Jaymar Acas Theories

John James (2003)

The Captain is the ship's brain. The crew is its blood and flesh. Treat your body
well, and it will treat you well in return. When the brain issues a command, the
body follows. The crew should obey the captain - and any superiors - at all
times. The captain issues the order, the crew carries them out. If they perform
well, the captain will look after them with greater care - a good, trustworthy
crew will be hard to find in this rough-and-tumble world. Each crewman should
know their place, their roles, and to never step outside of their role's authority.
Attempting to micromanage each other leads to chaos (the same goes for the
Captain - if he tries to micromanage that can lead to trouble as well). In times
of great duress, the crew should be able to rally to the aid of the Captain, and
vice versa.

In regards to communications, as a Deaf player, I often wonder if I will be able

to communicate to my crew effectively as a captain. Then I thought: "If I can
issue very simple orders, and the crew handles the rest, then my hearing loss
is not a big deal." This requires practice, practice, practice. The more time the
crew spends with me aboard my ship, the more they'll begin to understand my
intentions according to the situation and the orders given; this will allow them
to prepare better for what is needed.

If you ask me, one of the best examples in TV to examine is both Battlestar
Galactica (super srs) and Bodacious Space Pirates (more relaxed high-school
space pirate anime). Both shows will give you direct examples of how ships
are run, how a captain should consider the ship and crew, and vice versa.
They may be fictional, but the lessons they show are lifted directly from
real-life.

Eng Choon Leong,Email authorYiik Diew Wong,Cameron Williams

For a long time, a maritime education meant the education of a mariner where
technical knowledge of seafaring was taught. However, shipping has evolved
into a global and sophisticated business where two kinds of managers are
required: one that deals with the operation of the vessel and the other that
deals with the shore-side business. The education landscape for shipping has
also evolved with time. A mariners education has evolved from
apprenticeship on a ship to a professional certificate from maritime academies.
The shore-side business is traditionally staffed by master mariners that made
the career transition from sea to shore but the current staffing trend is to
employ graduates schooled in business and/or management. It has been long
recognised that shore-side business personnel should ideally be also
knowledgeable in vessel operations. Under this scenario, several maritime
degree programmes have cropped up around the world to bridge the
knowledge gap of shore-side business personnel. This paper provides an
overview of the evolution of maritime education and selected maritime degree
programmes around the world and proposes a conceptual framework for
comparing the programmes. The conceptual framework serves as a guide for
evaluating maritime education and an aid to curriculum design where choices
of courses need to be made to fit into a 3-year or 4-year study programme.

Robert E. Hoskisson, Michael A. Hitt, William P. Wan,

The development of the field of strategic management within the last two
decades has been dramatic. While its roots have been in a more applied area,
often referred to as business policy, the current field of strategic management
is strongly theory based, with substantial empirical research, and is eclectic in
nature. This review of the development of the field and its current position
examines the fields early development and the primary theoretical and
methodological bases through its history. Early developments include
Chandlers (1962) Strategy and Structure and Ansoffs (1965) Corporate
Strategy. These early works took on a contingency perspective (fit between
strategy and structure) and a resource-based framework emphasizing internal
strengths and weaknesses. Perhaps, one of the more significant contributions
to the development of strategic management came from industrial organization
(IO) economics, specifically the work of Michael Porter. The
structure-conduct-performance framework and the notion of strategic groups,
as well as providing a foundation for research on competitive dynamics, are
flourishing currently. The IO paradigm also brought econometric tools to the
research on strategic management. Building on the IO economics framework,
the organizational economics perspective contributed transaction costs
economics and agency theory to strategic management. More recent
theoretical contributions focus on the resource-based view of the firm. While it
has its roots in Edith Penroses work in the late 1950s, the resource-based
view was largely introduced to the field of strategic management in the 1980s
and became a dominant framework in the 1990s. Based on the
resource-based view or developing concurrently were research on strategic
leadership, strategic decision theory (process research) and knowledge-based
view of the firm. The research methodologies are becoming increasingly
sophisticated and now frequently combine both quantitative and qualitative
approaches and unique and new statistical tools. Finally, this review examines
the future directions, both in terms of theory and methodologies, as the study
of strategic management evolves