A Diet of Worms in the Digital Age :: Digital Technology Technological Papers

A Diet of Worms in the Digital AgeI basist prove it, but there is no doubt in my mind that textual arguments have been raging in scholarly circles for as eagle-eyed as there has been text to debate. In my minds eye I can see them ancient Sumerian scribes lecturing each some other about clay types and wedge depth early Semitic peoples voting no on the vowel medieval European scribes boldly pushing front with punctuation, spaces between words, and the lower-case alphabet, and having heated debates on the long-term viability of the capital letter. And then came the printing press Can you imagine the contention What bold fresh vistas were opened up for scholarship But eachone could publish anythingno matter what the quality And surely, this spelled the doom of calligraphy.With the advent of the digital age, scholarly textual debate has simply entered a new phase. At issue here what is the potential of digitally-powered scholarship, and how can that potential be realized? What approa ches should we take in terms of format and methodology? William H. ODonnell and Emily A. Thrush ( intent a Hypertext Edition of a Modern Poem) discuss the issues involved in designing hypertext editions of literature. Specifically, they refer to the edition of Yeatss Lapis lapis lazuli that they designed. The main wager to be studied, they feel (be it Lapis Lazuli or something else), must not be cluttered with visible links. They have devised a method of windowing that anticipates the modern frames format of internet documents, and stress that any attempt at electronic analysis of a work of literature must be intuitively structured, easy to use, and customizable. Their edition of Lapis Lazuli appears well-constructed and functional and seems to have fairly broad appeal, but it seems also to be intended more as an aid to understanding the poem than as a tool for scholarly research. This distinction separates this article somewhat from the others considered here, though the basic fo rmat could be applied to other projects.Peter Shillingsburg (Principles for Electronic Archives, Scholarly Editions, and Tutorials) aboveboard admits that what we all secretly want is to have every conceivable kind of informationtextual, visual, audiorelated to a given topic all sort for us and available right at our fingertips. This is, of course, impossible, but he feels that electronic editions of scholarly works have the potential to come closer to that ideal than any other medium. He systematically lays out the main problems facing those who create electronic editions and suggests some ways to address them.

Diagnosis and Management of Diabetic Coma Essay -- Diabetes Health Ess

Diagnosis and Management of Diabetic ComaDiabetes is any disorder of the metabolism which causes excessive thirst and the production of extensive volumes of piss. A coma is a state of unrousable unconsciousness. (Martin (2002)) There are two types of diabetes Diabetes Insipidus (DI) is a rare metabolic disorder, the symptoms of which are the production of large quantities of dilute urine and an increased thirst. It is caused by a deficiency of the pituitary hormone Anti-diuretic hormone (ADH / vasopressin) which regulates water reabsorption in the kidneys. (Martin (2002)) Diabetes Mellitus (DM) has symptoms of polyuria, wasting and glycosuria (mellitus means sweet urine) as well as the following tests to give a laboratory diagnosis of DM Venous plasma glucose 11.1 mmol / L or Fasting venous plasma glucose 7.0 mmol / L or Plasma venous glucose concentration 11.1 mmol / L two hours after taking 75 g glucose in an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). There are two types of DM insuli n dependent DM (IDDM or type 1) and non-insulin dependent DM (NIDDM or type 2) Type 1 is caused by the ending of pancreatic b cell destruction, which can be predicted by the detection of the presence of antibodies (Abs) to islet cells, (Pitteloud, Philippe (2000)) insulin and glutamic acid dehydrogenase (GAD) (a neurotransmitter) and a decrease in b cell insulin secretion. This destruction causes a decrease in insulin production, the hormone which stimulates glucose to be stored in the muscle and liver as glycogen. Type 1 causes an abrupt onset of severe symptoms, including a tendency to ketosis and a dependence on exogenous insulin. Type 2 is caused by a diet elevated in saturated fats, a lack of exercise and obesity. This is because the constantly high glucose levels cause insulin to be produced at constantly high levels, and so the body becomes desensitized to its effect as cells in lead tissues posses fewer insulin receptors. Characteristics of NIDDM are that insulin is prese nt, symptoms are moderate (tiredness and thirst), there is no tendency to ketosis and patients are not dependent on exogenous insulin. high school blood glucose is controlled by diet, possibly with diabetic drugs. Complications of DM are Cataract, as excessive blood glucose binds to lens proteins. Retinopathy (micro-angiopathy) caused by hemorrhage, etc.. ... ...ether the cause is glucose concentrations being too high or too low. Many causes of diabetic coma can be treated easily with hormones and fluids. References EMANCIPATOR K (1999) Laboratory diagnosis and Monitoring of Diabetes Mellitus, American Journal of Pathology, 112(5) PP665-674 EVERS IM, TER BRAAK EW, DE VALK HW, VAN DER SCHOOT B, JANSSEN N, VISSER GH (2002) Risk indicators Predictive For Severe Hypoglycemia During The First Trimester of Type 1 Diabetic Pregnancy, Diabetes Care, 25 (3) Pp554-559 Previous course notes, BIOM2003 MARTIN ELIZABETH A (2002) laconic Medical DictionarySixth Edition, Oxford, Oxford Universit y Press, Pp148, 190-191, 374, 665-666, 717 MAYNE Philip D. (2001) Clinical Chemistry Sixth Edition, London, Arnold, Pp209-210 MOHSENI S (2001) Hypoglycemic Neuropathy, Acta Neuropathology, 102 (5) Pp 413-421 PITTELOUD N, PHILIPPE J (2000) Characteristics of Caucasian Type 2 Diabetic Patients During Ketoacidosis and Follow-up, Schweiz Med Wochenschr , 130, Pp576 - 582 TORTORA Gerard J, GRABOWSKI Sandra Reynolds (2000) Principles of Anatomy and Physiology Ninth Edition, bracing York, John Wiley & Sons Ltd., Pp 41, 964, 966, c-0, c-1

Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock Essay: Inability to Love

Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock - Inability to Love T. S. Eliots The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock is not a poem about love, at least(prenominal) in any traditional sense. Rather It is a collection of the fragmented minds of a man without self-esteem. Far from being about love, it is about one mans unfitness to love (himself or the world around him.) It is the cynical statement of a man who does not believe good things will ever happen to him, or that the world has anything to offer him. The title is bitterly ironic Prufrock does not love any body, least of all himself, (no matter how much he might drive to the ideal of romance and passion), nor does he believe that any one could ever love him. His own life is devoid of love, so in his bitterness he brands his work a love song. Although the poem addresses the reader directly, saying, Let us go then, you and I,1 Prufrock is really just talking to himself. His is a record of shame and insecurity that he would never dare share w ith another human being. The epigraph graphically illustrates this being a passage from Dantes Inferno.... If I thought my reply would be to someone who would ever return to earth, this flame would remain without further movement but as no one has ever returned from this gulf, if what I hear is true, I can answer you with no fear of infamy.2 When one considers the poem in the light of this prologue, one must see that Prufrock is fundamentally telling the tale of his isolation and living hell, but without shame because he believes his words will never be heard. He speaks to himself, and poses questions to himself as many do when they are grappling internally with issues and problems of their own. I wish to discuss two main thread... ...nse it is indeed a song about love, but it is not a love song in the traditional sense. The Lovesong of J. Alfred Prufrock is not radio friendly mainstream love. Bibliography Eliot, T. S., The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock, in Leonard, John, Ed ., Seven Centuries of Poetry in English, Third Ed., Melbourne Oxford, 1994, pp.128-31. destination Notes 1 Eliot, T. S., The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock, in Leonard, John, Ed., Seven Centuries of Poetry in English, Third Ed., Melbourne Oxford, 1994, pp.128-31, l. 1. All subsequent line numbers refer to this text. 2 Leonard, p. 128. 3 ll. 13-14, 35-36. 4 ll. 32-33. 5 ll. 38, 45, 122. 6 ll. 45-46. 7 l. 122. 8 ll. 97, 110. 9 l. 55. 10 ll. 73-74. 11 l. 34. 12 l. 51. 13 l. 60. 14 l. 81. 15 l. 85. 16 l. 84. 17 ll. 87, 99. 18 ll. 129-131.

Hinduism :: essays research papers

Hinduismhinduism The term Hinduism refers to the acculturation of the Hindus (originally, the inhabitants of the land of the Indus River). Introduced in about 1830 by British writers, it properly denotes the Indian politeness of approximately the last 2,000 years, which evolved from Vedism the religion of the Indo-European peoples who settled in India in the last centuries of the 2nd millennium BC. The spectrum that ranges from the level of popular Hindu belief to that of epicurean ritual technique and philosophical speculation is very broad and is at hightail ited by many stages of transition and varieties of co cosmos. Magic rites, animal worship, and belief in demons atomic number 18 often combined with the worship of more or less personal gods or with mysticism, asceticism, and abstract and profound theological systems or esoteric doctrines. The worship of local deities does not exclude the belief in pan-Indian higher gods or even in a single high God. Such local deities ar e also frequently looked down upon as manifestations of a high God. In principle, Hinduism incorporates all forms of belief and worship without necessitating the selection or elimination of any. It is axiomatic that no apparitional idea in India ever dies or is superseded-it is merely combined with the new ideas that arise in response to it. Hindus are inclined to revere the divine in every manifestation, whatever it may be, and are doctrinally tolerant, allowing others - including both Hindus and non-Hindus - whatever beliefs suit them best. A Hindu may embrace a non-Hindu religion without ceasing to be a Hindu, and because Hindus are disposed to think synthetically and to regard other forms of worship, strange gods, and divergent doctrines as inadequate rather than wrong or objectionable, they tend to believe that the highest divine powers are complement one another. Few religious ideas are considered to be irreconcilable. The core of religion does not depend on the existence or nonexistence of God or on whether there is one god or many. Because religious truth is said to transcend all communicatory definition, it is not conceived in dogmatic terms. Moreover, the tendency of Hindus to distinguish themselves from others on the basis of practice rather than doctrine further de-emphasizes doctrinal differences. Hinduism is both a civilization and a congregation of religions it has neither a beginning or founder, nor a central authority, hierarchy, or organization. Hindus believe in an uncreated, eternal, infinite, transcendent, and all-embracing principle, which, comprising in itself being and non-being, is the restore reality, the ultimate cause and foundation, source, and goal of all existence.

Africana Womanism: An Historical, Global Prespective for Women of African Descent :: essays research papers

Africana Womanism An Historical, Global Prespective for Women of African DescentAfricana Womanism An Historical, Global Perspective for Women of African Descent is an essay based on Africana Womanism and how it compares to uninfected feminism. The essay was written by Clenora Hudson-Weems, an African American writer and literary critic. She was born in Oxford, multiple sclerosis and she was raised in Memphis, Tennessee. I will compare Africana Womanism and Feminism and discuss the definition of the two the topics. Also I will discuss the important historical figures that are womanists. I think the issue is important because the common misconception is that a womanist and a feminist are the same thing but they are solely different. A womanist is more family oriented and feminists are dealing with the empowerment of themselves.Clenora Hudson-Weems wrote Africana Womanism An Historical, Global Perspective for Women of African Descent and it was about womanism. A nonher word for woma nism is feminism, and feminism is outlined as the empowerment of woman. In the era of womens rights, women were not treated as equals, especially black women. Colored women could not get any comparison or any empowerment unless they live in a community which they can establish their own racial and cultural integrity. White women and Africana both befuddle the same amount of rights but white women had better accommodations as far as restrooms, water fountains, swimming pools, and everything else that is segregated. I think that Africana women were oppressed more than white women. I believe that black women should be treated just as equally as white women. Africana women are fighting for civil rights and womens rights. Africana women postulate been more concerned for the whole Africana community. Their main priority is race empowerment, with class and gender following(Weems, 80). Womanism was important in the Africana community because the Africana women was trying empower not just themselves but empower the whole Africana community. For example, Harriet Tubman (Underground Railroad conductor), risked her life time and again in freeing Africana men, women, and children in slavery, thereby establishing her commitment to racial proportion(Weems, 80). The crucial role of an Africana woman is that many Africana academicians accepted the idea of female empowerment so that the level of struggle or concerns of Africana women are noticeable. Many mass think because a woman is a feminist, that she is oppressed with gender issues, but an Africana woman are traditionally family centered.

Collective Strategy Development Essay

JSTORs Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you whitethorn not masterload an replete(p) issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may give content in the JSTOR archive solo for your personal, non-commercial office. Please contact the publisher regarding whatever(prenominal) further use of this work. Publisher contact education may be obtained at http//www. jstor. org/action/showPublisher? publisherCode=jwiley. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR contagious disease must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of much(prenominal) transmission.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that aids scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a entire range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use development technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For much than reading round JSTOR, please contact sup portjstor. org. John Wiley Sons is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Strategic Management Journal. http//www. jstor. org Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 9, 375-385 (1988) AND COMPETITIVE MATCHING incarnate RUDIK. F.BRESSER Baruch College, The City University of New York,New York,New York,U. S. A. This root word discusses possibilities for combining embodied and private-enterprise(a) strategies. Combinations shadow be problematic if free-enterprise(a) intentions atomic number 18 disclosed through with(predicate) the culture connect resultingfrom embodied strategies. After describing how different incarnate strategies may lead to an un accountantled manifestation of strategicalal nurture, a typology evaluating the feasibleness of outline conspiracys is developed. The typologys implications for research and managerial practice ar discussed.A recent development in the business policy literature is a concern with strategic planning at a embodied level. joint strategies atomic number 18 attempts by sets of administrations to manage their mutural interdependence and the system dynamics of their interorganizational environments (Astley and Fombrun, 1983a Bresser and Harl, 1986 Thorelli, 1986). In managing interdependent and dynamic environments, collective strategies empennage be antiphonal by absorbing movement indoors an environment, or they keister be proactive by forestalling the unpredictable demeanour of some new(prenominal) organizations.Firms squeeze out use collective strategies in combination with contendery strategies. This paper discusses the consummation to which such combinations are feasible. MANAGING INTERDEPENDENCE organizational interdependence exists whenever one organization does not all in all control all the conditions necessary for achieving a desired action or outcome (Pfeffer and Salancik, 1978). In addition to environmental movement, interdependence can cause problems of decision-making scruple for focal organizations. This occurs because the success of activities chosen by any interdependent organization depends on the activities selected by some other organizations.Consequently, an interdependent organization may need to recall other organizations actions, and it faces decision-making suspense if it is aware of its interdependence and has punishingies in controlling the activities of other organizations. Decision-making uncertainty is most likely to be perceived among horizontally interdependent organizations operate in oligopolistic market places. Under these conditions all organizations are aware of their mutual interdependence and have considerable difficulties in controlling all(prenominal) others behaviors as they contest with one another for market share (Fombrun and Astley, 1982 Pennings, 1981).Business incorruptibles can use both war-ridden and collective strategies to manage their interdependencies. The literature distinguish es three major(ip)(ip) dimensions of warring strategies price, promotional, and product competition strategies (K wadwalla, 1981). Competitive strategies manage interdependence successfully if they result in advantageous private-enterprise(a) positions, thus forestalling interdependence and trim decisionmaking uncertainty (Pennings, 1981). For Received 20 October 1986 Revised 21 July 1987 ? 0143-2095/88/040375-11$05. 50 1988 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 376 R. K. F. Bresser fudge 1.Coordination mechanisms for collective strategies Coordination mechanism Regulative legislation assure amalgamations Joint dangers Interlocking directorates Trade associations secret approval and industry leadership Degree of formalization proud High High High Moderate Moderate economic crisis instance, product differentiation can create a protected domain for a focal organization with boundaries hard to penetrate by other competitors. However, in complex business environments interdependencies of ten are obscured from focal organizations so that respective(prenominal)ly coping with the dynamics of these environments becomes problematic (Emery and Trist, 1965).In these situations, collective strategies can supplement competitory strategies as a path of coping with the diversity of interdependent environments (Astley and Fombrun, 1983a). CONCEPTIONS STRATEGY OF COLLECTIVE CONFLICTS BETWEEN COMPETITIVE AND COLLECTIVE STRATEGIES Bresser and Harl (1986) described the dynamic relationship among competitive and collective strategies as being composed of devil strategic perspectives that are dialectically related to one another.For instance, when competitive strategies prevail within a market the resulting turbulence and decision-making uncertainty flushtually volition encourage organizations to use more collective forms of strategizing. However, when collective strategies prevail and create dysfunctions (such as reductions in strategic flexibility, amplified impacts of ext ernal disturbances, and attraction of innovative outsiders) which also cause environmental movement and decision-making uncertainty, competitive strategies may again be considered the more attractive methods for coping with interdependence.The dialectical relationship between competitive and collective strategies implies that organizations should remain alert to potential dysfunctions developing from their run strategies, and that they should honor a capacity to alternate between more collective and more competitive forms of strategizing (Bresser and Harl, 1986). However, some conflicts between competitive and collective strategies can be anticipated and should be considered before a particular scheme mix is adopted.This paper evaluates combinations between competitive and collective strategies in light of a potential conflict arising from the need to both share and conceal strategic discipline. Whenever organizations attempt to use both faces of strategies simultaneously, i. e . competitive The term collective system has been defined in two different ways (Astley and Fombrun, 1983a Bresser and Harl, 1986). On the one hand a collective dodge is defined as a larger interorganizational network which emerges unintendedly.As individual organizational actions aggregate into interorganizational networks an unintended collective dodge emerges that none of the participating organizations could have foreseen. Developments in the telecommunications industry exemplify the emergence of an unintended collective dodging (Astley and Fombrun, 1983b). On the other hand a collective dodging can also be voluntary and intended. Such a collective outline results from the purposive collaboration of organizations attempting to manage their mutual interdependence.This paper focuses on voluntary collective strategies, developed by oligopolists to manage their horizontal interdependence. Voluntary collective strategies can be based on different coordination mechanisms. Table 1 presents these mechanisms utilize degree