Revisiting Wether, Incidence and Different Than

Revisiting Wether, Incidence and Different Than Revisiting Wether, Incidence and Different Than Revisiting Wether, Incidence and Different Than By Maeve Maddox wether/whether In researching the recent song lyrics post, I came across a comment written by a high school sophomore. (For the information of non-American readers, a high school sophomore is 15 or 16 years of age.) The student said she was writing a research paper on the influence of song lyrics. I certainly hope she looks up the spelling of the conjunction whether before she finishes her assignment; she used it four times in her comment, each time spelling it wether. wether (noun): a castrated ram. whether (conjunction): one use is to introduce an indirect alternative question expressing doubt or choice between alternatives. More at â€Å"Wether, Weather, Whether.† incident/incidence NPR (National Public Radio) announcers are a rich source of nonstandard English. On a recent morning I listened to Sam Sanders report on a pediatrician who prescribes exercise to his overweight patients. One of the doctor’s techniques is to encourage patients to visit local parks. Sanders mentioned that safety is a concern. He said that one of the parks, Kingman Island, â€Å"had 30 incidences of violent crime over the past year.† The erroneous use of incidences for incidents was cleaned up in the transcript, but it can be heard in the audio (3:33). incident (noun): something that occurs. incidence (noun): the range or scope of a thing; the extent of its influence or effects. For example, â€Å"The incidence of poverty among  the aged has consistently been higher than for any other age group in the United States.† More at: †It’s Not the Ox-Bow Incidence† different from/different than/different to A reader asks, â€Å"Is the correct usage ‘different to’ or ‘different from’? Different to seems very common (almost universal), but surely the essence of difference is separation, not convergence, so isn’t ‘different from’ correct?† This question comes up frequently, often with angry attacks on speakers who use the â€Å"wrong† phrase. Of the three, â€Å"different from† is by far the winner on the Ngram Viewer. â€Å"Different to† is heard more frequently in Britain than in the United States. â€Å"Different than† has its American defenders, but the AP Stylebook comes down firmly for â€Å"from, not than.† The Chicago Manual of Style is less dogmatic, but does say, â€Å"The phrasing different from is generally preferable to different than.† More at †Different from, Different to, Different than.† Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Misused Words category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:100 Words for Facial ExpressionsThe Possessive ApostropheRite, Write, Right, Wright

Theoretical Analysis - The 21st Centy Organization Assignment

Theoretical Analysis - The 21st Centy Organization - Assignment Example The three articles: Why Few Organizations Adopt Systems Thinking by Ackoff; How to be a truly global company by Prahalad and Bhattacharya; and Putting Organizational Complexity in Its Place by Birkinshaw and Heywood, are highly relevant as they provide a huge insight into the factors that are having an impact on organizations in the 21st century. Three reading that are interesting Ackoff (2005) in his article is distinct in its philosophy that system thinking is vital ingredient of organizational success or its failure when it is not part of organizational strategy. According to him, there is a distinct lack of dynamic decision making that takes into account the changing environment and organizational management’s willingness to learn from its failure or wrong decisions. These are important factors because organizational culture does not allow failures thereby not only restricting creativity within organization but also failing to take risk that could provide the organizations with competitive advantage. It is important that one takes the risks and commits mistakes and learns from it. System thinking broadly encourages responsible decision-making and allows its workforce to err in order to make a successful decision next time. In the contemporary environment of competitive business, new challenges need to be faced with equanimity and as new opportunities of growth. Prahalad and Bhattacharya (2011) have given important clues to become a global company with success. They emphasize that organizational restructuring greatly helps to inculcate trust in the stakeholders across the globe. Meeting local demands through customization of products and using local resources is very important for business to gain the trust of the local people where they are doing business. McDonalds’ has customized its products to suit local requirement across its global outlets. Exploiting local talents and cultural competencies become the highlight of truly global companies which thrive on global competitive businesses. Globalization has given a big thrust to industrialization and development through expansion of business across geographical boundaries. In globalization, inter-dependency of resources has become a reality. Thus, flexible approach and acting local with global vision provides the individuals and organizations with greater leverage to compete and gain leverage. Birkinshaw and Heywood (2010) have raised very pertinent issues of organizational complexities within and outside its offices across different geographical areas which emerge due to changing dynamics of business environment in the 21st century. The outdated business processes, ambiguity in roles, conflicting ideologies of pluralistic workforce etc. are vital obstacles that hinder growth. The institutional complexities and individual complexities need to be addressed and managed effectively for higher productive outcome. Institutional complexities are major issues which considerably impact employees’ performance. The complexities like role ambiguity, identifying obstacles like poor processes, product alignment with current demand etc. must be addressed and redefined to accommodate changing preferences of the