Projectification of the organisational world

Projectification of the organisational world It is fascinating to observe from the management and business sciences, how organisations are changing their structural behaviours: Nowadays, it is hard to imagine an organisation that is not engaged in some kind of project activity. Over the past decade, organisations have been turning from operations to project management as part of their competitive advantage strategy. Organisations are now redefining their business structures by adopting project management practices, thus Maylor et al. (2006, p.663) point out that projectification is the process that comprehends organizational changes through a process where work is managed by projects. We should therefore look at projects as projectification means to get to the implementation of strategy although it might be a realistic statement, it still has a more in dept reasoning behind it and we hope this document will enlighten this further. Projects as the fundamental of projectification are defined as temporary organizations created to deliver one or more business products translated in to project objectives according to their business case requiring specific competencies or skills for a pre-determined period of time according to The Office of Governament Commerce (OGC, 2009, p.31). However, Maylor et. al. (2006, p.664) have a different designation of projects, as managerial tools and structures for innovation and change. Other interconnected concepts related to projects will be further explained looking at the projectification of the organisational world. Maylor et. al. (2006, p.663) support that there are two completely opposite ideas between the managerialist concept of a project as a way to control and the idea that projects are flexible and less bureaucratic structures and as many commentators according to Morris and Jamieson (2005, p.8) cite, they position projects as more appropriate for implementing deliberate strategies. Despite the above, Maylor et. al.(2006, p.664) citing Davies, Brady and Hobday point out that organisations are finding that traditional organizational structures (i.e. with departments, business units and divisions) are no longer appropriate. However, Haniff and Fernie (2008) defend that projectification is not always seen as the most favourable process and it can become problematic if different organisations working together do not have the same projectification approach. Thus, projectification is not seen as a firm solution, i.e. in the perspective of delivering deliberate strategies. That might be the case in the construction sector where Haniff and Fernie (2008, p.9) state that it is naive to assume that any pre-determined project plan can be simplistically implemented. According to above pessimistic view, Maylor et. al. (2006, p.667) agree that we might face barriers to projects being carried out, this might in turn show that is an unwanted consequence of the projectification process but one to account for as limitations in the implementation of the organizational strategy may emerge. Despite these limitations, Maylor et. al. (2006, p.664) citing Packendorff and Hodgson support that there is an evidence of increasing belief of projectification through projects. This is stated by Morris and Jamieson (2005, p.5), they believe that corporate strategy is now a means of thinking through and articulating how an organizations corporate goals and objectives will be achieved. This lead us towards how Bracker cited in Shirley (1982, p. 263) characterises business strategy: as an environmental or situational analysis to determine a firms posture in its field and if the firms resources are utilized in an appropriate manner to attain its major goals. Some consider that business strategy is folded in strategic initiatives such as Morris and Jamieson (2005, p.5), explain that these initiatives are often clustered into portfolios of programmes and projects for implementation, whose support is given by organization roles in particular project workers and managers as Packendorff and Hodgson cited in Maylor et. al. (2006, p.664) emphasize. Again, Maylor et. al. (2006, p.666) agree these developing roles are a consequence of projectification as well as the search for authority by project managers. These are responsible for the planning, delegating, monitoring and control of all aspects of the project, and the motivation of those within the temporary organization to achieve the project objectives within the expected project performance measures, time, cost, quality, scope, benefits and risks according to OGC (2009, p.4). Gaddis (1969, p.96) makes a good point when distinguishing tactics from strategy doing the analogy to the advanced-tec hnology project manager and the research administrator, where the first is considered the tactician and the other the strategist. Therefore, project managers are not directly seen as a strategy deliver role as Morris and Jamieson (2005, p.6) citing Thomas, Delisle, Jugdev, and Buckle argue. In addition project managers are seen as strongly execution oriented role, as per project management responsibilities, and as such, they are not perceived as strategically important by senior managers.Although, Pellegrinelli and Bowman (1994, p.126) see that projects are grouped in programmes to actually achieve beneficial changes of strategic nature for an organisation. Unlike project management, Pellegrinelli, Partington and Young cited in Morris and Jamieson (2005, p.8) see implementation of strategy through programme management, as well as McElroy cited in Morris and Jamieson (2005, p.6) emphasizes the need for senior management involvement for successful strategy implementation. A more realistic view from Morris and Jamieson (2005, p.8) is that many commentators position projects as more appropriate for implementing deliberate (planned) strategies, while