New and Improved Rewards at Work Research Paper - 2

New and Improved Rewards at Work - Research Paper Example The most important goal for an employment compensation strategy is to offer better rewards for right employee actions for success of the company. In order to make competitive compensation packages for employees, companies need to consider what their rivals are offering so that they do not end up running into losses by offering more than the equilibrium package in the industry or offering less than the minimum, because this will make it impossible for them to recruit and retain staff. Best packages are sometimes those that are preferred by employees while at the same time appear to be competitive in the particular industry. One advantage with compensation schemes is that they are able to underpin organizational culture, something that is highly desired by companies. The government governs every aspect of employee compensation within the public sector. In many instances, this leaves no room for innovative ideas towards formulation of important compensations schemes. Companies that are highly innovative in engaging their employees record high returns that are sometimes double those of rival companies which do not engage their employees adequately (Pollitt, 2081) The first way to creatively engage your skilful employees is by putting them in a position where they can have direct contact with consumers of their products. In many industries, employees design products and dispatch them for sale, yet they have no idea about the impact of the products on the lives of their end users (Grant, 2007; Grant, 2008). A good example is the automotive industry where automotive engineers design cars of all kinds worldwide but they never gets the chance to have direct feedback from drivers of the cars, authors as well compose many pieces of literature to millions of faceless readers but never meets them for feedback. Meeting end users as a product developer has been known to enhance prosocial motivation as well

Individual Risk Management Essay Example for Free

Individual Risk Management Essay The objective of risk management is to develop response actions to minimize the impact of possible negative events during every phase of a project. The process also works to increase the impact of the positive events and mitigate the problems associated with making changes (Project Management Institute,  © 2013). The risks in many projects are multifaceted in nature because the positive impact created at one stage of a project, could have dire consequences at another. For example, occasionally in construction projects, floor slabs will have design defects that will not properly drain and eliminate the migration of water breaching the inside of the structure. A minor re-design of the slab configuration will eliminate the drainage problem but cause a significant structural issue with roof trussing and its ability to hold the house together during a minimal shift. The changes made to correct the slab issue are great, but the problems it will create down the line are greater unless the initial solution is analyzed all the way through the project. Identifying the risk and plausible solutions is done through a series of procedures, techniques, and analysis to meet the objectives of risk management. Another dimension of the risk management kaleidoscope understands the definition of risk from various viewpoints and positions with stake in the project. The risk management operation requires a planning process describing how to conduct the risk management based on the activities and tasks necessary to complete the work. There is an intangible element with assessing the risk of defining the tolerances and attitudes of the organizational leaders and stakeholders. A project manager with experience will have a more complete understanding of this component performing an internal analysis of risk appetite and risk tolerance levels surrounding the organization and the primary stakeholders. The amount of risk for a project is measured, analyzed, and quantified with  numerous equations, graphs, and statistical parameters to confirm and justify the data, but understanding what is in the head of corporate leaders and stakeholders and the level of risk they are comfortable with; is not on a spreadsheet. The understanding of this type of risk management comes from experience and high-level communication skills put into an action plan before the project is started. The risk management process is dependent on several documents for information to achieve its objectives, respond accordingly with monitor and control procedures specific to the project (Project Management Institute,  © 2013). The risk team will rely in the risk management plan to identify and classify their roles and responsibilities in the key areas. The team also collects information from cost management plan that assists in controlling levels of precision, accuracy, and units of measure. The cost management for risk managers involves more controlling of operational expenditures than total cost of the project (Cooper, Raymond, Walker, 2005). The information provided by the schedule management plan is also a vital document especially in conjunction with the cost management plan to control progression throughout the project life cycle. The scope baseline document is a mandatory piece of information the risk team will look closely at for possible assumptions and uncertainty that might exist. Information for the project that the teams will use throughout the project as reference and updating tools are the stakeholder register, procurement documents, and enterprise environmental