The Related Diversification In A Business

The Related Diversification In A Business Since the pioneering study of Rumelt (1947) an extensive research has focused on the effects of diversification on firm performance. Two types of diversification are generally selected by then firms. Variables of investigation like firm size, industry performance and their effects on performance are not controlled. Typical studies always focus upon that how a firm diversifies? Managers take strategic decisions about product/industry diversification and always choose the appropriate strategies. Current study reveals that much diversification has reduced the risk leading to a better performance. More diversification need not to improve the performance of firms. It can be argued that current thinking encourages the broad diversification which is warranted, suggesting that unrelated diversification selection has poorer managers on average. In this paper we examine an alternative explanation of the difference between the two types of the diversifications across the different firms impacting on their performances. Porters thinking on corporate strategies is focused on the diversification and its effects on the firms. Hamel and Prahalad advocate the diversified corporations must be not looked only the portfolio of discrete business but a collection of important competencies used in market for different products. Literature on diversification and performance represents the sustainable work in the business strategy. Rumelts (1947) has tested the hypothesis that companies adopting the strategy other than related diversification has not performed well. Another avenue taken in the efforts marks linear versus non-linear structure of diversification-modeling relationship (Palich, Cardinal and Miller, 2000). Three main important perspectives are identified by the Montgomery (1994) which helps to know that why a firm selects to diversify: market power, resource based view and agency theory. Agency theory says that diversification is due to the managerial interests at the expense of stakeholders. Managers seek the diversification because they want to increase the compensation and also provide the ways to make the firms more secure and also reduce the dangers of their personal investment portfolio. Diversified firms are more consolidated and form the organizing of economic activities in more effective ways (Penrose, 1959). Market power is third theoretical perspective from which corporate diversification is motivated. Why the Firms Diversify? Firms exist due to their products and managers maximize the profits. An entity called Marshalls representative firm has resemblance with the real business firms and more than one products are integrated. Business transactions are key role player which determine distribution of the firms activities in industries. Related Diversification It is claimed that multi-business firms having the same business portfolios may get advantages which non-diversifies business firms cannot achieve. This raises the two main questions. Firstly the kinds of similarity and secondly the circumstances under which similar business portfolios give the efficient advantages. It is seen that relevant similarities imply the resources substitution and complement the resources in other company. First we look the situation in which involving resources substitute across the industries. Teece (1980, 1982) has pointed out that there exist such indivisibilities which explain the joint production but did not explain that why joint production is organized in a single firm. In case when the excess capacity is created and traded in well established markets, then single firm and unrelated diversifier have opportunity to sell out their excess products. They can also buy the products according to their capacity from other companies. Two separate companies ca n contact each other to share the input facilities. Joint production may have fewer benefits as compared to the dangers which are greater in numbers and their impacts. Firm integration depends upon the comparative benefits of contacting and costs. Only the resource substitutability is not the source of efficiency gains but it also needed the resource complementarily (Teece, Rumelt, Dosi, Winter, 1994). The process of complementary increases as the investment in another company is increased. Also the resource use in one industry affects the resource use in another industry. These qualitative and quantitative coordination problems are well controlled by the diversified firms (Richardson, 1972; Milgrom Roberts, 1992). All kinds of supply chain use the process of complementarities but only a few are integrated. Diversification exploits the complementarities only when specialized firms are prevented by the transaction costs to recognize the benefits of contacts. Complementary products are also main type of the relatedness. The products of every company are used with the conjunction of other complementary products of same company or another company. For example computers are used with software, cars are purchased with loans, and e lectronic equipments are purchased with other accessories; hence these strategic practices concerning the complements are distinguished (Porter, 1985). Unrelated Diversification So for the arguments presented mainly focus upon the decisions which exploit the valuable resources across the industries. A prediction that related diversification should outperform the unrelated diversification or conglomerate diversification exists in the literature about the diversification. In US the conglomerates that arose during 1960s did not disappear from corporate scene. As the Rumelt (1982) has reported that number of single business firms decreased very rapidly during the 1950s which resulted in increase the unrelated business firms. However the major US companies continued to be diversified during the 1990s. Montgomery (1994) reported that from 1985 to 1992 more than two third of 500 Fortune companies were interested in five distinct business lines. Companies having slow growth industry need to use the excess cash to initiate the diversifying. Business firms can leverage their core using the best strategy. But unrelated businesses only need the diversification when attractive profit prospects are offered by the related business opportunities. Joint