Search results

Examines aspects of local enterprise in Wales during the Industrial Revolution and seeks to place the historical experience of such within the wider debates surrounding the relationship between enterprise and economic development. Study of this period has traditionally focused attention on the discontinuity precipitated by the impact of industrialism and particularly on the development of large‐scale factory production. Within Welsh history this focus has largely obscured an examination of local developments to the process of economic development, with the result that there has been no possibility for discussion of, or participation in, gradualist accounts of such development. This study seeks to demonstrate that part of the economic development experienced during the period was generated as a result of indigenous enterprise, and therefore raises the possibility of continuity within certain areas of Welsh economic development ‐‐ prior to the influx of English enterprise and capital at the end of the eighteenth century.

The Howard Shuttering Contractors case throws considerable light on the importance which the tribunals attach to warnings before dismissing an employee. In this case the tribunal took great pains to interpret the intention of the parties to the different site agreements, and it came to the conclusion that the agreed procedure was not followed. One other matter, which must be particularly noted by employers, is that where a final warning is required, this final warning must be “a warning”, and not the actual dismissal. So that where, for example, three warnings are to be given, the third must be a “warning”. It is after the employee has misconducted himself thereafter that the employer may dismiss.

This essay argues that the teachings and ethos of Jesus are needed in public administration to address a potentially fatal weakness in modern industrial republics. The latter are increasingly prone to domestic tyranny and international imperialism, because the values that once constrained them, and which once were thought to be self-evident, have been traced to Christian doctrines discredited by science. The first half of the essay chronicles the failure of the West either to live well without these values, or to find an alternative foundation for them. The second half of the essay shows that this dilemma can be overcome by differentiating the teachings of Jesus from the doctrines of Christianity

This article provides a review and conceptual comparison between self‐report and performance‐based measures of emotional intelligence. Analyses of reliability, psychometric properties, and various forms of validity lead to the conclusion that self‐report techniques measure a dispositional construct, that may have some predictive validity, but which is highly correlated with personality and independent of intelligence. Although seemingly more valid, performance‐based measures have certain limitations, especially when scored with reference to consensual norms, which leads to problems of skew and restriction of range. Scaling procedures may partially ameliorate these scoring weaknesses. Alternative approaches to scoring, such as expert judgement, also suffer problems since the nature of the requisite expertise is unclear. Use of experimental paradigms for studying individual differences in information‐processing may, however, inform expertise. Other difficulties for performance‐based measures include limited predictive and operational validity, restricting practical utility in organizational settings. Further research appears necessary before tests of E1 are suitable for making real‐life decisions about individuals.

Patriotism is often described as the “love of country” that individuals display in the acclamation of their national community. Despite the prominence of this sentiment in various societies around the world, organizational research on patriotism is largely absent. This omission is surprising because entrepreneurs, human resource (HR) divisions, and firms frequently embrace both patriotism and patriotic organizational practices. These procedures include (among other interventions) national symbol embracing, HR practices targeted toward military members and first responders, the adulation of patriots and celebration of patriotic events, and patriotic-oriented corporate social responsibility (CSR). Here, the authors argue that research on HR management and organization studies will likely be further enhanced with a deeper understanding of the national obligation that can spur employee productivity and loyalty. In an attempt to jumpstart the collective understanding of this phenomenon, the authors explore the antecedents of patriotic organizational practices, namely, the effects of founder orientation, employee dispersion, and firm strategy. It is suggested that HR practices such as these lead to a patriotic organizational image, which in turn impacts investor, customer, and employee responses. Notably, the effect of a patriotic organizational image on firm-related outcomes is largely contingent on how it fits with the patriotic views of other stakeholders, such as investors, customers, and employees. After outlining this model, the authors then present a thought experiment of how this model may appear in action. The authors then discuss ways the field can move forward in studying patriotism in HR management and organizational contexts by outlining several future directions that span multiple levels (i.e., micro and macro). Taken together, in this chapter, the authors introduce a conversation of something quite prevalent and largely unheeded – the patriotic organization.

The milk supply of our country, in one form or another, has been the subject of discussion year after year at Congress meetings. Its importance is an admitted fact, but, notwithstanding, I again venture to call attention to the matter. On this occasion, however, I do not propose to touch much of the ground already covered by former papers, but to consider the results of experiments and observations made while dealing with milk supply under the Sale of Food and Drugs Acts. For many years dairy regulations have been in force throughout the country which deal with the construction of floors and walls, and with lighting and ventilation. The owners of dairy farms in many parts of Scotland have spent large sums of money in improving their farms. Indeed, some enthusiasts have gone the length of introducing a system of heating and mechanical means of ventilation. It is only reasonable to pause and consider the practical results of these improvements, and to discover who are reaping the benefits from a milk supply standpoint. Do the owners of dairy farms receive anything like a fair return for their capital outlay? No. It is a well‐known fact that rents are on the down grade. Is the farmer of to‐day in a better financial position than formerly? No. He will tell you that the working of a “modern dairy” is more expensive than in the old steading, and that there is less flow of milk from the cows in the large airy byre than in the small old “biggin.” The price of milk is considerably less than it was fifteen or twenty years ago. At that time it ranged from 10d. to 1s. per gallon, and it is well known to you that hundreds of gallons of milk are now sent into our large cities for at least a distance of 100 miles, carriage paid, at 7½d. per gallon. In some cases the price is 9d. per gallon during the winter and 7½d. in summer. A farmer I know has a contract with a dairyman to supply him with 20 gallons of sweet milk, 16 gallons of skim milk, and 4 gallons of cream every day at an average rate of 7½d. per gallon all the year round. I have proved, by having test samples taken of the sweet milk, that it contains an average fat of 4.89 per cent. in 16 gallons. Neither the owner nor occupier of the farm can be any better off so long as such small prices prevail. Does the profit then come to the consumer? It does not.

