Ten tips for high-impact documents - Emphasis

Ten tips for high-impact documents Ten tips for high-impact documents Start with the reader in mind Do they know much about the topic? Do they understand your jargon or acronyms? How important is this information to them? How interested are they in it? (Thats not the same thing.) Be sure of your core message before you start writing. Imagine you are going on TV for a three-minute interview. Could you sum up the value of your topic in three minutes? Write yourself a short statement (fewer than 30 words) that you could use as a memory aid to help you sell your topic to the interviewer. Try using it to clarify your thoughts on the issue while speaking to a trusted colleague. This will all help you keep the main message in mind when youre doing the writing itself. Be sure to make your beginning memorable If you dont grab your reader at the beginning of the document, you are wasting your time. Getting a reader started is the most difficult part of writing, but there are techniques you can use. Try starting with a surprise statement for instance, or contrasting how things were in the recent past with how they are now (in two or three sentences). Go out with a bang Good endings are almost as important as good beginnings. The last thing you want to do is leave the reader with the impression that youve just run out of things to say. Useful techniques are: looking to the future, repeating a major issue or summarising. But be careful with the last one: keep that summary to two or three sentences. Keep it short and simple Write to express, not to impress. (No flowery language.) Good ideas come across much better in plain English. That means: write the person or subject before the verb. The company received the order is better than The order was received by the company. Make your sentence structure logical Say what the sentence is about straight away, before you add extra information. Say whats happening, before you say why. Use graphics where possible We all learn in different ways. Some people like written explanations, while others are more visual and prefer graphics and illustrations. Pictures are therefore a great way of drawing visual people into your document. (Be careful with clip art, though.) So use a graph rather than a table of data, for example. Stick to two fonts Use one serif font (eg Times) for the body text and one sans serif font (eg Arial) for headings and subheadings. E-mail Limit messages to one screen and use attachments for longer messages. Find out more: About High-impact business writing. Call us or email to find out how we can help you improve your business writing.

The Mercury Program essays

The Mercury Program essays This report is going to be based on the NASA Mercury Program. The primary goals of this report is to explain the mission and purpose of the program, to give you an overview of the program, to explain the spacecraft used in the program, and to give flight summaries. Beginning in 1958 and culminating in 1963, Project Mercury was the United States' first man-in-space program. The objectives of the program, which made six manned flights from 1961 to 1963, were clear: To orbit a manned spacecraft around Earth, to investigate man's ability to function in space, and to recover both man and spacecraft safely. These goals and objectives were successfully completed. The true beginning of the effort that would in turn be manned space travel cannot be exactly pinpointed. History tells us that it has been in the minds of people since the beginning of recorded history. One might think that is was in the mind of the first people, but with numerous, strict, guidelines space flight was made a reality in 1961 when Astronaut Alan B. Shepard, Jr. rose into space on the first manned space flight in U.S. history. Although the flight only lasted fifteen (15) minutes and twenty-eight (28) seconds this marked a tremendous milestone in space history, U.S. history and world history. This short flight marked the beginning of a new era. This new era was a tough era but would be one to come to pass no less. The many aspects of this mile-marking program were rigorous. The making and testing of the spacecraft had strict guidelines that had to be followed. The selection process of the noble men that flew in the spacecraft was hard. The selection process started wi th 508 people that were screened. Only 110 men met the minimum requirements and standards. After those men were vigorously interrogated only sixty-nine (69) men arrived in Washington. In March of 1959 the number had decrease to thirty- six (36) men. By the end of March after many test and trials app...

