Using examples to illustrate the perceptual errors that indi essays

Using examples to illustrate the perceptual errors that indi essays Using examples to illustrate the perceptual errors that individuals may make in organisations, describe the potential consequences of these errors, and define what steps you would advise to reduce their impact. Perception is the selection and organisation of environmental stimuli to provide meaningful experiences for the perceiver (Hellriegel, D. et al. 1995). Individuals mostly perceive things differently, depending on what they selectively perceive and how they organise and interpret the things perceived. The process of how we receive stimuli from the environment happens through our five senses: taste, smell, hearing, sight and touch. The perceptual process however may result in errors (perceptual errors); especially in our working environment we have to cope with perceptual errors. Three of perceptual errors we have to deal with in our daily life, are stereotyping, perceptual defence, and the halo effect. One of a common perceptual error in organisations is stereotyping between men and women, also called gender stereotyping. Stereotyping is defined as the tendency to assign attributes to someone solely on the basis of a category in which that person has been placed (Hellriegel, D. et al., 1995). The reason for this perceptual error is to be due to the fact that we were taught and some may have been grown up with the fact that men and women play different roles in our society. For example the woman has to be at home taking care of the household and the children. However the man is responsible for making money. In addition to that there are certain jobs which are labelled to be suitable for women only, such as nurses or jobs in social care. Because of that and due to little acceptance from male managers, women face difficulties in climbing up the career ladder and getting the recognition they may deserve. A survey by Online Recruitment (September 2004), shows that over half of male manag...

Analysis of Margaret Atwoods Happy Endings

Analysis of Margaret Atwoods Happy Endings Happy Endings by Canadian author Margaret  Atwood is an example of metafiction. That is, its a story that comments on the conventions of storytelling and draws attention to itself as a story. At approximately 1,300 words, its also an example of flash fiction. Happy Endings was first published in 1983. The story is actually six stories in one. Atwood begins by introducing the two main characters, John and Mary, and then offers six different versions- labeled A through F- of who they are and what might happen to them. Version A Version A is the one Atwood refers to as the happy ending. In this version, everything goes well, the characters have wonderful lives, and nothing unexpected happens. Atwood manages to make version A boring to the point of comedy. For example, she uses the phrase stimulating and challenging three times- once to describe John and Marys jobs, once to describe their sex life, and once to describe the hobbies they take up in retirement. The phrase stimulating and challenging, of course, neither stimulates nor challenges readers, who remain uninvested. John and Mary are entirely undeveloped as characters. Theyre like stick figures that move methodically through the milestones of an ordinary, happy life, but we know nothing about them. Indeed, they may be happy, but their happiness seems to have nothing to do with the reader, who is alienated by lukewarm, uninformative observations, like that John and Mary go on fun vacations and have children who turn out well. Version B Version B is considerably messier than A. Though Mary loves John, John merely uses her body for selfish pleasure and ego gratification of a tepid kind. The character development in B- while a bit painful to witness- is much deeper than in A. After John eats the dinner Mary cooked, has sex with her and falls asleep, she stays awake to wash the dishes and put on fresh lipstick so that hell think well of her. There is nothing inherently interesting about washing dishes- its Marys reason for washing them, at that particular time and under those circumstances, that is interesting. In B, unlike in A, we are also told what one of the characters (Mary) is thinking, so we learn what motivates her and what she wants. Atwood writes: Inside John, she thinks, is another John, who is much nicer. This other John will emerge like a butterfly from a cocoon, a Jack from a box, a pit from a prune, if the first John is only squeezed enough. You can also see from this passage that the language in version B is more interesting than in A. Atwoods use of the string of cliches emphasizes the depth of both Marys hope and her delusion. In B, Atwood also starts using second person to draw the readers attention toward certain details. For instance, she mentions that youll notice that he doesnt even consider her worth the price of a dinner out. And when Mary stages a suicide attempt with sleeping pills and sherry to get Johns attention, Atwood writes: You can see what kind of a woman she is by the fact that its not even whiskey. The use of second person is particularly interesting because it draws the reader into the act of interpreting a story. That is, second person is used to point out how the details of a story add up to help us understand the characters. Version C In C, John is an older man who falls in love with Mary, 22. She doesnt love him, but she sleeps with him because she feels sorry for him because hes worried about his hair falling out. Mary really loves James, also 22, who has a motorcycle and a fabulous record collection. It soon becomes clear that John is having an affair with Mary precisely to escape the stimulating and challenging life of Version A, which he is living with a wife named Madge. In short, Mary is his mid-life crisis. It turns out that the bare bones outline of the happy ending of version A has left a lot unsaid.  Theres no end to the complications that can be intertwined with the milestones of getting married, buying a house, having children, and everything else in A. In fact, after John, Mary, and James are all dead, Madge marries Fred and continues as in A. Version D In this version, Fred and Madge get along well and have a lovely life. But their house is destroyed by a tidal wave and thousands are killed. Fred and Madge survive and live as the characters in A. Version E Version E is fraught with complications- if not a tidal wave, then a bad heart. Fred dies, and Madge dedicates herself to charity work. As Atwood writes: If you like, it can be Madge, cancer, guilty and confused, and bird watching. It doesnt matter whether its Freds bad heart or Madges cancer, or whether the spouses are kind and understanding or guilty and confused. Something always interrupts the smooth trajectory of A. Version F Every version of the story loops back, at some point, to version A- the happy ending. As Atwood explains, no matter what the details are, [y]oull still end up with A. Here, her  use of second person reaches its  peak. Shes led the reader through a series of attempts to try to imagine a variety of stories, and shes made it seem within reach- as if a reader really could choose B or C and get something different from A. But in F, she finally explains directly that even if we went through the whole alphabet and beyond, wed still end up with A. On a metaphorical level, version A doesnt necessarily have to entail marriage, kids, and real estate. It really could stand in for any trajectory that a character might be trying to follow. But they all end the same way: John and Mary die. Real stories lie in what Atwood calls the How and Why- the motivations, the thoughts, the desires, and the way the characters respond to the inevitable interruptions to A.