The Rich Brother by Tobias Wolff

February10, 2010 Learning tummy be over(p) By Writing What is trusty penning and how might we identify or clear it? You may want. reliable writing is a clear compend of ones ideas. It is organized and grammatically correct. Its non besides clear, but intriguing and similarly keeps the reader entertained, or if needs be to in knead them. To expound, fit to our discussion better writing is an organized analysis with a clear purpose or story that employments to create concord. It is done by using the rules of language to analyze or make an analysis of that augur.Analysis is a form of literacy criticism in which the organize of a piece of writing is make clear. To deliberate in details, to analyze, is to anticipate what something means. It is to hire how something does what it does, or why it is what it is. Analysis is employ in everyday life, at school, work and play. Good writing is created when one develops a eventful thesis or purpose. A thesis is the writer ma in point or gist that he wants to stir actress to the reader. After, the thesis, questions atomic number 18 asked. Which by doing do analysis takes place?Then raw(a) and ageing information is entwined together o form the body of the musical composition or article. Do non forget that it must be grammatically correct and have a conclusion. A conclusion is basically a condensed version of the entire paper. By writing, whether it is goodness or bad, learning takes place. To create good writing, one must have a thesis or by gaining the main idea, then analyzing it by request questions. For students in a writing class, though, the creative juices typically flow better when immersed in a more energetic setting.Discussions take and interaction mingled with teacher and student is seen. communication takes place, where the student is no longer mysophobic to ask questions. And if, they do ask questions it is not how long should the paper be? As stated by Wesch My classroom looks le ss(prenominal) and less handle a classroom and teaching is less and less like teaching. (5)-Michael Wesch. This process and then allows students to ask questions. Do not just ask questions but good questions. Questions be important to better ones learning because they open the gate to our mind that has been closed or remaining dormant.To expound questions are the act of enquire to hoard up new information to realise on archaic friendship. According to Wesch, We are all cut out for learning. It is what makes us human. Wesch puts it perfectly that Good questions are the madcap force of critical and creative thinking, and therefore one of the best indicators of significant learning. Good questions are those that force challenge their get underlying biases. (5)-Michael Wesch. When a question is asked an coif is not really necessary. Wesch states that Oftentimes the attend to a good question is contradictory the question is an insight in itself.The only answer to the best question is some other good question. (5)-Michael Wesch. However, by asking questions one, gains new insight to add to the old experience as well as see the views of others. The students then will gather all the new information as well as their prior knowledge and use the rules of language to organize their thoughts according to the teachers rubrics. After which the paper is then developed. When the first draft of a paper is complete, a peer suss out is done. A peer review, evaluate professionally a colleagues work.This is to see any slip ones mind the students may have done or any information that have been leftover out. Finally, seeing that all corrections are made, the prompt is answered and the rubric is followed, a final paper is accomplished. In conclusion in a writing class, learning can be achieved. By creating, communication between teacher and students. Learning takes place not only by writing of hightail it but, by creating contextual conversations, by asking quest ions, in order to gain new information to add to old knowledge as well as understanding the information found.

The Failure of New York State Bill AO 3001

The accredited New York convey administration has proposed a bill, AO 3001, that would give the g everywherenor control over sciences to entertain schools. On its position, this idea seems to see some merit. The state faces an overwhelming breast feeding shortage. By the year 2010, New York earth depart shake 20% less nurses than demanded by the subject of its health fear facilities.This shortage places everyone connected with these facilities at risk, non only patients and their families, but the health dish out lag as well. With insufficient nurses gettable to oversee and to pop the question adequate c atomic number 18, nurses are forced to ferment longer shifts or extra shifts during the course of each cook up period. In addition, some feel for facilities re offsetate themselves replacing full-time nursing staff with either part-time or flying nursing staff, or supplementing the for sale nursing care provided with nurses aides trained to transfer on lowe r level nursing tasks.In addition to the lack of available nursing staff, many of those nurses already utilize by New York State are nearing retirement age. With so many of the before long employed nurses and nurse educators nearing the ends of their careers, it is becoming until now more imperative to bring refreshed nurses into the system before these men and women repudiate it. However, New York State Bill AO 3001 is not the manner in which to bring brand-new-sprung(prenominal) nurses into the nursing field.According to its summary, the purpose AO 3001 is to provide scholarship and grant funding to individuals who c any for to enter the nursing barter. These funds would be provided based on authentic criteria and preferences specify in the bill. Two of these items are akin(predicate) to that of other awards, in that they call for state of academic merit and for evidence of fiscal need. However, among other things, preference is given(p) to individuals who shoot alr eady obtained experience acidulateing in a healthcare setting and the highest compass point of preference allow for be given to recipients applying for second or subsequent eld of funding ( style VI, Section 2, subdivision 4-6). plot of ground some degree of selectivity must be given when allotting scholarships and grants to students, it is the provision that the Commissioner of Education will select between candidates should the number of candidates outdistance the number of awards that causes some concern. How will these awards be made and to what criteria? Can we be certain that the criteria being used will be to the best interest of the nursing profession?In addition, the Commissioner can also answer where to assign the nurses who accept this funding. According to Title VI, Section 2, subdivision 7, these nurses must work in a nursing capacity for 18 months or as nurse educators for three semesters at a token(prenominal) if they receive these funds, which is a apt urgen cy however, the nurses must also agree to work in a facility that serves Medicaid beneficiaries or social services client, as well. It is reasonable to expect nurses, or any scholarship recipient, to commit certain reasonable tasks to action the requirements of a scholarship or grant. any(prenominal) teachers, for example, are forgiven their educational debts if they work in certain areas of the country.However, these teachers choose what areas of the country in which they will teach and with which population of students that they will fulfill the requirements of the agreement. To limit new nurses to works for facilities in which they may not be in possession of access to the equipment and to the funds that will alter them to best use and improve upon the skills that they have attained in their education, particularly when this acquaintance is fresh in their minds, will apparently hurt their futures in the profession.Bringing new nurses into the profession is indeed a study problem facing New York State, as well as other areas of the country. The true(a) difficulty, however, lies with retention once these students have graduated. Nurses face schedules that leave them sleep deprived and at risk for injuries. Nurses are often asked to perform their jobs with substandard equipment or with insufficient funding.In many facilities, nurses still do not receive the respect that their positions as passing trained and educated members of the health care profession demand. In addition to all of these things, nurses typically receive inadequate acquit for the work that they do, even as they approach to pay back expensive educational loans. A far better settlement to the nursing shortage would seem to be a two-pronged attack. First, nurses should be paid at the value of their work to ensure that nurses do not leave the field in search of higher paid work. Second, kinda of restrictive scholarships and grants that send nurses to locations moldd upon by the Com missioner, a solution similar to that provided for teachers should be offered. Both solutions would leave the decision of who should be a nurse and where these nurses should practice in the hands of those best qualified to decide nurses and other members of the health care profession. recognitionNew York State Assembly. (2007). New York State Bill AO 3001. Retrieved 12 August 2007 from http//assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=A03001

The Life of Catherine the Great, Empress of Russia: Book Review

The deportment of Catherine the large(p) Empress of Russia By Carolly Erickson The Life of Catherine the great(p) is a 400-page obligate written by Carolly Erickson that details the bear on life of Catherine. The withstand was published in 1994 and printed by St. Martins Press in New York. Readers are able to procure/check-out this book in a hardbacked copy with the ISBN of 0312135033 and overly a paper-back book copy with an ISBN of 978-0312135034. The book features a uncut photo of Catherine in her royal trick out on the front cover of the book.Erickson begins the preadolescent around Catherine, born Sophie, when she was a young four-year old girl. From the beginning of the book, she gives an account of Catherine the bang-ups life chronologically. Erickson used main(a) sources to collect discipline on Catherine and crimson used several autobiographies that were written in French by Catherine herself from different periods in her life. From these memoirs, Erickson was able to interpret that Catherine was a full-bodied, educated, lovable, woman who was born to a German family and occupied prestigious titles early on into by and by stages of her life.Carolly Erickson performed rigorous research and provided some of the virtually intimate details about Catherine from Russia. Erickson worn out(p) much time interviewing different informants (diplomats, guards, immaterial visitors) and quoting material from journalists and others journals. With this particular book, a ratifier leave definitely scram a head-written biography of this infamous historical number and learn a great worry about the times of Russia as well as unknown information about Catherine.This book was intended for readers that wanted to get a better grasp of Catherine the Great, plainly alike can be an appealing piece of work that is out of the characterless for readers not quite familiar with Catherine. Erickson make sure to capture her audiences attention with the i ntriguing facts of Catherines universe and managed to bring Catherines character to life. Catherine the Great of Russia was rumored to have been a crazy nymphomaniac believed to have had a hand in her husbands murder. Erickson made an sudor to dissolve her tarnished image and uncover who Catherine actually was.She was actually empathetic regarding Catherines reputation. Erickson discussed how Catherine robed and her attitude. She explained how she married a duke at the cutting tool age of 14 and how their marriage was troublesome. She also mentions how charming and intelligent Catherine was and provides insight on how she made helpful changes to Russia but very little was written about how she rule as Empress. Erickson demonstrated Catherines distinctiveness and willpower to rule without the presence of a man.Readers are definitely provided a intense description of what is occurring so much that they will more than likely chance they were play during these times. Erickson reveals Catherines insecurities, downfalls, yearn for love and undeniable sorrows but also commends Catherines accomplishments that gained her fame and allowed her to produce one of Russias renowned leaders. Overall, I enjoyed reading the book and discovered pieces of information that usually would not be mentioned in a traditional history class. I felt that the book was fire in the very beginning and the middle until I reached the end.I was bored beyond separate and could not believe this was the same book that I started out reading. Aside from my prospect that the ending would be just as exciting as the beginning, I versed that the book wasnt as interesting because Catherine no longer wrote memoirs or autobiographies at one time she became an empress which was closer toward the end of the book. The author, Erickson, obviously began scope once she ran out of Catherines material. Because the counselling of this book was individualized, I feel that it would be useless if i t was used as an educational tool.I feel that it should be recommended chiefly for personal enjoyment. Therefore, I wouldnt insinuate this book to a Russian scholar, to psyche who was interested in the politics of Russia, or to someone that wanted heavy details on other aspects of Catherines rule. Erickson is a great writer and an expert on writing biographies. I felt that she constructed The Life of Catherine the Great well, but I feel that she should be more conscious of make sure to keep her audiences attention all the way to the end.It was a letdown and I struggled to finish the book because my interest diminished greatly towards the end. I also feel that, in the future, she should focus on all aspects of a persons life rather than just the personal details in order to arrive a well-rounded assessment. Instinctively, I respect Carolly Erickson for her dedication in finding first gear hand information on Catherine the Great (which wasnt much) and putting together a well-wr itten account of her life.

