#professor JRM

[baeaisling]

#jonathan rhys meyers #jrm #30 year challenge #30 years #30th workiversary #happy 30th workiversary #happy workiversary #zoolander #derek zoolander #professor JRM #psa #beautiful people be like

[vulujatope]

Jhargram raj college notice 2019

  JHARGRAM RAJ COLLEGE NOTICE 2019 >> DOWNLOAD LINK vk.cc/c7jKeU

  JHARGRAM RAJ COLLEGE NOTICE 2019 >> READ ONLINE

<br> jhargram raj college ug admission 2022

<br> jhargram raj college photo

<br> jhargram raj college whatsapp group link

<br> jhargram raj college admission 2022-23

<br> jhargram raj college merit list 2021jhargram raj college online admission 2022

<br>

<br>

<br>

<br>

<br> </p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Notification for an emergency meeting related to PG Admission 2022-2023 on Notification for Charge Handover to Dr. Ansuman Bej, Assistant Professor and

Tender Notification. Tender Notification for Procurement of different items. Tender Notice for Procurement of Books for Jhargram Raj College Library.

Government General Degree College at Lalgarh. P.O.: Lalgarh, District: Jhargram, PIN: 721516. Go to College Website Home Page.Fill Jhargram Raj College, Edit online. Sign, fax and printable from PC, iPad, tablet or mobile with pdfFiller ✓ Instantly. Try Now!

admission notice 2022-23 03221-299907. [email protected]. Copyright @ 2019 Jhargram Raj College (Girl's Wing) | Powered by Affinity Infosoft.

ADMISSION NOTICE 2022-23 Admission 18-07-2022 · FEES STRUCTURE 2022-23 Admission 02-08-2022 · Courses offered and Intake 2022-23 Admission 18-07-2022

Jhargram Raj College, [JRC] Midnapore West Bengal has recently released application forms for admission Jhargram Raj College Admission Notice, Website.

7, JHARGRAM RAJ COLLEGE, Jhargram PS, 03221-258700 TENDER NOTICE INVITING FOR STATIONERY ARTICLES, JRM. Date - 16/03/2020 Puja Guide Map 2019.

</p><br>https://vulujatope.tumblr.com/post/693050723628449792/rfid-reader-pdf, https://vulujatope.tumblr.com/post/693050975728107520/televisores-nex-manual, https://vulujatope.tumblr.com/post/693050375140458496/vlsi-and-embedded-systems-lab-manual, https://vulujatope.tumblr.com/post/693050375140458496/vlsi-and-embedded-systems-lab-manual, https://hutulobaqe.tumblr.com/post/693054246496747520/panasonic-kx-tda100-programming-manual.

[thosebizzareserpents]

Over course of two magical wars majority of Susan Bones family had been slaughtered.

Her paternal grandparents were killed by Tom Marvolo Riddle Jr.

Her uncle Edgar Bones was a member of the Order of the Phoenix. Edgar, his wife, and their children were all killed by Death Eaters.

Her mother was killed by Death Eaters as well.

Before the First Wizarding War came to a close.

Susan's aunt Amelia Bones was a member of the Wizengamot and Head of the Department of Magical Law Enforcement was killed personally by Tom Riddle Jrm as well.

Her father had gone missing.

Her professors, head of house and clasmates and housemates looked at gave sympathetic looks. Looks of pity.

Most avoided her in the halls. Fear of association.

Her fellow D.A. members said now she had a good idea what it felt like to be Harry."

Susan was the subject of much unwanted attention

Wasn't that some shit?

Now she knows what it feels like?

Susan had always known.

Become pawn or a tool. Both was just as worse. All for the greater good.

Now she was thought to be expendable just another soon to be casualty of war.

Fuck that. They could all kiss her freckled ass. Fuck Tom Riddle Jr., the Knights of Walpurgis, Death Eaters, Rufus Scrimgeour, The Ministry of Magic, Albus Dumbledore, The Order of the Phoenix, and Dumbledore's Army.

