John Stuart Mill s Ethical Theory - 865 Words

Moral Dilemma A describes a case in which a physician has an option to inform a patient of an untreatable cancer, or to not inform. This case in my opinion has the most merit, and can be applied to Mill’s Utilitarian Ethical Theory, the Kantian ethical theory, as well as the Principle of Beneficence and the Principle of Respect for Autonomy in order to determine an appropriate response for the doctor to act upon. Utilitarianism is an idea generated by John Stuart Mill and encompasses the idea of Principle of Utility. The Principle states that acts are right when they produce happiness, which is defined as pleasure and the absence of pain, as well as that acts are wrong when they promote unhappiness, which is defined as pain and the privation of pleasure. This theory is used to analyze a dilemma through a series of positive and negative consequences of a certain action. In this case, the action performed by the doctor would be to inform the patient of the cancer. Negative consequences, or those that will occur by not informing the patient, include preventing unneeded worry and extreme stress due to the inability to cure the cancer, as well as the patient can continue to live their everyday life in which they are accustomed. Positive consequences of telling the patient even though a cure does not exist includes a chance for the patient to say goodbye to loved ones, arrange their affairs accordingly, and the patient can come to the realization of their impending death.Show MoreRelatedJohn Stuart Mill s Ethical Theory920 Words   |  4 PagesJohn Stuart Mill believed in the ethical theory (utilitarianism). Everyone should act in such way to bring the largest possibly balance of good over evil. The goodness of an act may be determined by the consequences of that act. Consequences are determined by the amount of happiness or unhappiness caused. A good man is one who considers the other man s pleasure as equally as his own. Each person s happiness is equally important. Mill believed that a free act is not an undetermined act. It isRead MoreCareer Prospects Vary For Me872 Words   |  4 Pagesas a lead in a film. In the future when I am confronted with a script with a lead that can be played by either a female or male, I will make the decision to cas t a female. Nine times out of ten, this casting choice will rail against the screenwriter s vision because when men write, they write with the intent to fictionalize characters that identify with them. This is not entirely a bad thing, however it does indirectly cause the number of women leads in Hollywood to regress. My actions as a directorRead MoreComparing Aristotle And John Stuart Mill1130 Words   |  5 Pagesintend to concentrate of the famous works of Aristotle, Immanuel Kant, and John Stuart Mill. After meticulously analyzing each of the above philosophers’ texts, I personally prefer the position of utilitarian and Benthamite, John Stuart Mill. After comparing and contrasting the positions and reasonings of these philosophers, I will demonstrate my own reasons why I have chosen John Stuart Mill as the most established in his theory of the role of pleasure in morality. Aristotle was a particularly influentialRead MoreAristotle s Philosophy Of Morality And The Final Goal Of Human Life Essay1895 Words   |  8 PagesAristotle on Ethics The Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle s key study of morality and the final goal of human life, has for many years been a popular and persuasive book. It offers the modern reader many useful insights into human desires and behavior despite being thousands of years old. The overarching theme behind this book is Aristotle s assertion that there are no recognized unconditional moral standards and that every ethical theory must take into consideration an understanding of psychologyRead MoreUtilitarianism : Bentham And Mill766 Words   |  4 PagesBentham VS. Mill Utilitarianism is a normative ethical theory that holds the morally right course of action in any given situation is the course of which yields the greatest balance of benefits over harms. More specifically, utilitarianism’s core idea is that the effects of an action determine whether actions are morally right or wrong. Created with philosophies of Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) and John Stuart Mill (1806–1873), Utilitarianism began in England in the 19th Century. Bentham and Mill builtRead MoreImmanuel Kant And John Stuart Mill Essay2002 Words   |  9 PagesTwo of the most widely known ethical philosophers are Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill. While they may have philosophized around the same time period, the philosophers have very different ideas about ethics and happiness. Immanuel Kant, author of Duty and Reason, believed in the morality of the good will and duty. He espoused that happiness is an irrelevancy insofar as fulfilling duty is the most important aspect of leading a moral life. Conversely, John Stuart Mill, who wrote, The Greatest HappinessRead MoreJohn Stuart Mill s On Liberty And Utilitarianism Essay2257 Words   |  10 PagesThis essay examines and inspects liberty and order conflict based on the writings of philosopher John Stuart Mill, titled On Liberty and Utilitarianism. We will discuss how his philosophical views on equality as fundamental to what it means to be human. We will interpret John Stuart Mill’s theorist view on equality as fundamental to the good or bad functioning of the state? The question and debate we would also raise will be, is equality be integral the arrangements of power? Lastly, we wouldRead MoreThe Energy Cooperative1800 Words   |  8 PagesCooperative.† The following paper will analyze the ethical issues surrounding the use of such a statement from five different ethical theories. These particular theories come from Immanuel Kant, John Stuart Mill, John Locke, John Rawls, a nd Lawrence Kohlberg. Finally, there will be a solution that the board should take with the issue, ethical, or otherwise. Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) had an ethical theory dubbed the Categorical Imperative. Within this theory he discusses the morally right and morally wrongRead MoreUtilitarianism, By John Stuart Mill1372 Words   |  6 Pagesbasic elements, can be described as creating â€Å"the greatest good for the greatest number† (122). Such was the sentiment of John Stuart Mill, one of act utilitarianism’s (also known as just utilitarianism) greatest pioneers, and promoters. Mills believed that his theory of always acting in a way that achieved the greatest net happiness was both superior to other philosophical theories and also more beneficial to the general public. However, as often occurs in the field of philosophy, there were many detractorsRead MoreSimilarity Between Religion And Utilitarianism813 Words   |  4 Pagessimilarities between religion and utilitarianism are striking, it is not true to assert that religion is utilitarian. The views of Aristotle and those of Mills on ethics are different. While Aristotle’s focuses on individual happiness, Mill focuses on the happiness of the community as a whole. Mill and Aristotle had very different views on individual happiness. Mill believed that pleasure and the absence of pain are what make an individual happy. On the other hand, Aristotle believed that happiness arises from

To What Extent Did The Fugitive Slaves Acts Impacted Slavery

Internal Assessment Elimary Perez Fxb096 To what extent did the Fugitive Slaves Acts have an effect on slavery in the United States of America? Table of Contents A) Plan of Investigation†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Pg.1 B) Summary of Evidence†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Pg.2-4 C) Evaluation of Sources†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. D) Analysis†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. E) Conclusion†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. Plan of Investigation This investigation will assess to what extent did the Fugitive Slaves Acts impacted slavery in America. This will primarily focus on how the acts were executed and what havocs arose from them. The laws brought controversy amongst the Northern and Southern States which includes how the Northern States, which were the Free states, reacted to the acts. The investigation will consist of an abolitionist’s argument against the acts. It will also include the basics of the Fugitive Slaves Acts and as to what their intentions were. Most of the evidence will be provided by historical summaries. This will also include a primary resource from abolitionist William Lloyd George. Word: 108 Summary of Evidence 2.1) Purpose and Execution of the Fugitive Slaves Acts The first set of the Fugitive Slaves Acts was enacted in 1793. This act called for the capturing and returning of fugitive slaves. With it came the permission of slave holders to invade the Northern States to capture escapees (FSA) 1. Even though the FugitiveShow MoreRelatedHow Did the Constitution Guard Against Tyranny5601 Words   |  23 Pagesaddresses you. I do but quote from one of those speeches when I declare that I have no purpose, directly or -Antithesis indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no -Parallelism lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so. Those who nominated and elected me did so with full knowledge that I had made this and many similar declarations and had never recanted them; and more than this, they placed in the platform for my acceptanceRead MoreAmerican Revolution and Study Guide Essay example5377 Words   |  22 PagesChapter 2 Study Guide Questions â€Å"The Planting of English America† 1. Discuss English treatment of the Irish and its consequence (10pts) 2. What lessons do you think English colonists learned from their early Jamestown experience? Focus on matters of fulfilling expectations, financial support, leadership skills, and relations with the Indians. What specific developments illustrate that the English living in the plantation colonies tried to apply these lessons? (25 pts) 2. Compare and contrastRead MoreOrganisational Theory230255 Words   |  922 PagesPerspectives John McAuley, Joanne Duberley and Phil Johnson . This book is, to my knowledge, the most comprehensive and reliable guide to organisational theory currently available. What is needed is a text that will give a good idea of the breadth and complexity of this important subject, and this is precisely what McAuley, Duberley and Johnson have provided. They have done some sterling service in bringing together the very diverse strands of work that today qualify as constituting the subject

Desistance Free Essays

string(46) " were victims of their own lack of insight\)\." Criminology Criminal Justice  © 2006 SAGE Publications (London, Thousand Oaks New Delhi) and the British Society of Criminology. www. sagepublications. We will write a custom essay sample on Desistance or any similar topic only for you Order Now com ISSN 1748–8958; Vol: 6(1): 39–62 DOI: 10. 1177/1748895806060666 A desistance paradigm for offender management FERGUS McNEILL Universities of Glasgow and Strathclyde, UK Abstract In an in? uential article published in the British Journal of Social Work in 1979, Anthony Bottoms and Bill McWilliams proposed the adoption of a ‘non-treatment paradigm’ for probation practice. Their argument rested on a careful and considered analysis not only of empirical evidence about the ineffectiveness of rehabilitative treatment but also of theoretical, moral and philosophical questions about such interventions. By 1994, emerging evidence about the potential effectiveness of some intervention programmes was suf? cient to lead Peter Raynor and Maurice Vanstone to suggest signi? cant revisions to the ‘non-treatment paradigm’. In this article, it is argued that a different but equally relevant form of empirical evidence—that derived from desistance studies—suggests a need to re-evaluate these earlier paradigms for probation practice. This reevaluation is also required by the way that such studies enable us to understand and theorize both desistance itself and the role that penal professionals might play in supporting it. Ultimately, these empirical and theoretical insights drive us back to the complex interfaces between technical and moral questions that preoccupied Bottoms and McWilliams and that should feature more prominently in contemporary debates about the futures of ‘offender management’ and of our penal systems. Key Words desistance †¢ effectiveness †¢ ethics †¢ offender management †¢ nontreatment paradigm †¢ probation 39 40 Criminology Criminal Justice 6(1) Introduction Critical analysts of the history of ideas in the probation service have charted the various reconstructions of probation practice that have accompanied changes in penal theories, policies and sensibilities. Most famously, McWilliams (1983, 1985, 1986, 1987) described the transformations of probation from a missionary endeavour that aimed to save souls, to a professionalized endeavour that aimed to ‘cure’ offending through rehabilitative treatment, to a pragmatic endeavour that aimed to provide alternatives to custody and practical help for offenders (see also Vanstone, 2004). More recent commentators have suggested later transformations of probation practice related ? rst to its recasting, in England and Wales, as ‘punishment in the community’ and then to its increasing focus on risk management and public protection (Robinson and McNeill, 