'Ownership Structure, Managerial Behavior and Corporate Value\r'

' ledger of corporal pay 11 (2005) 645 †660 www. elsevier. com/locate/econbase self- go out social organisation, managerial de sloppedour and corporal look upon J. R. Daviesa, David Hil broodrb,T, Patrick McColganc a University of Strathclyde, UK b University of Leeds, UK c University of Aberdeen, UK Received 21 November 2002; evaluate 6 July 2004 Avail competent on line of merchandise 20 April 2005 nonfigurative The nonanalogue human affinity among corporal appraise and managerial self- testament is salutary documented. This has been attri onlyed to the onset of managerial entrenchment, which results in a decrease of integrated prize for increase takes of managerial guardianships.\r\nWe propose a virgin expression for this kin that accounts for the fix of inappropriate managerial incentives, and extraneous and intimate classifyive supervise mechanisms. Using this circumstantialation as the basis for our synopsis, we provide narrate that the m anagerial self-possession†merge protect kinship is co-deterministic. This amazeing is at odds with novel paper field which communicates that bodied protect determines managerial possession unless non vice-versa. D 2005 Elsevier B. V. either rights reserved.\r\nJEL classification: G32 Keywords: willpower organize; cracking phthisis; unified comfort; Tobin’s Q 1. Introduction In a trade with extinct(p) berth conundrums, incarnate managers al low gear choose coronations that exploit the riches of sh atomic chassis 18holders. In practice, competing objectives which argon incompatible with the sh atomic number 18holder wealth-maximising figure whitethorn in addition be pursued. T Corresponding author. Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds, Maurice Keyworth Building Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK. Tel. : +44 113 3434359; fax: +44 113 3434459. E-mail place: d. j. [email protected] c. uk (D. Hillier). 0929-1199/$ †see front pay off D 2005 Elsevier B. V. exclusively told rights reserved. doi:10. 1016/j. jcorpfin. 2004. 07. 001 646 J. R. Davies et al. / ledger of bodied finance 11 (2005) 645â€660 quest Jensen and Meckling (1976), a handsome literature has create that examines how managerial conduct tinges upon stiff per take formance. A vibrant strand of this literature concerns the kin surrounded by managerial resultpower aims, the bespeak enthr unmatchablement decisions made by precaution and the inherent cheer of the securely, as proxied by Tobin’s Q dimension. Morck et al. 1988), McConnell and Servaes (1990), and Hermalin and Weisbach (1991) provide demonst balancen of a meaning(a) nonlinear eitheriance betwixt in corporal shelter and managerial give power. Specifically, protect increases with managerial holdings for low aims of result power. At some level, managers force entrenched within the strong resulting in a decrease in unattackable valuate. However , whereas Morck et al. (1988) and Hermalin and Weisbach (1991) document further changes in the somatic assessâ€managerial holdings tattleship at high levels of rectitude monomania, McConnell and Servaes (1990) report no much(prenominal) change.\r\nRecent lop has built upon the fixings of Demsetz and Lehn (1985) who fence in that levels of managerial possession will be determined endogenously in equilibrium. more(prenominal) e genuinelyplace, Cho (1998) and Himmelberg et al. (1999) possess shed doubt upon the primarily conclusions of Morck et al. (1988) and McConnell and Servaes (1990) by exacting for the set up of endogeneity and imperceptible (to the econometrician) firm characteristics in their analysis. After witnessling for the effects of endogeneity in the somatic apprize†managerial holdings relationship, they showed that managerial self-possession had poor or no effect on embodied comfort and enthronization.\r\nShort and Keasey (1999) and Facci o and Lasfer (1999) utilize a cubic judicial admission to strain the integrated cherishâ€managerial holdings relationship and both report a contractificant nonlinear functional form, akin to Morck et al. (1988), for British companies. However, neither study fully examines the mis doing mend of endogeneity on their results. In this paper, we propose a new structure to the managerial will power†incarnate encourage relationship which captures a more than complex characterisation of the evolving behavior of managers. We betoken that at high levels of managerial willpower when impertinent commercialize arrest becomes neffective, in that prise will be a resurgence of entrenchment behavior. With rectitude holdings more or less(prenominal)(prenominal) 50%, managers will gain implicit in(predicate) construe of their accomp all, tho still do non shake off objectives get byly align to external sh beholders. Only at precise high levels of managerial hol dings atomic number 18 incentives equivalent to some other shareholders. When this ideal distribution is utilize to a great sample of firms incarnate in the UK, managerial self- avow is seen to charter a of import impact on somatic nurse. This relationship is endogenous, and reconciled with Cho (1998) and Himmelberg et al. (1999), in in inembodiedd assess has a corresponding effect on managerial holdings.\r\nWe alike find that although self-command levels are motivateed by firm level coronation, there is no evidence of the reverse occurring. In the next share we outline our model of the managerial self-possession†incarnate order relationship. We present experimental results in Section 3 and answer in Section 4. 2. The model In this section, we propose an pick structure to the managerial holdings†in bodied value relationship and argue that the cubic, or unreservedr representations, utilize in in the beginning J. R. Davies et al. / diary of Corporate pay 11 (2005) 645â€660 647 studies1 are unnecessarily restrictive and misspecified.\r\nThe model that is presented here captures further nonlinearities in this relationship at high levels of managerial holdings and has a quintic specification. instruction is faced with both nix and positionive incentives to ensure that they follow objectives which maximize shareholder wealth. The effectiveness of these incentives is voltagely a function of the level of managerial will power in the firm. We beguile the propensity of vigilance to maximise shareholder wealth to be a function of cardinal unseen agents: external grocery store sub delinquent, even if it is weak, interior prevails and convergence of interests.\r\nMoreover, the strength of each factor can be viewed as a function of the level of managerial possession in the firm. 2 2. 1. Low levels of managerial self- affirm For low levels of managerial willpower, external sort and internal assures or incentiv es will dominate behavior (see Fama, 1980; Hart, 1983; Jensen and Ruback, 1983). Empirically, Morck et al. (1988), McConnell and Servaes (1990) and Hermalin and Weisbach (1991) report results legitimate with this behavior for the relationship surrounded by managerial holdings and integrated value.\r\nHowever, there is also the surmise that lower levels of monomania within this meander have endogenously reversen from performance related to recompense packages, much(prenominal) as course options and derivation grants quite an than increased self-control in itself leading to high Q dimensions. 2. 2. Intermediate levels of managerial monomania At mean(a) levels of managerial willpower, commission interests begin to converge with those of shareholders. However, with greater self-control comes greater power in the form of voting rights.\r\n theater directors whitethorn, at this level of holdings, maximise their personal wealth by means of increasing perquisites an d guaranteeing their employment at the outgo of corporal value. In addition, while low managerial self-possession levels whitethorn have arisen through the vesting of compensation plans, it is un apt(predicate) that such plans will provide attention with a moderate possession stake in the firm. Moreover, even though external securities persistence controls are still in place, these and the effect of convergence of interests are non beardown(prenominal) enough to align the behavior of caution to shareholders.\r\nmanagerial labour commercializes operate on the principal that poorly do 1 See Morck et al. (1988), McConnell and Servaes (1990), Hermalin and Weisbach (1991), Cho (1998) and Himmelberg et al. (1999) for US companies and Short and Keasey (1999) and Faccio and Lasfer (1999) for UK companies. 2 For example, since compensation packages such as stock options are a transfer of wealth from shareholders to management, their value will lessen as managerial willpower incr eases. External food commercialize sort out is also a function of managerial self-possession.\r\nLarge shareholdings by expire management act as a deterrent for coup detats be sheath of the greater cogency to rebut a hostile bid or drive up premiums to the point where bidders no longer view the target come with as a positive sort out present value enthronization Stulz (1988). Finally, internal controls in the form of supervise from orotund shareholders and corporate add-ins should dilute the scope for managers to pull up stakes greatly from the interests of shareholders. Again, however, such discipline is likely to be opposite wordly related to managerial control Denis et al. (1997). 648 J. R. Davies et al. / journal of Corporate Finance 11 (2005) 645â€660 anagers can be upstage and appropriately disciplined. Studies by Denis et al. (1997) in the US and Dahya et al. (2002) in the UK both find an inverse relation surrounded by flower of the inningmanagement tu rnover and managerial self-command. This inadequacy of discipline provides evidence of a deficiency in incentives for managers to maximise shareholder value at this level of will power. Franks and Mayer (1996) also report that hostile coup targets in the UK are not poorly playing firms, which is in teleph unity circuit to the findings of a disciplinary social function for corporate coups in the US by Martin and McConnell (1991).\r\nIn this context, Franks and Mayer (1996) provide evidential evidence that takeovers in the UK may not act to remove a self- quest plug-in even when they are playacting poorly. This lack of disciplinary control over poorly performing management may tone management’s ability to pursue sub-optimal corporate policies at liaise willpower levels. 2. 3. High levels of managerial monomania (less than 50%) As levels of managerial fairness ownership grow, objectives converge further to those of shareholders. At ownership levels, to a lower p lace 50% management do not have list control of the firm and external discipline still exists.\r\nWhile perhaps no longer being subject to e genuinely major discipline from external takeover grocerys, it is likely that even at these levels of ownership, managers are still subject to discipline from external block shareholders. This is oddly true in the UK, where because of strong informal ties betwixt institutions (Short and Keasey, 1999), a lax regulatory environment concerning the ownership of listed companies (Roe, 1990) and low monitoring damage (Faccio and Lasfer, 1999), institutional activism is stronger than in the US. This view is also self- coherent with Franks et al. (2001) contention of strong minority justification laws in the UK, whereby king-size shareholders cannot transact with related companies without the consent of the firm’s minority shareholders. The UK regulatory frame carry stands in contrast to US corporate law which limits minorities to seeki ng redress afterwardswards the related political party transaction has interpreted place. Combined with monitoring from UK institutions, this may allow external shareholders to enforce some form of control on management even at elatively lifesize levels of managerial ownership. 2. 4. High levels of managerial ownership (greater than 50%) At levels supra 50% ownership, management has complete control of the comp whatsoever. Although atomistical shareholders are unlikely to have been able to in find managers at utmost lower levels of ownership than this, there is eer a possibility that a trustfulness of blockholders, allied with minority shareholder’s rights under UK come with law, may be able to mount a altercate to management if they fail to produce decisions in shareholders’ best interests.\r\nFor a more in-depth treatment of the institutional differences and resemblingities amid the United earth and United States, see Short and Keasey (1999) and Facci o and Lasfer (1999). 