Accounting for Strategic Decision-Making Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Accounting for Strategic Decision-Making - Essay Example First, the research paper has used multiple methods, which are combined together such as the four methodological approaches. This gives better results to the report. Secondly, the paper raises the issue of supply management area, which often concerns the implementation steps to facilitate concurrent engineering, which is not raised nor discussed in the previous accounting literatures. Third, â€Å"the allocation of target costs to the detailed component level should be performed by multidisciplinary teams in the U.S based target costing compared to the previous research on the target costing practices of the Asians firms† (Ellram 15). This stresses that target costing allocation is an individual duty. Fourth, all teams work together in U.S based target costing to resolve tensions that are created by the market pressures in conjunction with the supplier to achieve the target cost. Fifth, it illustrates that U.S target costing has very close working relationship between the supp ly management and design engineering. This impacts directly on a product or service’s capacity to meet their target costs. This relationship is absent in other targets costing such as the Asians. Sixth, the paper discusses how the target selling price can be established through customer negotiations which are not addressed in the previous target costing research. Lastly, it shows that the supply in U.S costing method plays a major role in product development which is not clearly stated in other costing methods. On the other hand, on weaknesses, it fails to discuss what affects the products success in U.S target costing method, whether it is the products higher prices or the markets readiness. It has also not specified the theoretical target costing time frame for each of the steps in the implementation process. Another weakness is that it shows the same way of determining the product cost which is just the same with

Managing Information Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 words

Managing Information - Essay Example Leibold et al. (2002) assert that during last three decades the world has gone through the important turning period in its economic, political and social history, which is related to the increasing appreciation of new values, such as openness, freedom, interdependency, networking and collaboration. It is accompanied by the acceleration of technological changes and impetuous development of computer and electronic communications. In the organisational context these processes entailed significant shifts in strategic management thinking and implementations: from information to knowledge and wisdom; from bureaucracies to networks; from training / development to learning; from local / national to transnational / global and meta-national; from competitive to collaborative thinking; from single and multi-connective relationships to bio-corporate relationships (Leibold et al. 2002: p.14). All these changes clearly reveal that the current era of the global economy is primarily based on knowled ge and intellectual assets rather than on material and financial assets. This era is often called New Economy or Knowledge Economy (Drucker 1994; Davenport & Prusak 1998), where knowledge is considered as a key organisational asset, which ensures sustainable competitive advantages for companies (Alavi & Leidner 2001). Companies in its turn also represent a new form of organisations, which exploit specific organisational structures and new information technologies, and base their business upon a development of core competencies through knowledge and expertise sharing and organisational learning. This paper is aimed to discuss modern concepts and approaches related to management of knowledge in organisations, and critically assess the role of Knowledge Management in creation of sustainable competitive advantages of enterprises. 3.0 Key Findings 3.1 Supporting Knowledge Management Understanding Knowledge in Organisations Knowledge in organisations is considered as â€Å"any text, fact , example, event, rule, hypothesis, or model that increases understanding or performance in a domain or discipline† (Liebowitz & Beckman 1998: p.49). Another useful definition of knowledge is â€Å"a fluid mix of framed experience, values, contextual information, and expert insights that provides a framework for evaluating and incorporating new experiences and information. In organisations, it often becomes embedded not only in documents and repositories but also in organizational routines, processes, practices, and norms† (Davenport & Prusak 1998: p.5). Allee (1997: p.62) explains that when information is involved in the larger context of meaning, when it is analysed and linked with other information, when it is referred to existing patterns, social and cultural biases and interpretations – then it becomes knowledge. So, evidently, knowledge can be organised and classified, having the properties of an object. At the same time, â€Å"knowledge can be viewed as a process of transformation through creation, adaptation, enhancement and application† (Allee 1997: p. 47). Or, in other words, â€Å"knowledge is the process of knowing, a reflexive process that takes data and information, in a social context, mixes the ingredients and factors [experience, judgment, common sense, rules of thumb, values and beliefs, basic truths, context, best practices, emotions, desires] to generate new data, information, and/or knowledge†

Sleeping Problems of the Elderly Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Sleeping Problems of the Elderly - Assignment Example Sleep pattern assessment of community partner:- ================================== DJ’s Story:- ---------------- DJ has lived all her life in a small town . She is a widow nursing her sweet memories that date back to the days when her husband lived . In her hay days she used to wear the pants in her family consisting of her two kids (both boys) and husband , and now that she has crossed the threshold of 87 years she no longer is the same bright boastful lady ; she has grown peevish , is fussy about the smallest of things and refuses to accept that her three grandsons are incarnations of The Satan himself . Questionnaire :- ============ 1) At what time do you get up in the morning ? 2) At your age you mustn’t probably be busy doing household work when you are awake , so what is it that keeps you busy most of the time ? 3) How often do you talk to the other family members during the course of the day about yourself ? 4) Do you feel bored during the afternoon hours ? 5) At what time do you take your lunch ? 6) Over a period of one week how often do you consider taking a nap after lunch ? 7) At what time do you take your afternoon snacks ?

