseries. From experience working in Early Years settings each setting has its own culture and way of doing things that enables them to successfully achieve their goals. Research reveals that there is relationship between culture and an organisation’s success. Relating this idea in the context of Early Years Settings one can say that there is a definite relationship between culture and a setting’s success. Deal and Kennedy (1982) argue that culture is the single most important factor that determines the success or failure in an organisation. They identified four key dimensions of culture: * Values – the beliefs that lie at the heart of the corporate culture. You read "Organisation Culture" in category "Essay examples" * Heroes – the people who embody values. * Rites and rituals – routines of interaction that have strong symbolic qualities. The culture network – the informal communication system or hidden hierarchy of power in the organization. Again Peters and Waterman (1982) emphasise on the importance of organisational intangibles such as values and heroes. They suggest a psychological theory of the link be tween organizational culture and performance. According to them ‘culture can be looked upon as a reward of work; we sacrifice much to the organization and culture is a form of return on effort’. From the above researches so far it is evident that culture exists in every organisation including Early Years Settings. The next paragraph describes observation from two organisations I worked as part of my placement. A particular focus is an evaluation of the merits and demerits of these cultures as noticed in these organisations. Organisation 1 Features * Routine planning is done by leader for the next day * Staff follows strictly what has been planned * Staff needs to consult leader at each stage of daily routine there7 * No flexibility * Leader style is autocratic * There is no hierarchy * There are informal groups within who are often friends that â€Å"get on well† with each other therefore sees any new staff as threat. Evaluation Oganisation1 exhibits power culture, part of the reason perhaps been the fact that the leader is the only highly qualified member with the subordinates possessing basic qualification. The merits of this type of culture are it unifies the each one’s effort behind the vision of the leader as everyone strives hard to please the leader. Again it can provide certainty and focus and reduces conflicts and confusion since the leader is the absolute decision maker. The demerits are that, staff turn to give the bosses wishes a priority even if it interferes with a vital decision on individual level. People do not question the leader even if he or she is wrong. Leaders also could break rules and take personal privileges thereby restricting the flow of information to only friends and allies. Furthermore, people are promoted by been loyal to the leader even when they are not competent. Finally because there are informal groups within the organisation with personal interest there is a tendency of rivalry ‘set up each other† attitude among staff in an attempt to please the leader. Organisation 2 Features * Planning and preparation is done as a team * There is some flexibility in routine Leadership style exhibits both democratic and autocratic * There is hierarchy of job roles and specialisation by each member * There is bureaucracy in decision making * Work is controlled by procedures and rules that spells out each member’s role Evaluation A close study of organisation 2 show a role culture one merit of which is the fact that there are clear rules and guidelines th at protects each staff member from exploitation, abusive use of power and position. This in turn provides a sense of security and confidence to staff to carry on their daily duty without any fear or intimidation. Secondly, there are well designed structures in place this enable new staff members to know quickly what to do at what time and when to do this. This further help new members to â€Å"fit well† among existing staff which motivates them to freely interact with everybody. Again staff members do not hold back information but share freely among staff which is necessary for any good teamwork. On the contrary, this type of organisation culture has some demerits. Job roles are strictly defined that it does not enable staff members with special abilities to flourish. In other words, members stick to their job roles as prescribed by the rules. The problem with this practice is that it turns to generate a blame culture among staff. It could lead to individualism depending on the size and spectrum of the setting in that, each department only share among themselves and no one else. Finally it can be difficult for staff to get approval for changes because of bureaucracy and procedures. Staff may give up and stick to their normal roles. As noted by Harrison (1993 p. 34) that ‘it is a sin to exceed one’s authority or deviate from accepted procedures. From the above discussion so far one can say that both cultures have their merits and demerits but overall role culture shows an example of healthy organisational culture as compared