Virtue Ethics Essay Example for Free

Virtue Ethics Essay Virtue Ethics and the view that ethics should be wholly concerned with a person’s attributes based on the holistic theory of Aristotle and his Golden Mean, is a newly accepted theory, which looks at a person’s virtues and not their actions. It is a view that directly contrasts with the theories of Kant and Bentham, which focus on actions as opposed to the actual person making those actions. Although the deontological nature of Kant’s theory does partially contradict the teleological constitution of Bentham’s theory, they both focus on the moral decision that a person chooses to make and these theories both clash with Virtue Ethics, in respect that Virtue Ethics looks at why and what made the person make that decision. Whilst it is important to focus on the person behind the action, a more consequentialist view of ethics is a better functioning theory in today’s society due to the emphasis placed on the result of actions and the many cultures in the world, where virtuous acts would be difficult to define. In this essay, I will explore these contrasting ethical positions to prove that ethics should be more concerned with what you do than who you are. Aristotle’s theory is ultimately based on the idea of reaching eudaimonia, and this was something which, unlike the theories of Bentham and Mill, was sought for itself rather than as a means to some other end. The virtues that lead to this â€Å"happiness† are described by Aristotle to be like a habit, they should be learnt and acquired making one a better person, meaning that they will make the correct moral decisions. Using â€Å" Virtue Ethics† as an approach to life is taken up by many parents across the globe, as they act to make the child become a better person. However, one must question whether Virtue Ethics is a logical means of moral explanation as perhaps just because a person has many desirable virtues, it doesn’t certainly follow that they will make good, ethical, moral decisions. The aim of reaching Eudaimonia highlights the teleological aspect of Virtue Ethics as it is Aristotle’s GOAL for life. However whereas in consequentialism actions are taken in order to be happy, Aristotle believes that we should be happy in order to do something else. Aristotle arrived at the answer of whether an act was virtuous or not by using his â€Å"Final Cause† argument. In this, he believed that everything has a final good, which is achieved by fulfilling the purpose for which it was designed. Aristotle claimed that we all learn to have virtues that are â€Å"good† and will help us to obtain Eudaimonia. However, a major flaw of Virtue Ethics, leads from this, as Virtues are liable to change. The attributes that Aristotle valued are not necessarily what is valued in today’s society. He also talked about the doctrine of the Golden Mean. This aspect of virtue ethics is, for me, what makes it a potentially credible theory, as it takes into account human emotions, recognising that we can sometimes be extreme. This is explained by the idea of vices versus virtues, in that we should not have extremes of virtues as they are no longer â€Å"good†. However, surely this makes virtue ethics hard to follow, as there are no clear rules of what to do in a moral dilemma, instead just telling us to be a balanced person. By being a balanced person, Aristotle concludes that people will also be moral After Aristotle Virtue ethics was dismissed until Elizabeth Anscombe revived it in 1958, criticising Kant and Bentham claiming they are in their ivory tower, with theories that are not in touch with todays society. This point made by Anscombe really highlights the changeability of ethics, as ethics can change with society. The point about morals adapting to society reflects MacIntyre’s view on Virtue Ethics as he makes it more current and recognises that virtues must operate within a community for them to be â€Å"virtuous†. Contradicting Virtue Ethics are the theories that hold that ethics and morals should be based on the actions that one takes, such as the theories of Kant and Bentham. The Teleological stance on morals, taken by relativists including Bentham and Mill believe that the consequences of an action define its ‘goodness’. By doing so, relativists ensure that the focus of ethics is on the actions that are taken, which relates to todays society. An example of this is the justice system in Britain Jury’s are not interested in your attributes, or how good a person you are; if somebody has committed a crime (a bad action) then they will be punished for that. Personally, I feel that just because you are a good, virtuous person does not defy you from making unethical decisions, a view that Virtue Ethics contradicts. Unlike consequentialism, absolutism focusses on the motives for the action. By following definite rules, absolutists believe that acts are intrinsically wrong. Kant believes that all his definite rules can be universalised and followed by anybody no matter how ‘virtuous’ they are. These rules are meant to give the best moral outcome, but circumstances occur that when these rules can contradict a deep rooted moral conscience. This is shown with the example of is a murder asked you where your friend was so they could kill them, would you be obliged to tell the truth? This problem is eradicated by consequentialism as each moral issue is treated differently and circumstances, time and place are all taken into account. This is a clear advantage of relativism as opposed to absolutism, because it can change with different societies, and is accepting of other cultures. By focussing on what people do, ethics ensures that people can be held responsible for their actions. The ends of a decision are what really matters in ethics because that is what makes the change to your life, the lives of others or society. Morals need to be based on ends in order to take into account these differences. Without basing morals on ends, the same rules would have to apply to everything, all the time which wouldn’t work. Despite this strength of the teleological argument I think it needs to be interpreted with this quote in mind â€Å"when in Rome do as the Romans do†. This way, we avoid the criticism that ‘anything would go’, as within societies people would be clear on the moral guidelines, but unlike absolutism, would not feel condemned if they felt the need to break those guidelines. Virtue Ethics is a good way of life, but I dont feel that is as good for functioning in society as consequentialism.

Principles of Good Policing: Avoiding Violence Between Police and Citiz

Thesis Statement: police discretion is the framework for promoting justice in police-citizen interactions in the traffic sector. 　　　　Police officers face a myriad of challenges in their line of duty. Most cases necessitate sound decisions to settle disputes amicably. When they apply discretion in an incoherent manner, they may end up abusing human rights. Therefore, they apply it when dealing with legal sanctions such as making arrests, giving out a ticket and stopping the offending party. Miller, Blackler and Alexandra (2006) state "police are specialized role players who preserve order and enforce the law" (p. 11). Sometimes, vagueness results when communities fail to engage in a consensus to streamline the issues that constitute criminal behavior law. Communities and legislatures trust the police officers' capacity to exercise discretion. 　　　　The Ride and Purpose of the Paper 　　　　The purpose of the paper is to identify who the police on patrol stop on the roads. It will also examine the cause of police confrontation with citizens, and how this influences and affects their work. What is more, it will analyze the forces that the police use to arrest the culprits in many cases. It will act as an examination of the importance of officers’ discretion while on patrol. Views on Discretion 　　　　Many people interpret police activities from pre-conceived ideas because they happen away from the citizens' view. The privacy creates a circumstance that allows police officers’ discretion in the way they react and handle citizens that breach the law. The research community tries to investigate the issues that concern the police officers' conduct while responding to citizen's woes and their interaction with them. The gap that exists in... ...oals due to the environment's needs that require rapid response. When they enforce discretion properly, they respond to margin situations in the best way possible. â€Å"However, if they fail to control it, they may infringe the constitutional provisions. Dempsey and Forst (2013) state "one of the ways of controlling discretion, particularly the improper application of discretion is through the establishment of employee early warning systems" (49). Proper discretion is a sure way of restoring sanity in the traffic system owing to its accrued discipline. 　　　　 References Dempsey, J. S, & Forst, L. S. (2008). An Introduction to Policing. Belmont, CA: 　　　　Thomson/Wadsworth. Dempsey, J. S, & Forst, L. S. (2013). Police. Clifton Park, NY: Delmar Cengage Learning. Miller, S, Blackler, J, & Alexandra, A. (2006). Police Ethics. Crows Nest, N.S.W: Allen & 　　　　Unwin.

