The Discipline of Teams: What Kenyans Need to Learn

A team is a small number of people with complementary skills who are committed to a common purpose, set of performance goals, and approach for which they hold themselves mutually accountable. The difference between teams that perform and other groups that don't is a subject to which most of us pay far too little attention. Teams and good performance are inseparable; you cannot have one without the other. Most executives advocate teamwork. And they should. Teamwork represents a set of values that encourage listening and responding constructively to views expressed by others, giving others the benefit of doubt, providing support, and recognizing the interests and achievements of others.

Committees, councils, and task forces are not necessarily teams. To understand how teams deliver extra performance, we must distinguish between teams and other forms of working groups. That distinction turns on performance results. A team's performance includes both individual results and "collective work-products". Teams differ fundamentally from working groups because they require both individual and mutual accountability. Teams produce discrete work-products through the joint contributions of their members. The first step in developing a disciplined approach to team management is to think about teams as discrete units of performance and not just as positive sets of values.

The essence of a team is a common commitment. Without it, groups perform as individuals; with it, they become a powerful unit of collective performance. Teams develop direction, momentum, and commitment by working to shape a meaningful purpose. Most successful teams shape their purposes in response to a demand or opportunity put in their path, usually by higher management. The best teams invest a tremendous amount of time and effort exploring, shaping, and agreeing on a purpose that belongs to them both collectively and individually.

The best teams also translate their common purpose into specific performance goals, such as reducing the reject rate from suppliers by 50% or increasing the math scores of graduates from 40% to 95%. Specific team performance goals help to define a set of work-products that are different both from an organizationwide mission and from individual job objectives. The specificity of performance objectives facilitates clear communication and constructive conflict within the team. The attainability of specific goals helps teams maintain their focus on getting results. Specific objectives have a leveling effect conducive to team behavior. Specific goals allow a team to achieve small wins as it pursues its broader purpose.
Performance goals are compelling. They are symbols of accomplishment that motivate and energize. They challenge the people on a team to commit themselves, as a team, to make a difference.

Goals help a team to keep track of progress, while a broader purpose supplies meaning and emotional energy. In addition to finding the right size, teams must develop the right mix of skills, that is, each of the complementary skills necessary to do the team's job. Skill requirements fall into the technical or functional expertise, problem-solving and decision-making skills, and interpersonal skills.

Organizational Behavior Class- By Gerald Baraza
Gleaned from Katzenbach, Jon R. McKinsey & Company; Smith, Douglas K.

Case Study: Nucor Steel Corporation.

Nucor Corporation is characterized by its owner‐operators who take pride in their work and teams and as a result have created great profitability for a traditional steelmaker. Nucor is known for many things including its pay practices that base earnings on performance as well as the value and trust the corporation places in its employees. At Nucor employees are rewarded based on their effort, treated with great respect and empowered to make decisions based on their expertise and knowledge. Nucor is a unique organization among its rust‐belt counterparts. To understand its success it is necessary to understand the leadership mentality, empowerment strategy, motivation and rewards base as well as its approach to change and innovation. All of these elements have turned Nucor into a desirable place to work with the potential for future success as it acquires new entities and grows.

Leadership
When looking at the Nucor Case Study, it is advantageous to discuss the leadership styles in relation to the Vroom‐Jago Leadership Model as well as other concepts and issues of leadership. The initial leader to focus on is F. Kenneth Iverson, a former Nucor Steel President (1965‐1999) and legendary leader. His leadership fostered the close‐knit culture that exists even today.

When Iverson and Sam Siegel, Financial Vice President, initially assumed leadership roles, they exhibited the AI Autocratic style at individual and group level in selling off many wide‐ranging operations to focus on one area. They also made the decision to move corporate headquarters to where it is even today, Charlotte, NC. From that point leadership has continued to have a basis in the group with Nucor employees empowered to make decisions that will benefit the organization. Nucor Steel‘s leaders also exhibited other Vroom ‐Jago leadership styles as they evolved to the present day. Iverson installed radical concepts giving employees better pay and real power exhibiting GII decision Style: willing to accept and implement employee decisions. Current CEO Daniel R. DiMicco uses a different leadership style when purchasing 13 new companies and instilling the unique culture in those new facilities. Nucor management, as a whole still focuses on the people in the front line of their business predominately using DI individual style leadership and GII group level decision style.

Different perspectives of leadership also can explain Iverson and DiMicco. Both exhibit traits of charismatic leaders. The case study points out how employees are willing to accomplish tasks based on an emotional commitment to Nucor Steel. The example of electricians helping sister plants in another state on their own initiative shows, when crisis arose, the employees showed extraordinary behavior. All General Managers contact a new GM within 2 days of starting in a different factory, offering help, and meaning it. This behavior is unconventional, and counters to established norms in the current business culture. Only a visionary charismatic behavior from the leader could motivate such commitment.

Leadership approaches discussed here point out that leadership is an exchange process with employees. A look at transactional leadership and transformational leadership helps further explain Nucor's success. Transactional leaders help the follower identify what is done to accomplished desired results and ensure the resources are on hand to complete the job. Transformational leadership motivates followers to work for goals rather than on short term self-interest this leader is able to express clear vision and inspire other to accomplish that vision. Nucor's management, in this case study continually exhibit transformational leadership attributes. When Nucor employees innovate themselves out of tight spots, the leader’s charisma has instilled this sense of value respect, and pride. The General Managers reaching out to the new GM shows leaders reaching out to help individual needs. These leaders allow the employees to rethink rational ways to correct problems, and do not intervene in work tasks unless people are sidetracked. The most important aspect of transformational leadership is charisma coupled with other roles. The deep emotional attachment to Nucor management is one facet of this style. These leaders also play the role of teacher, coach, mentor, reformer, or revolutionary further establish their transformational style of leadership.

Power
In addition to the various leadership styles and involvement of the employees and commitment to the organization there are different types of power between leaders and employees at Nucor. There is a lot of employee power at the Nucor Steel Company generating from the flat organization structure found within the company and the leaderships focus on employees. A standard joke in the company is that if you were a janitor and you got five promotions you would have the CEOs job. Unlike the pyramid structure that is found in other companies, at Nucor the CEO believes that he is the one who was at the bottom and he works for all the others in the organization.
Power within Nucor, as in other corporations, comes from two places: interpersonal and structural. With the flat organizational structure at Nucor the majority of the power is interpersonal rather than prescribed by the organizational structure and layers of management. At Nucor employees have a large amount of power – specifically expert power. Expert power arises an individual has the ability to influence as a result of a highly valued expertise regardless of job title.

Expert power is clearly exhibited in the case study when employees call upon each other (as in the case of the Hickman plant calling expert electricians from another plant) and when leadership entrusts decision making to employees. In addition to expert power, referent power is also common among Nucor employees. Referent power is based upon charisma – whether it is the charisma of the CEO or of the line worker, this type of power comes from interactions with others. Not only did Nucor leaders Iverson and DiMicco have structural power they also had referent power from charismatic leadership styles.

Where interpersonal power results from expertise, attitudes and actions, structural power comes from the organizational structure itself. At Nucor with its flat hierarchy structural power is not the main source of influence or power. A type of structural power that is present is the decision making power of the employees. Individuals at Nucor have a broad range of decision making power as seen in the electrician situation. The decision making power is based on the premise that they will make the best decisions for the organization since their compensation depends on the organizational success.

Motivation & Rewards
When looking at the Nucor Corporation, it is important to understand why the employees are motivated to act the way that they do. Nucor has high job satisfaction which in turn brings improved job performance. This improved performance benefits everyone in the company instead of just management at Nucor.

Herzberg's two factor theory is utilized in the Nucor case study. The people from Nucor demonstrated there were motivators by traveling to fix a problem that was a great distance away. The people in this situation had achievement, recognition, and responsibility all in mind when they decided to take steps not required to help others in the organization. Achievement motivated the employees in the example because they knew that they were helping the company immensely and this would in turn help them. The recognition would be shown in their personal pay checks. The responsibility in this situation was the people agreeing to help out without any supervisors there to persuade them to go. Additionally, teams in Nucor's situation are beneficial in motivation. People are willing to help one another because both people will be rewarded for a job well done. The mentality of "us guys" instead of "you guys" motivates people to form teams in a manner that is beneficial to the company.

The hygiene factors in Nucor case does not apply to their company. The areas of dissatisfaction that most other companies face such as pay and security do not come in to account. The factory workers by percentage make a much more comparable amount to their managers in comparison to different companies.

The primary reward for the executives at Nucor is financial compensation, including benefits. In their roles as executives, they naturally have many of what could be considered rewards by others in the organization. Autonomy, the ability to effect decision, and many other roles are a natural part of the role as an executive within an organization. The executive salaries are on average are a bit lower than average, while performance based pay is more and makes up more than 50% of total compensation.

The performance‐based component is primarily paid in the form of stock options and restricted stock. Options allow the holder to purchase the stock at a specified price, usually lower than market value. Restricted stock is direct partial ownership in the organization that vests over a period of time. These types of rewards are common among executives, as there is a direct correlation between how the company performs and the ownership stake the executive receives in the organization they have the ability to effect.

The employee reward system contains both financial rewards (including benefits), as well as non financial. The average employee at Nucor makes $100k a year, 20% more than industry average. This reinforces the organizations belief that people are the backbone of the company, and further strengthens the commitment to try and retain its employees. One of the most difficult aspects to manage in the milling industry is the turnover and training of employees; Nucor has recognized this and used financial rewards to deter this from taking hold within its own organization.
The employee also has intrinsic rewards available within the organization. They include: completion, autonomy, achievement, and personal growth. Moreover, they are all encouraged within the culture. This is most evident in the recalling of employees taking it upon themselves to help during a time of need. This allows them to grow, achieve a goal, make their own decision, and work until completed.
Approach to Change.

In analyzing the Nucor example, several observations can be made on change within the company and can be analyzed from the following viewpoints:
•
the external and internal forces driving change,
•
the agents of change involved,
•
the benefits and drawbacks, and
•
Innovation
Nucor is committed to its mission, taken from the company website, of “being the safest, highest quality, lowest cost, most productive and most profitable steel and steel products company in the world”. Therefore, reasons for change will be driven, as with any competitive company, by market conditions and competition. Under the three external force categories of economic, technology, and social / political change, changes based on market and competitors fit under the area of economic forces. An early example of an external economic force that caused the company to change was the high cost of steel in the 1960’s.

This high raw material cost drove the company to investigate how to supply its own bar steel rather than buying it on the open market. This was the start of an entire production strategy that is responsible for the survival of the company today. Another example of external forces of change facing Nucor today is the Crawfordsville plant which lacks access to a large waterway and therefore has to use ground transport for products, exposing the company to high fuel costs and their fluctuations. This is an example of external forces causing competitive disadvantage which will drive change into the organization.

Internal forces are also a factor of change at Nucor. The example cited by David Hutchins, a frontline supervisor at the Auburn, NY plant, explains that instead of slowing down his group’s production cadence in response to a problem occurring downstream in the manufacturing sequence, his group goes to the “bottleneck” and helps solve the problem. This seems characteristic of the way change is brought about and is an example of internal change forces. As employees recognize problems within the organization, they initiate change to solve the issues. Another example of internal forces requiring change would be the Crawfordsville plant’s limited capacity to produce wide sheets and the fact that it is Nucor’s oldest sheet mill. These limitations, internal to the company’s production facilities, will drive needed change.

The agents of change at Nucor are primarily internal change agents. The highly motivated workforce initiates change motivated out of rewards and personal implication that is tied to the culture of the organization. The example of the 3 electricians ‐ who went, of their own initiative, to the Hickman plant that was not theirs, and spent 20 hr days working over the weekend to get the electrical grid back up and running so the plant could perform to production plans – shows the level of empowerment and implication of the Nucor employees and that they didn’t depend on people outside the company to initiate the needed changes. Another illustration of internal change agents at Nucor is when the new manager of the Grapevine, TX plant received calls from all the other plant managers offering help if needed. The reflex of the Nucor employees is to personally involve themselves wherever they are needed.

There are several benefits to the Nucor approach of responding by internal change agents to internal and external forces. The company doesn’t have to depend on external change agents that need to spend time learning and analyzing the problems before initiating change. This is a gain of time and also expense since the external change agents charge consulting fees. There is also a major benefit in the creation and maintaining of the culture of “us guys” who are responsible for the business results at every level of the organization. The fact that the employees initiate change when they find problems within the company (internal force of change) is beneficial because not only is there a constant flow of continuous improvement effort that address specific issues, but also all areas of the company are enhanced from a performance standpoint because the entire workforce has the entrepreneurial spirit to impact results everywhere in the company.

This same spirit and benefits apply when economic or environmental conditions are identified and require change (external force of change). Because the whole company is striving to reach performance goals, the external forces of change motivate company‐wide adjustments to operations and strategy.

