What Not to Do Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

What Not to Do - Case Study Example Those who asked such burning questions were either pressured to conform to the ‘norms’ or faced limitation of their terms. The other major flaw that contributed to the demise of AHERF was the alliance between the chief executive officer and the chairperson of the board. The board meetings became only staged performances, as if the participants were following a script. The participants were often given huge reports and never enough time to review them. To summarize both the problems, many frauds and financial weaknesses were covered up, investors were kept in the dark about financial standing of AHERF and there were justifications for later acquisitions by AHERF, such as expansion or market presence (Burns, Cacciamani & Clement, 2000). Here are some of the proposed solutions for the problems that AHERF faced. The board structure plays crucial role in the financial and operational wellbeing of any corporate. The articles of incorporation and bylaws serve as guidelines for the board members. The organization of board is not a hard and fast rule, it varies considerably from one board to another (Lockee, 2005). In fact, each hospital must uphold its own ethos and autonomy (Tipping, 1999).The task of the committees is to support the work of the board, (which AHERF did too well). However, support never means bling support for board’s work. The major mistake that AHERF made was when people started ruling board meeting and decisions instead of bylaws defining their roles. The chairperson is the most important member of the board, which delegates tasks and oversees performances, had AHERF done this properly, an alliance between the chair person and the chief executive would not have been possible. The other mistake regarding AHERF’s board meeting is suppressing opinions, twisting and contorting free speech so that it would not hurt the agenda of the chairperson and the chief executive officer. Effective boards are

,Eyes on the Prize, Aint Scared of Your Jails (1960-1961) Movie Review

,Eyes on the Prize, Aint Scared of Your Jails (1960-1961) - Movie Review Example In Alabama, the laws spelt that no white nurse was allowed to practice in public or private hospitals where African Americans were admitted (Delgado 93). Additionally, the bus and train conductors were allowed to direct each passenger to the section designated for his or her race. In Florida, all marriages between a Negro and a white person were forever prohibited (Delgado 93). Federalism is a means of structuring a nation in a way that two or more levels of government have formal power over the same people and area (Delgado 56). For instance, the U.S. Constitution gives the federal government power over issues of national concern while state governments have jurisdiction over issues of domestic concern (Delgado 56). Civil right movement is often perceived as a struggle for federalism since it is responsible for the creation of most controversial issues between the Northern and Southern States. The civil right movement made the Northerners desegregates and creates a basis from which to attack Jim Crow laws at a period when the Southerners advocated for national legislation against segregation laws (Delgado 58). Civil right movements also advocated for the supremacy clause, which includes three items: the Constitution, laws of the national government, and treaties (Delgado 62). Members of civil right movement believed that the 10th Amendment implied that th e national government only had authority over powers specifically assigned by the Constitution (Delgado 62). Civil rights are rights protected and granted by government for its people with the purpose of ensuring fairness, and preventing discrimination in relation to certain attribute of its people (Delgado 130). On contrary, civil liberties are basic rights that are primarily meant for all people in a given country by the constitution or other document of that nation, and are exercised upon citizens without further specificity like freedom of religion or speech, in the U.S. (Delgado 131). Those people who are