What Gives a Region a Large-Scale Competitive Advantage?

What Gives a Region a Large-Scale Competitive Advantage? The paper titled ‘The Limits of Autarky’, written by AnnaLee Saxenian (1994)[1], considers the issues surrounding clusters of industries specifically those seen in Silicon Valley and on Route 128. By studying the two areas the author aims to discover why one region can be considerably more successful than another, despite having the same mix of technologies. It has long been recognised that there is competitive advantage to having clusters of companies working together in the same geographic region. However, what is not so clear is exactly why some areas experience considerable competitive advantage while others see little or no notable benefits. By taking a detailed look at Silicon Valley and comparing it directly with Route 128, the author aims to answer this key question, namely, what exactly gives a region such large-scale competitive advantage over other regions? Underlying this analysis, the author makes the important decision to rebut earlier presumptions made by other scholars in relation to the boundaries between internal and external economies. The author notes that in previous research there has been a tendency for scholars to draw strong distinctions and boundaries in relation to where the internal firm ends and the external economy begins. By suggesting that there is no clear-cut point between internal and external and that the region is, in fact, more akin to a social network with blurred boundaries, the author is able to take a novel and arguably more useful position when it comes to explaining differences in regions (Powell, 1996)[2]. The first area of research that the author undertakes is looking at the traditional limits of external economies and the analysis that has traditionally been done on the impact of such external economies and localised industrialisation. On a basic level of external economy of scale, analysis explains why firms will tend to cluster together so they can share resources such as transport or even talent; this is not disputed by the author and, in fact, is given greater importance by the author than it has by other modern researchers. The author does not dispute that both Silicon Valley and Route 128 are classic examples of external economies and even reinforces this concept by recognising that they are similar to 19th century industrial districts. However, the author states that there are limits to this analysis which restrict the potential use of external economies as a means of determining why one region would be so much more successful than another. Both Silicon Valley and Route 128 b enefited from the self-reinforcing position that they found themselves in, due to these external economies. For example, as new firms joined the area there was greater venture capital available allowing yet more firms to join. This in turn attracted some of the best talent in the country which allowed the areas to expand (Piore Sabel, 1984)[3]. However, the real question that the author is focusing on is how Silicon Valley became so much more successful than Route 128, despite seemingly having the same underlying situation. Starting at the same position, between the years 1975 and 1990 Silicon Valley expanded offering 150,000 new jobs in the technology field, whereas on Route 128 only 50,000 jobs were created (Saxenian, 1994)[4]. By 1990, Silicon Valley produced one third of all electronic products from the USA, with a total value of $11 billion. By which time, Route 128 had seen considerably less growth producing just $4.6 billion. It is this divergence that the author focuses on; how did two areas that were so similar in 1975 become so different? One of the first concepts that the author explores is that of a network approach. This furthers the concept stated earlier by the author that firms are not individual, autonomous entities and that the boundary between internal factors and external factors is considerably more blurred than previous research might suggest. The author successfully argues that one of the key differences between Silicon Valley and Route 128 is their approach to the way in which individual organisations network with each other within the region. Previous researchers have alluded to this difference, but the author notes that they tend to be disregarded largely as cultural differences, e.g. with California being known for its particularly laid back approach and Massachusetts for being much more risk averse. Whilst the author agrees with this and believes it may have had a bearing on the differences, she feels culture alone is not the main issue. By taking a detailed look at the culture of Silicon Valley, the author identifies that one of the fundamental differences between this region and Route 128 is that Silicon Valley actively encouraged firms to learn jointly and to share experiences. This type of mutual adjustment is something that the author believes is fundamental to the competitive advantage that Silicon Valley has established. Not only has this allowed Silicon Valley to develop some of the most complex technological products, but it has also encouraged very free labour markets ensuring that the right people are commonly found in the right jobs. Contrasting this with Route 