1. Warm Up (SOpts)
i. (ZS pts) Draw map showing how you are connected to your friends or family. You may pick the
criteria of the connection (e.g., emotional closeness, contact frequency, business connection, etc).
Draw a map of how you are connected.
a. Define the linkage. Use one measure of linkages (frequency of contact, emotional connection, etc).
Show how you defined your scale.
b. What defines your clusters? Show 3-5 clusters. (3xmaximum: 9096 credit, St maximum 10096
c. What is the nature of your connections (e.g., Y’s, stars, bridges, etc). What percent of your links
does this cover?
ii. (25 pts) Repeat i, but use a different criteria for your linkages.
2. Mass Effect (50 pts)
There are over 18 hair cuts in the United States per year. Yet, there is no strong network platform to
connect hair stylists and people in need of a cut. People cite many inconveniences with regards to
haircuts: travel, scheduling, dependability.
How would you build a platform that connects stylists to people in need of a good cut?
a. Name the first 3 buckets that you will need to fill. How will you do that?
b. What value proposition would you focus on? How will you measure whether people are
receiving the value you are touting?
c. When do you think you will reach critical mass? What criteria would you use?
d. All businesses grow in stages. What do you think will be the first 3 stages this business will go
through? (Hint: think TM-SAM-TAM). Keep in mind, a bucket is different from a stage.
Durkheim was a French positivist, with an accentuation on functionalism, which spins around a natural relationship where in the public arena, is viewed as a natural entire with every segment attempting to keep up the others, like the human body. Its principle intrigue is perceiving how these parts make a steady entirety. One of the principle regions of Durkheims approach is the attention on social certainties, these are social wonders and mindsets and acting that control people in some way or other and can incorporate foundations, for example, the state and instruction. They show up from on the whole framed standards and practices, be they religious or common and are outside our ability to control as people. Due to these social certainties people have more diminutive or no power over their own behavior, as opposed to developing their own reality they are coordinated by the framework as society needs certain social practices and wonders to survive. These social actualities are passed on from age to age and shared among the people. From this point of view it isn’t individual will that drives practices yet rather the basic standards and estimations of society that shape ones awareness. “Not exclusively are these sorts of conduct and thinking outer to the individual, however they are endued with a convincing and coercive power by uprightness of which, regardless of whether he wishes it or not, they force themselves upon him” (Durkheim, 1895 pp50). These social certainties frame the premise of an aggregate awareness, which Durkheim sees as ‘the group of convictions and slants regular to the normal individuals from a general public’ (Durkheim, 1893). This aggregate awareness advances solidarity, producing a typical bond between people in a general public, making a type of request and security. Without a type of good accord there would be strife and confusion “From where intrigue is simply the main decision for every individual winds up in a condition of was with each other” (Durkheim, 1973, p89) Since the aggregate awareness is a social truth it too obliges people to act as far as more noteworthy’s benefit and for the benefit of the general public and is profoundly engraved on the person as without it there would be no general public as we probably am aware it. These social realities can have issues on the off chance that they direct excessively or insufficient, without enough control the individual would surrender to their own particular needs and wants, with an excess of they would feel stifled, definitely both will prompt abnormality, that being conflicting with the standards and estimations of society. From an aggregate awareness come two types of solidarity, natural and mechanical. Natural solidarity depends on a reliance that people in a propelled society put on each other. It is basic among social orders where the division of work is high. In spite of the fact that people perform diverse undertakings and regularly have distinctive esteems and interests, the request and survival of society relies upon their dependence on each other to play out their particular errands. Mechanical solidarity then again depends on the likenesses among people in a general public, inside it individuals feel associated through comparable work, instruction and religious practices. It essentially exists in social orders that have a low division of work where this is little association amongst people and where there is a fundamental or sloppiness and contrasted with social orders with natural solidarity there is more esteem set on religion, society and its interests and there is a more prominent aggregate awareness and less accentuate set on independence, that being the place you consider yourself an individual as opposed to some portion of a gathering, putting yourself first and so forth (Haralambos 2004 pp??). From natural solidarity and independence can come anomie, this is a feeling of normlessness, where standards themselves are misty, separated or unregulated “If the principles of the marital ethical quality lose their power, and the common commitments of a couple turn out to be less regarded, the feelings and cravings governed by this division of profound quality will end up unlimited and uncontained, and emphasizd by this very discharge; feeble to satisfy themselves since they have been liberated from all restrictions, these feelings will create a disappointment which shows itself visibly…”(Durkheim, 1972, p. 173) He noticed that it was basic in social orders that had a less characterized aggregate cognizance and a higher measure of individualism”…The condition of anomie is unimaginable at whatever point associated organs are adequately in contact and adequately broad. In the event that they are near each other, they are promptly mindful, in each circumstance, of the need which they have of each other, and therefore they have a dynamic and lasting sentiment common dependence.”