Focus on the furure Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Focus on the furure - Essay Example In having the skills used by the military, a lot of people may be subjected to mishandledment by the police (Scafer, 2007). Ever since 9/11, a lot of situations that policing have become seen doing involved using techniques from the military when dealing with internal operations. The police force has become forced to start adopting means used by the military in the past years in order to sharpen the way in which they handle people. With the increase in terrorism levels in the country, the police force had to learn some means of handling situations like those used by the military (Scafer, 2007). What is the relationship between police education and training, why is it seen as a critical matter for the future of policing, and what support becomes raised by Buerger for college-educated police officers to meet the needs of the future? Police education becomes defined as a process of acquiring or imparting particular or general police-related knowledge which leads to obtaining a given academic degree. Police training can be defined as acquiring or imparting skills or knowledge necessary for police work and does not lead to any issuance of degree, but can have some form of certificate (Smith, 2007). Both prove to improve the quality of policing. An educated, and a well trained police handle situations presented to him or her in a more orderly way as he or she understands the rights of the person arrested (Wright,

Dorothy and the Tree Essay Example for Free

Dorothy and the Tree Essay Dorothy and the Tree: A Lesson in Epistemology Stanley Fish discusses how we in society base our lives off of assumptions. Using the example of Dorothy and the tree, Fish is able to show how with our assumptions, we as people categorize others and things into what we believe to be correct. Whether or not we have actually taken the time to figure out if we are right is irrelevant. He notes that we should just â€Å"keep trying to expand our sense of ‘us’ as far as we can†, so we can avoid judgments and isolating ourselves from the rest of society. Even though Dorothy realizes her mistake, she doesn’t realize that it is not a failure, but her consciousness assuming the classification of things in the world. Fish later on defines thought as the â€Å"structure that at once enables perception†, meaning that within categories things emerge, limiting perception and nothing can allow one to see everything because that is God’s job. Fish uses many Bible allusions to create justification for his assertions. He uses Genesis 1:26, and Paul’s road to Damascus to show that people can be persuaded to change their placement of things in society. Despite all of his valid points, Fish states that it is nearly impossible for one to change just on realizations. He believes it takes practice to accept the fact that there are things that we cannot comprehend because there is no limit on the conceptual trappings of society.

The strategy of teamwork

The strategy of teamwork INTRODUCTION For many years now, the strategy of teamwork has been widely used in many organizations. One of its motives is to translate organizational values into specific rules of conduct created by team members, thereby, allowing the creation of self-managed identification with organizational goals (Webb, 2006). Many contemporary theorists believe that working in teams tends to solve most if not all challenges faced by organizations. It tends to end the bureaucratic form of control, improving efficiency and productivity while providing employees an avenue for socialization, self-actualization and participative management (Johnson and Johnson 1987). It is important to organize work around teams in some cases. For instance, in other to ensure the successful outcome of the National Health Service (NHS) project in the UK, general practitioners, IT experts, project managers and other professionals would need to collaborate and work together. However, behind this seemly pleasant style of work lie certain undesirable traits and characteristics. The essay begins by presenting popular understanding of teams and some positive ideologies that support the use of teamwork. It then goes further by critically analyzing these ideologies and identifying some unproductive characteristics exhibited by teams. The premise of this essay is not trying to be cynical about the benefits that teamwork offers but rather expose some traits which reveals that it does not ‘always benefit organizations, and particularly, its members. This would profit us by having a broader understanding about its strengths, shortcomings and implication about its use. WHAT ARE TEAMS? Teamwork as an approach to how work is organized is not new but rather historic; probably older than the phenomenon ‘formal organization (Benders and Van Hootegem, 1999). Management literature began sensing its benefits in the 1920s (Wilson, 2004). Studies reveal many companies using teamwork as a way of organizing work (Cully et al. 1998; Cohen et al., 1996). Today, ‘team player skills usually needs to shown be potential employers to stand a chance of employment. A team is a small number of people with complementary skills, committed to a common purpose, having set of performance goals, and approach for which they hold themselves mutually accountable (Katzenbach and Smith, 1993, p113). Teams are thought to be ‘special form of groups because members have a more shared focus in all regards as opposed to seeking individual goals. Teams develop direction, commitment, and momentum by working to shape a meaningful purpose (Wilson, 2004, p206). There are some teams regarded as self-managing teams because they have more authority to self-regulate throughout the task (Cohen et al., 1996). Teamwork has been popularized to be a remedy for solving inflexible structures to work and alleged inefficient bureaucratic control, and enhancing employee higher-order ‘growth and ‘relatedness needs by job enrichment and empowerment (Bratton el at., 2007, p313). Socialtechnical theorists claim that teamwork improves employee discretion, thereby leading to commitment, motivation and satisfaction (Wilson, 2004). Teams enhance organizational dimensions by providing flexibility, motivation and learning (Knights and Willmott, 2007). Effective teams has also been framed as always task-oriented with confluence, having participative and shared form of leadership and tending to overcome the subversive forces of power, conflict and emotion (Sinclair, 1992). CRITICAL ANALYSIS ABOUT TEAMWORK In reality, teams are not always composed of the clearly perfect picture that ideologists and management gurus claim it to be. Team members are still humans and could exhibit their sense of individuality and purpose, which at certain times could be conflicting. Some views about teamwork are unitary (Burrell and Morgan, 1979; Storey, 1995) which only assumes cohesion not conflicts between members thereby writing off teams that actually exhibits tension and strife as not ‘real teams. In addition, the focus is centrally on achieving greater productivity with little emphasis to feelings, personal reflections or experience of team members (Metcalf and Linstead, 2003; Wilsons, 2004). To claim that teamwork is always beneficiary to the organization and its members, certain measures are required to ascertain its effectiveness. Does teamwork always produce remarkable results? Are team members always satisfied with the environment set for them to operate in and create themselves? Are they always willing to continue contributing? Do organizations always have control in channeling team outcomes? It appears that from the enjoyable and seemly pleasant surface of teamwork lie a murky side. Rhetoric of exploitation by working harder Teamwork is a sleeker form of oppressing labour to suck out optimal performance. It allows employees work ‘harder and smarter (Parker and Slaughter, 1988), intensifying labour from workers (Knights and Willmott, 2007; Wilson, 2004). Teamworks goal is to cultivate organizational values into members by making them more participative and giving them a bit of autonomy, thereby instilling in them passion to thrive and work further even outside their contracted job schedule without being paid. Moreover, team members in addition to their tasks have to supervise other colleagues ensuring they do their work. Teams have huge responsibility in ensuring delivery of tasks despite varying situations such as absenteeism, slackness or even change of members. These places profound burden on the rest of the team (not the organization) as additional efforts is required to nullify them as seen in the NUMMI case (Parker and Slaughter, 1988; Knights and Willmott 2007). Team members embrace self-dign ity by striving harder to ensure the teams success work not minding additional labour. While this benefits organizations who are obviously looking for maximum labour at minimum cost, it does not for team members because stress levels, tension and pressure are heightened as work is intensified and could lead to negative effects on employees well-being (Wilson, 2004). Concertive control and surveillance The strategy of teamwork is an effort to improve the traditional bureaucratic control. However, a tighter form of control, ‘concertive control tends to exists within team-based work (Barker, 1993). Similar ethnographic study by Kunda (1992) showed similar control used to gain unstinting commitment from employees. Traditionally, management was responsible for setting rules and regulations for employees. With teamwork, members set their own rules possibly forming stricter punishment for defaulters (as seen in