considering programmes for both deliberate and emergent (unplanned) strategies. Including the view of the Association for Project Management (APM) cited in Morris and Jamieson (2005, p.6) for good governance practice is that now clearly requires alignment between business, portfolio, programme and project plans, and transparent reporting of issues throughout the strategic hierarchy as well as Morris and Jamieson (2005, p.6) defend that these should have a reciprocal relationship. Morris and Jamieson (2005, p.8) bring to this context that corporate strategy is not translated into project strategy by a simplistic process. It is further complex and it requires an extensive range of management competencies and a clear definition of roles and responsibilities. See Figure 1 below. Figure 1 Organisations Strategic Hierarchy Subsequently, Morris and Jamieson (2005, p.16) defend that the hierarchy of objectives and strategies, represented in Figure 1 by the interconnectivity between those 5 blocks, enable organizations to cascade strategy in a systematic way, such as the Archibalds model mentioned in Morris and Jamieson (2005, p.6) specifies, objectives and strategies are developed at the policy, strategic, operational and project levels and cascaded down, thereby ensuring alignment and continuity of strategy. Partington cited in Morris and Jamieson (2005, p.6), suggest three levels of strategy (See Figure 1) as corporate, business and operational being operational level focussed on programmes and projects. Yet, according to Morris and Jamieson (2005, p.6), this hierarchy of objectives and strategies can generally be formed as a result of using a strategy planning process which in turn can be a highly effective mean of structuring and managing strategy, and communicating it to the organization and through out. Johnson and Scholes cited in Morris and Jamieson (2005, p.5) highlight that, strategic management is often ambiguous, complex and dynamic, fundamental and organization-wide, and generally has long-term implications. Although, there may be pre-established strategy planning processes and practices, strategy may not be realized in a straightforward way as many planners assume according to Morris and Jamieson (2005, p.6). Baker, Bard, Cooper and others cited in Srivannaboon and Milosevic (2006, p. 494) argue that aligning project management with the business strategy is not a clear process but Gomolski cited in Rathnam (2004, pp. 2-3) defend that with business ownership and accountability can lead the way to ensure alignment of business strategy. Most studies link business strategy with project management through project selection and see that as part of the alignment process. Others such as Thompson cited in Henderson and Venkatraman (1990, p.26), see alignment made not only of static elements but a combination of strategy dynamics and behaviors which are managed by external factors to the organization. Supporting this view, Mintzberg and Waters (1985, P. 271), argue that managing requires: ÂÂ ´a light deft touch to direct, in order to realize intentions while at the same time responding to an unfolding pattern of actions. Again, the interaction between projects or programmes and the organizations strategy may be both deliberate and emergent when attempting to implement the intended strategy, according to Grabher, cited in Morris and Jamieson (2005, p.6). The UK Office of Government Commerce (OGC) in Morris and Jamieson (2005, p.8) considers the alignment between strategy and projects to be one of the main benefits of programme management. However, this seems out dated regarding recent guidance on governance. It is expected that increasing need to understand this alignment issue will be translated in to more literature and experience based contributions on this subject. The project management has become an important business process for organizations and Srivannaboon and Milosevic (2006, p.493) support that project management and the business strategy alignment help organizations to focus on the right projects, given the objectives of the business strategy. On the other hand, any misalignment may cause an organization to lose market opportunities and the organizations recovery process might be difficult. Therefore, to effective project management and to achieve the business strategic alignment it is required to have a deeper understanding of these complexities. Accordingly to Shirley (1982, p. 268) it is in the study of such complexities in relation to internal strengths, weaknesses, and values of the organization that students and faculty are challenged and also confused with processes involved in strategy making. This is furthermore complex when various organisations are working together to deliver the projects objectives and therefore the business strategy. Accordingly to Haniff and Fernie (2008, p.9), each individual organisation has got their one project strategy that aligns with the organizational strategy. This results in individual team members influencing at some level the project strategy by creating an emergent project management strategy. Similarly, Jamieson and Morris cited in Srivannaboon and Milosevic (2006, p.495) suggest that most of the elements of the strategic planning process, such as internal analysis, organizational structures, and control systems, are strongly linked to project management processes and activities and thereby strongly influence intended business strategies. Accordingly to Mintzberg and Waters (1985, p.272) this strategic control mentioned above may be in managers which is further recognized by the patterns and actions of managers on their own actions with in the organization configuration. Despite project management processes, other issues co-exist such as the lack of a single coherent project strategy that can lead to loss of business understanding and directly influencing the link between