factors just to name a few ( Project Management Institute,  © 2013). The risk management team completes the identification process with the creation of the risk register and a defined risk management plan (RMP) explaining the risk activities, risk challenges, risk treatment, and structured response in detail. This RMP defines the tools, resources, roles, and responsibilities for managers and line workers alike to minimize project defects and enhance project production. The RMP delivers four main objectives significant to the project, by categorizing the risk into different levels for each phase and department. The risk categorization provides the probability and impact of the risk to gain a better understanding of the impact on the project in terms that are explicit to each, department, or stakeholder at every stage. The risk management matrix has four primary project objectives defining a plan to address cost, time, scope, and quality. The risk management during  the initial planning stages is performed the same way with adjusted tolerances because of limited information. (Project Management Institute,  © 2013). Provided below is a Risk Breakdown Structure (RBS) as defined in the; A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK ® Guide). The RBS is performed on the information in the course syllabus â€Å". Your organization has decided that to be successful in the global economy it must expand its supply base into China† (The Apollo Group Inc., 2010). Project Risks: Internal risks of compatibility with stakeholders and foreign lending institutions. The technical capabilitites and servicing capacity for optimum production levels. External Risks: Implmenting organizational objectives in bureaucratic ccontext of host country and meet essential program operations. Risk associated with enviromental enterprise and conceptual framework. Shortage of resources, poor infrastructure, foreign currency, cultural and socioeconomic enviroment. Incomplete understanding of project objectives, design, and sustainability to promote future growth. References Cooper, D. F., Raymond, G. S., Walker, P. (2005). Project Risk Guidelines: Managing risk in large projects and complex procurements. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley Sons.. Kerzner, H. (2009). Project Management: A systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling (10th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley Sons. Project Management Institute. ( © 2013). A Guide to the Project Management body of knowledge. (PMBOK ® Guide), Fifth Edition. Retrieved 02 17, 2014, from http://common.books24x7.com/toc.aspx?bookid=51356. Sollish, F., Semanik, J. (2007). The procurement and supply manager’s desk reference. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley Sons. The Apollo Group Inc ®. (2010). Syllabus CPMGT/302 Procurement and Risk Management. School of Business. Pheonix, AZ: University of Phoenix.

Knowledge Management Models And Frameworks Commerce Essay

Knowledge Management Models And Frameworks Commerce Essay The purpose of this paper is to critically review the various knowledge management models and frameworks. The review found that various knowledge management models and frameworks varies in perspectives ranging from the basic assumption of the articulation and transfer of tacit and explicit knowledge to the more complex and complicated assumption that knowledge is intellectual capital and it is mechanistic in perspective as well as an important asset that has to be managed efficiently for firms success. In this paper, knowledge management models are divided into three categories: knowledge category models, intellectual capital models, and socially constructed models. Besides, two knowledge management frameworks will be discussed in this paper. Finally, a KM model and framework is tentatively suggested to act as a useful guide for further research and organizational application. Introduction Nowadays, the world is fully experiencing an era, namely: knowledge age or the knowledge economy. In knowledge economy, knowledge is the crucial commodity due to the rapidly technological advancement. The technological innovations are eliminating the gap between competing companies and the collective knowledge of the employees become the key factor in producing innovative and competitive products or services (Sunassee and Sewry, 2002). Since previously managers did not encourage diffusion and sharing of knowledge among employees, changing in mindset is required for managing the knowledge effectively. The knowledge-driven activities in organizations and of the broader economic and social life lead to the management of knowledge become very important (Sunassee and Sewry, 2002). In general, this managerial activity has been known as Knowledge Management (KM). Previous research on knowledge management indicates the existence of various definitions of knowledge management. According to Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995), knowledge management is the capability of a company to create new knowledge, disseminate it throughout the organization and embody it in products, services, and systems. Duffy (1999) defines knowledge management as the identification, growth and effective application of an organisations critical knowledge. Knowledge management has been defined in another term, which is an organized and explicit process to generate, renew, and apply knowledge to maximize an organizations knowledge-related effectiveness and returns from its knowledge assets (Wiig, 1997). Alavi and Leidner (1999) define knowledge management as a systemic and organizationally specified process for