venture is logically possible with other organizations into areas of business. Strategic sense makes a sizeable profit in companies adopting the diversification. A strong company with slow-growth industry needs to curtail the new investment in present facilities. A concept about the diversification is the strategic fit in the field of strategic management. This concept also implies that when the weaknesses and strengths of companies are realized and top management begins considering the need of diversification through the process of acquisition. The purpose of this model is not only acquiring through the diversification but also identifying the strengths which are transferable into other markets. This model is useful for the firms with distinctive capabilities entering into new market through the acquisition (Salter Weinhold, 1979). Finally companies try to manage the interdependence through the acquisition or diversification and also sustain their growth. Objectives of Diversification Trends and contingencies provide the analysis which indicates that a company must diversify and avail the diversification opportunities. What are the diversification opportunities? Three main opportunities are included here in this paper which significantly impacts the firms performance. Diversification due to unique products ensures that material used for the manufacturing is composed of the functional components, basic materials and other parts which form the final shape of the product. A big lot of material is purchased from the suppliers from outside. Vertical diversification branches out the all production into its components, parts and materials. One of outstanding example of vertical diversification is the Ford Empire. This vertical diversification not only introduces the new products but also caters the new mission. We have already given a touch to horizontal diversification that introduces the new products which are not inline; cater to those missions in companys knowledge a lso experience in marketing, technology and finance. Third way of diversification is lateral diversification that moves beyond the limits of the firms which a firm belongs. Horizontal and vertical diversifications are restrictive because horizontal and vertical diversifications delimit the field of interest while lateral diversification is more extensive. Premises of Corporate Strategy Numbers of premises are required to build the successful corporate strategy. Facts of diversification cant be altered and when these are ignored the corporate strategy fails. The diversification at Marriot has exploited the food services and hospitality due to well-developed skills. Marriot earns a great margin due to its services in nine regional procurement centers. The diversification in Marriot has balanced the start- ups and acquisitions. The start-up is used for the acquisition of small companies. Marriot has expanded its geographic base; acquires the companies and disposes those parts which do not fit. Companies need sharing activities when diversify across the business evolving the similar evolutionary paths. Many industries in the market share the activities. Wal-Mart performs such activities of sharing and distributes at its discount stores and Sams Club warehouses. These companies get success through diversifying across the similar companies enough for their requirements. Companies compromise on activities which become generic when the divisions of companies grow in different in their core requirement. Porter has worked on the business strategies for different industries, companies and concentrated on different aspects of the diversification in business. Porter has also worked on diversification and companies can spread risk and attain development by the diversification and acquisition. Blue-Chip companies including the Boston Consulting Companies and McKinsey developed the models for discovering which companies will raise and fall. Porter has identified the three critical tests for the success. An Attractive Test: Diversification adopting companies must be structurally attractive and attractive industries will produce better results and entry barriers will be high. Suppliers and customers will have very moderate bargaining power and very few products will substitute. Unattractive industries have high fixed costs and also high rivalry. Cost of Entry Test: When cost of entry is high it will prejudice the potential investment and profitability which will also erode before the game starts. Better-off test: It is required that how the acquiring will provide the advantage in acquiring and significant advantage to others. Porter has tackled these issues by knowing the competition unit level. Identifying the core businesses based on the strategies. Core businesses include those which are found in attractive industries and competitive advantage is found in these industries. Interrelationships among the core businesses can be facilitated by creating the horizontal organizational mechanisms. Diversification opportunities are pursued based on the shared activities and pass the all three critical tests. Skills can be transferred through the shared activities pursuing the diversification. Porter has further addressed the assertion and says that internet is in infancy; too observes that lack of strategies like diversification will result in weak market penetration. He has argued that many internet companies are following to run on the unsustainable competitiveness. He further says that new rules of competition will be thrown up by the re-emerging principles (Porter, 2001). Porter found that diversification st rategies had failed in US as many companies were not successful to create the value (Porter, 1987). He provided the proof of his comments as he had seen that many companies in US cut costs and downsized their staff during the 1980s. However this strategy of diversification could not create value for these companies. Porter (1985) has also said that diversified company is nothing without synergy; it is only a mutual fund. Kanter (1989) has also argued that diversifications justification is only the achievement of synergy. However both of the Porter and Knater have acknowledged that companies find it hard to achieve the synergy, therefore the high rate of failure is there for companies. Porter has vast experience