business strategy and project implementation which may be extremely affected according to Morris and Jamieson (2005, p.11). In addition, Rathnam (2004, p.2) draws attention to research made by others that leads us to communication and understanding to be the strategy alignment problem. Morris and Jamieson (2005, pp.7-8) also point out that the business and operating requirements of a project frequently affect the project strategy significantly. Per instance, in the IT industry as Rathnam (2004, pp.4-5) shows, the lack of business strategy, lack of focus on business process, misalignment between business areas and organization structural barriers, lack of an enterprise-wide view, business against IT mentality, lack of awareness in need for strategy alignment, difficulty in communicat ing and understanding IT, resistance to escalate misalignment conflicts to executive management and rapid rate of technological change where considered the main gaps for strategy alignment. Cicmil et. al. (2006, p.679) argue that, If projects fail because of miscommunication and failure to meet expectations, what is it about project management that makes this happen so much in a project environment? Projects are very complex and characterized by issues related to uncertainty, control and mutual interaction among project intervenients according to Cicmil et. Al. (2006, p.676). In addition Cicmil et. al. (2006, p.683) claims that management actions to accelerate perturbed projects make the problem worse which is the case when the project is heavily time-constrained. Avots (1969) adds that the wrong man appointed as project manager, lack of support from the company management, inadequate task definitions, management techniques not appropriate or project termination not well planned are also the reasons for a project failure. Despite the fact that organisations may be using projects to secure business benefit, Midler cited in Maylor et. al. (2006, p.669) question whether this is actually being achieved by these management practices. The existing concepts for what constitutes a project may not be in agreement within the project management practitioners community. Also the temporary organisation (project team) and expectancy of the project outcomes may not be consistent with all intervenients. This is a result of organisational projectification and as such we shall reconsider the term project given this paper. It is evident that in a multi project level is where we can find a bigger gap in maintaining the strategic alignment through project management and projects. Therefore this presents an area of great interest for both practitioners and scholars. Different project management approaches and methodologies are now being used by organizations at all stages of the project life cycle with project strategy development, review and optimization occurring at specific points. A high percentage of organizations define the personal project management competencies required to develop project strategy. Several organizations stressed the leadership qualities that they expected of their executives in shaping and delivering strategy, at both the project level as well as the corporate level. It can be concluded, therefore, that although project strategy management is an underexplored and insufficiently described subject in the business and project literature, it is, in fact, a relatively well-trodden area, deserving of more recognition, formal study, and discussion. (Word count: Max 2500)

The Battle of the Sexes :: Education Educational Essays

The Battle of the Sexes All students deserve an education that nurtures them, providing opportunities and experiences that inspire their creative and intellectual minds. Whether a student gets this education from a man or a woman should not make a difference. The fact of the matter is that in many cases the gender of a teacher does affect a student's ability to learn. In many instances, it also matters to some teachers if the student is a girl or a boy. Why would this be so? From research and personal observations and experiences, I will answer this question. At the elementary school level, the majority of teachers are women. In an experiment form the University of California, Los Angeles, boys were found to have better reading scores than the girls when "taught" by a machine. When a female teacher was brought in to give the lesson, the girls outperformed the boys (Thomas 122). Why is this? Maybe it's the difference in the behavior styles of the boys and girls. David Thomas, in his essay "The Mind of Man", says, "Boys are, across all cultures, much more boisterous and overly competitive than girls. They seek out physical competition ... this makes them harder to control than girls." Little boys create more distractions by being loud whereas girls are more docile and less disruptive. Tony Mooney, a secondary- school headmaster, says, "Women teachers find boys too noisy... and reward more 'feminine' behavior" (qtd. in Thomas 121). I am one of those women teachers that like the quietness of girls. From experiences of the past, I would say th at most other female teachers feel the same way I do. I can remember several instances in the past involving situations that concerned my brothers in relation to their education. My brother John and I attended the same elementary school. Since I was four grades ahead of him, he eventually ended up with many of the same teachers I had during my elementary school years. I went to pick John up from his second grade class as I did every day. One day in particular though, his teacher, Mrs. Janet Nitahara, who by the way was one of my favorite teachers, called me in to discuss John's behavior. When I walked in to the class I saw my brother sitting in the corner of the room in a chair. Mrs. Nitahara said that he talked too much and needed to learn how to be quiet and behave in class like I used to.