128, the author notes that there was considerable more secrecy amongst the firms and much less in the way of sharing. These cultural differences and the way in which the networks operate in these two regions have been noted by the author to be the main reason that Silicon Valley became so much more successful than Route 128. The way in which the individual firms perceive themselves within the Route 128 region and the way in which they keep themselves distinct from other similar companies has been developed as a way of ensuring that each individual firm maintains corporate secrecy. Whilst this protective approach may seem logical, it has inadvertently caused the region to stagnate with little in terms of job movements and little or no sharing of knowledge between firms (Florida Kenney, 1990)[5]. Capturing this, the author identifies Silicon Valley as being a regional network-based system rather than being an independent firm-based system. In establishing this analysis, the author questions why Route 128 firms would employ such a strategy for victory when it was clear to see that the diametrically opposed strategy was working so well in Silicon Valley. Having recognised that this is the fundamental difference between Silicon Valley and Route 128, the author explores this competitive advantage further. It is identified that the rigidity seen within Route 128 was entirely suitable when technology was not moving quickly. Where there was no need to adapt rapidly, maintaining individual firms with their own internal knowledge base was key to maintaining a competitive advantage. However, during the 1970s, technological developments were moving rapidly and the need to share resources between firms became critical; this was not something that the firms within Route 128 were able to a dapt to, primarily down to the systems that they had established and the high levels of corporate secrecy that were inherent in their business structures (DeBresson Walker, 1991)[6]. In order to confirm what the author suspects may be the reason for Silicon Valleys competitive advantage, the author looked at Japanese industry (Imai, 1989)[7]. Networking is recognised as critical for all Japanese industries. Moreover, many smaller medium enterprises are linked together, either with agreements or joint ownership structures in order to share a greater variety of resources. This often results in geographical clusters but is not essential. What is clear, however, is that these types of collaborative clusters produce considerable efficiencies. For example, the Japanese car market is one of the best in the world and uses this network-based structure to remain competitively advantaged. Having seemingly found the reasons for Silicon Valley’s success, the author then moves on to compare and contrast two specific companies in order to see if the theory holds up in practice. The author chose to consider Apollo Computer and Sun Microsystems as the two companies were essentially similar in the 1970s; they were both technology-based start-ups with Apollo computer being established on Route 128 and Sun Microsystems established in Silicon Valley. In keeping with Route 128 culture, Apollo established itself as a very independent company even in so far as actually producing the workstations, not simply designing them. Whilst this initially offered considerable competitive advantage over competitors, it did mean that they developed systems that were entirely incompatible with any other. In contrast, Sun Microsystems, which was established in Silicon Valley, operates a very open policy for sharing information with neighbouring companies and establishing a system that is fully compatible with all other available systems. Sun Microsystems also looks at other companies actually to produce the systems as sticking to the pure design prototype building enables them to concentrate their efforts and expertise. Initially, there was very little difference in the actual performance of the two companies, but over time, Sun became considerably more profitable, as it was able to adapt much more quickly to changes in the industry. By keeping everything internally, Apollo was unable to adapt and this caused considerable decline in sales (Granovetter, 1985)[8]. These structural differences were clearly important to the relative success of the two organisations. The author then takes this one step further by stating that she actually believes the differences lie in the management style and not in the physical structure of the organisation. Apollo, for example, was very strict about business dress codes and very tight on quality controls; the new manager of Apollo, in 1984, was Thomas Vanderslice and he brought in an exceptionally strict regime which was entirely opposite to the casual and relaxed atmosphere seen in Sun Microsystems (Schein, 1985)[9]. Although this in itself should not indicate the relative success of the organisation, it was indicative of the willingness to adapt and change that Sun Microsystems had and Apollo did not. This again is typical of Silicon Valley companies in contrast with Route 128 companies. In fact, Sun’s success was so substantial that many Apollo managers left during the 1980s to join the rival compan y. This caused even further splits between the two regions as expertise began to