Charlie Chaplin & the Little Tramp Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Charlie Chaplin & the Little Tramp - Essay Example Susan Beegel has recently offered the intriguing speculation that the character f Manuel Garcia was based partially on the nineteenth-century matador Manuel Garcia "El Espartero." (Beegel 12-23) Hemingway's article in the Toronto Star Weekly (October 17, 1923) continues to suggest, however, that the character in question was inspired largely by Manuel Garcia Lopez, called "Maera," and his chaotic bullfight at Pamplona in July 1923. Hemingway was a relatively inexperienced spectator when he wrote the article for the Toronto Star Weekly. In fact, he had never seen a bullfight until earlier that spring, and the title f the article, "World Series f Bullfighting a Mad, Whirling Carnival," (White 99-108) characterizes his rather unsubtle response to what he saw. By contrast, in the so-called "miniature" that he wrote about the fictionalized "death" f Maera-shortly after seeing the fight-Hemingway's tone is, despite the subject matter, coldly, if not grotesquely, ironic. Although he had completed a draft f the miniature by late July, he apparently revised it in response to Ezra Pound's comments, because he wrote Pound that he had "redone the death f Maera altogether different.... The new death is good." (Baker 91) Although Hemingway is not, ... Indeed, the potential comedy f Maera's cinematic "death" was not lost on Scott Fitzgerald, who parodied the miniature in a letter to Hemingway in the fall f 1926, a year after the miniature appeared as "Chapter XIV" f In Our Time: "The King f Bulgaria began to whirl round and round.... Soon he was whirling faster and faster. Then he was dead." By the time Fitzgerald wrote him, however, Hemingway had long since moved from comparing Maera's death (in the miniature) to a sped-up film, to comparing Manuel Garcia's bullfight (in "The Undefeated") to a pratfall ballet which echoed not just Maera's bullfight at Pamplona in 1923 but the antics f Chaplin's comic tramp, "little Charlie." Comic bullfights featuring clowns dressed like Chaplin's little tramp were very popular in Spain and France in the Twenties and Thirties. (Campbell 42) And perhaps Hemingway was influenced solely by having seen a bullfight involving "Charlie Chaplins," as he calls them in "The Undefeated." But there is a good possibility that he was inspired to employ the tramp as an analogue in "The Undefeated" by a conversation he had with Fitzgerald's close friend Edmund Wilson, who had written what he called "a great super-ballet f New York for the Swedish Ballet--a pantomime explained by movie captions and with a section f movie film in the middle, for which Or nstein is composing the music and in which we hope to get Chaplin to act." (Wilson 117) Hemingway had first met Wilson in New York, in January 1924 (see Selected Letters, 103, Notes) and apparently learned about the projected ballet at this time. On October 18, 1924, a month before he completed "The Undefeated" (see Selected Letters, 133), originally entitled "The Bullfighters,"

Medical Law & Ethics Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Medical Law & Ethics - Essay Example There are proponents of a universal healthcare insurance plan for all Americans. In this policy, everyone will be entitled to government-controlled health insurance regardless of their financial background (WHO, 2010). I believe that everyone in the US is entitled to equal rights and this includes equal access to medical services. This means that no one should be turned away from a hospital just because they are not properly insured, or because their insurance is not enough to cover medical expenses. Yet there are over 50 million American citizens who cannot afford basic health insurance (Bardes, Shelley and Schmidt, 2008). It is true that not all Americans are well endowed in terms of material wealth. Therefore there are many out there who cannot afford health insurance. I think the introduction of a universal system of health insurance would help lessen the burden of medical costs for many people in America who deserve the same medical care as those who have the means of paying hefty health insurance cover money. I do not think that there is anyone out there who is wiling to part with his or her hard earned cash paying for someone else’s health insurance. However, if this universal health insurance is adopted, someone has to bear the cost. It is a known fact, however, that the money needed for an ambitious project such as a universal healthcare plan will come from the Americans themselves (Bardes, Shelley and Schmidt, 2008). I do not think that this is as bad as people think it is. In any case, this is a classic case of Americans helping their fellow Americans. In my opinion the government is doing a great job in pushing for a universal health insurance system. I believe that the federal government is very capable of running a well organized health insurance system for all Americans. It is about time we started thinking about out fellow Americans who cannot

Effects of the Soviet on the Cuban Missile Crisis