to power culture. It is again notable from the evaluation that both of the organisations discussed so far have leaders to direct the affairs. This leads to one important question that needs consideration – d o leaders mould the shape of Early Years Settings or do the settings mould the leaders? The next section critically examines this. Does leadership influence organisational culture? From ordinary point of view and experience as workers we all worked under some form of leadership and most often we end up following leadership directives and procedures. Again we often hear that some leaders are competent and perform brilliantly in one organisation but struggle to make impact when they are moved into another organisation to perform the same level of duty. Similarly we also function effectively when placed into one team but when moved to another team we struggle to understand the routines. The question of whether leadership influence organisational culture would be two sided answer in that both influence each other. As much as good leadership is vital for the success of any organisation so is effective organisational culture essential in putting necessary structures in place for staff members to operate effectively. To support the above notion early research shows that leadership affects organizational form, culture, and practices. Founders of organizations establish the initial culture of their organizations (Schneider, Goldstein, Smith, 1995), and founders and subsequent leaders continue to influence the organizational culture (Schein, 1992). It is therefore notable that in most organisations new leaders try to follow the practices and culture laid down by their predecessors with some improvements. Another dimension of influence can be linked to leader effectiveness and acceptance by staff members. One can therefore say that leader acceptance influences leader effectiveness and leader effectiveness influence leader acceptance. In fact they are interdependent. Furthermore societal cultural values and practices also affect organizational culture and practices. Societal culture has a direct influence on organizational culture, as the shared meaning that results from the dominant cultural values, beliefs, assumptions, and implicit motives endorsed by culture (House, Wright, and Aditya, 1997). Thus, the attributes and behaviours of leaders are, in part, a reflection of the organizational practices, which in turn are a reflection of societal cultures (Kopelman, Brief, Guzzo, 1990). The next paragraphs looks at organisational culture, leadership and how to handle change in Early Years settings. Organisational Culture and Change management in Early Year Settings This part delves into the principles of change management, the key factors that influence change, problems with change and techniques for implementing change in Early Years settings. Organisational change can be a complex process and therefore needs to be handled carefully as pointed out by (Frenkel, 2003) that Organisational change is a process that affects employees at all level in an organisation. Any new policies or changes to introduce could have both positive as well as negative effect. (Schneider amp; Rentsch 1988) also re-iterated that in dealing with the management of organisational culture, it is firstly necessary to identify as fully as possible the attributes of the existing or new target culture — the myths, symbols, rituals, values and assumptions that underpin the culture’. Early Years settings have their own cultures in place as discussed earlier and any attempt to introduce a change or an improvement to the existing cultures could lead to resistance in many forms including overt comments such as ‘we are ok with how we do things’ or ‘Oh here we go again we have been through a lot of changes already which never worked’. In view of this there are a number of factors that influence the process of change. Key influences on the change process One important factor that counts towards the success of change is commitment to change. This is true because change is most likely to be successful if staffs understand the reason for the change and show willingness and commitment. Another factor that influences change can be found in a model by (Herscovitch and Meyer 2002). According to the model commitment to organisational change comprises of three construct: Affective, Normative and Continuance to change. Affective commitment to change is based on the realisation of the benefits associated to change. Normative commitment to change is the sense of obligation an employee feels towards the organisation. Continuance commitment to change is based on the realisation of the fact that there are costs associated to the failure to support the change. All or a combination of these types play are vital factors that influence a change. Furthermore, timing and pace of change can be a crucial influence in making a change successful. This is true when a change agent introduces one thing at a time and takes time to make sure that all recipients embrace the idea and gradually tried and test it. Finally resistance to change is a major factor that influences