dari ChangkatNingkeBTP
Disertakan sedikit maklumat untuk memudahkan pehak tuan menyiarkan artikal bagi memohon bantuan kewangan untuk pembinaan Ma’ahad Tahfiz Qira’ad Addin Kg. Lubuk Katak Tapah.
Untuk makluman, Maahad Tahfiz Kg. Lubuk Katak Tapah Perak adalah Ma’ahad Tahfiz persenderian dan ianya telah beroperasi semenjak tahun 2001 diatas tanah yang diwakafkan dan bangunan lama di Kg. Lubuk Katak.
Pada masa ini Ahli Jawatan Kuasa Pembangunan Ma’ahad Tahfiz ini telah berjaya membina bangunan baru bagi menampung pelajar-pelajar untuk tahun 2010 ini.
Bangunan baru ini terdiri daripada satu bangunan pejabat, satu bangunan dua tingkat untuk asrama dan kelas belajar, satu bangunan kantin pelajar dan 3 pintu rumah guru. Bangunan ini pada keseluruhannya telah siap 75%.
Pembinaan bangunan ini adalah bersumberkan sumbangan orang ramai dan para-para dermawan dari muslimin dan muslimat, buat masa ini keadaan kewangan Ma’ahad Tahfiz Kg. Lubuk Katak ini tidak cukup bagi menyiapkan lagi 25 % bangunan ini.
Oleh itu JK Pembangunan Ma’ahad Tahfiz ingin merayu kepada semua dermawan di seluruh Malaysia dan dunia agar dapat membantu untuk menyumbangkan wang Ringgit agar bangunan Ma’ahad Tahfiz ini dapat disiapkan dengan sempurna. Semoga Allah jualah yang dapat memberi ganjaran yang tinggi diatas sumbangan saudara-saudara semua.
Untuk makluman semua, kos bagi menyiapkan keseluruhan bangunan tersebut dianggarkan RM 350,000.00 (Tiga Ratus Lima Puluh Ribu Ringgit) diperlukan.
Kepada dermawan-dermawan yang berhasrat untuk menyumbang, bolehlah berbuat demikian dengan:-
MENYALURKAN SUMBANGAN KEPADA :
TABUNG PEMBANGUNAN MTQ-4. KG LUBUK KATAK
NO. AKAUN: 558127311239 MAY BANK CAWANGAN TAPAH.
ATAU MENGHUBUNGI:
1. UTZ. HJ AMINUDDIN B HJ ABDUL HAMID DI TALIAN 054011563 - SELAKU PENGERUSI PEMBANGUAN MA’AHAD
2. TN. HJ. ABDUL WAHAB B HJ ABU BAKAR DITALIAN 0195976284 - SELAKU TIM. PENGERUSI PEMBANGUAN MA’AHAD
3. EN. ABD. MUAZ B HJ. ABD AZIZ DITALIAN 0135288084 - SETIAUSAHA PEMBANGUNAN MA’AHAD
4. TN. HJ. MOHAMAD KHALID B ABDULLAH DITALIAN 0195036367 - SELAKU BENDAHARI PEMBANGUAN MA’AHAD
Sebarang maklumat tambahan, mohon hubungi :
Abd. Mu'as bin Hj. Abd. Aziz
SETIAUSA PEMBANGUNAN
MA’AHAD TAHFIZ KG. LUBUK KATAK
35000 TAPAH PERAK.
e-mail: kgdmth@gmail.com
Marilah kita menyumbang ke Jalan ALLAH. Moga amaln sedaqah kita walau sedikit diterima ALLAH hendaknya. AMIN
Khamis, Disember 24, 2009
Khamis, Disember 10, 2009
HOW TO RECRUIT THE RIGHT PERSON FOR THE JOB?
dari ChangkatNingkeBTP
Put about 100 bricks in some Particular order in a closed Room with an
Open window. Then send 2 or 3 candidates in the room and close the door.
Leave them alone and come back after 6 hours and then analyze the situation..
If they are counting the Bricks. Put them in the Accounts Department.
If they are recounting them.. Put them in Auditing ..
If they have messed up the whole place with the bricks. Put them in Engineering.
If they are arranging the Bricks in some strange order. Put them in Planning.
If they are throwing the ricks at each other. Put them in Operations.