Possible drawbacks to Nucor’s approach would be that external change agents might be able to see blind spot areas that the internal change agents might miss. Another drawback would be that the internal change agents are also responsible for the daily running of the business and therefore might not have all the necessary resources (time and energy) to implement all the necessary changes and end up in a “burn out” situation.

The Nucor culture of continuous improvement toward performance goals also drives innovation. The early example of high steel prices compelled the company to innovate by changing their business model to use a process that was new to the US steel industry. Nucor switched to European type electric arc furnace mills (called minimills), which not only were cheaper to build but also used less expensive scrap steel to supply raw material.

Nucor also implemented this type of recycled scrap steel production on a larger scale than had ever been tried. Another example of innovation is the use of a West German technology to create steel sheets out of thin slabs that was at the origin of the Crawfordsville plant ‐ the world’s first thin‐slab cast mill. Innovation and change is ever‐present at Nucor. The company faces constant external and internal forces of change and the resulting innovation and change is seen as the responsibility of every Nucor employee. As the article states, “…Nucor employees have to innovate themselves out of tough spots and into more profitable ones. Changes have to be made often to the environment.”

As Nucor Corporation continues to innovate and grow as an organization, success will require a continuation of the innovative work practices they have implemented. Through empowering employees, providing rewards based on the achievements of the company, motivating team members and continuing to drive change they will have continued success. Nucor’s historical financials (www.nucor.com) show a steady increase in sales and earnings. Their corporate policies surely contribute to the successes as many other steel mill and industrial organizations have failed. In the words of Louis L. Schorsch, president and CEO of Mittal Steel USA (a Nucor rival), “In terms of a business model, they’ve won in this part of the world.”

Study done by:
Kim Selleck
Theresa Wood
Dave Miller
Gerald Baraza
Bill Reynolds
Jeff Williams
Organizational Behavior: Management Class of Professor Allene Kief

What is the most corrupt nation in the world?

ABOUT THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES.

I'm a little confused. Let me see if I have this straight...

* If you grow up in Hawaii, raised by your grandparents, you're 'exotic, different.’

* Grow up in Alaska eating mooseburgers, a quintessential American story.

* If your name is Barack you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.

* Name your kids Willow, Trig, and Track, you're a maverick.

* Graduate from Harvard law School and you are unstable.

* Attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you're well grounded

* If you spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer, become the first black President of the Harvard Law Review, create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor, spend 8 years as a State Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people, become chairman of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs committees, you don't have any real leadership experience.

* If your total resume is: local weather girl, 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000 people, 20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000 people, then you're qualified to become the country's second highest ranking executive and next in line behind a man in his eight h decade.

* If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising 2 daughters, all within Protestant churches, you're not a real Christian.

* If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and then left your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're a true Christian.

* If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, including the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.

* If, while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no other option in sex education in your state's school system while your unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant, you're very responsible.

* If your wife is a Harvard graduate lawyer who gave up a position in a prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner city community, then gave that up to raise a family, your family's values don't represent America's.

* If your husband is nicknamed 'First Dude', with at least one DUI conviction and no college education, who didn't register to vote until age 25 and once was a member of a group that advocated the secession of Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely admirable.

Political Violence in a fledgling democracy.

Professor Julius O. Ihonvbere

Mr. Chairman, it is not my intention to speak for too long today. I would prefer to be brief and to leave enough time for discussions and questions. Let me also confess that I hurriedly put this lecture together in the last two hours or so. I think it does contain enough to generate some conversation. I have left out details of violence. I chose to focus on the conceptual aspects of the problem though I would use examples as necessary. I thank you for honoring me with your invitation. I commend you for your courage, vision and commitment to the truth in a society that is as decayed as ours.

Thirty seven years ago, a young, charismatic and courageous military officer declared in a coup broadcast:

Our enemies are the political profiteers, swindlers, the men in high and low places who seek bribes and demand ten percent, those that seek to keep the country divided permanently so that they can remain in office as ministers and VIPs of waste, the tribalists, the nepotists…(Major Chukwuma Kaduna Nzeogwu, January 1966 Coup Broadcast.)

Ladies and gentlemen, let me ask a few questions: Are the political profiteers gone from the Nigerian society? Are the bribe takers gone? Do they demand ten percent or more today? Are those that seek to keep Nigeria permanently divided gone? Are the VIPs of waste no longer with us? What about the tribalists? Are they gone? Are they weaker in their politics? What about the nepotists? Have they been reformed? If we can answer “yes” to one of these questions, we can end the lecture right here, go home, pop some champagne and sing halleluiah because our country has been reborn. Let me put it to you all (as if you did not already know) that our country is still in big trouble. These troubles were not created by some invisible elements or by God. They were generated and nurtured by people that live amongst us; people that we all know very well. In fact, in many instances we have encouraged and protected these characters and this attitude has emboldened them to take more risks in perpetuating their dubious agenda. Today, we are all paying very dearly for the indiscipline, irresponsibility, arrogance, limited vision, wickedness and greed of this group. Unfortunately, their pathological fixation of irresponsibility, nepotism, corruption, waste, and other lucrative unproductive but not really helpful ventures have percolated to the lowest ebbs of our society to such an extent that even ordinary people now mimic the decadent elite. This is very unfortunate for a creative and hardworking people.

It is the coalitions, contradictions, distortions and disarticulations arising from these factors and forces that shape the content and context of our politics and society. It is the inability of the state to emerge as a relatively autonomous force; the inability of the governing class to build hegemony and emerge as a ruling class; the contradictions of production and exchange relations; and the continuing marginal location and role of the social formation in the global power balances that have created the foundations for political rascality in Nigeria. Thus, rather than build structures, ideologies, relationships, networks, and enabling environments to build a nation-state (if not a nation) out of the contending diverse interests, identities and nationalities that occupy our political landscape, the opportunistic politics of the power elite has rather, congealed alternative sites of loyalty and power. It has enthroned and reified normless politics, alienated significant communities that continue to survive and operate outside the hegemony of the state, and promoted a culture of cynicism and reliance on extra-legal processes and actions that now guide relations between the people on the one hand and the state and its custodians on the other. It is not an accident therefore that informality and informal relations continue to reign supreme whether is it to get a job, scholarship, admission, contracts, relate to public institutions and officers or whatever, Nigerians consider first an informal approach before or alongside a formal one.
Text of public lecture delivered under the auspices of THE BREEZE MAGAZINE, Airport Hotel, Ikeja, Lagos March 14, 2003

Read the rest of the lecture here:
http://www.ihonvbere.com/julius/2008/09/political-violence-in-a-fledgling-democracy/#more-166

WHO WILL AMERICANS HIRE TO BE THEIR CEO?

Obama:
Occidental College - Two years.
Columbia University - B.A. political science with a specialization in international relations.
Harvard - Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude

& Biden :
University of Delaware - B.A. in history and B.A. in political science.
Syracuse University College of Law - Juris Doctor (J.D.)

vs.

McCain:
United States Naval Academy - Class rank 894 out of 899 (meaning that, like George Bush, McCain was at the bottom of his class)

Palin:
Hawaii Pacific University - 1 semester
North Idaho College - 2 semesters - general study
University of Idaho - 2 semesters - journalism
Matanuska-Susitna College - 1 semester
University of Idaho - 3 semesters - B.A. in journalism

Now, which team are you going to hire to lead the most influential nation in the world?

KDPM STATEMENT ON THE INTENDED REMOVAL OF THE DEPUTY GOVERNOR OF THE CBK

WHEREAS Mrs. Jacinta Mwatela has served diligently at CBK since 1977, rising to the position of Deputy Governor and,

WHEREAS Mrs. Jacinta Mwatela served faithfully and effectively in an acting capacity when former Governor Andrew Mullei was removed from the Governor’s office and,

WHEREAS Mrs. Jacinta Mwatela, an extraordinary banker and public servant has an exemplary record of service at the CBK showing a personal commitment and struggle to make the Bank a reputable and respectable institution in Africa and,

WHEREAS Mrs. Jacinta Mwatela’s "replacement and promotion" to the position of permanent secretary for the Ministry of Northern Kenya and Arid Lands was not inspired by a sense of gratitude for the 30 years of exemplary service she has given to the CBK and,

WHEREAS Mrs. Jacinta Mwatela should have been made Governor because she had the academic qualifications and work experience needed for that office and,

WHEREAS Mrs. Jacinta Mwatela has been outspoken and uncompromising on issues that have to do with procedure and accountability and,

WHEREAS Mrs. Jacinta Mwatela now finds herself fighting to keep her hard-earned position at the CBK

THE KENYAN DIASPORA PRO-DEMOCRACY MOVEMENT WISHES TO STATE AS FOLLOWS:

THAT Mrs. Jacinta Mwatela’s purported removal from the office of the Deputy Governor of the CBK is illegal.

THAT the Government of Kenya has a constitutional obligation to respect the principal of the Central Bank’s independence which it subscribes to.

THAT the Government of Kenya has a constitutional obligation to keep politics out of the running of the CBK.

THAT decisions affecting the running of the CBK should not and must not be influenced by political considerations of a few power-hungry politicians.

Michigan On Fire For Obama!

The Coming of the New Organization: Is the Kenyan Industry Well Prepared?

Peter F. Drucker, a writer, management consultant, and self-described “social ecologist” who was widely considered to be the father of “modern management,” in his 39 books and countless scholarly and popular articles explored how humans are organized across all sectors of society. More than 20 years ago he observed that the levels of management in large businesses are going to be reduced drastically in the next 20 years. He saw that the businesses will have no choice but to become information-based. According to him, the impact of computer technology on capital-investment decisions is going to be huge. Drucker rightly believed that before the advent of data-processing capacity using computer technology actual analysis used to take many years but now with a spreadsheet anyone can do the same work in few hours. He predicted that computer technology is going to eliminate all the layers of management levels and managers that function as boosters for the faint, unfocused signals that pass for communication in the traditional pre-information organization.Drucker believed that unlike today’s big companies, the large, information-based organizations will more likely resemble businesses of a century ago where all the knowledge lay with the very top people and the rest were helpers or hands.

When one looks at the various industries that we have, you notice that this kind of change can already be observed in pharmaceuticals, telecommunications, and paper-making industries. In these research-oriented businesses, the traditional sequence of research, development, manufacturing, and marketing is being replaced by synchrony where specialists from all these functions work together as a team, from the inception of research to a product’s establishment in the market.

A keen observation at the development in the various industries shows that information-based organizations require clear, simple, common objectives that translate into particular actions. They also need concentration on one objective or at most, on a few. Because of this, an information-based business must be structured around goals that clearly state the management’s performance expectations for the enterprise and for each part and specialist and around organized feedback that compares results with these performance expectations so that every member can exercise self-control. The key to such a system is that everyone asks: Who in this organization depends on me for what information? And on whom, in turn, do I depend?

A number of management problems will surface in the information-based organizations. These will include developing rewards, recognition, career opportunities for specialists, creating unified vision in the organization of specialists, devising the management structure for an organization of task forces, ensuring the supply, preparation, and testing of top management people. The other challenge that information-based organizations face is giving its organization of specialists a common vision, a view of the whole.

Lastly, the hardest challenge will probably be to ensure the supply, preparation, and testing of top management people. With the number of middle-management positions sharply cut, where will the information-based organization’s top executives come from? What will be their preparation? How will they have been tasted?

OBAMA-PHOTO U WON'T SEE ON FOX!!!!

NO REMEDY FOR SACKED UNIVERSITY LECTURERS !

 By Monica Achode - Advocate

August, 2008

Nairobi

Republic V The Vice Chancellor Jomo Kenyatta University of
Agriculture and Technology [2008] eKLR (www.kenyalaw.org

)

High Court at Nairobi

J.G. Nyamu (J)

 July 25, 2008 

The remedy of judicial review is concerned with reviewing not the
merits of a decision in respect of which an application for judicial
review is made, but the decision - making process itself

The High Court on the 25th of July 2008 dismissed an application on
judicial review brought against the Vice Chancellor of Jomo Kenyatta
University of Agriculture and Technology (JKUAT). The applicants, Dr
Cecilia Mwathi and Mr Moses Muchina, had come to High Court seeking
orders to quash the decision by the Vice Chancellor made on the 25th
October, 2006 terminating their services and employment as academic
staff members of the University. They also sought orders compelling
the Vice Chancellor to reinstate and or recognize the applicants as
members of the academic staff of the said University.

The application was based on the grounds that the Vice Chancellor
acted improperly and in abuse of his powers. The applicants further
claimed that the decision was in breach of the rule of law, fairness
and natural justice as well as the rules of the code of conduct and
ethics. It was the applicants' contention that the decision was
oppressive and discriminatory. The applicants claimed that the
respondent had no powers to hire and fire University staff as this
power was vested in the University Council under sections 16 and 20
of the JKUAT Act No 8 of 1994 and the attendant University statutes.
The application was opposed by the Vice Chancellor who also happened
to be a member of the Inter-Public Universities Councils
Consultative Forum (IPUCCF).

 Strike Notice

The Applicants had been employed as lecturers by the University.
They also held the positions of the Chairman and Secretary of
University Academic Staff Union (UASU) respectively, of JKUAT
Chapter. The Applicant together with other officials of UASU had
issued the Minister for Labour and Human Resource Development with a
21 days notice to strike. The said Minister tried to intervene and
UASU vowed to go on with the strike. On 18th October, 2006, the
Applicants and other UASU officials of JKUAT Chapter called a meeting
to plan the launch of the strike. Contemporaneously, the Industrial
Court issued an order restraining the imminent strike or any
interruption of services by UASU and its members.

On the said 18th October, 2006, the JKUAT University Council held a
meeting and resolved that the respondent would take disciplinary
action against any UASU member that participated in the impending
strike. The Applicants encouraged their members to go on strike and
on 23rd October, 2006, they participated in the unlawful strike. On
31st January, 2007 the JKUAT Council Academic staff Disciplinary
committee met and ratified the termination of the applicants
employment. It was for this reason that the applicants brought the
application to the courts seeking judicial review over the decision.

It was the applicants' claim that the terms of service for Academic
Staff established a statutory and contractual relationship between
themselves and the University. According to them, the letter of
termination did not quote under which councils meeting the
disciplinary action against them was discussed and passed after
proper deliberations. Their argument was that the procedure: to
appear and be heard by the Council; to call and examine witnesses;
and to appeal to a full Council, was not followed by the Vice
Chancellor.

The Vice Chancellor in opposition to the application argued that the
orders sought by the applicants were directed to the wrong party as
neither JKUAT nor its Council was enjoined as parties to the suit. He
stated that it was only the Council that had the mandate to dismiss
the applicants. The Vice Chancellor maintained that the notice of
termination was properly served and although the applicants had the
right to appeal against their termination from employment they chose
not to do so. The termination was later ratified by the University
Council after the applicants waived their right to appeal. As such
they were barred from alleging that they had not been given an
opportunity to be heard.

Court Analysis

The Court considered the arguments put forth both by the applicants
and the respondent and felt that the issues before the court were
threefold: whether the respondent acted improperly and in abuse of
his power in terminating the applicants services as lecturers;
whether the decision of the respondent to terminate applicants
services had any basis in law and if it was oppressive and
discriminatory; and whether judicial review remedies were the most
efficacious for the applicants in the circumstances.

It was clear that the applicants had been employed by JKUAT as
lecturers. It was also apparent from the provisions of the said Act
that the University Council was the supreme body in all maters of
governance, control and administration of the University. The
applicants conceded that they were appointed by the University
Council, not the Vice Chancellor, in their respective positions and
that the university Council had powers to remove them from the
office. They failed to discharge the onus of demonstrating that the
respondent had abused his power in terminating them.

Justice Nyamu noted that the applicants admitted that they attended
the Council meeting of 18th October, 2006. It was therefore not true
that they were never given a chance to be heard before their
termination. A public body or a local authority while formulating a
decision in circumstances to which the principles of natural justice
apply did not need to observe the strict procedures of a court of
law. The court found that there had been no abuse of power by the
respondent who actually followed the procedure for removal from
office of academic members of staff.

The Court appreciated the fact that the statutes allowed the
dismissal of academic staff, and that the general principles of the
law of master and servant as applied in employment contracts, applied
to lecturers. It was of the opinion that the remedy of judicial review
was concerned with reviewing not the merits of the decision in respect
of which the application for judicial review was made, but the
decision - making process itself. The case of Republic V Judicial
Service Commission Ex-Parte Pareno, [2004] Klr 203 At P.204 was cited
in support of that position.

Justice Nyamu was of the opinion that the court's function was to
decide on whether the process leading to termination was proper and
not to adjudicate on the merit of the same since it was not in
dispute that the applicants could be removed from office. From the
foregoing principles the court could not therefore substitute the
termination for anything else for example reinstatement because the
court would be usurping the power clearly vested in the University
Council and or the Vice Chancellor. It was for the above reasons that
the court found the application lacking in merit and dismissed it with
costs to the respondent.

Download Case
<http://kenyalaw.org/Downloads_FreeCases/Republic_v_VC_JKUAT.pdf>

The Krigler & Waki Commissions – A total waste of time?

Hallow fellow Kenyans,

Much as I appreciate the need to "uncover" the truth, commissions of
inquiry haven't done Kenyans proud in the past. The ndung'u report on
grabbed land, the Goldenberg report, the Ouko inquiry etc etc continue
to gather dust at statehouse (their contents remain unknown to the
ordinary Kenyan).

How sure can we be that the Krigler & Waki inquiries will have their
recommendations made public, leave alone being implemented?

Serious questions arise, and Krigler's & Waki's is credibility is
based on the answers to the following main questions

• In the event that it emerges that PNU actually won (thanks to one
province). Will Hon.Raila resign as Prime minister and take up the
post of official opposition leader?
• If the elections were actually rigged and that PNU had infact lost,
will Baba Jimmy apologise to Kenyans and then leave for Othaya?
• If indeed it is made clear that the police used excessive force.
Will the Police Commissioner Major Gen.Ali be fired? (especially now
that he says he regrets nothing – not even the Rambo movie part)
• If it emerges that the polls were rigged, will Kivuitu be thrown
behind bars?

If the answer to any of these main questions is NO, then both
commissions are a waste of the public's time & resources.

By the way, most Kenyans will agree that the voting and the counting
went on very well. Trouble only began at the KICC during tallying when
it became clear that PNU was actually on its way out of power.
Why then is Krigler spending so much time & energy  going to Nyamira,
Kacheliba, Nyeri, Butula etc etc???
Will he ever question Jack Tumwa, and the other commissioners
Hon.Kibaki appointed unilaterally??
Will he ever ask Kivuitu exactly how it took 3 days "transporting"
bloated results from Kiambaa to KICC (Kiambaa is a mere 30 mins
journey to town).

See why am not so enthusiastic about these money guzzling inquiries???

Yours truly,
Alan E Masakhalia

DEAR KENYANS---WHAT DO YOU SAY?

DEAR Prime Minister Odinga,

Please be advised that we take great exception to some of the words you have used in describing our leadership in Zimbabwe, when you know very well that some of those words you use could well be used to describe yourself and your new government.

We shall not repeat everything you have said otherwise we will not be able to make our point clear.