Effects of the Soviet on the Cuban Missile Crisis The Cuban Missile Crisis:Â  Was it the Fault of the Soviets? Introduction The required brevity of this essay precludes the possibility of giving any kind of narrative of the events of the Cuban Missile Crisis; however we will begin with a brief analysis of the origins of the crisis before proceeding to analyse who was to blame and eventually concluding that there were faults on both sides, although more on Kennedy’s than Khrushchev’s. President Kennedy had come to office in 1960 under the generally held, but entirely inaccurate belief that America had far fewer missiles than the Soviets.[1] Almost immediately upon election he committed the US to a massive increase in the US’ nuclear missile arsenal. Even when it was admitted that the US in fact had far more missiles than the Soviet Union, the building program did not slow down (Kahan Long, 1972, 565). Giglio has argued that the crisis arose out of a personal vendetta of the Kennedy’s against Castro himself (Giglio, 1991, 190). It is long established that the CIA were engaged in attempts to assassinate Castro.[2] Robert Kennedy even held responsible for these operations for a time (Chang Kornbluh, 1992, 20-23). The American trade embargo on Cuba and the growing belief that an invasion was imminent led the Soviet Union to threaten war if any such event should occur (Giglio, 1991, 190). We can say, with hindsight, that direct invasion was unlikely given the disastrous Bay of Pigs incident, however this was certainly not clear to the Soviets at the time. Bohlen and Thompson have noted that the Russians had never before placed nuclear weapons outside of their territory and that placing them in Cuba could have been seen by the Americans as a direct threat to their national security. The Russians now had a first strike capability on America’s very doorstep with the ability to strike anywhere at will. This was a threat that Kennedy simply could not ignore (Beschloss, 1991 424). From the Soviets perspective, they may have seen the positioning of missiles in Cuba as a way of balancing the strategic superiority the US had over them in such weapons. Who was to blame? John and Robert Kennedy, Nikita Khrushchev, Adlai Stevenson, Kenneth Keating and Dean Acheson all played significant roles in creating or exacerbating the crisis. It is beyond doubt that Khrushchev had made the critical decision to place missiles in Cuba; but Kennedy’s campaign to overthrow Castro had helped convince the Russian Premier that they were needed to act as a deterrent to American invasion. Keating and other Republicans had forced Kennedy to promise the American electorate that he would resist any attempts to put missiles on Cube, compelling Kennedy to action in October 62. Even Stevenson, whose ideas and policies throughout the crisis were generally sound, had contributed by laying the foundation in 61 for the Cubans to be ejected from the OAS (White, 1996, 232). External and Internal factors were no doubt in operation during the build up to the crisis. External factors were certainly of vital importance. Khrushchev almost certainly believed that placing missiles in Cuba would close the strategic gap that he knew to exist; it would also help appease the Chinese and provide a bargaining chip in negotiations with the west (White, 1996, 233). Kennedy’s policy in Cuba was not new. It was underpinned by the standard assumptions of American Cold War policy: monolithism, the domino effect and the lessons of the 1930’s Garthoff, 1989 43ff). Kennedy felt that Castro was Khrushchev’s puppet, and far to close for comfort. He also believed that this extension of Soviet influence was unacceptable and could lead, in a domino like fashion, to a whole series of communist revolutions in Latin America. The evident failure of appeasement towards Hitler in the 1930’s demonstrated that a touch stance was required. The internal factors that contributed to the crisis have generally been considered of lesser importance by historians; in particular, on the American side, Kennedy’s relationship with the liberals in his government. If JFK had been more receptive, he would probably have rejected the Bay of Pigs proposals. He also likely would not have organised such a concerted campaign against Castro in 1961 and 62. A more liberal Cuban policy would not have increased Khrushchev’s fears over the likelihood of invasion, making deployment of missiles far less likely. Accepting Stevenson’s proposal to offer the Soviets a negotiated settlement at the same time as the blockade was announced could have brought about a quicker and safer resolution to the crisis (White, 1996, 234). Kennedy’s relationship with Republicans was also significant. In order to prevent accusations of weakness, he had told the American public that the Soviet build up in Cuba did not represent a significant threat because they had not included missiles. In 1962 when that situation changed, Kennedy had little choice but to respond swiftly. It also ensured that Kennedy’s response could not be one of toleration (White, 1996, 235). During Kennedy’s campaign for the Presidency in 1960 he had criticised Eisenhower for his failure to prevent the rise of Castro and had pledged to remove him from power if elected (Dinerstein, 1976, 21ff). Khrushchev’s belief that, after the Bay of Pigs, Kennedy would again try to fulfil his election promise and attempt to remove Castro, this time directly using American military power, was one of the key factors behind Khrushchev’s decision to install warheads on Cuba. It can be argued, therefore, that there was a clear causal link between the 1960 re-election campaign and the missile crisis, with the former helping to bring about the Bay of Pigs, which in turn helped convince Khrushchev of the need to protect Cuba and thus install missiles (White, 1996, 235). Kennedy also believed in the connection between public opinion and policy, this also helped define the approach towards Castro’s Cuba. One of the lessons to be learned from Britain’s appeasement of Hitler in the late 1930’s was that the public can, at times, exert an unhealthy influence over the pursuit of the national interest. In the case of 1930’s Britain, various pressure groups acted to prevent an increase in military spending. Kennedy, with these lessons in mind, was drawn towards secret operations that would not trigger a public debate. Domestic concerns were also of paramount importance to Khrushchev and certainly contributed to his decision to deploy missiles on Cuba. The Soviet Premiere evidently felt that Russian nuclear weapons in the Caribbean would allow his to justifiably make the argument to the rest of the Soviet ruling class that they significantly improved the Soviet strategic position and that it would therefore be safe to resume the program of cutting troop numbers in order that funds could be diverted away from military spending and towards the civilian economy, which even then was not in a good condition. Installing missiles in Cuba would allow Khrushchev to adopt a strategy of brinkmanship with Kennedy. Kennedy’s public assertion of nuclear superiority (however true) had seriously undermined Khrushchev’s position in the autumn of 1961. Brinkmanship was essentially a way of achieving foreign policy goals without the application of any actual resources: Khrushchev could, therefore, essen tially concentrate on domestic rather than defence needs with his limited resources. Kennedy and Khrushchev were jointly responsible for the crisis. Khrushchev’s decision to install missiles on Cuba was an un-necessary risk. He could have secured the Cuban dictators position, and appeased the Chinese at the same time, be moving troops and conventional arms to the island; although this would have detracted from his domestic agenda. Faced with the prospect of a military clash with the Soviet Union it is highly likely that Kennedy would have abandoned any plans to again attach Cuba (White, 1996, 236). Kennedy was equally culpable for the crisis. Before Khrushchev ever ordered missiles to Cuba, Kennedy had ordered the CIA sponsored invasion, ordered various assassination attempts on Castro, installed a tight embargo on trade to and from the island, approved working towards Cuba’s removal from the OAS and approved large scale military operations in the region (Nash, 1997, 117ff). That Kennedy appeared not to realise that these actions would annoy the Soviets seems, to say the least, naive. He also failed to realise, or perhaps did not care, that his massive increases in defence spending coupled with public proclamations of superiority would trouble the Russians. Although Kennedy and Khrushchev shared, to varying degrees, the responsibility for causing the crisis, they also much share the credit for defusing it. They managed to avoid clashes on the high seas, and in a letter sent to Kennedy on October 26th, Khrushchev showed that he was willing to be the first to make concessions in order to secure a peaceful resolution. Kennedy on the other hand was able to astutely and effectively respond to the two conflicting letters send by Khrushchev on the 26th and 27th of October (White, 1996, 238). All too often Kennedy’s Cuban policies have been prone to oversimplification, much like assessments of his Presidency in general. His record on Cuba was neither excellent in a way that his supporters claim, nor poor as per his detractors Kennedy’s pre crisis approach to Castro was misguided; he also tinkered with but never fully engaged with as examination of America’s cold war position (White, 1996, 238). Conclusion Khrushchev’s decision in 1962 to install nuclear weapons on Cuba was almost certainly not required to fulfil his various foreign, domestic and defence policy objectives. His belief that American military intelligence would fail to detect the missiles on Cuba before they were fully operational was foolish and mistaken. Most importantly of all, Khrushchev should have realised that the new American administration would never tolerate Soviet missiles on Cuba, able to deliver a first strike capability to the Soviet Union. The decision made confrontation inevitable. Kennedy on the other hand was far more culpable. His approach to Castro before the crisis was misguided to say the least. The assassination attempts code named project Mongoose, his aborted invasion, trade embargo etc. as noted above all smack of bullying and of a deep seated hatred. He repeatedly implemented policies towards Cuba that were unnecessarily hostile. His belief that a communist Cuba would lead to the spread of communism throughout the Latin American world smacks of paranoia. He failed to take advantage of opportunities before the crisis arose to improve relations with Havana and Moscow and he failed to listen to his liberal advisors like Stevenson. As with most international problems throughout history, the fault does not lay with just one side. The leaders of both nations have to take some of the blame but it seems evident that Khrushchev was largely acting in response to American aggression and was the first to offer a negotiated peace that would allow the situation to be defused. Kennedy should also be praised in the final analysis for allowing the Soviets to save face by negotiating away the American Jupiter missiles in Turkey (Nash, 1997, 150-176). The crisis need never have arisen in the first place, but it appears largely to be America acting and the Soviets reacting. Bibliography M. P. Beschloss, Kennedy V. Khrushchev: The Crisis Years (Boston 1991) L. Chang P. Kornbluh, The Cuban Missile Crisis: A National Security Archive Documents Reader (New York 1992) H. S. Dinerstein, The Making of a Missile Crisis: October 1962 (London 1976) R. L. Garthoff, Reflections on the Cuban Missile Crisis (Washington D. C. 1989) J. N. Giglio, The Presidency of John F. Kennedy (Kansas 1991). R. Helsman, The Cuban Missile Crisis: Struggle Over Policy (London 1996) J. H. Kahan A. K. Long, The Cuban Missile Crisis: A Study of its Strategic Context, Political Science Quarterly, 87 (1972) P. Nash, The Other Missiles of October (London 1997) S. M. Stern, Averting ‘The Final Failure’: John F. Kennedy and the Secret Cuban Missile Crisis Meetings (Stanford, California, 2003) M. J. White, The Cuban Missile Crisis (London 1996) 1 Footnotes [1] The US in fact had 17 times more warheads than the Soviet Union, (Giglio, 1991, 192.) [2] The so called operation Mongoose.