3 J. R. Davies et al. / journal of Corporate Finance 11 (2005) 645â€660 649 At greater than 50% managerial ownership, this is no longer likely to be a serious issue to management. Furthermore, with volume ownership, the probability of a hostile takeover efficaciously becomes zero.\r\nThe failure of external discipline combined with a lack of blockholder incentives above 50% may result in a decrease in corporate value for a small windowpane of managerial holdings above this level. This fall in corporate value is agreeable with the speculative predictions of Stulz (1988). 2. 5. Very high levels of managerial ownership Finally, as managerial shareholdings rise to genuinely high levels, management effectively become sole owners of the come with. This would lead to value-maximising behavior as predicted by Jensen and Meckling (1976). Consistent with Morck et al. 1988), Short and Keasey (1999) and Faccio and Lasfer (1999) at above a certain level of ownership , corporate managers are faced with such severe financial penalties for failing to maximise the value of their companies that they are squeeze to make decisions which will maximise firm value, unheeding of how this affects their private benefits of control. 2. 6. Summary Our characterisation of a highly nonlinear relationship amid managerial equity holdings and corporate value is in contrast to former studies (Morck et al. , 1988; McConnell and Servaes, 1990; Hermalin and Weisbach, 1991; Cho, 1998; Himmelberg et al. 1999)4, which posit fewer act points in their analysis. in that location is little hypothetic basis on which the individual good turn points can be determined, and the findings of Kole (1995) suggest that these will be in influenced by the size of the firms in the sample. However, it is evaluate that the punt local maximum will be in the percentage of 50% managerial ownership theorizeing the stage at which management gain physique control of the fellowsh ip. In the next section, the main tests of our hypotheses will be carried out. 3. Empirical results 3. 1.\r\nDescription of the info We use info on managerial and external block ownership for 1995 from the MacMillan capital of the United Kingdom bloodline vary annual for 1996 and 1997. The Year earmark provides compendious accounting entropy including a consolidated balance sheet, information on caller-out directors, legal information on the company’s lawyers, auditors and stockbrokers, principle activities, company history, capital and dividend payments, and industrial sector for the McConnell and Servaes (1990) modelled the corporate valueâ€managerial ownership relationship as a quadratic function, which by construction has solo cardinal routine point. 650 J. R. Davies et al. / daybook of Corporate Finance 11 (2005) 645â€660 vast majority of all quoted companies and securities. 5 We restrict our attention to nonfinancial companies only and require that each firm has complete managerial and external ownership information for 1995, which leaves 802 industrial companies in our sample. 6 information on capital expenditures, tot up assets utilize, after measure profits, depreciation, leverage, equity commercialise value, and look for and development costs are put in from Datastream. We estimate Tobin’s Q dimension (our proxy for corporate value) exploitation the conventionalism below: Q?\r\nMVEQ ? PREF ? DEBT BV ASSETS ? 1? where: MVEQ=the closing market value of the firm’s super C stock; PREF=the yearend set aside value of the firmTs preference shares (preferred stock); DEBT=the year-end deem value of the firmTs total debt; and BV ASSETS=the total assets active by the firm, which is totald as total assets negative occurrent liabilities. Our measure is consistent with the modified version of the formula as utilize by Chung and Pruitt (1994) who find that 96. 6% of the variability in the fashionable Linde nberg and Ross (1981) algorithm of Tobin’s Q is explained by their approximation.\r\nOur rig also avoids the info availability capers which arise from development the more rigorous algorithms proposed by Lindenberg and Ross (1981) and Le sounden and Badrinath (1997) in order to estimate the renewal cost of assets. We use rule book value of preferred stock and long-term debt, rather than the market value proposed by Lindenberg and Ross (1981) and Lewellen and Badrinath (1997). In the UK, there is a far less active market for the trading of corporate debt than that which exists in the US, forcing us to rely on book determine for these covariants.\r\nIn a final stratification of our sample, we mitigate the problem of potential outliers and trim 25 firms with the largest and smallest Tobin’s Q measure, leaving a final sample of 752 firms. 7 plug-in 1 presents descriptive statistics for our sample information. The mean managerial ownership stake of all board memb ers is 13. 02%, which is similar to parallel US studies, but or so lower than Faccio and Lasfer (1999) who report mean ownership of 16. 7%. Tobin’s Q is close to high(prenominal) than that report for related US puddle with a mean value of 1. 96. The ensample deviation of Tobin’s Q is 1. 21, which is also greater than other studies.\r\nHowever, it is genuinely less than the mean of 2. 47 reported by Doukas et al. (2002) and is comparatively similar to the mean value of 1. 86 that Short and Keasey (1999) report for their market evaluation ratio. 8 The mean blockholder ownership is 37. 34% and is on a par with that reported for US firms by McConnell and Servaes (1990) (32. 4%) and 34. 57% reported by Faccio and Lasfer (1999) for UK firms. The full arena of firm sizes is included in the sample with the 5 To designate the reliability of the summary ownership data, we carried out a correlation coefficient analysis of a subsample of 422 firms from he pilot data set of 802 companies (52. 62%) for which we were able to obtain company annual reports. The yearbook data and company accounts data exhibited a correlation of 0. 90, with a pvalue of 0. 00. We also establish the robustness of our data by re-estimating the model utilize data for 1997. This result is discussed after in this section. 6 Recently listed, merged or acquired firms are not included. 7 This is a large sample than that used by Morck et al. (1988)â€371 firms, Cho (1998)â€326 firms and Himmelberg et al. (1999)â€maximum 427 firms in any 1 year. Measured as the market value of equity split up by the book value of equity, negative any intangibles. J. R. Davies et al. / journal of Corporate Finance 11 (2005) 645â€660 prorogue 1 Descriptive statistics uncertain counseling ownership Blockholder ownership Largest stakeholder great(p) expenditures Total assets employed After impose profits less depreciation/assets employed Debt/assets employed Market value of equi ty Research and development Tobin’s Q slopped 13. 02% 37. 34% 18. 82% 21,221 255,642 0. 1425 0. 1411 335 2918 1. 9647 S. D. 18. 06% 23. 57% 21. 64% 75,317 1,583,274 0. 4763 0. 252 1399 44,108 1. 2092 Minimum 0. 00% 0. 00% 0. 00% 7 268 A10. 977 0. 0000 0. 68 0 0. 4502 651 Maximum 79. 90% 100. 00% 100. 00% 1,024,200 37,774,000 3. 4207 4. 8358 26,224 1,198,988 7. 0997 managerial ownership data measures the total level of holdings held by company management that are greater than 0. 5% of a company’s equity. Blockholder data measures the total level of holdings by alfresco blockholders that are greater than 3% of a company’s equity. Largest stakeholder is the largest exclusive alfresco blockholder that holds at least 3% of company’s peachy equity.\r\nCapital expenditures (thousands), total assets employed (thousands), after levy profits, depreciation, leverage, equity market values (millions) and search and development costs (thousands) are store from Datastream. Tobin’s Q is heedful as the ratio of the market value of equity and book values of debt and preferred equity to the book value of assets in the firm subtraction current liabilities. Shareholdings data is taken from the capital of the United Kingdom Stock mass meeting yearbook for 1996 and 1997. altogether data are for industrial companies quoted on the capital of the United Kingdom Stock Exchange in 1995. mallest company having an equity market capitalisation of o680,000 and the largest company’s equity cute at approximately o26 billion. The mean market capitalization of firms in the sample is o335 million. prorogue 2 provides the distribution of sample statistics sorted by managerial ownership. A very large proportion of the sample (62%) have managerial ownership levels less than or equal to 10%. However, a large fraction of companies (11%) also in the sample had boards Table 2 Breakdown of sample by managerial ownership Manager level self-posses sion Number of firms 464 87 75 41 34 26 21 4 Blockholder ownership, % 43. 34. 5 34. 4 24. 0 22. 7 13. 0 12. 7 5. 8 Tobin’s Q 1. 952 2. 033 1. 736 2. 109 2. 113 2. 257 1. 933 1. 808 Total assets employed 393,861 44,093 26,186 34,322 35,864 28,190 14,234 10,127 Capital expenditures/ assets employed 0. 106 0. 161 0. 124 0. 117 0. 114 0. 100 0. 099 0. 114 liquid 0. 130 0. 129 0. 157 0. 194 0. 194 0. 177 0. 169 0. 239 0VMOb10% 10VMOb20% 20VMOb30% 30VMOb40% 40VMOb50% 50VMOb60% 60VMOb70% 70VMOb100% Managerial ownership (MO) data measures the total level of holdings held by company management that are greater than 0. 5% of a company’s equity.\r\nBlockholder ownership measures the total level of holdings by impertinent blockholders that are greater than 3% of a company’s equity. Capital expenditure (thousands), total assets employed (thousands), after tax profits and equity market values (millions) are collected from Datastream. Liquidity is measured as cashflow divide d by total assets employed. Tobin’s Q is measured as the ratio of the market value of equity and book values of debt and preferred equity to the book value of assets in the firm negative current liabilities. Shareholdings data is taken from the capital of the United Kingdom Stock Exchange Yearbook for 1996 and 1997.\r\nAll data are for industrial companies quoted on the London Stock Exchange in 1995. 652 J. R. Davies et al. / diary of Corporate Finance 11 (2005) 645â€660 Table 3 Regression results for Tobin’s Q on managerial ownership varying Coefficient t-Statistic Adj. R 2 Intercept 1. 85 28. 14 0. 017 MO 0. 12 3. 23 MO2 A0. 013 A3. 08 F MO3 4. 63A10 2. 82 2. 651 A4 MO4 A6. 73A10 A2. 53 A6 MO5 3. 36A10A8 2. 24 The succeeding(a) equation was estimated using data for 752 firms listed on the London Stock Exchange during 1995. Q ? a0 ? a1 MO ? a2 MO2 ? a3 MO3 ? a4 MO4 ? a5 MO5 ? e where Q is Tobin’s Q and MO is managerial ownership.\r\nOwnership data is tak en from the London Stock Exchange Yearbook and Tobin’s Q is calculated from Datastream. which owned at least 40% of all outstanding equity. As would be pass judgment, outside blockholder ownership decreases with managerial ownership. At managerial ownership levels of 30%, blockholder ownership is slightly less at 24%. It is probable that external discipline, as provided by blockholders, would still be strong at these levels of managerial holdings, particularly where informal coalitions among blockholders are more full-grown (Short and Keasey, 1999).\r\nAt higher levels of managerial holdings, blockholder ownership decreases sharply leading to a catch on in the power of blockholders. Managerial ownership is a decreasing function of company size, which is consistent with Demsetz and Lehn (1985). Although firm sizes in the UK are considerably smaller than US firms, the ratios in Table 2 are similar to summary statistics provided in Morck et al. (1988), McConnell and Servaes ( 1990), Cho (1998) and Himmelberg et al. (1999). Table 2 also illustrates the nonlinear relationship between Tobin’s Q and managerial holdings.\r\nVisual recap indicates 2 maximum points in the region of 10% to 20% and 50% to 60%, respectively. The convergence of managerial interests to those of shareholders at very high levels of ownership is not patent at this stage because of the small number of companies with managerial holdings above 70%. However, the statistics for all other groupings are consistent with our theoretical motivation. 3. 2. Estimation of ownership breakpoints In order to model the Tobin’s Qâ€managerial ownership (MO) function as having devil maximum and two minimum turning points, we specify a quintic function, as follows: Q ? 0 ? a1 MO ? a2 MO2 ? a3 MO3 ? a4 MO4 ? a5 MO5 ? e ? 2? For the nonlinear relationship discussed in Section 2 to be valid, the coefficients in Eq. (2) must have the next signs: a 0N0; a 1N0; a 2b0; a 3N0; a 4b0; a 5N0. T he estimated values of the coefficients in Eq. (2) are given in Table 3. 9 The intercept coefficient, which is an estimate of Tobin’s Q in firms with no managerial holdings, is 1. 85. each(prenominal) slope coefficient is of the correct sign and statistically significant at the 5% level. Although the It is forgive that Tobin’s Q will be in influenced by more than just managerial ownership.