The similarities of leadership styles

The similarities of leadership styles Purpose of this study is to examine the similarities of Servant leadership, transformational and transactional theories and also examine the Contribution those theories make to the understanding of leadership. Introduction: Leadership has a major role in 21st century in all sectors. Here I am going to discuss about understanding of what leadership is, is there any similarities among three theorists on what fine or valuable leadership ought to be. Expectation, in the 21st Century leader should be moral, social and ethical responsible. What is leadership? Leadership is a process of influencing the people to obtain the desired goal. There are many authors giving different definition. Goleman (2000): A leaders singular job is to get results. House et al (2004): Leadership is the ability to motivate, influence and enable individuals To contribute to the objectives of organizations of which they are members. Stogdill (1974): Leadership is an influencing process aimed at goal achievement. Johns T (2008) says: A leader takes people where they want to go. A great leader takes people where they dont necessarily want to be, but ought to be.There are a number of types of leaders who adopt different leadership styles According to Richard Bolden (2004), Different leadership theories were revealed and classified.   And also only few leadership theories reached to people. They are: Great Man Trait Contingency Situational Behavioral Participative Management ( transactional leadership theory ) Relationship (transformation , servant and team leadership) Now I am going to discuss about transformational, transactional and servant leadership. Transformational leadership: James Macgregor Burns was the first person who forward concept of transforming Leadership. Burns (1978) states, Transforming leadership as a process where leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of morality and motivation(p.20). Transforming leadership can answer in a relationship of mutual Stimulation and elevation that converts followers into leaders and may convert Leaders into moral agents(p. 4) and then bass b.m was developed the transformation leadership. Bass (1996), Transformational headship happens when a Leader encourage followers to share a vision, allowing them to achieve the vision, and providing the opportunity to develop their individual potential. covey (1992) says, The goal of transformational leadership is to transform people and organizations in a literal sense, to change them in mind and heart; enlarge vision, insight and understanding; clarify purposes; Make behavior congruent with beliefs, principles, or values; and bring about changes that are permanent, self-perpetuating, and momentum building(p.287).Transformational lea ders serve as role models, and also (Kelly, 2003) mentioning about how transformational leadership motivates its followers by following Maslows hierarchy. Transformational leader raise people from low levels of need (food, water, etc) to higher levels (self actualization). Components of transformational leadership: Four common Is are, 1. Idealized influence: Transformational leaders behave in ways that result in their being role models for their followers. The leaders are admired, respected, and trusted. 2.  Inspirational motivation. Transformational leaders act in ways that inspire and encourage those around them by providing sense able and challenge to their followers, work. Team spirit is aroused. The leader creates clearly communicated expectations that followers want to meet and also demonstrates commitment to goals and the shared vision. 3. Intellectual stimulation. Transformational leaders encourage their followers hard work to be inventive and new, modern by questing assumptions, reframing the troubles, and approaching mature situations in new or different ways. Creativity is encouraged. Followers are encouraged to try new approach and are not criticized because they differ from leaders idea. 4. Individualized consideration. Transformational leaders pay special focus to each individuals needs and to help them achieve their higher level needs. Trace over individual talents. Being a coacher and mentor to his followers and colleagues are developed to consecutively higher levels of potential. Source: (Kelly, 2003) Characteristics of transformational leader: According to (Tichy and Devanna, 1986), they have seven characteristics to inspire their followers to achieve beyond the expectation. 1. They visibly see themselves as change agents 2. They are brave 3. They believe in people 4. They are driven by a strong set of values 5 .They are life-long learners 6. They can cope with complexity, uncertainty and ambiguity 7. They are visionaries Example of successful transformation leadership: There are many leaders succeed in the way transformational leadership qualities. Mahatma Gandhi is Transformational leader representing charismatic qualities. Lou Gerstner is a transformational leader retired Chairman and CEO of IBM (1993 to 2002). He entered in IBM when it was in $8.1 billion loss in 1993 after recognizing the companys problem are wrong validation, only looking for results and values. IBM had become small-minded and nonflexible (Sheppard, 2002). Lou Gerstner entirely transformed organizational culture. For example, shut down infamous IBMs dress code to reproduce better the clothing of their customers (Sheppard, 2002). Another example for transformational leader is Lee Iacocca, who is accredited with saving the Chrysler Corporation (1980-1992). Chrysler Corporation when it was on the edge of bankruptcy. He taken responsibility and he set about transforming the principles to his contiguous subordinates. He began to restructure the corporations culture. Because a trans formational leader gives confidence to others to become transformational leaders, soon the whole organization was packed with successful leaders (Kelly, 2003). Transactional leadership: Transactional leadership emphasizes Social transaction or exchange between followers and a leader that involves involves a number of transactions based on reward. The transactional leader makes clear what he want, Performance expectations, goals, link between goals and rewards. The leader also watches followers performance And if any mistakes occurring towards the goal, the leader appear to correct (Burns 1978). In practice, these leaders use more closed and leading questions (Randell, 1997). Components of transactional leadership: (Bass Avolio, 1994) Contingent rewards: It refers to a prearranged agreement: If you do as we agreed then it specifies expectation and sets goals. Active management-by-exception : It refers to behavior where the leader is actively monitoring a follower: I am seeing to it that you (do not) the leader is strongly supervising and has specified corrective actions for mistakes. Passive management-by-exception: It occurs when the leader is passively monitoring a follower: If I happen to notice that you (did not) ; the leader takes corrective action in the case of mistakes if these are found out. All these behaviors work on the principles of expectancy of reward and fear of punishment, related to needs that are lower on Maslows hierarchy Characteristics of transactional leadership: according to Marcbowles (2003), They setting a clear goal. They create targets for each individual and the team They spot performance gaps. They wont trust their followers, they monitor their performance. They take corrective actions when necessary. They gaining promise to performance and tasks through pay, reward, appreciation and honor. Example of successful transactional leadership: Transactional leadership is mostly follow by managers and CEO in many organizations in 21st century. Ezine (2010) mentioning about Steve Jobs chairman and CEO Apple inc.he got award best CEO OF 2009 by TIMES. He is the famous transactional leader. Steve Jobs was famous for his down to world and job oriented nature of his leadership in apple computer. http://ezinearticles.com/?Leadership-StylesTransactional-Leadershipid=4262945 Servant leadership: Servant leadership sights a leader as a servant. Servant leadership was developed by green leaf in 1970, he said that The servant-leader is servant first. It begins with the natural emotion or feelings that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then mindful choice brings one to aspire to lead. Such a person is sharply different from one who is Leader first, perhaps because of the need to assuage an unusual power drive or to acquire material possessions. (Greenleaf et al, 1998). Katzenbach and Smith (1993) highlights The importance of leaders knowing when to follow The importance of the leader acting as supportive person to their followers to achieve task rather than just directing. They propose that the leader should ask questions rather than giving answers; provide opportunities for others to lead them; Components of servant leadership: According to (Laub, 1999) cited in (Smith et al, 2004), Servant leadership has six distinct components: Respecting people Rising people Building society Displaying legitimacy offering leadership shared leadership Characteristics of servant leadership: They Serve others needs before their needs They believe in people They are very simple and caring personalities They Provide opportunities to learn and grow They create Strong interpersonal relationships divide power and release control divide status and promote others Example of Successful servant leadership: Maxwell j (2007) add the new law in The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership Leaders Add Value by Serving Others, he described about serving others ,can make huge values(profit) in the organization. Adding Profits by Adding Value Costcos CEO, Jim Sinegal, believes the success of Costco comes from treating his employees well. Transactional versus Transformational leadership: According to Bass (1985) transactional leader motivates subordinates by exchanging rewards for services provided. Transactional Leader mainly focused on goal. Leader has been gaining promise to performance and goals through pay, reward, recognition and praise. Transformational leaders, on the other hand, motivate subordinates to perform beyond expectations.. Bass argued that such performance cannot be achieved through transactional leadership alone. A Comparison of Transactional and Transformational Leadership: Leithwood and Jantzi (2000) end that transactional leader more generally apply teleological principles (teleology is the study of goals, ends and purposes.) Where as transformational leaders deploy deontological ethics. Servant Leadership versus Transactional Leadership: Servant leadership and transactional leadership are evident in a number of ways. Servant leaders emphasize activities that fans of well-being, while transactional leaders focus on the activities of routine maintenance and resource allocation followers of monitoring and management to achieve organizational goals. Contrary to the chief servants who influence followers through personal development and empowerment, the transactional leader influences followers through the use of rewards, sanctions, and formal authority and position to induce behavior consistent. According to Blanchard and Johnson (1985), transactional leaders create strong expectations about the behavior of employees, as well as clear guidance on employees receive rewards for meeting the expectations of transactional leader.Li Thus, leaders use transactional contingent reward behavior to implement transactions with followers to achieve work goals (Bass, 1985). Servant Leadership versus Transactional Leadership: According to the stone and his colleague point of view servant leadership and transformational leadership, both models incorporate characteristics such as value, vision, power, molding, belief, honesty, and designation (Stone et al., 2003).Transformational leadership and servant leadership have similar qualities such as individualized appreciation and consideration of followers. A Comparative Model: Servant and Transformational Leadership The Servant Leader model, the leaders motivation to lead occurs from a fundamental attitude of social equality. The servant leaders system believes that He or she is no better than those headed. The All associates of the organization have equal privileges to vision, value, and information. The leaders role is to make easy the appearance of a community within the organization. According to (Laub, 1999), the key inventiveness for Servant leadership is importance of people, rising people, structuring community, displaying legitimacy and sharing management. Possible impacts of these drivers could be: higher capable people, more moral people, better negotiator, well-built interpersonal relationships, establishment of shared visions, and clear tasks. It is discussed here that these results in combination with the leader initiatives that produce them to form a spiritual generative culture. Transformational leader model, the key initiatives for the transformational leader is II or charisma behavior, IM, IS and IC. These Components lead to: role modeling, high moral standards, caring about others needs requirements, communication of hope, shared visions, innovations, risk taking, and quizzical of practices and systems. Servant leadership tends to develop a more fixed method to the exterior environment than transformational leadership. The transformational leaders motivation is aimed at for more toward achieving targets for the organization, which will reveal on his/her capabilities, and the success of these leaders is calculated by the level to which they acquire organizational rewards. The Servant leaders motivation is mainly focus on its follower the personal growth, thus the servant leaders achievement is calculated by the level to which the follower moves on the way to self actualization. Source: smith .B et al( 2004) CONCLUSION: leadership is attitude not a role. Leadership in Leadership, It seems, is increasingly becoming the universal remedy of the 21st Century and its emphasis is turning towards the moral, social and ethical responsibilities of leaders. Transformational leadership is suitable for dynamic organization and servant leadership suitable for static organization such as church, non-profit organization, non-government organization. Most of leader using transactional leadership theory while they using transformational leadership. There is nothing as practical as a good theory (Lewin, 1935). So Todays leaders need to be skilled in change management to adopt in any situation CHRISTINA OSBORNE (2008).

Government Policy and Ideologies of Welfare

Government Policy and Ideologies of Welfare With reference to changes in government policy and ideologies of welfare, debate the significance of the shift from victorian ‘pauper to 21st century ‘service user and its impact on social work practice and values. By charting changes in government policy and welfare ideologies, this essay will discuss the significance of the move from the Victorian ‘Pauper towards the 21st century ‘Service User and examine how this has influenced social work values and practice. But first, brief consideration must be given to offering a definition of these terms. The Oxford English Dictionary (2009: online) defines a pauper as somebody with no property or means of livelihood; who is dependent upon charity from others; and a beggar. Terminology has changed dramatically and the term ‘service user emerged in the 1990s as the generic name for people social workers work with (Pierson Thomas, 2006: 560). In contrast to ‘pauper, the Collins Internet-Linked Dictionary of Social Work by Pierson and Thomas (2006: 560) states: â€Å"its popularity has spread among practitioners, managers and social work educators alike as it seems to convey the more contemporary emphasis on those who receive the service having some rights and influence over that service† (Ibid.). All societies have methods of assisting those in financial difficulties (Payne, 2005: 13) and the 1601 English Poor Law was the first national welfare provision that lasted in one form or another for 350 years (Spicker, 2008: 78). However, in the 18th century, the Poor Law Report demonstrated the current allowance system was demoralising and promoted idleness (Fraser, 2009: 53). This, coupled with a proliferation of paupers and escalating relief costs, led to the Poor Law Amendment Act 1834 which heralded the introduction of workhouses, designed to deter everyone but the destitute from applying for support (Thane, 1996: 31). It was hoped by replacing outdoor relief with the workhouse, the faults of the current system would be corrected (Fraser, 2009: 55). Ultimately, it provided a harsh alternative to self-help that the pauper would only accept when destitute; and fearing the workhouse, they would hopefully find employment (Ibid.: 55-56). This was in keeping with the general social p hilosophy of the time that supposed â€Å"men were masters of their own fate and that the individual had within his grasp the power to find his own salvation† (Ibid.: 56). Those requiring assistance were blamed for their position and expected to find solutions to their own self-imposed misery (Sullivan, 1996: xiv). Therefore, the Victorian Poor Law divided the needy into the deserving and undeserving poor; with the deserving worthy of philanthropic assistance whilst the undeserving was punished for their feckless behaviour (Ibid.). In essence, the Amendment Act successfully forced able-bodied men to take responsibility for themselves (Thane, 1996: 33). Throughout the 1880s charitable responses to suffering grew (Payne, 2005: 36) and the Charitable Organisation Society was established in 1869, aiming to persuade charities to organise resources so they were distributed to those best able to use them (Thane, 1996: 21). The COS was not an alternative to the Poor Law, but the flip side of the same coin (Payne, 2005: 36) and its principles encouraged people to become self-dependent and only helped those with potential to support themselves (Thane, 1996: 21). It provided charity for the ‘deserving and hence, left those without potential to become self-dependent to destitution or the Poor Law (Ibid.: 21-34). Furthermore, COS endeavoured to find lasting solutions to peoples problems, without removing them from their environment and pioneered the practice of case-work whereby investigations were conducted into clients backgrounds who were then helped if deemed worthy (Ibid.). Much had to be said for this case-work approach, which provi ded a real attempt to investigate the nature of the peoples problems (Ibid.) and essentially, through the development of this method, created social work (Payne, 2005: 38). Many people following COS principles in theory found it challenging to abandon those in desperate need in practice (Thane, 1996: 23). Hence, dissatisfaction generated new voluntary approaches, including the Settlement Movement, which initiated modern community work (Ibid.). Residential settlement Toynbee Hall was established in 1884 where graduates would live and work among the poor; a model replicated throughout the country by the end of the century (Ibid.). It aimed for them to utilise their moral example and education to foster social development (Payne, 2005: 37) and its warden Samuel Barnett believed class harmony and material improvement would only improve when the rich regarded the poor as equally worthy individuals (Thane, 1996: 21). Moving to the twentieth century, following the Second World War, fundamental welfare changes were introduced under the Labour government in accordance with a blueprint proposed in the 1942 Beveridge Report (Bochel, 2008: 192). Subsequently, the period from 1945 until the 1970s is considered: â€Å"One of political consensus on key issues, stemming from a combination of the economic philosophy of Keynes, and the social policy of Beveridge, enshrining the ideas of the mixed economy and the welfare state† (Ibid.). During this period it was assumed societies had progressed, rendering the state responsible for providing universal welfare provision for citizens (Payne, 2005: 50). Subsequently, the state established a range of social services in the new era of welfare capitalism and this social security was regarded as the instrument that would eradicate poverty (Sullivan, 1996: xiii-3). The welfare state was created to put welfare on a new footing (Briggs, 1961 cited in Spicker, 2008: 121) where everyone, not just the poor, had the right to access services (Spicker, 2008: 121). This contrasted starkly to when support was confined to the destitute and deliberately made unpleasant under the Poor Law (Checkland Checkland, 1974 cited in Spicker, 2008: 121) and this commitment to universalism provided an obvious change from the past (Sullivan, 1996: 54). Moreover, social work was becoming accepted as part of universal welfare provision alongside health, housing and social security (Payne, 2005: 50) a nd in the 25 years following the war, a gradual professionalizing shift occurred (Lymberry, 2001: 371). Subsequently, following the 1968 Seebohm Report and the 1970 Local Authority Social Services Act, the three existing personal social services were reorganised into unified local authority departments (Sullivan, 1996: 195-196). It was hoped this would â€Å"provide a more co-ordinated and comprehensive approach to the problems of individuals, families and communities† (Seebohm Report, 1968 quoted in Lymberry, 2001: 371). Fundamentally, this was a period of proliferation and consolidation for social work with the hope it would contribute towards creating a more equal society (Lymberry, 2001: 371). This movement to the welfare state from the Poor Law is referred to as the progression to ‘institutional welfare from ‘residual provision (Wilensky Lebeaux, 1965 cited in Spicker, 2008: 92). Residual welfare catered for a limited number of people, was provided under sufferance and regarded as a public burden (Spicker, 2008: 92). Furthermore, the Poor Law was punitive in nature, limited liabilities through deterrence and deprived paupers of their rights (Ibid.). Contrastingly, institutional welfare covered the general populations needs, regardless of their financial circumstances, and offered protection to everyone (Ibid.). It was built on accepting mutual responsibility, considered dependency to be normal, and was based on the premise of a right to welfare and citizenship, (Ibid.). Theoretically, this universalism provided the only way to guarantee high quality of services were available for all and removed the stigma associated with state services (Sullivan, 1996: 54). During the two decades after the war, governments believed in Keynesian demand management techniques and Beveridges social ideas (Ibid.: 90). However, from the late 1960s these economic policies failed and the UK faced a fiscal crisis of the state (Ibid.). Subsequently, when the Conservatives were elected in 1979, the ideology of the New Right dominated and heralded a change from the post-war welfare consensus (Lymberry, 2001: 372). This period was characterised by Neo-liberal thinking, which fundamentally questioned the state-delivered institutions forming the welfare state, and these beliefs have affected policy-making and the welfare system during recent decades (Ellison, 2008: 61-67). For example, Thatchers government was dedicated to rolling back the state and denying mutual commitments among citizens because allegedly society did not exist but comprised of competing individuals instead (Lowe, 1999: 307). They aspired for those dependent on the state to become independent becaus e: â€Å"If those in need were encouraged to look passively to the state for help, they would be denied the invigorating experience of self-help and of family or community care† (Ibid.). Therefore, the New Right were committed to re-moralising society, just as Poor Law reformers of the 1830s had before them, with a return to Victorian values (Ibid.). This generated a reduction in benefits and conditions stipulated for accessing these were toughened (Clarke et al., 2000: 3). Furthermore, an increasing stigma was attached to publicly provided welfare and it was, in some respects, criminalised by linking US notions of ‘welfare dependency and ‘demoralisation to UK ideas of ‘scrounging and ‘undeserving (Ibid.). Fundamentally, welfare had come full circle when: â€Å"Individualism as the motor of economic and social policy in the nineteenth and early twentieth centurys gave way to the collectivism of that classic welfare state only to re-emerge in the late twentieth century† (Sullivan, 1996: xv). New Right emphasis on the sanctity of marriage and family, the demonization of those who threatened these and their promotion of a social order based on ‘Victorian values impacted on social work (Lymberry, 2001: 372). It was forced to abandon its pretensions to providing a universalist service and focus on statutory duties, omitting the preventative remit laid out in the Seebohm Report (Ibid.). Furthermore, it underlined individuals looking after themselves and their families (Bochel, 2008: 194). Subsequently, social work changed after the Barclay Report of the 1980s, which introduced community social work strategies and encouraged local authority social services departments to develop alternative ways of meeting social need (Sullivan, 1996: 196). This approach envisaged moving from the traditional one-to-one focus towards facilitating self-help by communities, social networks, and individuals (Ibid.). Moreover, it heralded the movement of social workers from therapists to enab lers, supporting informal carers instead of providing the care themselves (Ibid.). When looking at New Labour and their ‘Third Way approach, a decisive shift has occurred in the role of the recipients of social work services. For example, Blair (2000 cited in Jordan, 2001: 529) intended to change the welfare state from delivering passive support towards active support, promoting citizens independence instead. Taking the middle ground between free-market principles of the Conservative years and old style socialism it meant services would demand more from citizens, requiring people to contribute to a responsible community (Jordan, 2001: 529-530). This tougher approach to welfare is evident in expecting many single parents, the disabled, and those receiving employment benefits to actively seek employment (Ellison, 2008: 67). Additionally, benefits are now less generous and more strictly means-tested than in the height of Keynesian welfare (Ibid.). Furthermore, the development of anti-oppressive practice signals a change in the attitudes towards the role of users of social work services. Anti-oppressive practice has emerged over the last decade, forms part of the critical social work tradition, and is concerned with transforming power relations at every level in practice (Healy, 2005: 172-178). Theorists believe the social work role is political with social workers holding a privileged status in comparison to service users (Ibid). Therefore, social workers must be critical and reflective in order to not replicate oppressive social relations in practice (Ibid.). Furthermore, it promotes working in partnership with service users with power genuinely shared at both an interpersonal and institutional level (Dalrymple and Burke, 1995: 65 cited in Healy, 2005: 187). Thus, service users opportunities for participation in decision-making should be maximised (Healy, 2005: 187). Social work has been affected by the unabated advancement of consumer capitalism and service users are expected to be more involved in arranging and managing services (Harris, 2009: 67). The New Right ideas emphasised that citizens had a right to freedom and choice (Ibid.: 68) and recent Conservative and Labour administrations have encouraged citizens to participate in welfare services; utilising market-like approaches to consultation and increased empowerment in decision-making (Bochel, 2008: 194). Efforts have been made to promote service user participation in planning and development with the view that their active role improves health and social care services (Carr, 2004: 2). Furthermore, the importance of individual choice in improving provider effectiveness, the notion of citizens rights and responsibilities and a belief that individuals involvement in decision-making results in solutions that better meet their needs have been underlined (Bochel, 2008: 194-195). This is evident in the Direct Payments scheme, endorsed on the basis of choice and independence, and demonstrates that the state increasingly expects citizens to be competent enterprising, managerial and autonomous individuals (Scourfield, 2007: 108). However, as Scourfield (Ibid.) asserts this raises concerns about dependent citizens and emphasises: â€Å"a danger of using independence and choice as central organizing principles is to forget how and why the public sector emerged in the first place—to ensure that those who are necessarily dependent are treated with respect and dignity, to ensure a collectivized approach to risk, and to ensure that secure and reliable forms of support outside of the market or the family are available†. Additionally, as Carr (2004: 2) found, the extent to which service user participation leads to improvements in services varies and there is little monitoring and evaluation of the difference user participation is making. Furthermore, despite citizenship, choice, community, social inclusion and autonomy being key to New Labours programme, (Blair, 1998 cited in Humphries, 2004: 95) Humphries (2004: 95) contends Labours pursuing of neo-liberal economic and morally repressive policies has degraded public services; punishing and excluding those â€Å"regarded as having been ‘given a chance but having ‘failed†. She proposes it is social workers who are expected to implement the surveillance systems that operate these policies and under New Labour a shift has occurred towards social work having an increasingly negative and narrow practice focussed on restriction, surveillance, control and exclusion (Ibid.: 93-95). Thus, social work is concerned with the moralistic side of Labours policies rather than with empowering people instead (Jordan, 2001 cited in Humphries, 2004: 94). Moreover, since 1993, increasingly punitive and repressive measures have been introduced to deter asylum seekers from coming to Britain and if they are granted access they enter an inhumane and inferior ‘welfare system (Humphries, 2004: 100). Acts such as the 1993 Asylum and Immigration Appeals Act and the 1996 Asylum and Immigration Act removed those subject to immigration controls from the welfare state (Ibid.: 101) and Cohen (2003 cited in Humphries, 2004: 101) describes the asylum support system as the creation of a modern day poor law based on coercion and lack of choice. This essay has documented the move from the use of the Victorian term ‘pauper to the 21st century term ‘service user by looking at shifts in government policy and welfare ideologies and its impact on social work. Looking back, one would hope we have progressed from the Victorian Poor Law that blamed the pauper for their need of assistance and deterred them from accessing support by rendering it as unpleasant as possible. However, when observing the stringent means-tested benefit system and New Labours tough approach welfare, ascertaining whether we have moved forward becomes questionable. Zarb (2006: 2), referring to how older couples can be separated due to housing and care allocation, questions whether citizens are still treated like the paupers in the Poor Law era who were regularly split up for not meeting the parishes criteria for support. Furthermore, to finish, Wynne-Jones (2007: online), writing on the Joseph Rowntree Foundation website, highlights that today the media still assigns different types of morality to types of poverty: â€Å"The undeserving poor are the Asbo kids and the hoodies, the drug-addicted and long-term unemployed. On the other hand, the ‘deserving poor look a lot like middle Englanders fallen on hard times†. Having spent time with a group of troubled young people on a Peckham estate, following the death of Damilola Taylor in 2000, she believes that it is through the stereotyped comedy characters such as Little Britains ‘Vicky Pollard that Middle England reveals how threatened it feels about the ‘undeserving poor; utilising comedy as a means of criticising our societies ‘underclass (Ibid.). She maintains that as Middle England laughs from the unease that people like this exist on our poorest estates, years on from Damilolas death, we are still failing those, like the group in Peckham, who are â€Å"damaged so badly by life that their only empowerment is to attack others† (Ibid.). Therefore, to conclude, whilst a change in terminology has occurred moving from ‘pauper to ‘service user, it is problematic determining how far attitudes towards those in need of assistance have genuinely changed for the better. Reference List Bochel, C. (2008) â€Å"State Welfare† in Alcock, P. et al., (2008) The Students Companion to Social Policy, 3rd Ed, Oxford: Blackwell. Carr, S. (2004) â€Å"SCIE Position paper 3 Summary: Has service user participation made a difference to social care services?† available at http://www.scie.org.uk/publications/positionpapers/pp03-summary.pdf accessed on 17th December 2009. Clarke, J. et al. (2000) â€Å"Reinventing the Welfare State† in Clarke, J. et al. (2000) New Managerialism: New Welfare? London: Sage. Ellison, N. (2008) â€Å"Neo-Liberalism† in Alcock, P. et al., (2008) The Students Companion to Social Policy,3rd Ed, Oxford: Blackwell. Fraser, D. (2009) The Evolution of the British Welfare State, 4th Ed, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Harris, J. (2009) â€Å"Customer-citizenship in modernised social work† in Modernising Social Work: Critical Considerations, Bristol: Policy Healy, K (2005) Social Work Theories in Context: Creating Frameworks for Practice, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Humphries, B. (2004) â€Å"An Unacceptable Role for Social Work: Implementing Immigration Policy† British Journal of Social Work 34: 93-107 available at http://bjsw.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/34/1/93 accessed on 17th December 2009. Jordan, B. (2001) â€Å"Tough Love: Social Work, Social Exclusion and the Third Way†, British Journal of Social Work 31: 527- 546. Lowe, R. (1999) The Welfare State in Britain Since 1945, 2nd Ed, Houndmills, Basingstoke : Palgrave Macmillan Lymberry, M. (2001) â€Å"Social Work at the Crossroads†, British Journal of Social Work 31: 369-384 available at http://bjsw.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/31/3/369 accessed on 22nd December 2009. Oxford English Dictionary (2009) available at www.oed.com accessed on 23rd November 2009. Payne, M. (2005) The Origins of Social Work: Continuity and Change, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Pierson, J. Thomas, M. (2006) Collins Internet-Linked Dictionary of Social Work, Glasgow: Harper Collins. Scourfield, P. (2007) â€Å"Social Care and the Modern Citizen: Client, Consumer, Service User, Manager and Entrepreneur† British Journal of Social Work 37: 107-122 available at http://bjsw.oxfordjournals.org.ezproxy.lib.le.ac.uk/cgi/reprint/37/1/107?maxtoshow=HITS=10hits=10RESULTFORMAT=1title=Social+Care+and+the+Modern+Citizen%3A+Client%2C+Consumerandorexacttitle=andandorexacttitleabs=andandorexactfulltext=andsearchid=1FIRSTINDEX=0sortspec=relevanceresourcetype=HWCIT accessed on 24th November 2009. Spicker, P. (2008) Social Policy: Themes and Approaches,2nd Ed, Bristol: Policy. Sullivan, M. (1996) The Development of the British Welfare State, London: Prentice Hall Thane, P. (1996) Foundations of the Welfare State, 2nd Ed, London ; New York : Longman. Wynne-Jones, R. (2007) â€Å"Deserving vs Undeserving† available at http://www.jrf.org.uk/reporting-poverty/journalists-experiences/deserving-undeserving accessed on 16th December 2009. Zarb, G. (2006) â€Å"From Paupers to Citizens: Independent Living and Human Rights† available at http://www.scie.org.uk/news/events/humanrights06/gerryzarb.pdf accessed on 17th December 2009.

Personal Narrative - I Don’t Want to Cry :: Personal Narrative

I Don’t Want to Cry Tonight, I punched a child in the stomach. He gasped for air, his face grew red, and his eyes got watery. Granted, we were at Karate class and we were sparring. And, granted, I was 19 and he was likely 10. I hadn’t meant to hurt him; I had actually been â€Å"going light.† But I hurt him. The fact is, he knew it and didn’t care. He could have continued the night without a single tear. But when the Shihan came to try and make him feel better, the boy’s face got redder and his lip quivered as that single tear rolled down his cheek. The boy was perfectly fine until he was consoled. When I was younger, I wasn’t the most popular. I was known as a bookworm who frequently dazed off in class, all the while being admired by the teachers for my intelligence. I was short, wore glasses, didn’t talk much, and only had 2 friends in my grade. I was, expectedly, picked on by the bigger kids. I was hurt several times. However, I hid it from my teachers and parents. I didn’t want to cry. And I was fine without crying; I merely accepted the beating and went on, trying to avoid or get back at the bullies. Girls are taught at an early age that they can cry. The sight of a girl with tears running down her cheeks inspires compassion, while a boy’s tears bring mostly embarrassment. Girls are also ingrained with the fact that females are â€Å"there for each other,† and can therefore support one another emotionally. Women frequently talk of how refreshed a â€Å"good cry† is, as if it were a long bath or a cigarette. But guys don’t cry. Pop psychology tells us that this is because men see crying as negative. Because we can’t accept our feelings and are scared at the expression of them. So this boy was too scared to cry until the instructor let him know it was OK? Hogwash. A Karate instructor, like a coach, wants to keep little boys from crying whenever possible. It isn’t fair that a man’s dislike of being forced to cry makes others think he is â€Å"all bottled up inside. Personal Narrative - I Don’t Want to Cry :: Personal Narrative I Don’t Want to Cry Tonight, I punched a child in the stomach. He gasped for air, his face grew red, and his eyes got watery. Granted, we were at Karate class and we were sparring. And, granted, I was 19 and he was likely 10. I hadn’t meant to hurt him; I had actually been â€Å"going light.† But I hurt him. The fact is, he knew it and didn’t care. He could have continued the night without a single tear. But when the Shihan came to try and make him feel better, the boy’s face got redder and his lip quivered as that single tear rolled down his cheek. The boy was perfectly fine until he was consoled. When I was younger, I wasn’t the most popular. I was known as a bookworm who frequently dazed off in class, all the while being admired by the teachers for my intelligence. I was short, wore glasses, didn’t talk much, and only had 2 friends in my grade. I was, expectedly, picked on by the bigger kids. I was hurt several times. However, I hid it from my teachers and parents. I didn’t want to cry. And I was fine without crying; I merely accepted the beating and went on, trying to avoid or get back at the bullies. Girls are taught at an early age that they can cry. The sight of a girl with tears running down her cheeks inspires compassion, while a boy’s tears bring mostly embarrassment. Girls are also ingrained with the fact that females are â€Å"there for each other,† and can therefore support one another emotionally. Women frequently talk of how refreshed a â€Å"good cry† is, as if it were a long bath or a cigarette. But guys don’t cry. Pop psychology tells us that this is because men see crying as negative. Because we can’t accept our feelings and are scared at the expression of them. So this boy was too scared to cry until the instructor let him know it was OK? Hogwash. A Karate instructor, like a coach, wants to keep little boys from crying whenever possible. It isn’t fair that a man’s dislike of being forced to cry makes others think he is â€Å"all bottled up inside.

Martin Luther King Jr. Essay -- American History

Martin Luther King Jr. On the first day of school, sophomore year, my history teacher presented me with the question of "Who is your hero?" I didn’t have a hero, and until then I hadn’t thought about the subject. Later in the year, my eyes caught a quotation from Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. on the bulletin board which stated somewhat to this effect, "Do not merely be a thermometer that records the ideas and principles of popular opinion; but rather a thermostat that transforms the mores of society." Out of all the quotes that had been posted over the year, it was this one that caught my attention and captured my emotion. When I would read it, I felt as if something inside me had been sparked. Little did I know that this man whom I had come to know for the "I have a dream speech" and civil rights would come to be my hero. After reading "Pilgrimage to Nonviolence" while studying the civil rights movement I became intrigued in the beliefs of Martin Luther King Jr. Nonviolence seemed like such a radical concept to me, yet I found myself agreeing with every point that he made. The va...

Homosexuality Essay -- Biology Essays Research Papers

Homosexuality For years scientists have been attempting to ascertain whether or not homosexual behavior can be linked to a biological catalyst. From Alfred Kinsey's revolutionary survey in 1947 to the current media upheaval about a prospective "gay gene," the desire to pinpoint a cause for the personalities and behaviors associated with homosexuality has reached new plateaux. The scientific community is constantly developing more and more evidence to suggest that there may well be a neurological explanation for homosexuality. Although historical studies and purposed treatments have ranged from group counseling to shock therapy, recent research suggests that exposure to an abnormally high or low amount of certain hormones could potentially affect sexual behavior. Just as there is no gene for heterosexuality, there can be no "gay gene." Genes are not responsible for an individual's actions; they simply guide the "sequence of a particular protein that may influence behavior" ( 1 ). However, it is possible that there is a genetic factor which is responsible for a protein synthesis resulting in particular sex hormone levels (namely testosterone and estrogen) which could augment certain sex-typical characteristics, and might explain sexual behavior ( 1 ). This paper will discuss various studies which examine the effects of male and female hormones in an attempt to develop a potential correlation between biological foundations and homosexual behavior. According to Fred Delcomyn (2), mammals naturally develop as females "in the absence of sex hormones." Without the intervention of androgens (testicular hormones, specifically testosterone), all mammals develop in utero as female. Not only are the genitals identical in early fe... ...r that personality and behavior are more than simple chemical reactions. While prenatal over-androgenization or estrogenization could potentially be one of the many underlying causes of homosexuality, this has only been shown in certain cases, largely those in which chemical abnormalities have caused effeminate or masculinizing behavioral (and in some cases physical) traits. The studies discussed herein cannot account for the physiological characteristics of every member of the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered community. It is also possible that the amounts of hormones studied are not abnormal, but fall somewhere in the spectrum of human sexuality. Internet Sources: 2. Delcomyn, Fred. Foundations of Neurobiology. New York: W.H. Freeman & Co. 1998 http://salmon.psy.plym.ac.uk/year1/Sexdiff.htm http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~sg7/eng105/students/Beth.htm

How does Shakespeare develop character, plot and theme in Act 3 scene 4 of Macbeth? Essay

In this essay, I will answer the question â€Å"How does Shakespeare develop character, plot and theme in Act 3 scene 4 of ‘Macbeth’?† by divulging into ‘Macbeth’ written by Shakespeare. ‘Macbeth’ is a play with issues such as power, villainy, assassination, deceit and chaos, which are epitomize during Act 3 scene 4 of ‘Macbeth’. This scene is where all the issues group together to form a scene of evilness of human. Macbeth was a knight at the start, became the Thane of Cawdor and assassinated King Duncan to thrust himself to power. Although he regretted for murdering King Duncan since Lady Macbeth encouraged him to murder Duncan. â€Å"He that’s coming must be provided for, and you shall put this night’s great business into my dispatch, which shall to all our nights and days to come give solely sovereign sway and masterdom.† (Lines 64 to 67, Act 1 Scene 6) Lady Macbeth used veiled words because she was afraid that direct language would make Macbeth refuse to act. This is evidence for Macbeth was originally a kind and not ambitious person, however, after Lady Macbeth’s persuasion he decided to kill King Duncan. After Macbeth became King, he send assassin to murder Banquo. During the banquet, he received the news of Banquo’s death but Banquo’s son managed to escape. â€Å"Here had we now our country’s honour roofed, were the graced person of our Banquo present.†(Lines 40-41, Act 3 scene 4) This quote made by Macbeth means if only Banquo were here, all the nobility of Scotland would be under our roof. In addition, it shows he pretended he did not know Banquo had been murdered and to show the Scottish Lords his kindness and respect to Banquo even he is the King now. However, when Banquo’s ghost suddenly appeared in front of him but no one could see Banquo’s ghost. Macbeth was terrified and astonished because he was the only one who knew Banquo is already dead. â€Å"Thou canst not say I did it; never shake the gory locks at me?†(Lines 50-51, Act 3 scene4) First, it is extremely awkward that the King suddenly say something weird that does not relate to the dinner. Additionally, from the Scottish lords’ view, Macbeth seems had done something bad and trying to hide it from them which created a feeling of chaos and unsafe. Furthermore, it is a sign that Macbeth is not suitable to be a King. â€Å"Ay, and a bold one, that dare look on that which might appal the devil† (Lines 58-59, Act 4 scene4) â€Å"Avaunt and quit my sight! Let the earth hide thee! Thy bones are marrowless, thy blood is cold; Thou hast no speculation in those eyes† (Lines 93-95, Act 3 scene4) I personally would believe Macbeth was mad even though his wife was trying to persuade people this is normal and all the things he said are like hints that he had murdered someone who we do not know and he is back. In my opinion, no guests would expect this from Macbeth because he had never behaved in this weird way and he is very brave man since he had killed many people in battles. Lady Macbeth was a dominant character. She was portrayed as ambitious, greedy to power by Shakespeare. When Lady Macbeth was first introduced in the play, she was reading a letter from Macbeth, which was describing the three weird sisters’ prophecy. â€Å"He brings great news† (Lines 36, Act1 scene5) At this point, her only concern was whether Macbeth is capable of fulfilling the prophecy and certainly, she would grab hold of this chance to persuade Macbeth to do it in order to satisfy her hunger to power. The following quotes made by Lady Macbeth states how she criticizes Macbeth. â€Å"If we should fail?†(Macbeth, Lines 58, Act 1 scene7) â€Å"We fail?†(Lady Macbeth, Lines 59, Act 1 scene 7) The quote made by Lady Macbeth shows she believes her husband should become ambitious and be confidence. In addition, Lady Macbeth did not insult Macbeth because this would only make Macbeth feel even worst of him. At this point, she was disappointed by Macbeth since she could not believe her husband did not show any determination to make use of this excellent chance to kill King Duncan and fulfill the prophecy and to satisfy her hungriness to power. â€Å"And live a coward in thine own esteem, letting ‘I dare not’ wait upon I would† (Lady Macbeth, line 43, Act 1 scene 7) â€Å"I have given suck and know how tender ’tis to love the babe that milks me: I would, while it was smiling in my face, Have plucked my nipple from his boneless gums and dashed the brains out, had I so sworn as you have done to this.† (Lady Macbeth, Line 54-59, Act 1 scene 7) Furthermore, due to emotions Macbeth is feeling at this point, he tells his wife the couple will â€Å"will proceed no further in this business†, which explains the assassination would not happen due to the respect King Duncan had recently showed him, he was not willing to carry out the plan. This frustrates Lady Macbeth and leads her using another tactic to persuade Macbeth to stand on her side. Example of another tactic is calling Macbeth as a coward, and informs him she would rather kill a newborn baby rather than break a promise like the one Macbeth has to her. On the other hand, she had tried to cover up for Macbeth even though she did not know what exactly was happening to Macbeth. The following quote made by Lady Macbeth shows her solicitude to Macbeth even Macbeth did not tell her Banquo’s death which states he did not trust her wife. â€Å"Sit, worthy friends. My lord is of often thus, and hath been from his youth. Pray you keep seat.