2004). In each of these eras of probation history, practitioners, academics and other commentators have sought to articulate new paradigms for probation practice. Though much of the debate about the merits of these paradigms has focused on empirical questions about the ef? acy of different approaches to the treatment and management of offenders, probation paradigms also re? ect, implicitly or explicitly, developments both in the philosophy and in the sociology of punishment. The origins of this article are similar in that the initial impetus for the development of a desistance paradigm for ‘offender management’1 emerged from reviews of desistance research (McNeill, 2003) and, more speci? cally, from the ? ndings of some particularly important recent studies (Burnett, 1992; Rex, 1999; Maruna, 2001; Farrall, 2002). However, closer examination of some aspects of the desistance research also suggests a normative case for a new paradigm; indeed, some of the empirical evidence seems to make a necessity out of certain ‘practice virtues’. That these virtues are arguably in decline as a result of the fore-fronting of risk and public protection in contemporary criminal justice serves to make the development of the case for a desistance paradigm both timely and necessary. To that end, the structure of this article is as follows. It begins with summaries of two important paradigms for probation practice—the ‘nontreatment paradigm’ (Bottoms and McWilliams, 1979) and the ‘revised paradigm’ (Raynor and Vanstone, 1994). The article then proceeds with an analysis of the emerging theoretical and empirical case for a desistance paradigm. This section draws not only on the ? ndings of desistance studies but also on recent studies of the effectiveness of different approaches to securing ‘personal change’ in general and on recent developments in the ‘what works’ literature in particular. The ethical case for a desistance paradigm is then advanced not only in the light of the empirical evidence about the practical necessity of certain modes of ethical practice, but also in the light of developments in the philosophy of punishment, most notably the ideas associated with the work of the ‘new rehabilitationists’ (Lewis, 2005) and with Anthony Duff’s ‘penal communications’ theory (Duff, McNeill—A desistance paradigm for offender management 2001, 2003). In the concluding discussion, I try to sketch out some of the parameters of a desistance paradigm, though this is intended more as an attempt to stimulate debate about its development rather than to de? ne categorically its features. 41 Changing paradigms for probation practice Writing at the end of the 1970s, Bottoms and McWilliams declared the need for a new paradigm for probation practice, a paradigm that ‘is theoretically rigorous, which takes very seriously the limitations of the treatment model; but which seeks to redirect the probation service’s traditional aims and values in the new penal and social context’ (1979: 167). Bottoms and McWilliams proposed their paradigm against the backdrop of a prevailing view that treatment had been discredited both empirically and ethically. Though they did not review the empirical case in any great detail, they refer to several studies (Lipton et al. , 1975; Brody, 1976; Greenberg, 1976) as establishing the broad conclusion that ‘dramatic reformative results are hard to discover and are usually absent’ (Bottoms and McWilliams, 1979: 160). They also stressed the theoretical inadequacies of the treatment model, noting several ? aws in the analogy between probation interventions and medical treatment; ? st, crime is voluntary whereas most diseases are not; second, crime is not pathological in any straightforward sense; and third, individual treatment models neglect the social causes of crime. Worse still, neglect of these ? aws produced ethical problems; they argued that over-con? dence in the prospects for effecting change through treatment had permitted its advocates both to coerce offenders into interventions (because the treatment provider was an expert who knew best) and to ignore offenders’ views of their own situations (because offenders were victims of their own lack of insight). You read "Desistance" in category "Essay examples" Perhaps most insidiously of all, within this ideology coerced treatment could be justi? ed in offenders’ own best interests. Bottoms and McWilliams also discerned an important ‘implicit con? ict between the determinism implied in diagnosis and treatment and the frequently stressed casework principle of client selfdetermination’ (1979: 166). How can offenders be simultaneously the objects on whom psychological, physical and social forces operate (as the term diagnosis implies) and the authors of their own futures (as the principle of self-determination requires)? Bottoms and McWilliams’ hope was that by exposing the weaknesses of the treatment paradigm, they would allow for a renaissance of the probation service’s traditional core values of hope and respect for persons. They suggested that the four primary aims of the service ‘are and have been: 1 2 3 4 The provision of appropriate help for offenders The statutory supervision of offenders Diverting appropriate offenders from custodial sentences The reduction of crime’ (1979: 168). 42 Criminology Criminal Justice 6(1) It is their discussion of the ? rst and second of these objectives that is most relevant to the discussion here. However, it is worth noting ? rst that, for Bottoms and McWilliams, the problem with the treatment model was that it assumed that the fourth objective must be achieved through the pursuit of the ? rst three; an assumption that they suggested could not be sustained empirically. 2 With regard to the provision of help as opposed to treatment, Bottoms and McWilliams rejected the ‘objecti? cation’ of offenders implied in the ‘casework relationship’, wherein the offender becomes an object to be treated, cured or managed in and through social policy and professional practice. One consequence of this objecti? ation, they suggested, is that the formulation of treatment plans rests with the expert; the approach is essentially ‘of? cer-centred’. Bottoms and McWilliams (1979: 173) suggested, by way of contrast, that in the non-treatment paradigm: (a) Treatment (b) Diagnosis (c) Client’s Dependent Need as the basis for social work action becomes becom es becomes Help Shared Assessment Collaboratively De? ned Task as the basis for social work action In this formulation, ‘help’ includes but is not limited to material help; probation may continue to address emotional or psychological dif? ulties, but this is no longer its raison d’etre. Critically, the test of any proposed intervention technique is that it must help the client. Bottoms and McWilliams (1979: 174) explicitly disavowed any claim that the help model would be bene? cial in the reduction of crime. 3 Having reconceived of probation practice as help rather than treatment, Bottoms and McWilliams’ discussion of probation’s second aim, the statutory supervision of offenders, explored the implicit tensions between help and surveillance. Accepting that probation of? cers are ‘law enforcement’ agents as well as helpers, they drew on an article by Raynor (1978) that argued for a crucial distinction between coercion and constraint; ‘choice under constraint is morally acceptable; manipulative coercion is not’ (Bottoms and McWilliams, 1979: 177). Following Raynor, they suggested that making this distinction meaningful required probation of? cers actively to seek, within the constraints of the probation order, to maximize the area of choice for the offender. Their paradigm therefore invoked a distinction between the compulsory requirements imposed by the court (with the offender’s constrained consent) and the substantive content of the helping process. In the latter connection, the ‘client’ should be free to choose to accept or reject help without fear of further sanctions. Put another way, the authority for supervision derives from the court but the authority for help resides in the offender. For Bottoms and McWilliams this required that the (then) legal requirement of consent by defendants to probation and community ervice should be taken much more seriously; indeed, they suggested that so as to avoid compulsory help McNeill—A desistance paradigm for offender management arising from a probation recommendation, defendants’ consent to such recommendations should be required. Where consent was absent, no such recommendation should be made. Fifteen years later, Peter Raynor and Maurice Vanstone (1994) argu ed that the non-treatment paradigm—a paradigm that they clearly regarded as being well worthy of the in? uence that it had exercised in the intervening years—was none the less in need of revision. The resurgence of optimism about the potential effectiveness of some forms of ‘treatment’ led Raynor and Vanstone to argue that the foundations of the non-treatment paradigm, ‘built as they were out of a mixture of doubt and scepticism about the crime-reducing potential of rehabilitation, have produced cracks in the structure’ (1994: 396): By uncoupling ‘helping offenders’ from ‘crime reduction’, the paradigm is prevented from exploring whether work with individuals on their thinking, behaviour and attitudes has any relevance to crime reduction. Current knowledge of research into effectiveness necessitates, therefore, a rede? ing of the concept of appropriate help in a way that retains the principle of collaboration, and the stress on client needs, but which incorporates informed practice focused on in? uencing and helping individuals to stop offending . . . This should not detract from the need to address the social and economic co ntext of crime. (Raynor and Vanstone, 1994: 398) 43 It is clear that Raynor and Vanstone (1994) were not advocating a return to a treatment paradigm; rather, in their discussion of intervention ‘programmes’, they explicitly rejected Bottoms and McWilliams’ dichotomization of treatment and help. More speci? cally, Raynor and Vanstone questioned the assumption that critiques of psychodynamic approaches as ‘involving disguised coercion, denial of clients’ views, the objecti? cation of people, and a demonstrable lack of effectiveness when applied to offenders’ (1994: 399) could be equally applied to all forms of treatment. This false assumption, they argued, led Bottoms and McWilliams to ‘ignore other possible bases for intervention outside the â€Å"medical model† and encouraged the reader to identify all attempts to in? uence offenders as ethically objectionable treatment’ (Raynor and Vanstone, 1994: 400). A further crucial problem with the ‘non-treatment paradigm’ rested in its neglect of victims. The arguments of left realist criminologists (Young, 1988) persuaded Raynor and Vanstone (1994) that the traditional probation value of ‘respect for persons’ had to include the actual and potential victims of crime. This in turn implied that the extent to which client (that is, offender) choice could be respected and unconditional help could be offered had some necessary limitations; essentially, probation had to accept an obligation to work to reduce the harms caused by crime, as well as the ills that provoke it. Thus: Compensatory help and empowerment of offenders are a proper response to situations where individuals have had few opportunities to avoid crime, but 44 Criminology Criminal Justice 6(1) their purpose is not simply to widen offenders’ choices: it includes doing so in a manner consistent with a wider goal of crime reduction. Such a goal is not simply in the interests of the powerful: although criminal justice in an unequal society re? ects and is distorted by its inequalities, the least powerful suffer some of the most common kinds of crime and are most in need of protection from it. This includes, of course, many offenders who are themselves victims of crime . . . ) (Raynor and Vanstone, 1994: 401) Raynor and Vanstone (1994: 402) concluded by adapting Bottoms and McWilliams’ (1979) schematic summary of their paradigm: (a) Help becomes Help consistent with a commitment to the reduction of harm Explicit dialogue and negotiation offering opportunities for informed con sent to involvement in a process of change Collaboratively de? ned task relevant to criminogenic needs, and potentially effective in meeting them b) Shared assessment becomes (c) Collaboratively de? ned task becomes In terms of both organizational change and practice development, the 10 years that followed the publication of Raynor and Vanstone’s (1994) article have been even more tumultuous than the years between the publication of the non-treatment paradigm and its revision. It is beyond the scope of this article to give an account of these changes (see Nellis, 1999; Raynor and Vanstone, 2002; Mair, 2004; Robinson and McNeill, 2004). Indeed, since the purpose of this article is to consider how the practice of offender management should be reconstructed in the light of the desistance research, there is some merit in ignoring how it has been reconstructed for more political and pragmatic reasons. That said, two particular developments require comment. The ? rst relates to changes in formulations of the purposes of probation since the publication of the earlier paradigms. Without entering into the ongoing debates about the recasting of probation’s purposes south of the border (see Robinson and McNeill, 2004; Worrall and Hoy, 2005), it is suf? cient to state that, in contrast to the four