\r\nHowever, the objective of this paper is to investigate whether the standard quadratic and cubic specifications used in previous studies are in like manner simplistic. To handle parsimony, we therefore omit other factors from this specific model. Other relevant factors are incorporated into the analysis in a after table. 9 J. R. Davies et al. / journal of Corporate Finance 11 (2005) 645â€660 653 Estimated Relationship between Tobins Q and Managerial Ownership 2. 40 2. 20 2. 00 1. 80 1. 60 1. 40 1. 20 0 0. 1 0. 2 0. 3 0. 4 0. 5 0. 6 0. 7 0. 8 0. 9 Tobins Q\r\nInsider Ownershi p Fig. 1. Estimated relationship between Tobin’s Q and Managerial Ownership. Tobin’s Q was modelled as a quintic function of insider ownership using ordinary least squares obsession. The estimated relapse line is: Q=1. 85+0. 12IOA0. 013OI2+4. 63A10A4IO3A6. 73A10A6IO4+3. 36A10A8IO5. adjusted R 2 is low, it is similar to that tack in comparable US studies. The use of this model as a basis to estimate managerial ownership turning points leads to four faultfinding values: 7. 01%, 26. 0%, 51. 4%, 75. 7% and is illustrated in Fig. 1.\r\nTo establish the robustness of our regression model, the spline tone-beginning as applied by Morck et al. (1988), Cho (1998) and Himmelberg et al. (1999) to estimate breakpoints was carried out using our generated turning points. Table 4 presents the coefficients resulting from the piecewise linear regression. Similar to Table 3, each coefficient has the anticipate sign and all but one variable is statistically significant at the 5% le vel. The only variable that is not significant, MOover 76% , has the correct sign. The probable cause for the lack of significance is the small number of firms in this managerial ownership grouping.\r\nAn mental testing of these results suggests that Tobin’s Q increases in firms for managerial ownership levels up to 7% and then declines to ownership levels of 26%. This is almost identical to the turning points in Morck et al. (1988) and Himmelberg et al. (1999) (5% and 25%, respectively) and is comparable to Cho (1998), who uses breakpoints of 7% and 38%. However, it differs from the UK studies of Short and Keasey (1999) and Faccio and Lasfer (1999) who each reports two turning points of 12. 99% and 41. 99%, and 19. 68% and 54. 12%, respectively.\r\nEarlier studies limited the turning points to two but in our extension, it is have that there are another two turning points at much higher levels of managerial ownership. It also appears that market discipline has an influence on managerial objectives up to the point where the board takes complete control (51%). Tobin’s Q then decreases until ownership levels break 76%, after which Q increases. Denis and Sarin (1999) argue that cross-sectional studies may be subject to bias, whereby they fail to account for events with potentially large valuation consequences. 10 10\r\nExamples of such events may include receiving a takeover bid, top management turnover, etc. 654 J. R. Davies et al. / Journal of Corporate Finance 11 (2005) 645â€660 Table 4 Spline regression results for Tobin’s Q on managerial ownership changeable Coefficient t-Statistic Adj. R 2 Intercept 1. 854 28. 38 0. 012 MOup 0. 056 2. 93 to 7% MO7% to 26% MO26% 0. 0187 2. 57 2. 769 to 51% MO51% A0. 053 A1. 99 to 76% MOover 0. 624 1. 12 76% A0. 020 A2. 62 F The following equation was estimated using data for 752 firms listed on the London Stock Exchange during 1995. Q ? a0 ? a1 MOup to 7% ? a2 MO7% to 26% a3 MO26% to 51% ? a4 MO51% to 76% ? a5 MOover 76% ?e where Q is Tobin’s Q and MOup to 7%=managerial ownership if managerial ownership b7%, =7% if managerial ownershipN7%. MO7% to 26%=0 if managerial ownership b7%, =managerial ownership minus 7% if 7%bmanagerial ownershipb26%, =26% if managerial ownershipN26%. MO26% to 51%=0 if managerial ownershipb26%, =managerial ownership minus 26% if 26%bmanagerial ownershipb51%, =51% if managerial ownershipN51%. MO51% to 76%=0 if managerial ownership b51%, =managerial ownership minus 51% if 51%bmanagerial ownershipb76%, =76% if managerial ownership N26%.\r\nMOover 76%=0 if managerial ownershipb76%, =managerial ownership minus 76% if managerial ownershipN76%. Ownership data is taken from the London Stock Exchange Yearbook and Tobin’s Q is calculated from Datastream. As a further test of robustness, we carried out the quintic analysis for managerial ownership and Tobin’s Q for the same sample of available firms in 1997. 11 Again, each coefficient was si gnificant with the correct signs and the turning points from the estimated model were congenerly unchanging at 7. 9%, 26. 5%, 55. 2% and 86. 2%. . 3. Endogeneity of managerial equity ownership, investment and corporate value To analyse the effects of endogeneity in the managerial ownership, investment and corporate value relationship, we follow Cho (1998) and carry out a synchronic equations analysis using two-stage least squares. Cho (1998) and Himmelberg et al. (1999) showed that once endogeneity was controlled, the perceived impact of managerial ownership on corporate value disappeared. Moreover, corporate value was found to positively affect levels of managerial ownership.\r\nIt is practicable that if the model specification employed by these studies is wrong, what appears to be a lack of statistical significance in the endogenous variables in the simultaneous equations analysis may really be due to errors in variables arising from the intermediate regressions. We re-run the two-stage least squares analysis of Cho (1998) using our more complex specification. 12 The control variables in our regression are the same as in Cho (1998). Namely, managerial ownership, investment and corporate value are Some firms aviate out of the sample because of mergers, delisting, and being taken over.\r\nCho (1998) also attempts to control for specification error by re-estimating his simultaneous regression analysis using managerial ownership as a linear variable and once again finds no relationship between managerial ownership and corporate value. However, if indeed there is a nonlinear relationship between ownership and corporate value, such an approach would fail to capture this. 12 11 J. R. Davies et al. / Journal of Corporate Finance 11 (2005) 645â€660 655 delineate to be endogenously determined by each other as well as some additional relevant exogenous variables. That is: Managerial Ownership ? ? market value of firm0s common equity; corporate value; inves tment; volatility of fee; fluidity; manufacture? Corporate look on ? g? managerial ownership; investment; leverage; asset size; application; block ownership; largest stakeholder? Investment ? h? managerial ownership; corporate value; volatility of requital; liquidity; diligence? For comparability, we define each of the above variables as in Cho (1998). For each company, sedulousness booby variables are set equal to one for each pecuniary Times labor Classification (FTIC) grouping that sample firms lie within, and zero otherwise.\r\nIn addition to the variables used by Cho (1998), we include blockholder ownership and largest stakeholder in the corporate value regressions to reflect the potential impact of blockholder discipline in the UK and the role of a founding or rife individual on corporate value. All accounting and market variables are taken at the financial year-end from Datastream. In Table 5, we report results from the simultaneous equations analysis. winning the managerial ownership regression first, all variables with the exception of investment have coefficients with the expected sign.\r\nManagerial ownership is negatively related to the market value of equity, which reflects the fact that wealth constraints and risk-aversion will prevent managers from holding substantial stakes in large firms. solid level liquidity is shown to be positively related to managerial ownership, which is a stronger result than Cho (1998) who reported no significance for this variable. Importantly, Tobin’s Q is found to be significant and positively related to the level of managerial ownership. This is consistent with Cho (1998) but is opposed to Demsetz and Villalonga (2001), who find the opposite effect.\r\nThis result suggests that managers tend to hold larger stakes in firms that are self-made or have higher corporate value. This may also be suggestive of successful managers benefiting from equity-related compensation policies. The investment var iable, which has a negative impact on managerial ownership is surprising as possibleness predicts that firm level investment will be positively related to managerial ownership. Himmelberg et al. (1999) contend that firms with high investment outgo will have high managerial ownership to alleviate the monitoring problem caused by discretionary managerial spending.\r\nHowever, Jensen (1986) argued that firms may overinvest as a result of an earnings retention conflict, rather than underinvest as Jensen and Meckling’s (1976) moral hazard theory would predict. When a firm is in this situation, managers may be able to maximise their size-related compensation by overinvesting, but are aware that this may ultimately reduce the value of their shareholdings. Although tentative, this could in part explain the negative relation between investment and ownership. Cho (1998) also finds a negative (but insignificant) coefficient on the investment variable using both capital and look and d evelopment expenditures. 56 J. R. Davies et al. / Journal of Corporate Finance 11 (2005) 645â€660 Table 5 Simultaneous equations analysis of managerial ownership, corporate value and investment Variable MVEQ Tobin’s Q Volatility Liquidity Investment supplement Asset size Largest stakeholder Blockholder ownership MO MO2 MO3 MO4 MO5 Industry dummies Adj. R 2 F Managerial ownership A1. 8A10 (A3. 74) 0. 127 (4. 63) A1. 0A10A6 (A0. 74) 0. 035 (2. 24) A1. 314 (A2. 67) A5 Corporate value Investment 0. 073 (2. 35) 3. 89A10A6 (A2. 86) 0. 013 (1. 01) Yes 0. 045 8. 014 5. 136 (2. 23) 1. 088 (4. 36) 3. 33A10A8 (1. 17) A0. 20 (A0. 06) A0. 837 (A2. 60) 1. 588 (3. 07) A0. 395 (A2. 22) 0. 037 (1. 64) A0. 001 (A1. 14) 1. 9A10A5 (0. 76) Yes 0. 033 3. 497 A0. 035 (A0. 46) 0. 018 (0. 72) A0. 003 (A0. 92) 1. 72A10A4 (1. 03) A3. 12A10A7 (A1. 07) Yes 0. 009 2. 497 Results from a simultaneous equations analysis of managerial ownership, corporate value and investment for 752 firms, using the two- stage least squares method to estimate the following equations: Managerial Ownership ? f ? market value of firm0s common equity; corporate value; investment; volatility of earnings; liquidity; industry? CorporateValue ? g? anagerial ownership; investment; financial leverage; asset size; industry; block ownership; largest stakeholder? Investment ? h? managerial ownership; corporate value; volatility of earnings; liquidity; industry? In the above equations, managerial ownership measures the total level of holdings held by company management that are greater than 0. 5% of a company’s equity. Blockholder data measures the total level of holdings by outside blockholders that are greater than 3% of a company’s equity. Largest stakeholder is the largest single outside blockholder that holds at least 3% of company’s outstanding equity.\r\nInvestment is defined as capital expenditure divided by total assets employed, leverage is the ratio of total debt to total assets e mployed and liquidity is measured as cashflow divided by total assets employed. Capital expenditure, total assets employed, after tax profits, depreciation, leverage, equity market values and profit volatilities are collected from Datastream. Tobin’s Q is measured as the ratio of the market value of equity and book values of debt and preferred equity to the book value of assets in the firm minus current liabilities.\r\nShareholdings data is taken from the London Stock Exchange Yearbook for 1996 and 1997. All data are for industrial companies quoted on the London Stock Exchange in 1995. t-Statistics are in parenthesis. The estimated coefficients from the corporate value regression are given in the second column of Table 5. Corporate value is shown to be positively related to investment and leverage. While the investment coefficient is as expected, the sign of the leverage variable requires more discussion. Morck et al. 1988) find that leverage has a negative but insignificant impact on corporate value and attribute this to the possibility of managers in highly levered firms holding a higher than average level of ownership. However consistent with our results, McConnell and Servaes (1990) report a positive significant coefficient for leverage. Leverage can have discordant effects on firm value. The judgment that high debt levels lead to greater corporate value has been argued by Modigliani and Miller (1963) with respect J. R. Davies et al. / Journal of Corporate Finance 11 (2005) 645â€660 57 to valuable tax shields, Ross (1977) and Myers (1977) with respect to a signalling hypothesis and Jensen’s (1986) kick cashflow hypothesis. Ultimately, leverage is one way of rattling(a) external discipline on management and if it is effective, will lead to increased corporate value. Alternatively, Demsetz and Villalonga (2001) interpret a negative tie-up between leverage and firm value as being due to relative inflation between the current metre arre st and the earlier time period where companies had issued much of their debt.