Managers Explore and Exploit

Organizational Ambidexterity in Action: How Managers Explore and Exploit Author(s): Charles A. O'Reilly III and Michael L. Tushman Reviewed work(s): Source: California Management Review, Vol. 53, No. 4 (Summer 2011), pp. 5-22 Published by: University of California Press Stable URL: http://www. jstor. org/stable/10. 1525/cmr. 2011. 53. 4. 5 . Accessed: 27/11/2011 04:22 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www. jstor. org/page/info/about/policies/terms. sp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email  protected] org. University of California Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to California Manag ement Review. http://www. jstor. org Organizational Ambidexterity in Action: How Managers explore and exploit Charles A. O’Reilly III Michael L. Tushman he life span of the average American is 79. Japanese can expect to live to age 83, Liberians to only 46. The average age of a large company is much less than any of these. Research has shown that only a tiny fraction of firms founded in the U. S. are likely to make it to age 40, probably less than 0. 1 percent. 1 In this study, for firms founded in 1976, only 10% survived 10 years later, leading the authors to conclude that â€Å"Despite their size, their vast financial and human resources, average large firms do not ‘live’ as long as ordinary Americans. 2 While this is partly understandable because of the high mortality rates among newly founded companies, other research has estimated that even large, well-established companies can only expect to live, on average, between another 6 to 15 years. 3 Ormerod, in a study of firm failure, noted that â€Å"Over 10 percent of all companies in the U. S. , the largest and most-successful e conomy in the history of the world, fail every single year. 4 In a study of the world’s largest companies between 1912 and 1995, Hannah reported that only 20 firms remained on her list for the entire period— and many of those were in industries like natural resources without disruptive change. In her study, the modal large firm failed. 5 Why this should be is a puzzle, since when firms are doing well they have all the resources (financial, physical, and intellectual) to continue to be successful. Yet the evidence is that most organizations do not survive for long periods of time. In addressing this conundrum, James March notes that central to the ability of a firm to survive over time is its ability to exploit existing assets and positions in a profit-producing way and simultaneously to explore new technologies and markets—to configure and reconfigure organizational resources to capture existing as well as new opportunities. In March’s terms, this is the fundamental tension at the heart of an enterprise’s long-run survival. â€Å"The basic problem confronting an organization is to engage in sufficient exploitation to ensure its T CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL. 53, NO. 4 suMMER 2011 CMR. bERkELEy. Edu 5 Organizational Ambidexterity in Action: How Managers Explore and Exploit current viability and, at the same time, devote enough energy to exploration to ensure its future viability. †6 March also notes that this requires not the blind variation-selection-retention process of biological evolution but what he refers to as â€Å"evolutionary engineering† in which organizational experience and memory are used to strengthen exploitation and exploration rocesses and adapt to changed environmental conditions. 7 Hannah, struggling to explain the survival of a comparatively small number of the world’s largest companies, suggests that a plausible explanation for the survivors is that â€Å"they had some distinctive architecture which enabled them—but not others—to constantly replicate their early success [and that] such corporate architectures must be complex and difficult to ident ify, describe and copy, for, if that were not the case, their value would be competed down by emulators. 8 In the past decade, a growing body of research has examined how organizations can both explore and exploit. 9 One promising stream of research has focused on how dynamic capabilities may underpin the ability of firms to sense, seize, and reconfigure organizational assets to adapt to changed environmental conditions. 10 With dynamic capabilities, sustained competitive advantage comes from the firm’s ability to leverage and reconfigure its existing competencies and assets in ways that are valuable to the customer but difficult for competitors to imitate. In this view, dynamic capabilities are embedded in organizational processes or routines around coordination, learning, and transformation and allow a firm to sense opportunities and then to seize them by successfully allocating resources, often by adjusting existing competencies or developing new ones. These capabilities underpin the organization’s ability to maintain ecological fitness and, when necessary, to reconfigure existing assets and develop the new skills needed to address emerging threats and opportunities The Roots of Organizational Ambidexterity O’Reilly and Tushman argue that the ability of a firm to be ambidextrous is at the core of dynamic capabilities. Ambidexterity requires senior managers to accomplish two critical tasks. 11 First, they must be able to accurately sense changes in their competitive environment, including potential shifts in technology, compeCharles A. O’Reilly III is the Frank Buck Professor of Management at the Graduate tition, customers, and regulation. Second, they School of Business at Stanford University. must be able to act on these opportunities and threats; to be able to seize them by reconfigurMichael L. Tushman is the Paul Lawrence ing both tangible and intangible assets to meet MBA Class of 1942 Professor of Business new challenges. 12 As a dynamic capability, ambiAdministration at the Harvard Business School. dexterity embodies a complex set of routines including decentralization, differentiation, targeted integration, and the ability of senior leadership to orchestrate the complex trade-offs that the simultaneous pursuit of exploration and exploitation requires. Developing these dynamic capabilities is a central task of executive leadership. 6 NIVERsITy OF CALIFORNIA, bERkELEy VOL. 53, NO. 4 suMMER 2011 CMR. bERkELEy. Edu Organizational Ambidexterity in Action: How Managers Explore and Exploit Although theoretically compelling, research on dynamic capabilities and ambidexterity is still at an early stage. Conceptually, the need for organizations to both explore and exploit is convincing, but how do managers and firms actually do this? At an operating level, how do the challenges of ambidexterity present themselves—and what differentiates the more successful attempts at ambidexterity from the less successful? To develop a more granular sense for the managerial challenges presented by ambidexterity, consider the following three examples. Mike Lawrie at Misys In 2007, Mike Lawrie was appointed CEO of Misys, a $1B FTSE 100 global supplier of software and services to banking and health care customers. Although Misys had been a star performer earlier in its history, by 2006 the firm was in trouble with margins and growth rates far below their competitors. It had grown through acquisitions and was a loose federation of 34 separate business units with 6,000 employees spread across 79 countries. Part of Lawrie’s turnaround strategy was straightforward: to install common practices across the business units to reduce costs and drive productivity. As a 27-year veteran of IBM and former CEO of Siebel Systems, Lawrie knew how to do this. More problematic was the potential disruptive challenge posed by open source software, which threatened the proprietary products from which Misys derived most of its current revenue. However, given the poor financial position of the company, Lawrie’s senior team was focused on cutting costs and getting through the immediate crisis. With their legacy business and their powerful business unit managers under cost, quality, and growth pressures, open source experiments were seen as a needless distraction and a $300M cost. They questioned whether the company should divert scarce resources to fund an uncertain new initiative that, if successful, could undermine their current business model? In addition, if they were to do this, how should the new venture be organized and led? Ganesh Natarajan at Zensar Technologies Zensar Technologies is one of India’s top 25 business process outsourcing companies proving services to 300 of the Fortune 500 firms. In 2005, its business was growing but Ganesh Natarajan, the CEO, saw the opportunity to implement a potentially radical software process innovation (Solution Blue Prints or SBP). SBP was a revolutionary way to do software development that, if implemented, would require a more collaborative relationship with clients, a different product development framework, and a different sales process. Zensar’s existing customers, its top team, its sales force and its product development staff were not enthusiastic about SBP. Like Mike Lawrie’s team at Misys, Natarajan’s senior team and business unit leaders were preoccupied with their current business and saw little need to explore an approach that would require them to alter their current business model. When pressed by Natarajan to explore the new approach to software development, several senior managers CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL. 53, NO. 4 suMMER 2011 CMR. bERkELEy. Edu 7 Organizational Ambidexterity in Action: How Managers Explore and Exploit suggested that SBP simply be integrated into their existing units. Others wanted SBP to be spun out as a new venture. In contrast, the leader of the SBP project wanted to have his own business unit reporting directly to the CEO. As Natarajan reflected on the challenge, he was sure that the company should pursue SBP but was unsure how to structure the new initiative to best ensure its success. Caroline White at Defense Corp Defense Corp (pseudonym) is a major U. S. defense contractor with long-term relationships with customers in the military. Caroline White, a vice president and general manager of a division, saw an attractive opportunity for growth in the new Homeland Security market but was frustrated in her efforts to develop this area. Her mission, approved by the President, was to create a franchise in this business equivalent to those it enjoyed in other defense markets. In spite of this high-level approval, Caroline found funding difficult, with the business development funds budgeted by supporting units never available in the amounts promised. Instead, these seem to be siphoned off to support more near-term opportunities with existing clients. When Caroline pressed her colleagues in other business units about this, she heard complaints about her new initiative. They saw her mission as less tangible and immediate than theirs, with a smaller payoff to investment, and labeled her effort as a â€Å"think tank† as opposed to a real business. They also complained that her project lacked clarity around deliverables and metrics. Making matters more difficult, line of business leaders were under significant pressure to deliver revenues and questioned the viability of Caroline’s efforts. In the face of these obstacles, Caroline was resolved to ask the CEO to intercede. The question, however, was what she wanted him to do to ensure the viability of her exploratory effort? Given the resistance, she knew that it would require more than just funding to ensure the success of the new initiative. Mike Lawrie, Ganesh Natarajan and Caroline White each face the classic explore-exploit dilemma. What specifically can they do? At a high level of abstraction, ambidexterity requires a willingness of senior managers to commit resources to exploratory projects and the establishment of separate structural units for exploitation and exploration. Most research on ambidexterity begins with the acceptance of these general characteristics. 