<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
   <channel>
      <title>Steve Lunsford</title>
      <link>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/</link>
      <description></description>
      <language>en</language>
      <copyright>Copyright 2008</copyright>
      <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 07:46:45 -0500</lastBuildDate>
      <generator>http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/?v=3.2</generator>
      <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs> 

            <item>
         <title>Thinking About the Election:  I Might Be A Cynic</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>First I want to say, I know that politics can be a fiery topic, and I realize that.  Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and this is one of many for me.  Take it for what it's worth, and you're of course welcome to disagree.  Moving on...</p>

<p>A favorite radio show host of mine used to say, "tell me where you sit, before you tell me where you stand," so I'm going to do just that.  I was born and raised in Indiana, and many of my fellow Hoosiers have, I have grown up in a fairly conservative environment.  As I have matured, I have found myself drifting from that perspective, but more in a third direction rather than left or right.  I consider myself a libertarian, believing in a number of principles from either side, but my main sentiment in regard to government is that it is bloated far beyond what it should be.  In my mind, the government should be there to perform in a role of core functionality.</p>

<p>What it feels like to me, heading in to this election, is that no one is getting it.  We've got some very serious issues facing our nation, and everyone is pointing the finger at President Bush.  Now don't get all foamy at the mouth, you silly liberal, I'm not saying that Bush is or was the greatest president ever, or that he's done an excellent job in the past few years.  The man is obviously tired.  He's given nearly a decade of his life to the country and characterizing him as "evil" and blindly speculating about conspiracy is not only unproductive, but stupid.  His time is over, it's history.  </p>

<p>The thing that people have to realize is that the executive branch is a limited role.  The president is in the spotlight, but what he actually does is perform as a figurehead for our government, and if we're lucky (which we have not been this past term), provide some leadership.  He does not control the economy, single-handedly make decisions to go to war, or eat our babies.  The point I'm making is that the executive branch is a minor part of our problem.  </p>

<p>Our problem is ...are you ready for this?  Congress.  It's that simple.  Everyone wants to quote the presidents approval rating, but in fact the congressional approval rating is far more abysmal, not scoring more than 15% in 2008.  The fact is until our congress starts performing, we will be doomed to more of the same.   The main problem that we have is, in my view is campaign finance, but that's another topic altogether.   Forget the president, worry about the people representing you when we're writing these laws and passing corporate bailout bills weighed down with pork.</p>

<p>Give some thought to your pick this year, but forget about the part that really matters and that's the congress.  Either presidential pick will do, both are good picks, or you can do what I'm doing (as a Colorado resident) don't worry about it, the electorate will decide your vote for you.  Your vote matters, but only in the case of congress, get over the presidential campaign.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/10/thinking_about_the_election_i.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/10/thinking_about_the_election_i.html</guid>
         <category></category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 07:46:45 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Defining Communications: Conveying a Message</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>Communication is a concept that would seem easy to define, but not so simple to define in a comprehensive and concise manner.  In order to form a baseline understanding of what communication is, it should first be examined as defined by the dictionary:</p>

<p>Main Entry: com•mu•ni•ca•tion <br />
Pronunciation: \kə-ˌmyü-nə-ˈkā-shən\ <br />
Function: noun <br />
Date: 14th century<br />
1: an act or instance of transmitting<br />
2 a: information communicated b: a verbal or written message<br />
3 a: a process by which information is exchanged between individuals through a common system of symbols, signs, or behavior <the function of pheromones in insect communication>; also : exchange of information b: personal rapport <a lack of communication between old and young persons><br />
4 plural a: a system (as of telephones) for communicating b: a system of routes for moving troops, supplies, and vehicles c: personnel engaged in communicating<br />
5 plural but sing or plural in constr a: a technique for expressing ideas effectively (as in speech) b: the technology of the transmission of information (as by print or telecommunication)<br />
(Merriam-Webster, 2008)</p>

<p>Ultimately, what we learn from examining this definition is that communication when broken down to its most simple form is the transmission of information from one source to another that can be done in a variety of different ways.</p>

<p>The means by which this information is transmitted is not necessarily the way by which this term is defined, but it is most certainly an important consideration, and can be filed into two different categories, verbal and nonverbal.  All communication can be categorized under one of these two areas of communication and can be verbal or nonverbal, but often the two overlap with each other.  </p>

<p>Verbal communications are simply communication that is transmitted by voice, and is understood by the receiving party hearing the message, whether they are able to comprehend it or not.  For instance, if someone were to say “Please pass the salt” it would be heard and ideally understood that the person sending the initial communication, is conveying that they would like the salt to be handed to them.  Now, suppose, the person might be speaking a different language, then no matter how much they asked for the salt, though they might be still verbally communicating, the message would not likely be effective, and would likely be dependent upon nonverbal communication for understanding of this message to occur.</p>

