Name: Geun Ho LeeMr. SheridanTSEA (1)May 12, 2011 Tolerating Brain Drain in the Philippines: Should the Philippines? Midwife Chae Reviso came back in the Philippines, her motherland, after eight yearsworking tax-free and living rent-free in Saudi Arabia to live again with her husband.However, barely a year later, Mrs. Reviso is preparing to leave again as she finds too fewwork opportunities in her homeland. Although she came back because she felt that she owedher husband some time, she is not satisfied with the situation in her homeland as she claimsin frustration, “I cannot afford to build a house on my salary in the Philippines” (Macaraig). For decades, the problem of brain drain in the Philippines has been an on-going issue.Recently, it has gotten worse as the number of the top skilled and educated workers leavingthe country continues to rise (Alburo and Danilo). The increasing number of overseasFilipino workers (OFWs) benefits the Philippines economically as the remittances sent backhome encourage others to get educated and work abroad (Hennessey). Thus, some are contentwith the government’s inactive stance on the brain drain. Despite the economic and socialbenefits the Philippines gains from the export of its citizens, the Filipino government shouldtake more aggressive actions to minimize this, because the net effect of the brain drain isnegative, causing economic troubles, impeding the development of the nation, and causingsocial problems. The economic problems in the Philippines caused by brain drain are much greaterthan the benefits. One main economic problem experienced is that the local Filipinopopulation becomes too dependent on the remittances sent back home by the OFWs.According to the World Bank’s 2005 Global Economic Prospects report, there is evidence to
2. suggest that remittances retard local development by crowding out entrepreneurial initiative(Hennessey). This is a serious problem since the economy cannot grow or continue to existwithout entrepreneurs starting up and venturing businesses. Simply put, lack of entrepreneursputs a halt on an economy. Also, exporting skilled and educated workers makes the countryto be dependent on the economies of importing nations. For instance, the OFWs in developednations have been significantly affected by the collapse of technology stocks as thetechnology firms closed down and thereby open job positions for technology-specializedworkers intensely decreased. Thus, the thousands of technology-specialized OFWs are nolonger in demand (Alburo and Danilo). A problem arises from this because these newlyunemployed workers come back to their homeland and increase the unemployment rate athome. Again this problem caused by brain drain works against the economic growth of thePhilippines. Moreover, the most significant problem due to brain drain is that while theeconomy of the Philippines expands, it fails to acquire the attributes of a developed economy.For instance, while the educated leave the country for mental labor, the others in theworkforce are at home, working in factories or doing very basic mental labor (Alburo andDanilo). This description of the economy of the Philippines reveals that unlike the economiesof developed countries where the majority of the workforce is involved in metal labor, theFilipino economy is still driven by physical labor. Since factual data suggest that a developedeconomy is unlikely physical-labor driven one, it can be deduced that the Filipino economywill see its growth halted by this factor in the coming future. In contrast, considering some of the economic benefits of brain drain on thePhilippines, the government should not act against it. By exporting workers to other countries,the unemployment rate in the Philippines decreases. It has been statistically proven that abouta total of nine million Filipinos work overseas, which is about 10% of the total population(Macaraig) and 23% of the workforce (Llorito). This means that the remaining 67% of the
3. labor force in the Philippines can compete for jobs at home whereas the full 40 millionFilipino workforce would have to compete for the same number of jobs if it were not for thebrain drain. Moreover, the remittances sent back to the Philippines by the OFWs contributes ahuge sum to the nation’s gross domestic product (GDP). OFW dollar remittances haverecently averaged about US$7 billion per year (Llorito) and peaked at more than $11.6 billionin 2005 (Hennessey). The foreign remittances account for about 13% of the Filipino GDP(Llorito) and the specialized workers account for about 340,000, which is about 3.78% of theOFWs and about 0.85% of the Filipino workforce (Alburo and Danilo). These data show thathaving brain drain certainly helps out with the economic growth of the nation since only 0.85%of the 40 million labor force working in the foreign countries makes up roughly about 10% ofthe Philippines’ total GDP. In addition, brain drain solves the problem of providing jobs forboth the past and current generation workers. According to a study done by InternationalMigration Programme, many of the Filipino migrant workers were already in the labor forceand had come from the past decade’s professionals (Alburo and Danilo). This means that asthe previous generation’s professional workers move out of the country to work abroad, thenew professionals can find jobs at home more easily, hence effectively increasing theemployment rate. However, the brain drain is impeding the development of the Philippines. Thequestion to ponder is, “how to develop when the best and the brightest routinely set out insearch of more developed and comfortable nations?” (Hennessey) This questions how thePhilippines is supposed to develop if its brightest citizens, who can change the nation, moveout of the country. Also, the Philippines lacks incentives to offer to the brightest to keep themfrom leaving. With no solutions in sight, business groups and the government hold little hopeof keeping the nation’s top talent at home (Macaraig). This means that with the decreasingnumber of accessible skilled local workers, businesses and the government are hesitant to

Name: Gaopalelwe Lekabe
Student No. 25526413
Module code: AEXM 324
Lecturer: Dr ModirwaAssignment No.1
Date: 07 September 2018
The factors to be considered when forming a group.