to study the diversification from 1950 to 1986 for leading thirty-three companies of the US and concluded that track record of diversification remained poor and in many cases of acquisition was divested. During the 1970s many acquired business units were resold and establishe d themselves as independent firms (Porter, 1987). Prior to porter strengths and weaknesses, opportunities and threats were framed on SWOT framework developed by the Harvard (Andrew, 1971). However this framework lacked an analytical foundation. Porter Competitive strategy has changed the strategic management during his work in 1970; it has achieved high value in 1990 and still is shaping the thinking on competitive strategy. His work is academic to a fault Mr. Porter is about as likely to produce a blockbuster full of anecdotes and boosterish catch-phrases as he is to deliver a lecture dressed in bra and stockings. (Porter, 1994). He abstracted his thinking into digestible chunks of business and he proved to be helpful for the business and academic world. In every organization of the world Porters five forces are used more frequently. Later thinking of the Porter on corporate strategy rides runs on the new ways of evolutionary approach. Value chain model of Porter attempts to analyze those resources which are possessed by the companies; companies perform the activities linked together. Intrinsic factors like work morale, corporate culture, level of communication, team spirit, leadership and interpersonal skills exploit the maximum inherent power of employees. However Porter does not include these factors in analysis. Primary and supporting technologies are identified in competitive advantage. What are the core technologies which impact an organization in achieving the competitive advantage? The core functions consist of internal resources of a company such as company culture, management and organizational stru cture. Joint ventures or acquisition adds new skills to the corporation but in Competitive Advantage the intrinsic factors always lead to create or develop technology advancement. Merging or acquiring is also included in the advance technology of diversification. Prahalad and Hamel (1990) have argued that diversified corporations must not be seen as portfolio of discrete business; but also the collection of the competitively necessary competencies; which are used in many markets and different products. Above arguments of Prahalad and Hamel are based on the Honda Company. The core competence theory of Hamel and Prahalad has identified the fundamentals of the core competencies in companies. Bundle of skills and technologies shape the core competence and not the single skill or the technology do it. Prahalad et.al (2001) argues that firms achieve the core competencies when multiple technologies are harmonized along with the customer knowledge, skills and marketing institution to manage them synergistically. This is called the creative building (Prahalad et.al, 2001). Both of Hamel and Prahalad have focused upon the production skills and corporate wide technologies to define the core competencies. The importance of the Prahalad arguments rests on the similarities found in the forms of relatedness as well as in unrelated business. However Hamel and Prahalad concede that approach adopted by the Porter embodies the concept of strategic fit; matching the external requirement with the organizations resources is not so much wrong but it can be referred as unbalanced. Managers imply the concept of strategy that fits with the resources of an organization. According to Hamel and Prahalad the Porters approach is not wrong but it tends to vague the approach where strategic stretch supplements the strategic fit. Here the strategic means the creation of the gap between resources and ambition. We again come to the core competencies but now it comes from the school of Prahalad and Hamel. Hamel and Prahalad (1990) argued that management created organizational abilities of making the products according to the needs of the customers. They have argued as: The skills that together constitute the core competence must coalesce around individuals whose efforts are not so narrowly focused that they cannot recognize the opportunities for blending their functional expertise with those of others un new and interesting ways (Prahalad Hamel, 1990, p.82). The strategic capability brings the cluster of attributes which assist to achieve the competitive advantage. Toyota is a company which has adopted the diversification strategy and Toyota carmakers are happy with the preferred brands as Prius and hybrid cars. General Motors, BMW and DaimlerChrysler have scrambled to roll out their own hybrid products. Ford has also taken step to increase its products but Toyota is leading to produce the more diversified hybrid products. So for we have discussed the different aspects of the diversification across the different companies; theories of Hamel and Prahalad have focused upon the core competencies of the organizations. These core competencies make differentiation of firms adopting them. Porter has advocated that co-operation and collaboration are the means to retain the competitive advantage. Porter has seen that any sign of alliance may prove to be the source of erosion for the long term competitive advantage. Conclusion: We have tried in this paper to focus upon the corporate strategies in business. In most part of the paper we have focused upon the diversification strategy. Diversification with its two common types is described briefly. We have seen that most of the companies in the world operate on the related diversification. The relationship between the cash flow sensitivity and corporate diversification is also investigated in this paper. The cash flow of diversified companies is lower as compared to cash holding. Diversification objectives are also given in this paper. Arguments on the corporate strategy have focused the views of the Porter and other economists. Corporate strategy of Porter depends upon the competitive advantage. It is tried to evaluate the arguments of porter that diversification destroys the value; but Hamel and Prahalad have contradicted the views of the Porter about the core competencies with examples. Quotes from the Porters work are included in this paper which is based o n corporate strategy.