Barkers case at ISE). Team members monitor actions ensuring total conformity with norms, meting out punishment to defaulters (Sewell, 1998). Employees feel additional pressure knowing that they are under surveillance from other team members, which may pose unhygienic to working environments. It appears that the freedom that teamwork promises seems contradictory to its reality. As Barker (1993, p435) rightfully argues that powerful combination of peer pressure and rational rules forms tighter form of cages as opposed to contemporary claims. It is worthy to note that teams are not truly effective if they get the job done but self-destructs or burns everyone out (Roberts and Corbett, 2009, p150). Conflicts of power and leadership traits Many contemporary theorists believe that groups that do not have conflicts over power or authority and have good interpersonal relations pass as real or working teams. However, studies show that groups do experience various forms power (French and Raven, 1959) which is not equally distributed (Fiorelli, 1988). The most influential or powerful individuals could maneuver the team efforts to possibly suit their own interests rather than the teams. Janis (1985) notes that political factors due to autocratic leaders cause high decision-making errors. Less powerful members have no choice but to concede to the opinions of these elite members despite the fact of their convictions about its failure. Decisions readily accepted unanimously without contests, weakens the efficiency of teams (Sinclair, 1992). ‘Groupthink (Janis, 1972) existence is likely in teams that try to reduce conflicts by cohesiveness and consensus without critical analysis and evaluation. The output of work in this case is not thorough and lacks excellence since further evaluation and alternatives may not be considered. An illustration is the famous NASA Shuttle Challenger case in 1986 where the engineers had to concede to launch the shuttle despite their concerns about its safety resulting into tragedy. It is difficult to eradicate the concept of leadership in teams, as they are important to their efficiency (Sinclair, 1992; Roberts and Corbett, 2009). Wilson (2004) argues that there difficulties in recruiting team leaders because the perception about their qualities varies. Bad leaders not being able to steer the team in its right course often lead to counterproductive results. Emotional conflicts and Resistance Teams are prone in displaying certain emotions during tasks that deters its efficiency (Ashkanasy el at., 2000). In the findings by Alan (2005), emotions are positive at the start of the project but tend to be negative as the project grows affecting the overall team process. McKinlay and Taylor (1996), Ezzamel and Wilmott (1998) shows emotional conflicts arise from unfairness and inequalities of peer evaluation system such as attaching benefits to individuals and variations in pay. Others causes include the need for belonging or frustrations having to conform, ‘social loafing or too much dominance by some members. All these negative emotions can produce actions that restrain team members towards putting in their best thereby impeding teamwork results. In the pyramid case, the system of peer review was a disciplinary mechanism by management to encourage individual performance and prevent free riding in the team but employees opinion that all team members should get equal benefits since the overall output was a team effort disrupted managements strategy. Contrary to ‘hegemony theory that management always exercises dominant influence over teams, it does not always appear so. In some teamwork cases, elements of conflicts and contention causes member to demand more control over their work process than what is available to them leading to renegotiation of managerial authority boundaries (Vallas, 2003). His study shows evidences of organizational tensions, contradictions and solidarity among workers restricted managements hegemonic control over their culture. This might frustrate managements strategy of imbibing their agenda into teams. Present managers might also frustrate organizations plight for teams because it might render them no longer necessary. Teamwork draws employees to micro-management of tasks (Milkman, 1998) and Peters (1987, p296) argues that because teams become self-managing, they tend to eliminate first-line supervisory jobs. This means that their services might become redundant or hinder their chances of promotion as seen in the traditional era of management (Sims, 1995). Time efficiency issues Meetings are places where teams spend lot of work time discussing issues and arriving at decisions (Briggs, 1997). In a research conducted by Olson and Olson (1999) on educators in the U.S., team members indicated weaknesses in effectiveness of meetings and timelines. From experience, being in team