A. B. Facey’s Relation to The typical Australian Essay -- essays resea

Australia has had many national identities in its existence; the most noticeable of these being the Bush discourse, the battler discourse, the Convict discourse and the Larrikin discourse. Russel Ward utilises these discourses in his book, â€Å"The Australian Legend†. He explains that the typical Australian is a practical man, tough who drinks heavily. A. B. Facey is a classic example of a typical Australian, although he does not fit in with all of the aspects of Ward’s construction. The convict discourse, Australia’s first image, was christened by the first fleet, which consisted of incredibly hard-hitting men, who came from Britain in 1788. Britain was no longer allowed to ship convicts from Britain to the American Colonies, forcing her to find a new land to use. Australia. The convict discourse consisted, like most of Australia’s identities, of the dominant man, strong, practical and entirely anti-British, holding absolutely no respect for the crown. After the British government became aware of the reputation of Australia, she began offering free land to settlers who wished to take up residence in Australia. This was designed as a bribe to create a more pro-government settlement. During the 19th century, the representation of Australia began to change. Poets such as Banjo Patterson created this new image, through poems such as â€Å"The Man From Snowy River†, creating the image of the bush. In addition to the bush discourse and the convict discourse Australia had the militar...

Justification of the Corn Laws Essay -- Politics History Political

Justification of the Corn Laws The Corn Law was a potentially dangerous bill introduced in 1815 after three years of good harvests. It was instigated with the support of Lord Liverpool the current Prime Minister who saw the Corn Laws as a temporary measure to create stability in the agricultural sector in the immediate post-war years. The Corn Laws were potentially disastrous because they, along with the abolishment of Income tax and the creation of the Game laws, were seen as a return by the ultra-Tory's to a single-issue, single class government. That issue being the wants and needs of the landed classes. I believe that the Corn Laws led large groups of the urbanised population to become unreasonably politicised in their demands to parliament. The catalyst for these potentially revolutionary actions being the starvation of the working classes - the Corn Laws. Lord Liverpool's justification for the Corn Laws was the appalling state of agriculture in England in the post war period. England faced a unique set of financial and economic problems bought about by the end of the war. The harvest of 1813, 14 and 15 were extremely good leading to a fall in prices by almost half. The end of trade sanctions after the end of the Napoleonic Wars flooded the British market with cheaper corn that made British Corn uncompetitive. Agriculture still exceeded manufacturing as the country's largest single economic interest. Therefore the Corn Laws were justifiable in this sense because they still supported the largest single category of labour provider. But while choosing to secure one social group Liverpool and his cabinet had provided immedia... ...for a slim chance of economic recovery in a single sector of the country's economy-agriculture. The British Government had decided to choke one group of citizens, the urban based working classes, to create a wealthier group of large land owners-ironically the largest group of MP's. In my eyes protecting no part of the economy would have been the best idea. No economic area would flourish but neither would any industry be choked. A free market mentality would be painful but would result in more efficient techniques in manufacturing and agriculture. All the Corn Laws seemed to do was underline the injustices that were allowed to happen because of the lack of universal suffrage. It also highlighted how inward looking and self centred the Ultra-Tory's were as well as highlighting urban electoral under representation.

My Best Holiday Celebration Essay

  Syria is a mixture of cultures , it combines between Christians and Muslims , as 30% of the population is Christians and the rest is Muslims ; people in this country celebrate together the same holiday festivities whereas Christians have many holiday celebrations such as the head of the year , and Muslims have two per a year such as ead feter and ead adha . And one of the best holiday celebrations ever was ead feter which we celebrate it for many reasons. One major reason of this holiday is to break the fast after thirty days without eating from the sunrise till sunset . And during this thirty days , people sit together sharing a large dinner then they watch many series and competitive programs on the TV . Moreover , most of them stay awake till evening telling each other stories and comics , and as Islamic people share the celebration of the head of the year with Christians , also Christians people share the dinner and the celebration with them. Furthermore , the important part of this celebration is the communication between families, whereas after this thirty days all the members of every family should visit each other, and across the generations the older instructs the younger , and the younger enlivens the older. In the same way , even who are unconnected by blood they should at least call each other on the phone and say hello , such as friends or neighbors. Another reason is to remind rich people to donate the poor people by many ways . For instance , there is something called Zakat which is mean that people should donate 2.7% of their money account for poor people by hand instead of philanthropic organization .In addition, neighbors exchange each other (rich people to poor people) the food they made to make close relations gather together. Other important reasons exist , but in conclusion ,I can tell from this celebration that the familiarity and the intimacy between all the members of the society such as friends even different religions , families , and neighbors all in all can be stronger and closer much more than any days during the year.

