Analysis Of The Movie Fast Five

Analysis Of The Movie Fast Five Fast Five is also known as Fast Furious 5 or Fast Furious 5: Rio Heist which was written by Chris Morgan and directed by Justin Lin. It is the fifth instalment in the Fast and the Furious movie series. It was released in Malaysia on 5th May 2011. The characters in the movie are Dominic Toretto (Vin Diesel), Brian OConner (Paul Walker), Mia Toretto (Jordana Brewster), Gisele Harabo (Gal Gadot), Han Lue (Sung Kang), Elena Neves (Elsa Pataky), Monica Fuentes, Roman Pearce (Tyrese Gibson), Luke Hobbs (Dwanyne Johnson), Hernan Reyes (Joaquim de Almeida), Tej Parker (Ludacris), Zizi (Michael Irby), Tego Leo (Tego Calderon), Vince (Matt Schulze) , Rico Santos (Don Omar). Fast five was the fifth highest grossing movie in Malaysia movie industry for the year 2011 that made RM 16,535,815. Basically, this movie was on a budget of $125 million and the shooting of Fast Five had started by July 14, 2010. Basically the main location of shooting was in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The reasons we choose this movie is to review the good values that contained in the movie. We watched that movie before and we find it very interesting as the movie involved in situations that relate to our reality life for example, case of bribery and gambling. Furthermore, this movie valued a good relationship between siblings; between brother and sister (Dominic Toretto and Mia Toretto) and among their friends as well. Other than that, most values in this movie are related to this course, organizational behaviour. For example, they are using decision making to make decision. Besides, they applied team work to complete their mission. Each of the team members has their own role to make their mission success. ANALYSIS OF THE MOVIE FAST FIVE Main Storyline The story starts when Dominic Toretto is confirmed to be in jail for his previous wrong doings. When he is being transported to Lompoc Maximum Security Prison by bus, his sister Mia Toretto and friend Brian OConner lead an assault on the bus and causing the bas to crash with their cars hence freeing Dom. After the incidence, the authorities search for them and the trio escapes to Rio de Janeiro. In a meanwhile, Mia and Brian look for their friend, Vince on a job to steal three cars from a train. At the Vinces house, Mia found out that she is pregnant Brians child. The next day, Brian and Mia discover that agents from the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) are also on the train and that the cars are seized property. When Dom arrives with the rest of the participants, they start to steal the car. The conflict begins when Dominic realizes that one of the participants, Zizi, is only interested in stealing one car, a Ford GT40. Dom quickly made a decision as he orders Mia to drive the car and change their plan. After Mia has driven the car, Dominic and Brian fight with Zizi and Zizis friend. Later, Zizi kills the DEA agents assigned to the vehicles and Dominic take this opportunity to escape and he is succeed; however Dom and Brian are captured and brought to crime lord Hernan Reyes, the owner of the cars and Zizis boss. Reyes orders his men to interrogate them to discove r the location of the car, but they manage to escape and return to their safe house. Dom found out that the car Ford GT40 is very important to Reyes and they try to discover its importance. At the same time, Vince arrives to their safe house and later he is caught trying to remove a computer chip from the car and Dom saw it. Vince said he will sell the chip to Reyes on his own and get things clear with Reyes but Dom forces him to leave. Brian investigates the chip and he discovers that the chip contains details of Reyes criminal empire, including the locations of US$100 million in cash. Next, the murder of the DEA agents aboard the train is been blamed on Dom and his team. Diplomatic Security Service (DSS), agent Luke Hobbs Chief of Police and his team arrive in Rio and want to arrest Dom and Brian. With the help of local officer, Elena Neves, they travel to Doms safe house. At the same time, Reyes men also attack them. Brian, Dom and Mia escape successfully. Dom suggests they split up and leave Rio, but Mia announces she is pregnant Brians child. Dom agrees to stick together and suggests they steal Reyes money to start a new life. Later, Dom, Brian and Mia organize a team to perform the heist, recruiting Han Seoul-Oh, Roman Pearce, Tej Parker, Gisele Yashar, Leo and Santos. Vince later joins the team after saving Mia from being captured by Reyes men and earning Doms trust once more. Agent Hobbs and his team eventually find and arrest Dom, Mia, Brian and Vince. While transporting them to the airport for extradition to the United States, the convoy is attacked by Reyes men, who kill Hobbs team. Hobbs and Elena are saved by Dom, Brian, Mia and Vince as they fight back against Reyes men and escape, but Vince is shot in the process and he dies. Wanting to avenge his murdered team, agent Hobbs and Elena agree to help them with the heist. The gang plans how to break into the police station where Reyes money is kept and tear the vault from the building using their cars. On the day planned, they manage to tear the vault and dragging it. As expected, the police pursuit them trough the city. Believing they cannot outrun the police, Dom makes Brian continue without him while he attacks the police and using the vault attached to his car to smash their vehicles. Reyes is dead by the smash of the vault. However, Zizi is still alive and a quick action by Brian, he manages to shoot Zizi. Agent Hobbs arrives on the scene. Agent Hobbs refuses to let Dom and Brian go free but, unwilling to arrest them, agrees to give them a 24-hour head start to escape. The gang splits Reyes money. Some of the amount is given to Vinces family as reward and as compensation of Vinces dead. Lastly, all the members go their separate ways and live with their own life freely. Main Characters Dominic Toretto Vin Diesel Character Dominic Toretto is portrayed by Vin Diesel. He is an elite street racer, auto mechanic, ex-convict and brother to Mia Toretto. Even though he is very rough but he loves his sister and gives her protection. In the movie, he is the leader of the gang which planned to reveal the corruption by Hernen Reyes and also plan how to break into the police station where Reyess corruption money is kept. Brian OConner Paul Walker Brian OConner is played by Paul Walker. Brian OConner leads an assault on the bus and causing the bas to crash with their cars hence freeing Dom. He is the fastest racer and during the heist of the vault, he is helping Dominic to tear the vault from the police station by his car and dragging the vault. He is a brave man. This shows when he bravely shoots Reyess men, Zizi. He is a loving man as well as he loves Mia so much and later at the end of the movie he lives happily with Mia is pregnant his child. Mia Toretto Jordana Brewster She is Dominics sister and Brians love interest. In this movie, she assists Dominics team in the heist by staying back at the base and monitors the traffic for them to avoid the police. Character Mia Toretto is portrayed by Jordana Brewster. Roman Pearce Tyrese Gibson Roman Pearce is portrayed by Tyrese Gibson. He is a childhood friend of Brian OConner. In Fast Five, Roman appears as part of Dominic and Brians in their attempt to steal a vault from a corrupt Brazilian businessman. He is reluctant at first, thinking the mission is personal and not being good business until Dominic utters the vault is full one hundred million dollars in cash which is enough to change his mind. In this movie, he is the most talkative and he went to the police station to send a robot as camera on how to steal the vault. Ludacris Tej Parker He is one of the Dominics team in stealing the vault. He is brilliant as he can solve the security code of the vault. Sung Kang Han Seoul-Oh He is one of the members of Dominics heist team to steal the vault. In Fast Five, he act as a precision driver and a chameleon. Gisele Harabo Gal Gadot. He is also one the members in Dominics heist team. Her role in this movie is she used to seduce the criminal corruptor, Hernan Reyes to get his hands print to open the vault later on. Luke Hobbs Dwayne Johnson He acts as an agent from DSS. His mission is to caught Dominic and his friends because they are suspecting of killing the DEA officer when they steal a luxurys car on the train. Later he realizes that Reyes is a corruptor only then help Dominic and the gang. Elena Neves Elsa Pataky She is helping agent Hobbs to catch Dominic and his friends. Later, she also help Dominics team to steal the vault. Diversity The main characters in this movie are different from one another. The diversity in the characters can be seen in various aspects like genders, age, ethnicity and skill. Two of them are women while the others is men. In the team of Dominic Toretto, consists of two women and the rest is men. Although Mia and Gisela are women, they are welcomed to the group just like the men. They are not underestimating by the group and are given the tasks just like the men. There are also different stages of age. The characters are of the age between 20 to 40 years old. Dominic Toretto is the eldest among all members in the group. The characters also come from different background, race and ethnicity. Furthermore, they come from the various nations around the world for instance, United State of America, London and Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. In Fast Furious 5, the members are calling back from the place they belong to by Dom and OConner to accomplish a task. In addition, the characters in this movie have their own skill and talent. Dominic Toretto and Brian OConner is a street racer. They are very precision driver, do not crack under pressure and never lose. Han is someone who can blend in anywhere. Roman is a fast talker. He can do anything just according his way. The expert person in circuit goes to Tej. A woman with the expertise in dealing with utilities and weapons is Gisele who also someone who are not afraid to throw down her target. However, they are all same in talent and professionalism in driving. Besides that, Hobbs is acknowledged as the governments version of the best bounty hunter on the planet. Attitudes According the research in Organisation Behaviour, there are three major attitudes which are job satisfaction, job involvement, and organizational commitment. In the movie, the characters are having job satisfaction as they hold positive feelings about their job. Just like Hobbs, he is very exciting to do the job as he like his job so much. Although all of the case he faced is very challenging, he always committed to do it as he takes the difficulties positively. Job involvement can be seen in all the characters. Dom and friends are involved in the robbery of Reyess money because they feel that they are worth it if they do steal the money. They will get a lot of benefits compared to the degree of consequences that they may face if they are caught. Dom is a good leader which he involve all the members in decision making thus they feel that they are part of the task and team. In organisational commitment, the Doms friends are the good example. They have identified a particular team and its goal, so they decide to remain as a member and willingly to give a full effort to achieve the goal. It is where someone feels like he is belong to the organisation, he tend to stay longer in it. Similarly, Reyess followers also do the same thing. Emotions and Moods This action movie portrayed a lot of emotions and moods. The emotions that can be identified through the characters facial expression are anger, fear, happiness, hate, hope, joy and love. On the other hand, the basic moods consist of high positive affect and high negative effect. The scenes where Vince wants to steal the chip create anger and hate emotion in Dom. He feels very mad as he thinks Vince want to betray him. Fear of the money would be steal by Doms, Reyes try his best to put his box money in the safest place that is Police Station to make sure Doms cannot have it. Love is blossoms in three partners; Dom with Elina, OConner with Mia and Han with Gisela. This movie has a happy ending scene. Therefore, all characters are happy and enjoy their life meaningfully. In high positive effect, all characters are excited and alert to do their job. They are committed to finish the job until the end. The moods for high negative affect is when the situation are getting worst and tense at time the police ambush the place where Dom are hiding just after they has work on their first plan. Dom, Mia, OConner and Vince have been arrested at the moment. vi) Personality Types Four of main characters in this movie are Dominic, Brian OConner, Hernan Reyes and Agent L. Hobbs. Therefore, there is few personality types can be identified in those characters. The first one is Dominic, from MBTI concept, he can be classified as sensing as he prefers order and focus on details. This can be seen on how he made the strategy and choose who he needs to do the job before he started the robbery. Plus, it can be proved on how he collects the data in details. For example, to break into the police station, he made research how the police station looks like and where the vault is stored. Next, according to Big Five Personality Model (BFPM), he scores high on conscientiousness which he is shown as a very responsible, organized, dependable and persistent. As a leader, he leads the job very well and able to assign which person to their ability are. Most of the other members depend on him as the job is too risky, yet he is still able to gain trust from his members. Besides, he has a positive core self-evaluation. He knows he is effective, capable and he believes he can do the job very well despite the risk he is taking which is can be said as an ambitious goal, to rob $100 million from a very powerful man in Rio who is known to have lots of supporters. Moreover, he is willing to take risks and never fear of anything even when most of the members start to withdraw from the job, he is still standing firm with his decision to finish the job started. Second character is Brian OConner. From BFPM, he is considered as high on agreeableness that refers to an individuals propensity to defer to others. He is very cooperative and trusting. In whatever Dominics decision, he will always believe in him as if right-hand man of Dominic. Plus, just like Dom, he is also risk taking person. He grabs any chance to make sure the job done smoothly, he even risks his life to rob the vault and drive it on the street while followed by many police cars behind. Third character is Agent L. Hobbs, based on MBTI, he may fall into thinking person. While investigating of Dominic and the gang, he mostly uses reasons and logic to handle. In that movie, when he wants to know where is Dom, he asked his teammates to rebuild the car again as in logic, why would Dom break the cars as if Dom is searching something from that car and right as he guessed, Dom did take something from the car which is the chip. Besides, he can be classified as Machiavellianism as he said that he will use anything to get what he wants no matter at what costs. He is so determined to find Dom and asks his colleagues to search for any clues until he found Dom. Next, last character is Hernan Reyes. Based on BFPM, he scores low in emotional stability that he tends to be nervous, anxious, depressed and insecure. It can be proved when he asks his people to move all his money to be stored at one place after one of his ten houses has been robbed by Dom and the gang. Followed by emotions, he didnt think it carefully as what he did is already expected by Dom except the part that Reyes stores the money at police station. He is also can be categorized as Machiavellianism. In order to be very rich and has a lot of wealth, he will use any mean to meet the end. He will kill those who on his way and he even do illegal business such as drugs. Plus, in order to use the locals helps, he pretends to help them by giving what the local wants but then, he asks them to do many illegal works or threat to take back the facilities given. vii) Perceptual Biases Based on the movie, there are three biases that can be identified. The first one is overconfidence bias, it can be explained as someone who is too confident based on past success and believe that nothing will go wrong in their ways. From the movie, Dominic can be seen as someone who has the bias as he truly believes that everything is planned correctly and no problems will appear. Yet, when he started to do the job, before he could make it, Agent Hobbs come to his place and they start to fight. Though he already put the tracker on Agent L. Hobbs car, he didnt give a thought that what if Agent Hobbs realises there is a tracker on his car. So, thats when the only mistake occurs. Next bias identified is availability bias which has been done by Hernan Reyes. He thought that if he moves all the money to police station, the money will be secured because as people said, the last place criminals would be willing to go is police station. Therefore, based on that thought, he made that decision without thinking further that Dominic and the gang may be very determined which they are willing to take the risk to break into police station. The last bias is risk aversion. After being robbed at one of his cash houses and being told that he will come for more, Reyes without considering more, he decides to store all the money at the safest place he can think about which is at police station. This is because he does not want to take the risk to just let the money be without realizing his action is expected by Dominic. viii) Decision Making Process There are many decisions made in this movie. The first one is when Dom and Brian discussed and decides to rob Hernan Reyes. This is a big decision because this is a big job, to Rob the most powerful guy in Rio, Brazil. The decision is taken after they realize they have been chased by polices and they are in top list of wanted people. Therefore, for them to get out of that life and start a new one, they decide to do one last job but a very big one. Considering all the complexities to make the job done, they started to gather a team and call all the capable people from around the world. With a team of 9 people, each of them has expertise in own area. Dom is using rational model as he gathers a great deal of information about all the options and abilities they have. After identifying them, he started to get cars, mock-up the routes to the vault stored in police station. The second decision is made by Agent L. Hobbs when he decides to help the gang to get back at Hernan Reyes as he has killed many of his men. So, he wants to get revenge for that. But he should be thinking carefully about that as his main objective is to catch Dominic yet later he is on Dominics side. Plus, as a cop, to help