meetings could take a huge amount of time giving little time for the actual task. Covey et al. (1994) highlights the importance for strategies to help groups maximize time indicating the possibility of getting too engrossed in fruitless meetings. CONCLUSION There are some instances whereby individual performance is preferred to teamwork. Teamwork at times lead to frustration and ultimate failure when there are senses of hidden agendas, lack of understanding, poor leadership, wrong mix of team members and unhealthy team environment such as stress and unrealistic expectations (Yeung and Bailey, 1999). There is no single experience of teamwork as Knights and McCabe (2000) finding shows three classes of peoples experience as bewildered, bothered or bewitched. It is therefore inappropriate to claim teamwork is always beneficial to its members. In addition, team systems may open up possibilities beyond those which management intends (Derber and Schwartz, 1983). It is clear as some research suggests (e.g. Wall et al., 1986) that teamwork increases productivity. However, we need to understand when the concept of teamwork holds true. By just applying the framework of teams without properly exploiting those grey areas, it might tend to hamper rather than nourish organizational performance as some cases also show that ‘teamwork do not necessarily lead to organizational performance (Bratton, 2007). As Katzenbach and Smith (1993), rightly points that it is important for organizations, in other to make better decisions, know when teams can be encouraged and used. To add further, they must also be aware of those negative traits found in teamwork so as not feel disappointed in unanticipated outcomes. REFERENCES Ashkanasy, N. M., HÃÆ' ¤rtel, C.E. J. and Zerbe, W. J. (2000). Emotions in the workplace: research, theory, and practice. Westport: Greenwood Publishing group, Inc. Alan, P.R. (2005). Emotions and team projects and processes. Team Performance Management, 11(7-8), pp. 251-262. Barker, J. (1993). Tightening the iron cage: Concertive control in self managing teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(3): 408-437. Belbin, R.M. (2000). Beyond the Team. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Benders, J., and Van Hootegem, G. (1999). Teams and the Context: Moving the Team Discussion beyond Existing Dichotomies. Journal of Management Studies, 36(5), pp. 609-628. Bratton, J., Callinan, M., Forshaw, C., Sawchuk, P. (2007). Work and Organizationl Behaviour: Understand the Workplace. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Briggs, M.H. (1997). Building early intervention teams: Working together for children and families. Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen. Burrell, G., and G. Morgan (1979). Sociological paradigms and organisational analysis. London: Heinemann. Cohen, S., Ledford, G., and Spreitzer, G. (1996). A Predictive Model of Self-Managing Work Team Effectiveness. Human Relations, 49(5), pp. 643-676. Covey, S. R., Merrill, A. R. and Merrill, R.R. (1994). First things first. New York: Simon and Schuster. Cully, M., Woodland, S., OReilly, A., Dix, G., Millward, N., Bryson, A., Forth, J. (1998). The 1998 Workplace Employee Relations Survey: First Findings, London: DTI. Derber, C. and Schwartz, W. (1983). Toward a Theory of Worker Participation. Sociological Inquiry 53, pp. 61-78. Ezzamel, M. and Wilmott, H. (1998). Accounting for teamwork: A critical study of group based system of organizational control. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43(2), pp. 358-396. Fiorelli, J. (1988). Power in work groups: team members perspectives. Human Relations, 41(1), pp. 1-12. French, J.R.P., Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power, in D. Cartwright (ed.) Studies in Social Power. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. Sam* French and Raven (1958) Janis, I. (1972). Victims of groupthink. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin. Janis, I. (1985). Sources of error in strategic decision-making in Organizational strategy and change. J. M. Pennings, ed., pp. 157-197. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Johnson, D.W., and Johnson F.P. (1987). Joining together: group theory and group skills. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Katzenbach, J.R., and Smith, D.K. (1993). The Wisdom of Teams: Creating the High Performance Organization. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Knights, D. and McCabe, D. (2000). Bewitched, bothered and bewildered: The meaning and experience of teamworking for employees in an automobile company. Human Relations 53(11), pp. 1481-1517. Knights D. and Willmott H. (2007). Introducing organizational behaviour and management. London: Thomson Learning. Kunda, G. (1992). Engineering Culture: Control and Commitment in a High-Tech Corporation. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. McKinlay, A. and Taylor, P. (1996). Power, surveillance and resistance: Inside the â€Å"Factory of the Future†, in Ackers, P., Smith, C., and Smith P, eds. The New Workplace and Trade Unionism. London: Routledge, pp. 279-300. Metcalf, B., and Linstead, A. (2003). Gendering Teamwork: Rewriting the Feminine. Gender, Work and Employment, 10(1), pp. 94-119. Milkman, R. (1998). ‘The new American workplace: high road or low road?, in P. Thompson and C.Warhurst, eds. Workplaces of the Future. Basingstoke: Macmillian- now Palgrave Macmillan. Olson, J. and Olson, P.D. (1999). Teamwork strengths and weaknesses: Perceptions of practicing educators. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 3(1), pp. 9-15. Parker, M. and Slaughter, J. (1998). Choosing Sides: Unions and the Team Concept. Boston: South End Press. Peters, T. (1987). Thriving on Chaos. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. Inc. Peters, T. (1998). Thriving on Chaos: Handbook for a Management Revolution. London: Pan Books. Pfeffer, J. (1998). The human equation: Building profits by putting people first. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Roberts, A. and Corbett M. (2009). Understanding Organisational Behaviour. New York: McGraw-Hill Custom Publishing. Sewell, G. (1998). The Discipline of Teams: The Control of Team-Based Industrial Work through Electronic and Peer Surveillance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43, pp. 397-428. Sims, H. P. (1995). Challenged to implementing self-managing teams. The Journal for Quality and Participation, 18(2), pp. 24-31. Sinclair, A. (1992). The tyranny of team ideology. Organization Studies, 13(4), pp. 611-625. Storey, J., ed. (1995). Human Resource Management: A Critical Text. London: Routledge. Vallas, S.P. (2003). The Adventures of Managerial Hegemony: Teamwork, Ideology, and Worker Resistance. Social Problems 50(2): 204-225. Wall, T.D., Kemp, N.J., Jackson, P.R. and Clegg, C.W. (1986). Outcomes of autonomous workgroups: A long term field experiment. Academy of Management Journal 29, pp. 280-304. Webb J. (2006). Organisations, identities and the self. New York: Palgrave macmillan. Wilson F.M (2004). Organizational Behaviour and Work: A critical introduction. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press Inc. Yeung, R. and Bailey, S. (1999). Get It Together. Accountancy, June 1999.

Male Attitude in Hurston’sTheir Eyes Were Watching God and Seraph on the Suwanee :: Their Eyes Were Watching God Essays

Male Attitude Towards Women in Hurston’s Novels, Their Eyes Were Watching God and Seraph on the Suwanee "‘Aw naw they don't. They just think they's thinkin'. When Ah see one thing Ah understands ten. You see ten things and don't understand one.'"(71) Joe Starks to Janie in Their Eyes Were Watching God "‘That shows the difference between me and you. I see one thing and can understand ten. You see ten things and can't even understand one.'"(261) Jim Meserve to Arvay in Seraph on the Suwanee While reading these two novels by Zora Neale Hurston, I noticed several metaphors, ideas, and lines that she uses in both texts. I think that the almost parallel lines quoted above are particularly telling of the way that these two novels relate in their depictions of male attitudes towards women and the relationships that exist between the husband and wife characters. Janie's marriage to Joe Starks in Their Eyes Were Watching God and Arvay's marriage to Jim Meserve in Seraph on the Suwanee both operate under the rubric of the male figure's ideas about what marriage and women should be and do. Within both of these marriages, the husband feels his wife is a possession that is to be provided for and cherished, yet not necessarily to be communed with. Joe embodies this sentiment throughout his marriage with Janie, placing her on a kind of pedestal where she can be seen, but not heard. Jim establishes his marriage under similar pretenses and verbally reiterates them throughout the novel, yet seems to evolve past them in a certain respect as he urges Arvay to take an active role in their love. In their patriarchal positions of authority, both Joe and Jim see themselves as wise, as "understanding ten things," whereas they view their wives as stupid and ungrateful, as unable to "understand even one thing." We can infer Joe's attitude towards women and marriage from several statements that he makes to Janie throughout their relationship. While he courts his future wife, Joe explains himself and his intentions: "‘Ah'm uh man wid principles. You ain't never knowed what it was to be treated lak a lady and Ah wants to be de one tuh show yuh. Call me Jody lak you do sometime'"(29). He then situates Janie's subservient and silent position within the marriage: "‘mah wife don't know nothin' ‘bout no speech-makin'. Ah never married her for nothin' lak dat.