†(Lines 53-54, Act 3 scene4) â€Å"I pray you speak not; he grows worse and worse. Question enrages him. At once, good night. Stand not upon the order of your going, but go at once.†(Lines 118-121, Act 3 scene 4) These two quotes are major piece of evidence, which suggest Lady Macbeth was putting huge amount of effort to cover for Macbeth and this shows she really loved him and she knew there is something that Macbeth had done but has not informed her yet which is a hint for Macbeth no longer trusted Lady Macbeth. The Scottish lords were playing a less important role in the play compared to Lady Macbeth and Macbeth. However, they were still important since they represent the Scottish government. Macduff and Ross were the two key lords in the play since they were suspicious about Macbeth (apart from Banquo). â€Å"Is’t known who did this more than bloody deed?†(Ross, line20, Act 2 Scene4) â€Å"Those that Macbeth hath slain.† (Macduff, Line 21, Act2 scene4) A supportive quote made by Macduff, which supports that Macbeth is suspicious because Macduff did not assume any other people killed King Duncan but only assumed Macbeth murdered King Duncan. Moreover, the following quote shows he dislike Macbeth. â€Å"Will you to Scone?†(Ross, Line 35, Act2 Scene4) â€Å"No, cousin, I’ll to Fife.†(Macduff, Line36, Act 2 Scene4) An extremely supportive evidence from Macduff to support argue that Macbeth was the murderer because Macduff did not want to go to the Scone and instead he would like to go to Fife. Under normal circumstances, all the lords would attend to this kind of important ceremony but Macduff had chosen to ignore it which is out of order. In my opinion, at this point of the play Macduff seems to be suspicious about Macbeth. This is mainly due to the worsen friendship between Macbeth and Macduff since Macbeth killed the guards who look related to Duncan’s death without allowing anyone to ask them a question and the guards were the only clue for King Duncan’s death. This leads other people to think why Macbeth just killed the guards who were drunk and had bloody daggers in their hand. As a result, Macbeth became suspicious to Duncan’s death. From a third person’s view, Macbeth seems to be trying to cover the truth. In addition, during the Banquet Macbeth suddenly saw a ghost of a bloody man and he was terrified about this which is unusual because he used to be a general therefore he would not be afraid of dead people. This made Macbeth became even more suspicious because after he became King, disorders and chaos has been consecutively occurring. Additionally, the lords would wonder the relationship between Macbeth and a ghost of bloody man because they would worry if Macbeth were the suitable one for this position. The relationship between Macbeth and Lady Macbeth was complex and hard to analysis because it has been changing throughout the play. At the beginning of the play Lady Macbeth was introduced as a kind and loving wife, who underneath was a scheming and deceitful person. She received a letter from Macbeth about the weird sisters’ prophecy. â€Å"It is too full o’th’milk of Human Kindness to catch the nearest way.†(Line 15, Act 1 scene 5) Lady Macbeth would like to take the fastest route to royalty by murdering King Duncan, however she knew Macbeth is not ready for this since recent respect from King Duncan makes Macbeth loyal to King Duncan. Additionally, they are friends and Duncan is a good King therefore there was no reason to kill him. â€Å"Wouldst thou have that which thou esteem’s the ornament of life, and live a coward in thine own esteem.†(Line 41-43, Act1 Scene7) She called Macbeth a coward that live in thine own esteem because she is deeply desire to gain more power and the only way is to be queen but this needs Macbeth to cooperate with her, however, Macbeth was not ready to murder King Duncan. Therefore, she insulted her husband to intimidate her husband to satisfy her own need. At this point, their relationship is poor because Lady Macbeth was forcing her own husband to do something he was really willing to do. Immediately after the murder of King Duncan, Macbeth was remorseful and frightened. When she heard Macbeth was talking about his bloody hands, she says: â€Å"My hands are of your color, but I shame to wear a heart so white.†(Lines 68, act 2 scene 2) This is evidence that Lady Macbeth was on the same side as Macbeth as she meant her hands are red too, but she was not regretful as she said she would be ashamed to have a heart so white. In act 3 scene 2, we know that Macbeth have not been communicating as well as before Duncan’s death, because Lady Macbeth had to ask the servant to call for Macbeth therefore she could talk to him. When Lady Macbeth asks, â€Å"what’s to be done†, Macbeth did not want to tell her and since he did not want his wife to get further involvement in this mess. Therefore, he replied: â€Å"Be innocent of the knowledge, dearest Chuck.†(Lines 45, Act 3 Scene2) This quote can be evidence for both side arguments. The first side is Macbeth did not trust his wife anymore therefore he refused to let her know anything. On the other hand, Macbeth really loved his wife and he attempts to protect her from this mess. In my own view, he did not trust Lady Macbeth because it was she who encouraged him to get rid of King Duncan and disorders and chaos had been brought in. After Lady Macbeth had asked all the guests to get out in the last part of Act 3 scene 4, I believe Lady Macbeth was in charge because she asked Macbeth all the questions and Macbeth answered all of them. At last, he listened to his wife to go to sleep. â€Å"You lack the season of all natures, sleep† (line 141, Act 3 Scene 4) â€Å"Come, we’ll to sleep.† (Line 142, Act 3 Scene4) They started to cooperate again, which is a signal that their relationship is developing because they both helped each other out in the banquet. If Lady Macbeth did not love Macbeth so much she would not in an attempt to restore order and made him act normal again. Nevertheless, she could do that for other reasons. Such as she might be more worried about Macbeth leaked out the secret about Duncan’s death than Macbeth mental health state. In Act 5 Scene 1, Lady Macbeth said she could see Duncan’s blood on her hands and tries to wash it off, but nothing could was it away. â€Å"Here’s the smell of the blood still; all the perfumes of Arabia would not sweeten this little hand.†(Line 43, Act 5 Scene 1) This could made by Lady Macbeth is a strong evidence to show her she is mad because no one could see the blood and only she could. Additionally, she had been suffering from this for a period. Afterward, she committed suicide because she could not cope with the guilt of murdering King Duncan. There are many different themes. The most famous one is order/chaos and followed by the difference between the false and the real. In Act 3 Scene 4, as the banquet begin the lords were told to sit down in order because it is a formal dinner. However, during the process, Macbeth went crazy because he said he saw a ghost of a bloody man, which is odd. At the end, all of the guests were told to get out as soon as possible but all in once. The banquet had started in order, finished in chaos. This is a demonstration of the Kingdom because when King Duncan was ruling everything was normal, no chaos but when Macbeth ruled the country chaos and disorders were brought in since he had to hide the truth but he was becoming more suspicious and therefore he killed all the people who he believes is trying to get rid of him. At last, blood will only bring in more blood. An example for difference between false and the real is whether Banquo’s ghost is ‘real’. This depends on the director to decide to bring on a Ghost or not. Of all the characters on stage, only Macbeth could see the Ghost. The advantage of an invisible Ghost is the audience will know what is actually happening instead of guessing what Macbeth is doing on the stage. However, the downside is as the ghost supposed to be invisible, so no one should able to see and this includes the audience. Another tricky question of putting on a visible ghost is what does he wear and how does he move?

Differentiating Between Market Structures Essay

Coca-Cola is one of the world’s top selling soft drink companies. Coca-Cola has continuously progressed since it began 1886. A pharmacist in Atlanta named Dr. John S. Pemberton created a unique soft drink flavor that could be sold at soda fountains. The credit for the name and trade mark goes to Frank M. Robinson. Frank was Dr. Pemberton’s partner and bookkeeper. Today Coca-Cola is the manufacturer of over 500 brands of products sold in over 200 countries worldwide. The Coca-Cola Company operates in an oligopoly. An oligopoly is a market structure in which there are only a few firms and firms explicitly take from other firms’ likely response into account; there are often significant barriers to entry that prevent smaller firms from making an impact(Colander, 2013). There are several different reasons why Coca-Cola is an oligopoly. Only two firms dominate the majority of the market share, Coca-Cola and Pepsi. There are other smaller firms in the market, but their market share in the industry is very small when compared to these two major firms. Small companies do not have the financial capital to start a brand on a massive scale. For, small companies, the barriers to entering the industry are too high. The high operating cost of production in the soft drink industry prevents companies from entering the soft drink market. Comparisons Oligopoly has previously been defined as a market structure in which there are only a few firms and firms explicitly take from other firms’ likely response into account; there are often significant barriers to entry that prevent smaller firms from making an impact(Colander, 2013). A few firms mean the number of firms has to be significantly low, as in this case two Coca- Cola and Pepsi, for there to be acknowledgment that each firm aware that its future prospects depend on both its policies and the policies of its rival. Firms in oligopoly can use either high-price strategy or low-price strategy to maximize their profit. An industry is defined as a group of firms where the firm’s products are close substitutes for one another that have a high and positive cross elasticity of demand (WEI, 2012). Coca-Cola and Pepsi are in an oligopoly market. Both companies sell the same product, giving them power over pricing, both companies will take into consideration each otherâ€⠄¢s actions are changing the prices of their  products. Prices of their goods usually change according to the kinked demand curve. The kinked demand curve theory is an economic theory about oligopoly and monopolistic competition. If other firms ignored price increases and price decreases brought about lowering of prices by competitors, the firm will have a demand curve with the kink at the present market price of P*. Firms believe that a kinked demand curve is brought about from basic strategic considerations. Usually, low pricing strategy is used by both firms simultaneously to increase market profits. As the summer holidays approach, the firms will use harsh competition practices to buildup sales, and in turn increase profit. Game theory is applied to be a market share. A game theory is a pricing policy, and it helps a firm to enhance profit (WEI, 2012). The barriers are high to enter this market. Coca-Cola and Pepsi have signed a cartel contract. The two firms will become a cartel to avoid other firm from entering this market because it will decrease their economic profit. Cartel is a small number of firms acting together to limit cost, raise price, and increase profit. Neither Coca-Cola nor Pepsi exit from this market, another firm will become a monopoly. The soft drink price will become higher (WEI, 2012). Monopolistic competition is present when the market has multiple sellers marketing differentiated products. Retail trade can be used as an example. Oligopoly represents a steady market form where a few sellers dominate in the market and each firm has a certain amount of share of the market. Both firms are aware of their dependence on each other. Competitive Strategies Coca-Cola and Pepsi take part in non-price product differentiation. Product differentiation is the process of distinguishing a service or product from other products, to make it more appealing to a targeted market. On a rare occasion, will you see Pepsi try to challenge Coca-Cola in pricing. These two companies use creative advertisement instead. Another competitive strategy that, can be used by Coca-Cola is to produce their product globally. Coca-Cola will need to obtain contracts with restaurant chains to be their sole distributor of soft drinks. By partnering with major food chains, it guarantees that consumers on have the choice of purchasing their product. If you only have one choice, it is almost a guarantee your product will be purchased. Product packaging, which is also another form of product  differentiation. Coca-Cola cans and bottles are constantly changing to give consumers a new sense of worth. If Coca-Cola did not keep its packaging updated, Pepsi would gain market share from consumers who have become bored Coca-Cola customers. Recommendations Loyalty programs can be used to gain customer loyalty. Coca-Cola can offer discounts and free products to customers who buy large quantities of their product. Loyalty programs would provide an encouragement for customers to stay loyal to the Coca-Cola brand. Product line expansion, by expanding their product line Coca-Cola will be able to reach a wide variety of customers. With the growth of the global economy, Coca-Cola will need to target the tastes of certain customers. An example would be; people’s soft drink choices are different in Asia than they are in Africa. There will have to do an enormous amount of research and testing to find the right products for these markets. Although the investment will be costly, it will prove to be valuable in the long run. Summary Coca-Cola is in an oligopoly market for obvious reasons. Coca-Cola and Pepsi dominate the soft drink market. There are significant barriers to entry that prevent smaller firms from making an impact on the market. Because of their dominance, the two companies can compete in area like marketing and product expansion to maximize profit. Success is driven by product differentiation through product packaging and advertising. By putting into place loyalty programs and expanding the product line, Coca-Cola will continue to be the top selling soft drink company. Reference Lin, H. (2012). Coca-Cola vs. Pepsi: The Economics behind Coke’s Dominance. Retrieved from http://economicstudents.com/2012/10/coca-cola-vs-pepsi-the-economics-behind-cokes-dominance/ Wei, G. C. (2012). Oligopoly-Coca-Cola & Pepsi. Retrieved from http://economicsdicussion.blogspot.com/2012/11/oligopoly-coca-cola-pepsi.html Octotutor. (2014). The Market Structure of the Coca-Cola Company. Retrieved from http://octotutor.com/the-market-structure-of-the-coca-cola-company/