change. It is important to understand the people who will be involved in the process ie those engaged in it and those who will feel the consequence of it. Resistance to change could happen as a result of breakdown in communication between the change agent and recipient of change or a failure on the part of the change agent to legitimise the change after it has successfully been put in place. Techniques to implementing and managing change as EYP From the earlier discussions it is found out that organisational culture, leadership and change management are interrelated. This section outlines the role of EYP in implementing a successful change to a perceived organisational culture in Early Years settings. The techniques for change below are among numerous suggestions which is adapted from the work of John P. Kotter’s: The 8 steps process of leading Change. Although he explains this in the context of profit making business organisations I believe this can be very useful in the context of leading a change in Early Years Settings. Establishing a sense of urgency This involves discussing crisis and identifying potential threats and opportunities. EYPs as a leader of change should not allow too much complacency from staff – This happens when complacency levels are high for example comments like â€Å"yes we have our problems, but they aren’t that terrible and we’re doing our job just fine† This kind of comments reflects the mind-set of some staff members which might not necessarily be their fault but rather the organisational culture that existed long before some members were employed. The role of an EYP is to always look out for ways of improvement and create a sense of urgency among subordinates. Creating a powerful guiding coalition It is vital for EYP’s to collaborate with key members of staff to lead the change and encourage them to work as a team. This is where leadership plays an important role. A leader of change cannot work in isolation but mobilise specific skilled personnel within to work on aspects of the culture that needs changing. Developing a change vision One of the most common errors in leading a change is underestimating the power of vision. Vision plays a useful role in bringing about successful change by helping to direct, align and inspire actions on the part of large number of people. As a new EYP, it can be challenging when you find yourself among experienced staff that have been on the job for many years. This is where resilience and confidence play a part in getting the vision across. The most important thing is to believe that your vision is accomplishable if you put the necessary procedures in place. Communicating the vision for buy-in Communication is essential for the ideal EYP if any vision is perceived. This problem is what John Kotter described as ‘under-communicating the vision by a factor of 10 (100 or even 1000)’. There are a number of good ideas and that never materialise as a result of poor communication. Communication in this context is not just a matter of assembling staff to announce the vision. It is a matter of seeking opinions and engaging in a dialogue with the recipients of the change in a calm and sensible manner. Occasionally those who resist the change would pretend not to be aware of the vision have no knowledge about it. Your role as a professional should focus on getting the message once again to them and ensure that they understand it. Empowering Broad-based Action Actions should be based on building a sense of community that understands that there is a need for change. This would minimise hindrances to the progress of the vision. As an EYP it is advisable to prevent obstacles to block your efforts in making a contribution to change. New initiatives fail when employees, even though they embrace a new vision feels disempowered by huge obstacles in their paths. Occasionally the obstacles are in people’s head and the challenge is to convince them that no external obstacles exist. One well-placed blocker can stop an entire change process. Generate Short-term wins Failing to create short-term wins will act as a disincentive to some people. Some people will not carry on unless they see a compelling evidence of success. Without this some may give up and join the resistance. As the change takes off, there should be plans in place to track changes in performance then recognise and reward employees involved in the improvement accordingly. Consolidate improvement and produce more change Sometimes we get too excited when a vision takes off and we start hearing success stories such that we end up with declaration of premature victory. As a leader of change it is vital to build on present victory or consolidate the change so that not attempt in any form will collapse it. This is not to say that EYPs should not celebrate success if they achieve their vision, it brings a positive change in their setting which is of course vital as a motivating tool in that it helps achieve self-actualisation. However they should use the early wins to further change systems and structures that would support the vision for good. Institutionalise new approaches Finally when the change has