Contents
PREFACE xiii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS xviii
PART 1 Emphasizing Local and Global Sustainability in the on-Demand and Sharing economies
1 Digital Transformation
Disrupts Companies, Competition, and Careers Locally and Globally 1
Case 1.1 Opening Case: Uber and Airbnb Innovative Digital Business Models Facilitate Global Expansion and Operational Resilience During the COVID-19 Pandemic 2
Introduction 4
1.1 Doing Business in the On-Demand and Sharing Economies 5
Disruptive Digital Business Models 7
IT’s Role in the On-Demand and Sharing Economies 8
IT—Business Objectives 8
1.2 Business Process Improvement and Competition 10 What Is a Business Process? 11 Improving Business Processes 12 Don’t Automate, Obliterate! 12 Competition 13
1.3 IT Innovation and Disruption 15 Social–Mobile–Analytics–Cloud (SMAC) Model 15
Technology Mega Trends 16
COVID-19 Accelerates Digital Transformation 18 Lessons Learned 19
1.4 IT and You 20
On-Demand ‘Gig’ Workers 21
IT Adds Value to Your Performance and Career 22
Managing and Interpreting Big Data Are High Demand Skills 23
Becoming an Informed IT User 26
Case 1.2 Business Case: The IoT Comes to Sports 29
Case 1.3 Video Case: Creating a Digital Vision to Transform a Company and Improve the Customer Experience 30
2 Information Systems, IT Infrastructure, and the Cloud 31
Case 2.1 Opening Case: The Amazing Story of Tommy Flowers—Creator of the First Programmable Computer 32
Introduction 33
2.1 IS Concepts and Classification 34 IT Adds Value 34 Six Components of an IS 35
Data, Information, Knowledge, and Wisdom 36 Types of Information Systems 37
Transaction Processing System 38
Management Information System 40
Decision Support Systems 40
Executive Information System 41 ISs Exist within Corporate Culture 43
2.2 IT Infrastructure, IT Architecture, and Enterprise Architecture 43 Adding Value with an EA 44
Measuring EA Success 45
EA and Sustainability 46
Developing an EA 47
EA Must Be Dynamic and Evolving 48
2.3 Data Centers and Cloud Computing 48
Data Centers 49
Data Virtualization 50
Cloud Computing 53
Cloud Infrastructure 53
Moving Workloads from the Enterprise to the Cloud 53
Cloud Services 54 Anything-as-a-Service (XaaS) Models 54
Selecting a Cloud Vendor 57
2.4 Virtualization and Virtual Machines 59
Case 2.2 Business Case: Grupo AGORA Upgrades IT to Quench the Thirst of Millions Throughout Spain 64
3 Data Management, Data Warehouses, and Data Governance 66
Case 3.1 Opening Case: ThyssenKrupp Elevator Saves $1.5 Million and 900 Trees by Digitizing Documents 67
Introduction 68
3.1
3.2
Data Management 69
Database Technologies 69
Databases 70
Centralized Databases 71
Distributed Databases 72
Database Management System (DBMS) 73
Elements of a DBMS 73
Benefits of a DBMS 79
DBMS Vendor Rankings 80
Data Warehouses and Data Marts 81
Moving Data from a Database to a Data Warehouse or a Data Mart 81
Building and Using a Data Warehouse 82
Real-Time Support from an Active Data
Warehouse 83
Data Lakes 85
3.3
Data Governance and Master Data Management (MDM) 85
Data Governance 85
Master Data and Master Data Management (MDM) 87
Benefits of Data Governance and Master Data Management 89
Information Management 90
Data Life Cycle and Data Principles 90
Harnessing Scattered Data 91
Breaking Down Data Silos 91
Culture Must Change 92
Garbage In, Garbage Out 93
The Cost of Dirty Data 94
3.5
Electronic Document, Record, and Content
Management 96
Electronic Document Management 97
Electronic Document Management Systems 97
Electronic Records Management 97
Legal Duty to Retain Business Records 98
Electronic Records Management Systems 99
Enterprise Content Management 100
Enterprise Content Management Systems 100
Choosing an EDMS, ERMS, or ECMS 100
Case 3.2 Business Case: Dirty Data Jeopardize University Fundraising Efforts 104
4.2
Local Area network (LAn) 111
Wide Area network (WAn) 112
Intranets, Extranets, and Virtual Private networks 113
Transmission Media and Speed 114
network Components 115
Circuit Switching vs. Packet Switching 115
network Applications 116
Wireless Networks and Standards 117
Differences Between 4G and 5G networks 118
Advantages and Disadvantages of 5G 118
There Is a Growing need for 5G 118
Wireless network Standards 119
Wireless Connectivity 120
Wireless networks Use Different Transmission Media 122
Wireless network Technologies 123
4.3 Mobile Computing and the Internet of Things (IoT) 127
Mobile network Drivers 127
More Smartphone Use 128
More High-Capacity networks 128
Faster Broadband Speeds 128
More Mobile Video 129
Benefits of Mobile Computing 129
Mobile Technologies 129
Examples of nFC Applications and Their Potential
Business Value 131
The Internet of Things 132
Factors Driving IoT 133
IoT Architecture 133
The Growth of IoT 134
Advantages and Disadvantages of IoT 136
Edge Computing 137
Edge Architecture and Apps 138
Industry Applications of Edge Computing 138
Choosing Mobile Computing Solutions 138 networks Support Communication, Search, Collaboration and Relationships 139
4.4 Network Quality of Service 142 net neutrality 142
Quality of Service Models 143
and Edge Computing
107
4 networks, the Internet of Things (IoT),
Case 4.1 Opening Case: Cedar Park, Texas Improves Customer Communications to Empower Them to Conserve Water through Its New Smart Water Network 108
Introduction 109
4.1 Network Fundamentals 109
Business Functions Supported by Computer networks 110
Types of networks 111
Case 4.2 Business Case: Carnival Seeks to Keep Passengers Happier at Sea with IoT, NFC, and Edge Computing 147
5 Data Privacy and Cyber Security 149
Case 5.1 Opening Case: Yahoo Is Fined $117.5 Million for Worst Data Hacks in History 150
Introduction 151
5.1
and Regulations 152
The Privacy Paradox 154
Privacy Rights Are Civil Rights 154
U.S. Consumer Protection Data Privacy Regulations 154
U.S. State-Level Privacy Laws 155
European Union’s General Data Protection Rules (GDPR) 156
The EU-U.S. Privacy Shield 157 Public Lack of Understanding 157
5.2 Extent and Cost of Cyberattacks and Cyber Threats 158
Unintentional Cyber Threats 161
Intentional Cyber Threats 161
How Much Does a Cyberattack Really Cost an Organization? 169
Cyberattack Targets and Consequences 170 Most Prevalent and Deadly Cyber attack Targets 170
5.4 Defending Against Cyberattacks and Managing Risk 176
Cyber Defense Strategies 177
Managing Risk 178
Securing Systems 179
Backup and Recovery 181
Business Continuity Planning 182
Disaster Recovery Services 183
5.5 Regulatory Controls, Frameworks, and Models 184
General Defense Controls 185
Application Defense Controls 186
Auditing Information Systems 186
Government Regulations 187
Risk Management and IT Governance Frameworks 187
Industry Security Standards 189
IT Security Defense-In-Depth Model 189
Case 3.2 Business Case: Multi-National Marriott Hotels Could Face Consumer Backlash and up to $1 Billion in Regulatory Fines and Litigation Costs for Massive Data Breach 195
PART 2 Maximizing Growth with Data
Four Phases of Decision-Making 202
Data Driven Decision-Making with Data Analytics 203
Traditional and Modern Business Intelligence (BI) 204
Adding Value with Traditional and Modern BI 206
Finding and Hiring BI Professionals 207
Software to Support BI Professionals 208 Data Science 210
Adding Value with Data Science 212
Building a Data Science Team 213
Software to Support the Data Science Team 215
6.2 Big Data and Advanced Data Analytics 217 Big Data 217
The Four Vs of Big Data 218 Big Data Goals and Challenges 220
Predictive Data Analytics 221
Prescriptive Data Analytics 223
6.3
Descriptive Data Analytics Tools 224
Adding Value with Data Mining 224
Adding Value through Learning, Exploration, and Discovery with Data Visualization 226 Dashboards Are Real Time 231
Adding Value with Digital Dashboards 231
Enterprise Mashup Architecture 233
Adding Value with Mashups 233
6.4 Predictive and Prescriptive Data Analytics Methods and Techniques 234
Adding Value with Text Mining 235
Spatial Data Mining 235
Geocoding 236
GIS Is not Your Grandfather’s Map 237
Infrastructure and Location-Aware Collection of Geospatial Data 238
Adding Value with Spatial Data Mining 238 Geospatial Data Analysis Software 238
Regression Modeling 238
Time-Series Regression 239
Adding Value with Regression 240
Adding Value with Optimization and Rules-Based Decision-Making 241
Adding Value with Machine Learning 241
Case 6.2 Business Case: London Heathrow Airport Launches BI and Machine Learning to Improve Airfield Management, Predict Passenger Flow, and Transform Airport Security 245
Case 6.3 Video Case: The Beauty of Data Visualization 246
7 Social Media and Semantic
Web
Case 6.1 Opening Case: NASCAR Pushes the Envelope by Combining Big Data with Augmented Reality in the World of Live Customer Engagement 200
Technology 249
Case 7.1 Opening Case: The Darkside of Digital Campaigns: Disinformation and Foreign Influence 250
7.1
7.2
Introduction 251
Web 2.0—The Social Web Technologies 252
The Constantly Changing Web 252
A Platform for Services and Social Interaction 252
Emergence of Social Applications, networks, and Services 253
Why Managers Should Understand Web
Technology 255
Communicating on the Web 255
Challenges and Opportunities for Business 257
Social Web Tools and Applications 258
Social networking Services (SnS) 259
How Businesses Use Social networking Services 260
E-commerce 2.0 and Social Commerce 261
Private Social networks 262
Engaging Consumers with Blogs and Microblogs 262
What Is the Purpose of a Blog? 262
Blogging and Public Relations 262
Reading and Subscribing to Blogs 263
Blogging Platforms 263
Microblogs 263
Twitter 263
Consumer Mashups and RSS Technology 264
RSS Technology 264
Social Metrics and Monitoring Tools 264
Enterprise 2.0: Workplace Collaboration and Knowledge Sharing 266
Collaboration Tools 266
Social Tools for Information Retrieval, Knowledge Management, and Sharing 266
Social Bookmarking Tools 267
Content Creation and Sharing 267
Shared Content Creation with Wikis 267
Leveraging the Power of the Crowd: Crowdsourcing and Crowdfunding 268
Crowdfunding 268
Social Media Is More Than Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter 269
7.5
7.3
7.4
Using Search Technology for Business Success 270
How Search Engines Work 270
How Crawler Search Engines Work 271
Why Search Is Important for Business 274
Enterprise Search 274
Recommendation Engines 275
Search Marketing 275
Web Search for Business 276
Emerging Search Technologies 277
A Search for Meaning—Web 3.0 and Semantic Technology 278
What Is the Semantic Web? 278
The Language(s) of Web 3.0 279
Semantic Web and Semantic Search 280
Semantic Web for Business 282
Recommendation Engines 283
Case 7.2 Business Case: Facebook Helps Songkick Rock the Ticket Sales Industry 290
Case 7.3 Video Case: Power Searching with Google 291
8 Omnichannel Retailing, E-commerce, and Mobile Commerce
Technology 294
Case 8.1 Opening Case: Amazon Pioneers New In-Store Retail Concept 295
8.1
Introduction 296
Omnichannel Retailing 297
Keeping Up with Consumer Demands and Behavior 297
Digital Connections 299
Consumers Still Love to Shop in Stores 299
Supply Chain Is More Important Than Ever 300