3 However, while there is general agreement about the elements of ambidexterity, O’Reilly and Tushman have noted that what is missing is a clear articulation of those specific management actions that facilitate the simultaneous pursuit of exploitation and exploration. What has been missing from the research on ambidexterity is insight into the core leadership mechanisms that underlie how dynamic capabilities operate in practice. T hus, while directionally correct, the research is not granular enough to be of much use to an operating manager facing the problems described above. To be practically useful, what is needed is greater insight into the specific micromechanisms required for a manager to implement and operate an ambidextrous strategy. This article reports the results of interviews and qualitative case studies 8 uNIVERsITy OF CALIFORNIA, bERkELEy VOL. 53, NO. 4 suMMER 2011 CMR. bERkELEy. Edu Organizational Ambidexterity in Action: How Managers Explore and Exploit of leaders in 15 organizations that were confronted with the need to simultaneously explore and exploit. We use these data to induce how managers actually dealt with the challenges of ambidexterity. In doing this, we also explored those activities that discriminated between those more- versus less-successful attempts at implementing ambidextrous designs. Leading the Ambidextrous Organization In an attempt to characterize the specific elements of ambidexterity, we offer five propositions that are necessary for leaders to be successful at managing ambidexterity. 14 These are specific mechanisms that enable firms to successfully manage separate â€Å"explore-and-exploit† subunits and to leverage common assets in ways that permit the firm to adapt to new opportunities and threats. It is the presence of these characteristics that permits leaders to reconfigure existing competencies and assets to explore new opportunities even as the organization continues to compete in mature markets. Absent these elements, inertial forces keep the firm focused on the exploitative part of the business. 15 Thus, we propose that ambidexterity is more likely to be successful in the presence of the following five conditions: b A compelling strategic intent that intellectually justifies the importance of both exploration and exploitation. An articulation of a common vision and values that provide for a common identity across the exploitative and exploratory units. b A senior team that explicitly owns the unit’s strategy of exploration and exploitation; there is a common-fate reward system; and the strategy is communicated relentlessly. b Separate but aligned organizational architectures (business models, structure, incentives, metrics, and cultures) for the exploratory and ex ploitative units and targeted integration at both senior and tactical levels to properly leverage organizational assets. The ability of the senior leadership to tolerate and resolve the tensions arising from separate alignments. To appreciate the logic of these, consider the effects on ambidexterity if these elements were not present. First, without an intellectually compelling strategic intent to justify the ambidextrous form, there will be no rationale for why profitable exploit units, especially those under pressure, should give up resources to fund small, uncertain explore efforts. As previous research has shown, managers routinely discount future threats and focus on short-term gains at the expense of less certain long-term returns. 6 Second, absent a common vision and values, there will be no common identity to promote trust, cooperation, and a long-term perspective. 17 Third, if the senior team lacks a consensus about the importance of ambidexterity, those who are uncommitted will be encouraged to resist the effort, diminishing cooperation, increasing competition for resources, and slowing down execution. 18 The absence CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL. 53, NO. 4 suMMER 2011 CMR. bERkELEy. Edu 9 Organizational Ambidexterity in Action: How Managers Explore and Exploit f a common-fate reward system and a lack of relentless communication of the ambidextrous strategy can further undermine cooperation and encourage unproductive conflict. 19 Fourth, without separate alignments for explore and exploit units and targeted integration to leverage common assets, there will be inefficient use of resources and poor coordination across the units. 20 Finally, if the leadership is unable to manage the conflicts and trade-offs required by ambidexterity, the necessary decision processes will be compromised and end up in confusion and conflict. 1 Method and Results To assess whether these five propositions are veridical descriptions of ambidexterity in practice, we conduc ted semi-structured interviews with senior managers at fifteen firms that were attempting to manage both exploratory and exploitative units. Eight of the 15 cases were either successes or qualified successes as reflected in increased growth or profits, three were clear failures, and four firms were underperforming before learning how to be ambidextrous and deemed successful afterwards. Table 1 lists these companies and the challenge each faced. Senior managers and key informants in each firm were interviewed and asked to describe in detail how they attempted to simultaneously explore and exploit. 22 They were probed about the nature of their leadership challenges, what actions they had taken, an assessment of their progress to date, and to identify those elements that they believed were helping or hindering them in accomplishing their task of exploration and exploitation. The focus in these interviews was on understanding in some detail what actions had been taken and how these had been implemented. The goal of these interviews was to specify in a granular way what leadership actions were associated with the organization’s ability to reconfigure existing assets and develop the new capabilities needed for exploration. 23 Table 2 provides a summary of the comparative results across the fifteen organizations studied. These results suggest that there are themes associated with the leadership of more- versus less-successful ambidextrous designs. The first proposition offered by O’Reilly and Tushman suggests that ambidexterity is facilitated when there is a compelling strategic intent that intellectually justifies the explore and exploit strategy. In each of the 15 cases investigated here, there was a clear strategic intent on the part of the organization to pursue an exploratory venture (this obviously reflects our sample selection where cases were chosen based on their attempt to be ambidextrous). While each of the 15 firms articulated a strategic intent, only ten were able to actually execute such an aspiration. The articulation of a clear strategic intent clearly does not discriminate between more- versus less-successful attempts to implement ambidextrous designs. Other research has documented the transformation of firms occurring without an explicit ambidexterity strategy. 24 These results suggest that while 10 uNIVERsITy OF CALIFORNIA, bERkELEy VOL. 53, NO. 4 suMMER 2011 CMR. bERkELEy. Edu Organizational Ambidexterity in Action: How Managers Explore and Exploit TABLe 1. sample description (continued on next page) IBM Life Sciences (Success) In 2000, IbM began a programmatic effort, (termed the Emerging business Organization or EbO), to identify and develop cross-IbM business that could provide $1b in revenue within a 5-year time frame. In April of that year, Carol kovac, an IbM R manager, was asked to establish a new Life science business that would capitalize on the increased demand for computing being generated by the genomic revolution. between its founding and 2006, Carol grew the business to $5b in revenue. IBM Middleware (Success) In 1998, IbM’s software division was in turmoil. There were conflicting pressures to continue to develop and service software for their existing installed base that relied heavily on mainframe computers and to develop radically new products based on the emerging World Wide Web. Resolving this required that their senior managers exploit existing programming languages and customers and to explore new languages and markets. They accomplished this by systematically establishing different units and carefully integrating them at senior levels. Cisco TelePresence (Success) Cisco systems is a $22b company that sells plumbing for the internet. It has grown at 12-17% annually and currently has a dominant market share in its main businesses. As a part of his effort to continue Cisco systems growth, John Chambers, the CEO, has launched an ambitious initiative to identify 30 new potential $1b businesses. His aim is to generate 25% of the firm’s revenues from these new ventures within 5-10 years. In October 2006, one of these efforts (TelePresence) was launched as an internal venture to develop high-end video conferencing. since then the business has grown from two internal entrepreneurs and a sheet of paper to more than 100 people and $200M in revenue. Misys Corporation (Success) Misys is a $1b software firm selling service and systems to health care and banking clients. As a part of a turnaround effort commenced in 2007, the new CEO initiated a cost-cutting effort in the mature business and proposed a new open source approach to replace the existing proprietary platform. To ensure the success of this disruptive approach, he set up a new exploratory unit and replaced several members of his senior team who were resisting the new approach. by 2010, the new open source platform had opened up new markets and attracted a significant number of new customers. DaVita Rx (Success) daVita is a $6b business that derives the bulk of its revenues from operating kidney dialysis centers. In 2004, kent Thiry, the CEO, formed a team to identify new business opportunities that would match daVita’s clinical skills with economic opportunities. One opportunity identified was to provide prescription drugs to chronic kidney patients. begun in 2004, daVita Rx was an internal start-up with a different business model, metrics, and margins than the larger daVita. by 2010, this new business was generating $220M in revenue with 400 employees. Defense Corp (Success) defense Corp is a $6b provider of hardware and systems to the u. s. military establishment. In 2005, in an attempt to broaden their customer base the company initiated an effort to sell technology to the newly established Homeland security Agency. Although the initiative was approved by the CEO, development funding and cooperation from main lines of business were slow in coming until a separate unit was established with a clear charter, appropriate metrics, and an aligned senior team. The new unit recently won a $13M contract. Ciba Vision (Success) In the early 1990s, Ciba Vision, a maker of soft contact lenses and lens solutions, was losing ground to their larger competitors, J and bausch and Lomb. In a bold move, Glenn bradley, the President, halted all incremental innovation and placed six bets on revolutionary new products such as extended wear lenses and daily disposables. These new units were encouraged to establish their own alignments (people, structure, culture) as they pursued their