acquiring, organizing, and communicating both tacit and explicit knowledge of employees so that other employees may make use of it to be more effective and productive in thei r work. Besides, ODell et al., (1998) define knowledge management as a conscious strategy of getting the right knowledge to the right people at the right time and helping people share and put information into action in ways that strive to improve organizational performance. For instance, Beckman (1999) define knowledge management as the formalization of and access to experience, knowledge and expertise that create new capabilities, enable superior performance, encourage innovation and enhance customer value. In general, KM is the process of creating, storing, distributing, and applying knowledge. By reviewing the significance of knowledge management and the complexity of its nature, it is timely to try to understand the latest theories underlying knowledge and knowledge management. Hence, this paper will critically study the latest models and frameworks of knowledge management and discuss on the assumptions and views of each model and framework. The aim of this paper is to examine the current understanding of the theory and practice of the emerging field of knowledge management by critically evaluating existing knowledge management models and frameworks. Therefore, employers or practitioners in organizations can understand their concepts and improved approaches can be developed and applied to organization and to those who need to work and implement knowledge management. This paper will begin by presenting the aims and objectives and followed with a short discussion on the types of knowledge. This is followed with the discussion on some of the existing knowledge management models and frameworks. Types of Knowledge In todays competitive business environment, only the knowledge of an organization can provide the basis for organizational renewal and sustainable competitive advantages. Organizational knowledge can be classified into two distinctive types of knowledge: explicit and tacit. According to Polanyi (1967), explicit knowledge is the knowledge which is easily to formalize, transfer, and store; documented, articulated into formal language, formally expressible and easily to communicate; tacit knowledge is pertaining to ideas, feelings, and individual experience, which is more complicated and difficult to share with each others. Explicit knowledge is the fact and can be codified and transmitted in a systematic and formal language. It is usually data, which is internal to an organization and can be easily collected. Tacit knowledge is the personal experiences, context-specific knowledge that is difficult to formalize record or articulate. It actually resides in the heads of the people, behavior and perception (Frid, 2000). Examples are intuitions, hunches, insights, beliefs and values. Both tacit and explicit knowledge are needed for an organization to achieve greater performance (Sanchez et. al. 1996). Knowledge Management Models and Frameworks Knowledge Category Models These types of model categorize knowledge into discrete elements. One of the most renowned KM models fits into this category, the Knowledge Spiral model by Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995). This model presents a high level conceptual representation of the knowledge dimensions, namely tacit and explicit knowledge. The model makes a number of assumptions, namely: 1. Tacit knowledge can be transferred through a process of socialization (everyday comradeship) to become the tacit knowledge of others top left quadrant 2. Tacit knowledge can become explicit knowledge through a process of externalization (formalizing a body of knowledge) top right quadrant 3. Explicit knowledge can be transferred into tacit knowledge in others through a process of internalization (translating theories into practice) bottom left quadrant 4. Explicit knowledge can be transferred to explicit knowledge in others through a process of combination (combining existing theories) -bottom right quadrant. One criticism of the model is that knowledge transfer in organizations is much more complicated and convoluted than this simple matrix suggests. The model also assumes an integration of tacit and explicit knowledge; often this is not the case. This model is shown in figure no. 1 below. A simple but more elaborate version of Nonakas model is shown in figure no. 2 (Hedlund and Nonaka, 1993). This model assumes there are four different levels of carriers, or agents, of knowledge in organizations, namely the individual, the group, the organization and the inter-organizational domain (customers, suppliers, competitors, etc.). The above model is helpful by relating the carriers to the types of knowledge; it remains problematic in that it assumes the carriers, like the knowledge, can be simply separated. Another example of a knowledge category model is that of Boisot, (1998), as shown in figure no. 3. Boisots model considers knowledge as codified or uncodified, diffused or undiffused, within an organization. Boisot uses the term codified to refer to knowledge that can be readily prepared for transmission purposes (e.g. financial data). The term uncodified refers to knowledge that cannot be easily prepared for transmission purposes (e.g. experience). The term diffused refers to knowledge that is readily shared while undiffused refers to knowledge that is not readily shared. The model presents the following characteristics: 1. Knowledge categorized as both codified and undiffused is referred to as propriety knowledge. In this case, knowledge is prepared for transmission but is