The Omnichannel Retailing Concept 301
8.2 In-Store Retail Technology 303 Changes in Consumer Shopping Behavior 303
In-Store Retailing Trends 303
In-Store Tech Improves Convenience and Enhances the Shopping Experience 304
8.3 E-commerce—Online Retailing 306 Types of E-commerce Markets 306 Challenges to E-commerce 312
E-commerce Business and Strategic Planning 313
8.4
Mobile Commerce 313
Mobile Advertising 314
Mobile Apps 315
Information: Competitive Advantage in Mobile Commerce 315
QR Codes in Mobile Marketing 316
Mobile Entertainment 317
Hotel Services and Travel Go Wireless 317
Mobile Social networking 318
8.5. Mobile Payment and Financial Services 319
Mobile Payment Systems 319
Mobile Banking and Financial Services 320 Short Codes 321
Security Issues Questions 322
Case 8.2 Business Case: eBay—An E-commerce Pioneer Faces New Challenges 326
Case 8.3 Video Case: Searching with Pictures Using Mobile Visual Search 327
9 Functional Business Systems 330
Case 9.1 Opening Case: Business Case: Equifax Data Breach Highlights Need for Regulatory Compliance Changes in Financial Management 331
Introduction 332
9.1 Functional and Cross-Functional Business Processes 332
Information Systems to Support Functional Business Units 333
9.2 Production and Operations Management Systems 336
Inventory Control Systems 337
Quality Management Systems (QMS) 339
Computer-Integrated Manufacturing Systems 340
Manufacturing Execution Systems 341
Transportation Management Systems 342 Other POM Technologies 343
9.3 Sales and Marketing Management Systems 344 Sales Management Systems 345
Marketing Management Systems 346
Social Media as a Marketing Management Strategy 347
9.4 Accounting, Finance, and Regulatory Compliance Systems 348
Accounting Systems 349
Financial Planning and Budgeting Systems 349 Regulatory Compliance Systems 351
9.5 Human Resource Information Systems (HRIS) 355
Employee Development 356
HR Planning, Control, and Management 356
HRIS Move to the Cloud 357
Case 9.2 Business Case: MAHLE GmbH
Partners with SAP and MHP to Digitalize Its Logistics and Product Development Processes 361
Case 9.3 Video Case: Fuze Increases Its Sales and Marketing Success with an Account-Based Marketing System 361
10 Enterprise Systems 363
Case 10.1 Opening Case: High-Profile Food Recalls Prompt Walmart to Create a Safer, More Transparent, and More Efficient Global Food Supply Chain 364
Introduction 365
10.1 Intro to Enterprise Systems 366 Types of Enterprise Systems 366
Integrating Legacy Systems 368
10.2 Enterprise Resource Planning 370
Automating ERP 370
ERP and the IT Infrastructure 371 ERP Implementation Critical Success Factors 373
Lessons Learned 374
What’s new in ERP Systems? 375
Selecting an ERP Vendor, Value-Added Reseller or Consultant 376
10.3 Supply Chain Management 378
Automating the Supply Chain 378
Managing the Three Supply Chain Flows 379
Electronic Data Interchange in the Order Fulfillment and Logistics Process 380
Virtual Collaboration in the Supply Chain 382
Achieving a Fully Digitized Supply Chain 382
Four Technology Stages of Digital Adoption 383
Lessons Learned 386
Leading SCM Systems Developers 387
10.4 Customer Relationship Management 387 The CRM Process 388
Automating CRM 390
Customer Acquisition and Retention 390 CRM for a Competitive Edge 391 Implementing a CRM System 391 Lessons Learned 392
10.5 Communicating and Collaborating with Enterprise Knowledge Management Systems, Enterprise Content Management Systems, and Enterprise Social Platforms 393 What Is Knowledge Management? 393 Koenig’s Three Stages of KM Development 394 Automating EKM 394 Benefits of EKM System 395 Techniques for Managing Knowledge in Group Work 396
Enterprise Content Management (ECM) 398 Purpose and Benefits of an ECM System 398 Using an ECM System 399 Enterprise Social Platforms 399 Growth in the ESP Market 400 Evolution of ESPs 401
Case 10.2 Business Case: Lowe’s Integrates Augmented Reality and Robot Assistants into Its SCM and CRM Programs 406
Case 10.3 Video Case: P&G—Creating Conversations with Global Consumers 407
11
Artificial Intelligence, Robotics, and Quantum Computing Technology 409
Case 11.1 Opening Case: HSBC Adopts Machine
Learning Artificial Intelligence to Fight Money
Laundering 410
Introduction 411
11.1 How AI Works 411
Stages of Artificial Intelligence Development 412
Types of Artificial Intelligence Machines 413
The Six Branches of Artificial Intelligence 414
11.2
AI Applications in Business and Society 419
Adoption of AI Business Applications 419
AI Maturity in Organizations 419
Current AI Use in Business and Society 421
Do All Businesses need to Invest in AI? 423
AI Use in the Public Sector 424
Barriers to AI Adoption and Use 425
11.3
AI and Society (Ethics) 426
Major Issues of Concern 426
Work Automation and Job Loss 426
Privacy, Civil Rights, and Government Use of Artificial Intelligence 427
Unexpected Results When Bias Creeps into the Learning Process 428
11.4
11.5
Robotics 430
Types of Robotic Machines 430
Quantum Computing (QC) 436
What Is Quantum Mechanics? 436
Quantum Computers 436 Challenges in Quantum Computing 437
Case 11.2 Business Case: Recommendation
Systems Powered by AI—Still Room for Improvement 441
12 IT Strategy, Sourcing, and Strategic Technology Trends
444
Case 12.1 Opening Case: San Diego County’s 20-Year
Outsourcing Journey 445
Introduction 446
12.1
IT Strategy and Competitive Advantage 447
Aligning IT Strategy and Business Strategy 447
The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF) 448
Resistance to Business–IT alignment 449
Achieving and Sustaining a Competitive Advantage—Locally and Globally 449
Competitive Advantage Tools 450 Competing Globally 453
12.2
IT-Enabled Service-Based Comparative Advantage 456
IT Strategic Planning, Process, and Tools 457
The Five Components of an IT Strategy 457
Identifying Value Drivers 458
A Reactive Approach to IT Investments Will Fail 458
Developing an IT Strategic Plan 458
IT Strategic Planning Process and Tools 459
Strategic Planning Tools 461
12.3
IT Sourcing Strategies and IT Service
Management 468
IT Offshoring 468
IT Onshoring 469
Cloud Services 469
IT Service Management 470
Levels and Types of IT Services 471
Benefits of Using a Structured ITSM Strategy 475
The Outsourcing Life Cycle 476
Ask for “Proof of Concept” or a Trial Run 478
Establishing and Managing IT Vendor
Relationships 478
Outsourcing Benefits 480
Outsourcing Risks and Hidden Costs 480
12.4
Strategic Technology Trends 481
Scanning for Strategic Technology Trends 482
Case 12.2 Business Case: Department of Defense (DOD) Evaluates Technology to Gain Help for Crisis Victims and Protect First Responders 487
PART 4 Building, Operating and Managing Systems to Support
Sustainable Business Practices During and After the COVID-19 Pandemic
13 Systems Development, IT Service Management and Project, Program and Portfolio Management 490
Case 13.1 Opening Case: VELCO Outsources Project Management and Brings in Politically Sensitive
Capital Project $6 Million Under Budget 491
Introduction 492
13.1
Systems Development 493
The Systems Development Life Cycle 494
13.2 Systems Development Methodologies 497
Waterfall Model 497
Object-Oriented Analysis and Design 498
Agile Systems Development Methodology 499
The DevOps Approach to Systems Development 501
Systems Development Tools and Techniques 503
Choosing a Systems Methodology or Tool 505
13.3 Project, Program and Portfolio Management (PPPM) 506
Project Management 506
The Role of the Project Manager 507
Program Management 509
Portfolio Management 510
Putting It All Together 511
Why Projects Fail 512
The Project Management Office 513
PPPM Frameworks 514
The Project Triple Constraint 515
Five Phases of the Project Management Life Cycle 516
13.4 Initiating, Planning, and Executing Projects 517
Phase One: Project Initiating 517
Phase Two: Project Planning 520
Phase Three: Project Execution 521
13.5 Monitoring/Controlling and Closing Projects 522
Phase Four: Project Monitoring and Controlling 523
Phase Five: Project Closing 526
Achieving a High PMTQ 527
Case 13.2 Business Case: It Took 10 Years and More Than $600 Million to Realize That Big Muscles, Not Computer, Can Best Move Baggage 532
Case 13.3 Demo Case: Mavenlink Project Management and Planning Software 533
14 IT Ethics and Local and Global Sustainability 537
Case 14.1 Opening Case: Royal Bank of Scotland Leverages Technology to Fulfill Its Strategy to Build a More Sustainable Bank 538
Introduction 539
14.1 An Introduction to Ethics 540
The Three Basic Tenets of Business and IT Ethics 541
Code of Ethics 542
IT Professionals’ Code of Ethics 543
Developing an Ethics and Compliance
Program 544
Ethics Training in the Workplace 545
IT-Related Unethical Behavior 545
Discrimination in Social Media Recruiting 552
Recruiting Regulations 554
Proving Social Media Discrimination 555
Protecting Companies and Candidates from Social Media Discrimination 556
Providing a Secure and Respectful Workplace 557
The Ethical Dilemma of Competing Responsibilities 558
14.2 ICT and Local Sustainability 559
The Triple Bottom Line and Sustainable Development 560
Profits: “Green IT” Trumps Greenbacks 561
People: Preserving Quality of Life 562
14.3 ICT and Global Sustainability 569
The Link between ICT and Climate Change 573
Climate Change Mitigation 574
Formal Climate Change Initiatives and Agreements 575
Beyond Climate Change 576
ICT and Sustainability in Developing Countries 577
Barriers to ICT Acquisition, Implementation, and Use in Developing Countries 582
Taking a People-First Approach to Technology 583
Sustaining Business in a Post-COVID-19 World 583
Case 14.2 Business Case: Spies vs. Pirates—La Liga Fined Over Mobile App That Spied on Illegal Match Screenings 588
Case 14.3 Video Case: IT Ethics in the Workplace 589
GLOSSARY G-1
ORGANIZATION INDEX I-1
NAME INDEX I-3
SUBJECT INDEX I-4
Information Technology for Management discusses the importance of aligning business-IT strategies and explains how companies rely on data, digital technology, and mobile devices to support them in the on-demand and sharing economies and help them address the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic. Our goal is to provide students from any business discipline with a strong foundation for understanding digital technology concepts and terminology and the critical role that it plays in facilitating business sustainability, profitability, and growth locally and globally. The text also seeks to equip students with the information they need to become “informed users of IT.” Enabling technologies and related concepts, discussed in this text include the following:
• Sustainability. Cloud services, artificial intelligence, blockchain technologies, edge computing, and other disruptive technologies are fundamental to sustaining business profitability and growth in today’s on-demand and sharing economies. These technologies play a critical role in developing and managing projects and sourcing agreements, addressing personal privacy, encouraging social responsibility and attracting, connecting with and engaging employees, customers, and partners across omnichannel technologies to promote sustainable business performance and growth.