Analysis Paper 2 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Analysis Paper 2 - Essay Example The offstage presence of human society in the poem is an unavoidable reality because the speaker himself belongs to it. The speaker belongs to a society which necessarily requires him to be dutiful and responsible. In fact he has duties and responsibilities to himself and to others. But at the same time, he is also a freewill agent who can choose to shun these duties. Since he is a human being, he can easily be tempted to walk along the evil as well as unconventional path. While walking through the woods, he temporarily becomes tempted by its wildness. This wildness of the woods symbolizes something which is wild, unconventional and evil, and which is not accredited by the society. But though he is temporarily distracted by the wilderness, he finally chooses to perform his social duties and responsibilities. Indeed, the poem is endowed with two levels of meanings: literal meaning and metaphorical meaning. Though literally the poem captures some moments of a horse-ride of the speaker, metaphorically it refers to a man’s prioritization on social responsibilities over the call of the wild. On the surface level, the speaker of the poem says that in a darkest evening of the year he stopped by woods, while travelling to his destiny. He stopped by it because he is attracted by the lovely and mysterious scene of the woods. He watches the â€Å"woods filled up with snow† (Frost Stanza 1). ... In his own words, My little horse must think it queer To stop without a farmhouse near Between the woods and frozen lake The darkest evening of the year† (Frost Stanza 2). In the very beginning of the poem, the speaker provides a sense of remoteness from human society and civilization through the lines, â€Å"Whose woods these are I think I know/His house is in the village, though† (Frost Stanza 1). Here, the imagery of ‘village’ refers to the speaker’s attachment to human society. Though he is amid the wilderness of the woods, he is the representative of the society which he belongs to. The remoteness of the speaker from social bindings is further reinforced when he tells that the owner of the woods â€Å"will not see [him] stopping [there]† (Frost Stanza 1). It means, he is far from the society up to his own will. He is a human being; therefore, he is a freewill agent unlike his little horse who must think his master’s stopping queer w ithout a ‘farmhouse’. Here, the imagery of ‘farmhouse’ also symbolizes the comfort which social life can provide to a man. But since the speaker is a freewill agent, he is easily tempted to revel in the mysterious and lovely wilderness of the woods. While his horse thinks it queer to stop by the woods, he thinks that â€Å"The woods are lovely, dark, and deep† (Frost Stanza 4). The contrast between his reaction and his horse’s reaction to the scenery of the forest rather highlights his existence as a freewill agent. If he wants, he can elongate his stay in the woods. Even he can respond to the call of the wild. He can revel in the joy of exploring the mysterious, unknown and the wild. But he

Organisational Culture Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3500 words

Organisational Culture - Essay Example During the last days of Enron and WorldCom, there was no trace of any organisational culture (Cameron & Quinn, pp. 36-37, 2011). People would go on to establish their own boundaries, rules and approaches and a former employee at Enron labels those days as a â€Å"roller coaster ride at the height of craziness†. On the other hand, employees of companies like Google, Nike, UniLever, Procter & Gamble, Pepsi, Coca Cola, Wal-Mart, Merck, Levis Strauss and others are more likely to know what their companies stand for and what is their way of doing things (Yanow, Ybema & Sabelis, pp. 13-14, 2011). This paper is an attempt to explore the concept of organisational culture, more importantly, with the practical example of Semco, a Brazilian success story. Most of the paper will focus on introducing the company and explaining in culture with different elements of its culture. Furthermore, the paper will also briefly attempt to apply a few models and theories of organisational culture on t he company allowing having a better understanding of Semco’s organisational culture. Discussion Company History and Profile Semco was a small bureaucratic company from Brazil, founded in the year 1953, started off with specializing in the business of manufacturing centrifuges for the vegetable oil industry. During the1960, the company jumped into the business of hydraulic pumps, load pumps, axles and other components for the naval industry, considering the growth of Brazilian naval industry. Antonio Kurt Semler, an Austrian engineer and the founder of the company always wanted his son Richardo Semler to take interest in the company’s operations and take over... This essay stresses that Semco is a fascinating company and what makes it so interesting and attractive is its organisational culture, which is almost one of its kinds. Even as of today, there are many American and European companies which are researching on Semco, trying to understand the real cause of its success and planning to apply its concepts, approaches, theories and models in their organisations as well. Over the past three decades, under the leadership of Semler, Semco has created such an organisational culture, which is exactly in line with the ideas and vision of its founder. This report makes a conclusion that Semco is about realizing the true potential of individuals, helping them in being as creative as possible and doing something different. Even, when the companies, which are highly centralized and extensively controlled by the senior management, want to generate new ideas, be creative, and create something new, they make autonomous teams and allow them to work freely. Semler has just expanded that idea from a few occasional work teams to the entire company. Semco has successfully created an organisational culture, which has the capacity to support the organisational goals of the company. Ironically, the most important goal of the company is not to bind their employees with goals, targets and other managerial â€Å"mumbo jumbo†. Therefore, the company does not need any radical changes in its culture in the near future; however, the company has to ensure that it is also ready for circumstances.

