<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Scots, Wha Hae</title>
	<atom:link href="http://organizationsandmarkets.com/2006/05/11/scots-wha-hae/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://organizationsandmarkets.com/2006/05/11/scots-wha-hae/</link>
	<description>Economics of organizations, strategy, entrepreneurship, innovation, and more</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 May 2012 19:17:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Organizations and Markets &#187; The nature of the (family) firm</title>
		<link>http://organizationsandmarkets.com/2006/05/11/scots-wha-hae/#comment-86</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Organizations and Markets &#187; The nature of the (family) firm]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 May 2006 03:29:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://organizationsandmarkets.wordpress.com/2006/05/11/scots-wha-hae/#comment-86</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Brayden King at orgtheory.net has a nice post today about family-owned firms. He summarizes a recent sociology paper on the transformation of the Scottish [hooray!] shipbuilding industry from one of mostly family firms to one dominated by corporate firms. Writes Brayden: &quot;Family businesses and corporations are clearly different creatures, but we [organizational scholars] usually just take the word of legal scholars in this matter. . . .&#160;My take-away is that, besides temporal continuity established through lines of heredity, the distinguishing feature of family firms is that affective relationships serves as the glue holding together various components of the business. This affect, which translates into close identification with the organization, is a distinctive competency of the family firm.&quot; [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Brayden King at orgtheory.net has a nice post today about family-owned firms. He summarizes a recent sociology paper on the transformation of the Scottish [hooray!] shipbuilding industry from one of mostly family firms to one dominated by corporate firms. Writes Brayden: &quot;Family businesses and corporations are clearly different creatures, but we [organizational scholars] usually just take the word of legal scholars in this matter. . . .&nbsp;My take-away is that, besides temporal continuity established through lines of heredity, the distinguishing feature of family firms is that affective relationships serves as the glue holding together various components of the business. This affect, which translates into close identification with the organization, is a distinctive competency of the family firm.&quot; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bo Nielsen</title>
		<link>http://organizationsandmarkets.com/2006/05/11/scots-wha-hae/#comment-64</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bo Nielsen]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 May 2006 01:11:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://organizationsandmarkets.wordpress.com/2006/05/11/scots-wha-hae/#comment-64</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Not to speak of Colin Mongomorie and my favorite &quot;disinfectant&quot;: Laphroaig!

Apparently during the American prohibition on alcohol they stopped importation of Scotch, but some of the most phenolic stuff (ie Laphroaig) managed to slip through the net: It was imported as a *disinfectant*. The customs authorities must have thought that nothing smelling like Laph. could be drunk for any other than medical purposes...

Laphroaig was the single best selling whisky legally during prohibition in the U.S. It was prescribed to those in need of medicinal alcohol (probably because it has been described as smelling of gauze)..

Cheers!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not to speak of Colin Mongomorie and my favorite &#8220;disinfectant&#8221;: Laphroaig!</p>
<p>Apparently during the American prohibition on alcohol they stopped importation of Scotch, but some of the most phenolic stuff (ie Laphroaig) managed to slip through the net: It was imported as a *disinfectant*. The customs authorities must have thought that nothing smelling like Laph. could be drunk for any other than medical purposes&#8230;</p>
<p>Laphroaig was the single best selling whisky legally during prohibition in the U.S. It was prescribed to those in need of medicinal alcohol (probably because it has been described as smelling of gauze)..</p>
<p>Cheers!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter Klein</title>
		<link>http://organizationsandmarkets.com/2006/05/11/scots-wha-hae/#comment-63</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Peter Klein]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 May 2006 21:10:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://organizationsandmarkets.wordpress.com/2006/05/11/scots-wha-hae/#comment-63</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Update: Mom loves the post but insists that I add &quot;tarmacadam, mackintosh raincoats, the bicycle, chloroform, television, and the King James Bible.&quot; How can I refuse?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Update: Mom loves the post but insists that I add &quot;tarmacadam, mackintosh raincoats, the bicycle, chloroform, television, and the King James Bible.&quot; How can I refuse?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

