Stanford Academic Calendar Essay Example

Stanford Academic Calendar Paper AUTUMN QUARTER 2017-18 August 1 (Tue) Axess opens for course enrollment. Stanford Bulletin publishes academic year 2017-18 degree requirements August 28 (Mon) M.D. first-year students, first day of instruction. August 31 (Thu) M.D. second-year students, first day of instruction. September 5 (Tue) Law School instruction begins for 1st-year J.D. students. See the full Law School academic calendar (pdf). We will write a custom essay sample on Stanford Academic Calendar specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on Stanford Academic Calendar specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on Stanford Academic Calendar specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer September 15 (Fri) Autumn Quarter Cardinal Care Waiver Deadline; see the Cardinal Care web site. September 15 (Fri) M.B.A. 1st-year instructions begins. September 15 (Fri, 5:00 p.m.) At-status enrollment deadline in order to receive stipend or financial aid refund within the first week of term. September 19 (Tue) New undergraduates arrive. Convocation. Undergraduate housing opens for new students; see Residential Dining Enterprises Calendar. September 21 (Thu) Undergraduate housing opens for returning students; see Residential Dining Enterprises Calendar. September 25 (Mon) First day of quarter; instruction begins. September 25 (Mon, 5:00 p.m.) Preliminary Study List deadline. Students must be at status; i.e., students must have a study list with sufficient units to meet requirements for their status, whether full-time, 8-9-10 units (graduate students only), or approved Undergraduate Special Registration Status or Graduate Special Registration Status. The late study list fee is $200. September 25 (Mon, 5:00 p.m.) Deadline to submit Leave of Absence for full refund (see undergraduate leaves of absence and graduate leaves of absence). See Tuition and Refund Schedule for a full refund schedule. September 25 (Mon) Law School instruction begins for 2nd/3rd-year J.D. and advanced degree students. See the full Law School academic calendar (pdf). September 28 (Thu) Conferral of degrees, Summer Quarter 2016-17. September 29 (Fri) GSB course add/drop deadline. October 13 (Fri, 5:00 p.m.) Final Study List deadline, except GSB. Last day to add or drop a class; last day to adjust units on a variable-unit course. Last day for tuition reassessment for dropped courses or units. Students may withdraw from a course until the Course Withdrawal deadline and a W notation will appear on the transcript. November 6 (Mon, 5:00 p.m.) Term withdrawal deadline; last day to submit Leave of Absence to withdraw from the University with a partial refund. November 17 (Fri, 5:00 p.m.) Change of grading basis deadline, except GSB. November 17 (Fri, 5:00 p.m.) Course withdrawal deadline, except GSB, Law, and M.D. November 17 (Fri, 5:00 p.m.) Application deadline for Autumn Quarter degree conferral. November 20-24 (Mon-Fri) Thanksgiving Recess (no classes). December 1 (Fri) Last day of Law classes. See the full Law School academic calendar (pdf). December 2-7 (Sat-Thu) Law School Reading Period. See the full Law School academic calendar (pdf). December 4-10 (Mon-Sun) End-Quarter Period. December 8 (Fri) Last day of classes (unless class meets on Sat.), except Law. December 8 (Fri) Last opportunity to arrange Incomplete in a course, at last class. December 8 (Fri, noon) University thesis, D.M.A. final project, or Ph.D. dissertation, last day to submit. December 8 (Fri, 5:00 p.m.) Late application deadline for Autumn Quarter degree conferral ($50 fee). December 8-15 (Fri-Fri) Law School examinations. See the full Law School academic calendar (pdf). December 11-15 (Mon-Fri) End-Quarter examinations. December 15 (Fri) Winter Quarter Cardinal Care Waiver Deadline; see the Cardinal Care web site. December 16 (Sat, noon) Undergraduate housing closes for Winter Break; see Residential Dining Enterprises Calendar. December 19 (Tue, 11:59 p.m.) Grades due. January 11 (Thu) Conferral of degrees, Autumn Quarter. WINTER QUARTER 2017-18 October 29 (Sun) Axess opens for course enrollment. December 29 (Fri) At-status enrollment deadline in order to receive stipend or financial aid refund within the first week of term. January 6 (Sat, 8:00 a.m.) Undergraduate housing opens for Winter Quarter; see Residential Dining Enterprises Calendar. January 8 (Mon) First day of quarter; instruction begins for all students. January 8 (Mon, 5:00 p.m.) Preliminary Study List deadline.Students must be at status; i.e., students must have a study list with sufficient units to meet requirements for their status, whether full-time, 8-9-10 units (graduate students only), or approved Undergraduate Special Registration Status or Graduate Special Registration Status. The late study list fee is $200. January 8 (Mon, 5:00 p.m.) Deadline to submit Leave of Absence for full refund (see undergraduate leaves of absence and graduate leaves of absence). See Tuition and Refund Schedule for a full refund schedule. January 12 (Fri) GSB course add/drop deadline. January 15 (Mon) Martin Luther King, Jr., Day (holiday, no classes). January 26 (Fri, 5:00 p.m.)Â  Final Study List deadline, except GSB. Final day to add or drop a class; last day to adjust units on a variable-unit course. Last day for tuition reassessment for dropped courses or units. Students may withdraw from a course until the Course Withdrawal deadline and a W notation will appear on the transcript. February 19 (Mon) Presidents Day (holiday, no classes; Law does hold classes). February 21 (Wed, 5:00 p.m.) Term withdrawal deadline; last day to submit Leave of Absence to withdraw from the University with a partial refund. March 2 (Fri, 5:00 p.m.) Change of grading basis deadline, except GSB. March 2 (Fri, 5:00 p.m.) Course withdrawal deadline, except GSB, Law, and M.D. March 2 (Fri, 5:00 p.m.) Application deadline for Winter Quarter degree conferral. March 12 (Mon) Last day of Law classes. See the full Law School academic calendar (pdf). March 12-18 (Mon-Sun) End-Quarter Period. March 13-15 (Tue-Thu) Law School Reading Period. See the full Law School academic calendar (pdf). March 16 (Fri) Last day of classes (unless class meets on Sat.) March 16 (Fri) Last opportunity to arrange Incomplete in a course, at last class. March 16 (Fri, noon) University thesis, D.M.A. final project, Ph.D. dissertation, last day to submit. March 16 (Fri, 5:00 p.m.) Late application deadline for Winter Quarter degree conferral ($50 fee). March 16-23 (Fri-Fri) Law School examinations. See the full Law School academic calendar (pdf). March 19-23 (Mon-Fri) End-Quarter examinations. March 24 (Sat) Undergraduate housing move-out (if departing at end of Winter Quarter); see Residential Dining Enterprises Calendar. March 27 (Tue, 11:59 p.m.) Grades due. April 5 (Thu) Conferral of degrees, Winter Quarter. SPRING QUARTER 2017-18 February 11 (Sun) Axess opens for course enrollment. March 23 (Fri) At-status enrollment deadline in order to receive stipend or financial aid refund within the first week of term. March 31 (Sat) Undergraduate housing move-in date for Spring Quarter; see Residential Dining Enterprises Calendar. April 2 (Mon) First day of quarter; instruction begins for all students. April 2 (Mon, 5:00 p.m.) Preliminary Study List deadline.Students must be at status; i.e., students must have a study list with sufficient units to meet requirements for their status, whether full-time, 8-9-10 units (graduate students only), or approved Undergraduate Special Registration Status or Graduate Special Registration Status. The late study list fee is $200. April 2 (Mon, 5:00 p.m.) Deadline to submit Leave of Absence for full refund (see undergraduate leaves of absence and graduate leaves of absence). See See Tuition and Refund Schedule for a full refund schedule. April 5 (Thurs) GSB classes begin. April 10 (Tues) GSB course add/drop deadline. April 13 (Fri, 5:00 p.m.) Application deadline for Spring Quarter degree conferral. April 15 (Sun) Spring Quarter Cardinal Care Waiver Deadline; see the Cardinal Care web site. April 20 (Fri, 5:00 p.m.) Final Study List deadline, except GSB. Last day to add or drop a class; last day to adjust units on a variable-unit course. Last day for tuition reassessment for dropped courses or units. Students may withdraw from a course until the Course Withdrawal deadline and a W notation will appear on the transcript. May 14 (Mon, 5:00 p.m.) Term withdrawal deadline; last day to submit Leave of Absence to withdraw from the University with a partial refund. May 25 (Fri, 5:00 p.m.) Change of grading basis deadline, except GSB. May 25 (Fri, 5:00 p.m.) Course withdrawal deadline, except GSB, Law, and M.D. May 28 (Mon) Memorial Day (holiday, no classes). June 1-7 (Fri-Thu) End-Quarter Period. June 1 (Fri) Last day of Law classes. See the full Law School academic calendar (pdf). June 2-3 (Sat-Sun). Law School reading Period. See the full Law School academic calendar (pdf). June 4-8 (Mon-Fri) Law School examinations. See the full Law School academic calendar (pdf). June 6 (Wed) Last day of classes. June 6 (Wed) Last opportunity to arrange Incomplete in a course, at last class. June 6 (Wed, noon) University thesis, D.M.A. final project, or Ph.D. dissertation, last day to submit. June 6 (Wed, 5:00 p.m.) Late application deadline for Spring Quarter degree conferral ($50 fee). June 7 (Thu) Day before finals, no classes. June 8-13 (Fri-Wed) End-Quarter examinations. June 13 (Wed, noon) Grades for GSB graduating students due. June 14 (Thu, noon) Grades for graduating students due. June 15 (Fri) Undergraduate housing move-out date (for all students not involved in Commencement); see Residential Dining Enterprises Calendar. June 16 (Sat) Senior Class Day. June 16 (Sat) Baccalaureate Saturday. June 16 (Sat) Law School Diploma Ceremony. See the full Law School academic calendar (pdf). June 16 (Sat) GSB Diploma Ceremony. June 16 (Sat) Medical School Commencement Ceremony. June 17 (Sun) Commencement. Conferral of degrees, Spring Quarter. June 18 (Mon) Undergraduate Housing move-out date (for graduates and others involved in Commencement with permission); see Residential Dining Enterprises Calendar. June 19 (Tue, 11:59 p.m.) Grades for non-graduating students due. SUMMER QUARTER 2017-18 April 8 (Sun) Axess opens for course enrollment. June 15 (Fri) Summer Quarter Cardinal Care Waiver Deadline; see the Cardinal Care web site June 15 (Fri) At-status enrollment deadline in order to receive stipend or financial aid refund within the first week of term. June 25 (Mon) First day of quarter; instruction begins. June 25 (Mon, 5:00 p.m.) Preliminary Study List deadline. June 25 (Mon) Deadline to submit Leave of Absence for full refund (see undergraduate leaves of absence and graduate leaves of absence). See Tuition and Refund Schedule for a full refund schedule. July 4 (Wed) Independence Day (holiday, no classes). July 6 (Fri, 5:00 p.m.) Final Study List deadline.Final day to add or drop a class; last day to adjust units on a variable-unit course. Last day for tuition reassessment for dropped courses or units. Students may withdraw from a course until the Course Withdrawal deadline and a W notation will appear on the transcript. July 27 (Fri, 5:00 p.m.) Term withdrawal deadline; last day to submit Leave of Absence to withdraw from the University with a partial refund. August 3 (Fri, 5:00 p.m.) Change of grading basis deadline. August 3 (Fri, 5:00 p.m.) Course withdrawal deadline. August 3 (Fri, 5:00 p.m.) Application deadline for Summer Quarter degree conferral. August 11-16 (Sat-Thu) End-Quarter Period. August 16 (Thu) Last day of classes. August 16 (Thu) Last opportunity to arrange Incomplete in a course, at last class. August 17-18 (Fri-Sat) End-Quarter examinations. August 21 (Tue, 11:59 p.m.) Grades due. August 31 (Fri, noon) University thesis, D.M.A. final project, or Ph.D. dissertation, last day to submit. August 31Â   (Fri, 5:00 p.m.) Late application deadline for Summer Quarter degree conferral ($50 fee). September 27 (Thu)Â  Conferral of degrees, Summer Quarter.

