Search results

This empirical study aims to consider the stability and connection of implicit leadership theories to authentic leadership using performance feedback as a first step in a larger research agenda.

Scenarios were created to operationalize implicit and authentic leadership, manipulate implicit leadership theory between followers and leaders, and discover perceptions of leader effectiveness. The use of scenarios was purposely intended to create anticipatory future research agendas.

Components of authentic leadership may be a part of implicit leadership theory and leadership performance feedback may alter leader and follower implicit leadership theories.

Data collected in this study were from students’ perceptions, and did not infer causality between constructs. This study is also subject to mono‐operation and mono‐method bias.

This research provides an extension of theory in several ways: by looking at the authentic leadership paradigm; and by viewing perceptions of leader authentic effectiveness as a continuous influence on implicit leadership theories.

President Bill Clinton has had many opponents and enemies, most of whom come from the political right wing. Clinton supporters contend that these opponents, throughout the Clinton presidency, systematically have sought to undermine this president with the goal of bringing down his presidency and running him out of office; and that they have sought non‐electoral means to remove him from office, including Travelgate, the death of Deputy White House Counsel Vincent Foster, the Filegate controversy, and the Monica Lewinsky matter. This bibliography identifies these and other means by presenting citations about these individuals and organizations that have opposed Clinton. The bibliography is divided into five sections: General; “The conspiracy stream of conspiracy commerce”, a White House‐produced “report” presenting its view of a right‐wing conspiracy against the Clinton presidency; Funding; Conservative organizations; and Publishing/media. Many of the annotations note the links among these key players.

This issue is a selected bibliography covering the subject of leadership.

This chapter documents how eugenics, scientific racism, and hereditarianism survived at Harvard well into the interwar years. In the late 1920s and early 1930s, Thomas Nixon Carver and Frank W. Taussig published works in which they established a close nexus between an individual’s economic position and his biological fitness. Carver, writing in 1929, argued that social class rigidities are attributable to the inheritance of superior and inferior abilities on the respective social class levels and proposed an “economic test of fitness” as a eugenic criterion to distinguish worthy from unworthy individuals. In 1932, Taussig, together with Carl Smith Joslyn, published American Business Leaders – a study that showed how groups with superior social status are proportionately much more productive of professional and business leaders than are the groups with inferior social status. Like Carver, Taussig and Joslyn attributed this circumstance primarily to hereditary rather than environmental factors. Taussig, Joslyn, and Carver are not the only protagonists of our story. The Russian-born sociologists Pitirim Alexandrovich Sorokin, who joined the newly established Department of Sociology at Harvard in 1930, also played a crucial role. His book Social Mobility (1927) exercised a major influence on both Taussig and Carver and contributed decisively to the survival of eugenic and hereditarian ideas at Harvard in the 1930s.

Aarhus Kommunes Biblioteker (Teknisk Bibliotek), Ingerslevs Plads 7, Aarhus, Denmark. Representative: V. NEDERGAARD PEDERSEN (Librarian).

It has been held not infrequently that of the influences which together mould the individual and determine his or her value as a social unit those of heredity are so prepotent as to leave little room for those of the environment. By others this view has seemed to involve unjustifiable pessimism. You will, I think, admit that in the past when there was little objective knowledge to bear on such questions, current views were largely decided by that ingrained difference in social outlook which has divided and still divides human opinion on so many other fundamental questions. Those who are naturally inclined to justify privilege, and who have felt instinctively that class distinctions are a social necessity founded on nature, have been tempted perhaps to emphasise too exclusively the unmistakable influence of heredity; those to whom a different outlook is natural have wished to believe, not, of course, that all are born equal as the eighteenth century philosophers declaimed, but that in favourable environments individuals tend to display greater equality of capacity.

The purpose of this paper is to review a popular business handbook – The Business Guide – by James L. Nichols, first published around the turn of the twentieth century. The analysis is geared toward determining how it fits within the development of marketing thought and education.

A review of the marketing history literature focusing on marketing thought, education and practice around the turn of the twentieth century is conducted. The content of The Business Guide is analyzed and compared with the themes reflected in the literature review.

Most editions appeared in the era just proceeding the emergence of marketing as distinct discipline. It is unlikely that it had any appreciable influence on the development of marketing thought. However, it was used as a textbook at North-Western College in Naperville, IL, and may have been at other early business education programs in the USA and Canada. Nichols’ treatment of marketing topics was consistent with the era. It reflected commodities and functional views. For him, marketing was primarily distribution along with advertising, pricing, product management and credit. Consistent with modern marketing philosophy, Nichols placed heavy emphasis on ethics.

Despite the fact that this book was published in multiple editions over several decades, it seems to have been largely forgotten. As far as is known, this paper is the only recent treatment of this historical artifact.

In this paper, I demonstrate an alternative explanation to the development of the American electricity industry. I propose a social embeddedness approach (Granovetter, 1985, 1992) to interpret why the American electricity industry appears the way it does today, and start by addressing the following questions: Why is the generating dynamo located in well‐connected central stations rather than in isolated stations? Why does not every manufacturing firm, hospital, school, or even household operate its own generating equipment? Why do we use incandescent lamps rather than arc lamps or gas lamps for lighting? At the end of the nineteenth century, the first era of the electricity industry, all these technical as well as organizational forms were indeed possible alternatives. The centralized systems we see today comprise integrated, urban, central station firms which produce and sell electricity to users within a monopolized territory. Yet there were visions of a more decentralized electricity industry. For instance, a geographically decentralized system might have dispersed small systems based around an isolated or neighborhood generating dynamo; or a functionally decentralized system which included firms solely generating and transmitting the power, and selling the power to locally‐owned distribution firms (McGuire, Granovetter, and Schwartz, forthcoming). Similarly, the incandescent lamp was not the only illuminating device available at that time. The arc lamp was more suitable for large‐space lighting than incandescent lamps; and the second‐generation gas lamp ‐ Welsbach mantle lamp ‐ was much cheaper than the incandescent electric light and nearly as good in quality (Passer, 1953:196–197).