Half The Sky Essay

With Pulitzer Prize winners Nicholas D. Kristof and Sheryl WuDunn are great authors who give us true stories of girls and woman from Africa and Asia and their extraordinary struggles. We view the Cambodian teenager sold into sex slavery and an Ethiopian woman who suffered devastating injuries in childbirth. Drawing on the breadth of their combined reporting experience, Kristof and WuDunn view our world with anger, sadness, clarity, and, ultimately, hope. Through these stories, Kristof and WuDunn help us see that the key to economic progress lies in unleashing women’s potential. They make clear how so many people have helped to do just that, and how we can each do our part. In much of the world, the greatest unemployed economic resource is the female half of the population. Countries such as China have prospered precisely because they emancipated women and brought them into the formal economy. Realistic, and inspirational, this book is essential reading for everyone. They tell of an attempt to help a woman dying in childbirth in an African hospital, and the institutional, social, and financial problems that block efforts. They discuss how their support for legalization of prostitution was undercut by the more sordid reality they discovered behind the apparent success of just such a legal zone in India (in Kolkata), and examine how legalization of prostitution in the Netherlands compares as an anti-trafficking technique with the criminalization of sex-service purchases in Sweden. They point out how the campaign against female circumcision has been set back by the campaigners’ use of terminology (â€Å"female genital mutilation†) that turned the people they wanted to help against them. Kristof and WuDunn emphasis how important it is for individuals speaking up and resisting—but it’s here that their proposals (or, at least, their exhortations) seem questionable. (Mukhtar Mai) name we have heard before, Usha Narayane, and Sunitha Krishnan are clearly remarkable women, and deserve every support, but it is also true that they are very brave, and driven individuals—and lucky, because of their risk.

Siege of Boston in the American Revolution

Siege of Boston in the American Revolution The Siege of Boston occurred during the American Revolution and began April 19, 1775 and lasted until March 17, 1776. Commencing after the opening battles at  Lexington Concord,  the Siege of Boston saw the growing American army block the land approaches to Boston. During the course of the siege, the two sides clashed at the bloody Battle of Bunker Hill in June 1775. The stalemate around the city also saw the arrival of two commanders who would play a central role in the conflict over the next three years:  General George Washington  and  Major General William Howe. As the fall and winter progressed, neither side proved able to gain an advantage. This changed in early 1776 when artillery captured at Fort Ticonderoga arrived in the American lines. Mounted on Dorchester Heights, the guns compelled Howe to abandon the city. Background In the wake of the Battles of Lexington Concord on April 19, 1775, American colonial forces continued to attack British troops as they attempted to withdraw back to Boston. Though aided by reinforcements led by Brigadier General Hugh Percy, the column continued to take casualties with particularly intense fighting occurring around Menotomy and Cambridge.  Finally reaching the safety of Charlestown late in the afternoon, the British were able to gain a respite. While the British consolidated their position and recovered from the days fighting, militia units from across New England began arriving on the outskirts of Boston. Armies Commanders Americans General George WashingtonMajor General Artemas Wardup to 16,000 men British Lieutenant General Thomas GageMajor General William Howeup to 11,000 men Under Siege By morning, around 15,000 American militiamen were in place outside of the city. Initially guided by Brigadier General William Heath of the Massachusetts militia, he passed command to General Artemas Ward late on the 20th. As the American army was effectively a collection of militias, Wards control was nominal, but he succeeded in establishing a loose siege line running from Chelsea around the city to Roxbury. Emphasis was placed on blocking Boston and Charlestown Necks. Across the lines, the British commander, Lieutenant General Thomas Gage, elected not impose martial law and instead worked with the citys leaders to have private weapons surrendered in exchange for allowing those residents who desired to leave Boston to depart. The Noose Tightens Over the next several days, Wards forces were augmented by new arrivals from Connecticut, Rhode Island, and New Hampshire. With these troops came permission from the provisional governments of New Hampshire and Connecticut for Ward to assume command over their men. In Boston, Gage was surprised by the size and perseverance of the American forces and stated, In all their wars against the French they never showed such conduct, attention, and perseverance as they do now. In response, he began fortifying parts of the city against attack. Consolidating his forces in the city proper, Gage withdrew his men from Charlestown and erected defenses across