Challenges Faced by Multinational Corporations

Challenges Faced by Multinational Corporations Multinational Corporation (MNC) is one of type of potential firm in the world nowadays. A corporation can be categorized as MNC if there are 20% to 50% or more of its net profit from directs investment in one or more in foreign countries. (Iamsam, n.d).[ http://hubpages.com/hub/Multinational-Corporations-MNCs]MNC are managed from one home country. With well- manage structure and due business firm good performance, it able to expand its products and services to foreign country. The growth of multinational corporations is measured by Foreign Direct Investment (FDI). When business firm make an investment in a second nation, the investment is counted as part of the outward direct investment from the source country. FDI is an investment in foreign firms where the foreign investor owns at least ten percent of the ordinary shares. 1.2. Coca-Cola Company History Coca-Cola is the largest manufacturer, distributor and marketer of non-alcoholic beverage concentrates and syrups that invented by Dr. John Stith Pemberton in Midtown Atlanta, Georgia in 1886. Today, Coca-Cola owns or licenses more than 500 brands, including diet and light beverages, waters, juice drinks, tea, coffees, and energy and sports drinks. It has already marketed 2400 beverage products in more than 200 countries globally at a rate of approximately 1.5 billion servings each day. E. Neville Isdell leads the Coca-Cola Company into the new century with a firm commitment to the values and spirit of the worlds greatest brand. Today, Coca-Cola is recognized as the world s most valuable brand. Coca-Cola Enterprises established in 1986, is a young company by the standards of the Coca-Cola system. Yet each of its franchises has a strong heritage in the traditions of Coca-Cola that is the foundation for this company. The Coca-Cola Company traces it s beginning to 1886, when an Atlanta pharmacist, Dr. John Pemberton, began to produce Coca-Cola syrup for sale in fountain drinks. However the bottling business began in 1899 when two Chattanooga businessmen, Benjamin F. Thomas and Joseph B. Whitehead, secured the exclusive rights to bottle and sell Coca-Cola for most of the United States from The Coca-Cola Company. The Coca-Cola bottling system continued to operate as independent, local businesses until the early 1980s when bottling franchises began to consolidate. In 1986, The Coca-Cola Company merged two large ownership groups which are John T. Lupton franchises and BCI Holding Corporations bottling holdings to form Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc. In December 1991, a merger between Coca-Cola Enterprises and the Johnston Coca-Cola Bottling Group, Inc. (Johnston) created a larger, stronger Company, again helping accelerate bottler consolidation. As part of the merger, the senior management team of Johnston assumed responsibility for managing the Company, and began a dramatic, successful restructuring in 1992. 1.3. Management Structure To create an effective organizational structure is one of the important tasks for top managers. In the International division structure, the abroad branch of the company is the attachment of the parent company. The international unit is responsible for controlling all of the international activities of the company. The division can be based on geography, product or function. There is an international division head which is responsible for controlling all of the activities of these units. This division structure allows the multinational companies to freely explore resources internationally. Whenever there are changes in internal business environment, the companies which have this structure undergo some changes.   Coca-Cola Company as the biggest non-alcoholic beverage concentrates which also a multinational company has to handles the enormous capacity of its business by international division structure. Coca-Cola is geographically operating segments; the five groups are North America, Africa, Asia, Europe, Eurasia and Middle East and finally Latin America. These five groups can explore their own ideas as to upturn the performance and continue success of Coca-Cola. 2. Globalization The process of globalization has impacted on the world s business operation which is mostly driven by the development of MNCs. According Macmillan Dictionary, term of globalization defines as concept a single economy and culture are developed as a result of advance in technology which easier the communications between two corporation and globalization mostly influence by multinational companies toward economic, financial, trade and communication. Besides, the United Development Program (1999) announces globalization is the most important integration of economy, political and cultural phenomenon across nation frontiers. (cited in Kiggundu 2002). Our world is increasingly becoming global, not only has increased in interconnected of countries in the area of economics and political but also culture Coca-Cola is a good example of a business which truly international in scope. Coca-Cola reported that 67% of its total net income from non- U.S. source. Various tactics used to expand globally: By setting up facilities and developing a global market which gives foreign markets easier access to our goods. Establishing transnational corporations to reduce production costs, and gives the companies cheaper labor. Competition-based pricing Product branding and positioning The idea of globalization can be simplified by identifying several key characteristic: Improved technology in transportation and telecommunications Movement of people and capital Diffusion of knowledge Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and Multinational Corporations Impacts of Globalization 1.) Establishment of international alliances The establishment alliances or coalitions which link firms of the same industry based in different countries. MNCs commonly engage in international alliances such as joint ventures and licensing agreements with foreign firms. Coca-Cola formed global joint venture with many industries to strengthen its company buy launching new products. These are the few joint ventures for Coco-Cola which doing well and earned huge profit on it. a. Coca-Cola joint venture buys Philippine drink company San Miguel, the Philippine food and beverage company, and its joint-venture partner Coca-Cola agreed yesterday to pay 14 billion pesos ($269 million) for the Philippines second-largest soft drink company, Cosmos. The purchase, which defeated a bid by PepsiCo, will give the joint venture, Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, a 90 percent share of the Philippines $1-billion-a-year soft drink market. The deal was approved when Cosmoss majority owner, the RMF Corporation, agreed to accept a lower offer after San Miguel discovered that some Cosmos equipment was below Coca-Colas standards. Wayne Arnold (NYT) b. Joint venture between Coca-Cola and Nestle to tap rapidly growing beverage segments   Coca-Cola and Nestle Refreshments (CCNR) is their highly successful joint venture formed on 1991 which operates directly in 24 countries and enjoys a strong position in the ready-to-drink tea category. On 30Jan2001, CCNR rename as Beverage Partners Worldwide (BPW) function as an entrepreneurial unit dedicated to tapping the growth potential of emerging beverage segments, actively expand into new beverage particularly ready-to-drink coffee, teas and beverages with a healthful positioning. BPW also focus on expanding its geographical with existing products include Nestea and Nescafe and new products inclusive of Tian Yu Di tea and Yang Guag tea businesses undertaking by Coca-Cola. c. Joint venture of Coca-Cola Company and Illycaffe Spa They introducing three premium ready-to-drink (RTD) espresso-based coffee products. The products are: Caffe full-bodied character, real Italian chilled caffe. First ready-to-drink coffee to offer black (no milk) espresso-based coffee. Cappucino intense uplifting aromas of illy espresso, blended with milk and dark cacao. Latte Macchiato smooth fresh illy espresso experience, swirled with milk. The product will be available in stylish premium can to attract the consumer. The RTD first launch in 10 European countries including Austria, Croatia, Greece and the Ukraine as the firm aim of their joint venture. After 1 month, the additional countries in Asia, North America, Eurasia and the Pacific as the expansion of the sales and will be delivered through the Cola-Cola system. The highly profitable RTD coffee category globally is valued at just under $16 billion and has experienced several years of growth that is expected to continue. Globally (excluding Japan), the ready-to-drink coffee category has grown at an average rate of 10.1 percent over the past five years.

Lester Pearson :: essays research papers

Lester Pearson Lester B. Pearson lived from 1897-1972. He was born on April 23 1897, in Newtonbrooke Ontario (now part of Toronto). He died on December 27 1972. He was born the son of a Methodist parson. As a child he worked very hard in school, and he became one of the minority of high school graduates who went on to college. In his studies he went to Victoria College and the Methodist College inside the University of Toronto. In his free time he played hockey and baseball. He then became a medical doctor in the Royal Flying Corps. He was Private Pearson in the Canadian Army Medical Corps. This took him to numerous foreign countries from 1915-1917. When he returned he went to Oxford University under the guidance of the poet Robert Graves. When he graduated he enrolled for the assignment of the Royal Flying Corps. He then began taking flight training but as fate would have it he was hit by a London Transport Bus. He remained in the hospital until he revived in the spring of 1918. In November 1918 he enrolled in the University of Toronto again. On June 5 1919 he graduated. Like many other young veterans he was at a loss for something to do. Law was a respectable profession at the time so he ground away at the ungrateful task of articling for law. After a week he decided that business was more promising. He worked at a number of places but in the end he decided to teach at the University of Toronto. He taught history in the University of Toronto from 1924-1928. All his students said he was a very unique teacher. In March 1924 one of his students, Maryon Moody decided to ensure getting her degree by becoming engaged to her teacher. And it worked. On August 22, 1925 Lester Pearson and Maryon Moody got married in Winnipeg. From there on they lived just outside of Toronto. Later he signed up for a position in The Canadian External Affairs Department. The government officials at first thought he had some sort of mental disorder due to the way he dressed and acted. In 1928 he got a position in the Canadian Department of External Affairs despite their beliefs. At the time Pearson had a very important position because Canada had finally achieved a feeling of nationalism. Canada also had hardly any diplomatic relations with other countries because Great Britain still handled most of it's affairs. For that reason when Great Britain went to war with Germany, so did Canada.