criminal is against his oath. Therefore, the decision made can be classified as intuitive decision-making which is an unconscious process created out of distilled experience. To see his men died in front of his eyes, he may be unconsciously made that decision and it made that the decision is not rational. ix) Motivational Theories Motivation refers to the process by which a persons efforts are energized, directed, and sustained toward attaining goal. There are three elements on this definition which are energy, direction, and persistence. Among the motivational theories that were applied in this movie is reinforcement theory which says that the behaviour is a function of its consequences. The consequences that immediately follow behaviour and increase the probability that the behaviour will be repeated are called as reinforces. In Fast Five, it shows when Elena works as a translator in police station in Rio, Luke Hobbs chooses her as translator since she is one of the few incorruptible cops in Rio. In addition, she is motivated by the death of her beloved husband in previous movie, who was also a policeman before he was killed on her doorstep. Thus, the fact that the death of her husband is actually becomes a positive reinforcer for her to work as policeman in Rio. x) Teamwork There was a teamwork applied in this movie and I think the teamwork applied was an effective team. Teamwork is a group whose individual efforts result in performance that is greater than the sum of the individual inputs which able to generate positive synergy through coordinated effort. The effectiveness of the team can be seen through Team Effectiveness Model. It encompasses three elements which are context, team composition and team processes. The first contextual factor related to Fast Five is a climate of trust. Members of effective teams should trust each other. They also must exhibit trust in their leaders. Dominic Toretto who is a leader receives high degree of trust from his members including Brian OConner, Roman Pearce and other members. Interpersonal trust among team members facilitates cooperation and reduces the need to monitor each others behaviour. When team members believe they can trust each others in any kind of situation, they are more likely to take risks and expose vulnerabilities. For instance, there is a scene in Fast Five when Brian OConner needs to jump off from the train towards the car driven by Dominic Toretto in order to avoid bridge from being crashed. This kind of crisis does need a high degree of trust from Brian OConner to Dominic Toretto as it is quite risky. If there is less or no trust between each other, the possibility of Brian OConner to die is very high. Thus, the teamwork is less effec tive. The second contextual factor related to Fast Five is leadership and structure. If the team members cannot agree on who is to do what and ensure all members share the workload, team is dysfunctional. For instance, Domino Toretto has assigned specifics of work to each member and fits them all together to integrate individual skills required by leadership and structure. Since each of the members has variety of skills and capabilities to make the work done, Dominic Toretto plays a vital role to delegate responsibility to them, and plays a role as facilitator as well. This complies with multiteam systems which mean different teams need to coordinate their efforts to produce a desired outcome. The desired outcome in the movie is destroying the corruption made by a politician named Hermen Reyes. The first variable in team composition related to Fast Five is abilities of members. In this movie, each of the members has different abilities, knowledge and skills to perform their respective tasks. For example, Roman Pearce is a fast talker. In fact, he has skills to divert people when talking from revealing the real intention. It can be seen in the movie when he enters the police station to put the evidence box which is actually a controlled car. He is successful to divert the policeman to put the evidence box in the vault. The second variable in team composition related in Fast Five is diversity of members. The diversity is actually should be a good thing. It should benefit from differing perspectives. In Fast 5, there is team diversity which affects the team performance to make job done. The team shares a different demographic attribute such as sex, race and age. For instance, Han Seoul-Oh is a Korean guy comes all the way from Korea to join team with Dominic Toretto in Brazil which shows different race with other members. Proper leadership can improve the performance of diverse teams. Dominic Toretto provides an inspirational common goal for members with varying types of skills and knowledge making team more creative and able to achieve desired goal. The first process variable related to Fast Five is common plan and purpose. Effective teams begin by analyzing the teams mission, developing goals to achieve that mission, and creating strategies for achieving the goals. Dominic Toretto, Brian OConner and Mia Toretto have initially analyzing the plan and purpose of the mission before gathering the team members. They even create strategies so that the others members ready to understand the common plan and purpose as well as ready to take risk. They put a tremendous amount of time and effort to discuss, shape and agree on a purpose that belongs to them collectively and individually. The second process variable related to Fast Five is specific goals. The teamwork in this movie can be said as effective as the team is able to translate its common purpose into specific, measureable, and realistic performance goals. The goal of the team delegated by Dominic Toretto is to eliminate the corruption made by a politician named Hermen Reyes and reveal the hidden and illegal activity of distribution of drugs made by him. The goal is quite challenging as the team has to face the politician who has a strong position in the country. xi) Leadership Style Leadership can be defined as an ability to influence a group toward the achievement of a vision or set of goals. The leaders that can be found in this movie are Dominic Toretto and Luke Hobbs. Dominic Toretto is a professional criminal and a leader of the team with Brian OConner, Mia Toretto and other members. He uses a transformational leadership style. In organizational term, transformational leaders inspire followers to transcend their own self-interests and who are capable of having a profound and extraordinary effect on their followers. Dominic Toretto uses this kind of leadership style as he pays attention to the concern and needs of his team members, change members awareness of problems by helping them look at old problems in new ways, and inspire team members to put out extra effort to achieve their goals. On top of that, this kind of leadership style is more effective compared to others and also it encourages other team members to follow them by being creative. Besides, Luke Hobbs can be considered as a leader among the cops. He leads other policemen to catch the most wanted professional criminals like Dominic Toretto and Brian OConner. It can be seen that he brings out a character of charismatic leadership style in the movie. In the point of organizational term, charismatic leadership theory can defined as followers make attributions of heroic or extraordinary leadership abilities when they observe certain behaviours. Among the key characteristics of a charismatic leader are vision and articulation, personal risk, and unconventional behaviour. xii) Power and Influential Tactics Power or influential tactics that could be identified from this movie is that consultation. It happens when Dominic is giving an idea to his friends and how they are going to do it together in order to make the plan successful. All of them will have their own part in order to accomplish the job that they already to do it at the first stage. They all are given task based on their expertise such as good in circuit, fast talker, an expert driver and many more. Dominic get all of his teammates support by encouraging them that they are going to get US$ 100 million if the plan successful and every each one of them will get same amount from US$ 1oo million. This can be classified as exchange influential tactics, means rewarding the target with benefits or favors in exchange for following a request. Another one of power or influential tactics that applied in this movie is pressure. Hernen Reyes uses this tactics so that his worker will listen and obey to him. He likes to use harsh way in order to get what he wanted, thus make his follower afraid of him because he has power and money. He also will kill anybody that is not finishing what he asked for and when the task is not accomplished so that it will be a lesson to his follower. xiii) Conflicts Yes. The conflicts begin when one of the members, Roman Pearce does not want to get involved in the plan because he said it was a business but actually it was a plan to rob one of the richest men in the country that conduct a drug business but never get caught. The conflict resolution techniques that Dominic, Brian and Mia apply based on the movie is problem solving and also superordinate goals techniques. First, they invite and gather all of their friends that they feel reliable and suitable for the task and then face-to-face meeting of the conflicting parties for the purpose of identifying the problem and resolving it through open discussion. Next, after knew that the goal is to rob US$ 100 million in cash, the superordinate goals conflict resolution techniques take place when they are creating a shared goal that cannot be attained without the cooperation of each of the conflicting parties. It shows that everything can be done through negotiate if we do have skills about it. xiv) Organizational Change and Stress Management Yes. Dominic and the gang try to reveal the corruption by Hernen Reyes and they try to make changes in Rio. They also want to get a freedom for themselves. The tactics that they are used is to steal the vault from the corruptor Hernen Reyes placed at the police station. Even though the mission is totally wrong and against the principle of Islamic practice but they are still doing it to gain self satisfaction. The opposing party do not making any tactics as they do not expect Dominics team will steal his vault as the vault is placed in the police station. So the possibility for them to steal is very low. At the end, when the team is successfully steal the vault, Reyes and his men are chasing them as they expect they will get the vault back. At first, the team is giving up continuing their mission because they see their chances to success is very low but because of the external factor which they will get a big amount of money so they are courage to finish off their mission. The well-planned strategy makes them success in the end and the victory is by their side (Dominics team). LESSON LEARNT FROM THE MOVIE FAST FIVE Teamwork Based on the movie Fast Five, the gang was cooperating to achieve their objective which is to steal the corrupted money from the Hernen Reyes, the criminal empire, of US$100 million in cash. The gang breaks into the police station where Reyes money is kept and tears the vault from the building using their cars. They assigned each of one to do certain job. For example, Brian and Dom are assigned to tear the vault from the building and Mia is assigned to observe the traffic during the vault is being dragging along the stress to avoid police and Hernan Reyess team. Friendship In terms of friendship, there is a quote tells that, no matter how crazy things get among friends, they should stick together till the end of the time. In Fast Five, although there are a number of situations and things attack Dominic Toretto and Brian OConner, they still stick together in whatever kind of situations. In fact, it is because both of them stay side by side that they able to pull off such a big heist involved by a politicia

Psychophysiological Aspects of Stress Essay

Stress seems to be an unpleasant, but essential part of human life. Adverse events happen in life, and hardly anyone is an exception. However, the same negative life events may result in different outcomes depending on the individual who faces them. To paraphrase the common words, â€Å"what doesn’t kill you (just) makes you stronger†. The question of what inner resources help one cope with stressful â€Å"lemons† in one’s life, and perhaps, â€Å"make lemonade† out of them has long attracted attention of philosophers, writers, moviemakers, and at some point every person who has experienced negative life events. It is not surprising that the issue of individual differences in response to stress has been extensively explored in psychology. Individual differences may vary from situational resources, such as social support, to personal resources, such as certain personality traits (e. g. , hardiness, explanatory style, optimism, self-esteem, psychological control, etc. ) These psychosocial resources strongly influence both psychological and physiological outcomes of stress. The Alameda County Study showed that those people who had more ties to their community and social network lived longer (Berkman & Syme, 1979). Receiving social support helped women with ovarian cancer cope with their illness better (Costanzo et al. , 2005), whereas social isolation strongly increased the likelihood of stroke recurrence in patients with stroke (Boden-Albala, 2005). Lack of social support strongly predicted elevated levels of anxiety and depressed mood (Godin, 2004). Personality resources may also help people cope with stressful life events. For example, optimistic explanatory style was associated with significantly fewer physical complaints in college students (Carver & Scheier, 1999), whereas pessimistic explanatory style increased symptoms of depression (Bennett & Vanderbilt, 2002). Perceived control also appears to mitigate the effects of stressful life events (Frazier, 2004). Finally, almost 3 decades of research on the moderating effect of hardiness has linked this personality resource to physical and mental health (Maddi, 1999). Specifically, hardiness is associated with fewer symptoms of depression (Oman, 2003) and burnout (Cilliers, 2003), and it physical strain as well (Beasley, 2003). The list of personal and situational resources moderating the effect of adverse life events is far from being complete; in fact, it may be quite extensive. Given the strong moderating effect of psychosocial resources on mental and physical health established by the previous research, the questions that arise, such as how exactly do these resources affect health? Are there any physiological differences in the way those individuals who have more psychosocial resources, and those individuals who have fewer resources, react to stress? The present study aims to answer this question with regard to the effect of personality hardiness on physical outcomes of stress. Research has shown that hardy individuals appear to thrive on stressful life events (Maddi, 1999). Hardy individuals are committed to their work and family, they perceive control over their life circumstances, and they perceive stressful life events as an opportunity for growth and development, rather than a threat (Maddi, 2002). Hardiness is an important moderator of stress response, yet little research has investigated the differences in the physiology of stress responses in high hardy versus low-hardy individuals. Previous research found that increased physiological reactivity to stress (for example, in terms of blood pressure) is associated with detrimental health outcomes, such as hypertension. However, hardiness has been strongly linked to better health outcomes of stress (Beasley, 2003; Cilliers, 2003; Maddi, 2002, Oman, 2003). Previous research has also shown that identical blood pressure increases can be produced by different hemodynamic mechanisms, with negative or neutral implications for health (Sherwood et al. , 1999). The goal of the present study is to clarify how hardiness takes its effect on health in terms of the psychophysiology of human stress responding. The Biopsychosocial Model of Challenge and Threat In this paper, the physiological response to stress is conceptualized within the biopsychosocial model of challenge and threat paradigm developed by Blascovich, Mendes, Tomaka, and colleagues (Blascovich, Mendes, Tomaka, Salomon, & Seery, 2003; Seery, Blascovich, Weisbuch, & Vick, 2004). In a series of studies, Blascovich, Tomaka, and colleagues demonstrated that threat and challenge appraisals are associated with distinctive patterns of cardiovascular response during a goal-relevant, motivated-performance task (Blascovich et al. , 1999). In Obrist’s terms (1983), this type of task involves active coping. In order to evoke both challenge and threat reactivity, the task should be engaging and psychologically involving, such as taking a test, making a good impression, giving a speech, and engaging in athletic competition (Seery et al. , 2004). Challenge appraisals are associated with positive affectivity, greater engagement in the situation, and are mediated by the myocardial response; whereas threat appraisals are associated with negative affectivity and blood pressure responses that are mediated by the vascular resistance. Challenge and threat are distinguished by changes in total peripheral resistance (TPR; the index of net constriction of the blood vessels) and cardiac output (CO; the amount of blood pumped by the heart per minute). In relative terms, greater CO and lesser TPR reflect greater challenge/lesser threat response profile. According to biopsychosocial model, threat reactivity is associated with detrimental health outcomes of stress. Blascovich and colleagues tied Lazarus and Folkman’s (1984) transactional model of stress and coping to physiological response to stress in terms of myocardial and vascular hemodynamic profiles. According to Lazarus and Folkman (1984), when the individual confronts new or changing environment, he/she tries to determine the meaning of the event (â€Å"primary appraisal†). Primary appraisal is concerned with whether the event is likely to be neutral, positive, or negative in its consequences. Negative events may be appraised in terms of future damage potentially produced by the event (â€Å"threat†), or as damage that has already been made by the event (â€Å"harm†), or in terms of one’s potential to overcome the event and perhaps even benefit from it (â€Å"challenge†). Secondary appraisal is concerned with the evaluation of whether one’s resources are sufficient to meet the threat, harm, or challenge. The balance between the primary and secondary appraisal determines one’s experience of stress. Blascovich and colleagues (Blascovich et al. , 2003) conceptualized threat/challenge essentially in terms of the ratio between the primary appraisal and secondary appraisal. In addition, in their approach, primary appraisal involves estimations of danger, uncertainty, and required effort. Danger, uncertainty, and effort define how demanding the situation is. The subjective experience of stress then depends on the ratio between the demand and one’s coping resources. If the demand is high, and the resources are low, the individual feels threat. If the demand is high, but at the same time the coping resources are sufficient to meet it, the individual feels challenge. Threat appraisal implies the aversive experience in that the individual anticipates damage from the situation, and presumably experiences negative affectivity, such as fear, anxiety and anger. In contrast, challenge appraisals are considered less aversive, with a primary focus on the potential for growth or gain that can come from the situation, although damage is also possible. Challenge appraisals are therefore theoretically associated with increased motivation and positive affectivity, such eagerness, excitement, and exhilaration. To reiterate, it is the threat appraisal that primarily accounts for perceived stress (Tomaka & Palacios-Esquivel, 1999). Blascovich and colleagues conceptualize threat and challenge as two opposite points on the single appraisal continuum. This is also different from Lazarus and Folkman’s conceptualization of threat and challenge as not mutually exclusive appraisals. Lazarus and Folkman’s (1984) concept of appraisal has come under considerable criticism (Zajonc, 2000). Zajonc believes that cognitive appraisal and affective experience are â€Å"distinct, conceptually separable processes† (Zajonc, 2000, p. 31). The appraisal theories of emotion were considered too â€Å"cognitive†, conscious, and slow, as appraisal often occurs unconsciously and quickly. The proponents of appraisal theories respond that appraisal does not need to be conscious as it often occurs unconsciously, automatically, and very quickly, and appraisal may be accompanied by subcortical as well as cortical processing (Ellsworth, Scherer, & Forgas, 2003). That’s why, according to appraisal theorists, although stressful experience is defined as a combination of appraisals, it is not experienced as such (Ellsworth, Scherer, & Forgas, 2003). However, this makes appraisal difficult to study. Self-reports might not adequately reflect one’s appraisal, and because appraisal is assessed a posteriori, a wide variety of confounding variables may interfere with accurate measurement. Within the biopsychosocial model of challenge and threat, appraisal is conceptualized as a process involving both unconscious and conscious processes; and therefore the best way to investigate appraisal would be to manipulate the task in the experiment, whereas subjective evaluations are considered much less reliable (Blascovich et al. , 2003). The biopsychosocial model is based on Dienstbier’s (1989) research. Dienstbier (1989) argued that there are two axes of stress response, sympathetic-adrenal-medullary (SAM) and hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenocortical (HPA), both of which serve to mobilize energy reserves. However, SAM activation involves the release of catecholamines, including epinephrine and norepinephrine, which have a half-life in the body for only a few minutes, whereas HPA activation involves the release of cortisol, which has a half-life in the body for approximately 90 minutes. Thus, SAM allows for rapid energy mobilization, whereas HPA involves long-term mobilization of energy resources. Dienstbier’s (1989) argued that fast large SAM response to the acute stressors coupled with low HPA response is indicative of the organism’s physiological toughness and adaptive pattern of stress responding. According to Frankenhauser (1983), SAM activation is associated with greater coping effort, whereas HPA activation reflects greater negative affect. Both Frankenhauser (1983) and Dienstbier (1989) believed that the stressors involving joint activation of the SAM and HPA have the most detrimental effect on health. For example, individuals with hypertension were found to have both higher diastolic blood pressure reactivity and higher cortisol reactivity to stress (Nyklicek, Bosch, & Amerongen, 2005). Thus, joint SAM axis and HPA axis activation is observed in hypertensive individuals, i. e. , the group that has traditionally been found to be especially vulnerable to the effect of stressful life events. Blascovich et al. (2003) argued that challenge reflects primarily SAM axis of stress response, whereas threat reflects joint activation of the SAM and HPA axes of stress response. Blascovich and colleagues did not empirically test this assumption. This conceptualization of the treat and challenge profiles as reflections of sympathetic/HP A reactivity has come under considerable criticism in the recent literature. Wright and Kirby (2003) argued that this conceptualization may not reflect the true activation of the stress response system, and it needs to be tested empirically before one can rely on the assumption. The Effect of Individual Differences on Hemodynamic Response to Stress Individual differences in hardiness may have impact on one’s response to stress. To understand the influence of individual differences on the physiological response to stress, it is important to establish if the hemodynamic profile is a characteristic if the individual, or a function of the situation. Would a specific situation elicit the same hemodynamic response in all individuals? Or, is the hemodynamic response a stable individual trait? To answer this question, one should consider the research on the consistency of hemodynamic profiles across diverse tasks and over time. Previous research suggested that hemodynamic responses are to some extent situation-specific. The myocardial hemodynamic profile is evoked by the tasks that require active coping (Obrist, 1983) or fight or flight response; whereas vascular hemodynamic response is evoked by the tasks that require passive endurance and offer little control, such as cold stressor tasks. Blascovich and colleagues (Mendes, Blascovich, Lickel, et al. , 2002) used a speech delivery task to validate their theory. The participants were instructed to deliver a speech in the presence of either a same-group partner (challenge) or an out-group partner (threat). As expected, the TPR response was higher in the threat condition, whereas CO response was higher in the challenge condition. Maier, Waldstein, and Synowski (2003) used a computerized mental arithmetic task to find that challenge appraisal was related to greater positive affect and task engagement, whereas threat appraisal was related to greater negative affect and perceived stress. Prkachin, Mills, and Husted (2001) found that anger-inducing interview led to the vascular response, whereas mental arithmetic led to the myocardial response. Hartley, Ginsburg, and Heffner (1999) showed their participants a previously recorded videotape, in which they were disclosing personal information about themselves. The participants in the active condition were allowed to mark the segments of the tape, which they wanted to re-shoot before the tape was â€Å"evaluated by the reviewer†; whereas the participants in the passive condition were not allowed to mark the segments of the tape. Both conditions produced similar elevation in blood pressure; however, in the active condition, blood pressure elevation was elicited through myocardial mechanism, whereas in the passive condition, blood pressure elevation was elicited through the vascular mechanism. Gregg, James, Matyas, and Thornsteinsson (1999) found that mental arithmetic task elicited myocardial response, and cold pressor task elicited vascular response. Quigley, Barrett, and Weinstein (2002) did a within-subject analysis of cardiovascular reactivity to the different tasks, and found that greater CO was associated with greater challenge implied by the task (serial subtraction); however, there was no difference in TPR. Although Quigley and colleagues (2002) investigated the differences in physiological reactions produced by different tasks within the individuals, they did not investigate the consistency of these reactions within the individuals themselves, i. e. , how stable was the hemodynamic response within a given person across different tasks. Previous research has established that at least some parameters of cardiovascular reactivity may be stable characteristic, such as blood pressure reactivity. In other words, the individuals with higher blood pressure reactivity would consistently exhibit this response pattern in different circumstances. Sherwood et al. (1999) argued that hemodynamic profiles also represent a trait, as individuals have a tendency to exhibit a certain type of response across diverse tasks. However, this is a very â€Å"relative† tendency as it is determined by comparison with other individuals. So instead of always responding in a fixed way to all situations, a particular individual would just show more/less myocardial/vascular response comparing to other individuals in the context of a given task. In addition, Sherwood et al. (1999) argued that the individual’s tendency to exhibit a particular hemodynamic response profile is stable over time. For example, middle-aged Type A men exhibited significant correlations over a 3-month interval on a competitive reaction time task (Sherwood et al. , 1999). Kamarck et al. (2000) identified myocardial and vascular responders in the initial testing session, and this tendency was stable after a 4-week interval. Thus, there is