of formalization as the distinguishing criterion (Bresser and Harl, 1986 Fombrun and Astley, 1983). Regulative legislation (resulting from collective lobbying) and contracting deliver coordination forms with high levels of formality.Collective strategies based on organise directorates or trade associations are characterized by moderate levels of formality, and collusion as wellhead as industry leadership can be classified as informal coordination mechanisms. interconnected Collective and Competitive Strategies strategies in one business field of view and collective strategies in others, a potential for contradictory activities or conflicts arises, because the major advantage of a collective scheme is a major disadvantage from a competitive point of view.With regard to managing interdependence the major advantage of a collective strategy is that it establishes linkages and communication channels through which information about other int erdependent organizations can be obtained. Through this information the behavior of other organizations becomes predictable. This makes an environment more stable and less threatening for a focal organization, and thus reduces decision-making uncertainty (Fombrun and Astley, 1983 Pennings, 1981).Precisely this advantage of a collective strategy (stability through predictability) is a disadvantage if organizations compliments to use competitive strategies to further their growth goals. Successful competitive strategies require that organizations maintain the covert of their strategic plans to forestall untrue (Starbuck and Nystrom, 1981). However, this need for cover is jeopardized if interorganizational linkages and communication channels resulting from a collective strategy allow organizations to predict and anticipate one anothers moves in areas where they wish to compete.Thus, organizations face a peril of loose information disclosure when using collective and competitive strategies side by side. Risk of torrential information disclosure is defined as the likelihood that a disclosure of strategically mad information will occur, where the process of disclosue is anarchical from a focal organizations point of view and damaging to its competitive plans. The potential vituperate resulting from an uncontrolled disclosure of information is particularly salient in oligopolies (the dominant US market expression) because in such markets ompetitors typically are in a position to use sensitive information to exert control over each others fates (Pennings, 1981 Scherer, 1980). Evaluating the adventure of uncontrolled information disclosure emanating from collective strategies is important for two reasons. On the one hand, such information disclosure tends to render competitive strategic intentions ineffective. On the other hand uncontrolled information disclosure tends to aggravate problems of strategic inflexibility.Bresser (1984) and Bresser and 377 Harl (1986) argued that organizations adopting collective strategies limit their strategic flexibility because, by agreeing to give over from certain types of competitive behaviors such as price competition, they curtail their repertoire of available strategic tools. When considering the problem of uncontrolled information disclosure, losses in strategic flexibility resulting from a collective strategy may be even more encompassing.If the managements of organizations realize that the communication links provided by a collective strategy allow for an uncontrolled disclosure of strategic plans, they may be reluctant to pursue competitive strategies even in those business areas that are not capable to a collective agreement. PROCESSES IMPAIRING SECRECY Since potential combinations between competitive and collective strategies face the hazard of uncontrolled information disclosure resulting from collective strategy links, they arouse the issue of strategic fit (Venkatraman and Camillus, 1984).In order to minimize problems of uncontrolled information disclosure it is necessary to obtain some degree of compatability among possible strategy combinations. Attaining a fit between competitive and collective strategies requires first of all an appreciation of the processes that may impair an organizations desire to maintain the secrecy of its strategic plans. Table 2 summarizes for each type of collective strategy the particular processes that may lead to an impairment of secrecy, and it assesses the insecurity of uncontrolled disclosure of information.If collective lobbying leads to protective regulation the activities of regulators may impede competition (Pennings, 1981). Regulators often collect and disseminate a wealth of information about regulated industries. Through these information flows, regulators can allow competitors to forecast each others moves even in areas that are not subject to regulatory control.For example, Litwak and Rothman (1970) suggested that t he Federal Communications electric charge had provided the broadcasting networks with so much information about the broadcasting industry that the networks were able to anticipate their competitors behavior and, as a result, effective competition was not possible. The autonomy of 378 R. K. F. Bresser Table 2. Processes impairing secrecy and risk of uncontrolled disclosure by type of collective strategy Type of collective strategy Impairment of secrecy Risk of uncontrolled information disclosureRegulative legislation Contracting Mergers Joint ventures Interlocking directorates Trade associations Collusion and industry leadership Regulators collecting and disseminating information Contracts contingent on information Dissatisfied employees (defectors) Mediation of information Passing on of information due to multiple and indirect communication links dispersion of trade statistics Informal communication High humble Low Intermediate High Intermediate Low regulatory agencies in their i nformation-gathering activities results in high risk of uncontrolled disclosure.Contracting refers to the negotiation of formal agreements among organizations (Thompson, 1967). In general, the information exchanged as a result of contractual negotiations will be foc employ, avoiding the disclosure of sensitive competitive aspects. However, some contracts such as bank loans may require that focal organizations provide extensive information about their competitive plans. This raises the first step that information leaks within the information-seeking institution will be exploited by a focal organizations competitors. Since he disclosure of sensitive information in the context of contractual negotiations is not very(prenominal) common, the risk of uncontrolled disclosure can be considered low. Mergers and joint ventures are two special forms of contracting. Mergers, with the exception of hateful takeovers, are contracts through which two or more organizations comneunder common contr ol. Joint ventures can be viewed as partial nuclear fusions which preserve the autonomy of the organizations subscribe tod. Often mergers are accompanied by a host of administrative problems (Lubatkin, 1983).For example, departments and operations must be consolidated and initial inequities in wages have to be resolved. If such administrative problems remain unresolved, inefficiencies will result, as well as employee dissatisfaction and turnover. The merger between Kennecott Corp. and Carborundum Co. is a case in point (Business Week, 1983). The two companies managements quarreled over administrative problems and, after a short period of infighting, most Carborundum executives jumped ship.There is danger that defecting executives may disclose strategically sensitive information concerning the merging firms when they join other organizations within the same industry. However, the risk of uncontrolled disclosure resulting from a merger is considered low. This is because senior exec utives leaving merging firms