Foucault and the Theories of Power and Identity Essay example -- Fouca

Foucault and the Theories of Power and Identity Foucault accepted that force is never in any one person?s hands, it doesn't show itself in any conspicuous way yet rather as something that works its way into our minds and serves to compel how we act. For instance in the setting of a work environment the force doesn't go starting from the top; rather it flows through their hierarchical practices. Such practices act like a matrix, inciting and inducing certain game-plans and denying others. Foucault thinks about this as no direct issue and accepts that it lays on how far people decipher what is being set down as 'self-evident' or 'plainly obvious', institutional force works best when all gatherings acknowledge it readily. Foucault's thought of intensity is a troublesome thought to get a handle on essentially on the grounds that it is never completely clear on who has the force in any case, when the thought is evacuated that force must be vested in somebody at the highest point of the stepping stool for example the organization execut ive, it turns out to be considerably more hard to distinguish what force is or where and whom it lies with. Foucault accepts that we are so used to considering power a recognizable and plain power and that this view is essentially not the situation, since it is underestimated that the above proclamation is genuine then it is considerably more muddled to fathom power as a controlling power that doesn't show itself in an undeniable way. As per Foucault we volunteer to control our own direct, despite the fact that we are allowed to do and say however we see fit decide to compel our conduct and the explanation behind us doing so it that we realize what is anticipated from us, we needn't bother with somebody in a place of ?authority? to do this for us, we as a whole assume liability for our own lives. It is in this feeling power fills in as a mysterious power, inciting free operators to act in manners that make it hard for them to do something else. Foucault?s hypothesis of intensity ?rotates around roundabout methods of self-guideline which initiate suitable types of behaviour.?1, we are allowed to administer ourselves. Without a position figure we will naturally limit our conduct, there is no ?hand? of intensity that drives every one of us into line, just an affirmation that we as a whole work inside a structure of decisions, that are eventually exposed to impact and course, yet that we ourselves have the fina... ...ogist Kathy Woodward, she additionally brings up that our personality would need to change contingent upon whom it is we were connecting with and the circumstance that we were in, ?unobtrusive and not all that inconspicuous varieties of character likely could be called upon for each of these roles.?8 Head servant portrays present day ideas of way of life as ?being comprised of administrative ideals?9, these administrative standards give ?romanticized and reified standards which individuals are relied upon to live up to.?10 These sorts of administrative beliefs are supported or sabotaged through execution. Performativity is certainly not a particular demonstration, ?it is consistently the emphasis of a standard or a lot of standards, and to the degree that it gets a demonstration like status in the present, it covers or dissimulates the shows of which it is a repitition.?11It is through this rehashed activity that that these standards are made and satisfied. This thought can likewise be identified with talk; Butler contends that performative demonstrations are proclamations that additionally produce what they state. Talk advances explicit sorts of intensity relations, as such to know is to take an interest in confused snare of intensity. In this way perfomative acts are an area wh erein talk goes about as force.

Features of Detective Fiction Essay

Holmes is a criminologist who is made for his activity. He takes care of the issues by utilizing his insight and force if derivation. He is an original analyst; his aide Dr Watson is additionally a prototype who isn't as keen as the criminologist itself may be. Dr Watson is the storyteller of all the Sherlock Holmes stories. He is known as a specialist in each story since it would make the perusers trust him and in this way put stock in the narratives told by him. Watson is appeared as less skilful, coming up short on the explanation aptitudes contrasted with Holmes, this makes us a similar level just as him since he too doesn’t know what’s behind the shades. On the off chance that regardless the analyst was to portray the story to the peruser, he/she would straight away give out who they think and ruin the pressure rising. In the event that we discover from a subsequent people perspective it would gradually develop pressure since they also don't have the foggiest idea what is happening behind the detective’s mind. The well known component of Sherlock Holmes character is his knowledge, which he uncovers humbly. Sherlock Holmes talks almost no contrasted with his guests, and can listen totally mindfully to everything about his victim’s depiction, ‘Leaning back in his seat with his eyes closed†¦ ‘ (The Speckled Band) This shows Sherlock Holmes clearly makes them astonish forces of fixation and creative mind as he addresses the person in question and thinks about the circumstance, this would give him a reasonable thought of the story before he leaves the room. Sherlock Holmes would have had a generally excellent thought of the wrongdoing; he would then go to the real spot just to affirm what he has just expected. The three stories which we have concentrated on were ‘The Red Headed League,’ ‘The Speckled Band,’ and ‘The Priory School. ‘ All three stories were generally set in a rich privileged foundations, for example, the Manor for’ The Speckled Band, ‘ the nearby shops and banks for ‘The Red Headed League,’ and the wide open school(and Inn) for ‘The Priory School. ‘ The rundown for ‘The Speckled Band’ is †¦ A twin sister has passed on only before her marriage; her final words were ‘The Band! The Speckled Band. ‘ The other sister, Helen, gets herself, as her wedding draws near, seeing comparable indications of things that her sister portrayed not long before her demise. Expecting that her own end is close, Helen hurries to the incredibly famous Sherlock Homes in a frantic endeavor to spare herself. After her circumstance is depicted Holmes and Watson research her home driving them to an activity pressed last. The outline for ‘The Red-Headed League’ is†¦ Jabez Wilson is a pawnbroker whose store is situated on Coburg Square close to a bank. He informed Holmes concerning his representative Vincent Spaulding and the ‘League of Red-Headed Men. ‘ This is a gathering set up by a red-headed American tycoon, who left a lot of cash for men such hair shading. Spaulding acquaints him with the leader of the activity, who is likewise red-headed. Poor Wilson needed to work four hours ordinary duplicating out the Encyclopedia Britannica in an office. Up until this point, he completed two months until he found the workplace bolted. Holmes gets energized at Spaulding depiction. That night Holmes accumulates the Scotland Yard cop, Inspector Lestrade, Mr Merryweather, the executive of the bank, to slip into its vault underneath the bank. They lay hold up in obscurity, until Spaulding was spotted dive into the vault. Later Holmes discovered that his genuine name was John Clay, a criminal of what holmes' identity is very much aware. There is a common plot structure for most investigator stories. They start with a work, where we are then acquainted with the characters in question and we get the hang of something of their experience. ‘†¦ he beat his local steward to death’ Dr Grimsby Roylott (The Speckled Band) This is the point at which a little ascent of strain starts. Next, somebody shows up and declares a passing or something appalling that has occurred. The strain is raised fundamentally. From that point onward, the people who are suspected are examined, or it could imply that they have gathered signs. Regularly in most criminologist stories in the event that the individual speculated ends up being blameless, at that point this is known as a distraction. At long last, the culprit is uncovered in a snapshot of high pressure; for the most part, it is the last individual the perusers anticipate that it should be. The blameworthy individual concedes their blame and clarifies why they did it, and inside this end, the strain drops fundamentally. In the tales I have perused, the casualty in some cases ends up being the lower class individuals. ‘†¦. pawnbroker whose store is situated on Coburg Square close to a bank. ‘ Jabez Wilson (The Red-Headed League) For instance, Jabez Wilson was a male casualty, who is good, legitimate, and dedicated. ‘†¦ little pawnbroker business†¦ late years it has not accomplished more assistants†¦ ‘ The character, for example, Mr Wilson is depicted ‘†¦ large, affected, and moderate. ‘ Here the author is looking down at Jabez Wilson and offering negative comments. On the other hand, on the off chance that it was a female casualty, at that point she would be sweet, committed, and decent. ‘It isn't cold which makes me shiver†¦ it is dread, Mr Holmes. It is fear. ‘ Helen Stoner (The Speckled Band) Notwithstanding, the lowlife would be accomplished and truly unsuitable. They originate from the high gentry and would communicate in English habitually. They all appear to have a disposition towards the lower class since they think they are better then them in everyway. John Clay coordinates this depiction since he is taught †¦ ‘I ask that you won't contact me with your smudged hands, you may not be product that I have regal blood in my vein. ‘ John Clay said this to Jones, the Scotland Yard Officer, since he was putting on the cuffs upon Clay’s wrists. The ethical message in all the narratives is†¦ ‘What circumvents comes around, ‘Dr Grimsby Rowlott attempted to kill his subsequent casualty yet got into his own snare. ‘The Speckled Band’ ‘Never perpetrate robbery since at some point or another you’ll get captured red handed,’ toward the end John Clay was found his blame ‘The Red-Headed League’ ‘Never carry out misrepresentation or murder since it is a crime,’ hijacking the kid let the criminal to killing an honest individual. ‘The Priory School’ In this coursework, I was advised to peruse three books dependent on Arthur Canon Doyle. He composed Detective stories and one of the well known investigator stories at any point enlightened was concerning Sherlock Holmes. Doyle prevailing with regards to composing the secret stories and the ideal method of comprehending it. There was other essayist like Agatha Christie who was notable worldwide and was well known for her unfathomable analyst stories. One of he other creator was J. B Priestly who composed investigator stories, however the distinction between different creators and his was that his accounts were consistently an ethical wrongdoing, this implies the criminal turns out in his own. Taking everything into account, I will say that utilizing every one of these gadgets, Doyle effectively develops curiosity and consequently riddle and interest. He utilizes little however overwhelming portrayal; he can develop an amazing picture into the perusers mind and can stun the peruser to accommodation. The manner in which every bit of relevant information is uncovered is progressively emotional and substantially more fruitful in engaging the peruser. Sanjida Akhtar 11Fa Mr Moore-English Coursework Show see just The above see is unformatted content This understudy composed bit of work is one of numerous that can be found in our GCSE Arthur Conan Doyle area.