collect in the Silicon Valley area (Nohria Eccles, 1992)[10]. Hewlett Packard was another example that the author cited as being a success for Silicon Valley. Despite being a huge organisation, it did not fall foul of becoming rigid and unable to adapt to this ever-changing industry. It maintained a nexus of almost entirely independent departments all working together but maintaining sufficient independence to enable them to react rapidly to any necessary changes (Sabel, 1988)[11]. The author draws contrast with DEC a large technological company based on Route 128, which was highly hierarchical in structure and failed to compete at this game due to its unwieldy and rigid internal structures. Conclusions By drawing together both the case studies mentioned above as well as previous research, the author has successfully demonstrated that the way in which an organisation views itself and the way in which it views its relationships with other firms in the same geographical region is critical to the ultimate success of the firm and the region in which it exists. The author concludes, correctly in my opinion, that network-based approaches offer considerable competitive advantage to a firm and the region, in particular, in industries where rapid adaptation is necessary. Collaboration vertically is essential to the success of the industry, as a whole. Corporate secrecy as is seen on Route 128 is a substantial barrier to the development of the technological industries and this has been proven to be the case. Although the author recognises that the physical structure is important to ensure openness and networking between firms, companies should also understand that management style of key firms is more influential than was originally thought. It should be noted that the author does recognise that this network-based approach may not always be suitable and that whilst it is evident that the network-based approach worked very well in the technology industry, in slower moving industries where firms must closely guard their corporate secrets, a much m ore individual firm-based approach is likely to be more successful. Comparing and contrasting Silicon Valley with Route 128 has allowed the author to explore fully and to explain successfully the potential impact of a network-based approach. The value of this comparison is immensely important for the understanding of the network-based approach and has provided valuable insight for other industries moving forwards. Bibliography DeBresson, C. Walker, R. eds. (1991). Special issue on networks of innovators. Research Policy, 20 (5). Florida, R. Kenney M. (1990). Silicon Valley and Route 128 wont save us. California Management Review, 33 (1), 68-88. Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91 (3), 481-510. Imai, K. (1989). Evolution of Japans corporate and industrial networks. In B. Carlsson, ed. Industrial Dynamics Boston, MA: Kluwer. Nohria, N. Eccles, R., eds. (1992). Networks and organizations: Structure, form, and action. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Piore, M. Sabel, C. (1984). The second industrial divide: Possibilities for prosperity. New York: Basic Books. Powell,W., (1996). Trust-Based Forms of Governance in Kramer, R,M. Tyler,T.R. eds, Trust in Organizations. London: Sage. Sabel, C. (1988). Flexible specialization and the reemergence of regional economies. In Hirst, P. and Zeitlin, J., eds. Reversing industrial decline?: Industrial structure and policy in Britain and her competitors. Oxford, UK: Berg. Saxenian, A. (1994). Regional advantage: Culture and competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Saxenian, A., (1994). The limits of Autarky: Beyond Networks and Industrial Adaptation in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Available at: http://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/~anno/. Schein, E. (1985). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Footnotes [1] Saxenian, A., (1994). The limits of Autarky: Beyond Networks and Industrial Adaptation in Silicon Valley and Route 128. [2] Powell,W., (1996). Trust-Based Forms of Governance in Kramer, R,M. Tyler,T.R. eds, Trust in Organizations. London: Sage. [3] Piore, M. Sabel, C. (1984). The second industrial divide: Possibilities for prosperity. New York: Basic Books. [4] Saxenian, A. (1994) Regional advantage: Culture and competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [5] Florida, R. Kenney M. (1990). Silicon Valley and Route 128 wont save us. California Management Review 33 (1), 68-88. [6] DeBresson, C. Walker, R. eds. (1991). Special issue on networks of innovators. Research Policy. 20 (5). [7] Imai, K. (1989). Evolution of Japans corporate and industrial networks. In B. Carlsson, ed. Industrial Dynamics Boston, MA: Kluwer. [8] Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology 91 (3), 481-510. [9] Schein, E. (1985). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. [10] Nohria, N. Eccles, R., eds. (1992). Networks and organizations: Structure, form, and action. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. [11] Sabel, C. (1988). Flexible specialization and the reemergence of regional economies. In Hirst, P. and Zeitlin, J., eds. Reversing industrial decline?: Industrial structure and policy in Britain and her competitors. Oxford, UK: Berg.

