Search results

A transcript of the Third Lord Goold Memorial lecture delivered at Bradford School of Management by David Bernstein in November 2000 at the 7th International Corporate Identity Symposium.

This article focuses on self‐reported child neglect and abuse in residential drug treatment drawing on data from clients in Scotland collected 1996‐1999. The authors' findings suggest that the prevalence of childhood abuse histories are higher in female drug users than male drug users but argues that diversity of abuse experiences in drug users negate broad treatment plans for those traumatised by such experiences.

All of the above proposals are realities in Western Europe, and it is suggested that the adoption of such “reforms” would substantially reduce the transaction costs of providing compensation to deserving plaintiffs, improve the efficiency of the tort system, and provide manufacturers and service providers with greater predictability and “fairness” in potential tort damages in the United States.

The purpose of this paper is to consider the nature and ongoing incidence of what is termed “corporate dissonance”, making explicit reference to developments relating to corporate communications since the publication of Company Image and Reality in 1984 and the founding of the International Corporate Identity Group in 1994.

Insights and reflections derived from consultancy experience, and from observations made by past and present captains of industry along with leading exponents of corporate marketing and from the literature, form the approach adopted in the paper.

The paper finds that, although organisations and writers have embraced the language relating to corporate marketing and to corporate‐level marketing concepts such as corporate identity, corporate branding, corporate communications and corporate reputation, corporate performance has not matched the promise of the new corporate language: this phenomenon term is called: “corporate dissonance”. In terms of corporate communications 21 shifts have been identified occurring over 25 years.

The paper presents a salutary reminder that the imperative is to calibrate rhetoric with behaviour and that the basis of corporate and corporate brand reputations is derived from what institutions have done and not what they would ideally do (what has been termed the “promise/performance gap”).

To the initiate in French studies, the term “French Literature” might be understood to mean anything — and everything — written in the French language. Etymologists would no doubt support this interpretation wholeheartedly. To scholars of French literature, however, the term has a very different meaning. Professors in the field generally consider French literature to be that written in France since the Middle Ages, a literature which stands apart from other written works in the French language. This is not to say that there is not a very substantial body of literature written, for instance, in French‐speaking Canada, or Algeria, Tunisia, Haiti, or a myriad of other places. Certain individuals specialize in the literature (French) of those countries, but they do not refer to those writings as “French Literature”; they label them “French‐Canadian Literature,” “French‐African Literature,” and the like. This essay will be limited to a discussion of French literature — the major literature of France, considered worthy of special attention or acclaim by readers and scholars worldwide.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) states in 2018 that safeguarding “civil liberties is critical” to their official duties. The Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties within DHS, as its website explains,

reviews and assesses complaints from the public in areas such as: physical or other abuse; discrimination based on race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or disability; inappropriate conditions of confinement; infringements of free speech; violation of right to due process … and any other civil rights or civil liberties violation related to a Department program or activity.

My chapter tracks the centrality of deportability in shaping the civil liberties and rights that DHS is tasked with enforcing. Over the course of the twentieth century, people on US soil saw an expanding list of civil liberties and civil rights. Important scholarship concentrates on the role of the courts, state and federal governments, advocacy groups, social movements, and foreign policy driving these constitutional and cultural changes. For instance, the scholarship illustrates that coming out of World War I, the US Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment did not protect something the Justices labeled “irresponsible speech.” The Supreme Court soon changed course, opening up an era ever since of more robust First Amendment rights. What has not been undertaken in the literature is an examination of the relationship of deportability to the sweep of civil liberties and civil rights. Starting in the second decade of the twentieth century, federal immigration policymakers began multiplying types of immigration statuses. A century later, among many others, there is the H2A status for temporary low-wage workers, the H2B for skilled labor, and permanent residents with green cards. The deportability of each status constrains access to certain liberties and rights. Thus, in 2016, when people from the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties within DHS act, they are not enforcing a uniform body of rights and liberties that applies equally to citizens and immigrants, or even within the large category of immigrants. Instead, they do so within a complicated matrix of liberties and rights attenuated by deportability, which has been shaped by the history of the twentieth century.