Monday, March 02, 2026

Understanding Military Conflict: Four Essential Questions for Citizens

Introduction

Whenever a significant geopolitical event occurs—particularly one as consequential as a war that will shape world history—citizens must ask four fundamental questions: Why did this happen? What was its purpose? Where does it lead? And how should we respond? These questions form the analytical framework necessary for democratic accountability and informed public discourse.

As we examine the current conflict with Iran, now in its early stages, these questions become urgently relevant. This analysis seeks to provide clarity on the origins, motivations, and implications of this military engagement from a political science perspective.

The Origins of Conflict: Agency and Decision-Making

Primary Actors and Motivations

The current military action originated not from direct American security imperatives but from sustained diplomatic pressure by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Over the course of seven visits to the White House in the past year, Netanyahu consistently advocated for U.S. military involvement in regime change operations targeting Iran.

This represents a significant departure from traditional justifications for military intervention. The stated rationale has evolved from immediate nuclear threats to broader strategic objectives. Netanyahu himself acknowledged that this military action represents the culmination of a forty-year strategic vision rather than a response to imminent danger.

The Importance of Historical Accuracy

Documenting these origins accurately serves multiple purposes beyond immediate analysis. Historical narratives shape collective memory and influence future policy decisions. When the origins of conflicts become obscured or deliberately misrepresented over time, societies lose the capacity to learn from past mistakes.

The pattern of historical revision is well-documented across numerous conflicts. Initial justifications often differ substantially from how events are remembered decades later. By establishing a clear record at the outset, we create accountability mechanisms that can inform future deliberations about military engagement.

Strategic Calculations and Regional Power Dynamics

The Pursuit of Regional Hegemony

From a realist perspective in international relations theory, Israel's strategic objectives align with classical great power behavior. The pursuit of regional hegemony—the ability to dominate one's geographic sphere without constraint—represents a fundamental ambition of rising powers throughout history.

Israel possesses several strategic advantages that support this ambition:

•        Status as the region's acknowledged nuclear power.

•        Advanced technological capabilities.

•        Robust defense partnerships with Western powers.

•        Significant economic development relative to regional neighbors.

The Iranian government represented the most significant obstacle to Israeli regional dominance. Through proxy organizations including Hezbollah, Hamas, and Houthi forces, Iran maintained the capacity to contest Israeli actions and constrain its freedom of operation throughout the Middle East.

Emerging Competition: Israel, Türkiye, and the Future of Syria

From a regional power perspective, the collapse of Cold War–era hegemonic discipline has opened space for three principal contenders: Iran and its “Axis of Resistance” proxies, Türkiye, and Israel. Iran’s attempt to leverage Hamas and Hezbollah to encircle Israel and gain prestige among Sunni Arab publics has largely failed, leaving its proxies weakened and its regional reputation damaged. This vacuum has elevated both Israel and Türkiye as the two most capable remaining contenders for influence from the Eastern Mediterranean to Syria and beyond.

Syria has become the central arena where these ambitions intersect. Israel’s military presence and strikes in Syria are justified as efforts to prevent hostile forces from consolidating along its borders and to maintain a demilitarized buffer south of Damascus. Türkiye, by contrast, has occupied large swathes of northern Syria since 2016 and now enjoys close ties with the new Syrian government, after years of backing Islamist rebel formations such as HTS. Turkish leaders see any move to fragment Syria or formalize sectarian or ethnic enclaves as a direct threat to their national security and have publicly warned they will intervene to prevent such outcomes.

Israel’s agenda is often read by regional analysts as favoring a fragmented Syria composed of weak sectarian or ethnic entities that cannot threaten its security and that can serve as buffers. This perception, combined with Israeli airstrikes on sites reportedly scoped by Türkiye for future bases, has driven Ankara to accelerate military modernization, including indigenous weapons development and new fighter-jet acquisitions from European partners, in part to narrow Israel’s qualitative edge. While both governments have an interest in avoiding a direct clash, overlapping operations, gray-zone activities, and proxy engagements in Syria increase the probability of incidents that could escalate if not carefully managed.

Territorial and Political Objectives

Beyond neutralizing Iranian influence, Israeli strategic planning encompasses territorial expansion into portions of Syria and Lebanon, along with consolidation of control over disputed territories. These objectives follow predictable patterns of state behavior in international relations, where dominant regional powers seek to expand their sphere of influence and secure strategic buffers.

