Almost All People Have Times In Their Life When They Feel Th ✓ Solved

Almost all people have times in their life when they feel th

Almost all people have times in their life when they feel that they are not in control of the events that happen to them. Look back over your own life and choose a situation in which you experienced a major power imbalance while interacting with another person that either assisted or prevented you from meeting your aims. This could be with a former boss, coach, teacher, parent, or friend who had authority over you when the incident occurred. Write a paper (750–1,000 words) in three parts: Part 1: What Happened — provide objective, factual details of the event; Part 2: Looking Back — describe your feelings and response during the event; Part 3: What I Learned and How I Can Apply It — discuss lessons learned, how this informs your future career in homeland security or emergency management, and advice you would offer someone facing a similar situation. Choose an incident that you feel has been resolved and that will not re-traumatize you.

Paper For Above Instructions

Part 1: What Happened.

In my third year at a mid-sized nonprofit organization, I was assigned to lead a small team implementing a community preparedness training program. The director of programs, who had formal authority over my position and the project budget, took unilateral control of key decisions without prior consultation. He reallocated funds to another initiative and directed our team to compress a six-week training timeline into two weeks to meet an external reporting milestone. Meetings were shortened, the training curriculum was edited without input, and the team was asked to run sessions with fewer materials. I documented project timelines, emails showing shifting expectations, and a budget adjustment memo that the director issued the week before implementation. I also recorded attendance and participant feedback from the first set of abbreviated trainings, which showed lower engagement and recurring participant confusion about expected outcomes.

Part 2: Looking Back.

At the time, my immediate response was frustration and a sense of helplessness. The director’s positional power (legitimate power) and control over resources (coercive and reward power) left me with limited formal recourse (French & Raven, 1959). I felt conflicted because I wanted to advocate for the integrity of the curriculum but I feared jeopardizing my professional standing and my team’s ability to continue their work. My coping response combined problem-focused actions (documenting changes, attempting private dialogue with the director) and emotion-focused strategies (seeking peer support and reframing the task to salvage key learning objectives) (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). Physiologically, the compressed timeline increased stress—sleepless nights and heightened vigilance—that aligned with conservation of resources theory: the threatened loss of time, materials, and professional reputation produced resource strain (Hobfoll, 1989).

Interpersonally, the power imbalance affected team morale. Some team members reacted by disengaging; others overcompensated by working excessive hours. My leadership approach shifted temporarily from collaborative to transactional as I focused on meeting the new, constrained deliverables. Looking back, I recognize how my own perceived lack of agency shaped a risk-averse posture that reduced transparent communication upwards and delayed escalation that might have brought additional oversight into the decision (Keltner, Gruenfeld, & Anderson, 2003).

Part 3: What I Learned and How I Can Apply It.

Several concrete lessons emerged. First, documenting objective details—timelines, emails, budgets, participant outcomes—was essential. Such records created an evidentiary basis for later discussions and supported eventual process improvements (Einarsen et al., 2011). Second, effective upward advocacy requires a combination of data-driven framing and constructive alternatives. When I later requested a formal review meeting, I presented succinct metrics and a revised phased plan that preserved priority learning objectives while aligning with the director’s reporting needs; that combination proved persuasive.

Third, attending to team well-being is critical. I instituted brief daily check-ins and redistributed tasks to prevent burnout. This approach drew on trauma-informed principles—recognizing stress reactions and offering predictable structure—which reduced anxiety and improved performance (SAMHSA, 2014). Fourth, cultivating personal self-efficacy and adaptive coping strategies helped me reclaim agency; investing in skills such as negotiation, conflict resolution, and evidence-based project management strengthened my ability to influence outcomes without direct authority (Bandura, 1977; Northouse, 2021).

Implications for a future career in homeland security or emergency management are direct. Practitioners frequently operate within hierarchical structures and encounter power asymmetries during incidents, resource allocations, and interagency coordination (U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 2013). My experience underscored the importance of maintaining credible documentation, communicating clear alternatives under constrained conditions, and protecting team resilience under pressure. In emergency management, rapid decisions by higher authorities can be necessary; however, leaders who solicit frontline input and offer transparent rationales produce better operational outcomes and uphold ethical standards (Keltner et al., 2003).

If advising a peer or subordinate facing a similar situation, I would recommend the following practical steps: (1) Preserve objective records of changes and impacts; (2) Prepare a concise, evidence-based briefing that outlines immediate risks and viable alternatives; (3) Frame recommendations in terms of mission success and risk mitigation to align with senior leaders’ priorities; (4) Protect team capacity through short, organized support measures; and (5) If coercive or abusive behavior persists, escalate through formal channels while seeking peer and mentor support (Einarsen et al., 2011; Lipman-Blumen, 2005).

Finally, this incident taught me that resolution often requires both strategic patience and timely action. By combining documentation, clear communication, protective measures for staff, and targeted advocacy, it is possible to convert a disempowering situation into an opportunity for process improvement and leadership growth. These are transferable skills for homeland security professionals who must balance hierarchical decision-making with ethical duty to communities and responders during crises (U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 2013).

References

• Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.
• Einarsen, S., Hoel, H., Zapf, D., & Cooper, C. L. (2011). Bullying and harassment in the workplace: Developments in theory, research, and practice. CRC Press.
• French, J. R. P., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 150–167). University of Michigan.
• Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44(3), 513–524.
• Keltner, D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Anderson, C. (2003). Power, approach, and inhibition. Psychological Review, 110(2), 265–284.
• Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer.
• Lipman-Blumen, J. (2005). The allure of toxic leaders: Why we follow destructive bosses and corrupt politicians—and how we can survive them. Oxford University Press.
• Northouse, P. G. (2021). Leadership: Theory and Practice (8th ed.). Sage Publications.
• SAMHSA. (2014). SAMHSA’s concept of trauma and guidance for a trauma-informed approach. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
• U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (2013). National Preparedness Goal. FEMA and DHS publications.