Assignment 2: stakeholder analysis

Swamped with your writing assignments? We'll take the academic weight off your shoulders. We complete all our papers from scratch. You can get a plagiarism report upon request just to confirm.


Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper

 Assignment 2: Stakeholder Analysis 

Write a five to six (4-6) page paper in which you:

(Note: Refer to Review Question 8 located at the end of Chapter 3 for criteria 1-3. Select two (2) editorials / essays / columns (by staff or freelance writers) on a current issue of public policy from two (2) different publications (large metropolitan or national newspaper such as Washington Post or the New York Times or national magazines such as Newsweek, Time, and The New Republic.)

Visit the online library at http://research.strayer.edu to read these titles.

1.  Apply the procedures for argumentation analysis (located in Chapter 8) to display contending positions and underlying assumptions for the content of Review Question 8.

2.  Determine which arguments are the most plausible. Provide a rationale for your views.

(Note: Refer to Demonstration Exercise 1 located at the end of Chapter 3 for criteria 4-6. Examine Box 3.0 – Conducting a Stakeholder Analysis. Choose one of the following policy issues in the U.S.: gun control, illegal drugs, medical insurance fraud, and environmental protection of waterways, job creation, affordable health care, or Medicare.)

3.  Apply the procedures for stakeholder analysis to generate a list of at least five to ten (5-10) stakeholders who affect or are affected by problems in the issue area chosen for analysis. (Note: Refer to the textbook for a step-by-step process on stakeholder analysis.)

4.  After creating a cumulative frequency distribution from the list, discuss new ideas generated by each stakeholder. (Note: The ideas may be objectives, alternatives, outcomes causes, etc.; ideas should not be duplicates.) Refer to the following video for a reminder on how to calculate cumulative relative frequency: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBX9aNdOYDg.

5.  Write an analysis of the results of the frequency distribution that answers the following questions: (a) Does the line graph flatten out? (b) If so, after how many stakeholders? (c) What conclusions can be drawn about the policy problems in the issue area?

6.  Appropriately incorporate at least four (4) quality sources. A quality source can be either grey literature, such as a news article, or scholarly, such as peer reviewed works. In the case of public administration, government websites are appropriate quality resources. Note: Wikipedia, SparkNotes, and similar websites do not qualify as academic resources. Visit the Strayer University Library at http://research.strayer.edu to conduct research.

Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:

·  Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.

·  Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.

The course learning outcome associated with this assignment is:

·  Evaluate policy outcomes using a variety of methods and techniques.

Grading Rubric Attached

Assignment 2: Stakeholder Analysis 


Due Week 5 and worth 225 points

Write a five to six (4-6) page paper in which you:
(Note: Refer to Review Question 8 located at the end of Chapter 3 for criteria 1-3. Select two (2) editorials / essays / columns (by staff or freelance writers) on a current issue of public policy from two (2) different publications (large metropolitan or national newspaper such as Washington Post or the New York Times or national magazines such as Newsweek, Time, and The New Republic.)

Visit the online library at 
http://research.strayer.edu
 to read these titles.

 

1.      Apply the procedures for argumentation analysis (located in Chapter 8) to display contending positions and underlying assumptions for the content of Review Question 8.

 

2.      Determine which arguments are the most plausible. Provide a rationale for your views.

(Note: Refer to Demonstration Exercise 1 located at the end of Chapter 3 for criteria 4-6. Examine Box 3.0 – Conducting a Stakeholder Analysis. Choose one of the following policy issues in the U.S.: gun control, illegal drugs, medical insurance fraud, and environmental protection of waterways, job creation, affordable health care, or Medicare.)

 

3.      Apply the procedures for stakeholder analysis to generate a list of at least five to ten (5-10) stakeholders who affect or are affected by problems in the issue area chosen for analysis. (Note: Refer to the textbook for a step-by-step process on stakeholder analysis.)

 

4.      After creating a cumulative frequency distribution from the list, discuss new ideas generated by each stakeholder. (Note: The ideas may be objectives, alternatives, outcomes causes, etc.; ideas should not be duplicates.) Refer to the following video for a reminder on how to calculate cumulative relative frequency: 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBX9aNdOYDg
.

 

5.      Write an analysis of the results of the frequency distribution that answers the following questions: (a) Does the line graph flatten out? (b) If so, after how many stakeholders? (c) What conclusions can be drawn about the policy problems in the issue area?