Collateral Consequences: The Gulf States

Impact on American Allies

The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) nations—Bahrain, Oman, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia—represent some of America's most significant strategic partnerships in the Middle East. These countries host American military installations, facilitate critical energy infrastructure, and increasingly serve as centers for international diplomacy.

The current conflict has placed these allies in an untenable position. Iranian missile strikes have targeted facilities across the Gulf region, including:

•        Critical energy infrastructure in Saudi Arabia.

•        International airports in Dubai and Abu Dhabi.

•        Military installations hosting American personnel.

•        Desalination plants essential for civilian water supply.

Erosion of Alliance Credibility

The perceived inability or unwillingness of the United States to defend these partners during hostilities initiated at American participation undermines decades of alliance-building. When allied nations experience attacks on critical infrastructure while hosting American forces, questions naturally arise about the value of such partnerships.

This erosion of confidence carries long-term implications for American strategic positioning. Gulf states may reconsider their alignment with Western powers, potentially seeking alternative security arrangements or adopting positions of neutrality in future conflicts.

The Question of American Interests

Divergence Between Allied and National Objectives

A central question in democratic accountability concerns whether military action serves American national interests or primarily advances the strategic objectives of allied nations. In this case, substantial evidence suggests the latter.

American military and diplomatic leadership expressed significant reservations about this course of action. The risks were well understood:

1.      Regime change operations historically produce unstable outcomes.

2.     No viable succession plan existed for Iranian governance.

3.      Regional destabilization could trigger refugee crises.

4.     American personnel face elevated risk without clear strategic gain.

Despite these concerns, the decision proceeded based on commitments to allied interests rather than calculated American strategic advantage.

The Precedent of Unilateral Allied Action

A critical dynamic emerged when Israeli leadership indicated willingness to proceed unilaterally regardless of American participation. This created a coercive dilemma: either join the operation to potentially moderate its scope, or face the consequences of allied action taken without coordination.

This represents a significant shift in alliance dynamics. Traditionally, the patron power (in this case, the United States) exercises substantial influence over client state military operations through financial leverage and security guarantees. The inversion of this relationship—where the smaller ally effectively compels larger partner participation—merits serious examination.

Historical Context: Patterns of Influence

The Last Presidential Restraint

Historical analysis reveals that President John F. Kennedy was the last American executive to impose meaningful constraints on Israeli strategic ambitions. In 1962, Kennedy demanded inspection of nuclear facilities at Dimona and threatened to cut aid if Israel pursued nuclear weapons development without transparency.

Following Kennedy's assassination in November 1963, Vice President Lyndon Johnson reversed this policy, effectively granting approval for Israeli nuclear development. Since that turning point, no American administration has successfully imposed significant constraints on Israeli strategic decision-making despite providing billions in annual assistance.

Implications for Sovereignty and Alliance Management

This pattern raises fundamental questions about sovereignty and alliance management. When a recipient of substantial foreign aid can effectively dictate the military policy of its benefactor, traditional power dynamics have been substantially altered.

Political scientists distinguish between:

•        Symmetric alliances where partners possess roughly equivalent power and influence.

•        Asymmetric alliances where a dominant partner exercises disproportionate influence.

•        Inverted alliances where the ostensibly weaker partner shapes the stronger partner's behavior.

The current relationship increasingly resembles the third category—a phenomenon worthy of systematic study.

Domestic Political Implications

The Absence of Public Mandate

Democratic legitimacy requires that significant military commitments reflect public will as expressed through electoral processes. Pre-conflict polling indicated minimal public support for military operations against Iran. This support has declined further as casualties mount and consequences become apparent.

The disconnect between elite policy preferences and public opinion creates potential for domestic political instability. When governments pursue military action without popular mandate, they undermine the foundations of democratic accountability.

The Acceleration of Social Change During Wartime

Historical analysis demonstrates that warfare accelerates social and political trends. Civil liberties typically contract during military conflicts as governments prioritize security over individual rights. Political discourse becomes more polarized. Dissent faces increased pressure for conformity.

These patterns emerge reliably across diverse political systems and time periods. Britain interned domestic political opponents during World War II despite its democratic traditions. The United States restricted civil liberties substantially during both World Wars and subsequent conflicts.

Current trends suggest similar dynamics. Calls for restricting speech, investigating dissent, and questioning the loyalty of those who opposed military action have intensified rapidly. These developments threaten the open discourse essential for democratic governance.

