Who Is Herbert Simon a Glimpse of a Nobel Peace Prize Winner free essay sample

Who was Herbert Simon? 1 Running Head: WHO WAS HERBERT SIMON? Who was Herbert Simon? A Glimpse of a Nobel Peace Prize Winner Crystal Peru Politics, Policy and Ethics in the Public Sector PAD510 May 30, 2010 Who was Herbert Simon? 2 Abstract This paper investigates and provides factual research on Mr. Herbert Simon and his contributions to the founding of Artificial Intelligence. Herbert A. Simon was one of the founding fathers of artificial intelligence. Simon, who, along with Allen Newell and J. C. Shaw, wrote the first AI program in 1956, received many honors in his lifetime, including the Nobel Prize in Economic Science in 1978. Simon was a true renaissance man. He researched human decision-making and problem-solving processes and the implications of those processes for social institutions. Simons major awards in four areas: psychology, economics, management science and computer science attest to his breadth of interest and expertise. Simons impact in the world is no more apparent than at Carnegie Mellon University, where, arguably, he was the most influential person. We will write a custom essay sample on Who Is Herbert Simon? a Glimpse of a Nobel Peace Prize Winner or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Simon left behind over 60 years of research and theorems. He also left the computer science world with the heuristic compiler, in which he applied theories and techniques from other disciplines. Who was Herbert Simon? 3 Who was Herbert Simon? A Glimpse of a Nobel Peace Prize Winner. Herbert Alexander Simon was born into a Jewish family in Milwaukee, Wisconsin on June 15, 1916. His father, Arthur Simon (1881–1948) was an electrical engineer who had come to the United States from Germany in 1903 after earning his engineering degree from the Technische Hochschule of Darmstadt. Arthur, an inventor, who was granted several dozen patents; he was also an independent patent attorney. Herberts mother, Edna Marguerite Merkel, was an accomplished pianist whose ancestors had come from Prague and Cologne. Herberts European ancestors had been piano makers, goldsmiths, and vintners. Herbert Simon was educated as a child in the public school system in Milwaukee where he developed an interest in science. He found schoolwork to be interesting but rather easy. Unlike many children, Simon was exposed to the idea that human behavior could be studied scientifically at a relatively young age due to the influence of his mother’s younger brother, Harold Merkel, who had studied economics at the University of Wisconsin–Madison under John R. Commons. Through his uncle’s books on economics and psychology, Simon discovered the social sciences. Simon received both his B. A. (1936) and his Ph. D. (1943) in political science, from the University of Chicago, where he studied under Harold Lasswell and Charles Edward Merriam. Among his earliest influences, Simon has cited Richard Ely’s economics textbook, Norman Angell’s The Great Illusion, and Henry George’s Progress and Poverty. In 1933, Simon entered Who was Herbert Simon? 4 the University of Chicago, and following those early influences, he studied the social sciences and mathematics. He was interested in biology, but chose not to study it because of his color-blindness and awkwardness in the laboratory. He chose instead to focus on political science and economics. His most important mentor at the University was Henry Schultz who was an econometrician and mathematical economist. After enrolling in a course on Measuring Municipal Governments, Simon was invited to be a research assistant for Clarence Ridley, with whom he coauthored the book Measuring Municipal Activities in 1948. Eventually his studies led him to the field of organizational decision-making, which would become the subject of his doctoral dissertation. From 1939 to 1942, Simon acted as director of a research group at the University of California, Berkeley. When the group’s grant was exhausted, he took a position in political science at the Illinois Institute of Technology. Back in Chicago, he began participating in the seminars held by the staff of the Cowles Commission who at that time included Trygve Haavelmo, Jacob Marschak, and Tjalling Koopmans. He thus began a more in-depth study of economics in the area of institutionalism. Marschak brought Simon in to assist in the study he was currently undertaking with Sam Schurr of the â€Å"prospective economic effects of atomic energy†. In 1949, Simon became a professor of administrations and chairman of the Department of Industrial Management at Carnegie Tech (later to become Carnegie Mellon University). He continued to teach in various departments at Carnegie Mellon, including psychology and computer science, until his death in 2001. Who was Herbert Simon? From 1950 to 1955, Simon studied mathematical economics and during this time, together with David Hawkins, discovered and proved the Hawkins-Simon theorem on the â€Å"conditions for the existence of positive solution vectors for input-output matrices. He also developed theorems on near-decomposability and aggregation. Having begun to apply these theorems to organizations, Simon determined around 1954 that the best way t o study problem-solving was to simulate it with computer programs, which led to his interest in computer simulation of human cognition. End 1950s he was among the first members of the Society for General Systems Research. Mr. Simon was a pioneer in the field of artificial intelligence, creating with Allen Newell the Logic Theory Machine (1956) and the General Problem Solver (GPS) (1957) programs. GPS was possibly the first method of separating problem solving strategy from information about particular problems. Both programs were developed using the Information Processing Language (IPL) (1956) developed by Newell, Cliff Shaw and Simon. Donald Knuth mentions the development of list processing in IPL with the linked list originally called NSS memory for its inventors. In 1957, Simon predicted that computer chess would surpass human chess abilities within 10 years when, in reality, that transition took about 40 years. In the early 1960s Simon wrote a paper responding to a claim by the psychologist Ulric Neisser that machines might be able to replicate cold cognition, e. g. processes like reasoning, planning, perceiving, and deciding, but could not replicate hot cognition, including desiring, feeling pain or pleasure, and having emotions. Simons paper was eventually published in 1967. It was ignored by the AI research community for some years, but later became very influential e. g. indirectly through the work of Sloman and Picard on emotions. Who was Herbert Simon? 6 Simon also collaborated with James G. March on several works in organization theory. With Allen Newell, Simon developed a theory for the simulation of human problem solving behavior using production rules. The study of human problem solving required new kinds of human measurements and, with Anders Ericsson, Simon developed the experimental technique of verbal protocol analysis. Simon was interested in the role of knowledge in expertise. He said that to become an expert required about 10 years of experience and he and colleagues estimated that expertise was the result of learning roughly 50,000 chunks of information. A chess expert was said to have learned about 50,000 chunks or chess position patterns. Simon was also interested in how humans learn and, with Edward Feigenbaum, he developed the EPAM (Elementary Perceiver and Memorizer) theory, one of the first theories of learning to be implemented as a computer program. EPAM was able to explain a large number of phenomena in the field of verbal learning. Later versions of the model were applied to concept formation and the acquisition of expertise. He was awarded the ACMs A. M. Turing Award along with Allen Newell in 1975. In joint scientific efforts extending over twenty years, initially in collaboration with J. C. (Cliff) Shaw at the RAND Corporation, and subsequentially with numerous faculty and student colleagues at Carnegie Mellon University, they have made basic contributions to artificial intelligence, the psychology of human cognition, and list processing. Who was Herbert Simon? 7 Herbert Simon has been credited for revolutionary changes in microeconomics. He is responsible for the concept of organizational decision-making as it is known today. He was also the first to discuss this concept in terms of uncertainty; i. e. it is impossible to have perfect and complete information at any given time to make a decision. While this notion was not e ntirely new, Simon is best known for its origination. It was in this area that he was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1978. At the Cowles Commission, Simon’s main goal was to link economic theory to mathematics and statistics. His main contributions were to the fields of general equilibrium and econometrics. He was greatly influenced by the marginalist debate that began in the 1930s. The popular work of the time argued that it was not empirically apparent that entrepreneurs needed to follow the marginalist principles of profit-maximization/cost-minimization in running organizations. The argument went on to note that profit-maximization was not accomplished, in part, because of the lack of complete information. In decision-making, Simon believed that agents face uncertainty about the future and costs in acquiring information in the present. These factors limit the extent to which agents can make a fully rational decision, thus they possess only â€Å"bounded rationality† and must make decisions by â€Å"satisfying,† or choosing that which might not be optimal but which will make them happy enough. Simon was known for his research on industrial organization. He determined that the internal organization of firms and the external business decisions thereof did not conform to the Neoclassical theories of â€Å"rational† decision-making. Simon wrote many articles on the topic over the course of his life mainly focusing on the issue of decision-making within the behavior of what he termed â€Å"bounded rationality†. â€Å"Rational behavior, in economics, means that individuals Who was Herbert Simon? 8 maximizes his utility function under the constraints they face (e. g. , their budget constraint, limited choices ) in pursuit of their self-interest. This is reflected in the theory of subjective expected utility. The term bounded rationality is used to designate rational choice that takes into account the cognitive limitations of both knowledge and cognitive capacity. Bounded rationality is a central theme in behavioral economics. It is concerned with the ways in which the actual decision-making process influences decisions. Theories of bounded rationality relax one or more assumptions of standard expected utility theory†. Simon determined that the best way to study these areas was through computer simulation modeling. As such, he developed an interest in computer science. Herbert Simons main interests in computer science were in artificial intelligence, human-computer interaction, principles of the organization of humans and machines as information processing systems, the use of computers to study by modeling) philosophical problems of the nature of intelligence and of epistemology, and the social implications of computer technology. Some of Simons economic research was directed toward understanding technological change in general and the information processing revolution in particular. While living in Pittsburgh, PA, he advised the citizen ry on various issues including the use of public funds to build stadiums and the method of raising tax revenue. Simon emphasized the usefulness of the land tax, reflecting the early influence of Henry George on his economic thought. Who was Herbert Simon? 9 Administrative Behavior was Herbert Simon’s doctoral dissertation and his first book. It served as the foundation for his lifes work. The centerpiece of this book is the behavioral and cognitive processes of making rational human choices, that is, decisions. An operational administrative decision should be correct and efficient, and it must be practical to implement with a set of coordinated means. Any decision involves a choice selected from a number of alternatives, directed toward an organizational goal or subgoal. Realistic options will have real consequences consisting of personnel actions or non-actions modified by environmental facts and values. In actual practice, some of the alternatives may be conscious or unconscious; some of the consequences may be unintended as well as intended; and some of the means and ends may be imperfectly differentiated, incompletely related, or poorly detailed. The task of rational decision making is to select the alternative that results in the more preferred set of all the possible consequences. This task can be divided into three required steps: (1) the identification and listing of all the alternatives; (2) the determination of all the consequences resulting from each of the alternatives; and (3) the comparison of the accuracy and efficiency of each of these sets of consequences. Any given individual or organization attempting to implement this model in a real situation would be unable to comply with the three requirements. It is highly improbable that one could know all the alternatives, or all the consequences that follow each alternative. Who was Herbert Simon? 10 There is: given the inevitable limits on rational decision making, what other techniques or behavioral processes can a person or organization bring to bear to achieve approximately the best result? Simon writes: â€Å"The human being striving for rationality and restricted within the limits of his knowledge has developed some working procedures that partially overcome these difficulties. These procedures consist in assuming that he can isolate from the rest of the world a closed system containing a limited number of variables and a limited range of consequences. † Administrative Behavior, as a text, addresses a wide range of human behaviors, cognitive abilities, management techniques, personnel policies, training goals and procedures, specialized roles, criteria for evaluation of accuracy and efficiency, and all of the ramifications of communication processes. Simon is particularly interested in how these factors directly and indirectly influence the making of decisions. Weaving in and out of the practical functioning of all of these organizational factors are two universal elements of human social behavior that Simon addresses in Chapter VII—The Role of Authority, and in Chapter X—Loyalties, and Organizational Identification. Authority is a well studied, primary mark of organizational behavior, and is straightforwardly defined in the organizational context as the ability and right of an individual of higher rank to determine the decision of an individual of lower rank. The actions, attitudes, and relationships of the dominant and subordinate individuals constitute components of role behavior that can vary widely in form, style, and content, but do not vary in the expectation of obedience by the one of superior status, and willingness to obey from the subordinate. Authority is highly influential on Who was Herbert Simon? 