deliberately restricted to a selectively small population, on a need to know basis (e.g. projected profits, share price issues) top left quadrant 2. Knowledge that is relatively uncodified and undiffused is referred to as personal knowledge (e.g. perceptions, insights, experiences) bottom left quadrant knowledge that is both codified and diffused is referred to as public knowledge (e.g. journals, books, libraries) top right quadrant Knowledge which is relatively diffused but also uncodified is labeled common sense bottom right quadrant. Boisot, (1998) considers such knowledge as being built up slowly by a process of socialization, harboring customs and intuition. There are few similarities between Nonakas model and Boisots model. For example, Nonakas categorization of explicit and tacit knowledge has a degree of correspondence with Boisots reference to codified and uncodified knowledge. The horizontal dimension relates to the spread or diffusion of knowledge across the organization in both models. However, Boisots model experiences the same limitations as Nonakas model in that codified and uncodified are but two discrete categories of knowledge. In addition, the idea of diffused knowledge is rather general and it is not clear if it includes incorporating knowledge within the organization, as well as disseminating it. Figure No. 3-Knowledge Category Model (Boisot, 1998) Intellectual Capital Models Management gurus such as Drucker (1993) and Brooking (1997) and practitioner icons such as Edvinsson, (1997) elucidated the notion of Intellectual Capital (IC). Knowledge and capital have been linked together for many years. Knowledge is being capitalized as a resource comparable to land or oil. However, we also need to focus on the intangible elements which knowledge contains such as employee skills, experiences, patients, copyrights, brands, licensing opportunities, research and development, innovative use of assets such as databases, etc. (Quintas et al, 1997). As these type of elements are not normally recorded on the traditional organizational balance sheet they are referred to Intellectual Assets; hence the term Intellectual Capital. KM is actively concerned with the strategic outlook and operational tactics required for managing human centered, intellectual assets (Brooking, 1997). According to Peters (1992), KM can affect intellectual capital or as recognizing or rediscovering assets that the organization are not using to full potential, ultimately employees. As these approaches imply that the key areas of KM are the management of IC it is worth reviewing a typical IC model. The model, shown below in figure no. 5, is the Intellectual Capital model from Skandia Insurance which is adopted from Chase (1997), and Roos and Roos (1997). According to Edvinsson and Malone, (1997) intellectual capital concsists the applied experience, organizational technology, customer relationships and professional skills that provide Skandia with a competitive advantage in the market. One problem that can be associated with this model is the adoption of a scientific approach to knowledge. This is evident through the classification of knowledge as a commodity linking it to organization capital. This view of intellectual capital ignores the political and social aspects of KM. KM can be decomposed into objective elements rather than being socio-political phenomena from the view of intellectual capital. This is similar to the Nonaka and Takeuchi, (1995) approach. As befits a new area of inquiry, much analytical work is focused on categorizing, mapping and measuring of knowledge types and processes. Although this is helpful, the epistemological basis of the field cannot be ignored (McAdam and McCreedy, 1999). Hence, we need to embrace socially constructed models of KM. Figure No. 4-Intellectual Capital Model of KM (Chase, 1997) Socially Constructed Models This group of models assumes a wide definition of knowledge viewing it as being intrinsically linked within the social and learning processes of the organization. KM is concerned with the construction, capture, interpretation, embodiment, dissemination and use of knowledge. These components are represented in Demerests (1997) Knowledge Management model. The model is developed from the original work of Clark and Staunton, (1989) and Nonaka and Takeuchi, (1995). It can be compared to that of Jordan and Jones, (1997) who speak of knowledge acquisition, problem solving, dissemination, ownership and storage and that of Kruizinga et al. (1997) who include knowledge policy, infrastructure and culture. Firstly, the model emphasizes the construction of knowledge within the organization. The model assumes that constructed knowledge is then embodied. Next the embodied knowledge is disseminated throughout the organization. Ultimately the knowledge is used to gain economic value with regard to organizational outputs. The black arrows in figure no. 5 show the primary flow direction while the white arrows show the more recursive flows. Figure No. 5 -Knowledge Management Model Demerest, (1997) Demerests model is attractive in that it does not assume any given definition of knowledge but rather invites a more holistic approach to knowledge construction. However, it does imply a simplistic procession approach to the flow of knowledge transfer, while in reality this may be extremely rapid and circulatory. To overcome this gap a slightly modified version of Demerests model has been developed, figure no. 6. Firstly the model emphasizes the construction of knowledge within an organization where either a scientific or social paradigm may be adopted. The scientific view of knowledge takes