Does urea formation have a feedback inhibition mechanism Explain the Essay

Does urea formation have a feedback inhibition mechanism Explain the why or why not - Essay Example Carbomyl phosphate synthase I acts as the rate limiting enzyme in urea cycle. N-acetylglutamate allosterically activates it thus lowering its Km for protein synthesis. Carbomyl Phosphate Synthase I binds with the primary ATP molecule and converts into a vigorous conformation. It then changes into a second form by binding with N-acetylglutamate thus enhancing its own ATP affinity. As a result, a phosphate group is transferred from a subsequent ATP to the enzyme bound carbamate. This changes the carbamate to carbomyl phosphate. This happens according to the Rubio-Britton-Grisolia model. Hence, it is seen that hepatic N-acetylglutamate controls the rate of protein synthesis in the urea cycle, by regulating its rate-limiting enzyme allosterically (Das 475). Arginine does not cause feedback inhibition of Carbomyl PS-1 or OTC but stimulates the activity of acetylglutamate synthetase. However, according to Snodgrass (67), â€Å"in bacteria and fungi, arginine inhibits conversion of glutamate to acetylglutamate†. Also, only at high concentration levels, orthinine transcarbomylase and argininosuccinate synthase undergo feedback inhibition mechanism by citrulline and argininosuccinate, which are their respective

Berman v. dept of interior - ethics Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Berman v. dept of interior - ethics - Essay Example POGO filed a suit against the oil companies based on this fact, which resulted into the oil companies making a settlement of $440 million to the United States. POGO thereof honored its agreement with Berman and Berman received a check of $383,600, which on the face side of the the check indicated that it is a public service award to Berman for working for the government. It is on this basis the United States government filed a suit against Berman stating that Berman had violated section 209(a) by using his office for private gain since he had accepted the amount from POGO, which is a private entity. This led to his removal from office. Berman appealed the judgment passed, but to no gain. This is because the jury based his ruling on the fact that Berman did not consult any ethics official in the agency for advice before entering into the agreement. His agreement with POGO clearly showed that he intended to use his office for private gain. This showed how reckless Berman was in performing his duties. This case seeks to show how important it is for employees to observe the highest levels of ethical conduct. As evident in this case, despite Bermans 26 years of service in the government and having no record of crime earlier, it was not sufficient to prevent him from losing his job. Therefore, it is important that employees observe appropriate ethical behaviors while at work. This case seeks to show how important it is for the state also to be efficient enough in its duties. It shows that the state was not doing enough to curb fraud in the United States. Such fraud should be exposed at an early stage to avoid wrongful decision-making by the state. POGO argued that oil companies had committed fraud since they had undervalued the oil they got from the federal lands; hence, formulating undervalued reports and making undervalued payments to the state in terms of royalties. POGO considered this act as being totally unethical to have been

Working Capital Simulation Essay Example for Free

Working Capital Simulation Essay This simulation has given me a better understanding of what managers and CEO’s go through when making decisions for the company. As I went through each simulation more than once to see what affects the decisions had on cash flows, sales and EBIT. In some situations they changed whether it dropped or risen, and others they were completely stagnant with their movement through each phase. Below I will point out how and why I made each decision. Phase 1, I chose to acquire a new customer and tighten up accounts receivable in both times I did the simulation. I chose to take on a new customer because SNC needed the exposure to become known as it is starting to get widespread exposure. The results of this acquisition were that it increased the sales significantly but also left us with higher receivable an inventory balances. (Harvard SNC Synopsis) The results of tightening up the accounts receivable were that sales have declined but the receivables improved which freed up cash. (Harvard SNC Synopsis) In phase 2, I chose to expand the online presence as well as develop a private label in one simulation and the second simulation I just chose to expand on line. In my first choice since I chose to expand online and develop the label, the amounts varied in increase of cash flows. The expansion of the online presence increased Internet sales and the private label increased the EBIT margin only a little. This also counteracts with the accounts receivable and inventory balances after phase one. But it was not that drastic of a change. In ’17 there was no increase or decrease in