breakthrough innovation. With the success of several of these, revenues tripled over the next decade. Zensar Technologies (Success) In 2002, Zensar Technologies, a mid-sized Indian IT services firm was losing market share and key talent. There was substantial tension between a potentially promising new technology platform and the existing geographical business units. A new CEO shifted Zensar to a product-focused firm but kept the new technology venture as a business unit reporting to his office. In 2008, after the entrepreneurial unit’s technology and business model was validated this unit and its innovative business model was integrated into the product units. Over the five-year period, Zensar was able to build its core business even as it brought to the market a fundamentally new technology. CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL. 53, NO. 4 suMMER 2011 CMR. bERkELEy. Edu 11 Organizational Ambidexterity in Action: How Managers Explore and Exploit TABLe 1. sample description (continued from previous page) SAP Business-by-Design (Failure) In 2006, the CEO of sAP declared that future revenue growth for the company was in the small and Medium business market and selling software on demand. This software-as-a-service product (business-by-design or byd) was developed but no separate unit was established. Although this market has grown substantially, sAP has failed to successfully market their offering. In 2010, the CEO, Leo Apotheker, was fired for failing to implement business-by-design. HP Scanner (Declining to Success) beginning in 1991, HP’s scanner division had begun to develop a portable scanner to complement their flatbed product. For five years they had failed to commercialize any of their inventions. In 1996, a new division GM separated out the handheld business into an ambidextrous unit that was physically separated from the flatbed business and had its own people, systems, incentives, and culture. Two years later, this business was successful enough to be spun-out as its own division. Printing Company (Failure) In 2007, faced with increased competition and declining customer satisfaction and usage of their core legal research products, the senior managers of the business decided to reinvent their business as a web-based publisher based on a new open source architecture. In spite of a clear vision of the future, heavy investment in the new technology, and a promise to â€Å"rescue the company†, the new product has failed to reignite growth. The new unit has faced continual resistance from the more mature part of the business. Turner Technologies (Declining to Success) The Advanced IC division of Turner had issues of growth in new products as well as quality in its existing product line. While the division’s strategic intent was clear, it could not get traction on either performance issue until it split out the innovative strategic agenda from its existing product line. Energized by two new managers reporting the divisional GM and a rearticulated identity for the division, Turner was able to both effectively explore and exploit. Software Company (Failure) under pressure from corporate executives, the general manager of software Company articulated a strategic intent to both build on its struggling extant product line and initiate a remarkable set of new software solutions. This general manager built a separate unit, reporting directly to him, to focus on innovation. Over a three-year period, he did not, however, staff or fund this innovative unit. The unit underperformed in its existing as well as its innovative product line. IBM Network Technologies (Declining to Success) A highly entrepreneurial general manager articulated a strategic intent to exploit her existing chip line even as she promised to explore into fundamentally new chips. yet her zeal for exploration led her to build a business unit only focused on exploration. Her extant product line suffered. under pressure from corporate staff and client dissatisfaction, the general manager rebuilt her senior team and her business unit to focus attention on both her current product as well as her new product lines. USA Today (Declining to Success) In the late 1990s, usA Today, like most u. s. ewspapers, began to see a decline in both circulation and advertising revenues as web-based news began to supplant print. In response to this trend, Tom Curley, the paper’s publisher, adopted a â€Å"network strategy† which emphasized the delivery of news content across three platforms, print, the web, and TV. between 1999 and 2002, he was successful at managing this transition and simultaneously d elivering news content across the three platforms-with the result that earnings increased by 50 percent. 12 uNIVERsITy OF CALIFORNIA, bERkELEy VOL. 53, NO. 4 suMMER 2011 CMR. bERkELEy. Edu Organizational Ambidexterity in Action: How Managers Explore and Exploit TABLe 2. Interview Results (continued on next page) strategic intent that intellectually justifies ambidextrous form Vision and values that promote a common identity but separate cultures senior team that explicitly owns the ambidextrous strategy (common-fate rewards, communication) Ambidextrous Leadership (conflict resolution, resource allocation) separate units with aligned architectures and targeted integration (senior level and tactical) Proposition 1 Proposition 2 Proposition 3 Proposition 4 Proposition 5 Success: IbM Life sciences yes yes yes 100% of bonus for senior executives yes yes yes 70% of bonus yes EbO structure yes success— $5b in revenue in 6 years Cisco TelePresence yes Council/board structure yes Geographically separate yes daVita Rx yes yes yes but some initial disputes over autonomy yes but some conflict over metrics and rewards yes senior leader integrates Ciba Vision yes yes â€Å"Healthy eyes for life† yes yes Geographically separate Explore report to senior team IbM Middleware yes yes â€Å"beat bEA† yes senior leaders agree on a new structure yes yes Geographically separate units yes distinct unit for new platform es senior leaders integration yes Tension held at top Zensar Technologies yes yes â€Å"Among the top Indian IT services Firms† Misys yes yes drive productivity and innovate yes Replaced old team with new one yes Open source reports to CEO yes CEO drove the new effort CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL. 53, NO. 4 suMMER 2011 CMR. bERkELEy . Edu Overall Performance success— $200M in revenue in 4 years success— $220M in revenue in 6 years success— tripled sales in 10 years success— old and new products combined both profit and growth doubled from 20052010 success— developed new platform with new customers 13 Organizational Ambidexterity in Action: How Managers Explore and Exploit TABLe 2. Interview Results (continued from previous page, continued on next page) strategic intent that intellectually justifies ambidextrous form Vision and values that promote a common identity but separate cultures senior team that explicitly owns the ambidextrous strategy (common-fate rewards, communication) Ambidextrous Leadership (conflict resolution, resource allocation) separate units with aligned architectures and targeted integration (senior level and tactical) Proposition 1 Proposition 2 Proposition 3 Proposition 4 Proposition 5 defense Corp yes No but did set new explore culture yes After initial resistance yes unit reports to President yes used consultant to mediate conflict Failure: sAP businessby-design yes No No disputes over revenue recognition yes but the strategy does not fit well with current one yes yes â€Å"save the company† No short-term revenue still dominates No clear ambidextrous unit or leader No Continued conflicts over who owns the customer No Ambidextrous unit not represented Failure— lack of penetration in targeted markets Failure—no new growth Printing Company No Explore unit not protected software Co No No yes No Transition to Success: usA Today yes yes â€Å"Network, not a newspaper† H-P scanner yes No No then yes senior team bonus based on overall performance No to yes yes separate units with targeted integration No then yes Physically separate units No to yes Resource allocation to web-based business No to yes senior leader integrates stalled to success— increased earnings 50% in 3 years stalled to success— then innovation unit spun out 14 uNIVERsITy OF CALIFORNIA, bERkELEy VOL. 53, NO. suMMER 2011 CMR. bERkELEy. Edu Overall Performance success— Won $13M in new contracts Poor Innovation Performance Organizational Ambidexterity in Action: How Managers Explore and Exploit TABLe 2. Interview Results (continued from previous page) strategic intent that intellectually justifies ambidextrous form Vision and values that promote a common identity but separate cultures senior team that explicitly own s the ambidextrous strategy (common-fate rewards, communication) Ambidextrous Leadership (conflict resolution, resource allocation) eparate units with aligned architectures and targeted integration (senior level and tactical) Proposition 1 Proposition 2 Proposition 3 Proposition 4 Proposition 5 Turner Technologies yes yes No to yes No to yes No to yes IbM Network Technologies yes No to yes yes No to yes No to yes possibly helpful, a clear strategic intent may not be a necessary condition for executing ambidextrous designs. The second proposition suggested the importance of a common vision and values as necessary to promote a common identity across explore and exploit units. Here the evidence is largely consistent with proposition two. Six of the eight consistently high-performing firms had a clear over-arching vision and common values. In contrast, two of the three poor performing firms did not have such clarity. Printing Company (pseudonym) had a senior team that both articulated a clear strategic intent as well as an overarching vision and identity. This senior team could not, however, execute against this clear strategy and overarching identity. Moreover, three of the four firms that learned how to be ambidextrous had or developed a well-defined vision. For example, at USA Today there was an explicit strategy to â€Å"be a network, not a newspaper. † The over-arching aspiration was to be â€Å"the local paper for the global village. † This strategy and vision, and a common set of values around fairness, accuracy, and trust, helped knit together a highly differentiated organization. Of the twelve firms able to execute ambidextrous designs, only HP Scanner and Misys were able to implement the ambidextrous design without an overarching identity. Thus, while not definitive, the evidence suggests that a common vision is an important discriminator of more- versus less-successful ambidextrous designs, but not necessarily a sufficient one. The third proposition argued for the importance of a consensus in the senior team about the ambidextrous strategy and a common-fate reward system within the team to promote this. Our data supports this proposition. In each of the three instances of failure, there was a lack of consensus within the senior team about the relative importance of ambidexterity and there was no CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL. 3, NO. 4 suMMER 2011 CMR. bERkELEy. Edu Overall Performance declining to improving declining to Improving 15 Organizational Ambidexterity in Action: How Managers Explore and Exploit common-fate reward system for the senior team. Interviews suggested that the existing reward systems that were based on sub-unit or functional performance were a major cause of the inability of the organization to leverage common assets. In the case of SAP, these disputes played out in the unwillingness of the sales force to promote