The Socioreligious Significance of Rice A comparison between two Southeast Asian societies :: essays papers

The Socioreligious Significance of Rice A comparison between two Southeast Asian societies ‘Without rice, there is nothing doing.’ Introduction. The fact that rice plays an important role in the lives of the peoples of Southeast Asia is undeniable. It is not just a form of sustenance that nourishes the body; it is also an aspect of everyday life that feeds not only the soul but the unbounded realms of the imaginative human mind. Such proverbs as above are an example of how rice is revered and incorporated in day-to-day living of the peoples in this region. Even outside the region, as in Mizumono Kuni – the Land of Luxurious Rice Crops that is Japan, the placement of rice is that of a very high level: †¦next to the Emperor, rice is the most sacred of all things on earth. Money can be squandered and the wastrel forgiven, but there is no forgiveness for wasting rice (Piper 1993:14). In Southeast Asia, rice is seen as the basis of almost all the cultures and civilizations ever created. It is also said to be responsible for the high populations of this region for if it wasn’t for rice that had replaced the millets and other staple food crops that preceded it, far fewer people could have been supported by agriculture (Piper 1993:1). The truth remains that the bulk of the cultures of Southeast Asia constitutes agriculturalists with rice as the main crop, with a few exceptions of course, in more industry-oriented nations for example. Two main elements can be derived: firstly, since rice has been the major crop cultivated in Southeast Asia for perhaps more than 7,000 years, surely cultures and civilization are interwoven with each other (Piper 1993:1). One can safely assume that that long a time must have been ample enough for gradual evolutions and intermixing of cultures and traditions, rituals and beliefs and so on that is closely linked to rice, so we can s ee similarities between cultures of different countries within this region that may have even perpetuated from the same roots. And the same goes to the careful selections of good varieties of rice over time. Secondly, rice is such an adaptive crop that it is not impossible to successfully grow it in different environments where crops could not have been grown successfully- from swampy valleys and deltas to hot, dry land above the floods and even in the mountain forests (Piper 1993:1).

Problem Formulation and Identification Process Essay

â€Å"It doesn’t matter which side of the fence you get off on sometimes. What matters most is getting off. You cannot make progress without making decisions† (Jim Rohn). In the corporate world, leaders are faced with decisions that can make or break the organizations they represent. Several methods, consensus, brainstorming, systematic, and democratic are used in the decision making process. This paper will investigate the decision-making processes most prevalent in each team member’s organization, compare and contrast them, and will show the most favorable aspect of each style. Consensus The name of my company is Envicor. Envicor is a plastics molding company that manufactures anything that can be made of plastic. This author was recently hired as the national sales manager to oversee Envicor’s newest product line, sporting goods equipment. This author’s job is to promote the sale of portable pitching mounds to a broad range of customers. When it comes to decision making, Envicor uses the consensus method. Consensus is a process using group decision making. The input and ideas of all participants are gathered and synthesized to arrive at a final decision acceptable to all. Through consensus, the company is not only working to achieve better solutions, but also to promote the growth of community and trust. Consensus takes more time, as many resources are investigated before a decision is made. Team members become committed to the decision through consensus. The consensus method gives everyone experience with new processes of interaction and conflict resolution. For consensus to be a positive experience, the group should have 1) common values, 2) some skill in group process and conflict resolution, or a commitment to let these be facilitated,3) commitment and responsibility to the group by its members, and 4) sufficient time for everyone to participate in the process† (C.D.T. 2009). The goal of Envicor is to expand our product line to as many customers as possible. After making contact with a catalog company, a meeting is called  in order to discuss the pros and cons of including our product in the catalog. In the meetings, each person gets a chance to give his or her opinion. Once everyone has spoken, a decision is made. By using the consensus method, the group is able to come together and make a decision based on each person’s opinion. Advantages and disadvantages exist when using the consensus method of decision making.. Some examples are:Strengths:†¢Encourages cooperation instead of competition†¢Garners trust and confidence; everyone is involved in the final decision†¢Everyone agrees to the final decision no matter whether a majority, minority, or lone voiceWeaknesses†¢Lack of experience may lead to inefficient use of the method†¢Lack of control in meetings, conversation goes off topic†¢No â€Å"ownership† when decision is not correct or no consensus made (Notes on Consensus-Decision Making). Consensus seems to work well for smaller companies because it allows them to actually talk out their decisions and come together. Bigger companies might struggle with this type of decision making process because there might be too many employees and it could waste a lot of time. Brainstorming In the brainstorming model, all