She was more than what people assumed.

Susan was not some tragic figure, martyr or victim.

It seemed that's all people ever did here was have preconceived notions and expectations of what someone was.

She was going fight, survive, and live by any means necessary.

#susan bones #i have some many feelings about susan #like jkr used her no more than a footnote. #susan would have more access and knowledgeable about the ministry and death eater than anything. #she's going survive and take a few heads along the way

[jeramymobley]

Marketing Flaws For Powerful Brand Differentiation

In 1982, Levi’s launched black jeans in the UK. At the time denim was invariably blue so Levi’s wanted to capture the rebellious spirit of those opting for black.

The ad by BBH became a classic.

But the strapline, written by Barbara Noakes, “When the world zigs, zag”, has relevance beyond fashion. Advertisers should heed the brand’s message: distinctiveness is a route to memorability.

And that’s not just hearsay. After all academic evidence shows that brands benefit from subverting expectations.

The original evidence comes from the work of Hedwig von Restorff in 1933. The pediatrician gave participants a list of text: it consisted of random strings of three letters interrupted by one set of three digits. So, for example: jrm, tws, als, huk, bnm, 153, fdy.

After a short pause the participants were asked to recall the items. The results showed that items that stood out, in this case the three digits, were most recalled. This is known as the von Restorff effect.

Delivering Distinctiveness

Knowing that your ads need to be distinctive is helpful, but how do you standout?

Luckily for you, most brands abide by category conventions. Break those conventions and you become distinctive.

In the U.K. you can see this herd mentality in lager beer advertising with leading brands invariably associating themselves with football. Such is the clutter that Campaign magazine said they’re “playing 11-a-side on a 5-a-side pitch”.

Lager isn’t the only guilty category. Most brands brag about their success which creates a simple way to stand-out: admit your flaws.

But Isn’t This Risky?

You’re not alone in worrying about admitting weakness.

However, there’s plenty of evidence that this tactic improves your odds of being effective. The original evidence comes from Harvard psychologist, Elliot Aronson.

In his experiment, Aronson recorded an actor answering a series of quiz questions. In one strand of the experiment, the actor – armed with the right responses – answers 92% of the questions correctly. After the quiz, the actor then pretends to spill a cup of coffee over himself (a small blunder, or pratfall).

The recording was played to students, who were then asked how likeable the contestant was. However, Aronson split the students into cells and played them different versions: one with the spillage included and one without. The students found the clumsy contestant more likeable.

Aronson called the preference for those who exhibit a flaw the ‘pratfall effect’. It’s an insight that has occasionally been harnessed to great effect by brands. Think of VW Beetle (Ugly is only skin deep), Stella (Reassuringly expensive) and Avis (We’re only No. 2 so we try harder).

It works because admitting weakness is a tangible demonstration of honesty and, therefore, makes other claims more believable.

Risk Free For Who?

I’ve listed a few examples of brands harnessing the pratfall effect, stretching back to VW in 1959. But there have been tens of thousands of ads since then. Why have only a couple of dozen reveled in their failings?

The rarity is explained by the principal-agent problem, a theory first suggested by Stephen Ross, a professor at MIT. He suggested that there is a divergence of interest between the principal, the brand, and the agent, the marketer. The brand is interested in long-term profitable growth, but the marketer is also interested in safe career progression.

If a campaign flops having used the pratfall effect it might end a marketer’s career. Imagine you were the marketing director responsible for Reassuringly Expensive and the campaign flopped. You’d be lucky to escape with your job.

Resolving The Principal-Agent Problem

The best way to ensure brands strive for distinctiveness is to popularize the principal-agent problem. If following the herd becomes equated with putting one’s career ahead of the brand’s needs, then it will become a disreputable tactic.

Perhaps then we’ll see more brands admitting fallibilities.

You can find more ideas like this in my new book The Choice Factory: 25 Behavioral Biases That Influence What We Buy

The Blake Project Can Help: Differentiate Your Brand In The Brand Positioning Workshop

Don’t Miss Marketing’s Most Powerful Event: The Un-Conference: 360 Degrees of Brand Strategy for a Changing World, May 14-16, 2018 in San Diego, California. A fun, competitive-learning experience reserved for 50 marketing oriented leaders and professionals.

Branding Strategy Insider is a service of The Blake Project: A strategic brand consultancy specializing in Brand Research, Brand Strategy, Brand Licensing and Brand Education

FREE Publications And Resources For Marketers

[markjsousa]

3 Mistakes Brands Make About Human Behavior

Our role as marketers is simple. Persuade customers to pay more, switch to our brand or purchase more frequently. It all comes down to behavior change.

Luckily for us, there’s a body of knowledge dedicated to fathoming what influences consumers: behavioral science.

The findings in this field are robust. They’re based on more than a hundred years of experiments by leading scientists from around the world, such as those by Richard Thaler, Robert Cialdini and Leon Festinger.

Surely, it’s better to base your advertising approach on their experiments, rather than take a gamble on the opinion of the most eloquent person in the room?

Despite this pedigree some brands ignore behavioral science. Here are three of the most common mistakes.

1. Negative Social Proof

Have you ever spotted a poster in a doctors office telling you how many people haven’t bothered turning up for their appointments? Or seen the charity appeal on Wikipedia that announces most readers don’t bother donating?

It’s a common tactic, trying to shock people with daunting figures about the scale of a problem. But it’s an approach that exacerbates the issue it’s trying to solve.

These messages fail because they stress that unwanted behavior is commonplace. Unfortunately, as we’re social animals who mimic others, this only encourages the very behavior they’re trying to stop.

Robert Cialdini, Professor of Psychology at Arizona State University, has called this social proof.

He measured the effect of social proof on anti-social behavior at the Petrified Forest National Park in Arizona, which was being slowly eroded by the 3% of visitors who pilfered pieces of the beautiful rock-like wood. Cialdini created signs highlighting the scale of the problem: ‘Please don’t take wood because the park is being changed by the many visitors who steal’.

This sign led to a near tripling of theft compared to the message free control. A full 8% of visitors pocketed a piece of wood. By publicizing the scale of the problem, he lessened the sense of crime: surely it couldn’t be that bad if everyone was at it? In Cialdini’s words, “This wasn’t a crime prevention strategy; it was a crime promotion strategy.”

The misuse of social proof is so commonplace – especially among charities and public-sector advertising – that Cialdini has called it the “big mistake”.

2. Pratfall Effect

If you wanted to impress someone, what would you do? If you’re like most people, you’ll try and wow them by hinting at your many accomplishments.

Brands tend to apply the same tactic. They typically show off and bombard their audience with a monotonous list of the reasons why they’re wonderful.

It sounds sensible, but evidence from Harvard psychologist, Elliot Aronson, suggests it might be the wrong tactic.

In his experiment, Aronson recorded an actor answering a series of quiz questions. In one strand of the experiment, the actor – armed with the right responses – answers 92% of the questions correctly. After the quiz, the actor then pretends to spill a cup of coffee over himself (a small blunder, or pratfall).

The recording was played to a large sample of students, who were then asked how likeable the contestant was. However, Aronson split the students into cells and played them different versions: one featured the contestant spilling the coffee and one without. The students found the clumsy contestant more likeable.

Aronson called the insight that flaws made us more appealing the ‘pratfall effect’.

The smartest brands have recognized this and used the pratfall effect to stand-out from their braggard competitors. Just think of VW (Ugly is only skin deep), Stella (Reassuringly expensive) and Avis (When you’re only No. 2 you try harder). Three of the most successful campaigns of all time are based on this simple psychological insight. It works because admitting weakness is a tangible demonstration of honesty and, therefore, makes other claims more believable.

However, it’s still a minority tactic. I flicked trough a weekend’s worth of papers and only spotted a handful of ads that harnessed the bias. Most brands brag far too much.