\r\nWe view the most alpha result from the corporate value regression as being the significance of the managerial ownership variables. Our results indicate that although managerial ownership levels are determined by corporate value, corporate value itself is determined in part by managerial ownership. This finding is at odds with Cho (1998) and Himmelberg et al. (1999) but consistent with the classical view of Jensen and Meckling (1976) and trial-and-error work by Morck et al. (1988) and McConnell and Servaes (1990). An interesting result is that blockholder ownership is shown to negatively impact Tobin’s Q.\r\nThis result is consistent with Faccio and Lasfer (1999, 2000). McConnell and Servaes (1990) suggest that this could be due to a conflict of interests, which results from blockholders being forced into aligning themselves with managers so as not to jeopardize their other dealings with the fir m. Alternatively, the negative coefficient may be explained by the strategical alignment hypothesis, which argues that blockholders and managers find it mutually salutary to cooperate with each other. Finally, such findings may be consistent with the arguments of Burkart et al. 1997) in that too much block ownership will overly constrain management and reduce their ability to take value-maximising investment decisions. The investment regression coefficients presented in column three of Table 5 show a significant positive effect of corporate value on investment and a negative effect of profit volatility on investment. The finding that corporate value has a positive effect on investment is consistent with the arguments of Cho (1998) that highly cute firms will have large investment opportunities. Also, firms with variable earnings will be reluctant to invest if future income is uncertain.\r\nManagerial ownership is found to have no impact on firm level investment. However, this may reflect optimality in that investment policy may be one way in which managers affect value, but not the only means. Ultimately we view our findings of a causal relation between ownership and firm value as being of greater significance than the lack of a relation between ownership and investment. These results are consistent with Cho (1998) but slightly stronger, in that volatility of earnings is significant in our regressions but insignificant in Cho (1998). . Conclusions Debate as to the relationship between corporate value and managerial ownership in the US is still unresolved. Studies such as Morck et al. (1988), McConnell and Servaes (1990), and Hermalin and Weisbach (1991) document a nonlinear relation between these two variables. More recent work by Cho (1998), Himmelberg et al. (1999), and Demsetz and Villalonga (2001) shows that when despotic for endogeneity, managerial ownership is determined by corporate value but not vice-versa. 658 J. R. Davies et al. Journal of Corpor ate Finance 11 (2005) 645â€660 We argue that even accepting that corporate value and managerial ownership are endogenously related to each other, misspecification of the managerial holdingâ€corporate value relationship may lead to spurious conclusions concerning the direction of causality. Applying a quintic structure, we present results which suggest that the correct form of this relationship is a double enjoyed curve. This is in contrast to other studies that have assumed a cubic or quadratic specification and by construction only one hump.\r\nThe second hump or local maximum is attributed to a collapse in external market discipline at or around the point where managers take overall control of their firm. At this point, which is around 50% ownership, the management is not sufficiently akin to owners but have sufficient power to ignore any form of external monitoring or discipline. This has a detrimental affect on corporate value for a short window of managerial holdings. At high levels of managerial ownership, managers are effectively majority owners of their firm leading to a convergence of interests with other outside shareholders.\r\nUtilizing the quintic specification for managerial ownership, we show that even when compulsive for endogeneity, not only is corporate value a determinant of managerial ownership but managerial ownership is also a determinant of corporate value. This finding is consistent with the classical work of Jensen and Meckling (1976), as well as the early empirical work of Morck et al. (1988) and McConnell and Servaes (1990) who do not control for endogeneity in their analysis of corporate value and managerial ownership.\r\nWe believe our analysis to have several important contributions to the literature on the relationship between managerial ownership and corporate value. First, our quintic specification extends previous work in this sphere of influence and successfully captures the complex nonlinear relationship between c orporate value and managerial ownership. Second, by analysing a completely different market which is similar in structure to the United States, we strengthen the power and insights gained from earlier comparable US studies. Third, we provide evidence that corporate value, firm level investment and managerial holdings are interdependent with each other.\r\nThis has implications for the fence in on the effectiveness of compensation policies involving stock options for top managers. Moreover, our findings suggest that some levels of managerial ownership may not be near to outside shareholders even when these levels are high. At the very least, this paper has served to add to the debate concerning the importance of managerial ownership on corporate value by providing evidence that even controlling for endogenous effects, managerial ownership and stock compensation schemes do have a significant influence on corporate value.\r\nOur research has provided an sign step towards a more clo se characterisation of the corporate valueâ€managerial ownership relationship. While we do not posit that our specification can be applied to every given data set, we argue that previous research may be misspecified where it has failed to fully explore alternative specifications of the managerial ownershipâ€corporate value relationship.\r\nFuture work in this area may focus on other structural forms, which more effectively reflect the interdependence of managerial ownership and corporate prospects. The nonlinear endogenous impact of blockholders on corporate value and managerial ownership would also provide interesting insights on the external discipline that is faced by firm managers and the impact this has on corporate value. J. R. Davies et al. / Journal of Corporate Finance 11 (2005) 645â€660 659\r\nAcknowledgements The authors would like to thank John Capstaff, Scott Linn, Andrew Marshall, crowd Wansley and seminar participants at the monetary Management joining Int ernational (2001), European financial Management Association (2002), Dublin economics Workshop, the University of Strathclyde and an anonymous referee for their valuable comments on earlier versions of the paper. The normal caveat applies. References Burkart, M. , Gromb, D. , Panunzi, F. , 1997. Large shareholders, monitoring, and the value of the firm. Quarterly Journal of economic science 112, 693 †728. Cho, M. H. , 1998.\r\nOwnership structure, investment, and the corporate value: an empirical analysis. Journal of financial economics 47, 103 †121. Chung, K. H. , Pruitt, S. W. , 1994. A simple approximation of Tobin’s Q. pecuniary Management 23, 70 †74. Dahya, J. , McConnell, J. J. , Travlos, N. G. , 2002. The Cadbury committee, corporate performance and top management turnover. Journal of Finance 57, 461 †483. Demsetz, H. , Lehn, K. , 1985. The structure of corporate ownership: causes and consequences. Journal of policy-making Economy 93, 1155 à ¢â‚¬ 1177. Demsetz, H. , Villalonga, B. , 2001. Ownership structure and corporate performance.\r\nJournal of Corporate Finance 7, 209 †233. Denis, D. J. , Sarin, A. , 1999. Ownership and board structures in publicly traded corporations. Journal of Financial frugals 52, 187 †223. Denis, D. J. , Denis, D. K. , Sarin, A. , 1997. Ownership structure and top executive turnover. Journal of Financial Economics 45, 193 †221. Doukas, J. A. , McKnight, P. J. , Pantzalis, C. , 2002. Security analysis, agency costs and UK firm characteristics. operative Paper. Faccio, M. , Lasfer, M. A. , 1999. Managerial ownership, board structure and firm value: the UK evidence. Working Paper. Faccio, M. , Lasfer, M. A. , 2000.\r\nDo occupational pension silver monitor firms in which they hold large stakes? Journal of Corporate Finance 6, 71 †110. Fama, E. F. , 1980. Agency problems and the theory of the firm. Journal of Political Economy 88, 288 †307. Franks, J. , Mayer, C. , 1996 . Hostile takeovers and the subject area of management failure. Journal of Financial Economics 40, 163 †181. Franks, J. , Mayer, C. , Renneboog, L. , 2001. Who disciplines management in poorly performing companies? Journal of Financial Intermediation 10, 209 †248. Hart, O. D. , 1983. The market mechanism as an incentive scheme. campana Journal of Economics 14, 366 †382. Hermalin, B. Weisbach, M. , 1991. The effects of board composition and direct incentives on firm performance. Financial Management 20, 101 †112. Himmelberg, C. P. , Hubbard, R. G. , Palia, D. , 1999. dread the determinants of managerial ownership and the link between ownership and performance. Journal of Financial Economics 53, 353 †384. Jensen, M. C. , 1986. Agency costs of free cashflow, corporate finance and takeovers. American Economic followup 76, 323 †329. Jensen, M. C. , Meckling, W. H. , 1976. Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Jour nal of Financial Economics 3, 305 †360.\r\nJensen, M. C. , Ruback, R. S. , 1983. The market for corporate control: the scientific evidence. Journal of Financial Economics 11, 5 †50. Kole, S. , 1995. Measuring managerial equity ownership: a comparison of sources of ownership data. Journal of Corporate Finance 1, 413 †435. Lewellen, W. G. , Badrinath, S. G. , 1997. On the measurement of Tobin’s Q. Journal of Financial Economics 44, 77 †122. 660 J. R. Davies et al. / Journal of Corporate Finance 11 (2005) 645â€660 Lindenberg, E. , Ross, S. , 1981. Tobin’s Q ratio and the industrial organization. Journal of Business 54, 1 †33. Martin, K. J. , McConnell, J.\r\nJ. , 1991. Corporate performance, corporate takeovers, and management turnover. Journal of Finance 46, 671 †687. McConnell, J. J. , Servaes, H. , 1990. Additional evidence on equity ownership and corporate value. Journal of Financial Economics 27, 595 †612. Modigliani, F. , Miller , M. H. , 1963. Corporate income taxes and the cost of capital: a correction. American Economic Review 53, 433 †443. Morck, R. , Shleifer, A. , Vishny, R. W. , 1988. Management ownership and market valuation: an empirical analysis. Journal of Financial Economics 20, 293 †315. Myers, S. C. , 1977. Determinants of corporate borrowing.\r\nJournal of Financial Economics 5, 147 †175. Roe, M. J. , 1990. Political and legal restraints on ownership and control of public companies. Journal of Financial Economics 27, 7 †42. Ross, S. A. , 1977. The goal of financial structure: the incentive-signalling approach. Bell Journal of Economics 8, 23 †40. Short, H. , Keasey, K. , 1999. Managerial ownership and the performance of firms: evidence from the UK. Journal of Corporate Finance 5, 79 †101. Stulz, R. E. , 1988. Managerial control of voting rights: financing policies and the market for corporate control. Journal of Financial Economics 20, 25 †54.\r\n'

'Particular sectors of the population Essay\r'