aims outlined by Bottoms and McWilliams—aims which were still uncontested by Raynor and Vanstone in 1994—the new National Offender Management Service, incorporating prisons and probation, exists to manage offenders and in so doing to provide a service to the ‘law-abiding’ public. Its objectives are to punish offenders and to reduce re-offending (Blunkett, 2004: 10). The second development concerns the application of a particular approach to developing effective probation practice in England and Wales in McNeill—A desistance paradigm for offender management the form of the ‘what works’ initiative (McNeill, 2001, 2004a). In effect, this initiative involves the imposition from the centre of an implicit ‘what works’ paradigm for probation practice. Once again the debates about the characteristics, implications and ? aws of this paradigm are complex (see Mair, 2004). Perhaps he easiest way to summarize the paradigm however, is to suggest a further revision to Raynor and Vanstone’s (1994) adaptation of Bottoms and McWilliams’ (1979) schematic summary: (a) Help consistent with a commitment to the reduction of harm (b) Explicit dialogue and negotiation offering opportunities for informed consent to involvement in a process of change (c) Collaboratively de? ned task relevant to criminogenic needs, and potent ially effective in meeting them becomes Intervention required to reduce reoffending and protect the public Professional assessment of risk and need governed by the application of structured assessment instruments 5 becomes becomes Compulsory engagement in structured programmes and case management processes to address criminogenic needs – as required elements of legal orders imposed irrespective of consent Theoretical and empirical arguments for a desistance paradigm4 A fundamental but perhaps inevitable problem with the non-treatment paradigm, the revised paradigm and the ‘what works’ paradigm is that they begin in the wrong place; that is, they begin by thinking about how practice (whether ‘treatment’, ‘help’ or ‘programmes’) should be constructed without ? rst thinking about how change should be understood. For Bottoms and McWilliams (1979) this omission makes some sense, since their premise was that the prospects for practice securing individual change were bleak. However, for Raynor and Vanstone (1994) and for the prevailing ‘what works’ paradigm, the problem is more serious; given their reasonable optimism about the prospects for individual rehabilitation, the absence of a well-developed theory of how rehabilitation occurs is more problematic. 5 Understanding desistance The change process involved in the rehabilitation of offenders is desistance from offending. The muted impact that desistance research has had on policy and practice hitherto is both surprising and problematic because 46 Criminology Criminal Justice 6(1) knowledge about processes of desistance is clearly critical to our understandings of how and why ex-offenders come to change their behaviours. Indeed, building an understanding of the human processes and social contexts in and through which desistance occurs is a necessary precursor to developing practice paradigms; put another way, constructions of practice should be embedded in understandings of desistance. The implications of such embedding are signi? cant and far-reaching. Maruna et al. (2004) draw a parallel with a related shift in the ? eld of addictions away from the notion of treatment and towards the idea of recovery, quoting an in? uential essay by William White (2000): Treatment was birthed as an adjunct to recovery, but, as treatment grew in size and status, it de? ned recovery as an adjunct of itself. The original perspective needs to be recaptured. Treatment institutions need to once again become servants of the larger recovery process and the community in which that recovery is nested and sustained . . (White, 2000, cited in Maruna et al. , 2004: 9) Although the language of recovery may be inappropriate in relation to offenders, given both that it implies a medical model and that it suggests a prior state of well-being that may never have existed for many, the analogy is telling none the less. Put simply, the implication is that offender management services need to think of themselves less as providers of correctional treatment (that belongs to the expert) and more as supporters of desistance processes (that belong to the desister). In some respects, this shift in perspective, by re-emphasizing the offender’s viewpoint, might re-invigorate the non-treatment paradigm’s rejection of the objecti? cation of the ‘client’ and of the elevation of the ‘therapist’. However, it does so not by rejecting ‘treatment’ per se, but by seeing professional intervention as being, in some sense, subservient to a wider process that belongs to the desister. Before proceeding further, more needs to be said about how processes of desistance should be understood and theorized. Maruna (2001) identi? es three broad theoretical perspectives in the desistance literature: maturational reform, social bonds theory and narrative theory. Maturational reform (or ‘ontogenic’) theories have the longest history and are based on the established links between age and certain criminal behaviours, particularly street crime. Social bonds (or ‘sociogenic’) theories suggest that ties to family, employment or educational programmes in early adulthood explain changes in criminal behaviour across the life course. Where these ties exist, they create a stake in conformity, a reason to ‘go straight’. Where they are absent, people who offend have less to lose from continuing to offend. Narrative theories have emerged from more qualitative research which stresses the signi? cance of subjective changes in the person’s sense of self and identity, re? ected in changing motivations, greater concern for others and more consideration of the future. Bringing these perspectives together, Farrall stresses the signi? cance of the McNeill—A desistance paradigm for offender management relationships between ‘objective’ changes in the offender’s life and his or her ‘subjective’ assessment of the value or signi? cance of these changes: . . . the desistance literature has pointed to a range of factors associated with the ending of active involvement in offending. Most of these factors are related to acquiring ‘something’ (most commonly employment, a life partner or a family) which the desister values in some way and which initiates a reevaluation of his or her own life . . (Farrall, 2002: 11) 47 Thus, desistance resides somewhere in the interfaces between developing personal maturity, changing social bonds associated with certain life transitions, and the individual subjective narrative constructions which offenders build around these key events and changes. It is not just the events and changes that matter; it is what these events and changes mean to the people involved. Clearly this understanding implies that desistance itself is not an event (like being cured of a disease) but a process. Desistance is necessarily about ceasing offending and then refraining from further offending over an extended period (for more detailed discussions see Maruna, 2001; Farrall, 2002; Maruna and Farrall, 2004). Maruna and Farrall (2004) suggest that it is helpful to distinguish primary desistance (the achievement of an offence-free period) from secondary desistance (an underlying change in self-identity wherein the ex-offender labels him or herself as such). Although Bottoms et al. 2004) have raised some doubts about the value of this distinction on the grounds that it may exaggerate the importance of cognitive changes which need not always accompany desistance, it does seem likely that where offender managers are dealing with (formerly) persistent offenders, the distinction may be useful; indeed, in those kinds of cases their role might be constructed as prompting, supporting and sustaining secondary desistance wherever this is possible. Moreover, further empirical support for the notion of secondary desistance (and its usefulness) might be found in Burnett’s (1992) study of efforts to desist among 130 adult property offenders released from custody. Burnett noted that while eight out of ten, when interviewed pre-release, wanted to ‘go straight’; six out of ten subsequently reported re-offending post-release. For many, the intention to be law-abiding was provisional in the sense that it did not represent a con? dent prediction; only one in four reported that they would de? itely be able to desist. Importantly, Burnett discovered that those who were most con? dent and optimistic about desisting had greatest success in doing so. For the others, the ‘provisional nature of intentions re? ected social dif? culties and personal problems that the men faced’ (Burnett, 2000: 14). That this implies the need for intentions to desist to be grounded in changes of identity is perhaps supported by Bu rnett’s ? ndings about different types of desisters. She discerned three 48 Criminology Criminal Justice 6(1) categories: ‘non-starters’ who adamantly denied that they were ‘real criminals’ and, in fact, had fewer previous convictions than the others; ‘avoiders’, for whom keeping out of prison was the key issue; and ‘converts’ who appeared to have decided that the costs of crime outweighed the bene? ts. Indeed, the converts were: the most resolute and certain among the desisters. They had found new interests that were all-preoccupying and overturned their value system: a partner, a child, a good job, a new vocation. These were attainments that they were not prepared to jeopardize or which over-rode any interest in or need for property crime. (Burnett, 2000: 14) Although Burnett notes that, for most of the men involved in her study, processes of desistance were characterized by ambivalence and vacillation, the over-turning of value systems and all pre-occupying new interests that characterized the ‘converts’ seem to imply the kind of identity changes invoked in the notion of secondary desistance. Maruna’s (2001) study offers a particularly important contribution to understanding secondary desistance by exploring the subjective dimensions of change. Maruna compared the narrative ‘scripts’ of 20 persisters and 30 desisters who shared similar criminogenic traits and backgrounds and who lived in similarly criminogenic environments. In the ‘condemnation script’ that emerged from the persisters, ‘The condemned person is the narrator (although he or she reserves plenty of blame for society as well). Active offenders . . . argely saw their life scripts as having been written for them a long time ago’ (Maruna, 2001: 75). By contrast, the accounts of the desisters revealed a different narrative: The redemption script begins by establishing the goodness and conventionality of the narrator—a victim of society who gets involved with crime and drugs to achieve some sort of power over otherwise bleak circumstances. This deviance eventuall y becomes its own trap, however, as the narrator becomes ensnared in the vicious cycle of crime and imprisonment. Yet, with the help of some outside force, someone who ‘believed in’ the ex-offender, the narrator is able to accomplish what he or she was ‘always meant to do’. Newly empowered, he or she now seeks to ‘give something back’ to society as a display of gratitude. (Maruna, 2001: 87) The desisters and the persisters shared the same sense of fatalism in their accounts of the development of their criminal careers; however, Maruna reads the minimization of responsibility implied by this fatalism as evidence of the conventionality of their values and aspirations and of their need to believe in the essential goodness of the ‘real me’. Moreover, in their accounts of achieving change there is evidence that desisters have to ‘discover’ agency in order to resist and overcome the criminogenic structural pressures that play upon them. This discovery of agency seems to McNeill—A desistance paradigm for offender management relate to the role of signi? cant others in envisioning an alternative identity and an alternative future for the offender even through periods when they cannot see these possibilities for themselves. Typically later in the process of change, involvement in ‘generative activities’ (which usually make a contribution to the well-being of others) plays a part in testifying to the desister that an alternative ‘agentic’ identity is being or has been forged. Intriguingly, the process of discovering agency, on one level at least, sheds interesting light on the apparent theoretical inconsistency that Bottoms and McWilliams (1979) inferred from the treatment paradigm; that is, an inconsistency between its deterministic analysis of the causes of criminality and its focus on self-determination in the treatment process. Arguably what Maruna (2001) has revealed is the role of re? exivity in both revealing and producing shifts in the dynamic relationships between agency and structure (see also Farrall and Bowling, 1999). Supporting desistance The implications for practice of this developing evidence base have begun to be explored in a small number of research studies that have focused on the role that probation may play in supporting desistance (for example Rex, 1999; Farrall, 2002; McCulloch, 2005). In one study of ‘assisted desistance’, Rex (1999) explored the experiences of 60 probationers. She found that those who attributed changes in their behaviour to probation supervision described it as active and