Petites bourgeoises and penny capitalists: women in retail in the Lille area during the nineteenth century

With few exceptions, historians have argued that in the nineteenthcentury women were excluded from most retail activities. InEurope women became increasingly concentrated in small-scale,under-capitalized, and short-lived stores. The "separate sphere" ideology in its different guises underlay this evolution.In North America, on the other hand, women capitalized on thisideology to carve a niche for themselves in trade and retailing.Women were not marginalized or segregated everywhere in Europe,however. In northern France the expansion of retail trade andoverall improvements in standards of living provided women,especially married ones, with opportunities they were not reluctantto grasp. Though the activities of married women remained subordinatedto the needs of their families, female retailers were neitherparticularly impoverished nor segregated in sectors deemed appropriatefor persons of their sex.     

The nonprofit sector's $100 billion opportunity

Imagine what an extra $100 billion a year could do for philanthropic and other nonprofit institutions. According to a new study, the nonprofit sector could free that amount--maybe even more--by making five changes in the way it operates. The study asked two central questions: Does the sector's money flow from its source to its ultimate use as efficiently and effectively as possible? If not, where are the big opportunities to increase social benefit? According to former senator Bill Bradley and McKinsey's Paul Jansen and Les Silverman, nonprofits could save roughly $25 billion a year by changing the way they raise funds. By distributing funds more quickly, they could put an extra $30 billion to work. Organizations could generate more than $60 billion a year by streamlining and restructuring the way in which they provide services and by reducing administrative costs. And they could free up even more money--an amount impossible to estimate--by better allocating funds among service providers. The authors admit that making those changes won't be easy. The nonprofit world, historically seen as a collection of locally focused charities, has become an enormous sector, but it lacks the managerial processes and incentives that help keep the for-profit world on track. And when the baby boomers start to retire in less than a decade, public budgets will be squeezed even more than they are today. If the nonprofit sector is to help the nation cope with the stresses ahead, it must become more efficient and challenge its traditional concepts of stewardship.     

What really works

When it comes to improving business performance, managers have no shortage of tools and techniques to choose from. But what really works? What's critical, and what's optional? Two business professors and a former McKinsey consultant set out to answer those questions. In a ground-breaking, five-year study that involved more than 50 academics and consultants, the authors analyzed 200 management techniques as they were employed by 160 companies over ten years. Their findings at a high level? Business basics really matter. In this article, the authors outline the management practices that are imperative for sustained superior financial performance--their "4+2 formula" for business success. They provide examples of companies that achieved varying degrees of success depending on whether they applied the formula, and they suggest ways that other companies can achieve excellence. The 160 companies in their study--called the Evergreen Project--were divided into 40 quads, each comprising four companies in a narrowly defined industry. Based on its performance between 1986 and 1996, each company in each quad was classified as either a winner (for instance, Dollar General), a loser (Kmart), a climber (Target), or a tumbler (the Limited). Without exception, the companies that outperformed their industry peers excelled in what the authors call the four primary management practices: strategy, execution, culture, and structure. And they supplemented their great skill in those areas with a mastery of any two of four secondary management practices: talent, leadership, innovation, and mergers and partnerships. A company that consistently follows this 4+2 formula has a better than 90% chance of sustaining superior performance, according to the authors.     

Pull the plug on stress

Stress is rampant, stress is growing, and stress hurts the bottom line. A 1999 study of 46,000 workers revealed that health care costs are 147% higher for those who are stressed or depressed, independent of other health issues. But what exactly is stress? It usually refers to our internal reaction to negative, threatening, or worrisome situations--a looming performance report, say, or interactions with a dismissive colleague. Accumulated over time, negative stress can depress you, burn you out, make you sick, or even kill you--because it's both an emotional and a physiological habit. Of course, many companies understand the negative impact of cumulative stress and offer programs to help employees counteract it. The problem is that employees in the greatest need of help often don't seek it. Since 1991, the authors have studied the physiological impact of stress on performance, at both the individual and organizational levels. Their goal largely has been to decode the underlying mechanics of stress. They've sought not only to understand how stress works on a person's mind, heart, and other bodily systems but also to discover the precise emotional, mental, and physiological levers that can counteract it. After working with more than 50,000 workers and managers in more than 100 organizations, the authors have found that learning to manage stress is easier than most people think. They have devised a scientifically based system of tools, techniques, and technologies that organizations can use to reduce employee stress and boost overall health and performance. In this article, they use the story of someone they call Nigel, a senior executive with whom they've worked, to describe how these techniques reduce stress in the real world.     

A new century approach for alcohol screen in the insurance industry

Several recent studies point to the value of using combinations of biochemical markers for the identification of alcohol abuse. The Early Detection of Alcohol Consumption (EDAC) test uses a statistical method that combines the results of several routine laboratory tests to form a metabolic fingerprint for each subject. In this study, we evaluated the use of the EDAC test as a screening tool to assess heavy drinking in insurance applicants. The EDAC was calculated by linear discriminate function analysis using the results of 14 routine tests including liver enzymes, lipids, proteins, and blood sugars. We collected and analyzed 1680 random samples at Heritage Laboratories (Olathe, Kan). Alcohol Detection Services (Brookfield, Wis) and Millennium Strategies (Madison, Wis) collaborated in the data analysis and interpretation of laboratory tests results. Ninety-three percent of applicants showed a negative EDAC test. The 7% (n = 134) who screened positive for the EDAC test were then reflexed to carbohydrate deficient transferin (CDT) and whole blood associated acetaldehyde (WBAA). Sixteen percent (22/134) showed a positive confirmatory test. Among these 16% of subjects, 41% (9/22) showed no elevations in liver enzymes or HDL-C results. Four of these subjects were among the top one third with the highest elevations for the CDT test in the entire group and one of them was positive for both the CDT and WBAA tests. These results suggest that the EDAC screen may provide an efficient alternative screening tool for the identification of heavy alcohol consumption not HBA as it identifies applicants with both normal or abnormal liver enzymes and HDL-C.