occurred, it is the role of the leader to anchor changes firmly in the corporate culture- two important approaches in anchoring new changes in organisational culture firstly, is a conscious attempt to show people how specific behaviours and attitudes have helped improve performance. When people are left to make their own connections they can easily create wrong links. e. g. Our nursery is rated the first and oversubscribed by parents last year when Irene Attrams was the leader so it must be as a result of her ‘flamboyant and zero tolerance or no nonsense behaviour’, rather than the new ‘every child matters’ strategy that had in fact, made the difference. It is therefore necessary to lay down policies and legitimise them so that all staffs can see which actions lead to success instead rather than the leader. Conclusion What constitutes organisational culture and its perceived role in organisational success are challenged to originate from perceptions of culture. This could be historically-based rooted from the founder’s initial ideas, society of environment in which the setting operate, or a pure influence from the past and present leaders. Change management is one of the challenging aspects of EYPs role couple with the fact that the EYP qualification is still at the stage of full recognition. Nevertheless the role of EYP as a leader of change has become laudable especially with the government’s decision to shift from just a babysitting era into early year professionalism with a set of directives detailing what is seen as best practice. In the current era more emphasis is laid on a set of qualifications as well as personal attributes necessary for leadership in Early Years setting. Researchers however fear that this will make the work of the EYP more mechanistic. For instance (Rike and Sharp, 2008) stated that ‘We prefer to think more in terms of the qualities and ‘professional dispositions’ that can be seen in practice, such as having a caring attitude, valuing early education, reflecting carefully on the way children learn, gaining relevant qualifications and showing a desire to change practice’. Moss, 2010) therefore suggest that they should be seen as dispositions that may be refined and developed by a considered exploration of values, beliefs, attributes, professional and personal heritage and professional competencies. This moves away from the notion of practitioners being seen as ‘implementers’ of policies, competencies and technical skills. The is however an evidence of bright future for the EYPs as leaders and managers of change. In July 2009 a survey was commissioned by CWDC to undertake the longitudinal study of the role and impact of Early Years Professional Status. The research was a three-year investigation of the role and impact of Early Years Professionals on their settings and on practitioners’ career development and aspirations through two national surveys of EYPs and case studies based in 30 early years settings across England. The survey asked practitioners to rate the impact of gaining EYPS across a number of skills, dispositions and understandings drawn from the EYPS standards. These range from developing their own knowledge and skills and those of colleagues through to working with children and parents and their use of observations to assess children’s cognitive and social development. The overall responses are extremely positive across all six areas of the standards. The highest level of agreement (92 per cent) is in the area of their own knowledge and skills development, with lower levels of impact reported in the areas of observing children’s learning (74 per cent) and social development (73 per cent). (Hadfield M. , Waller T. 2011) In view of the above there is remarkable evidence that the EYPs have acquired the highest skills in their own delepment which is necessary to become a leader of change in any setting they find thelselves. Charles Handy’s Model of Organisation culture http://www. managementstudyguide. com/charles-handy-model. htm Charles Handy (Understanding organisations, 4th edition, Penguin Books 1993) http://www. cihm. leeds. ac. uk/document_downloads/new_nla_paper_leadership_and_culture__2_. pdf Arnold, J. 2005. Work Psychology: Understanding Human Behaviour in the Workplace, 4th edition. London: Prentice Hall Financial Times. Brown, A. 1998. Organisational Culture, 2nd edition. London: Financial Times Pitman Publishing. Schneider, B. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology, 40, 437-454. Schneider, B. , Goldstein, H. W. , ; Smith, D. B. (1995). The ASA Framework: An update. Personnel Psychology, 48, 747-783. Schneider, B. ; Rentsch, J. 1988, ‘Managing Climates and Cultures: A Futures Perspective’, in Futures of Organizations, ed. J. Hage, Lexington Books, Massachusetts. Harrison, R. 1993. Diagnosing Organizational Culture: Trainer’s Manual. Amsterdam: Pfeiffer ; Company. Herscovitch L. Meyer J. P. 2002) Commitment to Organisational Change: Extension of a three component model . Journal of Applied Psychology , 87, 474-487. Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press. Schein, E. H. (1992). Organizational culture and leadership: A dynamic view (2nd ed. ). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. House, R. J. , ; Aditya, R. N. (1997). The social scientific study of leadership: Quo vadis? Journal of Management, 23(3), 409-473. Kopelman, R . E. , Brief, A. P. , ; Guzzo, R. A. (1990). The role of climate and culture in productivity. In B. Schneider (Ed. ), Organizational climate and culture (pp. 282-318). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Martins, N. ; Martins, E. 2003. ‘Organisational culture’, In Robbins, S. P. , Odendaal A. ; Roodt, G. (eds), Organisational Behaviour: Global and Southern African Perspectives. Cape Town: Pearson Education South Africa. Rike, C. and Sharp, L. K. (2008) ‘Assessing pre-service teachers’ dispositions: a critical dimension of professional preparation’, Childhood Education, 84 (3): 150–3. Moss, P. (2010) ‘We cannot continue as we are: the educator in an education for survival’, Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 11 (1): 8–19. Kotter J. P. â€Å"Why Transformation Efforts Fail† Harvard Business Review (March-April 1995): 61 Kotter J. P. (1996) ‘Leading Change’ Harvard Business Press Hadfield M. , Waller T. (2011) ‘EYPs are a force for good’ University of Wolverhampton’s Centre for Development and Applied Research in Education. at http://www. nurseryworld. co. uk/news/1051102/Analysis-EYPs-force-good/ . How to cite Organisation Culture, Essay examples

Essential Reference Resource for Exegesis †MyAssignmenthelp.com

Question: Discuss about the Essential Reference Resource for Exegesis. Answer: Introduction: The Bible is written by human beings to record their experiences of getting association of Jesus Christ, or expressing their firsthand accounts. Therefore, it is very comprehensible and possible that there are discrepancies and problems in the Bible. There are different accounts which are of conflicting nature and those which do not match with the accounts of each other (Robertson 2014). The death of Judas has been explained differently in Matthew 27:3 and Acts 1:18. In the first account the person had killed himself by hanging however in the second account the person died by an explosion happening inside his body. In Matthew there was one angel a young man sitting down. However, Luke has portrayed that two men stood by a women and proclaimed resurrection. About the Baptism of Jesus, Matthew and Luke has slightly different way of narration. Also in the narration of Mark and John there was difference of opinion about the time when Jesus was crucified. Therefore, it is to be understood that the various people who had presented the accounts of Jesus were human beings, therefore there can be slight difference in their understandings. The three synoptic Gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke give a vivid description about the life and teachings of Jesus. The three Gospel writers have described the life of Jesus according to their own capabilities and perspectives. The differences of version in the three Gospels have been studied vividly by the Biblical Scholars, some are of the opinion that these cannot be harmonized by the present thinkers and scholars (Schrter and Coppins 2013). Also there are differences in versions of creation, for example GE 1:3-5 On the first day, God created light, then separated light and darkness. GE 1:14-19 The sun (which separates night and day) wasn't created until the fourth day. The human limitations must be given due consideration as explanation to the differences in these accounts. Greetings of the day. I hope this finds you in good health. You had posed your query about whether there are discrepancies and errors in the new Testament. This is in regards to the fact there are different versions of particular events in various Biblical sources. Therefore, you are unsure about the authenticity of the Biblical texts. The answer to this is, there are no errors in the new testament, however there are certain differences of opinion about nature of certain incidents in the Biblical texts. The meaning of this can be explained by stating that the Biblical texts are composed by human beings, who have detailed their own experiences and accounts they have come across, related to Jesus. Therefore, there are some differences in their opinion according to their perception but there are no errors. If the different scriptures are studied carefully it would be found apart from very minor differences most of them describes the life of Jesus accurately. The life of Jesus is to inspire the human kind to follow the path of righteousness and morality. Herod the Great was lived a little before Jesus was born, and he was himself half Jewish as he adopted Jewish lifestyle. The person in order to impress the Roman monarchs started building many architectural wonders including religious centers using Greco-Roman architecture. Most of the architecture were temples which were grand and huge. All these were mainly aimed at pleasing the Roman royals, these did not have any spiritual significance. He also had the objective of bringing more tourists to Jerusalem to increase the wealth, hence he built spectacular architecture. In his