I Serve No Master; I Am Chaos :: Personal Narrative Writing

I Serve No Master; I Am Chaos Works Cited Missing Let's be blunt; you, Professor, want to know who is the person writing my papers. To be more clear, you want to know what is the difference between Bill, the person who writes the papers for your class, and the other Bill, who is a son, friend, brother, cohort in crime, and what other title is given to me. It is you who wants to know the voice behind this black ink and white paper, or the electrons if you read this off a computer screen. You have suggested that I, as well as the rest of the class, begin with our first paper. I would rather start with the second paper. Do you remember my second paper? It's the one about writing beyond the theme. Oh, wait, -- roughly twenty other students wrote similar papers. I'll be more specific; I wrote a narrative story about a Dungeons and Dragons game. In it, I wrote about a third person incident in which the protagonist is slowly replaced by a fictional character he plays in a role-playing game. I was trying to show how it was impossible to escape what professors want out of student papers. The game master, Chris, was my metaphor for the professor. As the G.M., he expects that I, as a player, suppress anything else going on in my life and do what is required of me as a game player. In a similar sense, that is exactly what teachers want in one of my paper; to write exactly what is required of me in order to match their expectations. This was the original point to my paper. However, I became a victim to what I was attempting to overcome. I turned in my paper and the teacher (that means you, Mike) didn't like it. I had to re-write it in a week's time or I would not receive credit for the assignment. With the gun loaded and pointed to my head, I re-wrote the paper. I edited my original point out of the paper, changed the format, and added a new point about bending the rules of writing. I received a B+. Even in the attempt to escape normal expectations, I failed. So who's voice was writing that paper? It was mine first time around, but it was not mine second time. The first paper was me. It was based on a true event.

Market Control: Boeing

Boeing is no doubt a market leader in the aircraft manufacturing industry with heavy presence in virtually all continents.   This places Boeing in a better place in the market control due to its ability and potential to influence aircraft prices.   Although market control for Boeing has not been that easy considering the stiff competition from competitors such as Airbus, mostly it is Boeing which evidently exerts a great deal of influence on the price of aircrafts. As a result, Boeing has been able to combine cutting edge technology with its market position to its advantage. Although aircraft-manufacturing industry has considerably many players, few have a global presence and can significantly have an input in the market control.   Boeing happens to be among the few players who influence prices. The fact that there are relatively more buyers of aircrafts than there are sellers especially of heavy and fighter airplanes means that the sellers can easily exert market control.   Considering this imbalance between strength of buyers and the control of the manufacturers, Boeing has come up as a market power.   The ability of Boeing in market control is not only evident in price control, but in innovation of new and modern products such as; custom made accommodation in the aircrafts especially targeting the business and tourist segment of market. Evidence of market control of Boeing is seen in the positively sloped supply curve which has characterized the market prices for Boeing’s products in the past decade.   Market control has had an effect on Boeing especially considering that, all of the functions of management such as planning; organizing, coordinating and controlling are pegged on market performance.   Market control has seen profits for Boeing stabilize which means the management of Boeing can strategically plan for expansion programs and other programs with certainty. With market control, it is easier to estimate sales volume with certainty, and therefore planning for staff needs becomes easy for Boeing as well as the organization of Boeing’s organizational structures.   It becomes easier for the management of Boeing to control its internal processes as well as its external process due to its market control ability.   Market control has made it possible for Boeing to source and maintain highly motivated staff due to the fact that Boeing has been able to maximize profits. The market control especially on aircraft prices by Boeing portents the danger of pushing small competitors out of business. As a result of market control by Boeing, there lacks perfect control as Boeing together with a few other industry big players continue to drive small firms out of business and therefore denying the buyers the freedom of choice as well as the satisfaction that comes with the freedom of choice.   Market control has resulted into a near monopoly situation in the aircraft manufacturing industry although in actual sense, Boeing’s environment is oligopoly. Market control by Boeing has resulted into a situation whereby, due to lack of many potential substitutes, Boeing continues to exert influence in pricing, making its prices some of the most exorbitant in the market.   On the other hand, market control has seen Boeing grow into a very profitable organization therefore creating benefits to the society by providing job opportunities as well as by engaging in sponsorship programs in the society. As a result of the market control mechanism employed by Boeing, decision-making process has become easy, as delegation is possible.   Market control mechanisms at Boeing has made it possible for the management at Boeing to execute its organizing, planning, coordinating and controlling functions easily as the market is friendly, less turbulent and predictable.   Despite the sustained competition from Airbus, Boeing still commands market control and it should be able to regain some of the market share it has lost to Airbus in the past few years. Reference http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/01/13/aribus_ed3._.php Accessed on 8/4/2007. www.tau.ac.il/~razin/Airbus%20versus%20Boeing%20revisited.doc Accessed on 8/4/2007.      