• Performance and Profitability. Combining the latest capabilities in descriptive, predictive, and prescriptive data analytics, reporting, collaboration, search, and digital communication helps enterprises be more agile and cuts costs to optimize business performance and profitability.
• Growth. Strategic technologies enable business to create new core competencies, expand their markets, and move into new markets to experience exponential growth in the on-demand and sharing economies locally and globally.
In this twelfth edition, students learn, explore, and understand technology concepts and terminology and the importance of IT’s role in supporting the three essential components of business performance improvement: technology, business processes, and people. This edition has a greater focus on the global impacts of IT and includes discussions of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the ways technology is enabling organizations to connect with employees, customers, and partners and to use disruptive technologies in new and innovative ways to get the job done!
What’s New in the Twelfth Edition?
In the twelfth edition of Information Technology for Management, we present and discuss concepts in a comprehensive,
yet easy-to-understand format by actively engaging students through a wider selection of case studies, interactive figures, chapter summaries, 34 whiteboard animations, tech notes, self-check quizzes, online and interactive exercises, critical thinking questions, and crossword puzzles. We have enhanced the twelfth edition in the following ways:
Diverse Audience. Information Technology for Management is directed toward undergraduate, introductory MBA courses, and Executive Education courses in Management Information Systems and General Business programs. Concepts are explained in a straightforward way, and interactive elements, tools, and techniques provide tangible resources that appeal to all levels of students.
Strong Pedagogical Approach. To encourage improved learning outcomes, we continue to employ a blended learning approach, in which different types of delivery and learning methods, enabled and supported by technology, are blended with traditional learning methods. For example, case study and theoretical content are presented visually, textually, and/or interactively to enable different groups of students to use different learning strategies in different combinations to fit their individual learning style and enhance their learning. Throughout the book, general content has been reorganized and updated to reflect the current state of new and previously included topics and 100 new informative static or interactive figures and 29 new tables have been added to effectively visually demonstrate new and expanded concepts. In addition, all cases and IT at Work vignettes have been updated or replaced, and learning objectives have been updated to be more succinct and consistent with new content. Finally, a chapter summary linked directly to each learning objective has been added at the end of each chapter.
Leading-Edge Content. Prior to and during the writing process, we consulted with a number of vendors, IT professionals, and managers who are hands-on users of leading technologies, to learn about their IT/business successes, challenges, experiences, and recommendations. To integrate the feedback of these business and IT professionals, new or updated chapter opening and closing cases have been added to many of the chapters along with the addition of relevant, leading-edge content in the body of the chapters.
New Technologies and Expanded Topics. New to this edition are the topics of artificial intelligence, quantum computing, edge computing, cognitive knowledge management and blockchain technology. Also included are updates to the IT framework, expanded coverage of data science and advanced data analytics and the tools and techniques that support them, the newest systems developments methodologies, and expanded
coverage of the Project, Program, and Portfolio Management framework. Table P-1 provides a detailed list of new and expanded topics.
Useful Tools and Techniques. The “IT Toolbox” feature provides a skills-based takeaway tool or technique that the students can use in future courses and their upcoming career. In the twelfth edition, it has been revised and/or updated to reflect new content in the text. New to this edition is a feature we call “Did You Know?” This feature appears at the beginning of the main text of each chapter and delivers some interesting and often “fun” facts related to the technologies discussed within the chapter content and is designed to more effectively capture the students’ interest at the beginning of each chapter.
Case 1.1 Opening Case
Uber and Airbnb Innovative Digital Business Models
Facilitate Global Expansion and Operational Resilience During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Almost every new startup wants to disrupt some traditional industry with a digital solution. Two of the most ingenious and most-valuable startups to achieve this goal are Uber and Airbnb. For example, most consumers who tap an Uber app to get a ride would never consider dialing an 800 number for a taxi. With all transactions performed by apps and automated processes, the entire process from hailing to paying for a ride is slick, quick, and easy and eliminates the use of cash or credit cards at the time of service. Similarly, Airbnb provides an easyto-use digital platform to offer accommodations, dining, and leisure activities to guests worldwide with the click of a couple of buttons.
New
Economies and COVID-19 Require New Digital Business Models
Uber and Airbnb are popular examples of companies that developed new digital business models to transform slow-to-innovative industries. A simple definition of a business model is the way a company generates revenue and makes a profit. On-demand and sharing (access-over-ownership) business models provide real-time fulfillment of goods and services, which have attracted millions of users worldwide. These models fit best when speed and/or convenience matter the most. The ground transportation, grocery, and restaurant industries are examples of hyper-growth categories in the on-demand world. The home-based accommodation and bicycle/scooter rental industries are good examples of high-growth categories in the sharing economy. Currently, forward-thinking companies that have reaped the benefits of rethinking their business models by applying digital solutions to reshape their industries are now adapting their business models by utilizing technology in even more new and creative ways to meet the demands and uncertainties of the COVID-19 pandemic. The sharing economy has been severely impacted by COVID-19 causing companies like Uber and Airbnb to make creative adjustments and develop new strategies to ensure their customers feel safe and how they will need to operate in the ‘new normal.’
Uber On-Demand Business Model
Uber disrupted the taxi industry with a workforce that is essentially any person with a smartphone and a car. Location-aware smartphone apps bring drivers and passengers together, while in-app accounts make the cashless payment process effortless. By simply opening the Uber app
and pressing the middle button for several seconds (a long press), customers can order a ride to their current location, selecting the kind of car they want. Payment is automatically charged to the credit card on file with receipts via e-mail.
The Uber concept developed in response to scarcity of taxies. It started on a snowy Paris night in 2008 when the two founders could not get a cab. They wanted a simple app that could get them a car with a tap. On June 1, 2015, the entrepreneurs celebrated Uber’s fifth anniversary and announced that the company had grown into a transportation network covering 311 cities in 58 countries in North and South Americas, Europe, Africa, Asia Pacific, and the Middle East. By mid-2018, their global presence had grown tremendously over the past few years, and to achieve this phenomenal growth Uber has invested in new and developing technologies and partnerships. For example, the company partnered with Carnegie Mellon University to build robotic cars and purchased deCarta, a 40-person mapping start-up to reduce its dependence on Google Maps.
Airbnb Access-over-Ownership Business Model
Another disruption to a traditional industry occurred when Airbnb blindsided the hotel industry. Airbnb—probably the most global of the new startups—allows anyone with a spare apartment or room to run their own bed and breakfast by giving them a technology platform to market themselves to a global market. Just click a few buttons on Airbnb’s website and type up a brief description of your property and its amenities, and your spare room can become a new source of income! By 2016, Airbnb hosts had accommodated 40 million guests in its 1.5 million listings in 34,000 cities in 190 countries. In mid-2018, Airbnb had accommodated over a whopping 150 million guests in 4 million listings—including 1,400 castles—in 65,000 cities and 191 countries around the globe. In comparison, Hilton, InterContinental, and Marriott, the largest hotel chains in the world, have less than one million rooms each.
Business Success of Uber and Airbnb in terms of Company Valuation, Growth, and Globalization
The ride-hailing app Uber and the housing rental app Airbnb are two of the most valuable start-ups, as displayed in Figure 1.1. Valuation of a company at its early stages is based heavily on its growth potential and future value. In contrast, the valuation of an established company is based on its present value, which is calculated using traditional financial ratios and techniques related to revenues or other assets.
Mr.Whiskey/Shutterstock.com
hh5800/iStock/Getty Images
Airbnb
UberStarted in 2008
Founders Nathan Blecharczyk, Brian Chesky and Joe Gebbia couldn't pay their rent so they rented out space in their apartmentto travelers. First venture funding was $20,000 USD
Started in 2009 as UberCab Founder Garrett Camp wanted to tackle taxi shortage in San Francisco
Leading Disrupter in the global accommodation rental market
Uber epitomizes disruption Changed the way customers think about grabbing a ride
As of April 2019, Airbnb was valued at $38 billion USD and had hosted 500 million guests in 6 million listings worldwide.
By 2019, Uber was valued at 62 billion USD and 3.9 million Uber drivers had driven 99 million active users in 700 cities worldwide
By end of 2020 projected revenue will be approximately $8.5 billion USD
Uber’s massive market value—estimated at $60 billion—is greater than 80% of all Standard & Poor (S&P) 500 companies, many of which have been around for 25, 50, or 100 years. Currently, investors value Airbnb at $31 billion—rivaling that of hotel giant Marriott International.
To achieve their phenomenal local and global growth, both Uber and Airbnb have used some interesting technology-enabled strategies. For example, Uber has been aggressive in going global. It uses “Ambassadors” who are paid to recruit new drivers from its competitor Lyft using an automated hiring, recruitment, and onboarding system that is far more efficient than the process used by traditional taxi companies. Ambassadors also offer free rides to new customers to advertise Uber by word of mouth in new cities, and drones are used to recruit new drivers and customers around the globe! Once a customer base has been established, Uber founder, Travis Kalanick, then actively lobbies governors worldwide to write new laws that favor Uber’s business model.
However, globalization hasn’t all been plain sailing for Uber. Since 2011, when Uber first expanded its services outside of the United States, Uber has encountered resistance in several countries such as
In 2019, Uber had a 87.6% market share of rideshare drivers in the US and revenue was 11.3 billion USD
China, Russia, and Southeast Asia. Despite setbacks, it has been able to salvage market share in these countries by retaining a substantial share in joint ventures with local rivals such as Yandex.Taxi (https:// taxi.yandex.ru) and Grab (https://www.grab.com/sg). More recently, Uber has shifted its focus to countries where it is convinced it can win, including India, Middle East, and North Africa, and has a particular interest in Saudi Arabia where Uber is focusing on recruiting female drivers who have only recently been allowed to drive there. Despite its optimism that its business model will be successful in these parts of the world, local competitors there also present undisputed barriers to Uber’s ultimate success. For example, Uber sold its Chinese business to Didi Chuxing in 2016, putting an end to its very expensive, high-stakes battle over the lucrative Chinese market.
On the other hand, Airbnb growth strategies include developing new services to enhance their guests’ travel experience, such as creating “Airbnb Plus - a listing of homes verified for quality and comfort” and identifying “Superhosts” who have consistently been rated highly by previous guests. They have also added “Travel Experiences”
FIGURE 1.1 Innovative business models of Airbnb and Uber have been extremely successful.
to allow their guests insider access to unexpected places together with a list of restaurants that have been recommended by many of their guests. But, Airbnb’s most effective growth strategy has been increasing the number of countries where its services are offered. For example, since Airbnb unveiled its French platform in 2012, it has gone from strength to strength with a staggering 8.5 million French people using Airbnb properties between June 1 and August 31, 2019. This strategy, however, has presented Airbnb organizers with some very interesting challenges that include handling a total of 65 different currencies, translating host listings between countries, dealing with foreign law agencies, and offering country-specific sign-up methods. For example, although Facebook or Google accounts work in the United States, these are not the best sign-up methods in other parts of the world, and just by allowing travelers to use Weibo (https://www. weibo.com/us) and WeChat (https://www.wechat.com/en), Airbnb is able to grow its customer base in China by 700%.