Boston Neck. Traffic in and out of the city was briefly restricted before both sides came to an informal agreement allowing civilians to pass as long as they were unarmed. Though deprived of access to the surrounding countryside, the harbor remained open and ships of the Royal Navy, under Vice Admiral Samuel Graves, were able to supply the city. Though Graves efforts were effective, attacks by American privateers led prices for food and other necessities to rise dramatically. Lacking artillery to break the stalemate, the Massachusetts Provincial Congress dispatched Colonel Benedict Arnold to seize the guns at Fort Ticonderoga. Joining with Colonel Ethan Allens Green Mountain Boys, Arnold captured the fort on May 10. Later that month and into early June, American and British forces skirmished as Gages men attempted to capture hay and livestock from the outer islands of Boston Harbor (Map). Battle of Bunker Hill On May 25, HMS Cerberus arrived at Boston carrying Major Generals William Howe, Henry Clinton, and John Burgoyne. As the garrison had been reinforced to around 6,000 men, the new arrivals advocated for breaking out of the city and seizing Bunker Hill, above Charlestown, and Dorchester Heights south of the city. The British commanders intended to implement their plan on June 18. Learning of the British plans on June 15, the Americans quickly moved to occupy both locations. To the north, Colonel William Prescott and 1,200 men marched onto the Charlestown Peninsula on the evening of June 16.  After some debate among his subordinates, Prescott directed that a redoubt be constructed on Breeds Hill rather than Bunker Hill as originally intended. Work commenced and continued through the night with Prescott also ordering a breastwork to be built extending down the hill to the northeast. Spotting the Americans works the next morning, British warships opened fire with little effect. In Boston, Gage met with his commanders to discuss options. After taking six hours to organize an assault force, Howe led British forces over to Charlestown and attacked on the afternoon of June 17. Repelling two large British assaults, Prescotts men stood firm and were only forced to retreat when they ran out of ammunition. In the fighting, Howes troops suffered over 1,000 casualties while the Americans sustained around 450. The high cost of victory at the Battle of Bunker Hill would influence British command decisions for the remainder of the campaign. Having taken the heights, the British began work to fortify Charlestown Neck to prevent another American incursion. Building an Army While events were unfolding in Boston, the Continental Congress in Philadelphia created the Continental Army on June 14 and appointed George Washington as commander-in-chief the following day. Riding north to take command, Washington arrived outside Boston on July 3. Establishing his headquarters in Cambridge, he began molding the masses of colonial troops into an army. Creating badges of rank and uniform codes, Washington also began creating a logistical network to support his men. In an attempt to bring structure to the army, he divided it into three wings each led by a major general. The left wing, led by Major General Charles Lee was tasked with guarding the exits from Charlestown, while Major General Israel Putnams center wing was established near Cambridge. The right wing at Roxbury, led by Major General Artemas Ward, was the largest and was to cover Boston Neck as well as Dorchester Heights to the east. Through the summer, Washington worked to expand and reinforce the American lines. He was supported by the arrival of riflemen from Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia. Possessing accurate, long range weapons, these sharpshooters were employed in harassing the British lines. Next Steps On the night of August 30, British forces launched a raid against Roxbury, while American troops successfully destroyed the lighthouse on Lighthouse Island. Learning in September that the British did not intend to attack until reinforced, Washington dispatched 1,100 men under Arnold to conduct an invasion of Canada. He also began planning for an amphibious assault against the city as he feared his army would break up with the arrival of winter. After discussions with his senior commanders, Washington agreed to postpone the attack. As the stalemate pressed on, the British continued local raiding for food and stores. In November, Washington was presented a plan by Henry Knox for transporting Ticonderogas guns to Boston. Impressed, he appointed Knox a colonel and sent him to the fort. On November 29, an armed American ship succeeded in capturing the British brigantine Nancy outside of Boston Harbor. Loaded with munitions, it provided Washington with much needed gunpowder and arms. In Boston, the situation for the British changed in October when Gage was relieved in favor of Howe. Though reinforced to around 11,000 men, he was chronically short on supplies. The Siege Ends As winter set in, Washingtons fears began to come true as his army was reduced to around 9,000 through desertions and expiring enlistments. His situation improved on January 26, 1776 when Knox arrived in Cambridge with 59 guns from Ticonderoga. Approaching his commanders in