Assignment 2: Block Business Letter

Due Week 4 and worth 150 points

Steps to Complete Assignment Two: 

1) Consider a professional scenario you have addressed in previous professional settings or are currently dealing with at work or choose one of the professional scenarios provided in Blackboard under the Week 4 tab. 

2) Write a Block Business Letter from the perspective of company management. It must provide bad news to the recipient and follow the guidelines outlined in Chapter 7: Delivering Bad-News Messages in BCOM7 (pages 110-128).

3) In addition to your block email you will use the insert comment box function in Word to add at least 5 comments to your letter that explains why you made the choices you did in your email. For example, you might have a comment box that briefly (1-3 sentences) explains why you chose to use a friendly greeting to an employee who had a broken a rule. If you still have questions about the reflection, do not worry! I will give more examples and provide a sample before this project is due! 

* The message should take the block business letter form from the posted example; however, you will submit your assignment to the online course shell.

The block business letter must adhere to the following requirements:

1. Content:
   1. Address       the communication issue from the scenario.
   2. Provide       bad news from the company to the recipient.
   3. Concentrate       on the facts of the situation and use either the inductive or deductive       approach.
   4. Assume       your recipient has previously requested a review of the situation via       email, letter, or personal meeting with management.
   5. After       completing your email, add at least 5 comment boxes where you reflect on       specific choices you made in your letter. 
2. Format:
   1. Include       the proper introductory elements (sender’s address, date, recipient’s       address). You may create any details necessary in the introductory       elements to complete the assignment.
   2. Provide       an appropriate and professional greeting / salutation.
   3. Single       space paragraphs and double space between paragraphs.
   4. Limit       the letter to one page in length.
3. Clarity /      Mechanics:
   1. Focus       on clarity, writing mechanics, and professional language/style requirements.
   2. Run       spell/grammar check before submitting.

Your assignment must:

• Be typed,      single-spaced within paragraphs/elements and double spaced between the      paragraphs/elements, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch      margins on all sides. Your professor may provide additional instructions.

Submitting your assignment:

• Submit your      assignment through the online course shell only.

The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:

1. Plan,      create, and evaluate professional documents.
2. Write      clearly, coherently, and persuasively using proper grammar, mechanics, and      formatting appropriate to the situation.
3. Deliver      professional information to various audiences using appropriate tone,      style, and format.
4. Analyze      professional communication examples to assist in revision.

  

SOCW 6530 wk 2 peer response

Respond to the blog posts of three colleagues in one or more of the following ways:

• Validate      an idea in your colleague’s post with your own experience.
• Make a      suggestion to your colleague’s posting.

Say hello and peer name each one must be a separate response with name and full reference at the end of each. I have provided each peer blog.

PEER 1: Cheeia Xiong  

An explanation of potential challenges for engagement in field education experience

A potential challenge I have experience during engagement in my field education is language barrier. The clients we serve are Spanish speaking primary and they feel more comfortable with a Spanish speaker. I have found myself unable to connect with them and often rely on a interpretor to translate our conversation. Language barrier is a potential challenge I see in the social work field as well. I currently work for DaVita and we have a clinic with only Vietnamese population. The patients only speak Vietnamese and they do not allow an interpretor to join the conversations. Either you have to speak the language or the patient is non compliant which makes it hard for anyone who is not Vietnamese to engage with them. Another challenge I have experience is trust which results in lack of rappor. It can start from language barrier, however, it is hard to build a rapport with a client when they feel that you don’t understand them. 

An explanation of personal action plans you might take to address engagement in your field education experience

First, I think it is extremely important to have stakeholders and build that partnership. I currently work alongside case managers and when they introduced me such they already have a rapport with the client. One way I have found that work for me is through cultural competent. I go the extra mile to learn about who they are and what they enjoy that way when I am engaging with my clients they feel that I truly care about them. To further elaborate, we knew of a Holiday this client celebrated and I asked if he will be attending the event. He immediately got so excited that I knew about this event and had so much to share. Also another personal action plan I have is to learn basic Spanish, I recently learned how to say “Hi, how are you? I’m doing well.” It surprises the clients and I can immediately tell they start to open up. The last personal action I have for myself is to reach out to my supervisor when I feel that I am unable to engage with my clients. I believe it is important to address it sooner than later. It will also give me advices on how to approach my clients as well. 