Argumentative Position Paper

| | | | | | The â€Å"Weak† Tea Party Movement Curt D. Collins Bellevue University Professor Wright EN102-T301 Composition II October 13, 2012 The â€Å"Weak† Tea Party Movement On Feb. 19, 2009, about a month after President Barack Obama’s first day on the job, CNBC host Rick Santelli railed against the President’s proposed bank bailout and stimulus package on the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange calling it an effort to help those who did not, or could not, help themselves (Tea Party Movement, 2012).Santelli sanctioned â€Å"another tea party† similar to the American Revolution movement of the same name, and almost immediately, the movement gained momentum. By autumn, hundreds of Tea Party groups organized efforts in every state (Tea Party Movement, 2012). A year later, the movement influenced Republican party politics in the 2010 congressional elections (Tea Party Movement Evolves, 2012). With all the hype and candidate activities grabbing headlines for the past two years, the Tea Party Movement has fallen back to the shadows of the alleys that seldom get noticed.The goals of the movement initially were to remove Republican Party officials who were not living up to the conservative standards adopted by the movement and stop the Democratic economic policy supporters from carrying out the bailout plan. Although the Tea Party Movement was effective in 2009 and 2010 at trying to accomplish it’s goals, the lack of a substantive spokesman, little to not political pull, and sporadic support has watered down the efforts of the movement to an almost complete halt in 2012. Therefore, the Tea Partiers have lost their chance to evoke change in the government. Since the Tea Party Movement ideals do not support the President’s party, Democrats view the movement as a road block to progressing the current administration’s plans for economic recovery. Conservative thinkers, on the other hand, see the Tea Partiers as throw back hardliners who will stop at nothing to achieve the success that comes with defeating the Democrats in elections, passing an economic strategy that supports a more conservative framework, and purging the Republican party of so called conservatives that really don’t practice what they preach.This kind of focus and drive is a good thing. The founding of the United States of America is based on the idea that we all have the right to speak out against the current government. Conflict is healthy. With conflict comes resolution. The resolution brings a new idea that best suites the situation. Theda Skocpol, Victor S. Thomas Professor of Government and Sociology Harvard University, cites three main forces behind the movement’s success: â€Å"grassroots activism, funding from wealthy conservative advocacy groups, and publicity from right-leaning broadcasters† (Skopcol and Williamson, 2012).The movement has all the ingredients of becoming a very viable and valid contender for fighting the good fight, according to some. Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the US House of Representatives, stated the following in a July 29, 2010 interview with Newsmax. tv:†First of all, I think the Republican Tea Party will beat the Democratic Socialist Party†¦ Second, I like the Tea Party movement†¦ I think the Tea Partiers I meet with around the country†¦ re serious people studying the Constitution, trying to find a way to get back to balanced, limited government with balanced budgets and with much less power in Washington, and I approve of their general direction. † July 29, 2010| The key point to take away from Gingrich’s statement is that the Tea Party is trying, without success, to invoke principles that have do not have widespread appeal. In cases like this, a spokesman for the Party Movement would be most beneficial.Rick Santorum, former US Senator (R-PA), stated the following during the June 13, 2011 CNN Republican presidential debate in Manchester, NH, available on CNN. com: | â€Å"I think the Tea Party is a great backstop for America. I love it when people hold up this Constitution and say we have to live by what our founders laid out for this country. It is absolutely essential that we have that backbone to the Republican Party going into this election. † June 13, 2011 | Although Santorum supports the ideas the Tea Party Movement endorses, he does not support the movement.Tea Partiers fight for what is theirs. Most are older citizens that rely on Social Security and Medicare, two things that the Democratic economic strategy will substantially reduce fiscally. â€Å"They think that government spending is OK as long as it’s for people who’ve worked all their lives and earned the benefits,† Skocpol said. â€Å"They speak of themselves as hard-working Americans who deserve all they’re getting from society. † The Tea Party Movement does not support pro grams like Pell Grants, food stamps, and Medicaide.In general, the movement members do not feel an obligation to support groups like immigrants, people of color, and young people. Opposition from these groups has contributed greatly to the demise of support for the Tea Party Movement. The mantra for Tea Partiers is that of a generation who worked hard for the benefits that they currently have and damned be anyone who tries to â€Å"steal† from that pot (Skopcol and Williamson, 2012). This ideology is slowly turning away a whole generation.Without support from these less mature individuals, the party is losing popularity, fast. The beginnings of the movement may have be admirable, however, its growth and victories are a result of donations from conservative groups and exposure due to making headlines (Skopcol and Williamson, 2012). â€Å"Conservative political action committees saw a good thing erupt in 2009, and joined with right-wing media leaders in cheerleading, pushing, leveraging the grassroots protesters to effect change within the Republican Party,† Skocpol said. Their goal was to move the GOP further to the right in policy terms, and to prevent moderates from getting elected, and from compromising with Democrats if they got there. The right-wing media helped to give scattered protesters and groups the sense that they were in something big together and could affect national politics. † Although Republicans benefitted from Tea Party influence by achieving electoral success in 2010 and may again in 2012, Skocpol says that the movement creates major problems for the Republican Party as the years go on (Skopcol and Williamson, 2012).One of the problems being that the popularity of the movement might polarize supporters, therefore, the support will die in order to facilitate â€Å"acceptance† in the party as a whole. The more likely result is that Tea Party supporters will come into the fold of the Republican Party, abandoning the ideals and issues once fought for strongly by the movement. Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts, stated the following during the NBC News/Politico Republican presidential debate held at the Reagan Library in Simi Valley, CA  on Sep. , 2011, available at NYTimes. com:| â€Å"I believe in a lot of what the Tea Party believes in. The Tea Party believes that government's too big, taxing too much, and that we ought to get — get to the work of getting Americans to work. So I put together a plan with a whole series of points of how we can get America's economy going again. Tea Party people like that. So if the Tea Party is for keeping government small and spending down, and helping us create jobs, then, hey, I'm for the Tea Party. † Sep. 7, 2011|The real Tea Party Movement is not a political party. How can a movement endorse anybody? It can’t. This is a big factor for why interest and momentum is dwindling with the movement. One reason for the lack of leade rship: Romney, Gingrich, and Santorum have each taken political and economic contrary stands on issues that the Tea Party Movement supported. Gingrich and Romney both supported a bank bailout in 2008, as well as supporting health insurance incentives years earlier (Skopcol and Williamson, 2012).Santorum, the most conservative of the three, voted against several projects that received Tea Party support during his time in the Senate (Skopcol and Williamson, 2012). Looking more like a senior citizens brigade than a force to be reckoned with in the political arena, the Tea Party Movement is waning. â€Å"The Tea Party movement is dead. It’s gone,† says Chris Littleton, the cofounder of the Ohio Liberty Council, a statewide coalition of Tea Party groups in Ohio (The Tea Party Movement Evolves, 2012). I think largely the Tea Party is irrelevant in the primaries. They aren’t passionate about any of the candidates, and if they are passionate, they’re for Ron Paul . † Ron Paul has no support from any party and is not considered to be a contender for the office of the President. The Tea Party Movement will not influence government as long as it continues to repel support of minority groups, cling to issues that affect only a fraction of the population, and fail at choosing a spokesperson who can be rallied around to act as effective leader for the group.References Skocpol, T. , and Williamson, V. , (2012). The Tea Party and the Remaking of an Conservatism. Oxford; New York: Oxford UP. Print. Tea Party Movement. (2012). In The New York Times. Retrieved from http://topics. nytimes. com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/t/tea_party_movement/index. html Barrow, W. , (2012). Tea Party Movement Evolves, Achieves State Policy Victories. (2012). In Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www. huffingtonpost. com/2012/08/12/tea-party-movement_n_1770452. html

Effects if the Columbian Exchange on Europe Essay