February, Washington proposed an attack on the city by moving over the frozen Back Bay, but was instead convinced to wait. Instead, he formulated a plan to drive the British from the city by emplacing guns on Dorchester Heights. Assigning several of Knoxs guns to Cambridge and Roxbury, Washington began a diversionary bombardment of the British lines on the night of March 2. On the night of March 4/5, American troops moved guns to Dorchester Heights from which they could strike the city and the British ships in the harbor. Seeing the American fortifications on the heights in the morning, Howe initially made plans for assaulting the position. This was prevented by a snowstorm late in the day. Unable to attack, Howe reconsidered his plan and elected to withdraw rather than have a repeat of Bunker Hill. The British Depart On March 8, Washington received word that the British intended to evacuate and would not burn the city if allowed to leave unmolested. Though he did not formally respond, Washington agreed to the terms and British began embarking along with numerous Boston Loyalists. On March 17, the British departed for Halifax, Nova Scotia and American forces entered the city. Having been taken after an eleven-month siege, Boston remained in American hands for the remainder of the war.

Free Essays on On Solid Ground

On Solid Ground I had a great group to do this project with. Sometimes you get a group that has either a slacker or a control freak. This group had neither. It was amazing how cohesive we were. After everyone had read the book we all met and discussed our ideas for presenting the information. We all loved Sandy’s idea of a song, so we sat down and wrote the verses. No one took control; we all equally contributed to the song writing process. After we had the song written and practiced a few times we then decided to assign chapters for each person to give a brief summary of. Three people got three chapters and two of us got two chapters. Since I only had two chapters I was also in charge of putting the handout together and printing off copies. Vera offered to type up the summaries as well as the song verses. Davie volunteered to play the keyboard while we sing. Overall, I feel that the work was very evenly divided. I didn’t feel as though I had too much work, or was uninvolved. I thou ght that my opinion was listened and valued. I feel that this process was very good for my learning. I loved the book and believed it to be a great supplement to our textbook. I thought that working in a group to do the presentation made this a lot easier for me. I am not one to like public presentations, so the thought of being there along with four other people really helped ease my nerves. It also lessened the work load so that I was not totally overwhelmed by the assignment. As I was reading the book I was consistently seeing things that I would love to use in my class. I saw this as a great example of one woman’s experiences and her method to teach literacy. I think that this is a great resource and I especially love the appendices. I think that everyone who is more interested in teaching the lower primary grades should read this book. I also found practical application in the chapter that describes how she chooses to set up her clas... Free Essays on On Solid Ground Free Essays on On Solid Ground On Solid Ground I had a great group to do this project with. Sometimes you get a group that has either a slacker or a control freak. This group had neither. It was amazing how cohesive we were. After everyone had read the book we all met and discussed our ideas for presenting the information. We all loved Sandy’s idea of a song, so we sat down and wrote the verses. No one took control; we all equally contributed to the song writing process. After we had the song written and practiced a few times we then decided to assign chapters for each person to give a brief summary of. Three people got three chapters and two of us got two chapters. Since I only had two chapters I was also in charge of putting the handout together and printing off copies. Vera offered to type up the summaries as well as the song verses. Davie volunteered to play the keyboard while we sing. Overall, I feel that the work was very evenly divided. I didn’t feel as though I had too much work, or was uninvolved. I thou ght that my opinion was listened and valued. I feel that this process was very good for my learning. I loved the book and believed it to be a great supplement to our textbook. I thought that working in a group to do the presentation made this a lot easier for me. I am not one to like public presentations, so the thought of being there along with four other people really helped ease my nerves. It also lessened the work load so that I was not totally overwhelmed by the assignment. As I was reading the book I was consistently seeing things that I would love to use in my class. I saw this as a great example of one woman’s experiences and her method to teach literacy. I think that this is a great resource and I especially love the appendices. I think that everyone who is more interested in teaching the lower primary grades should read this book. I also found practical application in the chapter that describes how she chooses to set up her clas...