3. Following The Herd

Much advertising slavishly abides by category norms. Car ads are prone to loving shots of the model rounding bends in the rugged countryside. Fashion ads feature beautiful people pouting at the camera. Watch ads take it the furthest. Almost every ad shows the same time on the watch: a few minutes either side of 10:10.

But this mimicry comes at the cost of memorability.

You’re hard-wired to notice what’s distinctive. The academic evidence for this stretches back to 1933 and the experiments of a young, postdoctoral student, Hedwig von Restorff.

Restorff was a paediatrics researcher at the University of Berlin when she published her study on memorability. She gave participants a long list of text: it consisted of random strings of three letters interrupted by one set of three digits.

So, for example: jrm, tws, als, huk, bnm, 153, fdy. After a short pause the participants were asked to recall the items. The results showed that items that stood out, in this case the three digits, were most recalled. This is known as the Von Restorff, or isolation, effect.

But that experiment was more than 80 years ago – do the findings still stand? My colleague, Laura Weston, and I investigated. We gave 500 nationally representative participants a list of numbers: 15 written in black, one in blue. A short time later we asked which number they recalled. Respondents were 30 times more likely to recall the distinctive number.

In communications distinctiveness pays. Or as the legendary creative John Hegarty puts it, when the world zigs, zag.

Social proof, the pratfall effect and distinctiveness are just three of the hundreds of biases discovered by psychologists. If you immerse yourself in the study of behavioral science, you can discover the biases most relevant to your challenges. This will allow you to avoid these mistakes and work with human nature, not against it.

You can find more ideas like this in my new book The Choice Factory: 25 Behavioral Biases That Influence What We Buy  (Recently named the #1 book ever written on Advertising by BBH)

The Blake Project Can Help: Differentiate Your Brand In The Brand Positioning Workshop

Branding Strategy Insider is a service of The Blake Project: A strategic brand consultancy specializing in Brand Research, Brand Strategy, Brand Licensing and Brand Education

FREE Publications And Resources For Marketers

[joejstrickl]

3 Mistakes Brands Make About Human Behavior

Our role as marketers is simple. Persuade customers to pay more, switch to our brand or purchase more frequently. It all comes down to behavior change.

Luckily for us, there’s a body of knowledge dedicated to fathoming what influences consumers: behavioral science.

The findings in this field are robust. They’re based on more than a hundred years of experiments by leading scientists from around the world, such as those by Richard Thaler, Robert Cialdini and Leon Festinger.

Surely, it’s better to base your advertising approach on their experiments, rather than take a gamble on the opinion of the most eloquent person in the room?

Despite this pedigree some brands ignore behavioral science. Here are three of the most common mistakes.

1. Negative Social Proof

Have you ever spotted a poster in a doctors office telling you how many people haven’t bothered turning up for their appointments? Or seen the charity appeal on Wikipedia that announces most readers don’t bother donating?

It’s a common tactic, trying to shock people with daunting figures about the scale of a problem. But it’s an approach that exacerbates the issue it’s trying to solve.

These messages fail because they stress that unwanted behavior is commonplace. Unfortunately, as we’re social animals who mimic others, this only encourages the very behavior they’re trying to stop.

Robert Cialdini, Professor of Psychology at Arizona State University, has called this social proof.

He measured the effect of social proof on anti-social behavior at the Petrified Forest National Park in Arizona, which was being slowly eroded by the 3% of visitors who pilfered pieces of the beautiful rock-like wood. Cialdini created signs highlighting the scale of the problem: ‘Please don’t take wood because the park is being changed by the many visitors who steal’.

This sign led to a near tripling of theft compared to the message free control. A full 8% of visitors pocketed a piece of wood. By publicizing the scale of the problem, he lessened the sense of crime: surely it couldn’t be that bad if everyone was at it? In Cialdini’s words, “This wasn’t a crime prevention strategy; it was a crime promotion strategy.”

