EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE - Research Paper Example As such, this study aims at reviewing the available literature with regard to VAP bundle; describe the risk factors and etiology and explain the bundled practices; discuss the framework that would promote knowledge translation of VAPBs to clinical set-up; and finally identify the areas needing further research and how this could be use to curb VAP incidence. Despite the paper having the limitation of unclear data collection process, its strength in diversity, thus reliability comes out in the use of inclusion criteria to source data from various search engines – Cochrane Collaboration, PsycINFO, CINAHL, EMBASE and MEDLINE - giving a sample of six peer-reviewed studies published between 1997 and 2007. Each of these studies examined the bundled practices. The findings of the study indicate that the bundled VAP, VAPB practices reduce the rates of VAP. In addition, the practice reduces mortality rates, the length of stay under intensive care and the ventilator days. There was also an indication of increased compliance among clinicians with regard to VAPB protocols as the VAP rates decrease. Even though the study suffered unclear methodology, it provides useful insights on care for patients with respiratory complications. In this study, McCarthy, Santiago and Lau (2008) appreciate the need for evaluating the efficacy of VAPBs against the common ventilator care practices using RCTs (randomized controlled trials) employing clinical outcomes like mortality rates, ventilator days and VAP rates as indicators. However, the study fails to measure the effectiveness of the relationship between VAPBs and the outcomes. The findings in this paper point towards the need to implement research-based VAPBs into the normal clinical practice. For effective implementation, I will adopt the PARIHS (Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services) conceptual framework as it effectively informs on transfer of knowledge

How to Protect the United States Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

How to Protect the United States - Essay Example This research will begin with the statement that considering the ever-evolving nature of terrorism and the risks posed by the terrorists to the American future, it becomes imperative that the nation should prepare itself for potential future attacks. The overall nature and modus operandi of the attacks can be uncertain however, it is important that a comprehensive and holistic strategy is developed to counter any potential threats and terrorist attacks. It is suggested that in future, the overall barriers to large and catastrophic events will be low and the individuals, as well as small groups, will have larger and better capacity to strike their targets. Such enemy can pose a greater level of threat to the security of the nation as compared to those enemies whose strength is almost known. The overall threats are not just limited to the man-made threats but the natural disasters can have an impact on the economy, people as well as the society at large of the United States. It is crit ical to note that the ideology and the Jihadist philosophy is still intact despite the fact that senior Al-Qaeda leadership has been killed. This continuity in the Jihadist ideology, therefore, offers a greater vitality to the overall Islamic Jihad and thus pose the greater level of threat in future. In order to dilute this ideological surge, it is critical that Homeland Security must evolve and develop a new strategy to deal with the ever-increasing level of terrorist threats.

Ethical behaviour in business Essay Example for Free

Ethical behaviour in business Essay In this task I will be explaining how my business (Ben and Jerry’s) could change or alter some of its practices and showing how these changes would contribute to improved ethical behaviour. The ethical issues I will be working on are CSR and trading fairly. Corporate social responsibility: Businesses do not exist in isolation nor is it simply just to make money; a lot of factors come into play. Customers, suppliers and the local community are all affected by the business and its operations. Ben and Jerry’s products, and the way they produce them all have an impact on the environment. CSR is all about businesses understanding the effects that they have on the community/wider world. Businesses will use this impact in a positive way to benefit both their business and the wider world. CSR means that business such as Ben and Jerry’s will have to take responsible attitude, going beyond the minimum legal requirements (as being ethical is strictly something you don’t have to do by law) and following basic principles that apply. How Ben and Jerry’s are responsible to society? Ben and Jerry’s take on corporate social responsibilities, taking action to achieve more desired goals to expand their business growth and also maintaining open line communication with employees to gain a better outcome. Ben and Jerry’s conduct various CSR activities, some of these include: Use of Fairtrade ingredients- Ben and Jerry’s first started using Fairtrade certified ingredients in 2005; they pledged in 2010 that by the end of 2013 they will go fully Fairtrade. Ben and Jerry’s work with dairy farmers and other farmers from third world countries, they source ingredients like cocoa, vanilla pods and various other ingredients. Fair Trade standards ensure that employees in these countries have good and safe working conditions, work reasonable hours and paid a fair amount for their work. Corporate Philanthropy- Corporate philanthropy in simple terms means a business’s care/love of humanity. Ben and Jerry’s a portion of its pre-tax profits to corporate philanthropy in attempts to become more socially responsible. Corporate philanthropy is led by employees through the BJ’s foundation and community action teams. Ben and Jerry’s award 1.8 million dollars to a philanthropy (an organisation that helps communities and the welfare of others) every year in and around Vermont, where Ben and Jerry’s  was initially set up. Engaging the Community through Community-based Projects- Another way in which Ben and Jerry’s is engaging in corporate responsibility to society is by setting up community –based development projects. The Vermont Dairy Farm Sustainability Project, which was launched by Ben Jerry’s in 1999, set out to develop practical methods that could be used on day-to-day dairy operations to keep the water quality safe from nitrogen and phosphorus while not sacrificing the economic viability of the farm and making the farm a sustainable business. How can Ben and Jerry’s change/alter corporate social responsibilities (listed above) to contribute even more to improved business ethical behaviour? Ben and Jerry’s do all they can to make sure that they are socially responsible to stakeholders. They have engaged in a wide variety of activities/projects to insure that they do what they claim to do and that is to be as responsible to the wider community as much as they can, this includes Fairtrade, good working conditions, humanitarian concerns and other key factors in making sure that the community is affected in a positive manner. There is no denying that Ben and Jerry’s are very successful in their business operations and also their responsibility toward the society. But there are instances where they can improve on certain things. First of all the business follow all ethical procedures from Sourcing ingredients fairly to protecting the environment to the best of their ability’s, but if you were to be p icky Ben and Jerry’s are unethical in the sense that they are promoting unhealthy food. Now to most people this will not seem like a huge deal, but because obesity levels are on the increase and campaigns have been set up to tackle obesity and unhealthy eating, it seems somewhat of a contradictory move by Ben and Jerry’s to promote and sell Ice cream. This is being very, very picky however as they, like mentioned earlier, they ensure various factors are done ethically. You can argue that their advertisements and marketing techniques do not in any way state the products are healthy, so it’s not that they are misleading people. Some people may say that all Ben and Jerry’s do is sell unhealthy, fattening, chocolate rich ice creams, which can be considered a bit unethical. So in order to tackle this issue and make the company an even more ethically operating organisation, they can introduce healthier ice-cream or produce something alongside their standard ice-creams which is significantly healthier. They can use ingredients that  are healthier/low fat and implement a recipe that is just as good if not better than the original. This would contribute to better ethical behaviour by Ben and Jerry’s because it allows them to give people concerned an option of purchasing healthy (healthier) ice-cream. This will also mean that they are somewhat promoting healthier eating as people will look at them and think highly of them as they are taking these obesity concerns into consideration and doing something about it. Trading fairly: Trading fairly is a movement which strives for fair treatment for farmers. In a fair trade agreement, farmers will negotiate with the purchasers in order to receive a fair price for their products. Farmers who engage in fair trade also aim to pay their workers a fair price, and engage in environmentally-friendly practices. How Ben and Jerry’s trade fairly? Ben and Jerry’s have multiple tasks/missions they conduct to ensure that their operations are done fairly. First of all they are using fair trade. Using the Fairtrade method means that farmers who supply the ingredients get a fair pay, working and living environment. Another way in which they trade fairly is that they give back to society. This may seem like it is not directly trading fairly but Ben and Jerry’s do give something back to society. What they do is that they â€Å"operate the company in a way that actively recognizes the central role that business plays in society by initiating innovative ways to improve the quality of life locally, nationally and internationally† ( Source Ben and Jerry’s website). So while they are producing high quality ingredients at the same time they are giving back to society locally, nationally and internationally. How can Ben and Jerry’s change/alter trading fairly (listed above) to contribute even more to impro ved business ethical behaviour? Like with the previous point I struggled to really find an area within Ben and Jerry’s that they need improving on so I had to be picky, the same goes for trading fairly. Ben and Jerry’s seem to tick all the boxes when it comes to trading fairly; I mean they do everything from Fairtrade to providing the community that little something back. But If I were to be picky I think there is one thing that they might have to improve on ever so slightly and that is the marketing of  the products. The criticism that I have for their marketing is that they have allegedly a couple of times offended customers with the names of their ice creams. Now this may not seem like it has nothing to do with trading fairly but it is. The reason as to why it is because customers are ultimately the ones keeping your business going, now if they were offended with the marketing techniques such as naming then they will be put off in the future. Although Ben and Jerry’s have admitted to using â€Å"cheeky names† on their ice creams they do not do this with the intention of offending people although they have mislead/offended a few. Although they have now changed the names of those products and it was a one off incident they’ll be keen to make sure that this does not happen in the future. (The source where I found out about the names of products offending customers- http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/19/hazed-and-confused_n_5845650.html) So in order to alter the trading of products Ben and Jerry’s can make sure that in future releases of new Ice cream they choose names carefully and make sure that they do not refer to anything in a bad light . Ben and Jerry’s are known for their innovative names but in order to prevent people from getting offended they can make sure they choose names that are simple in the sense that people won’t get offended. They will have to take into consideration various factors that could offend people and make sure that names that are obvious to offend people are not used and well away from the products they make.

The Development Of Strong Sense Of Self Esteem

The Development Of Strong Sense Of Self Esteem Introduction The development of a strong sense of self-esteem during childhood is important since children are to withstand the family stresses, school pressures, and temptations in societies. It is also a general belief of many professionals, including researchers, educations and parents, high self-esteem in children is linked to better academic achievement and more success in life (Leary, Schreindorfer, Haupt, 1995), conversely, low self-esteem is linked to poor school performance and deviant social behaviours (Daane, 2003). This paper is to discuss whether schools should put resources for boosting self-esteem of their students so as to improve students school performance/achievements. Self Esteem and School Performance Self-esteem is a complex concept. Burns, Dunn, Brady, Starr, and Blosser (2000) explained this term as the basic developmental milestone of all children which is paramount in basic personality development. The simple definition for self-esteem is how much value that people place on themselves. Self-esteem is difficult to have an accurate or exact definition. Thus various explanations/definitions of self-esteem are listed in the figure below cited by Malbi and Reasoner (2000). Figure 1: Some Definitions of Self-Esteem Cited (Malbi Reasoner, 2000) The interpretation of self-esteem can be generalised as the extent to which an individual believes himself or herself to be competent and worthy of living. Humphrey (2004) identified the three constructs of sense of self which are self-concept, ideal-self, and self-esteem. He explained that self-esteem is an evaluation of personal worth based on the difference between ones ideal-self and ones self-concept. Lawrence (2000) mentioned that self-esteem construct is recognised today to be a major factor in learning outcomes. With reference to the various definitions of self-esteem, people with high self-esteem possess the characteristics of having higher aspiration and better global evaluation of oneself. They should be more willing to persist in dealing with initial failure and to have no sense of hopeless when recognising of their initial incapability. Furthermore they should have confidence when facing problems and get satisfaction easily from progress and success. According to Baumeister, Campbell, Krueger, and Vohs (2003), however, self-esteem can refer to an inflated, arrogant, grandiose, unwarranted sense of conceited superiority over others. Low self-esteem refers as an unfavourable or relatively unfavourable definition of self when using some common self-esteem scores. Therefore, low self-esteem can be further defined as either an accurate and well-founded understanding of a persons shortcomings or a distorted, pathological sense of insecurity and inferiority (Baumeister et al., 2003). Learning refers to acquire information and skills that one does not initially have. Effective learning can be revealed by proper measurement of school performance of students such as commonly use of GPA and achievement scores/grades. Researches have consistently shown positive correlations between how people value themselves (self-esteem), and the level of their academic achievements (school performance). Those who have higher self-esteem with confidence, generally achieve more in schools, while those who lack confidence with lower self-esteem achieve academically less. No one would argue that the majority of students in band 3 schools of Hong Kong are likely to have relatively low self-esteem as a result of feeling inadequate over not being able to read, write or spell like most others studying in the schools at the upper bands although their relatively low self-esteem may be a result of other experiences beginning in childhood (Lawrence, 2000) or problematic distribution of self-es teem scores. Furthermore, many educators and administrators believe that one of possible sources of self-esteem may be academic achievement. Good academic results could enhance a students sense of worthiness and competence (Naderi, Abdullah, Aizan, Sharir, Kumar, 2009). It is found in a research that self-esteem and academic achievement seem to be most highly related between the years of about seven to fifteen (Malbi Reasoner, 2000). However, the enthusiastic claims of the self-esteem movement are not sustainable in view of some selected researches to be discussed in the following section. In fact the effects of self-esteem on academic achievement are small, limited, and not all good. A Myth of Self-Esteem In 1986, the Californian government funded a task force annually with the huge amount of money to boost the self esteem of her citizens aiming at the reduction of some social problems, such as unwanted pregnancy and school failure, as well as subsequently the contribution of the taxpayers. Disappointingly, the literature review done by this task force shown low associations between self-esteem and its presumed consequences (Smelser, 1989). Albert Ellis, a reputable clinical psychologist, claimed that self-esteem was the greatest know to man or woman because it was conditional so that people would be in more favourable conditions if they stopped trying to force themselves to believe they are worthy. Self-esteem movements are a distinctive feature of individualist cultures in western countries like the US but the same concerns are rare in collective cultures like Japan. That indicates that self-esteem is not a universal human motive but rather an artefact. The effect of self-esteem on a childs school performance can be examined in two aspects: the correlation and the causal relationship between self-esteem and school performance. Positive but Weak Correlation Many researchers investigated the correlation between self-esteem and academic achievement in recent years. However, only some of them, like Maruyama, Rubin, and Kingsbury (1981), found that high self-esteem facilitates academic achievement. Self-esteem is multidimensional, which can refer as either academic self-esteem, physical appearance self-esteem or global self-esteem. Many researches in which showed positive correlation were generally used global self-esteem instead of academic self-esteem for their measurements that reduced the confidence of their outcomes and results. Pullmann and Allik (2008) found that only a limited correlation between self-esteem and academic achievement. Indeed they identified in their studies that low general self-esteem did not necessarily signal a poor academic achievement. By contrast, their research results showed that low, but not high as the general belief, self-esteem is a significant predictor of good school performance. In addition, Naderi et al. (2009) found in their studies done in Iran that self-esteem is not significantly related to academic achievement and they concluded that self-esteem and academic achievement might be confounders to each other. According to the research findings from Marsh and OMara (2008), prior self-esteem has only small positive effect on subsequent academic achievement. From the studies of Hansford Hattie (1982) with more than 200,000 participants also showed that a significant positive but weak correlation with average r between +.21 and +.26. In addition, r ranged from .10 to .03 of which reflected very weak correlation was found in the research on standard achievement tests done by Davies and Brember (1999). Similarly, research of students most recent semester grades in Maths and English by Bowles (1999) showed very weak correlation of r=.29. Kugle, Clements, and Powell (1983) conducted a similar research using scores on a reading achievement test as school performance which gave the result of r=.18 indicating very weak correlation. Another research by Simon and Simon (1975) proved the correlation between self-esteem and scores on achievement tests/IQ test scores was weak with r=.33 although it was significant. Zimmerman, Copeland, Shope, and Dielman (1997) asked students for general ratings of their grades in the studies. They concluded that high self-esteem could lead to better school grade but the correlation was very weak. Rubin, Dorle, Sandidge (1977) concluded for their research on measuring achievement and teachers rating of students behaviour and performance that practical significance between self-esteem and academic achievement is negligible. All in all, a number of researches support that self-esteem and school performance shows positive correlation but the relationship is weak and ambiguous. High-esteem and good school performance go together in many circumstances but there is no indication of causal conclusion whether self-esteem is a cause or a result of school performance. Positive but Bi-directional Causal Relationship It is interested to understand on whether self-esteem causes educational success or the other way round. In addition many researchers investigated the effectiveness of using self-esteem intervention program in schools on escalating the self-esteem of students so as to improve their academic performance. Could there be other variables responsible for the correlation between self-esteem and school performance as proved in many researches? Bachman and OMalley (1977) found that no significant causal influence between self-esteem and achievement in the high school context with the examination of longitudinal data by utilizing a priori model relating self-esteem and academic achievement of young males. Another study by Maruyama et al. (1981) also showed no significant relationship existed between self-esteem and school achievement. They revealed that self-esteem and academic achievement were not causally related to each other. In the study of about 1,900 boys who were at 10th-grade and 12th-grade (Rosenberg, Schooler, Schoenbach, 1989), the researchers only found modest causal relationship leading from school grades to self-esteem and, not surprisingly, extremely weak causal relationship leading from self-esteem to educational attainments. Thus they concluded that there was no solid evidence to support that self-esteem affected school results, instead self-esteem seemed to be the result of good school performance. Furthe r in the study conducted in Norway by Skaalvik and Hagtvet (1990), they found that doing well in school on year led to higher self-esteem the next year for the 600 samples of Norwegian students in two cohorts. They concluded that the self-concept of ability mediated the relation between global self-esteem and school performance. In addition they identified that there was no strong causal relation between self-esteem and school performance. Bachman and OMalley (1986) conducted a longitudinal study on more than 1,600 students at 10th-grade with the conclusion that there was no obvious causal relation between self-esteem and educational attainment. They also found that self-esteem was a result from good school performance, rather than a cause and the global self-esteem had a negligible relationship to eventual educational attainment. In addition they found that third variables like family background or ability were responsible for the relationship between self-esteem and school performance, though it was a very weak correlation. Regarding the effect of self-esteem intervention program on school performance, the research by Scheirer and Kraut (1979), in which it aimed at boosting self-esteem and hence improving study skills, revealed that no association between self-concept change and educational attainment. This view is also supported by Forsyth and Kerr (1999) in their field experiment of self-esteem intervention for college students. They found that boosting self-esteem could have negative impact on students academic achievement. Thus the findings of this experiment support that high self-esteem leads to low academic performance. Based on the above evidences, positive causal relationship between self-esteem and school performance exists but it seems to be a bi-directional one. It is also important to note that other varaibles, such as family, ability and socioeconomic status, are also responsible for the correlations between self-esteem and academic achievements. Conclusion According to the findings of Dalgas-Pelish (2006), it might be beneficial to offer self-esteem enhancement education, which could be incorporated into curriculum in schools, to children to improve their feelings about themselves. Then a child who is exposed to self-esteem enhancement programs may be better equipped to face decisions that are usually made in schools and homes. However the risk is that boosting self-esteem may lead to inflated self-esteem, i.e. students may overestimate themselves. Inflated self-esteem may also increase the risk of violence and self-defeating behaviours in schools. In accordance with most of the researches, it is certain that there are some benefits of high self-esteem on school performance but this is only minimal and most of the time the effects are difficult to notice. Even in some researches indicate that childrens academic achievements could be worse off due to their high self-esteem. It is evident that self-esteem makes little difference in school performance and it is not wise and not justify for putting a lot of scarce educational resources, in particular in Hong Kong, by boosting self-esteem of children in schools and then looking for unrealistic hope for having significant improvements in students academic achievements. However, this does not mean that educators do not need to put effort on boosting their students self-esteem since this is important for them to bounce back after failure, in particular academic failure, and try again. In general, high self-esteem can make students feel good so that their school performance could be reinforced by other third variables, such as self-control, which are responsible for the correlation between self-esteem and academic achievement.

Antigone :: essays papers

Antigone3 Often in plays, there are conflicting issues. This is what creates the storyline, or plot. Usually, each play has an antagonist and a protagonist. A protagonist is the main driving force in the play, whereas the antagonist the force that goes against the protagonist. Deciding who is the protagonist and who is the antagonist are really matters of opinion. In the play, "Antigone" by Sophocles, there are different opinions about who is the protagonist and who is the antagonist. In "Antigone," Creon and Antigone have distinct conflicting values. Creon's regard for the laws of the city causes him to abandon all other beliefs. He feels that all should obey the laws set forth by him, even if other beliefs, moral or religious, state otherwise. Antigone, on the other hand, reveres the beliefs of the gods. She feels that the laws of the gods should be obeyed above all others, especially when in respect to family. Creon has a very strong opinion about the laws of the city and the laws passed by him. His method of enforcing them is very strict. In "Antigone," Creon orders that Polynices, Antigone's brother, will not be buried because of his dishonor towards Thebes. Furthermore, if anyone is caught burying him, they will be killed for disobeying his order. Polynices is being punished because he attacked Thebes and betrayed Creon and the people of Thebes. Creon says "Remember this: our country is our safely. Only when the voyages true on course can we establi sh friendships, truer than blood itself." (Antigone 210-213) Creon's harsh punishment on those who disobey the law makes many fear him and dare not to go against him. One example is Ismene's regard for Creon's laws. She tries to talk her sister out of burying her brother because of what could happen to her if Creon found out that she went against him. Ismene says, "I'm forced, I have no choice-I must obey the ones who stand in power." (Antigone 78-79) Not only do the people of Thebes obey the laws of the city because of their fear but because it is a shame to dishonor the king. To go against the king's claim and dishonor the law is to die a more shameful death than Antigone's mother and father.

Beating Murphys Law :: GCSE Business Marketing Coursework

Beating Murphys Law This article deals with the topic of how organizations should go about implementing new technology systems. The article is built around Murphy's Law that, "Whatever can go wrong, will." When organizations implement new system a lot of know problems cannot be avoided and unforeseen problems arise with even grater frequency. Chew outlines seven points to help launch a new system with greater success since they are essential for long-term survival. Key Notes: Â · It is estimated 50 to 70 percent of US firms experience failure in implementing advanced manufacturing technology. Â · New technologies often cause drops in productivity following introduction of new equipment that can exceed the price of the technology. This still occurs with incremental purchases of new inexpensive equipment. Â · Performance tends to drop shortly prior to installation, as firms make ready for new systems. Performance drops can last over a year after the introduction of new equipment. Â · The greatest cost stem from mismatches between the new technology 's capabilities and needs, and existing process and organization. Â · Lack of the different required knowledge about new technologies causes the failures and problems that arise. Solutions to problems usually lead to additional problems due to a lack of knowledge. Â · Rule #1 is Think of Implementation as R&D. Acquisition should instead be considered an ongoing process of data gathering and learning that evolves over time. The introduction of technology should be considered less an investment issue or technical issue and more a question of research design. Technical and organizational concerns should be addressed. The user and technology managers should work together in research of new technologies. Â · Rule #2 is Ask "What made it hard?" Not "How well did it work?" Firms should look to outside experience to not only help them decide what new technologies to invest in but also how to avoid the problems that arose from the technology. Inquiry should be an active even aggressive targeted search for information. Â · Rule #3 Learn in Many Ways at Once. Firms can learn through four methods: vicarious, learning from others experience, simulation, using models and experiments, prototyping, building and operating on a smaller scale, and on-line, examining the

Contract and United Airlines

Cardillo Travel Systems, Inc. ACT 1 Russell Smith knew why he had been summoned to the office of A. Walter Rognlien, the 74-year-old chairman of the board and chief executive officer (CEO) of Smith’s employer, Cardillo Travel Systems, Inc. Just two days earlier, Cardillo’s in-house attorney, Raymond Riley, had requested that Smith, the company’s controller, sign an affidavit regarding the nature of a transaction Rognlien had negotiated with the United Airlines.The affidavit stated that the transaction involves $203,000 payment by United Airlines to Cardillo but failed to disclose why the payment was being made or for what specific purpose the funds would be used. The affidavit included a statement indicating that Cardillo’s stockholders’ equity exceeded $3 million, a statement that Smith knew to be incorrect. Smith also knew that Cardillo was involved in a lawsuit and that court injunction issued in the case required the company to maintain stockhol ders’ equity of at least $3 million.Because of the blatant misrepresentation in the affidavit concerning Cardillo’s stockholders’ equity and a sense of uneasiness regarding United Airlines’ payment to Cardillo, Smith had refused to sign the affidavit. When Smith stepped into Rognlien’s office on that day in May 1985, he found not only Rognlien but also Riley and two other Cardillo executives. One of the other executives was Esther Lawrence, the firm’s energetic 44-year-old persistent and chief operating officer (COO) and Rognlien’s wife and confidante. Lawrence, a long-time employee, had assumed control of Cardillo’s day-to-day operations in 1948.Rognlien’s two sons by a previous marriage had left the company in the early 1980s following a power struggle with Lawrence and their father. As Smith sat waiting for the meeting to begin, his apprehension mounted. Although Cardillo had a long and proud history, in recent years the company had begun experiencing serious financial problems. Founded in 1935 and purchased in 1956 by Rognlien, Cardillo ranked as the fourth-largest company in the travel agency industry and was the first to be listed on a national stock exchange. Cardillo’s annual revenues had steadily increased after Rognlien acquired the company, approaching $100 million by 1984.Unfortunately, the company’s operating expenses had increased more rapidly. Between 1982 and 1984, Cardillo posted collective losses of nearly $1. 5 million. These poor operating results were largely due to an aggressive franchising strategy implemented by Rognlien. In 1984 alone that strategy more than doubled the number of travel agency franchises operated by Cardillo. Shortly after the meeting began, the overbearing and volatile Rognlien demanded that Smith sign the affidavit. When Smith steadfastly refused, Rognlien showed him the first page of an unsigned agreement between United Airlines and Cardill o.Rognlien then explained that the $203,000 payment was intended to cover expenses incurred by Cardillo in changing from American Airlines’ Apollo system. Although the payment was intended to reimburse Cardillo for those expenses and was refundable to United Airlines if not spent, Rognlien wanted Smith to record the payment immediately as revenue. Not surprisingly, Roglien’s suggested treatment of the United Airlines payment would allow Cardillo to meet the $3 million minimum stockholders’ equity threshold established by the court order outstanding against the company.Without hesitation, Smith informed Rognlien that recognizing the United Airlines payment as revenue would be improper. At that point, â€Å"Rognlien told Smith that he was incompetent and unprofessional because he refused to book the united payment as income. Rognlien further told Smith that Cardillo did not need a controller like Smith who would not do what was expected of him†. ACT 2 In No vember 1985, Helen Shepherd, the audit partner supervising the 1985 audit of Cardillo by Touche Ross, stumbled across information in the client’s files regarding the agreement Rognlien had negotiated with United Airlines earlier that year.When Shepherd asked her subordinates about this agreement, one of them told her of a $ 203,000 adjusting entry Cardillo had recorded in late June. That entry, which follows, had been approved by Lawrence and was apparently linked to the United Airlines-Cardillo transaction: Dr ReceivablesUnited Airlines$203,210 Cr Travel Commissions and Fees203,210 Shepherd’s subordinates had discovered the adjusting entry during their second-quarter review of Cardillo’s form 10-Q statement. When asked, Lawrence explanation without attempting to corroborate it with other audit evidence.After discussing the adjusting entry with her subordinates, Shepherd questioned Lawrence. Lawrence insisted that the adjusting entry had been properly recorded. Shepherd than requested that Lawrence asks United Airlines to provide Touch Ross with a confirmation verifying the key stipulations of the agreement with Cardillo. Shepherd’s concern regarding the adjusting entry stemmed from information she had reviewed in the client’s files that the United Airlines payment to Cardillo was refundable under certain conditions and thus not recognizable immediately as revenue.Shortly after the meeting between Shepherd and Lawrence, Walter Rognlien contacted the audit partner. Like Lawrence, Rognlien maintained that the $203,000 amount had been properly recorded as commission revenue during the second quarter. Rognlien also told Shepherd that the disputed amount, which United Airlines paid to Cardillo during the third quarter of 1985, was not refundable to United Airlines under any circumstances. After some prodding by Shepherd, Rognlien agreed to allow her to request a confirmation from United Airlines concerning certain features of the agreement.Shepherd received the requested confirmation from United Airlines on December 17, 1986. The confirmation stated that the disputed amount was refundable through 1990 if certain stipulations of the contractual agreement between the two parties were not fulfilled. After receiving the confirmation, Shepherd called Rognlien and asked him to explain the obvious difference of opinion between United Airlines and Cardillo regarding the terms of their agreement with the chairman of the board of United Airlines. â€Å"Rognlien claimed that pursuant to this confidential business arrangement, the $203,210 would never have to repaid the United.Shepherd’s conversation with Rognlien refused. In fact, as Rognlien knew, no such agreement existed. † A few days following Shepherd’s conversation with Rognlien, she advised William Kaye, Cardillo’s vice president of finance, that the $203,000 amount could not be recognized as revenue until the contractual agreement wi th United Airlines expired in 1990. Kaye refused to make the appropriate adjusting entry, explaining that Lawrence had insisted that the payment from United Airlines be credited to a revenue account. On December 30, 1958, Rognlien called Shepherd and told her that he was terminating Cardillo’s relationship with Touche Ross.In early February 1986, Cardillo filled a form 8-K statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) notifying that agency of the company’s change in auditors. SEC regulations required Cardillo to disclose in the 8-K statement any disagreements involving accounting, auditing, or financial reporting issues with its former auditor. The 8-K, signed by Lawrence, indicated that no such disagreements preceded Cardillo’s decision to dismiss Touche Ross. SEC regulations also required Touche Ross to draft a letter commenting on the existence of any disagreements with Cardillo.This letter had to be filed as an exhibit to the 8-K statement. In touche Ross’s exhibit letter, Shepherd discussed that the improper accounting treatment given that transaction resulted in misrepresented financial statements for Cardillo for the six months ended June 30, 1985, and the nine months ended September 30, 1985. In late February 1986, Raymond Riley, Cardillo’s legal counsel, wrote Shepherd and insisted that she had misinterpreted the United Airlines-Cardillo transaction in the Touch Ross exhibit letter filed with the company’s 8-K.Riley also informed Shepherd that Cardillo would not pay the $17,500 invoice that Touche Ross had submitted to his company. This invoice was for professional services Touche Ross had rendered prior to being dismissed by Rognlien. ACT 3 On January 21, 1986, Cardillo retained KMG Main Hurdman (KMG) to replace Touche Ross as its independent audit firm. KMG soon addressed the accounting treatment Cardillo had applied to the United Airlines payment. When KMG personnel discussed the payment with Rognlien, he informed them to the alleged secret arrangement with United Airlines that superseded the written contractual agreement.According to Rognlien, the secret arrangement precluded United Airlines from demanding a refund of the $203,000 payment under any circumstances. KMG refused to accept this explanation. Roger Shlonsky, the KMG audit partner responsible for Cardillo engagement, told Rognlien that the payment would have to be recognized as revenue on a pro rata basis over the five-year period of the written contractual agreement with United Airlines. Cardillo began experiencing severe liquidity problems in early 1986. These problems worsened a few months later when a judge imposed a $685,000 judgment on Cardillo to resolve a civil suit filed against the company.Following the judge? s ruling Raymond Riley alerted Rognlien and Lawrence that the adverse judgment qualified as a â€Å"material event† and thus has to be reported to the SEC in a Form 8-K filling. In the me morandum he sent to his superiors, Riley discussed the serious implications of not disclosing the settlement to the SEC: â€Å"My primary concern by not releasing such report and information is that the officers and directors of Cardillo may be subject to violation of rule 10b-5 of the SEC rules by failing to disclose information that may be material to a potential investor. Within 10 days of receiving Riley’s memorandum, Rognlien sold 100,000 shares of Cardillo stock in the open market. Two weeks later, Lawrence issued a press release disclosing for the first time the adverse legal settlement or that Cardillo remained viable only because Rognlien had invested in the company the proceeds from the sale of the 100,000 shares of stock. Additionally, Lawrence’s press release, Roger Shlonsky met with Rognlien and Lawrence. Shlonsky informed them that the press released grossly understated Cardillo’s estimated loss for fiscal 1985. Shortly after that meeting, KMG res igned as Cardillo’s independent audit firm.EPILOGUE In May 1987, the creditors of Cardillo Travel Systems, Inc. forced the company into involuntary bankruptcy proceedings. Later that same year, the SEC concluded a lengthy investigation of the firm. The SEC found that Rognlien, Lawrence, and Kaye had violated several provisions of the federal securities laws. These violations included making false representations to outside auditors, failing to maintain accurate financial records, and failing to file prompt financial reports with the SEC, In addition, the federal agency charged Rognlien with violating the insider trading provisions of the federal securities laws.As a result of these findings, the SEC imposed permanent injunctions on each of the three individuals that prohibit them from engaging in future violations of federal securities laws. The SEC also attempted to recover from Rognlien the $237,000 he received from selling the 100,000 shares of Cardillo stock in April 1986 . In January 1989, the two parties resolved this matter when Rognlien agreed to pay the Sec $60,000