Uber and Airbnb Retool their Digital Business Models to Build Resilience during the COVID-19 Pandemic
While globalization has presented highly valued start-ups like Uber and Airbnb with huge opportunities for growth, the COVID-19 pandemic presented them with some daunting business challenges as people around the globe were told to stay home. In the early days of the pandemic, both Uber and Airbnb were faced with a significant downturn in demand as far fewer people took rides or sought accommodations for vacation or business, during COVD-19 lockdowns and Airbnb’s plans to file a request to ‘go public’ were waylaid by pandemic-related turmoil in the stock market. This initial reaction has been followed by ongoing government and customer concerns about general health and safety issues associated with the pandemic. As a result, on-demand and sharing economy companies have been forced to make significant adjustments in response to unforeseen events and recent data show that their businesses are growing again thanks to agile thinking and creative adjustments they have made to their business models. For example, Airbnb made efforts to increase the variety of the accommodations they offer and use technology to broadcast their new offerings. In June
IT architectures guide the process of planning, acquiring, building, modifying, and interfacing with deployed IT resources in a single department within an organization.
Legacy systems are older information systems that have been maintained over several decades because they fulfill critical needs.
2020 Airbnb reported that bookings for entire homes and cabins and cottages in secluded areas increased significantly causing their gross booking value to grow for the first time since February 2020 and on August 19, 2020 it filed with the Security Exchange Commission (SEC) to ‘go public’. In another creative move, Uber transformed itself from a solely ridesharing venture to a food delivery service. Consequently, their new mobile app ‘Uber Eats’ has become their key revenue generator amidst COVID-19. In creating Uber Eats, Uber offered restaurants a new way to connect with their customers and inject a modicum of positivity among the bad news plaguing the world during and after COVID-19. In quickly reacting to the unforeseen events of COVID-19, Uber and Airbnb have demonstrated the power of on-demand and sharing economy companies to make swift and significant adjustments to their business models by digitally transforming themselves. At the end of the day, it is clear that technology plays a huge part in both enabling innovative products and services to facilitate local and global success by allowing gig workers and consumers in the ondemand and sharing economies to seamlessly connect with business services 24 hours a day, 365 days a year despite important cultural differences and the challenges of COVID-19.
Questions
1. In what ways are the Uber and Airbnb business models similar and different?
2. What challenges did Uber and Airbnb face when they went “global”?
3. What growth strategies are benefiting the global success of Uber and Airbnb? How do they differ?
4. How has technology helped or hindered Uber and Airbnb in the growth of their global business?
5. In what ways has the COVID-19 pandemic impacted Uber and Airbnb?
Sources: Compiled from Solomon (2016), Hawkins (2017), Henshall (2017), Domat (2018), Ledsom (2019), Airbnb.com, and Uber.com, Overstreet (2020).
DID YOU KNOW?
That gig economy is a new buzzword that refers to the rise in contracted work—or “gigs”—that aren’t traditional jobs. Examples of these are ridesharing, home and apartment rentals, and food delivery and are made possible using apps and mobile devices. As many as one in every five jobs are currently contracted and it is estimated that over half of the U.S. workforce could find themselves doing contract or freelance work over the next decade. An example of “gig” work and how it affects the economy was offered in our opening case.
Introduction
Many forward-thinking managers and entrepreneurs are digitally transforming their existing business models and reinventing their businesses. In a recent industry study, 87% of senior business leaders said digital transformation is a company priority and 79% of corporate strategists said they are reinventing their business and creating new revenue streams in new ways (Gartner, 2019). By no longer operating and maintaining outdated and complex IT architectures with a mix of legacy systems that can delay or prevent the release of innovative new products and
services and absorb large portions of the information technology (IT) budget, companies can add value, increase their customer base, expand their business capabilities, and increase profits. Companies such as Uber (https://www.uber.com), Airbnb (https://www.airbnb.com) Shyp (http://shyp.com), TaskRabbit (https://www.taskrabbit.com), and Lyft (https://www. lyft.com) are leveraging IT to create exciting new business models and revolutionize the way workers, businesses, and customers interact and compete. Peter Hinssen, a well-known business author, university lecturer, and digital consultant, described the change in digital technology as follows:
Technology used to be nice. It used to be about making things a little bit better, a little bit more efficient. But, technology stopped being nice: it’s disruptive. It’s changing our business models, our consumer markets, our organizations. (MacIver, 2015)
As businesses continue to change their business models to accommodate the needs of the on-demand and sharing economies, IT professionals must constantly scan for innovative new technologies to provide business value, help shape the future of the business, and facilitate performance and growth in local and global markets. For example, smart devices, mobile apps, sensors, and technology platforms—along with increased customer demand for digital interactions and on-demand and shared services—have moved commerce in fresh new directions. We’ve all heard the phrase “there’s an app for that,” and that kind of consumer thinking drives the on-demand and sharing economies.
Business leaders today need to know what steps to take to get the most out of mobile, social, cloud, big data, analytics, visualization technologies, artificial intelligence and the Internet of Things (IoT) to move their business forward and enable new on-demand and sharing business models. Faced with opportunities and challenges, managers need to know how to leverage IT earlier and more efficiently than their competitors.
A goal of this book is to empower you to improve your use and management of IT by raising your understanding of IT terminology, practices, and tools and developing your IT skills to transform you into an informed IT user. Throughout this book, you will learn how digital technology is transforming business and society at all levels as the IT function takes on a key strategic role that determines an enterprise’s success or failure. You will also be provided with an in-depth look at IT trends that have immediate and future capacity to influence products, services, competition, and business relationships. Along the way, we’ll describe many ways in which IT is being used and can be used in business and provide you with the some of the terminology, techniques, and tools that enable organizations to leverage IT to improve their growth, performance, and sustainability.
In this opening chapter, you will learn about the powerful impacts of digital technology on people, business, government, entertainment, and society that are occurring today. You will also discover how leading companies are deploying digital technology and changing their business models, business processes, customer experiences, and ways of working. We will present examples of innovative products, services, and distribution channels to help you understand the digital revolution that is currently shaping the future of business, economy, and society and changing management careers. And, we’ll explain why IT is important to you and how becoming an “informed user” of IT will add significant value to your career and overall quality of life.
1.1 Doing Business in the On-Demand and Sharing Economies
LO1.1 Define the differences between the on-demand and sharing economies and the six business objectives IT should focus on to enhance organizational performance, growth, and sustainability
The on-demand and sharing economies are revolutionizing commercial activities in businesses around the world. The businesses in these new economies are fueled by years of technology innovation and a radical change in consumer behavior. As companies become more highly digitized, it becomes more and more apparent that what companies can do depends on what their
On-demand economy is the economic activity created by technology companies that fulfill consumer demand through the immediate provisioning of products and services.
Sharing economy is an economic system in which goods or services are shared between private individuals, either free or for a fee, typically arranged through an online company or organization.
IT and data management systems can do. For over a decade, powerful new digital approaches to doing business have emerged. And there is sufficient proof to expect even more rapid and dramatic changes due to IT breakthroughs and advances.
In market segment after market segment, mobile communications and technology stacks make it financially feasible for companies to bring together consumers and providers to purchase or share products and services. These capabilities have created the on-demand economy and the sharing economy. As Ev Williams, cofounder of Twitter (https://twitter.com/home) says,
The internet makes human desires more easily attainable. In other words, it offers convenience. Convenience on the internet is basically achieved by two things: speed, and cognitive ease. If you study what the really big things on the internet are, you realize they are masters at making things fast and not making people think.
The proliferation of smartphone-connected consumers, simple and secure purchase flows, and location-based services are a few of the market conditions and technological innovations that are propelling the explosion of on-demand and shared services.
Just as the rapid growth of online-only Amazon (https://www.amazon.com) and eBay transformed retail, the even faster growth of app-driven companies, such as Uber, Airbnb, and Grubhub (https://www.grubhub.com), has disrupted the taxi, hotel, and restaurant markets. As you read in the opening case, in six short years, Uber changed the taxi industry as it rose from start-up to the world’s most valuable private technology company, and Airbnb tackled the fiercely competitive hotel market and attracted more than 60 million customers to become the third most valuable venture-capital-backed company in the world. Another example is Grubhub who became No. 1 in online food ordering, controlling over 20% of that $9 billion market. What today’s successful technology businesses have in common are platform-based business models. Platforms consist of hardware, software, and networks that provide the connectivity for diverse transactions, such as ordering, tracking, user authentication, and payments. These business models are designed to serve today’s on-demand economy, which is all about time (on-demand), convenience (tap an app), and personalized service (my way). For example, millennials want the ease of online payment over cash and insist on efficiency for all aspects of their lives, including shopping, delivery, and travel.
Key strategic and tactical questions that determine an organization’s profitability and management performance are shown in Figure 1.2. Answers to each question require an understanding of the capabilities of mundane to complex IT, which ones to implement and how to manage them.
Strategic direction: industry, markets, and customers
• What do we do?
• What is our direction?
• What markets & customers should we be targeting and how do we prepare for them?
• How do we do it?
• How do we generate revenues & profits to sustain ourselves and build our brand?
Business processes, producers, and technology
• How well do we do it?
• How can we be more efficient?
Business model
FIGURE 1.2
Disruptive Digital Business Models
Digital transformation drives radical changes in business models to enable organizations to provide goods and services to customers in the way they want them delivered, when they want them, and where they want to have access to them.
Companies that adopt digital business models are better positioned to take advantage of business opportunities and survive. Figure 1.3 describes seven highly disruptive business models and some of the companies that use them to differentiate their products and services. Today, a top concern of well-established corporations, global financial institutions, bornon-the-Web retailers, and government agencies is how to design their digital business model to
• Deliver an incredible customer experience
• Turn a profit
• Increase market share
• Engage their employees
Business model is a company’s core strategy for making a profit. It defines the products and/or services it will sell, its target market, costs associated with doing business, and the company’s ongoing plans for achieving its goals.
Digital business model prescribes how businesses make money and meet their goals using digital technology, such as websites, social media, and mobile devices.
Business Model
• Description/Examples
• Apple Music Subscription
• Customer pays monthly payment for continued access to a specific product/service
• Netflix
• Customer gets 'basic' or free version of a product/service or a free trial. Has option to upgrade to a paid version of the product/service
• Dropbox Freemium
• Linkedin
• Customer is the "product". Customer data is the most valuable part of the business along with his/her attention for advertisiing purposes
• Google
• Facebook Free
Access-overOwnership
• Customer pays for temporary access to the product/service, but does not own it
• Zipcar
• AirBnb
• Customer is given a unique experience for which they are willing to pay a high price
• Apple Experience
• Tesla
• Customer pays for a service they don't have time to do themselves, but is fulfilled by people with time, but short on money
On-Demand
• Uber
• Taskrabbit
• Customer is sold an interdependent suite of products/services that when purchased, increase in value based on how many are owned
• Google Ecosystem
• Apple
FIGURE 1.3 Disruptive digital business models enable companies to engage customers to create value via websites, social channels, and mobile devices.
Customer experience describes the cumulative impact of multiple interactions over the course of a customer’s contact with an organization.
Data analytics is the process of examining data sets to draw conclusions about the information they contain, usually with the aid of specialized information systems.
In the digital (online) space, the customer experience must measure up to the very best the Web has to offer. Stakes are high for those who get it right—or wrong. There is a strong relationship between the quality of a firm’s customer experience and loyalty, which, in turn, increases revenue. As a result, a firm’s IT business objectives should be carefully and clearly defined.
