List price: $12.95 (that's 20% off!)
Used price: $8.95
Collectible price: $15.88
Buy one from zShops for: $6.95
Used price: $43.37
Buy one from zShops for: $43.25
The chapters as they delineate conditions and DSMIV categories were well chosen. Academic disorders received appropriate emphasis within the total clinical perspective.
So what's missing? The advances of neuropsychiatry for one. The Ungame and the other published materials are offered in the back for purposes of purchase and review.
The methodologies are limited to play therapy and techniques like the "ungame." The precision, as in, what and how such activities will yield is just too vague and rather dated.
A nonverbal learning disability, for example, will need a qualitatively different play activity than a child with disorder of written expression, or autistic spectrum. No more one size fits all.
The book suffers from a fixation on the psychodynamic approach which we know from research has not effectively met the needs for many disturbed kids. All patients, but more so for children, need successes to undergo change. Brain science has given us more precise tools to assess where those weaknesses lay and therefore a map to gain greater insight into the nature of the condition. Interfamilial discord, then, may be a result of poor communication or an inability to model behaviors- to treat all such dynamics similarly is generally a waste of time. Children have not got the resources to be in such confusing and often haphazard services.
The basic product then can be used for limited support and I see that as a solution in writing treatment plans. I think a good updating would do the trick.
Una excelente fuente para diseñar planes de tratamiento!
As the work of a member of what Hegel called the âpolitical classâ, born and raised to serve in the state machine, altruistically looking after the affairs of the rest of society, this book appears to express the writerâs discovery of a world outside the bureaucracy.
âSocial democracy needs to give closer consideration to the relations between citizens rather than simply working from an assumption that all social issues can be resolved in the state-to-citizen relationship.â [p. xl-xli] âOther strands of political thought [as well as social democracy] have taken a strong interest in the social relations between citizensâ. [p. 263]
As such, it should be welcomed. Latham has read widely and has plenty of ideas for the political class to reflect upon and we should wish him well. But there are some profound misunderstandings in his work which need to be addressed.
Latham believes that the creation of the Welfare State in the wake of the Wall Street Crash, the Great Depression, Fascism and World War Two was based on a series of âoldâ assumptions about stability, security and conformity. [see p. 199] In passing, it should be noted that Lathamâs principal method of argument is to append adjectives like âoldâ, âcrudeâ, âbinaryâ, âsimpleâ, ârawâ, âtraditionalâ, âmechanisticâ, âdogmaticâ, âlinearâ, ârigidâ, ânarrowâ or âconventionalâ to the view he opposes and ânewâ, âcomplexâ, âprofoundâ, âradicalâ, âfreshâ to the view he advocates. But it remains to be seen whether he is able to distinguish in the new and in the old what should be supported and what should be opposed.
His principal thesis is that the Welfare State was a product of a culture in which Fordist methods of production predominated in the economy, and the Welfare State and the associated methods of macroeconomic economic management, essentially emulated the methods of Fordist hierarchically organised, one-size-fits-all mass production.
Observing the decline of Fordist methods of production in the economy, it is hardly surprising that Fordist methods of government administration are called into question.
âSome commentators have suggested ... that the organisation of government will increasingly reflect these methods of post-Fordist production and service deliveryâ. [p. 211]
The economy of mass production and its workforce have been replaced by the globalised, information-age economy and its very different workforce. Latham is fully cognisant to the malaise affecting the modern world, its shallowness and individualism, the anomie, widespread insecurity, loss of community, the spread of âdownwards envyâ, the widening of the gap between rich and poor, the growth of an under-class, etc., etc.
Also to be observed everywhere is the decline in what Latham calls âverticalâ âpatron/clientâ relations, alongside the growth of symmetrical, âhorizontalâ relations. Under these modern conditions, Fordist organisations, such as the Welfare State, are altogether dysfunctional.
âorganisations tending towards the vertical have declined most notably in their participation and relevance in recent decades. ... Conversely, some organisations displaying horizontal social capital and the virtues of mutual trust seem to have moved against the tide of social capital depletion.â [p. 278]
Let us agree with Latham the welfarism and Keynesianism were indeed part and parcel of the period of Fordist production and that with the decline of mass production manufacture, these methods of governance must also decline. No rational person could wish to restore them.