If they are sleeping. Put them in Security.
If they have broken the bricks into pieces. Put them in Information Technology.
If they are sitting idle. Put them in Human Resources.
If they say they have tried different combination, yet not a brick has been moved,
Put them in Sales.
If they have already left for The day. Put them in Marketing.
If they are staring out of the window. Put them in Strategic Planning.
And then last but not least...
If they are talking to each other and not a single brick has been moved. Congratulate them and put them in Top Management.
Put about 100 bricks in some Particular order in a closed Room with an
Open window. Then send 2 or 3 candidates in the room and close the door.
Leave them alone and come back after 6 hours and then analyze the situation..
If they are counting the Bricks. Put them in the Accounts Department.
If they are recounting them.. Put them in Auditing ..
If they have messed up the whole place with the bricks. Put them in Engineering.
If they are arranging the Bricks in some strange order. Put them in Planning.
If they are throwing the ricks at each other. Put them in Operations.
If they are sleeping. Put them in Security.
If they have broken the bricks into pieces. Put them in Information Technology.
If they are sitting idle. Put them in Human Resources.
If they say they have tried different combination, yet not a brick has been moved,
Put them in Sales.
If they have already left for The day. Put them in Marketing.
If they are staring out of the window. Put them in Strategic Planning.
And then last but not least...
If they are talking to each other and not a single brick has been moved. Congratulate them and put them in Top Management.
Rabu, Disember 09, 2009
How our inner EGO sometimes misjudges a PERSON
dari ChangkatNingkeBTP
A lady in a faded grey dress and her husband, dressed in a home-spun suit walked in timidly without an appointment into the Harvard University President's outer office. The secretary could tell in a moment that such backwoods, country hicks had no business at Harvard and probably didn't even deserve to be in Harvard.
"We want to see the President "the man said softly. "He'll be busy all day " the secretary snapped.. "We'll wait" the lady replied.
For hours the secretary ignored them, hoping that the couple would finally become discouraged and go away. They didn't and the secretary grew frustrated and finally decided to disturb the president..
"Maybe if you see them for a few minutes, they'll leave" she said to him. The President, stern faced and with dignity, strutted toward the couple.
The lady told him "We had a son who attended Harvard for one y ear. He loved Harvard. He was happy here. But about a year ago, he was accidentally killed. My husband and I would like to erect a memorial to him, somewhere on campus."
The president wasn't touched....He was shocked. "Madam " he said, gruffly, "we can't put up a statue for every person who attended Harvard and died. If we did, this place would look like a cemetery."
"Oh, no," the lady explained quickly, ” we don't want to erect a statue. We thought we would like to give a building to Harvard."
The president rolled his eyes. He glanced at the gingham dress and homespun suit, and then exclaimed, "A building! Do you have any earthly idea how much a building costs? We have over seven and a half million dollars in the physical buildings here at Harvard."
For a moment the lady was silent. The president was pleased. Maybe he could get rid of them now. The lady turned to her husband and said quietly, "Is that all it costs to start a university ? Why don't we just start our own?"
Her husband nodded. The president's face wilted in confusion and bewilderment. Mr. and Mrs. Leland Stanford got up and walked away, traveling to Palo Alto, California where they established the University that bears their name: -
Stanford University, a memorial to a son that Harvard no longer cared about.
Most of the time we judge people by their outer appearance, which can be misleading. And in this impression, we tend to treat people badly by thinking they can do nothing for us. Thus we tend to lose our potential good friends, employees or customers.
Remember
In our Life, we seldom get people with whom we want to share and grow our thought process. But because of our inner EGO we miss them forever.
It is you who have to decide with whom you are getting associated in day to day life.
Small people
talk about others,
Average people talk about things,
Great people talk about ideas.
A lady in a faded grey dress and her husband, dressed in a home-spun suit walked in timidly without an appointment into the Harvard University President's outer office. The secretary could tell in a moment that such backwoods, country hicks had no business at Harvard and probably didn't even deserve to be in Harvard.
"We want to see the President "the man said softly. "He'll be busy all day " the secretary snapped.. "We'll wait" the lady replied.
For hours the secretary ignored them, hoping that the couple would finally become discouraged and go away. They didn't and the secretary grew frustrated and finally decided to disturb the president..
