****NEED THIS ASSIGNMENT BY 11PM EASTERN TIME TONIGHT!!!!**** Post a substantive reply of at least 300 words each to a minimum of TWO threads. · You must use at least 1 peer-reviewed reference (not used in the original posting) in your response. · Do not simply revisit what was discussed in the thread, but add information from the unique article you researched on the concept and compare the findings. Did the findings of the article you found and the articles used in the original thread agree, disagree, address different aspects of the concept? · Only the substantive part of the response will be counted toward the word count. · Use APA format and write in 3rd person. Thread 1: Brainstorming Definition: Brainstorming are sessions where people pop out ideas. (Knight-Wallace, 2017) Summary: Carol Knight-Wallace (2017) discusses brainstorming myths and strategies to overcome them. The article does this by referring to the process of brainstorming and relating it to popping popcorn. The first indication of this is when coming up with ideas during a brainstorming session they “pop” out. Knight-Wallace (2017) reviews three myths of brainstorming. The first myth is that in groups more ideas will be produced. The second myth is that debating topics is bad and should be limited. The third myth is that all ideas should be treated the same. By making adjustments and modifications to the brainstorming process these myths can be overcome. By giving people time to be creative and structure ideas alone before coming together as a group. Incentives such as rewarding the most creative or unique idea. Encouraging improvisation to enhance creativity. Structure the brainstorming by using the Seven Ways method as a tool. Seven Ways encourages a team to solve a problem or create a new process. Knight-Wallace (2017) offers many solutions to processes to enhance brainstorming and avoid the problems that are discussed. Discussion: Before brainstorming starts a flow chart is created, data collected, the root cause determined, and, now it is time to discuss solutions. (Knight-Wallace, 2017) Brainstorming can be beneficial however, it doesn’t come without potential concerns. The first myth is that groups generate more ideas; many people can be more creative alone so It is not always true that brainstorming in a group setting can generate more ideas. (Knight-Wallace, 2017) Downfalls to brainstorming in a group setting are group think and fear of ridicule. Sharing can be difficult in this setting and create a situation where one forgets what they were going to say when they get the chance to talk. (Knight-Wallace, 2017) In a study conducted by Said Abdullah Al Saifi, Stuart Dillon, and Robert McQueen (2016), where 25 interviews were conducted of top and middle managers, and frontline employees regarding face-to-face social networks and knowledge sharing. Ten of the participants stated that brainstorming and problem-solving can play an important role in supporting knowledge sharing. (Saifi, Dillon, McQueen, 2016) The second myth is that debates are bad; the key of brainstorming is that all ideas are good ideas and debate should be limited. (Knight-Wallace, 2017) A study indicated that when debate is made permissible and encouraged as a method to stimulate more ideas it is actually successful. (Knight-Wallace, 2017) Through brainstorming and problem-solving social interactions between employees can occur. (Saifi, Dillon, McQueen, 2016) Brainstorming can often cause people to focus on being right, and they come up with ideas that may be too obvious and uncreative. (Knight-Wallace, 2017) The third myth is that all ideas are treated equally; when an idea is being shared already the group is thinking about that idea and no longer thinking about their own. This is a concept that Knight-Wallace (2017) describes as anchoring, and it can crush original and creative ideas. It is possible to counteract the myths discussed. Employees need to be given the time needed and opportunity to use the right process. Time can be given for individual thoughts, group interaction, discussion and debate in order to create more creative ideas. (Knight-Wallace, 2017) One enhancement to traditional brainstorming is asking people to write down ideas individually. This allows for people to spend time alone allowing creative juices to flow before sharing with others. Giving rewards for ideas that fall outside of the box encourages people to not just play it safe. Apply improvisation rules to encourage creativity, innovation, communication, teamwork, and leadership. (Knight-Wallace, 2017) Encourage criticism during debate explain this increases creativity to help reduce defensive reactions. Biblical Integration: God wants us to work together. In Ecclesiastes 4:9, “Two are better than one; because they have a good reward for their labor. There is reward in working together and creating order instead of disorder by working together. In Proverbs 27:17, “Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend.” A group working together offers checks and balances. The help each other to stay on task. In summary 1 Corinthians 12:14, “For the body is not one member, but many.” The body of Christ are a team we are the strongest when working together to do God’s will. Thread 2: ENVIRONMENTAL UNCERTAINTY Definition: Environmental uncertainty means the managers do not have enough information about the environment to understand or predict the future. This setback forces the managers to rely on scientific studies and findings. this is a costly procedure that managerial have to adhere for the success of the success of the organization. Martin Weiss, Christina Wittmann, (2018) “Objective environmental conditions and perceived environmental uncertainty: Cognitive models as explanation for a perceptual gap”, Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change , Vol. 14 Issue: 1, pp.33-60, https://doi-org.ezproxy.liberty.edu/10.1108/JAOC-11-2016-0079 . Summary: Martin Weiss did scientific study on why their is a huge differences between objective and perceived environmental uncertainty. This has posed a huge problem for executive directives towards making effective organizational changes. The purpose of this paper is to develop deeper understanding of what lead to gap between objective and perceived eenvironmental objectives. The process consisted of three stages that included attention, encoding and storage/retrieval. This may explain why people perceive the environmental conditions differently. Schneider and Angelmar(1993) define cognitive structures as “representations of knowledge that contain and organize information. These include categories, construct systems, causal systems and scripts which refer to the structures and not the contents of those structures”. Cognitive structures are innate, although they can be acquired, developed and adjusted over time through experience, which results from learning (Stanovich, 2012). Therefore, cognitive structures are dispositional. Yasai-Ardekani (1986) discovered that fundamental differences in individuals’ cognitive structures result from varying levels of cognitive complexity. Schroder et al. (1967) summarize that the number of categories that are used in the context of perceiving environmental stimuli as well as the system of rules, which organizes these categories, determine the degree of cognitive complexity. In this regard, individuals with superior cognitive complexity gather broader ranges of information (Streufert et al., 1964) and tend to put their attentional focus on complex information, rather than simple information (Schroder, 1971; Yasai-Ardekani, 1986). Individuals with complex cognitive structures are able to perceive multidimensional stimuli, which is important for properly perceiving complex conditions (Schroder, 1971; Yasai-Ardekani, 1986). Accordingly, complex cognitive structures result in a more accurate perception (Baron and Ensley, 2006; Dane, 2010). Biblical Integration: Jesus Biblical leadership is a good implication to organizations to keep striving for the best despite the challenges we face. Jesus was rejected at different occasions despite him proving himself through healing and performing miracles. This is a good moral lesson that we should always expect any outcome and keep pressing for the best. Give a reply to both thread 300 words minimum EACH REPLY! Total of 600 words!!