Globalization and Culture Change Essay

From a sociocultural anthropological perspective, by investigating how globalization affects different parts of the world we can build a better understanding of how global structures affect social and cultural practices. Globalization is the worldwide interdependence of economic and cultural activities through the interchange of worldviews, goods, beliefs, and other aspects of culture (Lalonde slide 22/01/13). To facilitate interdependence, globalization uses new technology, innovation, tourism, international trade, and the media to build and maintain a dominant global culture (Lalonde slide 22/01/13). In recent years, the process of globalization has hastened the destruction of small egalitarian cultures (Larkin and Robbins 2007). Using information conducted from three ethnographies, this paper discusses how globalization has impacted the culture of traditional societies. To narrow the focus, it will examine how globalization and the related process of modernization has contributed to culture change and will discuss each ethnography’s involvement within the World Systems Theory. The progress of society is introduced by the idea that â€Å"human history is the story of a steady advance from life dependent on whims of nature to a life of control and domination over natural forces† (Larkin and Robbins 2007:43). This notion of culture change assumes that technological advancement is the driving force of progress, and that traditional societies should become modernized because it is in their best interest to align with technological, economic, and sociocultural systems of western industrial nations (Lalonde slide 15/01/13). Modernization is characterized by â€Å"industrialization, consolidation of the nation-state, bureaucratization, market economy, technological innovation, literacy, consumerism, vertical mobility, and an open class system† (Lalonde slide 15/01/13). These processes help amplify globalization and support the assumption that â€Å"economic trade is the source of all well being† (Larkin and Robbins 2007:60). Traditional societies are pressured to become modern under the presumption that economic growth and integration will help solve national and global ecological/social problems, and foreign assistance to underdeveloped countries will create a better standard of living by helping them participate in global trade (Larkin and Robbins 2007). The belief that the social, political, and cultural, systems of western society should dictate how traditional societies should develop is a very egocentric view. What supporters of globalization fail to  recognize is that by supporting the modernization of small-scale civilizations â€Å"we may be eliminating societies whose systems of meaning hold solutions to compelling current world problems, such as environmental destruction, inter-group and intra-group conflict, poverty, and sickness† (Robbins and Larkin 2007:72). The World Systems Theory, developed by Immanuel Wallerstein, addresses culture change in relation to power (Lalonde slide 15/01/13). Unequal distribution of wealth and resources along with the capitalist mode of production contribute to the functionality of this theory. The world system divides the world into core, semi-periphery, and periphery countries. The core countries are highly developed and use technology to increase capital development. In contrast, the periphery countries are least developed and are exploited by the core for their cheap labor and material. Semi-periphery countries lie between the core and periphery and are both exploited and engage in exploitation. The World Systems Theory relies on the commodification of goods, labor, nature, and human relations in the market for exchange value (Lalonde slide 15/01/13). Current neo-liberal economic policies that promote individualism, competition, and consumerism within a free-market have highly contributed to the acceptance of inequality and disparity globally enhancing the effects of the World Systems. The application of this theory will be discussed further later in the paper. In an ethnography of the Beng people, who reside in the village of Asagbe, in Cà ´te d’Ivoire, West Africa, American anthropologists Alma Gottlieb and Philip Graham recount their cultural engagement and reflect that their â€Å"presence [in the village] might actually be triggering a young man’s return to mental illness† (2011:38). Alma and Philip use an ethnographic approach to study the Beng culture, which includes participant observation, interviews, and the use of a key cultural consultant, Amenan. The ethnography written by Alma and Philip illustrates how modernization has had a negative impact on the Beng culture causing some men to refuse their cultural identity. Matatu, identifies himself in French as the â€Å"prime minister of Cà ´te d’Ivoire†, and refuses to speak the Beng language (Gottlieb and Graham 2011:38). Although unintentionally, the anthropologists contribute to the perception that the Beng lifestyle is less desirable than a modern lifestyle by arriving in Asagbe with cameras, typewriters, audio recorders and a