lower-margin new products and disputes among senior managers about revenue recognition. In the printing company case, short-term financial pressures and the lack of any common-fate reward for the senior team resulted in a focus on achieving short-term revenue targets through the older but higher-margin products. Similarly, at Defense Corp, White’s Homeland Security initiative was initially opposed by other members of the senior team because of its inability to generate short-term revenue. The uncertainty of a long sales-cycle associated with a new government customer was overwhelmed by the short-term metrics of revenue and gross margin. The senior team’s systems for evaluating performance lacked the capacity to evaluate a business at a more immature phase of development. In contrast, in the most-successful ambidextrous efforts, the senior team was heavily incented to promote both explore and exploit businesses. In the Cisco TelePresence case, members of the governance team (Boards and Councils) had a significant portion of their bonus contingent on the success of both units. In the successful DaVita Rx case, there were initial disputes within the senior team about metrics and margins that were only resolved after a common-fate reward system was installed. At Misys, senior team resistance was overcome only after Lawrie replaced the opposing managers. Importantly, in three of the four cases where the firms learned how to be ambidextrous, there was a shift from a lack of consensus ownership about the importance of the exploratory effort to a fully committed senior team. This shift in top team ownership of the ambidextrous strategy involved the creation of common-fate incentive systems, a shift in leadership behaviors of the senior manager, and, in several cases, turnover within the senior team. The fourth condition proposed as necessary for successful ambidexterity was the presence of separate aligned architectures for the explore and exploit units coupled with targeted integration to ensure that common resources were leveraged across units. In all three instances of failure, these distinct alignments were conspicuously missing. In the case of SAP, responsibility for the exploratory venture (software-as-a-service) was split between two functional heads with the result that effective coordination never occurred and decisions were made slowly. At Software Company (pseudonym), a separate exploratory unit was established on paper but never staffed. In each of these ambidextrous failures, the locus of integration between the needs of the exploratory and exploitative activities was either too low in the firm or was ambiguous. In contrast, in each successful case there were always separate explore and exploit units with senior-level integration to ensure that resources were allocated. At IBM this was done either through their EBO process (e. g. in Life Sciences)25 or, in the Middleware case, through the establishment of distinct units focused on different time horizons; that is, mature, growth, and emerging 16 uNIVERsITy OF CALIFORNIA, bERkELEy VOL. 53, NO. 4 suMMER 2011 CMR. bERkELEy. Edu Organizational Ambidexterity in Action: How Managers Explore and Exploit products. At Cisco this was done through a Boards and Councils process where there was a clear allocation of responsibilities, resources, and structures. In all successf ul cases, the exploratory units were initially physically separated from the exploit parts of the business. Similarly, for three of the four firms that learned how to be ambidextrous, there was a switch in organization design from an integrated approach (e. g. , project teams) to the establishment of separate units for explore and explore businesses. The final core mechanism proposed as important for successful ambidexterity was the ability of the ambidextrous leader to resolve the inevitable conflicts and resource allocation decisions that this organization design entails. This too is an important discriminator between more- versus less-successful ambidextrous designs. In each failure case this capability was lacking. At SAP there were continual disputes about resources and responsibilities across the participating functions without a clear mechanism or clear leadership for resolution. In the printing firm, although there was a separate explore unit with a responsible manager, he reported to an exploit manager who was held responsible for margins and short-term revenues. The exploratory unit manager was not represented on the senior team with the result that his voice was not heard when critical resource decisions were made. In contrast, in each successful case, there was a clear, identifiable leader and forum to resolve conflicts and make definitive resource allocation decisions. For example, at Zensar, even though there were substantial conflicts between the existing business units and the new integrative software platform, the CEO saw to it that his team actually dealt with these conflicts and made the appropriate resource allocation shifts between the existing units. At Misys, Mike Lawrie ensured that resources needed for the new open source effort were allocated in a timely manner. Similarly, in each of the four units that learned how to be ambidextrous, the general manager changed the senior team composition and processes to resolve conflicts associated with exploration and exploitation. For instance, at USA Today, only after Curley replaced several members of his team was his firm able to excel at both print and web-based content delivery. Similarly, only after the division general manager changed her leadership style at IBM’s Network Technology Division was her team able to balance resource allocation and decision making between her explore and exploit business lines. The Management of Ambidexterity One of the key features of ambidexterity is the ability of the organization to reallocate assets and capabilities to address new threats and opportunities. Practically speaking, this means that leaders within the organization are able to make the difficult choices required to reconfigure assets to promote exploratory ventures. The results from these fifteen case studies suggest that there are identifiable core mechanisms that discriminate between more- versus less-successful ambidextrous designs in action. The most-successful ambidextrous designs had leaders who developed a clear vision and common identity (Proposition 2), CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL. 53, NO. 4 suMMER 2011 CMR. bERkELEy. Edu 17 Organizational Ambidexterity in Action: How Managers Explore and Exploit built senior teams that were committed to the ambidextrous strategy and were incented to both explore and exploit (Proposition 3), employed distinct and aligned subunits to focus on either exploration or exploitation (Proposition 4), and built teams that could deal with the resource allocations and conflicts associated with exploration and exploitation (Proposition 5). Those less-successful attempts at ambidexterity did not employ these core mechanisms. Although useful, the articulation of a clear strategic intent (Proposition 1) and, to a lesser extent, the provision of an overarching vision (Proposition 2) did not discriminate between the more- versus less-successful attempts to build an ambidextrous organization. This suggests that articulating why ambidexterity is important is not the same as how it is implemented. In the implementation of an ambidextrous design, execution appears to trump strategy. The first two propositions (articulating a strategy and overarching vision for the ambidextrous form) are the easy part for senior managers. The next three propositions are about strategic execution. These require hard choices about resource allocation, leader behavior, senior team composition (or replacement), and the balancing of contradictory organizational architectures. The most-successful ambidextrous designs had more of these components from the beginning. In contrast, those firms that learned how to be ambidextrous struggled with at least two of these core components and only after resolving these were they to effectively implement an ambidextrous design. These results suggest that effective ambidextrous designs are based on a set of interrelated choices made by the leader. Any subset of the core mechanisms is associated with underperformance. As such, executing ambidextrous designs can be seen as a complex senior leadership task that requires an integrated set of strategic, structural, incentive, and top team process decisions. Clearly, successful ambidextrous designs require more than the simple organizational structural decision in which the exploratory and exploitative subunits are separated. The critical elements, and perhaps the more difficult elements, are the processes by which these units are integrated in a value enhancing way. Discussion These results are largely consistent with Teece’s observation that â€Å"dynamic capabilities reside in large measure with the enterprise’s top management team. †26 Concretely, it appears that ambidexterity as a dynamic capability rests on the ability of leaders not only to articulate a strategic intent and vision that justifies exploration and exploitation, but—more importantly—to manage the inherent tensions associated with incompatible organizational architectures. These results also extend previous research that has linked transformational leadership to successful ambidexterity by explicating some of the core processes that underpin the transformational leadership construct. 27 These mechanisms are largely consistent with earlier research. For example, our findings that senior team consensus is an important ingredient in the implementation of ambidexterity is consistent with previous research showing that the behavioral integration 18 uNIVERsITy OF CALIFORNIA, bERkELEy VOL. 53, NO. 4 suMMER 2011 CMR. bERkELEy. Edu Organizational Ambidexterity in Action: How Managers Explore and Exploit of the senior team is a precursor to successful ambidexterity. 28 Similarly, the importance of targeted integration and clear incentives documented here has also been suggested in previous studies. 29 The critical aspect of resource allocation illustrated here has also been seen in previous studies, especially in research showing that failed efforts at renewal stem not from a lack of technology or resources but the inability of senior managers to allocate those resources effectively to the exploratory effort. 0 Finally, while each component characteristic of ambidextrous designs is important, it appears that it is the set of components interacting together that define the dynamic capabilities that drive effective ambidextrous designs. 