You recently called Zimbabwe Africa’s ‘eyesore’ and an example of ‘how not to do it’. You have also said that ‘disaster is looming in Zimbabwe’.

You made similar statements about Zimbabwe, before the current violence had started around the beginning of April 2008, as if you had some special powers of ‘reading the future’. Everything you predicted has happened in exactly the same way; yet there was no precedent to such election violence in Zimbabwe — at least of that nature.

Today Zimbabwe feels like Kenya in December 2007-January 2008, where bodies, for the first time, are burnt and body parts cut off innocent civilians in the name of politics. We had never seen this kind of violence and level of killing in Zimbabwe and we condemn it unreservedly.

We challenge you to read reports of violence documented on Zimbabwe and you will agree with us that this type of violence is a first in Zimbabwe’s post-independence history.

You have been recently installed as a Prime Minister after almost 2, 500 post-election deaths, violent deaths, in your own country where we saw some of the worst brutality on the African continent in this day and age. Three hundred of your own people died pre-election (before December 2007) — a number that the current violence in Zimbabwe could never match; yet you have the audacity to call Zimbabwe an 'eyesore'.

Mr Odinga, we know that two wrongs don’t make a right, so Zimbabwe is not exonerated from criticism and it should be criticized. But who criticizes Zimbabwe and using what words? The words you have used recently Sir, are not akin to a new leader and whose own country is still reeling from one of the worst violent episodes on the continent.

We are getting increasing concerned and frustrated that you are not using diplomatic channels in criticising Zimbabwe. You will soon be mirroring the utterances of the erstwhile enemies of Zimbabwe, who have closed all diplomatic channels and are now trying to use 'force' to bring change in the couintry. You might as well be representing those countries, and their interests in Zimbabwe, not Kenya.

We do not exactly know what ‘triggered you off’ as a new Prime Minister to dedicate your respectable offices to criticizing Zimbabwe in this manner, when you have the advantage of your 'good offices' to do so. We were hoping that if you had any concerns, as a ‘head of state’ you had the opportunity to visit President Mugabe and speak to him directly. But you chose to use different fora; just like those people who have traditionally been at loggerheads with Zimbabwe.

Cowardly Insults

In this regard, with all due respect, we think this is cowardly. As a ‘head of state’ why you preferred to use the World Economic Forum in Pretoria and the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington as platforms for firing ‘insults’ at Zimbabwe, rather than engage the leadership to find common solutions, is not clear. Your silence on Darfur and your own problems at home on these same fora is very concerning.


When you said you are ‘enemy No 1’ in Zimbabwe, you were wrong Mr Odinga. Zimbabwe does not hate you at all. You are not the enemy. Why are you identifying yourself with the enemies of Zimbabwe? Why should Zimbabwe hate you? Or, to rephrase, do you want Zimbabwe to hate you? As a news organsiation, we are concerned by your statements, but hate is a far-fetched word. Afterall, you are an African brother.

We sincerely hope that you do not view your leadership as ‘a way of doing it’ in Africa. Your leadership as Prime Minister is yet to be tested, yet you have the audacity to speak ill about Zimbabwe's leadership.

As we speak ethnic tension in your country is showing no sign of abating and suspicion runs high in your cabinet. We do not know if President Mwai Kibaki shares the same sentiments as you on Zimbabwe. We have only heard your lone voice from your bloated cabinet.

The just-ended by-elections in your country have highlighted continued tensions between the coalition partners and the persistence of ethnic politics.

The coalition that holds your government together is still to be tested. We urge you not to be over-excited by power and start criticizing what you term 'old African leaders'.

We know about the disgruntlement that exists in your party today, and your desire to forgive those who have perpetrated violence in the post-election period which has been criticised by the Roman Catholic prelate Cardinal John Njue of Nairobi.

Many of your allies “have been disheartened by the success of Mr Kibaki’s party – and his Kikuyu ethnic group – in dominating a government conceived as a union of equals,�� according to the Financial Times.

Long-standing ethnic grievances over the unequal distribution of land, wealth and power in Kenya will not be resolved by a GNU, and we hope you know that. This, we know, is what triggered the post-election violence, although others have said it was your desire to attain power.

We hope you will not get so overzealous in your new job as to create new enemies for Kenya from old friends. You still have a long way to go before the next election (in 2012). There is still a lot of work to do on constitutional reform, on truth, justice and reconciliation, and on the ever contentious issue of land. These are very delicate areas and before you start presenting yourself as an effective leader, you have to resolve these problems first.

KENYA, NOT SO LONG AGO

We do not know who you represent in your views Mr Odinga, given that you seem to be distracting world attention from Kenya.

It would suffice to remind people of what happened to kenya in January this year, to contextulise our concern. Some quotations from the media not so long ago would help:

“An estimated 30 Kenyans of the Kikuyu ethnic group – many of them children – were burned alive after taking shelter from a mob in a church in the western town of Eldoret,�� CS Monitor, Jan 3, 2008.

“Ethnic violence continued to spread throughout Kenya on Sunday, with at least 7 people burned to death in their homes in a tourist town and more than 100 people killed in the past four days.�� Associated Press Janury 27, 2008.

In one incident, witnesses said at least 7 people and possibly as many as 14 had been burned to death after they were trapped inside their house. Associated Press January 27, 2008.

“On Saturday, hundreds of men prowled a section of the city with iron bars, poisoned swords, clubs, knives and crude circumcision tools. Boys carried gladiator-style shields and women strutted around with sharpened sticks. The police were nowhere to be found. Even the locals were shocked. ‘I've never seen anything like this,’ said David Macharia, a bus driver.�� Associated Press Janury 27, 2008.

This will suffice for now.

300 people died in pre-election violence in Kenya and 2,500 died post election violence. This number, by any measure, dwarfs the 65-70 deaths recorded by the MDC (Tsvangirai) in unclear circumstances, yet you call Zimbabwe an eyesore, without trying to engage the Zimbabwean government as a PM.

We feel that Mr Odinga you still have to prove yourself as a leader and therefore are unqualified to make informed judgments about other leaders. We do not know what advises your judgment.

We urge you to stop the globe-trotting and focus on troubles in Kenya and engage African (Zimbabwean) leaders. We also urge you to let Mr Kibaki sometimes comment on Zimbabwe. He is the president, afterall. We do not even know if he shares the same sentiments as you over Zimbabwe.