participatory. Probationers’ commitments to desist appeared to be generated by the personal and professional commitment shown by their probation of? cers, whose reasonableness, fairness and encouragement seemed to engender a sense of personal loyalty and accountability. Probationers interpreted advice about their behaviours and underlying problems as evidence of concern for them as people, and ‘were motivated by what they saw as a display of interest in their wellbeing’ (Rex, 1999: 375). Such evidence resonates with other arguments about the pivotal role that relationships play in effective interventions (Barry, 2000; Burnett, 2004; Burnett and McNeill, 2005; McNeill et al. , 2005). If secondary desistance (for those involved in persistent offending at least) requires a narrative reconstruction of identity, then it seems obvious why the relational aspects of practice are so signi? cant. Who would risk engaging in such a precarious and threatening venture without the reassurance of sustained and compassionate support from a trusted source? However, workers and working relationships are neither the only nor the most important resources in promoting desistance. Related studies of young people in trouble suggest that their own resources and social networks are often better at resolving their dif? culties than professional staff (Hill, 1999). The potential of social networks is highlighted by ‘resilience perspectives’, which, in contrast with approaches that dwell on risks and/or needs, consider the ‘protective factors and processes’ involved in positive adaptation in spite of adversity. In terms of practice with young 49 50 Criminology Criminal Justice 6(1) people, such perspectives entail an emphasis on the recognition, exploitation and development of their competences, resources, skills and assets (Schoon and Bynner, 2003). In similar vein, but in relation to re-entry of ex-prisoners to society, Maruna and LeBel (2003) have made a convincing case for the development of strengths-based (rather than needs-based or risk-based) narratives and approaches. Drawing on both psychological and criminological evidence, they argue that such approaches would be likely both to enhance compliance with parole conditions and to encourage exprisoners to achieve ‘earned redemption’ (Bazemore, 1999) by focusing on the positive contributions through which they might make good to their communities. Thus promoting desistance also means striving to develop the offender’s strengths—at both an individual and a social network level—in order to build and sustain the momentum for change. In looking towards these personal and social contexts of desistance, the most recent and perhaps most wide-scale study of probation and desistance is particularly pertinent to the development of a desistance paradigm. Farrall (2002) explored the progress or lack of progress towards desistance achieved by a group of 199 probationers. Though over half of the sample evidenced progress towards desistance, Farrall found that desistance could be attributed to speci? c interventions by the probation of? cer in only a few cases, although help with ? ding work and mending damaged family relationships appeared particularly important. Desistance seemed to relate more clearly to the probationers’ motivations and to the social and personal contexts in which various obstacles to desistance were addressed. Farrall (2002) goes on to argue that interventions must pay greater heed to the community, social and personal contexts in which they are situated (see also McCulloch, 2005). After all, â €˜social circumstances and relationships with others are both the object of the intervention and the medium through which . . . change can be achieved’ (Farrall, 2002: 212, emphases added). Necessarily, this requires that interventions be focused not solely on the individual person and his or her perceived ‘de? cits’. As Farrall (2002) notes, the problem with such interventions is that while they can build human capital, for example, in terms of enhanced cognitive skills or improved employability, they cannot generate the social capital that resides in the relationships through which we achieve participation and inclusion in society. 6 Vitally, it is social capital that is necessary to encourage desistance. It is not enough to build capacities for change where change depends on opportunities to exercise capacities: ‘. . the process of desistance is one that is produced through an interplay between individual choices, and a range of wider social forces, institutional and societal practices which are beyond the control of the individual’ (Farrall and Bowling, 1999: 261). Barry’s (2004) recent study provides another key reference point for exploring how themes of capital, agency, identity and transition play out speci? cally for younger people desisting from offending. Through in-depth interviews with 20 young women and 20 young men, Barry explored why they started and stopped offending and what in? enced or inhibited them McNeill—A desistance paradigm for offender management in that behaviour as they grew older. The young people revealed that their decisions about offending and desisting were related to their need to feel included in their social world, through friendships in childhood and through wider commitments in adulthood. The resolve displayed by the young people in desisting from offending seemed remarkable to Barry, particularly given that they were from disadvantaged backgrounds and were limited in their access to mainstream pportunities (employment, housing and social status) both because of their age and because of their social class. Barry recognizes crucially that: Because of their transitional s ituation, many young people lack the status and opportunities of full citizens and thus have limited capacity for social recognition in terms of durable and legitimate means of both accumulating and expending capital through taking on responsibility and generativity . . . Accumulation of capital requires, to a certain extent, both responsibilities and access to opportunities; however, children and young people rarely have such opportunities because of their status as ‘liminal entities’ (Turner, 1969), not least those from a working class background. (2004: 328–9) 51 It is interesting to note that similar messages about the signi? cance both of the relational and of the social contexts of desistance have emerged recently from ‘treatment’ research itself. Ten years on from McGuire and Priestley’s (1995) original statement of ‘what works’, these neglected aspects of practice have re-emerged in revisions to and re? nements of the principles of effective practice. One authoritative recent review, for example, highlights the increasing attention that is being paid to the need for staff to use interpersonal skills, to exercise some discretion in their interventions, to take diversity among participants into account and to look at how the broader service context can best support effective practice (Raynor, 2004: 201). Raynor notes that neglect of these factors may account for some of the dif? culties experienced in England and Wales, for example, in translating the successes of demonstration projects to general practice. He suggests that the preoccupation with group programmes arises from their more standardized application, which, in turn, allows for more systematic evaluation than the complex and varied nature of individual practice. However, this pre-occupation (with programmes), ironically perhaps, is undermined by the literature on treatment effectiveness in psychotherapy and counselling; arguably the parent discipline of ‘what works’. Here, the evidence suggests that the most crucial variables of all in determining treatment outcomes—chance factors, external factors and ‘client’ factors— relate to the personal and social contexts of interventions rather than to their contents (Asay and Lambert, 1999). Moreover, in terms of those variables which the therapist can in? uence, it is a recurring ? nding that no method of intervention is any more effective than the rest, and, instead, that there are common aspects of each intervention that are responsible for bringing about change (see Hubble et al. , 1999; Bozarth, 2000). These 52 Criminology Criminal Justice 6(1) ‘core conditions’ for effectiveness—empathy and genuineness; the establishment of a working alliance; and using person-centred, collaborative and ‘client-driven’ approaches—are perhaps familiar to probation staff, but not from earlier reviews of ‘what works? ’. 7 With regard to the probation paradigms reviewed earlier, these ? ndings are particularly signi? cant because, despite the disciplinary location and positivist approaches of these studies, the forms of treatment that they commend seem to be some way removed from those criticized by Bottoms and McWilliams (1979). Indeed, the notion of therapeutic or working alliance implies, as Bottoms and McWilliams (1979) advocated, that the worker and client share agreement on overall goals, agreement on the tasks that will lead to achievement of these goals and a bond of mutual respect and trust (Bordin, 1979). This seems explicitly to preclude the kind of attitudes and practices that Bottoms and McWilliams (1979) associated with treatment and that arguably characterize the prevailing ‘what works’ paradigm (McNeill, 2004b). Ethical arguments for a desistance paradigm Leaving aside these emerging empirical ? ndings and theoretical issues, desistance research has some clear ethical implications for the practice of offender management. The ? rst of these implications is perhaps already obvious. Rex’s (1999) research, reviewed in the context both of Maruna’s (2001) account of narrative reconstruction and of the evidence from psychotherapy research about the critical signi? cance of certain core conditions for treatment, points to the importance of developing penal practices that express certain practical virtues. Virtue-based approaches to ethics have experienced something of a resurgence in recent years (Pence, 1991), suggesting a shift in moral thinking from the question ‘what ought I to do? ’ to the question ‘what sort of person should I be? ’ In this context, one of the merits of desistance research is that by asking offenders about their experiences both of attempting desistance and of supervision, progress is made towards answering the question that a would-be ‘virtuous’ offender manager might ask: What sort of practitioner should I be? The virtues featured in responses from desisters might include optimism, hopefulness, patience, persistence, fairness, respectfulness, trustworthiness, loyalty, wisdom, compassion, ? exibility and sensitivity (to difference), for example. The practical import of the expression of these virtues is suggested by recent discussions of the enforcement of community penalties, which have emerged particularly (but not exclusively) where community penalties have been recast as ‘punishment in the community’. This recasting of purpose has increased the need for effective enforcement in order that courts regard community penalties as credible disposals. Though the language of ‘enforcement’ implies an emphasis on ensuring the meaningfulness and inevitability of sanctions in the event of non-compliance, Bottoms (2001) has argued convincingly that attempts to encourage or require compliance in McNeill—A desistance paradigm for offender management the criminal justice system must creatively mix habitual mechanisms, constraint-based mechanisms, instrumental mechanisms and normative mechanisms (related to beliefs, attachments and perceptions of legitimacy). What seems clear from the desistance research is that, through the establishment of effective relationships, the worker’s role in supporting compliance is likely to be particularly crucial to the development of these normative mechanisms. It is only within relationships that model the kinds of virtues described above that the formal authority conferred on the worker by the court is likely to be rendered legitimate in the mind of the offender. Just as perceptions of legitimacy play a key role in encouraging compliance with prison regimes (Sparks et al. 1996), so in the community legitimacy is likely to be a crucial factor both in preventing breach by persuading offenders to comply with the order and, perhaps, in preventing recidivism by persuading offenders to comply with the law. This notion of moral persuasion (and modelling) as a role for offender managers resonates with some aspects of Anthony Duff’s penal communications theory (Duff, 2001, 2003). Duff (2003) has arg ued that probation can and should be considered a mode of punishment; indeed he argues that it could be the model punishment. However, the notion of punishment that he advances is not ‘merely punitive’; that is, it is not concerned simply with the in? iction of pain as a form of retribution. Rather it is a form of ‘constructive punishment’ that in? icts pain only in so far as this is an inevitable (and intended) consequence of ‘bringing offenders to face up to the effects and implications of their crimes, to rehabilitate them and to secure . . . reparation and reconciliation’ (Duff, 2003: 181). The pains involved are akin to the unavoidable pains of repentance. For Duff, this implies a role for probation staff as mediators between offenders, victims and the wider community. Though developing the connections between Duff’s theory and desistance research is beyond the scope of this article, Maruna’s (2001) study underlines