Crisis and Risk Management for Business Continuity: The Case of Northern Rock

a) Research problem The global economic crisis has topped the many discussions in the business world today. The current credit crunch is not only being felt in the United States where the actual problem started but in the United Kingdom as well, with more companies feeling the pinch by the day. It is a pity that many businesses have been declared bankrupt following the shock experienced from the crisis. It is however notable that the blame is partly on their side. The reason for this is that many businesses today have not bothered to come up with crisis and risk management plans to shield their businesses from such shocks. They operate based on the current situations and pay little attention to disasters that are likely to affect the business and how these effects can be minimized. Even where attempts have been made, crisis and risk management plans do not fully address all the potential risks that are likely to face the company. Another issue is that whenever the said crises occur, these plans are not properly set out so that they often end up doing little to save the situation. These characteristics perfectly fit the circumstances surrounding the liquidity crisis at Northern Rock between 2007 and 2008. Northern Rock is a British bank that is now under public ownership following a government bailout in 2008. The bank which started off as a building society became a bank in 1997 when its shares were offered in the London Stock Exchange. As of September 2008, the bank which is ranked as one of the top mortgage lenders in the UK employed 4500 employees. Until 2007, Northern Rock was doing well and was considered one of the fastest growing banks in the UK; at least based on its asset base. The ongoing economic crisis however sent the bank giant reeling as banks tightened their lending rates. As if this was not enough, funding from covered bonds and the securitisation model which made up 75 percent of Northern Rock's funds started deteriorating and eventually these markets closed simultaneously following the economic crisis. What followed was crisis after crisis as the bank threatened to go down. On September 2007, the Northern Rock approached the Bank of England to request for a liquidity support facility to contain some of the problems it was facing following the credit crunch. This caused a bank run as customers rushed to withdraw their savings. The bank was overwhelmed and intervention by the state was necessary to save the bank giant. The UK financial Investment Limited now manages the bank at â€Å"arms length† for the government which was taken into government ownership in February 2008. Northern Rock's inability to deal with the crisis has been blamed on poor risk and crisis management. b) Justification of the study The near collapse of Northern Rock is a wake up call to every business that intends to survive past any kind of crisis.Business Management Study Guide The misfortunes encountered by Northern Rock and the consequences of these should be a good lesson for other companies to learn from through the implementation of risk and crisis management. The challenge however still remains and unless the issue is addressed by giving managers a guide, another company could still go the Northern Rock way. This study will address this challenge effectively by revealing all that a manager needs to know about crisis and risk management for business continuity. Three issues are at hand with each of them carrying substantial weight. Firstly, only a few companies undertake crisis and risk management. Secondly, the few of those who have taken the initiative have not given it adequate attention. Thirdly, when the actual crisis occurs, implementation of the set plan is not normally adhered to so that the essence of the plan is in fact dissolved. Other companies just like Northern Rock are constantly at risk of disasters and hence the knowledge about how to deal with them is quite invaluable. The research which mainly aims at uncovering the dangers of not having a crisis management plan and how having one could save the company's future and form a useful guide to business managers. c) Objectives of the study. In order to ensure that this research addressed the above problems while maintaining the scope of the study, the following objectives were used to guide the research. †¢ To establish whether Northern Rock had any crisis and risk management plans in place. †¢ To identify the importance of crisis and risk management plans. †¢ To show how Northern Rock could have survived the crisis using crisis and risk management planning. Literature Review a) The Case of Northern Rock In the second half of the 2007, Northern Rock became the first bank in the UK to experience a bank run since 1866 (Shin, 2008: 2). World lenders' balance sheets were already shrinking so that banks had reduced their lending and interest rates were going up following the credit crunch (Llewellyn, 2008: 35-36). The credit crunch originated from the U. S sub-prime mortgages that led to a shortage in money available to banks for lending. The bank's over-reliance on securitisation and covered bonds is considered the major cause of the of Northern Rock's downfall (Tevin, 2008: 13). Securitisation is used to refer to the kind of funding where mortgages are used as security to obtain loans from other banks (Shin, 2008: 6). Being a prominent mortgage lender, the bank had quite a substantial amount of security. The mortgages were also used to secure covered bonds which were a constant source of finance for the bank. These two types of markets made up 75 percent of the bank's source of finance and therefore when they collapsed at the same time, the bank's finances were threatened (Victoria, 2006: 2). On the other hand, banks were shrinking their lending rates and therefore the bank could not afford to pay up its dues and sustain its mortgage lending. An innovation unique to the bank is also associated with the downfall. Northern used model that they referred to as â€Å"originate to distribute† in which they could take loans and then sell them to other investors before they matured such that they obtained additional funds and the liability of the loans was transferred to the investors (Tevin, 2008: 15). As a result of the credit crisis, the bank could not sustain its financial needs and consequently could not meet market demand. North Rock's method of funding is described by Shin (2008: 8) as an unusual business model. While banks are expected to have customer deposits as their major liabilities, Northern Rock operated on securitised loans which they offered as mortgages to their customers. Long-term loans which they repaid using the payments paid by mortgage beneficiaries were used to pay -up the loans (Llewellyn, 2008: 37-38). The mortgages were also used as security for additional loans. Deposits only accounted for 23 percent of the finances held by the bank (Tevin, 2008: 14). Given that banks heavily rely on deposits as their major assets and source of financing, the amount available was limited when loans could not provide for the required amounts. Attempts to sell off the bank were unsuccessful because no investor wanted to risk taking up an endangered bank (Adams, 2008: 1). The bank obtained the government bailout from the Bank of England in form of emergency funding (Adams, 2008: 1; Laughton, 2008: 1). This was done in the knowledge that collapse