evidence that hemodynamic profiles may be relatively stable across tasks and across time, i. e. , some individuals may respond in a relatively more myocardial/vascular way to diverse tasks, and this response may tend to be stable over time. What are the factors that may influence one’s hemodynamic response pattern? Previous research indicated that ethnicity may be one of these factors as African American individuals typically have a tendency to respond in a vascular way; in addition, there are significant gender differences (Allen, Stoney, Owens, & Matthews, 1999). However, there is little research on the personality factors that might affect hemodynamic pattern of responding. Cooper and Waldstein (2004) found that hostility was associated with greater TPR. Cacioppo and colleagues (2002) and Hawkey, Burleson, Berntson, & Cacioppo (2003) found that in young adults, loneliness was associated with higher TPR and lower CO, whereas non-lonely young adults had higher CO. Tomaka and colleagues (Tomaka et al. , 1999) found that approach motivation was associated with higher CO. However, these two studies looked at the state variables, such as loneliness and approach/avoidance motivation. It might be of interest to investigate the effect of stable personality traits as well. Previous research has documented the health-enhancing and health compromising effect of a number of personality variables, such as optimism (Carver & Scheier, 2001), Type A, and hardiness (Maddi, 1999) in terms of blood pressure and future risk for hypertension and CVD development. Yet, there has been little research investigating the effect of personality variables on the hemodynamic mechanisms underlying BP reactivity. Blascovich and colleagues (2003) emphasized the need for research clarifying the effect of social and emotional factors on the patterns of physiological response associated with challenge and threat appraisals. HPA Reactivity in Response to Stress Situations Evoking HPA Activation HPA response is elicited by the situations implying significant threat to the individual, such as physical survival (Sapolsky et al. , 2000) and threat to one’s important goals (Carver & Scheier, 1999). Cortisol helps the organism manage short-term metabolic demands of the situation. Although cortisol response may be elicited by a variety of situations, it is the threat to one’s important goals that triggers this response. Dickerson and Kemeny (2004) conducted meta-analysis of 208 studies on cortisol reactivity. The effect size found in these studies varied from small (d=. 20) to fairly large (d=. 87) depending on the experimental task. The largest effect sizes were produced by tasks that involved uncontrollable threat to social self, such as public speaking, coupled with harassment, false feedback, perceived inability to complete the task, etc. (d = . 92). Thus, it appears that cortisol response to an acute laboratory stressor is most likely to be elicited by the uncontrollable social-evaluative tasks. These two features of uncontrollability and social evaluation have consistently been found to produce intense distress. Uncontrollability is one of the classical characteristics defining stressful situations. In a classical study, Glass and Singer (1973) showed that stress is associated with the situations involving uncontrollability and unpredictability. Social evaluation and self-presentation are common features of everyday life. In the experience of daily stress, interpersonal events play a central role, self-presentation is concerned with (1) one’s need to define one’s social self, and make one’s social self as close as possible to one’s ideal self; and (2) one’s need to please the audience (Baumeister, 1982). This need to make a favorable impression is very important for most people, and when they doubt that they succeed, people experience social anxiety marked by feelings of apprehension, self-consciousness, and distress. Social anxiety may be a dominant factor in modern life. Thus, an uncontrollable social-evaluative threat may produce intense experience of distress marked by significant cortisol elevation. The Relationship between Joint SAM and HPA axes Activation and Personality The research investigating joint HPA and SAM axes activation in response to stress indicated that a single manipulation of the experimental task may elicit different patterns of SAM and HP A response. For example, Earle, Linden, and Weinberg (1999) compared participants performing mental arithmetic task in front of an audience in harassment and no-harassment conditions. Harassment consisted of the scripted statements by same-gender experimenters. Both conditions produced sympathetic activation in terms of DBP (in men) and HR (in women), but it was the harassment condition only that produced significant cortisol elevation. The research on the relationship between joint HPA and SAM axes activation and personality dispositions during a single exposure to stress found a link between personality and SAM reactivity, but not between personality and HPA reactivity. This finding pertains to the studies involving single exposure to an acute laboratory stressor. For example, Taylor et al. (2003) found that high self-enhancers had lower sympathetic responses (SBP and HR), but authors did not find a significant difference in eortisol response to stress between the high and low self-enhancers. Gregg et al. (1999) did not find any meaningful correlations between eortisol and hemodynamic measures in the participants performing mental arithmetic task and cold pressor task. Schommer, Kudielka, Hellhammer, and Kirschbaum (1999) found no relationship between eortisol response to an acute laboratory stressor and the personality traits of Extraversion, Neuroticism, or Psychoticism measured with the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Revised. However, the research evidence with regard to the effect of exposure to repeated psychosocial stress did find a significant effect of personality on cortisol reactivity. Pruessner, Gaab, Hellhammer, Lintz, Schumer, and Kirschbaum (1999) exposed the participants to psychosocial stressor (public speaking) over a period of 5 consecutive days. Although during the first day, there was no significant relationship between personality factors (locus of control) and cortisol response, there was a significant relationship between locus of control and cortisol response later, from day two to day five. Pruessner et al. (1999) found that the combination of data obtained over the five consecutive days was necessary to detect the significant effect of personality traits, such as locus of control, on cortisol reactivity. In another study, Kirschbaum, Prussner, Stone, Federenko, Gaab, Lintz, Schommer, and Hellhammer (1999) investigated cortisol response to the repeated psychosocial stressor consisting of public speaking and mental arithmetic in a group of healthy young adults. The participants had been exposed to the stressor for 5 days. Kirschbaum and colleagues (1999) observed quick habituation of the HPA axis in some participants. These â€Å"low cortisol responders† exhibited large cortisol responses during the first day, and then this response subsided during the 5-day interval. However, in some participants, the HPA axis did not habituate to the stressor. These â€Å"high responders† kept producing large cortisol reactions throughout the entire 5-day period. The tendency to exhibit persistent high cortisol responses to repeated psychological stress was strongly associated with a number of personality variables, such as having lower self-esteem, viewing oneself as less attractive than others, and being more often in depressed mood, and lower extraversion. Cortisol high responders also reported significantly more symptoms of distress than cortisol low responders. In another study, Schommer, Hellhammer, and Kirschbaum (2003) also found a group of individuals with persistent cortisol response to psychosocial stress. In addition, high cortisol responders had significantly higher plasma ACTH levels. This study also looked at the sympathetic activation. The results suggested that SAM axis does not habituate to the repeated stress, as rapidly as the HPA axis does, because the levels of catecholamines (epinephrine and norepinephrine) were consistently elevated in both high and low cortisol responders. Pruessner et al. (1999) suggested that during the first exposure to stress, the effect of personality on HPA reactivity is masked by the novelty of the situation. Novelty, which is one of the classical features defining a stressful situation, has a profound effect on HPA reactivity masking moderating effect of personality. However, during the second and subsequent exposures to stress, the novelty is lessened, so the influence of personality dispositions may be investigated. Discussion and Conclusion According to the biopsychosocial model, challenge and threat response are evoked only by the situations involving â€Å"motivated performance† (Seery at al. , 2004). Engagement in the task is essential in eliciting both challenge and threat reactivity. The task should be â€Å"goal-relevant† (e. g. , it should be important for the participant). Hardiness, especially its commitment and control components, can be significantly correlated with conscientiousness, and both dispositions are associated with greater TPR increase in response to stress and little or no change in CO. Higher conscientiousness, commitment to the task and need to control the situation might lead to the greater