![]() If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. ![]() And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.īut you know what? We change lives. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.” My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. “Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. Even in many male-only jobs, such as loading tanks and artillery, there are currently no established physical standards for being eligible to have the job.Ībout a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”: The key now is designing tests that can be used to create physical standards. ![]() The head of US Special Operations Command, for example, then has another year – until July 2015 – to review the information and provide his recommendation about whether integrating women into SOF units is feasible and, if not, to explain why.īy January 2016, services are to begin officially integrating women into positions that have previously been closed to them, if they have not already done so. The secretary of Defense has ordered the services to begin having assessments of how they will integrate women into combat units completed by July 2014. "These concerns include both social cohesion – referring to the extent to which team members feel emotionally bonded with each other – and task cohesion, referring to the mutual commitment among the individual team members in achieving the group objective."Īnd so General Sacolick says that he has commissioned a RAND Corporation study to design a survey "for every single SOF operator to assist in first identifying – and then eliminating – barriers to integration." Bennet Sacolick, director of Force Management and Development for US Special Operations Command. "Our concern about integration generally centers upon the impact of unit cohesion," said Maj. More than physical standards, others have questioned the impact of female troops on the morale of all-male units, such as those in the Special Operations Forces.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |