Uncategorized Archives - Academic Master Best Academic Papers Writing Services in UK Fri, 29 Nov 2024 16:51:19 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.7.1 Issue of change Management and Leadership https://academicmaster.co.uk/2022/04/issue-of-change-management-and-leadership/ Wed, 27 Apr 2022 14:48:04 +0000 https://academicmaster.co.uk/?p=1035 ISSUES OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP Introduction Change management for most organizations is about modifying or transforming in order to maintain or improve effectiveness (Hayes,

The post Issue of change Management and Leadership appeared first on Academic Master.

]]>
ISSUES OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP

Introduction

Change management for most organizations is about modifying or transforming in order to maintain or improve effectiveness (Hayes, 2007). However, the research literature reviewed seems to lacks a clear understanding of a specific change management approach toward improving the management of business system implementations. Ming- Ling and Shaw (2005) conducted a case study to suggest that in addition to executive leadership, resource management and the ability to formally incorporate business and technology managers are variables that appear to offer success in change management approaches to improve the management of business system implementations. Experience in a leader is defined by Fiedler (1972) and Doh (2003) as (a) what an individual learns over years on a job, (b) guidance and knowledge obtained from superiors and fellow leaders, and (c) informal training that increase influence and the ability to achieve success. A leader’s influence, according to Hogg (2001) and Giles (2005), is difficult to measure. However, Giles posited that leaders who are influential appear to have special advantages or power over program aspects not necessarily in their direct control, such as resources and decision-making. Therefore, one can infer that sustained leaders are experienced leaders willing to influence change management to improve management success.  

Background of the Study

According to Byrd, Lewis, and Bradley (2006), enterprise business systems implementations have become an important management challenge, to the point that many organizations have placed its management activities and actions among their top concerns. The definition of change management, as described by Fulla (2007), is “the act of managing modifications to an organization’s culture, hierarchy, and/or business processes in order to achieve a desired outcome” (p. 36). The implementation of enterprise business systems has become increasingly important due to an increased demand for automated business processes, information sharing across organizational boundaries, and its desire to integrate business systems (Hite, 2004; Kutz & Hite, 2004). Hayes (2002) advocated that the management of change can be achieved either by an incremental change approach or a transformational change approach. He stated that the aim of incremental change “is to improve alignment between existing organizational components in order to do things better and improve the efficiency of the organization,” whereas transformational change “is to seek a new configuration of organization components in order to re-align the organization with its changing environment” (p.17).  Hayes found that whichever change approach is organizationally implemented, leaders play an integral part in considering the organization’s situation from an overall perspective. This is supported by Fiedler’s contingency theory, which postulates that a leader’s effectiveness is based on “situational contingency,” that is a result of interaction of two factors, known as “leadership style” and “situational favorableness” (Bass, 1990).  Using Hackman and Wageman (2007), as well as Vroom and Jago (2007), elaborations  on the Fielder contingency theory, leaders are believed to positively impact  organizational change because it is the interaction between leadership influences on a  change situation that makes the outcome(s) effective. While this may be true, a leader’s perception of change management reflects previous experiences with similar problems or situations and perhaps their willingness to influence the management of change management variables to achieve the desired outcome. Research that presents information regarding a leader’s perception of change management, and research that presents information regarding experienced leaders’ willingness to influence change management variables, may add to the knowledge for improving the management of enterprise business system implementation.  

Statement of the Problem

Adopting a change management approach appropriate for the challenge of implementing business systems is an uncertain art, and past researchers relied on the nature of the problem, theoretical consideration, and previous research findings when strategizing how to improve upon management success effectively (Labovitz, 1965). The literature repeatedly suggests leadership is a possible missing component to improved management success and the management of investment costs (Ming-Ling & Shaw, 2005). Because of the increased demand for business systems that deliver new or efficient capabilities and services in the form of enterprise business systems to maximize interoperability, this study gauged IT  leaders’ perceptions of change management and their willingness to influence change  management approaches to improve the management of enterprise business system  implementations.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to provide a better understanding of change management and leadership to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations. Specifically, the research intended to provide information on change management and how change management was perceived by organizational leaders in order to determine whether a relationship existed between leaders’ years of experience in an organization and their willingness to influence change management variables to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations. The perception reflected a leader’s experience and the willingness to influence resource negotiations, facilitate business and technology managers’ participation in formal groups, and persuade the use of enterprise architectures as a change management approach to improve management success of enterprise business systems. This study specifically analyzed the leaders’ years of experience in organizational setting, assuming that years of experience within a particular organization provides leaders with more knowledge, wisdom, and understanding of the organizational politics bureaucracy, and culture. There was also the assumption that experienced leaders had been exposed to training, guidance, and processes by their organization, making them more apt to deal efficiently with issues or situations that might arise.

Rationale

Despite the existence of theory and previous research on change management  approaches and variables to improve upon the challenges of business system  implementations, a common theme underlying the theories and models is a need for  leadership as an independent variable. Ylimaki and Halttunen (2006) postulated that  attitudes or perceptions of a single committed leader for change who established needed  resources and management frameworks to control the complexity and constant changes in  technology and business environments is instrumental in the adoption of change  management approaches. The importance of leadership perception is pivotal, based on the role they play in managing change management approaches when implementing enterprise business systems for organizational change. This highlights a need for more research in this area to understand more completely a leader’s influence on key variables: resources (financial and human), participation of business and technology managers in formal groups, and the use of enterprise architectures to improve management success for enterprise business system implementations. The results of this non-experimental correlational research design were informative, and its overall intent was to provide factual, statistical information about existing perceptions of IT leaders, based on variables of leadership years of experience acting upon the change management phenomenon. “Academic Master provides the best academic writing services. If you are having trouble doing any academic work and are in search of a website that provides academic help of top-quality at a reasonable price, then look no further and contact us. We will provides you with the best academic help.”  

Research Question

The overall goal of this research was to provide senior leaders better insight to a leader’s perception and willingness to influence management variables thought to improve management success.  With regard to specific influential factors highlighted in this study, a number of  researchers identified influence factors such as negotiations, facilitation, and persuasion  (Conger, 1998; Karlof & Loevingsson, 2005; Harsayni, 1995;), which were used in the  study. Change management variables included resource negotiations, facilitation of business and technology managers within formal groups, and persuasion to use enterprise architectures. The research question and the hypotheses for this study was: Do information technology leaders within the Information Systems Agency, perceive that change management coupled with leadership experience improves the management of enterprise business system implementations?  

Research Hypotheses

  Hypothesis 1 An information technology leader’s perception of change management is independent of his/her willingness to influence the management success of business system implementations. Hypothesis 2 An information technology leader’s willingness to negotiate resources to improve the management of enterprise business system implementation is independent of his/her leadership experience. Hypothesis 3: An information technology leader’s willingness to facilitate the participation of business and technology mangers in formal groups to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations is independent of his/her leadership experience. Hypothesis 4: An information technology leader’s willingness to persuade the use of enterprise architectures to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations is independent of his/her leadership experience.  

Significance of the Study

This non-experimental correlational quantitative study contributed to the fields of change management and leadership. It may add new information based on the perceptions of IT leaders regarding change management approaches. It also provided insight into why senior leaders might want to consider a leader’s  years of experience when assigning IT project responsibility for enterprise business  system implementations. IT project organizations and their senior leaders may be interested in results of this study when selecting IT leaders to transition its business practices, operations, or information technology or information systems into enterprise environments.  

Definition of Terms

Change management. Change management is a systematic approach to dealing with change, both from the perspective of an organization and on the individual level (Kettinger & Grover, 1995). For the intent of this study, change management is “managing the process of implementing major changes in IT, business processes, organizational structures and job assignments to reduce costs of change and to optimize  benefits” (Rockley, Kostur & Manning, 2003, p. 431).   Enterprise architecture. “An enterprise architecture consists of snapshots of the  enterprise’s current environment and its target environment, as well as a capital  investment road map for transitioning from the current to the target environment” (Kutz  & Rhodes, 2005, p. 5). Enterprise business system. An enterprise business system includes interdependent resources (people, organization, and technology) that are coordinated and organized to collect, store, process, share, and transmit information (Federal CIO  Council, 2001; U.S. Department of Defense, 2002). For the intent of this study, enterprise business systems included systems, capabilities, products, or services implemented for the execution of business processes formed from portions of one or more business applications or technologies in an enterprise environment.   Implementation. For the intent of this study, this term refers to the process of managing and coordinating independent resources for the development of information systems to support business activities in production.   Sustained leadership. For the intent of this study, this term refers to leadership experience. Leadership experience was defined using ideas by Fiedler (1972) and Doh  (2003), as what an individual learns over years on a job, guidance and knowledge  obtained from superiors and fellow leaders, and informal training, which combine to  increase leadership control, influence, and ability to achieve success.  

Assumptions and Limitations

The roles of the IT leaders in this study were defined by their position in the agency and were not dependent on an explicitly defined leadership role. An assumption was made that the sample frame of IT leaders was representative of IT leaders with experience in an IT organization as part of an IT project with enterprise business system implementation responsibilities. Limitations are factors that may compromise the study or the results (Creswell, 2005). The study was limited by the intentional choice to use a single agency in a non-experimental correlational  research approach. Because the study was without a comparison group, it did not allow conclusions about cause, according to Creswell.  

Nature of the Study

In the case of this quantitative, non-experimental, correlational study, the consideration of IT leaders’ perceptions of change management and their willingness to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations was investigated. This investigation explored IT leaders’ willingness to (a) negotiate for  needed resources, (b) facilitate participation of business and technology mangers in IT  formal groups, and (c) persuade the development and use of enterprise architectures as change management approaches to improve success to achieve the desired outcome for implementing enterprise business systems within an organization. The use of a quantitative study was appropriate, because the aim of quantitative research is to quantify relationships between one thing (independent variable) and  another (dependent variable) in a population (Creswell, 2003, 2005). The use of a non- experimental approach was appropriate, as no attempt was made to change behavior or modify the environment in this study. Finally, an explanatory correlational design was appropriate, as it explained whether, and to what degree, an association existed between or among variables based on data reported by individuals. Any determination or existence of a relationship for variables in this study can facilitate further and more advance future research of the phenomena under investigation in this study. Known limitations associated with this research design were that while correlational studies suggest that there is an association or relationship between two variables, Creswell (2005) stated that they could not prove causation.  

Organization of the Remainder of the Study

The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Chapter 2 provides a theoretic overview of change management and its important contribution toward improving the management of enterprise business system project implementations. Additionally, chapter 2 provides a theoretic overview of leadership, highlighting encouraging and discouraging cultural factors for organizational change. Chapter 3 describes the research methodology and rationale for its use in this study. Chapter 4 reports the results and findings, and finally, chapter 5 discusses findings and conclusions

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

The literature review in this chapter presents an overview and analysis of two important topics underlying this research effort: change management and leadership relevant to improving the management of enterprise business system implementations.  The first section of the literature review provides a theory overview of change management as a process to optimize organizational change. The second section provides a theoretical leadership overview drawn from the power-influence leadership theory and emphasizes three influential factors: negotiation, facilitation, and persuasion. In the third section, change management variables in conjunction with influential leadership are discussed for their combined capability to improve the management of enterprise business implementations. The fourth section discusses the importance of managing organizational culture and considers consequences believed to encourage or discourage organizational success during organizational change. The concluding section of the overview provides a summary of the research and discusses gaps in the literature where further research on change management, in conjunction with leadership, can lead to improved management of enterprise business system implementations. Recommendations are designed to provide better understanding and information regarding organizational leadership as a catalyst to change management approaches to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations. According to Legris and Colerette (2006) the low success rate for information technology projects could be increased by closely involving stakeholders, paying attention to social factors, and integrating better change management practices. According to Levinson (2006), researchers at A.G. Edwards measured project success as a combination of factors such as time, cost, and the project’s business values. Levinson argued that if a project is not completed on time but delivered the expected business value, the company still considered it a success. Internal or external customer business success was the real value that defined project success or failure. Customers had the final say on project success. Lewis (2007) posited that for a change process to succeed there was a need for an involvement plan. He added that people accepted change that affected them positively and resisted change that was bad for them. He concluded that people would only embrace those changes that they controlled. Researchers at Prosci (2004) claimed that the  most important contributor to project success was active, strong, and visible sponsorship throughout the project from top management, managers and supervisors. Paul Underwood (2005), a senior manager in performance, claimed that realizing benefits and ensuring project success was largely a change management issue. Dharmarag, Lewlyn, Rodrigues, and Shrinivasa (2006) focused on change management as a tool to manage changes in project scope and analyzed the influence of the change in scope on time and cost. Edward (2000) posited that projects changed over time because business requirements change and that to be successful in business, one needs to include these changes in strategic projects. He added that an efficient change management process could make the difference between project success and failure. He claimed that an efficient change managements process required a well-defined project baseline, a work authorization system, a trend program, and a change control process. The baseline clearly defined what was in and what was out of the project. A work authorization system helped to reduce costs and increased effectiveness in resource management and performance. The main functionality of a trend program was to provide for early alarm of potential changes. Edward concluded that during the change control process employees identified, quantified, planned, and evaluated impacts of a change on project baseline. Fielden (2001) claimed that project managers managed all types of change requests including specification and documentation changes through the change management process. He added that change management software applications produced reports that project managers needed in order to track and analyze project performance. According to the Project Management Institute (2004), change may influence a project’s scope, time, and cost. Green (2003) studied the use of a particular change management technique called configuration management techniques, management and employees increased their support to process improvement efforts and thus created a receptive environment for change. Moreover, the researcher added that communications issues were reduced and processes became less static and came under better organizational control. According to Fuchs (2004), the functionality of change management should not be limited to managing variance in the project management tried but should include user adoption. Involving business users in the change management process was key to overall project success. Fuchs claimed that project managers failed in delivering their projects because even when change had no impact on any of the three projects constraints, it did impact business users. It was posited that business users should get involved during the start-up of the project, its development, and after its implementation. He argued that any new IT project implied changes in process, operations, policies, or business. Fuchs concluded that employees who were affected by the project needed to change to adapt to the new project technology, user-interface, or limitations. Change management could help in defining these changes, quantifying them, and planning for their execution. Nadler and Nadler (1998) attributed changes in business to external factors. The authors claimed that companies changed because something outside the organization forced them to make a change. Nadler and Nadler discussed the change management practices. They named seven steps to drive and sustain change to include: owing, aligning, setting expectations, modelling, communicating, engaging, and rewarding. Goff (2000) claimed that change management tools and process were enough to make change management succeed; rather, it was people who made companies work. Gary Kissler, a partner at Deloitte Consulting Change Leadership practice, concluded that the three components critical to the project’s success and that form an integral part of change management were people, processes, and technology (Goff, 2000). Gomolski (2003) listed five actions that could help manage the behavioural implications and thus favour the implementation of a comprehensive change management program. The aforementioned actions listed by the author were to (a) identify the desperate need for change, (b) instigate and sustain change, (c) identify and implement levers, (d) identify and sustain affected agents, and (e) identify and use buoys and stabilizers. Jick and Peiperl (2002) claimed that on average 30% of project managers who were responsible to realize change initiatives succeeded. It is interesting to compare these results to those of the study by researchers at Price Water house Coopers. These researchers concluded that only 2.5% of global business achieved 100% project success (PriceWaterhouseCoopers, 2005). While only 2.5% of global businesses achieved 100% project success, 30% of project mangers who were responsible to realize change initiatives succeeded. The evidence indicated that projects that implemented change had a better probability of success than those who did not. According to Laszlo (2004), if change was critical for a company’s success, then change management became crucial for the survival of the organization. He concluded that project managers should accompany change management by motivation through reasoning and then into implementation through planning and execution. The author highlighted how change champions used change management to improve an organization’s success. Levinson (2006) claimed that researchers at A.G. Edwards found that  one of the main reasons for project failure was the lack of implanting a change management process, not just in IT but across the company. The author added that applying the change management process across the company improved project success by 50%. Researchers at Prosci (2004) conducted a benchmarking research on change management. The researchers found that there were varying levels of change management capabilities across organizations. They developed a model that they named the change management maturity model. The model had five levels or stages that ranged from no change management to organizational competency. These levels could be used as measurements of the change management maturity in organizations. Level 1-3 were the lower levels where change management was an ad-hoc process or at most a structured process localized to particular teams or areas in the organizations. Level 4-5 were the levels where change management was an integral part of the project management process and the organization. Eighty-five percent of the 160 companies ranked their change management processes between level one and three. It is asserted that the change management levels could be used to identify the type of change management used in an organization.  Level 1-3 included companies whose employee used a traditional change management process while levels 4-5 included companies whose employees used an integrated change management process. Bin Sayeed and Prasad (2006) linked change orientation experienced with the qualitative differences perceived in the management practices of the company using a sample of 157 managers and supervisors. The researchers inferred that there was a critically higher level of linearity or correspondence between these two major constructs of the study that is, if individuals saw a change due to a change management program implementation or an ongoing organizational learning/maturation process within, there would be a qualitative difference in management practices (Bin Sayeed and Prasad, 2006). The increasing global competition has concentrated management’s collective mind in most organizations on change. To effect change in the organization, it is important effectively work through such changes (Bridges, 1991). It is people who have to carry out the change in an organization. In big transformations of organization, the organization’s stakeholders focus their attention on devising the best strategic and tactical plans. Likewise, they try to generate intimate understanding of the human side of change management. As a result of change management, the company’s culture, values, people, and behaviours are also tried to be aligned with the organizational change. This is done to generate the desired results. The organizational value is realized only through the sustained, collective actions of each of the stakeholders in the organization. These stakeholders are responsible for designing, executing, and living with the changed environment. No single methodology fits every company in change management efforts. There is no specific sets of practices, tools, and techniques that can be adapted to all situations. The management may have many tools and strategies at their disposal, however, the knowledge and skills in determining how, when and why use them can make or break a change management process. Best practice can be use in a change management process. This best practice tends to spread throughout a field or industry after a success has been demonstrated. There are, however, best practices that are slow to spread even within an organization. There are several barriers to adoption of a best practice. These include lack of knowledge about current best practices, absence of motivation to make changes involved in their adoption, and deficiency in the knowledge and skills required to do so. In any change management, the major concerns are on the way the workforce will react on the change, on method on making the team work together, and the way to lead the people in the organization. Usually, what is done in most organizations is retaining their company’s unique values and sense of identity in dealing with change management. It is important for the company to plan for the human side of change as a major component of the change management plan. It is important to address the human side of change management systematically. Any significant change creates issues on people. Dealing with issues on people on a reactive basis puts speed, morale, and results at risk. Open discussion of challenges and obstacles met in the organization fosters collaboration in the organization to resolve issues internally and externally. It will help in the efficient acceptance of change when involving impacted stakeholders early on the change management process and often. A great challenge in leading and sustaining change is building momentum early on. This is a critical time for any organization since during this time that it is most difficult to obtain buy in that change is necessary and agreement on what needs to be done. Also, another practice is creating a culture of commitment and performance involving every layer of the organization, as part of change management. This type of culture should start at the top. The leaders are the ones expected to lead on showing a culture of commitment and performance through showing leadership giving strength, support, and direction to its workforce. The leaders must embrace the new approaches first, both to challenge and to motivate the rest of the institution. Leading and sustaining change is the best way to attain efficiency in the organization. Take the change(s) in the organization as opportunities.

Aspects of Organizational Change

In the following sections, five aspects of organizational change will be presented which are planned change, the evolution of schools of management, collaboration and cooperation, organizational culture and change, and the role and evolution of leadership.

Planned Change Theories

Planned change is usually a solution to a problem, or a result of dissatisfaction with the status quo. Planned change is usually triggered by the failure of people to create continuously adaptive organizations (Dunphy, 1996). Oftentimes, planned change initiatives focus on just surface-level changes, essentially leaving organizational assumptions, values, and beliefs unexplored (Argyris & Schon, 1978). There are many change models that are used to aid practitioners in implementing change. These models can be broken into two types of change theories or approaches that organizations can use: radical and incremental. Within each of these approaches there are various models and/or processes. Radical change approaches include, but are not limited to, six sigma, quality function deployment, and re-engineering. Radical change models are used to jump-start an organization and are also used when a culture change is required. In a traditionally Midwestern family business atmosphere, change is likely to be more heavily resisted than in other organizations because the feelings surrounding the change tend to be deeper and more intense, and previous research shows that family values, goals, and relations deeply influence strategic change in family-oriented firms (Dyer, 1994). Incremental change approaches include, but are not limited to, Kurt Lewin’s model (1951), Beckhard’s change model (1997), Kotter’s transformation model (1998), and the Bridges transition model (1980). Incremental change models are concerned with improving the existing system and operate within the current business model. All these models have a stage of unfreezing of the current behavior, a change being introduced, and a stage of refreezing the new behavior, or else they begin with the identification of the current state, the desired state, and the blocks and barriers that exist between the two. John Kotter (1996) suggests that certain conditions need to be met in order to bring about effective change. He bases these conditions on what is known to contribute to the failure of change efforts. Kotter also states that producing change is about 80% leadership (establishing direction, aligning, and motivating and inspiring people) and about 20% management (planning, budgeting, organizing, and problem-solving). In most change efforts he has studied, the percentages have been reversed! While there are some examples of successful change efforts, CEOs report in recent surveys that up to 75% of their organizational change efforts do not yield the promised results (Wheatley, 1998). Numerous studies indicate that as many as two-thirds of all change efforts fail in some way (Trahant, Burke, & Koonce, 1997). These efforts not only fail to yield desired results, but they produce a stream of unintended consequences. This means that leadership spends its time managing the unwanted impact rather than the planned results (Wheatley, 1998). Research also shows that resistance derails most change efforts, with the most notable obstacle being management behaviors not supportive of the change (O’Dononvan, 2003). In a planned change effort, change agents are professionals who influence and implement the change; they are critical to the success of a change effort (Vago, 1999). Recent studies indicate that static change models are being replaced with dynamic change models that reflect the discontinuous nature of organizational change. In other words, change does not occur at a steady rate even though in the past organizational theory has written about steady or static models. A review of the literature (Mintzberg, 1979; Senge, 1990) reflects the need for organizations to be able to continuously adjust as well as to allow for learning to take place. “Culture change inevitably involves unlearning as well as relearning and is therefore, by definition, transformative” (Schein, 2004, p. 335), thus: Learning leaders must be well connected to those parts of the organization that are themselves well connected to the environment—the sales organization, purchasing, marketing, public relations, legal, finance, and R&D. . .must be able to listen to disconfirming information coming from these sources and to assess the implications for the future of the organization. (Schein, 2004, p. 410)

The Evolution of Schools of Management

There are numerous management theories and schools of thought about systems management identified in the literature. Scott (2003) identified three main schools of thought: rational, natural, and open; also referred to in the literature as rationalistic and humanistic schools. Scott (2003) presented definitions associated with rational systems and natural systems perspectives: “Organizations are collectivities oriented to the pursuit of relatively specific goals and exhibiting relatively highly formalized social structures” (p. 27) and Organizations are collectivities whose participants are pursuing multiple interests, both disparate and common, but who recognize the value of perpetuating the organization as an important resource. The informal structure of relations that develops among participants is more influential in guiding the behavior of participants than is the formal structure, respectively. (p. 28)

Collaboration and Cooperation

Collaboration as a value is a cornerstone upon which many successful organizations are being rebuilt. During a review of the literature on collaboration and cooperation, the researcher found that although these two terms are often used interchangeably, many authors identified a meaningful difference between the two. The researcher is using the terms collaboration and cooperation interchangeably or synonymously. Cooperative learning refers to learning environments in which group members work together to achieve a common goal; however, the members of the group may choose to take responsibility for subtasks and work cooperatively, or they may collaborate and work together on all parts of the problem (Underwood, 2003). Cooperative learning occurs when individuals work together to maximize both their own as well as other’s learning experiences. In business organizations today, teams are a popular form of job design, and work teams represent a major change in the management of organizations. Cooperative or team-based learning has gained in popularity (Siciliano, 2001). “Team learning is the process of aligning and developing the capacity of a team to create the results its members truly desire. It builds upon the discipline of developing a shared vision” (Senge, 1990, p. 236). Communities of practice (CoPs) have been identified as playing a critical role in the promotion of learning and innovation in organizations. Communities of practice have been defined as any social group whose members share a mutual engagement, who negotiate a joint enterprise, and who have developed a shared vision (Machles, 2003). Lave and Wenger (as cited by Wenger & Snyder, 2000) wrote that a defining feature of CoP is that they are seen to emerge spontaneously from the (largely informal) networking among groups of individuals who have similar work-related activities and interests. Lesser and Everest (as cited by Wenger & Snyder, 2000) wrote that communities of practice help provided an environment where knowledge could be both created and shared to improve the following three areas: effectiveness, efficiency, and innovation. Perry and Zender (2004) found that in 1999 the phrase “communities of practice” was just beginning to appear in business literature and that it was used to refer to a new organizational form that complemented existing structures by facilitating knowledge sharing, learning, and change.

Organizational Culture and Change

A survey of the literature on organizational culture produced many definitions on culture. Organizational culture – an organization’s values, beliefs and rules about how things get done – influences every aspect of life in corporate America (Bierma, 1996). Many referred to culture as being commonly held beliefs, attitudes, values, expectations, and norms that exist within the organization that have been derived from both its history and the external environment (Glensor & Peak, 1996; Pratt & Margaritis, 1999; Schein, 1992), while others described corporate culture as the personality of an organization (Larson, 2002). Any organization can do a quick test of its corporate culture by looking at what it measures and what it celebrates (Larson, 2002). Culture is important when looking at continuous change because it acts as the glue for holding the multiple changes in place. Mallak (2001) identified strong cultures as having a set of core values or key principles that are not only understood by all employees, but also followed. One must recognize that effective cultural change is a long-term process and does not happen overnight. While the desired culture can be captured on paper, it takes time for it to exist in reality. The challenge comes in shifting the culture of the organization. McManus (2003) stated that cultural change is possible and necessary, but argues that it is essential for people to understand and appreciate the reasons for the desired changes. McManus (2003) mentioned that both the current beliefs and mental models, which make up the current collective culture, must be shifted for a change to occur. He explained that while training will provide an awareness of the new culture, it alone will not shift beliefs. Larson (2002) defines the culture of an organization as nothing more that its personality as defined by the individuals that work there. Just as it is difficult for individuals to modify or change their personality, it is the same for an organization. In fact, it is compounded when looking at an organization due to all the systems, processes, and people. Schein (1992) defined organizational culture as the pattern of basic assumptions, values, norms, beliefs, and artifacts that are shared by organizational members that allows them to derive sense and meaning. Schein (2004) saw culture as a result of three sources: “The beliefs, values, and assumptions of founders of organizations; the learning experiences of group members as their organization evolves; and new beliefs, values, and assumptions brought in by new members and leaders” (p. 225). Jick (1999) wrote, “No organization can institute change if its employees will not, at the very least, accept the change. No change will work if employees don’t help in the effort. And, change is not possible without people changing themselves” (p. 1). Jick (1999) also stated that while change can be managed externally, it would only be implemented when employees accept the change internally. Dotlich and Noel (1998) asserted, “The ability of organizations to change has become inextricably linked to the ability of individual employees to change” (p. 149). Changing the culture is not a quick process as culture is a network of embedded practices and representations that shapes every aspect of social life (Frow & Morris, 2000). Changing an organization’s culture will affect the micro (individual) and macro (organization) levels (Vago, 1999). A majority of the literature stated that one must identify the current culture before one can determine how to change it, and that this can be accomplished by utilizing various types of culture assessment instruments (Maher, 2000). Ultimately, “The bottom line for leaders is that if they do not become conscious of the cultures in which they are embedded, those cultures will manage them” (Schein, 2004, p. 23). Cameron and Quinn (2000) noted that most organizations do not operate within a single culture. This presents a unique dynamic when attempting to change an organization’s culture. Some of literature mentioned that when referring to an organization’s culture, the dominant culture, which represents the core values that are shared by most of the members, is what was being referred to (Simpson, 2001). All the literature agrees that a change only occurs when both the organization as a whole and all of its individuals are committed to the change process. Schneider, Gunnarson, and Niles-Jolley (1994) suggest that because an organizational culture cannot be changed directly, it changes slowly. They propose that the organizational environment and climate must first have its practices, procedures, and behaviors modified before a change in culture can occur. Schein (2004) expounded upon this basis for changing an organizational culture by stating that “building an effective organization is ultimately a matter of meshing the different subcultures by encouraging the evolution of common goals, common language, and common procedures for solving problems” (p. 289). Baker (2004) quoted Kotter from an interview: “Leadership, as much as anything, creates the culture, and culture helps shape the leadership. It’s a chicken-and-egg thing” (So how do you get these changes done? section, ¶ 2). Leaders have the responsibility to both reinforce and reshape an organization’s culture (Kotter & Heskett, 1992; Schein, 2004).

The Role and Evolution of Leadership

The concept of leadership has evolved over time and can be grouped into several themes – beginning with the leaders’ traits or who they are, moving to the leaders’ behavior or what they do, next to the leadership situation, and lastly to leaders’ character or everything for which they stand. The great man and trait theories (Daft, 2002) assumed that leaders were born not made – that leadership qualities were inherent in one’s personality. In other words, one was born to lead. In the behavioral approach, behaviors could be learned. If individuals adopt the right behaviors, then they could become good leaders. Environmental leadership approaches assumed that everyone was born with a blank slate; thus leaders were a result of events that provided opportunities and could be made – the nature versus nurture paradigm. Situational approaches were based upon the premise that there was not one best way, but rather that effective leadership was based upon many situational variables. Contingency approaches linked leadership style and follower attributes, stating that effective leadership was dependent upon the situation, while contemporary leadership approaches are character-based and focus on a leader doing the right thing. Today, leadership is understood to be a much more complex phenomenon than either the great man or great event approaches considered (Rost, 1991). Schein (2004) alleged that it was not the leader’s personality, but rather the leader’s learning capacity that was critical for cultural transformation. Two leadership approaches still have merit today and are widely used: situational and contemporary. “The effectiveness of leader behavior is contingent upon organizational situations. Aptly called contingency approaches, these theories explain the relationship between leadership styles and effectiveness in specific situations” (Daft, 2002, p. 79). There are several theories that fall under the broad heading contingency approaches including:
  1. Fiedler’s contingency model – designed to enable leaders to diagnose both leadership style and organizational situation with a leaders effectiveness dependent upon how well the leaders style fits the situation
  2. Hersey and Blanchard’s situational theory – premise that subordinates vary in readiness level and thus need different leadership styles, and based upon directive leadership and supportive dimensions
  3. Goal-path theory – premise that the leader’s responsibility is to increase subordinates motivation to attain personal and organizational goals by emphasizing the relationship between the leader’s style, the subordinate’s style, and the work environment
  4. Vroom-Jago model – development-driven model that permits leaders to adopt a participation style by answering diagnostic questions in sequence
These contingency approach models assumed that there was no one best approach to leadership, but rather that a leader could identify the appropriate leadership style by reflecting upon the subordinates’ capability and willingness (Daft, 2002). This was supported by Blanchard and Blanchard (2005) when they proposed, “Great leaders know how to tailor management styles to individual employees. They realize that they must understand their people well enough to give them the direction and support they need to succeed” (p. 54). In other words, leadership effectiveness must be determined by the adaptability of the leader to the follower’s situation, specifically to the skill and maturity level being displayed. Contemporary leadership approaches tend to focus on the whole person. Several approaches fall into contemporary leadership: servant leadership, transactional leadership, and charismatic or transformational leadership. Servant leadership was based on a premise by Robert Greenleaf that servant leaders put others’ interests and needs before their own. Transactional and transformational leadership approaches have been considered to be on opposite sides of a spectrum. Transactional typically refers to an exchange process between leaders and followers in which the leader essentially manages and maintains the organization, whereas transformational refers to leaders who attempt to engage the whole person toward a shared goal whereby promoting fundamental changes that aid the organization in remaining competitive in a rapidly changing environment. A review of the literature on leadership has shown that trait leadership has not disappeared as it can be seen in contemporary leadership approaches today (Northouse, 2004). Transformational leadership assumes a leader has influence that results in followers and ultimately an organization exceeding performance expectations (Northouse, 2004). Conger (1999) found that transformational leadership’s focus was on change and empowerment that typically consisted of several components: leaders possess charisma or a strong ability to influence others; leadership is capable of inspiring others to action; leaders have strong mental or intellectual capabilities; and leaders have the ability to understand individuals and their needs. In fact, Conger (1999) explained, “At the heart of the [transformational] model is the notion that transformational leaders motivate their followers to commit to and to realize performance outcomes that exceed their expectations” (p. 149). Transformational leadership is characterized by a leader’s ability to bring about significant change (Daft, 2002). A review of the literature showed another description of leadership—adaptive versus operational. Pascale et al. (2000) defined operational leadership as occurring when a leader appropriately exercises authority during times of equilibrium, while describing adaptive leadership as one who “makes happen what isn’t going to happen otherwise” (p. 39), with the caveat being that successful leaders will effectively balance both of these leadership styles. Rost (1991) and Daft (2002) saw leadership as an influence relationship resulting in a mutually desired change. You can’t get people to make an exceptional commitment to sustained great performance out of fear. . . . The only way to get people to achieve remarkable results is by being willing to show them that you genuinely and personally care about them. (Webber, 1999, p. xii)

Model for Leadership of an Organizational Cultural Intervention

Kotter’s eight-step approach to organizational change (1996) was based upon years of evaluating failed change efforts, and addresses many of the problems identified by Beer and Nohria (as cited by Vakola, Tsausis, & Nikolaou, 2004). These eight steps include:
  1. Establish a sense of urgency – Create a burning platform.
  2. Create a guiding coalition – Individuals who are well-respected and who are committed to the change initiative that have the power and influence to drive this change through the organization.
  3. Develop the vision and strategy – This must be a relevant vision that can be clearly articulated by every employee within the organization.
  4. Communicate the vision – This must be done to gain buy-in.
  5. Empower employees to action – Organizations must remove barriers that prevent employees from achieving the organization’s vision.
  6. Create short-term wins – So as to energize employees and build momentum necessary for the change initiative.
  7. Do not let up – Change must be embedded within the organization in order to make the vision a reality.
  8. Make change stick by anchoring these new approaches in the culture – Create supporting systems, processes, and structures that strengthen the culture.
Kouzes and Posner (2002) expressed that leadership was about practice, not personality. They identified the common themes and created a model of leadership in which they identified successful leadership practices (taken from the followers’ perspective):
  1. Challenge the process – Constantly ask, “Why are things being done this way?”
  2. Inspire a shared vision – Share the vision so as to provide direction and meaning to engage others in its pursuit.
  3. Enable others to act – Foster environments that enable others to act to produce both high task and high results accomplishments.
  4. Model the way – Lead by example.
  5. Encourage the heart – Recognize individuality as well as hard work and success.
As indicated by DeSimone, Werner, and Harris (2002), “Cultural changes involve a complex process of replacing an existing paradigm or way of thinking with another” (p. 594) resulting in a new set of values, systems, and processes, which can only be accomplished through effective leadership. Kotter and Heskett (1992) asserted that producing change is the primary role of leadership within an organization and that competent leadership is the primary driver of successful organizational change, thus “Without leadership, purposeful change of any magnitude is almost impossible” (p. 99). That being said, this researcher sees no value in creating a new model for leadership of an organizational cultural intervention when several successful models are in existence today that have been built based upon failed change efforts and are fully supported by the literature. This researcher reviewed many models, with a strong focus on Kotter’s eight-step approach and Kouzes and Posner’s five practices of effective leadership. This review showed a strong similarity between the two as both models include inspiring a shared vision, enabling others to act, and creating short-term wins. Thus either model by itself would be effective. Kotter’s eight steps might appear to be relatively simple, but that is far from the case as can be seen by the magnitude of the number of failed change efforts depicted in the literature! Schein (1992) posited that the roles of leadership and organizational culture are linked: “Change then occurs through cognitive redefinition of key concepts, and the resulting behavioral changes become frozen in the personality of the individuals and in the norms and routines of the group” (p. 312). Organizational culture is a result of an organization successfully managing these eight steps and inculcating the change. Dotlich and Noel (1988) stated, “The ability to turn on a dime, to create new organizational structures, cultures and mind-sets that thrive on a diet of rapid-fire change, has become critical to ongoing business success”. After reviewing the current literature on change and organizational change, one must come to the realization that change is no easy feat, especially as the research indicated that up to 75% of change efforts do not yield the promised results (Wheatley, 1998). The research indicated that the success of a change effort boils down to three essential ingredients: planning, communication, and participation. In order for a cultural change to be successful, one must ensure (a) active participation in each step of the process, (b) that one has the ability to accurately assess the existing culture while defining the desired culture, (c) that one can define the gap between the two and create an effective action plan, and last but not least (d) that there is a leader who can clearly communicate and create passion around the desired change.

Causes of Change

Researchers have developed numerous approaches to describing the causes and types of change that affect organizations. Change may be spurred within an organization because of environmental pressures, internal culture, change in leadership, or growth strategy. Both fine-tuning and incremental change are representative of emergent change, that although planned, emerges as the change occurs (Senior, 2002). Parnell and Lester (2003) added that in a perfect world, strategic change would always be incremental because organizations would follow carefully devised, predictable plans of action. Change would occur in phases triggered as the organization moves through a lifecycle of creation, growth, maturity, turnaround, and decline (Ward, 2003). The entrepreneurial phase (creation) is characterized by quick, almost frenzied action as the organization follows the leader’s vision to bring a product or service to market. The growth phase may be marked by extremely rapid growth if a product or service catches the target audience’s imagination or the growth phase may be slower and steadier. Whether fast or slow, structure, systems and people are geared towards growth. During the maturity phase, an organization seeks market share where comparisons are made between the company and competitors rather than against its own former growth. Ward indicated that after a period of maturity, the organization may begin a decline unless the people within become a learning organization, recognizing blind spots and the need to learn. Then, the organization enters a turnaround that may entail new products and services, reaching new markets, even a power shift within the organization. Belasen (2000) agreed stating that even successful companies must engage in continual reinvention to win customers. If the organization fails to continue the growth phase or to enter a turnaround, it will enter terminal decline. Although terminal decline may end in dissolution of the organization, it may also result in acquisition by a competitor (Ward). In addition to change brought about by the organizational lifecycle, cultural, evolutionary, and revolutionary change also occur (Beach, 2006). Cultural change includes economic or internal crises, changes in laws and regulations, social change, and changing demographics. Evolutionary change is usually brought about by a threat such as social trends or structural shifts within an industry and occurs over a fairly long period of time. In contrast, the impact of changes in any of the cultural or evolutionary areas may bring about revolutionary change, a struggle for survival. Changes in top leadership frequently occur during periods of revolutionary change as Beach suggested that existing leaders have more difficulty with revolutionary change than do new leaders to the organization. Combining some aspects of the previous causes of change, Ansoff and McDonnell (1990) examined change through the lens of the evolution of management systems and revealed five levels spanning 1900 – 1990 that show “progressively decreasing familiarity of events and decreasing visibility of the future” (p. 12). Five levels of changeability range from predictable to unpredictable surprises: Level 1: Recurring—Characterized by an environment where the challenges remain repetitive, and the future outlook is expected to be the same as the past. Level 2: Forecastable by extrapolation—Leaders can plan for the future through extrapolation of the historical growth. Level 3: Predictable threats and opportunities—Again, the future can be forecast with some degree of confidence through periodic strategic planning and strategic posture management. Level 4: Partially predictable opportunities—A partially predictable future complicated by increasing environment turbulence including global and socio-political changes. Level 5: Unpredictable surprises—Environmental turbulence with resulting significant changes occurring too quickly to permit timely anticipation. (pp. 12-13) A review of the literature on organizational change theory and research conducted during the 1990s (Armenakis & Bedeian, 1999) grouped studies of change through a review of four research themes: content issues, contextual issues, process issues, and criterion issues. Content issues included factors that influence an organization’s long-term environmental relationship, shaping its character, mission, and direction. Contextual issues, similar to the cultural issues presented by Beach (2006), included forces within the external and internal environment of the organization such as government regulations, marketplace forces, technology, and previous experiences with change. Process issues included the external environment, the organization, and individual levels that are affected during an intended change. Finally, criterion variables that are frequently used as organizational change outcomes were explored. From this four-fold analysis, Armenakis and Bedeian suggested longitudinal studies of organizational change research in order to determine how and why change emerges. In a complex model of organizational change, Burke and Litwin (1992) reached these conclusions regarding organizational change:
  1. Change, especially an overhaul of the business strategy, stems more from environmental impact than from any other factor.
  2. In large scale or total organizational change, mission, strategy, leadership, and culture have more “weight” than structure, management practices, and systems.
  3. Having organizational leaders communicate the change is not sufficient for effective change.
  4. Culture change must be planned and aligned with strategy and leader behavior. These variables have more weight because they affect the total system whereas changing structure may not affect the total system. (p. 529)
Kotter (1999) disagreed with Burke and Litwin (1992), reasoning “the single biggest impetus for change in an organization tends to be a new manager in a key job” (p. 77). As demonstrated by the many definitions of change, the researchers may have been referring to change in different contexts but it also demonstrates the difference in leader focused research and a systems approach. This qualitative study of the phenomena of change will offer an opportunity to gain perspective from co-researchers as to the causes of change in their organizational environment. Change is often treated as though it can be isolated; that a change in a process or procedure does not affect interaction with other areas of an organization (Malott, 2003). Early change literature even portrays change as a clear-cut, concise event which may provide an indicator of why change is most often thought of as incremental or linear (Quinn, 1996). K. Lewin (1947) suggested successful change consisted of unfreezing at the present level, moving to the desired new level, and refreezing. Today’s organizations are comprised of interrelated systems that add to the complexity of change as never before. As Senge (1990) pointed out, people within organizations must learn to see “underlying ‘structures’ rather than ‘events’” (p. 65), and think of change as a process rather than a single event or series of events. Supporting this finding, Humphreys (1990) discovered that higher-performing leaders were more open to engaging internal and external environments and gave attention to the social system of their organization. James (2005) concurred, stating, The internal and external context of an organization plays a significant part in the process of change. Second, it is important to see change as a complex process . . . with . . . the potential to disrupt the life of the organization. (p. 306) According to Elkjaer (2005), there are two basic understandings regarding organizational change: “‘the long haul’ understanding versus ‘the many balls in the air’—some of which may risk ending up on the floor—understanding” (p. 538). The first view approaches change as a strategic planning process with change occurring as a result of this orderly process while the latter stems from a systems view of the organization where ideas may arise at any time in any part of the system (Elkjaer). In a conceptual paper on organizational capacity for change, Meyer and Stensaker (2006) stated when organizations are viewed as interdependent elements, change introduced in some organizational elements will result in change in other elements. Gill (2003) supported the concept that change has often been treated as an event and without consideration for the effects upon the whole organization. In developing a new model that included vision, strategy, empowerment, motivation, inspiration, and development of a culture of sustainable shared values as contributors to successful change, he stated that too often change is implemented through management fads that do not consider the effects of change throughout the organization, resulting in unanticipated disruption. Although a planned change may be seen as insignificant or small to leaders, change of any scope may be significant to the individual organizational citizen or groups within the organization. Jennings (2004) listed “it’s not a big change” as the top myth that defeats change in organizations. Hence the many sayings such as “nobody likes change except a wet baby,” “nothing is sure but death, taxes, and change,” and “change is disturbing when it is done to us, exhilarating when it is done by us” (Canter, 2007, preface). In an assessment of corporate cultural transformation, Gilmore et al. (1997) illustrated this same point, suggesting that an organizational pattern of change usually includes optimism among top management and pessimism among workers and middle management. “This dynamic rests on a combination of fact (who holds the power) and emotion (who feels the greater vulnerability)” (Gilmore et al., p. 176). In interviews with 120 managers and employees within one organization to study cynicism about change, Reichers, Wanous, and Austin (1997) concluded that enthusiasm for change varies from hierarchical level to hierarchical level with those at the top more likely to see the value in the proposed change unless there is a well prepared program for managing cynicism in place. Support also appeared in a study of the reception of change by work group members based on who initiated the change: leaders outside the work group, work group leaders, or group members who initiated change (Griffin, Rafferty, & Mason, 2004). The study concluded that change initiated by group member improved the morale of the group, change initiated by outside leadership resulted in negative perceptions of the work group leader, and positive perceptions of the work group leader resulted from work group leader initiated change. In a study of change in 40 organizations through the organization’s senior and middle managers and frontline staff, LaClair and Rao (2002) confirmed that success or failure in creating change depends upon how the change is made as well as the project itself.

Readiness for Change

Although often a topic of popular press books and articles, perceived readiness for change has undergone little empirical research (Eby, Adams, Russell, & Gaby, 2000). Huy (1999) suggested that individual readiness for change is the extent to which an individual is prepared to participate in a different organizational activity. Readiness for change has been studied but seldom separated from resistance (Armenakis, Harris, & Feild, 1999) and is usually researched or written about in conjunction with remedies for reducing resistance. Armenakis et al. proposed that “readiness is the cognitive precursor to the behaviors of either resistance to, or support for change” (p. 327). Eby et al. (2000) identified individual attitudes and preferences, work group and job attitudes, and contextual variables from their own and other research as the three classes of variables impacting interpretation of organizational reality. Results of a study of two divisions of a national sales organization comprised of survey results from 117 employees and managers supported the conclusion that the variables of preference for working in teams, perceived participation, trust in peers, and flexible organizational policies and procedures were important in understanding perceived readiness for change (Eby et al.). The results were consistent with Armenakis et al.’s (1999) findings that participation in decision making in conjunction with enactive mastery and vicarious learning help produce self-discovery on the part of organizational members and can assist in producing a feeling of partnership during change. There are three elements needed for organizational readiness for change: dissatisfaction with the current state, a vision of a new future, and a set of steps that will enable movement toward the future (Thomas, 2001). Unless dissatisfaction at some level exists, change is unlikely to occur. J. Kotter (personal communication, August 4, 2006) stated that most organizations and people inside them are trying to create a future that differs from the current reality; in other words, to create change. This statement appears in conflict with much of the literature regarding resistance that suggests resistance is inherent in organizational citizens. A study of 67 employees who were about to undergo a change in computing systems in their workplace produced evidence that employees who perceived that their organizational culture was strong in human relations values indicated higher levels of readiness during the pre-implementation stage (Jones, Jimmieson, & Griffiths, 2005). This also predicated usage of the system at Time 2 in the study. Further, the research showed a correlation between the positive attitudes of employees regarding the organizational changes and higher levels of satisfaction with the system’s accuracy, user-friendliness, and system’s formatting functions. Readiness for change was a mediating variable in the relationship between reshaping capabilities and system usage (Jones et al.) The study did not, however, capture the differences in perceived readiness for change acceptance when the change is not just beneficial to the individual but beneficial in a larger scope within the organization. Just as a long list of descriptors of the characteristics of “good” leaders have been developed through trait theory, leadership case studies, experience, observation, and practice wisdom have yielded their own lists of characteristics to researchers that purport to represent attitudes that encourage change and learning (Pearlmutter, 1998). However, Pearlmutter pointed out that there is research lacking in “how to develop the capabilities, characteristics, and attitudes that allow and encourage change, learning and innovation” (p. 24). Beer et al. (1990) suggested instead of focusing on a change in attitude, the focus should be on changing the organizational roles that individuals play. The most effective way to change behavior, therefore, is to put people into a new organizational context, which imposes new roles, responsibilities, and relationships on them. This creates a situation that, . . . ‘forces’ new attitudes and behaviors on people. (p. 159) The attempt to force new attitudes on people could create stressors of the types described by Schabracq and Cooper (1998) such as changes in tasks that offer too little or too much challenge or a change in the compatibility of values with the organization. Pettigrew, Woodman, and Cameron (2001) and Desplaces (2005) proposed individual action and the context in which they occur are inseparable. The influences of context, content, and change processes must be considered through their interaction over time to impact individual readiness for change. In writing of resistance, Ford, Ford, and McNamara (2002) suggested that unlike much of the literature proposing resistance as based on individual attributes or personality, “resistance is not to be found in the individual, but in the constructed reality in which individuals operate” (p. 106). Therefore, the nature of resistance will vary depending upon the constructed reality surrounding that individual (Ford et al.). These studies raised the question, “Is resistance inherent in individuals?” as a question for the focus groups. Rafferty and Simons (2006) examined readiness for change from the perspectives of fine-tuning and corporate transformation changes. Their findings indicated that trust in peers and logistics and system support had strong relationships with fine-tuning while corporate transformation changes were positively affected by trust in senior leaders and self-efficacy. Perhaps the most significant part of their study was that multiple change readiness attitudes exist within an organization and that it will vary depending upon the circumstances. Rafferty and Simons also echoed the earlier sentiments of Dent and Goldberg (1999) in the statement, “A ‘one size fits all’ approach to change implementation is not likely to result in high readiness in all circumstances” (p. 345). Fostering hardiness among organizational leaders is recommended by Kouzes and Posner (2002) as a way to stimulate readiness for change. Leaders who are psychologically hardy are unafraid to take action and have self efficacy for the task of change. Consequently, they encourage others to view change as full of possibilities, rather than to fear change. One important note on change was discovered in the research of Bernerth (2004) who assessed the readiness for change among 115 employees. According to management and labor contacts in the organization, no significant change occurred other than a paper change. Yet, the change was viewed negatively by organizational members. The research highlights the fact that “change is not simply changes in technical or operational aspects of the job; change is also a cognitive process of reevaluating the old way of doing things” (p. 48). It also supports Jennings (2004) research on the myths of change, “It’s only a small change.” Further, the disparity in what management perceived as a change and what the organizational citizens perceived suggests research such as this qualitative study is needed to directly address the feelings and attitudes of organizational citizens.

Resistance to Change

Resistance is “a multifaceted phenomenon, which introduces unanticipated delays, costs, and instabilities into the process of a strategic change” (Ansoff & McDonnell, 1990, p. 405). This view of resistance often repeated in the literature develops language that tempts managers to treat organizational citizens as obstacles and to potentially dismiss legitimate concerns (Piderit, 2000). Piderit applied attribution theory and stated that management is likely to blame employees if a change initiative fails. Similarly, employees will blame management for failed changes. Neither party is likely to look to themselves when assigning blame (J. Kotter, personal communication, August 4, 2006). In a discussion of cognitive dissonance during change, Burnes and James (1994) suggested employees possess valuable knowledge of a situation and can contribute a great deal toward determining how to solve the problem requiring change, or in determining if a change is required. Involving organizational citizens in change decisions is more likely to result in commitment on the part of the employee, thus culminating in a positive attitude toward the change. Burnes and James built upon this thought process by examining cognitive dissonance related to change in two project case studies. Defining cognitive dissonance as an individual’s tendency to develop consistency among attitude and behavior, the conclusion was reached that the key is that the greater the effect on the individual, especially in terms of psychological constructs and attitudes, the deeper the level of involvement required if successful behavior change is to be achieved. It follows from this that where a proposed change is in tune with the established norms of an organization and the individual’s own attitudes, that person will be more included to accept its legitimacy . . . and may merely involve a passive acceptance. (p. 18) The concepts of resistance and defense mechanisms were separated and explored by Kets de Vries and Miller (1984) who posited that resistance is observable behavior and defense mechanisms are “hypothesized processes through which resistance is brought into being” (p. 134). Resistance is triggered by defense mechanisms that “have as their general aim to ward off anxiety caused by intrapsychic conflict stemming from incompatible demands between an individual’s wishes and external reality” (p. 136). Defense mechanisms include repression where thoughts, wishes, and emotions are suppressed from awareness; regression, reverting to behavior or adaptation techniques from earlier stages of development; projection, rejecting a quality personally but ascribing it to someone else; identification, adoption of thoughts or values of a person significant to the individual; reaction formation where the opposite attitude or trait is emphasized rather than the true feeling; and, denial where the change is denied as existing (Kets de Vries & Miller). “Resistance is natural” and grows from “primitive anxiety and fear” (Jarrett, 2004, p. 248) and may appear in either individual or collective forms. Kets de Vries and Miller (1984) offered several motives for resistance. First, individuals attempt to avoid psychic pain through forced confrontation with their inner self thus producing psychological resistance. Next, individuals “may be reluctant to change because they derive benefits such as care and attention from their symptoms” (p. 133). For example, the announced downsizing of an office or plant may generate enough attention from media, family, friends, and others sympathetic to an individual’s plight that the individual may resist adapting to a new position in the organization or even in another organization because they perceive a benefit from the attention. These situations may create a tendency to remain with the familiar even if the familiar is dysfunctional or self-destructive. Since the workplace is composed of various individuals and their psychological components, change that unsettles the status quo may “threaten our sense of being values, competent, successful, likable, and attached to something larger than ourselves such as an idealized leader, a group, or an organization” (Allcorn, 2005, p. 21). Ivancevich and Matteson (2002) proposed a number of reasons for resistance at the individual level: (a) Threat of loss of position, power, and authority; (b) economic insecurity regarding retaining a job or level of compensation; (c) the possible alteration of social friendships and interactivity; (d) the natural human fear of the unknown; (e) failure to recognize or be informed about the need for change; and, (f) cognitive dissonance created because one is confronted with new people, processes, systems, technology, or expectations (p. 632). Kets de Vries and Miller (1984) listed the reorganization of power and political behavior generated by power struggles as factors in creating resistance. What appeared to be missing from the literature was an open discussion with organizational citizens regarding these and other findings on resistance.

Change Management Theory Overview

Change management is the discipline that ensures organizations and their members meet new and existing performance goals efficiently and effectively (Futerer & Elshennawy, 2005). Futerer & Elshennawy defined it as a structured approach to organizational change that takes an organization and its members from a current state to a desired future state using processes to minimize the impact of change. Change management, as a phenomenon, has been around for many decades. In the 1950s, Lewin introduced change management as a renowned three-stage theory that has been instrumental in helping organizations understand the management of change as a process  (Zand & Sorensen, 1975); the three stages are known as unfreeze-change-refreeze.  Baulcomb (2003) elaborated on the description of the three-stages as preparing the  organization for change by first dealing with change resistance (unfreezing); introducing  and implementing a change process (change); and finally, managing the implemented  change process (refreezing). Researchers investigated as organizations applied the fundamental principles of this theory when faced with organizational culture and situational challenges associated with change. For example, in the late seventies, Zmud and Cox (1979) applied Lewin’s  model to address challenges of implementing management information systems (MIS).  Zmud and Cox approached managing MIS implementations by first dealing with organizational change by having organizational leaders and users assume responsibility for systems during implementation, so they could own and better embrace its outcome.  Like Lewin’s theory, the first step deals with managing organizational resistance to change (unfreeze). The change implemented in the Zmud and Cox MIS change management approach was to educate the organizational members who would be involved or affected by the MIS implementation (change). Lastly, Zmud and Cox implemented a feedback mechanism to allow its members a means of expressing and exchanging their ideas to manage the implemented change (refreezing). Early researchers like Zand and Sorensen (1975) and Zmud and Cox (1979) agreed that the use of Lewin’s theory for change management as a process could be instrumental in optimizing the management of organizational change. Today, a variety of change management processes address standardization and specific management challenges, such as quality and process improvements in information technology and information systems implementations offered to business and organizations. For example, three widely used change management models in the IT industry include the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 9000 series, the Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI), and Lean Six Sigma. These models of standards are implemented as processes to help manage common issues found among businesses and organizations implementing change. ISO 9000 was developed with the intent to integrate concerns for quality into daily organizational management (Boiral, 2003). The ISO 9000 model focuses on an organization’s quality management practices by considering whether it has proper quality control plans, program documentation, and procedures (Han, Chen, & Ebrahimpour, 2007). The advantage to organizations obtaining  ISO 9000 certification is an international acceptance for established management  practices and processes most likely to achieve successful results. Additionally, organizations that obtained ISO 9000 certification are believed to have a competitive advantage over those who have not, and they are believed to have improved customer satisfaction. CMMI includes quality management to some extent, but is more about process improvement for software development projects. Its focus is for projects that have yet to establish improvement processes as a means to improving the management of information system implementations (Gefen, Zviran, & Elman, 2006; Kay, 2005). Lean Six Sigma is based on two improvement programs: Six Sigma and Lean  Enterprise, and the concept of combining lean manufacturing and Six Sigma principles  begin in the 1990s (Spector, 2006). Six Sigma is both a quality management philosophy and a methodology that focuses on reducing variation, measuring defects, and improving the quality of products, processes, and services. Spector reported that Six Sigma was developed in early 1980’s by General Electric Corporation and their former CEO Jack  Welch. The Lean Enterprise portion is a methodology that focuses on reducing cycle time and waste in processes that “originated from Toyota Motor Corporation as the Toyota  Production System and increased in popularity after 1973 energy crisis” (p. 6). Its objective is for efficient and economical use of human effort, inventory, space, and time to produce high-quality products while being highly responsive to customer demand. ISO 9000, CMMI, and Lean Six Sigma are similar in that the ISO 9000 series  model specifies minimal acceptable quality level for management processes, CMMI  establishes a framework for measuring continuous process improvements, and Lean Six  Sigma seeks to improve the quality of products, processes, and services efficiently,  effectively, and with less variation. These models, like Lewin’s change theory, provide models of standards and change management processes instrumental in assisting businesses and organizations to deliver change successfully. However, researchers like Gowan and Mathieu (2003) stated that change management processes for business system implementations remains problematic and worth continual research. In fact, recent researchers admit that there is still too little understanding of business system implementations, and agree that change management processes alone have not been enough (Gowan & Mathieu, 2003; Saynisch, 2005). The impetus for the focus on improving the management of enterprise business system implementations includes the increasing demands that businesses and organizations encounter to maximize returns on  IT investments, to share information across organizational boundaries, and to improve customer satisfaction while effectively and efficiently managing cost and. For this reason, IT organizations may want a better understanding and awareness of their leaders’ perceptions of change management and their willingness to influence improved management of enterprise business system implementations as part of effective organizational change.

Leadership Theory Overview

The study of leadership has been an important and central part to organizational management for many decades (Yukl, 1989). However, research regarding leadership in complex organizations focuses narrowly on leadership qualities and behaviors, while research about leadership effectiveness tends to focus on organizational limitations such as internal infrastructures and cultural boundaries (Bryd, Lewis & Bradley, 2006;  Lieberson & O’Conner, 1972). The focus of sustained leadership to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations in IT organizations is derived partly from the need to focus on much more than a leader’s qualities and behaviors.  Researchers in the research literature found that leaders who are experienced and influential are more apt to be effective in dealing with situations that arise as part of organizational change (Doh, 2003; Fiedler, 1972). Fiedler (1972) defined leadership experience as on-the-job training, because individuals supposedly learn over years on the job, and because organizational leaders typically receive guidance and informal training from fellow leaders and superiors.  Additionally, Doh (2003) postulated that this may be true because leaders with experience in their jobs are armed with training, formulas, and guidelines that have worked in the past. Even though Doh admitted this philosophy has been dispelled by researchers to some extent, he believed experienced leaders have an advantage because experience is designed to increase a leader’s control and influence, thereby improving the ability to achieve success. Doh highlighted the idea that the effectiveness of a group or organization is dependent upon two interacting variables: (a) the motivation system of the leader, and (b) the degree to which the situation gives the leader power and influence. He believed leadership effectiveness is a relationship involving power and influence and that power and that influence means having good relationship with organizational members and positional power. The power-influence theory provides a complimentary understanding of leadership effectiveness. The first part suggests that the amount of power, the type of power, and the way in which power is exercised by a leader is what gives him or her power to influence organizational internal and external factors (Bass, 1990; Turner, 2005; Yukl, 1989). Corollary to the beliefs of Doh (2003), however, many researchers believe leadership power that is given by organizational position is not always effective (Turner, 2005; Yukl, 1989). In fact, there is research that argues that there are risks associated with a leader’s dependency on given power because there is a propensity for an overreliance on it, causing a leader to neglect the advantages of the second attribute of this theory, influential leadership (Turner, 2005). Although there are many influential factors leaders can or should adopt to more effectively facilitate change as part of good leadership; negotiation, persuasion, and facilitation are considered based on the belief that they provide complementary value to the change management variables considered important to improving the management of enterprise business system implementations (Cialdini, 2001; Conger, 1998; Salacuse, 2006).

Negotiation

Researchers found that good leaders have good negotiation skills and that effective organizational leadership almost always includes negotiations (Harsanyi, 1995; Museler, 2004). Although Salacuse described negotiations as being a labor-intensive, time-consuming process, it was considered a core management competency for information system project implementations. Negotiating skill is considered a core competency for IT project management because managers typically deal with different functional and business owners and multiple stakeholders with different interests and ideas; these must be brought into alignment for things such as requirements, definitions, expectations, or simply to achieve consensus on important implementation project issues  (Mass & Gebhart, 1998; Porat, 1970). However, negations are critical for more than challenges associated with organizational internal and external environments and its members. It often becomes necessary to negotiate or re-negotiate resource allocations, cost, and budgets to ensure project continuity and overall project success when uncertainties and unpredictable circumstances and situations arise. It is inferred that experienced influential leaders can improve management outcomes for enterprise business system implementations because they are often responsible for the alignment of important management variables that include both financial and human resource challenges.

Facilitation

Although it may be likely that IT project leaders are challenged with negotiating for organizational resources (financial and human), they are also charged with facilitating certain desired outcomes. Facilitation was described by Farrell and Weaver (1998) as a process used to help individuals complete and improve how they work together. In more recent studies, researchers discovered the importance of a facilitator role and the need for facilitation processes for effective management in organizations facing organizational change (Karlof & Loevingsson, 2005; Farrell & Weaver, 1998). The role of an effective facilitator is described as one of: (a) competence to think on several levels while allowing group members to focus on particular challenges and functional tasks, (b) becoming one with the group while remaining external and objective, and (c) having an ability to stimulate performance (Karlof & Loevingsson, 2005). Specific to successfully managing enterprise business system implementations, researchers like Ming-Ling and Shaw (2006) found it important that leaders facilitate appropriate attitude and support from the correct mix of organizational members to have the correct balance of wisdom, know-how, and understanding for better management of information technology and information systems project implementations. Ming-Ling & Shaw believed that it was necessary that business and technology managers’ participation in decision-making and the development of viable courses of action must be part of effective management of enterprise business system implementations. It was inferred that leaders capable of facilitating the participation of business and technology managers in formal groups for improved management of enterprise business system project implementations would help improve management success.

Persuasion

Improved management success of enterprise business system project implementation also requires leaders who are persuasive. Persuasion was described by Conger (1998) and Cialdini (2001) as a leadership characteristic that is misunderstood and underutilized, but more essential than ever. Cialdini reasoned that persuasion has historically had a bad reputation based on its predominant use in sales and deal closing and its connotations of manipulation. However, Conger posited that decades of study by experimental psychologists revealed that persuasiveness, as a methodology or a process, could reliably lead people to concede, comply, or change. The process is often multifaceted and involves a leader’s ability to prepare and properly frame arguments, effectively present evidence, and find the correct emotional match with targeted audiences. Moreover, Cialdini reported that several decades of rigorous empirical research by behavioral scientists provided deep and detailed information to suggest that persuasion as a process creates a base of power entirely separate from processes controlled by culture or political implications.

Leadership and Change Management

Although there is growing insight and theory as to how to manage challenges that often plague IT implementations, researchers search for better understanding of how to improve change management for increased success overall (Ginzberg, 1981; Zand, &  Sorensen, 1975). As previously discussed, effective change management tends to involve multi-step processes, but Kotter (1996) believed the processes for change management can never be employed effectively unless they are driven by high-quality leadership, not just excellent management. Kotter also believed it is important that leaders focus on the correct change management variables to overcome the situational challenge. Change management variables found to be important in research literature reviewed to improve the management of business system implementations included resources, formal groups, and the use of enterprise architectures (GAO, 2007b; Ming-Ling & Shaw, 2006).

Negotiating Resources

It is common for businesses and organizations to seek business systems as a means to improve efficiency and effectiveness for business operations. It is reasonable that the implementation of such systems to any IT organization is a huge resource investment. Resource management is of particular importance to organizations because economic gain leads to organizational survival and prosperity (Mass & Gebhart, 1998). According to Fisher, Frederickson, and Peffer (2000), resource management involves a negotiation process to ensure that strategic business goals and objectives are met.  Frederickson and Peffer found that almost all large and medium-size organizations have strategic and formal budgeting programs for which resources are negotiated for strategic intent. Turnquist and Nozick (2004) believed that a synergy exists between leadership and organizational resources (financial and human), and leadership is the portion of that synergy that must assess the resource needs from a holistic perspective. This often means re-negotiations at lower levels, especially when attempting to maintain program cost, schedules, and performance objectives and goals. Turnquist & Nozick reported that  it is not uncommon that leaders are responsible for reestablishing project budget  baselines, nor is it unforeseen for leaders to consider trade-offs in an attempt to satisfy  other project or organizational goals. Experienced leaders value and are willing to use negotiations as part of resource management to improve management success of implementing enterprise business systems.