Art Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 47

Art - Essay Example The smaller frame has a golden lining around it making the breakage of the black color clearer and more defined. The entire frame seems to be made out of wood. In the painting that appears in the picture, there are two people, a male and a female, who seem to be dancing. The girl is shorter than the man and she is in the foreground of the picture. The girl may be shorter than the man because she is leaning forward. She is wearing a short white dress with a purple band around her waist. The lower waist of the girl’s skirt is flared and seems to have pleats. The girl is leaning forward and is supported by the man from behind. She has spread her hands in the air to look like she is flying. Her left hand is spread lower than her right hand. She has lifted her right leg way up in the air from behind. The whole body of the girl can be seen. The girl in the picture appears to be smiling. Her eyes seem to be closed and her face is facing down at an angle. Her hair is short and black. The man in the picture is standing straight behind the girl. He is wearing a white shirt with a dark suit. The man has a black hat that has a red flower and white feather on the front left side. He seems to be looking down towards what the girl is doing. The man has yellow, long and curly hair. Both the man and the girl are averagely slender. The man and girl look like they are in a forest. Several green leafy trees can be seen around them and behind them. The blue clear sky is visible in the background. Not the whole sky can be seen because it is blocked by the trees. Only some parts of the sky are visible through the spaces left by the trees. The picture is an up-close photograph of a painting that shows two people performing. The background of the picture is not clear. It is difficult for one to pinpoint that the plantations behind the two people are actually trees. Color variations have also been used to show the different features of

Regent Park Mosque Coursework Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Regent Park Mosque - Coursework Example The Muslim community in the United Kingdom was officially presented with the Masjid as a gift from the government of Britain. This was aimed at enabling Muslims in London to create a centre for Islamic culture and build a mosque with an aim of providing an opportunity to carry out affairs related to their Islamic faith (Hodges, 2009, p. 57). This gift was greatly accepted by a mosque committee which comprised distinguished Islamic diplomats and Islamic residents living in the United Kingdom. This gift was presented to the Muslim community with the intent of paying tribute to thousands of Indian Islamic soldiers who had passed on while fighting for the British Empire. The British Empire at this time had more Muslims than Christians. In 1947, the London Central Mosque was registered by the mosque committee as a trust corporation named London Central Mosque Trust Limited. To date, the board members of the trust committee comprise Muslim countries’ diplomatic representatives whom the Court of St. James’s has accredited. The main objectives of the mosque committee included: first, to build a mosque on the provided site and secondly, to establish a cultural and religious centre for Muslims who resided in the United Kingdom at that time, and future generations. ... The cost of building the mosque was partly covered by Saudi Arabia’s King Faisal’s contribution of â‚ ¬2 million. In 1977, the mosque was finally completed with a total cost of â‚ ¬ 6.5 million. According to Hodges (2009), Regent’s Park Mosque is the United Kingdom’s centre for Islamic focus for Muslims and Islam. Apart from the mosque being a place where Muslims offer daily prayers, it also provides several services that include offering education to children located in central London and its environs. It provides conference facilities and serves as a convention centre. The centre also offers counseling and wedding halls for hire as well as fairs among other services. Regent’s Park Mosque symbolizes the presence of Islam and Muslims in London and the United Kingdom as a whole. The mosque is distinct from other buildings in London due its golden dome shape and the minaret (Hodges, 2009, p. 62). The prayer hall is designed in such a way that it is facing Mecca. It also has a distinguishing red carpet feature with a vast mosaic decorated dome as well as a huge chandelier located at the centre. In one prayer session, the mosque has the capacity to accommodate up to 1400 worshippers. The mosque can be extended to accommodate additional 4,000 worshippers during festivals and even more when the worshippers overcrowd in the main court yard (Hodges, 2009, p. 79). The London Central Mosque receives up to fifty thousand Muslim visitors during the two main Islamic festivals. During these periods, the mosque is overflown with Islamic worshippers from within London and outside. The central mosque of London is an active place receiving visitors and worshippers on a daily basis (Hodges, 2009, p. 79). The