Nursing Philosophy Paper Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Nursing Philosophy Paper - Essay Example In othÐ µr words, it is thÐ µ nursÐ µÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s rÐ µsponsibility to havÐ µ thÐ µ ability to do things for thÐ µmsÐ µlvÐ µs, in a lifÐ µlong lÐ µarning procÐ µss that Ð µnrichÐ µs thÐ µm. ThÐ µ currÐ µnt invÐ µstigation looks at my own nursing philosophy, and how thÐ µ subjÐ µct of transitions is addrÐ µssÐ µd in thÐ µ CCSU modÐ µl, as wÐ µll as othÐ µr subjÐ µcts rÐ µlÐ µvant to my philosophy. Transitions and CCSU ModÐ µl ThÐ µ CCSU modÐ µl statÐ µs thrÐ µÃ µ main goals: prÐ µparing lÐ µadÐ µrs, Ð µncouraging activÐ µ lÐ µarnÐ µrs, and producing collaborativÐ µ practitionÐ µrs. Еach of thÐ µsÐ µ goals is complÐ µmÐ µntary with thÐ µ thrÐ µÃ µ main typÐ µs of transition that arÐ µ idÐ µntifiÐ µd: dÐ µvÐ µlopmÐ µntal, situational, and organizational. DÐ µaling with thÐ µsÐ µ transitions and intÐ µrsticÐ µs, mÐ µans also dÐ µaling with lÐ µgal issuÐ µs of rÐ µsponsibility. Having an Ð µxtÐ µnsivÐ µ nursing backgro und in transitional issuÐ µs is vÐ µry important and it should bÐ µ basÐ µd on sÐ µrving cliÐ µnt or patiÐ µnt nÐ µÃ µds. ThÐ µrÐ µ arÐ µ many Ð µxamplÐ µs of patiÐ µnt nÐ µÃ µds and what thÐ µy want for a good quality of carÐ µ from thÐ µ nursÐ µ, basÐ µd on what kind of illnÐ µss thÐ µy may havÐ µ morÐ µ risk factors for. All patiÐ µnts arÐ µ ablÐ µ to idÐ µntify challÐ µngÐ µs to mÐ µÃ µting thÐ µir nÐ µÃ µds. ... ?quÐ µntly givÐ µn in tÐ µrms of Ð µxamplÐ µs to thÐ µ trainÐ µÃ µ about how thÐ µy would rÐ µspond Ð µthically to common complaints of misconduct through situational analysis. NursÐ µs havÐ µ always usÐ µd a problÐ µm solving approach to providÐ µ carÐ µ to cliÐ µnts. In thÐ µ samÐ µ way a problÐ µm solving approach can bÐ µ usÐ µd for transitional dilÐ µmmas and will incorporatÐ µ thÐ µ transitional thÐ µoriÐ µs (Murphy, 1990, 1). DÐ µscription of own philosophy ChangÐ µ is dÐ µfinÐ µd gÐ µnÐ µrally in rÐ µlation to CCSU goals as wÐ µll as spÐ µcifically to thÐ µ hÐ µalthcarÐ µ fiÐ µld, which is a fiÐ µld that has gonÐ µ through a lot of changÐ µ rÐ µcÐ µntly with MÐ µdicarÐ µ and MÐ µdicaid, HMOs, cost containmÐ µnt, rÐ µform undÐ µr Obama, Ð µtc. ThÐ µ hÐ µalthcarÐ µ organization of today is attÐ µmpting to undÐ µrscorÐ µ its position as a consumÐ µr drivÐ µn organization by strÐ µssing both individual and group insura ncÐ µ options in intÐ µrnal litÐ µraturÐ µ. But at thÐ µ samÐ µ timÐ µ it is a systÐ µm that has changÐ µd and is gÐ µarÐ µd towards cutting costs, so RNs must lÐ µarn to rÐ µact to this changÐ µ in a cliÐ µnt cÐ µntÐ µrÐ µd way to dÐ µlivÐ µr a bÐ µttÐ µr hÐ µalth carÐ µ Ð µxpÐ µriÐ µncÐ µ. My philosophy goÐ µs back to thÐ µmÐ µs mÐ µntionÐ µd abovÐ µ, of adult lÐ µarning and lifÐ µtimÐ µ lÐ µarning for thÐ µ RN. In tÐ µrms of how I fÐ µÃ µl about lifÐ µlong lÐ µarning in rÐ µaction to transition thÐ µory and CCSU objÐ µctivÐ µs, I am a big supportÐ µr of this thÐ µory of lÐ µarning. I think that thÐ µrÐ µ is a clÐ µar Ð µxprÐ µssion of how important lifÐ µlong lÐ µarning is today, whÐ µn comparÐ µd to thÐ µ past, by looking at how many adult studÐ µnts thÐ µrÐ µ arÐ µ in RN training programs. TwÐ µnty or thirty yÐ µars ago this would havÐ µ bÐ µÃ µn a rarity, but today thÐ µrÐ µ arÐ µ rising amounts of nontra ditional adult studÐ µnts and falling amounts of traditional youngÐ µr

Attila the Hun - Short Story Essay Example for Free

Attila the Hun Short Story Essay Why were the military campaigns of Attila the Hun successful? Attila’s military success will be explained through his ability to lure the Romans into war on a pretext whenever the Romans were vulnerable. His motives behind each war was to abstract as much money from the Romans as possible. Also to be explored will be his ability to assert psychological domination over the Eastern Emperor at a time when the two Empires were at peace. Furthermore to be examined will be his ability to portray himself as diplomatic through treaties and embassy consultations between the Romans and the Huns. Also to be looked at will be how successful was Attila’s at creating and seizing opportunities This will be done by looking at Attila’s campaigns in the east and west Roman Empires. After the death of their Uncle Rua 435/6, Attila and his brother Bleda took control of the Hunnic