Bicycles in Miami Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Bicycles in Miami - Essay Example ate in the manufacture and sale of high quality bicycles in the city and the growth of the industry portrays the both the potential and the future of the place of bicycles in Miami, Florida. Miami is among the leading tourist destinations in the United States famed for its wide beaches. As such, the city experiences an influx of visitors especially during summer a feature that piles pressure on the city’s transport system. In order to overcome such challenges, the state government encouraged the use of bicycles thereby giving rise to the number of bicycles in the city. The history of the city therefore includes the high number of bicycles (Mathur, 2014). Progressively, bicycles remained a fundamental feature of transport in the city as the industry expanded owing to the concerted government effort to promote clean and safe environment. As a preferred tourist destination, the use of bicycles in Miami offered a cheaper means of transport especially for the locals who had to compete for public transport with the rising number of tourists visiting the city annually. This explains the historical position of bicycles in the city, the position has not changed since to d ate both locals and tourists alike prefer the use of bicycles as the preferred means of transport in Miami. The use of bicycles remains commonplace in Miami as the government continues to expand projects that foster the growth of the industry through systematic policies. The wealthy and the rich in Miami continue to show preference for bicycle as a means of transport owing to the government’s endeavors to improve the appreciation of the means of transport. The trend spread throughout the city owing to the health benefits associated with cycling to work. Besides sustaining the cleanliness of the environment, cycling to work promises a lean healthy body since it provides the body with intense physical activity thereby burning used calories in the body (Frantz, 2009). Different arms of the government

UNIT 5 DISCUSSION BOARD Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

UNIT 5 DISCUSSION BOARD - Essay Example Here the cost center is a responsibility center whose employees control costs but do not control its revenues or investment level. On the other hand a revenue center is a responsibility center whose members control revenues but do not control the cost of the product or service they sell or the level of investment in the responsibility center. Thirdly there is a profit center which is a responsibility center whose manager and other employees control both the revenues and the costs of the product or service they sell or deliver. Lastly, we come up to the investment center that is a responsibility center whose manager and other employees control the revenues, costs, and the level of investment in the responsibility center. If we take into account the policies incorporated by Howard Works ltd the scene could be easily clarified. In Howard Works Ltd the four aspects of Responsibility Centers are dealt in the most efficient manner. Cost centers, Revenue centers, Profit centers and Investment centers are in able hand and they are evaluated in every possible way. In Howard Works Ltd Responsibility Centers are evaluated in regular interval by the dint of underlying the accounting classifications of responsibility centers is the concept of controllability. Moreover, the controllability principle asserts that people should only be held accountable for results that they can control. Though it should be remembered that, according to Rick Dobson, the CEO of Howard Works Ltd, â€Å"it is often difficult to apply the controllability principle†. (Hobbs, 84) Rick Dobson also pointed out some problems associated with controllability; according to him the problem stays with jointly earned revenues and/or jointl y incurred costs. He also pointed out the problem regarding intricate, and often arbitrary, accounting procedures. But with management principals applied in a more perfect manner and with more vigor it is expected that these problems would gradually

Free

Free Will and Moral Responsibility Essay This collection of essays has its roots in a conference on free will and moral responsibility held at Monash University in November 2005, though only a few of the papers presented at the conference have made it into the current volume. We would like to thank both the participants at this conference and the contributors to this volume, as well as Cambridge Scholars Publishing for inviting us to put the collection together. Grateful acknowledgement is also made to the editor of the online journal, Sorites, where Nick Trakakis’ paper, â€Å"Whither Morality in a Hard Determinist World? †, was originally published (in vol. 19, December 2007). Finally, thanks to Shannon Weekes for her assistance in compiling the Index. INTRODUCTION NICK TRAKAKIS AND DANIEL COHEN Much of the interest of the free will debate depends on the assumption that free will is necessary for moral responsibility. In particular, it is because responsibility seems so important for our practical lives that debates about the compatibility of free will and determinism seem so urgent. However, much of the discussion in this volume bypasses this link. Instead, questions are raised that directly concern responsibility, such as whether it is compatible with determinism (see, for example, the essays by Fischer, Widerker, and Pereboom) and whether it is compatible with indeterminism (for example, the exchange between Levy and Kane). For the purposes of this introduction, we have not attempted to summarize the various ways in which the contributors construe the metaphysical foundations of moral responsibility. Instead, we wish to address a more preliminary matter. In the first part of this introduction, our aim is to say something about what we mean when we say that someone is morally responsible. It is surely important to clarify this before addressing any further substantive issues because, if we don’t clarify the meaning of this key term, there remains a significant danger that different participants in the debate about the possibility of moral responsibility will simply ‘talk past each other’. This suggests that in order to conduct a fruitful debate participants need firstly to agree on the nature of their subject-matter and, perhaps, to disambiguate different dimensions of the debate that arise if the term ‘moral responsibility’ has different connotations. In the second part of the introduction, we will discuss a neglected Wittgensteinian perspective on the notions of freedom and responsibility, a perspective that may help to clarify some of the confusion that arises when we ask what it means to say that a person is free or responsible. 1. The Meaning of Responsibility. Before proceeding to ask whether people are, in fact, ever morally responsible, it seems that an important preliminary matter needs to be settled. That is, we need to ask what we mean when we say that a person is x Introduction morally responsible. As will quickly become clear, settling this preliminary matter is, in fact, much harder than it first seems. Many of the controversies concerning the possibility of responsibility emerge even when we try to say just what ‘responsibility’ means. Let’s start with a claim that seems relatively uncontroversial. We will simply assume that ‘person A is responsible’ is a normative claim. That is to say, it is a claim to the effect that it is appropriate to hold A responsible in certain circumstances (circumstances, for example, where A has acted wrongly and where no mitigating, justifying, or excusing factors are present). However, this account of the meaning of ‘A is responsible’ raises at least two further issues. Firstly, we need to say more about what it means to hold someone responsible and, secondly, we need to say more about the nature and basis of the norms that govern appropriate responsibility attribution. It is important to keep in mind that our goal, in clarifying these two questions, should not be to settle any question regarding whether people are, in fact, ever morally responsible. Rather, we want to settle the terms of this debate before it begins. To this extent, we need sufficiently neutral accounts both of the nature of responsibility attribution and of its normative basis so that we don’t beg any substantive questions before debate has even begun. As we will try to show, however, this is a rather elusive goal. The only neutral account of the nature of responsibility attribution renders the normative question deeply controversial. And the only neutral account of the normative basis of responsibility attribution renders the nature of responsibility attribution deeply controversial. Holding Responsible There appear to be two plausible contending views regarding the nature of responsibility attribution. On cognitivist accounts, holding A responsible fundamentally involves believing something to be true of A, while on noncognitivist accounts, holding A responsible essentially involves holding some conative attitude towards A. (Cognitivists may, of course, argue that responsibility attribution is also usually associated with some conative attitude. However, they will maintain that it is possible to hold someone responsible without holding such conative attitudes. Similarly for noncognitivist accounts, mutatis mutandis. ) Non-cognitivism appears to provide the most successful neutral basis on which to premise the debate concerning the possibility of responsibility. This is because there seems little room for debate concerning the conative attitudes that characterize normal responsibility Nick Trakakis and Daniel Cohen xi attribution. In particular, few would disagree that responsibility attribution is strongly associated with the ‘reactive attitudes’ identified by P. F. Strawson, i. e. , resentment, indignation, anger and so on. 1 If one wishes to argue, however, that the reactive attitudes, while prevalent, are inessential to responsibility attribution, it is much harder to locate any common ground concerning the beliefs that are essential to responsibility attribution. One may suggest, for instance, that to hold A responsible is to believe that she is the source of some bad behaviour. Deep controversies quickly emerge on this view, however. One might take sourcehood to involve a psychological claim, for instance that A ‘really wanted’ to act wrongly. 2 However, others might object that any such glib psychological account fails to explain why it is fair to blame A for the wrongdoing (see Smilansky’s contribution). One might object, in this vein, that any such psychological story is unable to show that an agent really is the source of her having certain desires or values (see McKenna’s contribution), and that sourcehood thus requires some more obscure metaphysical basis (e. g. , agent-causation). Alternatively, one may suggest that sourcehood involves some impossible requirement such as that an agent was self-created. 3 On this view, holding someone responsible is essentially impossible. 4 Our goal is to account for the meaning of responsibility in neutral terms so as to provide a basis for constructive debate about the conditions (and the very possibility) of responsibility. It appears, however, that the cognitivist view of responsibility attribution quickly leads to debates that already beg these important questions before debate has even begun! This suggests that the best theory-neutral account of the meaning of responsibility must explain holding responsible in non-cognitivist terms. The Normative Basis of Responsibility Attribution Recall that, for the purposes of this discussion, we have assumed a normative account of responsibility according to which ‘A is responsible’ means ‘it is appropriate to hold A responsible in certain conditions’. Having addressed how best to interpret what ‘holding A responsible’ might mean, without begging any important questions, we need now to turn to a second question raised by the normative account: when exactly is it appropriate to hold someone responsible? In other words, what are the norms that govern appropriate responsibility attribution? Again, there are two plausible contending views: appropriateness may be explained either in terms of practical norms (taking ‘holding responsible’ to be analogous xii Introduction to the performance of an action) or by way of doxastic norms (taking ‘holding responsible’ to be analogous to the formation of a belief). Again, only on one of these accounts—the doxastic view—is it possible to offer an appropriately uncontroversial explanation of the norms implicit in responsibility attribution. On the doxastic view, one ought to hold A responsible if and only if it is true that A is responsible. On this view, the normative basis of responsibility attribution straightforwardly derives from the normativity of belief. It is clear that the doxastic account presupposes the cognitivist view discussed earlier, according to which holding A responsible involves believing something about her. Given this view of the nature of responsibility attribution, the normative question— concerning when responsibility attribution is appropriate—has a straightforward answer. Unfortunately, as we saw, there is no uncontroversial way to account for the truth-conditions of ‘A is responsible’, on the cognitivist assumption that it involves belief. So, despite the advantages of the doxastic view in providing a neutral account of the normative basis of responsibility attribution, this view at the same time precludes us from obtaining a neutral view regarding the nature of responsibility attribution (i. e. , the truth-conditions for the belief that A is responsible. ) Might we find an account of the normative basis of responsibility attribution that is consistent with the preferable non-cognitivist view outlined earlier? This would have to involve an alternative view, according to which responsibility attribution is justified in virtue of practical norms. However, if responsibility attribution is governed by practical norms, then things are much less straightforward. One may suggest that the relevant practical norms are just moral norms, so that ‘A is responsible’ states something like: ‘It is morally obligatory (or, perhaps, permissible) to hold A responsible’. This view may appear immediately problematic because the appropriateness of responsibility attribution will now depend on further questions that are deeply controversial (for instance, questions concerning the debate between consequentialism and nonconsequentialism; see Vargas’ contribution). A more fundamental worry arises concerning the methodological appropriateness of appealing to moral norms. One may argue, for instance, that the nature of moral obligation, itself, depends on the foundations of responsibility, which is, of course, the question at issue. Haji (in his contribution) argues that the best metaphysical basis of responsibility (i. e. , event-causal libertarianism) renders moral obligation essentially lucky. This suggests that there would be something viciously circular in explaining the meaning of responsibility Nick Trakakis and Daniel Cohen xiii in terms of some claim about our moral obligations. (See also Trakakis’ contribution. ) To avoid these worries, one may appeal to practical norms that appear to be more fundamental than any particular moral system. For instance, R. J. Wallace offers a normative account of responsibility that appeals to fairness. 5 This is meant to provide a normative basis for responsibility that remains neutral on more substantive moral issues. (See also Smilansky’s contribution. ) Clearly, however, appealing to practical norms launches us into further debates that already beg the question at issue. Again, such an account seems ill-suited for the purpose of setting up a neutral definitional framework on which to premise further debate. A Dilemma Our aim has been to find some neutral definition of responsibility to enable further non-question-begging debates about the possibility and conditions of responsibility. It seems that this goal gives rise to a tricky dilemma. The best theory-neutral account of holding responsible is the non-cognitivist account. However, this account appears incompatible with the best theory-neutral account of the norms that govern responsibility attribution—the doxastic account. The doxastic account, in turn, seems compatible only with the most problematic account of holding responsible—the cognitivist account. This is a puzzling result. Even though responsibility clearly gives rise to very complex issues, it is surprising that it is not possible even to define the terms of the debate without deep controversy. The worry thus remains that debates about the possibility and conditions of responsibility are essentially question-begging, insofar as different participants to the debate conceive of its key terms differently. Must we conclude, then, that different people and different theorists are indeed talking past each other when they debate about the possibility of responsible action? This, of course, would be a depressingly deflationist conclusion. There is a possible way out, however, that is rarely canvassed. If the question concerns the meaning of ‘responsibility’, one might suggest that there are, perhaps, other ways to settle things. In particular, isn’t the meaning of a term determined by our use of the term? (Or, at least, isn’t use a good guide to meaning?) Thus, appeal to real-world attributions of responsibility may illuminate the meaning of the term ‘responsible’. Such a methodology is sometimes rejected on the grounds that real-world attributions are rife with internal inconsistency (see, for example, Cohen xiv Introduction and Saling’s contribution). But perhaps a closer look at the Wittgensteinian ‘solution’ to the problem of freedom and responsibility will throw new light on the matter. 2. Making Sense of Free Will: A Wittgensteinian Account Wittgenstein published very little during his lifetime, and even less on the topic of free will. He does, however, make some pertinent remarks in his Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus that mirror in some respects the contemporary debates on free will. As is well known, the early Wittgenstein claims to have definitively solved the central problems of philosophy, and by implication this would include the perennial problem of free will. Wittgenstein’s strategy proceeds by separating sense from nonsense. The realm of sense is delimited in the light of his picture theory of meaning, according to which a proposition is meaningful (or capable of expressing a fact) only if it can represent or picture a contingent state of affairs. What cannot thus be represented is consigned to silence, or as Wittgenstein famously put it at the conclusion of his book, â€Å"What we cannot speak about we must pass over in silence† (proposition 7). 6 In the course of the book, however, it soon becomes clear that what can be meaningfully said are only the propositions of natural science, thereby leaving out of the realm of sense a daunting number of statements which are regularly made and used in language, including the propositions of logic, aesthetics, religion, and (most relevant for our purposes here) traditional metaphysics and ethics. But unlike the positivists, Wittgenstein does not assume that what is nonsensical is of no value. As he stated in a letter to a prospective publisher, Ludwig von Ficker: â€Å"My work consists of two parts: the one presented here plus all that I have not written. And it is precisely this second part that is the important one. †7 Further, ethical and metaphysical truths that cannot be ‘said’ or formulated in sayable (sensical) propositions can nonetheless be ‘shown’: â€Å"There are, indeed, things that cannot be put into words. They make themselves manifest. They are what is mystical† (6. 522). In line with this austere outlook, Wittgenstein hints in the Tractatus that the very concepts at issue in the free will debate—concepts such as ‘freedom’ and ‘responsibility’—cannot be meaningfully expressed. Although in propositions 5. 1361 (â€Å"We cannot infer the events of the future from those of the present†) and 5. 1362 (â€Å"The freedom of the will consists in the impossibility of knowing actions that still lie in the future†) he seems to reject determinism as false and to accept freedom of the will as true, rather than rejecting both as nonsensical, here we arguably have a Nick Trakakis and Daniel Cohen xv minimalist conception of free will as nothing more than ignorance or uncertainty regarding the future, as opposed to a substantive commitment to the metaphysical idea of a ‘will’ that could be free or unfree. This is confirmed in later passages where Wittgenstein takes the law of causality—the principle that every event has a cause—to be â€Å"not a law but the form of a law† (6. 32), adding a few propositions later that, â€Å"If there were a law of causality, it might be put in the following way: There are laws of nature. But of course that cannot be said: it makes itself manifest† (6. 36). The law of causality, in other words, is not itself a law of logic nor a law of nature (or an empirical generalization), nor a synthetic a priori proposition, but rather â€Å"something purely logical† (6. 3211), a vacuous principle that tells us, not something about the world, but only something about the form our thinking about the world must take. But what is formal, according to the Tractatus, can only be shown, not said. On this view, then, the law of causality, and by extension any substantial or metaphysical doctrine of determinism, cannot be affirmed or denied, but must be placed in the category of ineffability or nonsense. Similarly, the denial of determinism—viz. , indeterminism—is bound to result in nonsense. At one stroke, then, Wittgenstein seems to have dissolved the free will problem. Contemporary discussions of free will often take a similar turn. For example, concepts such as ‘free will’ and ‘moral responsibility’ are routinely rejected as internally incoherent or contradictory, or as incompatible with determinism or indeterminism (or both), and like the early Wittgenstein this result is achieved simply through a kind of armchair or a priori reflection on the conditions of possibility of free will and responsibility. A glaring instance of this is Galen Strawson’s ‘pessimist’ conclusion that free will, of the sort that is necessary for genuine moral responsibility, is impossible, for in order to have that kind of free will (according to Strawson) one would per impossible have to be the ultimate cause or origin of oneself, a sort of causa sui. But what is neglected in this procedure is attention to particulars, to the variety of ways in which concepts such as free will and responsibility function in different discourses and social practices. This, of course, is the message of the ‘later Wittgenstein’, the Wittgenstein of the Philosophical Investigations8, which effects a fundamental change of perspective: from the realm of an idealized logical language with rigorous definitions and analyses to the vagaries of everyday life and action out of which arise the multifarious ‘language games’. The earlier reduction of language to representation is now seen as incapable of doing justice to the rich fabric of human language, and so xvi Introduction Wittgenstein famously moves from a conception of meaning as representation to a view of meaning as use: language as a kind of doing rather than a kind of picturing. We are therefore exhorted to â€Å"look and see† (PI 66) whether there is anything in common in the variety of uses to which a word is put. We cannot simply assume that words like ‘freedom’ and ‘responsibility’ must have a hidden essence, or a universally applicable meaning that can be formulated in terms of necessary and sufficient conditions. Rather, we need to look to the complicated network of overlapping and criss-crossing similarities—what Wittgenstein calls ‘family resemblances’—between various words as these find expression in ordinary life and in various language games. Each language game, however, has its own unique ‘grammar’ (or network of rules which determine what linguistic or conceptual moves are allowed as making sense) and its own criteria of truth, rationality and intelligibility which may or may not be shared by other language games. What counts as freedom of the will may therefore differ widely depending on which language game is being played: freedom, for some religious believers, requires the extinction of one’s will, while for purposes of legislation freedom may be conceived of as requiring a significant degree of self-determination. Underlying this view is the rejection of the mathematical ideal of the Tractatus, typified by statements that are put forward as impersonal, unambiguous and impervious to context, and whose truth is intended to be timeless and without qualification. Language, for the later Wittgenstein, is a much more dynamic, diversified and activity-oriented phenomenon. And to be faithful to the richness and complexity of this phenomenon demands an appreciation of the bewildering and sometimes conflicting ways in which words and concepts—‘free will’ and ‘responsibility’ included—are used. It may be instructive to briefly compare (the later) Wittgenstein’s treatment of religious belief with his remarks on free will and voluntary action. Consider, for example, how Wittgenstein, in his â€Å"Remarks on Frazer’s Golden Bough†, responds to the phenomenon of religious diversity, to the fact that different religions seem to say different and incompatible things about (e. g. ) the nature of divine or ultimate reality and the nature and destiny of the human race: Was Augustine in error, then, when he called upon God on every page of the Confessions? But—one might say—if he was not in error, surely the Buddhist holy man was—or anyone else—whose religion gives expression to completely different views. But none of them was in error, except when he set forth a theory. 9 Nick Trakakis and Daniel Cohen xvii Against philosophers and anthropologists like James George Frazer, who construe religious doctrines as hypotheses or theories that can be confirmed or disconfirmed in light of empirical evidence, Wittgenstein views each religion as embodying a unique form of life that finds expression in language games whose ‘rules’ (relating to truth, rationality, intelligibility, and so on) may diverge quite dramatically from those of science. On this view, the various religions of the world are not in the business of constructing hypotheses and searching for evidence, and so they are not in competition with one another, at least in the way that scientific theories may vie for the mantle of verisimilitude. The problem of religious diversity is therefore dissolved. No language game, religious or otherwise, has a monopoly on truth and on the meaning of ‘truth’. Wittgenstein is thus opposed to both the religious exclusivist, who maintains that there is one religion which is privileged with respect to truth and soteriological effectiveness, and the scientistic philosopher who argues that the methods and techniques of science (perhaps construed broadly enough to include philosophy and logic) are our only reliable guide to truth. Instead, Wittgenstein places all language games on an equal footing, allowing a thousand flowers to bloom. Thus, as David Pears has perceptively pointed out, Wittgenstein’s later work has †¦an extraordinary levelling effect. It does not assimilate one kind of discourse to another: on the contrary, it is always the differences between them that are emphasized, and particularly the difference between factual discourse and the other kinds. But it does bring all the great philosophical questions which arise within them back to the same level, ordinary human life, from which philosophy started. Philosophy is the voyage out, and the voyage back, both of which are necessary if the logical space of our ordinary linguistic practices is to be understood. 10 One of these ‘great philosophical questions’ is, of course, the question of free will and moral responsibility. On this matter, as with questions to do with religious faith, Wittgenstein refused the dominance of science on modern thinking: rather than constructing systematic theories that dictate from ‘on high’—inevitably from a position that holds up science as the model for all other discourses—how the phenomena in question are to be understood, we are brought back time and again to particular facts and examples rooted in everyday language and practices. Taking such an approach to free will can produce startling results. For one thing, the belief in free will begins to look more like a religious commitment than a theoretical or scientific belief. Wittgenstein’s Kierkegaardian (or, more pejoratively, fideistic) account of religious belief is well known: xviii Introduction It strikes me that a religious belief could only be something like a passionate commitment to a system of reference. Hence, although it’s belief, it’s really a way of living, or a way of assessing life. It’s passionately seizing hold of this interpretation. 11 But his somewhat similar account of free will has received less attention, despite the ever-expanding publishing industry on free will: In the sense in which asking a question and insisting on an answer is expressive of a different attitude, a different mode of life, from not asking it, the same can be said of utterances like â€Å"It is God’s will† or â€Å"We are not masters of our fate†. The work done by this sentence, or at any rate something like it, could also be done by a command! Including one which you give yourself. 12 Life is like a path along a mountain ridge; to left and right are slippery slopes down which you slide without being able to stop yourself, in one direction or the other. I keep seeing people slip like this and I say â€Å"How could a man help himself in such a situation! † And that is what â€Å"denying free will† comes to. That is the attitude expressed in this ‘belief’. But it is not a scientific belief and has nothing to do with scientific convictions. 13 Thus, belief in free will, much like religious belief, does not purport to express an empirical fact, but is rather expressive of an attitude, a mode of life, an imperative to live in a certain way. In the two lectures he delivered at Cambridge on freedom of the will, Wittgenstein went on to characterize belief in free will as ‘groundless’, as not supported by evidence or arguments14, again indicating parallels with religious faith. To better appreciate this view of free will, one might introduce certain ideas from the Philosophical Investigations and, especially, On Certainty. 15 In the former work, Wittgenstein speaks of our beliefs as founded upon a ‘bedrock’ certainty: â€Å"If I have exhausted the justifications [for following a rule] I have reached bedrock, and my spade is turned. Then I am inclined to say: ‘This is simply what I do’† (PI 217). Similarly, in OC 341 Wittgenstein states, â€Å"the questions that we raise and our doubts depend on the fact that some propositions are exempt from doubt, are as it were like hinges on which those turn† (cf. OC 88). Although Wittgenstein refers here to propositions as acting as hinges, it is commonly thought that in the more mature phase of his epistemological work Wittgenstein thought of practices rather than propositions as primary. This, then, is no traditional foundationalism, where an inferential relationship is thought to obtain between the set of beliefs that comprise the foundations and the other beliefs we hold, with the former justifying the latter. Instead, for Wittgenstein what lies at the bottom or at the foundations of our language Nick Trakakis and Daniel Cohen xix games are not specific beliefs or propositions, but ‘ungrounded ways of acting’ (OC 110, 204), ‘communal practices’ (OC 128, 298), and ‘forms of life’ (OC 7, 358). It is in this spirit that Wittgenstein quotes from Goethe’s Faust: â€Å"In the beginning was the deed† (OC 402). Nonetheless, our practices and forms of life can be said to show or manifest the beliefs (or quasi-beliefs) and assumptions upon which we base our lives, including such beliefs as ‘I have two hands’ and ‘The world has existed for more than 10 minutes’. However, in opposition to G. E. Moore, Wittgenstein describes these as ‘certainties’ rather than ‘knowledge-claims’, for they are not grounded in evidence or open to verification, but express an attitude and a way of acting, and so are not true or false, reasonable or unreasonable, but simply â€Å"there—like our life† (OC 559, cf. 162, 205). It would be arguably in keeping with this epistemological account, in conjunction with the later Wittgenstein’s remarks on free will, to say that belief in free will (and moral responsibility) may also function, at least in some contexts, as one of the bedrock certainties, as one of the things that ‘stand fast for us’ in our actions and practices (cf. OC 116), or as the framework within which our ethical practices operate and are made intelligible. There are close parallels here with existentialist philosophy, where to exist as a human being and to be free (almost) come to the same thing. Jean-Paul Sartre, for example, famously stated that we are ‘condemned’ to freedom, not free not to be free. In a similar vein, the Russian religious existentialist Nikolai Berdiaev, dubbed ‘the philosopher of freedom’, eschewed traditional accounts of freedom, which treat free will as an object that could somehow be perceived, investigated and proved or disproved from the outside, and adopted instead the Kantian position that freedom is a postulate of action: it is something we must presuppose to even think of a world in which human life and human agency are possible. Wittgenstein would have been sympathetic to this outlook, for like the existentialists he is primarily concerned with concrete social and linguistic practices and seeks to provide a philosophical understanding of human existence that is not restricted to the explanatory framework of science (or even that of much traditional philosophy). For Wittgenstein, therefore, belief in free will, just as much as belief in God, is not threatened by scientific discoveries: â€Å"we couldn’t say now ‘If they discover so and so, then I’ll say I am free’. †16 In line with this view, Wittgenstein spends some time in his lectures on freedom of the will in attempting to show that even if a deterministic account of the world were demanded by our best scientific theories, belief in free will need not be affected at all. 17 But he is not thereby putting forward a case for compatibilism: â€Å"All these arguments xx Introduction might look as if I wanted to argue for the freedom of the will or against it. But I don’t want to. †18 Wittgenstein does not follow the traditional course of attempting to resolve the free will problem by proving one position or refuting another. His aim, as with other traditional philosophical problems, is to expose the problem as some kind of deep muddle or confusion arising largely from misunderstandings of the workings of language. One recurrent criticism of this view is that it appears to render the language games of science, religion, and ethics entirely self-contained and cut off from each other, if not also immune from criticism from ‘without’. This, indeed, is a common misconception of the Wittgensteinian account of religion, and in response Wittgensteinians such as D. Z. Phillips have emphasized the many important connections between religious and nonreligious forms of life which (it is held) must be recognized if religious belief is not to degenerate into superstition. Similarly, Wittgenstein points out that scientific discoveries may have a bearing on ascriptions of free will: â€Å"A discovery might influence what you say on the freedom of the will. If only by directing your attention in a particular way. †19 But despite these connections between the scientific and non-scientific domains, Wittgenstein insists that the distinctiveness of each language game must not be overlooked. In particular, the languages of ethics and religion must not be assimilated to the kind of fact-stating discourse and fact-finding activities that characterize the empirical sciences.

Complex Leadership Styles And Success Management Essay

Complex Leadership Styles And Success Management Essay Leadership style is too complex to limit to a simple formula, although there are some personality traits that are effective for becoming a successful leader. Some of these belong to leadership, while others are used in project management. Some general characters are common in most of the leaders such as: creativity, intelligence and courage. However, there are two opposite traits among leaders especially in critical situation which can determine whether the leader will be successful or not. Some leaders tend to blame others and avoid responsibility, while other leaders accept the failure and believe that outcomes depend on their decision and also their actions. Today, being an effective project manager is one of the most important issues in each organisation. This chapter will demonstrate the gist of activities which have been done about leadership so far. It will demonstrate the differences between management and leadership within the project environment. Leadership can be expressed in terms of the ability to build the instruction of project, motivate the members and maintain the performance of different groups in the organisation. In general, managers should deal with complexities and leaders should focus on changes. Leadership is related to conflict management and soft skills but management is related to formulating, monitoring and processing. Accepting failure but not defeat, considering the past mistakes during the project, and being the optimistic person should be considered for leaders to overcome the problems and direct the project in the proper way. It is difficult to establish a certain instruction for becoming an effective project manager although many different leadership and management styles have been built to develop the project accurately. All of the leadership styles and management technologies have been made in order to finish the project on time, precisely and satisfactorily. Effective leaders should first find out the purpose of their leadership (George, 2006). . Leadership theories General view Leadership has been considered more than any other aspect of human behaviour in the project management study. Leadership is the ability to bring people together to attain the results over time. Leadership is the long-term process and it needs years of progress and hard working. The leadership for 21st century becomes more complex and should be redefine in order to achieve the great goals (George, 2006). Many investigations have been carried out in leadership studies so as to find an appropriate leadership theory. For instance, Bass (1985) has had a great impact on leadership theory. He identified different types of characteristics, behaviours, and leadership styles. In spite of that, the science of leadership does not have certain factors which can be applied for all of projects in the world. Measuring and assessing projects in different places are not the same due to different situations. Therefore, many aspects of leadership still stay theoretical and cannot be practical (Gehring, 2007, Geoghegan and Dulewicz, 2008). All general leadership theories such as transformation, transaction and path-goal indicate that the project managers should own the required traits to lead a project effectively. In other words, effective project managers should recognise which approach is appropriate for applying to project leadership. Pinto et al. (1998) stated that Any project managers ability to lead effectively is augmented by his or her understanding of alternative approaches to leadership. Therefore, leaders should extract the skills of their employee and apply them to the project in order to lead the project accurately (Gehring, 2007). History of theories Theory of leadership like other theories has the history of formation. The first one was called superior individual and related to ancient Egyptians kings. The second was the great man theory which made by developing the first theory and indicated that a great man could determine the history of his country. The third one was the man of the hour and it was the modern form of the great man theory. This theory expanded and made the basic recorded leadership theory that called trait theory. After this time leadership was broadly modelled due to impact of great leaders on history such as Napoleon, Frederick, Churchill, Roosevelt and etc (Gehring, 2007). Trait theory Generally, traits are concerned with personal characteristics such as courage, intelligence, creativity and appearance. Trait theory has remarkable mistakes due to its limitations. The reason is that it is difficult to determine which leader can be known as a successful leader. Also, many trait lists have been made for leadership; therefore it is not easy to make a trait list as a reference. In addition, leaders who only possess the trait list cannot be called as successful leaders. Finally, by the end of 20th century, this theory is replaced by modern theories which concerned by behaviour of leader rather than traits (Gehring, 2007) . This theory indicates that effective leaders are born, not made. It supposes that effective leaders have almost the same traits. Three major factors are considered in this type of theory: personal appearance, personality, and abilities. Kirkpatrick and Locke (1991) found the main traits of effective leaders; intelligence, technical knowledge, self-confidence, influence, ambition, and integrity. This classification for effective project managers is different. It includes problem-solving and negotiating abilities, initiative, orientation, communication, perspective and self-confidence (Turner, 1999, Turner, 2005). The authentic leaders should have the five main traits for leading the organisations such as: showing self-discipline, making connected relationship, leading with both hearts and heads, training solid value, and encouraging their purpose with passion (George, 2006). Competency Unfortunately, the leadership terms such as: leadership trait, leadership attribute, leadership style and leadership competence have very narrow definition. Therefore, sometimes these terms have been used in an incorrect position. However, it should be noted that in the modern project, all of these terms should be considered in order to evaluate leadership success (Gehring, 2007). According to trait theory, some researchers believe that the effective leaders have the common inherent competencies. Although, this idea is just for inherent competencies and the personal competences can be learned as well as personal characteristics during the work (Geoghegan and Dulewicz, 2008). Some authors believe that all of people have the power of leading in them; some of them in government, some of them in business, and etc. This power as series of competencies should be discovered in a certain time by themselves to serve others (George, 2006). Projects need project management competencies in order to be accomplished successfully. Competence can be defined in terms of skills (including intelligence, management and problem-solving skills), knowledge, traits, aptitude, behaviour, and motive. The competencies have been identified by the project manager competency development (PMCD) framework: knowledge, performance and personal. The personal one also has been classified into six major competencies: (1) personal effectiveness, (2) influence, (3) Managerial, (4) cognitive, (5) human service and (6) accomplishment (Gehring, 2007). Many taxonomy have been made for the competency, although, one of the comprehensive one was made by Dulewicz and Higgs (2003). They defined fifteen leadership competencies for three types of leadership: intellectual, managerial skill and emotional. See table 2.1(Dulewicz and Higgs, 2003). Table 2.1: Fifteen leadership competencies and the competencies profiles of their styles of leadership (Dulewicz and Higgs, 2003). The competency leadership theory was made in 1990 in order to recognise the competencies of effective leaders. It shows that effective leadership can be obtained only by learning. Different combination of competencies can make different styles of leadership; therefore, they can be useful in different situations. Accordingly, Bass (1990) stated that certain leaders are more suitable for stable circumstance and others are suited to an unstable circumstance (Turner, 2005). It should be noted that the leaders in certain industry can very rarely to be effective in other industries where they have not enough experience. Thus, the structure of industry can impact on competence of leaders (Groysberg et al., 2006). Major leadership theories Many leadership theories lists have been identified over the last century. One of the significant of these lists is classified into six theories: (1) trait theory, (2) competency theory, (3) behavioural or style theory, (4) contingency theory, (5) visionary or charismatic theory, and (6) emotional intelligence theory (Turner, 2005). The behavioural or style theory is related to behaviours and assumes that effective leadership can be obtain during the life and effective leaders are not born naturally. The Cognitive theory assumes that an effective leader can be made in a special environment. Path-goal theory is made through cognitive theory. In pas-goal theory leaders should help members to find their path to their goal. This theory determines four leadership behaviours: directive, supportive, participative and achievement-oriented (House, 1971, Turner, 2005). The visionary or charismatic theory appeared in 1980 when business leaders changed their strategy due to critical situation. Two leadership types of this theory are transformational (people-focused) and transactional (task-focused) which are made by Bass (1985). Later, Bass and Avolio (1995) developed these transformation and transaction leadership styles and found that transformation style has greater influence on the project than transaction one. The transformational one is usually for high difficulty circumstance and the transactional one is usually for low difficulty circumstance. However, the appropriate one is the combination of both types which can be useful in diverse condition (Turner, 2005, Bass and Avolio, 1990). The emotional intelligence theory indicates that the leaders emotional intelligence is more effective than the leaders intellectual ability for the project. The main areas of emotional intelligence are as followed: visionary, coaching, affiliative, democratic, pacesetting, and commanding (Turner, 2005, Goleman, 2002). Leadership Models Firelighter and fire-fighter There are two general styles of leadership in project management: fire-fighter and firelighter. The leaders who pay more attention to anticipate and even prevent problems are known as proactive leaders or firelighter, although, the leaders who tackle immediate problems are known as reactive leaders or fire-fighter. There should be a linkage between proactive decision and reactive decision to control the project accurately. Therefore, recognizing the necessary skills for the project manager is vital in order to make the shift in leadership style. However, it is obvious that project leadership which tends to be proactive in controlling projects is more effective (Barber, 2005). Proactive decision affects the direction of project and reactive decision solves the existing problems of project. These two leadership styles might be known as transformational leadership model or firelighter and transactional leadership model or fire-fighter. Transformational leadership is about lighting the fires of stakeholders motivation and creativity. In contrast to the transformational style is transactional leadership style which indicates the reactive behaviour of leadership (Barber, 2005). Bass and Avolio (1990) pointed out that there are times when leaders may need to apply a more reactive transactional style and be fire-fighters, but the main outcomes for success depend on the leaders capacity for being a firelighter. Active and effective leader combines leadership style (how the leader affects) and best practices (the best day to day working behaviours). The best practices for effective leadership style include parameters such as: vision, credibility, collaboration, communication, action-orientation, feedback and recognition, and accountability. In addition, the research has proved that the most popular leadership style for running safety and creating high-performance culture is transformational one (Krause, 2007). Transactional leadership style might be passive or active, although both approaches stay reactive. Fire-fighter leaders who just take action when they face to the problem are known as passive and other fire-fighters who trace deviation from standards tools and react to problems are known as active (Barber, 2005). The firelighter leadership style is more complex than the fire-fighter style. The fire-fighter style is overcoming the inertia of reactive leadership. Many different fire-fighter-firelighter models have been built to control the project precisely. One of these models separates the transactional style into three parts; maintenance, reactive and avoidant. Figure 2.1 (Barber, 2005) illustrates this model. Maintenance comprises initiating structure, emotional consideration and contingent reward. This part can prepare the requirements to transform the fire-fighter leadership style to firelighter one. In other words, the maintenance behaviours make a bridge to the transformational leadership style (Barber, 2005). The reason for that is the forming of credibility and trust of leadership which enable the leader to be accepted among team members as the firelighter leader. The firelighter part of this model combines the maintenance behaviour and the transformational behaviour. The contribution of this model is to expand understanding of the importance of the firelighter role in project management (Barber, 2005). The significant point of this model is the active transactional behaviour. It can provide a bridge to firelighter style for project managers who are confused by reactive fire-fighting style. Maintenance behaviours explain the tasks, assign responsibilities, identify rewards for attempt and observe the personal requirement of the team members (Barber, 2005). Bass (2003) indicated that contingent reward is the capability to establish fundamental objective and to present bonus to project members accordingly. It indicates a combination of task oriented and stakeholders supportive manners. In the initiating structure, the leader should clarify contingent rewards, direction of the project and assignment for the team members. Emotional consideration is related to team structure, personal requirement and ambitions (Barber, 2005). Leadership in project management Figure 2.1: The fire-fighter-firelighter model of leadership (Barber, 2005). The leader should defuse conflict between the team members and provide an appropriate environment for the team members. Bass (2003) expressed that firelighter leaders should persuade the team members to be inventive and imaginative by searching new assumptions, reframing problems, and applying new approaches. They also define four vital elements for transformational leadership; idealised influence, inspirational motivation, individualised consideration and intellectual simulation (Bass, 2003). Firelighter leader should enhance the understanding of the advantages of the project among the stakeholders. They should persuade their members to think about their action beyond simply what is in it for them. In other words, they should raise the consciousness of followers and move the focus of follower away from their self-interests (Bass, 2003). In addition, Bennis and Nanus (1985) asserted that the effective leader can manage changes and unpredictability by encouraging members to be innovative to overcome the difficulties. Therefore project managers are known as fire-fighter due to continually solving the problem and put out fires. Project manager and leadership style Project managers should trace the progress of their project and anticipate any problems before they will occur in the future. So, it is wise that project managers can be proactive and forestall the problems rather than being reactive and solve the problems. Project managers who focus on proactive leadership style will be more successful in completing projects accurately. Thus, project managers are known as fire-fighter due to continually solving the problem and put out fires (Barber, 2005). A project manager is a businessman, a psychologist, an accountant, and a technician. The project management institute (PMI) has developed classification; the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK) which identifies eight main management competencies: scope, time, cost, risk, quality, contract, communication and human resource. Project managers should be highly effective people. They should possess knowledge of the technical details of their jobs as well as the ability to obtain the goals by leading the project team effectively (Barber, 2005). It should be noted that there is not only a comprehensive leadership style for leading a project successfully. However, using different leadership styles for each stage of a project can be more appropriate (Frame, 1987). Project managers leadership style affect their implementations, although, they usually tend to be task-oriented rather than people-oriented. They should create an appropriate environment for their project members. Therefore, their competencies are evaluated in terms of their success in leading the projects. In addition, it should be mentioned that in multiple-cultural projects, project managers should use particular leadership styles (Turner, 2005). Leaders with any leadership styles should be careful with the hazards of leadership in order to prevent to lose their way such as: being an imposter, being a shooting star, being a loner, being a glory-seeker, and being a rationaliser (George, 2008). Implication of the fir-fighter-firelighter model The fire-fighter-firelighter model builds a combination of firelighter and fire-fighter styles. It is useful for different styles of managing especially those which need remarkable changes in the project management environment (Barber, 2005). Firelighter leaders encourage the team members to use their creativity and adopt the requisite manners to deal with the problems. They demonstrate a combination of transformational and transactional behaviours. Nevertheless, they tend to be active leader and rely on transformational behaviour rather than reactive behaviours of management by exception. Thus, It is essential that the leader tend to be proactive in order to conquer the forthcoming problems (Barber, 2005). Software tools in project management by monitoring past data can strengthen a reactive leadership style. The leader who trusts on monitoring software tools would be the reactive fire-fighter through the project cycle. The concept and control of forthcoming problems is the most important ability for being an effective leader in project management (Barber, 2005). Integrating leading and managing Leading versus managing Many different rules have been established for differentiating the leading and managing so far. However, it is difficult to determine the role of them in succeeding of a system. Some researchers state that the competences and traits of leaders and managers should differ from each other in order to perform their tasks successfully. Managers tasks are related to effectiveness, direct and stability of the project, although, leaders tasks are related to adaptation, innovation and flexibility of the project. In other words, managers are practical, critical, and logical, while leaders are imaginative, inventive, and sensitive (Yukl and Lepsinger, 2005). There are diverse views about managing and leading. Some people who are more pessimistic about managing would like to have leaders in their systems. Some people who are more optimistic about managing would like to have both manager and leader in their systems. The other attitude is to having one person as a both leader and manager in a system. Nevertheless, it is very rare that someone can perform both managing and leading tasks in an organisation. It should be considered that in any of these perspectives, too much attention on leading or managing makes an organisation to be unsuccessful (Yukl and Lepsinger, 2005). If a system is more complicated, then a managing role is more important and if a system has an active atmosphere with much uncertainty, then a leading role is more significant. In other words, a system which needs more changes requires a leader rather than manager and a system which needs more process and orders requires a manager rather than leader. Herein, the significant point is to inter-relate the leading and managing roles in an organisation. Therefore, if any organisation can establish this joint properly, then it would have the better performance and successful project accordingly (Yukl and Lepsinger, 2005). Different approaches There have been different approaches for definition of managing and leading. This debate is still continuing due to complexity of appreciation of these contexts. The first approach is to make a coequal role for both leading and managing and defined each of them more broadly. The second approach is to define a leading role as the previous definition but add it to managerial roles. The third approach is to establish a set of roles without identifying as leading or managing roles. The most appropriate approach should be defined in terms of the performance determinants in the flexible leadership model. In spite of that the best approach is still unknown and further research is needed to obtain it (Yukl and Lepsinger, 2005). The Flexible leadership model Three determinant of organisational performance can be recognised by the flexible leadership model; (1) effectiveness and popularity, (2) invention and changeability, and (3) human resources and relations. Each of these determinants is more important in an especial situation. Human resources and relations are more important when replacing skilled members is difficult. Organisations which consider this determinant are more likely to have effective employee skills. The example of this is General Electric Co. which has been identified as the best organisation in training employees. The reason is that, it uses sequence plan to prepare employees for empty key positions (Yukl and Lepsinger, 2005). Leadership behaviours There are many kinds of leadership behaviours that can affect the performance determinants such as task-oriented which are related to efficiency, change-oriented related to changeability, and relations-oriented related to human resources. Table 2.2 (Yukl and Lepsinger, 2005) illustrates these leadership behaviours (Yukl and Lepsinger, 2005). Management programs and systems Management is an essential work for any organisation. Organisations prepare their members to be effective in all levels. However, there is not a certain code of conduct for management. The lack of common acceptable knowledge, skill and practice lead to management as a practice rather than profession. However, with enhancing the technology in management some programs and systems cover this problem (Lorsch and Clark, 2009). Management programs and systems also can influence the performance determinants. They are demonstrated in Table 2.2 (Yukl and Lepsinger, 2005). One of these systems is benchmarking. It is a systematic program for improving adaptation, services, and products. It should be noticed that in all of organisations, programs and systems should be directed by leaders to ensure that a management system is carried out accurately (Yukl and Lepsinger, 2005) Table 2.2: Leadership behaviours and management programs and systems (Yukl and Lepsinger, 2005). Leadership behaviours and management system Both of these ways can affect the performance determinants and they act as supplementary for each other. The leadership behaviour can be applied in an organisation to develop new programs. For instance, if manager persuade employees to attend a new training programs and apply them to their job, then this program would be more successful. In the other hand, management program also can improve the effect of leadership behaviour. Employees cannot be innovative without programs. In spite of that in some cases the application of leadership behaviours are limited by management programs (Yukl and Lepsinger, 2005). Performance determinants Each of performance determinants can affect the other determinants. Sometimes this affection leads to improve the other determinants and sometimes it leads to degrade the others. Therefore, it is not easy to build a certain formula for enhancing all aspects of performance determinants simultaneously. However, the right balance among performance determinants can be useful for improving the organisational effectiveness (Yukl and Lepsinger, 2005). Project success factors In the 1970s, project success factors have been determined in terms of developing system, improving of implementation, and evaluating time, cost and process. In the 1980s, critical success factors (CSF) was brought up in terms of the quality of the implementation, stakeholders activities and organisational objectives (Turner, 2005). Many efforts have been done for establish the comprehensive project success factors. One of the most popular lists was made by Pinto and Slevin (1988). See Table 2.3 (Pinto and Slevin, 1988) . Table 2.3: Project success factors (Pinto and Slevin, 1988). The other important list which covers the previous efforts was made by Turner (1999). This list includes five main factors for project success: context, attitude, sponsorship, definition, people, system, and organisations. See Figure 2.2 (Turner, 1999). Figure 2.2: The seven forces model for project success (Turner, 1999). Project managers leadership competencies and project success Project manager competencies The six main schools of leadership have been recognised by Higgs (2003): trait, behaviour, contingency, visionary, emotional intelligence, and competency. Leadership is defined in terms of these schools as a combination of personal characteristic and competencies (i.e. skills and knowledge). This combination can create different leadership styles which are suitable for different situation. Moreover, competency school has been identified as the most important school of leadership in project management. Therefore, more studies on this school is required for leadership of project management (Geoghegan and Dulewicz, 2008). Personal characteristics and competencies of leaders can influence skills, knowledge and effectiveness of projects accordingly. Thus, assessing the leadership competencies is essential for any organisation. Many efforts have been undertaken for assessing leadership competencies such as multi leadership questionnaire (MLQ) made by Bass and Avolio (1995). However, the documentation has shown that they are still not trusted by all of organisation(Geoghegan and Dulewicz, 2008). Goleman (1996) asserted that two factors are very important for success of projects: emotional intelligence (EI) and intellectual aptitude (IQ). In accordance with this idea, EI model has been made and used by organisations as the most important factors due to its variation in the performance of project. In general, four key competencies have the major role in leadership performance such as: emotional, cognitive, behavioural, and motivational. Intellectual competencies (IQ), managerial competency (MQ), and social and emotional competencies (EI) are the significant elements of leadership competencies (Dulewicz and Higgs, 2000b, Dulewicz and Higgs, 2000a, Geoghegan and Dulewicz, 2008). Project competence and success of project management are closely interconnected. Many competencies lists for project managers have been determined such as: knowledge (qualification), skills (ability to do diverse tasks as: technical, administrative, planning, budgeting, leadership), and core personality characteristics. The effective project leaders should have the basic characteristics such as: credibility, problem solving, tolerance, flexible and communication. However, the researchers have not been able to make a certain link between project manager leadership competencies and project success (Pinto, 1998, Geoghegan and Dulewicz, 2008). Project success There have been many measurement tools for assessing the project success in terms of time, cost and function. The common tool of evaluating project success is critical success factors (CSFs). These days, the modern instrument can take into accounts the parameters such as: client satisfaction, stakeholders ideas, product and service success, business and commercial success, performance improvement, and system benefit. Nevertheless, there are some hazards in projects which can delay the process of implementations. These can be appeared in planning, controlling, and performing of tasks (Geoghegan and Dulewicz, 2008). There is a close connection between the project managers concept of project success and his or her competence. Some researchers have defined this relationship in terms of people, project strategy, leadership style, teamwork, and industrial relations. Although, others have been defined it in terms of cost, time and quality of project and ignore the influence of people on projects. According to project success, Jugdev (2005) found the four key parameters as follows: (1) The project sponsor should have enough desire to carry out the project, (2) The working relationship between project sponsor and project manager should be adjusted accurately, (3) A project manager should tackle complexity and uncertain situations, and (4) Stakeholders idea should be taken into the success criteria (Geoghegan and Dulewicz, 2008). Instruments Today, managers can measure their performance by an intangible variable based more on perceptions rather than factual proof. It includes the quality of management and the status of relationship with the leaders, colleagues and employees. Geoghegan and Dulewicz (2008) identified that there is a statistically significant relationship between a project managers leadership competencies and project success. They used two different types of questionnaire to approach their idea. The first one is the leadership dimensions questionnaire (LDQ) made by Dulewicz (2005) and the second one is the project success questionnaire (PSQ) made by Pinto (1986) (Budd Jr and Marx, 1999). LDQ This tool has been worked in terms of respondents leadership competencies that evaluated on fifteen aspects of leadership. It includes seven EQ competencies five MQ competencies, and three IQ competencies. It has been known as one of the most popular instruments and has been used in diverse public organisations such as: the Royal Air Force, the Home Office, the Royal Navy and private organisation such as DHL. Each dimensions of this tool can be acceptable by reaching the reliable level (i.e. Cronbachs alpha > 0.7) (Geoghegan and Dulewicz, 2008). The example of LDQ questionnaire that has been filled out by 80 project managers is shown in table 2.4(Geoghegan and Dulewicz, 2008). Project managers work in different par

The Fifth Child Essay -- literary Analysis, Doris Lessing

The intricate complexity and astonishingly realistic descriptions of space in Doris Lessing’s The Fifth Child masterfully illuminates society’s dire inability to cope with it’s imperfection. Society demands immaculate perfection, a world free of defect, and the lust to live in a flawless utopia drives the identification and elimination of crude invalids. These desolate individuals are feared and deemed to be barbarous degenerates who must be placed beyond the boarders of functioning society to assure an uncorrupted world. Less desirable beings are cast into heterotopias or â€Å"counter-sites† while society denies their existence and feigns perfection. Lessing’s novel tears this image down and hastily exposes society’s despicable attempts to marginalize, blame, and exile those regarded as abnormal and dysfunctional in the supposedly immaculate world. In The Fifth Child the precisely executed heterotopia of the institution draws on this theor y of a parallel space as a capsule for undesired bodies and Harriet, the mother of a repugnant beast, is victim to society’s brutality. Harriet is an outcast and her remarkably horrific interaction with the cruel institution further alienates her from her family and miserably casts her into her own tumultuous heterotopia. Throughout the novel Harriet’s striking differences are juxtaposed against the societal trends of the time and she is commonly viewed as a misplaced oddity. Early descriptions in The Fifth Child define Harriet as abnormal and her image places her outside of the robust and transitional society in which she lives. Harriet is a curious misfit and she â€Å"sometimes felt herself unfortunate and deficient in some way† (10). This recognition of inexplicable peculiarities soon establishe... ...ly illuminates and exploits the despicable views and problems in society. The novel exemplifies society’s elitist attitude and unjust marginalization of individuals who are regarded as degenerate, invalid and grotesque through Harriet. Her harrowing interactions with the magnificently developed and horrific institution highlights the pathetic attempts of society to displace individuals and dispose of them beyond their functioning boarders. In addition, Harriet’s parallels with the institution lead to her alienation from the world. She is regarded as grossly unnatural, criminalized, and left alone to raise her difficult son Ben. It is clear that Harriet’s unfortunate interaction and connection to the ghastly institution uncovers society’s unforgiving demeanor and demonstrates the terrible and irreparable rift between misunderstood, peculiar individuals and the world.

Homelessness in Public Schools Essay -- Education

In the United States nationwide public schools are faced with dilemmas. The choices schools make has to be effective, serve the students, and have the best outcome. Well known problems such as bullying, special educational needs, budget cuts, new standards, and job cuts. Some of the problems are well known to the public while other problems are left in the background. According to the National Association for the Education of Homeless Children and Youth (NAEHCY) reported that the U.S. Department of Education collected data stating â€Å"during the 2008-2009 school year that 954,914 homeless children and youth were enrolled in public schools.† This problem affects the child socially, mentally, and most importantly academically. The National Association for the Education of Homeless Children and Youth (NAEHCY) defines Homelessness â€Å"is a lack of permanent housing resulting from extreme poverty and/or unsafe or unstable living environments† (NAEHCY, 2011, p. 2). In the year 2004, it was required that all states were to report to CSPR (Consolidated State Performance Report) of data collected of children and youth enrolled in any educational services (Bowman, Dukes, Moore, 2012, p. 6). The table presented below shows reports the school years of 2004-2010. Number of Homeless Students Reported by States in the CSPR 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 655,591 906,680* 679,724 794,617 956,914 939,903 The National Center on Family Homelessness (NCFH) conducted research and collected data and found during a three year research of CSPR reports. (Bowman. ET al.’s, 2012). In the school years 2006-2009 â€Å"41% increase in the number of homeless student enrolled in schools across the nation† (Bowman... ...2). Summary of the state of research: On the relationship between homelessness and academic achievement among school-aged children and youth (ED-04-CO-0056/0002). Retrieved from U.S. Department of Education website: http://www.serve.org/nche Carter. Samuel, C. (2000). No excuses; lessons from 21 high performing high poverty schools. Washington, DC: The Heritage Foundation. Murphy.Joseph, F. & Tobin.Kerri, J. (2011, November). Homelessness comes to school. How homeless children and youths can succeed, 93(3), 32-37. Retrieved from http://kappanmagazine.org National Assocation for the Education of Homeless Children and Youth. (2011). Facts about homeless education. Retrieved from http;//naehcy.org/facts.html W&B School of Education. (2012). History of the mckinney act. Retrieved from http://education.wm.edu/centers/hope/resources/mckinneyact/index.php

Marketing Assignment

We want from our target market to make a habit of eating their meals in our restaurants. If we are able to reach them, this will help us to grow at the end of the first year. In addition to this, we have another objective which is to decrease the number of people who are not aware and people who are resisting to not purchase our goods. In this case, we are planning to encourage them to taste our products and take their opinions about them to adjust our goods according to their needs and wants. Stressing our competitive advantage to our target customers is our another goal which makes them loyal to our restaurants.Identify the marketing segment for the product and explain why this segment was selected. Because we are producing healthy fast foods for different diet programs, mass marketing does not fit our marketing strategy. Therefore we segment the market based on Demographics. For example, if gender is taken into consideration, woman and man should take different amount of calories per day in order to carry on their daily activities. Besides, amount of calories are taken by young people, adults, and elderly people changes as well according to their heights, weights, and activity levels.Therefore when our customers come to our restaurants, they should be able to find a food that best fits their diet in order to be satisfied. Moreover, we also segment the market based on geographic as well. In this case, we are planning to run our business in United States because there is a high demand for healthy foods since people want to live healthy and longer. Discuss the target market and why these customers will be targeted. We segmented market according to people’s ages and genders. We decided to target people whose ages are between 18 and 64 or more and tried to figure out the market size.According to US and World Population Clocks in the US Census Bureau web page, there are 309,092,421 people living in America now. Again, according to the report posted on US Ce nsus Bureau, Meyer (2001) stated that people whose age is under 18 is 26 percent, people whose age is between 18 and 64 is 62 percent and people whose age is more than 64 is 12 percent of US population. So if we assume that the percentage of people whose ages are between 18 and 64 or more remain unchanged from 2000 to 2010, the total population of young people, adults and elderly people is now 228,728,319. 62%+12%=74%, 309,092,421? 74%). Moreover, if we assume that 50 percent of this amount is woman and 50 percent of it man. So we have 114,364,159 men and 114,364,159 women whose ages are between 18 and 64 or more. This is a huge number and it seems that targeting this segment is profitable. Furthermore, this market size can grow in the future because in 2000 the total US population was approximately 281 million according to US Census Bureau 2000 report. (Meyer 2001). Today, as I mentioned above it is nearly 309 million. Conduct a SWOT (strength, weakness, opportunities and treats an alysis for company.One of our strengths is offering healthy foods. Our menu contains foods that they are rich in terms of protein, vitamins, mineral etc. which play an important role in the structure of human body. Secondly, while we are preparing our menu, we consult nutritionists about the ingredients, the types to enhance the variety and cooking techniques. In addition to this, our customers can benefit from the dietician service on every Mondays, and Fridays between 1-5pm. They can ask their questions and have a chance to take medical support. Moreover, we are using organic and fresh foods while we are cooking and these vegetables and ruits are produced and picked diligently. This is also one of our strengths that help us to meet our customers’ expectations. Unfortunately, we have also some weaknesses as well. One of the most important weaknesses of our healthy fast food restaurant is our prices. To produce organic vegetables and fruits is very costly. Therefore this is r eflected in prices of those kinds of products. Because organic foods are crucial ingredients of our foods, we also have to reflect the prices of vegetables and fruits to our food prices in order to make profit.In addition to this, because we do not offer any unhealthy foods such as fried chicken, fried potato, hamburger etc. our foods may not fit the people’s tastes. Beside our strengths and weaknesses, we have also some opportunities coming from macro environment. Firstly, people love eating in Unites States and they like to know about different and new foods. In addition to this, United States is the best place to run a fast food restaurant because of being a home country of fast food industry. Secondly, number of obese people is increasing day by day in United States because of overeating fast foods.Since these kinds of meals are unhealthy and they can cause serious health problems, this makes people more conscious while they are making decision about food choices. Therefo re they tend to eat more healthy foods. Thirdly, organic food industry is growing in Unites States and people tend to consume organic foods because of being healthful compared to regular vegetables and fruits. Furthermore, number one fast food chains such as McDonald’s, Burger King, etc. do not offer rich healthy meals alternative to unhealthy ones. In this case, consumers are in pursuit of healthy food restaurants.Lastly, in United States technology is advanced a lot to prepare fast and healthy foods. This leads fast food restaurants to work more efficient. We also have some threats caused by macro environment as well. For example, people may not have enough purchasing power to buy healthy foods. In this case unhealthy foods seems cheaper to them. Therefore they may tend to prefer unhealthy fast food restaurants. Besides, organic foods are expensive. As a result, restaurants that are not using organic foods charge lower prices to their meals compared to restaurants that use those kinds of egetables and fruits. Moreover, eating hamburger, fried potato, fried chicken, cheese burger, etc. can seem more attractive to customers. Therefore customers may prefer places that offer those foods. Describe the market position for your product and service When we are positioning our product, the quality and the price are taken into consideration and we compared our product with the one that is produced by our competitors. In the fast food market, we have many competitors; however our number one and well known competitors are McDonalds, Burger King, Subway, Taco Bell, Wendy’s and others.In figure one, circles which are depicted closely represent our competitors and the upper circle represents our fast food company. The competitors’ circles are depicted closely because they are perceived more or less the same by consumers. For example, their menus and prices are more or less the same. They are using nearly same strategies. For instance, both Burger King and McDonalds have the dollar menus. Although our competitors offer some kinds of healthy foods such as salads, grilled chicken, etc. they are still selling unhealthy foods.On the other hand, our company’s number one strength is always serving healthy foods to our customers. Besides, we are offering free dietician service for our customers. Our customers can ask their questions and get a customized service. In light of these facts, our product quality is high relative to our competitors. price X’s Healthy Fast Food Restaurant Low qualityHigh quality Our competitors Figure 1 Perceptual Map In addition to our product quality, our products’ prices are also higher than the average prices as well. Because organic foods’ prices are high, we have to reflect this to our prices.According to figure 1 it can be seen that our competitors dominate us in terms of prices. However, we also dominate them in terms of product quality as well. Recommendations Service is an i ntangible product and X’s Healthy Fast Food Restaurants are producing both tangible product (i. e. food) and intangible product (i. e. dietician service). In service industry customer satisfaction is very important. If a company satisfies their customer’s needs and wants, they become loyal.Therefore management should know whether their customers are happy with the service provided or not. This is the case that X’s Healthy Fast Food Restaurant can be face with. Therefore we should do some surveys to measure the satisfaction level of our customers about the service quality. There are many tools to do this. For example, Winner (2004) stated that â€Å"One of the most popular approaches to measuring service quality is the SERVQUAL instrument† (p. 418). In this type of questionnaire there are several questions that measure the quality of service.If we put servqual surveys on customers’ table and request to fill them after they finish their meal we can m easure the satisfaction level of our customers by looking the results and this helps us to improve our service quality. Because service is an intangible product, customers may not know what they are buying until they buy. One author said that â€Å"†¦the service provider’s task is to make the service tangible in one or more ways† (Kotler 1999 p. 648). In this case, we should find some ways to make our product tangible.For example, if we give importance to keep our restaurants clean, our customers may think that we prepare our foods diligently. Providing a qualified and quick service can be another way to make our product tangible. If consumers see how we deliver our service quickly, they always prefer us.References Kotler, P. (1999). Principles of marketing. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Winner, S. R. (2004). Marketing management: New Jersey Pearson Prentice Hall Meyer, J. (2001). Age:2000. US Census Bureau. Retrieved April 8, 2010 from http://www. census. gov/prod/20 01pubs/c2kbr01-12. pdf Marketing Assignment International market segmentation (International market segmentation) is the concept of market segmentation in the use of international marketing. Its concept is by comparing the domestic and international market for more buyers, a wider distribution. With businesses having limited power, it is usually very complex to meet the needs of worldwide customers. A market segment is defined as â€Å"a group of customers who share a similar set of needs and wants†. In this case its HSBC trying to target potential customers. The first key consideration is the benefits of segmentation. This segmentation uses customers as a point of reference.The firm can then focus on their marketing resources and it gives them competitive advantage by being able to serve more according to customer segments. There are four level of segmentation, first one is preference segments. Some consumers have a very different taste for the things that they want. Consumers are free to prefer HSBC or other banks ava ilable in the market. A group of people gathered their preference will show the natural segments. Second level of segmentation is niche. It is defined as a more narrowly defined customer group seeking a distinctive mix of benefits.HSBC in this case targets consumer niches with distinctive products and services. It is proved by having a pet insurance product, growing at a 125% per year. Third level is local,which involves local customer groups in trading areas, neighborhoods and even industrial stores . HSBC is actually focusing at serving local markets. They maintain to have local presence in the area with the tagline which is â€Å"world’s local bank†. Last level is individual, customer with HSBC bank card, etc will get a ride in the BankCab. The next step is to segment the consumer markets.The fundamentals to consider are geographic, demographic, psychographic and behavioural. Geographic segmentation means dividing market into different geographical units such as nat ions, states, regions, cities or neighbors. HSBC demonstrated its local knowledge with marketing efforts dedicated to specific locations. In 2005, it set out to prove to jaded New Yorkers that the London-based financial behemoth was a bank with local-knowledge. Demographic segmentation means â€Å"dividing by age and life cycle, life stage, gender, income, generation and different social class†.HSBC offered a â€Å"smart card† and no frills credit cards to the underserved student segment and targeted high-value customers with special â€Å"Premium Centers† bank branches. Psychographic segmentation is segmentation depending on the person itself on primary motivation such an ideals and achievements. Last element is behavioral segmentation. This is segmenting â€Å"based on decision roles such as intiator, influencer, decider, buyer and user. † As for behavioural it consists of occasions, benefits, user status, user rate, buyer-readiness, loyalty status and attitude. The second key to be considered is target marketing.It develops measures of market attractiveness and select target segments. For example, â€Å"selecting the most profitable segments to focus on†. HSBC target student segment by offering â€Å"smart card† and high-value customers with special â€Å"Premium Centers† bank branches. Steps in segmentation process include need-based segmentation, segment identification, segment attractiveness, segment profitability, segment positioning, segment acid test and market mix strategy. â€Å"To be useful, market segments must rate favorably on five key criteria which are measurable, substantial, accessible, differentiable and actionable. †The third key to be considered is the market positioning. Positioning is done by targeting segments and develops a marketing mix for each segment. For example â€Å"creating an image or position for the brand with competitors’ brands†. For example HSBC wants to be known as the â€Å"world’s local bank†. This tagline reflects HSBC’s positioning as a globe-spanning financial institution specialised on serving local markets. Strategy for positioning includes, â€Å"Identifying a set of possible competitive advantages on which to build a position†, choosing the right competitive advantages and selecting an overall positioning strategy