employees use free thinking to create ideas that will later be used as part of the project’s process. Brainstorming is useful because it allows all employees, some with extensive experience, to give their input. All members’ contributions allow them to â€Å"own† their role within the group and therefore, believe they have been a larger part of greater good. Like other decision making processes, brainstorming has advantages and disadvantages. One advantage is that all decisions are reached by consensus of the entire group. The larger the group is in a brainstorming session, the better the results will be. Everyone works from his or her strengths, weaknesses, experience, and education to find the best results for the project. Next, by making the decision a group project, everyone has a chance to  participate in the decision making process. They are able to voice their objections and give alternative suggestions. This open forum allows ideas to flow freely, and sound decisions are made quickly. A disadvantage of brainstorming is similar to one of its advantages. With more than two or three employees making a decision, the result can become a point of contention and a fight for power within the group. The more people involved in the process, the greater the propensity for debate, creating the possibility of a stalemate. Another disadvantage of brainstorming is something called group think. This occurs when one member of a group makes a statement, and the others follow along. Nothing is accomplished because only one person is making the decision with no alternate suggestions. An open dialogue does not exist; therefore, solutions to problems are not properly explored. SystematicThe systematic approach to decision-making is rational and analytical. (Concise Handbook of Management) This approach employs existing data, and the goal of the decision is the focus of the steps taken to put the decision together. This author’s organization uses the systematic approach for making most decisions. A strength of using the systematic approach is that information used to reach the final decision is based on factual data. The goal has been clearly identified; the objective(s) have been defined; the impact of not addressing the issue has been established. A weakness of systematic decision making, an example of which will be described in the following paragraphs, is that the decision can become stalled in the process. Additionally, regardless of how much research is done, if all principal stakeholders are not engaged in the process, a negative outcome is possible. Several years ago this author’s company developed a product that was designed to align with current imaging procedures. The equipment is a dual-head injector for use in CT scan. The purpose of the dual-head is to provide Radiologists with the capability of using not only contrast media for the CT exams, but also saline. Benefits of having the saline option developed as  the clinical team became more familiar with the system, but initially the service team was concerned about damage occurring to the injector head if a saline syringe was not used. At that time, without consulting other stakeholders, the service and engineering teams went to work on a solution that would prevent this issue.Several years later, as the clinical team was successfully promoting saline usage, the engineering department began shipping a cap for the saline side of the injector. Yes, the issue had been clearly identified, the objective for the project was defined, and the impact of not addressing the issue had been determined. However, because all stakeholders in the decision were not involved, and because the process took so long, the decision and resulting action became a very expensive mistake. Democratic In this participative form of the decision making process the superior(s) gives complete ownership of the decision to the subordinates (Sager 1999). The democratic decision making process allows for the employees (stakeholders) to have ownership of the decisions that are made. The majority vote wins, which can lead to fast and effective decisions concerning the stakeholders. In this decision making process the adage regarding having strength in numbers reigns true. A drawback to the democratic process can be that no one person takes responsibility for the decision if something goes wrong. It may be hard to pinpoint how the decision came to such a conclusion if it does not work out for the benefit for the stakeholders. In using the example of the Health Insurance Accountability and Portability Act (HIPPA) of 1996, a vote for change by a group of individuals affected by the way health records were handled was applauded, then when implemented, the act became more a hindrance than a solution to a problem. In the vast health systems used there was a need to implement a privacy feature to protect patients’ information, so the HIPPA regulations were signed into law in 1996. HIPPA was implemented by a democratic decision making process and became popular with health organizations such as Medicare and well known health insurance companies. Later HIPPA’s biggest fans became its biggest objectors because the law made it impossible for anyone to get  health information on the patient, including the parent(s) or guardians of minor children and the elderly, unless there was a form signed by the patient, the legal guardian, or POA. HIPPA soon became more frustrating than helpful, and the majority who voted for its implementation became the majority opposing it. So in implementing the democratic decision making process for the good of the people to whom the power is given, it must be made known that â€Å"with great power comes great responsibility (Uncle Ben, Spider Man Pt1). Contrast and