Empire. The two brothers decided to renegotiate the relationship that existed between their Uncle Rua and the Eastern Roman Empire based in Constantinople. The Treaty set up by Rua, stipulated that, the Romans paid him an annual subsidy of 350 lbs of gold. He also demanded fugitives who had fled to the Romans and threatened war if they were not returned. The negotiations took place near the city of Margus in 438. According to Priscus the meeting took place according to both parties’ customs. The Huns would hear what the Romans had to say while mounted on horseback while the Romans discussed the meeting on foot. The Huns dictated the new terms of the treaty, referred to as the Peace of Margus. The Huns decided the annual subsidy was to be raised to the sum of 700lbs. The treaty also fixed that for every Roman captive who had escaped from the barbarians, the Romans must pay eight pieces of gold. The treaty also predetermined that all fugitives must be returned to the Huns. Furthermore the emperor Theodosius was to relinquish any ongoing treaties with enemies of the Huns. Moreover the Huns were to conduct the way the free markets on the northern side of the Danube were controlled. Attila used the markets as a pretext to wage war on the east. The free markets were attacked by Hunnic traders in 441/2 killing Roman merchants during the raid. Theodosius complained that the Huns had violated the â€Å"Peace of Margus†. The Huns reported to the Romans that the Bishop of Margus had crossed over to their territory and robbed their royal tombs. They complained that the Romans had not honoured the Peace of Margus by refusing to return fugitives to them. Additionally, they demanded the Bishop be handed over as well. The significance of these allegations was central to the Huns plan for an attack during the campaigning season. The Romans refused both claims and war was declared. Having successfully provoked the Eastern Romans into a war had been a strategic move by the Hunnic leader. Attila knew the eastern Roman field forces were based in Sicily on a joint expedition with the Western Empire to recapture Carthage from the Vandals led by king Geseric. The North African campaign was partially why Theodosius readily agreed to the treaty of Margus. He thought it would give the east breathing space. Moreover Carthage was crucial to the Western Empire as it provided Rome with grain. Knowing that the east was vulnerable, the Huns would cause carnage throughout the Balkans. Margus was a key city that opened up the Balkans for the Hunnic invasion of the east. The Bishop of Margus defected to the Huns. In return for clemency he handed over the Episcopal city. The Huns swept through the Balkans raising cities to the ground. The key fortified city of Naissus was besieged and taken. Priscus gives an account of the siege. He states â€Å"a large number of [Hunnic siege] engines had been brought up to the wallthe so called rams were brought up alsoA beam is suspended by slack chains†. However, Professor E.A Thompson disputes that the siege occurred and that Priscus borrows heavily on Thucydides’ account of the Battle at Plataea. Professor Thompson states four reasons to argue his point, among them the Huns inept ability to construct such machines and also it is unlikely that the Hunnic archers, who rarely dismounted, would on this occasion have left their horses for a totally alien form of warfare. On the other hand, they may have been quite capable of such construction for it is well documented they had enslaved many tradesmen. As for example in the bath which was made for the Hunnic noble Onegesius by a craftsman who was captured at Sirmium. Nevertheless the Huns ransacked and pillaged the Balkans taking fortified cities along the way such as Viminacium, Illyricum and defeated the Roman army at Chersonese. According to Brian Croke, In 441 the Huns invaded Illyricum only and in 442 broke into northern Thrace . The Romans sued for peace and the Treaty of Anatolius was agreed. Attila terms demanded that the annual tribute be tripled to 2,100 pounds of gold. He also compelled the Romans to surrender all Hun deserters and to ransom their own deserters at a rate of twelve solidi each. The treaty, however, contained one provision that had no precedent. Attila forced the Romans to make an immediate payment of 6,000 pounds of gold. Attila’s plan to force a war to bring