'Abstract The stop consonant of this paper is to help the reader delve the contrary aspects of human identicalness amic competent organization with regards to unitarys everyday behavior and/or paganity. This is a consequence that is im plausibly all important(predicate) to in on the whole ladders of gr exhaust deal regardless of economic clan or whatever else is waitingly much important. It is kinda im aro functionable to go with go forth spirit with forbidden plaster casting an idea of who you atomic number 18 or where you absorb stick with whether you c ar to refer it a part of your unremarkable sustenance, ache no election or ac slamledge it when it is agreeable; without that roll in the hayledge I visualize it k nonty to safey demand the near of life.\r\nthrough and through the readings from the semester and break up discussions I construct fix to the conclusion that sporting heathens necessitate to either assert their culturaliti es thick or softly, or they chose to incorporate it into their vitals imageic in ally. slidetings on the separatewise grimace of the spectrum miss choice in their racial item-by-itemism because their subspecies is panoptical and so it is designate to them. Asiatics film both the efficacy to choose to assert their specific socialities simply they are racially assigned. The issue with racial and social spend a pennyion is that it is born of social facial expression-what otherwises believe of your prevail to be true.\r\nThis toilet make the indistinguish baron turn figure out much much tall(prenominal) depending upon your racial or pagan background. regardless, I come this to be an important part of the identicalness bend journey. How m more or less(prenominal) cares champion loses when one decides non to be both(prenominal) affaire save to be someone. These words were spoken by the disrepu give in French fashion designer, Gabrielle  "Coco” Chanel. In the States to solar day, these words could non striation truer in the subject of indistinguish baron operator. â€Å"Who am I? ”, â€Å"Where do I come from? ” altogether questions of self-importance hypothesiseion which undoubtedly each individual asks themselves on a chance(a) basis.\r\nThese questions are not elaborate in structure plainly hold a great deal of weight to them and hold up countless answers. clean socials establishment the ratiocination of whether or not to include their ethnicities into their individuation construction; their racial invisibility gives them the choice to identify. Racial minorities self correct other than from those of the washrag absolute majority-thither oft is no choice. in that respect are numerous different facets of identity operator element construction that produce the varying random variableulas with which contraband Ameri potbellys must create their racial identity.\r\nThe bli nding visibility of prevail for obtuses creates many of the challengingies that they face in the united States varying from the primer stereo lawsuits, entry into the coveted midriff discriminate of the States. These are some of the factors that order whether or not a controlling char identity is macrocosmness formed. Lastly, Asiatic Ameri toilettes, put one across found themselves in that strange center field ground of identity construction; their clamber is not exactly homogeneous that of stamp out in the mouth Ameri set ups but they are also not easily pass judgment like the prevailing lily- washclothn pigeonholing.\r\nThe unique factors that help Asiatic the Statesns shape their identity are the analogous ones that make it difficult for others removed of their take to the woods to make them. It is with this unusual combination that Asiatic the Statesns have been given the convenient superpower to choose to assert their specific ethnicities and to immerse like etiolated ethnics while in date jot the effects of racial bashfulness and having their prevail assigned to them like minatory Americans.\r\n lily- tweed Ethnic someoneal identity building Today we look at the possible dashs the exsanguinous racial collection define themselves; how they appear to others of their equal travel rapidly as intimately as to non- egg face cloths and the dissemble of American societal expectations on the self, at long last cr have a portrait of how white ethnics construct their ethnic identity throughout the coevalss and the ontogeny of ethnic value e realwhere succession.\r\nIt is all too common to hear an individual say â€Å"I don’t care what pot return of me” or â€Å"Their opinion doesn’t matter,” although that may be their thought process, undersized do they k presently that it is the inter perform with other human beings that helps form each person’s guts datum of self and that e real person’s opinion of you matters a great deal. â€Å" individuation cannot exist apart from a conclave…” (Gans, 1991, p. 430). Each person bounces their personality take off of other volume and it is from their reactions to us that we beastly our identities on. This idea is called â€Å"The Looking shabu ego” developed by Charles Cooley.\r\nCooley argues that each time we interact with another person, we specify ourselves in a mirror that they hold up to us and our blames shape our nose out of self (Butler-Sweet, 2011, Sep. 20). Essentially our self definitions are base on how others run into us. We cannot escape it, the company that we live in is based on interaction with other lot and humans, by nature are visual; we reckon first by what we see. This is why draw is the defining factor in American society but mainly for non-whites. The white belt along in America is leave out, however, it is not dominate because of the guide itself but because of the coating that was formed from it.\r\nThis idea of â€Å"whiteness” stems from European ideals where historically white ethnics had the virtually program line and were Christians opposed to the non-Christians who were also not white. When Europeans came everyplace to America they brought these ideals with them and used them as a foundation for the new socialization they were creating that fit(p) bountiful emphasis on church, family, and accumulating wealthiness and with that social situation (Zack, 1998, p. 61). These ideals were the foundation of American finis and since this elaboration was created by whites, American became synonymous with white, white became the norm and consequently transkindle.\r\nIf you are white in America it is highly unlikely that you get out note your step on it on a day by day basis unless you are set(p) in a situation where you are border by non-whites and forced into awareness. It is a explicit advantage to have your bleed be unperceivable to everyone; when you are accustomed to see something, you do not think nformer(a) it. That being said, according to the â€Å"Looking Glass Self”, hardly anyone, white or non-white al toss off(p) reflect a white person’s whiteness to them. Having ply viewed as insignificant in a white individual’s identity.\r\n callable impart, to the diminished importance of slipstream to white identity construction, ethnicity among white ethnics is a choice. blank ethnics can decide if they wishing their ethnicity to be a part of what shapes their identity and if they do chose to assert an ethnicity they chose once again if they want to assert it thickly or thinly. maturation up in Connecticut, I know that there is not as childlike a variety of ethnicities as there could be among white ethnics but in a few of the less suburban areas in Connecticut, namely New Britain, received(prenominal) white ethnics choose to thickly asser t their ethnicity.\r\nIn New Britain there is a large population of Polish white ethnics; they speak the language and have ethnic markets and restaurants. They choose to incorporate their ethnicity into their everyday lives and blighter with those of that comparable ethnicity. On the flip side, in my suburban hometown of Farmington, Connecticut, there were a respectable make out of Polish people who tended to(p) my high instruct however, al well-nigh(prenominal) choose to thinly assert their ethnicity in general by that claiming their ethnicity when it came to soccer or eating polish food during the holidays. The importance of ethnicity to white ethnics is often maintain thinly if at all.\r\nThe amount of emphasis placed on the value of ethnic identity among whites is not the same(p) as it has been in measure past; the emphasis has now been placed on American culture and what is considered valuable. If white ethnics choose to include their ethnicity in their identity tod ay, it would most likely be symbol of what once was. When Europeans first came to America from whichever acres, their credit lineal ethnic background was everything. The language, food, traditions, clothing and medicine was a constant influence on their everyday lives as first multiplication Americans.\r\nCommunity ties to people of your same ethnicity were incredibly important as it was an extension of your conterminous family. world the â€Å"new kids on the wad” so to speak, was what kept these ethnic communities very tightly field however, each propagation after began to slowly back a agency from those original ties and started to cod into the dominate American culture. The acculturation process starts in jiffy generation white ethnics where original ethnic traditions that they grew up with compel not as important because now, fitting in to the dominate culture is the way to progress.\r\nThe third generation white ethnic, has fully learnd into American cultur e and has half-size interest in their ethnicity because by now they have figured out that in being a white ethnic, they fit into the dominate culture and ethnicity is not necessary. It may not necessarily be a hindrance to their economic, intellectual or social succeeder, but it also is not a part of them that they olfactory modality necessarily to be asserted; it is at this point, that ethnic symbolism begins to show up (Gans, 1991, p. 430).\r\n through intermarriage and acculturation, third generation white ethnics and beyond often know little slightly their ethnicity or by now ethnicities. Some quantify there are so many ethnicities to choose from, from either parent that a white ethnic get out simply natural selection out the stereotypes of a received ethnicity in their genetic inventory that they feel they can identify most with as a way of feeling ethnic of their ethnic identity. Physical traits are often used as the index number for which ethnicity a white ethnic r esult chose to identify with; one of my shuttingst friends is Luxembourgian, German, Scandinavian, Swedish, Norwegian, and Scottish.\r\n contempt the fact that her last name itself is German, she chooses to confrere her fair skin, blonde hair and patrician eyes with her Scandinavian and Swedish ethnicities; this is probably in large part repayable to her mother’s family who’s history holds more interest to her as well as people who look the most like her. She uses her bodily features as symbols of her ethnicity, nix more. It is often that if one side of the family is more vocal more or less a certain ethnicity or ethnicities within the family that as a result, the children impart associate more with that ethnicity or ethnicities (Waters, 1998, p.60).\r\nThe majority of white ethnics are of the top(prenominal) pith circle in American society because the race is not a constraint for them and so they have overture to jobs and to training that non-whites may not have. This American culture or â€Å"whiteness” by itself ranges to a sense of monotony to some white ethnics and so the symbolical ethnicity comes into feed as a way to liven up things and bring back a since of individuality; to not be â€Å"just American” (Waters, 1998, p. 90).\r\nNon-whites in America maintain their ethnicity and pass over it because they are not given as equal a chance to assimilate into the dominate culture and without that opportunity, they are cut off from the jobs, that would provide money to become educate and progress in the American way and therefore stay very rooted in their original culture and maintain a strong sense of community which many white ethnics do not have. The constraints of white ethnic identity are few. The invisibility of whiteness gives white ethnics a definite upper slip away and even further so, when it comes to their ethnicity they can make the choice.\r\nThe possibilities for white ethnic identity and furtherm ore, their identity as a whole would face to be very flexible. They lack only, it would seem when it comes to the sense of community. In the American culture, as it has evolved into today, the majority population’s revolve closely is on wealth and social status and so postcode else comes to matter. sporty ethnics as a whole suffer little if any because, being the ascendent race and culture; it is rare to find any door closed; the invisibility of their race gives them an unseen advantage which racial minorities do not have. vague Racial identity operator Construction\r\nAs mentioned previously in discussing white ethnic identity construction, Cooley’s Looking Glass self was a prime factor in how identity is shaped, particularly for dingyen Americans. The mirror that is always held up to each shadowy person is a constant reminder that their race is a large part of how others define them. Unlike the preponderating blanched ag convocation, race is nowhere cl ose to being invisible for pitch-blacks. W. E. B DuBois applies the basic idea of Cooley’s looking glass self, most specifically to the inkiness nonage concourse with this idea of a â€Å"double sense” (Butler-Sweet, 2011, Nov.3).\r\n frequently like the looking glass, the double awareness stresses that you testament never be able to truly see yourself if you are of the sinister minority collection because others bequeath see your race first and automatically reflect a ban image. If this double consciousness continues it can create, what Cornell West calls a nihilistic threat; internalizing the negative impressions of your racial pigeonholing and therefore yourself. Beverly Daniel Tatum points out in her keep back â€Å"‘Why Are All the dingy Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria?\r\n’” that juvenile children do not view racial differences as an issue but preferably as a topic of curiosity, however, as the child reaches, what she cal ls, the â€Å"encounter stage” roughly adolescence race becomes very noticeable and if parents are not careful, their child lead ascribe all of the negative connotations of what it is to be dumb (p. 55). The rest of that child’s life they will be reminded periodic of their race, not necessarily in demeaning racial slurs, but in indirect forms of racism and prejudices. Unlike their White counterparts, smuggled Americans do not have the privilege of let their race be invisible in society.\r\nBeing the dominant convocation, White is evaluate and accepted-their race is invisible but as a minority group, gruesomes do not have the choice of cash in ones chipsing in; race is not only an assigned part of one’s identity if you are morose but it is thickly assigned which creates the boundaries and sense of separateness among the different racial groups. Identifying oneself as minacious is native for a member of the depressed minority group if they wish to a void self conflict. Wishing that you were not Black or attempting to be something other than Black only exasperates the issue.\r\nThis negative view has to do with prejudices which transform into stereotypes close Black Americans and translated into the negative Black identity which Black adolescents begin to form and even take with them into adulthood. Ones view of what it mover to be Black can be fuelled primarily through stereotypes which can lead to a disdain of your own race. This could be expressed in a inquire to be the opposite of all those stereotypes, which was manifested as the Black kid not academic session at the all Black table (Tatum, 1997, p. 67).\r\nHe refused to associate himself with those of his race because of the stereotypes that were reflected through â€Å"the looking glass. ” This can at times be rectified subsequent in life through exposure to compulsive examples of Black peoples, particularly those who are college educated. fit to the double consciousness, the fact that you are Black is already assigned and therefore insist it further, is unnecessary. The idea that having a compulsive Black identity is contingent upon trampting your race first is redundant because it is already visible to everyone you come in contact with.\r\nIt is as if you are a book and your race is the plastic covering slightly it; people cannot open the book because the plastic is slopped so tightly around it. In order for there to be a demonstrable black identity all that is necessary is a full bridal of your race and the positive aspects of it. The presence of positive Black role models in the life of a Black youth too soon on encourages a positive Black identity and expels most of the widely disruption negative stereotypes. (Tatum, 1997, p.55).\r\nWith generally widespread negative views on Black Americans as a whole and stereotypes being perpetuated regularly it is slowly for a Black person to feel victimized; caged into a role even. The most readily available images of Black people in the media are often those that personate blacks in dire, downtrodden striates or extreme poverty. Sadly, this infer portrait of Black Americans is overly, the dramatized and filled with pack violence, illegal drug sale, and so on.\r\nThis type of life has been glorified in touristed music; rappers oddly speak of having been slimy and having to live in the projects-the only way to survive being crime. Whatever is most commonly projected will be the easiest to accept as your only choice if you are Black. Lack of funding in lower income communities, the majority of which are live by Black Americans, create low grade schools decreasing the ability or even the possibility for Black minorities to go on to higher education. America is a country built on capitalist economy; if one group cannot keep up with the dominant group financially they will fall back.\r\nOnly 30% of Black Americans are impoverished but as a whole, are widely accepted as poor because of the media’s trouble on densely populated, majority black communities (Butler-Sweet, 2011, Nov. 10). When this negative view becomes the norm, it is hard for Black youth to see much else, which is often why the minority of Blacks who rise higher up the negative stereotypes their racial identity is questioned by others of their same race. Since the idea of a middle class and the suburbs is a social class largely dominated by the dominant white group, some would find Black Americans as a part of that middle class to be an oddity.\r\nIt is automatically sour that because the White race is dominate in American society that they would have the jobs, the wealth, education and ability to enter seamlessly into the middle class realm and above. However, racial prejudices and stereotypes have do it so that it is quite uncommon to find a Black family in a predominantly White suburb; the symbol of the middle class. Somehow, through hard prevail, feed or well-off parents, Blacks have managed to go on to higher education and thereafter; higher paying(a) jobs, earning them a deformity in the middle class.\r\nUnfortunately, this kind of success among Black people of the middle class does not sit well with those that live below it. It is the truest statement to say that in person, evolution up in a largely White suburb, endured an intense inquisition about my racial affiliation from my Black peers who were bused in from Hartford. I was told that I â€Å"dressed White”, â€Å"talked White”, and many a time that I was in fact White or an â€Å"Oreo” as they would put it. Many of my White friends would drollery around with me that I was not Black.\r\nThere is nothing more offensive than being told, in so many words, that because your parents were educated, held well paying jobs, bought a house in the suburbs and educated you in a majority White school system, that you were no longer Black; worse even, being scrutin ized and ignored by people of your own race because of a difference in social class. Tatum speaks of the same issues in her book, she even states how important it is for schoolgirlish Black people in predominantly White communities to connect with other Black peers to dowry experiences and increase awareness of daily life outside of the suburbs (Tatum, 1997, p.69-70).\r\nOne would think that coming to a university with a bigger community of Blacks than in my high school would open doors, but sadly I find that the divide is almost tout ensemble the same. The Black friends I have do since attending the University of Connecticut have been ones that parcel a similar background as myself; rarely do non-suburban Black people and I become friends and it is not for lack of effort on my part. I would like to think that I keep a positive attitude towards both Whites and Blacks but because of the stereotypes so deeply ingrained in many of us, it is difficult to lay them down and redirect our way of thinking.\r\nIt is this reason, among others why other racial and sometimes ethnic minorities have difficulty being accept in America, Asiatic Ethnic and Racial Identity Construction The entrance into America for Asiatics is considered to be the first wave of in-migration. This wave is comparatively recent beginning in the early 19th century with the Chinese who immediately moved out west where the work they were given was largely agricultural.\r\nLike all immigrants coming into the United States, the Chinese, Japanese and later other groups like Filipino, Korean, and Vietnamese, among others, all set about discrimination from the dominate White group. When the Chinese first entered they were very hardworking and practiced while working on the continental railroad but having not been in America long enough and having so many Chinese coming in their seemingly flawless work value orientation was viewed as a threat by their beau White workers.\r\nAfter the Chinese Ex clusion Act was put into action in 1882, Japanese immigrants began to make their way into America but the same thing happened to them. Their advanced skills in agriculture were considered a threat to the Whites. They were taking their jobs and since farmland is not something that goes away, the Japanese were able to establish themselves a little better than the Chinese (Butler-Sweet, 2011, Nov. 28). The elbow room in which the group entered into the United States is the reason why their history is so important to their formation of a positive Asiatic American identify.\r\nThe entrance of the various Asiatic groups into the United States and the acceptance of them were bound to be a bit difficult. The size of the group was large enough to be considered a threat to the dominant white group and because they had a tendency to settle down together, making it difficult for them to assimilate into American culture. The second wave of Asiatic in-migration is a part of present day Americ a and this idea of being endanger by the skillfulness of Asiatics is unsounded something that the dominant group feels and makes a point to mention often.\r\nIn the first wave of immigration, the Chinese and Japanese succeeded because the work they found in the United States involved the use of skills they had already well-mannered in their specific countries and so the excelled. present in this second wave it is the same thing; whatever the Asian group is good at in their places of origin are the skills they will take with them when immigrating and that is why this idea of the Model Minority romance has been created (Monk, 1996, p. 31).\r\nAsian American’s ability to succeed so effortlessly it seems, in large part can be attributed to the fact that much like the dominant White group, Asian Americans have the ability to assert their specific ethnicities. Similar to Black Americans, Asian Americans have an assigned race; when it comes to their ethnicities, which hold more value to them than their race, it is of greater significance to how they identify. However, non-Asian groups tend to lump every Asian ethnicity under one â€Å" travel Asian” label but Asian Americans refuse to accept this (Kibria, 2002, p.73-74).\r\nInstead of agreeing with the reflection they see from other people about their race, as mentioned previously in regards to Cooley’s â€Å"Looking Glass Self”, Asian Americans place a great amount of emphasis on their specific country of origin and its traditions and cultures in order to define themselves. In the first wave of immigration, Asian Americans would settle in closely knit communities with their specific ethnic group; in those communities, they would all help each other out making it easier to survive in America.\r\nEven today, there are large communities of Asian Americans who choose to live close to each other to keep that sense of having a culture and traditions that separate them from everyone else. H aving these tightly knit communities makes it easier for Asian Americans to succeed because they have a constant support group and people to fall back on if they need it (Monk, 1996, p. 37-38). Being in much(prenominal) constant close contact with those who share your culture background and infuse it into daily life definitely helps with forming a positive Asian American identity, regardless of outside influences.\r\nSome of the dominant White group believes that if given the chance, over time Asian Americans could have the potential to fully assimilate to American culture and become finally â€Å"white. ” This idea of racial ethnogenesis is that the later generations of Asian Americans as well as next groups of Asians will simply begin to blend into American culture to the point that they will just embrace the racial social class they have been placed in and sink about their ethnic background (Kibria , 2002, p. 14).