31 These patterns suggest concrete yet integrated sets of actions that leaders can take to execute strategies that encompass both exploration and exploitation. At Misys, Mike Lawri e articulated his strategic intent for open source software solutions at a senior team offsite. He kept Misys Open Source as a separate unit reporting to his office. He also emphasized the need for cost and quality progress in his existing business units even as he encouraged disciplined experimentation in the open source unit. As a leader, Lawrie was able to tolerate the competition between Misys Open Source and other platforms and was willing to risk shortterm revenue to help create longer-term options with a potentially disruptive technology. He has seen his strategy pay dividends. The healthcare business unit revenues grew more than 30% in 2009 with Misys Open Source as the basis for important new contracts with hospitals, physicians, and insurers. At the same time, Open Source has triggered innovation into other Misys units—a new banking product has large open source components, and the Misys website is completely open source. To realize the potential of SBP at Zensar, Ganesh Natarajan made the decision to keep SBP separate from the other units. He clarified his strategic and emotional rationale for exploration and exploitation with his senior team and, for the next two years, relentlessly emphasized both exploration and exploitation. By 2008, SBP had almost doubled its number of clients as well as profits. Having demonstrated its success technically and in the market, SBP was then reintegrated within the main business in 2008. Finally, at Defense Corp, Caroline White received approval to separate her homeland security exploration unit and built a new management system and metrics for gauging progress of this business. She also changed the incentives of her top team so that they were all accountable for both short-term results as well as longer-term results. By 2010, the exploratory unit proved its value, winning a $13M contract with the Transport Security Agency for improving perimeter security at U. S. irports. Conclusion There is now convincing evidence suggesting that for organizations to survive in the face of change, they need to be able to successfully exploit their existing businesses and to explore into new spaces by reconfiguring existing resources and developing new capabilities. 32 While the evidence for the benefits CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL. 53, NO. 4 suMMER 2011 CM R. bERkELEy. Edu 19 Organizational Ambidexterity in Action: How Managers Explore and Exploit of ambidexterity is accumulating, there exists a gap in understanding how ambidexterity is actually managed within organizations. This article has explored how leaders within organizations actually implement ambidexterity. The actions, behaviors, and design choices made by the senior leader comprise the dynamic capabilities that enable firms to simultaneously explore and exploit and emphasize the key role of strategic leadership in adapting, integrating, and reconfiguring organizational skills and resources to match changing environments. Notes 1. Charles I. Stubbart and Michael B. Knight, â€Å"The Case of the Disappearing Firms: Empirical Evidence and Implications,† Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27/1 (February 2006): 79-100. . Ibid. , p. 96. 3. Rajshree Agarwal and Michael Gort, â€Å"The Evolution of Markets and Entry, Exit, and Survival of Firms,† Review of Economics and Statistics, 78/3 (August 1996): 489-498. 4. Paul Ormerod, Why Most Things Fail (New York, NY: Pantheon Books, 2005), p. 18. 5. Leslie Hannah, â€Å"Marshall’s Trees and the Global Forest: Were Giant Redwoods Diff erent? † Center for Economic Performance, Discussion Paper #318, 1997. 6. See James G. March, â€Å"Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning,† Organization Science, 2/1 (February 1991): 71–87; James G. March, â€Å"The Evolution of Evolution,† in J. Baum and J. Singh, eds. , Evolutionary Dynamics of Organizations (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1994), pp. 39-52. 7. For interesting examples of how biological evolution might apply to organizations, see Tim Harford, Adapt: Why Success Always Starts With Failure (New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011); Martin A. Nowak and Roger Highfield, Supercooperators: Altruism, Evolution and Why We Need Each Other to Succeed (New York, NY: Free Press, 2011); Charles A. O’Reilly, J. Bruce Harreld, and Michael L. Tushman, â€Å"Organizational Ambidexterity: IBM and Emerging Business Opportunities,† California Management Review, 51/4 (Summer 2009): 75-99; Ormerod, op. cit. 8. Hannah, op. cit. , p. 19. 9. See, for example, Ze-Lin He and Poh-Kam Wong, â€Å"Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of Ambidexterity,† Organization Science, 15/4 (July/August 2004): 481-494; Sebastian Raisch, Julian Birkinshaw, Gilbert Probst, and Michael L. Tushman, â€Å"Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance,† Organization Science, 20/4 (July/August 2009): 685-695; Michael L. Tushman and Charles A. O’Reilly, â€Å"The Ambidextrous Organization: Managing Evolutionary and Revolutionary Change,† California Management Review, 38/4 (Summer 1996): 8-30. 10. For a review of the growing literature on dynamic capabilities, see V. Ambrosini and C. Bowman, â€Å"What Are Dynamic Capabilities and Are They a Useful Construct in Strategic Management? † International Journal of Management Reviews, 11/1 (March 2009): 29-49; Kathleen M. Eisenhardt and Jeffrey A. Martin, â€Å"Dynamic Capabilities: What Are They? † Strategic Management Journal, 21/10-11 (October/November 2000): 1105–1121; J. Bruce Harreld, Charles A. O’Reilly, and Michael L. Tushman, â€Å"Dynamic Capabilities at IBM: Driving Strategy into Action,† California Management Review, 49/4 (Summer 2007): 21-43; Constance E. Helfat, Sydney Finkelstein, Will Mitchell, Margaret A. Peteraf, Harbir Singh, David J. Teece, and Sidney G. Winter, Dynamic Capabilities: Understanding Strategic Change in Organizations (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2007); David J. Teece, Gary Pisano, and Amy Shuen, â€Å"Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management,† Strategic Management Journal, 18/7 (August 1997): 509-533. 1. C. O’Reilly and M. Tushman, â€Å"Ambidexterity as a Dynamic Capability: Resolving the Innovator’s Dilemma,† Research in Organizational Behavior, 28 (2008): 190. 12. Harreld et al. (2007), op. cit. ; David J. Teece, â€Å"Explicating Dynamic Capabilities: The Nature and Microfoundations of (Sustainable) Enterprise Performance,† Strategic Management Journal, 28 (D ecember 2007): 1319-1350. 13. See, for example, Vijay Govindarajan and Chris Trimble, â€Å"Building Breakthrough Businesses within Established Organizations,† Harvard Business Review, 83/5 May 2005): 58-68; Justin P. Jansen, Frans A. Tempelaar, Frans A. Van den Bosch, and Henk W. Volberda, â€Å"Structural 20 uNIVERsITy OF CALIFORNIA, bERkELEy VOL. 53, NO. 4 suMMER 2011 CMR. bERkELEy. Edu Organizational Ambidexterity in Action: How Managers Explore and Exploit 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. Differentiation and Ambidexterity: The Mediating Role of Integration Mechanisms,† Organization Science, 20/4 (July/August 2009): 797-811; Michael H. Lubatkin, Zeki Simsek, Yan Ling, and John F. Veiga, â€Å"Ambidexterity and Performance in Small- to Medium-Sized Firms: The Pivotal Role of TMT Behavioral Integration,† Journal of Management, 32/5 (2006): 646672; Tom J. Mom, Frans A. Van den Bosch, and Henk W. Volberda, â€Å"Understanding Variation in Managers’ Ambidexterity: Investigating Direct and Interaction Effects of Formal Structural and Personal Coordination Mechanisms,† Organization Science, 20/4 (July/August 2009): 812-828; Sebastian Raisch and Julian Birkinshaw, â€Å"Organizational Ambidexterity: Antecedents, Outcomes, and Moderators,† Journal of Management, 34/3 (June 2008): 375-409; Michael L. Tushman, Wendy K. Smith, Robert C. Wood, George Westerman, and Charles A. O’Reilly, â€Å"Organizational Designs and Innovation Streams,† Industrial and Corporate Change, 19/5 (October 2010): 1331-1366. O’Reilly and Tushman (2008), op cit. Clay M. Christensen, The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail (Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1997); Erwin Danneels, â€Å"The Dynamics of Product Innovation and Firm Competences,† Strategic Management Journal, 23/12 (December 2002): 1095-1121; March (1991), op. it. ; Mary Tripsas and Giovanni Gavetti, â€Å"Capabilities, Cognition, and Inertia: Evidence from Digital Imaging,† Strategic Management Journal, 21/1011 (October/November 2000): 1147-1161. Max Bazerman and Michael Watkins, Predictable Surprises (Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 2004); Mary J. Benner and Michael L. Tushman, â€Å"Exploitation, Exploration and Process Management: The Productivit y Dilemma Revisited,† Academy of Management Review, 28/2 (April 2003): 238-256; March (1991), op. cit. Justin J. Jansen, Dusya Vera, and Mary Crossan, â€Å"Strategic Leadership for Exploration and Exploitation: The Moderating Role of Environmental Dynamism,† Leadership Quarterly, 20/1 (February 2009): 5-18; R. Scott Livengood and Rhonda K. Reger, â€Å"That’s Our Turf! Identity Domains and Competitive Dynamics,† Academy of Management Review, 35/1 (January 2010): 48-66; Louise A. Nemanich and Dusya Vera, â€Å"Transformational Leadership and Ambidexterity in the Context of an Acquisition,† Leadership Quarterly, 20/1 (February 2009): 19-33. Lubatkin, Simsek, Ling, and Veiga, op. cit. Jatinder Sidhu, Henk Volberda, and Harry Commandeur, â€Å"Exploring Exploration Orientation and Its Determinants: Some Empirical Evidence,† Journal of Management Studies, 41/6 (September 2004): 913-932. Christine M. Beckman, â€Å"The Influence of Founding Team Company Affiliations on Firm Behavior,† Academy of Management Journal, 49/4 (August 2006): 741-758; J. Jansen, G. George, F. Van den Bosch, and H. Volberda, â€Å"Senior Team Attributes and Organizational Ambidexterity: The Moderating Role of Transformational Leadership,† Journal of Management Studies, 45/5 (July 008): 982-1007. Charles A. O’Reilly and Michael L. Tushman, â€Å"The Ambidextrous Organization,† Harvard Business Review, 82/4 (April 2004): 74-83; Nicolaj Siggelkow and Daniel Levinthal, â€Å"Temporarily Divide to Conquer: Centralized, Decentralized, and Reintegrated Organizational Approaches to Exploration and Adaptation,† Organization Science, 14/6 (November/December 2003): 650-669. Clark Gilbert, â€Å"Unbundling the Structure of Inertia: Resource versus Routine Rigidity,† Academy of Management Journal, 48/5 (October 2005): 741-763; Mom, Van den Bosch, and Volberda, op. cit. Charles A. O’Reilly, David F. Caldwell, Jennifer A. Chatman, Margaret Lapiz, and William Self, â€Å"How Leadership Matters: The Effects of Leaders’ Alignment on Strategy Implementation,† Leadership Quarterly, 21/1 (February 2010): 104-113; Wendy K. Smith and Michael L. Tushman, â€Å"Managing Strategic Contradictions: A Top Management Model for Managing Innovation Streams,† Organization Science, 16/5 (September/October 2005): 522-536. V. J. Gilchrest, â€Å"Key Informant Interviews,† in B. F. Crabtree and W. L. Miller, eds. , Doing Qualitative Research (London: Sage, 1992). This research used a multi-case design in which cases were written for each of the fifteen ambidexterity efforts (e. g. , Eisenhardt, 1989). These cases were then used to generate insights into those actions that were more or less likely to be associated with the successful implementation of an ambidextrous form. Each of the 15 cases was compared to the five propositions suggested by O’Reilly and Tushman (2008). Given the exploratory and qualitative nature of this investigation and the nature of our convenience sample, any results are necessarily tentative. CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOL. 53, NO. 4 suMMER 2011 CMR. bERkELEy. Edu 21 Organizational Ambidexterity in Action: How Managers Explore and Exploit 24. Govindarajan and Trimble, op. cit. ; Charles H. House and Raymond L. Price, The HP Phenomenon: Innovation and Business Transformation (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2009); Richard S. Rosenbloom, â€Å"Leadership, Capabilities, and Technological Change: The Transformation of NCR in the Electronic Era,† Strategic Management Journal, 21/10-11 (October/ November 2000): 1083-1103. 25. O’Reilly, Harreld, and Tushman, (2009) op cit. 26. Teece (2007), op cit. , p. 146. 