IT’s Role in the On-Demand and Sharing Economies
The 2018 IT Trends survey conducted by the Society of Information Management (SIM) reflects that the current state of IT management remains stable despite the massive changes present in the IT world today. Responses were analyzed from IT leaders in 793 highly digitized and tightly connected organizations. Results showed that companies are investing heavily in analytics, cybersecurity, cloud, application software development and maintenance, enterprise resource planning (ERP), and customer relationship management (CRM). These levels of investment are consistent with the top ten IT management concerns shown in Table 1.1 , which clearly demonstrate a need for companies to continue to focus on strategic and organizational priorities such as cybersecurity, business–IT alignment, and data analytics .
Source: Adapted from Kappelman et al. (2019).
Respondents also indicated that in addition to cybersecurity, their most worrisome personal IT concerns centered around the skills shortage that has led to difficulties in finding and retaining highly skilled IT talent, the credibility of IT, and perception of IT leadership within an organization. On the business side, they listed alignment of business goals with IT goals, business continuity, and compliance/regulations as areas of concern. Once again, these findings point to one clear message—IT in the on-demand and sharing economies is all about safeguarding data and identifying and meeting customer needs. Each of these concerns will be addressed throughout the following chapters to help you understand how IT is managed to ensure corporate performance, growth, and sustainability goals are met.
IT—Business Objectives
Now, more than ever, IT must be responsive to the needs of consumers who are demanding a radical overhaul of business processes in companies across diverse industry sectors. Intuitive interfaces, around-the-clock availability, real-time fulfillment, personalized treatment, global
TABLE 1.1 Top Ten IT Management Issues
consistency, and zero errors—this is the world to which customers have become increasingly accustomed. And, it’s not just about providing a superior user or customer experience—when companies get it right, they can also offer more competitive prices because of lower costs, better operational controls, and open themselves up to less risk.
According to Chirantan Basu of Chron (Basu, 2017), to stay abreast of the ever-changing business landscape and customer needs, IT today must concentrate on the following six business objectives to enhance an organization’s performance, growth, and sustainability:
1. Product development From innovations in microprocessors to efficient drug-delivery systems, IT helps businesses respond quickly to changing customer demands.
2. Stakeholder integration Companies use their investor relations websites to communicate with shareholders, research analysts, and others in the market.
3. Process improvement An ERP system replaces dozens of legacy systems for finance, human resources, and other functional areas to increase efficiency and cost-effectiveness of internal business processes.
4. Cost efficiencies IT allows companies to reduce transaction and implementation costs, such as costs of duplication and postage of e-mail versus snail mail.
5. Competitive advantage Companies can use agile development, prototyping, and other systems methodologies to bring a product to market cost-effectively and quickly.
6. Globalization Companies can outsource most of their noncore functions, such as HR and finance, to offshore companies and use Information Communication Technology (ICT) to stay in contact with its global employees, customers, and suppliers 24/7.
Every technology innovation triggers opportunities and threats to business models and strategies. With rare exceptions, every business model depends on a mix of IT, knowledge of its potential, requirements for success, and, equally important, its limitations.
Decades of technological innovation have given us smartphone apps, mobile payment platforms, GPS and map technology, and social authentication. These technologies are needed to build the infrastructure needed for on-demand services and sharing services.
This infrastructure—also referred to as a technology platform or technology stack supports the exchange and coordination of staggering amounts of data.
In many consumer markets today, companies that do not have these mobile apps (Apple or Android) or other technology platforms that support the exchange of goods and services—no matter how useful their website—may find themselves losing their competitive edge. This often leads to customer dissatisfaction, which results in a considerably smaller customer base and inevitably leads to an inability to sustain performance and growth followed by decline and, in extreme cases, extinction.
These and many other technologies and their impact on how companies operate and compete will be discussed in the following chapters to enable you to understand the importance of IT for management and become a more informed user of IT.
Technology platform is the operating system and computer hardware used as a base upon which other applications, processes, or technologies are developed.
Technology stack is the multiple layers of hardware, software, network connectivity, and data analytics capability that comprise a technology platform.
Another random document with no related content on Scribd:
Great Queen Street, and yet the fact that it also deals with the steps to be taken against “ one Holford and his tennantes” for their default in allowing “the streete in Drury Lane in his Maties ordinary way ” to be very noisome, seems to point to the Theobalds route. Perhaps the fields north of Holborn are referred to.
165. The entrance became known as “Hell Gate” or “Devil’s Gap.” The widening of the street to its present measurements is said to have been carried out in 1765 (Blott’s Blemundsbury, p. 370).
166. Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1611–18, James I., vol. 69 (36). Robert Cecil was created Earl of Salisbury in May, 1605; he died in May, 1612.
167. This form of the name occurs frequently.
168. See p. 14.
169. In January, 1669–70, references occur to “John Jones, the master of the White Swan in Queen Street, Drury Lane,” and “John Jones, victualler, at the White Swan in Queen’s Street” (Historical MSS. Commission, Ho. of Commons Calendar, App. to 8th Rep. I., 155b, 157a). As late as 8th April, 1677, a letter was addressed to “Don Manuel Fonseca, Queen Street” (Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1677–8, p. 82). On the other hand, the title Great Queen Street is found in 1667 as the address of Viscount Conway (Ibid., 1667, p. 535), and occurs even in a passage which must have been written at least fifteen years earlier (see p. 50).
170. See, e.g. Wheatley and Cunningham’s London, Past and Present, III., p. 135: “The houses in the first instance were built on the south side only”; Heckethorn’s Lincoln’s Inn Fields, p. 171; Parton’s Hospital and Parish of St. Giles, p. 133.
171. See p. 50.
172. See p. 35.
173. Lease to Edward Fort of 18th May, 1612, quoted in indenture of 10th February, 1625, between Jane and Richard Holford and Jeoffery Prescott (Close Roll, 22 Jas. I. (2601)).
174. In the absence of deeds relating to the early history of Nos. 14–35, it is impossible to be more precise. There may, of course, have been gaps in the north side (excluding Nos. 1–6) even later than 1612. In the Subsidy Rolls of 21 James I. (1623–4) and 4 Charles I. (1628–9), preserved at the Record Office, thirteen names of occupiers of houses in the street are given, and the assessment in 1623 for the rebuilding of St. Giles’ Church gives fifteen housekeepers in the street (Parton, Hospital and Parish of St. Giles, p. 136n). No adequate idea of the number of houses in the street can, however, be gained from these facts, for the subsidy rolls certainly do not give all the occupiers, and, as the assessment was not compulsory, it is improbable that every householder made a contribution.
175. History of ... St. Giles-in-the-Fields and St. George, Bloomsbury, p. 58.
176. No evidence has come to light in the course of the investigations for this volume whereby Lord Herbert’s house might be identified. In his will, dated 1st August, 1648, proved 5th October, 1648, he refers more than once to his “house in Queene Streete”. (Somerset House Wills, Essex, 138).
177. Close Roll, 18 Chas. I. (3295). Indenture between W. Newton and Francis Thriscrosse.
178. Close Roll, 15 Chas. I. (3192).
179. Close Roll, 15 Chas. I. (3190) Indenture between W. Newton and Ric. Webb, Nicholas Redditt and Jeremy Deane.
180. Harl. MS., 5,900, fol. 57b.
181. Indenture, dated 7th February, 1734–5, between John Bigg and Peter Guerin. (Middlesex Registry Memorials, 1734, V., 85.)
182. British Museum, Crace Colln., Portfolio 28, No. 53.
183. It is possible that in 1646 Sir Martin Lumley was resident at this house, but not certain. In the Subsidy Roll for that year his name is the first on the north side of the street, and precedes Sir Thos. Barrington’s, who, it may be proved, lived at No. 3. It may be, therefore, that Lumley was the occupant of No. 1.
184. G. E. C[ockayne’s] Baronetage, II., p. 80.
185. Reproduced here.
186. Elizabeth Killigrew, Lewis Richardes, Thomas Stoake.
187. Lewis Richardes.
188. See p. 35.
189. It is given (Close Roll, 22 Jas. I. (2601). Indenture between Jane and Richard Holford and Jeoffrey Prescott) as the eastern boundary of Prescott’s property, which extended along the north side of Great Queen Street from Drury Lane, and the length of which is given as 120 feet. Thus the Prescott property was on the site of the present Nos. 38 to 45. A deed dated 20 June, 1721, refers to property of which Seagood’s house had formerly formed the western boundary. This deed gives the names of the occupants of the houses to which it relates both in 1636 and at that time, and the latter list clearly identifies the property as Nos. 26 to 35, thus leaving 36 and 37 for Seagood’s house. That this house corresponded to two numbers is rendered quite certain by a careful comparison of the entries in the series of Hearth Tax Rolls. In fact, the house is on two occasions taxed for 30 hearths, which seems an over estimate, as the assessment is afterwards reduced to 24 hearths. Even this implies a very large house.
190. Close Roll, 13 Chas. II. (3123). Indenture between Henry Holford and Paul Williams, etc.
191. Reproduced here.
192. Close Roll, 5 Chas. I. (2800). Indenture between Richard Holford and Sir Edw. Stradling reciting indenture of 1618.
193. See Recovery Roll, 9 Chas. I. rot. 23 (201). Indenture between Edward Stradling and George Gage.
194. See p. 93.
195. Close Roll, 5 Chas. I. (2800). Indenture between Richard Holford and Sir William Cawley and Geo. Strode.
196. Calendar State Papers, Domestic, 1629–31, p. 47.
197. Calendar State Papers, Domestic, 1629–35, p. 55.
198. See p. 93.
199. Close Roll, 11 Chas. I. (3059). Indenture between Sir Kenelm Digby and William Newton.
200. He succeeded his father as Earl of Carnwath in 1639.
201. Patent Roll, 12 Chas. I. (2740).
202. The means taken to enforce a uniform design may be gathered from the fact that the purchaser of certain plots to the west of Nos. 55–56 was required to build three houses “to front and range towards Queenes Streete ... in the same uniformity, forme and beauty as the other houses already ... erected by the said William Newton in Queenes Streete are of.”
203. The evidence for this statement is gathered from the undermentioned illustrations:
No. 51. Sir Robert Strange’s House (Parton’s Hospital and Parish of St. Giles, p. 250), 3 bays, 4 pilasters. Western portion of third plot 41 feet wide.
Nos. 55–6, 57–8. Bristol House (Ibid.). Double façade each 44 feet wide, 5 bays, 6 pilasters. Fifth plot 88 feet wide.
Nos. 55–6, 57–8. J. Nash, 1840. (The Growth of the English House, J. Alfred Gotch.)
Original Freemasons’ Tavern. Engraving by Joseph Bottomley, 1783. 5 bays, 6 pilasters. Seventh plot 44 feet wide.
Queen Street Chapel (Parton, op. cit. p. 250). Western portion of tenth plot 59 feet 6 inches wide.
No. 70. (Photograph taken by the London County Council in 1903.) Refronted on old lines, 4 bays, 5 pilasters on plot 35 feet wide.
204. Survey of London, Vol. III. (St. Giles-in-the-Fields, Part I.), p. 97.
205. II., p. 174.
206. See p. 86.
207. See full quotation on p. 45 footnote.
208. Harl. MS., 5,900, 57b.
209. The reason why Lindsey House is now not in the middle of the west side of the Fields is that in the original design the west row extended from Gate Street to No. 2, Portsmouth Street. The building of the houses on the north and south sides of the Fields, not included in the original design, encroached on both sides of the west row, but the encroachment on the north being the greater, the axis of the square was thereby moved further south.
