Reflection Paper : ASSIGNMENT

Objective: Understand and apply the concept of meaningful work using your current job. You may also refer to a past job or use school if you are currently unemployed.

Chalofsky states that the interplay of self, work and balance are key to achieving meaningfulness. Reflect on your current job and answer the following questions.

• To what degree are you able to bring your whole self (mind, body, emotion, spirit) to your work and the workplace? What constraints, either external or created by you, are there to bringing any/all of these to the work environment? Consider the culture of your organization as discussed in your previous reflection paper. See reflection paper #1 BELOW

• What is the emotional labor (Ciulla) required of your job? What social and personal requirements exist beyond the economic transaction for which you were hired?

• To what degree are you able to exercise autonomy and control in your work environment and in what ways do you feel empowered?

• Do you exhibit a learning orientation or a performance orientation and what are the reasons that prompt this orientation?

• How does your job fit into what you consider to be your life's purpose?

• What practical changes can you make in any of these areas to achieve more meaning at work and greater life balance?

Instructions:

1. Describe your organization in paragraph format in 1500-2000 words. Answer each bullet point above.

2. Use subheadings. There should be a centered subheading for each bullet point listed above (e.g. Whole Self, Emotional Labor, etc.). This helps ensure that you address each required item and shows me that you covered them all.

3. Format using double-spaced, Times New Roman, 12-point font.

4. Submit this as a Word document by the due date posted in your syllabus.

5. Please remember to follow the rules of academic integrity as every paper is automatically submitted to Turnitin.com when it is submitted to D2L.

REFLECTION PAPER # 1, Use to relate and continue to new reflection paper #2

Reflection Report one

The organization relationship to its environment.

I choose to write about a church that I am acquainted with let's call it "Shiloh". Upon first accepting the invitation to become a member I was greeted with smiles and I believe genuine politeness. This sentiment was mutual for I felt like an enormous burden had finally been removed from my back. I felt free and along with this freedom there was a desire to learn as much as I could about Jesus. I had a voracious appetite for anything that would assist in my learning and growing into his stature. The attraction intensified as I started to get answers to long dormant uncomfortable questions. Why are you here? What is your Purpose? What happens when you die? What is life all for or about? As I read and studied the blinders were removed and all I saw was light. Light in passages of scripture I have read before but at that time there was no light. No connection just an Intellectual ascent. This brings me to our first question.

1, Does the organization perceive itself to be dominate, submissive, harmonizing, searching out a niche.

I would say do to my experiences that in the United States most Christian churches seem to be dominate. There is very little acceptance of other faith into today's society. Due to many negative associations and activities from individuals from other faiths in particular the Muslim faith: As well as a failure on the part of the Christian community to put their own selfish and self-interest aside many have put religion aside. So how is it dominate? Even though a large number of people have turn away from the faith in practice many still claim to be Christian. Or worse they claim they can be good of themselves. Not so at Shiloh. It is a place where the bible is studied. Also you are welcomed for who you are and not just what you are or have. Also unlike some that are in the spotlight today advocating the reemergence of separatism and cast system and also claiming to be a Christian; Shiloh is all about tearing down walls not reestablishing them. Therefore If you look at it from the perspective of Christianity you may say dominate. If you look at from a more personal perspective I would say Shiloh is filling a niche and hopefully, and prayerfully a niche that will someday transform the whole.

The nature of human activity

2, Is the "correct" way for human to behave to be dominate /pro-active, harmonizing, or passive/fatalistic?
I don't believe its one size fits all scenario. I believe because we are human. We were created the highest moral creatures on the earth, and because we can reason and have the power of choice we may find ourselves fluctuating between the choices. I try to be balance in my decision making moving from principle not just emotions or feelings. This hasn't always been the case, it wasn't until what I discussed earlier that that this mindset came to be. The world teaches that you have to be the best. From early childhood games like musical chairs. The music plays and when it stops everyone must sit down. However there isn't enough chairs for everyone. The game continues until you have two children and one chair. The music stops and you have one winner and one loser. Why? It's just a game you may say. I say look at what it teaches. Look how earlier the self-interest or survival of the fittest mindset is developed. By my answer I will say that I'm leaning towards Harmonizing.

The nature of reality and truth

3, How do we define what is true and what is not true: and how is truth ultimately determined both in the physical and social world? By pragmatic test, reliance on wisdom, or social consensus?

A lot of what we determine to be truth has been either proven by one own personal experience or by another's. However this doesn't mean just because it may be truth to me you will agree or that it will be truth to you as well. You see the concept of truth must be defined and agreed upon by all who are looking to base their beliefs on it. For a long time many thought that the earth was flat. It was their truth. Was it true? No, someone came along and proved that the earth was round. Did they accept that truth? No. My point is that you must have a foundation and we as individuals as well as society choose what that will be. I believe truth may be arrived at by test but I also hope that for some question I would rely on another wisdom or experience so that I may not have to have a negative experience to verify. "The stove is hot do not touch".

The nature of human relationships

6, what is the "correct" way for people to relate to each other. To distribute power and affection? Is life competitive or cooperation? Is the best way to organize society on the basis of individualism or groupism? Is the best authority system autocratic/paternalistic or collegial/participative?

I believe the biblical model is well suited to answer this question first "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". When raising my children one needed a whooping and the others I could look at or talk to and the corrected there behavior. I'm saying you can't go wrong with showing and giving affection when it is warranted. But there will be times when you must be firm. Hopefully you will lead with affection.

By nature I am very competitive. It hasn't always serve me well. I learned that when I feed into my competitive nature I really don't care about my opponent. Therefore, I'm trying to practice to be more cooperative. Think about the big picture or to put other individuals I care for first.

We are all going to be judged individual so that is my preference. Even though there can be a lot of good done when we pull together. History testifies that the majority can and has led many astray. Not sure on the last part of the question. Hopefully insight will come as we proceed through the semester.

Homogeneity vs, Diversity

7, Is this group best off if it is highly diverse or if it is highly homogeneous, and should individual in a group be encouraged to innovate or conform?

Oh how I love diversity. I believe the more the merrier. Different insights viewpoints experiences all go into what we discussed earlier about truth and human activity. To work together but at the same time be different is great. It is a goal that many have tried to achieve and haven't. I for one will embrace diversity and encourage its development. Diversity doesn't harm the individual it enriches them. If I just had my own inclinations and thoughts where would I be? Where would you be if left to yourself? No we need each other and shouldn't be threaten by that necessity.

Along with the need of diversity there is the need to be innovative. Again this shouldn't be looked at negatively for without innovation we wouldn't have many of the scientific marvels we have today. It may be cliché but "if you can dream it you can achieve it".