Leading Clever Perople

HBR Spotlight How to Manage the Most Talented How do you manage people who don’t want to be led and may be smarter than you? CLEVER PEOPLE by Rob Goffee and Gareth Jones LEADING F ranz Humer, the CEO and chairman of the Swiss pharma- ceutical giant Roche, knows how dif? cult it is to ? nd good ideas. â€Å"In my business of research, economies of scale don’t exist,† he says. â€Å"Globally today we spend $4 billion on R&D every year. In research there aren’t economies of scale, there are economies of ideas. For a growing number of companies, according to Humer, competitive advantage lies in the ability to create an economy driven not by cost ef? ciencies but by ideas and intellectual know-how. In practice this means that leaders have to create an environment in which what we call â€Å"clever people† can thrive. These people are the handful of employees whose ideas, knowledge, and skills give them the potential to produce disproportionate value fro m the resources their organizations make available to them. Think, for example, of the software Stephen Webster 72 Harvard Business Review | March 2007 | hbr. orgHBR Spotlight How to Manage the Most Talented programmer who creates a new piece of code or the pharmaceutical researcher who formulates a new drug. Their single innovations may bankroll an entire company for a decade. Top executives today nearly all recognize the importance of having extremely smart and highly creative people on staff. But attracting them is only half the battle. As Martin Sorrell, the chief executive of WPP, one of the world’s largest communications services companies, told us recently,â€Å"One of the biggest challenges is that there are diseconomies of scale in creative industries.If you double the number of creative people, it doesn’t mean you will be twice as creative. † You must not only attract talent but also foster an environment in which your clever people are inspired to ach ieve their fullest potential in a way that produces wealth and value for all your stakeholders. That’s tough. If clever people have one de? ning characteristic, it is that they do not want to be led. This clearly creates a problem for you as a leader. The challenge has only become greater with globalization.Clever people are more mobile than ever before; they are as likely to be based in Bangalore or Beijing as in Boston. That means they have more opportunities: They’re not waiting around for their pensions; they know their value, and they expect you to know it too. We have spent the past 20 years studying the issue of leadership–in particular, what followers want from their leaders. Our methods are sociological, and our data come from case studies rather than anonymous random surveys. Our predominant method consists of loosely structured interviews, lever people is very different from the one they have with traditional followers. Clever people want a high degre e of organizational protection and recognition that their ideas are important. They also demand the freedom to explore and fail. They expect their leaders to be intellectually on their plane–but they do not want a leader’s talent and skills to outshine their own. That’s not to say that all clever people are alike, or that they follow a single path. They do, however, share a number of de? ning characteristics. Let’s take a look at some of those now.Understanding Clever People Contrary to what we have been led to believe in recent years, CEOs are not utterly at the mercy of their highly creative and extremely smart people. Of course, some very talented individuals – artists, musicians, and other free agents – can produce remarkable results on their own. In most cases, however, clever people need the organization as much as it needs them. They cannot function effectively without the resources it provides. The classical musician needs an orchest ra; the research scientist needs funding and the facilities of a ? st-class laboratory. They need more than just resources, however; as the head of development for a global accounting ? rm put it, your clever people â€Å"can be sources of great ideas, but unless they have systems and discipline they may deliver very little. † That’s the good news. The bad news is that all the resources and systems in the world are useless unless you have clever If clever people have one de? ning characteristic, it is that they do not want to be led. This clearly creates a problem for you as a leader. and our work draws primarily from ? e contexts: sciencebased businesses, marketing services, professional services, the media, and ? nancial services. For this article, we spoke with more than 100 leaders and their clever people at leading organizations such as PricewaterhouseCoopers, Electronic Arts, Cisco Systems, Credit Suisse, Novartis, KPMG, the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) , WPP, and Roche.The more we talked to these people, the clearer it became that the psychological relationship leaders have with their people to make the most of them. Worse, they know very well that you must mploy them to get their knowledge and skills. If an organization could capture the knowledge embedded in clever people’s minds and networks, all it would need is a better knowledge-management system. The failure of such systems to capture tacit knowledge is one of the great disappointments of knowledge-management initiatives to date. The attitudes that clever people display toward their organizations re? ect their sense of self-worth. We’ve found most Rob Goffee ([email  protected] edu) is a professor of organizational behavior at London Business School in England. Gareth Jones ([email  protected] london. du) is a visiting professor at Insead in Fontainebleau, France, and a fellow of the Centre for Management Development at London Business School. Goffee and J ones are also the founding partners of Creative Management Associates, an organizational consulting ? rm in London. Their HBR article â€Å"Managing Authenticity† was published in December 2005. 