Free Essays on The Hapsburg Dilema

The European Political arena in 1500s to 1650 was full of religious, political and domination wars. At the beginning of the 1500’s Spain was one of the most powerful, influential nations in Europe. The Spanish had colonies in South America ( Mexico) and they supplied the Hapsburg Empire with gold and silver. The Hapsburg Empire was situated in Spain, Austria, parts of Netherlands and held a lot of influence in MittleEuropa . The Hapsburg’s had the largest, most technologically advanced , well equipped standing army in all of Europe. The Spanish were economically powerful and most importantly they were hard-core Catholics. At the beginning of the 1500’s France was a Protestant nation, which had a mediocre army and medium economy. The French Protestants were called Huguenots. France was military and economically weaker than Catholic Spain. The French resented being under Spanish influence and this resentment led to a series of wars and confrontations between the two countries. The English were largely an isolated community who were busy consolidating their power while the French and Spanish fought for control of northern Italy. The English were Anglican and would be sympathetic towards their fellow Protestants in Europe when the drums of war would begin to beat. MittleEuropa was a piece of land where the north was Protestant and the south was Catholic. This land was at a constant state of ‘civil war’ and it would be this place, which would draw the central European powers into a serious of bloody wars. The Catholic Church in that time had a lot of influence in Catholic nations. The Pope was the head of the Church and he was suppose to be ‘ advisor’ to the Holy Roman Emperor. The Pope was very well skilled at ‘flaming the fires of Catholic intolerance’ towards The Holy Roman Emperor who in turn would lead religious and political wars against Protestants. The Netherlands were under the rule of t... Free Essays on The Hapsburg Dilema Free Essays on The Hapsburg Dilema The European Political arena in 1500s to 1650 was full of religious, political and domination wars. At the beginning of the 1500’s Spain was one of the most powerful, influential nations in Europe. The Spanish had colonies in South America ( Mexico) and they supplied the Hapsburg Empire with gold and silver. The Hapsburg Empire was situated in Spain, Austria, parts of Netherlands and held a lot of influence in MittleEuropa . The Hapsburg’s had the largest, most technologically advanced , well equipped standing army in all of Europe. The Spanish were economically powerful and most importantly they were hard-core Catholics. At the beginning of the 1500’s France was a Protestant nation, which had a mediocre army and medium economy. The French Protestants were called Huguenots. France was military and economically weaker than Catholic Spain. The French resented being under Spanish influence and this resentment led to a series of wars and confrontations between the two countries. The English were largely an isolated community who were busy consolidating their power while the French and Spanish fought for control of northern Italy. The English were Anglican and would be sympathetic towards their fellow Protestants in Europe when the drums of war would begin to beat. MittleEuropa was a piece of land where the north was Protestant and the south was Catholic. This land was at a constant state of ‘civil war’ and it would be this place, which would draw the central European powers into a serious of bloody wars. The Catholic Church in that time had a lot of influence in Catholic nations. The Pope was the head of the Church and he was suppose to be ‘ advisor’ to the Holy Roman Emperor. The Pope was very well skilled at ‘flaming the fires of Catholic intolerance’ towards The Holy Roman Emperor who in turn would lead religious and political wars against Protestants. The Netherlands were under the rule of t...

Selection Strategy for Merino Textiles Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Selection Strategy for Merino Textiles - Essay Example This essay stresses that an effective HR Department will provide the company effective people to man the sensitive jobs of selecting qualified personnel for the various jobs of machine operators and an effective workforce for the different machineries in the production of textile and fabric products of the company. The role of the human resource department is significant to the attainment of the organisation’s goals and objectives. The manager has to maintain a good and effective rapport with his employees. The employees too have to establish an effective communication with the customers. Meeting the needs and wants of customers is the job of both the manager and employees. This paper makes a conclusion that the human resource department has to focus on identifying and selecting persons capable of implementing the organisation’s plans. HRD should maintain employee performance and see to it that that they are highly motivated. Without motivation employees cannot function well. Other HRM functions include job analysis, appraisal, and performance standards. Human resource management also determines the number and type of employees needed in the team and where the labor supply should come from. Recruitment, training and development, and assignment of people should all be in accordance with the organisation’s objectives. The organisation’s objectives are crucial to the staffing process.

Paris in 1792 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Paris in 1792 - Essay Example The events of this year thus, also heralded a new form of governance, complete democracy as the major form of governance. Even though democracy was followed in varying degrees in many parts of Europe, it was the French Revolution that gave the impetus for its establishment as the sole form of government acceptable to the people of a nation. As is the case with any historic event, the actual event is preceded by a build up consisting of mounting tensions, resentment and dissatisfaction on the part of certain communities. The involvement of the French government in the American Revolution and the huge expenditure that this interference had cost had created widespread dissatisfaction among the middle classes of France, who felt that this expenditure was needless and could have been avoided, had the government been more astute in the evaluation of the situation. The refusal of the nobility to have helped out the government had meant that an unfair share of the taxes required for the expe nses were extorted out of the bourgeoisie. This bred a lot of resentment amongst them, not only against the monarch, Louis XVI, but also against the nobility of France. France’s unsuccessful attempts to defeat England in war had also placed a heavy burden upon the exchequer that fell largely upon the French bourgeoisie whose standards of living dipped drastically. The constitution of the National assembly, a body of people who were picked out of the middle classes was an important development during the year of 1792. This led to an understanding on the part of both the king and the bourgeoisie of the power of a collective. Michael David Sibalis remarks upon this understanding of the power of the collective as an outcome of the class-consciousness that had seeped into the minds of the middle classes of France, as is seen in the emergence of â€Å"mutual aid societies† in Paris before 1789. These societies enabled the mobilization of the masses during the constitution of middle class citizens during the creation of the National Assembly that was created for the purpose of the creation of a national constitution for France that would invest the bourgeoisie with more powers that it had till then. This constitution of the National Assembly represents, for Sibalis, an attempt on the part of the Parisian middle classes to â€Å"provide themselves with some minimal economic security through their own efforts† (http://fh.oxfordjournals.org/content/3/1/1.extract). Many of these efforts were frustrated by later events of the Revolution but the events of 1789 displayed a passion and fervor on the part of the Parisian middle classes to rise above their petty divisions and fight for the causes of equality that the French Revolution stands for, even today. The fight was also against what Barry M. Shapiro refers to as an â€Å"irrational and inhumane judicial system† (Barry M. Shapiro, Revolutionary Justice in Paris, 1789-1790, ix) that refused to treat every subject of the state equally. The embodiment of this passion and fervor and one of the turning points of the revolution, according to historians like Eric Hobsbawm, was the storming of the Bastille on the morning of the fourteenth of July in 1789 (Eric Hobsbawm, The Age of

UNIT 5 DISCUSSION BOARD Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

UNIT 5 DISCUSSION BOARD - Essay Example Here the cost center is a responsibility center whose employees control costs but do not control its revenues or investment level. On the other hand a revenue center is a responsibility center whose members control revenues but do not control the cost of the product or service they sell or the level of investment in the responsibility center. Thirdly there is a profit center which is a responsibility center whose manager and other employees control both the revenues and the costs of the product or service they sell or deliver. Lastly, we come up to the investment center that is a responsibility center whose manager and other employees control the revenues, costs, and the level of investment in the responsibility center. If we take into account the policies incorporated by Howard Works ltd the scene could be easily clarified. In Howard Works Ltd the four aspects of Responsibility Centers are dealt in the most efficient manner. Cost centers, Revenue centers, Profit centers and Investment centers are in able hand and they are evaluated in every possible way. In Howard Works Ltd Responsibility Centers are evaluated in regular interval by the dint of underlying the accounting classifications of responsibility centers is the concept of controllability. Moreover, the controllability principle asserts that people should only be held accountable for results that they can control. Though it should be remembered that, according to Rick Dobson, the CEO of Howard Works Ltd, â€Å"it is often difficult to apply the controllability principle†. (Hobbs, 84) Rick Dobson also pointed out some problems associated with controllability; according to him the problem stays with jointly earned revenues and/or jointl y incurred costs. He also pointed out the problem regarding intricate, and often arbitrary, accounting procedures. But with management principals applied in a more perfect manner and with more vigor it is expected that these problems would gradually

Effect of Different Leadership Styles on Organisation

Effect of Different Leadership Styles on Organisation Management summary In this thesis the relationship between the predominant leadership styles in the academic literature, transformational and transactional leadership, and organization citizenship behaviour will be discussed and analyzed. In the transformational leadership   style the leader motivates and inspires followers by gaining their trust and respect. The leader communicates the goals, visions and missions in a clear way and stimulates his followers to go beyond the call of duty. Transactional leadership is based on an exchange relationship between the leader and followers. Followers receive rewards when they perform according to the standards and requirements set by their leader. Organizational citizenship behaviour concerns those voluntary acts performed by   individual employees that are of a discretionary and voluntary nature and contribute to the effectiveness of the organization. However, when organizations exert citizenship pressures on their employees this might have some serious consequences on their workforce. These high levels of pressure to be a good citizen can result in job stress, work-family conflicts, work-leisure conflicts and might even result in quitting intensions among employees. This thesis will also focus on the desirability of OCBs within the organization and the dangers of citizenship pressures. Chapter 1.Introduction to the thesis 1.1 Problem Indication Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB) has been a popular subject among several fields of study for the past couple of decades. OCBs are positive, individual and voluntary acts performed by employees which go beyond their job descriptions and are not directly rewarded or monitored (Organ, 1988). According to Katz Kahn (1966) these kinds of behaviour are important to organizations because organizations depend on behaviour of their employees that go further than their job description even though these behaviours are not actively monitored and enforced. Because of the voluntary nature of the positive acts the theory of OCBs seems to be very positive for both the individuals within an organization and the effectiveness of the organization as whole. OCB has been linked with loyalty, obedience, voluntarism, helping behaviours, altruism and other positive traits in many previous studies throughout the years (Bolino, Turnley, Niehoff, 2004; Organ, Podsakoff, MacKenzie, 2006). But recent studies have also investigated the â€Å"darker side† of OCB. The problem lies with the discretionary and voluntary nature of OCB. There are situations in which employees feel like OCB is expected of them, this citizenship pressure can lead to job stress, work conflicts and even quitting intensions (Bolino,Turnley, Gilstrap, Suazo, 2010). The first part of this thesis will go further into the dynamics of OCB and will look at both the positive and negative side of OCB. The second part of this thesis will address the relation between leadership st yles and OCB. Leadership styles are of great influence on the OCBs of employees (Bass, 1985; Burns, 1978). In the studies of Bass (1985) and Burns (1978)   a distinction has been made between transformational and transactional leadership. These different styles of leadership have different implications on the degree of OCB among the employees (Bass, 1985; Burns, 1978). 1.2 Problem statement The problem statement of this thesis is formulated in one single question: How do the different styles of leadership influence organizational citizenship behaviour ? 1.3 Research Questions The research questions that are derived from the problem indication are: To what degree is OCB desired within an organization? What is the influence of transactional leadership on OCB? What is the influence of transformational leadership on OCB? 1.4 Methodology The type of research that will be conducted for this thesis is a descriptive research. The thesis will be a literature study which means secondary sources will be gathered and researched (Sekaran, 2008). An analysis of the different variables will be made in order to find the answers to the formulated research questions. The links between the different variables researched in this thesis can be the basis for further empirical research. The main concepts of the research are organizational citizenship behaviour and the transformational (or charismatic) (Yukl, 1999) and transactional leadership types. 1.5 Structure In this thesis the relationship between the two predominant leadership styles and OCB within an organization will be analyzed. The first chapter will get into the dynamics of OCB in order to determine whether or not and to what degree OCB is desirable. This means that both the positive and negative sides of OCB within an organization will be balanced in this chapter. At the end of chapter one the first research question of this thesis will be answered. Chapter two and three will link transformational and transactional leadership with OCB. In these chapters it will become clear how the different styles of leadership stimulate OCB and which leadership style results in the largest amount of OCBs. After these chapters the answer to the problem statement is given in the conclusion. Furthermore, limitations of this research and managerial and academic implications will be discussed. Chapter 2. Organizational Citizenship Behaviour 2.1 Introduction Organizational citizenship behaviour is a topic that has fascinated many researchers and managers for the last couple of decades since Bateman and Organ (1983) were the first to address this topic in 1983. Nowadays in times of economical crises OCB remains an interesting subject, because in a race of the survival of the fittest organizations rely on good citizens to survive. However, recent studies of the past couple of years have reported some negative implications of OCB and have questioned the desirability of OCB (Bolino, Gilstrap, Turnley Suazo, 2010; Korgaard, Meglino, Lester Jeong, 2010; Van Dyne Ellis, 2004). Vardi and Weitz (2003) have reported on the concept of organizational misbehaviour (OMB) as a counterpart to OCB in their studies. In this chapter both the positive and negative implications of OCB and citizenship pressures exerted by the organizations will be discussed.   In order to answer the question whether or not OCB is desirable within an organization the concept of organizational citizenship behaviour has to be explained.. OCB can be defined as â€Å"individual behaviour that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promotes the effective functioning of an organization†, according to the study of Organ (1988, p. 4). OCB is behaviour of a constructive nature by the employee, which is not a part of the formal job description (Organ, 1988). According to Moorman, Blakely and Niehoff (1988) employees will engage in OCBs when they feel that that behaviour is justified by the positive actions of the organization and are consistent with the treatment and commitment of the organization. Employees feel the need to repay the organization for the positive treatment and commitment they receive throughout the relationship (Moorman et al., 1988). Research of Kidder (1998) and Stamper and Van Dyne (2001) argues that employees that have a long-term relationship with a firm perform more OCBs than temporary or part-time workers. 2.2 The sunny side of OCB Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine and Bachrach (2000) distinguished thirty forms of citizenship behaviours from the literature on OCB and grouped them in seven dimensions; helping behaviour, sportsmanship, organizational compliance, organizational loyalty, self development, civic virtue and individual initiative. Helping behaviours are voluntary behaviours that help fellow colleagues prevent or solve work related problems. This kind of behaviour includes supporting and cheering for fellow employees and also peacemaking activities when there are times of conflict and struggles between employees (Organ, 1988). Organizational compliance is a form of OCB which regards the following and obeying of organizational procedures and rules by the employees (Borman Motowidlo, 1993). Organizational compliance argues that good citizens follow the rules and procedures of the organization instinctively and precisely, even when they know that they are not being supervised or monitored (Podsakoff et al., 2000).  Ã‚   Podsakoff et al. (2000) state that organizational compliance is a form of OCB even though it is expected from subordinates to act according the rules and regulations of the company, because in many cases employees do not act according these rules and regulations when they know that they are not being observed or monitored. Thus, according to Podsakoff et al. (2000) employees that follow up the rules and regulations very precisely even when they know that they are not being supervised can be viewed as very good organizational citizens. Sportmanship is a type of OCB which describes the process of coping with all the inevitable problems and inconveniences that are bound to happen at work without complaining (Organ, 1990). According to Podsakoff, et al., (2000) good sportsmanship occurs when employees refrain from complaining when other colleagues cause inconveniences for them. ‘Good sports are willing to make personal sacrifices in the interest of the group and do not showcase a negative attitude when things are not going their way. Furthermore, ‘good sports do not get offended when their suggestions and ideas are not followed up by the rest of the employees in their working environment. Individual initiative is regarded as OCB when a person goes that far beyond the expected level of task-related behaviours that these behaviours can be viewed as voluntary (Podsakoff et al., 2000).   When employees engage in individual initiative they showcase extra effort and enthusiasm in order to increase their task performance or the performance of the organization as a whole. They voluntarily come up with new ideas and innovations in order to increase organizational effectiveness and encourage fellow colleagues to act in the same way (Podsakoff, et al., 2000). Organizational loyalty refers to the strong commitment of employees to the organization throughout the good and the bad times (Graham, 1991), defending the organization against threats from the outside and promoting the organization to people outside the organization (Borman Motowidlo, 1997; George Jones 1997). According to the research of Podsakoff et al. (2000) civic virtue(Organ, 1988)means that employees recognize that they are part of a larger whole and they acknowledge and accept the responsibilities for the effective functioning of their organization. The employees actively look out for opportunities and threats in the environment of their organization. They participate actively in the decision making process of the organization and are constantly acting out of the interest of the company while putting their personal interests aside (Podsakoff et al., 2000).   Self development is citizenship behaviour that occurs when employees voluntarily undertake actions in order to learn and improve their skills, knowledge and capabilities (Podsakoff et al., 2000). The study of George and Brief (1992) states that self development might consist of employees participating in advanced training course, employees undertaking actions in order to keep up with the latest developments in their field; or employees might even learn an entirely new set of skills. Self development behaviour is good citizenship behaviour because employees try to improve and increase their personal contributions to the performance and effectiveness of the organization (George Brief, 1992). These seven dimensions of OCB all describe positive acts and contributions from the employees which benefit the organization. According to Organ Konovsky (1989) these combined contributions of individual employees increase organization effectiveness significantly over time. Because of the positive nature of these citizenship behaviours organizations try to stimulate OCBs among their employees. These citizenship pressures lead to higher levels of OCB within the organization, which is essentially favourable for the company (Bolino,Turnley, Gilstrap Suazo, 2010). However, the stimulation of citizenship behaviours can have a negative effect on the employees because the citizenship pressure to please the organization can result in job stress, quitting intensions and work-family and work-leisure conflicts (Bolino et al., 2010; Greenhaus Beutell, 1985; Reich, 2001; Sauter Murphy, 1995). 2.3 The dark side of OCB One could argue that OCB has a lot of positive implications for an organization based on the dimensions described by Podsakoff et al.(2000). Recent studies however have also shed light on the darker side of OCB (Bolino et al.,2010; Korsgaard Meglino, Lester, Jeong,2010; Van Dyne Ellis, 2004; Vigoda-Gadot, 2006). Organ (1988) implies that OCB is solely a positive phenomenon within an organization, because of the discretionary and voluntary nature of OCB. Furthermore, Organ (1988, p. 4) argues that â€Å"OCB promotes the effective functioning of an organization†. Vigoda-Gadot (2006, p. 79) concludes from the definition of OCB by Organ (1988) that it implies that â€Å"OCB consists of informal contributions that a participant can choose to make or withhold, without the regard to considerations of sanctions or formal incentives†. However, recent studies have countered the discretionary nature of OCB. Korsgaard et al. (2010, p. 277), argue that OCB is â€Å"based on the norm of reciprocity: the obligation to reciprocate the benefits already received from another (â€Å"paying you back†) and the expected reciprocity that ones actions will stimulate future benefits from another (â€Å"paying me forward†).† Vardi and Weitz (2003) have mentioned the concept of organizational misbehaviour (OMB) in their studies as a counterpart to OCB. Organizational misbehaviour is behaviour of a social nature   that harms the interest of the organization.   According to Vardi and Weitz (2003) there are five types of organizational misbehaviour; intra-personal misbehaviour, inter-personal misbehaviour, property misbehaviour, production misbehaviour and political misbehaviour.   OMB can be viewed as the real dark side of employee behaviours. 2.3.1 Citizenship pressure Citizenship pressure occurs when employees feel the pressure to engage in OCBs because their employer tries to stimulate that behaviour by informal compensation (Bolino,Turnley, Girlstrap Suazo, 2010).Citizenship pressure is a phenomenon that differs from individual to individual and it is of a subjective nature (Bolino, et al.,2010). Employees that are regarded as high-self monitors are more likely to give in to citizenship pressures and engage more in citizenship behaviours, because those employees value their image and the way they are perceived by their co-workers and supervisors (Blakely, Andrews, Fuller, 2003). The study of Bolino et al. (2010) has shown that citizenship pressure leads to higher levels of OCB of employees within an organization. Hence, the studies of Korsgaard, et al.(2010) and Bolino, et al.(2010) question both the discretionary and voluntary nature of OCB. Research has shown that managers do take OCBs into account when evaluating their employees and making other decisions (Podsakoff, et al.,2000) Van Dyne and Ellis (2004) state that with citizenship pressure, behaviour that was once voluntary and discretionary can become an obligation. Van Dyne and Ellis (2004) mention the phenomenon of job creep, this situation occurs when employees constantly feel the pressure to do more than their job actually requires of them. The duties of the employees are slowly increased without official recognition of the organization and in time are expected of the employees (Van Dyne Ellis, 2004). Although citizenship pressure may be a positive phenomenon from an organizations point of view because it leads to more OCB, it also is associated with negative consequences for the employees and their organization (Bolino, et al.,2010). The amounts of job stress experienced by the employees are likely to increase in the case of high levels of citizenship pressures (Bolinio, et al.,2010).   Job stress occurs when employees do not have the capabilities and resources that are needed to fulfil their job requirements. The incapability to fulfil these job demands will lead to negative consequences for the emotional and physical state of the employees who experience high levels of job stress (Sauter Murphy, 1995). According to Bolino, Turnley, Gilstrap, Suazo (2010) employees who experience citizenship pressures to behave as a good citizen of the organization may also feel the pressures at home to be a good partner and parent. This work-family conflict is a role conflict that occurs when the work role demands that are required from an employee are not compatible with the demands of the family (Greenhaus Beutell, 1985).   