27. Jansen, George, Van den Bosch, and Volberda, op. cit. ; Jansen, Vera, and Crossan, op. cit. ; Nemanich and Vera, op. cit. ; Smith and Tushman, op. cit. 28. For example, see Beckman (2006), op. cit. ; Lubatkin, Simsek, Ling, and Veiga, op. cit. ; Alva Taylor and Constance E. Helfat, â€Å"Organizational Linkages for Surviving Technological Change: Complementary Assets, Middle Management, and Ambidexterity,† Organization Science, 20/4 (July/August 2009): 718-739. 9. See Jansen, Tempelaar, Van den Bosch, and Volberda, op. cit. ; O’Reilly and Tushman (2004), op. cit. ; Wendy K. Smith, â€Å"Managing Strategic Ambidexterity: Top Management Teams and Cognitive Processes to Explore and Exploit Simultaneously,† paper presented at the 25th EGOS Colloquium, Barcelona, July 3, 2009; Tushman, Smith, Wood, Westerman, and O’Reilly, op. cit. 30. For example, see Gilbert, op. cit . ; Robert Sobel, When Giants Stumble: Classic Business Blunders and How to Avoid Them (Paramus, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1999); Donald N. Sull, â€Å"The Dynamics of Standing Still: Firestone Tire and Rubber and the Radial Revolution,† Business History Review, 73/3 (Autumn 1999): 430-464; Tripsas and Gavetti, op. cit. 31. Harreld, O’Reilly, and Tushman (2007), op. cit. ; Jan Rivkin and Nicolaj Siggelkow, â€Å"Balancing Search and Stability: Interdependencies among Elements of Organizational Design,† Management Science, 49/3 (March 2003): 290-311; Richard Wittington, Andrew Pettigrew, Simon Peck, Evelyn Penton, and Martin Conyon, â€Å"Change and Complementarities in the New Competitive Landscape,† Organization Science, 10/5 (September/October 1999): 583-600. 2. Matthew S. Olson and Derek Van Bever, Stall Points (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2008); Raisch and Birkinshaw (2008), op. cit. ; Juha Uotila, Markku Maula, and Thomas Keil, and Shaker A. Zhara, â€Å"Exploration, Exploitation and Financial Performance: Analysis of S 500 Corporations,† Strategic Management Journal, 30/ 2 (February 2009): 221-231. 22 uNIVERsITy OF CALIFORNIA, bERkELEy VOL. 53, NO. 4 suMMER 2011 CMR. bERkELEy. Edu

Police Brutality, Have Times Really Changed Essay

The history of Police Brutality for minorities; especially people of color has left America wondering have times changed. Police brutality has deemed the opportunity for socioeconomic advancement or access to good and services for many Black/African Americans dating back as far as 1955. The system of Police brutality has affected many realms of society for minorities’ employment and family life. After some scholarly research, police brutality is still prevalent in the Black/African American community; moreover, it comes in many different forms and fashions. Police brutality is the use of excessive and/or unnecessary force by police when dealing with civilians. Excessive use of force is a means of force well beyond what would be necessary in order to handle a situation. This research seeks to understand the history of police brutality and how it continues to be prevalent; if not, more prevalent in presently than in the past. The history of police brutality dates back to slavery, encompasses the civil rights movement, and defines the growing accounts of modern situation in which Blacks/African Americans have been treated wrong by law enforcement. Elijah Anderson (2000) claims, â€Å"the idea of the race man goes back to the segregated Black/African American community, in fact all the way back to slaver† (Elijah Anderson, 2). Modern leaders like Jesse Jackson could be viewed as a race man; meaning, his help is deeply imbedded when he feels the Black/African American community has been treated unjust. As a leaders of the Black/African American community, there is always a time to become actively involved in the community, especial pertaining to police brutality. Secondly, Emmett Till is another example of police brutality, but in another form. Note, Emmett Till was not beaten by the police; however, his brutal beaten came from a group of white men in Money, Mississippi. I define this travesty as police brutality due to the milestone of social inequality that police brutality has fed off of. Bob Blauner (1992) reveals, â€Å"Chicagoan Emmett Till in Mississippi has been awakening to the end of social equality (Bob Blauner, 1). Instances such as the brutal killing of Emmett Till led to the civil rights movement. The civil rights movement was geared toward  helping not only Blacks/African American community, but helping America dismantle discrimination, segregation, lynching, double standards of laws and rules, police brutality and overall equality. The civil rights movement was filled with many acts of police brutality. For instance, a woman in Riverside, California was shot several times by law enforcement officers. They claim they were threaten by her, but had no idea this woman was engulfed in a diabetic coma. Legalized Cop Violence (1999) shares, â€Å"Dontae Dawson was sitting in his car and was ordered to raise his hands, when he did he fatally shot and killed the officer claims he thought the young man had a gun† The New York News, 12). The civil rights era proved that law enforcement officers did not serve the poor, the powerless or the un-influential. The legalized violence that was committed throughout the civil rights era has drastically changed; however, police brutality is still presently evident. For instance, officers of the law are servants of the state. They hold deeply to the interest of capital, wealth, and government to corporate figures. Currently, Black/African American leaders are still dealing with the vicious killing of two youth. These two particular situations has rocked the nation. First, Trayvon Martin, who was seventeen years old was walking from a community store in Sanford, Florida and was shoot to death at close range. No, he was not shot by the police; moreover, this situation has ignited once again racial inequality which is no stranger to police brutality. Although Trayvon Martin’s assassin was found not guilty, laws in the State of Florida allows citizens to stand they ground if they feel threaten. The 2014 State Statues of Florida 76.013 reveals, â€Å"home protection; use or threatened use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm† is permitted. Despite the important racial progresss our society has made since Emmett Till’s death, from the civil rights era, to present increase of police brutality has still left the Black/African American community in shadows of segregation. The second most recent shooting of teenager Michael Brown has left citizens in ongoing battles with law enforcement officers of Ferguson, Missouri. New Statement (2014) reports, Missouri police similarly attempted to retain control of the narrative, claiming Brown had stolen cigars, and then paying for them, and then claiming he was a bad child and attacked the officer who shot him† (New Statement, 21). Brown autopsy reveals he was gun less and shot six  times. Police brutality is not solely about Ferguson, Emmett Till, or the civil rights movement, but it is simply about the history of capitalism and police brutality in America and having many forms of it. Which leads us to the question has times really changed are is police brutality still very surreal. Granted we talked mostly about Emmet Till, Trayvon Martin Michael Brown, and the civil rights these are not the only men or eras in time where police brutality has and still to this day is taking place. A few others who have suffered and died from police brutality include: Ezzel Ford who was mentally disabled and John Crawford III who was playing with a toy gun in the toy section of Wal-Mart. I know there are more people and time eras that have faced police brutality but these are just a few that are having a major impact on the world as we see it today. Which rises brings us to the question is Police Brutality the problem or as we as African America/ Blacks causing the problems and then when police are called to settle or solve the problem we over react or act as if we have done nothing wrong. Some cases in which police were called to a scene and they were hurt or out in danger include in July of 1920 five police were called to a home in New York to settle a dispute between two brothers where in return all five of the cops were injured, another time is in September of 1991 when three of duty officers in the state of New York were in a argument with a 18year old who in return pulled out a box cutting razor knife slashing one of the officers. Now I am not saying that because of these incidents this gives cops a reason to act the way that they do, but my question again is are we as African Americans/Blacks completely innocent or do we sometimes react to situations when cops are just doing their jobs that make them feel threatened so they have to kill. Yet there are more and better ways to deal with situations. Just like we the people should not always resort to violence and killing and committing black on black or white on white crime police need to and should follow the same rules of the world. Every man woman boy and girl should be treated how they would want to be treated. I’m sure the way police treat African Americans/Blacks when we commit crimes is not how they would want their family and or friends to be treated. There are some people who think that the way to downgrade police brutality is to adopt more white ways specifically the white perspective and to manifest intensively. Granted this is true; however, I do believe that just like us African Americans can  sometimes over react and over step our boundaries, I believe that cops have a bad habit of doing this as well. Yes your job as a police officer is to protect and serve the communities that you are in but moreover we are all humans and at this day in age no one is better than the next person no matter what race ethnicity sex or community you live in we are all said to be treated equal but are we treated as equals? If we were would there be so much police brutality and hostility toward police. Since the Trayvon Martin, and Michael Brown case I can see and understand why so many people have so much hate in their hearts. Although Trayvon Martin was not shot by a police officer he was shot by â€Å"a watchman of the area† Which in my opinion means if you are here to watch our neighborhood and protect us then he should of known who Trayvon was he should have been tolerant t figure out if Trayvon was really a threat to the neighborhood or if he was just â€Å"overreacting and looking for somebody to shot† and the same with Michael Brown who was actually shot by police men were the jumping the gun and did not take the time to find out if he really was stealing or if there was a miscommunication which I believe that’s what it was. Which leaves us to the question with the belief that slavery has ended and that all people are equal; then why is that police have and continue to get away with the brutally killing of African Americans. Works Cited Abu-Jamal, M. (1999). Legalized Cop Violence. New York: The New York Amsterdam News. Anderson, E. (2000). Beyond the Melting Pot Reconsidering. International Migration Review , 1-7. Anderson, E. (2014). Emmett and Trayvon. Washington: The Washington Monthly. Blauner, B. (1992). Talking Past Each Other: The Black and White Language of Race. The American Prospect , 1-6. Edwards, B. (2014). 4 Dead Unarmed Men and the Police: What You Need to Know. The Root. Penny, L. (2014, August 20). Welcome to America, Where Police Shoot an Unarmered Black MAn Six Times-and then call him a Villain. New Statesman , pp. 22-28. Tucker, W. (1993, January). Is Police Brutality the Problem? Commentary , pp. 23-28.