often receive generous severance compensation for which they promise continued confidentiality. Additionally, since merging firms often develop new strategic concepts, the information available to departing executives is likely to be quickly obsolete.If a collective strategy is based on a joint venture the risk of uncontrolled disclosure is considered to be at intermediate levels. Although the cooperation provided by a joint venture is restricted to specific, mutual business problems, the regularity and longevity of interactions typical of a joint venture may allow participating firms to improve their intelligence about each others competitive strategies. For example, firm representatives engaged in joint ventures can develop friendship ties where they feel free to discuss more general strategic issues.During such discussions sensitive information may be disclosed inadvertently. Interlocking directorates result from organizational co-optation activities whereby organizations appoint external representatives to their Matching Collective and Comnpetitive Strategies boards of directors. Since many directors sit on the boards of two or more companies (Bunting and Barbour, 1971), interlocking directorates emerge which can be used as instruments for managing interdependence and uncertainty by encouiraging cooperation and the formation of collective strategies (Aldrich, 1979 Pennings, 1980, 1981).However, the risk of uncontrolled disclosure is high because the scope and the intensity of intra-industry communication facilitated by direct and indirect interlocks is beyond the control of individual organizations. Therefore, it is very difficult for individual organizations to conceal their competitive strategies when their directors have fractionship in a network of interlocking directorates. Trade associations provide member organizations with special services at low costs.For instance, they may distribute trade statistics, provide credit references on customers, offer legal and technical advice, or help collect bills (Olson, 1965). In addition, associations can aid in removing decision-making uncertainty resulting from interdependence. Since trade statistics generally include prices quoted in recent sales transactions as well as cost developments, member organizations have the opportunity to coordinate their market behavior and thus implement a collective strategy (Scherer, 1980).The dissemination of statistical information provided by trade associations may impair the desire of focal organizations to maintain secrecy their competitive strategies. While firms regiarding are often in prefer of price and cost reporting activities, they run the risk that other sensitive information concerning their competitive strategies may also be disclosed. Trade associations sometimes disassemble industry trends regarding product development or marketing strategies, and thus allow competitors to anticipate each others moves.A foc al organization may have lilliputian control over the kind of information being disseminated because trade associations are often dominated by a few powerful organizations. Olson (1965) described the case Association of Manufacturers as largely financed and controlled by a few big corporations, although the association had several thousand members. There is the possibility that such domination leads to activities favoring a handful of member organizations earlier than the majority. In addition, the selective services provided by 379 ssociations function as subtle forms of coercion restricting a firms flexibility. The exclusivity and low costs of legal, financial or other services operate as strong fillips for joining or remaining within an association even if a focal organization disagrees with some association activities. Thus, when using trade association activities to enforce a collective strategy, a moderate risk of uncontrolled information disclosure is likely. The term col lusion denotes express agreements, open or secret, that have the purpose of restricting competition.Most collusive agreements are outlawed in the United States because they encourage monopolistic price behavior. Nevertheless, collusive practices are widespread and often effective means of managing interdependence. Their attraction is associated with their high degree of informality which makes it difficult for outsiders to detect conspiratorial agreements (Khandwalla, 1981). Industry leadership is a tacit version of collusion based on imitation. It describes a situation where a specific firm is the acknowledged leader in setting prices, and other firms follow.As opposed to collusive agreements, industry leadership has the advantage of not being contrary to the just laws. It is considered legal as long as it is grounded on voluntary imitation rather than explicit communication (White, 1981). Since collective strategies mediated by collusive agreements are based on informal communica tion and, in the case of industry leadership, on imitation, the risk of uncontrolled disclosure is low. Colluding firms will share information totally in areas where they wish to cooperate while maintaining the secrecy of their competitive plans.The above risk assessments imply that uncontrolled information disclosure is always damaging for the success of a focal organizations competitive plans. While the dynamics of oligopolistic markets would tend to support this assumption (Scherer, 1980), the degree of maltreat resulting from uncontrolled disclosure can be viewed as contingent upon several situational variables. Specifically, four situational variables appear important breadth of information disclosure, quality of information disclosure, asymmetry in interdependence, and event control.These situational variables can facilitate the combination of a high-risk collective strategy with competitive strategies, and they can make the adoption of a 380 Matching Collective and Competit ive Strategies dimensions. This is pertinent for evaluating strategy combinations because an uncontrolled disclosure of information is less troublesome if competitors are unable to capitalize on the information due to their inability to respond quick to a focal organizations competitive moves.Table 3 presents a typology of possible combinations between competitive and collective strategies, and evaluates their feasibility from the perspective of individual firms. Generally, a strategy combination is considered feasible if (1) the risk of uncontrolled information disclosure is low. Feasibility evaluations also take into account (2) the degree of competitor responsiveness typical for a competitive dimension, and (3) typical characteristics of specific collective strategies, namely the number of participants involved and the stability of an agreement.Considering typical characteristics of collective strategies is important because such characteristics can modify feasibility ratings t hat are based on assessments of the risk of uncontrolled information disclosure and the level of competitor responsiveness. Situational variables, described above, may mediate the damage resulting from uncontrolled information disclosure but do not lend themselves to generalizations and therefore are excluded from considerations leading to the typology shown in Table 3.However, in using the typology, situational variables will have to be taken into account, as is shown in the implications section. In Table 3 the competitive dimensions pricing, announce and promotion, and product innovation are distinguished for each of the seven collective strategies summarized in Tables 1 and 2. Within each of these competitive dimensions, organizations can relate to each other by using either competitive or collective strategies.Thus, six strategy combinations are possible for each type of collective strategy, leading to a total of 42 combinations presented in Table 3. I Since only two values are