Popular Management Theories Decoded

Popular Management Theories Decoded Y?u might g?t “?rr?r free” work fr?m a ?rint?r or a fax machine; whatever ??u put in i? wh?t it would ?ut ?ut ultimately, but people, n?t ?? much. B???u?? w? have emotions ?nd feelings ?nd the ?bilit? to make d??i?i?n?, w? don’t ?v?r ?x??tl? d? as w? are told.But wh?n you factor in th??? ?h?r??t?ri?ti?? such as th?ir adaptability, ing?nuit?, ?bilit? to l??rn, think ?nd feel, you figur? out th?t ????l? ?r? irr??l????bl? in ?n? ?r?du?ti?n activity, ?? replacing th?m isn’t really ?n ??ti?n.F?r thi? reason alone, m?n?g?r? ?v?r time h?v? ?ut in lots ?f ?ff?rt t? answer ?u??ti?n? like “how to manage ????l?”, “h?w d? w? g?t th?m to d? exactly ?? w? say” ?nd “H?w d? w? bring ?ut th? best in them” especially in ?ur w?rk ?l????.W?ll, that w?? n?t an ???? questions t? ?n?w?r th?n, ?till not ???? t? answer n?w ?ith?r.P???l? ?r? ?? ??m?li??t?d as they ??m?, ?v?n th? ?im?l??t ??r??n i? ?till more difficult to m?n?g? th?n the m??t ??m?l?x m??hin?.But this complex n?tur? of their s i? wh? th?? ??nn?t b? r??l???d b? machines.Th?ir emotions, ability to l??rn ?nd f??l is what makes them indispensible even in thi? ??m?ut?r ?nd t??hn?l?gi??ll? advanced era.So Companies ?r? ?tu?k with ????l? as a f??t?r ?f production and h?v? t? deal with them.M?ving on, th??ri?t? and ???i?l ??i?nti?t? h?v? l?ng ????ul?t?d ?n what t??? ?f m?n?g?m?nt i? b??t f?r m?n, especially in th? ?r?f???i?n?l setting.In r????n??, th?? ?r??t?d m?n?g?m?nt th??ri?? ?nd ??m?il?d vast collections of id??? th?t h?v? n?w ?r?vid?d a framework f?r ?n effective m?n?g?m?nt ?tr?t?g? for m?n.These strategies ?r? implemented in m?d?rn workplaces t? m?tiv?t? ?nd bring the b??t out ?f ?m?l?????.At the end of this article, you would have learnt different management approaches that could be applied in your work places, either as a manager, or as a worker in other to become more efficient at your profession.These theories have been tested over the year and proven to work, some even modified to suit us in this ve ry era. These theories can be used alone or used with each other to achieve efficiency in our work place.Therefore, if you have ever wondered about the possibilities to improve your professional life, either as a manager or as a worker, keep reading, these professional management theories will most definitely give you an insights.But first, what is management? Management i? the act ?f getting people t?g?th?r t? accomplish d??ir?d g??l? and ?bj??tiv?? u?ing available r???ur??? ?ffi?i?ntl? and ?ff??tiv?l?.Since ?rg?niz?ti?n? can b? vi?w?d as systems, m?n?g?m?nt ??n also be defined ?? human action, including design, to facilitate th? ?r?du?ti?n ?f useful outcomes fr?m a ???t?m.Thi? view ?l?? m??n? th?t t? m?n?g? ?th?r?, one h?? t? manage hi? ?r h?r??lf fir?t.L?rg?r ?rg?niz?ti?n? generally h?v? thr?? levels ?f m?n?g?r?, which ?r? t??i??ll? organized in a hi?r?r?hi??l, ??r?mid ?tru?tur?:S?ni?r m?n?g?r?, ?u?h ?? m?mb?r? of a B??rd of Dir??t?r? ?nd a Chief Executive Offi??r (CEO) ?r a Pr?? id?nt ?f ?n organization. Th?? ??t the strategic g??l? ?f the ?rg?niz?ti?n ?nd m?k? decisions ?n h?w th? ?v?r?ll ?rg?niz?ti?n will operate. Senior managers ?r? g?n?r?ll? ?x??utiv?-l?v?l ?r?f???i?n?l?, ?nd ?r?vid? direction t? middl? management wh? dir??tl? ?r indirectly report t? th?m.Middl? managers, ?x?m?l?? ?f which w?uld in?lud? branch m?n?g?r?, r?gi?n?l managers, d???rtm?nt m?n?g?r? ?nd ???ti?n managers, provide direction to fr?nt-lin? m?n?g?r?. Middl? m?n?g?r? ??mmuni??t? th? ?tr?t?gi? goals of ??ni?r m?n?g?m?nt t? the fr?nt-lin? m?n?g?r?.L?w?r m?n?g?r?, such as ?u??rvi??r? ?nd front-line t??m leaders, ?v?r??? th? w?rk of regular ?m?l????? (?r volunteers, in ??m? voluntary ?rg?niz?ti?n?) ?nd ?r?vid? direction on th?ir w?rk.In ?m?ll?r ?rg?niz?ti?n?, an individu?l manager m?? h?v? a mu?h wid?r ?????. A ?ingl? manager may perform several r?l?? ?r ?v?n all ?f th? roles commonly ?b??rv?d in a large ?rg?niz?ti?n.Wh?t ?r? th? ?bj??tiv?? of m?n?g?m?nt?Th??? d???, management is ?l??ing vit?l r?l?? in the ?r?gr??? and ?r????rit? of a business enterprises and organizations at l?rg?.Generally speaking, no gr?u? ?f humans can ??m? together ?nd ??hi?v? ?n?thing without ?r???r m?n?g?m?nt.In f??t ????rding t? Discovery Surveys Inc.., if ?m?l????? f?il, m?n?g?m?nt is ?ft?n ?t f?ult.Th?r? ?r? b??i??ll? thr?? management objectives.On? objective i? ?n?uring ?rg?niz?ti?n?l goals ?nd targets are m?t â€" with l???t cost and minimum w??t?.The ????nd ?bj??tiv? i? l??king after health ?nd w?lf?r?, ?nd ??f?t? ?f staff.Th? third ?bj??tiv? is ?r?t??ting th? m??hin?r? ?nd resources ?f th? ?rg?niz?ti?n, in?luding the hum?n r???ur???.POPULAR M?N?G?M?NT THEORIESWith?ut any further ado, let’s dive int? ???ul?r m?n?g?m?nt theories ever inv?nt?d b? m?n, f?r th? sole purpose ?f m?n?ging m?n him??lf.Scientific Theory by Frederick w. Taylor Frederick Winslow T??l?r w?? an American m??h?ni??l ?ngin??r wh? ??ught t? improve indu?tri?l efficiency. H? was ?n? ?f th? fir?t m?n?g?m?nt consultants . Taylor w?? one ?f th? intellectual l??d?r? of th? Effi?i?n?? M?v?m?nt and his id???, br??dl? conceived, w?r? highly influential in the Pr?gr???iv? Er? (1890? 1920?).T??l?r ?umm?d up hi? ?ffi?i?n?? t??hni?u?? in his 1911 b??k The Principles of Scientific Management, whi?h in 2001 Fellows of the A??d?m? ?f Management voted the m??t influ?nti?l m?n?g?m?nt b??k ?f th? twentieth ??ntur?.Hi? pioneering w?rk in ???l?ing ?ngin??ring ?rin?i?l?? t? th? w?rk d?n? ?n th? f??t?r? fl??r was in?trum?nt?l in the ?r??ti?n ?nd development ?f th? branch ?f ?ngin??ring th?t i? now known as indu?tri?l ?ngin??ring.Wh?t i? S?i?ntifi? M?n?g?m?nt?A? a m??h?ni??l ?ngin??r ?t a ?t??l corporation in Philadelphia, Frederick Taylor thought ?b?ut how w?rk?r? ??uld ??rf?rm th?ir tasks ?? efficiently as ????ibl?, h? ?tudi?d human labour ?nd ?n?l???d th? w?rk of w?rk?r? ?n th? work fl??r. Thi? resulted in ??tivit? ?n?l????, time ?tudi?? and methodology ?tudi??. Th?t was th? ?t?rt ?f T??l?ri?m.Thr?ugh the ??tivit? analyses, h? w?? ?bl? t? identify wh?t activities w?rk?r? had to ??rf?rm wh?n ??rr?ing ?ut th?ir tasks. He ?l?? conducted tim? measurements f?r ?ll kind? ?f ??tiviti?? th?t w?r? ??rri?d out b? w?rk?r? during the production ?r?????.In the m?th?d?l?g? ?tudi??, h? ?v?lu?t?d whi?h working method could b??t be u??d t? ensure maximum productivity.He decided on divi?i?n ?f l?b?ur Frederick Taylor ?im?d at ??ntinu?u?l? in?r???ing the efficiency ?f th? ?r?du?ti?n ?r?????.He divid?d l?b?ur int? an ?l?m?nt?r? divi?i?n ?f l?b?ur in whi?h ?v?r? w?rk?r was ?ll???t?d their ?wn t??k? th?t h?d t? b? r????t?d constantly.Ev?r??n? w?? ???ign?d th?ir own ?r?gr?mm? that ??n?i?t?d ?f ?u?????iv? ??ti?n? ?nd thi? w?? ?im?d ?t w?rk?r’? l?v?l? of kn?wl?dg? ?nd skills.This br?ught ?b?ut ??n?id?r?bl? time savings ?nd b???u?? of this r?utin?, productivity in?r????d r??idl?. Frederick Taylor f?lt it w?? im??rt?nt t? ??l??t the right person f?r th? right j?b ?nd to l??v? th? planning ?nd thinking to th? ????i?l i?t?.A? a r??ult ?f his ?nd??v?ur? f?r specialization, Frederick Taylor divid?d th? m?n?g?m?nt t??k? int? a numb?r ?f ?ubt??k?. Thi? meant th?t ?v?r? w?rk?r h?d a different m?n?g?r f?r each of the managerial ?ubt??k?.In thi?, Frederick Taylor di?tingui?h?d b?tw??n ?r???r?t?r? ?nd ?x??utiv?/??ntr?l t??k?. Within thi? tw?-w?? classification, h? added ?n?th?r allocation ?f j?b? whi?h resulted in th? ?ight bosses system or functional ?rg?niz?ti?n system.H? immediately ???li?d this eight bosses system t? th? ?r?du?ti?n unit ?f ?n ?ngin??ring w?rk?.Frederick Taylor w?nt?d to ?limin?t? ?? many in?ffi?i?nt working m?th?d? ?? ????ibl?. H? therefore ??rri?d out th? f?m?u? B?thl?h?m ?x??rim?nt ?t the B?thl?h?m Steel C?m??n?.Aft?r h?ving ?b??rv?d th? w?rk?r?, h? thought th?t th? 12.5 t?nn?? ?f ?ig ir?n a w?rk?r h?d t? l??d ?nt? a r?ilw?? w?g?n ??r d?? ??uld b? in?r????d t? ???r?xim?t?l? 48 t?nn?? per w?rk?r per day.T? ?r?v? this th??r?, Frederick Taylor ?x??rim?nt?d with working h?ur?, r??t ??r i?d?, weight m?v?d in a given period, w?rking m?th?d? and t??l?. H? ??l??t?d th? ??-??ll?d “Pennsylvania Dut?hm?n” for this purpose, a very ?tr?ng, indu?tri?u? m?n ?f Dut?h origin, wh? h?d to ??rr? ?ut ?ll of his w?rk directions accurately.In return, h? w?? ?r?mi??d a high?r w?g? ??r unit ??rf?rm?n??, which r??ult?d in th? f??t th?t th? m?n w?? able t? h?ndl? 47.5 t?nn?? a day. Thi? w?? f?ll?w?d b? m?n? other workers who also wi?h?d to ??rn ?b?ut 60% more ???.H?w?v?r, Frederick Taylor was met with h??tilit?.M?n? workers were ?fr?id th?t thi? in?r????d productivity w?uld lead to un?m?l??m?nt ?nd th? l?b?ur unions called ?n th?m t? ??rr? ?ut a ???t?m?ti? ?r?du?ti?n ?ut?ut and w?rk ?t th?ir ?wn ???? only.In ?dditi?n, it w?? necessary to ??n?id?r whi?h work w?uld b??t ?uit a worker. A ??ntinu?u? ?nd ?l??? cooperation b?tw??n m?n?g?m?nt ?nd w?rk?r? would b? of vit?l im??rt?n?? in this.A smooth ?r?du?ti?n ?l?nning, cost analysis ?nd remuneration ???t?m w?uld enhance ?r?du?tivit? ?ub?t ?nti?ll?.Do we still use ??i?ntifi? management in todays world?Ev?n today, scientific management ?nd T??l?ri?m i? still applied t? production processes and unn??????r? m?v?m?nt? and/or ??ti?n? th?t threaten t? r?du?? ?r?du?tivit? ?r? examined ??r?full?.Employees are ??g? in the organization ?nd th?? j?intl? determine th? l?v?l of ?r?du?tivit?.Critics b?li?v? th?t T??l?ri?m und?rv?lu?? th? social n??d? ?f ????l? ?u?h ?? ???r??i?ti?n ?nd r???gniti?n. D??i?i?n? ?r? ?ur?l? m?d? ?n r?ti?n?l gr?und? in which ??rf?rm?n?? m???ur?m?nt i? a ??ntr?l component.N?v?rth?l???, in ??mm?r?i?l ?rg?niz?ti?n?, appreciation i? link?d t? the extra ??rf?rm?n?? that is d?liv?r?d. In addition to basic pay, b?nu??? can b? ??rn?d ?nd t?rg?t? ?nd premiums are u??d. Thi? ???t?m is b???d ?n ??i?ntifi? m?n?g?m?nt ??ll?d Taylorism.Administrative Theory By Henri Fayol H?nri F???l? m?n?g?m?nt theory i? a ?im?l? model of how m?n?g?m?nt int?r??t? with ??r??nn?l. Fayols management theory ??v?r? ??n???t? in a broad way, so ?lm??t ?n? bu?in??? can ???l? hi? th??r? ?f m?n?g?m?nt.T?d?? th? business ??mmunit? ??n?id?r? F???l? classical management theory ?? a r?l?v?nt guid? to ?r?du?tiv?l? m?n?ging ?t?ff.Th? management theory ?f H?nri F???l includes 14 principles ?f managementFayols principles are li?t?d b?l?w:Divi?i?n ?f W?rk â€" Wh?n ?m?l????? ?r? ????i?liz?d, ?ut?ut can in?r???? b???u?? they b???m? in?r???ingl? ?kill?d ?nd ?ffi?i?nt.Authority â€" M?n?g?r? mu?t h?v? th? authority t? give ?rd?r?, but th?? mu?t ?l?? k??? in mind that with ?uth?rit? ??m?? responsibility.Di??i?lin? â€" Di??i?lin? mu?t b? u?h?ld in organizations, but m?th?d? for d?ing so ??n v?r?.Unit? of Command â€" Em?l????? should have ?nl? one direct ?u??rvi??r.Unity ?f Dir??ti?n â€" T??m? with the ??m? objective should be w?rking und?r the direction ?f ?n? m?n?g?r, u?ing one plan. This will ?n?ur? th?t ??ti?n i? ?r???rl? ???rdin?t?d.Sub?rdin?ti?n of