For any policy, there are those who would support it while others would oppose it based on certain reasons. For policies supporting equality, some would argue that the policies would ensure equal opportunities to all citizens, irrespective of gender, race, and sexual orientation (Pager, & Shepherd, 2008). This article would present the views of supporters and opponents in simple flipchart. Various aspects such as stakeholder interest, resources channels of action, participation and the effect of the action plan on either the supporters or opponents of equality policies.
specifically for you
for only $16.05 $11/page
|Stakeholders||Stake or Interest||Resources||Action Channels Open to Stakeholder||Probability of Participation and Manner of Doing So||Influence, as a Product of Resources and Participation||Implications for Implementation Strategy||Affected Action Plan Elements|
|Supportive stakeholders||Human rights groups would be expected to support policies related to Equal Opportunity. In the US, specific civil groups, including Citizens Justice Association, Empowering Spirits Foundation, and workplace Fairness organization would be the major supporters of the policy. The above-mentioned civil groups aim at protecting the rights of minorities such as gays, women and minority communities face.||Resources are critical as far as implementation of policies is concerned. Apart from capital resources, stakeholders would need human resources meaning that they will have to employ skilled labor to handle issues that might arise.||Action channels include legal actions whereby supporters would move to court to sue those oppressing minorities. They might also employ mass action such as demonstrations and strikes.||There is a high chance that Citizens Justice Association, Empowering Spirits Foundation, and workplace Fairness organization would participate in strikes and demonstrations. They would also accept to be parties in case of legal suits.||Since the supporters of the equal opportunities are believed to be international bodies, their influences would be tremendous.||The human rights groups would be expected to face intimidation from government, which is reluctant to adopt equality policies.||The main action plan in the project would be communication. The project coordinators would be expected to change the mode of communication in order to succeed.|
|Opposing stakeholders||The main opponent of equality policies is the executive. In fact, the executive would be reluctant to accept change that threatens the position of the ruling class in society, such as equal distribution of resources. For instance, civil groups would demand that equal distribution of resources be incorporated as part of the equal opportunity plan. The interest of the executive would be to maintain the status quo since the state is perceived as the committee of the ruling class. Therefore, it would oppose the equal opportunity policy proposed. Moreover, religious denominations, including Seventh Day Adventist and the Baptist church would oppose equality policies aimed at promoting the rights of homosexuals (Ritter, 2008).||The resources that opponents of the policy would provide include capital resources. It might not provide human resources because chances are high that the government would use state machinery.||The main action plans would be advocacy whereby the government would meet privately with officials supporting the policy to influence them to change their mind.||The executive would not participate directly. It would use other organizations, particularly the judiciary, to influence the outcome.||The influence of the government is massive since it owns state machinery.||The decision of the state to oppose the policy would taint the image of political leaders who would be perceived to support the status quo.||In the project, the main action plan on the part of opponents is support from the minorities during elections (Marque, 2007). The policy would destabilize the relationship between the government and the electorate.|
Steps that would ensure the success of equality policies and prevent the influence of opponents
The most important action plan would be to strengthen communication in order to ensure that supporters of the policy have the backing of the populace. It would be difficult to implement equality policies if supporters do not have the backing of the public (Marquez, 2007). In this regard, it would be upon the supporters to reach out to the public and explain the importance of equality. This would be done through outlining the dangers of discrimination. The public should know that equality does not mean doing away with the positions of certain groups (Crosby, & Bryson, 2005). For instance, men should be convinced to believe that their roles would not be tempered with but instead they would be supposed to respect the roles played by women in society.
Implementation of action plans would not be a simple task since the opponents would launch a strong defense against the policy. Since the state perceived to control the state machinery, the supporters would be required to lobby other institutions of government such as the legislature in order to put pressure on government to adjust its position as regards to equality policies.
Crosby, B. C., & Bryson, J. M. (2005). Leadership for the Common Good: Tackling Public Problems in a Shared-Power World. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Marquez, J. (2007). Limits of diversity program revealed. Workforce Management, 86(5), 1-3.
Pager, D. & Shepherd, H. (2008). The Sociology of Discrimination: Racial Discrimination in Employment, Housing, Credit, and Consumer Markets. Annual Review of Sociology, 34, 181–209.
Ritter, B. (2008). Collision of religious and gay rights in the Workplace. The Humanist, 68(1), 5-7
100% original paper
on any topic
done in as little as