scholarly journals Approximation of radical type rational mappings

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Radical Type

scholarly journals Radical-Type Difunctionalization of Alkenes with CO2

2019 ◽  
Vol 77 (9) ◽  
pp. 783 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhen Zhang ◽  
Li Gong ◽  
Xiao-Yu Zhou ◽  
Si-Shun Yan ◽  
Jing Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radical Type

Radical Type Catalytic Oxidation of Butane at Low Temperatures overin-situPrepared Silica Species

1997 ◽  
Vol 26 (10) ◽  
pp. 1051-1052 ◽  
Author(s):  
Atsushi Satsuma ◽  
Naruaki Sugiyama ◽  
Yuichi Kamiya ◽  
Tadashi Hattori
Keyword(s):  
Catalytic Oxidation ◽  
Low Temperatures ◽  
Radical Type

Conditions and Key Success Factors for the Management of Communities of Practice

2010 ◽  
pp. 184-207
Author(s):  
Edurne Loyarte ◽  
Olga Rivera
Keyword(s):  
Communities Of Practice ◽  
Social Practice ◽  
Success Factors ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Competitive Advantages ◽  
Organizational Goals ◽  
Key Success Factors ◽  
Working Environments ◽  
Learning At Work ◽  
Radical Type

Communities of practice (CoPs) have been taken into account by both practitioners and academics during the last ten years. From a strategic point of view, CoPs have shown their importance for the management of organizational knowledge by offering repositories of knowledge, improved capacity of making knowledge actionable and operational (Brown & Duguid, 1998) and by facilitating maintenance, reproduction, and extension of knowledge (Brown and Durguid, 2001). CoPs are also reported to achieve value creation and competitive advantages (Davenport and Prusak, 1998), learning at work (Swan et alt., 2002) that promotes organizational competitiveness (Furlong and Johnson, 2003), innovation, even a radical type (Swan et alt., 2002), responsiveness, improved staff skills and reduced duplication (du Plessis, 2008). This impressive list of achievements is not for free; some authors have pointed out the limits of CoP’s (Duguid, 2005; Roberts, 2006; Amin & Roberts, 2008) from diverse points of view, including diversity of working environments, size, spatial or relational proximity, but mainly emphasizing the specificity of CoPs as a social practice paradigm, as it was defined by Wenger (1999, 2000) credited as the “inventor” of the term “CoP” (Lave and Wenger, 1991). This chapter focuses on the consideration of CoPs as an organizational reality than can be managed (Thompson, 2005), the contradictions that the idea of managing them generates, and how these controversial points can be overcome in a sound and honest way. To do so, we review different cases of CoP’s within organizations intended for the managerial team to achieve important organizational goals. Our analysis provides: (a) a reflection regarding the Key Success Factors in the process of integrating communities of practice, (b) insight to the structure of a model of cultivation, intended as a guideline for new experiences in this area, and (c) an informative account of this model’s adaptation to the studied organizations.

Synthesis of well-defined mechanochromic polymers based on a radical-type mechanochromophore by RAFT polymerization: living radical polymerization from a polymerization inhibitor

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (26) ◽  
pp. 4290-4296
Author(s):  
Daisuke Aoki ◽  
Moeko Yanagisawa ◽  
Hideyuki Otsuka
Keyword(s):  
Radical Polymerization ◽  
Raft Polymerization ◽  
Living Radical Polymerization ◽  
Polymerization Inhibitor ◽  
Radical Type

Synthesis of mechanochromic polymers based on a radical-type mechanochromophore by RAFT polymerization: living radical polymerization from a polymerization inhibitor.

Conditions and Key Success Factors for the Management of Communities of Practice

2010 ◽  
pp. 18-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edurne Loyarte ◽  
Olga Rivera
Keyword(s):  
Communities Of Practice ◽  
Social Practice ◽  
Success Factors ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Competitive Advantages ◽  
Organizational Goals ◽  
Key Success Factors ◽  
Working Environments ◽  
Learning At Work ◽  
Radical Type

Communities of practice (CoPs) have been taken into account by both practitioners and academics during the last ten years. From a strategic point of view, CoPs have shown their importance for the management of organizational knowledge by offering repositories of knowledge, improved capacity of making knowledge actionable and operational (Brown & Duguid, 1998) and by facilitating maintenance, reproduction, and extension of knowledge (Brown and Durguid, 2001). CoPs are also reported to achieve value creation and competitive advantages (Davenport and Prusak, 1998), learning at work (Swan et alt., 2002) that promotes organizational competitiveness (Furlong and Johnson, 2003), innovation, even a radical type (Swan et alt., 2002), responsiveness, improved staff skills and reduced duplication (du Plessis, 2008). This impressive list of achievements is not for free; some authors have pointed out the limits of CoP’s (Duguid, 2005; Roberts, 2006; Amin & Roberts, 2008) from diverse points of view, including diversity of working environments, size, spatial or relational proximity, but mainly emphasizing the specificity of CoPs as a social practice paradigm, as it was defined by Wenger (1999, 2000) credited as the “inventor” of the term “CoP” (Lave and Wenger, 1991). This chapter focuses on the consideration of CoPs as an organizational reality than can be managed (Thompson, 2005), the contradictions that the idea of managing them generates, and how these controversial points can be overcome in a sound and honest way. To do so, we review different cases of CoP’s within organizations intended for the managerial team to achieve important organizational goals. Our analysis provides: (a) a reflection regarding the Key Success Factors in the process of integrating communities of practice, (b) insight to the structure of a model of cultivation, intended as a guideline for new experiences in this area, and (c) an informative account of this model’s adaptation to the studied organizations.

Ligand-Free Nickel-Catalyzed Reductive Allylic Defluorinative Cross-Coupling of α-Trifluoromethyl Alkenes with Epoxides

Synlett ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chuan Wang ◽  
Zhiyang Lin ◽  
Yun Lan
Keyword(s):  
Ring Opening ◽  
Cross Coupling ◽  
Proton Donor ◽  
Mild Conditions ◽  
Ligand Free ◽  
High Yields ◽  
Radical Type

We report a reductive allylic defluorinative reaction of α-trifluoromethyl alkenes with terminal epoxides, which consists of an iodide-mediated regioselective ring opening and a nickel-catalyzed radical-type cross-coupling, providing diverse tertiary gem-difluorobishomoallylic alcohols in moderate to high yields. Notably, this reaction is conducted under mild conditions and requires no external ligand or proton donor.

scholarly journals 157 Prognosis after treatment of cervical cancer IB1: comparison between radical type B and type B radical hysterectomy

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
FL Cordeiro ◽  
KAS Almeida ◽  
FB Russomano ◽  
D Salles ◽  
FAR Fleming ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Radical Hysterectomy ◽  
Type B ◽  
Radical Type
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document