a knowledge is truth view (Morgan, 1986). This view considers that knowledge is a body of facts and rational laws thus promoting a non-personal view of knowledge, skills and tasks (Lave and Wenger, 1991). On the other hand the social view of knowledge is concerned with the social and learning processes within an organization. However, this approach assumes that knowledge construction is inequality, conflict, domination, subordination and manipulation influences as well as more traditional behavioral questions associated with efficiency and motivation (Alvesson and Wilmott, 1996). Thus social knowledge construction is a dynamic process of contextuality rather than the assimilation of a body of facts. In th e McAdam and McCreedys (1999) model depicted in figure no. 6, knowledge construction is not limited to scientific inputs through explicit programmes but includes a process of social interaction. The implications of this broader concept of knowledge construction must be reflected in the embodiment/dissemination of knowledge as part of the organizations KM approach. There is little point in widening the concept of knowledge construction only to limit the embodiment and dissemination techniques used or to force existing techniques onto new knowledge. Attempting to do so will lead to disappointing results, frustration and a negative view to KM caused by the mismatch between conception and application. Knowledge usage must also be reflected via the knowledge initiatives installed in the organization. Demerest (1997) describes use (as deployed in figure no. 6) as the production of commercial value for the customer. While increasing commercial value is a key objective of KM, it is not the only objective. Therefore knowledge use must be employed through the application of a complementary approach for emancipatory enhancements and organization outputs. This will permit the organization to be viewed and reformed from different perspectives that will facilitate continuous innovation, thus creating the ultimate business benefits for the organization as a whole. While the interconnecting vectors (black arrows) show the primary flow of activity, more recursive arrows are added to reflect the circulating nature of activity flows, thus depicting that KM is not a simple sequential process. Figure No. 6-Modified Version of Demerests Knowledge Management Model (McAdam and McCreedy, 1999) Knowledge Management Frameworks Stankosky and Baldanza (2001) developed a knowledge management framework which addresses enabling factors such as learning, culture, leadership, organization and technology (refer to figure no. 7). This framework presents that knowledge management covers a wide range of disciplines that include cognitive science, communication, individual and organizational behavior, psychology, finance, economics, human resource, management, strategic planning, system thinking, process reengineering, system engineering, computer technologies and software and library science. This framework consists four major foundations of an organization which is important for knowledge management are leadership, organization structure, technology infrastructure and learning. The role of leadership is practicing strategic planning and systems thinking approaches, making best use of resources, fostering a culture that encourages open dialogue and team learning, and for encouraging and rewarding risk taking, learning and knowledge sharing. Organization structure should facilitate personal interactions and support communities of practice to capture tacit and explicit knowledge within the organization. Besides, organizational structure should facilitate trust among people within the organization and encourage free exchange of knowledge. Technology infrastructure allows exchange of information without formal structures. Technology infrastructure should enhance the efficient and effective capture of both tacit and explicit knowledge. It should also support knowledge sharing in the entire organization. Lastly, learning is responsible for managing information in order to build enterprise wide knowledge and use that knowledge to organizational learning, change and performance improvement. Figure No. 7-Basic Disciplines Underlying Knowledge Management and its Enabling Factors (Stankosky and Baldanza , 2001) Karadesh et al. (2009) developed a knowledge management framework that emphasizes on developing phases such as knowledge infrastructure, knowledge combination, knowledge filtering, knowledge repository, knowledge sharing, knowledge application, and finally, knowledge performance across the KM process (refer to figure no. 8). The first element is knowledge infrastructure, which relies on building the proper culture for Knowledge Management System and establishes the awareness of the importance of KM among the individuals in the organization. The second element is knowledge combination that functions as a temporary repository of collected information from the infrastructure phase. The third element is knowledge evaluation which is used to assess the knowledge based on the value; accuracy and relevance after the knowledge have been combined from different sources (Sunassee and Sewry, 2002). Knowledge filtering is the fourth element that prepares knowledge to be stored in the next phase, after going through classification, categorization and organization. The fifth element is knowledge repository that functions as storage for the knowledge collected in the past stages. It also can be viewed as organization memory and retention of knowledge assets. Knowledge sharing is a core process in the process of the KM that transfers and shares