ComparisonProblems and issues are generally inevitable when people are working together. Each individual decision making process can allow for better management of those situations for building a better organization. This does not mean there will be an absence of issues, but whether or not the team resolves the problem effectively. Each decision making process described above demonstrates to the reader the importance of adhering to a process that will work for each organization. The consensus method shows how the power of agreement can lead to a good decision. However, this method can be time consuming and teamwork plays a major role. Brainstorming will allow for creativity and open ideas, but can also cause conflicts and debates among the group members due to so many independent ideas being presented. In the systematic approach to decision making organization is critical. This process bases decisions on factual information. The systematic process can be costly if all members are not involved in the final decision. Democratic decisions are made based on majority input. The stakeholders are in total control of the decision making process. Speedy and effective decisions can be made; however, problems can occur because not everyone who can vote will vote. Then if a decision has a negative impact on the group it can be hard to identify the owner of the problem. The authors of this paper have investigated four types of decision making, consensus, brainstorming, systematic, and democratic. Advantages and disadvantages of each type have been presented, and finally, all were compared and contrasted with each other. References â€Å"Consensus Decision Making.† Aids Coalition to Unleash Power. Retrieved May 19, 2009. http://www.actupny.org/documents/CDdocuments/Consensus.html†Notes on Consensus-Decision Making.† Retrieved May 19, 2009. www.vernalproject.org/papers/process/ConsensNotes.pdfScott, Jonathan T. 2009, Concise Handbook of Management: A Practitioner’s ApproachChapter 17: Managerial Decision Making and Problem Solving, p131- 138retrieved 5/19/09 from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.apollolibrary.com/ehost/pdf?vid=9&hid=106&sid=f7f74d3b-190b-4f87-ae2e-438809c65b35%40sessionmgr109McConnell, C. R. (2006). Umiker’s Management Skills for the New Health Care Supervisor. Ch 25 pp.337-345. Sager, K.L., & Gastil, J.,(1999). Reaching consensus on consensus Communication Quarterly. 47(1), 67-79.

Picasso Final Paper

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Book Will Always Exist Essay

We are living in a century of technical progress. More and more new gadgets appear in our everyday lives. If I had been told ten years ago that I would be able to check e-mails, listen to the music and read electronic books with the use of only mobile phone, I wouldn’t have believed it. Nevertheless nowadays it’s as easy as abc to read a book through computer, mobile phone or a special e-books reader. Major IT corporations raise competition for the invention of the most modern and convenient devise helping people among other options to read e-books. One of the advantages of e-books is that you can download it to your mobile phone, for example. Consequently there’s no need to take a heavy thick book with you anymore. Additionally some internet sources give the possibility to download files for free. You don’t go shopping, just to click on an icon. Hence, you simultaneously save your money and time – the most vital things in life. With the appearance of I-Pads, thin and light, more people change from paper books to this new handy gadget. However in spite of the variety of technical devises for reading, in my opinion, books will always exist. There is a large group of people who prefer simple paper to any modern equipment. Some people like the feel and the smell of paper. From my point of view that’s because paper is a natural material, produced from wood. Megapolis citizens often suffer from the lack of nature in the world of electronics and technology. Likewise when I think of myself recharging my batteries after a hard working day I imagine myself lying on a cosy sofa reading a thrilling book, a real paper book. I’d hazard a guess that I’m not the only one for whom a book may be associated with comfort and relax. That’s why it’s so pleasant to hold a book, turn its pages and feel yourself enjoying the atmosphere.

Effectiveness of Sobriety Checkpoints

Briana Purifoy Effectiveness of Sobriety Checkpoints Special Problems in Criminal Justice Dr. Stone December 1, 2010 Abstract A good theoretical basis exists for believing that properly conducted sobriety checkpoints and campaigns, may reduce drunk driving, and data from multiple checkpoint programs support this belief. The courts have upheld the constitutionality of checkpoints, opposing those who believe them to violate the fourth amendment. Each year, more deaths result for alcohol-related automobile accidents than any other cause.Sobriety checkpoints, along with media coverage and cooperation from multiple groups, are a necessity to reduce the amount of drunk driving in America. Introduction For many years, the law enforcement community has attempted to detect impaired drivers through numerous innovative efforts and measures. The problem of driving under the influence (DUI) is well known throughout society, yet, even with all of the strategies used to remove these drivers from U. S. highways, it continues to cause needless and tragic loss of life each year. When will this end? When will society no longer tolerate drunk driving?Until that time, the law enforcement community must attempt to contain the carnage inflicted upon law-abiding citizens by impaired drivers. Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of fatal injury and the second-leading cause of nonfatal injury in the U. S. Young adults 15 to 24 years old are particularly at risk for motor-vehicle-related injury (Miller, Galbraith, Lawrence, 1998). Driving under the influence of alcohol is the dominant risk factor for serious highway crashes. General drunk-driving deterrence can be achieved with programs of frequent, highly visible checkpoints.Checkpoints also offer specific deterrence by apprehending drunk drivers. One study estimates that 87% of the drinking drivers apprehended at sobriety checkpoints would not be apprehended otherwise (Miller et al. , 1998). The consequential deaths of drunk dri ving are not â€Å"accidents. † They are the inevitable results of behavior that can be prevented. Although there is no one solution to this problem, sobriety checkpoints are an important component of programs that have reduced the incidence of drunken driving and the resulting loss of life.The purpose of this paper is to discuss the effectiveness of sobriety checkpoints on drunk driving. It will review the constitutionality of the checkpoints, along with reviewing several studies on checkpoints administered in certain areas or states and their effectiveness on drunk driving and alcohol related accidents. Literature Review Operationalizing Drunk Driving According to national Highway Traffic Safety Administration statistics, 16,653 people died in alcohol-related crashes in 200, an increase of more than 800 deaths from 1999.This represented the largest percentage increase on record (Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), 2002). By some estimates, about two out of every five Amer icans will be involved in an alcohol-related crash at some time in their lives (Greene, 2003). An analysis conducted on the effects on crashes of DUI-checkpoints indicated that crashes involving alcohol are reduced by 17 percent at a minimum and that all crashes, independent of alcohol involvement, are reduced by about 10 to 15 percent (Erke, Goldenbeld, Vaa, 2009).Further research has revealed that authorities make 1 arrest for driving under the influence for every 772 episodes of driving within 2 hours of drinking and for every 88 occurrences of driving over the legal limit in the United States (Zador, Krawchuk, Moore, 2000). These tragic statistics dramatically illustrate that driving under the influence is a serious problem. Sobriety checkpoints have the greatest deterrent value of all impaired driving enforcement methods, and the public (87 percent in 2005) supports these measures (Kanable, 2006).Prevalence of Sobriety Checkpoints Sobriety checkpoints have existed for several y ears and have served as a deterrent to drunk driving across many communities. Although not the most aggressive method of removing impaired drivers from America’s roadways, these checkpoints comprise one piece of public awareness and education relevant to the drinking and driving dilemma. Sobriety checkpoint programs are defined as procedures in which law enforcement officers restrict traffic flow in a designated, specific location so they can check drivers for signs of alcohol impairment.If officers detect any type of incapacitation based upon their observations, they can perform additional testing, such as field sobriety or breath analysis tests (Greene, 2003). To this end, agencies using checkpoints must have a written policy as a directive for their officers to follow. Agencies normally choose locations for checkpoints from areas that statistically reveal crashes or offenses (Green, 2003). Officers stop vehicles based on traffic flow, staffing, and overall safety. They mus t stop vehicles in an arbitrary sequence, whether they stop all vehicles or a specified portion of them.Checkpoints offer a visible enforcement method intended to deter potential offenders, as well as to apprehend impaired drivers. Sobriety checkpoints must display warning signs to approaching motorists. Used to deter drinking and driving, sobriety checkpoints are related more directly to educating the public and encouraging designated drivers, rather than actually apprehending impaired drivers. They offer authorities an educational tool. Education and awareness serve as a significant part of deterrence.Frequent use of checkpoints and aggressive media coverage can create a convincing threat in people’s minds that officers will apprehend impaired drivers, a key to general deterrence. In addition, public opinion polls have indicated that 70 to 80 percent of Americans surveyed favored the increased use of sobriety checkpoints as an effective law enforcement tool to combat impair ed driving (MADD, 2002). The average motorist is stopped for a very brief period of time, found to be approximately 30 seconds by the trial court in Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz (Willard, 1990).Only if there is evidence of intoxication is the motorist given traditional sobriety testing. The goal of sobriety checkpoints is to deter drunk driving by increasing the perceived risk that those who drive under the influence of alcohol will be apprehended. The checkpoint serves as a visible warning not only to drivers who are drunk, but also to those who are sober but might contemplate driving in an impaired state on some other occasion. Programs that include checkpoints prevent drunk driving more effectively than those that rely solely on conventional law-enforcement techniques, such as waiting to bserve erratic behavior (Willard, 1990). The National Commission on Drunk Driving and the U. S. Department of Transportation support the use of sobriety checkpoints because of their dem onstrated effectiveness. Critics of sobriety checkpoints have argued that they are unconstitutional because other methods of combating drunk driving are less intrusive and more