74 Harvard Business Review | March 2007 | hbr. org Leading Clever People of them to be scornful of the language of hierarchy. Although they are acutely aware of the salaries and bonuses attached to their work, they often treat promotions with indifference or even contempt.So don’t expect to lure or retain them with fancy job titles and new responsibilities. They will want to stay close to the â€Å"real work,† often to the detriment of relationships with the people they are supposed to be managing. This doesn’t mean they don’t care about status–they do, often passionately. The same researcher who affects not to know his job title may insist on being called â€Å"doctor†or â€Å"professor. † The point is that clever people feel they are part of an external professional community that renders the organizational chart meaningless. Not only do they gain career bene? s from networking, but they construct their sense of self from the feedback generated by these extra-organizational connections. This indifference to hierarchy and bureaucracy does not make clever people politically naive or disconnected. The chairman of a major news organization told us about a globally famous journalist – an exemplar of the very clever and skeptical people driving the news business–who in the newsroom appears deeply suspicious of everything the â€Å"suits† are doing. But in reality he is astute about how the company is being led and what strategic direction it is taking.While publicly expressing disdain for the business side, he privately asks penetrating questions about the organization’s growth prospects and relationships with important customers. He is also an outspoken champion of the organization in its dealings with politicians, media colleagues, and customers. You wouldn’t invite him to a strategy meeting with a 60-slide PowerPoint presentation, but you would be wise to keep him informed of key developments in the business. Like the famous journalist, most clever people are quick to recognize insincerity and respond badly to it.David Gardner, the COO of worldwide studios for Electronic Arts (EA), knows this because he oversees a lot of clever people. EA has 7,200 employees worldwide developing interactive entertainment software derived from FIFA Soccer, The Sims, The Lord of the Rings, and Harry Potter, among others. â€Å"If I look back at our failures,† Gardner told us,â€Å"they have been when there were too many rah-rahs and not enough content in our dealings with our people. People are not fooled. So when there are issues or things that need to be worked out, straightforward dialogue is important, out of respect for their intellectual capabilities. †Seve n Things You Need to Know About Clever People Leaders should be aware of the characteristics most clever people share, which collectively make them a dif? cult crew to manage. 1. They know their worth. The tacit skills of clever people are closer to those of medieval guilds than to the standardized, codi? able, and communicable skills that characterized the Industrial Revolution. This means you can’t transfer the knowledge without the people. 2. They are organizationally savvy. Clever people will ? nd the company context in which their interests will be most generously funded. If the funding dries up, they have a couple of options:They can move on to a place where resources are plentiful, or they can dig in and engage in elaborate politics to advance their pet projects. 3. They ignore corporate hierarchy. If you seek to motivate clever people with titles or promotions, you will probably be met with cold disdain. But don’t assume this means they don’t care about status; they can be very particular about it, and may insist on being called â€Å"doctor† or â€Å"professor. † 4. They expect instant access. If clever people don’t get access to the CEO, they may think the organization does not take their work seriously. 5. They are well connected.Clever people are usually plugged into highly developed knowledge networks; who they know is often as important as what they know. These networks both increase their value to the organization and make them more of a ? ight risk. 6. They have a low boredom threshold. In an era of employee mobility, if you don’t engage your clever people intellectually and inspire them with organizational purpose, they will walk out the door. 7. They won’t thank you. Even when you’re leading them well, clever people will be unwilling to recognize your leadership. Remember, these creative individuals feel that they don’t need to be led.Measure your success by your ability to remain on the fringes of their radar. Managing Organizational â€Å"Rain† Given their mind-set, clever people see an organization’s administrative machinery as a distraction from their key valueadding activities. So they need to be protected from what we