Formal Groups

Formal groups are a deliberate creation of management for a specific purpose, and are considered an effective management tool for IT acquisitions. According to Robey and Markus (1984), the value of created management existed for many years in the form of steering committees used to conduct due diligence for such things as proposed strategies, policy administration, direction setting, resource rationalization, and ensuring project performance. The use of formal groups like those described above was effective because leaders and group members were afforded an opportunity to confront important issues and resolve differences of opinion throughout a project’s lifecycle (Byrd et al., 2006; Robey & Markus, 1984). One important and necessary part of formal group effectiveness is proper group member participation. For enterprise business system implementations, Ming-Ling and Shaw (2005) considered business and technology managers as critical group members to facilitate the transition of business processes and activities from manual to be automated. Researchers agree that formal groups are a deliberate creation of management and necessary when managing for success (Engel, 1997; Ming-Ling & Shaw, 2005; Robey & Markus, 1984). Experienced leaders value the use of formal groups and are willing to facilitate business and technology member to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations.

Architecture Frameworks

Implementing enterprise business systems is a complex management challenge for which effective management processes and tools are believed to be necessary for success. A brief history of the use of architecture frameworks includes IBM’s first-time use of information architecture (IA) in the 1970s as part of its IT investment planning and implementations (Periasamy & Feeny, 1997). IBM introduced the IA as a general and high-level blueprint for purposes of strategic planning. The effectiveness of IBM’s IA was dependent on successful mappings of applications, data, and existing business architectures. Periasamy and Feeny (1997) explained the importance of these three types of architectures as follows:
  • Application architectures show an organization’s major applications and their interrelationships that are unique and necessary to understand during implementations.
  • Data architectures are used to facilitate functions across system boundaries.
  • Business system architectures (BSA) provide pictorial representation and modeling for the fusion of strategic resources, competencies, and information technology, capturing the complete business process.
Although not a part of IBM’s IA at the time, the technology architecture was introduced for its importance for defining the technology platform needed for applications to manage business area data and to support business functions (Spewak, 1992). However, it should be noted that the most recognized architecture framework still in use was published by John Zachman in the late 1980s. Spewak reported that Zachman contributed to the evolution of architecture frameworks as a management tool for business systems by defining the development of systems as a process and creating system perspective views (i.e., planner, business owners, and designers) from a set of descriptions (i.e., data, function, network, and people). Throughout the last decades, the use of architecture frameworks for business system development continued to evolve for specific business and organizational needs. The business enterprise architecture (BEA) is an example of a framework for business system development. The BEA consists of snapshots of the enterprise’s current environment and its target environment, as well as a capital investment road map for transitioning from the current to the target environment” (Kutz & Rhodes, 2005, p. 5). It is an information infrastructure that includes business rules, requirements, data standards, system interface requirements, and the depiction of policies and procedures (U.S. Department of Defense, 2008). It is an enterprise-level transformation architecture intended to assist component and program level entities in remaining accountable when developing specific solutions. The importance of the BEA is that it defines business transformation priorities, business capability requirements to support those priorities, and systems and initiatives that enable these capabilities.

Leadership and Change Management Summary

There are numerous change management approaches that IT organizations and its leaders should consider when developing strategies to improve the management of business system implementations to achieve greater efficiencies and effectiveness. The change management variables and their associated ideologies discussed above for improved management of enterprise business system implementations were not new. However, they were identified in the research as variables thought to provide significant improvements to the management success of enterprise business system implementations, with leadership as a catalyst. For some organizations, this may involve a cultural change to current leadership involvement from the traditional IT project management practice, which tends to focus heavily on common IT program management practices and methodologies, with program managers as the catalyst.

A Cultural Perspective

Although organizational culture was not studied directly as part of this research effort, much research about culture in organizations, leadership, and the connections between the two exists (Alvesson, 1992; Martin & Siehl, 1983; Schein, 1983). The research literature did not offer a single definition of organizational culture, but the topic was studied from a variety of perspectives, with commonalities regarding certain themes identified by Lahiry (1994) as (a) representing values, beliefs, and expectations shared by all members, (b) conforming to shared codes, and (c) shaping its member’s behaviors. Schein (1986) provided a supporting and operational definition of organizational culture: The pattern of shared basic assumptions a group learns to solve its problems of external adaptation and internal integration, that has worked well enough to be considered valid, and therefore, to be taught to new members as the correct way perceive, think, and feel in relation to certain problems. (pp. 30-31) Using this operational definition of organizational cultures helps to explain why cultural resistance during organizational change must be managed effectively. Hofstede’s theory of culture’s consequences, which was first published in 1980 (Bing, 2004), offers a non-comprehensive review of operative cultural elements that must be managed. Although the elements were studied from the perspective of international cultures, they are also common in organizational cultures. The model has four consequential elements for management:
  • Power distance, which involves the degree of separation employees feel from organizational authority;
  • Uncertainty-avoidance, which involves the attitudes of employees toward things that change provokes such as risk and novelty;
  • Individualism, which defines the degree to which a given society or organization is characterized by collectivistic thought; and
  • Masculinity, which addresses the relative importance of ambitious performance versus quality of life. (Hofstede, 2001)
The elements of individualism and power-distance, and uncertainty-avoidance and masculinity are considered here for their encouraging and discouraging consequences as part of organizational change.

Encouraging and Discouraging Cultural

Factors Individualism and uncertainty-avoidance hinders organizational success, as success is heavily dependent on an organization’s ability as a whole to transition and accept culture change. Researchers Galpin (1996) and Al-Mashari (2003) stated that many organizations and their leaders ignore the need for cultural change where it becomes difficult to manage. Instead, the focus falls to more tangible change opportunities such as operations, technology, and procedures (Al-Mashari, 2003; Gilpin, 1996).997).But researchers such as Langan-Fox and Tan who believed the management of change cannot be separated from the organization’s strategy for achieving its operational objectives and goal. Hofstede’s model is empirically supported by studies that have found that individualism versus collectivism has major influences on organizational success. Researchers found certain cultural challenges that should be encouraged in order to avoid individualism and power-distance so that leader and employee relationships are not jeopardized, resistance to change is minimized, and organizations as a whole perform to achieve one single and common end state. Garg and Sigh (2006) discovered interdependencies between change approaches and the organization’s cultural commitment to change. Chatman & Barsade (1995) encouraged leaders to create cooperative cultures where priorities are placed on collective goals, conducting cooperative actions, and seeking joint contributions from organizational members, as opposed to placing individual priorities on individual goals and performances. Innes and Booher (1999) found it important that organizations seek organizational consensus for things like decision-making and the effective development of courses of actions. Likewise, discouraging elements must be dealt with as part of addressing organizational culture during organizational change. Hofstede’s model defines uncertainty-avoidance as “the extent to which the members of a culture feel threatened by uncertain or unknown situations” (Hofstede, 1997, p. 113). Masculinity, for this discussion, was defined as the extent to which organizations try to alleviate uncertainty by creating rules of conduct. Two heavily highlighted and discouraging cultural rules of conduct created in organizations include politics and bureaucracy (Franks, 1989; O’Neil, 2003). O’Neil described cultural politics as a focal issue believed to be a reaction to external pressures, organizational hierarchical structure, and the interaction or lack of interaction between organizational internal and external environments, whereas Franks described cultural bureaucracy as organizational behavior that is not corrected from lessons learned. Franks alleged that organizations remain in a bureaucratic state because they choose to continue to operate by established, formalized regulations and procedures that become a part of the organizational culture, thus leaving them susceptible to the consequences of unsuccessful and undesirable outcomes. These are critical thoughts for IT organizations that culturally adhere to inflexible, rigid, non-dynamic, and traditional management practices. In order to manage the discouraging consequences of organizational politics and bureaucracy as a culture to deal with uncertainty-avoidance during organizational change, researchers like Ewusi-Mensah and Prasnyski (1991), and the first step in Kurt Lewin’s change theory, suggested leaders need to be aware and capable of managing the internal and external environments and their members’ resistance to change. Organizational culture as part of change has been discussed from the perspective of Hofstede’s theory of culture’s consequences to address societal influences within an organizational infrastructure applicable to leadership and organizational design. Although all elements are important in Hofstede’s culture consequence model, the two highlighted for their encouraging and discouraging consequences to organizational change were individualism and uncertainty-avoidance. Organizations are encouraged to understand the interdependencies between the change management approach selected and the organization’s cultural commitment to the change being implemented. Similarly, organizational politics and bureaucracy must be managed to avoid discouraging consequences if the organizational culture is to be managed effectively as part of organizational change. Schein (1983) stated that an organization’s culture can be the glue that holds it together, or it can contribute to its downfall.

Gap in the Literature

A review of the recent literature suggests a gap exists for change management approaches; specifically, to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations. A few case studies attempted to address this research issue, but the efforts focused on the problem primarily from the perspective of technology and very little from the perspective of identifying specific change management variables. The review of the literature also presented a gap regarding what effect leadership has as part of improving the management of enterprise business implementations. Instead, comparative studies examined various leadership qualities and behaviors as predictor variables in the context of IT project implementation challenges. Not only dif the current study consider change management to be crucial to the improved management of implementing enterprise business systems individually, but it also believed that change management and leadership collectively working in concert with one another can improve management success.

Research Recommendation

Change management approaches and effective leadership are debatable topics when considering business system implementation. The complexities and challenges of implementing such systems make the specific change management variables and definition of leadership difficult to define. However, questions regarding research previously conducted on how to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations as part of organizational change could benefit from knowledge of how specific change management variables and effective leadership could be an effective mechanism. This research could provide insight to IT organizational leaders and senior leaders by providing better understanding and information regarding leaders’ perceptions on specific change management variables and leaders’ willingness to influence improved management of resources, formal groups, and the development and use of enterprise architectures.

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

The purpose of this study was to provide a better understanding of change management and leadership to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations. Specifically, the research intended to provide information on change management and on how change management was perceived by IT organizational leaders in order to determine whether a relationship existed between leaders’ years of experience in an IT organization and their willingness to influence change management variables to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations. A number of researchers recognized change management as a needed process to deal with organizational change and the challenges of implementing enterprise business systems (Periasamy & Feeny, 1997; Ponemon & Nagoda, 1990; Spencer, 2005; Zmud & Cox, 1979). Sustained leadership in this study is associated with experienced leadership. Therefore, this study was driven by the following research question: Do information technology leaders perceive that change management coupled with leadership experience improves the management of enterprise business system implementations?

Research Hypotheses

Hypothesis 1O: An information technology leader’s perception of change management is independent of his/her willingness to influence the management success of business system implementations. Hypothesis 1A: An information technology leader’s perception of change management is dependent on his/her willingness to influence the management success of business system implementations. Hypothesis 2O: Information technology leader’s willingness to negotiate resources to improve the management of enterprise business system implementation is independent of his/her leadership experience. Hypothesis 2A: An information technology leader’s willingness to negotiate resources to improve the management of enterprise business system implementation is dependent on his/her leadership experience. Hypothesis 3O: Information technology leader’s willingness to facilitate the participation of business and technology managers in formal groups to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations is independent of his/her leadership experience. Hypothesis 3A: An information technology leader’s willingness to facilitate the participation of business and technology mangers in formal groups to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations is dependent on his/her leadership experience. Hypothesis 4O: An information technology leader’s willingness to persuade the use of enterprise architectures to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations is independent of his/her leadership experience. Hypothesis 4A: An information technology leader’s willingness to persuade the use of enterprise architectures to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations is dependent on his/her leadership experience.

Research Design

The research population included IT leaders in ABC organization (for maintaining confidentiality of the participants, the selected organization is given the pseudonym of ABC). The minimum sample size attempted was 75 volunteer participants selected by one or both of the following: positional code to ensure IT role and position (i.e., program/project manager, system engineer) and pay grade level to ensure leadership talent. The study did not require that the IT leaders support a particular enterprise business system IT project, but that the IT leaders had experience in an IT organization with a focus to manage enterprise business system IT projects. Initial contact with the study participants was made by email from the organization’s senior leadership to show support of the research. The email invited the IT leaders to participate and included a link to the survey site to minimize the chances of sampling error. The survey provided instructions and consent information and assured confidentiality. The survey link corresponded to a Web server, allowing participants to access the research survey from their work computers with anonymity. Randomness of the target sample was preserved because each member of the sample population had an equal opportunity to complete the survey. The researcher was provided the final results for safekeeping and confidentiality. The participants completed the Web-based surveys over a period of 1 week. The collected data was organized to find patterns as to whether a leaders’ years of experience in IT organizations impacted their perceptions of change management and their willingness to influence certain change management variables to improve management success for enterprise business system implementations. The study was designed to be informative and to increase the awareness of organizational seniors leaders on their leader’s perceptions on change management, and whether their leader years of experience affected their willingness to influence change management variables found to improve the management success of implementing enterprise business systems by previous researchers. The results of the study could assist IT senior leaders in understanding the perceived value of specific change management variables by leadership and could prove useful in overall change management strategies and consideration of a leader’s years of experience when assigning leaders to enterprise business system implementation IT projects.

Sample

The IT leaders at ABC were asked to participate in this study, based on the probability that they were representative of the ABC population faced with the management problem of meeting cost and schedule, and delivering desired capabilities, service, and performance when implementing enterprise business systems.

Variables

The independent variable considered in this study was IT organizational leaders’ years of experience, categorized as less than 15 years of experience or more than 15 years of experience. It was inferred that IT leaders with experience in IT organizations were better able to navigate through parochialism, bureaucratic, and political challenges that exist as roadblocks to change management in a learned culture. Doh (2003) advanced that IT leaders with experience are more apt to manage familiar situations more efficiently and that experienced leaders have been exposed to mentorship from their supervisors and peers and have lessons learned, management techniques, processes, and understanding for how to best management challenges and situations associated with enterprise business system implementation projects. Sustained leadership was associated with experienced leadership in this study. The first dependent variables in this study dealt with IT leaders’ perceptions of change management. It was assumed that leaders implementing enterprise business systems understand change management as a process and that certain change management variables are deemed important to the effective management of implementing business systems as part of organizational change. The remaining three dependent variables considered IT leaders’ willingness to influence management change management variables by negotiating for resources, facilitating the participation of business and technology managers in formal groups where decision-making and courses of actions are developed, and persuading the use of enterprise architectures to improve management success (Ming-Ling & Shaw, 2006; Ravichandran & Lertwongsatien, 2005; Robey & Markus, 1984).

Reliability and Validity

Instrument reliability was important to help ensure that the result of the research process produced consistent and predictable results (Roberts, Priest, & Traynor, 2006). Validity was important to assess the appropriateness of the research instrument to the research design and the extent to which the instrument measured what it was supposed to measure (Boudreau, Gefen, & Straub, 2001; Roberts et al., 2006). Specific to determining reliability and validity of the research instrument, findings from the literature helped to ensure that questions in the survey represented the problem and accurately and clearly reflected answers to the issue researched.

Sample Size Determination

In order to define the minimum sample size appropriate for this study, the researcher relied on strategies by Hart (2007) and Thorndike (1978), which address studies with small variables. Hart offered the “ball park” strategy, which suggests using the number of variables in a research study multiplied by 20 or 30 to determine an appropriate sample size (p. 31). Similarly, Thorndike strategies suggested that as variables increase so should the sample size, and offers two formulas. The first formula suggests there should be 10 subjects for each variable, plus an additional 50 to ensure sample size is sufficient. “The formula: N = (10 x V) + 50, in which N is the minimum acceptable number in the sample size and V is the number of variables used in a study” (Thorndike, 1978, p. 184). Thorndike’s second and more stringent strategy suggests “N should be equal to the square of the number of variables plus an additional 50 or 100 and is represented by the formula: N = V² + 50 or N = V² + 100” (p. 184). The minimal sample size appropriate for this study was determined using Thorndike’s more stringent strategy, N = V² + 50, or 75 participants.

Instrument

To satisfy the intent of the study, survey questions were posed to address change management variables previously researched by Ming-Ling and Shaw (2006) and sustained leadership deemed important in GAO reports (GAO-06-831, 2006b) for the improved management of enterprise business system implementations. However, reliance on the participants’ experiences was the focus of the survey instrument, to determine patterns of relationship between the participant’s years of experience and their willingness to influence change management variables to improve management success. In order to provide more fidelity on the participants’ perceptions of the change management variables, they were asked to rank them based on their perceived value to enterprise business system implementations. Likewise, the participants were asked to rank the value of leadership influence in conjunction with those same change management variables toward improved management of enterprise business system implementations.

Data Collection

The use of electronic surveys allows a relatively simple, straightforward, and efficient means to gather data over a relatively short time period (Creswell, 2005; Granello & Wheaton, 2004; Robson, 2002). Because quick response time was part of the researcher’s intent to avoid delay in project completion, data was collected using electronic surveys administered by the researcher over the intranet. In order to reduce low response rates, a system to provide multiple reminders was implemented using electronic mail. Reminders were provided after sending the initial email with the survey link. More than the minimum sample size of 75 was obtained by the final day of the research, and the sample size of 98 was deemed sufficient for this study, with a small set of variables to consider. Results of the study were provided to the participants upon their request.

Data Confidentiality

The researcher did not collect any personally identifiable or confidential information, and the data was collected and handled in a manner consistent with sound practices for safeguarding personal data. All data collected using the electronic survey process ensured complete anonymity, with the inability to trace surveys back to individual respondents. It is important to note that true confidentiality is in the researcher’s moral claim of trustworthiness, while anonymity was a functional attribute of the research design (Creswell, 2005).

Data Analysis

Data was analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) software, version 14.0. The hypotheses were tested using the chi-square test of independence at a significance level of .05 to assess whether paired observations of two variables, expressed in a contingency table, were independent of each other (Norusis, 2005). More specifically, chi-square was used to explore the relationship between the participants’ years of experience in IT organization and their willingness to influence change management variables to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations. The independent variable in this study was a leader’s years of experience in a IT organization. The four dependent change management variables included (a) perception of change management, (b) negotiating resources, (c) facilitating participation of business and technology managers in formal groups, and (d) persuading the use of enterprise architectures as a management framework. Intervals measuring years of experience as a leader in the IT organization were divided into two categories: A1, representing IT leaders with less than 15 years of experience, and A2, representing IT leaders with more than 15 years of experience. Intervals measuring a leader’s perception of change management were divided into three categories: B1, representing IT leader’s perceived value of resource management, B2, representing IT leader’s perceived value of formal groups, B3, representing IT leader’s perceived value for the use of enterprise architectures. Measures of a leader’s willingness to influence change management variables to improve management success were divided into four categories: C1, representing IT leader’s willingness to negotiate resources, C2, representing IT leader’s willingness to facilitate business managers’ participation in formal groups, C3, representing IT leader’s willingness to facilitate technology managers’ participation in formal groups, C4, representing IT leader’s willingness to persuade the use of enterprise architectures.

Summary

Chapter 3 provided the non-experimental correlational research methodology used to address the research objectives. The quantitative correlation design was used to guide the research to determine whether, and to what degree, a relationship existed between two sets of variables.

 CHAPTER 4: DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This chapter describes the findings of the study. The researcher analyzed IT leaders’ perception of change management and their willingness to improve the management success of enterprise business system implementations based on years of experience in an IT organization. In particular, the study determined whether IT leaders’ years of experience in the IT organization impacted their willingness to influence resource negotiations, the facilitation of formal group member participation (business process and technology managers), and the persuasion to use enterprise architectures to improve enterprise business system implementations.

Data Collection, Response Rates, and Population

The minimum sample size used in this study was based on Thorndike’s (1978) strategy, which related sample sizes to the number of variables in a study, where “N should be equal to the square of the number of variables plus 50 or 100 for small sets” (p. 184), or N = (V) ² + 50. There were 98 participants, which exceeded the minimum sample size appropriate for this study.

Variables

According to Labovitz (1965), variables considered for analysis as part of a study should be selected based on deemed importance, the nature of the problem, theoretical consideration, or previous findings in research. The independent variable considered was based on the nature of a problem identified by GAO reports (GAO-06-031, 2006a) and Hite & Williams (2007) that sustained leadership was the driver to improved management of enterprise business system implementations. In this study, sustained leadership was classified by a leader’s years of experience in an IT organization. The dependent variables of change management were selected predominantly based on theoretical consideration. According to Fulla (2007) and Kotter (1996), change management is important to any organization when a change in the organization’s culture and/or business processes is the intended outcome, often the intent of implementing enterprise business systems. The change management variables, however, were selected based on previous research by Ming-Ling and Shaw (2005), who found resources and business process and technology managers important to business system implementations, while researchers like Porat (1970), Mass and Gebhart (1998) found the use of an architecture framework to be important to improved management success when implementing business systems. The four dependent variables in this study included perception of change management, resource negotiation, facilitation of formal group member participation, and persuaded use of enterprise architectures.