Work-family conflicts may arise when the partners of the employees have difficulties in understanding why their partner chooses to engage in OCBs that are technically not required of them and are not formally rewarded rather than to spend time with their family (Edwards Rothbard, 2000). Research of Flynn (1996) shows that in a situation of high citizenship pressures employees with less demanding family situations engage in more citizenship behaviours than married employees with more responsibilities towards their families. Another conflict related to citizenship pressure is the work-leisure conflict. This conflict arises when employees experience difficulties in balancing their work demands with their personal life and leisure time (Bolino, et al.,2010). The study of Reich (2001) states that employees who are physically away from their working environment, may still be mentally connected to their job. According to Bolino, et al.(2010) these employees experience a conflict between their desires for free time in their personal lives and the desire to be a good organizational citizen in order to receive the benefits that come with that kind of status. The employees who feel citizenship pressures may not enjoy their free time because they are worrying about the situation and problems at work. Furthermore, they may be troubled by the fact that their co-workers might surpass them in terms of productivity and value for the organization when they enjoy their personal time or they may be experiencing feelings o f guilt because they are not working (Reich, 2001). This may lead to an increasing tendency among employees to keep in contact with their work office, by means of mobile phones, pagers or email, in order to remain available for their colleagues and superiors (Reich, 2001). These types of conflict caused by citizenship pressure, like the work-leisure conflict and the work-family conflict and the phenomenon of job stress, contribute to the job quitting intensions among the employees (Bolino et al.,2010). The dark side of OCB can be accounted to the citizenship pressures exerted by the organization. When an organization pressures   employees to perform citizenship behaviours this can result in negative consequences for the state of mind of the employees (Bolino et al., 2010; Edwards Rothbard, 2000; Greenhaus Beutell, 1985; Reich, 2001). This in turn can lead to decreases in productivity and effectiveness for the organization, because employees in a bad state of mind are more likely to leave the organization or work inefficiently (Bolino et al., 2010). 2.4 Desirability of OCB within the organization OCB in its core essence is desirable for organizations because those citizenship behaviours are linked with helping behaviours, loyalty and commitment to the organization, the following of rules and regulations, creativity and innovation and going the extra mile (Podsakoff, et al.,2000) .   These citizenship behaviours are characterized as positive contributions to an organization and its productivity, effectiveness and social climate (Moorman et al., 1988; Organ, 1988; Podsakoff, et al.,2000). This makes it difficult for one to argue that citizenship behaviours are not desirable within an organization. However, there is also a darker side to OCB. These negative side effects of OCB occur when the voluntary and discretionary nature of citizenship behaviours is removed because of citizenship pressures exerted by the organization on their employees (Bolino et al.,2010; Korsgaard et al.2010) . Citizenship pressures can result in job stress, work-family conflicts, work-leisure conflicts and eventually in quitting intensions among employees (Bolino et al., 2010; Edwards Rothbard, 2000; Greenhaus Beutell, 1985; Reich, 2001).   Effectiveness and productivity of employees decrease when they experience job stress or work-family or work leisure conflicts, which in turn also has a negative influence on the company as a whole (Bolino, et al.,2010). In conclusion, one could argue that citizenship behaviours are a positive and desired phenomenon for an organization when the negative consequences of citizenship pressures exerted by the organization are not taken into account. However, citizenship pressures result in more OCBs among employees and thus organizations are inclined to exert those pressures on their employees (Bolino et al.,2010). Thus, organizations have to balance the positive and negative consequences of citizenship pressures and OCBs in order to maximize   the value of the employees for the company. Because citizenship pressures has different outcomes for each individual employee, the organization and group leaders could benefit from a thorough analysis of their workforce (Bolino et al., 2010). For instance, employees who are considered to be high self-monitors are more likely to engage in citizenship behaviours when they feel citizenship pressure, because they care about how they are being perceived by their co-w orkers and leaders (Blakely et al., 2003) Chapter 3.The transformational and transactional leadership styles 3.1 Introduction Leadership has always been an interesting topic for researchers from different fields. According to Tannenbaum, Weschler and Masarik (1961, p. 24) leadership is: â€Å"interpersonal influence exercised in situations and directed, through the communication process, toward the attainment of a specified goal or goals†. According to Wayne, Shore Liden (1997) leadership is important because the exchange between a manager and his follower   is the most important factor in determining employee behaviour. In the literature a distinction has been made by Burns (1978) and Bass (1985) between transactional leadership and transformational leadership. Burns (1978) reports that transactional and transformation leadership are complete opposites. Bass (1985), however, argues that transformational leaders may also use transactional leadership behaviours in certain situations. The concepts of transactional and transformational leadership will be explained in this chapter. 3.2 Transactional leadership The study of Bass (1985) shows that transactional leaders make the tasks and responsibilities of the followers clear and also promise the followers compensation for when their tasks are performed according to the standards. According to Deluga (1990) transactional leadership is an exchange process in which rewards and punishments are administered. Transactional leaders exchange financial rewards for productivity or deny rewards when the productivity of the followers is lacking (Bass Riggio, 2006). The relationship between the leader and his followers in a system of transactional leadership is focused on self interest and based on mutual dependency (Lagamarsino Cardona, 2003). Bass (1990) concludes in his research that there are four different types of transactional leadership. Contingent reward: The leader sets up a contract based on performance and rewards, solid performance is compensated with rewards. When goals are met the employees will get recognition for their accomplishments. Contingent reward leader behaviours have shown to have a positive relation with performance and follower attitudes (Avolio, Waldman Einstein, 1988; Waldman, Bass Yammarino, 1990). Laissez-Faire: In this particular form of transactional leadership the leader avoids making decisions and steps away from any responsibilities. The subordinates have to fulfil their tasks on their own. According to Dubinsky, Yammarino, Jolson, Spangler (1995) this type of leader is indifferent, frequently absent,   inattentive and does not influence the workforce. Management by exception (active): The leader actively looks for errors and mistakes in the work process. When the tasks performance of the employees is not on the required level the leader will intervene and he will try to put the employees back on the right track. Management by exception (passive): The leader only undertakes actions when the level of output and requirements and standards are not met by his subordinates. All these types of transactional leadership lack leadership behaviours that motivate employees to be the best they can be for the organization and to go the extra mile for colleagues and superiors. 3.3 Transformational leadership The transformational leadership theory of Bass (1985) states that transformational leadership creates a bond of trust between the leader and followers, motivating employees to achieve beyond expectations. According to Bass (1985) transformational leadership activates employees higher-order needs and lets them act out of the interest of the company. Transformational leaders are able to motivate their followers to the degree that they not only increase their task performance but also engage in OCBs that help the organization to function in an effective way (Smith, Organ, Near, 1983). Transformational leaders motivate their subordinates to come up with creative and innovative for difficult issues within the organization (Bass, 1985). Furthermore, in the transformational leadership style the leaders encourage their followers to go the extra mile for the organization and they reach out to their employees with constructive feedback (Bass, 1985).   Transformational leaders make their mis sions and goals clear to their followers and they convince the followers to act out of interest of the company (Piccolo Colquitt, 2006). Employees who are able to link their own success with that of the company and can identify with the values and goals of the organization are more likely to add value to the organization (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman, Fetter, 1990). Bass (1985) states in his research that when a manager acts like a transformational leader he will be perceived as a more satisfying and effective leader than a transactional leader. Furthermore, according to the studies of Bass (1985), employees report that they are more willing to put in extra effort and time for managers who behave as transformational leaders. Bass Avolio (1993) and Pillai (1995) have reported in their studies that there is a positive relationship between transformational leadership and employee satisfaction, and between transformational leadership and in-role behaviours that lead to job performan ce. According to Yukl (1999) transformational leadership can be viewed as the equivalent of charismatic leadership. In their research, Avolio Bass (2002) distinguished four different components of transformational leadership. Idealized influence: The leaders are admired, respected and trusted by their followers. The leaders are seen as examples/ role-models by the followers and the followers are inspired to emulate their actions. The leaders also put their followers interests above their own interest which earns them trust and respect. Idealized influence, or the charismatic dimension of transformational leadership (Bass, 1985), is often described as the most important component of transformational leadership (Waldman, Bass, Yammarino, 1990). Charismatic leaders receive respect and trust from their followers, because they create a sense of pride among their followers and communicate clear visions and missions (Bass, 1985).   Inspirational motivation: The leaders motivate their followers by attaching meaning and challenge to their work. The leader shows optimism and enthusiasm which stimulates individual and team spirit among the followers. Individualized consideration: The leaders take the needs and desires of the individual followers into account. The followers receive individual support from their leader in order to grow and develop and achieve higher goals. Intellectual stimulation: The followers are encouraged to be creative and innovative by their leaders. New approaches and new ideas are stimulated in order to get creative solutions to existing problems. Out of the box thinking is rewarded and it is not a shame to make errors. Chapter 4. The influence of transactional and transformational leadership on OCB 4.1 Introduction The predominant style of leadership in an organization has a great influence on the amount and types of OCBs performed by the employees within the organization. Bass (1990) described an experiment in a working area for convicted inmates. In this workplace the inmates had to produce several different types of products for in and outside the prison walls. One group of their supervisors received training in order to become transformational leaders, and the other group received a transactional leadership training. The inmates that were supervised by groups of transformational leaders performed better than those that were supervised by the transactional leaders. Not only did they perform better in the areas of productivity, absence and behaviour, the inmates also engaged in more citizenship behaviours. Furthermore, Bass (1990) states in his research that managers who are viewed as the high performers by their supervisors, also were viewed to be of a more transformational than transactional nature by their followers in a separate survey. In this chapter the relationship between transactional leadership, transformational leadership and organizational citizenship behaviour will be discussed. 