MGT444-Fall11

From Unmarried America: "Unmarried America is an information service for America's 106 million unmarried adults -- who head up a majority of the nation's households. Our services focus on your interests as employees, consumers, taxpayers, and voters, regardless of your household size or family structure. You will not find a more comprehensive or reliable source of information about this special population anywhere on the Internet. Unmarried America is a function of Spectrum Institute, a nonprofit corporation with federal tax exempt status." The intended audience of Unmarried America is basically anyone who is not married. This can included single individuals with or without children, gay couples, straight unmarried couples, single adults who live at home, etc. This website says it is targeted towards a special class of citizens, the unmarried. While I appreciate their attempt to keep the category broad and not to discriminate against anyone (except for married folks), their focus ends up being so broad as to not be of much benefit to anyone. Everyone who isn't married isn't really specific enough to constitute a "special population." The website is run by the Spectrum Institute which they state is a registered nonprofit. They do not provide any further information about their registered nonprofit regarding what its goals are, how they are funded, or what they have accomplished. They hint at advocating for the interests of unmarried individuals, but I found no evidence of any actual research or activities on their part. At its root, Unmarried America appears to be four people with an opinion that re-blog news stories.

A large part of their website appears to be broken for me, many things that looks like they should be links are either plain text or broken. I was able to read through several parts of the site though, and it is interesting. I do believe that the site slightly mispresents itself. They seem to be focused on equal rights for everyone, including things like homosexual marriage, and ending discrimination.

Christine, sounds like a lot of us are having the same issues with a lack of credentials on sites. You have to wonder if at least some of this is perhaps intentional. Sounds like an odd organization to me, and I think your opinion about it "their focus ends up being so broad as to not be of much benefit to anyone" is spot on. Really sounds like a 'what organization can we start that a huge number of people will automatically fall into and likely donate'? Seems completely unnecessary to me. As to the website problems - it's always a prudent idea to check your webmaster's final product (especially if he's not actually your employee) because they could easily put up something minimal and take the money and run. However, I will say that people who choose to not be married could be a different demographic deserving their own group. Just doesn't make sense to have it so broad like you point out. Also very ironic that it appears to only have four members in whatever respect you were referencing. Sounds very sketchy.

The website I chose to review for this paper is http://www.familysupportamerica.org/. I really have no clue as to who created this site or who is involved in contributing to the website. The "About Us" page simply states, "Here at Family Support America, we are dedicated to providing the information, support, and connections that families need to survive. Whether you have questions about child abuse, alcoholism, disciplining children, divorce, or other topics related to families, we can help. And if we cannot help, we will direct you to someone who can." They give absolutely no clue as to who they are at Family Support America. Are they a group of parents, business owners, teachers, or what? Also, the contact page gives the following contact information, "Email admin@familysupportamerica.org Mail 307 W 200 S Suite 2004 Salt Lake City, 84101" This also gives the viewer absolutely no clue as to the identity of the webmaster. I can only assume that they intended audience is parents, but even that isn't real clear. I guess the topics of childcare, child abuse and education are what led me to this conclusion. The homepage does little to excite me. The second paragraph talks about feeding your children only additive-free foods and avoid high-fructose corn syrup and products with MSG. They also suggest you avoid giving your kids juice. Already, I hate the site for feeling the need to counsel me on what to feed my children. I'm not against healthy foods, but I believe that all additives are not bad and as long as I feed these to my children in moderation, they'll be ok. At the bottom of the homepage are links to other websites. These sites are not labeled as supporters of this site, but the absurd collection and lack of relativity make me believe they must be sponsors, otherwise, what does dancewear, micro-bead pillows and scrubs have to do with F

And, here's the rest.... what does dancewear, micro-bead pillows and scrubs have to do with Family Support America? The links down the left page of the home page do provide some valuable information. They also link to some credible websites that offer more information than this parent site. Also, though, at the bottom of each page there is another ad for some product or business that is irrelevant in my opinion. The "Links and Resources" page does not have any working links. Also, the "FAQ" page is blank. The copyright date at the bottom of each page is 2011 so it's quite possible that the site is still under construction. The site has a consistent layout, but that's about the only thing positive I have to say about it. I don't think this website is a very good example of one that focuses on balancing work and home issues. Its main focus seems to be on preventing stress and child abuse at home. These are credible issues, but I don't think this site offers much useful information than the basics. I would not recommend this website to any one.

Erika - I had a very similar experience with my site, http://www.weareoneillinois.org/ They gave little information as to who actually started the site or who maintains it, other than the fact that mine listed a group of entities that support the movement now. Also, to digress quickly, it looks like we are all posting in different ways somehow. The site seems to distinguish between 'bookmark' and 'topic'. When I click 'topic' (under 'Filter' towards the top of the screen) it shows only my two posts, suggesting that everyone else made a 'bookmark', whatever that actually means. Anyway I thought you gave a good review to what sounds like a pretty bad website. If a website administrator is not finished with any part of a site, he/she should have the decency to post a 'coming soon' or something similar. I am somewhat curious because of how poor you made it sound as to who is running it and if they have any idea what they're doing frankly.

The Company That Cares website is an effective website that focuses on making companies socially responsible. The website offers three action programs, AIM High, Invisible Differences, and CareDays all stemmed towards developing children for college, helping those with disabilities gain skills to enter the workforce and address other significant issues throughout society. The not-for-profit company is founded by Marci Koblenz, Founder and President, Sandra Cunningham, Founder, Mary Ellen Gornick, Founder. The website also educates employers about the many issues that may be faced by their employees, especially those living in poverty. This website ties into our involvement in MGT 444 in many ways. The website makes employers aware of the many issues that employees face outside of the workplace which can have a direct impact on an employees work life. I feel that websites such as this one make it easier for employers to implement family friendly policies and be more open to the societal issues many employees face. Those companies involved with Companies That Care will more likely handle employees with conflicts between work and home life in more effective ways and the website is funded by companies that care. The companies that help fund this website have definately made a step at understanding the many issues employees face and will be more likely to deal with these issues in a way that will retain workers in the face of some family based conflicts. The Companies That Care's website provides a code of conduct that has ten characteristics. One of the characteristics is to encourage work/life balance and another characteristic is to enable the well-being of individuals and their families through compensation, benefits, policies and practices. Due to these and other of the ten characteristic codes of conduct I think it is clear that Companies That Care encourages family friendly policies in the workplace and more websites such as this should exist.

From Companies that Care: "Center for Companies That Care is a national, not-for-profit 501(c)(3) organization dedicated to enhancing the well-being of employees and communities by educating and inspiring employers to practice employer engagement and integrate the 10 Characteristics of a Socially Responsible Employer into their daily business practices. Our Community of Caring is making a difference in communities and workplaces nationwide through community-building initiatives and education about how to be a company that cares." The intended audiences of Companies that Care are employers and managers. Companies that Care seeks to resolve many of the work, life, time, community, and family balance issues identified in our studies this semester. They identify the 10 Characteristics of Socially Responsible Employers and also have created an Honor Roll to recognize companies that meet their standards of social responsibility. The website openly identifies the corporate connections of their board members and sponsors. This could lead the organization to be biased towards their sponsor when awarding their Honor Roll recognition, but it could also be an indication that these companies value the advocacy of social responsibility in the corporate world.

I feel that the website is biased towards dealings with companies that care. The corporate connections they hold are what I feel demonstrate support by other companies that value the family friendly policies this website endorses. I feel the website is credible by being able to pull the support of other organizations, seemingly those involved in healthcare are the websites main supporters, but the few supporters they have underline the fact that the organization is having it's effects on businesses who hold similar values. I expect this website to grow and obtain more support as they seem very genuine.

The name of the website I reviewed is Momsrising.org, and the URL is http://www.momsrising.org/. This is a non-profit organization 501(c)(4), which means contributions are not tax deductible. I was unable to pinpoint authorship to one person. The 'about us' section simply states that this is a group of people (mostly mothers) who have come together to address issues related to motherhood and family. Specifically, the group examines issues such as maternity and paternity leave, open flexible work, toxics, health care, early care and education, fair wages and paid sick time. The organization's ideas stem from a book titled, The Motherhood Manifesto, authored by Joan Blades and Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner. It just so happens that Rowe-Finkbeiner is also the Executive Director of Momsrising.org. Most of the articles and other stories on their site do not give credit to any author. The only exception would be the Blog page, but even then, it is sometimes just a first name. This organization seems to me to be basically like a PAC, working to change public policies in order to make the workplace more family friendly. The targeted audience would be working mothers and fathers, but it seems there are many more women involved than men. The website addresses many issues that are important regarding work, family, and community. Many workers struggle with finding affordable childcare and this site has a page directly related to promoting early education and childcare for all. They also promote family-friendly policies such as flex-time, job sharing, and telecommuting. I think this website provides some useful information, but I also believe that most of it is biased and subjective. For example, one of the issues they address is healthcare for all. Included is a link to a question and answer session with Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius. She touts that the

And, here's the rest.... She touts that the new health care reform is designed to put you (us) in charge of our own health, giving us more options, etc. However, no one really knows what is going to happen when this takes effect. There are countless other arguments that support the ideas that people will have less access to care, important medical decisions will be made by some 'board', and the number of qualified doctors will quickly decline. Of course, Momsrising.org only presents the side of the story they want you to believe with regards to the health care reform law. Overall, I would consider the website credible because this group does exist. News articles from around the country support their existence. I noticed they had a "Donate" button that takes you to a page where you can make a monetary donation; however, they don't give a 'breakdown' of where this money goes. For example, what percentage goes to overhead, etc? The site appears to be fairly current, as it should be since it is addressing issues that are being faced today. The copyright date only gives the year 2011, but the "In The News" page contains several links to recent press releases. The site is well designed and consistent in layout. I was unable to find a 'help' screen or a site map.

Results Only Work Environment is about changing how companies view employee time and results. The idea of a results only work environment or "ROWE" is that an employee's time is not tracked at all, only their results. This means that employees can have as much time off as they want, when they want as long as their jobs get done. The website has four main areas, ROWE results, how to move your company to a ROWE, news related to ROWE and normal work environments, and how they can help your company move to a ROWE. The website is aimed both at company leaders and employees. While the site is very informative about ROWE, it is also trying to sell their services. The Results Only Work Environment is my ideal form of work environment, and I believe such an environment could solve a lot of work-life balance issues for many people. The greatest part about such an environment is that employees no longer would be pressured to be away from their family to show their dedication, but only for things that actually matter to their work. One thing about the website does reflect poorly on its credibility. The website belongs to CultureRx a wholy owned subsidiary of Best Buy, but I could not find that information on their website. (http://www.workforce.com/article/20070323/NEWS02/303239971) However, while the website is not clear about this relationship with Best Buy, the relationship with Best Buy actually should give them more credibility. Cali Ressler and Jody Thompson were HR executives at Best Buy when they pionereed the ROWE concept, and Best Buy is one of the first and largest companies in the nation with a ROWE. Furthermore, the program has been a huge success for Best Buy.

Wow! Good job with the investigative work connecting this to Best Buy. How does this program tie into Best Buy's business concept? I know their retail stores still operate on a time clock compensation model. Do they advocate a results only system for higher level employees only?

According to the articles I read, Best Buy is trying to implement this in their stores, but there are a lot of issues with things like labor laws and hours tracking. A lot of the laws are state laws so they may have implemented this in some states by now, but I am not sure if any stores have gone ROWE yet.

Workplace Flexibility 2010 is a website that deems itself a public policy initiative that seeks to implement and recommend policies which promote and enforce workplace flexibility. The website is very informative of their components which include flexible work arrangements, time off, and career flexibility. The website is also informative to the extent that is has a lengthy list of policies both federal and state that foster workplace flexibility. The website seeks to make flexible workplaces a part of American culture. The site is very credible and is implemented by Georgetown Law. The founder Patricia Kempethorne is the executive director of the Twiga Foundation. I feel the site is geared towards employers and the general public for information and support. I am clued to this because the site offers information which will not only educate employees but also employers and seeks support from all individuals. Also, many of the staff are affiliated with Georgetown and can be emailed accordingly. This website falls hand in hand with many of the information we have learned this semester about family friendly policies in the workplace. We have found through many of our readings the importance of family friendly policies and how they can affect employees. Providing a proper work family relationship is not only helpful to the employee but the employer in that it will help provide quality staff who are well trained and retainable. These employees will also be able to handle the responsibilities of their work lives and home lives simultaneously.

This website offered a lot of information to not only employees and employers but the public in general. I completely agree with your targeted audience but the information on-hand is important for everyone to know. I think everyone should always stay informed. Also, the website, or the material in it, is actually part of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation's National Iniative on Workplace Flexibility. If I remember correctly, there was a reading assignment that we had that was also part of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. Anyway great post and great website!

This website clearly states their mission. They attempt to help shape public policy to help women's lives in a positive manner.They offer different sections about informing a reader about programs, publications, news updates and ways to support the website and cause. The website seems to mostly geared towards women. It is attempting to empower them. The website seems to be credible because of the mission of the Board of Directors. To attempt to change public policy, there has to be a level of professionalism and credibility. The staff and board of directors for this website include extremely educated individuals. The newsletter provided by CWPS has articles written by accredited authors. The newsletter provides information about how CWPS has helped change and mold different public policies that have come about. I will say that there is a bit of a bias in the writing on the website. Although, they cover different issues, they attempt to make it seem like their efforts are never good enough and nothing is getting done in their favor. This does take away from credibility a bit. The information provided does come from credible sources. They have information from the U.S Census and from their own findings. The CWPS has a social agenda to help improve women's lives not just in America but also around the world. I feel that this is a good website.They do a great job of calling people to action. CWPS does a wonderful job of presenting facts about the state of women around the world. They make it known that there is a problem and it must be improved.

The website does contain bias obviousely; however one should be able to tell that just by looking at the URL. The website offered insight into several of the measures working women are taking to hopefully balance out their work and family conflict. Not only that, but the website also included articles regarding the pay scale for men and women and the differences we suffer from. It included statistical data provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and broke down the participation of men and women in the public sector. Not that this was shocking but it pointed out the decrease in women participation. There are also community service projects that the organization participates in.

The CLUW is a national organization for union women that was formed in 1974 to unify all union women in a feasible organization to determine common problems and to ultimately develop action programs to deal with those concerns/problems. The website for the Coalition of Labor Union Women includes several links to expand one's knowledge on the topic and also provides information about what they do and who they are. The website also includes resource guides, recent news regarding the CLUW, and the opportunity to become a member of their organization. This website is informative but also persuasive in the sense that it advocates the participation of others to fight for their cause. There are several articles to access regarding equal pay (or lack there of), videos to watch about worker's rights, and statistics that demonstrate men and women in the workplace. The intended audience would be working mothers. The website is open to all audiences; however there is a little slogan or tagline on the website that reads, "CLUW.org…The online frontline for working women". This would clearly indicate a desired audience of women and future supporters as well as all the topics the webiste covers. Though I could not find an author for the material discussed and available on the website, the information, in my opinion, is credible. The website is orginating from the CLUW and any and all information provided on the website has to do with their practices and is stated as being published by the CLUW. There are other links and materials provided that also appear to be credible. They are from news stories, life experiences, and statistical data and provide source information. Also, all articles, newsletters, videos, and blogs are dated and reasonably up-to-date. In addition, there is contact information left for several members of the organization including the president. The website does contain bias obviousely; however one should be able to tell that just b

THE MAIN PURPOSE OF THIS WEBSITE IS TO BRING RESEARCH ON WORKPLACE EFFECTIVENESS AND WORKPLACE FLEXIBILITY INTO BUSINESS AND COMMUNITY PRACTICE. THE WEBSITE HAS DIFFERENT COMPONENTS TO IT WHICH INCLUDE; CURRENT RESEARCH AND REPORTS, FLEXIBILITY TOOLKIT, THE SLOAN AWARDS FOR BUSINESS EXCELLENCE, FLEX TIPS FOR EMPLOYEES, SUPERVISORS, AND COMPANIES, RESOURCE AND LINKS. IT SEEMS TO BE A VERY COMPLEX AND INFORMATIONAL WEBSITE. IT IS AVAILABLE TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC FOR VIEWING AND THERE ARE MANY OPTIONS OF DOWNLOADING INFORMATION THAT YOU COULD PRINT OFF AND KEEP. IT MENTIONED THAT IF EMPLOYEES HAVE MORE FLEXIBILITY THEY ARE MORE WILLING TO HELP THEIR EMPLOYERS AND GO ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT IS ASKED OF THEM. THIS TIES WELL WITH WHAT WE HAVE BEEN LEARNING IN CLASS. THE WEBSITE GIVES MANY OPTIONS TO LEARN ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF FLEXIBILITY AT THE WORKPLACE. THE INTENDED AUDIENCE SEEMS LIKE IT COULD BE ANYONE WHO IS CURRENTLY IN A JOB THAT DOESN'T HAVE FLEXIBILITY AND CAN LEARN THE BENEFITS FROM. ALSO COULD BE GEARED TOWARDS BUSINESS PARTNERS WHO ARE THINKING OF HAVING A MORE FLEXIBLE WORKING ENVIRONMENT. I FEEL THAT THIS WEBSITE IS CREDIBLE BECAUSE IT'S A VERY COMPLEX WEBSITE, AND WHEN YOU CLICK ON A LINK TO CONTACT SOMEONE IT GOES TO ANOTHER WEBSITE FULL OF INFORMATION. THERE ARE ALSO MANY DIFFERENT RESEARCH LINKS LISTED.