Reference: 

Birkenmaier, J., & Berg-Weger, M. (2018). The practicum companion for social work: Integrating class and fieldwork (4th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson. Chapter 2, “Socialization into the Social Work Profession” (pp. 34-61)

PEER 2: David Jones 

An explanation of potential challenges for engagement in field education experience

Engagement is important to connecting and developing interpersonal relationships with clients. The engagement process involves developing a mutual agreement about client goals and the most effective interventions. Engagement is universal to all client and social worker interactions (Tetley, Jinks, Huban & Howells, 2011). When trying to engage clients, challenges can surface. One challenge is language barriers. It can be difficult to build rapport when the client speaks a different language. Another challenge is engaging difficult clients. Some clients are resistant to change. They can be demanding, rude, and hostile. Building relationships with the difficult client also takes more time. Establishing a social worker-client relationship is the best way to engage clients in helping themselves.

An explanation of personal action plans you might take to address engagement in your field education experience

Because engagement is critical to developing interpersonal relationships with clients, it is important to create a plan. The first step in the plan is to build rapport. Rapport is built through respect and building trust. This begins with clear and honest communication. The second step in the plan is to connect with the client. Connections are made through positive interactions (Pope & Kang, 2011). The third step in the plan will be to focus on client goals. I will work with the client to help them problem solve and identify specific life goals. Lastly, I will encourage clients to complete tasks to reach these goals. Engaging client is key to helping them navigate life problems.

References

Pope, N. D. & Kang, B. (2011). Social work students’ attitudes about working with involuntary

clients. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 31, 442-456.

Tetley, A., Jinks, M., Hubans, N. & Howells, K. (2011). A systematic review of measures of

therapeutic engagement in psychosocial and psychological treatment. Journal of Clinical

Psychology, 67(9), 927-941.

PEER 3: Sasha Ritchie 

An explanation of potential challenges for engagement in field education experience:

Some challenges to patient or family engagement to the hospice experience are denial of end-of-life, language barriers, cultural differences, and lack of quality of care (Ingebretsen & Sagbakeen, 2016). Infinity Hospice does its very best to ensure the patient and their loved ones have exceptional support when in hospice services. However, engagement to services are at time lacking from either the patient or their family members. Some factors are there are cultural difference. In each culture the dying experience is a unique process varied in views. This week I had the opportunity to work with a patient who is primarily Spanish speaking. When providing support to the loved ones, its requirement education to understanding what comfort care and the hospice philosophy is. The assessed the emotional distress the family members are currently under and provide therapeutic emotional support with additional resources for services. Though the family members did not outright deny services, they did say they were fine without additional services for now. The family disclosed being in denial over the patient’s terminal diagnose and states they have hope that the patient will pull through. When the family is at high-risk for revoking hospice services, I must thread the waters to this very carefully because it is undetermined if the patient themselves would agree or not to being on hospice. We still want to honor their wishes while also keeping the family engaged in hospice services with self-determination (Murdach, 2011).

An explanation of personal action plans you might take to address engagement in your field education experience:

To overcome these challenges or address issues to engagement, I ensure that the family and patient understand all services offered with Hospice Care. Next, building rapport is a crucial step in ensuring family feels supported in the difficult time with witnessing their loved one, the patient transition. There is also the concern of ‘follow through’. In hospice there is a team of professional, nurses, physicians, chaplains, and social workers all working together to ensure the needs of the patient and family are met. At times, certain promises might be made by another discipline in which a different professional may be held accountable to uphold. For example, with hospice patients many may have a last wish that nurse say social workers can help fulfill. In situations like this, the social worker than is put in a position where the patient feels this promise must be fulfilled. Working with the team and proper communication is then important to ensure once again, engagement is addressed.

Reference

Ingebretsen, L. P., & Sagbakken, M. (2016). Hospice nurses’ emotional challenges in their encounters with the dying. International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being, 11, 31170. https://doi.org/10.3402/qhw.v11.31170

Murdach, A. D. (2011). What happened to self-determination? Social Work, 56(4), 371–373.

 

he objective of this assignment is to enable you to demonstrate your understanding of the relationship between justice policy and case processing and management using an example from the juvenile justice system. In 2004, researchers at the University of Colorado and the University of Bremen (Germany) reported on a cross-national study funded by a grant from the U.S. Department of Justice. (This free research report can be accessed here:  and downloaded in PDF format). NOTE: if for whatever reason this link does not work, you can also go to http://www.ncjrs.gov/, click on “Juvenile Justice” and in the keyword search within topic box, enter the grant number 205001 to download a PDF version of the report and also view the abstract and the agency summary.