The misuse of social proof is so commonplace – especially among charities and public-sector advertising – that Cialdini has called it the “big mistake”.

2. Pratfall Effect

If you wanted to impress someone, what would you do? If you’re like most people, you’ll try and wow them by hinting at your many accomplishments.

Brands tend to apply the same tactic. They typically show off and bombard their audience with a monotonous list of the reasons why they’re wonderful.

It sounds sensible, but evidence from Harvard psychologist, Elliot Aronson, suggests it might be the wrong tactic.

In his experiment, Aronson recorded an actor answering a series of quiz questions. In one strand of the experiment, the actor – armed with the right responses – answers 92% of the questions correctly. After the quiz, the actor then pretends to spill a cup of coffee over himself (a small blunder, or pratfall).

The recording was played to a large sample of students, who were then asked how likeable the contestant was. However, Aronson split the students into cells and played them different versions: one featured the contestant spilling the coffee and one without. The students found the clumsy contestant more likeable.

Aronson called the insight that flaws made us more appealing the ‘pratfall effect’.

The smartest brands have recognized this and used the pratfall effect to stand-out from their braggard competitors. Just think of VW (Ugly is only skin deep), Stella (Reassuringly expensive) and Avis (When you’re only No. 2 you try harder). Three of the most successful campaigns of all time are based on this simple psychological insight. It works because admitting weakness is a tangible demonstration of honesty and, therefore, makes other claims more believable.

However, it’s still a minority tactic. I flicked trough a weekend’s worth of papers and only spotted a handful of ads that harnessed the bias. Most brands brag far too much.

3. Following The Herd

Much advertising slavishly abides by category norms. Car ads are prone to loving shots of the model rounding bends in the rugged countryside. Fashion ads feature beautiful people pouting at the camera. Watch ads take it the furthest. Almost every ad shows the same time on the watch: a few minutes either side of 10:10.

But this mimicry comes at the cost of memorability.

You’re hard-wired to notice what’s distinctive. The academic evidence for this stretches back to 1933 and the experiments of a young, postdoctoral student, Hedwig von Restorff.

Restorff was a paediatrics researcher at the University of Berlin when she published her study on memorability. She gave participants a long list of text: it consisted of random strings of three letters interrupted by one set of three digits.

So, for example: jrm, tws, als, huk, bnm, 153, fdy. After a short pause the participants were asked to recall the items. The results showed that items that stood out, in this case the three digits, were most recalled. This is known as the Von Restorff, or isolation, effect.

But that experiment was more than 80 years ago – do the findings still stand? My colleague, Laura Weston, and I investigated. We gave 500 nationally representative participants a list of numbers: 15 written in black, one in blue. A short time later we asked which number they recalled. Respondents were 30 times more likely to recall the distinctive number.

In communications distinctiveness pays. Or as the legendary creative John Hegarty puts it, when the world zigs, zag.

Social proof, the pratfall effect and distinctiveness are just three of the hundreds of biases discovered by psychologists. If you immerse yourself in the study of behavioral science, you can discover the biases most relevant to your challenges. This will allow you to avoid these mistakes and work with human nature, not against it.

You can find more ideas like this in my new book The Choice Factory: 25 Behavioral Biases That Influence What We Buy  (Recently named the #1 book ever written on Advertising by BBH)

The Blake Project Can Help: Differentiate Your Brand In The Brand Positioning Workshop

Branding Strategy Insider is a service of The Blake Project: A strategic brand consultancy specializing in Brand Research, Brand Strategy, Brand Licensing and Brand Education

FREE Publications And Resources For Marketers

[nitxi]

Oficina de roteiro e storyboard - roteiro Sequestro relâmpago Felipe Neves - storyboard cena 5 @evypardini @_wallfl0wer__ professores @nelsoncaramico @rodcrissiuma (em Escola Técnica Estadual Jornalista Roberto Marinho (Etec JRM))

[joejstrickl]

Marketing Flaws For Powerful Brand Differentiation

In 1982, Levi’s launched black jeans in the UK. At the time denim was invariably blue so Levi’s wanted to capture the rebellious spirit of those opting for black.

The ad by BBH became a classic.

But the strapline, written by Barbara Noakes, “When the world zigs, zag”, has relevance beyond fashion. Advertisers should heed the brand’s message: distinctiveness is a route to memorability.

And that’s not just hearsay. After all academic evidence shows that brands benefit from subverting expectations.

The original evidence comes from the work of Hedwig von Restorff in 1933. The pediatrician gave participants a list of text: it consisted of random strings of three letters interrupted by one set of three digits. So, for example: jrm, tws, als, huk, bnm, 153, fdy.

After a short pause the participants were asked to recall the items. The results showed that items that stood out, in this case the three digits, were most recalled. This is known as the von Restorff effect.

Delivering Distinctiveness

Knowing that your ads need to be distinctive is helpful, but how do you standout?

Luckily for you, most brands abide by category conventions. Break those conventions and you become distinctive.

In the U.K. you can see this herd mentality in lager beer advertising with leading brands invariably associating themselves with football. Such is the clutter that Campaign magazine said they’re “playing 11-a-side on a 5-a-side pitch”.

Lager isn’t the only guilty category. Most brands brag about their success which creates a simple way to stand-out: admit your flaws.

But Isn’t This Risky?

You’re not alone in worrying about admitting weakness.

However, there’s plenty of evidence that this tactic improves your odds of being effective. The original evidence comes from Harvard psychologist, Elliot Aronson.

In his experiment, Aronson recorded an actor answering a series of quiz questions. In one strand of the experiment, the actor – armed with the right responses – answers 92% of the questions correctly. After the quiz, the actor then pretends to spill a cup of coffee over himself (a small blunder, or pratfall).

The recording was played to students, who were then asked how likeable the contestant was. However, Aronson split the students into cells and played them different versions: one with the spillage included and one without. The students found the clumsy contestant more likeable.

Aronson called the preference for those who exhibit a flaw the ‘pratfall effect’. It’s an insight that has occasionally been harnessed to great effect by brands. Think of VW Beetle (Ugly is only skin deep), Stella (Reassuringly expensive) and Avis (We’re only No. 2 so we try harder).

It works because admitting weakness is a tangible demonstration of honesty and, therefore, makes other claims more believable.

Risk Free For Who?

I’ve listed a few examples of brands harnessing the pratfall effect, stretching back to VW in 1959. But there have been tens of thousands of ads since then. Why have only a couple of dozen reveled in their failings?

The rarity is explained by the principal-agent problem, a theory first suggested by Stephen Ross, a professor at MIT. He suggested that there is a divergence of interest between the principal, the brand, and the agent, the marketer. The brand is interested in long-term profitable growth, but the marketer is also interested in safe career progression.

If a campaign flops having used the pratfall effect it might end a marketer’s career. Imagine you were the marketing director responsible for Reassuringly Expensive and the campaign flopped. You’d be lucky to escape with your job.

Resolving The Principal-Agent Problem

The best way to ensure brands strive for distinctiveness is to popularize the principal-agent problem. If following the herd becomes equated with putting one’s career ahead of the brand’s needs, then it will become a disreputable tactic.

Perhaps then we’ll see more brands admitting fallibilities.

You can find more ideas like this in my new book The Choice Factory: 25 Behavioral Biases That Influence What We Buy

The Blake Project Can Help: Differentiate Your Brand In The Brand Positioning Workshop

Don’t Miss Marketing’s Most Powerful Event: The Un-Conference: 360 Degrees of Brand Strategy for a Changing World, May 14-16, 2018 in San Diego, California. A fun, competitive-learning experience reserved for 50 marketing oriented leaders and professionals.

Branding Strategy Insider is a service of The Blake Project: A strategic brand consultancy specializing in Brand Research, Brand Strategy, Brand Licensing and Brand Education

FREE Publications And Resources For Marketers