 

 

6.      Appropriately incorporate at least four (4) quality sources. A quality source can be either grey literature, such as a news article, or scholarly, such as peer reviewed works. In the case of public administration, government websites are appropriate quality resources. Note: Wikipedia, SparkNotes, and similar websites do not qualify as academic resources. Visit the Strayer University Library at 
http://research.strayer.edu
 to conduct research.

Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:

         Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.

         Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.

The course learning outcome associated with this assignment is:

         Evaluate policy outcomes using a variety of methods and techniques.

 

Points: 225

Assignment 2: Stakeholder Analysis

Criteria

Unacceptable
Below 70% F

Fair
70-79% C

Proficient
80-89% B

Exemplary
90-100% A

1. Apply the procedures for argumentation analysis (located in Chapter 8) to display contending positions and underlying assumptions for the content of Review Question 1.
Weight:15%

Did not submit or incompletely applied the procedures for argumentation analysis (located in Chapter 8) to display contending positions and underlying assumptions for the content of Review Question 1.

Partially applied the procedures for argumentation analysis (located in Chapter 8) to display contending positions and underlying assumptions for the content of Review Question 1.

Satisfactorily applied the procedures for argumentation analysis (located in Chapter 8) to display contending positions and underlying assumptions for the content of Review Question 1.

Thoroughly applied the procedures for argumentation analysis (located in Chapter 8) to display contending positions and underlying assumptions for the content of Review Question 1.

2. Rate the assumptions and plot them according to their plausibility and importance. (Refer to Figure 3.16, Distribution of warrant by plausibility and importance.)
Weight: 10%

Did not submit or incompletely rated the assumptions and plotted them according to their plausibility and importance. (Refer to Figure 3.16, Distribution of warrant by plausibility and importance.)

Partially rated the assumptions and plotted them according to their plausibility and importance. (Refer to Figure 3.16, Distribution of warrant by plausibility and importance.)

Satisfactorily rated the assumptions and plotted them according to their plausibility and importance. (Refer to Figure 3.16, Distribution of warrant by plausibility and importance.)

Thoroughly rated the assumptions and plotted them according to their plausibility and importance. (Refer to Figure 3.16, Distribution of warrant by plausibility and importance.)

3. Determine which arguments are the most plausible. Provide a rationale for your views.
Weight:15%

Did not submit or incompletely determined which arguments are the most plausible. Did not submit or incompletely provided a rationale for your views.

Partially determined which arguments are the most plausible. Partially provided a rationale for your views.

Satisfactorily determined which arguments are the most plausible. Satisfactorily provided a rationale for your views.

Thoroughly determined which arguments are the most plausible. Thoroughly provided a rationale for your views.

4 Apply the procedures for stakeholder analysis presented in Box 3.0 Conducting a Stakeholder Analysis to generate a list of at least five to ten (5-10) stakeholders who affect or are affected by problems in the issue area chosen for analysis.
Weight:15%

Did not submit or incompletely applied the procedures for stakeholder analysis presented in Box 3.0 Conducting a Stakeholder Analysis to generate a list of at least five to ten (5-10) stakeholders who affect or are affected by problems in the issue area chosen for analysis.

Partially applied the procedures for stakeholder analysis presented in Box 3.0 Conducting a Stakeholder Analysis to generate a list of at least five to ten (5-10) stakeholders who affect or are affected by problems in the issue area chosen for analysis.

Satisfactorily applied the procedures for stakeholder analysis presented in Box 3.0 Conducting a Stakeholder Analysis to generate a list of at least five to ten (5-10) stakeholders who affect or are affected by problems in the issue area chosen for analysis.

Thoroughly applied the procedures for stakeholder analysis presented in Box 3.0 Conducting a Stakeholder Analysis to generate a list of at least five to ten (5-10) stakeholders who affect or are affected by problems in the issue area chosen for analysis.

5. After creating a cumulative frequency distribution from the list, discuss new ideas generated by each stakeholder.
Weight:15%

Did not submit or incompletely discussed new ideas generated by each stakeholder after creating a cumulative frequency distribution from the list.

Partially discussed new ideas generated by each stakeholder after creating a cumulative frequency distribution from the list.

Satisfactorily discussed new ideas generated by each stakeholder after creating a cumulative frequency distribution from the list.

Thoroughly discussed new ideas generated by each stakeholder after creating a cumulative frequency distribution from the list.