<p>Nonverbal communications make up the majority of communications, and they are made up of everything ranging from electronic communications to body language and gestures that accompany verbal communications.  Not only are nonverbal communications the most widely used but they are the most widely understood.  This type of communications is for the most part (there are some exceptions, cultural body language, for example) universally understood across cultures, regardless of language.  This area could be further broken down into categories such as electronic, body language, and inflection.</p>

<p>There can be interaction between verbal and nonverbal, which can take on several different forms such as substitution of nonverbal for verbal, conflicting messages between the verbal and nonverbal signals, or complementing nonverbal and verbal communication. (Knapp & Hall, 2007, pg. 9-10)  The areas in which verbal and nonverbal communications interact can result in either enhanced communication, better conveying the intended message, such as the gesturing in a way that helps facilitate the message.  In other cases, nonverbal communication may conflict with or impede the verbal message causing the verbal message to be misunderstood or not understood at all.</p>

<p>Yet with all of the ways that communication occurs in today’s world, it becomes increasingly common for the meaning of a communication to be missed, lost, or misunderstood.  George Bernard Shaw said, “The biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.” (Shaw)  With the more technologically advanced ways that we have in our increasingly global world and all the distractions that this provides, the difficulties that we see from the early 1900’s hold true the same as ever.</p>

<p>Communications is dependent upon multiple ways of expression in order to effectively convey a message from one party to another, and that ultimately is how it is defined.  The key to communications is finding the way to combine all the various elements that it is made up of in order to get information transferred from one party to another.</p>

<p>Works Cited</p>

<p>Communication. (2008). In Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary.<br />
Retrieved September 2, 2008, from http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/communication</p>

<p>Knapp, Mark L., & Hall, Judith A. (2007) Nonverbal Communication in Human Interaction. (5th ed.) Wadsworth: Thomas Learning. ISBN 0-15-506372-3</p>

<p>Shaw, G. B. ThinkExist.com. Retrieved September 2, 2008, from Think Exist: http://thinkexist.com/quotation/the_single_biggest_problem_in_communication_is/155222.html</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/09/defining_communications_convey.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/09/defining_communications_convey.html</guid>
         <category></category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2008 20:05:32 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Leadership: Utilizing Knowledge Effectively for the Competitive Edge</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>This paper discusses theory on leadership, competitive intelligence and knowledge management.   Next the importance of vision as it relates to leadership is taken into account along with the impact that effective organizational philosophies can make.  The differences between the roles of manager and leader are considered and dissected. Jay Gillette’s theories on knowledge management are then examined along with those of B.J. Deering.  All these things are combined to paint a broad picture of what these theories all have in common and why they matter in today’s business world. </p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/04/leadership_utilizing_knowledge.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/04/leadership_utilizing_knowledge.html</guid>
         <category></category>
         <pubDate>Fri, 18 Apr 2008 09:42:05 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>XM/Sirius Merger Apporved by Justice Department</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>  The Justice Department has officially givem approval for the merger of the two major satilite radio rivals, XM and Sirius, which, combined would result in a 17 million subscriber “de facto” monopoly (Shendon, 2008)</p>

<p>   The Jutice department, which is responsible, in this case, for evaluating any anti-trust implication that this merger could potentially pose, determined that the merger would not likely result in higher prices due to the elimination of competing companies in the satellite radio business.  The reasoning behind this was that satellite is not the only competitor for providing programming due to MP3 players and HD Radio emerging as mobile audio alternatives. (Shendon, 2008)<br />
   <br />
   Now that XM/Sirius has the blessing of the Justice Department, the merger only needs the approval of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in order to go through with the deal.  The  FCC has never turned down a deal that was approved by the Justice Department, but the final decision by the FCC is  likely to take several weeks.  (Leiberman, 2008)<br />
   <br />
   Anti-trust head, David Barnett believes that customers will not be negatively affected, saying, “A price increase is not going to cause you tjump to the other service, so there’s just not competition to day that would be eliminated by the merger.”  This merger would be enough to  help both companies achieve sustainability, the stock prices of each company rose, as investors experienced increased hopes for both companies with the likelihood of the merger going through successfully looking increasingly more likely (Leiberman, 2008).</p>