We also urge you to reduce the size of your cabinet. We know that cabinet posts in Kenya attract a monthly salary of nearly (US) $18,000 (£9,000). Assistant ministers earn a bit less - just over $15,000. (BBC)

We also know that there are “40 cabinet ministers and 52 assistant ministers, not far short of half the total number of MPs�� in your country.

“Ministers and their assistants also get allowances - that adds another $210,000 a month to the bill.

“To add insult to injury, the Kenyan exchequer only claws back a little in tax: only around $3,000 of the ministers' income is treated as taxable income.��

So we know that you spend at least US$1.5million a month on salaries alone — the Kenyan taxpayers’ money. What exactly are you managing in that country Mr Odinga? And couldn’t you use that money for land redistribution and dealing with ethnic divisions in your country? Do you think this is sustainable in the long run?

We have problems in Zimbabwe. We have to deal with them; but we do not need insults from you Mr Odinga. We need help. We did not insult your country or your leadership when innocent people died in Kenya in the name of politics.

We expect you, the new generation of leaders, to be exemplary, not derogatory and divisive.

What lessons are you teaching future generations of leaders?

Is this the best you can come up with in your first months of leadership?

Do you have to exploit every forum to chastise those who make mistakes and castigate your own continent?

The US$13m a year you are about top spend on your cabinet, according to the BBC, is enough to build around 50 new schools in Kenya. So is this not an ‘eyesore’ on the continent? Is this a ‘way of doing it’?

Having 40 permanent secretaries and their staff, adding hundreds of thousands of dollars more to the bill, is not a ‘way of doing it’, neither is it exemplary leadership on a continent that is trying to lift itself from years of foreign domination and extraction of resources.

Mr Odinga, we wonder why you have already been allocated 45 security staff and a fleet of cars to travel in, when you say the situation in Kenya is improving.

We also wonder why “cabinet ministers and their deputies get a minimum of five security personnel and a couple of shiny new cars.��

In a country with an annual per capita income of less than US$400, these statistics are shocking. They are irresponsible. They are an antithesis to development and an embarrassment to the continent, and definitely an ‘eyesore’ and a ‘way of not doing it’.

THE ZIMBABWEAN PROBLEM

Sometimes, Mr Odinga, we wonder if you really know the Zimbabwean problem — how it started and how long it took the government to get majority rule. We wonder if you have read the history of our relationship with the ‘wild wild West’. We wonder if you know how many people perished in colonial Rhodesian and how many people sacrificed their lives.

We also wonder if you know how many black Zimbabweans people fought in World War II and were only given 15 Shillings as compensation on return; and how your own people (the Kenyans) contributed to the British Empire in Burma and SE Asia and went back home to fight the same people for freedom. Obviously history is not important to you, Mr Odinga. We believe the world starts in 2008 for you?

We do not say seek retribution; but we say, ‘contextualize problems’ before you are given a ‘High Chair’ at some forum or institute. Have pride in resolving your continent’s problems; not castigating those who came before you. Even Catholicism was proved fallible, remember papal infallibility?

Why can’t Zimbabwe make mistakes without attracting your un-useful comments? Why can’t you take a trip to Zimbabwe and not to the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington D.C. if you feel Zimbabwe needs urgent attention? Why didn’t you detour to Zimbabwe on your way to, or from Pretoria, where you were attending the World Economic Forum?

Why do you always have to score points by mentioning Zimbabwe — and not providing credible solutions — than by talking about Kenya? Is there not enough trouble in Kenya?

We urge you Mr Odinga, to diplomatically engage the Zimbabwean government.

People are dying in the country and your words are not very helpful to a situation that is out of hand. We all exercised caution when Kenya was burning. It still is burning today, and we are still exercising caution. We are not getting over-excited. That’s what leaders do — find strtategic ways to resolve crises, not attack other leaders.

We do not remember hearing President Mugabe refusing to meet you or criticizing you or Mr Kibaki. We also do not remember you offering to help Zimbabwe. We remember your hugs with opposition leaders soon after your ‘inauguration’ and hugs at the World Economic Forum with Tendai Biti and Jendayi Frazer. Those are more memorable than anything useful you have said or done on ‘really’ resolving the Zimbabwean crisis.

We urge you to clean house before you make any further embarrassing statements about Zimbabwe in your first few months of leadership; and we also urge you to seek diplomatic ways of engaging the Zimbabwean government.

While at it, please also ask the Africa Commission and its splinter organisations and their spokespersons to lead a diplomatic offensive on Zimbabwe rather than speak from London.

Also please ask Mr Tony Blair to encourage the ‘African Elders’ he currently leads, to use the same methods he used in a more difficult situation in Northern Ireland, in resolving the Zimbabwean crisis.

Zimbabweans are dying from violence and soberness and diplomacy by leadership is needed; not these divisive by-partisan statements likely to divide a continent that was moving towards a Pan-African integration.

RSVP.
Wed 18 June 2008
http://www.talkzimbabwe.com/news/117/AR … 06-18.html

Benjamin Fulford Interviews David Rockerfeller

All Races Are Singing--OBAMA!

http://www.dipdive.com/dip-politics/wato/

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jun/13/barackobama.johnmccain

Michigandas-Obama Victory Party!

KDPM is glad to announce that we will have an Obama Victory Party for all Michigandas at the University club, Grand Rapids,MI, tomorrow from 7.00p.m to 12.00 a.m.An official from the National Steering Committee will address the gathering. Indeed this is a historic moment for all of us and we are glad to be part of it.All are welcome.

Gerald Baraza,President, KDPM

Clinton set to concede to Obama!

By BETH FOUHY, Associated Press Writer 6 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Hillary Rodham Clinton will concede Tuesday night that Barack Obama has the delegates to secure the Democratic nomination, campaign officials said, effectively ending her bid to be the nation's first female president.
ADVERTISEMENT

The former first lady will stop short of formally suspending or ending her race in her speech in New York City. She will pledge to continue to speak out on issues like health care. But for all intents and purposes, the two senior officials said, the campaign is over.

Most campaign staff will be let go and will be paid through June 15, said the officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to divulge her plans.

The advisers said Clinton has made a strategic decision to not formally end her campaign, giving her leverage to negotiate with Obama on various matters including a possible vice presidential nomination for her. She also wants to press him on issues he should focus on in the fall, such as health care.

Universal health care, Clinton's signature issue as first lady in the 1990s, was a point of dispute between Obama and the New York senator during their epic nomination fight.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080603/ap_on_el_pr/clinton

EVEN ASTROLOGERS SAY-"OBAMA WILL BE PRESIDENT-BUT...!