Survey Instrument

The survey instrument was organized into four sections with a total of 26 questions (see Appendix A). The first section provided information about the participant’s years of experience (question 2) using a 7-point Likert-type scale to capture any true experience disparity among the respondents: (none = 1, less than 1 = 2, more than 1 but less than 5 = 3, 5 or more but less than 10 = 4, 10 or more but less than 15 = 5, 15 or more but less than 20 = 6, more than 20 = 7). However, data analysis using Pearson’s chi-square test for independence captured years of experience using two variables: Less than 15 = 8, and 15 or more = 9. Other demographic questions in this section included position/title and whether the respondent was currently a leader implementing an enterprise business system. Section 2 assessed the use of enterprise architectures IT organizations. Captured data regarding the development and use of enterprise architectures was important for future research, assuming there is a leadership role regarding the use of enterprise architectures as a management tool for improved enterprise business system implementations. Section 3 assessed the participant’s 53 willingness to influence change management variables to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations using a 5-point Likert-type scale to capture the level of disparity among the leader’s willingness: (Strongly Agree = 1, Agree = 2, Neutral = 3, Disagree = 4, Strongly Disagree = 5). However, data analysis using Pearson’s chi-square test for independence captured the actual classifications for this portion of the study as Strongly Agree and Agree = Y and Neutral, Disagree, and Strongly Disagree = N. Section 4 was divided into two parts to capture the perceived value of the three change management variables considered in this study. The first part asked the respondents to rank perceived importance of three change management variables: resources, formal groups, and enterprise architectures. The second part asked the respondents to rank perceived value of leadership influence on the three change management variables toward improving the management of enterprise business systems. The rank order portion of the analysis was measured using frequency distribution tables. Experience The majority of respondents (56.1%) reported having more than 20 years of experience in the information technology (IT) organization. The respondents reported close percentages of experience at 5 or more but less than 10 (13.3%), 10 or more but less than 15 (11.2%), and 15 or more but less than 20 (16.3%). The minority of respondents reported having less than 1 (1%) and more than 1 but less than 5 (2%) years of experience (see Table 1). Table 1: Years of Experience Frequency Distribution
Years of Experience as a Leader in IT Organization f %
None 0 0.0%
Less than 1 1 1.0%
More than 1 but less than 5 2 2.0%
5 or more but less than 10 13 13.3%
10 or more but less than 15 11 11.2%
15 or more but less than 20 16 16.3%
More than 20 55 56.1%
Total 98 100.0
The years of experience (independent variable) was separated into two categories for analysis using Pearson’s chi-square: less than 15 years of experience (27.6%) and 15 or more years of experience (72.4%) as a leader in the information technology organization (see Table 2). Table 2: Years of Experience Leader Frequency Distribution
Years of Experience as a Leader in IT Organization f %
Less than 15 27 27.6%
15 or more 71 72.4%
Total 98 100.0
Positions/Titles It was important to analyze the respondent’s responses for positions and titles. The majority of respondents reported being IT program/project managers (37.8%) and IT specialists (32.7%). The respondents reporting “Other” listed positions not specifically identified and represented leadership jobs leadership assumed to be associated with enterprise business system implementations, such as business managers, engineers, enterprise policy and oversight, and deputy directors (16.3%) (see Table 3). Table 3: Position/Title Frequency Distribution
Position/Title During Enterprise Business System Implementation f %
IT Program/Project Manager 37 37.8%
Chief Engineer 0 0.0%
Systems Engineer 3 3.1%
IT Specialist 32 32.7%
Chief Technology Officer 2 2.0%
Computer Scientist 3 3.1%
Electronic Engineer 5 5.1%
Other (please specify below) 16 16.3%
Total 98 100.0
Additionally, participants were asked if their leadership experience implementing an enterprise business system was current or from previous experience. The majority of respondents reported working as leaders implementing enterprise business systems (80.6%). The remaining 19.4% of the respondents reported not having current or previous leadership experience implementing enterprise business systems. However, when asked to specify further, it appeared the respondents were leaders of teams or functional groups assumed to be in support of IT project efforts likely to include enterprise business system activities and actions based on their position/title. This information was considered important in determining the experience of respondents as leaders implementing an enterprise business system versus respondents that may have functioned as a leader in support of an enterprise business system implementation (see Table 4). Table 4: Experience Implementing Frequency Distribution
Was or Is Currently Working as a Leader Implementing Enterprise Business Systems f %
Yes 79 80.6
No 19 19.4
Total 98 100.0

Hypothesis Testing

The four hypotheses were analyzed using the Pearson’s chi-square test of independence. Although Pearson’s chi-square test is designed for large-sample sizes, it was considered appropriate for this study designed to test two categorical variables having two or more variables. In using chi-square analysis, the researcher did not violate an important assumption that the lowest expected frequency of the cells (representing cases) were to be five or greater (Norusis, 2005; Pallant, 2007). SPSS 14.0 software was used to provide the p-values, where the p-values represent the significance level between two categorical variables in order to conclude a significant association. More specifically, the p-value is a representation of the percentage or probability that the results are due to chance. For example, if the p = .05, 5% of the results are considered due to chance (Norusis, 2005). The significance of .05 in this study is associated with the conventional aspects of research to achieve results equal or less than 5% due to chance.

Descriptive Analysis

Descriptive statistics was used to address research hypotheses in this study. This portion of the analysis required the dependent variables to be identified. The four dependent change management variables associated with the four hypotheses included (a) perception of change management, (b) negotiating resources, (c) facilitating participation of business and technology managers in formal groups, and (d) persuading the use of enterprise architectures. The four survey items correlated with the four hypotheses to perform both pearson’s chi-square and ANOVA are mapped in table 5.

Pearson’s Chi-Square Analysis

Hypothesis 1. Hypothesis 1O stated, “An information technology leader’s perception of change management is independent of his/her willingness to influence the management success for business system implementations.” This intent of this hypothesis was answered using responses from hypothesis 2-4, which specifically addressed the three change management variables considered in this study: negotiating for resources, facilitating the participation of business process managers and technology managers in formal groups, and the persuading the use of enterprise architectures. These three change management variables were selected based on the nature of the problem, theoretical consideration, previous research findings, and their deemed importance to enterprise business system implementations. They were selected as variables of formal change management to improve the management of implementing major changes in IT and business processes to reduce challenges of organizational change when new processes or technology are introduced. Table 5: Survey Item and Hypothesis Mapping
Survey Items Hypothesis
19. Overall, I believe influential leaders improve the management success of enterprise business system implementation Hypothesis 1: an information technology leader’s perception of change management is independent of his/her willingness to influence the management success of business system implementations.
15. The management of the enterprise business system implementation I refer to in this survey is/was improved by the leadership’s willingness to negotiate for resources (financial or human). Hypothesis 2: an information technology leader’s willingness to negotiate resources to improve the management of enterprise business system implementation is independent of his/her leadership experience.
16. The management of the enterprise business system implementation I refer to in this survey is/was improved by the leadership’s willingness to facilitate the business process manager’s participation in formal groups Hypothesis 3: an information technology leader’s willingness to facilitate the participation of business and technology mangers in formal groups to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations is independent of his/her leadership experience.
17. The management of the enterprise business system implementation I refer to in this survey is/was improved by the leadership’s willingness to facilitate the technology manager’s participation in formal groups
18. The management of the enterprise business system implementation I refer to in this survey is/was improved by the leadership’s willingness to persuade the use of enterprise architecture throughout the implementation process. Hypothesis 4: An information technology leader’s willingness to persuade the use of enterprise architectures to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations is independent of his/her leadership experience.
The perception of respondent’s willingness to influence the management success for business system implementations was captured specifically using question 19, “Overall, I believe influential leaders improve the management success of enterprise business system implementations” (see Tables 6 and 7). Table 6: Cross Tabulation for Hypothesis 1
Years of Experience Negotiate for Resources Total
N Y
More than 15 57 14 71
Less than 15 21 6 27
Total 78 20 98
Table 7:Chi-Square Test for Hypothesis 1
Test (N = 98) Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Exact Sig. (2-sided) Exact Sig. (1-sided)
Pearson chi-square .76(b) 1 .783
Continuity correction (a) .000 1 1.000
Likelihood ratio .075 1 .784
Fisher’s exact test 784 .492
a Computed only for a 2×2 table. b No cells (.0%) had expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count was 51. The p-value using Pearson chi-square was .738, which was greater than 0.05. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected. The results suggested the respondent’s overall willingness to influence the management success for business system implementations is independent of the number of years of leader experience in an IT organization. The analysis using Pearson’s chi-square statistics indicated there was not a statistically significant relationship between leaders’ years in an IT organization and the perception of their willingness to influence change management success. The respondent’s perceptions of the three change management variables relevant to this study and their willingness to influence them to improve the management success of implementation of business systems were addressed in hypotheses 2-4. Hypothesis 2. Hypothesis 2O stated, “An information technology leader’s willingness to negotiate resources to improve the management of enterprise business system implementation is independent of his/her leadership experience.” This hypothesis was answered using question 2, which captured the respondents’ years of experience in an IT organization, and question 15: “The management of enterprise business system implementations I refer to in this survey is/was improved by the leadership’s willingness to negotiate for resources (financial and human)” Hypothesis 3. Hypothesis 3O stated “An information technology leader’s willingness to facilitate the participation of business and technical mangers in formal groups is independent of his/her leadership experience.” This hypothesis was answered in two parts, using question 2, which captured the respondents’ years of experience in an organization and questions 16 and 17. Question 16 stated: “The management of enterprise business system implementations I refer to in this survey is/was improved by the leadership’s willingness to facilitate the business manager’s participation in formal groups” The p-value using Pearson chi-square was .478, greater than 0.05. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected, which led to the conclusion that a leader’s willingness to facilitate the business manager’s participation in formal groups to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations was independent of the number of years of leader experience in an IT organization. The second portion of hypothesis used question 17: “The management of enterprise business system implementations I refer to in this survey is/was improved by the leadership’s willingness to facilitate the technology manager’s participation in formal groups” The p-value using Pearson chi-square was .478 and greater than 0.05. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected, which led to the conclusion that a leader’s willingness facilitate technology manager’s participation in formal groups to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations was independent of the number of years of leader experience in an IT organization. The analyses of the responses for the two change management variables in hypothesis 3 were identical. Therefore, the results using Pearson’s chi-square statistics indicated that there was not a statistically significant relationship between a leader’s willingness to facilitate business or technology managers’ participation in formal groups to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations. Hypothesis 4. Hypothesis 4O stated, “An information technology leader’s willingness to persuade the use of enterprise architectures is independent of his/her leadership experience.” This hypothesis was answered using question 18: “The management of enterprise business system implementations I refer to in this survey is/was improved by the leadership’s willingness to persuade the use of enterprise architectures throughout the implementation process” The p-value using Pearson chi-square was .170 and greater than 0.05. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected, which led to the conclusion that a leader’s willingness persuade the use of enterprise architectures to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations is independent of the number of years of leader experience in an IT organization. The analysis indicated there was not a statistically significant relationship between the two variables. Mean Comparison: One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) In order to further analyze the relationship between years in an IT organization and a leader’s willingness to improve the management success of enterprise businesses system implementations by influencing change management variables, ANOVA was used to compare the variance between the different groups (believed to be due to the independent variable) (Pallant, 2007). In order to conduct ANOVA, it was necessary to separate the independent variable (years of experience) into three levels (Pallant, 2007). The respondent’s years experience were grouped as follows: group 1: Less than 1 to less than 10, group 2: 10 but less than 19, and group 3: 20 or more. It was necessary to determine the mean and standard deviation for each group, using a 5-point Likert-type scale (Strongly Agree = 1, Agree = 2, Neutral = 3, Disagree = 4, Strongly Disagree = 5) to determine the respondent’s willingness to influence the management success of enterprise business system implementations by negotiating for resources, facilitating the participation of business process and technology managers in formal groups, and persuading the use of enterprise architectures. As mentioned earlier, ANOVA was used to determine whether there was a significant difference among the mean scores of the dependent variables for the groups identified in this study. Again the significance values were important to consider in the ANOVA because according to Pallant (2007) and Norusis (2002), the significance value(s) less than or equal to .05 indicate a statistically significant result somewhere among the groups. However, it does not indicate where among the groups. Because the significance value results ranged from .491 to .647, which were more than .05, the ANOVA test was concluded and there was no significant difference among the mean scores from the each group considered, or no variance among the groups

Data Gathered for Future Research

Additional data was gathered specifically for future research in the area of compliance, use of in-house architects, and enterprise architecture used to develop the organizational architecture. This included questions 7, 8, 9, and 11 in the survey. For compliance, question 7 asked, “The ABC IT organization implanting enterprise business systems that I refer to in this survey adheres to an enterprise architecture framework for compliance” The majority of respondents (66.3%) reported that enterprise architecture frameworks are being used as part of compliance within their IT organizations. In addition to compliance information, data was gathered in two parts regarding whether in-house architects were a part of the respondent’s IT organization, and if so, what type of architect. These questions were answered using Question 8 and 9. Question 8: “The ABC IT organization I refer to in this survey has in-house architects,” and question 9: “If yes on previous question, what type of architect(s) (select all that apply).”

CHAPTER 5: RESULTS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter provides the results and conclusion of the study and provides recommendations for further research regarding change management and leadership. The purpose of this study was to provide a better understanding of change management and leadership to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations. Specifically, the research intended to provide information on change management and on how change management was perceived by ABC IT organizational leaders in order to determine whether a relationship existed between leaders’ years of experience in the ABC IT organization and their willingness to influence change management variables to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations. The change management variables considered in this study were selected based on the nature of the problem, theoretical consideration, previous research findings, and their deemed importance to enterprise business system implementations. Leadership to influence specific change management variables was considered in the following manner: negotiations for resources (financial and human), facilitation of business and technology managers in formal groups, and persuasion of enterprise architectures. The independent variable, years of leadership experience in the ABC IT organization, was considered suggesting that sustained leadership is a key driver to the management success of its enterprise business system implementations (GAO-06-831, 2006b; Hite & Williams, 2007). Leadership experience was associated with sustained leadership based on ideas by Fiedler (1972) and Doh (2003) that individuals learn from (a) the years on a job, (b) guidance and knowledge obtained from superiors and fellow leaders, and (c) informal training over the years, thereby increasing a leader’s control, influence, and ability to achieve success. The dependent variables for change management considered negotiating for resources, which was considered important by researchers Ming-Ling and Shaw (2005), who found most implementations reported significant cost overruns when handling situations that have an impact on set resources. The same researchers found a second dependent variable, participation of business and technology managers in formal groups, important because they “frequently appear in successful business system implementation” (Ming-Ling & Shaw, 2005, p 5). Architecture frameworks was the third change management variable considered for its deemed importance by the GAO and other researchers that found them to be useful management tools or blueprints to move businesses or organizations from their current state to a future enterprise state successfully (Hite & Williams, 2007; Sotiriou & Wittmer, 2001). The core of this study was to determine whether there was a relationship between the ABC  IT leaders’ years of experience and their willingness to influence specified change management variables for improved management success of enterprise business system implementations. The specific research question was: “Do information technology leaders within the Department of Defense, Defense Information Systems Agency, perceive that change management coupled with leadership experience improves the management of enterprise business system implementations?”

Hypotheses

Hypothesis 1O stated, “An information technology leader’s perception of change management is independent of his/her willingness to influence the management success of business system implementations.” The perception of change management was answered using hypotheses 2-4. The Pearson’s chi-square test of independence resulted in failure to reject the null hypothesis, establishing independence from the number of years a leader has in the ABC IT organization. Hypothesis 2O stated, “An information technology leader’s willingness to negotiate resources to improve the management of enterprise business system implementation is independent of his/her leadership experience.” The Pearson’s chi-square test of independence resulted in failure to reject the null hypothesis and concluded that a leader’s willingness to negotiation for resources to improve the management success of enterprise business system implementations was not dependent on the number of years a leader has been in the ABC IT organizations. Hypothesis 3O stated, “An information technology leader’s willingness to facilitate the participation of business and technology mangers in formal groups to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations is independent of his/her leadership experience.” The Pearson’s chi-square test of independence resulted in failure to reject the null hypothesis and concluded that a leader’s willingness to facilitate the participation of business and technology managers in formal groups to improve management success of enterprise business system implementations was not dependent on a leader’s years of experience in a the ABC IT organization Hypothesis 4O stated, “An information technology leader’s willingness to persuade the use of enterprise architectures to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations is independent of his/her leadership experience.” The Pearson’s chi-square test of independence resulted in failure to reject the null hypothesis and concluded that a leader’s willingness to persuade the use of enterprise architectures to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations was not dependent on a leader’s years of experience in a the ABC IT organization. A one-way between-groups ANOVA was conducted to explore the impact of a leader’s years of experience (group 1 = Less than 1 to less than 10, group 2 = 10 but less than 19, and group 3 = 20 or more) and the willingness to influence change management variables to improve the management success of enterprise business system implementations. There was not a statistically significant difference at the p < .05 level in ANOVA; therefore, it was determined that there was no significant difference among the mean scores within the groups considered in this study.

Study Design

The research population consisted of the ABC IT organization leaders assumed to have experience in the management of enterprise business system implementations. More specifically, leaders were assumed to have experience managing the transition of systems, services, products, or capabilities to an enterprise environment for improved business operations and management. Participation in this study was voluntary, with 98 respondents. IT leaders in this study were defined by their position in the agency and participants were not dependent on an explicitly defined leadership role. The participants were identified by the organization’s personnel locator system (PLS) using positional codes to ensure their IT role (e.g., program/project manager, system engineer) and their leadership talent according to pay grade levels as a GS 14 or above. The survey instrument was organized into four sections with a total of 26 questions. The first section provided information about the participants’ years of experience. Section 2 assessed the respondents’ responses regarding the deployment and use of enterprise architectures within their IT organizations. Section 3 assessed the respondents’ willingness to influence change management variables to improve the management enterprise business system implementations, based on leadership experience. Section 4 was divided into two parts. The first part asked the respondents to rank the perceived importance of three change management variables: resources, formal groups, and enterprise architectures, and the second part asked the respondents to rank perceived value of leadership influence on three change management variables toward improving the management of enterprise business systems.

Discussion and Findings

Pearson’s chi-square test for independence was used to examine whether a relationship existed between leaders’ years of experience in a DoD IT organization and their willingness to influence change management variables to improve enterprise business implementations. Years of experience included two intervals: less than 15 years or more than 15 years. The independent variables for change management numbered five: (a) perception of change management, (b) negotiation of resources, (c) facilitation of business manager participation in formal groups, (d) facilitation of technology manager participation in formal group participation, and (e) the persuaded use of enterprise architectures. The overall results of Pearson’s chi-square analysis failed to reject the null hypotheses in all cases, suggesting that there was not a significant relationship between a leader’s years of experience in a the ABC IT organization and a leader’s willingness to influence change management variables to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations. The chi-square test values between the two variables considered in all four hypotheses were not significant at the .05 level; therefore, the four null hypotheses were not rejected. This indicated that leaders’ years of experience in the ABC IT organizations had no impact on their willingness to influence the three change management variables considered to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations

Limitations of the Current Study

There were two obvious limitations to this research study. The first limitation was related to the sample size and small number of respondents. Although the requested participation was limited to one IT organization by design, a larger number of respondents might have been more beneficial. The second limitation was the potential for self-reporting biases. The fact that the participants were asked to provide their perceptions on specific change management variables and to report on their willingness to improve the management success of enterprise business system implementations could be influenced by personal experiences, personal feelings about the IT organizations.

Implications of the Study

Researchers have attributed the lack of business system implementation success, more often than not, to technology innovations and solutions with little regard for leadership and change management that often influences the outcome of the implementation. This study did not specifically provide the evidence that a leader’s years of years of experience affected the willingness to influence the three change management variables considered to improve the management of business system implementations. However, future research should explore how a leadership emphasis in conjunction with other or new change management variables could prove beneficial toward the improved management success for such implementations. The research indicated there is a strong propensity to focus on technology innovation and solution for such business problems and not on the leadership necessary or the relevant change management factors needed to solve this business problem. It is not enough to consider just the latest technology without considering the perceptions of leaders regarding their ability to influence change management and their experience when they are charged to champion organizational change effectively and efficiently through the implementation of business systems.

Suggestions for Further Research

Research previously conducted regarding the question of how to improve the management for enterprise business system implementations emphasized the importance of architecture frameworks. The data collected suggested that the lower-level agencies and IT projects may have a fundamental understanding and awareness for the use of architecture frameworks as an essential part of managing business system implementations. However, future studies to provide the level of understand and awareness at the varying levels might prove useful to the overall objective of implementing these systems to achieve better management of IT investments. Additionally, future studies to address mature practices for the employment of architectures by organizations may yield important implications for improved management success. Future research to consider broader categories of change management variables that used a research methodology to support open-ended questions and follow-up interviews to understand leadership perception more completely and why change management factor(s) are valued may help to improve the selection of change management variables on which senior leaders should focus for improved management of enterprise business system implementations. This type of research might be helpful in identifying common challenges and common issues so that organizations can adopt cultural change management strategies based on lessons learned, whether by policy or process, to improve management success. Future studies to compare change management approaches might provide a valuable comparison or a valuable construct toward improving the management of enterprise business system implementations. This type of study might provide approaches and variables that could be generalized, since drawn from a larger and wider sample population. Finally, further research regarding leadership for improved management success should be considered using perspectives other than years of experience to understand more thoroughly how leadership can more effectively be a part of the management improvement for enterprise business system implementations. Although a leader’s years of experience were considered in this study, it might be feasible to investigate other leadership variables, such as training or exposure to business system implementations.

Conclusion

The purpose of this study was to provide a better understanding of change management and leadership to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations. Specifically, the research intended to provide information on change management and how change management was perceived by organizational leaders in order to determine whether a relationship existed between leaders’ years of experience in IT organization and their willingness to influence change management variables to improve the management of enterprise business system implementations. The driver for this study included the increasing demand by businesses and organizations for the successful management of business system implementations to improve efficient and effective information sharing, maintenance costs, and customer satisfaction (Benamati & Lederer, 2001; Hite, 2004; Kutz & Hite, 2004; Spathis, 2006). Although the change management variables considered in this study were not new management variables (resource management, formal groups, and enterprise architectures) the rationale for their consideration with IT project implementations was based on discussions found in Chapter 2. Chapter 2 also discussed the theoretical aspect of leadership, suggesting that experienced leaders have an advantage and improved ability to achieve success because experience is designed to increase a leader’s control and influence (Doh, 2003). Based on these ideologies supported theoretically and in previous research, leadership experience in conjunction with change management variables were the underpinnings that formed the hypotheses for this study. The analysis of the data and testing of the hypotheses did not statistically show that a relationship exist between leaders’ years of experience and their willingness to influence resource negotiations, facilitate the participation of business and technology managers in formal groups, and persuade the use of enterprise architectures to improve the management of enterprise business systems. However, this study contributed to the fields of change management and leadership by highlighting the perceptions of leaders for the change management variables considered to improve success for enterprise business system implementations. It added new knowledge from data that indicated a majority of leaders at the lower levels appeared to recognize, understand, and employ architecture frameworks as part of business system implementations. The majority of leaders in this study also indicated that they valued enterprise architectures as an effective management tool and that their senior leaders understood the value of enterprise architectures for enterprise business system implementations. Future studies can begin to address topics such as mature use of architecture frameworks in these types of organizations.