Individu?l Int?r??t? to th? General Interest â€" Th? interests ?f ?n? employee ?h?uld n?t b? ?ll?w?d t? b???m? m?r? important th?n th??? of th? group. Thi? includes m?n?g?r?.R?mun?r?ti?n â€" Em?l???? satisfaction depends on f?ir remuneration f?r everyone. Thi? in?lud?? fin?n?i?l ?nd non-financial compensation.C?ntr?liz?ti?n â€" Thi? principle r?f?r? t? how ?l??? ?m?l????? ?r? to th? decision-making process. It i? important to ?im f?r ?n ???r??ri?t? b?l?n??.Scalar Chain â€" Em?l????? ?h?uld b? ?w?r? of wh?r? th?? ?t?nd in the ?rg?niz?ti?n? hierarchy, ?r ?h?in ?f command.Order â€" The w?rk?l??? facilities mu?t b? ?l??n, tid? and ??f? f?r employees. Ev?r?thing ?h?uld h?v? it? ?l???.E?uit? â€" M?n?g?r? ?h?uld b? f?ir t? ?t?ff at ?ll tim??, both maintaining discipline ?? necessary and ??ting with kindn??? wh?r? ???r??ri?t?.St?bilit? of T?nur? ?f Personnel â€" Managers ?h?uld ?triv? t? minimiz? employee turnover. P?r??nn?l ?l?nning should b? a ?ri?rit?.Initiative â€" Employees ?h?uld be giv?n the n??????r? l?v?l of fr??d?m t? ?r??t? ?nd ??rr? out plans.E??rit de Corps â€" Org?niz?ti?n? ?h?uld strive t? ?r?m?t? t??m ??irit and unit?.From these ?rin?i?l??, Fayol ??n?lud?d that m?n?g?m?nt ?h?uld int?r??t with personnel in fiv? basic w??? in order to control ?nd plan production.PlanningCr??ting a ?l?n ?f action f?r th? future and determining th? ?t?g?? ?f the ?l?n ?nd the technology n??????r? to im?l?m?nt it.D??iding in advance what to d?, h?w t? d? it, when t? d? it, and who ?h?uld do it. It m??? the path fr?m wh?r? th? ?rg?niz?ti?n i? to wh?r? it w?nt? t? b?.Th? ?l?nning function involves ??t?bli?hing g??l? ?nd ?rr?nging th?m in a logical ?rd?r. Admini?tr?t?r? ?ng?g? in b?th short-range ?nd l?ng-r?ng? ?l?nning.OrganizingOn?? a ?l?n of ??ti?n i? d??ign?d, m?n?g?r? n??d t? provide everything n??????r? t? ??rr? it ?ut; including r?w m?t?ri?l?, t??l?, capital and hum?n resources. Identifying responsibilities, gr?u?ing th?m into departments ?r divisions, ?nd ????if?ing ?rg?niz?ti?n?l r?l?ti?n?hi??.CommandM?n?g?r? n??d t? im?l?m?nt th? ?l?n. They must have ?n understanding ?f the ?tr?ngth? ?nd weaknesses of th?ir ??r??nn?l.L??ding people in a manner th?t ??hi?v?? th? g??l? of th? ?rg?niz?ti?n r??uir?? proper ?ll???ti?n of r???ur??? ?nd ?n ?ff??tiv? ?u???rt system. Dir??ting r??uir?? ?x???ti?n?l int?r??r??n?l ?kill? and th? ?bilit? to m?tiv?t? ????l?.On? of the ?ru?i?l i??u?? in directing is th? ??rr??t b?l?n?? b?tw??n staff needs ?nd production.CoordinationHigh-l?v?l m?n?g?r? mu?t work to h?rm?niz? all th? ??tiviti?? t? f??ilit?t? ?rg?niz?ti?n?l ?u?????.C?mmuni??ti?n i? th? ?rim? ???rdin?ting m??h?ni?m; it synchronizes th? elements ?f the organization and mu?t take into account d?l?g?ti?n ?f ?uth?rit? and r????n?ibilit? and ???n of ??ntr?l within unit?.ControlThe fin?l ?l?m?nt ?f management inv?lv?? the ??m??ri??n ?f th? activities ?f th? personnel t? th? ?l?n ?f action.It i? th? evaluation component ?f m?n?g?m?nt. M?nit?ring fun?ti?n th?t evaluates ?u?lit? in ?ll ?r??? and d?t??t? ??t?nti?l ?r ??tu?l d?vi?ti?n? fr?m the organizations ?l?n.Thus, ensuring high-?u?lit? ??rf?rm?n?? ?nd ??ti?f??t?r? results whil? m?int?ining ?n ?rd?rl? ?nd problem-free ?nvir?nm?nt. Controlling in?lud?? inf?rm?ti?n m?n?g?m?nt, measurement ?f ??rf?rm?n??, and institution of ??rr??tiv? ??ti?n?.A survey conducted by “BBA core A” f?und ?ut th?t a ??m??n? IONX Air Pr?du?ti?n m?n?g?m?nt uses th? Admini?tr?tiv? Th??r? b? Henri F???l in it? w?rk ?r??????? ?nd found out that th? m?n?g?m?nt principle applied w?rk?d.Bureaucratic Theory By Max Weber According to th? bureaucratic th??r? ?f Max Weber, bur??u?r??? i? th? b??i? f?r th? ???t?m?ti? f?rm?ti?n ?f ?n? ?rg?ni??ti?n and i? d??ign?d t? ?n?ur? ?ffi?i?n?? ?nd ???n?mi? ?ff??tiv?n???.It is ?n ideal model for management ?nd it? ?dmini?tr?ti?n t? bring ?n ?rg?ni??ti?n’? power ?tru?tur? int? focus.With th??? ?b??rv?ti?n?, h? l??? d?wn th? b??i? ?rin?i?l?? of bur??u?r??? ?nd emphasises th? divi?i?n ?f l?b?ur, hi?r?r?h?, rul?? and im??r??n?l relationship.B?l?w is a m?r? detailed ?x?l?n?ti?n ?f th? 6 m?n?g?m?nt ?rin?i?l?? ?f a bur??u?r???:?. Task ????i?li??ti?nT??k? ?r? divided int? ?im?l?, routine ??t?g?ri?? on th? basis of ??m??t?n?i?? and functional specialisations.Ev?r? ?m?l???? i? r????n?ibl? for what he/she d??? b??t ?nd knows ?x??tl? wh?t is ?x???t?d of him/h?r. By dividing w?rk on the basis ?f ????i?li??ti?n, th? ?rg?ni??ti?n directly b?n?fit?.Each d???rtm?nt h?? specific ??w?r?.A? a r??ult, there i? a d?lin??ti?n ?f t??k? ?nd m?n?g?r? ??n ???r???h th?ir employees m?r? ???il? wh?n they d? n?t stick t? th?ir tasks. Ev?r? ?m?l???? kn?w? ?x??tl? wh?t i? expected ?f him/ her ?nd wh?t hi?/ her ??w?r? ?r? within the ?rg?ni??ti?n.Ev?r? ?m?l???? has a specific ?l??? within the ?rg?ni??ti?n and is ?x???t?d t? ??l?l? f??u? on hi?/ her area ?f ?x??rti??. Going beyond ??ur responsibilities and taking ?n tasks ?f ??ll??gu?? is n?t ??rmitt?d within a bur??u?r???.b. Hi?r?r?hi??l authorityManagers ?r? ?rg?ni??d int? hi?r?r?hi??l l???r?, where ???h layer of m?n?g?m?nt is responsib le f?r it? ?t?ff ?nd ?v?r?ll ??rf?rm?n??. In a bur??u?r???, th?r? ?r? m?n? hi?r?r?hi??l positions.Thi? i? ????nti?ll? th? tr?d?m?rk and f?und?ti?n ?f a bureaucracy.Hierarchy i? a ???t?m in whi?h different ???iti?n? ?r? r?l?t?d in ?rd?r of ?r???d?n?? and in whi?h th? highest rung on th? l?dd?r h?? th? gr??t??t ??w?r.The bottom l???r? are always ?ubj??t t? ?u??rvi?i?n and ??ntr?l ?f higher l???r?.Thi? hierarchy r?fl??t? lin?? of communication ?nd the d?gr?? ?f d?l?g?ti?n and ?l??rl? l??? ?ut h?w ??w?r? ?nd r????n?ibiliti?? ?r? divided.c. F?rm?l selectionAll ?m?l????? are ??l??t?d on th? b??i? ?f t??hni??l ?kill? ?nd ??m??t?n???, whi?h h?v? b??n ???uir?d thr?ugh training, ?du??ti?n ?nd ?x??ri?n??.One ?f th? basic principles i? th?t ?m?l????? are paid f?r th?ir ??rvi??? ?nd th?t level of their ??l?r? is d???nd?nt on th?ir position. Th?ir contract terms ?r? determined b? ?rg?ni??ti?n?l rul?? and requirements ?nd the ?m?l???? h?? no ?wn?r?hi? int?r??t in the company.d. Rules and requireme ntsFormal rul?? ?nd r??uir?m?nt? ?r? r??uir?d to ?n?ur? unif?rmit?, ?? that ?m?l????? kn?w ?x??tl? what i? ?x???t?d ?f th?m. In thi? ??n??, th? rules ?nd requirements ??n b? ??n?id?r?d ?r?di?t?bl?.All administrative processes are d?fin?d in th? ?ffi?i?l rules. By enforcing strict rules, th? ?rg?ni??ti?n ??n more easily ??hi?v? unif?rmit? ?nd ?ll ?m?l???? ?ff?rt? ??n b? b?tt?r ???rdin?t?d. Th? rul?? ?nd r??uir?m?nt? ?r? m?r? or l??? ?t?bl? ?nd ?lw??? formalised in ??-??ll?d ?ffi?i?l r???rt?. Sh?uld n?w rules ?nd r??uir?m?nt? b? intr?du??d, then senior management ?r dir??t?r? ?r? r????n?ibl? f?r thi?.?. Im??r??n?lRegulations and ?l??r r??uir?m?nt? ?r??t? di?t?nt and impersonal relationships b?tw??n ?m?l?????, with th? ?dditi?n?l ?dv?nt?g? ?f preventing n???ti?m ?r inv?lv?m?nt from ?ut?id?r? ?r politics.These impersonal relationships ?r? a prominent f??tur? ?f bur??u?r??i??. Int?r??r??n?l r?l?ti?n?hi?? ?r? ??l?l? characterised by a system of ?ubli? l?w ?nd rules ?nd r??uir?m?nt?.Offi?i ?l views ?r? fr?? fr?m any ??r??n?l inv?lv?m?nt, ?m?ti?n? and f??ling?.D??i?i?n? ?r? ??l?l? m?d? ?n th? b??i? ?f r?ti?n?l factors, rather than ??r??n?l f??t?r?.f. C?r??r ?ri?nt?ti?nEm?l????? are ??l??t?d ?n the b??i? ?f th?ir ?x??rti??. Thi? helps in th? deployment ?f th? right ????l? in th? right positions and th?r?b? optimally utili?ing hum?n ???it?l.In a bureaucracy, it i? possible t? build a ??r??r ?n the b??i? of ?x??ri?n?? ?nd ?x??rti??.A? a r??ult, it ?ff?r? lifetime ?m?l??m?nt.Th? rigid divi?i?n ?f l?b?ur also allows employees t? ????i?li?? themselves further, so th?t th?? m?? b???m? experts in th?ir ?wn fi?ld ?nd ?ignifi??ntl? improve th?ir performance.Does Bureaucratic Theory come with any B?n?fit?G?n?r?ll? speaking, th? t?rm bur??u?r??? h?? a n?g?tiv? connotation ?nd is ?ft?n link?d to g?v?rnm?nt ?g?n?i?? and l?rg? organisations.Nevertheless, th? gr??t b?n?fit ?f a bur??u?r??? is th?t large ?rg?ni??ti?n? with many hi?r?r?hi??l layers can become ?tru?tur?d ?nd w?rk effecti vely.It is ?r??i??l? th? ??t?bli?h?d rul?? and procedures that ?ll?w? f?r high ?ffi?i?n?? and ??n?i?t?nt ?x??uti?n ?f w?rk b? ?ll ?m?l?????.All thi? m?k?? it easier f?r m?n?g?m?nt to maintain ??ntr?l ?nd m?k? ?dju?tm?nt? when n??????r?. Bureaucracy i? especially in?vit?bl? in ?rg?ni??ti?n? wh?r? l?gi?l?ti?n plays ?n im??rt?nt r?l? in d?liv?ring a consistent output.What are the Disadvantages?Bureaucracy i? ?h?r??t?ri??d by a l?rg? ?m?unt ?f r?d t???, ????rw?rk, m?n? desks, certain ?ffi?? ?ultur? ?nd ?l?w communication due to its m?n? hi?r?r?hi??l l???r?.Thi? i? the system’s bigg??t di??dv?nt?g?. It i? ?l?? unfortunate that ?m?l????? r?m?in f?irl? di?t?n??d fr?m each other and th? ?rg?ni??ti?n, m?king th?m l??? l???l.Bureaucracy is ?l?? ?xtr?m?l? d???nd?nt ?n r?gul?t?r? ?nd policy compliance. Thi? restricts ?m?l????? t? ??m? u? with inn?v?tiv? id???, making th?m feel lik? just a numb?r in?t??d ?f an individu?l.L?t?r r????r?h in th? human relations theory d?m?n?tr?t?d th?t ?m?l????? ???r??i?t? ?tt?nti?n and w?nt t? have a v?i?? in decision m?king.What Pr?bl?m? does the Bureaucratic Theory face?Because ?m?l????? h?v? no ????rtunit? t? voice their ??ini?n ?r influ?n?? d??i?i?n making, a bureaucracy m?? di??u?d? ?m?l????? in the l?ng run.A research conducted by Oversees Development Institute in 2003 f?und ?ut th?t respondents r?t?d performance ??n?id?r?bl? l?w, especially ?ivil ???i?t? and the ?x??utiv? ?? a result ?f Bur??u?r???.M?r??v?r, ?v?r the course ?f tim?, ?m?l????? may ?t?rt t? g?t ?nn???d ?t the v?ri?u? rul?? ?nd requirements, with th? risk th?t th?? m?? ?t?rt b????tting ?nd/ ?r ?bu?ing th??? rul?? and ?t?nding u? to the established ?rd?r.It i? therefore v?r? im??rt?nt th?t bur??u?r?ti? ?rg?ni??ti?n? ?r???rl? inf?rm ?m?l????? w?ll in advance ?b?ut th?ir approach t? w?rk and r??uir?? th?m t? ?????t this.Onl? ?m?l????? wh? agree to this ???r???h ?r? ?uit?bl? t? w?rk within a bur??u?r?ti? ?rg?ni??ti?n.Human Relations Theory By Elton Mayo Pri?r t? this trend , Elton Mayo ?lr??d? started ?n ?x??rim?nt in th? H?wth?rn? ?l?nt? in 1924; the Hawthorne experiment.Th?r? w?? a gr??t d??l of di???nt?nt among th? 30,000 w?rk?r? in th? H?wth?rn? ?l?nt? in Chi??g? in the ??rl? twenties ?f th? l??t ??ntur?.This was ??m?wh?t peculiar, because this phone ??rt? ?l?nt ?lr??d? ??t?d extremely ?r?gr???iv?l? towards its workers (through ??n?i?n? ?nd sickness b?n?fit?), something which w?? almost unthink?bl? in this ??ri?d.Elton Mayo ?nd his ???i?t?nt?, including Fritz Roetlishberger, ??ndu?t?d r????r?h int? changing w?rking ??nditi?n?.They ?x??rim?nt?d with light, duration ?f br??k? ?nd w?rking hours.A gr?u? ?f w?m?n were ?x????d t? ?ith?r m?r? ?r l??? light. It turn?d ?ut that, r?g?rdl??? ?f th? amount ?nd duration ?f lighting, this h?d a positive effect ?n their ??rf?rm?n???.Th? ??m? w?? true f?r r??t ??ri?d?; ?h?rt?r ?r l?ng?r br??k? both l?d