Social group
The interest on members of the group
the projects
objectives of the group
integrating with the people in the group
meeting needs or goals lying outside group
The interest to members of the group eventually expand out of nearness or closeness and frequent interaction. We must gain remember that closeness create potential in the interest, factors come into existence when building up a relationship. Similarity is one of the most important aspect that appears in group formation.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

The assignment of the group is evident on its activities. Every group is expected to reach its goals and accomplish the needs of the group, the main ideal of joining the social group. The task of a group is experienced in its activities. One can join the agricultural cooperative because they are passionate in agriculture. People join and remain in groups when the rewards for doing so outweigh the costs, thus yielding profits.
The other factor for group formation is the hunger to interact with the members of the group. The satisfaction of need for affiliation is getting people involved as to meet the for obtaining them via objectives and activities of the group. Regardless of what we affiliate for the main reason is for everyone to be empowered in the social group and also changes in the behavior of an individual
Group membership may help us meet needs that lie outside the group – thus, group membership may be a stepping stone to achieve an external goal, rather than a source of direct satisfaction. A college professor may regularly attend meetings of a professional association to enhance the probability of promotion. A member for political office may host of community organizations to advice his or her luck for election. Attraction of the group is also detected by the attributes of that particular group.
Characteristics of groups that make it more attractive to potential members and which contribute to group formation:
1. Respect is one of the most vital attributes that a group should have in order to attract members.

2. Members who are in higher positions and have authority with respect are usually attracted to be in the group.

3. working together within the group brings out the best than individual, there are rewards which are obtain from working as a team and also results in the growth of the group.

4. The level of positive interaction among members have an effect on the attractiveness since it increases the range of personal and social needs to be met.

5. The size of the group have an impact on attraction. Smaller groups unlike big groups it is easier for members to interact easy because they share similarities and for obtaining individual needs thus how it tend to be more attractive.

6. A good relationship with another groups will add to the group honor and make
it more attractive.

7. Groups which are passionate in what they do to achieve are to be attractive, members who work together in reaching a success.

Name:
Instructor:
Course:
Date:
Paper based on Leaders eat last by Simon Sinek
Leaders eat last is a book for leaders in the modern world especially considering the fact that the world is divided into two: leaders and followers. Simon Sinek speaks about the true meaning of leadership and alludes to the fact that many leaders of today never really understand the impact their leadership have on those they lead. Sinek observes the modern struggles between followers and leaders to bring to the fore the nature of leading in the modern world.
One of the outstanding messages Sinek speaks about is the need to cultivate a circle of safety (Sinek, 41). In Sinek’s world the circle of safety involves employees working together and helping each other out rather than fighting and competing against each other to impress management. The circle of safety helps people built trust in each other knowing that in case of any outside danger someone is always there for us. What’s more, the circle will enable people exchange information freely which eventually propels the organization towards success.
In order to cultivate one’s circle of safety, Sinek proposes various habits that need to be developed. First, empathy helps the leader to recognize and share about how people that one is leading feel. Every employee deserves to have a leader that is not only concerned about results but is also empathetic to the things they go through every day. Secondly, he proposes treating employees with respect and dignity. Sinek affirms that when leaders treat employees with dignity and respect the benefits are unlimited.
Leadership is biology. Sinek explains how four chemicals including oxytocin, endorphin, dopamine and serotonin affect people. Each one of these chemicals has a role to play in shaping a person. Endorphin is responsible for masking pain, dopamine for achieving goals, serotonin for leadership and oxytocin for love. Sinek calls endorphin and dopamine selfish as they help people get things done. Serotonin and oxytocin are the selfless chemicals that help people in strengthening social bonds as well as in fostering networks and collaborations.
Selfish chemicals make us achieve our personal goals and make us happy whenever these goals are achieved. These chemicals are addictive and other than making us push others to the limits to accomplish our goals, they also make us happy at the expense of others. These chemicals are good but can be very dangerous when abused. Leaders are advised to avoid using these chemicals because they make them blind to people’s problems.
Selfless chemicals create trust, contribution and the feeling of belonging. Using these chemical in daily interactions inspires synergy which leads to better cooperation and collaboration. Many leaders want tangible results which is fine. However, they do so by ordering people around and posting memos and warning all over the office. Sinek observes that doing so is bad style of leadership because it involves only the selfish chemicals. Leaders must get away from the comfort of personalized offices and computers and connect with employees. They must come out and show them that they are there and that they care. Leaders must stand with the rest of employees not as cheerleaders when things are right but in every time regardless.
Sinek also discusses on the importance and means of becoming long-term leaders. He alludes to the fact that although short-term successes are good, they cannot measure up to the collective effect they have over the long-term. He further alludes to short-sightedness in leading where leaders only focus all their attention and energy on what happens today and perhaps tomorrow. Truth is leaders must look far ahead and setup strategies that will create a positive picture of a long-term contribution.
Many CEOs make decisions that only help them achieve what they need to achieve in the short periods they serve. They do this to protect their image and advance their interests. Sinek observes that advancing personal objectives over ta short term at the expense of the company’s long-term health is selfish. Leading should be long-term and hence leaders should focus on setting up strategies that ensure long-term health of the organizations and people they lead even when benefits will start coming long after they have left.
Essentially, Leaders eat last communicates the message that the buck stops with the leader. In literal meaning, it means leaders should think about the followers first before they think about their personal interests. In a perfect world, the only difference between leaders and followers is that the former work more than the latter. In this world, too, leaders do most of the work and only allow followers to finish. Leaders should be selfless people who want the best for followers even if it means taking home little or nothing for themselves. Leaders eat last is a mockery of current leadership where leaders take everything and leave nothing for the followers. It is a mockery of the way leaders are perceive in the modern society as people who need to be worshipped and feared.
Sinek sends the message that the current state of affairs is based on the wrong principles and must be changed as soon as possible. Leadership should not be a factor that divides people into two but a factor that makes people find more reasons to work together, help one another and ultimately improve working environment. Leaders need to use more of their selfless chemicals and reserve the selfish chemicals. Employees too must start working together to further their common cause and avoid unnecessary competition that only creates a very unhealthy working environment.
Work Cited
Sinek, Simon. Leaders eat last: Why some teams pull together and others don’t. Penguin, 2014.

x

Hi!
I'm Kyle!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out