vehicle. The goods show their â€Å"family’s privilege† and  Ã¢â‚¬Å"pushed in [Matatu’s] face how poor he is and will always be† (Gottlieb and Graham 2011:38). Contrasting the modernization of America with the underdevelopment of Asagbe, introduction of technology lead to a rejection of cultural identity, negatively altering the Beng perception of daily life. World systems theory can be applied to describe the culture change of the Beng men in relation to power. The anthropologist’s describe that the change of behavior Matatu and other Beng men displayed was a way to create â€Å"imagined power rather than face the near certainty of life long poverty†(Gottlieb and Graham 2011:51). When Matatu hypothetically â€Å"condemns people to death† he is symbolically representing and compensating for the domination of the core countries over the periphery in the World Systems (Gottlieb and Graham 2011:48). Matatu recognizes that exploitation of his country will continue to enable the core countries to remain in dominant power. The Beng society’s placement in the World System makes it is clear that systematic inequality and injustice due to unequal distribution of wealth and resources have negatively affected their daily lives by enabling them from achieving all basic human rights and needs. The ethnography conducted by anthropologist Liza Dalby, takes place on a rural island community in Japans Inland Sea. The ethnographic method’s used include: participant observation, interviews using a tape recorder, and questionnaires. Through Liza’s ethnography, globalization and the related process of modernization negatively affect the Japanese island community by causing the erosion of historical family member roles forever changing traditional family dynamics. Liza explains â€Å"eldest sons in small Japanese rural communities like this one are historically the inheritors of the family fields.†(2011:182). Because modernization implies urbanization, to younger Japanese citizens â€Å"the option of going to vocational school, or even college, and getting a white-collar job in a city was looking more attractive than staying on the farm† (Dalby 2011:182). The view that modernity is preferable to traditional culture is emphasized in the quote, â€Å"the modern young island girls who where bored to tears by it all couldn’t wait to hop on a boat to the nearby cities on Shikoku† (Dalby 2011:183). Modernization of Japan’s urban centers, including access to new technology such a s boats, dominant education systems, and white-collar jobs negatively affected the rural island community by causing the loss of group identity,  cultural heritage and diversity, and provides a system for further colonization and promotion a western model of the self. The world systems theory can be applied to explain the power relations between Japan and America. As a member of the core category in the world System, Japan is perceived as having advanced technology and complex products (Lalonde lecture 22/01/13). What is not always considered is that underdeveloped societies can exist within developed societies, and when governments assume that all markets in the country value the dominant economic view it monopolizes the production and sale of goods so smaller markets cannot function. On the Japanese Island, farmers were angry that the government was forcing them to import fruit in the open local markets (Dalby 2011). For Mr. H, a Japanese island resident and farmer, â€Å"California oranges were his adversary† (Dalby 2011:184). Mr. T’s opinion resembles the disadvantage of being associated with the core membership. Because globalization values economic trade as the source of well being, smaller markets like the one on Japan’ s rural island are often sacrificed to make room for more lucrative economic agreements. In the ethnography written by anthropologist Chris Boehm, he describes his encounter with the upper Moracha Tribe, in Montenegro, a country in Southeastern Europe. The ethnographic methods he uses to study the isolated tribe consist of participant observation and interviews. The ethnography about the upper Moracha Tribe discusses how globalization and Modernization are shown to negatively impact the village by creating unequal social relations between the tribe and their government. Once an unrestricted society, the ethnography reports that a small government police station was previously stationed in Moracha (Boehm 2011:101). In Montenegrin their â€Å"militantly socialist† government uses force to gain control (Boehm 2011:100). In opposition of government dominance, the Moracha Tribe became â€Å"tantamount to pirates† and engaged in violence, many local people saw â€Å"victims found at the bottom of cliffs†(Boehm 2011:100). Modernization via the introduction of a militant government sparked violence among Montenegrins and changed the way they interacted with their environment. In the capitalist World System Theory, Montenegrins are members of the periphery group causing them to be inherently exploited and oppressed. Historically, the introduction of capitalism can be linked to colonialism. Through imperialism, European