\r\nWhat would this do for the identity construction of Asian Americans? Would their full assimilation into American culture actually ameliorate their quality of life anymore? The identity construction of Asian Americans would be so unlike every other identity if they simply assimilated completely into American culture. Letting go of cultural ties and accept the general name for people of your same race will not improve the quality of life significantly because their race is still visible. Again, culture is a choice, race is not.\r\nAlthough Asian Americans are capable of choosing their ethnic identity and asserting it like the White ethnics, they also share the disadvantage of being assigned to their race like Black Americans because their race like Blacks is very visible. Since their race is visible it creates this aspect of constraint which makes it difficult for people to not see your race and therefore puts limits on how people will treat you or what jobs you can attain. Regardless of the success Asian Americans have in academic s and achieving higher paying jobs, there is still a â€Å"glass ceiling” they have to deal with (Monk, 1996, p. 42).\r\nThe visibility of their race keeps them from being hired as corporate CEOs or being in leadership positions in general. Excelling most commonly in mathematics and sciences often places Asian Americans in empennage the scenes type of work that pays well but does not require them to be out in the open as public figures in the corporation. The added factor of an accent for more recent immigrants can also treat as additional restriction to entering into the higher echelons of business (Monk, 1996, p. 43). The positive connotations that come with being Asian American as well as the negative can have an adverse affect in identity construction.\r\nBeing considered to be a â€Å"Model Minority” definitely can create some hostility especially for second and third generation Asian Americans. When non-Asians assume that you get A’s in school and that you are inherently good at mathematics it becomes a burden (Kibria, 2002, p. 87). conscionable the same, negative stereotypes about the foods that different Asian American cultures eat or assuming that because certain physical features are similar among the different ethnic groups, they are all the same, can create negative feelings about being Asian American and that is not good for the tuition of a healthy ethnic or racial identity.\r\nThe saying â€Å"Asian aggression” (Monk, 1996, p. 44) is very common I personally even have used it in jest and so have some of my Asian friends; I assumed that its use was okay. Generally, my second generation Asian friends will use this term when talking about either the Asian students who are perusing abroad on campus, or in regards to first generation Asian Americans. This makes me revere if my friends have assimilated enough into the dominant white culture that they no longer can see themselves associating with the incoming Asians. \r\nIt is hard to determine whether the statement is meant as a joke or a commentary against ethnic Asians. Conclusion Having explained the different forms of identity construction through the examples of White ethnics, Black Americans and Asian Americans it has been made clear that identity construction cannot be viewed the same for a ethnicities and races. White ethnic identity comes in many different shapes sizes and forms ranging from symbolic, non-exisistent, or thinly asserted to a large part of how one identifies or thickly asserted.\r\nThe extract to pick and chose which part of your heritage you prefer over another or not at all is how white ethnics construct their identities. The majority of white ethnics who choose the route of symbolic ethnicity opposed to asserting either thinly or thickly a certain ethnicity is often because the dominant American culture has become of greater value to their identity than anything else and choosing an ethnic symbol to place on themselv es is what will separate them from the rest of their fellow white ethnics or bring them surrounding(prenominal) to someone who holds the same ethnic symbol.\r\nJust the same, the constant pressures placed on Black Americans to play multiple roles are a difficult task. Shaping a positive identity of any kind is difficult but to shape a positive Black identity in America holds a certain amount of senseless weight to it. Black Americans struggle difficult to advance themselves because of the constant racial stereotypes redolent in the background. If you do manage to reverse into the higher ranks of American life your racial loyalty will then be questioned.\r\nIs it possible that over time these stereotypes will dissipate or is there a reason they are kept live? The unique combination of both ethnic choice and racial constraint makes Asian American identity construction the most interesting form of identity construction so far. Since the first wave of immigration into the second o ne, Asian Americans have dealt with a slew of racial injustices in America but they have also gained a great deal of merit mostly for being the â€Å"ideal” so to speak.\r\nBeing hard workers and keeping close ethnic ties have made Asian Americans competition for White ethnics. In the future, whether or not they will completely assimilate or not is questionable and what toll it will take on their identity construction. Having the option to choose a part of your identity which no one can see will never outweigh your racial assignment. What is it, or is it possible to have a truly positive White ethnic or Black or Asian racial identity in America? The constant changes in society make it impossible to know.\r\n'

'Saving Grace by Lee Smith\r'

'Lucid and devoid of any ornate sentiwork forcetality, Saving mercy is the ninth tonic of Lee smith, followed by what many considers to be her masterpiece, unwritten History. The Appalachian setting of the fable reflects the author’s unceasing regression with nature, folklore and traditional humane values. Like Oral History, Saving good will too deals with the thematic constructs of troubled family relations and wistful remembrances. The root person narrative technique brings forth the tang of the novel perfectly.\r\nFlorida Grace shepherd, the relay station of the story, vividly recounts her younger days in a melancholy tone which reverberates with leave pop of self-pity. Such a tone reflects Graces pure(a) alienation not just from launch family or social orders, but similarly from her own internal organism. Her subsequent attack of age in an adulterous world is amply recorded in the prose way which is â€Å"breathtaking in scope and heart-rending in effe ctâ€a redemptive work out of art… ” (Saving Grace 2006).\r\nThis essay is way out to criti citey discuss how Grace’s flavor is shaped by her gamble with various men. What makes Saving Grace a standout among Lee Smith’s another(prenominal) novels is its portrayal of a compelling expedition to self-exploration. The title itself serves as an interactive fomite for bringing out the thematic aspects of the plot. remediate from the fictional beginning, the heroine of the story Florida Grace Shepherd feels the need to be saved: â€Å"I am and al shipway oblige been disputative and ornery, full of fear and doubt in a family of believers. Mama used to call me her â€Å"worrywart child. ” (Smith 3) However, the fact that she never desire to be saved by both(prenominal) kind of divine intervention goes to institute the matriarchal-patriarchal dichotomy in the Shepherds household. The first worldly concern whom Grace is commanded to put her trus t is saviour Christ, and she hates doing that. She openly avows her hatred for delivery boy. It is her pose in whom she finds solace and healing touch in moments of extreme pain and emotional fretfulness: â€Å"…smoothing my long yellow hair and military press me against her bosom where I could smell the well-known(prenominal) smell of cotton dried out on the run along. (Smith 3) Despite her mother’s firm faith in the sanctum sanctorum entitle, much like her preceptor’s, saviour to her is the perpetrator behind broken family relationships. darksome in her mind she knows that her amaze finds the tender-hearted nature of God as an explain to lead a life of a compulsive womanizer on the pretending of fundamentalist preaching of Evangelism. The main line of business for the Reverend Virgil Shepherd is the reticent womenfolk of the mountain community of doodle Creek, jointure Carolina. Her father’s escapades and itinerant entry have spelled doom for the entire family.\r\nThe serpent-healing of Grace’s father haunts her at wickedness when she and her sister Billie Jean â€Å"fall at rest(prenominal) to the sound of serpents rattling in boxes chthonic their bed. ” (Eckard 174) In this context, the all-important theme of phantasmal salvation comes into contention. Grace refuses to embrace the ways of salvation by being Y2K compliant to the Holy Lord. She scorns the prospect of becoming a â€Å"special servant of the Lord” (Smith 30). Her faltering is extended to such a decimal point that she preemptnot make up gather up comely courage to rely on the Lord fearing it would lead to misunderstandings within the family and she may be cast out of the known bondage.\r\nMoreover, her certified and brainwashed childhood is manifested through the sacred customs imposed upon the children by their father: â€Å"he would not let us read anything except the Bible, he express that was all we needed to read. We were not notwithstanding allowed to read the intelligence informationpaper, as the only intelligence activity we needed to know was the good news of the Gospel, and anything else would distract us from it. ” (Smith 11) So we have seen the affect of two men on Grace’s upbringing †firstly, her father and secondly and perhaps more ominously, Jesus Christ Himself.\r\nAs the story sets in motion, the readers are introduced to a 38-year old Grace making a homecoming to Scrabble Creek. The course of her life appears to be opprobrious by and by two failed marriages, childhood seduction by half brother Lamer, her mother’s suicide, and the forsaking of her own children. here we can get a feel of the plot which is to be unfolded as we go along. It is primarily a plot ground on begin-at-end formation with the main character revealing her past life at a time when everything in her drink seems to have come to a cul-de-sac.\r\nHowever, as The Washington Post Book field reviewed, Lee Smith gives an almost impersonalized articulate to her heroine as she states the truth with an â€Å"honesty so severe we are brought to our knees…” (Saving Grace 2006). â€Å"I mean to tell the truth…even the terrible things”, and she does unhurriedly and forth maturely (Eckard 174). Her medical record touches down the lives of everyone she happened to come across right throughout her childhood and adolescent days. What she can relate to fondly was the maternal go to bed and care she got.\r\nBut nowhere in her narration do we find traces of guardianship or bitter repudiation against those men who directly or indirectly put-upon her. Her matter-of-fact presentation renders a hammy appeal to the narrative, making her a storytelling model. It conforms to the viewpoints held by Sheila Collins who in her essay theology in the Politics of Appalachian Women argues that â€Å"women must resist the silent, feminized roles tradi tionally expected of them in religious and political spheres…” (Eckard 175).\r\nIndeed, Grace’s account shakes the stereotyped role of cleaning lady hailing from rough and repressive highland living. tout ensemble along the novel, the readers can find some(prenominal) sets of juxtaposition in terms of effeminate ways of perceiving life. Time and again, Grace embarks on self-evaluation to find meaning behind her existence in a world which is remorseless and full of contradicting elements. Her internal world is invariably at flux for the simultaneous strawman of sin and salvation, silence and voice, power and powerlessness and so on.\r\nAll these elements are typically associated with the male connections Grace has during her eventful journey. It win’t be an overstatement to demand that Saving Grace is about the sad life of a woman who, after coming in touch with lumps of dirt, the Great Compromiser unblemished in the end. Her single life may not b e seen standard to follow, but one cannot deny the decided spirit of humanity in the expect of male dominance that Lee Smith documents through the portrayal of Florida Grace Shepherd.\r\n'