Syria’s Internal Settlement and the Israel–Türkiye Question

Beyond great power competition, Syria’s internal constitutional future has become a live debate that will shape regional stability regardless of Israeli or Turkish preferences. The core question concerns how power will be distributed among regions, communities, and the central state after years of civil war, demographic shifts, and external intervention. Kurdish forces, who hold significant territory and have borne much of the ground fighting, are even less willing than before to accept a strongly centralized Damascus and will resist any attempt to deploy national forces or HTS-aligned units in their regions.

Minority communities—Druze among them—have generally articulated maximal public demands that resemble robust federalism rather than outright partition: a single flag, currency, and army, with strong local governments and local law enforcement, and clear constitutional prohibitions on using the national army for internal repression. Such arrangements echo federal models in established democracies, where deployment of national forces in domestic provinces is tightly constrained. Over time, a census is likely to reveal that minorities have shrunk substantially under HTS rule and war conditions; if no single minority retains more than a small percentage of the population, Sunni majority fears of regional autonomy may ease. In that scenario, religious Sunni Arabs would dominate national politics, with their primary opposition emerging from a coalition of secular Sunnis and religious minorities—assuming some degree of political pluralism is permitted.

In this context, the prospect of an Israel–Türkiye conflict is best understood as a structural risk rather than an imminent inevitability. Ankara has declared it will oppose any attempt to divide or permanently demilitarize Syria in ways that appear to legitimize long-term foreign occupation or empower Kurdish entities it deems terrorist affiliates. Israel, for its part, has supported some Syrian minorities seeking autonomy and insists on retaining operational freedom inside Syria until it judges the regime sufficiently stable and non-threatening. Analysts note that relations between the two states are already described as a “cold war,” with deconfliction lines in place but mutual suspicion growing. Both sides are modern militaries, both are tied in different ways to Western security architectures, and both have much to lose from open conflict, making indirect competition—through proxies, gray-zone operations, and diplomatic contests for Sunni Arab support—the more likely trajectory.

The Path Forward: Policy Recommendations

Immediate Operational Priorities

Several immediate steps could mitigate ongoing risks:

1.      Declare objectives achieved and withdraw. Continued operations without clearly defined, achievable goals invite mission creep and escalating casualties. Declaring victory following the achieved objective (elimination of Iranian leadership) provides an exit pathway.

2.     Prioritize American civilian evacuation. Hundreds of thousands of American citizens remain in the region, many unable to secure transportation due to disrupted air travel and maritime routes. The State Department must prioritize citizen welfare over diplomatic considerations.

3.      Reassert alliance management. The United States must clearly communicate that allied nations cannot unilaterally commit American military forces. Future operations require explicit American consent based on American interests.

4.     Restore air defense to Gulf partners. The redeployment of air defense systems from Saudi Arabia to Israel left critical infrastructure vulnerable. Restoring these defensive capabilities demonstrates commitment to longstanding alliances.

Structural Reforms for Long-Term Accountability

Beyond immediate crisis management, several structural reforms merit consideration:

Foreign Lobbying Transparency

The influence of foreign-funded lobbying organizations on American policy requires greater transparency and potentially stricter regulation. Democratic governance suffers when foreign interests can effectively purchase policy outcomes through lobbying expenditures.

The Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) provides a framework for such transparency but faces inconsistent enforcement. Strengthening these mechanisms while respecting First Amendment protections represents a delicate but necessary balance.

Dual Citizenship in Government Service

Many democracies restrict individuals holding multiple citizenships from serving in sensitive governmental positions. The logic is straightforward: divided loyalties create potential conflicts of interest in policy-making.

The United States should consider whether individuals holding citizenship with foreign powers should occupy positions involving national security decision-making or military command. This standard should apply uniformly regardless of which foreign nations are involved.

Declassification and Historical Accountability

Excessive governmental secrecy undermines democratic accountability and fuels conspiracy theories. When citizens cannot access basic information about historical events—including assassinations, terrorist attacks, and military operations—they lose confidence in governmental institutions.

A systematic review of classification standards, particularly for events now decades old, would restore some measure of public trust while harming no legitimate security interests.

The Spiritual Dimension: Values in Conflict

Religious Leadership and Military Violence

Religious communities face particular challenges during wartime. Leaders must balance patriotic support for national defense with theological commitments to principles including just war theory, protection of innocents, and the inherent dignity of all persons.