cash flows, which only means that in that year we broke even on the developing label side. The last phase, I chose to adopt a global expansion strategy in one trial and in the second I chose to adopt and acquire the high-risk customer. The results of acquiring a high-risk customer increase the sale, but had a dramatic affect on the receivables. SNC has now to consider witting off a portion of the outstanding balance as the company Midwest Miracles filed for chapter 11 bankruptcies. This simulation alone has taught me one of the many risks of doing business with any company. (Harvard SNC Synopsis) I thought that after acquiring the company, they could maybe stand on their own with the help of SNC and pull out of their financial hardship. It had the complete opposite affect on the SNC and it could have potentially ruined my company, as well as made me lose investors. The global expansion however helped the SNC grow its top of the line with the new customer Viva Familia. Like expanding online, the global strategy was another attempt to make sure SNC is the first company consu mers think about when dietary supplements. Limiting access to financing can hinder any company or person from trying to grow their business. It can cause higher interest rates on loans and credit fees as well as force businesses to face hardships when it comes to registration costs, policies and equipment needed for the business. (Parrino, Kidwell, $ Bates, 2012) It can also limit the profits they may encounter with consumers on in the new market. The limit of access to finances also hinders the process to develop and own their own brand of products. Making a if I were really the CEO of SNC or any business, I would need the help of a team to help make these decisions on and expansion and growth as well as investing in other companies. This simulation put in perspective the skill set and education needed after studying finances to even hope that you can make a profit on any decision made. It is a really difficult task to try and manage a company as well as keep up with the market. If this were a sole proprietorship, it would really be stressful to handle all by their lonesome. Reference: Harvard Business Publishing. (2012). Working capital simulation: managing growth. Retrieved May 16th, 2915 from, http://forio.com/simulate/harvard/working-capital/simulation Parrino, R., Kidwell, D.S, Bates, T.W. (2012) Fundamentals of corporate finance (2nd ed.) Hoboken, NJ: Wiley

John Rawls Theory of Justice Summary

John Rawls Theory of Justice Summary A Theory of Justice (1971), by John Rawls, is one of the most influential works in moral and political philosophy written in the twentieth century, according to Samuel Freeman in the Collected Papers of John Rawls (1999). A Theory of Justice is Rawlss attempt to formulate a philosophy of justice and a theoretical program for establishing political structures designed to preserve social justice and individual liberty. Rawls writes in reaction to the then predominant theory of utilitarianism, which posits that justice is defined by that which provides the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Rawls proposes a theoretical person who, shrouded in a veil of ignorance, must design a just society without foreknowledge of his or her own status in that society. Rawls asserts that from this objective vantage point, which he calls the original position, the individual will choose a system of justice that adequately provides for those positioned on the lowest rungs of society. The ind ividual will do so because he or she may end up in such a disadvantaged position and will want to be adequately provided for. Rawls draws from earlier theories of political philosophy that posit a social contract by which individuals implicitly agree to the terms on which they are governed in any society. Rawls concludes that such a social contract, formulated from the perspective of the original position, will guarantee a just society without sacrificing the happiness or liberty of any one individual. Rawls addresses issues of liberty, social equality, democracy, and the conflict of interests between the individual and society. A Theory of Justice Summary: Justice as Fairness In A Theory of Justice, Rawls begins with the statement that, Justice is the first virtue of social institution, meaning that a good society is one structured according to principals of justice. Rawls asserts that existing theories of justice, developed in the field of philosophy, are not adequate: My guiding aim is to work out A Theory of Justice that is a viable alternative to these doctrines which have long dominated our philosophical tradition. He calls his theory-aimed at formulating a conception of the basic structure of society in accordance with social justice-justice as fairness. Rawls sets forth to determine the essential principles of justice on which a good society may be based. He explains the importance of principles of justice for two key purposes: first, to provide a way of assigning rights and duties in the basic institutions of society; and secondly, to define the appropriate distribution of the benefits and burdens of society. He observes that, by his definition, well-ordered societies are rare due to the fact that what is just and unjust is usually in dispute. He further notes that a well-ordered and perfectly just society must be formulated in a way that addresses the problems of efficiency, coordination, and stability. Critique of Utilitarianism A brief synopsis from Wikipedia: In A Theory of Justice, Rawls argues for a principled reconciliation of liberty and equality. Central to this effort is an account of the circumstances of justice (inspired by David Hume), and a fair choice situation (closer in spirit to Immanuel Kant) for parties facing such circumstances. Principles of justice are sought to guide the conduct of the parties. These parties face moderate scarcity, and they are neither naturally altruistic nor purely egoistic: they have ends which they seek to advance, but desire to advance them through cooperation with others on mutually acceptable terms. Rawls offers a model of a fair choice situation (the original position with its veil of ignorance) within which parties would hypothetically choose mutually acceptable principles of justice. Under such constraints, Rawls believes that parties would find his favored principles of justice to be especially attractive, winning out over varied alternatives, including utilitarian and libertarian accounts. In 1974, Rawls colleague at Harvard, Robert Nozick, published a defense of libertarian justice, Anarchy, State, and Utopia.[3] Because it is, in part, a reaction to A Theory of Justice, the two books are now often read together. Another Harvard colleague, Michael Walzer, wrote a defence of communitarian political philosophy, Spheres of Justice,[4] as a result of a seminar he co-taught with Nozick. In a related line of criticism, Michael Sandel (also a Harvard colleague) wrote Liberalism and the Limits of Justice,[5] which took Rawls to task for asking us to think about justice while divorcing ourselves from the very values and aspirations that define us. Sandels line of argument in part draws on critiques of Rawls advanced by both Charles Taylor and Alasdair MacIntyre who argue for the importance that moral ontologies have on ethical arguments.[6] Robert Paul Wolff wrote Understanding Rawls: A Critique and Reconstruction of A Theory of Justice[7] immediately following the publication of A Theory of Justice, which criticized Rawls from a roughly Marxist perspective. Wolff argues in this work that Rawls theory is an apology for the status quo insofar as it constructs justice from existing practice and forecloses the possibility that there may be problems of injustice embedded in capitalist social relations, private property or the market economy. Feminist critics of Rawls, such as Susan Moller Okin,[8] largely focused on the extent to which Rawls theory could account for (if at all) injustices and hierarchies embedded in familial relations. Rawls argued that justice ought only to apply to the basic structure of society. Feminists, rallying around the theme of the personal is political, took Rawls to task for failing to account for injustices found in patriarchal social relations and the gendered division of labor, especially in the household. The assumptions of the original position, and in particular, the use of maximin reasoning, have also been criticized (most notably by Kenneth Arrow[9] and John Harsanyi),[10] with the implication either that Rawls designed the original position to derive the two principles, or that an original position more faithful to its initial purpose would not lead to his favored principles. In reply Rawls has emphasized the role of the original position as a device of representation for making sense of the idea of a fair choice situation for free and equal citizens.[11] Rawls has also emphasized the relatively modest role that maximin plays in his argument: it is a useful heuristic rule of thumb given the curious features of choice behind the veil of ignorance.[12] Some egalitarian critics have raised concerns over Rawls emphasis on primary social goods. For instance, Amartya Sen has argued that we should attend not only to the distribution of primary goods, but also how effectively people are able to use those goods to pursue their ends.[13] In a related vein, Norman Daniels has wondered why healthcare shouldnt be treated as a primary good,[14] and some of his subsequent work has addressed this question, arguing for a right to health care within a broadly Rawlsian framework.[15] Philosopher Allan Bloom, a student of Leo Strauss, criticized Rawls for failing to account for the existence of natural right in his theory of justice, and wrote that Rawls absolutizes social union as the ultimate goal which would conventionalize everything into artifice.[16] Recent criticisms of Rawls theory have come from the philosopher G.A. Cohen. Cohens series of influential papers culminated first in his book, If Youre An Egalitarian, How Come Youre So Rich?[17] and then in his later work, Rescuing Justice and Equality. Cohens criticisms are leveled against Rawls avowal of inequality under the difference principle, against his application of the principle only to social institutions, and against Rawlsian fetishism with primary goods (again, the metric which Rawls chooses as his currency of equality). Philosopher and Nobel Prize-winning economist Amartya Sen, a former student of Rawls, critiques and attempts to revitalize A Theory of Justice in his 2009 book The Idea of Justice. He defends the basic notion of justice as fairness but attacks the notion that the two principles of justice emerging from the Original position are necessary. Sen claims that there are multiple possible outcomes of the reflective equilibrium behind the veil of ignorance. A Theory of Justice (1971), by John Rawls, is one of the most influential works in moral and political philosophy written in the twentieth century, according to Samuel Freeman in the Collected Papers of John Rawls (1999). A Theory of Justice is Rawlss attempt to formulate a philosophy of justice and a theoretical program for establishing political structures designed to preserve social justice and individual liberty. Rawls writes in reaction to the then predominant theory of utilitarianism, which posits that justice is defined by that which provides the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Rawls proposes a theoretical person who, shrouded in a veil of ignorance, must design a just society without foreknowledge of his or her own status in that society. Rawls asserts that from this objective vantage point, which he calls the original position, the individual will choose a system of justice that adequately provides for those positioned on the lowest rungs of society. The individual will do so because he or she may end up in such a disadvantaged position and will want to be adequately provided for. Rawls draws from earlier theories of political philosophy that posit a social contract by which individuals implicitly agree to the terms on which they are governed in any society. Rawls concludes that such a social contract, formulated from the perspective of the original position, will guarantee a just society without sacrificing the happiness or liberty of any one individual. Rawls addresses issues of liberty, social equality, democracy, and the conflict of interests between the individual and society. A Theory of Justice Summary Justice as Fairness In A Theory of Justice, Rawls begins with the statement that, Justice is the first virtue of social institution, meaning that a good society is one structured according to principals of justice. Rawls asserts that existing theories of justice, developed in the field of philosophy, are not adequate: My guiding aim is to work out A Theory of Justice that is a viable alternative to these doctrines which have long dominated our philosophical tradition. He calls his theory-aimed at formulating a conception of the basic structure of society in accordance with social justice-justice as fairness. Rawls sets forth to determine the essential principles of justice on which a good society may be based. He explains the importance of principles of justice for two key purposes: first, to provide a way of assigning rights and duties in the basic institutions of society; and secondly, to define the appropriate distribution of the benefits and burdens of society. He observes that, by his definition, well-ordered societies are rare due to the fact that what is just and unjust is usually in dispute. He further notes that a well-ordered and perfectly just society must be formulated in a way that addresses the problems of efficiency, coordination, and stability. Critique of Utilitarianism Throughout the twentieth century, the dominant philosophical theory of justice in Western philosophy was utilitarianism. Utilitarianism was first developed in the nineteenth century by the great utilitarians, whom Rawls lists as David Hume, Adam Smith, Jeremy Bentham, and John Stuart Mill. Utilitarianism essentially posits that a just society is one based on achieving the greatest good, or happiness, for the greatest number of people. However, many theorists have found this principle ultimately unsatisfactory because it implies that the  » Complete A Theory of Justice Summary I fondly recall arguing about Rawls theories in John Singers Values and Institutions class at Colgate, so it was interesting to finally try reading it.   It turns out, the revolution that Rawls created was based on a simple but totally specious change in the assumptions about human nature, and upon this rotten foundation he built up a shaky edifice to justify Liberal yearnings.   The book is reminiscent of a treatise by a Medieval scientist, working out the elaborate orbital patterns that planets would require if the Universe actually were geocentric. In order to accomplish his revolution, Rawls posited a counterintuitive and antihistorical starting point for the discussion of political theory. The great political philosophers, Hobbes, Locke, etc., had used the state of nature as the starting point for their theories.   In this state of nature, men were assumed to be completely self-centered and dedicated only to their own interests, with the result that life was nasty, brutish and short and only the strongest survived.   But gradually men tired of this blood sport and entered into a social contract wherein they surrendered some personal sovereignty to a central governing entity, which, in whatever form, would enforce a set of impartial laws in order to protect men from one another.   This is a pretty minimalist position, the social contract and the government that it creates serve only to provide a certain level of physical security, leaving men free to pursue their own fortunes and taking no interest in the degree to which they succeed.   But it conforms with our intuitive understanding of human nature, our observations of our fellow man and, most importantly, it has proven a workable basis for understanding politics for some 300 years. The essential change that Rawls made was to replace the State of Nature with his Original Position, wherein, when it came time for primordial man to enter into a social contract, because he would be ignorant of his own capacities (the veil of ignorance), he would pursue a low risk strategy and choose a social contract based on egalitarianism; he would seek the most equal distribution of wealth and power possible, just in case it turned out that he was the least fit of the species. If Rawls is right, if men acted on the assumption that they would be one of the ones left behind once the race of life begins, then the rest of his theory might be worth examining.   But, of course, this assumption runs counter to everything we understand about ourselves and our fellow human beings.   It is a fuzzy headed liberals view of the appropriate strategy for lifes losersmake political decisions on the basis of the likelihood that you are a loser and need help.  Ãƒâ€šÃ‚   But look around a casino or a Lottery Ticket line and you will see that the losers think that they too are winners.   Look at polls about taxation levels and you find that the lower class does not want the upper class taxed too heavily, because they assume that they, or their children, are headed for that bracket eventually.  Ãƒâ€šÃ‚   It turns out that people act very much as the great philosophers expected them to; they act out of naked self interest and the belief that t hey are capable and deserve whatever they can achieve.   The justice that men seek is in fact little more than an impartial application of a set of laws that are fair to all, not an equal distribution of goods and power, which would necessarily impinge on the freedom of all. Rawls great error is to try to base his theory on a generalized yearning for happiness.   Rawls was seeking a positive definition of Mans aspiration in the original position, but the inevitable result, because we will all define happiness differently, is to create a foundational quagmire for his theories.   After all, you may define happiness as having a lot of stuff, but I may define it as spiritual enlightenment.  Ãƒâ€šÃ‚   The classic understanding, basing the social contract on the avoidance of death, is obviously universal, we are all agreed that our own deaths are to be avoided, and, therefore, more sound.   . Finding the basic supposition that props up Rawls whole theory to be fundamentally incorrect, it behooves us little to examine the superstructure he seeks to construct upon this error.   Suffice it to say, no system of government has ever achieved a more equal distribution of wealth and power than has the American Constitutional Republic and it is based on the classic understanding of human nature found in Hobbes and Locke.   Nuff said. (Reviewed:) John Rawls is perhaps the most significant intellectual in philosophical ethics to have written in the past hundred years. It is nearly impossible to address ethics in contemporary philosophy without saying something about John Rawls. Central to his theory of justice are the concepts of fairness and equality from behind what he terms a veil of ignorance. Rawlss veil of ignorance is a component of the way people can construct society. He refers to an original position in which a person is attempting to determine a fair arrangement for society without any preconceived notions or prejudices. In this original position, people are behind what Rawls calls a Veil of Ignorance and do not know where they will fall in the social hierarchy in terms of race, class, sex, disability, and other relevant factors. Rawls is a Kantian liberal in that he believes that principles of justice should be universalizable, and so the only way to ensure that people will select fair principles of justice is to be certain that they do not know how the principles they select might affect them as individuals. A person behind the veil of ignorance does not know which side of a social contract he or she will be on, does not know his or her race, class, sex, or status in society. A person who does not know what privileges he or she will be born with (or without ) is, in Rawls view, more likely to construct a society that does not arbitrarily assign privilege based on characteristics that should have no bearing on what people get. Rawls believes that a society cannot be just without fairness and equalit y and believes this veil of ignorance both reveals the biases of In A Theory of Justice, Rawls attempts to make a rational study of social ethics by using reason to determine what a just society should look like and how a rational group of people would organize themselves. One major  topic of interest that Rawls presents is the veil of ignorance concept and its role in the creation of original position. Two further concepts of importance to the theory of a just society are the difference principle and the concept of individual liberty in society. Together, these three concepts provide a basis for the discussion and critique of Rawls theory and its implications for the pursuance of justice. Current society and can help to prevent biases in establishing future social arrangements. Rawls method to justice as a theory proposes that principles of justice can be determined through the rational thinking of individuals shrouded by a veil of ignorance. In a purely hypothetical situation, the veil of ignorance creates an original position of equality in which persons under the veil have no knowledge of status, position in society, personal wealth or natural abilities. From behind the veil of ignorance, a rational, objective and disinterested group of people would choose a system of justice that ensures an equal distribution of rights and duties. The term reflective equilibrium was coined by John Rawls and popularized in his celebrated A Theory of Justice as a method for arriving at the content of the principles of justice. Abstract John Rawls Theory of Justice (1971) is the single most important philosophical work of the Left since Marx. Rawls A Theory of Justice can be understood as two theories addressing two different subjects. The split can also be seen textually. The first half of the book deals almost exclusively with the hypothetical theory of justice founded in the original position. The second half of the book addresses how actual institutions should operate given the findings of the initial theory. There are many instances, such as Rawls distinction between fair and formal equal opportunity, where Rawls claims that the purely speculative arguments of his theory can justify his claims concerning actual situations. However, as Sher argues, it is not necessarily the case that Rawls can make the connection. Rawls hypothetical theory can operate on its own. Rawls theory of just institutions is a stronger argument if he does not try and connect the two theories. The problem of desert is one example of how R awls theory of justice as fairness should be read as two theories. Rawls offers a theory of a just and well-ordered society which would distribute wealth, income, liberties, opportunities and positions of authority. He considers justice as fairness as a political -moral conception of justice. The principles of justice are two according to Ralws and these would justify a given body of social, moral and political ideas since they are congruent to our ferments convictions. Utilitarianism was first developed in the nineteenth century by the great utilitarians. Utilitarianism essentially posits that a just society is one based on achieving the greatest good, or happiness, for the greatest number of people. However, Rawls rejects Utilitarianism, for it fails to take into consideration, the distinction that exists between individuals. Since it aims at the greatest happiness and tries to maximize greatest welfare, it fails to secure individual rights. Rawls relies on the social contract tradition in its Kantian form to account for principles that would guide individuals noumenal selves, secure equal basic liberties to all and account for social values and community. In A Theory of Justice, Rawls begins with the statement that, Justice is the first virtue of social institution, meaning that a good society is one structured according to principals of justice. . Rawls asserts that existing theories of justice, developed in the field of philosophy, are not adequate: My guiding aim is to work out A Theory of Justice that is a viable alternative to these doctrines which have long dominated our philosophical tradition. He calls his theory-aimed at formulating a conception of the basic structure of society in accordance with social justice-justice as fairness. He claims that justice as fairness provides a practical political procedure, which satisfies the demand of modern democracies societies. Pluralism entailed by industrial societies is presumed to be the permanent features of modern democracies, which challenges the priority of philosophy over democracy. However, Rawls theory has received large scale attention by some well-known Academicians. Some of them have disagreed and challenged its basic assumptions. These critical appraisals, but, indicate the importance of his work if one wants to deliberate on problems of contemporary social and political theory. In this thesis will try to excavate the philosophical understanding of the Rawlsian theory of justice and also try to identify the philosophical shift in his position under the light of some of major critiques.