Astrologers starry-eyed for Obama
By William Porter
Denver Post Columnist
Article Last Updated: 05/20/2008 11:33:03 PM MDT

In a presidential campaign where we have gauged candidates based on the color of their pantsuits, the health of their skin and the ability to throw a bowling ball, one critical test has been overlooked.

I am, of course, talking about how their astrological charts stack up.

Lucky for us, the United Astrology Conference was in Denver this week, with 1,500 devotees from 44 countries. On Tuesday, seven top forecasters took the stage in the downtown Sheraton and made like television political pundits, minus the screaming.

I'll cut to the chase: Six panelists predicted the election will go to Barack Obama, thanks to a Saturn-Jupiter conjunction spelling change. The seventh, Shelley Ackerman, saw an Obama win, but worried about Neptune doing something funky in January, endangering his chances of actually taking office. Her colleagues agreed the stars did look dicey in this respect.

Panelist Sandra-Leigh Serio ran it down for me.

"Obama's chart and the United States' chart are very much alike," she said. "From an astrological standpoint, he's a man of destiny. (John) McCain also has a strong connection to the U.S. chart."

Hillary Clinton? Eh, not so much, apparently. "There's a little more confusion with her and the U.S. chart," Serio said.

Me, I'm not into astrology. I'll occasionally scan my horoscope, but only if it shows up on the same newspaper page as the crossword puzzle I'm working. The advice is always beyond generic. "Today's a bad day to antagonize your boss/spouse/Doberman."

One breathless woman came up and asked how I felt about Mercury in August. I told her I was generally a Ford man, but given that I was in the market for a new car this fall, would keep an open mind.

So the general star-chart enthusiasm was lost on me.

Still, the panelists were impressive. They sounded like astronomy majors who had paid attention in poli-sci class.

Before announcing their predictions, panelists discussed how they did their charts. There was some distress about the methodology in this election year.

"We don't have a single solid birth chart," panelist Robert Hand told the crowd. "If those dates are wrong, everything I say is garbage."

And Serio said the panel was "doing this in the shadows of Mercury and Neptune — this might not have any validity at all in a few months."

I didn't quite know what that meant, but gave her points for hedging her bets as deftly as any CNN analyst.

Hand ominously noted there would be an eclipse of the sun in August, with Mercury ascending for George W. Bush. The crowd gasped. This seemed to portend election-day shenanigans.

Gloria Star noted that Clinton has looming problems with Neptune. While signs indicate she will be gone from the scene on Election Day, other signs "indicate she's fighting somewhere."

"Probably in her kitchen," a woman behind me said.

Don't tell me astrologers lack a sense of humor.

For the record, McCain is a Virgo, Obama is a Leo and Clinton is a Scorpio.

"Leos and Scorpios are historically at odds," Serio told me. She nodded knowingly. "Bill Clinton's a Leo."

So there it is, courtesy of our top astrologers: Obama wins, probably.

Hey, have we heard anything better from the pundits?

William Porter's column runs Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Reach him at 303-954-1977 or wporter@denverpost.com.
http://www.denverpost.com/headlines/ci_9327085

On Maina Njenga’s Release & Why not sue for defamation?

To say that am surprised will be an understatement.
Calls for Maina Njenga’s release by the so called Central Kenya
Elders are very unfortunate to say the least. Maina Njenga is yet to be charged for his association with the Mungiki. He is behind bars for the simple reason that he was found in possession of a firearm (without a license). So, if he is to be released, then why don’t we release all those
behind bars on similar charges? Maina isn’t special as far
as the law is concerned hence incase he is released then I demand that
we release all those caught with fire arms.

I rest my case.

Yours

Alan E Masakhalia
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Why not sue for defamation?

Our defense minister continues to baffle many with his unwavering
notion that it is the civilians who are torturing their brothers and then
handing them over to the harmless army officers. If this is the case then I would ask that the military shows to the world one of those civilians that has been supplying them with already tortured SLDF suspects.

Alternatively, since more people are blaming the military for their
injuries then I would ask that our good minister Hon. Yusuf Haji takes
legal action against them. Why then is he allowing them to taint the
good name of the armed forces?

Over to you bwana minister.

Yours

Alan E Masakhalia.

A Ph.D IN MATHEMATICS AT 20 YEARS OLD!

The National Science Foundation (NSF) is proud to announce that 32-year-old Terence Tao, a professor of mathematics at the University of California at Los Angeles, will receive its 2008 Alan T. Waterman Award. Called a "supreme problem-solver," and named one of "the Brilliant 10" scientists by Popular Science (October 2006), Tao's extraordinary work, much of which has been funded by NSF through the years, has had a tremendous impact across several mathematical areas. He will receive the award at a black tie dinner program at the U.S. Department of State on May 6.

The annual Waterman award recognizes an outstanding young researcher in any field of science or engineering supported by NSF. Candidates may not be more than 35 years old, or seven years beyond receiving a doctorate, and must stand out for their individual achievements. In addition to a medal, the awardee receives a grant of $500,000 over a 3-year period for scientific research or advanced study in their field.

Terence Tao was born in Adelaide, Australia, in 1975. His genius at mathematics began early in life. He started to learn calculus when he was 7 years old, at which age he began high school; by the age of 9 he was already very good at university-level calculus. By the age of 11, he was thriving in international mathematics competitions. Tao was 20 when he earned his doctorate from Princeton University, and he joined UCLA's faculty that year. UCLA promoted him to full professor at age 24. Tao now holds UCLA's James and Carol Collins Chair in the College of Letters and Science. He is also a fellow of the Royal Society and the Australian Academy of Sciences (corresponding member).

Nicknamed "the Mozart of Math," Tao's areas of research include partial differential equations (PDE), combinatorics, number theory and harmonic analysis. Harmonic analysis is an advanced form of calculus that uses equations from physics. Some of this work involves, in a colleague's words, "geometrical constructions that almost no one understands." Tao also works in a related field, nonlinear partial differential equations, and in the entirely distinct fields of algebraic geometry, number theory and combinatorics, which involves counting.

In addition to the prestigious Waterman award, Tao has received a number of other awards, including the Salem Prize in 2000; the Bochner Prize in 2002; the Fields Medal, often touted as the "Nobel Prize for Mathematics" and SASTRA Ramanujan Prize in 2006; and the MacArthur Fellowship and Ostrowski Prize in 2007.

Through the years, Tao's research has often been funded by other NSF grants. His current research is funded by NSF Award #0649473, "Global Behaviour of Critical Nonlinear PDE."

http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=111401&org=NSF&from=news