When religious leaders enthusiastically endorse violence against civilian populations or describe God as primarily a "God of war," they depart from theological traditions emphasizing peace, reconciliation, and the sanctity of human life. Such rhetoric serves political rather than spiritual purposes.

Christian just war theory, developed over centuries by theologians including Augustine and Thomas Aquinas, establishes strict criteria for justified military action:

•        Just cause (defense against aggression).

•        Right intention (genuine pursuit of peace, not conquest).

•        Legitimate authority (properly constituted government).

•        Proportionality (means proportionate to ends).

•        Discrimination (protection of noncombatants).

•        Last resort (exhaustion of peaceful alternatives).

Religious leaders who abandon these principles in favor of uncritical nationalism abdicate their prophetic role in favor of political convenience.

The Importance of Moral Restraint

Democratic societies depend on moral restraint—the willingness to limit the exercise of power based on ethical principles rather than pure capability. When leaders celebrate death, dehumanize enemies, or dismiss civilian casualties as "cost-free," they erode the moral foundations that distinguish democratic societies from authoritarian regimes.

Reverence for human life, even enemy life, does not constitute weakness. It represents recognition that all persons possess inherent dignity that transcends national boundaries or political conflicts. Societies that lose this recognition lose an essential element of their humanity.

Conclusion: Democracy Requires Truth

Democratic governance cannot function without accurate information. When governments systematically mislead citizens about the origins of conflicts, the motivations behind military action, or the costs being incurred, they undermine the consent of the governed.

This analysis has sought to establish several fundamental points:

•        The current conflict originated from allied pressure rather than direct American security threats.

•        Strategic objectives center on regional hegemony rather than defensive necessity.

•        Significant American allies face substantial harm from operations they did not request.

•        American casualties serve foreign strategic objectives more than national interests.

•        Democratic accountability requires honest assessment of these dynamics.

Citizens have both the right and the responsibility to demand truthful accounting from their leaders. When military action occurs, the public deserves clear answers about why American forces are deployed, whose interests are being served, and what constitutes success.

The path forward requires reasserting democratic accountability over military policy, prioritizing genuine American interests over allied preferences, and maintaining the moral restraint that distinguishes democratic societies from their authoritarian competitors.

As John Henry Newman wrote: "Eternal God, in whose perfect kingdom no sword is drawn but the sword of righteousness, no strength known but the strength of love, so mightily spread abroad your spirit, that all peoples may be gathered under the banner of the Prince of Peace as children of one Father to whom be dominion and glory now and forever."

These words remind us that genuine security emerges not from unconstrained military power but from justice, restraint, and respect for human dignity—principles that must guide policy in both war and peace.

#MiddleEastPolitics #Geopolitics #ForeignPolicy #InternationalRelations #PoliticalScience #WarAndPeace #USForeignPolicy #IsraelIran #IranCrisis #GulfStates #GlobalSecurity #RegionalHegemony #EnergyPolitics #WorldNews #DemocracyAndPower #MediaNarratives #ConflictAnalysis #HashtagDiplomacy #Syria #Turkey #KurdishIssue #IsraelTurkeyRelations #SyrianConflict #RegionalPowerPolitics

at No comments:

Sunday, March 01, 2026

Development Plans

 • 23,383 Views • 485 Likes • 69 Comments

How to develop and implement an employee development plan that drives to career growth?

Introduction

Plans do not develop anyone—only development experiences develop people. 

We see examples where people put more effort and attention into the planning process than they do into the development process. Development plan that drives to career growth process has lots of to-do s, forms, charts, meetings, due dates and checklists. They sometimes create a false sense that the planning process is an end in itself rather than a precursor to real development. Many of us fall into the same trap regarding physical fitness. We have may have fantastic plans in place to lose weight. We may be very proud of our plans, which include detailed daily goals for diet, alcohol consumption, and exercise. And if our execution were half as impressive as our planning, we would be very slim & fit. Our focus should be on weight loss, not planning for weight loss.

Consider we’re highly trained and experienced at this phase of our professional careers as senior managers. Organizations require their employee career development as a part of their organizational vision in order to drive performance, retain people and breed satisfaction.

Career development requires a systems approach. In simple terms means 'Providing employees an opportunity to grow', especially to those employees who deliver performance in a systematic form. This is why capturing and storing essential data about each employee is critical. As a general rule of thumb, your development plan must impact on your: Training path, performance evaluation, awards & recognition, special skills & competencies, promotions, pay increments and many other fields which depict the capability profile of an individual. Below are some examples what growth may possibly mean to an employee:

  • Climbing up the ladder in the organizational hierarchy.
  • On-going increase in salary.
  • Acquiring higher level skills & competencies.
  • Occupying higher level Job positions/titles.
  • Having an opportunity to benefit from some exclusive benefits/privileges.