efficient. Although these assertions are themselves highly debatable, the Supreme Court has held that such considerations do not provide a basis for finding a violation of the Fourth Amendment.Checkpoints do not involve the sort of unconstrained police discretion that the Court found objectionable in Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U. S. 648 (1979). Because every car or a predetermined ratio is subject to the checkpoint, police cannot stop motorists on an arbitrary or discriminatory basis. The validity of the checkpoints also can be sustained under the administrative search doctrine developed by the Supreme Court in such cases as New York v. Burger, 483 U. S. 691. Constitutionality of Sobriety Checkpoints In Michigan Department of State Police v.Sitz, The United States Supreme Court held that a Michigan sobriety chec kpoint program was consistent with the requirements of the fourth amendment. The Court, applying the balancing test announced in Brown v. Texas, held that the state had a legitimate interest in preventing drunk driving, the sobriety checkpoint sufficiently advanced the public interest, and the intrusion on individual motorists was slight (The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 1991). Moreover, the Court understated the effectiveness of the sobriety checkpoint program by undervaluing its deterrent effect.The checkpoint’s intrusion on individual liberty is slight and indistinguishable from the intrusion upheld in Martinez-Fuerte. The Supreme Court has indicated that an individual in an automobile is not entitled to the same level of privacy as an individual in the home, according to South Dakota v. Opperman. The Court has held that stopping a vehicle and detaining its occupants is a â€Å"seizure† within the meaning of the fourth amendment. Yet, it has also held that a stop and seizure of a moving automobile can be made without a warrant (Almeida-Sanchez v. United States, 1973). However, the Court noted in United States v.Almeida-Sanchez that roving patrol searches of vehicles required consent or probable cause to be â€Å"reasonable† under the fourth amendment. Later, in United States v. Martinez-Fuerte, the Court found permanent checkpoints on major highways near the Mexican border consistent with the fourth amendment, because the permanent checkpoints stopped all vehicles and questioned the occupants in an effort to uncover illegal aliens. Furthermore, when proving the effectiveness of the sobriety checkpoint program, the Michigan Department of State Police did not need to show the checkpoint was the only practical alternative (Michigan Dept. f State Police v. Sitz, 1990). Accordingly, Justice Stevens inappropriately evaluated the effectiveness of the checkpoint program in comparison to other potential police procedures when he ar gued that a higher arrest rate could have been achieved through use of more conventional police techniques. Such an approach â€Å"violates the principle that such less-restrictive-alternative arguments are inapplicable in the search and seizure context† (The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 1991).In fact, the Supreme Court rejected a less-restrictive-alternative argument in Martinez-Fuerte when it argued that â€Å"the logic of such elaborate less-restrictive-alternative arguments could raise insuperable barriers to the exercise of virtually all search and seizure powers. † The Court’s decision in upholding a sobriety checkpoint program paves the way for law enforcement officials to implement a promising technique for combating drunk driving. Importantly, the court accomplished this task without a radical departure from fourth amendment jurisprudence.Rather, the Court arrived at its decision through a consistent application of the case law on automobi le searches and seizures. The Court correctly applied the balancing test enunciated in Brown and properly held that the equities weighed in favor of upholding the constitutionality of the Michigan sobriety checkpoint program (Blade, 1990). The arrest rate realized in the Michigan program compared favorably with similar â€Å"seizures† upheld by the Court. Finally, the Court properly concluded that the subjective intrusion on individual liberty was slight in ight of the substantial drunken driving problem confronting this country, clearing the path for law enforcement officials to combat drunk driving more effectively. Review of Studies A comparative study implemented by Greene (2003) gives statistics compiled by two agencies, similar in size and area of responsibility. They offer an overview of the scope of the DUI problem. In 200, the Missouri State Highway Patrol conducted 58 sobriety checkpoints and arrested 323 drivers for DUI. The Ohio State Highway Patrol carried out 12 sobriety checkpoints and arrested 77 drivers for DUI.In 2001, Missouri effected 67 sobriety checkpoints and arrested 318 drivers for DUI. Ohio implemented 19 sobriety checkpoints and arrested 126 drivers for DUI. Since 1989, the Ohio State Highway Patrol has participated in 156 sobriety checkpoints and arrested 807 drivers for DUI. Also, from 1994 to 1995, Tennessee, in cooperation with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, implemented a statewide campaign completing nearly 900 sobriety checkpoints. Law enforcement agencies conducted these in all 95 counties in Tennessee in just over 1 year. The checkpoint programs were highly publicized and conducted basically every week.The evaluation of the program revealed it as highly favorable in reducing the number of alcohol-related fatal crashes. Basically, Missouri averaged about 5 DUI arrests per checkpoint. Ohio averaged less than 7 DUI arrests per checkpoint, and Tennessee’s aggressive checkpoint program averaged l ess than 1 arrest per checkpoint. Sobriety checkpoint programs in Florida, North Carolina, New Jersey, Tennessee, and Virginia have led to a reduction in alcohol-related crashes (Greene, 2003). In 1995, North Carolina conducted a statewide enforcement and publicity campaign aimed at impaired drivers.The campaign was deemed a success, indicating â€Å"drivers with blood alcohol levels at or above 0. 