Search results

WE publish this issue on the eve of the Brighton Conference and our hope is that this number of The Library World will assist the objects of that meeting. Everything connected with the Conference appears to have been well thought out. It is an excellent thing that an attempt has been made to get readers of papers to write them early in order that they might be printed beforehand. Their authors will speak to the subject of these papers and not read them. Only a highly‐trained speaker can “get over” a written paper—witness some of the fiascos we hear from the microphone, for which all papers that are broadcast have to be written. But an indifferent reader, when he is really master of his subject, can make likeable and intelligible remarks extemporarily about it. As we write somewhat before the Conference papers are out we do not know if the plan to preprint the papers has succeeded. We are sure that it ought to have done so. It is the only way in which adequate time for discussion can be secured.

In a finite element model of typical dam—foundation—reservoir systems, the presence of heterogeneous material properties for the dam and the foundation produces a combined damping matrix that is non‐proportional to the mass and/or the stiffness matrices of the system. In this case, the undamped real free‐vibration modes cannot uncouple the damping forces such that the classical mode superposition method using real modes is not applicable. This paper presents comparative analyses of recent coordinate reduction procedures that have been developed to compute the response of linear systems with non‐proportional damping. The comparisons are based on the numerical efficiency and the accuracy of the displacement, acceleration and stress response, and on the distribution of the damping energy in the system.

THE L.A. Conference can be said to have finished off the summer, albeit somewhat ingloriously. Frankly it was not a very inspiring affair. However the papers and atmosphere are well described in this number by Mr. Jack Dove and in this column we will confine ourself to that excitement‐packed Annual General Meeting which now probably holds the world record for the shortest A.G.M. of a serious professional institution. The opportunity to express an opinion or ask a question on any aspect of the affairs of the library profession comes only once a year, but the only persons who spoke at the Annual General Meeting were the Chairman, the proposer of the Hon. Auditors, the Mayor of somewhere inviting the Association to hold the Conference there next year and a mover of a vote of thanks to something or other. It makes you wonder. After all the past year has not been entirely without interest to librarians. There are some, we know, who are heartily sick of the sound of the word Roberts but is there no one sufficiently moved to express an opinion on the recommendations contained in the report of the Roberts Committee? It is simply astounding that there was not one motion on the agenda on any aspect of that report. At the time that the agenda was prepared, it was not known that there would be a general election immediately after the conference but surely it is important that the profession as a whole should manifest its view of the recommendations of the committee so that the government could prepare legislation which would have our support. Only one of the major political parties has announced in its manifesto to the electorate that legislation will be introduced in a new Parliament to improve the public library service but of course no details of its proposals have been given. We must know that there is no end to the possible stupidities which could be incorporated into an Act—unless all the bodies concerned impress on the Minister the confirmed opinion of their members. The Association of Municipal Corporations and the County Councils Association have not been slow in making their views known. The Library Association Council presented evidence to the Committee which enjoyed (sic) the support of the membership but it cannot be said that the recommendations have the same support. But does anybody care? Apparently not. We shall grumble when new legislation is presented and then spend the rest of our lives blaming “them”. Is it any wonder that in the words of a London Town Clerk, “librarianship is a depressed profession”? Which leads us nicely to that other apparently unimportant event of the past year.

This paper presents several methods for enhancing computational efficiency in both static and dynamic analysis of structural systems with localized non‐linear behaviour. A significant reduction of computational effort with respect to brute‐force non‐linear analysis is achieved in all cases at the insignificant (or no) loss of accuracy. The presented methodologies are easily incorporated into a standard computer program for linear analysis.

The purpose of this study is to narratively explore the influence of leader narcissism on leader/follower social exchange. Moreover, while researchers acknowledge that narcissistic personality is a dimensional construct, the preponderance of extant literature approaches the concept of narcissistic leadership categorically by focusing on the reactive or constructive narcissistic extremes. This bimodal emphasis ignores self-deceptive forms of narcissistic leadership, where vision orientation and communication could differ from leaders with more reactive or constructive narcissistic personalities.

The authors argue that they encountered a compelling example of a communal, self-deceiving narcissist during archival research of Robert Owen’s collective experiment at New Harmony, Indiana. To explore Owen’s narcissistic leadership, they utilize an analytically structured history approach to interpret his leadership, as he conveyed his vision of social reform in America.

Approaching data from a ‘history to theory’ perspective and via a communicative lens, the authors use insights from their abductive analysis to advance a cross-paradigm, communication-centered process model of narcissistic leadership that accounts for the full dimensional nature of leader narcissism and the relational aspects of narcissistic leadership.

Scholars maintaining a positivist stance might consider this method a limitation, as historical case-based research places greater emphasis on reflexivity than replication. However, from a constructionist perspective, a focus on generalization might be considered inappropriate or premature, potentially hampering the revelation of insights.

Through a multi-paradigmatic analysis of the historical case of Robert Owen and his visionary communal experiment at New Harmony, the authors contribute to the extant literature by elaborating a comprehensive, dimensional and relational process framework of narcissistic leadership. In doing so, the authors have heeded calls to better delineate leader narcissism, embrace process and relational aspects of leadership and consider leader communication as constitutive of leadership.