210. British Museum. J. W. Archer Collection. “The house called Queen Anne’s Wardrobe,” drawn 1846 (No. 55–6, Great Queen Street) and “House of the Sardinia Ambassador,” drawn 1858 (No. 54, Lincoln’s Inn Fields).
211. “The expert surveyour will repart the windows to the front of a palace, that they may (besides the affording of sufficient light to the rooms) leave a solid peeres between them, and to place some pleasing ornament thereon, not prejudicial to the structure, nor too chargeable for the builder, shunning incongruities, as many (pretending knowledge in ornaments) have committed, by placing between windows pilasters, through whose bodies lions are represented to creep; as those in Queen Street without any necessity, or ground for the placing lions so ill, which are commonly represented but as supporters, either of weight, or of arms on herauldry.” (Counsel and Advice to All Builders, pp. 13–14.)
212. See p. 38.
213. Anecdotes of Painting, II., p. 60.
214. Survey of London, Vol. III. (St. Giles-in-the-Fields, Part I.), Plate 6.
215. It was assessed for the hearth tax at 40 hearths, while Conway House, although of the same frontage, was only assessed at 31.
216. The frontage of this house is stated in certain deeds in the London County Council’s possession (e.g., Indenture of 26th October, 1639, between Wm. Newton and Compton, Dive and Brewer) to be 98 feet, but in others (e.g., Release by Wm. Newton senr., to Wm. Newton, junr., dated 22nd January, 1637–8) is given as 88 feet. That the latter is correct may be regarded as certain from the perfect accord of the total number of feet thus obtained with the present boundaries.
217. The deeds from which these particulars are taken are (1) Close Roll, 15 Chas. I. (3196) Indenture between Wm. Newton and Sir Ralph Freeman; and (2) a deed in the possession of the Council Indenture between Newton and Sir Henry Compton, etc. The former deed, in error, reverses the eastern and western boundaries.
218. A release by deed poll from Wm. Newton the elder to Wm. Newton the younger, in the possession of the London County Council.
219. Close Roll, 5 Geo. I. (5117) Indenture dated 16th May, 4 Geo. I., between Sir John Webb and Thos. Stonor, and Sir Godfrey Kneller, etc.
220. Mr. Stonor inhabited the western half of the original house, now forming Nos. 55 and 56; Mr. Browne was in occupation of the eastern half, afterwards Nos. 57 and 58.
221. Middlesex Registry Memorials, 1832, V., 93.
222. See p. 53.
223. Survey of London, Vol. III. (St. Giles-in-the-Fields. Part I.), Plate 66.
224. In possession of the London County Council.
225. Close Roll, 15 Charles I. (3196). Indenture between Wm. Newton and Sir Ralph Freeman.
226. Marginal note in his private journal (Memoirs and letters of Marquis of Clanricarde, ed. by K. De Burgh, p. 68).
227. Deed in possession of the London County Council.
228. Memoirs and Letters of the Marquis of Clanricarde, p. xiv.
229. Hist. MSS. Comm.; MSS. of the Earl of Egmont, I., p. 223.
230. Constitutional History of England (ed. 1854) III., 389n.
231. Somerset House Wills, Nabbs, 117.
232. She was Catherine, daughter of Francis Russell, Earl of Bedford; her husband, Robert Greville, second Baron Brooke, distinguished himself as a general of the parliamentary forces in the Civil War, and was killed at Lichfield in 1643. Fulke Greville, who was not born until after his father’s death, eventually succeeded to the title, and died in 1710.
233. Close Roll, 1654 (3814).
234. Sir William Constable was afterwards possibly an occupant of the house, for on 24th May, 1647, he wrote to the old Lord Fairfax from “Queen Street.” (Hist. MSS. Comm.; Morrison MSS., Report IX., Part II., App. p. 439.) Constable had married in 1608, Dorothy, daughter of Thomas, first Lord Fairfax. He contrived with difficulty to raise a regiment of foot in the Civil War, and greatly distinguished himself in the field. He was afterwards one of the king’s judges and signed the warrant for his execution. He died in 1655.
235. C. R. Markham’s The Great Lord Fairfax, p. 191.
236. Ibid., p. 254.
237. Ibid., p. 274. The old lord had recently married again. He announced the fact to his brother in a letter dated “Queen Street, October 20th, 1646.”
238. Hist. MSS. Comm., Pembroke College MSS., Report V., App. p. 487.
239. He was still in the parish (possibly in this house) in 1658, for Parton quotes (Hospital and Parish of St. Giles, p. 356) an entry in the churchwardens’
accounts for that year: “Pd. and expended at the sessions, about Sir William Paston’s complaynt, of his being double rated.”
240. Close Roll, 15 Chas. II. (4143) Indenture between the Hon. John Digby and Sir Anthony Morgan and Richard Langhorne.
241. Described in Survey of London, Vol. IV. (Chelsea, Part II.), pp. 18–27.
242. Some time between 1666 and 1675 he removed to No. 51, Lincoln’s Inn Fields (Survey of London, Vol. III., p. 71).
243. See also North’s account: “The great House in Queen Street was taken for the use of this Commission. Mr. Henry Slingsby sometime Master of the Mint, was the Secretary; and they had a formal Board with Green Cloth and standishes, clerks’ good store, a tall Porter and staff and sitting attendance below, and a huge Luminary at the Door. And, in Winter Time, when the Board met, as was two or three times a week, or oftener, all the Rooms were lighted, Coaches at the Door, and great passing in and out, as if a Council of State in good earnest had been sitting. All cases, Complaints and Deliberations of Trade were referred to this Commission, and they reported their opinion, whereupon the King in Council ordered as of course. So that they had the Province of a Committee of Council; and the whole Privy Council was less charge to the King than this.” (Examen, p. 461.)
244. The Council of Trade was established on 7th November, 1660, and by patent dated 1st December in the same year Charles II. also created the Council of Foreign Plantations. (Haydn’s Book of Dignities, 1894, p. 263.)
245. Slingsby writes on behalf of the Council for Foreign Plantations from Queen Street, on 27th April, 1671. (Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1671, p. 204.)
246. In October, 1672, the Council of Plantations was united to that of Trade (Evelyn, Diary, 13th October, 1672), and the united Council seems thenceforth to have utilised a portion of “Villiers House,” the house of the Duchess of Cleveland. (Audit Office, Declared Accounts, Trade, etc., 2303 (2)).
247. See schedules of deeds appended to Indentures between Thos. Stonor, etc., and Sir Godfrey Kneller, dated 11th and 12th March, 1717–8 (Close Roll, 5 Geo. I. (5117)).
248. Chancery Warrants (Series II.), Signet Office, 16th April, 1669 (21 Chas. II., 2386).
249. Indenture of 24th June, 1674, between Sir Chas. Harboard and John Hanson, by direction of the Earl of Devonshire, and the Earl of Sunderland, recited in Indenture of 12th March, 1717–8, between Thos. Stonor, etc. and Sir Godfrey Kneller (Close Roll, 5 Geo. I. (5117)). Sunderland’s purchase of the Earl of Bristol’s interest in the freehold was not effected until February, 1683–4 (Deed in possession of the London County Council) just before his sale of the premises.
250. The fact that the 1675 Hearth Tax Roll shows the Earl of Devonshire at the house is not conclusive against this, as it is probable, from other considerations, that this particular roll, though bearing the date 1675, represents the state of affairs in 1674.
251. Dictionary of National Biography.
252. Dictionary of National Biography.
253. Freehold and 99 years ’ lease in April, subsidiary lease in June.
254. Second son of Thomas, first Lord Fauconberg, a prominent royalist. Died in 1689.
255. Will of Lord Belasyse, quoted in Indenture of 12th March, 1717–8, between Thos. Stonor, etc., and Sir Godfrey Kneller (Close Roll, 5 Geo. I. (5117)).
256. Indenture of 12th March, 1717–8, between Thos. Stonor, etc., and Sir Godfrey Kneller (Close Roll, 5 Geo. I. (5117)).
257. The sewer ratebook for 1703 (representing probably the state of things in the previous year) shows “Thomas Stonor, Esq.” still in occupation; that for 1709 (the next issue) gives “Sir Godfrey Kneller.” The Dictionary of National Biography says he purchased the house in 1703, but this is obviously an error. (See above).
258. Somerset House Wills, Richmond, 161.
259. The statement seems to have originated with Horace Walpole (Anecdotes of Painting, Wornum ed. (1888), II., pp. 209–210).
260. Munk’s Roll of the Royal College of Physicians, I., p. 456.
261. London Past and Present, III., p. 137.
262. See p. 76.
263. A deed of 27th November, 1745, shows “Lady Goodyear” and Mr. Charles Leviez then in occupation. (Midd. Registry Memorials, 1745, III., No. 156).
264. Sir Godfrey Kneller left his Great Queen Street property to his wife for her lifetime, with reversion to his godson, Godfrey Kneller Huckle, “provided the surname of Kneller be adopted.” Godfrey Kneller, the younger, died in 1781, and his son, John Kneller, in 1814.
265. Bryan’s Dictionary of Artists; Walpole’s Anecdotes, p. 702.
266. The Dictionary of National Biography is in error in stating that he added this house to the other.
267. Redgrave’s Dictionary of Painters and Engravers.
268. Leask’s James Boswell, p. 125.
269. Nichol’s Illustrations of Literature, VII., pp. 308–9.
270. Details of Boswell’s residence there are given in the Council’s publication, Indication of Houses of Historical Interest, I., pp. 79–84.
271. III., p. 137.
272. Holden’s Triennial Directory for 1802–4.
273. Reproduced here.
274. See p. 47.
275. “All that messuage ... lately divided into two shops or dwelling houses.” Indenture, dated 7th October, 1813, between Sophia Kneller and G. J. Kneller and Thos. Crook. (Middlesex Registry Memorials, 1813, IX., 129.) The ratebook for 1812 shows the house in single occupation.
276. Close Roll, 17 Chas. I. (3275) Indenture between Edward, Lord Viscount Conway, Edw. Burghe, and William Newton and Elizabeth, Countess Rivers.
277. Release and quit claim by Wm. Newton, jnr., in possession of the London County Council.
278. The house was still standing on 12th February, 1738–9 (see indenture of that date between Philip Carter and Jas. Mallors, Middlesex Registry Memorials, 1739, I., 450–1), but by 22nd May in that year it had been demolished, the two houses fronting Great Queen Street were then in course of erection, and others were intended to be built. The parish ratebook for 1739 shows the house as “Empty”; that for 1740 gives: “Empty. 12 houses made out of one. ”
279. That the archway was exactly in the centre may be proved by the fact that when the two houses were sold to Jas. Mallors in the year 1742, they were each described as 22 feet in width, including half of the passage into Queen’s Court (Middlesex Registry Memorials, 1741, IV., 424 and 1742, I., 435).
280. Between Thomas Wither and Thomas Raye (Common Pleas Recovery Roll, 26 Chas. II., Trinity, Rot. 4).
281. Feet of Fines, Middlesex, 13 Chas. I., Trinity.
282. (27th January, 1650–1.) “Col. Berkstead to take care for the pulling down of the gilt image of the late Queen, and also of the King, the one in Queen Street, and the other at the upper end of the same street, towards Holborn, and the said images are to be broken in pieces.” (Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1651, p. 25.)
