Understanding Modern Evolutionary Synthesis

Understanding Modern Evolutionary Synthesis The theory of evolution has itself evolved quite a bit since the time when Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace first came up with the theory. Much more data has been discovered and collected over the years that have only helped to enhance and sharpen the idea that species change over time. The modern synthesis of the theory of evolution combines several different scientific disciplines and their overlapping findings. The original theory of evolution was based mostly upon the work of Naturalists. The modern synthesis has the benefit of many years of research in Genetics and Paleontology, among other various subjects under the biology umbrella. The actual modern synthesis is a collaboration of a large body of work from such celebrated scientists as J.B.S. Haldane, Ernst Mayr, and Theodosius Dobzhansky. While some current scientists assert that evo-devo is also a part of the modern synthesis, most agree it has so far played a very slight role in the overall synthesis. While most of Darwins ideas are still very much present in the modern evolutionary synthesis, there are some fundamental differences now that more data and new disciplines have been studied. This does not, in any way, take away from the importance of Darwins contribution and, in fact, it only helps support most of the ideas Darwin put forth in his book On the Origin of Species. Differences Between Original Theory of Evolution and Modern Evolutionary Synthesis The three main differences between the original Theory of Evolution through Natural Selection proposed by Charles Darwin and the most current Modern Evolutionary Synthesis are as follows: The modern synthesis recognizes several different possible mechanisms of evolution. Darwins theory relied on natural selection as the only known mechanism. One of these different mechanisms, genetic drift, could even match the importance of natural selection in the overall view of evolution.Modern synthesis asserts that characteristics are passed down from parents to offspring on parts of DNA called genes. Variation between individuals within a species is because of the presence of multiple alleles of a gene.The modern synthesis of the Theory of Evolution hypothesizes that speciation is most likely due to the gradual accumulation of small changes or mutations at the gene level. In other words, microevolution leads to macroevolution. Thanks to years of dedicated research by scientists across many disciplines, we now have a much better understanding of how evolution works and a more accurate picture of the change species undergo over a period of time. Even though different facets of evolutionary theory have changed, the fundamental ideas are still intact and just as relevant today as they were in the 1800s.

Last Glacial Maximum - Last Major Global Climate Change

Last Glacial Maximum - Last Major Global Climate Change The Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) refers to the most recent period in earths history when the glaciers were at their thickest and the sea levels at their lowest, roughly between 24,000–18,000 calendar years ago (cal bp). During the LGM, continent-wide ice sheets covered high-latitude Europe and North America, and sea levels were between 400–450 feet (120–135 meters) lower than they are today. At the height of the Last Glacial Maximum, all of Antarctica, large parts of Europe, North America, and South America, and small parts of Asia were covered in a steeply domed and thick layer of ice. Last Glacial Maximum: Key Takeaways The Last Glacial Maximum is the most recent time in earths history when the glaciers were at their thickest.  That was approximately 24,000-18,000 years ago.  All of Antarctica, large parts of Europe, North and South America, and Asia were covered by ice.  A stable pattern of glacial ice, sea level, and carbon in the atmosphere has been in place from about 6,700 years.That pattern has been destabilized by global warming as a result of the Industrial Revolution.   Evidence The overwhelming evidence of this long-gone process is seen in sediments laid down by sea level changes all over the world, in coral reefs and estuaries and oceans; and in the vast North American plains, landscapes scraped flat by thousands of years of glacial movement. In the lead up to the LGM between 29,000 and 21,000 cal bp, our planet saw constant or slowly increasing ice volumes, with the sea level reaching its lowest level (about 450 feet below todays norm) when there was about 52x10(6) cubic kilometers more glacial ice than there is today. Characteristics of the LGM Researchers are interested in the Last Glacial Maximum because of when it happened: it was the most recent globally impacting climate change, and it happened and to some degree affected the speed and trajectory of the colonization of the American continents. The characteristics of the LGM that scholars use to help identify the impacts of such a major change include fluctuations in effective sea level, and the decrease and subsequent rise in carbon as parts per million in our atmosphere during that period. Both of those characteristics are similar- but opposite to- the climate change challenges we are facing today: during the LGM, both the sea level and percentage of carbon in our atmosphere were substantially lower than what we see today. We do not as yet know the entire impact of what that means to our planet, but the effects are currently undeniable. The table below shows the changes in effective sea level in the past 35,000 years (Lambeck and colleagues) and parts per million of atmospheric carbon (Cotton and colleagues). Years BP, Sea Level Difference, PPM Atmospheric Carbon2018, 25 centimeters, 408 ppm1950, 0, 300 ppm1,000 BP, -.21 meters -.07, 280 ppm5,000 BP, -2.38 m /-.07, 270 ppm10,000 BP, -40.81 m /-1.51, 255 ppm15,000 BP, -97.82 m /-3.24, 210 ppm20,000 BP, -135.35 m /-2.02, 190 ppm25,000 BP, -131.12 m /-1.330,000 BP, -105.48 m /-3.635,000 BP, -73.41 m /-5.55 The major cause of sea level drop during the ice ages was the movement of water out of the oceans into ice and the planets dynamic response to the enormous weight of all that ice atop our continents. In North America during the LGM, all of Canada, the southern coast of Alaska, and the top 1/4 of the United States were covered with ice extending as far south as the states of Iowa and West Virginia. Glacial ice also covered the western coast of South America, and in the Andes extending into Chile and most of Patagonia. In Europe, the ice extended as far south as Germany and Poland; in Asia ice sheets reached Tibet. Although they saw no ice, Australia, New Zealand and Tasmania were a single landmass; and mountains throughout the world held glaciers. The Progress of Global Climate Change Visitors walking on a trail that leads to the melting and rock-covered Pasterze glacier hike past a lake of glacier water in a rocky basin once filled at least 60 meters deep by glacier ice on August 27, 2016 near Heiligenblut am Grossglockner, Austria. The European Environmental Agency predicts the volume of European glaciers will decline by between 22% and 89% by 2100, depending on the future intensity of greenhouse gases.   Sean Gallup/Getty Images The late Pleistocene period experienced a sawtooth-like cycling between cool glacial and warm interglacial periods  when global temperatures and atmospheric CO2 fluctuated up to 80–100 ppm corresponding with temperature variations of 3–4 degrees Celsius (5.4–7.2 degrees Fahrenheit): increases in atmospheric CO2 preceded decreases in global ice mass. The ocean stores carbon (called carbon sequestration) when the ice is low, and so the net influx of carbon in our atmosphere which is typically caused by cooling gets stored in our oceans. However, a lower sea level also increases salinity, and that and other physical changes to the large-scale ocean currents and sea ice fields also contribute to carbon sequestration. The following is the latest understanding of the process of climate change progress during the LGM from Lambeck et al. 35,000–31,000 cal BP- slow fall in sea level (transitioning out of Ã…lesund Interstadial)31,000–30,000 cal BP- rapid fall of 25 meters, with rapid ice growth especially in Scandinavia29,000–21,000  cal BP- constant or slowly growing ice volumes, eastward and southward expansion of the Scandinavian ice sheet and the southward expansion of the Laurentide ice sheet, lowest at 2121,000–20,000 cal BP- onset of deglaciation,20,000–18,000 cal BP- short-lived sea level rise of 10-15 meters18,000–16,500 cal BP- near constant sea level16,500–14,000 cal BP- major phase of deglaciation, effective sea level change about 120 meters at an average of 12 meters per 1000 years14,500–14,000 cal BP- (Bà ¸lling- Allerà ¸d warm period), high rate of se-level  rise, average rise in sea level 40 mm annually14,000–12,500 cal BP- sea level rises ~20 meters in 1500 years12,500–11,500 cal BP- (Younger Dryas), a much-reduced rate of s ea-level  rise11,400–8,200 cal BP- near-uniform global rise, about 15 m/1000 years8,200–6,700 cal BP- reduced rate of sea-level  rise, consistent with the final phase of North American deglaciation at 7ka 6,700 cal BP–1950- progressive decrease in sea level rise1950–present- first sea rise increase in 8,000 years Global Warming and Modern Sea Level Rise By the late 1890s, the industrial revolution had begun throwing enough carbon into the atmosphere to impact the global climate and start the changes that are currently underway. By the 1950s, scientists such as Hans Suess and Charles David Keeling began to recognize the inherent dangers of human-added carbon in the atmosphere. The global mean sea level (GMSL), according to the Environmental Protection Agency, has risen nearly 10 inches since 1880, and by all measures appears to be accelerating.   Most early measures of current sea level rise have been based on changes in tides at the local level. More recent data comes from satellite altimetry that samples the open oceans, allowing for precise quantitative statements. That measurement began in 1993, and the 25-year record indicates that the global mean sea level has risen at a rate of between 3/-.4 millimeters per year, or a total of nearly 3 inches (or 7.5 cm) since records began. More and more studies indicate that unless carbon emissions are decreased, an additional 2–5 feet (.65–1.30 m) rise by 2100 is likely.   Specific Studies and Long-Term Predictions U.S. Fish and Wildlife ecologist Phillip Hughes inspects dead buttonwood trees which have succumbed to salt water incursion in Big Pine Key, Florida. Since 1963, the Florida Keys upland vegetation is being replaced by salt tolerant vegetation.   Joe Raedle/Getty Images Areas already impacted by sea level rises include the American east coast, where between 2011 and 2015, sea levels rose up to five inches (13 cm). Myrtle Beach in South Carolina experienced high tides in November 2018 which flooded their streets. In the Florida Everglades (Dessu and colleagues 2018), sea level rise has been measured at 5 in (13 cm) between 2001 and 2015. An additional impact is an increase in salt spikes changing the vegetation, due to an increase in inflow during the dry season. Qu and colleagues (2019) studied 25 tidal stations in China, Japan and Vietnam and tidal data indicate that the 1993–2016 sea level rise was 3.2 mm per year (or 3 inches).   Long-term data have been collected throughout the world, and estimates are that by 2100, a 3–6 feet (1–2 meter) rise in the Mean Global Sea Level is possible, accompanied by a 1.5–2 degree Celsius in overall warming. Some of the direst suggest a 4.5-degree rise is not impossible if carbon emissions are not reduced.  Ã‚   The Timing of the American Colonization According to the most current theories, the LGM impacted the progress of human colonization of the American continents. During the LGM, entry into the Americas was blocked by ice sheets: many scholars now believe that the colonists began entering into the Americas across what was Beringia, perhaps as early as 30,000 years ago. According to genetic studies, humans were stranded on the Bering Land Bridge during the LGM between 18,000–24,000 cal BP, trapped by the ice on the island before they were set free by the retreating ice. Sources Bourgeon L, Burke A, and Higham T. 2017. Earliest Human Presence in North America Dated to the Last Glacial Maximum: New Radiocarbon Dates from Bluefish Caves, Canada. PLOS ONE 12(1):e0169486.Buchanan PJ, Matear RJ, Lenton A, Phipps SJ, Chase Z, and Etheridge DM. 2016. The simulated climate of the Last Glacial Maximum and insights into the global marine carbon cycle. Climate of the Past 12(12):2271-2295.Cotton JM, Cerling TE, Hoppe KA, Mosier TM, and Still CJ. 2016. Climate, CO2, and the history of North American grasses since the Last Glacial Maximum. Science Advances 2(e1501346).Dessu, Shimelis B., et al. Effects of Sea-Level Rise and Freshwater Management on Long-Term Water Levels and Water Quality in the Florida Coastal Everglades. Journal of Environmental Management 211 (2018): 164–76. Print.Lambeck K, Rouby H, Purcell A, Sun Y, and Sambridge M. 2014. Sea level and global ice volumes from the Last Glacial Maximum to the Holocene. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci ences 111(43):15296-15303. Lindgren A, Hugelius G, Kuhry P, Christensen TR, and Vandenberghe J. 2016. GIS-based Maps and Area Estimates of Northern Hemisphere Permafrost Extent during the Last Glacial Maximum. Permafrost and Periglacial Processes 27(1):6-16.Moreno PI, Denton GH, Moreno H, Lowell TV, Putnam AE, and Kaplan MR. 2015. Radiocarbon chronology of the last glacial maximum and its termination in northwestern Patagonia. Quaternary Science Reviews 122:233-249.Nerem, R. S., et al. Climate-Change–Driven Accelerated Sea-Level Rise Detected in the Altimeter Era. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115.9 (2018): 2022–25. Print.Qu, Ying, et al. Coastal Sea Level Rise around the China Seas. Global and Planetary Change 172 (2019): 454–63. Print.Slangen, Aimà ©e B. A., et al. Evaluating Model Simulations of Twentieth-Century Sea Level Rise. Part I: Global Mean Sea Level Change. Journal of Climate 30.21 (2017): 8539–63. Print.Willerslev E, Davison J, Moora M, Zobel M, Coiss ac E, Edwards ME, Lorenzen ED, Vestergard M, Gussarova G, Haile J et al. 2014. Fifty thousand years of Arctic vegetation and megafaunal diet. Nature 506(7486):47-51.

Feminist approach to The Awakening Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Feminist approach to The Awakening - Essay Example ark gender inequalities between men and women, and so awakened women like Edna chooses suicide over a life of limitations that her womanhood brings to her. Birds stand for imprisonment and the possibilities of being free. The mockingbird and parrot at Madame Lebrun’s house represent one of the freedoms that women lack: freedom of speech. These chattering birds irritate Là ©once: â€Å"Mr. Pontellier had the privilege of quitting their society when [these birds] ceased to be entertaining† (Chopin 2). He shares the sentiments of other men who find women’s stories as inane. At the same time, the power to leave women as they talk represents the power of men over women’s freedom of expression. They can overlook the female voice and get away with it. Women, on the contrary, are forced to listen to and to obey what men tell them. Birds, in addition, stand for the feeling of being trapped as a woman. A woman is ensnared already as a woman, and more so, when she is married. One time, Edna weeps after Là ©once charges her for being an irresponsible mother, and she feels: â€Å"An indescribable oppression, which see med to generate in some unfamiliar part of her consciousness, filled her whole being with a vague anguish† (Chopin 14-15). She slowly realizes that her gender has put her inside a strong figurative cage. Birds also signify freedom. The ability to open one’s wings and to fly is an action of complete freedom. Mlle. Reisz tells Edna to develop stronger wings for her artistic desires. Wings represent the strength of flight; it suggests the lack of boundaries in the sky. As a married woman, nevertheless, Edna cannot stretch her wings and fly, because she is in a cage of her gendered roles as a wife and a mother. The sea stands for Edna’s yearning for escape. Edna sees the ocean as her only escape from her limited world. In the sea, she can swim and flee from her husband’s controls of her actions. She can leave behind her roles as a mother too. She believes

Death Knocks Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Death Knocks - Essay Example He has used puns and pratfalls heavily and carefully to channel succinctly a light and comical delineation of death. Putting it differently, he has successfully managed to manipulate death, such a serious issue into a funny and laughable matter. The play begins with a vivid description of Nat Ackerman’s house (Myers, 4). He stays in a two-storey building in Kew curtilage. The wall is covered completely with carpet. Inside the bedroom, there is a large divalent bed and a large dresser. The living room is richly furnished and colorful curtains all over. There are a number of pictures smartly arranged on the wall and an ugly likeable barometer. Just as the curtains are opened, soft music emerges from the background. It is at this time that Nat, who is a fifty-seven-years- old dressmaker with a baldhead is seen comfortably lying on bed reading a newspaper. At close to midnight, Nat hears a noise that startles him prompting him to stand by the window to lock at what is happening. Woody Allen portrays death as a funny and humorous character. In the way death acts out, he is seen as very friendly contrary to the real life situation. Both Nat and Death are equally humorous, when Nat confirms that he was not expecting Death, Death replies in a joking way by asking Nat if he was expecting Rock Hudson. Furthermore, in this play, Death does not have the full capacity and aggressiveness in executing his task. He willingly joins Nat in playing gin rummy game. There is an agreement that if Nat emerges the winner in the game, Death spares his life for extra 24 hours. On the other hand, if Nat loses the game, Death leaves with him instantly. Allen depicts Death as unthreatening and conversant by impersonating him as an ethnical image. That Nat can talk to Death, changes everything modifying death as approachable and less awful. When Nat borrows the idea

Manifest Destiny and the Civil War Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Manifest Destiny and the Civil War - Essay Example By 1787, slavery was recognized in the Constitution (General History of the United Sates Supreme Court, accessed 2011). Slavery was not regulated within States through Congress. Until 1808, only the movement of slaves into States, or between States up to that date, was taxed and hence regulated (US Constitution: Art. I Sec. 9 Para.1). Slavery was, then, accepted as a fact which existed within States, and the federal Government restricted its involvement in the affairs of individual States. States made their own decisions about whether they were â€Å"Free States†, or whether they would allow slavery, and Congress respected those decisions. This meant that as the United States expanded, new States were declared, and in fact could make their own decisions about whether slavery was to be allowed or not. In 1819, Missouri appealed to be included in the Confederation as a slave-owning State. This appeal was met by much resistance from the Northern States – in which Abolition ism was dominant – and the Midwestern States – where economies without slave labor would struggle against the slave-owning State economies. But Missouri entered the Confederation as a slave-owning State in 1819.

Literature Review of Data, Information, Knowledge and Wisdom

Literature Review of Data, Information, Knowledge and Wisdom 2.5 Why Knowledge management is so important? Knowledge as a resource causes huge misunderstanding for economists, because unlike the physical commodities, it is the only resource which increased returns as it is used rather than reduced or diminished over time (Clarke, T. 2001). Knowledge may be costly to generate but there is modest cost to diffusion. Massa, S. Testa, S. (2008) believed that the determinants of success of organizations, and nationwide economies as a total, is ever more dependent upon their efficiency in assembling and utilizing knowledge. Accordingly to Malhotra, Y. (2000) knowledge has turn into a key production factor; though the monetary accounts are still leading by conventional factors of production, including buildings and machinery. The idea of knowledge flowing to where it is most needed is the critical point and it should not flow only from the top down, but flow in all ways in an organization, (Davenport, T. Prusak, L. 2000). Davidson, C. Voss, P. (2004), Lin, L. Kwok, L. (2006) claimed that know ledge is no longer a source of power; it is knowledge sharing that counts in the knowledge economy but author like Kakabadse, N. et al., (2003), viewed knowledge itself is power. Creation and codification of knowledge do not necessarily lead to performance improvement or value creation. Value is generated only when knowledge is allocated all the way through in an organization and linked where it is needed (Chena, C Huang, J. 2007). It is not sufficient to have smart people in the organization. Instead, the key is to create systems that tap into the knowledge, experiences, and creativity of your staff, your customers, your suppliers, and even your competitors. Knowledge strategy needs to be concerned with the quality of information, not the quantity; and with the timeliness of information delivery, not its speed. Smart systems are excellent but smart people are superior. Despres, C. Chauvel, D. (1999) identified that knowledge management occurs on three ends: the individual, the team and the organizational. 2.6 Framework for knowledge approaches Knowledge management is linked to diverse business fields and it has always been entrenched in the individual behavior. It is not all about creating an index or register that detains the whole thing that anyone ever knew. Collison, C. Parcell, G. (2004) suggested that it is about maintaining track of those who know the procedure, techniques and fostering the culture and technology that will get them talking. It is challenging to understand the nature of knowledge and the way it is managed. Also the management approaches towards knowledge management is varied. Knowledge can be created from re-describing and re-labeling the past knowledge, it also created from connecting people (the relationships) and connecting technologies (networks). This might be flexible social or stiff technical networks. These discussions vibrate with the managerial paradox of developing organizational performance via rigid or free control systems and this was interpreted in the following model adopted from Arm istead, C. Meakins, M. (2002) for describing four approaches to knowledge management stand on whether it is in an organizational or an individual context, and whether knowledge management is imposed or empowered by managerial approaches. Armistead, C. Meakins, M. (2002) Figure No: 2.3 Framework for knowledge approaches Imposition is linked with bureaucracy, structured and controlled systems and attempts to codify all aspects of knowledge. It might expect such perceptions to be more inclined to explicit rather than tacit knowledge. In contrast, Empowerment recognized the potential in the social and individual for knowledge creation and sharing, in which the tacit as much as the explicit aspect of knowledge is engaged. The authors considered that managers are likely to be concerned with knowledge at an individual and organization level and with particular approaches to managing knowledge. Consequently they proposed a managerial framework which uses the constructs of imposed and empowered as one axis and the individual and the organization as the other. Prescribed recommends a official approach to knowledge and its management at an  organizational level. It might see technology set up widely to detain, store up and  guard knowledge. Compliance means individual engage in knowledge activities through contract and  regulation. Resources are distributed via prescribed performance management  processes. Adaptive engages with the informal within the social fabric of the organization in  the logic of communities of practice and the self-management of teams. Self-determination supports individuals to get responsibility for their part to  learning in the knowledge creation and sharing processes. From the above management paradox of how the knowledge is manage at an organizational and individual context. There is another well known model, called SECI or knowledge spiral model. The model did not only described that how the knowledge is managed but it also explained the overall knowledge creation process. 2.7 SECI Model In 1995, (Nonaka, I. Takeuchi, H. 1995) introduced their SECI model, which stands for Socialization, Externalization, Combination and Internalization. The purpose of this model is to offer an understanding of how organizations create knowledge and formalize organization processes which are mostly tacit in nature. It further provides an understanding of knowledge sharing, its management and application at an organizational level. According to Nonaka, I. Takeuchi, H. (1995) knowledge is formed from the interaction between tacit and explicit knowledge. These four knowledge conversion processes interconnected by moving from tacit to explicit knowledge as it moves from socialization to internalization then return to socialization to shape a spiral model of knowledge creation. Hiscock, J. (2004) stated that the first generation earlier to 1995, completely dependent on technologies in their daily task often known technocratic, but this is the second generation of knowledge management, whe re knowledge exchange is illustrated as a spiral a thing to be managed and something which can be made explicit. As the purpose of this research it is to look at the barriers to knowledge management thus the only focal point from this model is to observe overall knowledge creation process. Nonaka, I. Takeuchi, H. (1995) discussed that how tacit and explicit knowledge interrelate to successfully create knowledge in an organization via four conversion processes: 2.7.1 Socialization tacit to tacit Socialization is the process through which tacit knowledge is passed to others; it is directly related to the group processes and organizational culture. Tacit knowledge is often attained through sharing experiences, observations and the processes that arises without formal discussions and using language for instance face to face interaction. Interviewing and focus groups techniques are also creating tacit knowledge amongst people. 