6. Write an analysis of the results of the frequency distribution that answers the following questions: (a) Does the line graph flatten out? (b) If so, after how many stakeholders? (c) What conclusions can be drawn about the policy problems in the issue area?
Weight:15%

Did not submit or incompletely wrote an analysis of the results of the frequency distribution that answers the following questions: (a) Does the line graph flatten out? (b) If so, after how many stakeholders? (c) What conclusions can be drawn about the policy problems in the issue area?

Partially wrote an analysis of the results of the frequency distribution that answers the following questions: (a) Does the line graph flatten out? (b) If so, after how many stakeholders? (c) What conclusions can be drawn about the policy problems in the issue area?

Satisfactorily wrote an analysis of the results of the frequency distribution that answers the following questions: (a) Does the line graph flatten out? (b) If so, after how many stakeholders? (c) What conclusions can be drawn about the policy problems in the issue area?

Thoroughly wrote an analysis of the results of the frequency distribution that answers the following questions: (a) Does the line graph flatten out? (b) If so, after how many stakeholders? (c) What conclusions can be drawn about the policy problems in the issue area?

7. 2 references
Weight: 5%

Does not meet the required number of references

Meets the required number of references; some or all references poor quality choices.

Meets number of required references; most references quality choices.

Exceeds number of required references; all references high quality choices.

8. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements
Weight: 10%

More than 6 errors present

5-6 errors present

3-4 errors present

0-2 errors present

Running head: RESEARCH PAPER 1

RESEARCH PAPER 4

Argument Mapping

Students Name

Institution of Affiliation

Authors Note

1. Argument Mapping

The paper analyzes the statement “The U.S. should return to the 55-mph speed limit in order to conserve fuel and save lives.” The article looks at the supporting and opposing side of the need to return speed limit in the US roads (Kockelman & Ma, 2018).

The best way to minimize deaths caused by accidents is by introducing speed limits at appropriate road points. On the other hand speed limits also affects the time taken for professionals such as doctors and engineer when traveling. According to research that has been done before the relationship between vehicle crash and speed is an axiomatic type. After the initial removal of speed limits of 55mph (national maximum speed limit), the number of severe accidents has risen at an alarming rate (Kockelman & Ma, 2018).

Statistical data from the Washington highway safety system has been used to develop a corresponding safety model to be used in predicting the safety levels when the existing speed limits of 55mph are increased to 65mph. this has been found to increase the number of crashed by about three percent with the probability of deaths increased by twenty-four percent. After increasing the speed limit to 65mph the number of high-speed drivers increased at an average speed of 1.7-4.3mph for all the stations. Noncompliance level with new speed limit dropped from 80% to 50%. (Kockelman & Ma, 2018).The portion of vehicles that travel more than 10 mph over this time reduced from 15% and 307 to 3% and 55 respectively as shown in Fig 1 below.

Fig 1: Summarized table

Fig 2: Argument Map

Initially, the 55mph speed limit was enacted because at low speed meant vehicle would use a lesser amount of gasoline at a167000 gallons per day. However for gas-powered vehicles doing an 80mph speed was more economical than 55 saving about $3.20 per ten minutes of driving. According to polls conducted on retaining the 55mph speed limit majority declined it at 595 with the minority supporting the 55mph speed limit policy. Initially, the Congress had though 55mph speed limit would save the gasoline consumption reducing energy requirements. However, it was discovered the savings made were minimal. People touted the speed limit as a way through which deaths could be avoided after realizing it had less financial savings as previously thought. It was made mandatory for all states with heavy fines imposed on those who will not adhere to the policy (Kockelman & Ma, 2018)

One of the ways through which deaths number was reduced on the American highways was by increasing the gasoline prices. This reduced the driving activities as people would prefer to drive on weekends and only during recreational activities. It is also important to note that most of the recreational activities were also reduced by about 25-30%. This was one of the most effective ways the administration found of regulating deaths on the highways (Kockelman & Ma, 2018).

2. Include in the map as many warrants, backings, objections, and rebuttals as possible.

The article is in support of the warrant that the current 55mph speed limit needs to be reduced further. This is because it will help in minimizing the number of road accidents encountered on a daily basis. Secondly, lower speeds would mean less fuel consumption levels of gasoline for the cars (Kockelman & Ma, 2018).

3. Assume that the original qualifier was certainly; indicate whether the qualifier changes as we move from a simple, static, uncontested argument to a complex, dynamic and contested argument. (Note: Refer to Demonstration Exercise 3 located at the end of Chapter 8 for criterion 4.)