4.2 Transactional leadership and OCB The transactional leadership style is based on an exchange relation between leaders and their followers. Employees are rewarded or punished based on whether or not their performance is according to the standards that were set by their transactional supervisors (Bass, 1985; Bass Riggio, 2006; Deluga, 1990). Because transactional leadership is a system of mutual dependency between leaders and followers that is based on self interest (Lagamarsino Cordona, 2003) and primarily an exchange process, transactional leadership leads to a low amount of citizenship behaviours performed by employees. The four different types of transactional leadership (Bass, 1990) do not convince employees to perform the seven dimensions of citizenship behaviour (Podsakoff et al.,2000). In the laissez-faire leadership style the leader avoids making decisions and steps away from his responsibilities. The followers have to do their tasks on their own and there is hardly any communication with the leaders. The leader is frequently absent, inattentive and indifferent and does not influence the workforce (Dubinsky et al.,1995). It is obvious that this type of leader will not stimulate citizenship behaviours among his followers. The leaders who act according to the management by exception style (both passive and active) only intervene when their followers do not meet up with the requirements and standards that are set for them. The employees do no Effect of Different Leadership Styles on Organisation Effect of Different Leadership Styles on Organisation Management summary In this thesis the relationship between the predominant leadership styles in the academic literature, transformational and transactional leadership, and organization citizenship behaviour will be discussed and analyzed. In the transformational leadership   style the leader motivates and inspires followers by gaining their trust and respect. The leader communicates the goals, visions and missions in a clear way and stimulates his followers to go beyond the call of duty. Transactional leadership is based on an exchange relationship between the leader and followers. Followers receive rewards when they perform according to the standards and requirements set by their leader. Organizational citizenship behaviour concerns those voluntary acts performed by   individual employees that are of a discretionary and voluntary nature and contribute to the effectiveness of the organization. However, when organizations exert citizenship pressures on their employees this might have some serious consequences on their workforce. These high levels of pressure to be a good citizen can result in job stress, work-family conflicts, work-leisure conflicts and might even result in quitting intensions among employees. This thesis will also focus on the desirability of OCBs within the organization and the dangers of citizenship pressures. Chapter 1.Introduction to the thesis 1.1 Problem Indication Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB) has been a popular subject among several fields of study for the past couple of decades. OCBs are positive, individual and voluntary acts performed by employees which go beyond their job descriptions and are not directly rewarded or monitored (Organ, 1988). According to Katz Kahn (1966) these kinds of behaviour are important to organizations because organizations depend on behaviour of their employees that go further than their job description even though these behaviours are not actively monitored and enforced. Because of the voluntary nature of the positive acts the theory of OCBs seems to be very positive for both the individuals within an organization and the effectiveness of the organization as whole. OCB has been linked with loyalty, obedience, voluntarism, helping behaviours, altruism and other positive traits in many previous studies throughout the years (Bolino, Turnley, Niehoff, 2004; Organ, Podsakoff, MacKenzie, 2006). But recent studies have also investigated the â€Å"darker side† of OCB. The problem lies with the discretionary and voluntary nature of OCB. There are situations in which employees feel like OCB is expected of them, this citizenship pressure can lead to job stress, work conflicts and even quitting intensions (Bolino,Turnley, Gilstrap, Suazo, 2010). The first part of this thesis will go further into the dynamics of OCB and will look at both the positive and negative side of OCB. The second part of this thesis will address the relation between leadership st yles and OCB. Leadership styles are of great influence on the OCBs of employees (Bass, 1985; Burns, 1978). In the studies of Bass (1985) and Burns (1978)   a distinction has been made between transformational and transactional leadership. These different styles of leadership have different implications on the degree of OCB among the employees (Bass, 1985; Burns, 1978). 1.2 Problem statement The problem statement of this thesis is formulated in one single question: How do the different styles of leadership influence organizational citizenship behaviour ? 1.3 Research Questions The research questions that are derived from the problem indication are: To what degree is OCB desired within an organization? What is the influence of transactional leadership on OCB? What is the influence of transformational leadership on OCB? 1.4 Methodology The type of research that will be conducted for this thesis is a descriptive research. The thesis will be a literature study which means secondary sources will be gathered and researched (Sekaran, 2008). An analysis of the different variables will be made in order to find the answers to the formulated research questions. The links between the different variables researched in this thesis can be the basis for further empirical research. The main concepts of the research are organizational citizenship behaviour and the transformational (or charismatic) (Yukl, 1999) and transactional leadership types. 1.5 Structure In this thesis the relationship between the two predominant leadership styles and OCB within an organization will be analyzed. The first chapter will get into the dynamics of OCB in order to determine whether or not and to what degree OCB is desirable. This means that both the positive and negative sides of OCB within an organization will be balanced in this chapter. At the end of chapter one the first research question of this thesis will be answered. Chapter two and three will link transformational and transactional leadership with OCB. In these chapters it will become clear how the different styles of leadership stimulate OCB and which leadership style results in the largest amount of OCBs. After these chapters the answer to the problem statement is given in the conclusion. Furthermore, limitations of this research and managerial and academic implications will be discussed. Chapter 2. Organizational Citizenship Behaviour 2.1 Introduction Organizational citizenship behaviour is a topic that has fascinated many researchers and managers for the last couple of decades since Bateman and Organ (1983) were the first to address this topic in 1983. Nowadays in times of economical crises OCB remains an interesting subject, because in a race of the survival of the fittest organizations rely on good citizens to survive. However, recent studies of the past couple of years have reported some negative implications of OCB and have questioned the desirability of OCB (Bolino, Gilstrap, Turnley Suazo, 2010; Korgaard, Meglino, Lester Jeong, 2010; Van Dyne Ellis, 2004). Vardi and Weitz (2003) have reported on the concept of organizational misbehaviour (OMB) as a counterpart to OCB in their studies. In this chapter both the positive and negative implications of OCB and citizenship pressures exerted by the organizations will be discussed.   In order to answer the question whether or not OCB is desirable within an organization the concept of organizational citizenship behaviour has to be explained.. OCB can be defined as â€Å"individual behaviour that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promotes the effective functioning of an organization†, according to the study of Organ (1988, p. 4). OCB is behaviour of a constructive nature by the employee, which is not a part of the formal job description (Organ, 1988). According to Moorman, Blakely and Niehoff (1988) employees will engage in OCBs when they feel that that behaviour is justified by the positive actions of the organization and are consistent with the treatment and commitment of the organization. Employees feel the need to repay the organization for the positive treatment and commitment they receive throughout the relationship (Moorman et al., 1988). Research of Kidder (1998) and Stamper and Van Dyne (2001) argues that employees that have a long-term relationship with a firm perform more OCBs than temporary or part-time workers. 2.2 The sunny side of OCB Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine and Bachrach (2000) distinguished thirty forms of citizenship behaviours from the literature on OCB and grouped them in seven dimensions; helping behaviour, sportsmanship, organizational compliance, organizational loyalty, self development, civic virtue and individual initiative. Helping behaviours are voluntary behaviours that help fellow colleagues prevent or solve work related problems. This kind of behaviour includes supporting and cheering for fellow employees and also peacemaking activities when there are times of conflict and struggles between employees (Organ, 1988). Organizational compliance is a form of OCB which regards the following and obeying of organizational procedures and rules by the employees (Borman Motowidlo, 1993). Organizational compliance argues that good citizens follow the rules and procedures of the organization instinctively and precisely, even when they know that they are not being supervised or monitored (Podsakoff et al., 2000).  Ã‚   Podsakoff et al. (2000) state that organizational compliance is a form of OCB even though it is expected from subordinates to act according the rules and regulations of the company, because in many cases employees do not act according these rules and regulations when they know that they are not being observed or monitored. Thus, according to Podsakoff et al. (2000) employees that follow up the rules and regulations very precisely even when they know that they are not being supervised can be viewed as very good organizational citizens. Sportmanship is a type of OCB which describes the process of coping with all the inevitable problems and inconveniences that are bound to happen at work without complaining (Organ, 1990). According to Podsakoff, et al., (2000) good sportsmanship occurs when employees refrain from complaining when other colleagues cause inconveniences for them. ‘Good sports are willing to make personal sacrifices in the interest of the group and do not showcase a negative attitude when things are not going their way. Furthermore, ‘good sports do not get offended when their suggestions and ideas are not followed up by the rest of the employees in their working environment. Individual initiative is regarded as OCB when a person goes that far beyond the expected level of task-related behaviours that these behaviours can be viewed as voluntary (Podsakoff et al., 2000).   When employees engage in individual initiative they showcase extra effort and enthusiasm in order to increase their task performance or the performance of the organization as a whole. They voluntarily come up with new ideas and innovations in order to increase organizational effectiveness and encourage fellow colleagues to act in the same way (Podsakoff, et al., 2000). Organizational loyalty refers to the strong commitment of employees to the organization throughout the good and the bad times (Graham, 1991), defending the organization against threats from the outside and promoting the organization to people outside the organization (Borman Motowidlo, 1997; George Jones 1997). According to the research of Podsakoff et al. (2000) civic virtue(Organ, 1988)means that employees recognize that they are part of a larger whole and they acknowledge and accept the responsibilities for the effective functioning of their organization. The employees actively look out for opportunities and threats in the environment of their organization. They participate actively in the decision making process of the organization and are constantly acting out of the interest of the company while putting their personal interests aside (Podsakoff et al., 2000).   Self development is citizenship behaviour that occurs when employees voluntarily undertake actions in order to learn and improve their skills, knowledge and capabilities (Podsakoff et al., 2000). The study of George and Brief (1992) states that self development might consist of employees participating in advanced training course, employees undertaking actions in order to keep up with the latest developments in their field; or employees might even learn an entirely new set of skills. Self development behaviour is good citizenship behaviour because employees try to improve and increase their personal contributions to the performance and effectiveness of the organization (George Brief, 1992). These seven dimensions of OCB all describe positive acts and contributions from the employees which benefit the organization. According to Organ Konovsky (1989) these combined contributions of individual employees increase organization effectiveness significantly over time. Because of the positive nature of these citizenship behaviours organizations try to stimulate OCBs among their employees. These citizenship pressures lead to higher levels of OCB within the organization, which is essentially favourable for the company (Bolino,Turnley, Gilstrap Suazo, 2010). However, the stimulation of citizenship behaviours can have a negative effect on the employees because the citizenship pressure to please the organization can result in job stress, quitting intensions and work-family and work-leisure conflicts (Bolino et al., 2010; Greenhaus Beutell, 1985; Reich, 2001; Sauter Murphy, 1995). 2.3 The dark side of OCB One could argue that OCB has a lot of positive implications for an organization based on the dimensions described by Podsakoff et al.(2000). Recent studies however have also shed light on the darker side of OCB (Bolino et al.,2010; Korsgaard Meglino, Lester, Jeong,2010; Van Dyne Ellis, 2004; Vigoda-Gadot, 2006). Organ (1988) implies that OCB is solely a positive phenomenon within an organization, because of the discretionary and voluntary nature of OCB. Furthermore, Organ (1988, p. 4) argues that â€Å"OCB promotes the effective functioning of an organization†. Vigoda-Gadot (2006, p. 79) concludes from the definition of OCB by Organ (1988) that it implies that â€Å"OCB consists of informal contributions that a participant can choose to make or withhold, without the regard to considerations of sanctions or formal incentives†. However, recent studies have countered the discretionary nature of OCB. Korsgaard et al. (2010, p. 277), argue that OCB is â€Å"based on the norm of reciprocity: the obligation to reciprocate the benefits already received from another (â€Å"paying you back†) and the expected reciprocity that ones actions will stimulate future benefits from another (â€Å"paying me forward†).† Vardi and Weitz (2003) have mentioned the concept of organizational misbehaviour (OMB) in their studies as a counterpart to OCB. Organizational misbehaviour is behaviour of a social nature   that harms the interest of the organization.   According to Vardi and Weitz (2003) there are five types of organizational misbehaviour; intra-personal misbehaviour, inter-personal misbehaviour, property misbehaviour, production misbehaviour and political misbehaviour.   OMB can be viewed as the real dark side of employee behaviours. 2.3.1 Citizenship pressure Citizenship pressure occurs when employees feel the pressure to engage in OCBs because their employer tries to stimulate that behaviour by informal compensation (Bolino,Turnley, Girlstrap Suazo, 2010).Citizenship pressure is a phenomenon that differs from individual to individual and it is of a subjective nature (Bolino, et al.,2010). Employees that are regarded as high-self monitors are more likely to give in to citizenship pressures and engage more in citizenship behaviours, because those employees value their image and the way they are perceived by their co-workers and supervisors (Blakely, Andrews, Fuller, 2003). The study of Bolino et al. (2010) has shown that citizenship pressure leads to higher levels of OCB of employees within an organization. Hence, the studies of Korsgaard, et al.(2010) and Bolino, et al.(2010) question both the discretionary and voluntary nature of OCB. Research has shown that managers do take OCBs into account when evaluating their employees and making other decisions (Podsakoff, et al.,2000) Van Dyne and Ellis (2004) state that with citizenship pressure, behaviour that was once voluntary and discretionary can become an obligation. Van Dyne and Ellis (2004) mention the phenomenon of job creep, this situation occurs when employees constantly feel the pressure to do more than their job actually requires of them. The duties of the employees are slowly increased without official recognition of the organization and in time are expected of the employees (Van Dyne Ellis, 2004). Although citizenship pressure may be a positive phenomenon from an organizations point of view because it leads to more OCB, it also is associated with negative consequences for the employees and their organization (Bolino, et al.,2010). The amounts of job stress experienced by the employees are likely to increase in the case of high levels of citizenship pressures (Bolinio, et al.,2010).   Job stress occurs when employees do not have the capabilities and resources that are needed to fulfil their job requirements. The incapability to fulfil these job demands will lead to negative consequences for the emotional and physical state of the employees who experience high levels of job stress (Sauter Murphy, 1995). According to Bolino, Turnley, Gilstrap, Suazo (2010) employees who experience citizenship pressures to behave as a good citizen of the organization may also feel the pressures at home to be a good partner and parent. This work-family conflict is a role conflict that occurs when the work role demands that are required from an employee are not compatible with the demands of the family (Greenhaus Beutell, 1985).   Work-family conflicts may arise when the partners of the employees have difficulties in understanding why their partner chooses to engage in OCBs that are technically not required of them and are not formally rewarded rather than to spend time with their family (Edwards Rothbard, 2000). Research of Flynn (1996) shows that in a situation of high citizenship pressures employees with less demanding family situations engage in more citizenship behaviours than married employees with more responsibilities towards their families. Another conflict related to citizenship pressure is the work-leisure conflict. This conflict arises when employees experience difficulties in balancing their work demands with their personal life and leisure time (Bolino, et al.,2010). The study of Reich (2001) states that employees who are physically away from their working environment, may still be mentally connected to their job. According to Bolino, et al.(2010) these employees experience a conflict between their desires for free time in their personal lives and the desire to be a good organizational citizen in order to receive the benefits that come with that kind of status. The employees who feel citizenship pressures may not enjoy their free time because they are worrying about the situation and problems at work. Furthermore, they may be troubled by the fact that their co-workers might surpass them in terms of productivity and value for the organization when they enjoy their personal time or they may be experiencing feelings o f guilt because they are not working (Reich, 2001). This may lead to an increasing tendency among employees to keep in contact with their work office, by means of mobile phones, pagers or email, in order to remain available for their colleagues and superiors (Reich, 2001). These types of conflict caused by citizenship pressure, like the work-leisure conflict and the work-family conflict and the phenomenon of job stress, contribute to the job quitting intensions among the employees (Bolino et al.,2010). The dark side of OCB can be accounted to the citizenship pressures exerted by the organization. When an organization pressures   employees to perform citizenship behaviours this can result in negative consequences for the state of mind of the employees (Bolino et al., 2010; Edwards Rothbard, 2000; Greenhaus Beutell, 1985; Reich, 2001). This in turn can lead to decreases in productivity and effectiveness for the organization, because employees in a bad state of mind are more likely to leave the organization or work inefficiently (Bolino et al., 2010). 2.4 Desirability of OCB within the organization OCB in its core essence is desirable for organizations because those citizenship behaviours are linked with helping behaviours, loyalty and commitment to the organization, the following of rules and regulations, creativity and innovation and going the extra mile (Podsakoff, et al.,2000) .   These citizenship behaviours are characterized as positive contributions to an organization and its productivity, effectiveness and social climate (Moorman et al., 1988; Organ, 1988; Podsakoff, et al.,2000). This makes it difficult for one to argue that citizenship behaviours are not desirable within an organization. However, there is also a darker side to OCB. These negative side effects of OCB occur when the voluntary and discretionary nature of citizenship behaviours is removed because of citizenship pressures exerted by the organization on their employees (Bolino et al.,2010; Korsgaard et al.2010) . Citizenship pressures can result in job stress, work-family conflicts, work-leisure conflicts and eventually in quitting intensions among employees (Bolino et al., 2010; Edwards Rothbard, 2000; Greenhaus Beutell, 1985; Reich, 2001).   Effectiveness and productivity of employees decrease when they experience job stress or work-family or work leisure conflicts, which in turn also has a negative influence on the company as a whole (Bolino, et al.,2010). In conclusion, one could argue that citizenship behaviours are a positive and desired phenomenon for an organization when the negative consequences of citizenship pressures exerted by the organization are not taken into account. However, citizenship pressures result in more OCBs among employees and thus organizations are inclined to exert those pressures on their employees (Bolino et al.,2010). Thus, organizations have to balance the positive and negative consequences of citizenship pressures and OCBs in order to maximize   the value of the employees for the company. Because citizenship pressures has different outcomes for each individual employee, the organization and group leaders could benefit from a thorough analysis of their workforce (Bolino et al., 2010). For instance, employees who are considered to be high self-monitors are more likely to engage in citizenship behaviours when they feel citizenship pressure, because they care about how they are being perceived by their co-w orkers and leaders (Blakely et al., 2003) Chapter 3.The transformational and transactional leadership styles 3.1 Introduction Leadership has always been an interesting topic for researchers from different fields. According to Tannenbaum, Weschler and Masarik (1961, p. 24) leadership is: â€Å"interpersonal influence exercised in situations and directed, through the communication process, toward the attainment of a specified goal or goals†. According to Wayne, Shore Liden (1997) leadership is important because the exchange between a manager and his follower   is the most important factor in determining employee behaviour. In the literature a distinction has been made by Burns (1978) and Bass (1985) between transactional leadership and transformational leadership. Burns (1978) reports that transactional and transformation leadership are complete opposites. Bass (1985), however, argues that transformational leaders may also use transactional leadership behaviours in certain situations. The concepts of transactional and transformational leadership will be explained in this chapter. 3.2 Transactional leadership The study of Bass (1985) shows that transactional leaders make the tasks and responsibilities of the followers clear and also promise the followers compensation for when their tasks are performed according to the standards. According to Deluga (1990) transactional leadership is an exchange process in which rewards and punishments are administered. Transactional leaders exchange financial rewards for productivity or deny rewards when the productivity of the followers is lacking (Bass Riggio, 2006). The relationship between the leader and his followers in a system of transactional leadership is focused on self interest and based on mutual dependency (Lagamarsino Cardona, 2003). Bass (1990) concludes in his research that there are four different types of transactional leadership. Contingent reward: The leader sets up a contract based on performance and rewards, solid performance is compensated with rewards. When goals are met the employees will get recognition for their accomplishments. Contingent reward leader behaviours have shown to have a positive relation with performance and follower attitudes (Avolio, Waldman Einstein, 1988; Waldman, Bass Yammarino, 1990). Laissez-Faire: In this particular form of transactional leadership the leader avoids making decisions and steps away from any responsibilities. The subordinates have to fulfil their tasks on their own. According to Dubinsky, Yammarino, Jolson, Spangler (1995) this type of leader is indifferent, frequently absent,   inattentive and does not influence the workforce. Management by exception (active): The leader actively looks for errors and mistakes in the work process. When the tasks performance of the employees is not on the required level the leader will intervene and he will try to put the employees back on the right track. Management by exception (passive): The leader only undertakes actions when the level of output and requirements and standards are not met by his subordinates. All these types of transactional leadership lack leadership behaviours that motivate employees to be the best they can be for the organization and to go the extra mile for colleagues and superiors. 3.3 Transformational leadership The transformational leadership theory of Bass (1985) states that transformational leadership creates a bond of trust between the leader and followers, motivating employees to achieve beyond expectations. According to Bass (1985) transformational leadership activates employees higher-order needs and lets them act out of the interest of the company. Transformational leaders are able to motivate their followers to the degree that they not only increase their task performance but also engage in OCBs that help the organization to function in an effective way (Smith, Organ, Near, 1983). Transformational leaders motivate their subordinates to come up with creative and innovative for difficult issues within the organization (Bass, 1985). Furthermore, in the transformational leadership style the leaders encourage their followers to go the extra mile for the organization and they reach out to their employees with constructive feedback (Bass, 1985).   Transformational leaders make their mis sions and goals clear to their followers and they convince the followers to act out of interest of the company (Piccolo Colquitt, 2006). Employees who are able to link their own success with that of the company and can identify with the values and goals of the organization are more likely to add value to the organization (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman, Fetter, 1990). Bass (1985) states in his research that when a manager acts like a transformational leader he will be perceived as a more satisfying and effective leader than a transactional leader. Furthermore, according to the studies of Bass (1985), employees report that they are more willing to put in extra effort and time for managers who behave as transformational leaders. Bass Avolio (1993) and Pillai (1995) have reported in their studies that there is a positive relationship between transformational leadership and employee satisfaction, and between transformational leadership and in-role behaviours that lead to job performan ce. According to Yukl (1999) transformational leadership can be viewed as the equivalent of charismatic leadership. In their research, Avolio Bass (2002) distinguished four different components of transformational leadership. Idealized influence: The leaders are admired, respected and trusted by their followers. The leaders are seen as examples/ role-models by the followers and the followers are inspired to emulate their actions. The leaders also put their followers interests above their own interest which earns them trust and respect. Idealized influence, or the charismatic dimension of transformational leadership (Bass, 1985), is often described as the most important component of transformational leadership (Waldman, Bass, Yammarino, 1990). Charismatic leaders receive respect and trust from their followers, because they create a sense of pride among their followers and communicate clear visions and missions (Bass, 1985).   