2.7.2 Externalization tacit to explicit Externalization of tacit knowledge is the conversion of tacit knowledge to explicit. As tacit knowledge is embedded in the peoples mind and that is externalize or express by sharing of paradigms, metaphors and concepts through formal discussions. Nonaka, I Takeuchi, H. (1995) declared that we have conceptualized an image; we generally tend to express it in language. Externalization is developing notions which facilitate tacit knowledge to communicate. Redesign of existing information can escort to new knowledge in the shape of written statements. Wakefield, R. (2006) argued that when knowledge is externalized and turn into explicit it is in fact converted back into information or data. Both have values, but this cannot be out until the data and information is internalized again to form knowledge that is used for some productive purposes. 2.7.3 Combination explicit to explicit Combination is a process of systemizing concept into a knowledge system, at this level explicit knowledge merged with written reports and other strategic documents through formal discussions (i.e. meetings, documents etc.). This process includes gathering significant knowledge then sorting, editing and distributing it, which allows knowledge sharing within organization. Formal education and training are also comprise in this type of knowledge conversion. 2.7.4 Internalization explicit to tacit Internalization is a mechanism of altering explicit knowledge into tacit knowledge. It is achieved through individual expression and learning by doing. Once the explicit knowledge shared with individuals to internalize what they have experienced and then their understanding becomes tacit knowledge in the form of shared intellectual models or technological know-how which further become a valuable asset for the organization. For example: customer complaint are recorded and then read by other team members. 2.8 key components and its related barriers to Knowledge Management DuPlessis, M. (2008) point out that knowledge management is a holistic solution integrating mixture of perspectives: people, process, technology and culture perspectives and every single one should hold equal influence. According to Gillingham, H. Roberts, B. (2006), people, process and technology (soft and hard aspects) reveals the most essential features engaged in capturing, disseminating and sharing knowledge. These elements require to be balanced to guarantee that the complete benefits of knowledge sharing are exploited. Of course, people, process, and technology (PPT) are intertwined and no organizations get very far benefits without having a basic competency in all. But the tougher challenge in knowledge management is how to built PPT into an organization. Collison, C. Parcell, G. (2004) suggested that involving people who knows, and the behaviors to ask, listen and share, some processes to make things easier for sharing, validation, distillation, and a familiar, reliable te chnology infrastructure to facilitate sharing. Knowledge management is all concerning the integration of people, process, technology but strategy and structure too (Armistead, C. Meakins, M. 2002). According to Quinn, F. (2008) the development of knowledge managements exposes many issues that firms claim to have solved completely. The issues for example related to business benefits, people and culture, technology and process. These issues reflect all the main areas of concern in a knowledge environment and can be produce the barriers or road block to achieving the corporate success that most of would wish to inhabit. 2.8.1 People The biggest misunderstanding that the Information Technology (IT) leaders composed is that the knowledge management is all about technology. Gillingham, H. Robert, B. (2006) confirmed that people are the most central and complex element in knowledge management. It is a people who create and share knowledge, Since, (tacit) knowledge is set aside in the individuals the most essential thing for knowledge management is the system to allow the conceal knowledge within an individual be spread to others in order for them to share, exploit, and then alter it into (explicit) knowledge within an organization (Yeh, Y. et al., 2006). Knowledge management helps us do what we do better and its connect information and people, and people and people. Call, D. (2005) suggested that people are not being able to gain knowledge in a minutes and hours but they learn over days or weeks and one of challenge is to detained knowledge from what people said and did as part of their everyday job and to build it reachable to rest in an organization. According to Gundry, J. Metes, G. (1996) people behaviors is often manipulated by their beliefs, values, attitudes, and the organization culture. Influencing what people believe should direct to changes in values, attitudes and behavior in which knowledge is shared behavior. Gillingham H. Robert, B. (2006) stated that it is complicated to get people to do things in a different way because people can simply fall back on defensive routines. A state of willingness require from individuals to get people to modify the way that they do things, it is central to manage those who are willing to create and share their knowledge (Yeh, Y. et al., 2006). According to the Abell, A. and Oxbrow, N. (2001) people ask numbers of question in organization towards knowledge management for example: What is in knowledge for me? How does it make my job easier? What appreciation will I get for sharing my knowledge? Etc. It is important to identify what knowledge peo ple need and what knowledge people already possess and how to link people and knowledge process. In any system where information or knowledge is accessible, there must be adequate security to ensure that only appropriate people are able to see what knowledge is held and by whom, in that case confidentiality is the barrier to crafting a knowledge sharing culture in the organization (DuPlessis, M. 2008). But from the organizational point of view, one can comprehend that it is in national interest that the particular knowledge stays confidential. In other word the right information and knowledge should distributed to the right people at the right time and right place. For example in defense sectors and utilities provider such as countries like South Africa where they have one and only major energy provider, their key knowledge and information would be exceptionally secret hence it should be strongly managed (Sutton, S. Leech, S. 2002). Employee often does not know what is the concept of knowledge management their perception about knowledge as resources