the signi? cance for desisters of the ‘redemption’ that is often achieved through engagement in ‘generative activities’ which help to make sense of a damaged past by using it to protect the future interests of others. It seems signi? ant that this ‘buying back’ is productive rather than destructive; that is, the right to be rehabilitated is not the product of experiencing the pains of ‘merely punitive’ punishment, rather it is the result of evidencing repentance and change by ‘making good’. In working to support the reconstruction of identity involved in desistance, this seems to underline the relevance of the redemptive opportunities that both c ommunity penalties and restorative justice approaches might offer. No less obvious, by contrast, are the futility and counter-productiveness of penal measures that label, that exclude and that segregate and co-locate offenders as offenders. Such measures seem designed to con? rm and cement ‘condemnation scripts’ and thus to frustrate desistance. However, as well as highlighting the importance of encouraging and supporting offenders in the painful process of making good, the desistance 53 54 Criminology Criminal Justice 6(1) research at least hints at the reciprocal need for society to make good to offenders. Just as both Bottoms and McWilliams (1979) and Raynor and Vanstone (1994) recognized the moral implications of accepting the role that social inequalities and injustices play in provoking offending behaviour, so Duff (2003) argues that the existence of social injustice creates moral problems for the punishing polity. The response must be ‘a genuine and visible attempt to remedy the injustices and exclusion that they [that is, some offenders] have suffered’ (Duff, 2003: 194). Duff suggests that this implies that: the probation of? cer . . . ill now have to help the offender negotiate his relationship with the polity against which he has offended, but by whom he has been treated unjustly and disrespectfully: she must speak for the polity to the offender in terms that are censorious but also apologetic—terms that seek both to bring him to recognise the wrong he has done and to express an apologetic recognition of the injustice he has suffered: and she must speak to t he polity for the offender, explaining what is due to him as well as what is due for him. (2003: 194, emphasis added) Thus the help and practical support advocated in the non-treatment paradigm can now be re-legitimated both empirically, in terms of the need to build social capital in supporting desistance, and normatively (even within a punishment discourse) as a prerequisite for making punishment both intelligible and just for offenders. Recognition of interactions between, on the one hand, exclusion and inequalities and, on the other, crime and justice, also lies behind some of the arguments for rehabilitative approaches to punishment. Such arguments tend to lead to rights-based rather than utilitarian versions of rehabilitation. For McWilliams and Pease (1990), rights-based rehabilitation serves a moral purpose on behalf of society in limiting punishment and preventing exclusion by working to re-establish the rights and the social standing of the offender. By contrast, Garland (1997) describes how, in late-modern penality, a more instrumental version of rehabilitation has emerged in which the offender need not (perhaps cannot) be respected as an end in himself or herself; he or she has become the means to another end. He or she is not, in a sense, the subject of the court order, but its object. In this version, rehabilitation is not an over-riding purpose, it is a subordinate means. It is offence-centred rather than offender-centred; it targets criminogenic need rather than social need. The problem with this version of rehabilitation, however, is that it runs all the same moral risks that led Bottoms and McWilliams (1979) to reject treatment; it permits, in theory at least, all of the same injustices, violations of human rights and disproportionate intrusions that concerned, for example, the American Friends Services Committee in 1971, and led ultimately to the emergence of ‘just deserts’ (von Hirsch, 1976; Home Of? e, 1990). Indeed, in England and Wales, the current situation is worse in one respect: McNeill—A desistance paradigm for offender management the removal of the need for offenders’ consent to the imposition of community penalties (under the Crime (Sentences) Act 1997), which made some sense in the context of the move towards seeing prob ation as a proportionate punishment, means that offenders can now be compelled to undertake ‘treatment’ in the form of accredited programmes. In a recent article, Lewis (2005) has drawn on the work of the ‘new rehabilitationists’ (Cullen and Gilbert, 1982; Rotman, 1990) to revive the case for a rights-based approach to rehabilitation; meaning one which is concerned with the reintegration of offenders into society as ‘useful human beings’. According to Lewis, the principles of the new rehabilitationists include commitment to, ? rst, the state’s duty to undertake rehabilitative work (for similar reasons to those outlined above); second, somehow setting limits on the intrusions of rehabilitation in terms of proportionality; third, maximizing voluntarism in the process; and, ? ally, using prison only as a measure of last resort because of its negative and damaging effects. In exploring the extent to which these principles are articulated and applied in current penal policy, she reaches the conclusion that ‘current rehabilitative efforts are window-dressing on an overly punitive â€Å"man agerialist† system’ (Lewis, 2005: 119), though she retains some hope that practitioner-led initiatives at the local level might allow some prospect that these principles could be applied. The value of the desistance research may be that just as the evidence about ‘nothing works’ allowed Bottoms and McWilliams (1979) to make a theoretical and empirical case for more ethical practice, and the evidence that ‘something works’ enabled Raynor and Vanstone (1994) to revise that case, so the evidence from desistance studies, when combined with these constructive developments in the philosophy of punishment, might do a similar job in a different and arguably more destructive penal climate. 55 Conclusions: a desistance paradigm This article has sought to follow the example offered by Bottoms and McWilliams (1979) and Raynor and Vanstone (1994) by trying to build both empirical and ethical cases for the development of a new paradigm for probation practice. In summary, I have suggested that desistance is the process that offender management exists to promote and support; that approaches to intervention should be embedded in understandings of desistance; and, that it is important to explore the connections between structure, agency, re? exivity and identity in desistance processes. Moreover, desistance-supporting interventions need to respect and foster agency and re? xivity; they need to be based on legitimate and respectful relationships; they need to focus on social capital (opportunities) as well as human capital (motivations and capacities); and they need to exploit strengths as well as addressing needs and risks. I have also suggested that desistance research highlights the relevance of certain ‘pr actice virtues’; that it requires a focus 56 Criminology Criminal Justice 6(1) on the role of legitimacy in supporting normative mechanisms of compliance; that it is consonant in many respects with communicative approaches to punishment which cast probation of? ers (or offender managers) as mediators between offenders, victims and communities; and that it suggests a rights-based approach to rehabilitation which entails both that the offender makes good to society and that, where injustice has been suffered by the offender, society makes good to the offender. Like the authors of the earlier paradigms, I do not intend here to offer a detailed account of precisely how a desistance paradigm might operate in practice (for some initial suggestions see McNeill, 2003). That task is one that could be more fruitfully undertaken by those working in the ? ld, preferably in association with offenders themselves. However, in an attempt to suggest some direction for such development, Table 1 summarizes the contrasts between the constructions of practice implied by the nontreatment, revised, ‘what works’ and desistance paradigms. Unlike the earlier paradigms, the desistance paradigm forefronts processes of change rather than modes of intervention. Practice under the desistance paradigm would certainly accommodate intervention to meet needs, reduce risks and (especially) to develop and exploit strengths, but Table 1. Probation practice in four paradigms The non-treatment paradigm Treatment becomes help The revised paradigm Help consistent with a commitment to the reduction of harm A ‘what works’ paradigm Intervention required to reduce re-offending and protect the public A desistance paradigm Help in navigating towards desistance to reduce harm and make good to offenders and victims8 Explicit dialogue and negotiation assessing risks, needs, strengths and resources and offering opportunities to make good Collaboratively de? ed tasks which tackle risks, needs and obstacles to desistance by using and developing the offender’s human and social capital Diagnoses becomes shared assessment Explicit dialogue and negotiation offering opportunities for consensual change ‘Professional’ assessment of risk and need governed by structured assessment instruments Client’s dependent need as the basis for action becomes collaboratively de? ned task as the basis for action Co llaboratively de? ed task relevant to criminogenic needs and potentially effective in meeting them Compulsory engagement in structured programmes and case management processes as required elements of legal orders imposed irrespective of consent McNeill—A desistance paradigm for offender management whatever these forms might be they would be subordinated to a more broadly conceived role in working out, on an individual basis, how the desistance process might best be prompted and supported. This would require the worker to act as an advocate providing a conduit to social capital as well as a ‘treatment’ provider building human capital. Moreover, rather than being about the technical management of programmes and the disciplinary management of orders, as the current term ‘offender manager’ unhelpfully implies, the forms of engagement required by the paradigm would re-instate and place a high premium on collaboration and involvement in the process of co-designing interventions. Critically, such interventions would not be concerned solely with the prevention of further offending; they would be equally concerned with constructively addressing the harms caused by crime by encouraging offenders to make good through restorative processes and community service (in the broadest sense). But, as a morally and practically necessary corollary, they would be no less preoccupied with making good to offenders by enabling them to achieve inclusion and participation in society (and with it the progressive and positive reframing of their identities required to sustain desistance). Perhaps the most obvious problem that might be confronted by anyone seeking to envision further or even enact this paradigm, is that the communities on which its ultimate success would depend may lack the resources and the will to engage in supporting desistance, preferring to remain merely ‘punishing communities’ (Worrall and Hoy, 2005). This is, of course, an issue for any form of ‘offender management’ or reintegration. However, rather than letting it become an excuse for dismissing the paradigm, it should drive us to a recognition of the need for offender management agencies to re-engage with community education and community involvement and to seek ways and means, at the local level and at the national level, to challenge populist punitiveness (Bottoms, 1995) and to offer more progressive alternatives. 57 Notes I am very grateful to Steve Farrall and Richard Sparks for their hospitality in hosting the seminars through which this article was developed and to all of the contributors to the seminars both for their helpful and encouraging comments on earlier versions and for the stimulation that their papers provided. I am also grateful to Monica Barry, Mike Nellis and Gwen Robinson for comments on the draft version of this article. Though I have grave reservations about the term ‘offender management’ (relating to its obvious inference that the offender is a problem to be managed rather than person to be assisted and that the task is technical rather than moral), I use it here, not just because of its contemporary relevance, but also because it refers both to community disposals and postprison resettlement. 8 Criminology Criminal Justice 6(1) 2 Owing to their pessimism about the prospects for treatment delivering their fourth aim (the reduction of crime), Bottoms and McWilliams tu rned their attention to other crime reduction strategies and in particular to crime prevention. Their argument in this connection was essentially that because ‘crime is predominantly social . . . ny serious crime reduction strategy must be of a socially (rather than an individually) based character’ (Bottoms and McWilliams, 1979: 188). 