Why We Need to Create a Development Plan?

Development Plans help the organization…

1. Build a global, diverse talent pipeline for leaders and individual contributors for targeted talent – attracting, developing, and retaining the best and the brightest

2. Build required capabilities of our employees through development and learning

3. Keep strong performers within the organization by constantly challenging them either in their current role or desired future role

4. Address generation issue in a more straightforward way

Organization’s talent pool is the most important asset and in order to build on our skill sets and desires to be successful our company has to make sure that they are doing all they can as an organization and leadership team to build the bridge between where an employee is currently and where the business needs us to be…what are the business goals and how does current talent pool line up to the business and customer needs.

The Importance of Analysis while creating effective development plans

Career development is a composite organizational process which involves people, addresses their ambitions, assigns them roles and responsibilities aligned with their potential, evaluates their performance, and promotes referral based Job opportunities to accommodate growth ambitions of employees. Since there are a variety of types of development opportunities available for employees we have to figure how to determine what makes sense for our goals.

Employees decide what they want from their careers now and in the future.

  1. Examine individually, or along with their managers, their interests & ambitions.
  2. Create 'Development Plans' by obtaining inputs from the managers, observing market trends, aligning themselves with other peers to meet the requirements of the current Job and to cater for the long term perspectives.
  3. Work with the mentor, manager to identify on the job learning and training opportunities and other avenues for professional development.

While creating your development plan keep in mind that:

  1. You are helping your manager to identify the job-related knowledge, skills, competencies and experience needed for you to be effective in that position.
  2. You are endorsing pro-active planning to engage with future promotional opportunities.
  3. You are helping your juniors to define their short and long term development needs which support organizational objectives and employee's career goals.
  4. You are indicating specific steps that need to be initiated to accomplish your learning goals in a formal form.
  5. You are expressing yourself in communicating the type of tasks which will be best suited for your career growth.

How developing SMART targets helps us to identify capabilities 

To ensure quality in results, it is imperative that targets are formulated and set in a S.M.A.R.T. way!

Specific-concrete

  • Is the objective clear and precise?

Measurable

  • Do you know how to measure it?

Is it possible to see clearly whether the objective is achieved?

Action oriented

  • Do you really know what kind of an action is expected from you?

Realistic

  • Do you think that your target is challenging enough but also achievable?

Time bound

  • Have clear timeframes for the achievement of the target been set?

Which of these capabilities that you may like to advance?

1. Healthcare Operations or whichever industry you perform at

2. Industry Knowledge (Healthcare Regulations or any applicable industry norms)

3. Product Knowledge

4. Communication Skills

5. Project Management Skills

6. Facilitation Skills

7. Team Building Skills

8. Problem Solving Skills

9. Understanding Contracts (Internal and/or External)

10. Software Tools

11. Quality Process (Order Fulfillment, Project Management Methodology)

12. Product Functionality

13. Difficult Communications

While Building your development plan

"Do s"

* Stay realistic.

* Keep it simple.

* Measure outcomes, not process

"Don’t s"

* Fail to be flexible when flexibility makes better business sense.
* Try to do too much, too fast.
* Neglect your individual development plan; instead layer in emphasis on on-the-job developmental experiences, such as rotations and stretch assignments, as opposed to” off-the-job” formal training programs.

Where am I? - Make Accurate Analysis to Discover Yourself

SWOT analysis will help you organize the information gathered in this planning process. Many of you are familiar with SWOT for a business analysis. SWOT is a strategic planning method to evaluate 4 arenas Strength or S, Weakness or W, Opportunities or O, and Threats or T. Typically used in business modeling, let's look at how SWOT can help you with career development.

S or Strength refers to employee attributes that are helpful to achieving a career/professional development objective. This can include core competencies such as technical knowledge and skills a person especially if these skills are transferable or niche; should also include experience and education. This arena also includes personal attributes and characters that may give someone advantages, such as, ability to work under pressure, innovative, or creative. An additional component is networks - what are the connections the employee has to other - internal and/or external to our organization.

