Ovi -
we cover every issue
Apopseis magazine  
Ovi Bookshop - Free Ebook
Ovi Greece
Ovi Language
Books by Avgi Meleti
The Breast Cancer Site
Murray Hunter: Opportunity, Strategy and Entrepreneurship
International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement
BBC News :   - 
iBite :   - 
Are South-East Asian "B" Schools infatuated with 'Western' Management ideas? Are South-East Asian "B" Schools infatuated with 'Western' Management ideas?
by Murray Hunter
2013-01-31 11:21:00
Print - Comment - Send to a Friend - More from this Author
DeliciousRedditFacebookDigg! StumbleUpon

In the rapidly urbanizing ASEAN region today upward career mobility requires a diploma, degree, and some form of post graduate qualifications to get promotions, particularly within the desirable publicly listed companies in the region. Upon closer scrutiny of what is taught at these "B" schools,  a colonial hangover and psychological dependence on 'Western' ideas appears to still linger on. This is somewhat ironic in a region where most South-east Asian governments espouse their own national values and "ways of doing things".

South-East Asian countries may stand independent politically, gone a long way in achieving economic independence, but today still trapped within the syndrome of intellectual colonization. As business schools steadfastly stick to occidental business curriculum, former “western colonial masters” still dominate their ex-colonies, this time intellectually.

Business, entrepreneurship, and management courses are the fastest growing areas in South-East Asian education. Along with ICT, these are the most popular areas within both the private and public higher education sectors. The relatively low overhead and operational cost per cohort is a financial windfall for colleges and universities. Business education has become the cash-cow of colleges and universities within the region.

What makes these courses financially lucrative is the relatively low cost of teaching resources for basic courses compared to other disciplines. Very little infrastructure aside from classrooms and lecture theatres are required. A great number of business schools develop curriculum around an array of “international” edition US sourced textbooks on offer by the major educational publishers, strongly competing for business.

Consequently the intelligentsia of many business schools has looked inwardly, focusing their concerns upon quantity and numbers. They are bureaucratic diploma factories based upon single textbook unit courses, orientated around exams that at best measure memory and retention rather than creativity and the potential of the student to be innovative. To cap it all off, these schools are burdened down with quality assurance processes at administrative and teaching levels. With the high time commitment needed to adhere to these processes, mediocrity is ensured through the rigidity these systems create.

The leaders and teaching staff of the region’s business schools have a preference for the imported hype of management gurus who are popular in the media, even if these positivist instruments are not directly suited to the different contexts and varied business situations within the local environment. Perhaps it would not be exaggerated in saying that local academics educated in the “western” paradigm locally or abroad are mesmerized by international management gurus.

The great paradox of South-East Asian business and entrepreneurship education is that local higher education institutions espouse values within their respective cultural frameworks, but what is actually taught is distinctly “western”.

There has been little debate about the fit between “western” management thinking and the make-up and behavior of local corporations, entrepreneurs, and the general environment. As a consequence, the relevance of many theories has been accepted without question.

For example in the theory area, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs is accepted into management curriculum where there may be many other more suitable theories and meta-theories that could be advanced. In the contextual area, the legal system, supply chain, where the emphasis on particular marketing tools should lie, interrelationships between people, which all could be described ‘as the way of doing things’, makes applying ‘western management theory’ challenging to say the least.

The preference for the ‘latest popular’ management knowledge often leads to misinterpretations, as very few management and entrepreneur instructors actually have much first hand business experience. Thus rigid interpretations of management still influence entrepreneurship courses. Many entrepreneurship courses advocate market research through focus groups, which are not suited to new to the world products in developing markets. Business plans are almost always at the central core of any curriculum where there is little evidence that planning leads to success in entrepreneurship.

Further business schools base much of the curriculum upon general misconceptions that both the media and imported textbooks that have evolved over the last 15 to 20 years have created. Entrepreneurship has been glorified by media stories, biographies of successful entrepreneurs, and events like ‘entrepreneurship week’, ‘business plan competitions’, and ‘entrepreneurship awards’. Course curriculum is shaped in the mold of the media made myths of hi-tech and high-growth entrepreneurs.