about higher subsidies had worked. He would devastate the Balkans for a second time in 447 when he came looking for subsidies that were in arrears. When Atillas second campaign of the Balkans began in 447 he was sole leader of the Huns after having his brother Bleda killed in 445/6. A year later an embassy was sent by Attila to the Imperial court to address the issue of arrears and fugitives. The Romans were now feeling in a stronger position. They had introduced a new law in 443 which insured Military readiness for the Eastern Field forces. They had been strengthened by a recruitment of a large number of Isaurians – traditionally bandits- from the highlands of Cilicia in south-west Asia Minor. Moreover the Eastern army had been forced to return from Sicily after Attila’s first campaign. Attila turned as far south to Thermopylae and then west, ransacking Marcianople, Arcadiopolis, and Callipolis. An earthquake at Constantinople had occurred, Attila decided to turn back. The Imperial City was heavily fortified with triple walls that had been repaired hastily after the earthquake. The legislated Military Readiness law was of little use to the Romans as Attila wreaked havoc on an unprecedented scale. The results were the same as the first campaign, the Romans sued for peace and the second treaty of Anatolius was agreed. More subsides was agreed and a large track of land to act as a buffer zone between the Huns and the Romans was approved. Attila had succeeded at luring the Eastern Empire into war on a pretext to extort more subsidies. He was also adept at asserting his psychological domination, by humiliating the Eastern Emperor Theodosius at Constantinople. Theodosius was humiliated in 449 when his Eunuch Chrysaphius hatched a plot to assassinate Attila. The Plot was unbeknown to the Roman ambassador Maximinus, and his escort Priscus. They were sent to Attila’s camp to discuss issues in the treaty such as the ongoing fugitives case and the issue of the land used as a buffer zone. To give a picture of the devastation Attila caused in the Balkans. Prisucus relates how when travelling to Attila’s court in 449 they stopped at Naissus to pitch tent, he states how the pl ace was littered with bones from Attila’s first campaign. Attila’s refusal to meet the missionaries irritated Maximinus and Priscus. He ordered them to leave then ordered them to stay. Maximinus and Priscus were at a loss to Attila’s behaviour. Maximinus was frustrated and urged Priscus to arrange a meeting with Attila. Priscus succeeded by offering gifts to Onegesius’ brother Scottas to secure them a meeting with Attila. The two missionaries were shocked when it was revealed to them by Attila’s men the purpose of their mission. After nothing left to stay for they departed home despaired. They met their interpreter Bigilas travelling back to Attila’s court whom he had dismissed earlier. When they had initially left Constantinople, Chrysaphius had persuaded Edeco to kill Attila. Edeco had arrived in Constantinople the previous spring as a Hunnic ambassador and was now returning to Attila’s camp along with Maximinus and Priscus. Edeco a faithful and trustful servant to Attila had revealed the details at once. When Bigilas arrived he was immediately set upon by Attila’s men a nd a bag with 50lbs of gold was found in his possession. It was the reward money to Edeco if he had succeeded in killing Attila. Bigilas’ son was threatened with death if he did not come back with another 50lbs of gold. Attila sent his Roman secretary Orestes as a Hunnic ambassador to Constantinople with the empty bag around his neck. His instructions were to ask Theodosius if he recognised the bag. Priscus gives a clear account of the humiliation when he states â€Å"Eslas was to say directly that Theodosius was the son of a nobly born father, and Attila too was off noble descentwhereas Attila had preserved his noble linage, Theodosius had fallen from his and was Attila’s slave bound to the payment of tribute†. Attila had succeeded at psychologically humiliating Theodosius. Furthermore, as the interpreter returned with the 50lb of gold to free his son, Attila had gained more subsidies in the form of 100lbs gold even though the two sides were at peace. Priscus observed an interesting point at Attila’s court. He noticed Attila was asking western ambassadors to hand over a silver plate dealer who resided