11 the formal structure of the organization, including patterns of communication, sanctions, and rewards, as well as on the establishment of goals, objectives, and values of the organization. Decisions can be complex admixtures of facts and values. Information about facts, especially empirically proven facts or facts derived from specialized experience, are more easily transmitted in the exercise of authority than are the expressions of values. Simon is primarily interested in seeking identification of the individual employee with the organizational goals and values. Following Lasswell he states that â€Å"a person identifies himself with a group when, in making a decision, he evaluates the several alternatives of choice in terms of their consequences for the specified group†. A person may identify himself with any number of social, geographic, economic, racial, religious, familial, educational, gender, political, and sports groups. Indeed, the number and variety are unlimited. The fundamental problem for organizations is to recognize that personal and group identifications can either facilitate or obstruct correct decision making for the organization. A specific organization has to deliberately determine and specify in appropriate detail and clear language its own goals, objectives, means, ends, and values. Chester Barnard pointed out that â€Å"the decisions that an individual makes as a member of an organization are quite distinct from his personal decisions†. Personal choices may determine whether an individual joins a particular organization, and continue to be made in his or her extra–organizational private life. But, as a member of an organization, that individual makes decisions not in relationship to personal needs and results, but in an impersonal sense as part of the organizational intent, purpose, and effect. Organizational inducements, rewards, and sanctions are all designed to form, strengthen, and maintain this identification. Who was Herbert Simon? 12 The correctness of decisions is measured by two major criteria: (1) adequacy of achieving the desired objective; and (2) the efficiency with which the result was obtained. Many members of the organization may focus on adequacy, but the overall administrative management must pay particular attention to the efficiency with which the desired result was obtained. Simons contributions to research in the area of decision-making have become increasingly mainstream in the business community thanks to the growth of management consulting. Conclusion These multiple events and effects have helped to paint a vivid picture of a very brilliant man. Herbert Simon articulated from the perspective of 1960 his vision of what we now call the New Economy the machine-aided system of production and management of the late 20th century. Simons analysis sprang rom what I term the principle of cognitive comparative advantage: one has to understand the quite different cognitive structures of humans and machines (including computers) in order to explain and predict the tasks to which each will be most suited. Perhaps unlike Simons better-known predictions about progress in artificial intelligence research, the predictions of this 1960 article hold up remarkably well and continue to offer important insights. In what follows I attempt to tell a coherent story about th e evolution of machines and the division of labor between humans and machines. Although inspired by Simons 1960 paper, I weave many other strands into the tapestry, from classical discussions of the division of labor to present-day evolutionary psychology. The basic conclusion is that, with growth in the extent of Who was Herbert Simon? 13 the market, we should see humans crowded into tasks that call for the kinds of cognition for which humans have been equipped by biological evolution. These human cognitive abilities range from the exercise of judgment in situations of ambiguity and surprise to more mundane abilities in spatio-temporal perception and locomotion. Conversely, we should see machines crowded into tasks with a well-defined structure. This conclusion is not based (merely) on a claim that machines, including computers, are specialized idiots-savants today because of the limits (whether temporary or permanent) of artificial intelligence; rather, it rests on a claim that, for what are broadly economic reasons, it will continue to make economic sense to create machines that are idiots-savants.