The Columbian Exchange refers to the interchange of diseases, crops, and ideas between the New and Old World after Christopher Columbus’s initial voyage to the Americas in 1492. These biological exchanges changed the way of life for both Native Americans and the Europeans, impacting the social and cultural makeup of both sides. The discoveries of valuable metals and crops are perhaps the biggest findings for the Old World, and these encounters helped countries like Europe get out of the Middle Ages and into the years of Enlightenment. However, the exchange not only brought gains, but also losses. The years of exploration and exchange following Columbus’s landing helped European nations in many ways, especially contributing to the development of the economy and population. Before Columbus’s expedition to the distant lands, Western Europe was an agrarian society, in which the people lived in family households. The feudal lords ruled the land strictly, causing living conditions to be poor for the majority of the Europeans. Most peasants and lowerclassmen survived on bread and porridge, seasonal vegetables, and rarely a piece of meat. In addition, one-third of Europe’s population died from starvation and diseases like Black Death. Still, however, productivity was increased by water mills, iron plows, and other new technologies. Under the Roman Catholic Church, and the pope, Europeans lived strictly religious lives. The Columbian Exchange helped bring Europe’s economy out from the depths and also aided food production, protecting Europeans from famine. The seemingly long years of these exchanges helped Europe’s economy for the better, even though much more money was being put into circulation. The introduction of new staple crops like corn and potatoes brought in large sums of money and surpluses. Slave labor saved the European a lot of money, too. Trade and raiding the I ndians, on the other hand, brought in valuable metals like gold or silver, furs, raw materials, and other goods. Additionally, these trades caused for the advancement of ships and other large vessels, which created more jobs and opportunities, helping the economy grow even more. Tobacco, another crop from the New World, was so widely accepted that it became a substitute for currency in some areas of Europe. All of these social and agricultural enhancements assisted in the specialization of labor, eventually leading European countries into the Renaissance. Many of the exchanges that transformed the economy also reformed the population. Surpluses from growing crops saved the  peasants and lowerclassmen from starvation. Since more people were able to survive, rather then dying from malnourishments, the population of European countries rose. The shipment of slaves, although not too large, also caused the population figures to go up. At this point, European countries started to send people to the New World due to overcrowding; however, some diseases like syphilis arrived at Europe from returning the Englishmen. Although syphilis caused many deaths, it did not effect the overall population of Europe, and it was in no way comparable to the epidemics that were caused by immigration to the New World. Europe truly gained from trading and exploring the unexplored, virgin soil of the New World. They gained materials and crops, which helped boost the economy; be that as it may be, the Europeans also lost lives due to diseases like syphilis. All in all, the Columbian Exchange helped the economy, reformed the way of agriculture and education, and started the age of Enlightenment.

Biography of William Travis, Texas Revolution Hero

William Barret Travis (August 1, 1809–March 6, 1836) was an American teacher, lawyer, and soldier. He was in command of the Texan forces at the Battle of the Alamo, where he was killed along with all of his men. According to legend, he drew a line in the sand and challenged the defenders of the Alamo to cross it as a sign of their promise to fight to the death. Today, Travis is considered a great hero in Texas. Fast Facts: William Travis Known For: Travis became a Texas hero for his role in the defense of the Alamo.Also Known As: BuckBorn: August 1, 1809 in Saluda County, South CarolinaDied: March 6, 1836 in San Antonio, Texas Early Life Travis was born on August 1, 1809, in South Carolina, and grew up in Alabama. At the age of 19, while working as a schoolteacher in Alabama, he married one of his students, 16-year-old Rosanna Cato. Travis later trained and worked as a lawyer and published a short-lived newspaper. Neither profession made him much money, and in 1831 he fled to the west, staying one step ahead of his creditors. He left Rosanna and their young son behind. By then the marriage had soured, and neither Travis nor his wife was upset by his departure. He chose to head to Texas for a new start; his creditors could not pursue him into Mexico. Anahuac Disturbances Travis found plenty of work in the town of Anahuac defending slaveholders and those who sought to recapture runaway slaves. This was a sticky point at the time in Texas, as slavery was illegal in Mexico but many of the Texas settlers practiced it anyway. Travis soon ran afoul of Juan Bradburn, an American-born Mexican military officer. After Travis was jailed, the local people took up arms and demanded his release. In June 1832, there was a tense standoff between angry Texans and the Mexican Army. It eventually turned violent and several men were killed. The fighting came to an end when a high-ranking Mexican official arrived to defuse the situation. Travis was freed, and he soon found he was a hero among Texans who wanted to separate from Mexico. Return to Anahuac In 1835, Travis again was involved in trouble in Anahuac. In June, a man named Andrew Briscoe was jailed for arguing about new taxes. Infuriated, Travis rounded up a gang of men and they rode up to Anahuac, supported by a boat with a lone cannon. He ordered the Mexican soldiers out. Not knowing the