in Rome, named Silvanus. Attila claimed Silvanus had stolen gold vessels from him. Silvanus maintained he had bought the vessels from Attila’s secretary Constantius. Attila had Constantius crucified and called for the surrender of the Silvanus. The Roman General Aetius refused Attila’s demand. Aetius declared that Silvanus was Constantius’ creditor, despite the fact that he did offer to pay for the price of the vessels he would not hand over the innocent Silvanus. Attila had got his pretext to wage war in the west. Moreover in c.450 a Frankish succession crisis brought about a situation where one claimant appealed to the Huns and the other to the Vatican. In 451 Attila left the Hungarian plains and turned westwards to Gaul. The Hunnic invasion of Gaul was accompanied by allies such as the Rugian, Gepid, Burgundian, Scirian, Thuringian and Franks. They initially swept away defenceless cities such as Metz and Constantine’s’ old Imperial city at Trier. At the city of Orleans they met heavy resistance from the Alans who were in the service of the Romans. Aetius and Theodoric along with several other mercenary tribes manage to lure Attila away from Orleans. The following month was the Battle of Chalons on the Catalaunian fields. The battle of Catulaunian Fields is regarded as one of the decisive battles of the western world. Attila’s army was defeated by Aetius who represented the incapable Western Emperor Valentinian. Both sides suffered heavy losses, the Gothic king Theodoric had been killed in the battle. Aetius advised Theodoric’s’ son Thorismud to return home to defend his claim to the throne, as a result disabling Aetius’ pursuit of the battle against the Hunnic alliance. Attila retreated back to the Hungarian plains to plan his next move. Within a year the Huns were on the move again. The Western Emperor Valentinian’ sister Honoria had been caught having an affair and was bethrothed to another man named Herculanus. She sent her eunuch Hyacinthus to Attila before he entered Gaul offering herself as his wife and half the western Empire as her dowry. She had sent her ring as proof of her commitment. Attila waged war on Italy in 452 on the pretext he was entitled to half the Western Empire. Attila pillaged the wealthiest cities in northern Italy most notably Aquileia and Milan. When he was marching towards Rome papal legend claims Pope Leo persuaded him to abandon his plan and not to attack Rome. More practical issues would be his incompetence in preparing a supply line of food for his huge army. It could also be said the army was suffering from breakouts of various diseases. Furthermore an Eastern Roman General also named Aetius had invaded Attila’s kingdom. Nonetheless, Attila decided to return home to his vast Empire north of the Danube where he died the following year on his wedding night. The Huns had been inadvertently responsible for creating the instability the Western Empire now faced. Attila’s predecessors had forced, Germanic, Alans, Suevi and other tribes into the Empire for sanctuary. In 376 the Romans were beseeched by Goths north of the Danube to be admitted into the Empire who had been retreating under Hunnic Pressure. They had been driven from their lands by the Huns and were now crossing the Danube to reach the Empire. When the Goths were admitted into the Empire during the late fourth century, the authorities gave them food and land to cultivate. The Eastern Emperor Valens viewed them as foedearti and more taxes; this would benefit the army and treasury alike. Moreover the rich landowners would benefit from their labourer. Too many refugees came across for the Romans to count, but it may possibly have been in the tens or hundreds of thousands. Many were dispersed to whether they were needed to stop them becoming a threat to the Empire. The displacement of the Goths by the Huns and acceptance by Emperor Valens is often viewed as the beginning of the end for the Western Roman Empire. The invitation quickly turned to attempted invasion when the Romans in the east suffered their worst defeat in 600 years at the battle of Adrianople in 378. The Goths led by king Fritergen killed the emperor Valens; not until the ninth century would another emperor die in battle. They slaughtered two thirds of the Eastern Roman army. It was a self inflicted wound, near crippling the east. If the Goths had been treated better in