Search results

This paper builds a system‐dynamics model of the Mexican economy and tests several propositions regarding policy and income inequality. It concludes, among other things, that one of the most significant developments over the past twenty years has been the declining wage paid to those in the manufacturing export sector. As a consequence, policies aimed at increasing developing states participation in the internationalization of production have been less helpful than supposed.

Within the past ten years Canada has experienced a renewed interest in its architectural past. Whether part of an international trend toward architectural conservation (witness European Architectural Heritage Year, 1976), or part of a general reappraisal of all things Canadian and the development of a sense of nationalism, or the realization, painful as it may be, that the character of the urban landscape is quickly losing its familiar character, this renewed interest in our architectural heritage has surfaced, and is manifesting its presence in many ways. To any who would doubt the existence of a Canadian architectural heritage, or would quarrel with its worth, one has only to turn to Alan Gowans' prefatory remarks to his Building Canada: An Architectural History of Canadian Life:

Historians have long understood that transforming people into property was the defining characteristic of Atlantic World slavery. This chapter examines litigation in British colonial Vice Admiralty Courts in order to show how English legal categories and procedures facilitated this process of dehumanization. In colonies where people were classified as chattel property, litigants transformed local Vice Admiralty Courts into slave courts by analogizing human beings to ships and cargo. Doing so made sound economic sense from their perspective; it gave colonists instant access to an early modern English legal system that was centered on procedures and categories. But for people of African descent, it had decidedly negative consequences. Indeed, when colonists treated slaves as property, they helped to create a world in which Africans were not just like things, they were things. Through the very act of categorization, they rendered factual what had been a mere supposition: that Africans were less than human.

THE centenary celebration is that of the apparently prosaic public library acts ; it is not the centenary of libraries which are as old as civilization. That is a circumstance which some may have overlooked in their pride and enthusiasm for the public library. But no real librarian of any type will fail to rejoice in the progress to which the celebration is witness. For that has been immense. We are to have a centenary history of the Public Library Movement—that is not its title—from the Library Association. We do not know if it will be available in London this month; we fear it will not. We do know its author, Mr. W. A. Munford, has spent many months in research for it and that he is a writer with a lucid and individual Style. We contemplate his task with a certain nervousness. Could anyone less than a Carlyle impart into the dry bones of municipal library history that Strew these hundred years, the bones by the wayside that mark out the way, the breath of the spirit that will make them live ? For even Edward Edwards, whose name should be much in the minds and perhaps on the lips of library lovers this month, could scarcely have foreseen the contemporary position ; nor perhaps could Carlyle who asked before our genesis why there should not be in every county town a county library as well as a county gaol. How remote the days when such a question was cogent seem to be now! It behoves us, indeed it honours us, to recall the work of Edwards, of Ewart, Brotherton, Thomas Greenwood, Nicholson, Peter Cowell, Crestadoro, Francis Barrett, Thomas Lyster, J. Y. M. MacAlister, James Duff Brown and, in a later day without mentioning the living, John Ballinger, Ernest A. Baker, L. Stanley Jast, and Potter Briscoe—the list is long. All served the movement we celebrate and all faced a community which had to be convinced. It still has, of course, but our people do now allow libraries a place, more or less respected, in the life of the people. Librarians no longer face the corpse‐cold incredulity of the so‐called educated classes, the indifference of the masses and the actively vicious hostility of local legislators. Except the illuminated few that existed. These were the men who had the faith that an informed people was a happier, more efficient one and that books in widest commonalty spread were the best means of producing such a people. These, with a succession of believing, enduring librarians, persisted in their Struggle with cynic and opponent and brought about the system and the technique we use, modified of course and extended to meet a changing world, but essentially the same. Three names we may especially honour this September, Edward Edwards, who was the sower of the seed; MacAlister, who gained us our Royal Charter ; and John Ballinger, who was the person who most influenced the introduction of the liberating Libraries Act of 1919.

Asserts that for quality to become part of a company′s natural way of working it needs to be accepted by everyone. Describes how J.I. Case, by utilising its people, has turned itself around and is now focusing on the future. Suggests reasons why the implementation of quality is not always successful. Discusses the company′s approach. Asserts that too often quality is seen as product quality only and the benefits of involving everyone are ignored. Concludes the company will look to the future by utilising people to produce quality products and services, on time at competitive costs/prices.

Examines the role played by business school academics in promoting management ideas through their teaching. Defines the concept of a popular management idea, and explains how the author identified bureaucracy, classical management, scientific management, human relations, neo‐human relations and guru theory, to be the most popular management idea families of the twentieth century. Reviews the existing literature on factors which may influence academics to select certain management ideas for presentation rather than others. Offers hypotheses based on the author′s own experiences as a business academic. Reports the findings of a small postal survey which explored academics′ reasons for choosing the topics to teach and compares the findings with the hypotheses presented earlier. Concludes by discussing the implications of this and further research, and considers the extent to which business academics now tend to follow management practice, rather than lead it. Finally, makes recommendations for future research in this field and suggests appropriate research methods to be used.

“Inevitable and profound” are the changes in the distribution world which John Harvey foresees for the rest of the decade. The number of operators in both the own‐account and public sectors will decline; there will be increasing polarisation between the small, local distribution company and the national network companies. Enhanced service levels will inevitably arise as a result of pressure from both manufacturers and their customers. Significantly, John Harvey visualises, in the short to medium term, an inhibition on investment in high technology materials handling, automation, and hardware; he sees more future for the pallet and picking truck than he does for automated warehouses and retrieval systems. SPD is of course one of the leading companies in the distribution sector; it employs nearly 8,000 people with a turnover of £175m from express parcels, haulage, warehousing and distribution and other functions. John Harvey gave this paper at a conference sponsored by Rolatruc Limited of Slough, and it was held in London in February.

“Is transport undersold?” is a rhetorical question; the answer is yes, according to John Harvey. When he gave the Presidential Address to the Transport and Distribution Group of the Institute of Marketing a few weeks ago, he delivered a withering attack on the transport industry as a whole. “Transport,” he said, “is underrated in terms of its national economic and social value and in terms of its user utility, having neglected to project or market its own worth. It is now belatedly doing so after decades of both government and corporate indifference.” “It is (also) an industry,” he continued, “whose failure to innovate, monitor and identify market trends and perceive its customers' needs has led to the industry's own clients becoming a major competitor through the growth of the ‘own account’ sector.” “It is an industry where its very industrial structure (outside the airlines and railways) reinforces the latent tendency for marketing myopia and reinforces the tradition of selling capacity on price and service and reacts to, rather than anticipates, customers' needs.” “Under the spur of recent events, it has embraced the trappings … of marketing with the enthusiasm of a discharged alcoholic let loose in a brewery.” “It is a sector of the economy whose participants are distinguished by operational excellence — but also by consistently poor financial performance and relatively low returns, whose problems have been compounded by the effect of the recession, falling prices and over‐capacity.” After delivering these sledgehammer blows, John Harvey set about an analytical examination of the transport industry. In particular he looked at the actual characteristics of the UK transport market in terms of structural organisation, inter‐modal competition, and financial performance. He reviewed some of the market forces which have reacted on the industry, highlighting one or two significant factors which should condition industrial marketing of transport; and finally he examined the process of product innovation and the difficulties of market research, and what this suggests for the most effective ways of selling and marketing “distribution” — a phrase deliberately chosen to encapsulate his own approach to transport marketing. But he did conclude on a hopeful note. “There is evidence,” he said, “that industrial marketing is improving and transport is being better sold because there is a wider perception of total distribution cost and trade‐off opportunity; because of competitive challenge; and there is consumer and technology‐led change. For reasons of space, this is a slightly abridged version of John Harvey's challenging address.

This article describes how effective leaders become aware of what is different about them that makes them attractive to others, and learn to use these differences to their advantage in a leadership role.

Presents examples of the use of this technique, including Microsoft's Bill Gates, ICI's John Harvey‐Jones, Sony's Akio Morita, Kimberly‐Clark's Darwin E. Smith, and London mayor Ken Livingstone.

Shows that there is an almost endless list of differences that individuals might communicate, but the differences must be authentic to the individual as a leader, and must be significant, real and perceived.

Argues that, in all the examples, leaders are using personal differences that work for them appropriately in context. They convey the right message – and they are real. Ultimately, it is this sense of authentic self‐expression that makes them so convincing.

Demonstrates how John Harvey‐Jones built upon his entrepreneurial pizzazz, Bill Gates his technological “geekiness”, Darwin E. Smith his modesty, and Ken Livingstone's identification with Londoners.

With multiples dominating the grocery sector, distribution has become a key factor in achieving both cost and value advantages in a highly competitive environment. John Harvey, speaking at the IGD Convention in Birmingham, takes the view that within three years retailers will have effective control over the grocery supply chain based on over 80% central warehousing and management by information technology.