Business literature in South-East Asia is primarily US based which reflects the needs of a post industrial society rather than a developing economy. This is partly responsible for one of the biggest tragedies of entrepreneurship education in the region. Very little if any focus is given to various technologies that a potential entrepreneur will require in a new business. The acquisition of technology is one of the greatest difficulties SMEs in developing countries face and little is done within the education sphere to solve this problem. A graduating student may have acquired some general business skills but has little or no knowledge or access to the means to acquire the knowledge to develop a farm, a small engineering shop, a food manufacturing operation, or a cosmetic manufacturing operation. One can see around the ASEAN region that it is the non-business schools that show innovation with their outreach programs while business schools fall into the trap of cashing in on their BBA, MBA, and now DBA programs.

Evolving South-East Asian business and entrepreneurship curriculum has followed the post industrial models with a number of errors and mistakes. Due to the developing nature of most South-East Asian economies, there should be an emphasis on manufacturing which should include new product development and manufacturing line and system development. However ‘cut and paste’ curriculum from business schools in post industrial societies have largely dropped manufacturing from their curriculum due to the cohort interest in the services sector, where opportunities exist. This leads to a mismatch of what South-East Asian business schools offer and what business and entrepreneurship students need. As a result business and entrepreneurship graduates flood out into the market place without any technology skills, crowding the services sector which is not creating extra employment or real economic growth. Business and entrepreneurship graduate employability is a major issue facing South-East Asian economies today, with thousands of unemployed business graduates all across the region.

These two issues, technology and pedagogy require some deep thinking on the part of the intelligentsia of South-East Asian business schools. Content and delivery needs to be closely examined, experimented with, and utilized  with close adaptation to the needs of South-East Asian cohorts. This is the challenge that requires a large investment in time and staff resources to create the curriculum and delivery methods necessary to meet the needs of the students and nation. 

To compound the problem further, governments and local corporations have a preference for foreign advisors and consultants, shunning their own. There is a negative disposition toward ‘locals’. Foreign advisors and consultants are most often sort in the misconception that their advice will be superior to local advisors and consultants, even though foreigners may have little real understanding of local context. This doesn’t occur because of any vacuum in knowledge and wisdom of local academics. In fact many South-East Asian academics are very successful in other universities around the world. Some have written very sound academic dissertations and hypothesis but fail to get them published through the publishers that can bring them to mass popularity. Rather they sell a few hundred copies and can be found gathering dust on library shelves.

Part of this preference for foreign expertise is based on the belief that something imported is better, an old colonial hangover. However the cost of this hangover is holding back indigenous intellectual development and preserving the state of neo-colonialism at a time when the US and Europe are far from possessing a monopoly of new ideas.

The irony is that Asian ideas have more influence on ‘Western’ management thought than in Asian management thinking. The only probable exception is Confucianism which could cautiously be associated with the structure, process, and strategies of family owned Chinese businesses in Southeast Asia. Although Sun Tzu’s ‘The Art of War’ and Buddhist Dharma originated in the Asian region, it has primarily been ‘Western’ management thinkers who have applied the respective philosophies to management, at least in these contemporary times. Although the Islamic ‘Tawhid’ is 1500 years old, it is probably only now that it is being considered seriously as a management philosophy.

Business school deans tend to play the role of a patriarch rather than a chairman of the board, which often degrades into crude authoritarianism. Consequently major positions within the hierarchy tend to go to those are liked and favored, rather than those who have worked meritoriously, successfully, and are qualified for the job.

Consequently many business schools in South-East Asia see personal power as the prize and Machiavellian behavior as the norm. Motivation among staff at the school will most probably be very low.

There is a drastic shortage of business and entrepreneurship lecturers within the region. Stringent criteria in the employment of lecturers eliminate the potential to employ mature, experienced practitioners or practademics. For example under the regulations of one aspiring university in Malaysia that portrays itself as the “Harvard of the East”, it would not be possible to employ people like Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, and the late Steve Jobs, even as adjunct, due to issues of qualifications. Thus those that gain employment within the region’s colleges and universities have formal qualifications, usually without much, if any experience.

South-East Asian business and entrepreneurship academics consequently tend to lack the depth of knowledge about what they teach and rely on textbooks and popular management books as the basis of their teaching. This lack of depth of knowledge in many fields leads to a lack of confidence to develop curriculum outside the familiar textbooks they have available to them, thus inhibiting the ability to provide an education according to local needs. With this comes a reinforcement of an unconscious bias towards ‘western’ literature as local literature is still rare and far between and in many cases just a translation of existing foreign textbooks. Any original local material usually lacks peer acceptance due to the lack of ability of many to critically appraise it.