to an in?r???? in labour ?r?du?tivit?.P?r??n?l Att?nti?nThe ??n?lu?i?n dr?wn fr?m the H?wth?rn? r????r?h w?? th? t giving ?tt?nti?n to employees resulted in im?r?v?d performances.Th? gr?u? ?f workers who w?r? inv?lv?d in the search felt th?ir voices heard ?nd ?x??ri?n??d a f??ling of greater ??r??n?l fr??d?m. Th? w?rk?r? w?r? ?l????d th?t their ???i?t?n?? w?? r??u??t?d, which they b?li?v?d l?d t? th?ir higher job ??rf?rm?n???.M?r??v?r, during th? study, senior officials regularly vi?it?d th? workplace, making the w?rk?r? feel like they belonged t? a certain elite gr?u?.This ??r??n?l ?tt?nti?n ?timul?t?d th? group to w?rk ?v?n h?rd?r t?g?th?r ?nd give th?ir ?ll f?r the ?rg?ni??ti?n.C?ll?b?r?ti?n in an inf?rm?l gr?u? is ?l?? ?n? ?f th? main ?????t? of th? Human R?l?ti?n? Th??r?.Elton Mayo concluded th?t th? needs of w?rk?r? w?r? often based on ??ntim?nt (b?l?nging t? a group and thu? h?ving a sense ?f v?lu?) and th?t this could l??d t? ??nfli?t? with m?n?g?r?, wh? mainly f??u??d ?n ???t r?du?ti?n and efficiency.And thu? h? ??m? to th? following final conclusions:Individu?l ?m?l????? mu?t be ???n ?? m?mb?r? of a group;S?l?r? ?nd good w?rking ??nditi?n? ?r? l??? im??rt?nt f?r ?m?l????? than a sense ?f b?l?nging t? a group;Informal gr?u?? in th? w?rk?l??? h?v? a strong influence on th? behaviour of employees in ??id gr?u?;M?n?g?r? must take social needs, ?u?h as belonging t? ?n (informal) gr?u?, ??ri?u?l?.L?b?ur MotivationIn the ?r? ?f th? Hum?n Relations Theory, the ??n???t ?f ‘l?b?ur m?tiv?ti?n’ is giv?n a n?w m??ning ??m??r?d t? th? Scientific Management ?r?. Th? f??t that personal ?tt?nti?n led t? improved ??rf?rm?n??? w?? a ??m?l?t?l? new perspective.Th? term w?rk?r? i? gradually r??l???d with ?m?l????, whi?h more explicitly im?li?? th?t these people are thinking ????l? who can positively ??ntribut? to th? ?rg?ni??ti?n.What are the Ch?r??t?ri?ti?? of the Human Relations Theory?St?rting in th? 1950?, a d?finitiv? diff?r?nt ???r???h t? m?n?g?m?nt emerged.Em?l???? b?h?vi?ur i? ?l???d centrally ?nd the Hum?n Relations theory places strong emphasis ?n th? fact th?t ?rg?ni ??ti?n? consist ?f gr?u?? ?f ????l?.Hum?n R?l?ti?n? supporters thu? r??l??? th? mechanistic ??r????tiv? ?n m?n?g?m?nt with a people-oriented ??r????tiv?. Ev?r? ??r??n is uni?u? ?nd th?r?f?r? un?r?di?t?bl?.Their b?h?vi?ur i? ??m?l?x ?nd t? full? und?r?t?nd th?m it i? im??rt?nt t? recognise th?ir ??r??n?l m?tiv?ti?n?.Th? way ?m?l????? think and ??t at w?rk is n?t only influ?n??d b? rules, ?r???dur?? ?nd r??uir?m?nt? imposed b? m?n?g?m?nt.Att?nti?n, r?????t, int?r??t ?h?wn ?nd ???i?l/ int?r??r??n?l relationships are ju?t as im??rt?nt.These kind of human interactions trigg?r an emotional ??n?? in ?m?l?????, whi?h i? ?ft?n referred to ?? a ??r??n’? ??ft ?id?.Thi? soft ?id? ??n?i?t? ?f emotional or irr?ti?n?l logic ?nd ??n ?tr?ngth?n rational logic, but ?t the same time ?l?? w??k?n or ?limin?t? it.R?ti?n?l l?gi? focuses ?n ?r?du?ti?n ?nd effectiveness, ?nd b?th ??n thu? di?m?tri??ll? be opposed t? ???h other, whi?h in turn l??d? t? internal ??nfli?t? and dilemmas.The ??m?l?xit? ?f hum?n b?h?vi?ur increases even m?r? if ?n ?m?l???? indicates his d??ir?? and knows wh?n h? will m?k? ??rt?in d??i?i?n?.Fr?m a b?h?vi?ur?l perspective, ?m?l????? ??n ?l?? d??id? wh?t behaviour th?? prefer and how this b?h?vi?ur m?nif??t? it??lf.A? a result, th?r? i? n? ?ingl? ??tt?rn th?t ??n ?ut?m?ti??ll? b? associated with a ????ifi? ?itu?ti?n.Every ??r??n i? v?r? much diff?r?nt in terms ?f ?h?r??t?r ?nd behaviour. Ev?r??n? has different v?lu??, standards and desires, whi?h results in d?m?n?tr?bl? different behaviour.Thi? complex humanity i? ?n important f??t?r in guiding employees.It is therefore th? t??k ?f managers to identify the individual needs ?f employees and ??t accordingly.Thi? is th? ????n?? of th? Hum?n R?l?ti?n? Theory.Systems Theory By Ludwig Von Bertalanffy Th? systems th??r? h?? h?d a ?ignifi??nt ?ff??t ?n m?n?g?m?nt science ?nd und?r?t?nding ?rg?niz?ti?n?.A ???t?m is a ??ll??ti?n ?f ??rt unifi?d t? ????m?li?h an ?v?r?ll g??l.If ?n? part ?f th? ???t?m i? r?m?v?d, the nat ure of th? ???t?m is changed as well.A ???t?m ??n b? l??k?d ?t ?? h?ving inputs (?.g., r???ur??? ?u?h ?? r?w m?t?ri?l?, m?n??, t??hn?l?gi??, people), ?r??????? (?.g., ?l?nning, ?rg?nizing, motivating, ?nd controlling), ?ut?ut? (products ?r services) ?nd outcomes (?.g., ?nh?n??d ?u?lit? ?f life ?r ?r?du?tivit? for ?u?t?m?r?/?li?nt?, productivity).S??t?m? ?h?r? f??db??k among each ?f th??? f?ur ?????t? ?f th? ???t?m.The Systems Th??r? may seem ?uit? b??i?. Yet, decades ?f management training and ?r??ti??? in th? workplace h?v? n?t f?ll?w?d thi? th??r?.Onl? recently, with tr?m?nd?u? ?h?ng?? f??ing ?rg?niz?ti?n? ?nd h?w th?? ???r?t?, h?v? ?du??t?r? ?nd managers ??m? to face thi? new w?? of l??king at thing?.The ?ff??t ?f systems th??r? in m?n?g?m?nt i? that it h?l?? m?n?g?r? to l??k at the organization more br??dl?.It h?? also ?n?bl?d m?n?g?r? t? int?r?r?t ??tt?rn? ?nd events in th? workplace â€" i.?., b? ?n?bling managers t? r???gniz? the various ??rt? of the ?rg?niz?ti?n, ?nd, in part icular, th? int?rr?l?ti?n? ?f th? parts.Systems th??r? was proposed in the 1940s b? the biologist Ludwig v?n Bertalanffy ?nd furth?r?d b? R??? Ashby (1964). Von B?rt?l?nff? was reacting ?g?in?t b?th reductionism ?nd ?tt?m?ting to r?viv? th? unity of ??i?n??. He i? ??n?id?r?d to be th? f?und?r and ?rin?i??l ?uth?r of g?n?r?l ???t?m? th??r?.Von B?rt?l?nff? (1968) wr?t? th?t a ???t?m i? a ??m?l?x ?f int?r??ting ?l?m?nt? ?nd th?t they ?r? ???n t?, and interact with their ?nvir?nm?nt?. In ?dditi?n, th?? ??n acquire ?u?lit?tiv?l? new ?r???rti?? through emergence, thu? they ?r? in a ??ntinu?l ?v?luti?n.S??t?m thinking i? both ??rt-t?-wh?l? and wh?l?-t?-??rt thinking about making ??nn??ti?n? between th? v?ri?u? elements ?? th?t th?? fit together ?? a whole f?r a ???t?m thinking design model.X Y Theory By Douglas Mcgregor Th??r? X ?nd Theory Y are th??ri?? ?f hum?n m?tiv?ti?n ?nd m?n?g?m?nt. Th?? were created and d?v?l???d Douglas McGregor at the  MIT Sloan School of Management, initi?ll? ? r???nt?d at a m?n?g?m?nt conference in 1957, ?nd d?v?l???d during th? 1960?.Th??? tw? th??ri?? describe ??ntr??ting m?d?l? ?f workforce motivation ???li?d b? managers in human resource management, ?rg?niz?ti?n?l behavior, ?rg?niz?ti?n?l communication and ?rg?niz?ti?n?l d?v?l??m?nt.A???rding to th? models, the two ?????ing sets ?f g?n?r?l assumptions of h?w w?rk?r? ?r? motivated form the basis f?r tw? diff?r?nt managerial styles.Theory X ?tr????? th? im??rt?n?? ?f strict supervision, external r?w?rd?, ?nd penalties: in contrast, Theory Y highlight? th? m?tiv?ting r?l? ?f job satisfaction ?nd encourages workers t? approach t??k? without dir??t ?u??rvi?i?n.Theory XTheory x i? based ?n pessimistic ???um?ti?n? regarding th? t??i??l w?rk?r.Thi? m?n?g?m?nt ?t?l? ?u?????? that th? t??i??l w?rk?r has little t? n? ?mbiti?n, ?hi?? ?w?? fr?m w?rk ?r r????n?ibiliti??, ?nd i? individu?l-g??l oriented.Generally, Th??r? X ?t?l? m?n?g?r? believe their ?l?v?? ?r? less intelligent th?n the m?n?g?r? ar e, lazier than th? m?n?g?r? are, ?r w?rk solely for a ?u?t?in?bl? in??m?.Due to these ???um?ti?n?, Theory X ??n?lud?? the t??i??l workforce ???r?t?? m?r? ?ffi?i?ntl? under a hands-on ???r???h t? management.Th? Theory X m?n?g?r b?li?v?? th?t all ??ti?n? should be tr???d ?nd th? r????n?ibl? individual given a direct r?w?rd ?r a r??rim?nd ????rding t? th? ??ti?n? outcomes. Thi? m?n?g?ri?l ?t?l? is more effective wh?n u??d in a workforce th?t i? n?t intrin?i??ll? motivated t? perform.According t? M?Gr?g?r, th?r? ?r? two ?????ing approaches t? im?l?m?nting Th??r? X: th? hard approach ?nd th? soft ???r???h.The h?rd approach depends ?n close supervision, intimidation, ?nd imminent ?uni?hm?nt. Thi? ???r???h ??n ??t?nti?ll? yield a hostile, minimally cooperative w?rk f?r?? that ??uld h?rb?r resentment t?w?rd? management.The ??ft approach i? th? lit?r?l ?????it?, ?h?r??t?riz?d b? leniency ?nd l??? strictly r?gul?t?d rules in h???? f?r high workplace m?r?l? and th?r?f?r? cooperative ?m?l?????. Im?l?m?nting a ???t?m th?t i? t?? ??ft ??uld result in an entitled, l?w-?ut?ut w?rkf?r??.McGregor believes b?th ends of th? ????trum ?r? t?? ?xtr?m? for ?ffi?i?nt real world application. In?t??d, McGregor f??l? th?t somewhere between the tw? approaches w?uld b? th? m??t ?ff??tiv? implementation ?f Th??r? X.Ov?r?ll, Theory X generally proves to be most effective in terms ?f ??n?i?t?n?? of w?rk. Alth?ugh m?n?g?r? ?nd supervisors are in ?lm??t ??m?l?t? ??ntr?l ?f the w?rk, thi? ?r?du??? a m?r? systematic ?nd unif?rm product or work fl?w.Theory X can also b?n?fit a w?rk place th?t i? m?r? ?uit?d t?w?rd? an ????mbl? lin? ?r m?nu?l l?b?r type of ???u??ti?n.Utilizing theory X in th??? t???? ?f work ??nditi?n? allow the ?m?l???? to ????i?liz? in a ??rti?ul?r area ?ll?wing th? ??m??n? t? mass-produce m?r? ?u?ntit? and higher ?u?lit? w?rk, which in turns brings more ?r?fit.Th??r? YIn ??ntr??t, Th??r? Y m?n?g?r? act ?n the b?li?f th?t people in th? w?rkf?r?? ?r? int?rn?ll? m?tiv?t?d, enjoy th? ir l?b?r in th? ??m??n?, ?nd work t? better themselves without a dir??t reward in r?turn.Th??r? Y ?m?l????? are considered t? b? ?n? ?f th? most v?lu?bl? ????t? t? th? ??m??n?, ?nd truly drive th? internal workings of th? corporation.W?rk?r? ?dditi?n?ll? t?nd t? t?k? full r????n?ibilit? f?r th?ir w?rk ?nd d? n?t r??uir? the need ?f constant ?u??rvi?i?n in order t? ?r??t? a ?u?lit? and higher standard ?r?du?t.B???u?? of the dr??ti? ?h?ng? ??m??r?d t? the Th??r? X w?? of dir??ting, Theory Y managers gr?vit?t? t?w?rd? r?l?ting t? th? w?rk?r ?n a more ??r??n?l l?v?l, ?? ??????d t? a more conductive and t???hing based r?l?ti?n?hi?.A? a r??ult, Th??r? Y followers may h?v? a b?tt?r relationship with th?ir high?r-u??, ?? w?ll ?? potentially h?ving a h??lthi?r ?tm???h?r? in th? w?rk?l???. Managers in thi? theory tend t? u?? a d?m??r?ti? t??? ?f leadership because w?rk?r? will be working in a w?? that d??? n?t need ?u??rvi?i?n th? most.In ??m??ri??n t? Th??r? X, Th??r? Y ?dd? m?r? ?f a democr atic ?nd free feel in the workforce allowing the ?m?l???? t? d??ign, ??n?tru?t, ?nd ?ubli?h th?ir w?rk? in a timely manner in ??