of Northern Rock could cause a major shake-up in the banking industry (Laughton, 2007: 1). The news on Northern Rock's bailout caused a bank run and depositors rushed to withdraw their money. At the same time, the share prices fell by 31 percent (Lastra, 168). b) Crisis and Risk Management. Crisis and risk management is a commonly ignored function of the management but which can play a significant role in determining the destiny of a company. Reliable studies reveal that most organisations do not take crisis and risk management seriously such that they do not put aside plans meant to counter unexpected crises (Robert and Lajtha, 2002: 184). According to McConnell and Drennan (2006: 62), the reason for this is that the probability of occurrence of crises is low within most business environments such that managers find no reason to use the company's resources to invest in countering risks that may never happen anyway. This notion is however wrong because no organisation is immune to crises and risks in the course of its operations. Yemen (2001: 65) notes that crises and disasters carry no warning and consequently always catch businesses unaware. Before they can react to the crisis by getting effective solutions, the damage is already done and chances of survival are highly minimized (McConnel and Dreannan, 2006: 60). For this reason, it is inevitable for every company to consider crisis and risk management in their strategic plan. Salter (1997: 60) defines crisis and risk management as the act of coming up with policies and procedures to be used to identify, analyse, treat and monitor risk. It is a guide on how to deal with crises and risks should they occur and how to recover from their effects (Pingeone, 2006: 37). The procedure of risk management involves the identification of areas where the company predicts that things may go wrong (Lee et al, 2007: 335). This could fall in any department of the organization. While some may be general, some risks are more likely to occur in one company than in another depending on their operations (Robert and Lajtha, 2002: 184) Crises and risks are always occurring in the business management and it is hard to predict what will happen the following day. While risks are used to represent threats or possibilities of an occurrence of misfortunes, the term crisis is used when the actual misfortune actually occurs (Lagadec 1997: 28; Shrivatsava, 1988: 284). Physical disasters such as fires, terrorist attacks, phishing attacks, floods among other disasters are among the major kinds of crises. These should however not form the sole focus of the company because they the business is bound to face many external and economic forces that could influence its performance. For example, relying on one source for supply of materials could lead to a crisis if this supplier can no longer make the supplies to the company (Pingeone, 2006: 100). It is therefore essential that a company makes such a consideration when determining the future of the business. This is actually what happened to Northern Rock who had relied on securitisation and long-term loans as their source of finance so that when banks could not lend as much as they demanded, they were left desperate with no other major source and hence had to turn to the government for help. ) Crisis and Risk Management Plan Crisis and risk management plans help to lay down the steps to be taken in the event of a crisis and in keeping the various risks that a company is exposed to at bay. In coming up with a crisis and risk management plan, the company ought to identify any possible risks that it is likely to suffer in the course of its operations (Alderman, 2008: 149; McMillan, 2006: 89). These risks are then assessed so as to come up with plausible ways of addressing them whenever they arise. This is known as making plans for post crisis actions (Alexander, 169-171). Crisis and risk management plans ensure that every employee participates in the company's safety precautions while ensuring that risks and crises are handled in the right manner. Designing the Crisis and Risk Management Plan It is notable that most companies have not yet put a risk and crisis management plan in place (Carmeli and Schaubroeck 2008: 182). This mostly stems from the fact that managers try to be optimistic; hoping that no disaster will occur. In other circumstances, they simply wish to eliminate the â€Å"unnecessary† expense on something that might never happen. There are however those who are simply ignorant and do not know how to go about implementing a plan. Further still, once the crisis and risk management plan is put in place, its implementation is often a challenge when the actual risk occurs. This is brought about by the panic that often characterises a crisis. Pingeone (2006: 99) notes that the management plan should be followed to the letter unless the situation calls for modification. He adds that the plan should act as a guide and it is for this reason that it is prepared. If properly followed while trying to adjust certain elements to fit the situation, it should be easy to solve the crisis than when there is no plan at all. The challenge of coming up with an effective plan is also cited as a problem given that response and recovery is largely influenced by the kind of crisis and risk management plan that the company has in place. To curb this problem, Smith (2001: 64-65), Fink (1986: 36-39), Gottschalk (2002:96) and Mitroff (2001: 29-35) give the following key elements that are desired for a risk and crisis management plan to be effective. Provision for continuous identification, evaluation and management of risk should be put in place. This is because the company is bound to face new challenges everyday and in the wake of globalisation, new economic and social risks and challenges keep cropping up (Mitroff, 2001: 33). ? Constant review of the effectiveness of the plan is necessary to ensure that all the desired aspects are addressed. Analysing the system of internal control which is part of the risk and crisis control annually can help the company to identify whether the plan is working as desired. For all crisis and risk management plans, the systems developed should rhyme with the organisational culture so that collisions do not occur. ? The crisis and risk management plan must be flexible and one that can effectively respond to evolving risks. A good crisis and risk management plan offers flexibility such that change in policy and new company strategy may be implemented in order to deal with the crisis at hand (Smi th, 2001: 65). ? The plan should set proper reporting procedures to be followed in the event of occurrence of an incident. On top of that, a procedure for reporting failures in the plan should be well laid out. ? The crisis and risk management plan should provide for training to all members of staff so that they are aware of the roles to take in the event of a disaster, the reporting procedures and any other relevant information contained in the plan. Research Design and Method Introduction This portion of the study establishes the ability of the company to satisfy the set objectives. It shows the design of procedures used in the study and outlines the major limitations involved during the study. Research scope The previously set objectives aim at establishing whether there was a crisis and risk management plan at Northern Rock and what could have been done better to further contain the crisis. The study