South-East Asian business schools have developed into a rut of pursuing quantity for the windfall incomes they can accumulate through popular products like the MBA. Foreign universities through setting up branches or strategic alliances are also cashing in on the rapid growth of business education in South-East Asia, further perpetuating the myth that foreign business theories are the first class product. They have adopted the classic post colonial market strategy of importing their product into a local market with minimum modification and exploiting the market to the maximum.

This rut manifests deep into the structure and processes of local colleges and universities. ISO quality accreditations and their logos are prominently displayed as symbols of quality, even though they have little or no relevance to the actual standard of the courses provided. ISO standards make no claims about product quality or relevance whatsoever and only mislead the public. The resources needed to implement these useless ISO standards are taken from potential academic development resources. This leaves a single textbook approach to courses, predominately delivered through formal lectures, rigid assessment and examination criteria and reliance on outdated curriculum development tools like Bloom’s taxonomy, when there have been many advances in pedagogy over the last few years; all in an unquestioning manner. The result of this is a sanitized teaching paradigm which doesn’t reflect the real business environment, leaving students ill-prepared for the outside world.

This ‘cut and paste’ culture without questioning and adaptation is holding back the development of business education in the region.

Of late, universities have realized the need for research to build esteem and gain a ranking. However this has been turned into a meaningless chase of KPI figures. Many new academic journals are cashing in on this unhealthy focus on SCOPUS indexing and now offer ‘pay for publishing’ arrangements, rather than the traditional ‘double blind peer review’ system. To date, most local research has tended to emulate other research, applying theory to local contexts, rather than developing indigenous hypotheses. This lack of originality is preventing the rise in international stature of local business academics and is the loss of a great opportunity to develop Asian based management knowledge.

Local South-East Asian academics have not asked whether “there is a distinctively Asian type of management based upon traditional philosophy?” Management theory has been something secular in Asia in contrast with the ‘west’ where it has been tainted with spiritualism.  Asian academics have preferred to keep both issues in separate boxes. May be it is just from lack of confidence to think outside their trained discipline and merge new ideas into their existing knowledge.

The education gap between South-East Asia, Europe, Australia, and the US is going to be felt for a long time. Part of the problem is the inept ability and resistance to change. Part of the problem is the lack of skilled, experienced and knowledgeable people. However the rigidity of educational institutions is something that can be solved, through some visionary thinking.

There is also another problem. It is apparent that creativity is an important aspect of education, which is deeply lacking in Asian curriculum throughout the whole school system within most of the ASEAN region. In business and entrepreneurship creativity is vital in the areas of opportunity recognition and construction, strategy development and execution, marketing, new product development, and solving general problems related to entrepreneurship. Creativity, rather than intelligence appears to be a more critical factor in achieving success.

It could be argued that ASEAN's failure to develop their own contextually relevant theories and the corresponding positivist practices, where instead culturally unsuited practices are utilized, is a missed opportunity to develop new forms of new dynamic capabilities and competitive advantage within the region. This is the challenge to management academics and practitioners in ASEAN. It is the task of looking through the rich history, culture, society, stories, and philosophies of the region for the inspiration to develop and construct homegrown management ideas, rather than importing ideas developed in other parts of the world, which are suitable for those parts of the world.

Confucian, Buddhist, Strategy, and Islamic institutes exist all over the region, but there has been little focus on developing these philosophies as management paradigms. Today there is an intense vacuum of original management thinkers in the ASEAN region.

Print - Comment - Send to a Friend - More from this Author

Get it off your chest
 (comments policy)

Emanuel Paparella2013-02-01 18:20:46
Thank you for your feedback Professor Hunter. Indeed, logical positivists never cease to surprise me either. The Kant you describe is a Kant I do not recognize in the least. Perhaps the link below may be helpful in this regard.

Here too regretfully the point that I was trying to put across seems to have been lost.


Emanuel Paparella2013-01-31 13:54:21
Actually the most glaring dependence on Western ideas and “intellectual cultural colonization” which lingers on in Asia and is alive and well as we speak, is the one that exists in the People’s Republic of China. That country comprising one fifth of the world’s population has been run for more than half a century now via a Western philosophy or ideology called Communism, unless we wish to make Karl Marx a Confucian international management Asian guru. I submit that such is an aspect of “lingering colonialism” deserving at least a modicum of attention too but is unfortunately nowhere to be seen in the above article.