vision Jerusalem would be one of the grandest cities which would attract tourists from all over Europe. He did not tolerate any kind of dissent or opposition and killed a number of his wives and sons. Any opposition to his theories were dealt with execution. His kingdom was divided into three parts among his three sons after his death. The three sons who luckily survived from the wrath of their father ruled three separate parts of the kingdom. The idea of God and religion in the Jews philosophy was completely different from what the Romans followed. The Romans had their own deities and several Gods. This was in stark contrast with the Jews idea of 1 God received from the 10 commandments. Therefore, the two ideas often clashed, and though the Romans made concessions to the Jews to come in their country and stay. However, the Jews in order to establish their philosophy of one God often had debates with the Romans in order to convince them of the sin of believing in multiple Gods. The culture and the belief systems of both the communities clashed against each other and this was before the Christian era. The Jews had migrated to Rome from Israel, and in the new place they thrived and became a part of the new land. Judea was administered by Roman general and later on the land was divided into 5 administrative districts. The main point of clash between the two people were the belief system about God. The pagan religions were condemned by the Jews on the ground of their teaching of Moses, who gave them the 10 commandments and one of the main point of conflict was the one true God or the various Gods and Goddesses. Gospel in Christianity is actually the good news and message from Christ. Gospel is the entire of the saving truth as God has passed on it to lost humankind as it is revealed in the person of His Son and in the Holy Scriptures, the Bible. In the Greek New Testament, gospel is the elucidation of the Greek thing euangelion inspiring news, and the verb euangelizo, connoting to bring or report elevating news. Both words are gotten from the angelos, "messenger." In set up Greek, a euangelos was one who brought a message of triumph or other political or individual news that caused joy. That both the thing and the verb are used so comprehensively in the New Testament display how it developed an especially Christian use and highlight because of the brilliant news announced to humankind of salvation and triumph over transgression and passing that God offers to all people through the individual and accomplished work of Jesus Christ on the cross as showed by His reclamation, rising, and session at God's right hand. The four gospels of the New Testament Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are the essential wellspring of information on the life of Jesus. For various reasons introduce day scientists are aware of relying upon them uncritically, yet regardless they do give a keen idea of individuals who were followers and about Jesus himself. The Gospel writers each had their symbols which represented them and their writings and these are known as synoptic Gospels as these contains many same stories. These four Gospel writers are represented as four creatures in various portraits of that era, and they are shown to draw the chariot of God. These four animals are represented as four aspects, like the man as the king of creator, the lion as the king of meat eating, the ox as the king of grass eating, and the eagle as the king of birds. Matthew is symbolized by the man with wings, Mark is represented as Lion with wings, Luke is represented as Ox with wings, John is represented as eagle. In the early Gospel books the four Gospel writers are most of the time represented as the four symbolic animals. The four symbolic animals are placed in four cardinal corners of Jesus Christ. Taylor Herverson states Ancient biography (or a modified form of ancient biography) is the literary type in which these writings were cast by the gospel writers. For more than a century biblical scholars disagreed about the literary style of the gospels. But recently there has been growing and wide acceptance that the gospels are ancient biographies. Rev. Professor Richard A. Burridge's bookWhat are the Gospels? A Comparison with Graeco-Roman Biographyis a major factor in this new understanding (Burridge 2004). The difference between the ancient and modern biographies is in the modern biographies the authors have focused on the changing nature of a mans character and their character development over time. However, in the ancient biographies emphasis has been given on the unchanging character of a person and the high moral grounds on which his or her character is built. Hence I agree with the statement that the Gospels have similarities with the ancient biographies. The character of Jesus is unchanging, he has been equally holy and moral throughout the narrative and as the Son of God he has been placed on the high stage of morality and righteousness. The Gospel writers of Jesus has glorified him as the Messiah and the Gods sent messenger who came to deliver the human kind from their sinful activities. In the verses Mark 4:35 to 