283. Recovery Roll (Common Pleas), 17 Chas. I., Hilary, 236. Indenture between William Newton, Philip Willoughby and Edward Mabb and Edward Burghe.
284. Afterwards Middle Yard.
285. See p. 82.
286. See Indenture of 18th May, 16 Geo. II., between Lord Conway and Francis Paddy (Middlesex Registry Memorials, 1743, I., 334–5).
287. Henry Sadler, Some memorials of the Globe Lodge No. 23 of the Ancient Free and Accepted Masons of England, p. 11.
288. Documents and drawings preserved in the Soane Museum.
289. Photographs of various modern features, although not coming properly within the scope of this volume, have been inserted for the purpose of showing the historic continuity of the buildings on the site of the old Hall.
290. The premises had been purchased in 1880. (Middlesex Registry Memorials, 1880, 962).
291. Indenture of 5th March, 1718–9, between Lord Montagu, etc. (1), William Juxon and Jas. St. Amond (2), and Sir Godfrey Kneller and Ed. Byng (3), in the possession of the London County Council.
292. G. E. C[ockayne’s] Peerage.
293. The sewer ratebook for this year shows “Henry Browne” in occupation of the house, but that for 1700 has the entry “ Webb, Esq.,” referring to the owner.
294. The sewer ratebook for this year shows “Henry, Lord Montague” in occupation.
295. Burke’s Extinct Peerage.
296. For other houses used for the purpose of the Portuguese Embassy in St. Giles-in-the-Fields, see p. 97, and Survey of London, Vol. III., pp. 13, 82.
297. Somerset House Wills, Richmond, 161.
298. The house is referred to later on as “all that messuage, etc., formerly called by the name of the Great Wardrobe” (Middlesex Registry Memorials, 1811,
VI., 104). It will be noticed that the title “Queen Anne’s Wardrobe” given to the western half of Bristol House in 1846 (Plate 16) is doubly incorrect. In the first place it is assigned to the wrong half of Bristol House, and secondly the dates show that it could not possibly have had any connection with Queen Anne.
299. See copy of deed, dated 11th March, 1708–9, for the appointment of Dummer as deputy. (Treasury Papers, Cal. 1708–14, CXIII., No. 12.)
300. Shortly before 4th February, 1774, Sheridan took a house in Orchard Street (Sanders’ Life of Sheridan, p. 23).
301. His name in the ratebooks is given as “Richard Sheridan” only, but a deed of 1811, giving the names of occupants of the house mentions him by his full name: “formerly in occupation of Benjamin Wilson, painter, afterwards of John Henderson, sometime since in the possession of Richard Brinsley Sheridan, and now of Ann Boak, milliner.” (Indenture of 20th June, 1811, between Jno. Kneller, Peter Tahairdin, and Thos. Grove Middlesex Registry Memorials, 1811, VI., 104.)
302. Moore’s Memoirs of Sheridan, p. 213.
303. F. M. Parsons’ Garrick and His Circle, p. 369. As an example of how false history comes to be written, it is interesting to note that Mrs. Parsons describes the house as “ an Inigo Jones house, in which five men known to fame: Hudson, the painter; scritch-scratch Worlidge, the etcher; Hoole, Tasso’s translator, whom Johnson loved; now Sheridan; and after him, Chippendale, the cabinet maker, successively lived.” None of the other individuals mentioned lived in the house occupied by Sheridan.
304. See p. 59.
305. Stafford’s Letters (Ed. Wm. Knowler, 1739), II., p. 165
306. Calendar State Papers, Domestic, 1638–9, p. 113.
307. Close Roll, 17 Charles I. (3275). Indenture between Lord Conway, Edw. Burghe and Wm. Newton and Elizabeth, Countess Rivers.
308. Historical MSS. Commission, House of Lords Calendar, Appendix to VI. Report, p. 109b.
309. G. E. C[ockayne’s] Peerage. The Dictionary of National Biography states that he was born in 1628, and was the son of John Savage, a colonel in the royal army.
310. Historical MSS. Commission, Frere MSS., Appendix to 7th Report, p. 531a.
311. Elizabeth Scroope, married to the Earl in 1647.
312. “Lord Rivers denies entrance to survey and payment,” and “Earle Rivers refuseth to pay. ”
313. Historical MSS. Commission, Frere MSS., Appendix to 7th Report, p. 531a.
314. At first a Roman Catholic, the Earl subsequently joined the English Communion.
315. Mary, the second wife of the second Earl, at this time Countess Dowager Rivers, by her will, proved 25th January, 1657–8 (in which she is described as “of St. Giles”) left £400 to Sir Francis Petre (Somerset House Wills, Wootton, 5).
316. Covent Garden.
317. Was this the third Earl’s sister of that name, youngest daughter but one of the second Earl by his first wife?
318. Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1673–5, p. 37.
319. Ibid., p. 174.
320. Dictionary of National Biography.
321. Arabella, died s.p. 21st March, 1717. (G. E. C[ockayne’s] Peerage.)
322. He married, in 1679, Penelope, daughter of John Downes; and in 1688 Mrs. Margaret Tryon. (Ibid.)
323. Somerset House Wills, Barnes, 209.
324. Daughter of Sir Peter Colleton, and one of the Earl’s numerous mistresses.
325. Sewer ratebook for 1720: “Lord North and Grey.”
326. On 29th September, 1722, the Duchess of Rutland wrote to Lady Gower: “The two lords went there [to the Tower] last night, Orrery and North and Gray, through their own want of consideration and indiscretion, ’twas said.” (Hist. MSS. Commission, MSS. of Duke of Sutherland, Report V., p. 191.)
327. G. E. C[ockayne’s] Peerage.
328. His country residence was St. Osyth’s Priory, Essex.
329. She died on 23rd June, 1746. (Gentleman’s Magazine, 1746, p. 328.)
330. Indenture of 12th February, 1738–9, between “Philip Carter of Tunstal, Suffolk, clerk, and Bessy, his wife (widow of Frederick late Earl of Rochford, deceased, and now commonly called Countess Dowager of Rochford), William Henry, Earl of Rochford, eldest son and heir of the said Frederick by the said Bessy, and Sir John Colleton, of Exmouth, Bt., brother and heir at law of Elizabeth Colleton alias Johnson, deceased, and James Mallors”; purporting to be a lease “for a year to vest the possession of and concerning all that capital messuage or mansion house situate on the south side of Great Queen Street where the said Frederick did lately dwell, which said messuage or mansion house was heretofore the house of Richard, Earl Rivers, and then called or known by the name of Rivers House.” (Middlesex Registry Memorials, 1739, I., 450–1.)
331. Lincoln’s Inn Fields, p. 174.
332. FitzGerald, Life of Mrs. Catherine Clive, p. 84.
333. Boswell, Life of Johnson, Vol. IV., pp. 7, 243.
334. See p. 60.
335. “March 31, 1638–9.... Direct your letter to be left with Lord Conway’s maid in Queen Street, so it will come more speedily to me, since I am very often with the Lord Admiral [Earl of Northumberland], whose house is next to Lord Conway’s, as I think you know” (Calendar State Papers, Domestic, 1638–9, p. 630).
336. See p. 86.
337. Clarendon’s History of the Great Rebellion, Book III., par. 228.
338. Letters from Thos. Smith to Sir John Pennington (Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, for 1638–9, pp. 92, 103, 113, 130).
339. Order of the Committee of the Council of War (Ibid., p. 166.)
340. March 5th, 1638–9. Instructions from the Lord Admiral to Capt. John Mennes of the Victory (Ibid., p. 537).
341. Letter, headed “Queen Street,” from Northumberland to the deputy lieutenants of Nottinghamshire (Hist. MSS. Commission, Reports on MSS. in Various Collections, VII., 295).
342. Recovery Roll (Common Pleas), 17 Chas. I., Hilary (236).
343. After her husband’s death she fell under the displeasure of Parliament, and “endured a long imprisonment ... and had ... been put to death if she had not made her escape to Oxford.” (Clarendon’s History of the Great Rebellion, Book XI., par. 222.) She afterwards (in 1648) married Sir James Livingstone, who became Earl of Newburgh.
344. Close Roll, 17 Chas. I. (3275) Indenture between Lord Conway, etc., and Countess Rivers.
345. John Lucas, etc., “ say they carried divers pictures, with frames, others without frames, and some rayles into Mr. Withers House [it will be remembered that Anthony Withers had purchased the house from Newton in 1637–8] in Queen’s Street, now in the possession of Col. Popham, the which goods above said these examiners say are the proper goods of Mr. Withers” (Interregnum Papers, A., 98). Withers was reported as a delinquent in October, 1645 (Domestic Interregnum Committee for Advance of Money (Order Book), A., 4 (295)), and was sequestrated in January, 1646 (Interregnum Papers A., 98 (13)).
346. Interregnum Papers G., 17 (704).
347. A deed relating to the house, dated 20th May, 1674, refers to it as being “ now or late in the tenure ... of the Right Hon. Francis, Lord Viscount Mountague”
(Common Pleas Recovery Roll, 26 Chas. II., Trinity, vol. 4 (366)).
348. G. E. C[ockayne’s] Peerage.
349. She was Elizabeth, daughter of Edward, first Marquess of Worcester. She died in 1684.
350. Sewer ratebook for 1683.
351. Indenture, 9th May, 1764, between Packington Tomkins (1), the Hon. Geo. Lane Parker (2) and Philip Carteret Webb (3) (Middlesex Registry Memorials, 1764, II., 491); indenture 16th November, 1774, between the Rev. Jas. Hallifax, etc., and Trustees for the Freemasons (Ibid., 1775, II., 122).
352. Historical MSS. Commission, Earl of Denbigh’s MSS. Appendix to 8th Report, Part I., p. 556b.
353. Feet of Fines (Middlesex), 1 Anne, Hilary.
354. His country residence was Woodberry Hall, Cambridge.
355. Somerset House Wills, Bedford, 210–211.
356. Mary, his eldest daughter, married (with a dower of £30,000) George, Viscount Parker, who in 1732 succeeded his father as (second) Earl of Macclesfield.
357. Afterwards married William Cartwright, of Aynho, Northampton.
358. See her will, dated 22nd June, 1753 (Somerset House Wills, Pinfold, 80).
359. Indenture of 9th May, 1764 (Middlesex Registry Memorials, 1764, II., 491).
360. See his will dated 7th February, 1770 (Somerset House Wills, Jenner, 417).
361. Indenture between the Rev. Jas. Hallifax, Ric. Blyke, Edw. Beavor of Farnham and Rhoda, his wife (lately Rhoda Webb, widow of Philip Carteret Webb, late of Busbridge, Surrey, deceased) and the Rt. Hon. Robert Edward Lord Petre, Henry Duke of Beaufort, Henry Duke of Chandos, Washington Earl Ferrers, Viscount Tamworth and Rowland Holt (Middlesex Registry Memorials, 1775, II., 122).