Moreover, the general statistical data that “business entrepreneurship and management courses is the fastest growing area in South East Asia” should raise a red flag with any bona fide concerned educator, East or West, for it would mean that the liberal arts and the humanities (be they imbued with Buddhism or Confucianism as per local culture) are being deemphasized as unpractical for the more practical entrepreneurship and management course culture.

One may of course get off the hook by branding the liberal arts and humanities an invention of the West, nevertheless Yale University as of three years ago has established a very successful liberal arts school in China. Does that mean that Yale is now engaged in cultural colonialism? I suspect the laisse faire economists and capitalists would answer with a resounding yes. That too, I submit, is an interesting conundrum worth exploring, and it has to do with the problematic of the two cultures and how best to bridge them which I have discussed in Ovi recently.

Indeed technology and pedagogy require deep thinking, no doubt about it, but we ought not to begin by placing the cart before the horse, by which I mean that rather than developing philosophies of management paradigms, one ought to carefully examine the philosophy behind management paradigms and “positivist practices and thinking.” One such philosophy may indeed be Smith’s liberal laissez faire social model which allows fierce competition and makes profits the main goal of life, reducing even religion to another field for fierce entrepreneurship and competition and does not allow for complaints when the more successful model (i.e. the most profitable one) wins out. In such an environment the fit survive the unfit perish, period. In philosophy it goes by the name of social Darwinism, another Western idea that seems to have taken hold in China even if it contradicts Marxism. In academia it goes by the name of publish or perish, which makes an oxymoron the statement that some Asian professors are successful abroad even though they have difficulties publishing. I for one doubt it. Another view could be Marx’s idea that exploitation of workers is unethical and inhumane and altruism and solidarity may even be desirable genetic components.

Indeed, Asian ideas are trendy in the West and that’s good because after two hundred years of logical positivism and fierce capitalism the results as seen in the global environment do not appear so genial after all. Mit Romney at the RNC made a joke of the issue by saying that Barack Obama will bring down the level of the sea, but I will give you jobs. I suppose as a good entrepreneur he was thinking of submersible automobiles what he would be able to sell and we would be able to purchase with the good jobs he was going to create for us out of altruistic humanitarian motives, of course. It’s a brave new world, perhaps Professor Hunter will agree.

Murray2013-01-31 18:16:19
Dear Prof, Last time I looked at the map China was not in SE Asia and I’m fairly sure not a member of ASEAN either, which was the focus of the article. Very sorry.
Yes there are entrepreneurship models outside the paradigms you are used to. All your comments are very occidental-centric. Lets thank God that she allows diversity of opinion.
I’m very lucky that the yale centre that you mentioned thought the article good enough to publish on their website.

Murray2013-01-31 18:16:55
The yale's link: http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/scandal-foreign-labor-asia

Murray2013-01-31 18:17:29
Ironically I got an email from a minister of entrepreneurship in one ASEAN Govt today who read the article on the Asiasentinel. I won’t mention what country he is a minister of but he definitely has another view from you and is a practitioner in the region:
"Salam Prof.
This is an interesting and an eye opener article. I totally agree with you that Asian may be except Japanese and Korean are tainted and spoiled with ideologies from the west. Too much respect either conscious or unconsciously are given to Western philosophers. As you said, I sure there are lot of values that could make good management system in this region called South East Asia.
Thank you for the motivating and exciting article".

Murray2013-01-31 18:18:07
People in this region have vastly different views than you do.
So Prof. lets agree to disagree. I will do my work as I believe to be right in my country (not Australia) and you are free to criticize which is the easier job of the two.
Thanks for taking interest in my article and the time to comment.
Best Regards

Murray2013-01-31 18:18:27
PS. This article will be picked up by World University news today. http://www.universityworldnews.com/

Thanos2013-01-31 19:50:59
Very good article Murray. I cannot talk about SE Asia since my experience East was very brief - not in South-East and definitely not in an education institute - but talking often with people who have finished management and marketing schools in different places of Europe I would say that most of them are infatuated with 'American' Management ideas that perhaps work in a society were money is worshiped, the only way to climb the career ladder is climbing on top of others and the big fish eats the small while institutes are not part of the society but part of private enterprises. And I’m not starting with marketing which has become a title in a business-card that identifies a salesperson. I’ve seen this “American management spirit” in the private sector in Europe and I have the feeling that it alienates them with their “customers” that are not necessary in the same spirit!