in not clear as capital assets resources. In the view of McCann, J. Buckner, M. (2004) people do not include knowledge into their work process to make final products and services and even do not feel responsible for sharing their own knowledge with colleagues. Kols, A. (2004) submitted that people do not even realize that they have knowledge worth sharing. Employees viewed knowledge management as an additional job, processes and formal channel of communications which is not incorporated into their daily working environment (DuPlessis, M. 2008). Another potential factor; employed turnover, where experienced employees transferred, promoted, retired, or fired from the organization, both their tacit and explicit knowledge may be lost unless the organization makes a concerted effort to assure that it is shared. Knowledge management setup and implementations requires sufficient time which is often claimed constraint. Time can be a difficult area or barrier, where employees are considered on the hourly basis, for example; accountants, lawyers, solicitors and engineers. For them, time is wealth and it is hard to modify the view that knowledge management be able to make them work smarter and quicker, even if they do expend some time on it upfront (DuPlessis, M. 2008). When the organization was steady and developing smoothly, it would be feasible for people to take extra time and effort to get involved in such knowledge management activities. Once the circumstances changed, these practices would be easily gone down because they were peripheral to business operations (Lin, L. Kwok, L. 2006). 2.8.2 Process Armistead, C. Meakins, M. (2002) declared that knowledge management is a process rather than an asset, and hence to facilitate maximize its value an organization must have to form an environment that facilitates the flow of knowledge. The argument between technology and people is about the ways of managing knowledge processes. Barnes, P. (2007), Probst et al., (2000) categorizes knowledge management in six core processes; knowledge identification, knowledge acquisition, knowledge expansion, knowledge sharing or distribution, knowledge exploitation and knowledge preservation. In order to share knowledge, one requires tools or processes: Expert locater systems, communities of practice (formal and informal), distance learning information-sharing tools, emergent expertise, storytelling, knowledge repositories, conferences/workshops/ seminars, e-learning applications and virtual communities are some of the methods organizations can use to disseminate knowledge. Abell, A. Oxbrow, N. (200 1) believed that people make process work, often through informal steps- how can these be formalized and how to build communities around business processes. Process must learn how to achieve the commitment of people to the learning process and how to integrate knowledge creation and utilization into business process. Processes need technology support- how to integrate business benefits and technology capability, it also require formal and informal communication between employees. Lack of communication, non-standardized processes and information systems and not knowing where to get knowledge. Gillingham, H. Roberts, B. (2006) stated that location and distance (geographical, legal, cultural and lingual) to access of vast organization knowledge can be a bottleneck Informal communication outlook as just chitchat or chatty activity, managers do not see the advantage of (tacit) knowledge process or transfer from one employee to another hence often employees are restricted to engage in discussing projects or ideas at meeting places such as near to water coolers or coffee machines (Webb, S. 1998). However organization confusion over the focus of the initiative often creates barriers to knowledge management: information or knowledge management; knowledge management or learning organization; which should lead human resources (HR) or information technology (IT). However there is danger in attempting to identify and collect everything available. According to Giannetto, K. Wheeler, A. (2000) if too much detail is gathered, it is impossible to distinguish what might be of value to employees and it will become a huge unmanageable, bureaucratic nightmare Organizations focus on collection not connection and attempt to capture all organization knowledge in repositories, often creating electronic bucket in place of physical filing cabinets also misunderstand the difference between tacit and explicit knowledge and treat it in the same way. 2.8.3 Technology The role of technology is significant; it is ultimately a facilitator of human knowledge in the organization. Technology or IS does not hold tacit knowledge, as it is held in the human brain (Rock, S. 1998), although it is transfer medium of tacit into explicit knowledge to some extend because tacit knowledge alters with each new experience and technology should be updated frequently. Armistead, C. Meakins, M. (2002) affirmed that information technology can enable speedy search, access and retrieval of information, and can support collaboration and communication between organizational members. In real meaning, it can undoubtedly play a variety of roles to support an organizations knowledge management processes. Technologies and knowledge management are strongly tied, because both assist the circulation of structured knowledge vertically and horizontally in the organization. (Yeh, Y. et al., 2006) argued that technology plays following roles in knowledge management: acquiring knowledge; classify, store, index, and tie knowledge related digital items; search and identify related content; and flexibly communicate the content based on the different utilization backgrounds. Knowledge management classifications are broadly defined technologies which improve and enable knowledge generation, codification and transfer. Peoples experiences and interpretations that add value, transforms into knowledge by using technologies. Knowledge management (technology) tools for instance: e-mail, document systems, groupware, the internet, intranet and video conferencing are all knowledge collaboration tools which can be use for gathering, organizing and sharing knowledge in the organizations (Gillingham, H. Roberts, B. 2006). Not everyone is computer literate and that sort of illiteracy become a cause which brake knowledge management processes also people finds that working with complex systems is not easy (DuPlessis, M. 2006). Sometimes it is more challenging for the organization to get people trained to using the KM tools (technologies) to facilitate knowledge sharing and retention. Holland, J. Johanson, U. 2003) recognized that organization consideration towards technological costs sometimes restrain in respect of installing knowledge management softwares and hardwares. Perhaps both are very expensive in terms of getting licenses for every member in a large organization. Since knowledge is an intangible asset, it is more complex for organization to calculate return on investment in hard form (cash), therefore step back from any initiative; however Collison, C Parcell, G. (2001) believed that knowledge benefits can be defined in qualitative and quantitative measures. Another barriers occur when technology is not up to date with the business processes as well as with the improvements in the technological world then knowledge and information might become rapidly old-fashioned and if maintenance and back-ups is not done regularly, knowledge can be vanished in a catastrophe situation, which is not only costly but also irretrievable. The advance type of communications for example; intranet if organizations only rely on this then it will be a huge barrier to the exchange of tacit knowledge. Davenport, T Prusak, L. (2000) suggest that knowledge sharing events happen when people connect via communities of practice and in person meetings. 