By PAUL TOUGH
Kids’ success — and happiness — may depend less on perfect performance than on learning how to recover from setbacks and improve regardless of the obstacles.
|注音一式 ㄒ｜ㄡˋ ㄌ｜ˇ ㄌㄞˊ ㄒ｜ㄡˋ ㄌ｜ˇ ㄑㄩˋ|
|漢語拼音 ｘｉ ｌ ｌ ｉ ｘｉ ｌ ｑ||注音二式 ｓｈｉ ｕ ｌ ｌ ｉ ｓｈｉ ｕ ｌ ｃｈｉ|
Troy Davis is scheduled to be executed on Wednesday for the 1989 killing of a police officer in Savannah, Ga. The Georgia pardon and parole board’s refusal to grant him clemency is appalling in light of developments after his conviction: reports about police misconduct, the recantation of testimony by a string of eyewitnesses and reports from other witnesses that another person had confessed to the crime.
Share your thoughts.
This case has attracted worldwide attention, but it is, in essence, no different from other capital cases. Across the country, the legal process for the death penalty has shown itself to be discriminatory, unjust and incapable of being fixed. Just last week, the Supreme Court granted a stay of execution for Duane Buck, an African-American, hours before he was to die in Texas because a psychologist testified during his sentencing that Mr. Buck’s race increased the chances of future dangerousness. Case after case adds to the many reasons why the death penalty must be abolished.
The grievous errors in the Davis case were numerous, and many arose out of eyewitness identification. The Savannah police contaminated the memories of four witnesses by re-enacting the crime with them present so that their individual perceptions were turned into a group one. The police showed some of the witnesses Mr. Davis’s photograph even before the lineup. His lineup picture was set apart by a different background. The lineup was also administered by a police officer involved in the investigation, increasing the potential for influencing the witnesses.
In the decades since the Davis trial, science-based research has shown how unreliable and easily manipulated witness identification can be. Studies of the hundreds of felony cases overturned because of DNA evidence have found that misidentifications accounted for between 75 percent and 85 percent of the wrongful convictions. The Davis case offers egregious examples of this kind of error.
Under proper practices, no one should know who the suspect is, including the officer administering a lineup. Each witness should view the lineup separately, and the witnesses should not confer about the crime. A new study has found that even presenting photos sequentially (one by one) to witnesses reduced misidentifications — from 18 percent to 12 percent of the time — compared with lineups where photos were presented all at once, as in this case.
Seven of nine witnesses against Mr. Davis recanted after trial. Six said the police threatened them if they did not identify Mr. Davis. The man who first told the police that Mr. Davis was the shooter later confessed to the crime. There are other reasons to doubt Mr. Davis’s guilt: There was no physical evidence linking him to the crime introduced at trial, and new ballistics evidence broke the link between him and a previous shooting that provided the motive for his conviction.
More than 630,000 letters pleading for a stay of execution were delivered to the Georgia board last week. Those asking for clemency included President Jimmy Carter, 51 members of Congress and death penalty supporters, such as William Sessions, a former F.B.I. director. The board’s failure to commute Mr. Davis’s death sentence to life without parole was a tragic miscarriage of justice.
Tyco International Ltd. is breaking up for the second time in four years, sending another signal that the era of the conglomerate is drawing to a close.
The move, which follows plans for similar corporate divorces at ITT Corp., ConocoPhillips and Kraft Foods Inc., transforms a serial acquirer that bought literally hundreds of companies over the past five decades into a single $10 billion entity selling security and fire-suppression systems to business customers.
Tyco's other two big segments, which sell ADT residential alarms and industrial valves and pipes, will be spun off to shareholders. The decision sets up all three units to be more easily acquired by the next generation of empire builders—or to pursue takeovers of their own.
Chief Executive Ed Breen didn't rule out the possibility that Tyco, which has a market value of about $20 billion, would consider selling all or part of the conglomerate before completing the breakup. "We don't ignore any opportunity that comes along," he said.
The idea for the separation came in 2007, the last time Tyco split into three companies. Tyco directors began seriously to explore another breakup at strategic-planning retreats in September 2009 and September 2010, Mr. Breen said in an interview. "We analyzed every alternative," including Tyco's possible sale, Mr. Breen said.
Tyco's directors decided that a breakup "is going to be the best path to create long-term shareholder value," he said. The board made its decision at a meeting last week in Geneva.