Actually in the end you say, “It could be argued that ASEAN's failure to develop their own contextually relevant theories and the corresponding positivist practices” and I think – judging always from Europe – that what happened to all of us is that we were overwhelmed with the American self-confidence of the “trust me, I know what I’m doing!” and the reputation built form all these American mega-profited-companies.

Thanos2013-01-31 20:04:31
Actually I need to add that your comments about “business plan” that don’t always work and the role of the ‘patriarchal’ board of directors made me smile because I have seen both more times that I would like to and in companies with international reputation and shares in the NY stock market you wouldn’t believe.

Emanuel Paparella2013-02-01 00:38:16

Indeed professor, agreeing to disagree while searching for the truth and remaining respectful of each other’s views is what free speech is all about, in and out of academia, and especially at Ovi magazine.

The point of Yale University (of which I am a graduate, for the sake of full disclosure) opening an affiliate school in Singapore is quite simple. The point was that the school being opened (see link above for more details) is not a business school but a school of liberal arts in which Yale excels. Indeed Yale also has a very good business school but it should give us some pause that it chose to open a liberal arts school instead. I simply asked if Yale University was exporting Western culture, or worse opening an affiliate for business... as some misguidedly believe, or is it simply attempting to counteract a regretful trend both East and West to place all the emphasis in education on business and science (positivism) and deemphasize the humanities and the liberal arts, thus bridging in some way the regretful gulf of the two cultures? and if so, is that a Western cultural colonizing effort? I would submit that the liberal arts are to be construed as universal and not a cultural export to promote an ideology and a political view. Thank your for the dialogue, professor Hunter and best regards.

Emanuel Paparella2013-02-01 01:03:15
P.S. Regarding the geography of South East Asia, of course you are geographically correct, Professor Hunter, but politically speaking in the language of power and hegemony China already considers the South China Sea and the nations around it as its sphere of influence. Moreover, Vietnam too which is in South East Asia is a Communist country. Here too, the point is simple and has nothing to do with being pro West or pro East: Communism is not a local ideology in South East Asia, it remains an import from the West for which Communist country such as Vietnam, Korea and China far from considering a colonial imposition from the West are ready to defend and fight for. Unfortunately such a paradox and conundrum is left unaddressed.

Emanuel Paparella2013-02-01 12:49:54
P.S.S. One more relevant consideration if I may: Hume and Kant are considered two great Western philosophers of the 18th century; people usually take sides depending on whether they have empiricist- positivistic tendencies or rationalistic tendencies; but there is something that can be said of the two vis a vis each other: it was far easier for Hume to put forth his not fully thought out empirical-positivistic philosophical tenets than it was for Kant to critique them thoroughly in his three “Critiques” (The Critique of Pure Reason, the Critique of Practical Reason, and the Critique of Judgment).

Murray Hunter2013-02-01 14:24:09
Oh Prof Paperella, you never cease to surprise me. Kant was the one who openly became skeptical about God, immortality, the existence of the soul, moral values, life after death and religious values; all things that I thought you valued. Hume inferred that life was illusionary and reduced God to just a 'clock maker' in a Newtonian world. One day you are espousing the virtues of Christianity and other days you side with the skeptics of Christianity itself. You may advocate a 19th century Newtonian world with your classical anti-Christian philosophers, but it's not my cup of tea.

Murray Hunter2013-02-01 14:30:22
By the way you really have the knack of side tracking the intent and aim of any article with all this reminissing with the usual suspects. Maybe a session with Lou Reed, one of the greatest living philosophers of our time would be in order.

Emanuel Paparella2013-02-02 00:14:59
Professor, the Immanuel Kant you describe is not the same Kant I have read. It must be a different Kant.

Murray Hunter2013-02-02 08:02:05
Im talking about Immanuel Kant born 1724 in Prussia who was such a lovely agnostic and really "threw a cat amoungst the Christian pigeons" to be metaphorical. In his seminal book "A critique of reason" he openly doubts whether a God actually exists. Certainly his writings about reality as an illusion are wonderful gems Im sure you would enjoy.
May I suggest Prof that instead of relying upon one paragraph summaries of Kant, you might like to actually read his work and ponder between the lines of his gems given to humankind. Then I hope he can open your mind to the possibilities that he is suggesting. I think there was a little bit of Buddhist in him to tell you the truth. Go back to his wonderful narrative. Prof "If God did not exist it would be necessary to invent him" sums up a lot of his message.