possible within each competitive dimension, and since the extreme cases (competitive or collective strategies across all competitive dimensions) are irrelevant as they do not represent combinations of collective and competitive strategies, the total number of strategy combinations C for each type of collective strategy can be calculated by collective strategy with low or moderate risks of uncontrolled disclosure problematic.For example, the potential damage resulting from uncontrolled disclosure may be considered low, and thus can facilitate the adoption of a collective strategy where the risk of uncontrolled disclosure is high, when the competitive information that could be disclosed is not very encompassing (breadth of information disclosure), or of apparent movementable quality regarding its reliability and/or timeliness (Adams, 1976 Smart and Vertinsky, 1977). Similarly, if interdependence is asymmetric, with some organizations being in a relatively powerful competitive positi on (e. . due to their size), uncontrolled information disclosure may not be very troublesome for these powerful organizations because they know that other competitors lack the resources to exploit the disclosed information (Pfeffer and Salancik, 1978). Likewise, damage may be low and containable, if organizations can rapidly and in effect counteract events leading to uncontrolled information disclosure, for example, by changing personnel or the content of a collective strategy (Pfeffer and Salancik, 1978).Implications for evaluating the feasibility of strategy combinations resulting from the piece of situational variables are discussed below. COMBINATIONS OF COMPETITIVE AND COLLECTIVE STRATEGIES Apart from an understanding of how collective strategies can lead to uncontrolled information disclosure, an assessment of what types of combinations between competitive and collective strategies are feasible requires that different competitive strategies also be distinguished. Three distin guishing dimensions of competitive strategies are pricing, advertising and promotion, and product innovation (Khandwalla, 1981).These dimensions can be classified accord to their degree of competitor responsiveness (Ansoff, 1984). The term competitor responsiveness refers to the speed with which competitors can respond to variations in competitive conditions. While price cuts usually can be matched instantly, it takes much longer to organize retaliations to a heavy advertising campaign, and even longer to respond to product innovations (Khandwalla, 1981 Scherer, 1980). Thus competitor responsiveness decreases along these three competitiveC = (21- 2) where d is the number of competitive dimensions considered. For d=-3 dimensions the number of possible strategy combinations is C=6. R. K. F. Bresser Table 3. Combinations of competitive and collective strategies and their feasibility Dimensions of competition Types of strategy Pricing combinations 1. 1 1. 2 1. 3 1. 4 1. 5 1. 6 2. 1 2. 2 2. 3 2. 4 2. 5 2. 6 3. 1 3. 2 3. 3 3. 4 3. 5 3. 6 4. 1 4. 2 4. 3 4. 4 4. 5 4. 6 5. 1 5. 2 5. 3 5. 4 5. 5 5. 6 6. 1 6. 2 6. 3 6. 4 6. 5 6. 6 7. 1 7. 2 7. 3 7. 4 7. 5 7. IL contender Regulation Regulation arguing Regulation rivalry ambition Contracting Contracting contention Contracting competition Competition Merger Merger Competition Merger Competition Competition Joint gamble Joint Venture Competition Joint Venture Competition Competition Interlocks Interlocks Competition Interlocks Competition Competition Trade Association Trade Association Competition Trade Association Competition Competition Collusion/IL Collusion/IL Competition Collusion/IL Competition Advertising and promotion Regulation Competition Regulation Competition Competition Regulation Contracting Competition Contracting Competition Competition Contracting Merger Competition Merger Competition Competition Merger Joint Venture Competition Joint Venture Competition Competition Joint Venture Interlocks Competitio n Interlocks Competition Competition Interlocks Trade Association Competition Trade Association Competition Competition Trade Association Collusion/IL Competition Collusion/IL Competition Competition Collusion/IL 381Product innovation Regulation Regulation Competition Regulation Competition Competition Contracting Contracting Competition Contracting Competition Competition Merger Merger Competition Merger Competition Competition Joint Venture Joint Venture Competition Joint Venture Competition Competition Interlocks Interlocks Competition Interlocks Competition Competition Trade Association Trade Association Competition Trade Association Competition Competition Collusion/IL Collusion/IL Competition Collusion/IL Competition Competition Feasibility of strategy combination Low Low Intermediate Intermediate Intermediate Intermediate Intermediate High High High High High High High High High High High Intermediate Intermediate High High High High Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Intermediate I ntermediate Intermediate Intermediate Intermediate Intermediate Intermediate Intermediate Intermediate Intermediate Intermediate IndustryleadershipThe first base of (six) strategy combinations uses competition in one or two competitive dimensions in conjunction with regulation as the butt for enforcing a collective strategy. The feasibility of all six combinations is rated either at low or intermediate levels. The first two combinations (1. 1 and 1. 2) have a low feasibility rating. If organizations use regulation to harmonize their promotional and product innovation activities, and have competitive flexibility in the area of pricing (combination 1. 1), their chances of competing successfully are slim. This is because 382 R. K. F. Bresser an industry may remain intense. In fact, often firms merge to obtain strategic advantages in the areas of price competition, promotion or product innovation wlhich may increase rather than decrease competitive interactions.When joint ventures ser ve as mechanisms to enforce collective strategies, feasibility ratings for strategy combinations are similarly favorable. This form of collective strategizing also tends to involve only a few organizations, allowing for competition within a particular area in appal of joint venture activity. fHowever, joint ventures carry a higher risk of uncontrolled information disclosure than contracting or mergers. Thus cautious feasibility evaluations seem appropriate when a focal organization engages in joint ventures in more than one comnpetitivearea, and when the only competitive dimension not subject to collective coordination is characterized by relatively high levels of competitor responsiveness (combinations 4. 1 and 4. 2).In these situations the relatively high number of information links among firms participating in several joint ventures multiplies the risk and potential damage of uncontrolled disclosure. If organizations choose interlocking directorates to coordinate intra-industry activity, they constantly run a high risk of uncontrolled information disclosure. Co-opted directors may intentionally or inadvertently, straight off or indirectly, pass on sensitive information to a focal organizations competitors. Thus, relying on interlocks to enforce collective strategies while simultaneously attempting to maintain some competitive flexibility does not appear feasible.The predominant feasibility rating assigned to the group of strategy combinations using trade associations as a means to develop collective strategies is intermediate. Although experience demonstrates that the coordination provided by trade associations mostly does not go beyond price and cost reporting (Scherer, 1980), the possibility of trade associations collecting and reporting other sensitive information is always acute. Often individual organizations cannot oppose such uncontrolled reporting of industry developments, particularly if the association is dominated by a few powerful corporation s. If trade associations do not engage in price reporting, but are used to develop collective strategies in the areas of advertising and promotion, and product innovation (combination 6. 