Candidate Hammer Case Study

The song, “The Workers’ Anvil,” written by Laura M. Griffing, is about workers who joined labor union to bargain for better pay, and working conditions. This is known as striking. The song is written in hope for change in better pay and have a safe work environment. Owners are enjoying their tremendous amount of profit that they earn at the expense of the workers.

To make a valid and reliable assessment of my candidate’s performance I get my candidate to produce work evidence to support there claim, to complete a Task Statement and I then type out the Observation which will backup the task which they completed and also to reference the criteria/elements which they successfully matched.

Candidate Genter began his brief strong with an Orientation that included key terrain in the area. However, SNC's Execution paragraph not only lacked detail, but completely omitted Tasks and any executable plan to accomplish the mission. The extent of SNC's Scheme of Maneuver was to utilize the planks to move, causing many questions from his fire team members following his brief. SNC's lack of initial plan significantly hindered the sense of urgency with which his fire team moved, and in his absence of direction, another team member began to make decisions and direct the team leader and the rest of the fire team what to do. When SNC did communicate to his fire team, he did so in a composed and calm tone of voice. However, this did little

Candidate Lamb posted security prior to the beginning of his brief. Candidates Lamb's brief was delivered confidently, naturally, and not rehearsed. SNC was very comfortable delivery the 5 paragraph order. During his brief, SNC oriented his fire team and provided references to aid in the understanding of his order. Prior to execution, SNC developed an initial plan that included all the elements necessary to complete the mission. During execution, SNC was able to make decisions at points of friction. SNC was able to develop a sensible and comprehensive plan by gathering intelligence and taking suggestions. However, SNC did not rely solely on the suggestions of others to make informed decisions. At points of friction, SNC checked on the

Candidate McKenzy demonstrated and understanding on how to conduct a five paragraph order but omitted key information throughout the entirety of the brief. SNC displayed he was somewhat confident with his brief by his calm demeanor using a conversational tone during his brief. SNC stated there is no need for security prior to conducting his brief. The scheme of maneuver was vague, and non-executable without further guidance. The tasking statement stated basic billet assignments as who was the ready, fire and the assist. Once the execution began, SNC was in control of his subordinates and effectively communicated adjustments to the initial plan. Upon the first friction point, SNC remained calm and was able to devise a new plan and maintained

Candidate Horton showed a firm grasp of the OSMEAC format and briefed a solid five paragraph order with confidence. The information he briefed was accurate based off the information provided to him by the evaluator. SNC focused on safety as well, instructing his fire team during coordinating instructions to not throw any of the equipment without being told by the evaluator. SNC's tasking statements contained purpose, showing he put some thought into how each member could be utilized to meet the objective and accomplish the mission. SNC addressed the tactical situation and ensured security was posted before briefing the order. SNC was clearly in charge of his fire team. SNC made good use of his fire team, ensuring security was posted at

Outstanding performance in all regards! From the moment she began her brief, Candidate Klenke displayed confidence and a strong command presence. Her order was thorough and allowed her fire team to begin executing the problem right from the start. She maintained good eye contact during the brief and utilized the obstacle to discuss her scheme of maneuver. During the execution, SNC carried out the plan she had developed. She was able to understand how to employ the equipment at hand to address individual parts of the problem, which demonstrated she has the ability to plan ahead and anticipate future requirements. During the execution, she constantly communicated her intent and tasked her fire team who followed immediately, leaving no doubts

Candidate Hargrove did a great job during this evaluation. SNC’s brief was excellent. He covered every paragraph of OSMEAC, briefed with a high amount of confidence and was methodical in his issue. SNC had a clear plan going into the execution, and managed his fire team well throughout. SNC maintained a calm demeanor and bearing, even when he faced friction. He evaluated the problem at decision points, thought through the problem, and gave solid direction to his fire team. Candidate Hargrove was clearly in charge of his team, leading them with a powerful demeanor and confidence. Communication was outstanding within the entire team, and SNC fostered their actions as those of a cohesive unit. Candidate Hargrove was able to make decisions,

Candidate Fowler displayed a low sense of urgency taking about two minutes following the evaluator’s brief to write his order then briefed his fireteam for over five minutes. SNC provided an adequate brief to be able to execute the mission. The Mission paragraph contained an accurate task and purpose but also contained additional information that was not necessary. Additionally, when he repeated the mission, it was not at all verbatim. SNC provided a scheme of maneuver that was above average however; SNC’s tasks were merely assigned billets with no true task and purpose. Throughout the brief SNC was a little choppy, showing a little lack of confidence and weak understanding of his plan. SNC did not post security during his brief, but did improve

If someone walked up to a random person and asked them to name the first tool that came to mind, they would be more likely to say “hammer” than “shingle froe”. The average Joe has a hammer in their house than a shingle froe since hammer is more commonly used. A single froe is a specialized tool that construction workers use to put shingles on the roof of a house. Prototype theory is the phenomenon that causes people’s mind automatically think of a hammer when asked that question. The prototype theory is the belief where everyone has a mindset of one word relating to another. (Prototype Theory, 2015). Another way the prototype is known as a way a person categorizes their mind (What is Prototype Theory?, 2016). An example would be is when a

Candidate Hosburgh’s brief delivery was at a normal tone and calm demeanor. His Orientation paragraph incorporated additional details from guidance he had received prior to SULE II. His scheme of maneuver provided a rough idea for what how he wanted to accomplish the mission, but did not go into enough detail, and after the brief his team leaders requested clarification on the initial plan. Following his brief, he got his teams moving and maintained this sense of urgency throughout execution. During execution, he periodically maintained track of the navigation and pace count. He positioned himself close to his team leaders and was able to control his unit through effective use of hand and arm signals. Upon contact, SNC provided a loud,

Both the hammer and feather fall at the same rate on the moon but different rates on Earth because of the differences in gravity between the two environments. Obviously, the hammer will weigh significantly more than the feather and when dropped on Earth, will hit the ground much sooner than the feather. The rate at which something falls is determined by its mass, its surface area, and its acceleration due to gravity. As all of these factors increase, the speed at which the object falls does as well. On the Moon, gravity is only 16% of the intensity it is on Earth. This decreases the hammer's ability to accelerate in its decent, allowing both it and the feather to land at the same time.

In the future it could be recommended that the committees should define specific rating parameters for evaluating the performance of individuals. The selected evaluation criteria must not be dominated by other organization members because it creates injustice to the deserving candidates. There should be a separate performance system for different groups of employees in the organization on the basis of seniority and experience 9advanced). The decisions made by committee must not be influenced by others if it not based solely on the parameters in which the nominees will be scored against each other. This will help in building trust and motivation among employees on the committee and will increase dedication to the organization. The advanced performance

The decision process made was basically to align the position expectations with the skills of the candidates based on the assessment. This will

The success of a corporation has been traditionally tied to how well the managers execute the roles of leading, planning and controlling. One of the key components of the controlling aspect of management is the evaluation of the people that they are managing. The function of this process involves monitoring performance goals and has management taking corrective actions when necessary. Performance evaluations can be described as the measurement of the performance of an employee related to defined measures, using an applicable performance goals and appropriate criteria that relates to the employees work in question. This paper will review the engineer’s evaluation in the given case study.