3 That said, they allowed that: ‘there is, ironically, at least a tiny shred of research evidence to suggest that, after all, help may be more crime-reducing than treatment’ (Bottoms and McWilliams, 1979: 174). To support this claim they referred to two studies that presaged later desistance research; the ? st suggested that although intensive casework treatment had no apparent impact, changes in the post-institutional social situations of offenders (for example, getting married or securing a job) were associated with reductions in recidivism (Bottoms and McClintock, 1973); the second suggested that treatment did demonstrate lower reconviction rates where the ‘treatment’ involved primarily practical help which was given only if and when offenders asked for it (Bernsten and Christiansen, 1965). 4 This section of the article draws heavily on McNeill et al. (2005). 5 It may be that this gap in theory s in part the product of the incremental and quasi-experimental character of ‘what works’ research; indeed it might even be said that the ‘what works’ philosophy is anti-theoretical in that it is more preoccupied with identifying and replicating successes than in explaining and understanding them (Farrall, 2002). 6 Signi? cantly, Boeck et al. ’s (2004) emerging ? ndings suggest that bridging social capital in particular (which facilitates social mobility) seems to be limited among those young people in their study involved in offending, leaving them ill-equipped to navigate risk successfully. That said, some recent studies have begun to explore the contribution of particular practice skills to effectiveness. Raynor refers in particular to a recent article by Dowden and Andrews (2004) based on a meta-analysis examining the contribution of certain key staff skills (which they term ‘core correctional practices’ or CCPs) to the effectiveness of interventions with offenders. 8 It is with some unease that I have merely mentioned but not developed arguments about the importance of making good to (and for) victims in this article. I am therefore grateful to Mike Nellis for highlighting the contingent relationships between offenders making good and making amends to victims. There is little empirical evidence that desistance requires making amends or making good to particular victims, although there are of course independent and compelling reasons why this matters in its own right. As Nellis suggests (personal communication, 18 August 2005), the case for making amends requires separate justi? cation. He further suggests that from the point of view of interventions with offenders, it may be important not so much as an enabling factor in desistance as a signifying factor. Drawing on this distinction, my own view is that although making amends is neither necessary nor suf? cient for desistance to occur, it may be useful none the less in consigning the past to the past (for victims and offenders) and thus in entrenching redemption scripts (for offenders). McNeill—A desistance paradigm for offender management References American Friends Services Committee (1971) Struggle for Justice. New York: Hill Wang. Asay, T. P. and M. J. Lambert (1999) ‘The Empirical Case for the Common Factors in Therapy: Quantitative Findings’, in M. A. Hubble, B. L. Duncan and S. D. Miller (eds) The Heart and Soul of Change: What Works in Therapy, pp. 33–56. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Barry, Monica (2000) ‘The Mentor/Monitor Debate in Criminal Justice: What Works for Offenders’, British Journal of Social Work 30(5): 575–95. Barry, M. A. (2004) ‘Understanding Youth Offending: In Search of â€Å"Social Recognition†Ã¢â‚¬â„¢, PhD dissertation, University of Stirling, Stirling. Bazemore, Gordon (1999) ‘After Shaming, Whither Reintegration: Restorative Justice and Relational Rehabilitation’, in G. Bazemore and L. Walgrave (eds) Restorative Juvenile Justice: Repairing the Harm of Youth Crime, pp. 55–94. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press. Bernsten, K. and K. O. Christiansen (1965) ‘A Resocialisation Experiment with Short-Term Offenders’, in K. O. Christiansen (ed. ) Scandinavian Studies in Criminology, vol. 1. London: Tavistock. Blunkett, David (2004) Reducing Crime Changing Lives: The Government’s Plans for Transforming the Management of Offenders. London: Home Of? ce. Boeck, Thilo, Jennie Fleming and Hazel Kemshall (2004) ‘Young People, Social Capital and the Negotiation of Risk’, paper presented at the European Society of Criminology Annual Conference, Amsterdam, August. Bordin, E. (1979) ‘The Generalizability of the Psychoanalytic Concept of the Working Alliance’, Psychotherapy 16: 252–60. Bottoms, Anthony (1995) ‘The Philosophy and Politics of Punishment and Sentencing’, in C. Clarkson and R. Morgan (eds) The Politics of Sentencing Reform, pp. 17–49. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bottoms, Anthony (2001) ‘Compliance and Community Penalties’, in A. Bottoms, L. Gelsthorpe an How to cite Desistance, Essay examples

Human Resource Management Teaching and Researching

Question: Discuss about the Human Resource Management: Teaching and Researching. Answer: Motivational theory Hertzberg's two factor theory The two element hypothesis by Frederick Hertzberg otherwise called motivation hygiene theory. Hertzberg states that the elements that prompt fulfilment in the occupation are independent and effortlessly recognizable from those that prompts disappointment in the employment (Maslach and Jackson 2013). The delightful components are known as motivational variables or inherent elements and the disappointing elements are known as hygiene elements or extraneous elements. The two elements are described below. Motivational factor Motivational elements are associated with the higher level need of an individual that overtake the basic need once it is fulfilled. Growth, recognition, opportunity and responsibility are the motivational factors. If the above factors are fulfilled then the individual will be satisfied otherwise not (Drnyei and Ushioda 2013). Hygiene factor Hygiene factor is associated with the work environment of the individual that includes include the administration and the policy in the company, supervision, relation with supervisor and peers, conditions in the work place and salary when exist adequately in a job. Fulfilment of all these factors leads to the satisfaction of the individual otherwise not. AMP Capital is taken as a case and how the two-factors is relevant in this firm is clarified. In this organization, cash and reward are the most persuading component for the employees. A few employees considered a congratulatory gesture, acknowledgement, and so forth. It really relies on upon the worker's mentality. According to the Herzberg compensation is one of the motivational factors for the individual that impact the performance based on satisfaction or dissatisfaction. Along with compensation, recognition is also one of the motivating factors for the employees because it feels more responsibility and more security (Moskovsky et al. 2013). AMP capital gives the opportunity to climb the ladder of hierarchy within the organization and an employee with two years internal experience can get the promotion with proper skill and knowledge. Process theory Process theory approach finds similarity between Vroom, Adams, Locke Latham and Skinner that are highly associated with the human behaviour on the organization. process approach of the motivational theory is associated with the behavioural changes of the employees that are influenced by the organizational activity (Miner 2015). If the organization is operating with a good environment that are supporting the employee to ease their job then their productivity is going to enhance. Goal setting theory Goal setting theory expresses those particular and extreme objectives with helpful criticism prompts better execution in the occupation. Edwin Locke expresses that the purpose to do the responsibility to accomplish an objective is the primary source of inspiration at work. An objective helps the member or staff what sort of work the worker needs to perform and the amount of effort is required to finish the assignment (Green et al. 2012). The harder the objective, the better will be the execution as the objectives, which are testing, keeps us centre in our work. The extreme objectives will motivate us to work even more hard deliberately to get it finished. Workers will perform better on the off chance that they get input as it will help for contemplation of the work of the representatives and can work efficiently to complete the assignment. Some variables like responsibility to your objective, attributes of the work and the way of life in the working environment influence the objectiv es execution connection. Equity theory Equity theory clarifies that the wages or compensations and the work society are not the primary driver for inspiration. Or maybe worker need to keep up balance between the inputs, for example, time, physical exertion, commitment, versatility in the work environment, resilience, duty, believing the bosses, and so forth they convey to the work place and the outcomes they get from the working environment like reward, compensation, social acknowledgment, self-regard, security and obligation (Aiken et al. 2013). Some approaches to keep up value are: A worker getting his or her inputs and in addition the yields modified, mutilating both the inputs and the yields subjectively and leaving the occupation For instance, if a worker was given a compensation increment however an associate was given a bigger pay increment for the same measure of work, the primary worker would assess this change and finds an imbalance, and be bothered. In any case, if the principal representative saw the other worker being given more obligation and consequently generally more work alongside the pay build, then the main representative may assess the change, infer that there was no misfortune in correspondence status, and not avoid the change (Den Boeft et al. 2016). An individual will consider that he or she is dealt with reasonably, in the event that he or she sees the proportion of his inputs to his results to be equal to everyone around him. Characteristics of positive environment Motivation Characteristics of a positive work environment are associated with the several factors that help to motivate the employees of the organization. According to Veenhoven (2013), when an employee performs in an organization then his or her working environment influences the productivity (Maslach and Jackson 2013). If the employee is associated with the positive environment of the work culture then an intrinsic factor will work to influence the motivation of the employees on the other hand if the work environment is working negatively then the performance of the employee will come down. Work life balance Several characteristic of the positive environment directly influence the employee performance. Flexible work schedule, good bonus, reorganization and transparency are the factors that help to enhance the employee behaviour towards the positivity balancing the personal and professional life (Veenhoven 2013). If all the factors are associated with the working environment of the organization then every employee, will the motivation. In this case, the motivation works externally to the employees of the organization Work climate Working environment shapes the approach of the employee towards the job. If the environment is providing support like making the job easier for the employee, providing the skill development program so that employee can improve the standard of the performance then it will help to enhance the performance. More the flexible and positive the environment is more the employee will engage with the job and the productivity will automatically increase (Veenhoven 2013). It is found that in spite of getting good environment some employees do not perform perfectly then it becomes the question of the integrity and effectiveness of that particular employee. In such cases, it is very important to identify such employees and isolate them because otherwise, they will exploit the situation and others will become negatively influenced by the behaviour. Therefore, characteristic of a positive work environment will always associate with the energy, health and security towards the job that will also consi der the employee benefit, which will influence the working pattern of the employees Training and development Training and development is the integrated factors of the work that help to increase the security of the employee by making them capable for the job responsibility. If an employee is not able to fulfil his or her responsibility during the job then he or she will always have the fear of losing the job (Avolio and Yammarino 2013). On the other hand, if the employee is able to perform well then he or she will never think of the job security because skill will provide the job security. Therefore training and development will always help to enhance the positive work environment. Recognition The different achievement and the milestones accomplished by a worker ought to be perceived by the administration to demonstrate that they administer to their staff as every worker is vital for the achievement of an organizational objective. The staff's commitments to the organization ought to be respected and celebrated with different workers. Work commemoration, birthday, marriage commemoration ought to be commended so they feel vital in the organization as the vast majority of the life they spent is in the workplace as it were. At the point when the staff's are remembered they have a feeling of