2.8.4 Culture Chen, C. Huang, J. (2007) described organizational culture as shared value, beliefs, and work atmospheres that could have considerable impacts on the behaviors of employees. According to Yeh, Y. et al., (2006) culture is the combination of value, core belief, behavior model, and emblem. Culture is normally reflected in the form of organizations corporate structure, management and leadership style, learning from experience, norms, and practices, trust, rewards and recognition, networks and community of practices etc (DeLong, DW. Fahey, L. 2004, Al-Hawamdeh, S. 2003). Culture can play a role for organizational learning and every organizations culture is an independent entity different than any other organization. Alavi, M. Leidner, D. (2001) suggested that it is significant to comprehend that knowledge management is not as much of technical problem, but it is more of cultural problem. Culture is not only intangible and illusive, but it can also be observed at multiple levels in an o rganization. Trust and honesty are elements of culture sometime not clearly visible, Davenport, T. Prusak, L. (2000) confirmed that without these elements knowledge management would not function properly between individuals. Employees ask many questions themselves for instance; if I share knowledge will others misuse it, can I belief the knowledge that others created (Abell, A. Oxbrow, N. 2001). Another familiar barrier point out by Kols, A. (2004) knowledge as a source of power or authority and therefore hoarding it, similarly organizations are naturally unwilling to share their skills and know-how with rivals. Employees possibly will not willing to share their knowledge because they might lose control/power, they spotlight on continued existence in the organization rather than willingness to share knowledge (Clegg, S. Palmer, G. 1996). The following Chinese sayings depicting this philosophy with influences from such widespread beliefs, knowledge sharing becomes more complex. A good mastery of a single skill ensures a lifetime employment (Lin, L. Kwok, L. 2006). Internal divisions are general obstacle. Each department, field office, service delivery site, or project team tends to focus on its own problems, have limited contact with outsiders, and unaware of what other subdivisions are doing. Davenport, T. Prusak, L. (2000) stated that employee often assumes that the people in top of organizational hierarchy have greater knowledge and expertise and this difference amongst individual may be seen as a barrier. Employees on different hierarchical or designations frequently struggle to share knowledge between these levels, as they feel they may have much or more knowledge on a particular subject but not consulted or totally ignored because of their position in organization. Furthermore Webb, S. (1998) revealed that managers often try to avoid consult subordinates because they might fear for losing face. If skills are greatly diverse within professional areas and/or within ranks, it might obstruct the tools and practice through the knowledge is s hared between levels. Organization consists of multiple genders and seeking assistance from same gender whether the person is helpful or not is normal cause and may be a barrier. Bartram, S. (2005) stated that women in managerial position often seen as one of the cultural barrier. Also assorted age makes a differentiation at the point of exchanging knowledge. Webb S. (1998) believed that employees are unwilling to share knowledge if the future economic growth of organization is unstable and they strive to secure their position by retention of tacit knowledge as power. The overall organization instability may spoil social networks and reduce flow of knowledge from one corner to another in an organization (Lesser, E. Prusak, L. 2001). Management emphasis on individual rather than team, disincentive to knowledge sharing, competition between employees, motivational limitations, lack of acknowledging for the supplier of knowledge, sub-standard physical layout of work space, and fewer management commitments could be a constraint for knowledge sharing environment (Chase, R. 1997). 2.9 How the barriers of knowledge management can be managed? Knowledge management is a lengthy and iterative process and its related benefits realized over a period of time. There are no rapid fix solutions to counter these barriers. However to overcome these barriers an organizations require to undertake essential approaches and actions. According to Du Plessis, M. (2008) knowledge management barriers directly line up with organizational, national and personnel culture. Top and senior managements can play a significant role for instance by raising the awareness of knowledge management activities and its benefits into work place (Birkinshaw, J. 2001). At any level of knowledge management it is compulsory to make sure that employees trained on the basis of knowledge management, once the knew the insights of knowledge management they are enough able to see how its adds value into their routine jobs and how organization can create social and intangible capital. However if employees ignore or do not understand the notion of knowledge management th en they will not be capable to leverage it completely, even though organizations have elegant knowledge management plans and systems. Flexibilities between departments could span knowledge sharing boundaries. Employees should not reserve by position in a hierarchy and retain by resources. Davenport, T. Prusak, L. (2000) stated that the components of knowledge management: people, process and technology must be uniformly supplied in terms of time and money. The most powerful force in knowledge management is people because they can able to change their environment so trust in people is an extraordinary phenomenon in managing people and their knowledge. Milton, N. (nd) described two other