Definition and Examples of Voice in Phonetics

Definition and Examples of Voice in Phonetics In phonetics  and phonology, voice refers to the speech sounds produced by the vocal folds (also known as the vocal cords). Also known as voicing. Voice quality refers to the characteristic features of an individuals voice.Voice range (or vocal range) refers to the range of frequency or pitch used by a speaker. Etymology From the Latin call. Examples and Observations John Laver[O]ur social interaction through speech depends on much more than solely the linguistic nature of the spoken messages exchanged. The voice is the very emblem of the speaker, indelibly woven into the fabric of speech. In this sense, each of our utterances of spoken language carries not only its own message, but through accent, tone of voice and habitual voice quality it is at the same time an audible declaration of our membership [in] particular social and regional groups, of our individual physical and psychological identity, and of our momentary mood. The Speech Mechanism Beverly CollinsThe overwhelming majority of sounds found in human speech are produced by an egressive pulmonic airstream, i.e. an outgoing stream of air produced by the lungs contracting (partially collapsing inwards) and thus pushing the air contained within them outwards. This airstream then passes through the larynx (known familiarly as the Adams apple) and along a tube of the complex shape formed by the mouth and nose (termed the vocal tract). A variety of muscles interact to produce changes in the configuration of the vocal tract so as to allow parts of the speech organs to come into contact (or near contact) with other parts, i.e. to articulate. Phoneticians term these anatomical bits and pieces the articulatorshence the term for the branch of science known as articulatory phonetics...The vocal folds (also called the vocal cords) vibrate very rapidly when an airstream is allowed to pass between them, producing what is termed voicethat is, a sort of buzz which one can hear and f eel in vowels and in some consonant sounds. Voicing Peter RoachIf the vocal folds vibrate we will hear the sound that we call voicing or phonation. There are many different sorts of voicing that we can producethink of the differences in the quality of your voice between singing, shouting, and speaking quietly, or think of the different voices you might use reading a story to young children in which you have to read out what is said by characters such as giants, fairies, mice or ducks; many of the differences are made with the larynx. We can make changes in the vocal folds themselvesthey can, for example, be made longer or shorter, more tense or more relaxed or be more or less strongly pressed together. The pressure of the air below the vocal folds (the subglottal pressure) can also be varied [in intensity, frequency, and quality]. The Difference Between Voiced and Voiceless Sounds Thomas P. KlammerTo feel the difference between voiced and voiceless sounds for yourself, place your fingers on your Adams apple and produce first the sound of /f/. Sustain that sound for a few seconds. Now quickly switch to the sound of /v/. You should be able to feel very clearly the vibration that accompanies the sound of /v/, which is voiced, in contrast to the absence of such vibration with /f/, which is voiceless. Voicing is the result of moving air causing the vocal folds (or vocal cords) to vibrate within the larynx behind the cartilage of the Adams apple. This vibration, your voice, is what you feel and hear when you sustain the sound of /v/. Resources Collins, Beverley, and Inger M. Mees.  Practical Phonetics and Phonology: a Resource Book for Students. 3rd ed., Routledge, 2013.Klammer, Thomas P., et al.  Analyzing English Grammar. Pearson, 2007.Laver, John.  Principles of Phonetics. Cambridge University Press, 1994.Roach, Peter.  English Phonetics and Phonology: A Practical Course. 4th ed., Cambridge University Press, 2009.

Why does ADHD impact on academic perfomance and what can be done to Essay

Why does ADHD impact on academic perfomance and what can be done to support ADHD children in the classroom - Essay Example th proper identification of factors comprising academic disadvantages, classroom based interventions could be designed to assist and support children diagnosed for ADHD. The strengths of the article come in terms of the authors’ ability to present the discourse in a clear, understandable and well-structured format that could be comprehended by the general audience. By defining terms, citing authoritative sources, and arriving at concise findings, readers from various academic backgrounds could appreciate the contents. The authors used clear language and words, where appropriate examples are provided for clarity and expounded explanations, as needed. On the other hand, the only weakness observed from the article was its lack of tables or illustrations that could summarize findings in a more concise and detailed manner. With the article being presented in literary form all throughout, readers would have tendencies lose focus and interest. Otherwise, the general evaluation is exemplary as the authors were able to achieve their identified objective of reviewing the relationship between ADHD and academic performance. More importantly, by providing â€Å"strategies that are directed towards remediating the academic impairment of individuals with ADHD† (Daley & Birchwood, 2010, p. 455), various practitioners are made aware of the interventions available to address concerns on children with ADHD. on academic performance and what can be done to support ADHD children in the classroom? Child: Care, Health and Development , Volume 36, Issue 4, 455-464. Retrieved 29 August 2011, from