engagement in the task and higher expectations for the quality of one’s performance. This might have resulted in greater negative affectivity about the task and about one’s performance. In contrast, the low-hardy participants can be probably disengaged, and, therefore, showed less reactivity. Due to the greater commitment to the task, high-hardy individuals showed a response profile that exaggerated the response typically evoked by the task. Thus, in a socially evaluative situation known to evoke a strong threat hemodynamic response profile, greater hardiness may be associated with greater threat response. This tendency may be due to the greater commitment to the task and greater need to control the situation. To fully understand the effect of hardiness on psychophysiology of human stress responding, the HPA reactivity should be evaluated (Seery et al. , 2004). Hardiness can be associated with a tendency towards exaggerated cardiovascular response to the psychosocial stressor. The general pattern of reactivity evoked by the TSST is consistent with the threat profile. It would be interesting to investigate reactivity to the stressor that evokes primarily challenge hemodynamic response profile. According to the biopsychosocial model, challenge and threat are defined by the ratio of the demand posed by the situation and perceived resources to cope with it (Blascovich et al. , 2003). Thus, in the challenging situation, the individuals would perceive more resources to cope with the demand. Due to the greater commitment to the task and greater conscientiousness, high-hardy individuals may potentially show greater challenge reactivity. However, it may also be possible that high-hardy individuals will still have greater concerns about their performance, which may be associated with greater distress reflected in a threat response profile. To sum up, it appears that in some individuals, the HPA axis cannot adapt quickly to the repeated stressful situation, so these individuals keep responding with high cortisol elevations consistently. There is link between personality dispositions (locus of control, self-esteem, and extraversion) and this persistent high cortisol response. In conclusion, the research suggests that although a single exposure to stress may provide information about the relationship between personality and SAM reactivity, the HPA activation will not be tapped. In order to obtain a true picture of joint SAM and HPA activation, it is necessary to consider the effect of repeated exposure to psychosocial stress. References Allen, M. T. , Stoney, C. M. , Owens, J. F. , & Matthews, K. A. (1993). Hemodynamic adjustments to laboratory stress: the influence of gender and personality. Psychosomatic Medicine, 55 (6), 505-17. Baumeister, R. F. (1982). A self-presentational view of social phenomena. Psychological Bulletin, 91(1), 3-26 Beasley, M. , Thompson, T. , Davidson, J. (2003) Resilience in response to life stress: The effects of coping style and cognitive hardiness. Personality and Individual Differences, 34 (1), 77-95. Berkman, L. F. & Syme, S. L. (1979). Social networks, host resistance, and mortality: a nine-year follow-up study of Alameda County residents. American Journal of Epidemiology, 109 (2), 186-204. Blascovich, J. , Mendes, W. B. , Hunter, S. B. & Salomon, K. (1999). Social ‘Facilitation’ as Challenge and Threat. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(1), 68-77. Blascovich, J. , Mendes, W. B. , Tomaka, J. , Salomon, K. , & Seery, M. (2003). The robust nature of biopsychosocial model challenge and threat: A reply to Wright and Kirby. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7 (3), 234-243. Boden-Albala, B, Litwak, E, Elkind, M. S. , Rundek, T. , & Sacco, R. L. (2005) Social isolation and outcomes post stroke. Neurology, 64(11), 1888-92. Cacioppo, J. T. , Hawkley, L. C. , Crawford, L. E. , Ernst, J. M. , Burleson, M. H. , Kowalewski, R. B. , Malarkey, W. B. , Van Cauter, E. , & Berntson, G. G. (2002). Loneliness and health: potential mechanisms. Psychosomatic Medicine, 64 (3), 407-17. Carver, C. S. , & Scheier, M. F. (2001). Optimism, pessimism, and self-regulation. In E. C. Chang (Ed. ), Optimism and pessimism: Implications for theory, research, and practice (pp. 31-51). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Cooper, D. C. , & Waldstein, S. R. (2004). Hostility differentially predicts cardiovascular risk factors in African American and White young adults. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 57 (5), 491-9. Costanzo ES, Lutgendorf SK, Sood AK, Anderson B, Sorosky J, Lubaroff DM. Psychosocial factors and interleukin-6 among women with advanced ovarian cancer. Cancer 2005;104:305-13.

Differences Between American and British English

While there are certainly many more varieties of English, American English and British English are the two varieties that are taught in most ESL/EFL programs. Generally, it is agreed that no one version is correct, but there are certainly preferences in use. The three major differences between American and British English are: Pronunciation - differences in both vowel and consonants, as well as stress and intonationVocabulary - differences in nouns and verbs, especially phrasal verb usage and the names of specific tools or itemsSpelling - differences are generally found in certain prefix and suffix forms The most important rule of thumb is to try to be consistent in your usage. If you decide that you want to use American English, then be consistent in your spelling (i.e. The color of the orange is also its flavour - color is American spelling and flavour is British). Of course, this is not always easy or possible. The following guide is meant to point out the principal differences between these two varieties of English. Minor Grammar Differences There are very few grammar differences between American and British English. Certainly, the words we choose might be different at times. However, generally speaking, we follow the same grammar rules. With that said, there are a few differences.   Use of the Present Perfect In British English, the present perfect is used to express an action that has occurred in the recent past that has an effect on the present moment. For example: Ive lost my key. Can you help me look for it? In American English, the following is also possible:I lost my key. Can you help me look for it? In British English, the above would be considered incorrect. However, both forms are generally accepted in standard American English. Other differences involving the use of the present perfect in British English and simple past in American English include already, just and yet. British English: Ive just had lunch.Ive already seen that film.Have you finished your homework yet? American English: I just had lunch OR Ive just had lunch.Ive already seen that film OR I already saw that film.Have you finished your homework yet? OR Did you finish your homework yet? Two Forms to Express Possession There are two forms to express possession in English: have or have got. Do you have a car?Have you got a car?He hasnt got any friends.He doesnt have any friends.She has a beautiful new home.Shes got a beautiful new home. While both forms are correct (and accepted in both British and American English), have got (have you got, he hasnt got, etc.) is generally the preferred form in British English, while most speakers of American English employ the have (do you have, he doesnt have etc.) The Verb Get The past participle of the verb get is gotten in American English. American English: Hes gotten much better at playing tennis. British English: Hes got much better at playing tennis. Have got is used predominately in British English to indicate  have in the sense of possession. Strangely, this form is also used in the United States with the British participle got, rather than gotten. Americans will also use have got to in the sense of have to for responsibilities. Ive got to work tomorrow.Ive got three friends in Dallas. Vocabulary The largest  differences between British and American English lie in the choice of vocabulary. Some words mean different things in the two varieties, for example: Mean: American English - angry, bad humored, British English - not generous, tight-fisted. American English: Dont be so mean to your sister! British English: Shes so mean she wont even pay for a cup of tea. There are many more examples (too many for me to list here). If there is a difference in usage, your dictionary will note the different meanings in its definition of the term. Many vocabulary items are also used in one form and not in the other. One of the best examples of this is the terminology used for automobiles. American English - hood / British English - bonnetAmerican English - trunk / British English - bootAmerican English - truck / British English - lorry For a more complete list of the vocabulary differences between British and American English, use this British vs. American English vocabulary tool. Spelling Here are some general differences between British and American spellings: Examples of words that end in -or in American English and -our in British English: color/colour, humor/humour, flavor/flavourExamples of words that end in -ize in American English and -ise in British English: recognize/recognise, patronize/patronise The best way to make sure that you are being consistent in your spelling is to utilize the spell check tool associated with your word processor and select the type of English (American or British) youd like to use.