strength of the rebel Texans, they agreed. Briscoe was freed and Travis’ stature grew enormously with those Texans who favored independence. His fame increased even more when it was revealed that Mexican authorities had issued a warrant for his arrest. Arrival at the Alamo Travis missed out on the Battle of Gonzales and the Siege of San Antonio, but he was still a dedicated rebel and anxious to fight for Texas. After the Siege of San Antonio, Travis, by then a militia officer with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel, was ordered to collect up to 100 men and reinforce San Antonio, which was, at the time, being fortified by Jim Bowie and other Texans. The defense of San Antonio centered on the Alamo, a fortress-like old mission church in the center of town. Travis managed to round up about 40 men, paying them out of his own pocket, and arrived at the Alamo on February 3, 1836. Discord at the Alamo By rank, Travis was technically the second-in-command at the Alamo. The first commander there was James Neill, who had fought bravely at the siege of San Antonio and who had vigorously reinforced the Alamo in the intervening months. About half the men there, however, were volunteers and therefore answered to no one. These men tended to listen only to James Bowie, who generally deferred to Neill  but did not listen to Travis. When Neill left in February to attend to family matters, the differences between the two men caused a serious rift among the defenders. Eventually, two things would unite Travis and Bowie (and the men they commanded): the arrival of the diplomatic celebrity Davy Crockett and the advance of the Mexican Army, commanded by General Antonio Là ³pez de Santa Anna. Sending for Reinforcements Santa Annas army arrived in San Antonio in late February 1836 and Travis busied himself sending dispatches to anyone who could help him. The most likely reinforcements were the men serving under James Fannin in Goliad, but repeated pleas to Fannin brought no results. Fannin did set out with a relief column  but turned back due to logistical difficulties (and, one suspects, the suspicion that the men in the Alamo were doomed). Travis wrote to Sam Houston, but Houston was having trouble controlling his army and was not in any position to send aid. Travis wrote the political leaders, who were planning another convention, but they moved too slowly to do Travis any good. He was on his own. Death According to popular lore, sometime on March 4, Travis called together the defenders of the Alamo for a meeting. He drew a line in the sand with his sword and challenged those who would stay and fight to cross it. Only one man refused (an ailing Jim Bowie reportedly asked to be carried across). There is little historical evidence to support this story. Still, Travis and everyone else knew the odds and chose to remain, whether he actually drew a line in the sand or not. On March 6, the Mexicans attacked at dawn. Travis, defending the northern quadrant, was one of the first to fall, shot down by an enemy rifleman. The Alamo was overrun within two hours, and all of its defenders were either captured or killed. Legacy Were it not for his heroic defense of the Alamo and his death, Travis would most likely be a historical footnote. He was one of the first men truly committed to Texas separation from Mexico, and his deeds in Anahuac are worthy of inclusion on an accurate timeline of events that led to Texas independence. Still, he was not a great military or political leader. He was just a man in the wrong place at the wrong time (or the right place at the right time, some would say). Nevertheless, Travis showed himself to be a capable commander and brave soldier when it counted. He held the defenders together in the face of overwhelming odds and did what he could to defend the Alamo. In part because of his discipline and hard work, the Mexicans paid very dearly for their victory that March day. Most historians put the casualty count at around 600 Mexican soldiers to some 200 Texan defenders. Travis showed true leadership qualities and might have gone far in post-independence Texas politics had he survived. Travis greatness lies in the fact that he obviously knew what was going to happen, yet he remained and kept his men with him. His final missives show clearly his intent to stay and fight, even knowing he would likely lose. He also seemed to understand that if the Alamo were crushed, the men inside would become martyrs for the cause of Texas Independence—which is precisely what happened. Cries of Remember the Alamo! echoed out all over Texas and the United States, and men took up arms to avenge Travis and the other slain Alamo defenders. Travis is considered a great hero in Texas, and many things in Texas are named for him, including Travis County and William B. Travis High School. His character appears in books and movies and everything else related to the Battle of the Alamo. Travis was portrayed by Laurence Harvey in the 1960 film The Alamo, which starred John Wayne as Davy Crockett. Sources Brands, H.W. Lone Star Nation: The Epic Story of the Battle for Texas Independence. New York: Anchor Books, 2004.Thompson, Frank T.  The Alamo. University of North Texas Press, 2005.