<p>Sources:<br />
Leiberman, D. (2008, March 25). Justice Dept. OKs Merger of XM, Sirius; Now it's up to FCC. USA Today , p. P. 03b.<br />
Shenon, P. (2008, March 25). Justice Department Approves XM Merger with Sirius. New York Times , p. P. B5</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/04/xmsirius_merger_apporved_by_ju.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/04/xmsirius_merger_apporved_by_ju.html</guid>
         <category></category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 15 Apr 2008 10:04:16 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>National Cell Phone Alert System Proposed</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>   The Federal Communications Commission will be announcing a new national cell phone alert system, that will use text messages to notify United States residents in case of emergency. (Davidson, 2008)</p>

<p>   The four major national cell phone providers, AT&T,  Sprint Nextel, Verizon, and T-Mobile are all expressed intent to participate in the program if the advisory commissions plan for the national text message plan is adopted. </p>

<p>  In the wake of disasters such as Hurricane Katrina, and the recent school shootings that have occurred, the system would be used primarily for three proposes:  a national disaster, terrorist attack, or other threat, ongoing updates on potentially disastrous weather conditions,  or child abductions. (CNN, 2008)</p>

<p>  With the prevalence of cell phones today, Kevin Martin, FCC  Chairman said, “It is essential that we support and advance new ways to share critical, time-sensitive information with them in times of crisis.”</p>

<p>  Should the plan for the National Text Alert plan be put into place, it should be in place by 2010.</p>

<p>Sources:<br />
Davidson, P. (2008, April 9). Nationwide Cellphone Alert System in the Works. USA Today , p. Pg. 01b.<br />
CNN Money (2008, April 9). Cell Phone Alert System Proposed. Retrieved April 14, 2008, from CNN Money: http://money.cnn.com/2008/04/09/technology/fcc_cell_phone_alert/index.htm?section=money_latest<br />
</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/04/national_cell_phone_alert_syst.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/04/national_cell_phone_alert_syst.html</guid>
         <category></category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 15 Apr 2008 08:02:43 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Leadership: Looking Back and Looking Forward</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>This paper discusses several views of leadership and effectively forms my theories of leadership.  Second, the contextual ramifications of leadership are defined, followed by the Sashkin’s theory of vision as it relates to leadership.  Next we get into my own personal views of leadership along with some of those of my peers.  The role that culture plays in a leadership role is discussed, and is followed by Jay Gillettes theories on knowledge management.  All these things are combined to paint a broad picture of leadership </p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/04/leadership_looking_back_and_lo.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/04/leadership_looking_back_and_lo.html</guid>
         <category></category>
         <pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 09:47:07 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Media Ownership Rules Under Scrutiny of Congress</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>    Congress has taken issue with the Federal Communications Commissions' relatively new ownership rules.  Five house lawmakers have produced a “resolution of disapproval” in order to nullify recent loosening of ownership rules that allow the ownership of both newspaper and broadcast in the same market (Kaplan, 2008).</p>

<p>  The 23 member Senate Commerce Committee will vote on Wednesday to repeal these rules which will give chairman Kevin Martin with his first rebuff on one of his decisions.  The vote is likely to come out in favor of the repeal, but it will then be a matter of how far it will make it from that point (Tienowitz, 2008).</p>

<p>  The adjustment to the ownership rules have faced significant opposition since it was narrowly passed by the FCC.  Should the House of Representatives be successful in it’s attempt to nullify the rules, it would likely face a presidential veto, therefore it is unlikely that the rules would be repealed in 2008 (Teinowitz, 2008)</p>

<p>   In December of 2008, the FCC adopted new media ownership rules with the explanation from Martin, Chair of the FCC, that it would help “forestall the erosion in local news coverage by enabling companies to share these local news gathering costs across multiple media platforms.  Opponents of the rules argue that it would increase the cost of buying stations and cause smaller owners and minority owned stations more difficulty in attracting advertisers.  <br />
John Kerry, Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama are among the more recognizable names of those opposing the rules, who time of the rules going into effect, had stated that they would fight the new rules due to the potential negative effects that they might have on minority ownership (Jones, 2008)</p>