The Concept of Human Life Value in Relation to the Need for Life Insurance Essays

The Concept of Human Life Value in Relation to the Need for Life Insurance Essays The Concept of Human Life Value in Relation to the Need for Life Insurance Essay The Concept of Human Life Value in Relation to the Need for Life Insurance Essay Essay Topic: The Breadwinner Almutairi Yahya Professor Ruben Acad. Writing Reading June 4 2013 The Concept of Human Life Value in Relation to the Need for Life Insurance Jane and Andrew had just celebrated their fifth year wedding anniversary, and they were coming from dinner when they had an accident. Unfortunately, Andrew did not survive, and Jane became paralysed from the waist down. With no one else to turn to and no way to make an income, Jane had to go back to her parents, where she became dependent on them for the rest of her life. This is a sad situation, but, unfortunately, it represents the story of many families, who are unprepared when fatal accidents happen. The families are left suffering when they lose their breadwinner. Had Andrew and Jane thought about their lives in the future, they would have purchased a life insurance policy, which would have enabled Jane to survive comfortably and even pay for her medical treatments. She would have avoided returning home to her aging parents for care. The rapid changes in life necessitate the acquiring of a life insurance policy. This is a sound financial plan that will ensure that your loved ones are not left destitute but are well taken care of and continue to enjoy a brighter tomorrow in the case of an unfortunate event to you, as the insured, especially if you are the breadwinner. Life insurance is also vital to you in the event that you are disabled. Employers can also benefit from purchasing a life insurance for their employees (assets) to regain financial cover in the event that they lose their lives or they are rendered inefficacious in a way that they can no longer work to make profits for the company. This is referred to as insurable interest. Life insurance/assurance is a security against loss of income resulting from the demise of the insured. The mentioned beneficiary receives the proceeds, and he is thus secured from the financial repercussions that would have occurred owing to the death of the insured. This paper thus aims at looking at the concept of human value in relation to the need of acquiring a life insurance. Some of the relevant sections that will act as principal topics of discussion will include the basic principles of life insurance, the benefits of life insurance, a focus of human value and the advantages disadvantages of life insurance. The human life possesses numerous values, most of which are immeasurable. For example, a person’s relationship with others creates a set of sentimental and emotional attachments. These can barely be measured or replaced with monetary value. However, such values are not the basis for life insurance even though it upholds a strong moral and social concern. The basis for the need of a life insurance cover is the fiscal worth of a human life. With regards to life insurance, the human life has monetary value in terms of its earning capacity only if someone/people or an organization depends upon it or anticipates gaining some financial benefit through it. This secures the economic state of the beneficiary in terms of financial dependence and future savings for fear that there is a negative contingency. Determining the fiscal value of human life helps in identifying the amount of life insurance needed by the beneficiary. The simplest way to work this out is by evaluating all what you pay for and whom you support. These might include things like educational costs, health insurance, mortgages, personal loans, rent, credit card debts, food and groceries, and car insurance among others. Out of these, you can then deduct the things that your family can comfortably do without such as stocks and property investments. The overall amount you get is what determines the level of life insurance that you need (Baldwin 60). Investing in a life insurance policy demands a high level of sacrifice. Life insurance encourages people to be responsible for their own families and the society (Mishra 6). This means that you voluntarily opt to continue providing and catering for your dependant’s wellbeing after death. However, the law morally obliges you to provide for your family to the extent that your financial means permit. A life insurance cover ensures that this moral obligation and financial decency persists after death. The death or disability of the head of a family should not necessarily lead to bankruptcy or financial problems for the family. However, it should be realised that the economic value of human life diminishes with the passage of time. As much as a person’s income may tend to increase indefinitely, the period of productivity lessens as each year passes. This owes to the fact that an individual’s fiscal value is indeed the unrealized earning ability in terms of skill, and it eventually diminishes as potential income is gradually converted into actual income. The basic principles of life insurance include the principle of Utmost Good Faith. The insurer and the insured should have good faith towards one another (Gulati 39). The insurer must provide the insuree with complete and correct information with regards to terms and conditions that apply while the insured should also be willing to disclose complete, clear and correct information of the subject matter. The other principle is the law of large numbers whereby the insurance company uses a large sample size to predict deaths. All life insurance principles operate with this principle. They carefully approximate mortality rates annually to balance their resources. Another principle is the insurable interest. This is whereby the insured, must have some personal relation to the policy owner, receives economic compensation in the event of death of whom they depended on. Perfected savings is another principle of life insurance where you purchase death assurance to your loved ones. This principle is, however, limited with regards to a pre-set time or a predetermined age, upon which the contract matures and compensation are made. In the event of a policyholder’s demise before the pre-set period, the insurer compensates the insured. The transfer of risk is a further vital principle for life insurance. The risk of death is not retained in your policy but spread out among all policyholders with relations to the insurer. The last principle of life insurance is the loss of minimization. This means that the policyholder needs to be careful to reduce the risk of death. This includes careful driving, indulging in proper lifestyle issues and maintaini ng your health as much as possible. The cost of insurance is heavy in the realization that you do not uphold the principle. There are numerous advantages that come with life insurance, such as the immediate infusion of cash when dealing with adverse fiscal consequences of the policyholder’s death. Life insurance guarantees protection of one’s family. The tax treatment for life insurance is quite favourable. The death benefits are usually income tax- free to the insured. It is possible for the life insurance to be exchanged for another policy such as annuity without the incurrence of current taxation. Another advantage is that it facilitates loans without affecting the benefits of the policy (Sethi and Bhatia 181-182). The life insurance policy just like any other has its cons. These include the fact that policyholders forego some current expenditure for the sake of the insured. The surrendered cash values are generally less than the premiums paid, and at times, it is impossible to recover them fully. You may outlive your insurance term and obtain no monetary benefit from the premiums you paid. The insurer also does not provide you with a permanent life insurance protection. Many people are willing to get insurance covers for their properties, but they are not willing to take life insurance, even though life is more valuable than property. The many adversities and uncertainties of life demand that a person acquire a life insurance policy. This is an indispensable measure if you care for the life of those who depend on you. Taking a life insurance cover is proof that a person cares for his or her family, and is concerned about their welfare in case of any eventuality. Some people put off taking life policies because they think that they will be okay so long as they take care of themselves. However, it is not possible to predict death, and it is prudent to consider taking a life insurance policy. Akrani, Gaurav. The Principles of Life Insurance- 7 Basic General Insurance Principles. 2011. Web. June 2, 2013 Baldwin, G. Ben. The Complete Book of Insurance: The Consumer’s Guide to Insuring Your Life, Health, Property, and Income. Burr Bridge: Irwin Professional Publishing, 1996. Print. CIFP Learning. Introduction to Life Insurance. Web. June 2, 2013 Gulati, C. Neelam. Principles of Insurance Management: A Special Focus on Developments in Indian Insurance Sector Pre and Post Liberalisation. New Delhi: Excel Books India, 2009. Print LIFE. What You Need to Know about Life Insurance. 2009. Web. June 2, 2013 Luke, Chris. Principles of Life Insurance Policy. 2012. Web. June 2, 2013 Mishra, Kaninika. Fundamentals of Life Insurance: Theories and Applications. New Delhi: PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd, 2010. Print Sethi, Jyotana and Nishwan, Bhatia. Elements of Banking and Insurance. New Delhi: PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd., 2007. Print

Abortion Essays (4361 words) - United States Law, Abortion

A couple decades ago, when abortion was illegal, thousands of women died because they did not want to bear an infant and attempted to terminate the child's life by themselves or with an unprofessional approach. After 1973's Supreme Court decision, which allowed women to have the choice to abortion, thousands of women were saved. Abortion can save thousands of lives of women and thus, should remain legal in the United States. Imagine you have a balance beam. On one side you have the physical life of an infant and on the other you have the mental and emotional life of a mother and her unwanted child. Which side can we, as civil humans, claim as more valuable? Up to this current day, abortion has become an exigent issue that faces everyone nationwide. As a moral and ethical issue, abortion is a dilemma for society. Abortion was illegal before the 1973 Supreme Court decision in the trial of Roe v. Wade, but now that abortion is legitimate, women have the freedom and the choice to live their life the way they want to. Albeit, abortion is criticized by religious sects in America and some of the public, the practice of abortion should remain legal in the U.S. because it allows a woman to choose her destiny and prevents unwanted children. Definitions are essential to define in this issue. Abortion is the forcible removal of a developing baby from the womb of his or her mother, using surgical, mechanical, or chemical means. Medical definition holds that abortion is any termination of pregnancy before 20 weeks. Medically defined, abortion is the "end of a pregnancy before viability." Therapeutic abortion is the termination of pregnancy via the intervention of a physician through surgery or the use of RU-486 or some other medications. Conception is a synonym for fertilization or creation. An embryo is a stage of prenatal mammalian development which extends from 2 to 8 weeks. Fertilization is the penetration of an ovum by a single sperm. A fetus is a stage of prenatal mammalian development which extends from 9 weeks after fertilization. Miscarriage is the interruption of pregnancy prior to the 7th month, usually used to refer to an expulsion of the fetus which starts without being induced by medical intervention. About a quarter of all pregnancies end in a miscarriage. An ovum is the mature sex cell generated by females in an ovary. Trimester is a period lasting nominally 3 months. A human pregnancy is often divided into three trimesters, from fertilization from birth. From a historical perspective, the purpose of abortion has been undoubtedly to act as a life saver for both child and mother. In the two decades before abortion was legal in America, it's been estimated that about one million women per year underwent illegal abortions. In the process, thousands of American women died and thousands more were maimed. Whenever a society outlaws abortions, it induces the women to seek abortions in the back alleys where they become deleterious, exorbitant, and tarnishing. Thus, to protect the woman's life, we must keep abortion legal in America. According to abortion statistics from the Alan Guttmacher Institute, about 15,000 women have had abortions each year because they become pregnant as a result of rape or incest. Fortunately, the nation's leaders were able to stop this butchery of women. In Roe v. Wade, a landmark Supreme Court decision in 1973, stated that a woman and her doctor may freely decide to abort a pregnancy during the first trimester, sta te governments can restrict abortion access after the first trimester with laws intended to protect the woman's health, and abortion after fetal viability must be available if the woman's health or life are at risk. In other situations, state governments have the right to prohibit abortions. Abortion, thereby, became authorized in the United States of America because the court decided to preserve the right to choose an abortion as a constitutionally protected liberty. It is possible for one to be supportive of abortion on a political level, but against abortion on a personal level. Although many individuals say this notion is contradictory, different people evidently have different morals and values based on religion, from parents, friends, family, experience, and knowledge.

Attributive expressions Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Attributive expressions - Essay Example Liberals and Leftists frame the abortion question as a â€Å"struggle† for the rights of women everywhere, a â€Å"right† supported by most Americans, and matter of â€Å"choice† (Nieves 2004). Two publications that illustrate the different approaches to framing and reporting on the issue of abortion are The American Spectator and The Washington Post. The former stands as an opponent of abortion and of politicians who support it. The latter largely supports the protection of abortion rights on the part of women. Both employ biased language, innuendo, colorful modifiers, and the overt display of sympathies for one side over the other. Both of the articles chosen from these two publications very early on make known their loyalties. The Washington Post story’s title of â€Å"Abortion Rights Said To Be at a Crossroads† with the subtitle of â€Å"Mont. Ex-Legislator Takes NARAL Helm† very clearly stands as an article sympathetic to the pro-abortion camp (Nieves 2004). Abortion is referred to as a â€Å"right,† which is to imply that it is something inalienable to women. The abortion fight is at a â€Å"crossroads† shows further sympathy. The right was affirmed back in 1974, but now things are at a â€Å"crossroads.† This hints at the fact that the foes of abortion rights are now trying to reverse that decision. The proponents, organizations like NARAL (National Abortion Rights Action League), feel that abortion rights are being threatened more now than ever. The â€Å"Ex-Legislator† who takes the â€Å"helm† is to serve as a sort of captain to guide the ship thr ough these troubled waters (Nieves 2004). The American Spectator’s title of â€Å"The President and Abortion† may seem nebulous or even politically neutral. This is probably just to draw the reader in. The article begins, however, with â€Å"Another somber anniversary of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton is upon us. These were the