ways to manage knowledge called connect and collect, however these terms are vastly similar to the Nonaka, I. Takeuchi, H. SECI model (see section 2.7). The S mean Socialization and it begins through the connecting people into social networks where they can able to talk, to share dialogues with other people where the other three boxes named Externalization, Combination and Internalization is all about revolving tacit knowledge into explicit into tacit knowledge. For example knowledge is documented, recorded into knowledge system or knowledge repository in an organized way thus the othe rs can access it. Organizational culture should abide for mistakes by recognizing and gratifying innovative errors, also there should be no fear of losing position from not knowing the entire thing (Gillingham, H. Robert, B. 2006). In the view of Barnes, P. (2007), decentralize structure gives opportunities to know where the decisive knowledge is located and able to make more accurate decisions. Incentive and reward systems not only influence members to support knowledge management activities but it also encourage their willingness to take part in the creation and sharing knowledge (Yeh, Y. et al., 2006). Lack of trust alters into culture of trust and confidence get by face to face interactions; its not only the way of transferring tacit knowledge between individuals but it allows to evaluating the trustworthiness of both the giver and the receiver. Use of technology in knowledge management stipulates user training and members should have skills available other than technical ones such as interpersonal skills. According to the Abell, A. Oxbrow, N. (2001) technologies should not be the driver and substitute of social interactions; neither should it be a barrier. 2.10 Summary Every organizations is a knowledge based and they possesses particular knowledge in various forms such as in human capital, structure capital, intellectual capital etc. and the issue of knowledge management is essential because organization lives in uncertain world. The above literature has been identified potential barriers to knowledge management which was categorized into organizational culture, people perceptions, ineffective processes and obsolete technologies. There is no cause to believe that those barriers will not impact on knowledge sharing to a more or fewer extent within an organization and between personnel. However the rationale of this study was not to classify an extensive organizational barrier profile but the principle was merely to recognize a set of commonly studied barriers in knowledge management which can be apparent in various means across an organization. When organizations managed and implement knowledge in a logical and structure way it can add value to bot h the employees and organizations effectiveness. The literature review also fascinated that knowledge management is a social activity or relies on social models, even though sharing of knowledge can be possible from technologies but recipient and sender of knowledge are still humans. Organizational culture, employees perceptions and their characteristics, sources of knowledge creation and the context in which knowledge is shared are key consideration in knowledge management.

Government Corruption Essay -- Corruption in Government

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Over the last few years, the issue of corruption--the abuse of public office for private gain--has attracted renewed interest, both among academics and policymakers. There are a number of reasons why this topic has come under recent inspection. Corruption scandals have toppled governments in both major industrial countries and developing countries. In the transition countries, the shift from command economies to free market economies has created massive opportunities for the appropriation of rents, excessive profits, and has often been accompanied by a change from a well-organized system of corruption to a more chaotic and deleterious one. With the end of the cold war, donor countries have placed less emphasis on political considerations in allocating foreign aid among developing countries and have paid more attention to cases in which aid funds have been misused and have not reached the poor. And slow economic growth has persisted in many countries with malfuncti oning institutions. This renewed interest has led to a new flurry of empirical research on the causes and consequences of corruption. Economists know quite a bit about the causes and consequences of corruption. An important body of knowledge was acquired through theoretical research done in the 1970s by Jagdish Bhagwati, Anne Krueger, and Susan Rose-Ackerman, among others. A key principle is that corruption can occur where rents exist--typically, as a result of government regulation--and public officials have discretion in allocating them. The classic example of a government restriction resulting in rents and rent-seeking behavior is that of an import quota and the associated licenses that civil servants give to those entrepreneurs willing to pay bribes. More recently, researchers have begun to test some of these long-established theoretical hypotheses using new cross-country data. Indices produced by private rating agencies grade countries on their levels of corruption, typically using the replies to standardized questionnaires by consultants living in those countries. The replies are subjective, but the correlation between indices produced by different rating agencies is very high, suggesting that most observers more or less agree on how corrupt countries seem to be. The high prices paid to the rating agencies by their customers (usually multinational companies a... ...e role of other forms of institutional inefficiency. Corruption is most prevalent where there are other forms of institutional inefficiency, such as political instability, bureaucratic red tape, and weak legislative and judicial systems. This raises the question of whether it can be established that corruption, rather than other factors correlated with it, is the cause of low economic growth. Regression analysis provides some evidence that if one controls for other forms of institutional inefficiency, such as political instability, corruption can still be shown to reduce growth. Nevertheless, it is hard to show conclusively that the cause of the problem is corruption alone, rather than the institutional weaknesses that are closely associated with it. The truth is that probably all of these weaknesses are intrinsically linked, in the sense that they feed upon each other (for example, red tape makes corruption possible, and corrupt bureaucrats may increase the extent of red tape so they can extract additional bribes) and that getting rid of corruption helps a country overcome other institutional weaknesses, just as reducing other institutional weaknesses helps it curb corruption.