knowledge among the individuals in the organization. Knowledge application is the seventh element that applies and represents information to knowledge seekers in appropriate matter. The last element is knowledge performance which is used to evaluate every KM system, process, performance, and impact of KM. It is performing according to the organization goals and objectives. Figure No. 8-Conceptual Framework for Knowledge Management Process (Karadesh et al., 2009) Conclusion The review of existing knowledge management models and frameworks has seen a wide spectrum of viewpoints. Knowledge management has been seen from the categorical view in which knowledge are categorized into discrete elements as seen in Boisot, Nonaka, and Nonaka and Hedlunds models to the more complicated and complex perspective of knowledge that is mechanistic and socially constructed orientation (McAdam and McCreedys, 1999). Moreover, these knowledge management models have made reference to: first, the process of managing the flow knowledge; second, categorization models are mechanistic; third, the intellectual capital model assumed that intellectual capital are crucial assets in organization and should be manage efficiently for firms success; fourth, Demerests model is intrinsically linked with the social and learning process within organizations; McAdam and McCreedys model is slightly modified from Demerests model, which seeks to address the limitations by explicitly showing the influence of both social and scientific paradigms of knowledge construction, and extends the use element to cover both business and employee benefits. Stankosky and Baldanzas knowledge management framework emphasized that leadership, organization structure, technology infrastructure and learning are important foundations for knowledge management in an organization; finally, Karadesh et al.s knowledge management framework represents with extensive and detailed processes and tends to provide guidelines for executing KM successfully, save time and efforts and to avoid inaccuracies. Even though knowledge management models and frameworks have evolved from time to time, basically the models and frameworks provide a way of transforming managerial activities and guiding managerial efforts in managing knowledge in the organizations. The KM model and framework that are suggested to act as a useful guide for further research and organizational application is McAdam and McCreedys model and Karadesh et al.s framework. McAdam and McCreedys model combines scientific and socially constructed knowledge, and also the uses/benefits of KM are viewed as both emancipatory and as business oriented. Karadesh et al.s framework provides a broadest analysis of KM process that can be used to foster the development of organization knowledge and enhance the organizational impact of individuals throughout the organizations. Therefore, it is suggested that this model and framework could act as a useful guide for further research and literature evaluation in the area of knowledge management.

The Microsoft Case: Protecting Competition or Competitors? :: Business Management Economics

The Microsoft Case: Protecting Competition or Competitors? "When a company of merchants undertake, at their own risk and expense, to establish a new trade with some remote and barbarous nation, it may not be unreasonable to incorporate them into a joint stock company, and to grant them, in case of their success, a monopoly of the trade for a certain number of years. It is the easiest and most natural way in which the state can recompense them for hazarding a dangerous and expensive experiment, of which the public is afterwards to reap the benefit. A temporary monopoly of this kind may be vindicated upon the same principles upon which a like monopoly of a new machine is granted to its inventor, and that a new book to its author." -Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations, 1776 Introduction Protecting the competition, not the competitor, has become a commonly used statement in recent interpretations of the Sherman antitrust acts of the late 19th century. Such words, however, were not used in the preliminary decision of the U.S. v. Microsoft monopoly case. Just recently, U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson cast Microsoft as a "voracious monopolist that has hindered innovation, harmed consumers, and run roughshod over its rivals." (Chandrasekaran, 1999: 1) A 207-page "findings of fact" report did not conclude whether Microsoft violates the Sherman Antitrust Act. The report suggests, however, that Microsoft is indeed a software hog with a decade of at least 90%-95% control of the Windows market share. Chief Executive Officer Bill Gates said he respectfully disagrees with a number of the court’s findings. "In the end we’re quite confident that our integrity†¦and the benefits we provide consumers will be upheld." (Chandrasekaran, 1999: 1). It seems that in an effort to protect the consumer, the government may have forgotten the power of the consumer’s dollar. Perhaps Microsoft has control of the market share because the product is superior to all others, and consumers know it. Is it possible that the government would be punishing the consumer, if in fact consumers truly are happy with the Microsoft product, and have chosen to buy it, not because Microsoft has a significant influence on the market, but because the product is more advanced? What makes a product superior to another? Vision, innovation, risk, marketing: the same elements that Adam Smith praises in a new venture, then rewards, if successful, by granting the company a temporary monopoly in the market.