colonization meant that foreign  power had cultural, social, and political control over the nations they conquered (Lalonde lecture 22/01/13). The colonizers used their power to exploit the land, resources, and labor, of their colonies to build economic wealth. To maintain this unequal distribution the capitalist mode of production and the world systems theory maintains the oppressive effects of colonialism. Therefore, the violence the Montenegrins display in regards to the actions of their government is also an indirect way of opposing the entire world system of inequality. Because no society can be isolated from the world system, globalization has made the actions of the Montenegrins not only a local individual message, but also a global political one. In conclusion, globalization discussed within the Beng community, the rural Japanese village, and Moracha tribe has caused irreversible damage to their traditional societies. Modernization has contributed to the rejection of cultural identity, heritage, and diversity, contributed to the erosion of traditional family dynamics and customs, and introduced modern political systems to egalitarian societies causing civil conflict changing the way citizens interact with their environment. Looking at cultural change in relation to distribution of power, the world systems theory made it clear that globalization enhances systematic disparity and the unequal distribution of wealth and resources, eliminates small market economies, and drives â€Å"small-scale societies to the edge of extinction [by] forcing them to enter civilization through the dark side of poverty, disease, and forced labor †(Robbins and Larkin 2007:72). Extinction of culture is black and white. To minimize the effects of globalization society must begin to value connection, cooperation, and equality, and continually reflect on how our individual actions affect others. References: Bohem, Chris 2011 Insult and Danger. In Being There: Learning to Live Cross-Culturally. Sarah H. Davis and Melvin Knonner, eds. Pp. 93-111. United States of America: Harvard University Press. Dalby, Liza 2011 Japanese Ghosts Don’t Have Feet. In Being There: Learning to Live Cross-Culturally. Sarah H. Davis and Melvin Knonner, eds. Pp. 35-52. United States of America: Harvard University Press. Gottlieb, Alma and Philip Graham 2011 Mad to Be Modern. In Being There: Learning to Live Cross-Culturally. Sarah H. Davis and Melvin Knonner, eds. Pp. 35-52. United States of America: Harvard University Press. Larkin, Sherrie, and Richard Robbins 2007 Cultural Anthropology: A Problem-Based Approach. Toronto: Nelson Education Ltd.

Laughters

Laughters A wise man say, â€Å"A laugh is a smile that bursts. † A very good morning Madam Chairperson, honourable judges, distinguished time keeper, and members of the floor. Ladies and gentlemen, it is indeed and honour to be given the chance to stand here in front of you, the audience. My task today is to share with you about, â€Å"Laughters. † Parents of newborn babies learn quickly there are many different ways for a baby to cry. One type of cry means the baby is hungry, another says the child needs to be changed and yet another may mean it simply wants some attention.Though these cries may seem indistinguishable to an outsider, parents learn to respond with exactly what their child needs. Parents don't tend to put as much thought into what their child's laugh might mean, unless it sounds really weird and indicates an attack to the people surrounding. In fact, very few people think about differences in laughter at all. We often ask ourselves, why do we laugh? The answer may seem obvious: We laugh when we perceive something funny. But the obvious answer is not correct, at least most of the time.According to the expert Robert Provine; A PhD neurobiologist and Professor of Psychology at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, most laughter is not in response to jokes or humor. Laughter isn't under our conscious control. Infants laugh almost from birth. In fact, people who are born blind and deaf still laugh. So we know it's not a learned behavior. Researcher also says that laughter may be just a simpler way to communicate and show agreement over certain matters.Laughter is a mechanism everyone has. It is part of the universal human vocabulary. All members of the human species understand it. Unlike English or Bahasa Malaysia or French, we don’t have to learn to speak it. We’re born with the capacity to laugh. Laughter is a message that we send to other people. We know this because we rarely laugh when we are alone, do we? La ughter is also specifically a social structure, something that connects humans with one another in a profound way.According to Provine’s findings, people are 30 percent more likely to laugh in a social setting that warrants it than when alone with humour-inducing media. That means that you're more likely to laugh with friends while watching a comedy together than when you're watching the same show or movie by yourself. Though there are many ways to laugh, from giggles to guffaws and from chuckles to cackles, it turns out that