Splitting up the businesses will give each greater flexibility to grow as it sees fit, Mr. Breen said. The units operate in fragmented industries that are being consolidated, offering the opportunity to be buyers or sellers.
Such thinking would have been anathema several years ago, when companies like Tyco were snapping up operations to bulk up offerings, turn into one-stop shops and diversify risks.
Academics long have argued that many acquisitions end up hurting the buyers' shareholders. And analysts have said that conglomerates often trade at a discount to the sum of their parts. Now, the economy's sluggish recovery has executives looking for ways to get their stock prices moving again.
J.P. Morgan analyst Stephen Tusa says the divided Tyco would be valued at a combined $54 a share in the worst case. At best, he said, the combined value could reach $65.
He said "the rationale for a split versus an outright sale" is that the company as a whole doesn't make sense for a single bidder, Mr. Tusa said in a note to investors. "But there are several that could see strategic rationale in the different pieces."
In a sign that investors aren't quite sold on the idea, Tyco's shares rose $1.05, or 2.4%, to $44.75 a share in 4 p.m. composite trading Monday on the New York Stock Exchange.
Tyco has been the subject of regular speculation about takeover attempts. Above, Tyco's offices stand in Boca Raton, Fla.
Such plans carry risks. It can take months to work out legal and financial details, during which time business conditions can deteriorate. Tyco estimates it will need to spend $700 million to execute the spinoff but said lower interest costs would offset some of that tab.
Companies including General Electric Co., which has completed a number of oil-and-gas acquisitions in the past year, and United Technologies Corp., which is said to be in talks to acquire Goodrich Corp., are keeping to the conglomerate path. ITT, whose shares jumped after it unveiled plans to break up, has seen the stock fall 16% from its level before the announcement.
Tyco made an art of acquisitions and divestitures. The company started in 1960 as a semiconductor and materials-science company and completed its first deal in the mid-1960s. More deals followed in the next two decades.
Several companies have announced plans to split themselves apart in recent months.
Acquisitions accelerated under Chief Executive L. Dennis Kozlowski, who was convicted with former Chief Financial Officer Mark H. Swartz in 2005 of systematically looting the company. Mr. Kozlowski's deals included the 1997 acquisition of ADT, which now will be spun off, and the 2001 acquisition of financial-services firm CIT Group Inc., which was sold a year later in an initial public offering.
Mr. Kozlowski in 2002 announced plans to break up the company but the idea was shelved because of shareholder concerns over Tyco's accounting. Mr. Kozlowski called the plan a "mistake."
"I am gratified to see the continuing strength of the company I left in 2002, including some of the business units that were acquired under my stewardship," the former CEO said from prison Monday in a statement issued by one of his lawyers.
The planned breakup will end Mr. Breen's decade-long tenure at Tyco's helm. On his first day on the job in 2002, investors holding more than 15% of Tyco's shares showed up unexpectedly and demanded that he replace the entire board. "Oh, this is going to be real good," Mr. Breen recalled telling himself.
Rather than spin of more operations then, Mr. Breen said directors opted to strengthen the remaining operations before sending them out on their own. Last year, Tyco bulked up its home alarm business by purchasing rival Broadview Security for $2 billion in cash and stock.
Tyco has been the subject of regular speculation about takeover attempts. Schneider Electric SA in April distanced itself from reports it was considering acquiring Tyco after news of the French company's interest drew a poor reception from investors.
Mr. Breen, 56 years old, said he might consider becoming a CEO elsewhere. The spinoff plan calls for him to become nonexecutive chairman of the commercial fire-and-security company, a director of the pipe-and-valve company, and a consultant to the ADT North America residential-security company.
UBS Reports $2 Billion Loss to Rogue Trader UBS said on Thursday that a rogue trader in its investment bank had lost $2 billion, a fresh blow to the struggling Swiss bank.
Police in London have arrested European equities trader, Kweku Adoboli, in connection with the case, according to a person with direct knowledge of the situation, who was not authorized to speak publicly of the matter.
The incident raises questions about the bank's management and risk policies at time when it is trying to rebuild its operations and bolster its flagging client base. In an internal memo, UBS said the unauthorized trading could drag down earnings in the third quarter, adding that "no client positions" were involved in the "unauthorized trades."
BY TAKESHI HATAKAWA STAFF WRITER
Starbucks Chairman and CEO Howard Schultz in an outlet in Seoul, South Korea, during a 13-country promotion tour for his book "Onward: How Starbucks fought for its life without losing its soul." (Toshiyuki Matsumoto)
Howard Schultz is the Steve Jobs of coffee. Like the former chief executive of Apple Corp., he transformed a small company into an institution that changed the rules and assumptions of its industry. Like Jobs, he left the company, only to return to save it from stagnation and then build it once again into a dominant market force.
He is credited with masterminding the meteoric rise of Starbucks Corp., a company credited with changing U.S and global coffee culture. It operates 17,000 stores in 55 countries, and serves 60 million people every week.
Walk a few city blocks in the morning in the United States, and you will almost certainly see someone carrying a Starbucks cup with the firm's famous green siren logo.
But Schultz is not satisfied. This spring, Starbucks changed made a subtle change to that logo, bringing the iconic green siren out of her circle and dropping the words "Starbucks Coffee."
Schultz wants his company leave its image as a simple coffee vendor behind it and fuel growth by expanding into other markets, and anyone familiar with the company's history would not bet against him.
As Starbucks' CEO in the 1990s, Schultz transformed Starbucks from a small coffee seller on the West Coast the United States into a global brand. He left the top job in 2000 for a seat on the board responsible for overseas operations, but returned as CEO in 2008 after the company ran into a rough patch. He has engineered a dramatic turnaround. After posting a one-quarter loss, Starbucks notched up a banner year in fiscal 2010.
Central to his style of business is a focus on the critical role ordinary employees' play in delivering an attractive experience to customers. He calls his staff "partners" and the company's headquarters is called the Starbucks Support Center. Rather than being the heart of the business, it is seen as an information and support provider for those working in the stores.
Starbucks was the first privately owned U.S. company to extend full health benefits and offer a stock option program to all of its employees, including part-timers.
Some of that emphasis on normal workers may come from Schultz's own personal history. The eldest son of an ex-U.S. Army trooper in Brooklyn, New York, he grew up with a brother and sister in a state-run housing project for low-income earners. Schultz's father had to move from one job to job, working without health care or work-related accident compensation, but Schultz excelled at football and other sports at high school and became the first person in his family to go to college after earning a university athletic scholarship.
"Watching my family and others struggle just to get by imprinted upon me a desire to build the kind of company that my father never had a chance to work for. One that provided for its people in a way that my father deserved," Schultz said.
In 1982, he joined Starbucks and took a trip to Italy the following year, where he was struck by the place Italy's espresso bars occupied at the heart of their communities. It gave him a new vision for the coffee industry.
At the time, Starbucks' main business was selling coffee beans. Schultz tried to persuade the company's founders to bring cafe' culture to America but was rebuffed, and he left to open his own chain of espresso bars. In 1987, he returned with enough money to buy the Starbucks chain and, as it CEO, turned it into the huge chain we know today.
During the 1990's, Starbucks expanded at breakneck speed, opening hundreds of stores each year. In 1996, it opened its first overseas shop in Tokyo and then pursued an ambitious global growth strategy.
Since buying Starbucks, Schultz has been devoted to ensuring that its stores become an integral part of customers' lives -- a "third place" in their daily routines. The idea is to create a comfortable and relaxing refuge from work lives similar to the espresso bars of Italy.
Despite his emphasis on the role of employees, he has sometimes been ruthless when the welfare of his company has been at stake. In 2008 and 2009, he closed 900 unprofitable stores, laying off 18,000 workers.
At the same time, he pushed through a series of reforms to revive the foundering coffee empire. He opened a website inviting customer complaints and ideas to improve stores and products. The company received more than 110,000 proposals and put over 600 of them into practice, including free wireless Internet access and a Facebook-based service allowing customers to give gifts to their friends.
Another of the reforms was a return to its roots, focusing once more on merchandise sold at each shop, including instant coffee which has proven to be a hit. But, if the subtle changes to the firm's logo this spring are anything to go by, more expansion rather than a retreat to old ground is on the horizon for a company Schultz says is in better shape than ever.
"The company has never been healthier than it is today, right now," Schultz said.
Kids’ success — and happiness — may depend less on perfect performance than on learning how to recover from setbacks and improve regardless of the obstacles.