Clash with the Hurricane- Personal Narrative Essay examples -- Papers

Clash with the Hurricane- Personal Narrative The sky darkened from the blue light sky, it turned suddenly to a dark black gloomy sky hovering with a mist cloud. I walked back into the car, seemingly it was going to pour down. Heavily, the wind blew. I turned to shut the windows, but, as I looked closer out of the window, huge clouds started fusing together which then created a huge immense hurricane. I could not believe my eyes, a hurricane was coming our way. I could not believe it, even though this was so dangerous and could have many damaging effects to the environment and to the people, but from a distance it was such a magnificent phenomenon. Heavily rain poured, hitting the ground like bullets from a gun. Luckily for me, I was in my car. ====================================================================== I tried to start the car but it wouldn’t work. I turned my head again towards the window, the death trap was seemingly getting even more closer. After many efforts of trying to start the car, the car would still now move. ============================================================================ ‘What a time for the car not to work I thought to myself’. I got out of the car and looked ahead. The treacherous whirlwind was closer than ever, people now started to notice and started fearing. At this point I was thinking only one thing, ‘Those damn weather reporters never told us that a hurricane was coming our way!’ ======================================... ... ‘The trees wavered like a stand full of supporters at a football match’ here he uses a metaphor/similes . Here he compares the trees to supporters at a football match. He does this probably sarcastically. â€Å"Heavily, rained poured, hitting the ground like bullets from a gun†. Here again he uses metaphor/similes. He describes the rain falling to bullets from a gun he does this so he can show how fast a painful the rain is falling on to the people and to the environment. He also again uses the word ‘heavily’ first. He does this so he can get his message through quickly and also so he can show the importance of the weather. Clash with the Hurricane- Personal Narrative Essay examples -- Papers Clash with the Hurricane- Personal Narrative The sky darkened from the blue light sky, it turned suddenly to a dark black gloomy sky hovering with a mist cloud. I walked back into the car, seemingly it was going to pour down. Heavily, the wind blew. I turned to shut the windows, but, as I looked closer out of the window, huge clouds started fusing together which then created a huge immense hurricane. I could not believe my eyes, a hurricane was coming our way. I could not believe it, even though this was so dangerous and could have many damaging effects to the environment and to the people, but from a distance it was such a magnificent phenomenon. Heavily rain poured, hitting the ground like bullets from a gun. Luckily for me, I was in my car. ====================================================================== I tried to start the car but it wouldn’t work. I turned my head again towards the window, the death trap was seemingly getting even more closer. After many efforts of trying to start the car, the car would still now move. ============================================================================ ‘What a time for the car not to work I thought to myself’. I got out of the car and looked ahead. The treacherous whirlwind was closer than ever, people now started to notice and started fearing. At this point I was thinking only one thing, ‘Those damn weather reporters never told us that a hurricane was coming our way!’ ======================================... ... ‘The trees wavered like a stand full of supporters at a football match’ here he uses a metaphor/similes . Here he compares the trees to supporters at a football match. He does this probably sarcastically. â€Å"Heavily, rained poured, hitting the ground like bullets from a gun†. Here again he uses metaphor/similes. He describes the rain falling to bullets from a gun he does this so he can show how fast a painful the rain is falling on to the people and to the environment. He also again uses the word ‘heavily’ first. He does this so he can get his message through quickly and also so he can show the importance of the weather.

A Comparison of Butlers Life and Kindred Essay -- comparison compare

A Comparison of Butler's Life and Kindred    What lies in the mind of an author as he or she begins the long task of writing a fiction novel? This question can be answered if the author's life is studied and then compared to the work itself. Octavia E. Butler's life and her novel Kindred have remarkable comparisons. This essay will point out important events of Butler's life and how they link to the mentioned novel. Octavia Estelle Butler was born on June 22, 1947 in Pasadena, California (Voices From 1). She began her life with many hardships as an only child and having her father die when she was very young (Voices From 1). She grew up in a location that had a wide variety of racial backgrounds, however Butler never felt like she lived in a world of segregation (Notable Black 144). She describes the situation best when she states, "I never...lived in a segregated neighborhood nor went to segregated school; the whole community was an economic ghetto" (Notable Black 144). The lack of money sometimes creates a humble atmosphere and that must have been the case with Pasadena throughout her childhood. Until this point it seems as if Butler had a very unhappy childhood, but the life that she was living was shaping her to become the great author that she is today. Trials can become positive experiences for one to grow and mature and this was definitely her case. Having been an only child, Butler spent most of her time surrounded by an adult crowd, presumably the acquaintances of her mother (Notable Black 144). Thus, she grew up as a "very solitary individual" (Notable Black 144). She was also inflicted with dyslexia, which made it very difficult for her to keep up with the rest of the children her age (Notable Black 144).... ...utler, Octavia E. Kindred. Boston: Beacon Press, 1979. Doerksen, Teri Ann. Into Darkness Peering : Race and Color in the Fantastic. Ed. Elisabeth Anne Leonard. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press, 1997. Gates, Jr., Henry Louis, and Dorothy Allison. Reading Black, Reading Feminist: A Critical Anthology. Ed. Henry Louis Gates. New York: Meridian Book, 1990. Jackson, Jerome H. "Sci-fi Tales from Octavia E. Butler." The Crisis 101.3(1994): 4-5,10. Smith, Jessie Carney, Ed. Notable Black American Women. Detroit: Gale Research, 1992. Stevenson, Rosemary. Black Women in America: an Historical Encyclopedia. Ed. Darlene Clark Hine, Elsa Barkley Brown, Rosalyn Terborg-Penn. Brooklyn, N.Y.: Carlson Pub., 1993. "Voices From the Gaps -- Women Writers of Color." July 31, 1998. October 14, 1998. http://english.cla.umn.edu/Ilkd/vfg/Authors/OctaviaButler.