fulfilment and will endeavour to work harder and feel more roused and locked in (Den Boeft et al. 2016). Advancements, grants, increment in pay, giving tickets to an occasion destination are some ways representatives can be acknowledged at the work environment. Hackman and Oldham job characteristics model According to Den Boeft et al. (2016), Hackman and Oldhams Model is associated with the work advancement which is a vocation outline system for upgrading work substance by functioning within it more inspiring prospective. In view of their own work and the work of others, they built up an occupation attributes model. Specifically, the model indicates that advancing certain components of employments adjusts individuals mental states in a way that upgrades their work adequacy. Core job characteristics Psychological state Psychological state is one of the extent to which a job requires a collection of various exercises and includes the utilization of various distinctive abilities and gifts of the worker. Occupations that are high in expertise assortment are seen by workers as all the more difficult due to the scope of abilities included; calm tedium that outcomes from tedious movement; and gives representatives a more prominent feeling of capability. Outcome Outcome is one of the extents that helps completing the work exercises required by the employment furnishes the person with bearing and clear data about the viability of his or her execution. Outcome is the scale that involves employment to give considerable prospect, liberty, and watchfulness to the individual who is preparing the job while deciding the process to be utilized as a part of taking the necessary steps (Green et al. 2012). How it helps to design the job Job specialization Specialization in work alludes to perform a duty which a man have a solid skill on a specific field. By doing the duty, a few times his work will be proficient and it will spare a ton of time as he has gotten to be master and know all the traps of the work. For a specific labourer, there will diminishment in the expense of generation and the work will be exact as he is doing it once a day (Miner 2015). Job rotation Job rotation is the process of providing different responsibility to the employees by sending them to different departments. This type of activity helps the employee to gain lot of experience and they feel good within the job. Several experiences will also help to increase the chance of promotion (Green et al. 2012). Therefore, job rotation has different benefit that helps to reduce the boringness of the employee as well as provide diverse experience. Job enlargement It refers to the expansion in the activities and obligations performed within the employment. The activities are included the same position as it were. It includes the stacking of the employment on a level plane. Because of occupation augmentation, ones aptitudes identified with physical and mental are better used for performing the duty. Job enrichment Job enrichment can be portrayed as a medium through which administration can persuade self-propelled staffs by appointing them extra obligation typically saved for high level representatives. By doing this, staffs feel like their work has meaning and is critical to the organization. This theory depends on the reason that workers have a characteristic propensity to need to succeed and are willing to be trusted with a greater part in the organization. At the point when these sorts of labourers are not being tested, they tend to slack off and not give their best exertion since they see their undertaking to be underneath their aptitude set. On the other hand when a worker is given independence over his/her work, they tend to feel in charge of the result of the undertaking and will attempt to advance the ideal deciding result (Hagger and Chatzisarantis 2014). General Job Enrichment is key to the work environment since it anticipates sentiments of tedium in the everyday operations from blo cking efficiency In Ford motor company, they always prioritize the skill and effort of the employees and reward them in every occasion and performance. The company always focus on the variety of skill, task identity and significance of the task therefore; they provide job enrichment through productivity of the employees and good customer satisfaction. Maslow hierarchy of needs Physiological The basic needs are salary, benefits and the work infrastructure for the employee. Safety and security If the employee is capable of doing the job then safety and security need will be fulfilled, that is associated with the work environment. Love and belongingness Relationship with collogue is very important to perform better task. Good relation will help employees to maintain a love within them. Self- Esteem When employees are promoted then their need of self esteem is fulfilled. Self-Actualization Intrinsic motivation is important to achieve the self actualization that is actually taking challenge in the worl place in a positive manner (Moskovsky et al. 2013). References Aiken, L.H., Sloane, D.M., Bruyneel, L., Van den Heede, K., Sermeus, W. and RN4CAST Consortium, 2013. Nurses reports of working conditions and hospital quality of care in 12 countries in Europe.International Journal of Nursing Studies,50(2), pp.143-153. Avolio, B.J. and Yammarino, F.J., 2013. Introduction to, and overview of, transformational and charismatic leadership.Transformational and charismatic leadership: the road ahead. London: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Den Boeft, M., Twisk, J.W., Hoekstra, T., Terluin, B., Penninx, B.W., van der Wouden, J.C., Numans, M.E. and van der Horst, H.E., 2016. Medically unexplained physical symptoms and work functioning over 2 years: their association and the influence of depressive and anxiety disorders and job characteristics.BMC Family Practice,17(1), p.1. Drnyei, Z. and Ushioda, E., 2013.Teaching and researching: Motivation. Routledge. Green, J., Liem, G.A.D., Martin, A.J., Colmar, S., Marsh, H.W. and McInerney, D., 2012. Academic motivation, self-concept, engagement, and performance in high school: Key processes from a longitudinal perspective.Journal of adolescence,35(5), pp.1111-1122. Hagger, M.S. and Chatzisarantis, N.L., 2014. An integrated behavior change model for physical activity.Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews,42(2), pp.62-69. Maslach, C. and Jackson, S.E., 2013. A social psychological analysis.Social psychology of health and illness,227. Miner, J.B., 2015.Organizational behavior 1: Essential theories of motivation and leadership. Routledge. Moskovsky, C., Alrabai, F., Paolini, S. and Ratcheva, S., 2013. The effects of teachers motivational strategies on learners motivation: A controlled investigation of second language acquisition.Language Learning,63(1), pp.34-62. Veenhoven, R., 2013. The four qualities of life ordering concepts and measures of the good life. InThe exploration of happiness(pp. 195-226). Springer Netherlands.

Star Appliance Company Essay Example

Star Appliance Company Essay This paper will discuss how Star Appliance Company managed its cost of capital and plan for future investments. The paper will reveal corporate problems and present relevant management theories to lead the company into a solution. The underlying problems consist of choosing a new and more efficient financing strategy, and designing more accurate method of evaluating investment projects. Previously, the company was having positive sales performances which indirectly cause the problem to be hard to identify. However, as the company needed to expand their business, the new financial officer discovered several inefficiencies in managing corporate financing strategies and evaluating future investment. The condition was described by the WACC method.   The paper will present alternatives of solutions for the problem and in the end choose the most beneficial one for the case. The company must adopt a new financing strategy which incorporates a balanced proportion between debt and equity financing instruments. The company must also design a new evaluation strategy for the new investment projects which incorporate risks premiums, additional cost of investments and a margin of error in forecasting future cash flow. The financial department has obtained increasing roles in the corporate management concept. In previous times, marketing department projects sales, production department determined the necessary amount of assets required in order to meet the projections, and the financial department’s function was only to provide funds for providing other department with their requirements. However, this model of management is obsolete and replaced by more coordinated types of decision making, where financial managers are responsible for planning as well as controlling activities. This reflects the increasing importance of good financial considerations in each decision of the corporation. We will write a custom essay sample on Star Appliance Company specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on Star Appliance Company specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on Star Appliance Company specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer According to Weston and Brigham (1996), there are several detailed activities related to financial management. One of them is the activity of making investment and financing decisions. In line with corporate long term strategy, financial managers must provide funds to support growth. Successful companies usually have high rate of sales, which required additional factory investment, equipment and current assets to produce goods and services. In the more coordinated decision making activities, financial managers must help determining the optimum sales level and make decisions on specific investment that will be performed. Within those activities, there are also questions of whether to use internal or external financing, debt or equity financing, and short or long term debts. These are important aspects of corporate management that could determine whether the company is heading to success or financial failure. Within this paper, I am discussing the importance of considering cost of assets in corporate financial management. The case study will be the Star Appliance Company in 1977. In this paper, I will describe the problems within Star Appliance Company financial management and offer recommendation to solve existing problems within the company. II.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Problems Within the Star Company II.1  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Corporate Background The Star Appliance Company is a successful business of manufacturing home appliances, especially electric stoves and ovens. Soon after the company was established in 1922, it receives a warm welcome from the growing market for home appliances. The company focuses on providing its customers with premium types of home appliances with a slightly higher margin than its competitors. In a short time, the company managed to gather significant market share due to its reputation of providing high quality appliances. Corporate financial strategy –to use equities instead of debts- has seemed to be working splendidly as The Company was able to survive the great depression and maintain its existence with smaller-based operations but strong financial structure within the company. However, management has become aware that there are problems in maintaining profitable operations with existing lines. The company plans to enrich its product lines, but there are some concerns regarding how the company managed its cost of capital. Without strong financial management capabilities, investments in new product lines could destroy corporate profitability instead of developing it. Therefore, these problems must be addressed first. II.2  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Hurdle Rates In simple understanding, hurdle rate means the minimum acceptable rate of return on a capital investment project. It is required to measure the limitation of when an investment is no longer considered profitable. The calculation has the basic logic of requiring returns to be higher than the cost of investment. However it also incorporate several factors such as the cost of risk, inflation, etc. It is a comprehensive look on how an investment will increase the wealth of the shareholders. Mathematically, the hurdle rate consists of the cost of the capital plus the project’s risk premium (‘The Hurdle Rate, 2006). II.2.1  Ã‚   Corporate Hurdle Rates The company seemed lacked logical reasoning to determine its hurdle rate. Corporate hurdle rate is based only by an experience on previous return of equity. According to the elaboration above, this policy is vulnerable to risks and provides low assurance for profit. The company must determine a new and more reasonable hurdle rate by incorporating factors such as cost of capital and risk premium (‘The Hurdle Rate’, 2006) II.2.2  Ã‚   Cost of Capital The cost of capital must be included within an investment calculation simply because we do not want to invest where we it provides us with no profit what so ever. Nevertheless, because obtaining money results additional costs, the concept cost of capital must include two things: the project cost and the financing cost. To be acceptable, a project must have a rate of return that exceeds the project cost plus the financing cost (‘The Hurdle Rate’, 2006) II.2.3  Ã‚   Risk Premium