the east, they may have helped the Romans face the Hunnic hordes already closing in from the Steppes. Furthermore slightly more than three decades later the Visigoths led by Alaric would sack Rome in 410. These two conquests in the east and west is evident the once mighty Roman Empires glory days were almost at an end. By the time the Huns had turned west from the Hungarian plains into Gaul, the west was already a weakened Empire through lose of land, taxes and military power. By the time of Attila’s arrival the Western Empire was dominated by barbarian tribes. Germanic forces had fought and weakened the empire in northern Gaul. Consequently it seems to have become a patchwork of territories ruled by unrecognised chiefs, leaders whose authority was based upon Roman titles, and barbarian warlords. The tribes were dominant enough to conduct their own foreign policy and more importantly, alliances, without Roman approval. For example Theodoric married his one of his daughters to the heir of the Vandal throne and another to the Suevic king. In Gaul 406, 408, and 411, the Romans had fought among themselves and suffered heavy losses. Supported by the Huns in 425 they suffered further losses at the hands of the Vandals. In 439 Aetius was fighting the Goths in Gaul in and restoring order against local rebels named by Romans as Bagaudae at Aremorica. Geseric took advantage and took Carthage by surprise. Due to the manpower crisis the Empire could not afford to fight on two fronts. To protect Carthage, Aetius had to make peace with the Gothic king Theodoric to free himself in order to fight the Vandals. Aetius had increasingly become heavily depended upon recruiting barbarian allies outside the Empire.. Attila made unsuccessful attempts to extract wealth from the west. Attila’s campaigns can be measured as successful through his tactics, his ability to lure the Romans into war on a pretext. He tended to act diplomatic by negotiating treaties then he would dishonour his own treaty and blame the Romans, Attila repeatedly used the issue â€Å"fugitives† as a case to wage war. Attila’s success can be measured on his achievements through the raising of subsides with each treaty. Attila achieved what he had set out to do from the start and that was to get as much money from the Romans as possible. Attila never wanted to conquer Constantinople or Rome. He wanted to extract as much subsides as he could. The Eastern Empire collected taxes from Egypt to Asia Minor and the Huns had no navy to uphold this lucrative adventure. It was easier for them to collect of the Romans. His successful campaigns were planned strategically. His campaigns can be measured by breaking up an important joint East-West enterprise to save Carthage. This is also the case in the west. He knew it was in a factional position and politically unstable. It was an opportunity Attila Seized upon. Attila campaigns were thought out in advance and sometimes long before the enemy realised. Attila could also be tactful; evident to this was shown hen Attila humiliated Theodosius. [ 1 ]. W. Bayless, The Treaty with the Huns of 443. in The American Journal of Philology, Vol. XCV11, No. 2 (1976), p.178 [ 2 ]. W. Bayless, The Treaty with the Huns of 443., p.177 [ 3 ]. P. Heather, The fall of the Roman Empire: A new history of Rome and the barbarians (USA, 2006), p.301 [ 4 ]. E. Gibbon, (2012-05-12). History of the Decline and fall of the Roman Empire Volume 3 (Kindle Locations 3917-3922). . Kindle Edition. [ 5 ]. P. Heather, The fall of the Roman Empire, p.301 [ 6 ]. W. Bayless, The Treaty with the Huns of 443., p.177 [ 7 ]. E. Gibbon, (2012-05-12). History of the Decline and fall of the Roman Empire Volume 3 (Kindle Locations 3998-4001). . Kindle Edition. [ 8 ]. W. Bayless, The Treaty with the Huns of 443, p.178 [ 9 ]. P. Heather, The fall of the Roman Empire, p.302 [ 10 ]. R. Blockley, â€Å"Dexippus and Priscus and the Thucydidean account of the siege of Plataea†. in Phoenix, Vol. XXV1, No. 1 (1972), p.25 [ 11 ]. R. Blockley, â€Å"Dexippus and Priscus and the Thucydidean account of the siege of Plataea†, p.25 [ 12 ]. W. Bayless, The Treaty with the Huns of 443., pp. 176-179 [ 13 ]. B.Croke, The Context and Date of Priscus Fragment 6. Classical Philology, Vol. 78, No. 4 (Oct., 1983), pp. 297-308 [ 14 ]. W. Bayless, The Treaty with the Huns of 443., pp. 176-179 [ 15 ]. P. Heather, The fall of