CONCLUSION
With respect to the advantages or strengths of this design for intergroup intervention, the preceding quotes from previous clients speak for themselves. These quotes are fairly typical ones.
The limitations of this design in my opinion, are primarily in the area of structure. The format is quite structured and paced. This structuring and pacing is deliberate on my part due to the brevity of time. What is sacrificed, however, is the opportunity for people to think inferentially as opposed to deductively; in other words, to “free wheel” and possibly discover issues and/or solutions that would likely not occur in this tight design. Moreover, people are not quite as free to express their emotions as would be the case in a less structured design. With follow-up support, however, there are certainly opportunities to think in these ways following the workshop.With all things considered, especially time, I believe this design is the most productive one, at least for the kinds of groups I’ve consulted with. I also believe that this design has broader applicability to groups other than the ones with whom I’ve worked such as racial differences, federal government and state government, school and community, and many others. The design would undoubtedly require modification according to the kind of groups in conflict.
More on the topic CONCLUSION:
- Conclusion
- Conclusion: are there any markets out there?
- Conclusion
- Conclusion
- Conclusion: the difficult design of tort law
- Hare C., Neo D. (eds.). Trade Finance: Technology, Innovation and Documentary Credit. Oxford University Press,2021. — 417 p., 2021
- BRIEF CONTENTS
- Fligstein Neil. The Banks Did It: An Anatomy of the Financial Crisis. Harvard University Press,2021. — 334 p., 2021
- SNAP 2011
- FIVE COMPONENTS OF LEGAL COMPETENCIES
-
Conflictology -
Ecology -
Economy -
Finance -
History -
Law -
Medicine -
Philosophy -
Religious studies -