<p>Sources:<br />
Jones, J. (2008, March). FCC Adopts New    Media Ownership Rules. Black Enterprise , p. 8.<br />
Kaplan, P. (2008 , March 13). House Lawmakers Take Aim at Media Ownership Rule. Retrieved 30 2008, March , from Reuters: http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssTechMediaTelecomNews/idUSN1353329820080313<br />
Teinowitz, I. (2008, March 30). Congress Takes Swing at Overturning FCC's Ownership Rules. Retrieved March 30, 2008, from TV Week: http://www.tvweek.com/news/2008/03/</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/04/media_ownership_rules_under_sc.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/04/media_ownership_rules_under_sc.html</guid>
         <category></category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 12:00:22 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Competitive Intelligence: Facing the Your Rivals with Confidence</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>This paper discusses four writings that examine concept of competitive intelligence and how it applies to today’s business world.  The first and second discusses how the world is changing to be more global and how competitive intelligence applies to that transition.  The second writing deals with lessons that have been learned from successful competitive intelligence implementation.  The final piece addresses how companies can improve the confidence with which they make decisions based on their work in competitive intelligence.   Finally, all of these readings are with personal experience to determine the relevance of these theories to each other.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/03/competitive_intelligence_facin.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/03/competitive_intelligence_facin.html</guid>
         <category></category>
         <pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 09:37:50 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Sprint/AT&amp;T Dispute Elevates to FCC</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>       Yahoo continues to fight the takeover offer of Microsoft from last week, and is getting creative with its options to accomplish this.  Few other companies have the capital to buy Yahoo outright, but several have lined up to get the chance to potentially get a piece of the internet company, helping them fend off Microsoft.  Among those offering various forms of deals are AOL(owned by Time Warner) and  News Corp(FOX).  (Kleinman, 2008)<br />
     AOL has offered few details in how they a deal would be structured, but anti-trust issues have cropped up as Google owns a small stake in AOL and has a number of advertising agreements in place with them.  In the case of News Corp, Rupert Murdoch is offering an 10 Billion dollar asset swap that would give Murdoch a large stake in Yahoo, and provide Yahoo with a piece of News Corp’s MySpace.com site.  (Kleinman, 2008)<br />
In any case, Yahoo seems determined to retain its independence from Microsoft and the battle is likely to get increasingly ugly as time passes. (Hansel, 2008)</p>

<p>Sources:<br />
Kleinman, Mark. AOL Clicks with Yahoo to Sideline Microsoft.  The Telegraph.  February 17, 2007.  Retreived February 17 from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2008/02/17/cnaol117.xml. </p>

<p>Hansel, Saul.  A Guide to Yahoo’s Unlikely Alternatives to Microsoft. NewYork Times  February 13, 2008.  pD2.<br />
</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/03/sprintatt_dispute_elevates_to.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/03/sprintatt_dispute_elevates_to.html</guid>
         <category></category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 18 Mar 2008 11:57:36 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>House Meets in Closed FISA Session</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p> The Democrats of the House of Representatives agreed to meet in the first closed session in 25 years over the issues presented by the Foreign Surveilance Intelligence Act (FISA) bill.  The request for the closed session was based on the  democratic revision of the bill.  The  significance of this session  is that closed sessions  of the regularly transparent House of Represenatives  are extremely rare and have only occurred  5 times since 1825. (Crabtee)<br />
   <br />
   The reason for  the session, is that FISA would not grant immunity retroactively to telecommunications firms that  complied with the warrantless wiretapping program.  The equivalent  Senate bill does grant that immunity to the telecommunications companies.  The new bill as proposed in the House would certainly be vetoed by President Bush. (Crabtree)</p>

<p>   President Bush also cited a very cumbersome process of obtaining permission to obtain telecom participation in intelligence gathering, which Bush believes would leave substantial gaps and unacceptable time lapses in intelligence gathering. (Bush)<br />
Sources:<br />
Bush, G. W. (2008, March 13). President Bush Discusses FISA. Washington D.C.<br />
Crabtee, S. (2008, March 13). Hoyer Agrees to Closed House Session. Retrieved 17 2007, March, from The Hill: http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/house-gop-seeks-closed-session-on-fisa-2008-03-13.html<br />
</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/03/house_meets_in_closed_fisa_ses.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/03/house_meets_in_closed_fisa_ses.html</guid>
         <category></category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 18 Mar 2008 01:58:33 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Organizational Leadership: Group Accomplishment through Outstanding Culture</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>This paper discusses three writings that examine the impact of a healthy group culture.  It discusses what organizational culture is and defines the problem that we face and the challenges that we deal with when presented with group dynamics.  The second essay deals with the leaders and how they create an “outstanding” culture.  The final piece deals with knowledge management and how it can be applied to the culture of groups.   Finally, all of these readings are pulled together and coupled with personal experience to determine the relevance of these theories to each other.<br />
</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/03/organizational_leadership_grou.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/03/organizational_leadership_grou.html</guid>
         <category></category>
         <pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 15:35:27 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Format War Ends, Blu-Ray Prevails over HDDVD</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>    Blu-ray has officially won out over HD DVD in the next– generation format wars as Wal-Mart, the largest retailer of DVDs in the country has made the decision to discontinue carrying the format once current stock is depleted.  (Richel, 2008)<br />
     Over the past two years a battle has been fought (as it usually is) for the next generation format for high definition video.  Toshiba has produced the HD DVD and Sony developed the Blu-ray format.  Both  had the backing of several studios and they have competed for retail shelf space. (Richel, 2008)<br />
    The announcement from Wal-mart came on Friday,following trends to discontinue carrying new stock of the HD DVD format.  Last year Target made the same decision to stop carrying HD DVD in its stores in favor of Blu-ray, opting to deplete it remaining stock  through online sales.  Best Buy and Netflix are among the others that made the same decision in the past week, assisting to seal HD DVD’s fate (Richel, 2008). <br />
     Experts say that based on the amount of influence that Wal-Mart carries, this signals that for Toshiba to continue to market this product would be a futile effort.  <br />
     The film industry and retailers have worked to quickly resolve the competition of these two formats as quickly as possible.  Stocking both formats is non productive for retailers and consumers are tentative to purchase players or disks of either format until industry-wide support is behind one format or the other (Richel, 2008).<br />
     On Saturday, a source from Toshiba stated that they have conceded defeat and will not continue to put funds into supporting it’s HD DVD format.(Reuters, 2008)</p>