According to this report, there are some key differences between these two jurisdictions in terms of how juveniles are treated, with the system in Bremen being more lenient and “diversion-oriented” and the one in Colorado being more “punitive.” In Colorado, offenders can be arrested at a much earlier age than in Bremen and are more often processed via juvenile court and detention, whereas in Bremen, dismissal of cases or diversion from formal court processing occurs in the vast majority of cases. Although the findings must be tempered by the limitations to the research discussed in the report, the authors nevertheless offer conclusions that should be considered by court administrators, including these: (1) arrest and imposition of sanctions are generally ineffective strategies and (2) policymakers should examine whether increasing the levels of severity in juvenile sanctions is an effective approach to reducing subsequent delinquency.

In this Discussion Board assignment, you have several tasks:

• First, demonstrate your understanding of what the authors mean by “diversion-oriented system” versus “punitive- or punishment-oriented system.”
• Second, offer your perspective on whether a shift toward a “diversion” and away from a “punishment” (arrest, court processing, court trial, possible detention) model for dealing with juvenile offenders would be effective in the U.S. juvenile justice system.
• Third, find an example of a diversion-oriented model that has been applied by a U.S. state or county juvenile court system, and describe its main features.
• Finally, suggest how you think a diversion-oriented shift might impact case processing and caseflow management.

 

The objective of this assignment is to enable you to demonstrate your ability to develop a court management policy proposal that addresses the key factors that should be considered to ensure that legal requirements and best practices in management are observed. You will craft a policy proposal designed to address problems of case backlog and excessive delay in calendaring of hearings that have resulted from the growing workload in state courts. You will select the U.S. state court system of your choosing as opposed to a hypothetical or generic state court in an effort to make this deliverable more realistic and to enable the use of information for your research that may be available through actual court administration offices (e.g., via their Web sites or publicly available research reports).

The environment in which this policy proposal is being generated is one characterized by several realities:

• State budgets for managing necessary services are shrinking.
• The political environment is somewhat unstable because of lack of consensus on how to address various types of social problems, including crime.
• Property-related crime is on the rise, including collateral offenses against persons.
• Court systems are so overwhelmed that there is growing public perception that public access to timely dispute resolution has become severely constrained.
• Correctional facilities are over-crowded, and problems of recidivism have accelerated.
• Plea bargaining and out-of court settlement of cases has increased in part as a way to side-step lengthy and expensive court trials.
• Certain alternative dispute resolution programs have been operating successfully in many circumstances and jurisdictions.

You will produce a policy proposal from the perspective that you are a senior policy analyst employed by a state’s Administrative Office of the Courts. In this role as a senior policy analyst, you have been assigned to draft a proposal for the court administrator recommending viable options based on the legislature’s interests and objectives. The background information that you have been given by your employer is that the Judicial Committee of the State Legislature is very interested in a policy proposal that weighs options for new programs and/or approaches to dispute resolution designed to satisfy the legislature’s stated objectives to do the following:

• Reduce case backlog
• Shorten the average time for court hearings to be calendared and for decisions to be rendered
• Avoid the expense of expanding the number of court houses, judges, and associated court staff and/or detention facilities and associated staff
• Minimize the need for funding of new programs
• Consider the viability of “community burden-sharing” through partnerships with private (where private includes both profit and nonprofit) organizations and resources

In addition, the judicial committee has specified that it would like to look at a policy proposal that focuses on dispute resolution options related to juvenile offenders that address the legislature’s objectives as a “pilot test” of new approaches to managing court-related services in the existing environment. Thus, the court administrator has asked that the policy proposal be narrowly focused on the juvenile justice division of the state court system.

The policy proposal should exclude considerations of whether any proposed new programs or expansions of existing programs meet existing statutory requirements. For purposes of this project, you are to assume that once the proposal is presented to the Judicial Committee of the State Legislature, that committee will charge the Office of Legislative General Counsel to determine what, if any, statutory changes would be necessary.

Questions the proposal would need to address include the following:

• Would it cost the state less to implement a victim offender mediation (VOM) program for juvenile offenders than it would to expand the courts and corrections staff and facility infrastructure?
• Would it take the state less time to implement a program such as this than it would to expand the courts and corrections staff and facility infrastructure?
• To what extent could a VOM program reduce court case backlog and thereby shorten the average time between arrest and case disposition?
• What is the “track record” of one or more comparable VOM program(s)?
• What are the social benefits and social costs of a VOM program for juvenile offenders both to the offenders themselves and to the larger community?
• Are there particular types of cases that are appropriate, as opposed to others that the legislature might want to exclude?
• What are the major challenges that will be faced by the Administrative Office of the Courts in implementing this proposed policy in terms of the following:
  • Program development
  • Training and credentialing of mediators
  • “Selling” it to potentially supportive community resources that could become partners with the state in this effort
  • Case flow and records management
  • Security issues related to cases being mediated outside of court facilities