1), a low uick competitor responsiveness can be expected with respect to the pricing dimension, and regulators are likely to disclose sensitive information concerning advertising and innovations. A similar argument applies to combination 1. 2, where competitive conditions exist only with regard to advertising and promotion, a dimension characterized by intermediate levels of competitor responsiveness. Since competitors usually need considerable time to respond to product innovations, combination 1. 3 (with regulation in the other two dimensions) is not quite as problematic as the first two combinations. However, the distinct possibility of uncontrolled information disclosure through regulator activities makes combination 1. 3 feasible only at an intermediate level. Combinations 1. 4 through 1. allow for competition in at least two dimensions. While these combinations provide organizations with a larger arsenal of competitive tools than the first three combinations, they also are considered feasible only at intermediate levels because of the risk of uncontrolled disclosure through regulators. The feasibility of strategy combinations involving contracting as a form of collective strategizing generally is considered high because the risk of uncontrolled information disclosure tends to be low. In addition, often (and in contrast to regulation) only few organizations participate in a particular contractual agreement, thus moderate the extent to which competition is constrained.If, within an industry of say eight oligopolists, three contract to standardize product designs, competition with the remaining five oligopolists in the area of product innovations is still possible and likely. The only strategy combination where a less favorable (intermediate) feasibility rating is assigned is combination 2. 1. If extensive contracting in the areas of advertising/promotion and product innovation has considerably lowered the participating firms strategic flexibility, relying on price competition as the sole competitive tool does not appear sensible. Price competition is likely to face a high degree of competitor responsiveness. The third group of strategy combinations, using merger activity to realize collective strategies, has high feasibility ratings throughout.The risk of uncontrolled information disclosure is low, and the number of firms involved in a merger is usually quite small, so that competition within Matching Collective and Competitive Strategies feasibility rating seems appropriate. Again, in this situation firms would maintain competition only in an area where high competitor responsiveness is likely. Combinations of competitive and collective strategies using the various forms of collusion and industry leadership are not as problem-free as the risk evalu ation in Table 2 might suggest. Although collusive agreements are not burdened with the problem of uncontrolled information disclosure, their combination with competitive strategies appears feasible at an intermediate level at best.Since collusive agreements are informal and difficult to enforce, individual firmns have a strong incentive to chisel-that is to increase their profits by secretly deviating from the agreement (Stigler, 1964). Secret deviations cannot be concealed for long periods of time, and frequently result in collusive conspiracies breaking down and touching off bitter rivalries such as price wars (Scherer, 1980 Weiss, 1961). It is likely that the tendency of collusive agreements towards breakdown will be aggravated if colluding organizations decide to compete in some competitive areas rather than displaying gentlemanly, non-competitive behavior across all competitive dimensions. A firms successful competitive behavior in one area will encourage less successful firms to chisel in other areas that are subject to collusive coordination.Thus combinations of competitive and collective strategies can be expected to be volatile when collusion serves as a means for enforcing collective strategies. This volatility results from the particular characteristics of collusive agreements, and exists irrespective of the risk for uncontrolled information disclosure or the level of competitor responsiveness. 383 SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS This paper extends the literature advocating the development of voluntary collective strategies as means to manage environmental turbulence and interdependence (Astley and Fombrun, 1983a Bresser and Harl, 1986). It assesses the possibilities of combining competitive with collective strategies from the perspective of individual organizations.Such combinations may be problematic because an organizations ability to maintain the secrecy of competitive strategic plans may be jeopardized by information links established through differe nt forms of collective strategy (Fornbrun and Astley, 1983a Starbuck and Nystrom, 1981). After discussing how collective strategies may lead to an uncontrolled disclosure of strategically sensitive information, combinations of competitive and collective strategies are classified according to their varying degrees of feasibility. A comparison of the ratings presented in Tables 2 and 3 makes apparent that the feasibility of strategy combination tends to be inversely related to the risk of uncontrolled information disclosure.If the risk and the feasibility ratings are expressed numerically with the values of low equaling 1, intermediate equaling 2, and high equaling 3, a correlation coefficient can be calculated on the basis of all 42 strategy combinations. The resulting coefficient is r = -0. 70, indicating that within the present classification scheme about 50 percent of the variance in feasibility evaluations is accounted for by the risk of uncontrolled information disclosure. Howev er, high risks of uncontrolled disclosure do not generally lead to low feasibility ratings, and low risks do not necessarily imply high feasibility scores , as is demonstrated by the combinations involving collective strategies based on regulation and collusion respectively.The unexplained variation in feasibility ratings suggests additional factors are important in assessing the feasibility of strategy combinations, notably the degree of competitor responsiveness and the particular characteristics of the type of collective strategy employed. Further variation in feasibility ratings can be expected when situational variables such as breadth and quality of information disclosure, asymmetry in interdependence, and event control are considered (Adams, 1976 Pfeffer and Salancik, 1978 Smart and Vertinsky, 1977). This is so because these situational variables can contain or amplify the potential damage resulting from uncontrolled infornmationdisclosure.While situational variables were not considered in the development of this papers typology of strategy combinations, they have implications both for research and managerial decision-making that can originate from the typological classification given in Table 3. The worldly concern of situational variables highlights a feature common to all typologies or organi- 384 R. K. F. Bresser information disclosure is of little relevance? 