(Durkheim, 1895, p184) Uneven characters in the measure of direction caused by social realities and the measure of mix from solidarity are one of the primary factors inside suicide, less propelled social orders having excessively mix and control and mechanical social orders have excessively tinier of either. Durkheim said that suicide was a social demonstration, not by any stretch of the imagination an individual one spinning around the connections between the individual and society. He found that there was a connection between’s the suicide rate and different social realities. For instance he found that suicide rates were higher in protestant nations than catholic ones, he likewise found that there was a low rate amid times of social and political change because of the measure of solidarity that such occasions makes (Durkheim in Marsh, pp66-69). He laid out four kinds of suicide, contingent upon the degree that people were engaged with society and on the degree that their conduct was controlled. The four kinds being selfish, anomic, philanthropic and fatalistic. Prideful suicide is basic in modern social orders with high measures of division of work and originates from a high measure of independence, which comes from a low measure of joining because of a feeble aggregate cognizance from the social gatherings from which they initially had a place; essentially society enables the person to escape it “For this situation the bond appending man to life unwinds in light of the fact that that connecting himself to society is itself slack” (Durkheim in Marsh pp67). This kind of suicide Durkheim said represented the distinctions of suicide rates amongst Protestants and Catholics, with Catholicism’s requesting a higher measure of congruity, in contrast with the Protestant church that urged the person to decipher the religious messages in their own specific manner without shame. Another sort of suicide normal in modern social orders is anomic which comes about because of a low measure of direction. It happens when standards and qualities are disturbed by social change, obtaining sentiments of vulnerability inside the person. “At whatever point genuine corrections occur in the social request, regardless of whether because of a sudden development or to a startling fiasco, men are more disposed to implosion” (Durkheim in K. Thompson, 1971, pp109) Durkheim found that suicide rates ascended amid positive and in addition negative headings of social change. He noticed that there was an ascent after the crash of the Paris stock trade in 1882 and the triumph of Rome in 1870 by Victor-Emmanuel which brought about rising compensations and expectations for everyday comforts yet in addition an ascent in the suicide rate. On the contrary side of the range is selfless suicide that originates from a high measure of joining and solid sentiment society and strong aggregate cognizance. This type of suicide is for the most part exhibit in pre-modern social orders who have mechanical solidarity. This was viewed as a benevolence for the benefit of the gathering “This forfeit at that point is forced by society for social finishes” (Durkheim in Marsh, pp68). It isn’t done in light of the fact that it seen as the best alternative however more out of a feeling of obligation to said gathering. For somebody to do such a carry on of obligation then they should have minimal self-esteem, the individual being completely submerged into a gathering and feeling like only a piece of a more noteworthy thing, along these lines exceptionally incorporated. “For society to have the capacity to constrain some of its individuals to execute themselves, the individual identity can have little esteem. For when the last starts to frame, the privilege to presence is the main surrendered” (Ibid, pp68) Various cases of this can be seen all through history, Vikings thinks of it as offensive to kick the bucket of maturity or infection thus finished their own particular lives to stay away from social disrespect. Durkheim set no significance on fatalistic suicide, saying that it had more place in history than in current social orders. It happened when society confined an individual so much that they were subdued, feeling that they had no fates or dreams. One of the significant reactions of Durkheim’s investigation is his ideas of incorporation and control. Durkheim gives no insight regarding how one would gauge reconciliation or direction for instance – he basically requests that we expect that such “hidden” ideas are huge in connection to the clarification of suicide. He accept that self-destructive conduct comes about because of a deviation from typical levels of reconciliation and direction. We are given no thought what precisely is an ordinary level, so we can’t state what measure of control and incorporation is typical or anomalous (Web ref 1). However with some work, it could be conceivable to think of different test identifying with proposals ideas, so we could quantify them among various gatherings in the public arena. A moment feedback is that his work on suicide depends on official measurements from the nineteenth century He gives us little thought regarding the unwavering quality of the wellspring of the insights and the techniques utilized as a part of recording them couldn’t be up to scratch, some could not be right, since they were written by hand things could be misread et cetera. Another factor is that the assurance of suicide includes is procedure of translation by various individuals, for example, policemen, specialists, coroners and so forth (Ibid). In this regard, we have no genuine method for deciding either the dependability>