How Business Strategy and Choices should be made - 700 Words

How Business Strategy and Choices should be made Business policies refer to the guidelines which are developed by an organization in order to govern its actions/operations. They help in defining the limits within which decisions can be made in accordance with Management Study Guide, (n.d). On the other hand, business strategy refers to a long term plan of action/s designed to achieve a certain goal or set of goals or even objectives (Rapid Business Intelligent Success, RBIS (n.d). The policies and strategies should be made in line with guiding principles. In business sphere, a business policy should be specific or definite. Making policy choices that are uncertain would imply that implementation would be difficult. Additionally, a†¦show more content†¦The choices are to be made in such a manner that the business is put on a competitive edge. Moreover, strategic choices are made according to the capabilities of the business to build and maintain in the competitive environment. Lastly, it is of great importance to consider the available management systems which are readily available in operation in order to build and maintain the key capabilities. We have several examples to illustrate the choice of policies and strategies. For instance, Corning Incorporated case study by Rebecca, Henderson and Cate (2009) has its strategic choices in innovation because it has a strong team of scientists in the research and development section. This is a strength to them and hence a capability. The policy of constant innovation makes the employees be regarded as career employees for long service. We also look at the case study of DDD (Anju, Grate and Jaime, 2009). The strategic choice to expand globally was due to its highly trained staff. However, its social policy and financial constraints impeded it from recruiting the best staff. Lastly, Compsis at crossroads (Jonathan and Paul, 2009) had strategic choices of expanding its ETC business to more powerful, flexible and user friendly SICAT due to the financial constraints it was facing. In a nutshell, strategic choices and policies are very important driving forces in a business enterprise. A business policy to beShow MoreRelatedRyanair Strategy1069 Words   |  5 Pagesworld. A corporate’s strategy mainly based on three steps: Identify the strategic position, make strategic choice and make strategic actions. Each step includes different aspects. When we identify the strategic position, we should analyses both internal and external environment, consider the purpose, capability and culture. After we identified the strategic position, we should make strategic choices, and when we are making strategic choices, we should consider from the business level, corporate levelRead MorePanera Bread Company1498 Words   |  6 Pagesformulate and direct their strategic management activities. Sophisticated planners, such as General Electric, Procter Gamble, and IBM, have developed more detailed processes than less formal planners of similar size. Small businesses that r ely on the strategy formulation skills and limited time of an entrepreneur typically exhibit more basic planning concerns than those of larger firms in their industries. Understandably, firms with multiple products, markets, or technologies tend to use more complexRead MoreThe Walt Disney Company: the Entertainment King Essay1589 Words   |  7 PagesTheir corporate strategies (primarily under CEO Eisner) include three dimensions: horizontal and geographic expansion as well as vertical integration. Disney is a prime example of how to achieve long-run success through the choices of business, the choice of how many activities to undertake, the choice of how many businesses to be in, the choice of how to manage a portfolio of businesses and the choice of how to create synergies between those businesses (3, p.191-221). All these choices and decisionsRead More8 Strategy Experience Intro601 Words   |  3 PagesStrategic Management The Strategy Experience Lecture 8 Mark Anderson WRSX GLOBAL ADVERTISING MARKETING COMMUNICATIONS The Strategy Experience †¢ You will act as a main Board Director of the WRSX Group, a (fictional) global advertising and marketing communications company. †¢ Your responsibility will be to make long-term, strategic decisions in order to manage the growth and prosperity of this large, multi-national organisation. †¢ Performance will be measured in both financial and nonfinancialRead MoreSummary Chapter 1 Johnson, Whittington Scholes993 Words   |  4 PagesJohnson, Scholes amp; Whittington – Exploring Strategy, text and cases Chapter 1 – Introducing Strategy Defining strategy - Strategy is about the key issues for the future of organizations, or in other words, the long term direction for an organization. The description of strategy in the book has two advantages: 1. It can include deliberate, logical strategy and incremental, emergent patterns of strategy; 2. It can lay the focus on differences and competition as well as on recognizing theRead MoreRhetorical Analysis1841 Words   |  7 Pagesanalysis assignment is to see how an author tries to present his work to a certain group of people. There is present certain meaning in all the texts and it is up to the author to communicate it in the required way. The purpose of this assignment was to review the article and see how the author made use of different strategies. It appears that a major aim that the author had was trying to convince the readers about revenue based financing. The author made use of several strategies as they will be discussedRead MorePlanning Matrix1055 Words   |  5 Pagesbasis for making strategy-formulation decisions. The matching techniques just discussed reveal feasible alternative strategies. Many of these strategies will likely have been proposed by managers and employees participating in the strategy analysis and choice activity. Any additional strategie s resulting from the matching analyses could be discussed and added to the list of feasible alternative options. As indicated earlier in this chapter, participants could rate these strategies on a 1 to 4 scaleRead More Exploring Walt Disney Company: The Entertainment King Essay1514 Words   |  7 PagesTheir corporate strategies (primarily under CEO Eisner) include three dimensions: horizontal and geographic expansion as well as vertical integration. Disney is a prime example of how to achieve long-run success through the choices of business, the choice of how many activities to undertake, the choice of how many businesses to be in, the choice of how to manage a portfolio of businesses and the choice of how to create synergies between those businesses (3, p.191-221). All these choices and decisionsRead MoreMarketing Plan For An Organization1683 Words   |  7 PagesThe real marketing plan made will be composed essentially for officials, who will utilize the conjectures in the arr angement to settle on planning choices. These individuals will settle on planning choices for the arranged showcasing exercises as well as for the association s assembling, requesting, and generation divisions, and different capacities in view of the promoting arrangement made. Notwithstanding administrators, numerous other individuals will utilize the advertising arrangement. ParticularlyRead MoreStrategic Human Resource Management1738 Words   |  7 Pagesthe strategic objectives of the organization in order to improve performance. Strategic management The word ‘strategy’, deriving from the Greek noun strategus, meaning ‘commander in chief’, was first used in the English language in 1656. The development and usage of the word suggests that it is composed of stratos (army) and agein (to lead). In a management context, the word ‘strategy’ has now replaced the more traditional term – ‘long-term planning’ – to denote a specific pattern of decisions