is therefore limited to Northern Rock and to crisis and risk management as a management strategy. The liquidity crisis at Northern Rock forms the basis of the study. Data and data collection The data collection process was applied in such a way that its efficiency could be gauged by the results obtained from the study. In doing so, primary and secondary data were employed in the entire study process. a) Primary data This formed an important part of the research as it helped in obtaining factual information from direct respondents. The use of written questionnaires and oral interviews to obtain information from the respondents was used. The data obtained was assimilated during the analysis of the study. Respondents were notified prior to their interviews so as to ensure that the information was more accurate. b) Secondary data The use of secondary data was invaluable in the study. This is in recognition that any research must incorporate other people's work as a precedent to the study. The use of journals, books, articles and other scholarly works were highly used to obtain the theory surrounding the study. The literature review practically involved the reviewing other people's work so that secondary data was of great importance. Sample selection, technique, and size The study sample incorporated a few present and former company officials as well as economic analysts who studied the Northern Rock liquidity crisis. Strategic sampling system was used to identify the officials and individuals to be interviewed during the period of study. A total of twenty five respondents were sent questionnaires and eight agreed to perform an oral interview. Eighteen questionnaires were returned and observations and responses were assimilated for the purpose of the study. Ethics of the research methodology At the beginning of the study, the research set an objective of reducing respondents' compromise as far as possible. In order to satisfy this, respondents were not required to mention specific names within the company. For privacy purposes, respondents' names were not required in the questionnaires. This served to raise the confidentiality levels as a factor in conducting scholarly research. Limitations of the study Even though this methodology played a vital role in satisfying the set objectives, various limitations faced the researcher. Without these limitations, more information would have been obtained to further improve the study. Among the major constraints was the high level of expenses. These included questionnaire printing and posting costs as well as travelling costs to meet the respondents. The problem of incomplete questionnaires was prevalent mostly due to the highly complex human nature so that some of the staff members could have been worried about giving information they considered confidential due to fears of victimization. This could have contributed to errors in the information obtained. The time element was also limiting which did not enable maximum amount of data as would have been desired. Analysis and Findings Most of the respondents in the study ascertained that Northern Rock was lucky and were it not for the government bailout; the bank would have landed into bankruptcy. Unavailability of credit which was actually the bank's major source of finance was an unfathomable blow to the bank whose reputation had made it the fastest growing mortgage lender in the UK. The situation was made worse by the bank run which was in essence caused by the media portrayal of the crisis (Victoria, 2008: 117-119). Nelkin (1998: 347-348) notes that the media could highly influence how a crisis affects the company due to messages and speculations made. As soon as the bank sought help from the Bank of England, word went round through the media and the public went into panic following the collapse of the bank. The result was huge amounts of withdrawals which highly overwhelmed the bank's finances (Shin, 2008: 6). Northern Rock therefore sunk into losses and could barely afford to sustain the payment of loans. Analysts involved in the study suggested that the bank run could have been avoided had the bank's management taken Northern Rock's crisis management plan In an effort to keep focus on the research scope, only the section of the crisis and risk management plan associated with the liquidity crisis was analysed. For each point noted, a note on how the situation could have been handled better is provided. Northern Rock management had given a thought to the possibility of reduction of market at home and shortage of funds from local banks. To help reduce this possibility, the bank had diversified its operations to other countries like Canada, United States, Europe, Australia and Far East (Tevin, 2008: 21-22). This was considered to be a substantial backup for any eventualities in the domestic market. The company had also secured its liquidity through insurance to cover for any shortages. In their plan however, they had not anticipated a crisis that would cause the collapse of their major sources of funds at the same time. It would have been unimaginable that the source of finance that seemed so reliable would collapse leaving the bank destitute. Even Dr Ridley; the bank's chairman had noted that the bank had not though at one time that its sources of finance could collapse at the same time (Llewellyn, 2008: 49). This just goes on to show that crises are not easily predictable and that routine can be deceiving. The fact that Northern Rock's long-term sources of finances were always available to them due to the high amount of mortgage securities almost ruled out the possibility of running out of finances. The Northern Rock crisis management can be said to have been inadequate. The reasoning behind this is that should it have been adequate, the liquidity crisis may have been avoided or subsidised. As noted by Regester et al (2005: 196-198), a good plan must entail the guidelines to be followed in the event of a crisis. Further, Northern Rock's management failed to predict; which is one of the objectives of the bank's risk management plan. Varma (2008: 1) notes that banks should be able to use cash flow projections to anticipate future fluctuations in demand for their customers. Using these projections, they can easily determine whether a liquidity problem is likely to arise due to increased demand or whether inventory will pile up as a result of reduced demand. It is also possible to gauge from the rise in interest rates offered by banks and other security traders. Such information could have proved vital to the management and this could have been used to limit mortgage lending and hence reduce the impact of the crisis. As noted by Tevin (2008: 17), the bank did not even have adequate liquidity insurance, a lesson which the England Governor noted could have been learnt from Countrywide, a US bank that suffered the same crisis that Northern Rock was facing. Insurance cover serves in ensuring that the company's assets are protected. This ensures that whenever assets that the company has insured against are lost in the event of a crisis, compensation can protect it from committing more resources in replacing the asset (Alderman, 2008: 204). With such knowledge the bank could have obtained enough liquidity insurance as security for the future. They could also have provided for plans to cope with a credit crisis should they get into the same position with Countrywide. This way, it could have been ready