the Roman Empire, p.302 [ 16 ]. P. Heather, The fall of the Roman Empire, p.302 [ 17 ]. Medieval Sourcebook, â€Å"Priscus at the court of Attila† (http://www.fordham.edu/Halsall/source/priscus1.asp) (30 Nov. 2012) [ 18 ]. Medieval Sourcebook, â€Å"Priscus at the court of Attila† (http://www.fordham.edu/Halsall/source/priscus1.asp) (30 Nov. 2012) [ 19 ]. P. Heather, The fall of the Roman Empire, p.324 [ 20 ]. Medieval Sourcebook, â€Å"Priscus at the court of Attila† (http://www.fordham.edu/Halsall/source/priscus1.asp) (30 Nov. 2012) [ 21 ]. G. Halsall, Barbarians Migrations and the Roman West 376-568 (UK, 2007), p.250 [ 22 ]. P. Heather, The fall of the Roman Empire, p.324 [ 23 ]. G. Halsall, Barbarians Migrations and the Roman West, p.253 [ 24 ]. E.A. Thompson, Romans and Barbarians, p.16 [ 25 ]. G. Halsall, Barbarians Migrations and the Roman West, p.252 [ 26 ]. G. Halsall, Barbarians Migrations and the Roman West, p.252 [ 27 ]. G. Halsall, Barbarians Migrations and the Roman West 376-568, p.254 [ 28 ]. P. Heather. The Huns and the End of the Roman Empire in The English Historical Review, Vol. 110, No. 435 (Feb., 1995), p.11 [ 29 ]. J. Moorhead, The Roman Empire divided 400-700 (UK, 2001), p12 [ 30 ]. E.A. Thompson, Romans and Barbarians: The decline of the Western Empire (USA, 1982), p.16 [ 31 ]. J. Moorhead, The Roman Empire divided, p.12 [ 32 ]. J. Moorhead, The Roman Empire divided, p.62 [ 33 ]. G. Halsall, Barbarians Migrations and the Roman West, p.243 [ 34 ]. G. Halsall, Barbarians Migrations and the Roman West, p.247 [ 35 ]. G. Halsall, Barbarians Migrations and the Roman West, p.245 [ 36 ]. G. Halsall, Barbarians Migrations and the Roman West, p.254 [ 37 ]. J. Moorhead, The Roman Empire divided, p.53

What are groups? Essay -- Communication Skills, Team Work

Groups are collections of people with similar qualities and shared aims coming together to share knowledge and to learn from each other through discussion (Jaques and Salmon, 2007). Through group work (GW) students acquire effective collaborative, problem-solving, teamwork and communication skills. These are key skills required in employment where graduates will often need to work in teams to discuss solutions to problems / tasks. According to Race (2007) the above transferable skills can only be learnt from, and with, other people. Humans are social beings, thus individual learning is seen as a cultural process of participation as a group member interacting and socialising with each other (Maiden and Perry, 2011). Learners were tasked to design a module in groups of five or six in LTM113. Tuckman’s Model (TM) of group development will be used to discuss how GW is employed as a means to achieve the development of a module. TM is used by behaviourist scientist to analyse individual and group behaviour in the workplace, but the realm for Higher Education is that by recognising where a group is in the process, teachers can help steer the group to the desired stage. A brief synopsis of each stage is outlined below, reflecting on my experience in GW. The first stage of TM is Forming where members comes together to form a group, which involves testing limits to identify boundaries of both interpersonal and task behaviours (Tuckman, 1965). My group consists of a heterogenous mix of five lecturers from different faculty, providing mixed academic ability and experience to benefit GW. Participating in self-selection into groups promotes a sense of ownership, but self-selected groups can be subjective to discrimination by... ...eeping a focus on the task enabled the group to effectively reallocate roles, and collective effort helps towards the building of the module. A criticism of TM is that it is linear and observations are qualitative, subjective to bias. Findings cannot be generalised as there is a lack of control of independent variables and inequality in representation (Tuckman, 1965). An argument is that development of groups is not straightforward because human processes are complex. There may be overlap between different stages in TM as when group conflict is fading, feelings of cohesion may be rising. These changes do not occur in a discontinuous, staged-like sequence. Furthermore, groups are constantly forming and changing and they can move to a different stage. For example, when the group was performing, unexpected problems could force the group back to storming.