08 percent declined from 198 per 10,000 before the program to 90 per 10,000 after the intensive 3-week alcohol-impaired publicity and enforcement campaign† (Delkab County, Georgia Police Dept. , 2002). Another study conducted by Levy, Shea, and Asch (1989) reported the result of some studies of the effectiveness of DWI programs in New Jersey. Effectiveness was defined in terms of traffic crash experience. Their study was devoted to a drunk driving deterrence program named Strike Force, which implemented sobriety heckpoints administered at the county level, with supervision and fund ing from the state and federal government. The Strike Force program provided overtime funding to police departments on a county-wide basis and used a system of random roadside checkpoints to examine drivers for possible intoxication. Police directed traffic onto a single lane, where officers spoke to the driver and provided drunk driving information materials. Drivers who appeared to have been drinking were directed to an area off the roadway for further screening (psychomotor and breath tests).The checkpoint sites and times were determined by police personnel based on prior analysis of accident and arrest data. Operations were usually conducted on weekend nights and were moved to different sites. Although the Strike Force program remained small in terms of resources, their impact on public consciousness was important. The checkpoint programs were publicized on radio and television. The sites were unannounced, but visibility was a prime consideration. Checkpoint trailers with banner s were conspicuously parked in the participating county and driven in major areas when not in use.Surveys conducted for the state found that awareness of them is close to universal among drivers. An important part of the deterrence strategy was the informational and consciousness-raising programs, which not only educate citizens but also inform then of enforcement efforts. The fall in New Jersey’s single-vehicle nighttime rates relative to the state’s all-fatality rate and relative to the US single-vehicle nighttime fatality rate would suggest that New Jersey was effective at deterring alcohol-involved traffic crashes.The coefficient for the Strike Force variable indicated that the program at its peak reduced the single vehicle nighttime crash rate by greater than 20 percent. However, a number of other influences may have contributed, such as other statewide policy changes in New Jersey, including two increases in the minimum legal drinking age and stricter court penal ties for drinking and driving (Levy et al. , 1989). Finally, another study was conducted in an attempt to reduce the amount of drivers driving under the influence on a college campus (Clapp, Johnson, Voas, Lange, Shillington & Russell, 2003).DUI checkpoints were operated by the campus police with assistance from the local city police and the highway patrol. Checkpoints were conducted on three main streets surrounding the campus. These streets were selected because they had a significant amount of student foot traffic and motor vehicle traffic. On average, 730 cars were stopped at each checkpoint. Consistent with Ross (1982), the primary goal of the checkpoints was to increase the perception of risk of arrest for DUI. Arrests were a secondary goal. As such, the checkpoints included 10-15 officers, several police cars with their lights turned on, cones, flares and large spotlights.For each checkpoint, the local media (including the campus paper) were contacted. The checkpoints all received coverage on local television news broadcasts. During the intervention period, the campus newspaper ran six stories related to DUI. One of these stories focused directly on increased enforcement. During the baseline period, the school paper ran 11 DUI-related stories. Additional informational tactics were used, such as telephone interviews and personal interviews. The results revealed a considerable drop in self-reported driving after drinking following the DUI prevention campaign tested at the campus.Also, perceptions of DUI risk increased for students at the university. An important part of the deterrence strategy was the informational and consciousness-raising programs. Conclusion Law enforcement agencies should not accept mediocrity in the area of driving under the influence enforcement. It is not a societal problem. It is everyone’s problem, and no one should take it lightly. More people die or are injured on this nation’s highways due to impaired driving than from all other causes combined (Greene, 2003).It is unacceptable, and all Americans pay a price, whether personal, financial, or professional. Law enforcement agencies must take up the challenge and employ every available weapon to combat this deadly threat. This is a very possible ambition. Through better education, increased awareness, and some strict penalties, the battle can be won. Working in collaboration with one another, the public, the law enforcement community, and the judicial system can help prevent the needless loss of life that results from drunk driving. When people are knocked away one at a time, it doesn’t make the headlines like it should, but we’ve got to make Americans realize the fact that it’s still the number one killer, and it’s 100 percent preventable. This is one thing that we can all work together to do something about† (Webb, 2002).