and encountered the crisis more boldly without having to seek government bailout. Northern Rock over-relied on one source of finance so that when it collapsed the effect was quite staggering. The theory of crisis management warns against relying on one source of supply because its failure could have detrimental effects on the company (Coombs, 1999: 114-115). Northern Rock had been relying heavily on loans gained from mortgage securities to finance their clients' mortgage needs and when they could not afford to meet the demand following the reduced liquidity levels, they had nowhere to turn to (Congdon, 2009: 11). Banks which were willing to lend proved too expensive for the bank to afford and still continue to operate comfortably. The whole problem arose because once these sources of finance collapsed; there was no other source of finance leading to the liquidity crisis. It is a major observation that companies rarely think about the possibility of a time when a certain source of supply will not be available to them because as long as they are concerned they have always relied on the source (Wiley, 2006: 85). Northern Rock should have diversified more as a way to maintain the flow of funds. For example, they could have used more deposits instead of relying on loans only. Tevin (2008: 14) notes that only 23 percent of their liquidity was in the form of deposits which Victoria (2008: 119) notes to be the major sources of bank liabilities. By focusing on loans, they lost their major source of money supply when the credit crunch set in. The management did not act swiftly to respond to rumours about liquidity shortages. According to Tevin (2008: 24) the bank had received warning signs about a possible shortage in credit as a result of the ongoing economic crisis. The Financial Stability Report that the Bank of England released in April 2008 suggested that wholesale funding which was on the rise in the market could pose unforeseeable danger to liquidity (Llewellyn, 2008: 51). Analysts had also predicted the same. Instead of analysing the possible risk and taking measures, Northern Rock continued with the expansionary lending policy (Tevin, 2008: 24). Mortgages continued to be issued yet there was a possibility of being unable to sustain the demand following the credit shortage. If the management had acted wisely, it could have limited the mortgage lending so as to save the finances available until a favourable time came. Its ability to detect the possibility of such an occurrence was limited hence the reason why the company was caught unawares. The crisis and risk management plan was not also well utilized when the bank realized its plight. Referring to the liquidity crisis, Northern Rock CEO maintained that the prediction made by the bank about its source of finances had been wrong in assuming that the mortgage assets would maintain the bank's liquidity. The company has made an attempt to recover from the crisis using the government assistance issued and change in strategy. This is part of a crisis management plan which requires that a company take the necessary measures to correct a crisis. As noted by Smith (2000, 65), Northern Rock had to change strategy so as to better manage the crisis. Their â€Å"Together† loans for example were withdrawn. These loans were an incentive to first time buyers and involved combining a secured and unsecured loan to obtain finance (Tevin, 2008: 26). The bank however could not manage to offer these loans given their financial constraints and had to withdraw them. The bank is still recovering and depositors have started gaining trust in the bank again more so because the government ownership provides a substantial level of financial security. Conclusions and Recommendations After an analysis of the case of Northern Rock and the importance of crisis and risk management, it would be true to say that the company's crisis and risk management plan was not properly implemented during the liquidity crisis. The plan was also inadequate to address the seriousness of the problem given that the company had never anticipated a risk of such magnitude. It is also true that every company needs to have a crisis and risk management plan to help in coping with disasters and incidents if they occur. It can therefore be concluded that having a crisis and risk management plan cannot be useful if it is not well implemented. This is as in the case of Northern Rock which did not react to the warning signs of the impending danger of a liquidity crisis through finding alternative sources of funds or through reducing its lending capacity. Northern Rock suffered a great deal from the liquidity crisis due to poor implementation of crisis and risk management. The plan was also inadequate and insurance cover taken could not compensate for the loss incurred. What matters however is not what has been lost in the past; but what can be saved in future. As Lagadec 1997: 28; Shrivatsava (1988: 284) suggest, a crisis should act as a learning opportunity for a company to make changes and improvements. The bank needs to focus on building more solid and workable plans to contain such crises as they could happen again in the future. The plan should be made by incorporating all the various aspects of a good crisis and risk plan indicated in this study. This means that the plan to be implemented should focus on constant examination of possible risks and designing of proper measures to counter them. There should also be plans set to address crises in the event that they arise as well as plans to recover after a crisis. This does not mean that the bank should exhaust all its resources on liquidity problems alone. There are other crises and risks which could also face the company and there is need to incorporate them in their crisis and risk management plan as well. The Northern Rock saga is a vital lesson that every growing company must learn from. While risks and crises could be few and far between, the need to account for them in the company strategy is invaluable. This is because there is no way of predicting the future. This should avoid a situation in which the company has to close down because they do not have any finances to cater for the losses incurred during the crisis. Every company should maintain a crisis and risk management plan that helps to shield it from any eventualities that may occur in the course of its operations. There are several lessons that have been learnt from the Northern Rock case study and which other companies can benefit from through the following recommendations. Firstly, disaster may strike at any time hence the need to come up with a plan to deal with risks and crises. It is also notable that some disasters can be predicted so that precautionary measures taken to reduce the shock on the company. To enhance this, constant review of the risks that the company is susceptible to should be done. Secondly, reliance on a single supply could pose danger to the company hence the need to diversify operations or plan for alternatives in case the current sources fail. Finally, having no plan could lead to desperate actions on the side of the company. If the company is not lucky, it could end up closing down. In the case of Northern Rock, there were attempts to sell it and then the government bailout. The bailout means that the company is now under government control and no longer in private hands which could highly impact on the company decision processes and operations.