4:41, the incident of Jesus calming the wind and the waves of the deep sea is described. The incident which is described in these verses indicate the situation when Jesus had been visiting the sea with some of his disciples on the boat. Soon it was found that large waves were coming and the winds turned very violent. The disciples who were accompanying Jesus were terrified of the sudden turn of incidents. Jesus was lying down on a cushion, and the disciples woke him up in a very afraid tone, the boat would capsize if the situation would prevail. When Jesus woke up he said that the disciples should keep faith and that he was there for them, he calmed the wind down and also the waves were not anymore there. The disciples were in a shock that how Jesus controlled the natural forces. This incident was similar to Moses controlling the ocean. Therefore, the Gospel writers had stated similar incidents like the incidents of the Old Testament (Clements 2012). As Jesus had calmed the storm he is also having the capability to calm the storm of the minds and life of the people who take shelter in him. He is the controller of the natural forces and also the controller of the lives of the people around him. If truly someone takes shelter unto him they will get his protection from the storm of life. The first readers would understand that Jesus is having super natural powers to control the natural forces. Jesus is described as the Son of God in the Biblical texts. Therefore, it is natural that he would be imbibed with powers that are not present in the normal people. He had his abilities to perform miracles. The natural forces used to obey him, and this was repeated several times in many incidents. The Gospels written by the three Gospel writers Matthew, Mark, and Luke are often called as the Synoptic Gospels. The reason of calling them by that name is, they contain many similar incidents and similar narrations about Jesus Christ. The sequences are also similar and the language in which the incidents are expressed are also similar in many ways. Therefore, these Gospels are known as the Synoptic Gospels. The term is derived from the Latin Word Synopsis, which means see all together, in English which can be expressed as looking from the same point of view. The similarity is sometimes intermittently broken by the appearance of incidents that are differently expressed in the Gospels. However overall presentation of the incidents has been similar, and the point of view of looking at the incidents, are also similar. They have all expressed Jesus as the Son of God, and the one who appeared to0 deliver the sinful human kind. The four source hypothesis was developed by Burnett Hillman Streeter in 1924. In this theory it was proposed by that Luke had sourced his matters which did not appear in Marks Gospel from at least two sources which can be stated as Q and L. Matthew also used a source which was distinctive and may be portrayed as M, and he sourced from Q as well. Now it after analysis it can be known that Luke did not come across the source M, and Matthew did not know about the source L. The M source suggests an origin from Jerusalem, whereas the source L is consigned to Caesarea and Q has been seen to be related to Antioch. This is the four source theory as a whole. The view also suggests that the Gospel that came first is the results of traditions of Jerusalem, Antioch and Rome. The theory suggests that the birth narratives and the materials from Mark was added later. The Synoptic problem is the problem of specific relationship between the three Synoptic gospels, and it is based on the enquiries about, which gospel was written when and what are the sources on which they depended when they were composed. The narration of the three synoptic Gospels are very similar, in their tone, in their quotations, and the way they have stated the events during the life of Jesus. The Gospel of Mark may have been the oldest Gospel which was composed, and the later gospels took material from the oldest one. The Lukes Gospel was composed somewhere around 80 AD. The Matthews Gospel was also written at a similar time. The Gospel of Matthew was primarily written for the Jews audience, whereas the Gospel of Luke was composed mainly targeted at the Gentile audience. Matthew had written his the gospel of Matthew was to mainly persuade the Jews that Jesus Christ was the Messiah who was predicted in the Old Testaments. The Gospel was written with a view point that the Jewish audience needs to be convinced about the mission of Jesus Christ. It is often also termed as the Gospel of the Jews. There was no need to explain the prevailing Jewish tradition to the readers by the Gospel, as it is intended for the Jewish audience only. The book has Jesus saying "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel", and also "Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel", therefore the very evident Jewish characteristic of this particular Gospel explains its purpose of being composed for the Jews audience. The Gospel of Luke was purposed for the Gentiles, or the non-Jews. In Mark's gospel, Jesus' first open act is an expulsion (1:23-28). Luke