Two Visions in The Heart of Darkness by Edward Said Essay

Two Visions in The Heart of Darkness by Edward Said - Essay Example Therefore, in a reflective analysis of the impact of colonialism and imperialism on the colonized nations as well as the visions provided in the novel Heart of Darkness, it becomes lucid that the author makes an important point when he refers to a network of interdependent histories. As Edward Said maintains in his article â€Å"Two Visions in The Heart of Darkness†, the network of interdependent histories provide the best illustration of why the former colonies of the European countries undergo a fundamental crisis in the cotemporary. The situation in these countries is not the result of self-inflicted wounds or the total responsibility of the colonizers. According to the author, â€Å"blaming the Europeans sweepingly for the misfortunes of the present is not much of an alternative. What we need to do is to look at these matters as a network of interdependent histories that it would be inaccurate and senseless to repress, useful and interesting to understand.† (Said, 4 22) A reflective analysis of the famous novel by Conrad, which reflects the imperialist settings of Africa, confirms that there is a network of interdependent histories which resulted in the contemporary situation of the post colonial world. The role of patriotism, chauvinism, ethnic, religious, religious, and racial hatreds in worsening the current situation makes the argument clear. In short, the author makes an essential point when he suggests that a network of interdependent histories have contributed to the contemporary.

The Battle of Britain Essay Example for Free

The Battle of Britain Essay ‘Never the Master, Always the Servant. ’ How Accurate is this Statement in Regard to Wolsey’s Conduct of Foreign Policy 1513-29? â€Å"Had I but served God as diligently as I have served the King, he would not have given me over in my grey hairs. † Cardinal Wolsey c. 1472-1530 Here Wolsey himself professed his obedience to Henry VIII, but historians of the previous century and a half claimed that between 1513 and 1529 foreign policy was governed entirely by Wolsey, some suggesting that Henry gave only perfunctory approval to his decrees. Modern historians dispute this, the king’s aspirations and decisions being of fundamental importance. The matter remains unsettled however, regarding the extent of Wolsey’s influence and manipulation. Contemporaries argued that Wolsey was effectual ruler, â€Å"Alter Rex† during particularly the mid 1520s, his palatial home eclipsing Henry’s in political importance. Wolsey was clearly very cunning; he won Henry’s favour by shrewdly encouraging him to enjoy leisure activities and leave the mundane politicking to him – exploiting the mistakes of his predecessors. Cavendish declares, â€Å"Thus the almoner ruled all those that ruled before him†. However, Wolseys desperation to gain Henry’s esteem is evidence merely of the need for Henry’s approval – as Wolsey clearly appreciated. Henry intervened less in politics before 1529 than he did afterwards, but as Peter Gwyn recognises; this was only due to his sincere satisfaction and comprehension of Wolseys loyalty. From 1512 Wolsey climbed the political ladder very swiftly; utilising the opportunity of the French invasion to exceed Henry’s expectations and impress the king with prizes in Tournai and Therouanne. By mid 1514 Wolsey was receiving all the king’s important business affairs, and exploiting Henry’s need for an authoritative chief servant fully Wolsey admittedly used his persuasion to gain himself numerous offices – Dean of Lincoln, Bishop of Tournai, Bishop of Lincoln and Archbishop of York. Although Warham still held the most senior church office, as Archbishop of Canterbury, Wolsey had won himself Lord Chancellorship by 1518, making him head of the legal system. However Wolseys ascendancy was resultant from Henry’s appreciation of his talents, by the time of the treaty of St. Germaine-en-Laye with France in 1514 Randell recognises Henry’s apparent disinterest with routine diplomacy, â€Å"He was still keen to win glory, but was content for someone else to arrange it for him. † His connections with the Papal authorities brought about suspicion that he had tied England to Roman foreign policy, such as Pollard’s insinuation that Wolsey considered his duty to his spiritual master over that over the king – In 1518 he was appointed ‘Legatus a latere’, a position he was