we humans laugh for many reasons, some of them are odd. So what are some of the different types and reasons for all the laughter?In first place, The Fake Laughter. This type of laughter comes in handy as a way to get along with others, that’s why sometimes we laugh at things that just aren’t funny, whether we’re with our boss, with our teachers or with our friends. Second, The Contagious Laughter. Imagine you're out for dinner with a group of friends. Someone tells a joke and gets one person laughing, which gets a second person laughing, and it continues to one another. Hence, a circle of laughter is created. Is catching laughter like catching a cold?It's very likely. Besides that, The Nervous Laughter. During times of anxiety, we often laugh in a subconscious attempt to reduce stress and calm down. Laughter lowers the levels of at least four hormones that are associated with stress, so after a good giggle you should be far less tense and anxious. However, nervous laughter usually just heightens the awkwardness of the situation. Let’s move on to The Belly Laughter. Belly laughter is considered as the most honest type of laughter.It may also be the hardest type to experience, because we have to find something truly hilarious before we'll let go with the kind of laughter that has us clutching our bellies and gasping for air. Next, The Silent Laughter. This happens when you laugh so hard no sound actually c omes out and sometimes, tears are coming out of your unsuspecting eyes . It’s like the laugh gets confused and forgets to come from the back of your throat. This laughter stays lodged inside of your brain and you hear it loudly in your head. Lastly, The Unappropriate Laughter.Fortunate because laughter is fun (and  good for your health  , remember? ). Misfortunate because this type of laughter could potentially offend someone else or ruin a particular mood. You've probably heard some motherly person say, â€Å"It isn't polite to laugh at others' expense. † Classic examples of this are to laugh while attending a person’s funeral, or maybe when someone farted, which is pretty funny, that you’re the only one who heard it or smelled it. If someone else hears your laughter they could be infected by it, because we all know that laughter is contagious.I’ve mentioned few ways of laughter; The Fake Laughter, The Contagious Laughter, The Nervous Laughter , The Belly Laughter, The Silent Laughter and lastly The Unappropriate Laughter. Ladies and gentlemen, which laughter do you prefer? This list of different types of laughter is not the end-all be-all, but it is pretty close. Even so, laughter takes on many different forms. As has been said, we`ve all heard the phrase â€Å"laughter  is the best medicine. † But what matters are when laughter is shared, it binds people together and increases happiness and intimacy. Thank you.

Behavioral Economic Research Concerning Ethical...

Method Embarking upon this study, I sought a premise of behavioral economic research concerning ethical consumerism and connections to psychology. Through basic search engines and the citations of other articles, a comprehensive set of studies and articles was compiled to identify and frame the research question. As a study focusing primarily on a marketing and psychological relationship, a primarily correlational research design was employed with a local survey to evaluate any behavioral connections and contribute to the present discussion; the use of a mixed research method allowed the study to gauge the participants’ perspectives more accurately and openly while maintaining a statistical basis. Following a similar format to the survey†¦show more content†¦On the other hand, socio-economic status, has yielded limited positive correlation with fair trade consumerism, so the survey captured the views of participants in most fields of work, with no field representing a majority, lending a reasonable control for socio-economic status. A total of 92 respondents participated in the survey, 63% female and 37% male. As the population of interest was American consumers, I could not create an entirely representative sample of the population, but the aforementioned diversity provides a reasonable idea of this sample. The two fundamental questions in the survey were (Question one), â€Å"How familiar are you with the concept of fair trade?† to gauge fair trade awareness, and (Question two), â€Å"How frequently do you purchase or attempt to purchase fair trade products?† to gauge fair trade consumption. These questions, with four and five answer choices, respectively, provided incremental responses. The answer choices for the former question ranged from, â€Å"I have never heard of fair trade† to â€Å"Very familiar; I often hear about or encounter fair trade products or related information,† while the answer choices to the latter question ranged from â€Å"I have never purposefully bought a fair trade product,† to â€Å"Anytime I shop; I purposefully seek out fair trade products in everything I buy.† The information from this survey parallels similar studies in the field to contribute a deeper understanding of personality in