call organizational â€Å"rain† – the rules and politics associated with any big-budget activity. When leaders get this right, they hbr. org | March 2007 | Harvard Business Review 75 HBR Spotlight How to Manage the Most Talented can establish exactly the productive relationship with clever people that they want.In an academic environment, this is the dean freeing her star professor from the burden of departmental administration; at a newspaper, it is the editor allowing the investigative reporter to skip editorial meetings; in a fast-moving multinational consumer goods company, it is the leader ? ltering requests for information from the head of? ce so the consumer pro? ler is free to experiment with a n ew marketing plan. Organizational rain is a big issue in the pharmaceutical business. Drug development is hugely expensive – industrywide, the average cost of bringing a drug to market is about $800 million – and not every drug can go the distance.As a result, the politics surrounding a decision can be ferocious. Unless the CEO provides cover, promising projects may be permanently derailed, and the people involved may lose con? dence in the organization’s ability to support them. The protective role is one that Arthur D. Levinson, Genentech’s CEO and a talented scientist in his own right, knows how to play. When the drug Avastin failed in Phase III clinical trials in 2002, Genentech’s share price dropped by 10% 76 Harvard Business Review | overnight. Faced with that kind of pressure, some leaders would have pulled the plug on Avastin.Not Levinson: He believes in letting his clever people decide. Once or twice a year, research scientists have to def end their work to Genentech’s Research Review Committee, a group of 13 PhDs who decide how to allocate the research budget and whether to terminate projects. This gives rise to a rigorous debate among the clever people over the science and the direction of research. It also insulates Levinson from accusations of favoritism or short-termism. And if the RRC should kill a project, the researchers are not only not ? red, they are asked what they want to work on ext. Roche owns 56% of Genentech, and Franz Humer stands foursquare behind Levinson. Leading clever people, Humer told us, is especially dif? cult in hard times. â€Å"You can look at Genentech now and say what a great company,† he said,â€Å"but for ten years Genentech had no new products and spent between $500 million and $800 million on research every year. The pressure on me to close it down or change the culture was enormous. †Avastin was eventually approved in February 2004; in 2005 it had sales of $1. 13 billion. March 2007 | hbr. org Leading Clever PeopleHaving a leader who’s prepared to protect his clever people from organizational rain is necessary but not suf? cient. It’s also important to minimize the rain by creating an atmosphere in which rules and norms are simple and universally accepted. These are often called â€Å"representative rules,† from the classic Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy, by the sociologist Alvin Gouldner, who distinguished among environments where rules are ignored by all (mock bureaucracy), environments where rules are imposed by one group on another (punishment-centered bureaucracy), and environments where rules are accepted by all (representative bureaucracy).Representative rules, including risk rules in banks, sabbatical rules in academic institutions, and integrity rules in professional services ? rms, are precisely the ones that clever people respond to best. Savvy leaders take steps to streamline rules and to promote a cul ture that values simplicity. A well-known example is Herb Kelleher, the CEO of Southwest Airlines, who threw the company’s rule book out the window. Another is Greg Dyke, who when he was the director general of the BBC discovered a mass of bureaucratic rules, often contradictory, which produced an infuriating organizational immobilisme.Nothing could be better calculated to discourage the clever people on whom the reputation and future success of the BBC depended. Dyke launched an irreverent â€Å"cut the crap† program, liberating creative energy while exposing those who had been blaming the rules for their own inadequacies. He creatively engaged employees in the campaign–for example, suggesting that they pull out a yellow card (used to caution players in soccer games) whenever they encountered a dysfunctional rule. Recruiting People with the Right Stuff Clever people require a peer group of like-minded individuals. Universities have long understood this.Hire a s tar professor and you can be sure the aspiring young PhDs in that discipline will ? ock to your institution. This happens in business as well. In the investment banking world, everyone watches where the cleverest choose to work. Goldman Sachs, for example, cherishes its reputation as the home of the brightest and best; a bank that seeks to overtake it must be positioned as a place where cleverness thrives. For this reason, the CEOs of companies that rely on clever people keep a close watch on the recruiting of stars. Bill Gates always sought out the cleverest software programmers for Microsoft.From the start, Gates insisted that his company required the very best minds; he understood that they act as a magnet for other clever people. Sometimes he intervened personally in the recruitment process: A particularly talented programmer