"Maybe if you see them for a few minutes, they'll leave" she said to him. The President, stern faced and with dignity, strutted toward the couple.
The lady told him "We had a son who attended Harvard for one y ear. He loved Harvard. He was happy here. But about a year ago, he was accidentally killed. My husband and I would like to erect a memorial to him, somewhere on campus."
The president wasn't touched....He was shocked. "Madam " he said, gruffly, "we can't put up a statue for every person who attended Harvard and died. If we did, this place would look like a cemetery."
"Oh, no," the lady explained quickly, ” we don't want to erect a statue. We thought we would like to give a building to Harvard."
The president rolled his eyes. He glanced at the gingham dress and homespun suit, and then exclaimed, "A building! Do you have any earthly idea how much a building costs? We have over seven and a half million dollars in the physical buildings here at Harvard."
For a moment the lady was silent. The president was pleased. Maybe he could get rid of them now. The lady turned to her husband and said quietly, "Is that all it costs to start a university ? Why don't we just start our own?"
Her husband nodded. The president's face wilted in confusion and bewilderment. Mr. and Mrs. Leland Stanford got up and walked away, traveling to Palo Alto, California where they established the University that bears their name: -
Stanford University, a memorial to a son that Harvard no longer cared about.
Most of the time we judge people by their outer appearance, which can be misleading. And in this impression, we tend to treat people badly by thinking they can do nothing for us. Thus we tend to lose our potential good friends, employees or customers.
Remember
In our Life, we seldom get people with whom we want to share and grow our thought process. But because of our inner EGO we miss them forever.
It is you who have to decide with whom you are getting associated in day to day life.
Small people
talk about others,
Average people talk about things,
Great people talk about ideas.
Jumaat, Disember 04, 2009
POWER OF THE DEADLINE
dari ChangkatNingkeBTP
Everybody knows the power of deadlines — and we all hate them. But their effectiveness is undeniable.
People procrastinate. Deadlines help. They speed up performance and, paradoxically, reduce the anxiety of uncertainty.
So when United States President Barack Obama announced on Tuesday night a strict timetable of 18 months before the US would begin to draw down its troops in Afghanistan, how did that affect the psychology of the nation? The emotional effect of the pronouncement depends on the party involved.
For the military brass, 18 months is a blink of an eye, so the deadline could motivate them to perform at their peak, or it might paralyse them with fear.
For the troops and their loved ones, 18 months is an eternity.
But for all those with an immediate stake in the war, a clear timetable reduces uncertainty — at least along the “when” dimension, if not the “what” dimension. After all, no one likes to wait. And the only thing worse than waiting is waiting with uncertainty.
A team at Emory University examined what happened when people waited for an impending electrical shock. Some people dreaded the shock so deeply that they chose to receive a more powerful shock earlier rather than wait for a lesser shock to arrive at a later, random time.
One of the key jobs of the human brain is to simulate the future, and the less information it has to work with, the more anxious it becomes.
Pinning things down in time makes waiting less troubling. With a clear idea about the order and timescale of events, people are more patient and less anxious. And that is the hope implicit in Obama's declaration of a timeline. But what about those people with a less immediate stake in the war? Here, the President's task becomes more complicated.
Some years ago, psychologists posed a deceptively simple question: If I were to offer you US$100 (RM340) right now, or US$110 a week from now, which would you choose? Most subjects chose to take US$100 right then. It didn't seem worthwhile to wait an entire week for only US$10 more. And the further an event lies in the future, the less people care about it. So, if offered US$100 now or US$500 18 months from now, many people still take the US$100. The consequence is that there's little difference between Obama promising 18 months from now versus 18 years from now. In the human ken, both are obscured in the mists of the distant future.
So, for his timetable to have emotional power, Obama would do well to define and adhere to intermediate goals. A year and a half offers little in the way of reassurance, but everyone can value action month by month.
I don't want to imply that people care only about the short term — after all, people do build college saving funds and retirement plans. It's simply that the present holds more sway than the future. Recently, researchers used brain imaging to monitor people making money-now-or-more-later decisions, and they discovered that the neural networks involved in short- and long-term decision-making are fundamentally separate. In situations of choice, the two systems are often locked in battle against each other.
Sub-prime mortgage offers are perfectly optimised to take advantage of the I-want-it-now system, as are chocolate cookies, temptations for marital infidelity and all manner of things that people choose now and regret later.
People manage the influence of the short-term systems by proactively binding their future options. We see this when a person in good health signs an advance medical directive to pull the plug in the event of a coma, when an alcoholic rids the house of drink to avoid future temptation, or when a person socks money into a Christmas account to keep himself from spending it before December.
Such deals with oneself are what philosophers call “Ulysses contracts”, named after the hero who decided in advance to lash himself to a mast to resist the sirens' song. The present, calm Ulysses was negotiating with his future, more emotional self.
In the same way, by drawing a line on the calendar, Obama hopes to favour his administration's long-term strategy over the unknown siren songs that will be heard over the next year and a half. Nations, like people, are continually buffeted by the winds of short-term events. In deference to a long-term strategy, the President hopes to bind the US to the mast to ensure it sticks to the plan. — The Straits Times
Everybody knows the power of deadlines — and we all hate them. But their effectiveness is undeniable.
People procrastinate. Deadlines help. They speed up performance and, paradoxically, reduce the anxiety of uncertainty.
So when United States President Barack Obama announced on Tuesday night a strict timetable of 18 months before the US would begin to draw down its troops in Afghanistan, how did that affect the psychology of the nation? The emotional effect of the pronouncement depends on the party involved.
For the military brass, 18 months is a blink of an eye, so the deadline could motivate them to perform at their peak, or it might paralyse them with fear.
For the troops and their loved ones, 18 months is an eternity.
But for all those with an immediate stake in the war, a clear timetable reduces uncertainty — at least along the “when” dimension, if not the “what” dimension. After all, no one likes to wait. And the only thing worse than waiting is waiting with uncertainty.
A team at Emory University examined what happened when people waited for an impending electrical shock. Some people dreaded the shock so deeply that they chose to receive a more powerful shock earlier rather than wait for a lesser shock to arrive at a later, random time.
One of the key jobs of the human brain is to simulate the future, and the less information it has to work with, the more anxious it becomes.
Pinning things down in time makes waiting less troubling. With a clear idea about the order and timescale of events, people are more patient and less anxious. And that is the hope implicit in Obama's declaration of a timeline. But what about those people with a less immediate stake in the war? Here, the President's task becomes more complicated.
Some years ago, psychologists posed a deceptively simple question: If I were to offer you US$100 (RM340) right now, or US$110 a week from now, which would you choose? Most subjects chose to take US$100 right then. It didn't seem worthwhile to wait an entire week for only US$10 more. And the further an event lies in the future, the less people care about it. So, if offered US$100 now or US$500 18 months from now, many people still take the US$100. The consequence is that there's little difference between Obama promising 18 months from now versus 18 years from now. In the human ken, both are obscured in the mists of the distant future.
So, for his timetable to have emotional power, Obama would do well to define and adhere to intermediate goals. A year and a half offers little in the way of reassurance, but everyone can value action month by month.
I don't want to imply that people care only about the short term — after all, people do build college saving funds and retirement plans. It's simply that the present holds more sway than the future. Recently, researchers used brain imaging to monitor people making money-now-or-more-later decisions, and they discovered that the neural networks involved in short- and long-term decision-making are fundamentally separate. In situations of choice, the two systems are often locked in battle against each other.
Sub-prime mortgage offers are perfectly optimised to take advantage of the I-want-it-now system, as are chocolate cookies, temptations for marital infidelity and all manner of things that people choose now and regret later.
People manage the influence of the short-term systems by proactively binding their future options. We see this when a person in good health signs an advance medical directive to pull the plug in the event of a coma, when an alcoholic rids the house of drink to avoid future temptation, or when a person socks money into a Christmas account to keep himself from spending it before December.
Such deals with oneself are what philosophers call “Ulysses contracts”, named after the hero who decided in advance to lash himself to a mast to resist the sirens' song. The present, calm Ulysses was negotiating with his future, more emotional self.
In the same way, by drawing a line on the calendar, Obama hopes to favour his administration's long-term strategy over the unknown siren songs that will be heard over the next year and a half. Nations, like people, are continually buffeted by the winds of short-term events. In deference to a long-term strategy, the President hopes to bind the US to the mast to ensure it sticks to the plan. — The Straits Times
Langgan:
Catatan (Atom)