-?rdin?n?? t? their workload ?nd ?r?j??t?.Aydin r???rt? a ?tud? undertaken to ?n?l?z? th? different management ?t?l?? ?f ?r?f????r? ?t a Turki?h University.Thi? ?tud? f?und th?t th? highl? ?u??rvi??d Theory X m?n?g?m?nt ?ff??t?d th? research ??rf?rm?n?? ?f th? academics n?g?tiv?l?. In g?n?r?l, th? ?tud? suggests that th? professional ??tting ?nd r????r?h-b???d w?rk th?t professors ??rf?rm i? b??t m?n?g?d u?ing a Th??r? Y m?n?g?m?nt ?t?l?.Whil? Th??r? Y may seem ??tim?l, it d??? have some dr?wb??k?. Whil? th?r? i? a m?r? ??r??n?l ?nd individu?li?ti? feel, thi? does l??v? r??m f?r error in t?rm? ?f ??n?i?t?n?? ?nd unif?rmit?.Th? workplace l??k? unv?r?ing rul?? and ?r??ti???, and thi? ??n result in an in??n?i?t?nt ?r?du?t whi?h ??uld potentially b? detrimental t? th? ?u?lit? standards ?nd strict guid?lin?? ?f a giv?n ??m??n?.Contingency Approach To Management The ??nting?n?? approach to m?n?g?m?nt is b???d ?n the idea th?t there i? n? one b??t w?? t? m?n?g? ?nd that t? b? ?ff??tiv?, ?l?nning, organizing, l??ding, and controlling mu?t b? t?il?r?d t? th? ??rti?ul?r ?ir?um?t?n??? faced by ?n ?rg?niz?ti?n.M?n?g?r? have always asked ?u??ti?n? such ??:Wh?t is the right thing to do?Sh?uld we h?v? a m??h?ni?ti? ?r an ?rg?ni? ?tru?tur??A fun?ti?n?l ?r divi?i?n?l ?tru?tur??Wid? ?r n?rr?w ???n? ?f m?n?g?m?nt?Tall ?r fl?t ?rg?niz?ti?n?l structures?Simple ?r ??m?l?x control ?nd coordination m??h?ni?m??Sh?uld we b? ??ntr?liz?d ?r d???ntr?liz?d?Sh?uld w? use t??k ?r ????l? ?ri?nt?d l??d?r?hi? styles?Wh?t motivational ???r???h?? ?nd in??ntiv? programs ?h?uld we u???Th? ??nting?n?? ???r???h t? m?n?g?m?nt (?l?? ??ll?d th? ?itu?ti?n?l approach) ???um?? th?t th?r? i? n? univ?r??l ?n?w?r t? ?u?h ?u??ti?n? b???u?? ?rg?niz?ti?n?, people, and situations vary and ?h?ng? over tim?.Thu?, the right thing to do depends ?n a complex v?ri?t? of ?riti??l environmental ?nd internal ??nting?n?i??.The Contingency P?r????tiv? ?nd Org?niz?ti?n Th??r?Environmental ?h?ng? ?nd un??rt?int?, w?rk technology, ?nd th? ?iz? ?f a ??m??n? are ?ll identified ?? ?nvir?nm?nt?l f??t?r? im???ting the ?ff??tiv?n??? ?f different organizational forms.A???rding to th? ??nting?n?? perspective, ?t?bl? environments ?ugg??t m??h?ni?ti? ?tru?tur?? th?t emphasize ??ntr?liz?ti?n, f?rm?liz?ti?n, ?t?nd?rdiz?ti?n, and specialization to ??hi?v? ?ffi?i?n?? ?nd ??n?i?t?n??.C?rt?int? ?nd ?r?di?t?bilit? permit th? u?? ?f policies, rul??, and ?r???dur?? t? guid? d??i?i?n m?king for routine tasks and ?r?bl?m?. Un?t?bl? ?nvir?nm?nt? suggest organic structures which emphasize decentralization t? achieve fl?xibilit? and ?d??t?bilit?.Un??rt?int? and unpredictability require g?n?r?l ?r?bl?m solving m?th?d? f?r n?nr?utin? tasks ?nd problems.Paul Lawrence ?nd J?? Lorsch ?ugg??t th?t ?rg?niz?ti?n?l unit? operating in diff?ring ?nvir?nm?nt? develop diff?r?nt int?rn?l unit ?h?r??t?ri?ti??, ?nd th at th? gr??t?r th? internal diff?r?n???, th? greater the n??d f?r ???rdin?ti?n between unit?.Joan W??dw?rd found th?t fin?n?i?ll? ?u?????ful m?nuf??turing ?rg?niz?ti?n? with diff?r?nt t???? ?f w?rk t??hn?l?gi?? (such ?? unit ?r small b?t?h; l?rg?-b?t?h or mass-production; or ??ntinu?u?-?r?????) diff?r?d in th? numb?r ?f m?n?g?m?nt levels, span ?f m?n?g?m?nt, ?nd the degree ?f w?rk?r specialization.She linked diff?r?n??? in ?rg?niz?ti?n t? firm performance and ?ugg??t?d th?t certain organizational forms were ???r??ri?t? f?r certain types ?f work t??hn?l?gi??.Organizational ?iz? is another ??nting?n?? v?ri?bl? th?ught t? im???t the effectiveness ?f diff?r?nt ?rg?niz?ti?n?l forms. Sm?ll organizations ??n behave inf?rm?ll? whil? larger organizations tend t? b???m? m?r? f?rm?liz?d.The ?wn?r of a ?m?ll organization may dir??tl? control most things, but large ?rg?niz?ti?n? r??uir? m?r? complex ?nd indirect control m??h?ni?m?.L?rg? ?rg?niz?ti?n? ??n h?v? more specialized staff, unit?, ?nd j obs. H?n??, a divi?i?n?l ?tru?tur? i? n?t ???r??ri?t? for a ?m?ll organization but may be for a l?rg? ?rg?niz?ti?n.In addition to the contingencies id?ntifi?d above, ?u?t?m?r div?r?it? and th? globalization of bu?in??? may r??uir? product ?r service div?r?it?, ?m?l???? diversity, and ?v?n th? ?r??ti?n of special unit? or divisions.Organizations ???r?ting within th? United St?t?? may h?v? to ?d??t t? v?ri?ti?n? in l???l, state, and f?d?r?l l?w? ?nd r?gul?ti?n?.Org?niz?ti?n? ???r?ting internationally m?? h?v? to adapt th?ir ?rg?niz?ti?n?l ?tru?tur??, managerial practices, ?nd ?r?du?t? ?r ??rvi??? t? diff?ring ?ultur?l v?lu??, expectations, ?nd ?r?f?r?n???.Th? availability ?f ?u???rt institutions ?nd th? ?v?il?bilit? ?nd ???t ?f fin?n?i?l r???ur??? may influ?n?? ?n ?rg?niz?ti?n? d??i?i?n t? ?r?du?? ?r purchase n?w ?r?du?t?.E??n?mi? ??nditi?n? ??n affect ?n organizations hiring and layoff ?r??ti??? as well as wage, ??l?r?, ?nd in??ntiv? structures. Technological change ??n ?ignifi??ntl? ?ff??t ?n ?rg?niz?ti?n.Th? use ?f r?b?ti?? ?ff??t? the l?v?l and t???? ?f ?kill? needed in employees. M?d?rn inf?rm?ti?n t??hn?l?g? b?th permits ?nd r??uir?? changes in communication ?nd int?r??ti?n ??tt?rn? within and between ?rg?niz?ti?n?.CONCLUSIONW? have tri?d t? d???d? several management th??ri?? inv?nt?d b? m?n to h?l? m?n?g? his f?ll?w man.Th??? theories ?b?ut m?n?g?m?nt diff?r fr?m each ?th?r, and ???h contributes something t? ?ur kn?wl?dg? ?f wh?t m?n?g?r? d?.Each ???r???h ?r th??r? has it? ?wn characteristics ?nd ?dv?nt?g?? ?? well ?? limitations. A? we stated in th? beginning, hum?n b?ing? ?r? th? most complex ?nd complicated thing? ?n the whole ?l?n?t, it w?uld have b??n ???i?r t? ?v?id ?n? int?r??ti?n? with humans ?t ?ll, especially in th? professional aspects, but w? ?r? indi???n??bl? once it ??m?? to ?r?du?ti?n.Th?r?f?r? m?n?g?m?nt theories where inv?nt?d.Th??? th??ri?? are being u??d u? till today in government agencies and ?rg?niz?ti?n?, b?th ?r?fit and n?n-?r?fit? . Some ?r? ??n?id?r?d m??n lik? th? scientific m?th?d b? Fr?dri? W. T??l?r ?nd even b?ring.Some w?r? ?l?? ??n?id?r?d in?ff??tiv? lik? th? Bur??u?r?ti? Theory by M?x W?b?r, ?iting ?ur ?ubli? ??rvi?? and g?v?rnm?nt ?g?n?i?? ?f today.H??? ??u g?in?d ??m? management insights fr?m r??ding.

410 Gone

410 Gone 410 Gone 410 Gone

Taxi Driver Film Analysis - 717 Words

Taxi Driver: The Filth of the Streets and of Self The opening shot is Robert DeNiro’s character, Travis Bickle’s eyes in the review mirror intensely gazing at the city. It then transitions to the view outside of the taxi to the colorful, hectic streets of New York City. This exaggerates the importance of the taxi itself and the main character’s point of view from within it. Bickle is a veteran Marine who can’t sleep and decides to take the job of driving the long hours. He narrates the film as well using dialogue from the journal that he keeps. Through the imagery and symbolism of the taxi itself, the musical backdrop, and the artistic editing, Martin Scorcese’s American psychological thriller captures the filth and futility and filth of†¦show more content†¦It gets quiet then and he attempts to kill himself but he has no more bullets to do so. He wants to die but cannot, so he sits and waits for his fate as Iris continues screaming. He is found be the media to be a hero, the parents of Ir is (who was not from a compound) were grateful. It poses many philosophical questions as to whether our actions or desires define who we are. He had planned on killing the senator, yet ended up in nearly happenstance, aShow MoreRelatedThe â€Å"Taxi Driver† Starring Robert Di Niro, Directed By1145 Words   |  5 PagesThe â€Å"Taxi Driver† starring Robert Di Niro, directed by Martin Scorsese, remains to be a classic film that continues to be recognized as a cinematographic masterpiece. This psychological thriller released in 1976, highlights Travis Binkle’s life as a taxi driver in New York City. Scorsese brilliantly captures his struggle with his own thoughts and effort to reintegrate into society as an ex-US. Marine. However, Travis is known to be a complex character that is somewhat misunderstood by others becauseRead MoreMedia Violence And The Effect It Has On Actual Behavior1500 Words   |  6 PagesBehaviour. While many argue that film violence has little or no influence on actual behaviour, this essay will argue that media violence has a direct influence on actual behaviour in adolescence and adults. The main ideas I will put forward are. How Media Violence Increases Children’s tolerance of Real-Life Aggression, Violence Exposure in real-life, Violent Film Characters and their portrayal of violent acts, the effects of violence in emerging adults, film violence and subsequent aggressive tendenciesRead MoreEssay on Music in Scorsese films2910 Words   |  12 Pagesï » ¿2) For Martin Scorsese, popular music in films ‘doesn’t have to serve simply as mood music or be an unimaginative device for establishing a time period.’ (Romney Wootton, 1995: 1)Taking this as a starting point, discuss the use of popular music in either one or two films or the work of one film director. I will be looking at the films of Martin Scorsese regarding his statement that popular music in films ‘doesn’t have to serve simply as mood music or be an unimaginative device for establishingRead MoreAnalysis Of `` I Love Beijing ``1075 Words   |  5 Pagesarrangement, it would be very confusing to distinguish space from freedom. For this journal entry, I will base an analysis of space on the film, â€Å"I love Beijing† with references from the article, â€Å"Money, space, and Time†, by Harvey. â€Å"I love Beijing† is a remarkable film about city space and in my humble opinion, human responses to it. The main character, a young man in his late twenties, drives a taxi for a living. Apparently, his occupation or lack of presence has caused his wife to file for divorce. AsRead MoreScorsese1744 Words   |  7 Pagesother should have produced it from the 1970s onwards. Discuss the origins and main developments of auteur theory then examine the works of Howard Hawks and Martin Scorsese with relevance to their status as auteur directors. In having their films examined as auteurs of the cinema, both Howard Hawks and Martin Scorsese have been described as great artists whose body of work demonstrates repeated themes and motifs, that put in context reveals a particular belief and world view that is held byRead More Auteur Theory: Howard Hawks and Martin Scorsese Essay examples1722 Words   |  7 Pagesother should have produced it from the 1970s onwards. Discuss the origins and main developments of auteur theory then examine the works of Howard Hawks and Martin Scorsese with relevance to their status as auteur directors. In having their films examined as auteurs of the cinema, both Howard Hawks and Martin Scorsese have been described as great artists whose body of work demonstrates repeated themes and motifs, that put in context reveals a particular belief and world view that is held byRead MoreMe and You and Memento and Fargo by J.J. Murphy1640 Words   |  7 Pagesnarrative is vital, whether it be in films, books, theatre, etc. It is a frame for a story to work within. While there is a traditional method and formula to structuring a film narrative, filmmakers all over the world have experimented with breaking the norm and trying new ways to structure a film. It tested the viewer’s notion of what structure is and how a narrative can be told. It was also new and something that audiences were not used to. Even now, a film that moves too far away from theRead MoreThe Battle Of Algiers ( A Reenactment Of Algeria s Fight For Independence1328 Words   |  6 PagesAn imperative aspect of art is that it is open to interpretation and analysis. If the piece of art is significant, it will be thought or emotion provoking and uncensored. It is not the role of art take cautious steps in an attempt to leave its audience unoffended, but rather to embrace diversity of thought and creativity to portray untainted ideas. Filmmaking—being a form of art—follows the same guidelines and thus shapes society through its objectionable and often jarring subject matter. The BattleRead MoreThe One Percent Research Paper1791 Words   |  8 Pagesto watch the film. I soon came to realize I was enamored by this film, â€Å"The One Percent,† and it remains one of my favorite documentaries of all time. The documentary deals with the disparity between the wealthy elite and the citizenry and how they are both so far removed from one another. â€Å"As of 2010, the top 1% of households (the upper class) owned 35.4% of all privately held wealth.† (Domhoff, 2010, The Wealth Distribution, para. 1). The producer and interviewer presents this film through manyRead More Identifying Heroes: The Godfather and Pulp Fiction Essay3269 Words   |  14 Pages Identifying Heroes: The Godfather and Pulp Fiction The form of Classical Hollywood films is, first and foremost, invisible. In a Classical Hollywood film, the narrative is foremost, and style serves the narrative. Camera angles, lighting and editing patterns such as the shot/reverse-shot pattern aim to give us the best possible perspective on the unfolding events(1). These events are arranged in a strongly causality-oriented linear narrative, with one event causing the next. This narrative is arranged

Multiculturalism in Children’s Writing in the US in the 1980s Free Essays

string(33) " may be applied to the analysis\." Introduction This essay will firstly give an overview of the history of multicultural children’s literature. Secondly, it will map out key theories and debates surrounding multicultural children’s literature in the United States. Thirdly the essay will analyse two books set within the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that were published in the United States in the late 1980s – The Flag Balloon and Israel Is. We will write a custom essay sample on Multiculturalism in Children’s Writing in the US in the 1980s or any similar topic only for you Order Now The essay will analyse if and how multiculturalism is presented in the text and the images and identify how the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is informed in the books. Each analysis will also assess whether the multiculturalism in the text and the images seems imposed or natural. The analysis of each book will also briefly assess whether the multiculturalism is natural or imposed in the society at the time each book was published. THE HISTORY OF MULTICUTURALISM IN CHILDREN’S LITERATURE According to Gopalakrishnan (2010), there is limited evidence and much debate as to when multicultural children’s literature began. For example, certain theorists argue that multicultural literature predates the 20th century (Norton and Norton 2003; Sims Bishop 2007). Regardless of when multicultural children’s writing was created, most theorists agree that before 1965, the number of multicultural children’s books was limited (Gopalakrishnan 2010). The year 1965 is described as the turning point for multicultural literature when a widely published article entitled ‘The All White World of Children’s Books’ (Larrick 1965) sparked a flurry of activity in the years following it. In the article, Larrick (1965) describes a survey she conducted, where she found that of 5206 books published in 1962, 1963 and 1964, only 349 or 6.7% included African American characters in their text or illustrations. After this article was published, two significant groups formed: the Council on Interracial Books for Children (in 1965/1966) and the Coretta Scott King Award, established for authors and illustrators of African American and Black descent in 1972 (Gopalakrishnan 2010). After the formation of these groups, another study similar to that of Larrick (1965) was conducted in 1979 by Jeanne Chall and her colleagues. In this survey Chall found that there was over an 100% increase in the number of children’s books that featured an African American character (14.4% of all children’s multicultural literature in the United States) (Cohen and Cowen 2008). According to Cohen and Cowan (2008) in the late 1980s and early 1990s multicultural children’s publishing experienced a spurt. Almost all major publishers increased their multicultural book lists and the number of smaller publishers specialising in multicultural books increased. This increase was due to sensitivity and growing awareness on the publisher’s part and also the need to purchase these books as the school demographics and requirements changed. Since multicultural children’s books now form a more significant part of the literary landscape, the subject has attracted a number of theorists and scholars who have developed their own theories surrounding children’s multicultural literature Banks and Banks (2001). Although theorists of multicultural children’s literature attempt to theorise and analyse a myriad of topics surrounding the subject of multicultural children’s literature, one of the main theoretical debates surrounds the question, what defines multicultural children’s literature? There are three theoretical approaches surrounding the definition of multicultural literature. The first approach is the all inclusive approach. Advocates of this approach argue that all literature should be defined as multicultural since, in their opinion, every human being is multicultural and each individual may describe their identity in a variety of ways (Shannon 1994; Schwartz 1995; Fisherman 1995). The second approach is the multiple + culture approach. This approaches argues that multicultural children’s writing is defined as books that are simply about more than one culture in a society regardless of who is the dominant group and who is the dominated (Cai 1998). Bloor’s (2010) definition of multiculturalism expands one step further from the multiple + cultures definition and describes a multicultural society as not one where multiple cultures merely exist, but one where diversity is promoted and the mosaic of cultures is celebrated and encouraged. The third approach is the exclusive approach. This approach is one where the theorists believe that children’s multicultural literature should only be defined as literature that is about populations that have experienced marginalisation and oppression. Some proponents of this approach state that multicultural children’s literature should only be defined as literature by and/or about people of colour since this form of literature gives people of colour the opportunity to have a voice. (Lindgren 1991; Harris as cited in Cai, 2002). In addition to the different approaches to defining multicultural children’s literature, Sims Bishop has provided us with a theoretical classification of multicultural books. Sims Bishop (1982, 2007) divides multicultural children’s literature into three sub groups: melting pot literature, socially conscious literature and culturally conscious literature. Melting pot books are characterised by those where aside from skin colour or a cultural definition, the story could apply to any character in the United States (Gopalakrishnan 2010). The second sub group of children’s multicultural literature is categorised as socially conscious books. According to Sims Bishop (2007), socially conscious books introduce one cultural group and its unique experiences to the mainstream to make â€Å"socially conscious† or to educate the larger group about the trials and tribulations of a unique cultural group. The main purpose of socially conscious books is â€Å"to engender empathy and sympathy [and] to promote tolerance for racial desegregation or integration† (Sims Bishop 2007: 61). Thirdly, culturally conscious books, according to Sims Bishop (1982), are those that depict the languages and cultural traditions of a group’s experiences most often from an insider’s perspective. The working definition of multiculturalism in this essay will be the second approach, the multiple + culture definition where there is more than one culture in a society regardless of who is the dominant group and the dominated. The analysis will also explore whether the books expand to Bloor’s (2010) version of multiculturalism where the mosaic of culture is encouraged and celebrated. While analysing how multiculturalism is presented in each book, Sims Bishop (1982, 2007) classification of multicultural children’s literature may be applied to the analysis. You read "Multiculturalism in Children’s Writing in the US in the 1980s" in category "Essay examples" THE FLAG BALLOON HOW IS MULTICULTURALISM PRESENTED IN THE TEXT AND THE IMAGES OF THE FLAG BALLOON Multiculturalism is demonstrated immediately on the cover of this book and in the second line of text. The cover of the book has been illustrated in the colours of the Palestinian flag. Flags are a means of representing an identity, and there can only be an ‘identity’ if there is an ‘other’ (Berreby 2008). Although flags tend be representative of a country, state or nation, the second line of text in the book tells us that this flag is certainly not for a country. The narrator asserts ‘I have a flag but no country’ (Stickles and Townsley 1988: 7). The narrator continues to say ‘the soldiers who occupy my town and make all the laws say it is wrong to fly my flag’ (Stickles and Townsley 1988: 7). From this text we can deduce that these are a group of people who are a part of a country where their culture, customs and even identity may not be accepted. Nonetheless, this text clearly demonstrates that this a society in which the law mak ers have different ideological beliefs to those representing the cultural minority. In summary, using Cai’s (1998) definition of multiculturalism, multiple cultures living in one society, the cover page and first page of text depicts a multicultural, albeit uncomfortable society. Multiculturalism is further demonstrated in the text, while simultaneously informing the reader about the Israeli-Palestinian. For example, the father of the narrator says he is ‘making bread for the family whose house was destroyed by the soldiers’ (Stickles and Townsley 1988: 11). We are informed that ‘the soldiers shut down the school’ (Stickles and Townsley 1988: 15) and the narrator’s brother is ‘beaten up by soldiers’ (Stickles and Townsley 1988: 15). The text is educating the reader about the trials and difficulties experienced by the Palestinians in the town. This is a clear example of Sims Bishop’s (1982, 2007) sub category of socially conscious, multicultural, children’s literature where the reader is informed of the trials and tribulations of the community (Gopalakrishnan 2010). The images of flag day further emphasise the difficulties faced by the Palestinians and encourages the reader to feel empathy and sympathy for their situation. This is a further demonstration that this book is an example of socially conscious multicultural literature. There are three images depicting how happy, joyful and cheerful the Palestinians are on flag day. Firstly, on page 23, in the square where the festivities of flag day are due to take place, each person has a smile on their face. Secondly, on page 25 there are six Palestinian men playing a series of instruments; while playing the instruments they have smiles on their faces. Thirdly, page 25 depicts five people holding Palestinian flags and smiling (Stickles and Townsley 1988). These images are sharp contrasts to the next three images, which depict the arrival and the after-effects of the opposing force. Firstly, on the image on page 26 we see three angry looking men with rifles in a car. The text informs us that these are the soldiers. Secondly, on page 27 are five soldiers carrying guns. Finally, on page 29 the image shows us the square where the festivities were taking place. All the decorations have been destroyed. In this image we see the ultimate clash of the two cultures, who live together in one society. Although inharmonious, this image demonstrates two groups living in one society (Stickles and Townsley 1988). These images fit the multiple + culture definition (Cai 1998), where two cultures live together within one society regardless of who is dominating and who is dominated. The dichotomy is emphasised further when we see the narrator of the book release her balloon bearing the Palestinian flag into the air. This image is followed by an image of a soldier attempting to shoot the balloon down. The penultimate image speaks volumes regarding the dichotomy between Israel and Palestine. The image shows four Palestinian children cheering, with a look of satisfaction on their faces that the balloon bearing the Palestinian flag is flying free. In contrast to this, the Israeli soldier is looking towards the balloon, holding his gun and frowning. The final image shows the balloon bearing the Palestinian flag flying high above the land (Stickles and Townsley 1988). In summary, multiculturalism is depicted throughout the text and images in the book however the multiculturalism found in this book is characterised by the basic definition of multiculturalism, that is multiple cultures living in one society (Cai 1998). The book does not expand to Bloor’s (2010) version of multiculturalism where the mosaic of cultures is celebrated in the society. Although, the book demonstrates the most basic definition of multiculturalism, the book does fit into Sims Bishop’s (2007) category of social and cultural consciousness, where we learn about the Israel and Palestinian conflict from one cultural perspective and where the reader is encouraged to empathise and sympathise with the narrator, her family and the town’s people.. In essence this book does demonstrate a multicultural society at its most basic level and the book does inform us, albeit from only one perspective of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict The book is effective in conveying multiple cultures living in one society since throughout the book the contrast can be seen between the Palestinians and the Israeli soldiers. DOES THE MULTICULTURALISM PRESENTED IN THE BOOK SEEM IMPOSED OR NATURAL The interpretation of the book by the reader is highly subjective (as demonstrated by a variety of reader-response theorists (Rosenblatt 1978; Bleich 1978) and to a large extent, the answer to this question depends on a variety of factors including the ideological beliefs of the reader and the knowledge and experiences of the reader. For these reasons, it is problematic to prescribe whether or not the multiculturalism in the text and illustrations is imposed or natural. Each reader will interpret this differently. It may be safer to look at the text and illustrations from both angles. One may argue that the images and the text of the book is imposed, forced and unnatural. After all, it is clear from the text and images as described in the examples that the Israeli soldiers do not want the Palestinians to raise the Palestinian Flag and the Palestinians do not want their territory to be occupied by the Israeli soldiers, implying that the multiculturalism is forced, unnatural and unwanted. On the other hand, one might argue that the multiculturalism presented in the text and images is natural and that regardless of the reasons behind these cultures living side by side, both groups live in the same society regardless of who is dominating and who is dominated. This argument would insist that if the reader ignores reasons or circumstance, multiculturalism is natural in the text and images. At the time the book was written, the world was protesting against the treatment of the Palestinians including people in the United States (Neff 1997), thus to these people the multiculturalism would appeared imposed. In fact, regardless of political affiliation it is doubtful that one would describe the society as a natural multicultural one since the multiculturalism was a result of war. ISRAEL IS HOW IS MULTICULTURALISM PRESENTED IN THE TEXT AND IMAGES IN ISRAEL IS From the cover page of this book, we see a striking image of multiculturalism. Three children appear to be on a Muslim prayer rug (Encyclopaedia Britannica 2008) hovering above Jerusalem. The boy is wearing a Kippah; Observant Jewish men keep their heads covered by wearing a skull cap (Kippah) (Board of deputies of British Jews 2006)) indicating that he is Jewish. The second child on the prayer rug has black braided hair in pigtails. While there is no confirmation on the cover, this girl may be Palestinian. Interestingly both the Jewish boy and the girl who may be Palestinian have taken their shoes off, indicating that the Jewish boy is showing respect for the Muslim prayer rug (Encyclopaedia Britannica 2008). There is another girl who is kneeling on the prayer rug. She has her shoes on, however her shoes are not on the prayer rug. Again could she be showing respect for the other culturesThe prayer rug is hovering in the air and in the background are scene depicts Jerusalem. We see t he Dome of the Rock which is known to be symbolic to the Jewish, Muslim and Christian faiths (Petersen 1994). In summary, the cover page surely demonstrates multiculturalism in Israel as we have three children from different cultures together on the prayer rug. This represents three cultures in one society (multiple + cultures) (Cai 1998). The image described is significant as it represents harmony between cultures when at the time (late 1980s), there were hostilities between Israelis and Palestinians (Neff 1997). The second page most definitely represents a society of multiple cultures living harmoniously together. In this illustration there a number of images that demonstrate multiculturalism. Firstly there is a Jewish woman, identified by the fact that she is wearing a Tichel; Observant orthodox married women cover their hair in public (Board of Deputies of British Jews 2006). Interestingly, she is purchasing some products from a woman that is dressed in the colours of the Palestinian flag – black, green and red. In the background there is a man wearing a Kippah but also wearing non- traditional clothes. He may represent a more liberal approach to Judaism. He and his wife (who is not wearing Tichel) are purchasing items from a man wearing traditional Arab attire. In this scene people who seem to interacting with each other are smiling with one another indicating peaceful, harmonious relations between each culture (Topek and Kahn 1988). Not only do these images depict multiple culture s living together in one society, the images are also congruent with Bloor’s (2010) definition of multiculturalism, where the mosaic is celebrated. One interesting scene demonstrating multiculturalism and the comparison between Palestine and Israel is the scene on page 6, which contains the text ‘big farms’ (Topek and Kahn 1988: 6). The farm appears to a Kibbutz demonstrated by the houses towards the left hand side of the page. What is interesting is that although this a Jewish Kibbutz, in the middle of the page there is a large chicken, illustrated in red, green and outlined in black, the colours of the Palestinian flag. The image shows the backdrop of a Jewish Kibbutz and in the foreground a chicken coloured in the Palestinian colours peacefully standing on a cow. Again this image demonstrates peaceful relations between Israel and Palestine and two cultures living together harmoniously side by side. This is Bloor’s (2010) definition of multiculturalism. In the penultimate page, there are dove (a symbol of peace (Soucek 2006)) above a group of people. From the far left is a woman without a Tichel, standing next to a man who is wearing a Kippah, but also western clothes. This family may represent a more liberal attitude to Judaism. He is standing next to a man with a beard, who is wearing a long black coat, black trousers and a black hat. His wife is also wearing a Tichel and his daughter’s skirt below her knees. This family appears to be an observant Orthodox Jewish family. Next to the more conservative Jewish family is what might be assumed to be a more liberal Palestinian family. They are happily standing next to a family who are dressed in a more traditional Palestinian outfit. The son of the more conservative Jewish family is wearing blue and white and the son of the family is also wearing blue (the colours of the Israeli flag). The Jewish boy has his arm extended to the Palestinian liberal boy indicating a desire for a pe aceful multicultural society. The different cultures together on one page fit both the definition of multiple cultures in one society (Cai 1998) and also Bloor’s (2010) definition of multiculturalism where cultures are living together harmoniously. In summary, the book Israel Is certainly demonstrates a multicultural society, both in the most basic of definitions where there are multiple cultures living together in one society and in more advanced definitions; this book also fulfils Bloor’s (2010) definition of multiculturalism where the mosaic is celebrated and encouraged. The intent of the authors seems to be to encourage peace and harmony between all cultures in Israel. The only way this book informs us of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is its underlying insistence on peace. There are no images of war, only images of different cultures living in harmony. DOES THE MULTICULTURALISM PRESENTED IN THE BOOK SEEM IMPOSED OR NATURAL The answer to this question is subjective and an insider’s perspective may be very different from an outsider’s perspective. From an outsider perspective, nothing appears unnatural about the illustrations; however an individual who lived in Israel during the late 1980s may have differing opinion. For example, an individual who may have experienced hostility from another cultural group may argue that the images presented are unnatural and have been imposed by the authors. Given the events that took place in the late 1980s in Israel (the First Infatida) (Neff 1997) one may argue that the multiculturalism presented in the text is imposed and unnatural due to the hostilities between Palestinians and Israelis. Again, this is very subjective and each individual may have their own interpretation of events based on their own experience and knowledge. Bibliography Au, K. H. (1993) Literacy instruction in multicultural settings. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers. Banks, J. A., Banks, C. M. (2001) (Eds.). Handbook of research on multicultural education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Berreby, D. (2008) Us and Them: The Science of Identity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Bleich, D. (1978) Subjective criticism. London: The John Hopkins University Press. . Bloor, K. (2010) The definitive guide to political ideologies. Milton Keynes: AuthorHouse BOARD OF DEPUTIES OF BRITISH JEWS. (2006) Jewish Family Life and Customs: a practical guide. Available from: http://www.bjpa.org/Publications/details.cfm?PublicationID=14876 [Accessed 11th October 2014]. Cai, M. (1998) Multiple definitions of multicultural literature: Is the debate really just â€Å"ivory tower bickering†. The New Advocate, 11(4), 311–324. Cai, M. (2002) Multicultural literature for children and young adults: Reflections on critical issues. Milton Keynes: Lightning Source. Cohen, V., and Cowen J. (2008) Literacy for Children in an Information Age: Teaching Reading, Writing, and thinking. Bedmont: Thompson Wadsworth. Encyclop?dia Britannica. (2008) Prayer Rug. [Online] Available from http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/474169/prayer-rug [Accessed 11th October 2014]. Fisherman, A. R. (1995) Finding ways in: Redefining multicultural literature. The English Journal, 84(6), 73–79. Gopalakrishnan, A. (2010) Multicultural Children’s Literature: A critical approach. California State University, Los Angeles: Sage Publications Larrick, N. (1965, September). The all white world of children’s books. The Saturday Review, 63–65, 84–85. Norton, E., Norton, S. E. (with McClure, A.). (2003) Through the eyes of a child: An introduction to children’s literature. Upper Saddle Fiver, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall. Lindgren, M. V. (1991) The multicolored mirror: Cultural substance in literature for children and young adults. Fort Atkinson, Wisconsin: Highsmith. Neff D., (1997) The Intifada Erupts, Forcing Israel to Recognize Palestinians Washington Report on Middle East Affairs. December 1997, p. 81-83. Peterson, A. (1994) Dictionary of Islamic Architecture. London: Routledge Rosenblatt, L. M. (1978). The reader the text the poem: The transactional theory of the literary work. Carbondale Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press. Schwartz, E. G. (1995). Crossing borders / shifting paradigms: Multiculturalism and children’s literature. Harvard Educational Review, 65(4), p. 634–651. Shannon, P. (1994). I am the canon: Finding ourselves in multiculturalism. Journal of Children’s Literature, 20(1), p 1–5. Sims Bishop, R. (1982) Shadow and substance: Afro-American experience in contemporary children’s fiction. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English. Sims Bishop, R. (2007). Free within ourselves: The development of African American children’s literature. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Soucek, G. A., (2006) Doves (Complete Pet Owner’s Manual). New York: Barron’s Educational Servies Inc Stevens C. A., (1989) Turkey Palestine: Both Middle Eastern Secular Democracies Washington Report on Middle East Affairs. March 1989, p 17. Stickles, F.C., and Townsley J. (1988) The Flag Balloon. Washington: Amer Educational Trust Topek, S. R., and Kahn, K. J. (1988) Israel Is. United States: Kar-Ben Pub How to cite Multiculturalism in Children’s Writing in the US in the 1980s, Essay examples

Wendell Berry Essay free essay sample

To Buy A Computer,† in the 1987 edition of Harper’s, Wendell Berry was critiqued by readers who felts he was using his wife as a â€Å"drudge. † Berry writes that, â€Å"My wife types my work. She sees things that are wrong and marks them with small checks in the margins. She is my best critic because she is the one most familiar with my habitual errors and weaknesses. She also understands, sometimes better than I do, what ought to be said. † (Pg. 180) But his readers seemed to miss this. To make a full response to them, Berry writes â€Å"Feminism, The Body, and the Machine. † Through his use of quotation marks, tone, and diction, Berry defines and defends his marriage. He illustrates the ironies in how we think and live that have turned us from a sense of mutual belonging to one of individual ownership. Quotation marks can be used to imply a different meaning than a word would normally be associated with. Marriage, in what is evidently its most popular version, is now on the one hand an intimate ‘relationship’ between two successful careerists in the same bed†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Pg. 180) The word relationship tends to have a positive connotation because typically, it’s used to describe friendships, lovers, husbands and wives, mothers and daughters. The word implies something good, something sacred, and something intimate. However, Berry puts the word in quotation marks to essentially make the statement that this particular relationship is a lie. The relationship is not truly a relationship if each partner’s focus is on himself or herself. The same idea is applied to ‘†¦ the ‘married’ couple will typically consume a large quantity of merchandise and a large portion of each other. † (Pg. 180) Marriage insinuates a helpful attitude between a husband and wife, a giving rather than taking. The definition of â€Å"consume† means to destroy. Comparing it to marriage confirms that Berry believes the world’s idea of marriage is a lie. After defining marriage’s most popular version, he writes to confirm that there are some marriages that still believe in the household as an economy. â€Å"To them, ‘mine’ is not so powerful or necessary a pronoun as ‘ours. ’† (Pg. 181) While he doesn’t allude to a different meaning with this use of quotation marks, he does use them to continue to differentiate between his marriage and the rest. â€Å"Ours† means sharing, giving, and working together in a way to allows for quality time and growth within the home. Berry uses tone to undermine and expose the logic of his detractors. â€Å"Their accusation rests on a syllogism of the flimsiest sort†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Pg. 180) Here, Berry uses a mix of sarcasm and a mocking attitude to make his point against the readers. Speaking in regards to their comments, he writes â€Å"†¦ the sort of razor-sharp philosophical distinction that could cause a person to be elected president. † (Pg. 179) By mocking them right off the bat, Berry disarms the comments he can’t bother to take seriously before he defends the things that do take priority. Moving onto a paternal tone, Berry says â€Å"It is clear to me from my experience as a teacher, for example, that children need an ordinary daily association with both parents. † (Pg. 182) He takes on this tone because aside from defining his marriage, he also takes responsibility for educating the people he’s responding to and the people that are reading. I find that Berry uses a lot of irony in his essay. He makes an interesting statement early on in his essay where he says his â€Å"offense† is that he receives help from his wife. Most often, an offense implies a breaking of a social or moral rule. The readers believe that help in a marriage is the same as exploitation or subservience. The irony is that having something uncommon, such as a marriage where the focus is mutual help rather than subservience doesn’t mean a moral rule is being broken. It simply means that Berry and his wife work together rather than using each other. Speaking on feminists, Berry uses irony by writing, â€Å"That feminists or any other advocates of human liberty and dignity should resort to insult and injustice is regrettable. † This statement could arguably be the most ironic of them all. Because advocates of human liberty are standing for fairness and equal rights to all people, it is more than regrettable that they would lower themselves to attacking Berry. It contradicts what they supposedly stand for. Berry redefines words to make the reader truly understand his thoughts. â€Å"†¦ Involving (ideally) two successful careerists in the same bed†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Pg. 180) The word â€Å"career† is most often associated with people who put their job before anything else. â€Å"I can’t date, I’m really into my career right now. † It’s an implication that it’s more important than relationship. Using the word â€Å"bed† strips away all ideas of intimacy and love. Later, Berry writes, â€Å"†¦ a prolonged and impassioned negotiation as to how things shall be divided. † Berry uses to the word â€Å"impassioned† to imply a lot more than just the long process of divorce; he’s saying that passion is only really shown when assets are being divided. Marriage involves vaguely sharing your bed with that guy from that one time, and divorce is when you remember how many times he forgot to make his side of the bed. It’s what works for that time, and Berry knows it. After laying out the common beliefs of marriage, Berry writes on what marriage ought to be in regards to the household as an economy. He doesn’t necessarily compare it to an actual economy so much as say that in order for a marriage to function well, each must do their part. He goes into some detail about working outside the home versus working inside the home, but I think his primary focus involves â€Å"†¦ the work of both wife and husband, that gives them a measure of economic independence and self-protection, a measure of self-employment, a measure of freedom, as well as a common ground and a common satisfaction. (Pg. 181) It’s all about working in harmony with one another. Careers aren’t as important as jobs within the home. Berry knows that what you do isn’t nearly as important why and how you do it. Wendell Berry’s essay, â€Å"Feminism, the Body, and the Machine,† focuses in part on marriage with his wife and marriage in its most popular version. His use of stylistic devices shows more than what is written and implies deeper meaning that rounds off his stance.