Inspirational motivation: The leaders motivate their followers by attaching meaning and challenge to their work. The leader shows optimism and enthusiasm which stimulates individual and team spirit among the followers. Individualized consideration: The leaders take the needs and desires of the individual followers into account. The followers receive individual support from their leader in order to grow and develop and achieve higher goals. Intellectual stimulation: The followers are encouraged to be creative and innovative by their leaders. New approaches and new ideas are stimulated in order to get creative solutions to existing problems. Out of the box thinking is rewarded and it is not a shame to make errors. Chapter 4. The influence of transactional and transformational leadership on OCB 4.1 Introduction The predominant style of leadership in an organization has a great influence on the amount and types of OCBs performed by the employees within the organization. Bass (1990) described an experiment in a working area for convicted inmates. In this workplace the inmates had to produce several different types of products for in and outside the prison walls. One group of their supervisors received training in order to become transformational leaders, and the other group received a transactional leadership training. The inmates that were supervised by groups of transformational leaders performed better than those that were supervised by the transactional leaders. Not only did they perform better in the areas of productivity, absence and behaviour, the inmates also engaged in more citizenship behaviours. Furthermore, Bass (1990) states in his research that managers who are viewed as the high performers by their supervisors, also were viewed to be of a more transformational than transactional nature by their followers in a separate survey. In this chapter the relationship between transactional leadership, transformational leadership and organizational citizenship behaviour will be discussed. 4.2 Transactional leadership and OCB The transactional leadership style is based on an exchange relation between leaders and their followers. Employees are rewarded or punished based on whether or not their performance is according to the standards that were set by their transactional supervisors (Bass, 1985; Bass Riggio, 2006; Deluga, 1990). Because transactional leadership is a system of mutual dependency between leaders and followers that is based on self interest (Lagamarsino Cordona, 2003) and primarily an exchange process, transactional leadership leads to a low amount of citizenship behaviours performed by employees. The four different types of transactional leadership (Bass, 1990) do not convince employees to perform the seven dimensions of citizenship behaviour (Podsakoff et al.,2000). In the laissez-faire leadership style the leader avoids making decisions and steps away from his responsibilities. The followers have to do their tasks on their own and there is hardly any communication with the leaders. The leader is frequently absent, inattentive and indifferent and does not influence the workforce (Dubinsky et al.,1995). It is obvious that this type of leader will not stimulate citizenship behaviours among his followers. The leaders who act according to the management by exception style (both passive and active) only intervene when their followers do not meet up with the requirements and standards that are set for them. The employees do no

How Should We Treat The Homeless? :: essays research papers

How Should We Treat the Homeless? I think that to treat all homeless people in one certain way would be hard for me to do because there are many reasons for a person to be homeless, and some of them should be treated differently from others. I feel that the runaways and drug addicts don't deserve as much as the unemployed and war veteran types. But I feel in my heart that all people with no homes, or lives for that matter, should get some sort of help to survive and get back on their feet so that they can become a pro-ductive member of society. Lars Eighner, a homeless man, wrote a book entitled "Travels with Lizbeth: Three Years on the Road and on the Streets" in which he describes in one chapter "the process of scavenging Dumsters for food and other necessities." Eighner states that even though he is homeless with not much money, he still eats and sometimes finds money from scavenging Dumpsters. This seems like a form of self-reliance for him. In his story, Eighner tells us what is safe to eat, how to tell if it is safe, and where to get the food. He states that a lot of people throw away perfectly good food, and when they do he finds it. Eighner says the food "can be evaluated with some confidence largely on the basis of appearance." In my opinion, I don't care if the food looks perfect, I wouldn't eat garbage unless I was dying from hunger. But eating is only one problem facing the homeless. Their second priority should be shelter. Where will they go if it is freezing or something? Many large cities have homeless shelters, but sometimes they get full and the last to arrive might not be allowed in due to overcrowding according to fire laws. I wish that they would let these people sleep on the floor or something rather than sleep outside and freeze to death. I think that if the government can't help these people get back on their feet, then they should build larger shelters to house all of them. They could even serve more food at the shelters

Shadow Kiss Chapter 1

One HIS FINGERTIPS SLID ALONG my back, applying hardly any pressure, yet sending shock waves over my flesh. Slowly, slowly, his hands moved across my skin, down the sides of my stomach to finally rest in the curves of my hips. Just below my ear, I felt his lips press against my neck, followed by another kiss just below it, then another, then another. †¦ His lips moved from my neck toward my cheek and then finally found my mouth. We kissed, wrapping ourselves closer together. My blood burned within me, and I felt more alive in that moment than I ever had. I loved him, loved Christian so much that – Christian? Oh no. Some coherent part of me immediately realized what was happening – and boy, was it pissed off. The rest of me, however, was still actually living in this encounter, experiencing it as though I was the one being touched and kissed. That part of me couldn't break away. I'd merged too much with Lissa, and for all intents and purposes, this was happening to me. No, I told myself sternly. It's not real – not for you. Get out of there. But how could I listen to logic when every nerve of my body was being set on fire? You aren't her. This isn't your head. Get out. His lips. There was nothing in the world right now except his lips. It's not him. Get out. The kisses were the same, exactly as I remembered with him. †¦ No, it's not Dimitri. Get out! Dimitri's name was like cold water hitting me in the face. I got out. I sat upright in my bed, suddenly feeling smothered. I tried kicking off the covers but mostly ended up entangling my legs even more. My heart beat hard in my chest, and I tried to take deep breaths to steady myself and return to my own reality. Times sure had changed. A long time ago, Lissa's nightmares used to wake me from sleep. Now her sex life did. To say the two were a little different would be an understatement. I'd actually gotten the hang of blocking out her romantic interludes – at least when I was awake. This time, Lissa and Christian had (unintentionally) outsmarted me. In sleep, my defenses were down, allowing strong emotions to pass through the psychic link that connected me to my best friend. This wouldn't have been a problem if the two of them had been in bed like normal people – and by â€Å"being in bed,† I mean â€Å"asleep.† â€Å"God,† I muttered, sitting up and swinging my legs over the side of the bed. My voice was muffled in a yawn. Couldn't Lissa and Christian have seriously kept their hands off each other until waking hours? Worse than being woken up, though, was the way I still felt. Sure, none of that making out had actually happened to me. It hadn't been my skin being touched or my lips being kissed. Yet my body seemed to feel the loss of it nonetheless. It had been a very long time since I'd been in that kind of situation. I ached and felt warm all over. It was idiotic, but suddenly, desperately, I wanted someone to touch me – even just to hold me. But definitely not Christian. The memory of those lips on mine flashed back through my mind, how they'd felt, and how my sleepy self had been so certain it was Dimitri kissing me. I stood up on shaky legs, feeling restless and †¦ well, sad. Sad and empty. Needing to walk off my weird mood, I put on a robe and slippers and left my room for the bathroom down the hall. I splashed cool water on my face and stared in the mirror. The reflection looking back at me had tangled hair and bloodshot eyes. I looked sleep-deprived, but I didn't want to go back to bed. I didn't want to risk falling asleep quite yet. I needed something to wake me up and shake away what I'd seen. I left the bathroom and turned toward the stairwell, my feet light on the steps as I went downstairs. The first floor of my dorm was still and quiet. It was almost noon – the middle of the night for vampires, since they ran on a nocturnal schedule. Lurking near the edge of a doorway, I scanned the lobby. It was empty, save for the yawning Moroi man sitting at the front desk. He leafed halfheartedly through a magazine, held to consciousness only by the finest of threads. He came to the magazine's end and yawned again. Turning in his revolving chair, he tossed the magazine on a table behind him and reached for what must have been something else to read. While his back was turned, I darted past him toward the set of double doors that opened outside. Praying the doors wouldn't squeak, I carefully opened one a crack, just enough to slip through. Once outside, I eased the door shut as gently as possible. No noise. At most, the guy would feel a draft. Feeling like a ninja, I stepped out into the light of day. Cold wind blasted me in the face, but it was exactly what I needed. Leafless tree branches swayed in that wind, clawing at the sides of the stone dorm like fingernails. The sun peeped at me from between lead-colored clouds, further reminding me that I should be in bed and asleep. Squinting at the light, I tugged my robe tighter and walked around the side of the building, toward a spot between it and the gym that wasn't quite so exposed to the elements. The slush on the sidewalk soaked into the cloth of my slippers, but I didn't care. Yeah, it was a typically miserable winter day in Montana, but that was the point. The crisp air did a lot to wake me up and chase off the remnants of the virtual love scene. Plus, it kept me firmly in my own head. Focusing on the cold in my body was better than remembering what it had felt like to have Christian's hands on me. Standing there, staring off at a cluster of trees without really seeing them, I was surprised to feel a spark of anger at Lissa and Christian. It must be nice, I thought bitterly, to do whatever the hell you wanted. Lissa had often commented that she wished she could feel my mind and experiences the way I could feel hers. The truth was, she had no idea how lucky she was. She had no idea what it was like to have someone else's thoughts intruding on yours, someone else's experiences muddling yours. She didn't know what it was like to live with someone else's perfect love life when your own was nonexistent. She didn't understand what it was like to be filled with a love so strong that it made your chest ache – a love you could only feel and not express. Keeping love buried was a lot like keeping anger pent up, I'd learned. It just ate you up inside until you wanted to scream or kick something. No, Lissa didn't understand any of that. She didn't have to. She could carry on with her own romantic affairs, with no regard for what she was doing to me. I noticed then that I was breathing heavily again, this time with rage. The icky feeling I'd felt over Lissa and Christian's late-night hookup was gone. It had been replaced by anger and jealousy, feelings born of what I couldn't have and what came so easily to her. I tried my best to swallow those emotions back; I didn't want to feel that way toward my best friend. â€Å"Are you sleepwalking?† a voice asked behind me. I spun around, startled. Dimitri stood there watching me, looking both amused and curious. It would figure that while I was raging over the problems in my unfair love life, the source of those problems would be the one to find me. I hadn't heard him approach at all. So much for my ninja skills. And honestly, would it have killed me to pick up a brush before I went outside? Hastily, I ran a hand through my long hair, knowing it was a little too late. It probably looked like an animal had died on top of my head. â€Å"I was testing dorm security,† I said. â€Å"It sucks.† A hint of a smile played over his lips. The cold was really starting to seep into me now, and I couldn't help but notice how warm his long leather coat looked. I wouldn't have minded wrapping up in it. As though reading my mind, he said, â€Å"You must be freezing. Do you want my coat?† I shook my head, deciding not to mention that I couldn't feel my feet. â€Å"I'm fine. What are you doing out here? Are you testing security too?† â€Å"I am security. This is my watch.† Shifts of school guardians always patrolled the grounds while everyone else slept. Strigoi, the undead vampires who stalked living Moroi vampires like Lissa, didn't come out in sunlight, but students breaking rules – say, like, sneaking out of their dorms – were a problem night and day. â€Å"Well, good work,† I said. â€Å"I'm glad I was able to help test your awesome skills. I should be going now.