Charles Dickens builds Essay

Great Expectations is a play written by the famous novelist Charles Dickens in the mid 1800’s. Great expectations is set in the early Victorian times this was a time were great social changes took place. This was when there were big differences between the rich and the poor and if you did not have money, you were not treated the same way as if you did. Charles Dickens tried to educate the poor about the differences in society and the divides between rich and poor through his novel. Books in those days were accounted as luxuries and only the rich had luxuries as they could afford them, therefore the poor people never got to read the books that were published. Charles Dickens on the other hand wrote his whole novel in parts, these were then published in a weekly magazine called â€Å"All The Year Round† Dickens may have done this so that both the rich and the poor could read his novel. Great expectations is all about a little poor orphan called Pip and how his life is changed from being poor to rich, throughout the play we see Pip change as in the middle of the play he becomes a person of great expectations as a unnamed benefactor (Abel Magwitch) pays for him to be a gentleman. The novel Great expectations tends to reflect the life of Charles Dickens himself and is fairly autobiographical as at a very young age Charles was sent to a blacking factory as his father was deeply in debt due to this Dickens’s whole family went to debtors prison. Charles was then sent off to work in a blacking factory to pay off his father’s debts. Later on in life after Dickens father was released Charles went back to school and as he grew up he finally became a very famous novelist. This reflects on how Pip is a poor orphan who has no money and less if no education is sent to London to become educated and become a gentleman due to an unnamed benefactor. In Great Expectations, Pip is the main character as the whole novel is based around him and his life. He is both the central character, whose actions make up the main plot of the novel, and the narrator, whose thoughts and attitudes make the reader’s view about the story. In the beginning of chapter one, we see Pip standing alone in a marshy churchyard in front of seven gravestones when he suddenly is confronted by Abel Magwitch an big, scary escaped convict who has an iron shackle on one of his legs. Magwitch grabs hold of young Pip and turns him upside down looking for food but only finds a loose crust of bread from within his pockets. Magwitch then threatens Pip by saying to him that he will tell a person that he knows which will grab him and take his liver out wherever he is, if he does not listen to him. Pip is very innocent and naà ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½ve and believes Magwitch’s threats and in fear accepts the deal of bringing him some food and a file so that he can take the iron shackle off. As Pip returns home and next the day early in the morning gets up to take some food and a file to Magwitch. Whilst Pip is stealing the food and the file we find out the he has a very strong conscience as when he is taking the food out the cupboard he hears voices ‘Mrs Joe wake up wake up’ also when Pip has the left the house and is on the way to marshes he hears the animals the cow the horse saying ‘catch that thief catch that thief’. This makes the opening chapter very interesting and effective as we do not really know much about Pip and we know nothing about Magwitch the escaped convict. Charles Dickens builds up a lot of tension as when Pip is stealing the food we do not know if he is going to make it or if is he going to be caught on the way. Throughout the play Pip changes in character a wide range as first he is a very innocent and kind hearted child and later on in the novel we see a different side of him as when he comes for his sisters funeral he doesn’t want to stay at his old house instead at a posh hotel at this time Pip is a snob and dislikes his family as they do not have social manners and not a lot of money. Pip always had the desire to marry Estella and become a member of a social class by being educated and a gentleman Near the end of the play we see Pip and see what the real important part is being honest and good hearted not rich and arrogant. Magwitch is the second character we meet his entrance is rather dramatic and at first he seems very scary as he is a convict. He threatens Pip to make him do work for him ‘I’ll cut your throat’. Magwitch seemed to be very violent as he grabs hold of Pip and turns him upside down looking for food also he sits Pip on a gravestone and scares him. Magwitch in the first chapters has a very effective effect, as he is criminal and is on the marshes, which indicate that he has escaped this makes him, look even scarier. Also as Magwitch is first introduced ‘he glared and growled’ giving an indication that he was very violent and a dangerous person. We start to see the softer side of Magwitch when he is caught and say that he stole the file and the mince Pie and doesn’t bring Pip into it As the play continued we later find out about more of the softer side of Magwitch and that he really is a good hearted kind person we find out about this when he is revealed to be Pip’s mysterious and unnamed benefactor and the reason for that being was that he gave food to Magwitch when he was on the marshes starving.