At the recent conference of the British Medical Association, Dr. Langdon‐Down, of South Middlesex, submitted the report of the Ethical Committee on behalf of the Council, upon the ethics of indirect advertising by the medical profession. The report mentioned a number of restrictions which it was thought advisable to impose as regards advertising by members of the profession. It was stated that in discussions in the Press on matters of public importance relating to the medical questions it was not necessary that the names of the medical writers or informants should be given. The newspapers, it was contended, could give the necessary assurance to their readers as to the professional standing of the authority quoted without mentioning names.—Dr. Fothergill moved that certain recommendations in the report be referred back for reconsideration, including that which related to medical men not attaching their signatures to letters and communications they sent to the Press on medical subjects. On that latter point he suggested that before the report was issued the council should approach the Press Association to get their views on the question. What the Press required was not the advertising of an inferior practitioner. What they desired was to get an adequate medical opinion. The Press said: “If you allow a doctor to go to the Church Congress and talk openly there of birth control, should you not allow that same doctor to put into the public Press a letter over his signature?”—Dr. Lyndon hoped the representative body would not be led away by Dr. Fothergill. The question of having a conference with the Press was brought before the council, who were all against it.—Sir Jenner Verrall said he did not think what was suggested would be a substitute for the indirect advertising complained of.—Dr. Bishop Harman expressed agreement with the contention that it was the name that really mattered in these contributions to the Press. An eminent medical man wrote to The Times a brilliant letter on an important medical subject, and signed himself “Veritas.” It never caused a ripple on the water. They thought it was a gas mantle or something, and there was no punch behind it. Three things mattered—what you say, how it is said, and who says it, and the last is the only thing that really matters.—The report was adopted with the exception of that part relating to medical men's names being attached to letters and communications sent to the Press. That section of the report was referred back for consideration, with the object of seeing how far it was possible to depart from anonymity.

President, Charles S. Goldman, M.P.; Chairman, Charles Bathurst, M.P.; Vice‐Presidents: Christopher Addison, M.D., M.P., Waldorf Astor, M.P., Charles Bathurst, M.P., Hilaire Belloc, Ralph D. Blumenfeld, Lord Blyth, J.P., Colonel Charles E. Cassal, V.D., F.I.C., the Bishop of Chichester, Sir Arthur H. Church, K.C.V.O., M.A., D.Sc., F.R.S., Sir Wm. Earnshaw Cooper, C.I.E., E. Crawshay‐Williams, M.P., Sir Anderson Critchett, Bart., C.V.O., F.R.C.S.E., William Ewart, M.D., F.R.C.P., Lieut.‐Colonel Sir Joseph Fayrer, Bart., M.A., M.D., Sir Alfred D. Fripp, K.C.V.O., C.B., M.B., M.S., Sir Harold Harmsworth, Bart., Arnold F. Hills, Sir Victor Horsley, M.D., F.R.C.S., F.R.S., O. Gutekunst, Sir H. Seymour King, K.C.I.E., M.A., the Duke of Manchester, P.C., Professor Sir Wm. Osler, Bart., M.D., F.R.S., Sir Gilbert Parker, D.C.L., M.P., Sir Wm. Ramsay, K.C.B., LL.D., M.D., F.R.S., Harrington Sainsbury, M.D., F.R.C.P., W. G. Savage, M.D., B.Sc., R. H. Scanes Spicer, M.D., M.R.C.S., the Hon. Lionel Walrond, M.P., Hugh Walsham, M.D., F.R.C.P., Harvey W. Wiley, M.D., Evelyn Wrench.

Political dissent threads through the history of the Olympic Games. Although the International Olympic Committee (IOC) openly prohibits athletes from injecting politics into the Games, Olympians have nevertheless staged protests, using the Olympics to challenge the predominant power structures and institutions. This chapter analyzes outbursts of athlete activism in the context of wider social movements that make these political paroxysms more viable. Social movements scythe political space for athletes, spark athletes' political imaginary, and provide support and cover. From the early days of the Games, Olympic athletes have expressed dissent, as when Irish track-and-field athlete Peter O'Connor rebelled against British colonialism at the 1906 Olympics in Athens. At the Mexico City 1968 Games, Czech gymnast Vera Čáslavská carried out a politically symbolic acts as did US sprinters John Carlos, Tommie Smith, and Wyomia Tyus. At the 1972 Munich Games, US track medalists Vincent Matthews and Wayne Collett protested in nonchalant fashion on the medal stand. At the 1980 Olympics, Polish Olympian Władysław Kozakiewicz issued politically provocative symbology on the pole vault mat that challenged Soviet hegemony. In the twenty-first century, numerous Olympians have made political statements, despite a rule in the Olympic Charter that forbids such activity. In each case, athlete activists were bolstered by vibrant political movements in their home country. In this chapter, I trace the relationship between political Olympians and social movements as well as the wider dialectic of resistance and restriction that encompasses the interplay between dissident Olympians and the IOC.