Basing on the initially made claim reduction of speed limits from 65% to 55% helps in conservation process of fuel as an energy requirement as well as minimizing on road crashes thereby saving lives on a daily basis (Kockelman & Ma, 2018).

4. Apply the argument mapping procedures presented in Chapter 8 to analyze the pros and cons (or strengths and weaknesses) of the recommendations that the United States should not intervene in the Balkans. (Refer to Demonstration Exercise 3 located at the end of Chapter 8.) (Note: Refer to Demonstration Exercise 4 located at the end of Chapter 8 for criteria 5-7.)

Yugoslavia legacy is an example of requiem of injustice that was obtained through violent means. As opposed to various interpretations that have been done, Balkan model regarding violent instability is not rooted in north ancient hatreds as well as ethnocentrism as other models do. Instead, this violence was an as a product of fears of marginalization both from the internal and external boundaries. Moderating elements in this model have been death with through the help of ethnocentrists political maneuvered. Some of the unresolved questions that further aggravated maligned history include the following, self-determination, sovereignty and nation questions (Mennecke & Markusen, 2017).

On April 1994 a US marine F-18 fighter jet did a battlefield air interjection. the mission was against the Serbian ground forces that were outside Gorazde, Bosnia-Herzegovina. This was the third time the Us used its military power against the Serbians in the Bosnian conflict. Us had failed intervention when it was needed most in the Balkans reinforces when they were required to give a strategic direction on a way out (Mennecke & Markusen, 2017).

The US military could not define its objectives in Balkans due to lack of an appropriate strategic direction it would follow. The military lacked full details of the war and its cause. This resulted in full intervention alongside misguide means of moral support. This intervention had also ignored the nature of war that led to the surrender of impartiality as a requirement of the ways that had been employed by the US government. The US lacked the required calculation strategy before entering into the Bosnian war. This led to an obvious result where there was termination of violence without resolution which undermined western forces credibility. The process also prolonged the suffering through which civilians have exposed an item that had been agreed earlier before intervention should not happen. The ethnic warfare in Yugoslavia was not as a result of past history. It was only due to political manipulation supported by a village-based culture (Mennecke & Markusen, 2017).

There are various reasons for the military that serves as an instrument of political viability and expediency which is Ana overwhelming advantage US military enjoys as a privilege. Relevant intervention requires a better definition of the end state regarding all elements of power that are balanced against the means (Mennecke & Markusen, 2017).



5. Write an analysis of 1-2 pages that use critical thinking to assess the overall plausibility of the claim: “The conflict in Bosnia is somebody else’s trouble. The U.S. should not intervene militarily.”

Clinton’s administration made a decision in August 1995 to provide a decencies intervention in Bosnia. Previously numerous attempts of the government getting involved in Bosnia had failed. The answer to why this happened is complex in nature. It can be explained ate two levels. In the firsts levels, a day to day crisis approach which had characterized Clinton’s administration on Bosnia is strategy had lost its credibility completely. It was evident that the events happening on the ground had forced the administration to seek an alternative solution to Bosnia’s problems (Bacevich 2017).

The second level involved the president who talked to his national security adviser to help in the development of a better-integrated strategy for Bosnia. this process was also to abandon the previously attempted efforts that had terribly failed. This led to developed of new Bosnia strategy targeting to solve the Bosnia issue in 1995 before presidential elections could interfere with the process. This will also help in avoiding a risk-taking behavior when it comes to resolving Bosnia Issue (Bacevich 2017).

As a fact, the Bosnia issues should not in any way have been America’s problem. According to article number 2 of the United Nations Charter, all countries that are members to the body should “settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.” “All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purpose of the United Nations”. The issue of Bosnia should have been handled by the united nations in a peaceful way rather than the US coming to intervene with an excessive force that backfired in the end (Bacevich 2017).

Works Cited

Kockelman, K., & Ma, J. (2018). Aggressive Driving and Speeding. In Safe Mobility: Challenges, Methodology and Solutions (pp. 37-55). Emerald Publishing Limited.

Mennecke, M., & Markusen, E. (2017). Genocide in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In Genocide at the Millennium (pp. 23-42). Routledge.

Bacevich, A. J. (2017). America’s War for the Greater Middle East: A military history. Random House Trade Paperbacks.

Writerbay.net

We offer CUSTOM-WRITTEN, CONFIDENTIAL, ORIGINAL, and PRIVATE writing services. Kindly click on the ORDER NOW button to receive an A++ paper from our masters- and PhD writers.

Get a 10% discount on your order using the following coupon code SAVE10


Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper