More handpicked essays just for you.
Explain conflicts in decision making
An essay on the importance of working together by Henry Ford
Theories of collaboration
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Henry Ford’s assembly line was created with teamwork in mind. Numerous workers come together to complete a task, in this case is the creation of a car. When M. Loisel brings home an invitation to a fancy ball, he believes that his wife who has wealthy aspirations will be overcome with joy, but her excitement is overshadowed by stress. Mme.’s attendance at the ball creates a series of conflicts only able to be overcome by teamwork and persistence. The Necklace exhibits that mutual effort enables people to overcome seemingly continual conflict created by the lacking of a suitable outfit, a lost necklace, and debt through collaboration.
Mme. Loisel’s lack of an outfit suitable for a ball creates a conflict which can be overcome only by collaboration. Mathilde’s realization of her lack of an appropriate dress leads her to ask her husband for money. Though she would like to have as much
…show more content…
and Mme. Loisel cooperate to find what seems to be an exact replica of the lost necklace, which they must purchase and return to Mme. Forestier. Mathilde attempts to find a replacement for the necklace to prevent Mme. Forestier from realizing the original had been lost. The couple travelled “from one jeweler to another hunting for a similar necklace” (175). They went together to look for the necklace, which proves that they are exerting mutual effort. M. Loisel uses all means necessary to pay for the necklace. He “made ruinous deals” (187) and “risked his signature” (188) in order to pay for the expensive diamond necklace. Though Mme. Loisel lost the necklace, her husband uses his savings and takes out loans to help her pay for the replacement. The couple acquires the necklace and must return it to Mme. Forestier. M. Loisel brings the necklace home, and “Mme. Loisel took the necklace back” (199) to the owner. The couple collaborates to get the necklace into the hands of its owner. Mathilde and M. Loisel work together to replace Mme. Forestier’s necklace, and she is none the
Henry Ford was born on July 30, 1863, on a farm near Dearborn, Michigan. His only formal education was through fifth grade at the local schoolhouse, where he took an early interest in tinkering with steam engines. He left his family farm for Detroit at sixteen and became a mechanist apprentice. In 1888 he married Detroit local Clara Ala Bryant, and they had a child named Edsel. Ford briefly returned to farming to support his family. In 1891, Ford returned to Detroit and was hired as an engineer at the Edison Illuminating Company. Several years later, he handcrafted one of his first cars, the Ford Quadricycle. He left his job at the Edison Company to briefly serve as superintendent at his first car company, Detroit Automobile
Henry Ford, the man who revolutionized the car industry forever, founded his company under the beliefs that a car wasn’t a high-speed toy for the rich but instead a sturdy vehicle for everyday family needs, like driving to work, getting groceries or driving to church. However, Henry ford did much more than just this feat. He also tried to make peace in WWI before America had joined the war. In addition, Ford made the radical new five dollars a day payment. However, Ford also had his lows. At an early age, his mother died. His first two companies had also been failures. Against many of his closest friends protests, he published an anti-semitic (Jewish) newspaper. Ford had a very interesting and unique life and he changed the automotive industry forever.
Imagine how life would be if our society did not have cars. Today, our society is depended on cars for our daily routines. From getting our food, clothes, and technology to just going to the store across the street, cars are a very important part of our society. In the 18th century, only the wealthy people had access to automobiles, and they only used cars for fancy transportation and to show off their money. This was because of the extreme prices of cars in the 18th century. With these high prices not many people could afford them, especially not the working class. Henry Ford reevaluated the automobile industry in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. With Ford's enthusiasm to mechanics, he perfected the assembly line, developed cheap cars for the common people, and sparked an era of mass production. Because of this, Ford paid higher and his actions allowed the common people to have access to cars.
First, in “The Necklace” Mme. Loisel needed the material possession of the necklace in order to go to the ball and her greed cost her to lose everything.
One of Madame Loisel’s worst character traits is her materialism. Her concern about clothes, jewelry, and how much money she has is the only thing that gives her happiness. This shows how egotistical she is when it comes to status. As stated by the author, “She had no proper wardrobe, no jewels, nothing. And those were the only things that she loved - she felt she was made for them.”
From the beginning, the reader can see how Mathilde Loisel truly feels about the world. At first, she claims to have simple tastes, since she could not afford any other. These tastes quickly change, however. She then appears to be very unhappy and is plagued with vanity. She believes he belongings cannot compare to her beauty. So, naturally, the woman craves to have more. She wants objects to love. When her husband presents her with an invitation to a fancy party, she begins to
Loisel wonders how differently her life would have been if she had not lost the necklace, and had to pay back so much debt. Mme. Loisel sees Mme. Forester with a child and describes her as still looking young and beautiful: “She perceived a woman walking with a child. It was Mme.
Mme. Loisel explains that the dress she has to go to the theater in isn’t good enough to go to the party. She expects that she should have the best, to go to this event with some very wealthy individuals. M. Loisel then spends his money that he was going to buy a rifle with to buy her this beautiful dress that she envisioned. She could’ve worn the theater dress that she already owned, but instead she decided that that wasn’t good enough for her.
Mathilde Loisel always longed for wealth and riches in “The Necklace.” She thought the only way she could be truly happy was if she lived in a lavish home, had all of the clothes and jewelry she could ever dream of, and had multiple servants and maids. Although she had always dreamed of being rich, in reality, she is poor and married to a clerk in the French Ministry of Education. Because his wife had always dreamed of being at lavish parties, he worked very hard and obtained an invitation to a party at the house of the Minister of Education. Mathilde, instead of being happy, is extremely disappointed as she feels she will be disrespected at the party because she is not rich.
In “The Necklace,” Guy de Maupassant uses irony and characterization to show how the necklace is a strong force working on Mathilde Loisel. The necklace is what causes a domino effect of actions and choices that are made which change her life. This force stems from her friend, Forestier, who gives her the necklace, to wear to the ball. Her friend being rich and a person of high society, gives the allusion that the diamond necklace is real, which makes this force even more influential for Mathilde, as her only wish is too seem wealthy and beautiful. Her wish is finally satisfied, during the night of the ball.
Loisel repaid the necklace together with their sweat and tears. Mathilde didn’t have a choice; she had to change from a vain, ungrateful, material, bored wife, into a hardworking proud and loving wife. She even says, right before she runs into Mme. Forestier, “What would have happened if she had not lost that necklace? Who knows? Who knows? How life is strange and changeful! How little a thing is needed for us to be lost or to be saved!”(39) In that quote I saw 2 things, when she asked herself what would have happened if she didn’t lose the necklace, she doesn’t go into some fairytale about what life she could be living, she just accepts what she is now, even if it’s not the easiest life in the world. At the very end of that quote “How little a thing is needed for us to be lost or to be saved!”(39) The fact that she added “or to be saved!” to her thought, tells me that she realizes that she was vain and unappreciated and that she lacked character, but now she is grateful, even though it was such a terrible thing, she was grateful that she was able to say that she was a better person now, even after everything that happened to her than she ever “dreamed” of being before. Guy de Maupassant certainly described a very difficult hardship for Mathilde in “The Necklace” but in the end, everything that happened to her, made her a much better and stronger woman inside and out. This story teaches a very important lesson, you have no idea what you can do and who you can become, until your chips are down and you’re put between a rock and a hard
In the beginning of the story, the theme starts out with pride interfering in her life and not being content in the level of society she and her husband are in. Madame Loisel believes that she deserves a better and more luxurious life with expensive things rather than the life she now has.“Believing that she had been born to enjoy every refinement and luxury, she suffered deeply”(3). Since Madame Loisel has always longed for a better life, her husband brought her home an invitation to a ball so she could experience a night of living in the higher
It took ten years for Mathilde and her husband to pay off the debt of buying a new necklace. Those ten years were not spent with the luxuries she experienced so many years ago at the party, nor were they filled with the simple things she once owned and despised. She came to know “the horrible existence of the needy. She bore her part, however, with sudden heroism.” When passing her rich friend again in the street, she was barely recognizable. Who she was the day she ran into her friend was not who she was the night she wore that necklace.
Loisel’s greedy behavior led to her demise, as well as her husband’s too. She focused on obtaining the finest jewels and having everyone believe her to be of higher status. However, the jewels she thought would make her elegant, turned out to be fake and worthless. This becomes ironic because she felt superior when wearing the necklace but, in fact, it was not of real value. Maupassant puts a lot of irony into this short story and that irony helps to create the themes that are frequently seen throughout “The Necklace”. Guy de Maupassant writes in an eloquent style that captivates the reader; through his use of diction and a short sentence structure he is able to do so. Maupassant effectively portrays the symbolism of real value versus perceived value through the use of the necklace. Guy de Maupassant also illustrates the theme in his short story that you can not assign a value to someone based on his or her material
The Necklace also displays distinctive realism in the use of socioeconomic influences which are essential to the plot. The major conflict in the story would be absent and the theme would not be obtainable without Mathilde Loisel’s insecurity about her own socioeconomic reputation. An example of Loisel’s self-deprivation nature is presented when she realizes she does not have a necklace, she says “I shall look absolutely no one. I would almost rather not go to the party” (Maupassant, sec. 3). Another example of the self-conflict caused by social pressure is Loisel’s immediate attempt to replace the necklace and her reluctance to speak to her friend Madame Forestier about the necklace for ten whole years. If she were not conflicted by societal pressures she might have avoided the whole situation altogether. The Necklace establishes a realistic difference in value between the necklaces and proposed clothing. Her husband proposes flowers which were valued 10 franks so in any case if she had chosen the flowers there would have been an insignificant economic loss. Her decision not to tell her friend about the necklace ends up costing her seven times the worth of the original. The roses symbolize the simpler things in life to the theme of the story. Mathilde Loisel’s withered appearance at the end