Emanuel Paparella2013-02-02 15:17:58
Indeed, dear professor, a modest beginning might be that of simply getting the title of Kant’s book right. It is not The Critique of Reason, but The Critique of Pure Reason. That little adjective “pure” once grasped makes all the difference philosophically, as I regularly teach my students of philosophy when we get to Kant.

Perhaps this link below may prove helpful without us desisting of course from reading the book in its entirity in the original German or in translation, given that it has been translated in dozens of languages and Kant is considered the greatest of the modern European philosophers, before we continue to discuss it:


Best regards,

Dr. Emanuel L. Paparella

Emanuel Paparella2013-02-02 15:52:45

Dear Professor, a postscript, before we continue our conversation on Kant you may also want to read the above linked comments on Kant which establish two things: 1) Kant was a Lutheran Christian 2) Kant wrote a moral argument for the existence of God. Best wishes,

Dr. Emanuel Paparella
Professor of Philosophy at Barry University

Murray Hunter2013-02-02 17:27:15
I am indeed reminded of a schzoid Chameleon while in sitting down in Hat Yai tonight. Semantics for the sake of semantics without personal conviction shows no passion. No passion and one is missing a soul. Using the words of philosophers for argument is not scholarship but paraphrasing. No passion or original thought is mirroring the psych of a zeolot from the reformation. One of the great achievements of a philosophy scholar would be to create rather than to reverberate. Lets take some more inspiration from the great philosopher Lou Reed, who I hope the good professor covers in his courses as one of the great contemporary commentators of society today. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsKwqr2SKwo

PS. I know a theologian who got his PhD from Prinction arguing that God didnt exist. He is now an ordaned minister in the US somewhere. Anything is possible as you have shown.

Emanuel Paparella2013-02-02 19:37:42
But the ineluctable fact remains, my dear professor, that the title of Kant's book is not "A Critique of Reason" but "The Critique of Pure Reason" and he reamains the greatest of the modern European philosophers. Now, one may call that pedantic but one can only do so if one knows precious little or has misinterpreted Kant's philosophy. As I said, let's at least begin our dialogue, if one is indeed desired, by getting the title of the book right.

Murray Hunter2013-02-02 20:05:28
My Dear Professor (or are you a professor?)
Since you want to be sooooooo "pedantic" over a typing mistake I really believe that you should Tell the faculty at Brown University that you are a professor of philosophy there. They apparantely dont know of the fact.
I was taught to be honest and up front about qualificiations and positions, a very important lesson in life that Im sure Kant would agree in earnest. Honesty is a vital part of ethical philosophy. Dont you think?
"So to be (a professor) or not to be (a professor) That is the question."
Sincerely I would rather be talking about entrepreneurship curriculum in South East Asia (not China). Why am I wasting my time being sidetracked on ancient history? If the good professor wants to talk about philosophy write an article. Talk straight, be honest, dont plaguerize and Im sure things will look up for you.
Never be shy of who we really are. I didnt have to go to a philosoper to learn that, my father taught me. Sometimes the best lessons in life are so close to us. Good night Prof, you are in my prayers.

Thanos2013-02-02 20:18:18
Ok gentlemen we reached the point where we can just agree that we disagree, leave it there and focus in the more important things surrounding us.

Emanuel Paparella2013-02-03 08:19:58

The above link is not intented as a comment, nor as a debating point, nor a rebuttal of any kind since I accept the editor’s (i.e., Thanos Kalamidas's) reasonable advise to leave it there with my interlocutor and to agree to disagree with in the above regretful exchange and shall refrain from any further comments and exchanges on the matter now or in the future. It is simply for the sake of transparency, to clarify the record, and for full disclosure of such a record which has been impugned, and it is clearly self-explanatory. After opening the link, please scroll down to p. 19.

© Copyright CHAMELEON PROJECT Tmi 2005-2008  -  Sitemap  -  Add to favourites  -  Link to Ovi
Privacy Policy  -  Contact  -  RSS Feeds  -  Search  -  Submissions  -  Subscribe  -  About Ovi