who needed a little additional persuasion to join the company might receive a personal call from Gates. Very ? attering – and very effective. Althou gh you need to recruit clever stars, you must also make sure that your culture celebrates clever ideas. In an effort to create stars, some media organizations divide their employees into â€Å"creatives† and administrative support staff.That’s a big mistake. It makes about as much sense as recruiting men only – you automatically cut your talent pool in half. The ad agency Bartle Bogle Hegarty doesn’t make this mistake. Many of its most successful executives started as assistants but were given the space to grow and express their cleverness. Not surprisingly, BBH has long been regarded as one of the most creative ad agencies in the world. At the heart of its corporate culture is the maxim â€Å"Respect ideas, wherever they come from. † Letting a Million Flowers Bloom Companies whose success depends on clever people don’t place all their bets n a single horse. For a large company like Roche, that simple notion drives big decisions about corpor ate control and M&A. That’s why Humer decided to sell off a large stake in Genentech. â€Å"I insisted on selling 40% on the stock market,† he told us. â€Å"Why? Because I wanted to preserve the company’s different culture. I believe in diversity: diversity of culture, diversity of origin, diversity of behavior, and diversity of view. † For similar reasons, Roche limits its ownership of the Japanese pharmaceutical company Chugai to 51%.By keeping the clever people in all three companies at arm’s length, Humer can be con? ent that they will advance different goals: â€Å"My people in the Roche research organization decide on what they think is right and wrong. I hear debates where the Genentech researchers say,‘This program you’re running will never lead to a product. You are on the wrong target. This is the wrong chemical structure–it will prove to be toxic. ’ And my guys say, ‘No, we don’t think so. â€⠄¢ And the two views never meet. So I say to Genentech, ‘You do what you want, and we will do what we want at Roche, and in ? ve years’ time we will know. Sometimes you will be right and sometimes we will be right. † Maintaining that diversity is Humer’s most challenging task; there is always pressure within a large organization to unify and to direct from above. Companies that value diversity are not afraid of failure. Like venture capitalists, they know that for every successful hbr. org | March 2007 | Harvard Business Review 77 HBR Spotlight How to Manage the Most Talented The Traitorous Eight Ineffective leadership of clever people can be costly. Consider the cautionary tale of William Shockley, a London-born research scientist who worked at Bell Labs after World War II.In 1947 Shockley was recognized as a coinventor of the transistor, and in 1956 he was awarded a Nobel Prize. He left Bell Labs in 1955 and founded Shockley Semiconductor Laboratory, in M ountain View, California. His academic reputation attracted some of the cleverest people in electronics, including Robert Noyce and Gordon Moore (of Moore’s Law fame). Shockley was blessed with a brilliant mind. Noyce described him as a â€Å"marvelous intuitive problem solver, and Moore said he had a † â€Å"phenomenal physical intuition. But his leadership † skills fell far short of his intellectual brilliance.On one occasion Shockley asked some of his younger employees how he might stoke their enthusiasm. Several expressed a wish to publish research papers. So Shockley went home, wrote a paper, and the next day offered to let them publish it under their own names. He meant well but led poorly. On another occasion, Shockley instituted a secret â€Å"project within a project. Although only 50 or so peo† ple were employed in his laboratory, the group assigned to work on his new idea (which, according to Shockley, had the potential to rival the transistor) was not allowed to discuss the project with other colleagues.It wasn’t long before rumblings of discontent at Shockley’s leadership style turned mutinous. The situation deteriorated and a disenchanted group – â€Å"the Traitorous Eight† – left to found Fairchild Semiconductor in 1957 Fairchild revolutionized computing . through its work on the silicon transistor. It also threw off a slew of clever people who went on to start up or develop some of the best-known companies in the industry: Bob Noyce and Gordon Moore (Intel), Jerry Sanders (Advanced Micro Devices), and Charlie Sporck (National Semiconductor) were all former employees of Fairchild.Through his poor leadership, Shockley inadvertently laid the cornerstone of Silicon Valley. He brought together some of the best scientists in the ? eld of electronics, many of whom might otherwise not have remained in the region. And he created conditions that provoked his brilliant employees to strike out on their own. new pharmaceutical product, dozens have failed; for every hit record, hundreds are duds. The assumption, obviously, is that the successes will more than recover the costs of the failures. Take the case of the drinks giant Diageo.Detailed analysis of customer data indicated an opening in the market for an alcoholic beverage with particular appeal to younger consumers. Diageo experimented with many potential products–beginning with predictable combinations like rum and coke, rum and blackcurrant juice, gin and tonic, vodka and fruit juice. None of them seemed to work. After almost a dozen tries, Diageo’s clever people tried something riskier: citrus-? avored vodka. Smirnoff Ice was born – a product that has contributed to a fundamental change in its market sector.It’s easy to accept the necessity of failure in theory, but each failure represents a setback for the clever people who gambled on it. Smart leaders will help their clever people to l ive with their failures. Some years ago, when three of Glaxo’s high-tech antibiotics all failed in the ? nal stages of clinical trial, Richard Sykes – who went on to become chairman of Glaxo Wellcome and later of GlaxoSmithKline – sent letters of congratulation to the team leaders, thanking them for their hard work but also for killing the drugs, and encouraging them to move on to the next challenge.EA’s David Gardner, too, recognizes that his business is â€Å"hit driven,† but he realizes that not even his most gifted game developers will always produce winners. He sees his job as supporting his successful people – providing them with space and helping them move on from failed projects to new and better work. Smart leaders also recognize that the best ideas don’t always come from company projects. They enable their clever people to pursue private efforts because they know there will be payoffs for the company, some direct (new busine ss opportunities) and some indirect (ideas that can be applied in the workplace).This tradition originated in organizations like 3M and Lockheed, which allowed employees to pursue pet projects on company time. Google is the most recent example: Re? ecting the entrepreneurial spirit of its founders, Sergey Brin and Larry Page, employees may spend one day a week on their own start-up ideas, called Googlettes. This is known as the â€Å"20% time. †(Genentech has a similar policy. ) The result is innovation at a speed that puts large bureaucratic organizations to shame. The Google-af? liated social-networking Web site Orkut is just one project that began as a Googlette.Establishing Credibility Although it’s important to make your clever people feel independent and special, it’s equally important to make sure they recognize their interdependence: You and other people in the organization can do things that they can’t. Laura Tyson, who served in the Clinton admi nistration and has been the dean of London Business School since 2002, says, 78 Harvard Business Review | March 2007 | hbr. org Leading Clever People â€Å"You must help clever people realize that their cleverness doesn’t mean they can do other things.They may overestimate their cleverness in other areas, so you must show that you are competent to help them. †To do this you must clearly demonstrate that you are an expert in your own right. Depending on what industry you are in, your expertise will be either supplementary (in the same ? eld) or complementary (in a different ? eld) to your clever people’s expertise. At a law ? rm, the emphasis is on certi? cation as a prerequisite for practice; at an advertising agency, it’s originality of ideas. It would be hard to lead a law ? rm without credentials.You can lead an advertising agency with complementary skills–handling commercial relationships with clients, for instance, while your clever people wri te great copy. A man we’ll call Tom Nelson, who was the marketing director of a major British brewer, is a good example of a leader Beckham, to practice a particular maneuver. When Beckham couldn’t do it, Hoddle – once a brilliant international player himself – said, â€Å"Here, I’ll show you how. † He performed the maneuver ? awlessly, but in the process he lost the support of his team: The other players saw his move as a public humiliation of Beckham, and they wanted no part of that.The same dynamic has played out many times in business; the experience of William Shockley is perhaps the most dramatic, and tragic, example (see the sidebar â€Å"The Traitorous Eight†). How do you avoid this kind of situation? One highly effective way is to identify and relate to an informed insider among your clever people – someone willing to serve as a sort of anthropologist, interpreting the culture and sympathizing with those who seek to un derstand it. This is especially important for newly recruited leaders. Parachuting in at the top and accurately reading an organization is hard work. One leader weIf you try to push your clever people, you will end up driving them away. As many leaders of highly creative people have learned, you need to be a benevolent guardian rather than a traditional boss. with complementary skills. Nelson was no expert on traditional brewing techniques or real ales. But he was known throughout the organization as â€Å"Numbers Nelson† for his grasp of the ? rm’s sales and marketing performance, and was widely respected. Nelson had an almost uncanny ability to quote, say, how many barrels of the company’s beer had been sold the previous day in a given part of the country.His clear mastery of the business side gave him both authority and credibility, so the brewers took his opinions about product development seriously. For example, Nelson’s reading of market tastes led to the company’s development of low-alcohol beers. Leaders with supplementary expertise are perhaps more commonplace: Microsoft’s Bill Gates emphasizes his abilities as a programmer. Michael Critelli, the CEO of Pitney Bowes, holds a number of patents in his own name. Richard Sykes insisted on being called Dr. Sykes.The title gave him respect within the professional community to which his clever people belonged – in a way that being the chairman of a multinational pharmaceutical company did not. But credentials–especially if they are supplementary–are not enough to win acceptance from clever people. Leaders must exercise great care in displaying them so as not to demotivate their clever employees. A former national soccer coach for England, Glenn Hoddle, asked his star player, David spoke to admitted that he initially found the winks, nudges, and silences of his new employees completely baf? ng. It took an interpreter – someone who had worke d among the clever people for years – to explain the subtle nuances. †¢Ã¢â‚¬ ¢Ã¢â‚¬ ¢ Martin Sorrell likes to claim that he uses reverse psychology to lead his â€Å"creatives† at WPP: â€Å"If you want them to turn right, tell them to turn left. † His comment reveals an important truth about managing clever people. If you try to push them, you will end up driving them away. As many leaders of extremely smart and highly creative people have learned, you need to be a benevolent guardian rather than a traditional boss.You need to create a safe environment for your clever employees; encourage them to experiment and play and even fail; and quietly demonstrate your expertise and authority all the while. You may sometimes begrudge the time you have to devote to managing them, but if you learn how to protect them while giving them the space they need to be productive, the reward of watching your clever people ? ourish and your organization accomplish its mission w ill make the effort worthwhile. Reprint R0703D To order, see page 145. hbr. org | March 2007 | Harvard Business Review 79

Development of American economic system

Economics is defined as the way the services to produce goods are allocated among alternative uses to satisfy human wants. In short, economics is the output of goods and services that society needs and wants. The history of the United States economy is one of growth. The amount of goods and services that the United States produces annually has grown significantly in the last 100 years. The American economic system, including modern developments and trends, are important to American society. The American economic system follows an outline for it to be successful.An economic system must determine what and how much product society is producing and how each service and good is to be produce. It must also determine how the services and goods are to be distributed to members of society and what â€Å"the rate of growth per capita income† will be. (Mansfield and Behravesh, 1998, p 24) The economic system must find out what its factories are putting into stores, how much is being put into stores, how much it will cost to get these products and services into the hands of Americans, and how much money society will make as a whole because of these products and services.This is a simple system of what goes out must be replaced by something equally as valuable. The United States will gladly give Americans what they need, however, those Americans need to trade cash for it so the workers who made those products can do the same for themselves and their families. In essence, it could be considered a barter system, but instead of trading goods for other goods, Americans trade cash for goods. Modern developments have become extremely important in the American economic system. For example, international trade is a modern development that plays a very important role.Many American industries depend on other countries for raw materials such as coffee, tin, or tea. American exports account for ten percent of its gross domestic product. American society and way of life would hav e to change drastically if trading with other countries was not an option. (Mansfield and Behravesh, 1998) Financial transactions in the form of revolving credit cards is another important modern development. Although the use of credit began during the time of the Pilgrims, the use of revolving credit cards is a modern development. Credit, as Americans know it today, began in the late 1800s with the advent of credit tokens.This made it faster and easier to extend credit instead of looking up individual information. In the 1950's, the revolving credit card came into use. People could now borrow money, repay it, and borrow again without having to be approved for a line of credit each time. Today, these credit cards are an easy way to pay for goods and services, and it is used more often than cash. Americans buy everything on credit, including clothing, food, and entertainment. Take away American's use of credit, and the economy would come to a grinding halt. (â€Å"The History of Cre dit & Debit: History of Credit Cards.†, 2009)In conclusion, America's economic system is a simple one, however, modern developments have complicated it somewhat. International trade and the use of credit in general and revolving credit cards are extremely important because these developments keep the country growing and moving forward. Many Americans drive foreign cars and drink foreign coffee, a result of international trade. Many Americans use credit to buy houses and food, a result of the advent of credit. Without these developments, American society as the Americans know it would change drastically, creating unnecessary hardship.

Mice and men dreams

Dreams are Dreams â€Å"Part of the American Dream Is to own your own property – something no one can take from you†(Henry Bonilla). Also a lot of luck is also needed. In Mice and Men no one achieved the American yet. It is a hard thing to attain in the 1930s. In this book, the American Dream was to won property pr be happy in what you do. Everybody has a dream to be happy and own their own land In the book. The workers wanted their own farm and pursue on living their own way. They all wanted a dream to work for.When guys in the book hear about owning land, they wanted to be a part of it and try o pitch in with money. American dream is to own property, and George, Lennie, and Crook all wanted that but the American Dream In 1930s was much different today but had a few slmllarartles too. George is the main character in Mice and Men. The American Dream was hard for George. He had a huge distraction while he finds his dreams. He had to take care of Lennie and also worry abo ut himself. When they were In the woods going to find a lob, George says to Lennie, â€Å"l got you!You can't keep a Job and you lose me ever' Job I get (Steinbeck 11). So Lennie was a distraction to George and lost opportunities because Lennie always gets in trouble. American Dream for George was to keep a Job, save money, and buy land to live in with Lennie. But without Lennie he achieved it faster or even easier because Lennie Is always In the way. American Dream is all about hard work, saving your earnings, and using it to buy land for yourself. George feels like a typical American in todays society because he is a normal guy just working and trying to find his own home.Like a typical person he had hard times and istractions. He had to kill Lennie to make his dreams come true and distractions from other works trying to be part of his Dream. It also feels Ilke back than, they were less opportunities for people like George. It was much easier in today's society but not for everyo ne. American Dream can be impossible to achieve for some people. Perfect example Is Lennie, Lennie was a slow guy. He had kid Inside of his huge body. George always had to take care of him and he needed George so he can talk for him.Lennie's disability slowed him and George's American Dream. Lennie knew what his American Dream was; he wanted a farm with lots of bunnies so he can pet them. But Lennie's journey was the toughest. First It starts with getting kicked out of town because he â€Å"assaults† a girl, â€Å"Jus wanted to feel that girl's dress-jus wanted to pet it like it was a mouse (11). He always gets in trouble even if it's not really his fault. He just didn't have a clue of what not to do, and that played a huge part in American Dream. He eventually gets shot by George because he kills Curly's wife accidently.

Effectiveness of Treatment Programs Research Paper

Effectiveness of Treatment Programs - Research Paper Example Patients having the problems relating to abuse of drugs are treated with the help of introducing and applying various treatment programs for the sole purpose of discontinuation of the use of drugs and other kinds of intoxicating chemicals. Apart from this, treatment programs concerning alcoholism are extensively introduced as well as exploited wherein patients with abnormal drinking habits are assisted through the most advanced measures of treatment that may include different types of exercises and meditation among others. Treatment relating to discontinuation to the habit of smoking is also provided to various patients. In addition to all the above treatment programs, there also exist certain other effectual treatment programs that are implemented in various hospitals and medical centers. In this regard, the other treatment programs embrace psychiatric treatment, wilderness therapy and residential treatment programs among others (Morral, 2006). Concept of Treatment Programs The conc eption of treatment programs aims to provide proper cure to an individual, a patient or a group of patients. It has been apparently observed that different types of treatment programs are provided to the patients for the purpose of providing effective measures for the discontinuation of various sorts of unhealthy practices that might affect the overall health of a person to a drastic level. Furthermore, treatment programs are also implemented so as to provide proper assistance for improving the mental conditions of a patient by a certain degree. There may be different kinds of patients having various problems in relation to psychological aspects. The idea concerning treatment programs especially deals with all the problems that might disrupts the behavioral attitudes of the individuals or the people in the form of students by a greater level. It is worth mentioning that effective treatment programs are designed as well as exploited to provide relief to the patients and help them in sustaining a healthy life (Morral, 2006). Effectiveness of Treatment Programs Treatment programs are structured and implemented to provide proper solutions to various patients having different medical problems that may constitute health along with mental problems. It also constitutes itself with different types of treatment which is provided to the patients so as to help them in discontinuing various types of harmful health practices that might include smoking, drinking alcohol and taking drugs among others. In order to determine the effectiveness of diverse treatment programs, it has been apparently observed that various sorts of treatment programs provide great aid to the patients for leading a healthier life and becoming free from conducting any kind of harmful activity relating to health and psychological problems. Different treatment programs are meant to provide distinct outcomes, but all the outcomes are specifically targeted to focus a common goal i.e. curing the patients. T reatment of a patient lays much importance in his life as it provides him/her the opportunity to start a life afresh. Different treatment programs have been viewed to provide active support to the patients in developing their morale and also raising their self-motivation by a greater level. These programs relating to treatment proves to provide the patients with increased number of health benefits. The introduction along with the execution of diverse treatm