Are the 1980s and 1990s the era of colour? According to some people, they are. Now you can buy radios and electric fans in lavender and pink. Restaurant have an emphasis on flowers and coulouful plates. Cars are coming out in pink and aqua. Even bathroom fixtures are being made in "honeydew" and "blond". Part of the importance of the colour of an object is that the coulour affects the way one feels about it. You want a vacuum cleaner to look light and easy, which is why it may be couloured in pastels and light colours. But gardening equipments you want to look powerful. You would never find a lawn mower in pink, but red would be fine. Not very long ago, sheets were always white and refrigerators commonly came in colours like "old gold", "avocado green" and "coppertone". Now those are thought of as old-fashioned. Popular colours change because fashion influences everything. In fact, new colours often spring from the fashion industry. It's a lot cheaper to make a blouse or skirt than a sofa. After people get used to seeing new colours on clothing or towels, they are ready to accept those colours in carpeting, refrigerators, or cars. Colour- analysis consultants have been very successful in recent years. People want to choose the most flattering colours for make up and clothing. Some car designers are even saying that people may begin buying cars of the colours that goes with their skin colouring. This sounds too extreme. It's hard to believe that people are that impressionable !.

Management is a set of processes that can keep a complicated system of people and technology running smoothly. The most important aspects of management include planning, budgeting, organizing, staffing, controlling and problem solving. Leadership is a set of processes that creates organizations in the first place or adapts them to significantly changing circumstances. Leadership defines what the future should look like, aligns people with that vision, and inspires them to make it happen despite the obstacles. This distinction is absolutely crucial for our purposes here. Successful transformation is 70 to 90 percent leadership and only 10 to 30 percent management. Yet for historical reasons, many organizations today don't have much leadership. And almost everyone thinks about the problem here as one of managing change.
For most of this century, as we created thousands and thousands of large organizations for the first time in human history, we didn't have enough good managers to keep all those bureaucracies functioning. So many companies and universities developed management programmes and hundreds and thousands of people were encouraged to learn management on the job. And they did. But, people were taught little about leadership. To some degree, management was the main item on the twentieth-century agenda because that's what was needed. For every entrepreneur or business builder who was a leader, we needed hundreds of managers to run their evergrowing enterprises.
Unfortunately for us today, this emphasis on management has often been institutionalized in corporate cultures that discourage employees from learning how to lead. Ironically, past success is usually the key ingredient in producing this outcome. The syndrome, as I have observed it on many occasions, goes like this : success creates some degree of marked dominance, which in turn produces much growth. After a while keeping the ever larger organisation under control becomes the primary challenge. So attention turns inward, and managerial competencies and nurtured. With a strong emphasis on management but not leadership, bureaucracy and an inward focus take over. But with continued success, the result mostly of market dominance, the problem often goes unaddressed and an unhealthy arrogance begins to evolve. All of these characteristics then make any transformation effort much more difficult.
Arrogant managers can over evaluate their current performance and competitive positions, listen poorly, and learn slowly. Inwardly focused employees can smoother those who want to respond to shifting conditions. And the lack of leadership leaves no force inside these organizations to break out of the morass.

Of many aspects of public administration, the ethical aspects is perhaps the most important but the least codified. While administrative rules and procedures have been codified in various public documents manuals there is no manuals for the ethics of public servants.
While organizational behaviour analyses the factors which influence the behaviour of individuals in an organization, ethics refer to those norms and standard which behaviour of the people in an organization must conform to. While behaviour analyses deals with factual aspects, ethics relates to the normative aspects of administration. The normative aspects are of the greatest significance. Just as for an individual if character is lost, everything is lost, so also for a administration if the ethics is lost, everything is lost. Neither efficiency nor loyalty could be substitute for higher ethical standards. In India, though there is no ethical code for public administrators, there are what are called, the Government Servants' Conduct Rules. These rules lay down what constitutes misconduct for the public servants. It is apparently implied that such misconduct, which is not permitted, is also unethical conduct.

It is difficult to reconcile the ideas of different schools of thought on the question of education. Some people maintain that pupils of school should concentrate on a narrow range of subjects which will benefit them directly in their subsequent careers. Others contend that they should study a wide range of subjects so that they not only have the specialized knowledge necessary for their chosen careers but also sound general knowledge about the world they will have to work and live in. Supporters of the first theory state that the greatest contributions to civilization are made by those who are expert in their trade or profession. Those on the other side say that, unless they have a broad general education, the experts will be too narrow in their outlook to have sympathy with their fellows or a proper sense of responsibility towards humanity as a whole.

As heart disease continues to be the number one killer in the United States, researchers have become increasingly interested in identifying the potential risk factors that trigger heart attacks. High-fat diets and "life in the fast lane" have long been known to contribute to the high incidence of heart failure. But according to new studies, the list of risk factors may be significantly longer and quite surprising.
Heart failure, for example, appears to have seasonal and temporal patterns. A higher percentage of heart attacks occur in cold weather and more people experience heart failure on Monday than on any other day of the week. In addition, people are more susceptible to heart attacks in the first few hours after waking. Cardiologists first observed this morning phenomenon in the mid-1980 and have since discovered a number of possible causes. An early-morning rise in blood pressure, heart rate and concentration of heart stimulating hormones, plus a reduction of blood flow to the heart, may all contribute to the higher incidence of heart attacks between the hours of 8:00 AM and 10:00 AM.
In other studies, bot birthday and bachelorhood have been implicated as risk factors. Statistics reveal that heart attacks rates increase significantly for both females and males in the few days immediately preceding and following their birthdays. And unmarried men are more at risk for heart attacks than their married counterparts. Though stress is thought to be linked in some way to all of the aforementioned risk factors, intense research continues in the hope of future comprehending why and how heart failure is triggered.

Nothing is sure but death and taxes, and of course that north is north and south is south, and thus it has always been, so they say. But they'd be wrong. You can perhaps be sure about death and taxes, but you might want to reconsider the rest of it. In fact, at many times in our planet's history, north has become south and south has become north, in a process called magnetic reversal.
Paleogeologists have discovered the existence of these mysterious phenomenon (in a field study known as paleomagnetism) by investigating rocks. When rocks are being formed from magmas, atoms within their crystals respond to the earth's magnetic field by "pointing" towards the magnetic north pole. By age dating the rocks and noting their magnetic alignment, scientist can determine where on earth the north pole was located at that time because as the rocks solidified, they trapped that information within them. The study of ancient lava flows have revealed that at certain periods in the earth's history magnetic north was directly opposite to its present location. In fact, it has been determined that the north/south reversal has occurred on average every 500,000 years and that the last reversal took place about 700,000 years ago. Scientists call those periods of "normal" polarity (the magnetic orientation of our modern era) and "reversed" polarity (the magnetic orientation of reverse situation) by the name "magnetic chrons".
Although the fact of such reversals is clear, why and how they happen and their effects on the planet are subject of considerable debate. Because no one knows precisely how the earth's magnetic field is produced, it become difficult to say how it might be reversed. Among explanations proposed are a reversal of the direction of convection currents in the liquid outer core of the earth and a collision between the earth and a meteorite or comet. And while the precise effects of a reversal are not known, there can be little doubt that the earth would receive during the process a great deal more damaging ultraviolet radiation than it now does and that such occurrences have been correlated with the extinction of certain species in the geologic past.