Comparison between Creon and Antigone in Oedipus the King Essay

In the Oedipus plays, two of the major characters include Creon, the brother in law of Oedipus and Antigone, the daughter of Oedipus. Although these two characters play different roles in the plays Oedipus the King and Antigone, they share a lot of similarities. Basically, one of the similarities that Creon and Antigone have is that the burdens that they carried throughout the plays were passed down to them by Oedipus following his downfall and exile. After Oedupis’s exile, Creon assumed the throne of Thebes and took control of the city. Although his intentions in ruling Thebes are pure, like Oedipus who refused to listen to the blind prophet when he told him that he was the one who murdered his father, Creon’s judgment was blinded when he initially refused to give proper burial rites to his enemy, Polynices, Oedipus son. As a result, Antigone, hanged herself, causing her lover Haemon, Creon’s son, to kill himself as well. Likewise, Antigone inherited the stubbornness of his father when she defied Creon’s order deny the corpse of Polynices, her brother, a proper burial. For her defiance, Creon had her thrown into a tomb, where she committed suicide through hanging. In short, both Creon and Antigone were affected by Oedipus’s tragic downfall as he apparently passed down his misfortunes to those who succeeded him and to his family members. Antigone herself said this in her conversation with her sister, in which she said â€Å"My own flesh and blood—dear sister, dear Ismene, how many griefs our father Oedipus handed down! Do you know one, I ask you, one grief that Zeus will not perfect for the two of us while we still live and breathe? There’s nothing, no pain—our lives are pain—no private shame, no public disgrace, nothing I haven’t seen in your grief and mine. † In other words, Antigone spoke as if tragedies are passed down in Oedipus’s family like they were family heirlooms. Moreover, both Creon and Antigone exemplified also suffered the same losses. Creon lost his son, Haemon, and his wife, Eurydice who both committed suicide while Antigone lost her father, Oedipus, and her two brothers, Polynices and Eteocles, who killed each other while fighting over who would rule over Thebes. In other words, both characters were left alone in their personal battles. However, while the two characters share several similarities, they also have various differences. For one, Antigone acknowledges the past tragedies as shown in the quote above and uses them as a motivation to move forward. Moreover, she is more bold and prudent than Creon as shown during their confrontation in which he asked her why she was defying him and she answered, â€Å"I didn’t say yes. I can say no to anything I say vile, and I don’t have to count the cost. But because you said yes, all that you can do, for all you’re crown and your trappings, and your guards—all that your can do is to have me killed. † On the other hand, Creon is a manipulative and narrow-minded person as shown in his initial refusal to believe in the blind prophet’s prediction. His personality is best shown in his description of Thebes wherein he said, â€Å"Anarchy—show me a greater crime in all the earth! She, she destroys cities, rips up houses, breaks the ranks of spearmen into headlong rout. But the ones who last it out, the great mass of them owe their lives to discipline. Therefore we must defend the men who live by law, never let some woman triumph over us. Better to fall from power, if fall we must, at the hands of a man—never be rated inferior to a woman, never. † In sum, while both characters share similarities due to their close relationship with Oedipus, they also have differences that distinguish their characters. Antigone is a realistic, decisive yet stubborn character while Creon is a person who holds himself in high esteem but later realizes he is human as well. Works Cited â€Å"Oedipus the King. † 2008. The Internet Classics Archive. 3 April 2008 . â€Å"Antigone. † 2008. 2008. The Internet Classics Archive. 3 April 2008 .