W or Weaknesses refer to attributes of the employee that can be viewed as harmful to their success - some of these may have been identified in the gap analysis you just performed. These may include lack of work experience or lack of knowledge - especially if it is a gap in key areas you've identified as critical; this arena may also include negative or weak personal characteristics; such as presence/image/attitude - characteristics and behaviors that may be seen as obstacles/challenges such as indecisiveness or someone who is destructively confrontational. Lastly consider geographic limits – do you feel like you are locked into a specific geographic location or situation that may be seen as less desirable? You may certainly have good reasons for the geographic limitation but the limitation may still be just that, a limitation.

T or Threats - these are conditions which can do damage or threaten one's career field - these may include impacts due to corporate structure or culture, your limitations - for example, perhaps your niche skills are a strength but the niche is becoming obsolete so the same skills can be part of a threat, consider the degree of competition for a career - do others tend to have new or superior skills. Additionally consider changes in the business or field that may negatively impact career options.

O or Opportunities - this refers to conditions that are helpful in your career field- these may include latest patterns or trends or innovation in the field/company/industry (in Healthcare one might consider the governments push for meaningful healthcare as creating opportunity for us, opportunities may include how needed and valuable our skill sets are - the more our organization needs our talents/the better the opportunity. One might also include opportunities for professional development in one's field. Also consider the potential support system or network - this can be quite an asset. Lastly, consider your option for relocation, transfer-ability and skills.

A couple more factors to consider by a Manager

Helping to build your employees capabilities is just as crucial as your employees meeting the objectives and targets that are set for them. Typically these capabilities are the soft skills and receiving feedback and/or development in these areas can assist an employee in meeting some of our customer, financial and process targets.

High performers like to be challenged. They often times have other goals such as education, certifications that they would like achieve outside their day-to-day responsibilities of their current role. They see what they do everyday for us as a career and not just a job. Having a development plan and having it be supported by you guarantees that you will get our return on our investment.

Closure

In helping prepare you to create a development plan, I have reviewed components from What, Why, Where, How, and When perspectives around Definitions, Evaluation, Assessments, and Analysis angle.

In each step/phase – I've given you tips tools and resources you and the manager can use to create an impact in development plan. Keep in mind that it will take some time to gather the information for the evaluation of making insightful assessments; plus at least couple of discussion sessions in a development dialogue with our manager. The goal is to drive our organization forward so if done well, it should reflect to be time well present.

As I've discovered, there are numerous resources in organizational development planning world –see below. That being said, sharing ideas with others may be helpful - don’t forget your colleagues are excellent resources too and of course don’t forget to touch base with your HR team for assistance.

Thank you again for taking time to review these notes and start making efforts to create/drive high performance culture.

Referenced Links:

  • Kramer, R. 2008. Learning How to Learn: Action Learning for Leadership Development. A chapter in Rick Morse (Ed.) Innovations in Public Leadership Development. Washington DC: M.E. Sharpe and National Academy of Public Administration, pp. 296–326.

  • Waddill, D. D. and M. Marquardt (2003). Adult learning orientations and action learning. Human Resource Development Review 2(4): pp. 406-429.

  • Career Development: A Policy Statement of the National Career Development Association Board of Directors (Adopted March 16, 1993; revised 2003)

  • Best Practices in Leadership Development and Organization Change, Best Practice Institute, by Louis L. Carter, Marshall Goldsmith, and David Ulrich by Jossey Utot The Leadership Development Guide Australian Leadership Development Centre

  • S. Cromwell & J. Kolb 2004, “An examination of work-environment support factors affecting transfer of supervisory skills training to the work place”, Human Resource Development Quarterly, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 449-71.

  • Herr, E.L., & Cramer, S. H. (1996). Career guidance and counseling through the lifespan: Systematic approaches. New York: HarperCollins) (Niles, S. G. & Harris-Bowlsbey, J (2002) Career Development Interventions in the 21st Century. Columbus, OH: Merrill Prentice Hall., pp.7

  • Baldwin, T. & Ford, K. (1988), "Transfer of Training: A Review and Directions for Future Research', Personnel Psychology, Spring, Vol. 41 Issue 1, pp. 63-105

  • Richard Arvid Johnson (1976). Management, systems, and society: an introduction. Pacific Palisades, Calif.: Goodyear Pub. Co. pp. 224–226. 

  • Newton Margulies (1972). Organizational Development: Values, Process, and Technology. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Co. pp. 3.

  • Weisbord, Marvin. (1987). Productive Workplace: Organizing and managing for dignity, meaning and community. Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco.

at No comments: