Search results

Anika, a new manager, is confronted by a dysfunctional organizational culture characterized by employee disrespect, insubordination, and low performance. Her charge is to “to turn the place around”. The case takes place in a service organization, a testing range run by the US Department of Defense. The staff is a combination of federal and contract employees who test clients’ high-tech systems in a sometimes dangerous, desert environment.

In addition, there are three vignettes that give a portrait of dysfunctional individual behaviors. Frequently, the response students want to make is “I'd just fire the guy.” Unfortunately, it is not so simple.

The contemporary focus on extracurricular activities, here the educational incubator environment, accentuates a need to understand what we offer students in terms of the curricular and extracurricular learning environments when situated in the same higher education institution (HEI). Current research points towards breaking down the invisible barriers and silo thinking. In this conceptual study, we apply the Didaktik triangle as a theoretical and conceptual framing to make comparisons of structurally based conditions for curricular and extracurricular entrepreneurship education (EE). We present a framework that helps bridge the ‘what’, ‘why’, and ‘how’ questions in the two different learning spaces and, thereby, conjoin educators and consultants in possible pedagogical discussions on how they work with the students. The suggested bridge frames a wider ‘why’ and adds a more holistic and cohesive view of the two different types of settings. Our study contributes to the literature on how to bridge the blurred lines between curricular and extracurricular activities and break down the silos. The framework can act as an inspiration for entrepreneurship educators and practitioners who wish to provide more suitable and sustainable structures and develop a holistic learning environment.

The negotiating process is of considerable significance in industrial situations, helping to develop understanding, agreeing terms and conditions of employment, accommodating conflicting interests, resolving conflict situations, developing procedures and structures for jointly dealing with the various types of problems arising in the industrial situation; resulting in an improved working climate, greater productivity, and more effective use of resources.

In their book Megatrends 2000, John Naisbitt and Patricia Aburdene (1990) stated that one of the ten “megatrends for the 1990's would be the rise of “The Age of Biology.” One of the central forces behind this societal shift which is occurring right now, they say, is research into understanding human genetics and the rise of biotechnology. The scientific knowledge regarding human genetics and the technology to examine an individual's genetic makeup have grown at a rapid pace, especially in the last decade as a result of the Human Genome Project. This venture has been labelled alternatively as “mediocre science” (Roberts, 1990b: p. 804) and as “biology's Holy Grail,” (Nelkin and Tancredi, 1989: p. 14). It is indisputably a monumental scientific undertaking, likened to the drive to put a man on the moon in the sixties (“The Geography of Genes,” 1989). This knowledge and the resultant trends will likely prove to be important factors not only in our future economy, but also in the nature of how we understand ourselves.

FLEET STREET'S ADVERTISING and editorial departments have always been frigid bedfellows. Amorous advances are confined to a little back‐scratching over things like ad‐pulling supplements, but both accept that this is as far as they can go.

Recent research has challenged traditional views of the 1920s-era Ku Klux Klan in the United States. Case studies have shown that the movement appealed to a broad middle-class constituency and advocated a range of popular reforms. These findings have stimulated a provocative debate over whether the movement represented a mainstream “civic populism” or a more racist reaction to change. Here, I review the recent debate and show how the new data are consistent with current sociological models of collective action. Comparing studies of Klan mobilization in several cities, I argue that the movement was both populist and racist, combining processes of contemporary urban racial and class formation. From this perspective, I suggest, the 1920s Klan highlights a critical moment in the development of racial and class identities in 20th century urban America.

Every seaport with foreign‐going shiping trade has always had its “foreign” quarters; every large city hat had its Oriental traders and services, eg., Chinese laundries, Indian restaurants, Italian restaurants, greengrocers, ice cream and biscuit manufacturers; all of which has meant that foreign foods were not unknown to food inspectors and the general public in its discerning quest for exotic food dishes. It was then largely a matter of stores specially stocking these foods for their few users. Now it is no longer the coming and going of the foreign seaman, the isolated laundry, restaurant, but large tightly knit communities of what have come to be known as the “ethnic minorities”, from the large scale immigration of coloured peoples from the old Empire countries, who have brought their families, industry and above all their food and eating habits with them. Feeding the ethnic minorities has become a large and expanding area within the food industry. There are cities in which large areas have been virtually taken over by the immigrant.

When the nations of Sub‐Saharan Africa won independence some twenty years ago, they faced formidable constraints on development which continue to impede their economic and social progress, despite considerable interim achievements. This article discusses five of these constraints‐internal factors based largely on historical circumstances and the physical environment: (1) underdeveloped human resources; (2) military and political conflict; (3) the colonial institutional heritage; (4) climate and geography; and (5) the twin factors of rapid population growth and expanding urbanisation. However, as an urban sociologist, the author will focus on the fifth development constraint and on the contrasting policies Tanzania and Kenya have devised in response to it. These two countries were chosen because while Tanzania is a low‐income Sub‐Saharan African nation, defined by the World Bank as one with a per capita income of $370 or less, and Kenya is a middle‐income Sub‐Saharan African nation with a per capita income exceeding $370, Tanzania and Kenya are similar in total population, being the fourth and fifth most populous nations in Sub‐Saharan Africa (Nigeria ranks first with a population of 82.6 million; Ethiopia, second, with a population of 30.9 million; Zaire, third, with a population of 27.5 million; Tanzania and Sudan essentially tying for fourth place with populations of 18 million and 17.9 million, respectively; and Kenya, fifth, with a population of 15.3 million, its closest competitors being Uganda with a population of 12.8 million and Ghana with a population of 11.3 million). Moreover, Kenya and Tanzania had the same average annual rate of population growth‐3.4 percent‐between 1970 and 1980, and their projected populations for the year 2000 are only 1 million apart – 34 million and 35 million, respectively. Even more relevant to the theme of this article, however, is the fact that by 1980 Tanzania had reached nearly the same level of urbanisation – 12 percent and 15 percent, respectively, as well as nearly the same concentration of urban population in their capital or primate cities—50 percent and 57 percent, respectively (World Bank, 1983).

Considers the rise in trade with the Asian nations of the Pacific Rim and the increase in their economic strength. Provides some examples of this growing strength. Looks at the opportunities and threats from this phenomenon. Considers the potential for export and opportunities for financing growth. Concludes that there are benefits and concerns from this growing power and new strategies will be required by business to ensure future success. Suggests that many future graduates may work for companies who have foreign headquarters and new cultures.