utilizes Mark as his principle source, however he makes Jesus' first open act a sermon (4:16-30). This address originates from Mark (6:1-6), yet Luke relocates it to the start of his gospel (in Mark it happens considerably well along in the story, afterward Jesus has played out various wonders, has ensnared himself in contentions with adversaries, and talked in anecdotes). Unmistakably, this is a deliberate proceed onward Luke's part, and more likely than not been done on the grounds that he needed to feature certain subjects. Precisely contrast Lk 4:16-30 and Mk 6:1-6 to acknowledge how Luke has changed the story. In Luke 4:16-30, the creator clarifies that this specific scene of Jesus' address happens in the place where he grew up of Nazareth, setting up his dismissal from his own kin as significantly all the more stunning and rather sudden (the rejected prophet). Notwithstanding just starting his own gospel with Jesus' discourse, Luke chooses to stretch the plot to an entire 15 verses, when contrasted with Mark's insignificant 5. In his discourse inside the good news of Luke, Jesus peruses specifically from a parchment expressing that The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor. In Johns own words Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah.. While a considerable lot of Jesus' signs were done within the sight of others, the nearness of his pupils is the vital certainty, for it is they who have accepted and been empowered to, by the Spirit, comprehend their centrality and give testimony regarding Jesus and Jesus' observer to the Father. The purpose of John was to mainly instate Jesus as the eternal Soon of God. John's motivation is unequivocally to authorize others to come across the holiness that Jesus has quite recently communicated about, which comes through confidence. The two principal designations for Jesus are Christ and Son of God. The reason (or result; hina can mean either) of this accepting is to have life in his name. The Gospel of John excludes a lot of matter found in the synoptic Gospels, with some shockingly vital scenes: the allurement of Jesus, Jesus' transfiguration, and the establishment of the Lord's dinner are not specified by John. John says no cases of Jesus throwing out evil presences. The Sermon on the Mount and the Lord's petition are not seen in the Fourth Gospel. There are no story illustrations in John's Gospel (most researchers don't respect John 15:1-8 as an anecdote in the strict sense). John likewise incorporates a lot of matter not found in the synoptics. All the matter in John 24, Jesus' initial Galilean service, isn't found in the synoptics. Earlier visits of Jesus to Jerusalem before the energy week are specified in John however not found in the synoptics. The seventh sign-marvel, the restoration of Lazarus (John 11) isn't specified in the synoptics. The broadened Farewell Discourse (John 1317) isn't seen in the succinct Gospels. John's gospel was most likely the last one composed. He was more seasoned. He had most likely been recounting his most loved Jesus stories for as long as he can remember. John recorded his record with the goal that later Christians could hear what he saw, similarly as the congregation had profited from his stories for the duration of his life. He gave an alternate, yet at the same time associated, point of view to the life and demise of Jesus. The other three Gospels are called "synoptic" Gospels, since they cooperated with a "typical view", which is the thing that succinct means. John worked independently with an alternate affair of Jesus. Versus a compelling Gnostic development, which experienced difficulty with Jesus' natural, physical nearness of the celestial, John underscored the truth of the awesome revealer in human experience: God getting to be human to reclaim us. References and Bibliography: Brown, R.E., 2015.An introduction to the New Testament. Yale University Press. Harris, M., 2017.Prepositions and Theology in the Greek New Testament: An Essential Reference Resource for Exegesis. Zondervan. Robertson, A.T., 2014.A grammar of the Greek New Testament in the light of historical research. Ravenio Books. Schrter, J. and Coppins, W., 2013.From Jesus to the New Testament: Early Christian theology and the origin of the New Testament canon. Baylor University Press. Martens, E.A., 2015.God's design: A focus on Old Testament Theology. Wipf and Stock Publishers. Clements, R.E., 2012.Old Testament theology: a fresh approach. Wipf and Stock Publishers. Moberly, R.W.L., 2013.Old Testament Theology: Reading the Hebrew Bible as Christian Scripture. Baker Academic. Wright, C.J., 2013.Old Testament ethics for the people of God. InterVarsity Press. Schrer, E., Vermes, G. and Millar, F., 2014.The history of the Jewish people in the age of Jesus Christ(Vol. 2). AC Black. Schrer, E., Vermes, G. and Millar, F., 2014.The history of the Jewish people in the age of Jesus Christ(Vol. 2). AC Black. McGrath, A.E., 2016.Christian theology: An introduction. John Wiley Sons. Burridge, R.A., 2004. What are the Gospels?: A comparison with Graeco-Roman biography. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing.