Sentences with phrase «what role you were given»

Consider what was happening in the company at the time, why you were hired, what role you were given, what challenges you faced, what actions you took, and what you made happen in relation to the focus of the resume.

Not exact matches

«It also gives them ownership over their role, as they know what we're trying to achieve as a team.»

However, Sacca declined to say what specific advice he has given Kalanick beyond the fact that he suggested a few names for the new COO role Uber is trying to fill.

The following day, one of the trainers, a bright, young, new - to - his - role superstar, gave me some powerful feedback: «Despite your experience in business and academia, you were open to changing your work and not just telling us «I'm an expert, this is what you need, now go train it.»

The former Bank of Italy governor, when asked by a reporter in 2013 what role gold plays in a central banks portfolio, answered that the metal was «a reserve of safety,» adding, it gives you a fairly good protection against fluctuations against the dollar.

But what happens when things aren't going well: when players make mistakes, teams aren't giving their all, or leaders won't accept the role that their coach needs them to embrace?

A connector thinks about - what questions / context do I need to ask that this person is not giving me, so that I can figure out how to play a role to help them in succeeding in life or business - where I can be helpful?

Here's what I mean: although we are giving B2B marketers a new label of content marketing to work with, many B2B marketers are still writing and publishing to the title and role set forth by the organization and not to the buying behaviors that have changed.

In one of those sessions, two representatives of Canadian unions who had visited Cuba gave what might be described as a naively sympathetic account of the role of Cuba's state - sanctioned labour unions, prompting Kenney to set aside the customary reserve of the chair to ask a few pointed questions of his own.

Based on notes of conversations he had with Chanel in 1946, Morand gives us Chanel's observations on friends and rivals like Picasso («He destroyed, but then he constructed»), Misia Sert («Misia is to Paris what Kali is to the Hindu pantheon), Diaghalev («he traveled through Europe in the role of a penniless patron»), Stravinsky (««You're married, Igor,» I told him... and he, very Russian: «She knows I love you.

I am very aware of what a chaplain's role is, and — even in our own US armed forces — the role of a Christian chaplain is to do what any other Christian minister would do: give them Jesus.

Just as history brings freedom from rigid role definitions, it may also give us the freedom to think seriously again about what it means to be not simply a unisex parent, but a mother or father in particular.

Paul Ricoeur, in the perceptive essay we have already quoted, seems to be denying what we are saying here, or at least giving it a role of little importance when he says:

Yet the need is to go beyond displaying that theocentric thinking gives a role to the whole of the natural world and articulating what that role is.

Max DePress in his books on leadership talks abot the role of elders as part of the overall focus on: Respect for the future, regard for present, understanding of the past the future requires humility to face what we can't control; the present requires attention to all the people to whom we're accountable; the past gives us the opportunity to build on the work of our elders.

I have never thought about this, no matter what some people assume, the word leader is definately more likely to give the wrong image of the role.

And what we have uncovered in the depictions of God's hesed is given significantly new dimensions in reflecting on the role of the crucifixion in comprehending [27] God's power and love — no longer just a basis for power «to the weak,» as we will see, but now a focus on power in weakness itself.

And I don't think we'll know what's it like to have let go of an identity that is so integral to our being that to give it a diminished role would be like Americans saying the Constitiution isn't really that important and hardly what makes you an American.

It could still be argued that these roles impose strain on womanly nature; that they are not what women are made for; that they show a certain lack of respect for God's work of creation; that in fulfilling them a woman is likely to treat men maternally, which will impose undue strain on masculine nature; and that the woman's womanly dignity and worth are to some extent at risk while she does these jobs; but it could not be maintained that she and those who gave her her role have sinned by disobeying God's command.

This is more than just echoing what's gone before, Abrams» has clearly made a conscious decision to give the film a similar role to that A New Hope played in the original trilogy.

Given the broad role and all - inclusive realm of spirituality, we need to ask: what is the Church?

Nephi in the Book of Mormon would be taking a similar role as a Mayan priest, or daykeeper and giving advice to his brothers about what God has in store for their souls.

What if the church started spouting off things like «It is inappropriate for men to ever hold their children unless the mother is absent or given permission by the mother, to do otherwise usurps the God - given role of the female in the family»?

I wondered to what extent those attacks were due to his being so open in his aim to give a stronger role in journalism to believers, both Catholics and from other faith backgrounds.

For me I do believe in the Sacraments and the role they play in Salvation - Jesus did change wine into this blood and the bread into his body during the last supper and told believers to do this in his memory and he did foreshadow what would happen on the Cross he gave up his life so we maybe could be saved, because not all who profess Christ is Lord or believe in God will be saved, there are many people who claim they can abuse, sleep around, steal, cheat and that they'll still go to heave because 1 day they said the sinner's prayer, actions speak louder then words.

This is what gives Jesus his central place and role, his continuing impact on successive generations of men and women.

The prevailing understanding of the subordination of Love under the dominant role of divine Power that we have been encountering in the history of western Christian thought not only failed to resolve what the philosopher Leibniz termed the «theodicy» problem but, in fact, explicitly gave rise to it.

I'm not sure this is a given, «since taxation is necessary unless you want anarchy...» And I don't think this is either, «what is the role of government in society to for the highest well - being of the greatest number» You have preconceptions even in your questions, but we all do.

The rest of Ephesians explains what your roles are, and what tools God has given you to perform these tasks.

Racheal i do nt believe that christians can commit the blasphemy of the holy spirit because the holy spirit has already taken up residence in our hearts.As christians we can greive the holy spirit but we cant blaspheme him otherwise we wouldnt have accepted Christ.When we ask Christ into our lives we are saved the holy spirit comes into our lives because we gave him permission to.We can sin and fall away from God but he is still there because nothing can separate us from the love of God.On the day we die we are saved why because when we were sinners he saved us it isnt dependent on what we do it is dependent on what Christ has done.Should we continue to sin of course not but we should follow him with all our heart.I think it is important to understand that Christ death has saved us from our sin the holy spirits role is to help us to overcome sin in our lives and to be come christlike.brentnz

Faith is our treasure, which makes us Christians, and gives us a role as believers surrounded by our brothers and sisters who long to know God and to know what it is to be authentically human.

In the last ten years I have moved increasingly toward experiential teaching (using self - awareness exercises, role playing of counseling methods, live demonstrations of growth groups, and so forth), which involves the students» own feelings, responses, and needs; asking the students to draw up their own «learning contract» based on what they want to get from a given course or workshop; expecting students to participate in the teaching by sharing in some systematic way the insights they have discovered to be meaningful; revealing my own struggles, uncertainties, and weaknesses; and asking the students to evaluate anonymously the course, including my teaching.

I don't believe I'm not saying anything much different than what you wrote above, but I would encourage you to point out that shaping role of culture that underlies who we become as humans rather than simply accepting cultural assumptions as givens that can not themselves be challenged.

Quite apart from misunderstanding the role of the altar and implying that it only begins to be used in the second half of the Mass, this practice reinforces the idea that the Mass is the result of our activity — that there is nothing given priorto what we do.

The question for us is, as this sign is given, what role will we play?

Fatburger also provides staff with an employee guide, which gives insight not only about the company's milestones for each position, but also what employees need to do to progress and be proficient in the role.

So what role will Holding be given now that Koscielny and Mustafi are almost certain to begin a strong partnership at the back?

A role of the dice is what's needed, if only to give some genuine hope to a very patient set of fans, we could drop out of top 4, absolutely... We could end up winning the league, but at least we would be making a statement by saying that this isn't acceptable anymore!

Learn to think, what do you think his job is??? Give you a clue, he has taken over a lot of Deins old roles....

Given his ability and what he showed for Wales when handed a prominent role in a team, it's no surprise that Stoke and Swansea were interested, while it's also not a shock that he opted against merely being a squad player next season.

Given the efficiency with which Hurst compiled his numbers in 2016, there's no telling what he could put up in a starting role.

Referring to Trice as a «role model» and «inspiration» who symbolized the ideals of «devotion to the team, giving one's all,» Jischke declared, «He has become a hero — not so much for what he accomplished, because his life was cut short — but for what he represented.»

Then, about player... i already said on early season we will play sanchez on suarez role, and it success... so, now we just realized that we have one more gems to work... it is chamberlain, the ox... what will we doing is, he has body type and dribble like someone star... its is hazard... from now lets give hazard role to chamberlain...

I strongly believe he should / will be given another season at least to show what he can do albeit in a different role to which he wants... he will have ro reinvent himself and learn to play and score from the wings because to be perfectly frank he had more than enough time and games to show he can top strike for us when he first joined and Giroud was out Injured and he was less than impressive goals wise.....

It is looking like we may be saying goodbye to Podolski in January, but the suspension of Giroud and the injury news on Welbeck may just have given him one last chance to show Wenger what he can do, perhaps in the centre forward role.

What makes him better than Arnautovic?The stats?I'm not saying Arnautovic is better or not but if I was a neutral watching them both the difference in quality is not huge.Do you know what Arnautovic could have done if he was given the lone CF role i Arsenal?I guess I'm also the only one who thinks Chicharito is better than Giroud yet playing at West Ham.If we had Chicharito instead of Giroud from 2012 we could have easily won the league in 15/16 season.What makes Giroud so good that if I watch him on my TV I can't see?All I see is a player who turns his back to goal for most parts of the maWhat makes him better than Arnautovic?The stats?I'm not saying Arnautovic is better or not but if I was a neutral watching them both the difference in quality is not huge.Do you know what Arnautovic could have done if he was given the lone CF role i Arsenal?I guess I'm also the only one who thinks Chicharito is better than Giroud yet playing at West Ham.If we had Chicharito instead of Giroud from 2012 we could have easily won the league in 15/16 season.What makes Giroud so good that if I watch him on my TV I can't see?All I see is a player who turns his back to goal for most parts of the mawhat Arnautovic could have done if he was given the lone CF role i Arsenal?I guess I'm also the only one who thinks Chicharito is better than Giroud yet playing at West Ham.If we had Chicharito instead of Giroud from 2012 we could have easily won the league in 15/16 season.What makes Giroud so good that if I watch him on my TV I can't see?All I see is a player who turns his back to goal for most parts of the maWhat makes Giroud so good that if I watch him on my TV I can't see?All I see is a player who turns his back to goal for most parts of the match.

@TH14atl the list of the players you gave me were players who were naturally central midfielders but could play in cmf position and you also gave me no 10's who could also play cmf so i do not get your take.However did you see that they were being played in their best positions.I am also against Ramsey on the wing but i will not be blinded by the fact that if he should be put in box to box role he will be better than santi in that role.But from what you said i think we might just sell cant we.Have you forgotten the man utd match last season where peeps were like O!

Would still like to see akpom given a shot at starting and villa as good a team to see what he has got to offer... And give cazorla a box to box role not on wing which even wenger must know is a waste of his talent....

This is an incredibly difficult question to answer for a variety of reasons, most importantly because over the years our once vaunted «beautiful» style of play has become a shadow of it's former self, only to be replaced by a less than stellar «plug and play» mentality where players play out of position and adjustments / substitutions are rarely forthcoming before the 75th minute... if you look at our current players, very few would make sense in the traditional Wengerian system... at present, we don't have the personnel to move the ball quickly from deep - lying position, efficient one touch midfielders that can make the necessary through balls or the disciplined and pacey forwards to stretch defences into wide positions, without the aid of the backs coming up into the final 3rd, so that we can attack the defensive lanes in the same clinical fashion we did years ago... on this current squad, we have only 1 central defender on staf, Mustafi, who seems to have any prowess in the offensive zone or who can even pass two zones through so that we can advance play quickly out of our own end (I have seen some inklings that suggest Holding might have some offensive qualities but too early to tell)... unfortunately Mustafi has a tendency to get himself in trouble when he gets overly aggressive on the ball... from our backs out wide, we've seen pace from the likes of Bellerin and Gibbs and the spirited albeit offensively stunted play of Monreal, but none of these players possess the skill - set required in the offensive zone for the new Wenger scheme which requires deft touches, timely runs to the baseline and consistent crossing, especially when Giroud was playing and his ratio of scored goals per clear chances was relatively low (better last year though)... obviously I like Bellerin's future prospects, as you can't teach pace, but I do worry that he regressed last season, which was obvious to Wenger because there was no way he would have used Ox as the right side wing - back so often knowing that Barcelona could come calling in the off - season, if he thought otherwise... as for our midfielders, not a single one, minus the more confident Xhaka I watched played for the Swiss national team a couple years ago, who truly makes sense under the traditional Wenger model... Ramsey holds onto the ball too long, gives the ball away cheaply far too often and abandons his defensive responsibilities on a regular basis (doesn't score enough recently to justify): that being said, I've always thought he does possess a little something special, unfortunately he thinks so too... Xhaka is a little too slow to ever boss the midfield and he tends to telegraph his one true strength, his long ball play: although I must admit he did get a bit better during some points in the latter part of last season... it always made me wonder why whenever he played with Coq Wenger always seemed to play Francis in a more advanced role on the pitch... as for Coq, he is way too reckless at the wrong times and has exhibited little offensive prowess yet finds himself in and around the box far too often... let's face it Wenger was ready to throw him in the trash heap when injuries forced him to use Francis and then he had the nerve to act like this was all part of a bigger Wenger constructed plan... he like Ramsey, Xhaka and Elneny don't offer the skills necessary to satisfy the quick transitory nature of our old offensive scheme or the stout defensive mindset needed to protect the defensive zone so that our offensive players can remain aggressive in the final third... on the front end, we have Ozil, a player of immense skill but stunted by his physical demeanor that tends to offend, the fact that he's been played out of position far too many times since arriving and that the players in front of him, minus Sanchez, make little to no sense considering what he has to offer (especially Giroud); just think about the quick counter-attack offence in Real or the space and protection he receives in the German National team's midfield, where teams couldn't afford to focus too heavily on one individual... this player was a passing «specialist» long before he arrived in North London, so only an arrogant or ignorant individual would try to reinvent the wheel and / or not surround such a talent with the necessary components... in regards to Ox, Walcott and Welbeck, although they all possess serious talents I see them in large part as headless chickens who are on the injury table too much, lack the necessary first - touch and / or lack the finishing flair to warrant their inclusion in a regular starting eleven; I would say that, of the 3, Ox showed the most upside once we went to a back 3, but even he became a bit too consumed by his pending contract talks before the season ended and that concerned me a bit... if I had to choose one of those 3 players to stay on it would be Ox due to his potential as a plausible alternative to Bellerin in that wing - back position should we continue to use that formation... in Sanchez, we get one of the most committed skill players we've seen on this squad for some years but that could all change soon, if it hasn't already of course... strangely enough, even he doesn't make sense given the constructs of the original Wenger offensive model because he holds onto the ball too long and he will give the ball up a little too often in the offensive zone... a fact that is largely forgotten due to his infectious energy and the fact that the numbers he has achieved seem to justify the means... finally, and in many ways most crucially, Giroud, there is nothing about this team or the offensive system that Wenger has traditionally employed that would even suggest such a player would make sense as a starter... too slow, too inefficient and way too easily dispossessed... once again, I think he has some special skills and, at times, has showed some world - class qualities but he's lack of mobility is an albatross around the necks of our offence... so when you ask who would be our best starting 11, I don't have a clue because of the 5 or 6 players that truly deserve a place in this side, 1 just arrived, 3 aren't under contract beyond 2018 and the other was just sold to Juve... man, this is theraputic because following this team is like an addiction to heroin without the benefits

Yes, they contribute to school spirit, but mostly they're about giving kids an opportunity to learn what it means to be on a team, to work hard for a goal, to accept roles and to grow as a person through the inevitable ups and downs of a season.