† â€Å"Rose – † Dimitri's hand caught my arm, and despite all the wind and chill and slush, a flash of heat shot through me. He released me with a start, as though he too had been burned. â€Å"What are you really doing out here?† He was using the stop fooling around voice, so I gave him as truthful an answer as I could. â€Å"I had a bad dream. I wanted some air.† â€Å"And so you just rushed out. Breaking the rules didn't even cross your mind – and neither did putting on a coat.† â€Å"Yeah,† I said. â€Å"That pretty much sums it up.† â€Å"Rose, Rose.† This time it was his exasperated voice. â€Å"You never change. Always jumping in without thinking.† â€Å"That's not true,† I protested. â€Å"I've changed a lot.† The amusement on his face suddenly faded, his expression growing troubled. He studied me for several moments. Sometimes I felt as though those eyes could see right into my soul. â€Å"You're right. You have changed.† He didn't seem very happy about the admission. He was probably thinking about what had happened almost three weeks ago, when some friends and I had gotten ourselves captured by Strigoi. It was only through sheer luck that we'd managed to escape – and not all of us had gotten out. Mason, a good friend and a guy who'd been crazy about me, had been killed, and part of me would never forgive myself for it, even though I'd killed his murderers. It had given me a darker outlook on life. Well, it had given everyone here at St. Vladimir's Academy a darker outlook, but me especially. Others had begun to notice the difference in me. I didn't like to see Dimitri concerned, though, so I played off his observation with a joke. â€Å"Well, don't worry. My birthday's coming up. As soon as I'm eighteen, I'll be an adult, right? I'm sure I'll wake up that morning and be all mature and stuff.† As I'd hoped, his frown softened into a small smile. â€Å"Yes, I'm sure. What is it, about a month?† â€Å"Thirty-one days,† I announced primly. â€Å"Not that you're counting.† I shrugged, and he laughed. â€Å"I suppose you've made a birthday list too. Ten pages? Single-spaced? Ranked by order of priority?† The smile was still on his face. It was one of the relaxed, genuinely amused ones that were so rare to him. I started to make another joke, but the image of Lissa and Christian flared into my mind again. That sad and empty feeling in my stomach returned. Anything I might have wanted – new clothes, an iPod, whatever – suddenly seemed trivial. What did material things like that mean compared to the one thing I wanted most of all? God, I really had changed. â€Å"No,† I said in a small voice. â€Å"No list.† He tilted his head to better look at me, making some of his shoulder-length hair blow into his face. His hair was brown, like mine, but not nearly as dark. Mine looked black at times. He brushed the unruly strands aside, only to have them immediately blow back into his face. â€Å"I can't believe you don't want anything. It's going to be a boring birthday.† Freedom, I thought. That was the only gift I longed for. Freedom to make my own choices. Freedom to love who I wanted. â€Å"It doesn't matter,† I said instead. â€Å"What do you – † He stopped. He understood. He always did. It was part of why we connected like we did, in spite of the seven-year gap in our ages. We'd fallen for each other last fall when he'd been my combat instructor. As things heated up between us, we'd found we had more things to worry about than just age. We were both going to be protecting Lissa when she graduated, and we couldn't let our feelings for each other distract us when she was our priority. Of course, that was easier said than done because I didn't think our feelings for each other were ever really going to go away. We'd both had moments of weakness, moments that led to stolen kisses or saying things we really shouldn't have. After I'd escaped the Strigoi, Dimitri had told me he loved me and had pretty much admitted he could never be with anyone else because of that. Yet, it had also become clear that we still couldn't be together either, and we had both slipped back into our old roles of keeping away from each other and pretending that our relationship was strictly professional. In a not-so-obvious attempt to change the subject, he said, â€Å"You can deny it all you want, but I know you're freezing. Let's go inside. I'll take you in through the back.† I couldn't help feeling a little surprised. Dimitri was rarely one to avoid uncomfortable subjects. In fact, he was notorious for pushing me into conversations about topics I didn't want to deal with. But talking about our dysfunctional, star-crossed relationship? That was a place he apparently didn't want to go today. Yeah. Things were definitely changing. â€Å"I think you're the one who's cold,† I teased, as we walked around the side of the dorm where novice guardians lived. â€Å"Shouldn't you be all tough and stuff, since you're from Siberia?† â€Å"I don't think Siberia's exactly what you imagine.† â€Å"I imagine it as an arctic wasteland,† I said truthfully. â€Å"Then it's definitely not what you imagine.† â€Å"Do you miss it?† I asked, glancing back to where he walked behind me. It was something I'd never considered before. In my mind, everyone would want to live in the U.S. Or, well, they at least wouldn't want to live in Siberia. â€Å"All the time,† he said, his voice a little wistful. â€Å"Sometimes I wish – â€Å" â€Å"Belikov!† A voice was carried on the wind from behind us. Dimitri muttered something, and then shoved me further around the corner I'd just rounded. â€Å"Stay out of sight.† I ducked down behind a bank of holly trees that flanked the building. They didn't have any berries, but the thick clusters of sharp, pointed leaves scratched where my skin was exposed. Considering the freezing temperature and possible discovery of my late-night walk, a few scratches were the least of my problems right now. â€Å"You're not on watch,† I heard Dimitri say several moments later. â€Å"No, but I needed to talk to you.† I recognized the voice. It belonged to Alberta, captain of the Academy's guardians. â€Å"It'll just take a minute. We need to shuffle some of the watches while you're at the trial.† â€Å"I figured,† he said. There was a funny, almost uncomfortable note in his voice. â€Å"It's going to put a strain on everyone else – bad timing.† â€Å"Yes, well, the queen runs on her own schedule.† Alberta sounded frustrated, and I tried to figure out what was going on. â€Å"Celeste will take your watches, and she and Emil will divide up your training times.† Training times? Dimitri wouldn't be conducting any trainings next week because – Ah. That was it, I realized. The field experience. Tomorrow kicked off six weeks of hands-on practice for us novices. We'd have no classes and would get to protect Moroi night and day while the adults tested us. The â€Å"training times† must be when Dimitri would be out participating in that. But what was this trial she'd mentioned? Did they mean like the final trials we had to undergo at the end of the school year? â€Å"They say they don't mind the extra work,† continued Alberta, â€Å"but I was wondering if you could even things out and take some of their shifts before you leave?† â€Å"Absolutely,† he said, words still short and stiff. â€Å"Thanks. I think that'll help.† She sighed. â€Å"I wish I knew how long this trial was going to be. I don't want to be away that long. You'd think it'd be a done deal with Dashkov, but now I hear the queen's getting cold feet about imprisoning a major royal.† I stiffened. The chill running through me now had nothing to do with the winter day. Dashkov? â€Å"I'm sure they'll do the right thing,† said Dimitri. I realized at that moment why he wasn't saying much. This wasn't something I was supposed to hear. â€Å"I hope so. And I hope it'll only take a few days, like they claim. Look, it's miserable out here. Would you mind coming into the office for a second to look at the schedule?† â€Å"Sure,† he said. â€Å"Let me check on something first.† â€Å"All right. See you soon.† Silence fell, and I had to assume Alberta was walking away. Sure enough, Dimitri rounded the corner and stood in front of the holly. I shot up from my hiding spot. The look on his face told me he already knew what was coming. â€Å"Rose – â€Å" â€Å"Dashkov?† I exclaimed, trying to keep my voice low so Alberta wouldn't hear. â€Å"As in Victor Dashkov?† He didn't bother denying it. â€Å"Yes. Victor Dashkov.† â€Å"And you guys were talking about†¦Do you mean†¦Ã¢â‚¬  I was so startled, so dumbstruck, that I could barely get my thoughts together. This was unbelievable. â€Å"I thought he was locked up! Are you saying he hasn't been on trial yet?† Yes. This was definitely unbelievable. Victor Dashkov. The guy who'd stalked Lissa and tortured her mind and body in order to control her powers. Every Moroi could use magic in one of the four elements: earth, air, water, or fire. Lissa, however, worked an almost unheard of fifth element called spirit. She could heal anything – including the dead. It was the reason I was now psychically linked to her – â€Å"shadow-kissed,† some called it. She'd brought me back from the car accident that had killed her parents and brother, binding us together in a way that allowed me to feel her thoughts and experiences. Victor had learned long before any of us that she could heal, and he'd wanted to lock her away and use her as his own personal Fountain of Youth. He also hadn't hesitated to kill anyone who got in his way – or, in the case of Dimitri and me, use more creative ways to stop his opponents. I'd made a lot of enemies in seventeen years, but I was pretty sure there was no one I hated as much as Victor Dashkov – at least among the living. Dimitri had a look on his face I knew well. It was the one he got when he thought I might punch someone. â€Å"He's been locked up – but no, no trial yet. Legal proceedings sometimes take a long time.† â€Å"But there's going to be a trial now? And you're going?† I spoke through clenched teeth, trying to be calm. I suspected I still had the I'm going to punch someone look on my face. â€Å"Next week. They need me and some of the other guardians to testify about what happened to you and Lissa that night.† His expression changed at the mention of what had occurred four months ago, and again, I recognized the look. It was the fierce, protective one he got when those he cared about were in danger. â€Å"Call me crazy for asking this, but, um, are Lissa and I going with you?† I had already guessed the answer, and I didn't like it. â€Å"No.† â€Å"No?† â€Å"No.† I put my hands on my hips. â€Å"Look, doesn't it seem reasonable that if you're going to talk about what happened to us, then you should have us there?† Dimitri, fully in strict-instructor mode now, shook his head. â€Å"The queen and some of the other guardians thought it'd be best if you didn't go. There's enough evidence between the rest of us, and besides, criminal or not, he is – or was – one of the most powerful royals in the world. Those who know about this trial want to keep it quiet.† â€Å"So, what, you thought if you brought us, we'd tell everyone?† I exclaimed. â€Å"Come on, comrade. You really think we'd do that? The only thing we want is to see Victor locked up. Forever. Maybe longer. And if there's a chance he might walk free, you have to let us go.† After Victor had been caught, he'd been taken to prison, and I'd thought that was where the story had ended. I'd figured they'd locked him up to rot. It had never occurred to me – though it should have – that he'd need a trial first. At the time, his crimes had seemed so obvious. But, although the Moroi government was secret and separate from the human one, it operated in a lot of the same ways. Due process and all that. â€Å"It's not my decision to make,† Dimitri said. â€Å"But you have influence. You could speak up for us, especially if†¦Ã¢â‚¬  Some of my anger dimmed just a little, replaced by a sudden and startling fear. I almost couldn't say the next words. â€Å"Especially if there really is a chance he might get off. Is there? Is there really a chance the queen could let him go?† â€Å"I don't know. There's no telling what she or some of the other high-up royals will do sometimes.† He suddenly looked tired. He reached into his pocket and tossed over a set of keys. â€Å"Look, I know you're upset, but we can't talk about it now. I have to go meet Alberta, and you need to get inside. The square key will let you in the far side door. You know the one.† I did. â€Å"Yeah. Thanks.† I was sulking and hated to be that way – especially since he was saving me from getting in trouble – but I couldn't help it. Victor Dashkov was a criminal – a villain, even. He was power-hungry and greedy and didn't care who he stepped on to get his way. If he were loose again†¦well, there was no telling what might happen to Lissa or any other Moroi. It enraged me to think that I could do something to help put him away but that no one would let me do it. I'd taken a few steps forward when Dimitri called out from behind me. â€Å"Rose?† I glanced back. â€Å"I'm sorry,† he said. He paused, and his expression of regret turned wary. â€Å"And you'd better bring the keys back tomorrow.† I turned away and kept going. It was probably unfair, but some childish part of me believed Dimitri could do anything. If he'd really wanted to get Lissa and me to the trial, I was certain he could have. When I was almost to the side door, I caught movement in my peripheral vision. My mood plummeted. Great. Dimitri had given me keys to sneak back in, and now someone else had busted me. That was typical of my luck. Half-expecting a teacher to demand to know what I was doing, I turned and prepared an excuse. But it wasn't a teacher. â€Å"No,† I said softly. This had to be a trick. â€Å"No.† For half an instant, I wondered if I'd ever really woken up. Maybe I was actually still in bed, asleep and dreaming. Because surely, surely that was the only explanation for what I was now seeing in front of me on the Academy's lawn, lurking in the shadow of an ancient, gnarled oak. It was Mason.