Nevertheless, cost of capital itself still does not provide a logical measurement toward a good financing decision. This is because every return from different sets of investment has a different degree of assurance. If the investment has less than 100% assurance for the return, then a risk premium must be included in the calculation of financing decision. However, the rate of risk premium must be set very in a very careful manner. Inadequate amount of risk premium will put our investment if jeopardy, on the other hand, over assuming the amount of risk premium will eliminate some profitable projects from consideration (‘The Hurdle Rate, 2006). II.3  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Financing Alternatives and Inflation II.3.1  Ã‚   Corporate Financing Strategy As mentioned in the case study, the company ha a unique strategy of financing. The company depends on equity financing methods a lot more than debt financing methods. On other words, the company survived through its years mostly by selling corporate equities. According to the case study, this is possible because the company has a remarkable reputation as a premium producer of household appliances and able to maintain good relationship with its affiliates. Nevertheless, Arthur Foster, the financial president of the company seemed confuse about corporate unwillingness to use debt instruments. Debt instruments have a considerably lower cost than equity, especially after incorporating tax into the calculation. The company might want to reconsider its policies of financing instruments. Furthermore, he argues that a proper additional margin must also be incorporated into the calculation to offset the effect of inflation. II.3.2  Ã‚   Debt and Equity Instruments The company prefers the equity financing because it has lower cost and smaller legal risk. However, due to corporate policy of increasing dividend rate, the alternative is no longer providing more efficiency compare to debt instruments. Generally, debt instruments will result a slightly higher capital cost and they would require monthly payment, nevertheless, they do not have the risk of loosing corporate control to shareholders. Moreover, if the company is able to maintain the good credibility toward creditors, after some time they would be more than happy to facilitate the company with debt extensions. On the other hand, the equity instruments are a tool of obtaining additional funds through affiliates or partners. These means management will loose more of the corporate control as the equity instruments build sups inside the company. Generally, the best option is to keep the proper balance between debt and equity financing instruments. Because the good balance differs among industry, the Star Appliance Company must put some effort in finding its own financing balance (‘Financing’, 2006). II.3.3  Ã‚   Inflation As stated by many economists in the late 1970’s, inflation was a significant factor influencing the cost of capital. A study by Cohen (1997) however, revealed that until today, inflation is still a significant influence for cost of capital. Inflation, even at its low rates, increases the user cost of capital significantly. If the rate of inflation decreases, the marginal gain in investment is greater compare to the rate of the decrease. This reflects the stronger effect of inflation toward cost of capital. Therefore, inflation should be incorporated in every investment analysis. II.4.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Risk, Legal Fees and margin of Error The last of Foster’s concerns is about how the company accounts for investment risks that are significantly larger than the others. There are opinions that riskier information should be evaluated using higher hurdle rates. Furthermore, Foster believed that there should be a margin to account for the existence of legal fees such as safety, and environmental costs. This margin is required to prevent the additional costs to eat away corporate profit from the investment. Finally, the investments must also calculate a margin of error, in order to account for unexpected disturbance in the forecasting process. In case of using different hurdle rates for different projects, management theories favor the opposite. According to several management theories, investment and financing consideration has different factors that must not be brought together. Investment decisions are based on the consideration of which project are the most profitable, while financing decisions should focus on supporting investment decision and not altering it. III.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Star Company Cost of Equity Cost of Equity is measured by various indicators. However, one of the most utilized is the Weighted Average Cost of Capital ratio. A firm’s WACC is the overall required return on the firm as a whole. In simple terms, the ratio accounts for every possibility of financing a corporation. According to the WACC concept, a corporation can either be financed by debt, preferen stock or common stock. The WACC put all of these factors into equation that resulted the average interest the company must pay for every dollar it finances. The calculation is as follows: WACC = w1k1(1-T) + w2k2 + w3k3 W1   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   = percentage of debt K1  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   = the rate of interest W2  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   = percentage of preferen stock K2  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   = cost of preferen stock W3  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   = percentage of common equity K3  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   = cost of common equity (Weston Brigham, 1996) According to existing data, the company financed most of its investments using retained earnings. The company did not have any long-term debt, which means that the w1 and k1 equals to 0. The case study also reveals that the company did not have any preferred stock within corporate balances sheet, which mean that the w2 and k2 equals to 0. Thus, the only variable exist within Star Appliance Company’s WACC is the common stock variable. Without the presence of debt and preferred stock, If we calculate the number of dividend paid and divide the result with total common stock of the company, then we will obtain a very high number of WACC. nbsp; Calculation : WACC (1978)  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   = percentage of common stock * (dividend paid/ total value of common stock) WACC (1978)  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   = 100% * [(dividend/share * total shares common stock)/total value of common stock] WACC (1978)  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   = 100% * [(1.52 * 13,414,268)/ 27,835,000] WACC (1978)  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   = 73% nbsp; The number means that on the period that ended December 31, 1978, the company paid as much as 73% for equity financing instruments. This is due to corporate operation to increase the rate of dividend paid, in order to satisfy shareholders. Despite corporate ability to sustain corporate operations and investment activities, the number is extremely high. Observing corporate financial structure, the company could easily obtain additional funding from debt instruments. Debts would have a much lower capital cost compare to the ‘sky-reaching’ dividend rate. nbsp; IV.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Recommendation From the case study, we are able to capture two main problems of the Star Appliance Company. The first point is the problem of choosing from alternatives financing instrument. Arthur Foster believed that despite the acceptable state of corporate financial performance at the time, the company could be a lot more efficient by altering its financing strategy. The second issue is that of choosing between different methods of evaluating alternative investments. There are several alternatives of solution forth both problems. nbsp; IV.1   Ã‚  Ã‚   Choosing Financing Instruments The first choice is to maintain corporate policy of using retained earnings and equity instruments in financing. This alternative will not create a problem for the company in the short-run. However, in the long-run, the company would need to expand its business by performing investment activities that require large amount of funds. This condition has been described in the case study as the company is trying to finance three projects with existing resource. In order to move forward with this project, the company needs to increase the efficiency of its financial structure. Maintaining current financing strategy will deny the company from further profitable investments using the projects. The second choice is to use debt instruments to cover the needs for investment. This alternative could provide the company with large amount of funds, considering the company did not yet have a balance of long-term debt. However, debt instruments are known for its slightly higher cost compare to standard equity instrument’s cost. It also requires a monthly payment that could be a burden if occurred in large proportions. Furthermore, companies overburdened with debts generally less favored by shareholders and future investors. The third alternative is to maintain a balance between debt and equity financing. This can be achieved by observing the debt-to-equity ratio and maintaining it within the proper balance. Some companies believe that a good company would not have a debt-to-equity ratio of more than 3 to 1. However, a good balance for debt-to-equity financing differs within each industry and the company must benchmark to other sin the industry to find the right balance. nbsp; IV.2  Ã‚  Ã‚   Methods of Choosing Investment Projects Within this issue, foster emphasizes several important points: methods of determining the proper hurdle rate, incorporating inflation, incorporating legal cost and a margin of error. The first alternative is to remain practicing existing investment evaluation method: using 10% hurdle rate, with little consideration of inflation cost, legal cost and a margin of error. This method will result all three projects to be acceptable alternatives. The company might be able to successfully financed all three projects if it apply for further external financing instruments, however,   the level of accuracy within the calculation will be low and there will be no certainty of the real cash flow that will be received in following years. The second alternative would be to incorporate financing costs, risk premium, inflation, legal cost and a margin of error. There is no sufficient data to perform these types of calculation within this paper. However, it can be estimated that the second alternative will not be acceptable according to the new hurdle rate and the new evaluation standard. The third alternative is to incorporate financing costs, risk premium, inflation, legal cost, margin of error and additional margin for riskier investments that require additional asset. This alternative will present a more accurate calculation of existing projects, but it will influence investment decisions with consideration of financing, something that will reduce investment activities considerably. nbsp; V.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Solution In choosing financing alternatives, the best solution for Star Appliance Company is to start using considerable debt instrument. The target is to balance the proportion between debt and equity. The company should have no difficulties in obtaining additional funds from debt instruments because of its good reputation and zero balance of long term debt. The balanced proportion between debt and equity instruments will lead to efficient financial management and resulted optimum capacity for further investment activities. In designing methods of evaluating investment projects, the company should choose to incorporate inflation, legal fees and margin of error, but should not choose to make additional margins for relatively riskier projects. Each project should be calculated using similar percentage of hurdle rate plus additional costs mentioned previously. nbsp; VI.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Conclusion Unlike most companies, the company seemed to have no problem in marketing and selling its premium product. However, the premium profits caused management to neglect efficiency concerns in managing its operations and investment decisions. The problem became visible as the company appointed new financial officer and tried to plan for further investment. Despite previous success, company’s WACC displayed that corporate cost of capital is significantly higher than average. The new financial officer mentioned problems such as the lack consideration of inflation, legal fees and margin of error in evaluating new projects. These factors are important in providing managers with accurate investment decisions and accurate predictions of cash flow. For example, according to a study by Cohen (1997) inflation has a significant effect in cost of capital. Furthermore, not incorporating legal fees and margin of error will eat away the profit of the investment. The solution presented for the company is to redesign its financing strategy into a balanced proportion between debt and equity. In terms of evaluating investment activities, the company should incorporate additional fees and a margin of error.