7. How rapidly and effectively can events of uncontrolled information disclosure be counteracted? Answers to these and similar questions can help executives to apply the information provided by Table 3 situationally before adopting a specific combination of collective and competitive strategies. From this process the selection of compatible strategies should result.This papers discussion has concentrated on oligopolistic markets because, typically, in such markets competitors are aware of their mutual interdependence, have incomplete control of each others moves, and yet the success of each ol igopolists strategic intentions depends considerably on the activities chosen by other competitors (Pennings, 1981). Obviously, within such a context, the damage resulting from an uncontrolled disclosure of sensitive information is potentially high. While the theory of oligopoly has been developed mainly for domestic, nondiversified enterprise (Stigler, 1964), the issues and ideas discussed in this paper can also be of relevance to multinational and diversified corporations. Due to the dominance of oligopolies, both multinational and diversified firms will often find themselves operating in different national or regional oligopolies.Additionally, managing a match between collective and competitive strategies may be more difficult in interindustry and international arenas than in intraindustry environments because the number of interdependent segments representing a particular coporations domain is larger and more complex (Bresser and Harl, 1986 Hawkins and Walter, 1981). Thus, antic ipating factors such as the risk of uncontrolled information disclosure and the potential damage resulting from such disclosure may be even more important for multinational and diversified firms than for domestic oligopolists. zational phenomena. Classifications of the type developed in Table 3 are ideal types, based on generalizations derived from common knowledge and common sense (Blau and Scott, 1962 Pugh, Hickson and Hinings, 1969).However, the strategy combinations distinguished represent 42 separate hypotheses regarding the opportunities and risks organizations might encounter when utilizing competitive and collective strategies side by side. The accuracy of any particular feasibility evaluation is an empirical question open to resolution through historical research, where the mediating role of situational variables has to be included in the research design. From a managerial point of view a typology of strategy combinations with varying levels of feasibility can aid in strate gic decision-making. The strategic options evaluated in Table 3 can serve as a run to managers considering a particular strategy combination. In attempting to extrapolate easibility evaluations, decisionmakers would have to assess whether the variables leading to the feasibility ratings shown in Table 3 are of the assumed magnitude, and to what extent deviations would lead to different feasibility assessments. In addition, decision-makers would have to evaluate the extent to which situational variables require changes in feasibility ratings. For example, a firm intending to implement a strategy mix similar to combination 4. 3 would have to consider the following questions before deciding whether the feasibility of such a combination is high 1. Is the risk of uncontrolled information disclosure resulting from the planned joint venture activity really at moderate levels, and how can it be contained? 2.Is there really a low degree of competitor responsiveness to product innovations wi thin this industry? 3. Is competitive flexibility in pricing and promotional strategies maintained in spite of joint venture activity within these competitive dimensions? 4. How encompassing is the information that could get disclosed? 5. How reliable and timely is the information that competitors could obtain? 6. Does asymmetrical interdependence typical for this industry favor our firm so that REFERENCES Adams, J. S. The structure and dynamics of behavior in organizational boundary roles. In Dunette, M. (ed. ), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1175-1199. Rand McNally, Chicago, 1976, pp. Matching Collective and Competitive StrategiesAldrich, H. E. Organizations and Environment, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1979. Ansoff, H. I. Implanting Strategic Management, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1984. Astley, W. G. and C. J. Fombrun. Collective strategy social ecology of organizational environments, Academy of Management Review, 8, 1983a, pp. 576-587. As tley, W. G. and C. J. Fombrun. Technological innovation and industrial structure the case of telecommunications. In Lamb, R. (ed. ), Advances in Strategic Management, vol. 1, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, 1983b, pp. 205-229. Blau, P. M. and W. R. Scott. Formal Organizations, Chandler, San Francisco, 1962. Bresser, R. K. The captives of collective strategies, Proceedings of the American Institute for Decision cognitions, Toronto, 1984, pp. 383-385. Bresser, R. K. and J. E. Harl. Collective strategy vice or justice? , Academ. y of Management Review, 11, 1986, pp. 408-427. Bunting, D. and J. Barbour. Interlocking directorates in large American corporations, 1896-1964, Business History Review, 45, 1971, pp. 317-335. Business Week. How Kennecott has mismanaged Carborundum, 23 May, 1983, pp. 127-130. Emery, F. E. and E. L. Trist. The causal texture of organizational environments, Human Relations, 18, 1965, pp. 21-32. Fombrun, C. J. and W. G. Astley. The telecommunian institutional cations c ommunity overview, Journal of Communication, 32(4), 1982, pp. 6-68. Fombrun, C. J. and W. G. Astley. Beyond corporate strategy, Journal of Business Strategy, 4(1), 1983, pp. 47-54. Hawkins, R. G. and I. Walter. Planning multinational operations. In Nystrom, P. C. and W. H. Starbuck (eds), Handbook of Organizational Design, vol. 1, Oxford University Press, New York, 1981, pp. 253-267. Khandwalla, P. N. Properties of competing organizations. In Nystrom, P. C. and W. H. Starbuck (eds), Handbook of Organizational Design, vol. 1, Oxford University Press, New York, 1981, pp. 409-432. Litwak, E. and J. Rothman. Towards the theory and practice of coordination between formal organizations. In Rosengren, W.R. and M. Lefton (eds), Organizations and Clients Essays in the Sociology 385 of Service, Merrill, Columbus, OH, 1970, pp. 137-186. Lubatkin, M. Mergers and the performance of the acquiring firms, Academy of Management Review, 8, 1983, pp. 218-225. Olson, M. The Logic of Collective Action, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1965. Pennings, J. M. Interlocking Directorates, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1980. Pennings, J. M. Strategically interdependent organizations. In Nystrom, P. C. and W. H. Starbuck (eds), Handbook of Organizational Design, vol. 1, Oxford University Press, New York, 1981, pp. 434-455. Pfeffer, J. and C. R. Salancik.The External Control of Organizations, Harper and Rowe, New York, 1978. Pugh, D. S. , D. J. Hickson and C. R. Hinings. An empirical taxonomy of structures of work organizations, Administrative Science Quarterly, 14, 1969, pp. 115-126. Scherer, F. M. Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance, 2nd edn, Rand McNally, Chicago, 1980. Smart, C. and I. Vertinsky, Designs for crisis decision units, Administrative Science Quarterly, 22, 1977, pp. 640-657. Starbuck, W. H. and P. C. Nystrom. Designing and understanding organizations. In Nystrom, P. C. and W. H. Starbuck (eds), Handbook of Organizational Design, vol. 1, Oxford Univers ity Press, New York, 1981, pp. ix-xxii. Stigler, G. J. A theory of oligopoly, Journal of Political Economy, 72, 1964, pp. 44-61. Thompson, J. D. Organizations in Action, McGrawHill, New York, 1967. Thorelli, H. B. Networks between markets and hierarchies, Strategic ManagementJouirnal,7, 1986, pp. 37-51. Venkatraman, N. and J. C. Camillus. Exploring the concept of fit in strategic management, Academy of Management Review, 9, 1984, pp. 513-525. Weiss, L. W. economic science and American Industry, John Wiley, New York, 1961. White, L. J. How organizations use exchange media and agreements. In Nystrom, P. C. and W. H. Starbuck (eds), Handbook of Organizational Design, vol. 2, Oxford University Press, New York, 1981, pp. 440-453.