But when trying to account for the malaise of modern society, is it rational to ascribe the rampant and burgeoning social problems of our times to the inadequacy of the system of government and welfare distribution? Can a member of the political class be so deceived as to their own importance to believe that the vast social changes witnessed over the past several decades are the result of a failure of government to move with the times?
To put it another way, if modernism has had the effect of replacing âverticalâ (hierarchical patron/client) relationships with mutual, âhorizontalâ relations, why is there a crisis at all? What reason do we have to believe that if the public sector emulates the private sector, the problem will not get far worse, rather than better?
To make sense of this confusion we have to look a little critically at what we could call, to borrow some of Lathamâs own adjectives, the old, rigid, binary categorisation of relationships as âverticalâ or âhorizontalâ.
What has been the transformation of person-to-person relations wrought by modernism which has transformed work and society? It has been the replacement of all forms of hierarchical relations (bureaucratic, managerial or traditional) by the commodity relation.
Now the commodity relation, the relation of buyer and seller, of customer to service provider, is a mutual, symmetrical relation based on fair exchange. It is a relation in which each party enters as a free agent with equal rights. This relation is nevertheless the very relation upon which the modern form of exploitation is based, for if two parties enter a fair exchange under conditions where there is a gross imbalance in social power, the outcome though fair is also exploitative. Furthermore, it is a relation in which, rather than collaborating, each manipulates the other for their own ends; it is a relation which isolates people and reduces them to appendages of an object.
This is a horizontal relation to be sure. But not of the same kind as that which, for example, binds together the participants in a neighbourhood project, a football team, a cooperative, a volunteer firefighting group, and so on. I call these relations âcollaborationâ. There is a third party in all these relationships, which I could call âweâ. In the exchange of commodities there is no third, there is no âweâ, only them and us.
So when Latham proposes to abolish the âoldâ patron/client relation in favour of the modern, mutual relation of customer/service provider, he sounds the death knell on the last surviving points of support against capital, and must thereby place enormous pressure on those relations of collaboration which are struggling to develop in opposition to both bureaucratic patronage and commercial anomie.
Used price: $13.90
Buy one from zShops for: $24.95
Throughout this study, David A. Nadler and Michael L. Tushman present a comprehensive, balanced approach to design that recognizes the technical requirements, human dynamics, and strategic demands of successful design in any organization or business unit.
Nadler and Tushman summarize the ten basic themes that capture the essence of this book :
1. Organizational capabilities represent the last truly sustainable source of competitive advantage.
2. Organizational architecture provides a conceptual framework for employing strategic design to develop organizational capabilities.
3. At every level of the organization, design constitutes one of the most powerful tools for shaping performance.
4. Regardless of its scope or scale, there are certain fundamental concepts that apply to design at every level.
5. There is a logical sequence of actions and decisions that applies to the design process at any level of the organization.
6. There are no perfect design; the design process requires the weighing of choices and the balancing of trade-offs.
7.The best designs draw upon the knowledge, experience, and expertise of people throughout the organization.
8. Even the best designs can be derailed by ill-planned, poorly executed implementation.
9. As continual redesign becomes a fact of life, successful organizations will learn to create flexible architectures that can accommodate constant change.
10. Flexible architectures and designs that leverage competitive strengths will themselves become the ultimate competitive weapons.
I highly recommend.
Used price: $3.00
Collectible price: $10.00
Buy one from zShops for: $6.94
Not in depth by any means, it is just what it purports to be a basic tome on basic Biblical literacy.
Used price: $23.90
Buy one from zShops for: $25.89
List price: $14.95 (that's 30% off!)
Used price: $6.49
Collectible price: $9.99
Buy one from zShops for: $9.73
List price: $17.99 (that's 30% off!)
Used price: $9.99
Buy one from zShops for: $11.90
Used price: $0.77
Collectible price: $3.64
Buy one from zShops for: $19.90
Used price: $0.42
Buy one from zShops for: $2.81
brian georgia partner in bettorsworld.com
While I wouldn't recommend this book if you are simply looking for romantic tips and ideas (The Romantic's Guide is a better choice) I would highly recommend it if you simply like the warm and fuzzy stories that the Chicken Soup books have continued to supply.