<p>Sources:<br />
Reuters. (2008, February 16). Toshiba to Give Up on HD DVD, End Format War. New York Times. P. 9</p>

<p>Richel, M. (2008, February 16). Taps for HD DVD as Wal-Mart Backs Blu-ray. New York </p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/02/format_war_ends_bluray_prevail.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/02/format_war_ends_bluray_prevail.html</guid>
         <category></category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2008 09:55:07 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Yahoo Struggles to Avoid Microsoft</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>       Yahoo continues to fight the takeover offer of Microsoft from last week, and is getting creative with its options to accomplish this.  Few other companies have the capital to buy Yahoo outright, but several have lined up to get the chance to potentially get a piece of the internet company, helping them fend off Microsoft.  Among those offering various forms of deals are AOL(owned by Time Warner) and  News Corp(FOX).  (Kleinman, 2008)<br />
     AOL has offered few details in how they a deal would be structured, but anti-trust issues have cropped up as Google owns a small stake in AOL and has a number of advertising agreements in place with them.  In the case of News Corp, Rupert Murdoch is offering an 10 Billion dollar asset swap that would give Murdoch a large stake in Yahoo, and provide Yahoo with a piece of News Corp’s MySpace.com site.  (Kleinman, 2008)<br />
In any case, Yahoo seems determined to retain its independence from Microsoft and the battle is likely to get increasingly ugly as time passes. (Hansel, 2008)</p>

<p>Sources:<br />
Kleinman, Mark. AOL Clicks with Yahoo to Sideline Microsoft.  The Telegraph.  February 17, 2007.  Retreived February 17 from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2008/02/17/cnaol117.xml. </p>

<p>Hansel, Saul.  A Guide to Yahoo’s Unlikely Alternatives to Microsoft. NewYork Times  February 13, 2008.  pD2.<br />
</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/02/yahoo_struggles_to_avoid_micro.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/02/yahoo_struggles_to_avoid_micro.html</guid>
         <category></category>
         <pubDate>Mon, 18 Feb 2008 09:56:40 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title> Salesperson Vs. Consultant:  The High Road to Credibility</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>I have recently given thought about what it is that I can give to those of you leaving in the summer, and I thought that I would try to pass it on some knowledge.  I hope that this information is useful to all of you.  If any of you want to discuss these writings, please speak to me about it or post comments, this is what I have learned and I want you to understand it. This is about the difference between the salesperson and the consultant.  It will be the first of many; I hope you find it useful.  </p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/02/_salesperson_vs_consultant_the.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/02/_salesperson_vs_consultant_the.html</guid>
         <category></category>
         <pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2008 21:32:50 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Contextual Leadership: Vision for the Information Renaissance</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>This entry discusses three essays that provide varying views of leadership.  It discusses Gillette’s concepts of Information Renaissance and the challenges that we face as our society rapidly evolves.  The second reading deals with the contextual ramifications of the many factors that may affect a person in the role of leader.  The final article describes the important role that vision plays in the personality of the “great leader”   Finally all of these readings are pulled together to determine the relevance of these theories to each other.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/02/contextual_leadership_vision_f.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.cicsworld.org/blogs/solunsford/2008/02/contextual_leadership_vision_f.html</guid>
         <category></category>
         <pubDate>Sat, 09 Feb 2008 11:17:22 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
      
   </channel>
</rss>