【邱俊吉、甯瑋瑜、呂志明╱台北報 導】愛滋器官誤移植事件持續延燒，台大、成大移植團隊對衛生署可能要懲處醫師大表不滿，台大昨指衛署的器官移植前置作業流程，未規定主刀醫師需看到書面檢 驗結果，且醫師也是依據衛署的器官捐贈登錄中心資料，只是登錄的資料錯誤。醫療改革團體也指器捐中心理該提供正確資料，衛署督導不嚴要負責。
台大收到衛署公文後隨即回文解釋，台大 醫院人員指出，在誤植事件前，衛署所訂器官移植前置標準作業流程，沒有規定移植團隊需先看到捐贈者書面檢驗結果，該院移植團隊是依器捐中心登錄資料移植。 一名台大醫院移植團隊醫師指為搶時間救人，移植前醫師均以官方登載資料為準，不會再調病歷。成大移植團隊成員李伯璋也指該院移植團隊也是看器捐中心登載資 料才動刀，若要懲處醫師不公平。
前天辭去台大器官捐贈小組與衛署器官勸 募網絡計劃主持人兩職務的台大醫院創傷醫學部主任柯文哲，昨指台大已針對疏失改正，這像彗星撞地球，其他醫院別幸災樂禍。對外界指他為保住院長陳明豐請 辭，柯說：「我已經很大了，人是我招考的、我管理的、作業守則我寫的…，當然我負責。」台大批踢踢則有網友嘲諷柯應改姓、叫余文哲（暗諷在總統馬英九特支 案中，馬的部屬余文為此坐牢）。
一個有趣的對比是，大提琴家張正傑將開演奏會，為普及古典樂，他將票價定為100元。結果一開放購票即演出秒殺，15 分鐘就全部賣完，創下古典樂售票的紀錄。這說明一件事實：台灣的古典樂迷人數非常多，但大多是窮學生和中產階級；平均票價若在1000元左右還可接受，兩 人同行約2000元，但若超過此價，樂迷們只能望梅止渴了。張正傑說，他可以把票價定這麼低是因為已找到贊助的企業，所以不致賠本。100元是紀念中華民 國建國100年；而且也為了讓窮學生有機會親身體驗現場演奏會的氣氛與質感。
參 加了在長春舉行4天的「中日韓媒體圓桌論壇」的多個日本傳媒記者周三晚發自 北京的報道引述劉雲山的分析說，新媒體和傳統媒體無境界化、一國發生的革命馬上擴大到世界等國內問題與國際問題無境界化、鐵道事故也變成政治和文化問題等 科技、經濟、政治、文化都在向無境界化方面推移，所以中宣部被挑戰、面臨危機。
The leadership lashing has come from all sides. Germany's former chancellors, the conservative Helmut Kohl as well as the social democrat Helmut Schmidt have criticized what they consider a lack of European leadership in the face of the financial crisis from Chancellor Angela Merkel. Germany's first-ever foreign minister from the Green Party, Joschka Fischer, also scolded what he perceives as Merkel's failure to guide Europe through what is arguably the most severe crisis since the founding of the European Union.
Across the Atlantic, Barack Obama is not faring much better. While the steady Republican drumbeat about the president's lack of leadership can be shelved as partisan campaign rhetoric, it does reflect a growing public sentiment. According to a new Pew survey, Obama's leadership ratings have nose-dived. For the first time since he took office significantly more Americans disapprove of the way he is handling his job (49-43 percent). Since May the percentage of people describing Obama as a strong leader also has fallen from 58 to 49 percent.
Last week, the president of the AFL-CIO, the country's most important labor organization said that if Obama didn't finally take stronger action to improve the US economy, he isn't a leader, but "a follower." A headline in Salon Magazine probably best sums up the growing disenchantment of Democrats and Progressives in the US with the leadership style of their president: "Obama's dopey rope-a-dope strategy."
Lack of leadership
In Merkel's case, the prime examples for her alleged failure to lead is what critics call her inept, unprincipled and late response to the debt crisis in Europe and Germany's stance against military action in Libya, which critics charge isolated Berlin from its Western allies.
As for Obama, he is accused of essentially having been duped by Republicans in accepting a deeply flawed debt deal, having played a passive role instead of taking a strong stand against the dictators who are trying to crush their own people in Syria and Libya and most importantly of being totally absent on the most important issue for Americans, i.e. jobs.
While much of the resentment with the leadership style of Merkel and Obama is understandable, say experts, to be fair it should be measured against what other political options were available.
"If we look at Merkel I would say that the demands on Germany to lead are very recent," Matthias Wächter, director of the Institut Européen des Hautes Etudes Internationales (EHEI) in Nice, France, told Deutsche Welle. He adds, that until recently, Berlin was not supposed to act as a strong international leader, but rather to exercise leadership only in the context of the so called Franco-German partnership, so Germany in a way is simply not used to acting as the sole, strong European leader as many now expect.
Germany's former chancellor Helmut Kohl issued a tough rebuke of Merkel's policy toward Europe
What's more, argues Hubert Zimmermann, a professor of international relations at Philipps University in Marburg, the grand vision and leadership for Europe that many critics now say Merkel should have provided would have to go very far and reach very deep.
Essentially it would lead to a much more centralized Europe than most of the people now calling for a grand plan would be prepared to go, says Zimmermann:
"So to call for very far-reaching European visions was relatively easy for people like Helmut Kohl when it was clear that it wouldn't be pushed through during his leadership."
Michael Genovese, the director of the Institute for Leadership Studies and a political science professor at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles, puts the calls for Merkel to emerge as the de facto European leader in a more practical context.
"For Merkel it is difficult to lead the European Union which is an organization which is still in the making and is far less organized by formal law than the United States. It's hard to lead or as we say in the US it's like herding cats," he told Deutsche Welle.
Arguably, though, her stance on Libya has weakened her position as an international leader even more than what critics call her dithering on Europe's debt crisis.
"Germany's European partners, particularly France where I live, are asking themselves what Germany is driving at, what the principles and the main lines of foreign policy are," says Wächter. "There should be a lot more clarity what Germany's objectives in foreign policy are."
Barack Obama, argue the analysts, is a similar type of political leader as Angela Merkel, as he is also a cool pragmatist who likes to weigh all the options, not an ideologue with a clear set of ideals and a more emotional approach to political issues.
Obama, says Genovese, has tried to learn the lesson from Bill Clinton's health care debacle. Clinton was personally heavily invested in every aspect of the legislation, essentially trying to dictate the policy to Congress. That backfired, health care reform failed and left Clinton deeply damaged. Obama took note of that and basically has left all legislation up to Congress instead of getting personally involved.
"I think he mislearned the lessons of recent history," says Genovese. "It's a strategic failure on his part. The lesson from Clinton no longer applies." The political system in the US is so polarized that leaving legislation to a Republican-dominated Congress ensures that nothing Obama wants to get done actually gets passed by Congress.
Sure, adds Zimmermann, Obama could have tried to act more forcefully in the debt ceiling debate and offer a riskier proposal, but that probably is also not his personal style.
"Usually American presidents are careful to hedge their bets and not make risky proposals or visionary speeches," says Zimmermann and cites Ronald Reagan's famous 'Tear down this wall' statement in Berlin during the Cold War. "Of course he could say that because the people who would be upset with that were on the other side of the wall."
Barack Obama was accused of leadership failure during the debt crisisHence, invoking earlier leaders like Helmut Kohl and Ronald Reagan to criticize the leadership of Angela Merkel and Barack Obama is understandable, but not entirely fair. First, the constant pressures and constraints Merkel and Obama face today dwarf those experienced during the Cold War by Kohl and Reagan.
"It's almost like you are Gulliver chained down by thousands of little Lilliputians," says Genovese.
Secondly, history's verdict on what makes great leaders takes time to evolve, notes Zimmermann.
"If you look at back at Reagan and Kohl, for a long time both of them were regarded as practically bumbling idiots and anything but strong leaders. The reason was of course that they also operated in a divided system. After the Cold War ended they both looked like visionary leaders."
Author: Michael Knigge
Editor: Rob Mudge
前天行政院長吳敦義受邀出席台中市太平 區舉辦的潑水節，事先到場的維安人員接到指令，必須把場地上的十多個大水桶裡的水全部倒光，「連水槍裡的水都要漏光」，並要求民眾不能對吳揆噴水，原因是 吳下一場活動要去為集團結婚證婚，衣服不能打濕。民眾氣得大罵：「潑水節不潑水，那就不要來了。」