The post Issue of change Management and Leadership appeared first on Academic Master.

]]>
Sample Assignment on The Beginnings of Scientific Psychology https://academicmaster.co.uk/2022/04/sample-assignment-on-the-beginnings-of-scientific-psychology/ Sat, 16 Apr 2022 12:06:02 +0000 https://academicmaster.co.uk/?p=1028 Wilhelm Wundt (1832-1920) is generally honored as the founder of scientific psychology. Wundt wrote his first book on psychology, dealing with sensory perceptions, in 1862.

The post Sample Assignment on The Beginnings of Scientific Psychology appeared first on Academic Master.

]]>

The Beginnings of Scientific Psychology

Wilhelm Wundt (1832-1920) is generally honored as the founder of scientific psychology. Wundt wrote his first book on psychology, dealing with sensory perceptions, in 1862. It was based largely on his training as a physiologists and would be characteristic of much of his work. In 1879, Wundt founded the first research laboratory in psychology at the University of Leipzig.

The initial goal of scientific psychology was to understand the nature of human consciousness. To understand this, Wundt used the method of introspection, in which a person experiences something and then describes the personal nature of the experience. This technique can be used quite rigorously when stimulus presentation are controlled, so that introspective accounts can be compared across many experiences. Researchers were to report their experiences in terms of specific sensations and feelings, which were then developed into the basic building blocks of the conscious mind. The main goal of Wundt’s psychology was to first discover these building blocks, and then discover how they combined to form the more complex elements of mental processes.

The research in Wundt’s lab consisted of studies in the fields of sensation and perception: investigating color vision and the passage of time, as well as research into other mental processes such as emotion. One famous study in Wundt’s lab was in the field of reaction time. Wundt hypothesized that by measuring the difference between the speed of a simple mental event and a complex mental event, it was possible to calculate the amount of time mental processing required.

“Read More : Sample Assignment | Pros and Cons of Death Penalty

Other scientific psychology laboratories soon emerged, including that of Herman Ebbinghaus (1850-1909), whose memory studies are still being referenced. These laboratories challenged many of Wundt’s views on psychology, such as his insistence that consciousness could be broken into elemental parts and his reliance on introspection. One German branch of psychology that was opposed to Wundt’s ideas was Gestalt psychology which originated with Max Wertheimer (1880-1943), Kurt Koffka (1886-1941), and Wolfgang Köhler (1887-1967). They argured with the atomistic approach to human consciousness, and instead claimed that “the whole is different from the sum of its parts.” For instance, a picture with all of the color information inverted is still recognizable as having the same pattern, even though the elements comprising the picture are completely different in the two versions. Gestalt psychology made substantial contributions to the areas of perception and learning before many in the field moved from Germany to the United States during the mid-1930s. Even though Gestalt psychology never became part of the mainstream, it had a great influence on the beginnings of American psychology. Much of the modern work with Gestalt theories are now associated with the cognitive approach.


The Start of American Psychology

One of the representatives of Wundt’s psychology that came to America was the British student E. B. Titchener (1867-1927). Titchener’s psychology, which became known as structuralism, closely follows the atomistic portion of Wundt’s psychology by studying the elemental structures of consciousness. However, instead of explaining them by hypothetical mental processes as Wundt had, Titchener focused on research that was purely descriptive. His books on experimental psychology (Titchener, 1901-1905) became very influential in the training of the first generation of American psychologists.

Other groups in America entirely broke away from the teachings of Wundt. Many of these groups used ideas developed by Charles Darwin (1809-1882) to formulate theories to explain variations between members of a species. Darwin’s theory of evolution that linked humans with the rest of the animal kingdom began the idea of comparative psychology, and the idea of interpolating human behavior from the study of animals. Another important contribution by Darwin to the emerging American psychology was that of natural selection. Specifically, how the implication of the selection of characteristics that were most valuable to the organism could be used to examine the adaptive significance of consciousness.

Functionalism

Under the influences of Darwin, many American psychologists began examining consciousness to understand how it helps the organism function, rather than its structures. One American psychologist who believed in the adaptive significance of consciousness was William James (1842-1910). James believed that mental processes had evolved in a similar manner to other traits, and his interest was in understanding the role consciousness played in helping an organism adapt to its environment. James’s emphasis on understanding the functions of consciousness led to the founding of a new system of psychology known as functionalism, which is mainly an American system of psychology. Most of James’s ideas were examined in The Principles of Psychology (1890), which is one of the most important works in the history of psychology.

Behaviorism

The third type of psychology that evolved during this time period contested with both structuralism and functionalism. Behaviorism, as the new system was called, was revolutionary in both the nature of material it studied, as well as the methods used in study. The founder of this branch of psychology was John B. Watson (1878-1958) who believed that psychology would never fully develop until “it need no longer delude itself unto thinking that it is making mental states the object of observation.” Watson called for a radical change in the focus of psychology: studying behavior instead of consciousness. Because consciousness was not directly observable, it was difficult to measure and therefore had no place in the domain of science. Behavior represented actions that were subject to direct observation, and psychology could then be based on discovering the causes of behavior and the investigation of relations between stimuli and response.

Watson also tried to minimize the importance of studying heredity that had been placed into the field of psychology by functionalism. He denied the existence of instints, or inherited traits. This viewpoint led him to decide that a person’s achievements are limited solely by the restrictions placed by the environment on the person’s abilities. This radical change gave psychology a means to improve the human condition in particular, and society in general, and made Watson a popular figure in American culture.

Watson’s scientific psychology could not have an imprecise means of experimentation, such as introspection, so Watson encouraged a number of new techniques:

  • Using instruments that increased the precision of measurements.
  • Objective tests: using the results of tests to sample behavior.
  • The conditioning-reflex method developed by Ivan Pavlov.

The post Sample Assignment on The Beginnings of Scientific Psychology appeared first on Academic Master.

]]>
Sample Assignment on positioning | Academic Master https://academicmaster.co.uk/2022/04/sample-assignment-on-positioning/ https://academicmaster.co.uk/2022/04/sample-assignment-on-positioning/#comments Mon, 11 Apr 2022 12:25:12 +0000 https://academicmaster.co.uk/?p=1021 The term “positioning” has been used by Ries and Trout (1972) in marketing for at least 14 years, ever since it was popularized by Trout

The post Sample Assignment on positioning | Academic Master appeared first on Academic Master.

]]>
The term “positioning” has been used by Ries and Trout (1972) in marketing for at least 14 years, ever since it was popularized by Trout and Ries. The idea of positioning has attracted the attention of management of the organizations and has been applied to consumer products.

Once considered the sole purview of global corporations and consumer product giants like Coca-Cola, Microsoft, Toyota, and Disney, the concept of branding is coming of age in financial services, health care, nonprofit organizations, government, professional services, and even (gasp) education.  While talk of market share, media budgets, brand strategy, positioning, and other common marketing terms still give many school board members and superintendents the willies, the fact is that public education can learn a lot from successful brands.

Widely viewed today by many taxpayers, business leaders, and elected officials as inefficient, ineffective, and bureaucratic, public education is losing its once-noble brand position as the cornerstone of American democracy. “The first problem is the name; it’s called public education,” says marketing guru Laura Ries, who has coauthored four books on branding.

“The perception out there is that anything run by the government is lousy. That may not be the way it is, but anything that is government-run is seen as big, inefficient, many times ineffective, and not as wellrun as the private sector.”

More than just a logo, theme, or color scheme, great brands own a unique attribute or position in the mind of consumers. It’s easy to test this proposition. Name a favorite brand and see what pops instantly to mind.

Now say “public education,” “ABC Senior High School,” or “XYZ School District” and see what happens. What words and images come instantly to mind? Contrast those results with the names of the most prestigious private schools in your area, and you begin to see why brands matter.

Taking a cue from private schools and well-endowed universities, public schools and districts may want to consider name changes that convey a special focus or emphasis on academic excellence, Ries says. Generic school names like North, South, East, and West do little to spark the imagination or position the school as an academic leader in the minds of prospective students and their families.

“Names are very important in branding, and so often the names for public schools are chosen haphazardly or without much thought at all,” says Ries, author of The 22 Immutable Laws of Branding and The 11 Immutable Laws of Internet Branding. “Many of the fancy names used by private schools are infinitely more powerful, and give people an ability to talk about them in a way that sounds much better.”

Charter schools, despite the fact that they have produced mixed results in terms of their actual academic achievement, appeal to parents and business leaders because they tend to have a unique focus and are viewed as being free of the bureaucratie taint associated with traditional public schools, according to Ries.

“People always feel a specialist is better than a generalist,” says Ries. “Public schools need to find ways to focus on one thing, on one word they can own in the mind of the consumer that no one else can own.”

One way in which public schools can build a better brand is to rally behind an outspoken leader who personifies the brand and unites the community around the importance of public schools.

“When Bill Gates talks about the future of the tech industry, people listen because Microsoft is such a big global brand,” says Ries. She notes that few people outside the field of education know who Margaret Spellings is-or care, given the political nature of the position. “Who speaks for public education? One of the problems is that there’s no one leader for this industry.”

It is true that school board members and school superintendents may not be able to solve the lack of visible leadership which exists at the national level. However, it is also true that they can-and should-spend more time on public school advocacy.

“Many times school administrators spend most of their time getting the organization running smoothly instead of working on the public perception of their school district,” says Ries. “While that is certainly understandable, having a highly visible spokesperson promoting public education is very important on multiple levels. A powerful, well-known leader can make a brand believable and keep everyone on course.”

Restoring credibility, rebuilding trust, and reclaiming public education’s brand position requires public relations, not advertising, Ries says. “Most people, when they hear any words like branding or marketing, only think of advertising. We don’t recommend advertising for a brand that’s trying to establish itself unless you have a credible message. What you really want to drive is public relations (PR).”

Giving speeches, publishing opinion pieces, connecting with community groups, and developing close, working relationships with reporters can help make school leaders-and the brand they represent-respected household names. Public relations, whether by word of mouth or in print, provides critical third-party endorsements that help build credibility.

“First, you have to do something, then you have to verbalize it, and then you need to do PR to get people to talk about it,” Ries says. “The difficult thing is not the idea but the verbalization of the idea, and then sticking to that turn of phrase that articulates the message and keeps it relevant.”

More than a decade into the standards and accountability movement, where data drives decisions and public policy, it’s ironic that facts often don’t matter when it comes to public perception. Take Volvo, for example: Volvo still owns safety in the minds of most consumers, even though a Volvo model didn’t make the top 10 in a recent automotive industry study that ranked the world’s safest cars.

Doing Better Job

For weak brands, as in the case of public education, the opposite is true: Research studies consistently show that public education is doing a better job with more students than ever before-so why do so’ many think public education is failing in this country?

Factoids and statistics don’t change minds. Research shows that consumers seek out information that reinforces an existing position, and that they filter out data that contradicts firmly held beliefs.

“Using one verbalization, and sticking to it, is better than trying to get it perfect,” says Ries. “If the numbers don’t match the perception, they’re not going to do you any good.”

In order to make an effort to counteract this problem, educators need to focus on positioning more than facts, telling stories and using emotion to drive home key concepts and ideas. Testimonials from successful graduates, satisfied parents, and highly credible community leaders will resonate more with information-weary consumers than charts, pie graphs, and 45 slides of mind-numbing data.

Brands are powerful because they represent a promise to the consumer in terms of consistency and quality. How many times in the past have you gone to a McDonald’s while you were traveling because “you know what you’re going to get?”

When it comes to the subjects of your schools or district, do parents know what they’re going to get? Are you delivering the same high-quality education to each and every child who attends?

I’m OK, You’re Not

The lack of consistency is part of what’s driving the “my school’s OK, public education isn’t” phenomenon, according to Ries. “The result of a weak brand is that consumers’ personal reactions may be different, but they can’t verify that their experiences are shared by others,” she says.

Defining your school or district’s brand promise-the one thing your students, parents, teachers, and other key groups can count on time and time again, and want to be a part of-is just the first step. According to Interbrand, a global brand marketing firm, the world’s most successful brands are characterized by consumer recognition, consistency, emotion, and uniqueness.

This is the reason that educators should stick to one theme or message consistently over a long period of time, rather than creating new tag lines, logos, and color schemes every year.

Collateral materials, websites, PowerPoint presentations, voice mail messages, e-mail signatures, fax cover sheets, automobile stickers, e-mail newsletters, and speeches all represent moments of truth for your brand image and message. When colors, fonts, formats, and other design elements change every time that a new piece is produced, your brand power diminishes.

It’s hard enough for public schools to cut through the clutter which is created by today’s advertisers without adding to the confusion through inconsistency and poor definition. Changing perception-the heart and soul of branding-represents a long-term investment.

“You’re not going to be able to combat the perception that our schools are failing, or that private schools are better, by running an ad campaign,” says Ries. “You’re going to have to get out there and promote the idea that public education is better than we think.”

The bottom line of the entire situation is this: Public education won’t survive without public support. It’s time for public education to reclaim its brand position as the world’s great equalizer, the place where the American dream takes root.

The movement away from product-driven and toward image advertising might have been heralded as early as 1981, when two advertising executives, Al Ries and Jack Trout, published their best-known work, Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind (McGraw Hill, New York). Trout and Ries defined positioning as “the communication activities necessary to alter the conception about a product or an organization that is held by a prospect.” Ries and Trout urged their readers to “oversimplify” their messages in order to cut through the “over-communications” occurring in American life.

While their approach was persuasive, it took the convergence of several major trends to move financial industry advertisers away from the concept of advertising that sells products and into a new focus on positioning through brand imagery.

First among these trends is the advent of the superregional financial services company. As more financial services institutions like Bank One and Norwest enter new markets, they need to establish their identity among their new customers and prospects. Often they are looking for a quick way to establish themselves as part of the local financial services community. Selling services can come later.

Increasing the urgency is the name change which often accompanies the expansion. That was the reasoning behind the NationsBank prime-time, major network placement on New Year’s Day. The TV commercial was designed to introduce the new name adopted by NCNB in the wake of its merger with C&S/Sovran. No products sold–just NationsBank CEO Hugh McColl establishing the behemoth’s new identity.

The name, NationsBank, itself marks a swing in taste. In the early days of consolidation, merged banks usually retained identities. Early attempts at forceful name changes, such as that which occurred after Mellon Bank’s takeover of Girard Bank, were often accompanied by public relations disasters. More often, as in the Fleet/Norstar combination, the names of the constituent banks were left inviolate.

When banks which were to be combined decided to merge identities, a new, often artificial, name was created to soothe feelings. That trend may have died when C&S and Sovran Bank created, then abandoned, “Avantor” as the name of the new company. More recently, acquired banks are likely to adopt the new parent’s name–with an attendant marketing splash.

In addition to the growth of the superregional, a second contributing trend is the growth of product management and, with it, decentralized control over advertising budgets. The result of dividing the advertising budget pie into micromanaged slices has led to an inability to mass the dollars needed for major media campaigns. Often, even when the marketing director is able to obtain agreement on joint budgeting for that purpose, it’s difficult to obtain consensus on advertising content.

Although some marketing directors were unwilling to speak on the record (another symptom of the fragility of some of these budgetary alliances), several acknowledged the trend. One state coordinator for a midwestern-based superregional put it this way: “Even when I get a few departments to agree to a major advertising expenditure, I can almost never get agreement on what to put in the ads. As a result, I fall back on name recognition and let each (department) do their own thing with their own budgets.”

“Doing their own thing with their own budgets” is another part of the phenomenon. Take, for example, a recent baskethall game between Indiana University and the University of Kentucky in Indianapolis’ Hoosier Dome. Bank One’s logo was visible throughout the stadium–on banners adorning the press table and festooning the upper decks, on the basketball court itself and on chair backs at court side.

Sidney P. Cook, senior vice president/director-marketing for Bank One, Indianapolis NA, points out that the branding or positioning of the Bank One name at a high-profile basketball game supports other nontraditional advertising vehicles such as more targeted micromarketing and direct mail, for example.

“Once we establish the name of the bank through programs like the Hoosier Classic, we find a greater acceptance of our direct mail programs,” says Cook. “They’re a terrific combination.” The combination, he maintains, is more cost-effective than reliance on media advertising alone, and using direct mail allows the bank to do more with less.

Doing more with less, and doing it differently, is still another major thread in the new advertising reality. Most marketers responding to a poll fielded by the Chicago chapter of the American Marketing Association (AMA) late last year said that dollars channelled away from traditional broadcast and print advertising will never return.

In their report on the study, the chapter revealed that nearly two-thirds of the respondents said that advertising dollars have been “permanently reallocated to other areas such as database marketing, direct mail and telemarketing.”

Enchantment with these high-efficiency techniques is only part of the story. Disenchantment with traditional media plays a role as well. The changing habits of media-hungry Americans has been well-chronicled.

First, there is the demise of the afternoon newspaper. When the Dallas Times-Herald ceased publication last December, it left in its wake only a handful of major markets with an afternoon edition. Commuters’ moving out of public transit and into automobiles and the popularity of early evening TV news are the two trends most frequently blamed for the demise of the afternoon editions.

It is also true that advertising revenue had been sharply reduced as major retail chains consolidated and airlines filed for bankruptcies, thus depriving newspapers of a large chunk of anticipated revenue. However, it was the steep drop in readership that ultimately did the afternoon papers in. The survivors report fewer readers–in some markets, as much as 60% of the households do not get a home-delivered newspaper, according to the admittedly biased Radio Advertising Bureau.

Retailers have never been as significant to the electronic media as they have been to print, but drive-time radio and network television are having their own problems–despite the popular wisdom that auto-bound commuters are listening to the radio and that, with no afternoon newspaper to read, the commuter turns on the television as soon as he reaches home.

On the contrary–new technology in audio systems has increased the range of choices available to the listener. With cassette, CD players and personal stereos available at increasingly lower prices, fewer commuters are tuning in to the radio.

Radio stations have also changed into a narrowly programmed, highly specialized outlet that forces advertisers to “buy the band” in order to reach a mass audience. As budgets contract, buying the band becomes a less-desirable option. But all of that is nothing compared to what’s happening in front of the television. As one market researcher who responded to the AMA poll said, “Advertisers and broadcast media don’t want to discuss it, but zapping, zipping and muting are so prevalent that broadcast advertising dollars are a poor marketing value nowadays.”

Zapping and zipping are terms of the VCR age –a byproduct of our ability to tape the shows we want and to watch them at our convenience, often eliminating the commercials. Add that to the glut of cable TV options, 105 channels in some markets, and it’s no wonder that advertising strategists are looking for more personal ways to get the message into the home.

At one time, according to industry experts, 93% of U.S. homes watching television were tuned to either CBS, NBC or ABC and were watching the show while it aired. Now media professionals calculate that fewer than 60% of TV watchers are tuned to the three major networks. The house’s TV sets (often as many as four or five) are still on, but they are just as llkely to be tuned to the newer Fox network, to a cable TV outlet, such as ESPN, MTV or one of the Home Shopping Networks, or, increasingly, to the external mode watching rented movie or a previously taped show or event. One of the sets, by the way, is likely to be connected to a Nintendo game.

The growth of cable has helped some advertisers, such as local banks. Advertising on cable outlets is less costly than advertising on network television, and cable stations usually provide a more targeted audience. Sheldon Weiss, director-marketing of Leon Shaffer Golnick Advertising, a Fort Lauderdale-based producer of syndicated TV advertising, says that the growth of cable has helped his business and his clients.

In general, national magazines have always played a minor role in most banks’ advertising budgets. With the exception of packages assembled by Magazine Networks, Inc., the reach of a typical magazine far exceeds that of a bank. Still, it should be noted that the malaise of the media has not left “slick print” unharmed. Many titles have ceased publication in the last two years, and others are much thinner than before.

The net result of all of this change has been a bleak outlook for the media, rolling readjustments on Madison Avenue and, in some cases, a determined rear guard action.

Typical of the outlook was the New York Times’ recent shareholders’ report, for example. The company suggested that newspaper advertising linage might have peaked early in the 1980s, and it could not project a return to those levels in the foreseeable future.

The layoffs taking place at major advertising agencies may have been caused, in part, by the late-1980s consolidation wave that hit that industry in the face of major acquisitions by the UK-based Saatchi brothers and Martin Sorrell. Whatever the reason, there is no question that the industry is losing jobs. Major agencies are cutting back and smaller ones are closing. And like the proverbial dominoes, suppliers to the industry are feeling the shock wave. For example, recent cutbacks announced at Birch-Scarborough, one of the leading broadcast rating agencies, were triggered by a decline in subscribers, most of whom had been advertising agencies.

As might be expected, TV and radio stations have been cutting both staff and advertising rates, as have newspapers, reversing a decade-long trend of escalating media costs. Network news bureaus are closing, and local stations are covering less, relying more on feeds from syndicated news broadcasts.

The post Sample Assignment on positioning | Academic Master appeared first on Academic Master.

]]>
https://academicmaster.co.uk/2022/04/sample-assignment-on-positioning/feed/ 1
Pros and Cons of Death Penalty https://academicmaster.co.uk/2022/02/pros-and-cons-of-death-penalty/ https://academicmaster.co.uk/2022/02/pros-and-cons-of-death-penalty/#comments Mon, 14 Feb 2022 13:09:17 +0000 https://academicmaster.co.uk/?p=1015 Pros and Cons of Death Penalty The death penalty has existed since ancient times. In its early days, the death penalty imposed as punishment was

The post Pros and Cons of Death Penalty appeared first on Academic Master.

]]>
Pros and Cons of Death Penalty

The death penalty has existed since ancient times. In its early days, the death penalty imposed as punishment was a form of private justice. It was not applied by the state, but rather by the family or tribe of the person who had suffered damage  (G. Rabbah). With the appearance of God, the rationale for imposing the death penalty shifted from private revenge to a divine one. 

The first death penalty law was the lex talonis of the God of Hamurabi M.H. Reggio, 2008). Later, in the seventh century BC, the Draconian Code of Athens prescribed death as a punishment for all crimes. Finally, the Roman law of twelve tablets codified it in the fifth century BC (Death Penalty Information Center). As far as 437 BC, the usefulness of the death penalty was questioned. By arguing its non-deterrent effect, Diodotus persuaded the Athenian assembly to reverse its decision to execute all adult males of the city of Mitylene. 

The death penalty was applied during the Middle Ages in an arbitrary and discriminatory way. The feudal system gave many people, not only the king or emperor, the power to impose capital punishment. This expansion of power led to the arbitrary imposition of the death penalty by the Feudatories (When Life Generates Death (Legally)-History). Also in this period, the fusion of political and religious powers led to the imposition of the death penalty for crimes committed against church. Methods of applying the death penalty differed for nobility, freemen and slaves. In order to reduce pain, the nobles were executed by cutting off their heads, while the others experienced death by hanging or poison.

In the eighteenth century, various philosophers called for the abolition of the death penalty. Montesquieu, for example, called for its restriction to murder, attempted murder, certain types of manslaughter and some offences against property. Beccaria, on the contrary, did not call for its limitation but rather for its complete abolition. The writings of Beccaria ended the distinction in the application of the death penalty between poor and nobles, and his ideas led to the promulgation of a penal code in Tuscany that eliminated it entirely  (When Life Generates Death (Legally)-History)

From that time on, the abolitionist movement has been flourishing. Michigan was the first jurisdiction to abolish the death penalty in 1846. Twenty years later, Venezuela abolished the death penalty, the Netherlands followed suit in 1870 and Costa Rica in 1882. Likewise, Brazil and Ecuador abolished the death penalty in the late 1890s and Panama, which joined the club of the states of the world in 1903, has joined the abolitionist club  since its formation  (When Life Generates Death (Legally)-History)

The progress of the abolitionist movement was temporarily slowed with the rise of totalitarianism in Europe after World War Two, and it was not until 1948 that the abolitionist movement regained its strength. In 1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights legitimized the struggle towards abolition of the death penalty. Since World War Two, approximately one state per year has abolished the death penalty.

In his report submitted to the UN, Novel Morris reported that twelve countries were totally abolished by the end of 1965 and eleven were abolitionist for ordinary crimes (United Nations, Capital Punishment, 1967). Three decades later, Roger Hood reported that the number of abolitionist countries has been on an increase since the last report submitted to the UN by Norvel Morris. In his book, The Death Penalty: A Worldwide Perspective, Hood stated that fifty-eight countries are totally abolitionist, fourteen are abolitionist for ordinary crimes and thirty de facto abolitionists  (Hood, p. 12-13).

Over the years, the abolitionist movement has succeeded in persuading many previously retentionist countries that the death penalty is a deadly evil. Recently, more than half the countries of the world have abolished the death penalty de fecto or de jure. 

(If you are having trouble writing a dissertation and want a similar dissertation like this, then you should contact us to benefit from our dissertation writing services.)

Although an international customary norm that bans the imposition of the death penalty has not yet materialized, the fact is that the abolition of the death penalty is becoming increasingly accepted. This acceptance is paving the way for an international customary norm banning capital punishment altogether.

The Death Penalty in the United States of America

The application of the death penalty in the United States of America dates back to the colonial period  (Prinzo). The first person executed in the US was Captain George Kendall in 1608. Executed in the Jamestown colony of Virginia, Kendall was charged with spying for Spain  (Introduction to the Death Penalty). In the 17th century, the common law of England, which prevailed in the new colonies, stated that public hanging was the obligatory punishment for crimes committed against the state, the person and property. Thirteen crimes were punished by death in the US: idolatry, witchcraft, blasphemy, murder, assault in sudden anger, sodomy, buggery, adultery, statutory rape, rape, man stealing, perjury in a capital trial and rebellion. Following the American Revolution, the death penalty retained the obligatory nature that it had under the British colony (Walsh).

Over the years, and perhaps ironically, the mandatory nature of the death penalty proved to be one of the ways by which criminals could escape punishment. In the absence of jury discrimination, juries preferred to acquit a person whom they believed to be guilty yet not deserving of death. This problem found its solution in statutes that allowed a discriminatory death penalty. The first state to enact such a statute was Tennessee in 1838 (Walsh). In addition to reforms introduced by enacting new statutes that allowed for a discretionary death penalty, the 19th and 20th centuries carried also the hope of abolishing it. There were two attempts made to abolish the death penalty in the US. The first abolitionist round took place between the years 1897 and 1917. During that time, ten states abolished the death penalty, and the main factor that enhanced this abolitionist trend was the improvement in socio-economic conditions across the country. The same factor that led to the abolition of the death penalty in these ten states, however, also led to its reinstatement in eighth of them when socio-economic conditions once again deteriorated  (When Life Generates Death (Legally)-History)

The beginning of the 1970s introduced a second abolitionist round. Contrary to the first round, this abolitionist course was enhanced by factors of a legal nature. In 1972 the US Supreme Court ruled in Furman v. Georgia,[1] in a five-to-four decision, that the death penalty as administered under existing statutes was unconstitutional. In that case, the judges ruled that in the absence of any guidance to juries in the statutes of Georgia, there was a substantial risk that the death penalty would be imposed in an arbitrary and discriminatory manner. To declare the death penalty practice unconstitutional, the majority in Furman relied on the Eighth Amendment prohibition of cruel and the Fourteenth Amendment requirement of equal protection under the law  (Cole). The justices who based their argument on the prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment were Brennan and Marshal JJ. Brennan J. argued that the death penalty violated the concept of human dignity, and Marshall J. stated that the death penalty served no legitimate penal purpose. Douglas, Marshal, and Stewart JJ. Based their argument on both the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments (Cole).  These three judges wrote that the unlimited discretion of juries led to discrimination against the poor, powerless and black.

As a result of Furman, death penalty statutes in thirty-nine states were invalidated. The next step was thought to be the abolition of the death penalty. However, Furman instead led to the adoption of new death penalty statutes that limited the discretion of juries by presenting mitigating and aggravating circumstances. Most of the thirty-nine states responded to Furman by enacting new death penalty statutes. One year later, twenty states had enacted new death penalty statutes.

In 1976, the Supreme Court ruled on the constitutionality of the new death penalty statutes in Gregg. V. Georgia.[2] The “guided-discretion” statutes provide that all capital trials must proceed in two stages. In the first stage, the jury decides the guilt or innocence of the defendant. In the case of guilt, the trial will proceed to the second step, the penalty stage. During the second step and before reaching its decision, the jury considers the aggravating and mitigating circumstances. A decision to sentence the defendant to death can be reached if at least one aggravating circumstance is present. If a defendant is sentenced to death, the decision will be automatically appealed to the State Supreme Court, which must: (a) see if the punishment is proportional to the crime committed by the defendant; (b) make sure that the jury’s finding of an aggravating circumstance is supported by reliable evidence; and (c) determine if the sentence reached was influenced by any arbitrary factors.

The majority of the Court in Gregg found that the “guided-decision” statutes removed the possibility of rendering arbitrary and discriminatory death sentences. It stated: “No longer can a jury wantonly and freakishly impose the death sentence, it is always circumscribed by the legislative guidelines.  Two judges in Gregg dissented. Brennan J. stated in his dissent that “evolving standards of decency” should make the Court get rid of the death penalty because it is no longer accepted in our times. Brennan added that the death penalty violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. The second dissent[3]  was pronounced by Marshall J., who refused the death penalty by stating that it is not necessary to promote any legitimate notion of retribution and such a penalty has no deterrent effect. Similar to Brennan J., Marshall J. affirmed that the death penalty violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.

Following the reinstatement of executions as a result of the decision in Gregg, the number of execution has continuously increased. From twenty-one executions in 1984, the number rose to thirty-eight in 1993 and eight-five in 2000  (Current Information on the Death Penalty-Death Sentences and Executions in 2000). The following timeline of death penalty cases throws light on the significant cases which have been under discussions in the court of law at various time.

Death Penalty Timeline

1972   Furman v. Georgia: The U.S. Supreme Court effectively voids 40 state death penalty statutes and suspends capital punishment, ruling that death sentences are handed down arbitrarily, violating the Eighth Amendment prohibition against “cruel and unusual punishment.”
1976   Gregg v. Georgia: The U.S. Supreme Court upholds Georgia’s new death penalty statute, effectively opening the door for states to reinstate capital punishment.
1977   Gary Gilmore is executed by firing squad in Utah on Jan.17. He becomes the first person executed since the death penalty is reinstated. Oklahoma becomes the first state to adopt lethal injection as a means of execution after its state medical examiner, Jay Chapman, proposes the method. Coker v. Georgia: The U.S. Supreme Court prohibits executions for rape when the victim is not killed.
1982   Texas becomes the first state to use the lethal-injection method when it executes Charles Brooks Jr. on Dec. 7.
1984   North Carolina killer Velma Barfield on Nov. 2 becomes the first woman to be executed since the death penalty was reinstated.
1986 Ford v. Wainwright: The U.S. Supreme Court rules that executing the mentally insane is unconstitutional.
1988 Thompson v. Oklahoma: The U.S. Supreme Court rules that executing prisoners who were 15 or younger at the time of their crimes is unconstitutional.
1989   Stanford v. Kentucky and Wilkins v. Missouri: The U.S. Supreme Court rules that the death penalty is not prohibited under the Eighth Amendment for those who committed their crimes at ages 16 or 17. Penry v. Lynaugh: The U.S. Supreme Court rules that executing the mentally retarded does not violate the Eighth Amendment.
1993   Maryland prisoner Kirk Bloodsworth becomes the first death-row inmate to be freed because of DNA evidence.
1994 President Clinton signs the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, expanding the federal death penalty to 60 crimes.
1996 After the deadly bombing of a federal building in Oklahoma City, Okla., President Clinton signs the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, which restricts review of death-penalty cases in federal courts.
 1999   Pope John Paul II in January visits St. Louis, Mo., and calls for an end to capital punishment in the United States. He privately urges then-Missouri Gov. Carnahan (D) to commute the death sentence of convicted killer Darrell Mease, scheduled to be executed during the Pope’s visit. Carnahan commutes Mease’s sentence to life without parole.
2000 Illinois Gov. George Ryan (R) orders a moratorium on executions and appoints a commission to study flaws in the state’s death penalty system.
2001 Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh on June 11 becomes the first federal prisoner to be executed in 38 years.
2002 Ring v. Arizona: The U.S. Supreme Court rules that juries, not judges, should decide sentences of death. Atkins v. Virginia: The U.S. Supreme Court reverses its 1989 decision in Penry v. Lynaugh and prohibits executing the severely retarded based on the Eighth Amendment.
2003 Illinois Gov. Ryan commutes the death sentences of all 167 inmates on the state’s death row before leaving office in January.
2004 New York’s death penalty statute is declared unconstitutional by the state’s highest court in June. The Kansas Supreme Court voids its death penalty law in December.
2005 Roper v. Simmons: The U.S. Supreme Court reverses its 1989 decision in Stanford v. Kentucky and Wilkins v. Missouri and rules that executing juvenile offenders who were under 18 at the time of their crimes is unconstitutional.
2006 Kansas v. Marsh: The U.S. Supreme Court reinstates Kansas’ 1994 death penalty law, upholding the state’s practice during the sentencing phase of imposing the death penalty in cases where the jury is tied between life imprisonment and death. Hill v. McDonough: The U.S. Supreme Court rules that a death-row inmate in Florida may file a last-minute challenge to the state’s lethal-injection procedures even though he exhausted his regular appeals. Challenges to lethal injection put executions on hold in nine states: Arkansas, California, Delaware, Florida, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Missouri and South Dakota. In Florida, Gov. Jeb Bush (R) suspends all executions after the lethal injection of convicted murderer Angel Diaz takes 34 minutes, twice the normal time.
2007 Sept. 25, 2007: The U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear Baze v. Rees, an appeal by two Kentucky death-row inmates who argue that the chemical cocktail used to execute prisoners in 36 states is cruel and unusual. Hours later, Texas inmate Michael Richard is put to death using the same lethal-injection method challenged in the Kentucky case. Sept. 27, 2007: The U.S. Supreme Court stops the lethal injection of another Texas inmate, Carlton Turner, the first of several delays granted to death-row inmates and the beginning of a de facto nationwide moratorium on executions until Baze v. Rees is decided. December 2007: With a moratorium on lethal injections effectively in place, 2007 is on track to have fewer executions, 42, than any year since 1994.
2008 Baze v. Rees: The U.S. Supreme Court upholds the constitutionality of Kentucky’s lethal injection procedure, holding that the administration of a three-drug cocktail does not violate the Constitution’s prohibition of “cruel and unusual punishment.” After a seven-month, nationwide moratorium, several states resume executions by lethal injection. Hearing arguments in Kennedy v. Louisiana, the U.S. Supreme Court considers whether the death penalty may be imposed on those convicted of raping a child.

(Source: Stateline.org reporting)

The continuous increase in the number of executions can be understood as an assertion of its constitutionality. In other words, an observer may be convinced that due to the impossibility of a constitutional challenge, courts apply the death penalty whenever they feel the gravity of the crime deserve such a punishment. A closer look at the number of people executed and their cases shows that the death penalty practice can still be challenged under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment.

The main debate surrounding the issue of capital punishment is its constitutionality. Death penalty proponents believe that the death penalty is an integral part of our criminal justice system and reserved for offenders who commit the most heinous of crimes, while death opponents believe in the sanctity of life for any reason. Capital punishment has been applied to both genders at all levels of competency. It has affected the lives of adults, juveniles and nearly all races of mankind.

The continuation of the death penalty raises several arguments. Capital punishment was a volatile issue in 20th century and continues to be a morally divisive topic in the 21st century. The underlying ideology of those who support capital punishment appears to be the notion of retribution and the concept of a safer society based on the theory of general deterrence. The following questions need to be examined when determining the validity of that premise: (a) is the death penalty a general deterrence to future criminal activity?, (b) is it morally acceptable to take a life in the name of justice?, (c) is the death penalty a form of cruel and unusual punishment? And (d) should an offender with a mental deficiency be a candidate for execution?

The questions are at the core of the issue and make capital punishment one of the most controversial topics facing society today. Thus, it is an intensely debated moral dilemma that affects the consciousness of Americans from every walk of life.

Both legal and moral issues need to be examined when addressing capital punishment. The moral issues are seeded within ethics, values, religious beliefs, and emotions. Thus, they play a pivotal role in representing some of the contrasting differences between death penalty proponents and death penalty opponents. The law has historically evolved from the moral majority. Many, if not all of our laws, represent society’s morals and value system. As with any society, laws are continually changing to reflect people’s ideological shifts and technological advances. Thus, the paradigm regarding the legality and morality of capital punishment transform accordingly. It is of significance to note that statistical variances can be noticed as paradigm change.

Since its inception, the death penalty has been carried out in a number of ways. Some appear to be inhumane and bring about vociferous protest by opponents of the death penalty. Others seem to be more practical in terms of the euthanasia for lack of a better term of a criminal adjudicated guilty of a capital crime. For example, lethal injection appears to be a peaceful way to die. It seems remarkably subtle how one lies on a gurney and slowly slips from life to death. Those who oppose capital punishment might contend that this method is the lesser of two evils; however, proponents of the death penalty might suggest that the victim experienced immense pain and suffering before dying an untimely death.        

Capital punishment by lethal injection may be too easy of a sentence for a premeditated killer. Those who pursue strict retribution through capital punishment might sanction a more harsh application of death. More severe types of execution have included the gas chamber, electric chair, firing squad and hanging. In contemporary America, the gas chamber is permissible in 5 states, electricity in 10, hanging and firing squad in 3 respectively. It should be noted that all of the states that have capital punishment legislation now allow for lethal injection as an alternative. Death by lethal injection is also the method of choice by the Federal government  (Death Penalty Information Center)

There were several national trends during the 19th century that affected the number of people executed in the United States. These trends include the following: (1) the invention of the first and second degree murder statutes, (2) the authorization of sentencing duties by a trial jury, (3) a reduction in the number of capital crimes that permitted the death penalty as a sentencing option, (4) the elimination of public executions, and (5) the introduction of more efficient methods of carrying-out executions. As the debate over the appropriateness of the penalty transcended generations, so to did the trends.

Political Aspects of Death Penalty

While a great deal of research has been done about many aspects of the death penalty, very little attention has been paid to the movement organized against it. As this study aims to look at the death penalty from different aspects, it would also analyse the death penalty issue from political perspective in order to investigate the external and internal factors that shape the anti-death penalty movement.

When we look at the successes and failures of the anti-death penalty movement, the role of political opportunities and constraints is apparent. The death penalty was successfully abolished from 1972-1976, largely due to the legal and institutional openings created by the Civil Rights Movement  (Haines). The Civil Rights Movement dramatically transformed American politics, redefining traditional politics as necessarily racial politics  (Winant). Indeed, the anti-death penalty movement and other racially-based movements were impacted by the political opportunity structure created by the Civil Rights Movement such that they collectively “transformed the meaning and contours of American culture” (Winant).. In 1963, civil rights attorney and the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund joined forces to highlight the racial disparities in capital sentencing. The ACLU later joined in this effort as well, as this coalition of lawyers began to attack the constitutionality of the death penalty for  white and  black offenders alike (Haines p. 13-14).

The success of the anti-death penalty movement was short-lived, however, for the dominant legalistic strategy during the period prior to the Furman ruling came with a significant cost. The dominant role played by the lawyers during this stage of the anti-death penalty movement had “contributed to the withering away of whatever was left of citizen-based, political abolitionism” (Haines p. 45). The movement’s size was very small during this time and protest against the death penalty did not begin to grow again until after the 1976 Gregg decision, which ruled that appropriate legal safeguard, could ensure the constitutionality of the death penalty.

Resistance to the death penalty in the US is experiencing a renaissance unseen since its  1960s heyday when it influenced a  1972 United States Supreme  Court  decision  that  stated  capital  punishment  could  not  be imposed arbitrarily and unfairly. The self-imposed state moratorium on executions that followed this decision ended in Utah with the 1977 firing squad death of Gary Gilmore. Prior to Gilmore’s execution The Supreme Court had in 1976 approved a model it thought would avoid death penalty unfairness in future cases.

Unfairness Continues

Another aspect which has aroused controversy for the death penalty is the racial discrimination which has been widely discussed. Today there is little faith in the idea that the death penalty is imposed fairly. Racial discrimination continues at the jury level. All white juries are still convicting blacks  (Yardley). Not surprisingly current data indicate that since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976, 11 white defendants have been executed for killing black victims, while 161 black defendants have been executed for murdering white victims (Death Penalty Information Center 2001).

The scale on which death penalty defendants have had inept defense attorneys is well documented, and a key to the current resistance. Recently a federal judge stated that it was a legal fiction that death penalty defendants receive a full measure of effective assistance of counsel.

Closely related to the issues of disproportionality and inept representation is the question of executing offenders with an intelligence quotient (IQ) of 70 or below, that is, mentally retarded. In Kentucky this refers to defendants  with  significant  sub-average  intellectual  functioning  existing concurrently  with  substantial  deficits  in  adaptive  behaviour  manifested during the developmental period. Thirteen years ago in 1989 when The Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution permitted the execution of mentally retarded people only two of the 38 death penalty states prohibited execution of the retarded  (Rimer). The Court revisited the issue during its 2001/2002 session, first with McCarver v. North Carolina, a death case in which the defendant has an IQ of 67. This case became moot in late 2001 when North Carolina banned executions of the retarded.

Later in mid-summer 2002, the court declared in the first of two rulings, Atkins v. Virginia, that it was excessive and inappropriate to execute mentally retarded offenders  (Greenhouse L.). In its 6-3 landmark vote the court accepted the argument that the national mood had indeed changed since its 1989 ruling. Now the number of states barring execution of the retarded is 18 (Greenhouse L). The impact of Atkins v. Virginia is highly debatable. The court did not offer guidelines on how to apply the new prohibition – that is now up to the individual states. The strength of the national consensus is also questionable. Less than half , 47%, of the 38 states with capital  punishment  have  banned  it  for  mentally  retarded  offenders. Coupled with the fact that state-level political opposition to court’s decision is strong in some states where capital punishment is popular, this leaves open the issue of the number of people who will be removed from death row, or prevented in the future being sentenced to death. When in 2000, Governor  ‘W’  Bush  was  campaigning  for  the  presidency  he  opposed banning the execution of retarded people. His successor in Texas vetoed a bill prohibiting such executions based on the logic that Texas already had provisions to prohibit executing the retarded, despite the fact that in recent years Texas has executed six mentally retarded convicts, and now has seven more on death row.

The second decision, Ring v. Arizona, decided that juries rather than judges must make the crucial factual determination that subjected an offender to the death penalty. This decision ‘invalidated the death penalty laws in five states and cast doubt on the laws of four others’ (Greenhouse 2002c). Coming only four days after Atkins v. Virginia, this ruling at first gave the appearance of a new momentum within the Supreme Court against the death penalty. It was instead addressing an issue raised previously when a New Jersey hate-crime law permitted the imposition of a higher sentence than the statutory maximum if a judge found that a crime was committed with a biased motive.  Together Atkins and Ring are expected to save hundreds of lives of those now on death row.

Another problem involves what has become known as geographical unfairness. In August 2001, a new study confirmed that in Nebraska, capital punishment was applied unequally in rural and urban areas, a discrepancy with subtle racial implications (because more blacks live in urban areas). The same study reported that in Nebraska the death penalty flowed down-ward – defendants whose victims were affluent were more likely to get the death penalty  (Belluck). In late December 2001, the Kansas Supreme Court ruled that its death penalty was unfair and had to be changed. At issue was ‘the requirement that defendants be sentenced to death even if the aggravating factors . . . [did] . . . not outweigh the mitigating circumstances …’ (New York Times).

The specter of executing those wrongfully convicted is probably the major reason that opposition to capital punishment is growing in the US. Since the death penalty was reinstated in 1973, 98 innocent death row inmates have been freed, 16 between April 2000 and July 2001  (More death-penalty doubts). According to a Columbia University report, June 2000, for 28 states between 1973 and 1995 that had death penalty appeals, 68% of the death sentences were found to be so legally flawed as to be reversed (Barton 2000). A follow-up study reported that states and counties that used the death penalty the most were the ones most likely to make flawed verdicts  (Court finds death penalty used unfairly in Kansas).

Combined with surveys reporting that as many as 67% of North Carolina’s population think innocent people have been executed within the last 25 years, it is unsurprising that support for capital punishment is waning  (Taylor D). Indeed, public support for capital punishment while still high has declined to a 19-year low. It is within this context that resistance to the death penalty is flourishing.

Death Penalty Abolition

Abolition is an oft-cited alternative to the death penalty; however, few organised voices of resistance put this on their ‘meet the public’ presentations because of the relative strength of the population that still supports capital punishment. Abolitionists’ arguments based on the immorality of state-sponsored executions have little plausibility with the public. More purchase for the resistance movement has been found on ‘practical’ grounds, which has helped to strengthen arguments for death penalty alternatives.

Life without parole

Life without parole (LWOP) is an option that is already available in 46 states and the federal courts (USA Today 2001b). Its appeal is based on the idea that life without parole provides certitude of punishment, discourages grandstanding by prosecutors who use death penalty cases for career enhancement, avoids allowing painful real and symbolic confrontations between unrepentant criminals and victims’ families and their supporters, and it eliminates the risk of deadly errors (USA Today 2001b). Recently a national poll found that support for capital punishment dropped to 55% when LWOP was offered as an alternative. LWOP does not appear to have much attraction to prosecutors  and  judges,  who  according  to  some  observers  seek  death  penalty sentences because they see them as saleable fodder for election and re-election campaigns. In one well-documented instance a judge repeatedly denied telling a jury it could use LWOP, when in fact it could use it.

Public opinion: Growing bipartisan support for moratoriums has occurred in recent years at city, state and federal levels more so than for calls for abolition. A Kentucky Catholic priest opposed to capital punishment stated: ‘I’ll support a moratorium as a strategy in order to get the issues of capital punishment before the public; we’ll use it to educate the public’ (Dalehanty).  Just what moratorium supporters hope to accomplish varies greatly. Some states favour them so that a commission can study death penalty flaws so as to fix them. Groups in other states, including Texas, favour provisions to ensure DNA testing for capital defendants and death-row inmates. There is fairly wide agreement that indigent capital defendants should have improved legal representation, especially those whose crimes are most likely to get death sentences. The most talked about ‘fix it’ measure has concerned executing the mentally retarded.

In a surprising show of bi-partisan cohesion in early 2000 (before the November presidential election) the US Senate saw the introduction of the Innocence Protection Act (IPA). It was designed to create legislation that would require those facing the death penalty to be represented by a qualified attorney, and give defendants access to DNA testing that may not have been available at the time of their trial. Later the same year and still before the national elections and the Florida recount debacle, another bi-partisan group of Senators and Representatives released a poll that they claimed demonstrated overwhelming public support for significantly reforming the nation’s death penalty system. According to the poll, 80% of Americans supported reforming or abolishing the death penalty. The report also found that 64% of the nation favoured suspending executions entirely until issues of fairness in capital punishments could be solved. Clearly, according to a Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt): ‘The people are ahead of the politicians -they know the death penalty machinery is broken’  (Stout).

One nationally respected editor argued in mid-May 2002, that it might be politically advantageous for the Democrat party to call for a national moratorium before the next presidential election. Such a move, he argued, might not only attract conservative Republicans disturbed by their party’s continued pro-death and anti-abortion agenda, it might also attract stronger voter turnout from African-Americans because they have been the disproportion-ate victims of capital punishment. A Democratic call for a national moratorium would also likely appeal to former party members who switched to the Republican party because, in part or whole, presidential candidate Bill Clinton flew home from campaigning to execute a mentally retarded murderer in Arkansas  (Beinart)

City council

In addition to national bi-partisan support for IPA several organisations are calling for moratoriums. Of particular note because it comes out of the south and because it was supported by clergy, civic leaders, lawyers and citizen’s groups, is Charlotte, NC’s city council. Urged by a Republican supporter of the death penalty in a state that sentences about 25 people a year to death – more per capita than other states including Texas -in Fall 2000 the council adopted a moratorium on executions. Charlotte became the seventh and largest municipality in NC to pass such a resolution since mid-1999. More than two dozen other municipalities had adopted moratorium resolutions by November 2000, including Philadelphia, Atlanta, Baltimore and San Francisco  (Rimer). It is doubtful that the city moratoria reflect a rural-urban split as much as it reflects civil rights activism that has a long history of being grounded in urban politics.

States

In January 2000, Illinois Governor George Ryan, a Republican who supports capital punishment cited the exoneration of 13 death row inmates since Illinois had re-adopted the death penalty in  1977, as the reason he would approve no more executions until the system had been studied. His reassessment coincided with the intense media coverage scrutiny given to Governor George W. Bush’s presidential campaign and his unflinching support for capital punishment in Texas, which leads the nation in executions. Nebraska’s Legislature approved of a moratorium in 1999, but its governor vetoed it. Later the legislature approved financing for a study of the death penalty system, as have Legislatures in Illinois, Maryland and Indiana. North Carolina’ Governor James B. Hunt, a Democrat, however thinks that his state’s death penalty system works fairly, and that a moratorium is unnecessary.

Church-based groups: Nationally both Catholics and Quakers have created specific organisations opposed to the death penalty, but spiritually based resistance is also found among personnel in secular organisations. In midsummer 2000, the Quixote Center, an interfaith organisation that tracks death-penalty issues, stated that at least 860 grass-roots organisations were lobbying for a moratorium on executions  (Barton)

Prison writers: Within the last 25 years a promising and abundant crop has emerged from the oppressive and barren confines of US prisons – prisoner writers. They have in no small measure brought a significant, authoritative and persuasive voice to abolition and moratorium camps. An exemplary example is Mumia Abu-Jamal, whom  (Davis) called ‘the country’s most well-known death row prisoner’. In 1995 he published Live From Death Row (Abu-Jamal 1995), which links capital punishment to racism and classism. He and other prisoner writers have placed their work in scholarly and popular journals, books and prison publications including the Angolite from Louisiana’s Angola Prison and Prison Legal News from Washington State Prison.

Pros and Cons of Death Penalty

Pros

Undoubtedly, taking a life is the supreme expression of a state’s power over its citizens. It should not be used without offering the accused every possible opportunity to present evidence that may keep the state out of the unimaginable position of executing the innocent.

Today, science provides the criminal justice system with a means of definitively answering many questions of guilt or innocence without eyewitness testimony or circumstantial evidence. There have been great, new, scientific and technological advances in DNA and forensic evidence testing that can explore evidence previously unusable.

However, we should not overemphasize technology. Minorities and the poor often cannot pay for adequate or competent representation. They cannot afford “dream teams” who negotiate with prosecutors to eliminate the possibility of a death sentence before a trial begins — as with O.J. Simpson. Innocent people are often unable to adequately address their legal problems with definitive evidence of their innocence.

In the past, many complained that death row inmates were given too many chances to appeal a conviction, dragging out the process for years and tying up the courts. So, Congress passed the Anti-terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), limiting an inmate’s right to appeal a capital conviction. However, in doing so, Congress also limited the ability of Americans wrongfully convicted to prove their innocence.

The Death Penalty Information Center reported that the average time between a capital conviction and execution is eight years. The average time that innocent people have spent on death row before proving their innocence is seven years. The provisions in AEDPA effectively cut the time between sentencing and execution in half, thus, virtually guaranteeing that innocent people will be executed.

 Cons

In this world of laws, our justice system will inevitably have some flaws. However, capital punishment is not one of them. If there is a defect, it is in the way we administer it.

From before the 1972 Supreme Court decision that outlawed it, to after the 1976 decision that reinstated it, the death penalty has been a topic of debate. It is described as racist, unreliable and ineffective. But no matter how detractors twist the issue, the vast majority of Americans continue to support this type of punishment.

It must be remembered that there is another party besides the murderer involved in every murder, and that is the victim. By the unjustified taking of another’s life, the murderer has forfeited his own.

We are not obligated to support murderers for the rest of their natural life. If one murderer is granted life in prison while another is executed, it is only because of the extraordinary degree of leniency that we have in our American system of jurisprudence, and not because of any intrinsic unfairness.

Critics of capital punishment have sought to hobble it in every way possible. And the statistics they use to try and justify its abolition are misleading. As Mark Twain once said, “First get your facts; then you can distort them at your leisure.” The fact is, however, the facts are just not there.

Some charge that capital punishment is racist. But the rates of execution reveal that white murderers are twice as likely to be executed as their black counterparts.

Others say that no deterrent effect is produced by capital punishment. The rub here is that it is impossible to prove the effect of something that didn’t happen. Common sense tells us that some people refrain from murder because they fear death themselves, many others refrain from it because they consider it socially reprehensible; one of the reasons they consider it reprehensible is because people are put to death for it.

We don’t need a moratorium on the death penalty. What we need is a death penalty applied in a more consistent and timely manner that will serve as a more effective deterrent to would-be murderers.

The skepticism and hesitancy currently found in the US regarding the death penalty is a hopeful sign that America is well on its way to joining most of the world’s countries on this ancient form of punishment. Clearly international pressure on this subject puts the US in an awkward and untenable position as a world leader  (Hood). At the moment, however, there are two reasons why it is not clear whether domestic doubt and international pressures are enough to abolish capital punishment. Firstly, death penalty resistance is not the beneficiary of a broader movement such as the civil rights movement of the 1960s to 1970s when voting rights, opposition to the Vietnam War and other issues helped fan the flames of moral indignation and demands for reforms. Today it seems that death penalty resistance is a one-off subject that struggles to get attention in the face of dropping crime rates and the economic attractiveness of prison growth (Kilborn). Secondly, capital punishment still has core appeal in a nation with more guns per capita than any nation in the world. If, however, LWOP can be shown to be good for local economies, safe for various forms of political careers, capital punishment just might disappear for lack of use (Kilborn).

An exception might be created for political criminals whose behaviour is as horrendous as that of Timothy McVeigh. Some observers have argued that McVeigh makes a strong case for capital punishment – a well represented guilty white killer who came from a caring family ostensibly free of any of the mitigating factors so often found in the background of those on death row  (Mcgrory). Such arguments fail to be persuasive because they ignore, or at the very least they minimise the fact that state-based executions are no different from the wrong-headed sense of ‘duty’ that drove McVeigh to kill 168 people. More directly, until there is a spiritual thirst in the US to abolish capital punishment, abolitionists will, rightly, continue to argue that in executing murderers the state and its citizens lower themselves to the same moral level as the murders

Works Cited

Barton, P. “Efforts to put death penalty on hold continues to grow.” USA Today 6 July 2000: 5A.

Beinart, P. New Life. The New Republic, 2002.

Cole, D. No Equal Justice: Race and Class in the American Justice System. New York: The New Press, 1999.

“Court finds death penalty used unfairly in Kansas.” New York Times 30 December 2001: A-18.

Current Information on the Death Penalty-Death Sentences and Executions in 2000. 10 May 2008 <http://www.amnest.org>.

D, Taylor. “New Poll finds North Carolinians overwhelmingly support death penalty moratorium.” North Carolina Academy of Trial Lawyers 29 June 2001.

Dalehanty, Father Parick. Kentucky Coalition to abolish the Death Penalty J.R Lilly. 24 July 2001.

Davis, Angella. “Writing on the wall: prisoners on punishment’.” Punishment and Society 3(3) (2001): 427-31.

Death Penalty Information Center. Washington, D.C, 2001.

Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972).

G. Rabbah, Oukoubat Al-Ihdam. Haal Am Mouchkila? Beirut: Nawafal Coporation, 1987.

Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 (1976).

Haines, Herbert. Against Capital Punishment: The Anti-Death Penalty Movement in America. New York: Oxford University Press, 1972-1994.

Hood, R. The Death Penalty: A World-wide perspective. Oxford: Clarendom, 1996.

Introduction to the Death Penalty. 10 May 2008 <htt.://deathpenaltyinfo.org/history1.html>.

Kilborn, P.T. “Rural towns turn to prisons to reignite their economies.” New York Times 1 August 2001: A-16.

L., Greenhouse. “’Citing “National Consensus”, Justice bar death penalty for retarded defendants’.” 12 Februray 2002b: A-21.

L., Greenhouse. ‘Top court hears argument on execution of retarded’, New York Times, 12 February 2002a: A-21

Mcgrory, M. “New surey shows overwhelming majority supports changing the death penalty.” Press Release, New Orleans, LA 15 September 2000: A-18.

M.H. Reggio. Frontline-History of the Death Penalty. Online: Frontline ,http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/execution/readings/history.html> date accessed 10th May 2008

“More death-penalty doubts.” US Today 5 July 2001a.

New York Times (2001) ‘Court finds death penalty used unfairly in Kansas’, 30 December, A-18

P, Belluck. “Bebraska is siad to use death penalty unequally.” New York Times 2 August 2001: A-13.

Prinzo, K.T. “The United States – ‘Capital’ of the World: An Analysis of why the United States practices capital punishment while the international trend is towards its abolition.” 24 Brooklyn J. Int’l L (1999): 855.

S, Rimer. “Support for moratoriums in executions gets stronger.” 31 October 2000: A-18.

Stout, D. “Law makers see hope for help on death cases.” New York Times 14 September 2000: A-20 col. 1.

United Nations, Capital Punishment, Development 1961 to 1965. (Report Presented by N. Morris) 1967

Walsh, T. J. “On the Abolition of Man: A Discussion of the Moral and Legal Issues Surrounding the Death Penalty.” 44 Cleveland State Law REv. (1994): 23.

When Life Generates Death (Legally)-History. 10 May 2008 <http://library.thinkquest.org/23685/data/history.html >.

Winant, Howard. Racial Conditions. . Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1994.

Yardley, J. “Execution approaches in a most rare murder case.” 10 August 2001: A-10.


[1] Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972).

[2] Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 (1976).

[3] Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 (1976). At 231-241

The post Pros and Cons of Death Penalty appeared first on Academic Master.

]]>
https://academicmaster.co.uk/2022/02/pros-and-cons-of-death-penalty/feed/ 2
How to Write Dissertation Introduction Chapter – Academic Master https://academicmaster.co.uk/2020/02/dissertation-introduction-2/ Wed, 12 Feb 2020 08:10:12 +0000 https://www.academicmaster.co.uk/?p=604 The important chapters of a dissertation are the literature review and the conclusion. But the introduction chapter is the most important as it serves as

The post How to Write Dissertation Introduction Chapter – Academic Master appeared first on Academic Master.

]]>
The writer’s focus must be on the point that after having a glimpse of the introduction chapter, the reader must be able to understand what the dissertation is about, what case study is going to be studied in the paper, and the implementation of the arguments in the practical. So, the introduction chapter must clarify the hidden ambiguities and must help the reader to understand the pros and cons of the research topic.

Write your Thesis Statement:

As a basic step, the dissertation introduction chapter must comprise of the thesis statement. It is very important that through your thesis statement, you may impart a good understanding of your topic to your readers. The introduction is very formal and it provides exact information and certain key points such as thesis statement, research question, hypotheses and aims and objectives of the study. Keeping in view these points, the writer has to expose a lot of information within the very beginning paragraph. Here, you have to make aware the writer about the main theme, the research question, subject matter, research methodology, and the core argument. You may also want to explain your research perspective.

Thus the introduction might pave the way to the entire dissertation. It will serve as a guide for the reader to know about the other chapters of the research work. So, it can be said that the introduction generates the expectations of the reader. Make sure that at the end of the dissertation, you should be able to relate your whole work with the introduction. As the introduction is planned to interconnect the complete dissertation together, so it is written at the last stage of dissertation writing. The reason is that at the final stage, you may better understand the applied research methodologies and research findings.

The Formation:

The dissertation introduction can be written in several ways, but it mainly depends on the type of your research topic. You may start your introduction with a fascinating quotation or an intrepid declaration. The main purpose is to draw the attention of the reader from the very beginning of the write-up. You must keep in mind the point that at the end of reading your written work, the readers may not think of wasting their time and energies. So you have to try your level best to enhance their reading ability. For this, you have to keep a balance between the provided information and the interest of the reader by using flowery language.

Before starting the writing project, you must gather and shortlist all the information. Your style of writing will enable you to create an influential argument. As the introduction consists of a thesis statement, the research questions, an outline of concepts and research methodology, and the scope and significance of work, the main point to arrange all the relevant topics in a sequence.

Review your introduction:

The introduction chapter serves as the base for the remaining chapters and the arrangement of the whole dissertation writing. Here, you may not have to describe the detailed arguments, analyze data, or provide the information relevant to the main body of your dissertation. The introduction is to place up the thesis statement by providing background information to the readers to enable him/her to clearly understand the research objectives. Also, the introduction chapter should be brief and convincing. Generally, the introduction comprises 10% of the entire write up.

Want to Write a Dissertation Introduction?:

If you are striving to write an impressive dissertation introduction, just take help from expert UK dissertation writing service where you will be assisted by highly qualified and professional dissertation writers. These writers can put your dreams into reality by using their best expertise and you will achieve your goals with guaranteed success. UK’s best dissertation writing service can help you at every stage of your dissertation writing from the topic selection to writing a research proposal, dissertation introduction, literature review, research methodology, data analysis and finally the conclusion. Your success and the best grades are our main concern.

The post How to Write Dissertation Introduction Chapter – Academic Master appeared first on Academic Master.

]]>
Best Tips to Improve Academic Writing Services – Academic Minds https://academicmaster.co.uk/2020/02/academic-minds/ Wed, 12 Feb 2020 07:56:01 +0000 https://www.academicmaster.co.uk/?p=594 The skill of academic writing is a very basic and essential skill that must be developed and possessed by all the students for a successful

The post Best Tips to Improve Academic Writing Services – Academic Minds appeared first on Academic Master.

]]>

Keep in mind the mental level of your readers: Academic report writing is usually done for extremely learned and educated personnel who are already aware of the basic knowledge of the topic. The readers of such academic minds do not need a thorough introduction and details of the topic. So, the general advice is to write your academic papers by keeping in mind the mental and academic level of your readers. In this way, you can easily convey your viewpoint to the relevant audience without wasting your time and energy.

Relate your academic topic with previous researches: Before writing an academic paper, a lot of research and knowledge is required. By searching for and shortlisting the relevant data and information and already published reports on a selected topic, a student can be able to write up to date and revealing papers that are not only in reliance with the previous research but also present the writer’s ideas and thoughts about the topic.

Stuck to the topic: It is suggested in academic writing that the introductory paragraph of the academic paper should possess a brief introduction to the topic. It should also serve as an outline of the main points that are going to be covered in the whole of academic writing. This part of the paper relates the reader with the topic and from the very first paragraph, the reader can guess about the material being presented in the paper. To serve the purpose of introduction, a brief abstract is written at the beginning of almost all the academic writings so that the readers can easily understand the outline of the topic.

Create a thesis statement: In academic writing, the stage of creating a thesis statement and delineating the underneath facts for the statement is one of the most effectual writing structures. For successful academic writing, the presentation of hypotheses with supportive details to prove its validity is a very basic point to be kept in mind.

Present supporting details and evidence: An important point to be considered in mind in academic writing is to attach the details of all the relevant list of sources and references used to collect the relevant data and information. It is an essential point that academic writing must comprise of the detailed bibliographic list. This list will enable the researchers and readers to easily locate and search for the relevant supporting details used by the author and weigh up the paper’s data and information in a logical way.

Enlighten the readers: The main purpose of writing an academic paper is to enlighten and inform the readers about the research topic. So, all the ideas and opinions of academic writing must be supported with solid evidence. The credibility of an academic mind can be proved by the sources and suggestions used to write a perfect academic publication.

Ignore flowery language: The main object of academic writing is to inform rather than impress the readers. The use of flowery language and irrelevant metaphors and similes’ may add charm to the writing but cannot enable an average reader to understand the main theme easily. So, academic writing may be done in a language that is clear, concise and according to the academic and mental level of the readers.

Be somewhat stylish: The simplicity of academic writings doesn’t mean that you should not follow the requirements of academic writings. Rather, a specific style and format must be adopted to make a paper acceptable by your tutors and institutions. By using the opposite style by following its recommendations, a writer may be able to improve the quality of writing and the acceptance and success of the written document can be ensured manifold.

Editing is must: The process of editing is mandatory in academic writing. Right from vocabulary to format, style and structure, the importance of editing cannot be ignored at any cost. The process of editing will enable a writer to make the written paper succinct and influential. Editing may enhance the serenity and authority of the written paper.

Proofreading makes a paper perfect: Before the final submission of an academic writing project, the writers should make it 100% sure that their written papers are free from all types of spelling or grammatical mistakes. The authority of an academic report can be ensured manifold after getting help from a professional and reliable proofreading service that is capable to offer academic proofreading, dissertation proofreading, essay proofreading, and thesis proofreading.

The post Best Tips to Improve Academic Writing Services – Academic Minds appeared first on Academic Master.

]]>