guaranteed for life in 1524. Scarisbrick however discredits Papal loyalty, acknowledging Wolseys disregard for Papal instruction as frequently as it was adhered to. Although England and the papacy had common interests, it was merely coincidental for the Pope’s wishes to be followed, and the king himself had the same attitude to Wolsey towards the pope. Henry wanted to become ‘Defender of the Faith’ and did so, in 1521, and there is more proof that it was he who encouraged Wolsey to pursue the office of Pope than vice versa. As Palmer asserts, â€Å"Wolsey was no more or less a servant of the Papacy than Henry himself. † Wosley required the position of ‘Prince of the Church’ (gained 1515) because he had not won such approval from the Papcy as he had from his royal master. He did not wish to rival Henry’s authority by becoming ‘Prince of the State’ because he was assured of Henry’s support. Although Wolsey bragged of being â€Å"author of the peace† at the Treaty of London in 1518, and despite evidence for him formulating his own policies by 1517; as Gwyn defends – he was winning glory for his master. Scarisbrick recognises Wolseys desire to become arbiter of Europe, but his dependence upon Henry is undeniable. As Randell recognises, Wolsey often hid things from Henry and considered ways in which he could put things to him in order to provoke a desired response, to push contenders away and get away with more than he officially should. Vergil even suggested that Wolsey bribed Henry with gifts to distract him whilst he was making demands and to gain further favour. All these efforts, however, merely emphasize Wolseys dependence upon the king and his desperation to maintain his support. Randell suggests that Wolsey made independent decisions – often trivial but sometimes-major ones, but Henry could and sometimes did intervene. Wolsey always needed to appear to be implementing Henry’s decisions even if it was not always strictly the case. Skelton and Palsgrave, authors of articles in the House of Lords December 1929 attacked Wolseys arrogance and misrule during parliament and regarding matters of foreign policy, alleging he bestowed himself excess authority and wrongfully excluded other councillors from attending court, but evidence suggests that they were pursuing a ruthless campaign to get him dismissed. Although, as Guy points out, up until 1927 â€Å"more than the details were left to Wolsey† Henry was nevertheless broadly responsible throughout all matters of foreign policy. Wolsey may have organised much of the minor details, such as the essential transport arrangements and food supplies during invasions, but it was under Henry’s direction and command. The king would instruct Wolsey and provide details of the task, which Wolsey undeniably fulfilled exceptionally and often made fitting amendments to Henry’s broader schemes. Henry’s certain dominance was clear throughout a number of issues. In 1518 Henry backed the Holy Roman Emperor despite Wolseys disproval and efforts to persuade him oppositely. Scarisbrick identifies disparagement between Henry and Wolsey throughout the events of 1520 and 1521; the Field of the Cloth of Gold in 1520 was extremely expensive and Wolsey discouraged Henry from spending such vast amounts of money on what he anticipated to be a political fiasco, yet the event went ahead with no expenses spared – regardless of Wolseys advice. In 1521 Wolsey wanted peace in contrast to Henry’s desire for warfare, but Wolsey was made to journey around Europe; negotiating with Charles in Bruges that England and Spain should ally against France, and then returning to Calais. His consolation being that war would be delayed until 1522 – but Henry’s leadership is clear, the attack was still launched and Wolsey left disregarded once more. As Gwyn appreciates, Wolsey realised the importance of bringing honour to his master through dominating affairs – which his desired neutrality would not bring. Wolsey deceived France against his own wishes to preserve Henry’s major international role. In 1525 the Battle of Pavia saw the capture of King Francis and the strengthening of Henrys desire to become Imperial Ruler. Wolsey was then unable to act as an Imperial Arbitrator, Henry VIII wanted an Imperial Alliance and Wolsey was forced to attempt the Amicable Grant for Henry to invade France, but this was impossible and in August the Treaty of the More was signed after the French war. The reversal was extremely embarrassing for Wolsey, who went through humiliation and dispute to please Henry VIII, eventually gaining an annual pension of 100000 gold crowns. Historian Dana Scott Campbell understands Wolsey as being motivated to tread the path necessary to ensure personal advancement and power in England. By satisfying Henry VIII with international glory and prestige his support was ensured; although his power was enhanced by the Papal authorities, Roman influence was limited – his self interest, over all else, forced him to please Henry primarily and the Pope if possible. He acted with more alacrity for Henry, and with more determination, joining the Anti-Imperial League of Cognac in 1526 and declaring war two years later. The Treaty of Cambrai in 1529 was a desperate attempt by Wolsey to retain Henry’s partiality, and was signed by the leaders of England, France and the Holy Roman Empire. Wolsey underwent mortification and infringement of his own desires in order to please his King, both in the matters which he may have seem to control and in those which were quite obviously of Henry’s design. Whether due to arrogance and untamed ambition or merely a desire to satisfy the King – Wolsey routinely aimed to please him in all aspects of foreign policy. Grossel appreciates Wolseys desire to serve the king; convictions in Wolseys vanity are now outdated as Wolsey clearly wanted to maintain the honour and influence of his own position through that of his king. Henry’s absolute dominance is evidenced by the impossibility of Wolsey sustaining esteem as European Arbitrator because of Henry’s belligerence (as well as the treachery of the European Kings). His independent decisions occurred only when permitted, or occasionally unknown, by Henry. Wolseys position was secured for the most part because of Henry’s satisfaction with his conduct – had it not been so (as in later years) Wolsey would have been rapidly dismissed. However, Randell recognises that the evidence for both supporting and admonishing Wolseys loyalty is in the form of letters written only to deceive the recipients, disparate word of mouth and untrustworthy third parties – all of it unreliable.

The Organisational Structure, Culture and Management Style of Sainsbury

The Organisational Structure, Culture and Management Style of Sainsbury A1.How the organisational structure, culture and management style inter-relates in the business and evaluate their impact and that of ICT on the performance of the business. The organisational structure in which Sainsbury’s uses is how Sainsbury’s move the ranks from highest to lowest. For Sainsbury’s to not have levels of different hierarchy then it would not give anybody a rank, which would make the aims of Sainsbury’s not do well in terms of not having someone to be a manager and manage all the staff and make decisions. Without the chain of command workers would be lost and would not know what to do. The way in which the hierarchal structure works for Sainsbury’s is that they have one Manager who looks after all of the operational staff by making the decisions of what they should do and guiding them with any queries or problems. The hierarchal structure in which Sainsbury’s has yet not been put down in terms of not working as they are very good in their selling of products and fails not to impress by being one of the most popular product chains in the UK as well as making a lot of profit on there way to success. The management style in which Sainsbury’s uses is autocratic where as explained before that there is only one manager on the store floor who watches over the other operational staff who are making orders from customers and serving the customers at the tills, also f...

International Business Ethics Essay

A business colleague once recalled a situation in which a former employer had to decide whether gift-giving or bribery was ethically acceptable. In an international business situation, bribery is often a way of cutting through bureaucratic red tape and expediting deals. American companies consider bribery unethical because the American way considers bribery an unfair advantage and does not condone the practice. On an international level, bribery is often an accepted part of local culture and not seen as unethical, but as a way to achieve a quick win-win deal for all parties involved. American business has long been accused of cultural imperialism, the practice of promoting the culture of one nation into another nation by force (wikipedia, 2007). American businesses feel that the American way of doing business is the only way all international businesses should operate, regardless of a locally accepted practices or culture. American companies that are not willing to accept that bribery is an ethical and integral part of performing business on international soil are severely short selling business opportunities. While bribery has resulted in unethical practices on American soil, the same is not true in many international settings. Extra payment for services is seen as good business and often the only way to get any business completed in a timely fashion. While some companies may use bribery on international soil to a disadvantage, most local business cultures simply will not do business without the bribery payments. Globalization has increased the pressure on international business members to regulate many business practices such as bribery. American businesses need to be cognizant of international cultures and take into consideration that accepted practices in a global setting may not be the same as on American soil. Global regulation should strive to be free of American cultural imperialism to be accepted and respected on an international level. Reference http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_imperialism