J & J Automotive Sales Essay

Replicate business and referrals from pleased clients are fundamental to success in selling. The longer you work in sales as a professional person committed to treating your customers right, the higher and higher will be the proportion of your business emanating from repeat business and customer referrals. By contrast, think about the stereotype of the person we would generally consider the antithesis of professionalism in selling, the used-car salesperson. Of course, there may be some used-car salespersons out there that are professional businesspeople, but by and large their reputation is not exemplary. The reason? We believe it has a lot top do with the fact that the person selling in the used-car lot sees the prospect as an opportunity for a one-time transaction. Seldom will a customer return to that same used-car lot for a repeat purchase, and the used-car dealer virtually never has service facilities for developing an ongoing relationship after the sale. Used-car buyers rarely refer friends and colleagues to the dealer they bought from. When they do, it’s because of the availability of a particular vehicle rather than the dealership per se. Compare that with successful new-car dealership, especially those at the high end, who want you as a long-term customer that will refer friends and colleagues to the store and its salespeople. If you’ve ever dealt with a dealership like that, you’ve enjoyed a personal relationship with your salesperson and the service department reps, which is well worth paying for. You’d certainly agree that your salesperson does not fit the stereotype of a used-car salesperson. It’s just one illustration of a business which appreciates the fact that its survival is contingent upon repeat business and customer referrals. Joe luckily has good dealing relationships with his customers which is a good start in countering this stereotype. Not only must he be aware of the features associated with a variety of models, he must also be familiar with mileage, modifications, rebuilds, and the quirks of each car on the lot. As such, he could work against the stereotype as a slick con artist looking to make a quick buck. Part of this, may be due to the larger commissions used car salespeople like Joe make on each sale, thus encouraging them to complete as many sales possible. While stereotypes abound regarding used car dealerships, it is unfair to cast a negative light on the entire used car industry. The bonded dealers behave like other principals; some are up front and cooperative; others disappear or simply refuse to cooperate. Now while you consider you have seen and heard it all, a new claim presents novel and astonishing facts. For example, you are looking for a second-hand care and Joe activates your stereotype of ‘used-car dealer’. However, the car looks quite good buy. Is he lying to you or is he offering a good deal? If additional information seems to fit your initial judgment then you have category confirmation. You are confirmed, in your view of the salesman and leave it at that. If, however, the category is not confirmed, then you engage in re-categorization, and attempt to find a category that is a better fit – maybe the Joe is re-categorized as ‘helpful assistant,’ who sold cars honestly. Since Joe has this characteristics of passion in cars and the sincere concern to his customers, having this kind of stereotype would not hinder him from obtaining good customers, because he will, of course, gain their trust and as such, would gain good relationship with them. As a customer on the other hand, having Joe as a salesperson of used cars, I would definitely come back to him and get another good deal in buying his cars. The stereotype wouldn’t definitely affect my relationship with Joe as his customer and surely would come back for another deal. AutoNation created a huge business by exploiting the public’s perception of used-car dealers. Middle-volume dealerships with less expensive cars try to increase sales volume by getting uncertain customers the larger dealers ignore. They track sales workers to make sure they follow a prescribed script with customers. Smaller suburban dealerships also concentrate on uncertain customers but some also give special services like loaner cars and pick-up and delivery service in hopes of repeat and referral business. Reference: Kimball, Bob, and Jerold Hall. Selling in the New World of Business. Binghamton, New York: Haworth Press, 2004.