362. Foxcroft’s Life of Gilbert Burnet, p. 144.
363. Survey of London, Vol. III., p. 75.
364. Macaulay, History of England, II., p. 180.
365. Ibid., II., p. 460.
366. Foxcroft’s Life of Gilbert Burnet, I., p. lvii.
367. Foxcroft’s Life of Gilbert Burnet, I., p. lix.
368. Beaven’s Aldermen of the City of London, II., pp. 109, 186.
369. Lipscombe’s History of Buckinghamshire, II., p. 222.
370. G. E. C[ockayne’s] Peerage.
371. See p. 56.
372. See p. 74.
373. Campbell’s Lives of the Lord Chancellors, IV., p. 560.
374. Wheatley and Cunningham (London Past and Present, III., p. 137), mentioning his residence, which they wrongly identify with Nos. 55–56, say: “Here on October 18, 1740, the young Joshua Reynolds came to him as a house pupil and remained under his roof till July, 1743.” Leslie, in his Life of Sir Joshua Reynolds, also states that this occurred at Hudson’s house in Great Queen Street. The ratebooks, however, show quite clearly that in 1740–42, “Vanblew,” was in occupation, and that from 1743 to 1745 the house was empty. The first year in which Hudson is shown as the occupier is 1746. Reynolds’ residence with Hudson, therefore, must have terminated before the latter had moved to the house in Great Queen Street.
375. The entry “Geo. Hudson” in the issue of the ratebook for this year is probably a mistake.
376. The Dictionary of National Biography states that Worlidge settled in Great Queen Street in 1763, and the fact that Hudson’s name appears in the 1764 ratebook is not conclusive against this. On the other hand, a deed dated 9th May, 1764, mentions the house as being then in the occupation of Hudson (Middlesex Registry Memorials, 1764, II., 491).
377. The parish ratebook for 1764 shows Hudson still in occupation of the house, but he had apparently built his house at Twickenham before this. “In 1762 Reynolds dined one Saturday with his old master, Hudson, at ‘Twitenham,’ where he had built a house in the meadows” (Leslie’s Life of Sir Joshua Reynolds, I., p. 213).
378. A deed of 16th November, 1774, refers to the house as “formerly in the tenure of Mr. Hudson, painter, and late in that of Mr. Worlidge” (Middlesex Registry Memorials, 1775, II., 122).
379. Dictionary of National Biography.
380. Memoirs of Mrs. Robinson, ed. by M. E. Robinson, I., pp. 74–5.
381. Memoirs of Mrs. Robinson, I., p. 94.
382. See p. 60.
383. Calendar State Papers, Domestic, 1638–9, p. 630.
384. G. E. C[ockayne’s] Peerage.
385. Letter, dated 16th May, 1631, from Thomas Case ... to Edward, Viscount Conway, etc., “at his house in Drury Lane” (Calendar State Papers, Domestic,
1631–3, p. 45).
386. Recovery Roll, Common Pleas, 21 Chas. I., Mich., rot. x (251).
387. G. E. C[ockayne’s] Peerage.
388. Possibly Lord Wharton was the actual occupant of the house at the time.
389. Historical MSS. Commission, Duke of Portland’s MSS., Vol. III., p. 291.
390. Calendar State Papers, Domestic, Addenda, 1660–70, p. 701.
391. Ibid., pp. 712–3.
392. Calendar State Papers, Domestic, 1667, p. 535.
393. Ibid., 1667–8, p. 259.
394. Ibid., 1668–9, p. 223.
395. Roger Boyle, Baron Broghill and 1st Earl of Orrery (1621–1679) rendered great service to the Parliamentarians in Ireland, but afterwards realising that Richard Cromwell’s cause was hopeless, he combined with Sir Charles Coote to secure Ireland for Charles II. He was also a dramatist of some repute.
396. Calendar State Papers, Domestic, 1668–9, p. 502.
397. Ibid., 1668–9, p. 567.
398. Ibid., 1670, p. 111.
399. A less known contemporary account is the following: “Wednesday night last ... some mischievous persons to dishonour my Lord Chancellour crept through a window of his house in Queen Street and stole the mace and the two purses, but by good chance could not find the seal. There was upon the table a great silver standish, and a thousand guineyes in a cabinet, as they report, but nothing of them touched, the design being upon another score than bare robbery” (Letter, dated 8th February, 1676–7, from Edward Smith to Lord Rous, Historical MSS. Commission, Rutland MSS., XII. Report, App. V., p. 37).
The entry in the Middlesex Sessions Records concerning the event is as follows: “7 February, 29 Charles II. True Bill that, at St. Giles-in-the-Fields, Co. Midd., in the night between 2 a.m. and 3 a.m. of the said day, Thomas Sadler alias Clarke, William Johnson alias Trueman and Thomas Reneger, all three late of the said parish, laborers, broke burglariously into the dwelling house of Heneage Lord Finch the Lord Chancellor of the said Lord the King and then and there stole and carried off a silver mace gilt gold worth one hundred pounds and two velvet purses imbroydered with gold and silver and sett with pearles, worth forty pounds, of the goods and chattels of the said Lord the King. Found ‘Guilty,’ all three burglars were sentenced to be ‘hanged.’” (Middlesex Sessions Records, IV., p. 75).
400. Dictionary of National Biography.
401. Roger North’s Autobiography, p. 165.
402. “After we came to London, we were to wait on the Lord Jeffreys, who had the Seal, to congratulate and offer him all the service we could do, and to receive his commands touching the house in Queen Street where the Lord Keeper lived, and it was so proceeded that he took the house” (Roger North’s Autobiography, p. 195).
403. H. B. Irving’s Judge Jeffreys, p. 332.
404. 7 and 8 Will. III., cap. 27 (sessional number, 53).
405. Then resident next door, see pp. 73–4. She was Ursula, widow of Edward Conway, first Earl of Conway.
406. See e.g., Indenture of lease, dated 18th November, 1743, between Francis Paddey and Jas. Mallors (Middlesex Registry Memorials, 1743, III., 453).
407. The vestry minutes for 1712 also refer to the house under this title: “That a proper place for the site of a new parish church, and a house for a minister, would be at the great house in Great Queen Street, commonly called by the name of the Land Bank” (Parton’s Hospital and Parish of St. Giles-in-the-Fields, p. 291).
408. He wrote several medical books, as well as a Narrative of the Birth of the Prince of Wales. He had been summoned to attend the confinement of James II.’s queen, but was away from London and arrived too late.
409. Subscriptions were to be paid at Mercers’ Hall and Exeter Change (London Gazette, May 28th–June 1st, 1696), and Dr. Chamberlain’s office was, at any rate, at first in New Buildings, Lincoln’s Inn (Ibid., June 20th–23rd, 1696).
410. “The trustees of the Land Bank, late at Exeter Change (now removed to the Three Anchors, over against Salisbury Court in Fleet Street) do give notice, that on the 11th day of February next they will make a dividend to such persons as are Heads of classes to whom transfers are made” (The Post Boy, January 25th–27th, 1697–8).
411. Reproduced here.
412. See pp. 60–61, 63.
413. Survey of London, Vol. III., p. 98.
414. Confirmation of his residence in Great Queen Street about 1794 is found by the mention of “Thos. Leverton of Great Queen Street” in a deed of 29th September, 1795 (Middlesex Registry Memorials, 1795, VI., 211).
415. Mrs. Piozzi’s Anecdotes of Dr. Johnson (1786), p. 173.
416. Boswell’s Life of Johnson, 5th April, 1775.
417. Obituary notice in Gentleman’s Magazine, 88, part ii., 179.
418. Reproduced here.
419. Indenture of 19th July, 1798 (Middlesex Registry Memorials, 1798, III., 185), referring to the sites of Nos. 67 and 68, recites the lease so far as it concerns
those sites. The recital also refers to other ground dealt with by the lease, and this was almost certainly the site of No. 66, which it is known was also a Mills house, the eastern boundary of Conway House being described as “the messuage of Peter Mills, bricklayer, now in the tenure of the Countess of Essex.” (Recovery Roll (Common Pleas), 17 Chas. I., Hilary (236).)
420. Peter Mills died in 1670, then being resident in Little St. Bartholomew’s. (Somerset House Wills, Penn, 147.)
421. There is a clause referring to “such messuages and buildings as then were or afterwards should be erected thereon,” which is quite indefinite, but if there had been any houses the names of the occupiers would almost certainly have been given. The Finalis Concordia relating to the transaction does not mention houses, but only half a rood of pasture.
422. Parton’s Hospital and Parish of St. Giles-in-the-Fields, p. 290.
423. The occupier of No. 68 seems to have persisted later than 1709 (see below). Moreover, the assessable value of No. 67 drops from £40 in 1703 to £25 in 1715 (the next record), a fact which seems to point to the curtailment of the property due to the erection of the chapel.
424. Baguley’s The True State of the Case.
425. On 3rd September, 1728, Thos. Burges sold to Thos. Parnell and Wm. Page certain houses (one of which was certainly No. 68), and “all that building or chappell, together with all and singular the pews, seats, gallereyes and other rights and privileges thereunto belonging.” (Middlesex Registry Memorials, 1728, I., 251).
426. A Sermon preached at Queen Street Chapel and St. Paul’s, Covent Garden, on ... the day appointed for a general fast.
427. He was certainly in possession on 19th June, 1758, for on that date he mortgaged the whole of the property to William Ferrand (Middlesex Registry Memorials, 1758, III., 4).
428. Middlesex Registry Memorials, 1798, III., 185.
429. Blemundsbury, p. 397.
430. Middlesex Registry Memorials, 1815, III., 227.
431. “The new Methodist Chapel erected on the south side of Great Queen Street, Lincoln’s Inn Fields, was opened yesterday morning. It is a spacious, handsome building, and will accommodate a larger congregation than most of our churches. It has a range of two galleries on each side. The altar is an appropriate and beautiful piece of architecture.” (Morning Herald, 26th September, 1817).
432. Heckethorn’s Lincoln’s Inn Fields, p. 183.
433. See p. 61.
434. G. E. C[ockayne’s] Peerage.
435. A much mutilated Hearth Tax Roll, dating apparently from some time between 1666 and 1672, shows “Geo. Porter, Esq.,” residing on the south side of Great Queen Street, but it cannot be proved that the entry refers to the same house.
436. Dictionary of National Biography.
437. Survey of London, Vol. IV., p. 81.
438. Burke’s Extinct Peerage. Knighted, 7th August, 1624 (Shaw’s Knights of England, II., p. 186).
439. Peerage of England, 1710 (2nd edn.), p. 232.
440. See Survey of London, III., p. 53.
441. Probably the “Ashburnham Froude” who is shown in joint occupation with Burges of No. 68 in 1723 (see p. 92).
442. Francis Const (1751–1839), legal writer. “Wrote some epilogues and prologues, and numbered among his convivial companions Henderson, John Kemble, Stephen Storace, Twiss, Porson, Dr. Burney and Sheridan.” (Dic. Nat. Biog.).
443. “Yesterday was married by the Rev. Mr. Francklin at his chapel near Russel Street, Bloomsbury, David Garrick, Esq., to Eva Maria Violetti.” (General Advertiser, 23rd June, 1749). Fitzgerald (Life of David Garrick, p. 126) wrongly says: “at the church in Russell Street, Bloomsbury.” The statement of Mrs. Parsons (Garrick and his Circle, p. 143) that it was “at Dr. Francklin’s Chapel in Queen Street (the modern Museum Street)” is based on unknown, but possibly quite good, evidence.
444. Dictionary of National Biography.
445. The Dictionary of National Biography states that her death also took place in Great Queen Street. It is difficult to reconcile this with the fact that the parish ratebook for 1795 shows that Francis Const took up his residence in the house in the course of that year. She was, however, certainly resident there on 4 June, 1795, the date of her will.
446. Burke’s Commoners of Great Britain and Ireland, III., p. 402.
447. Historical MSS. Commission, MSS. of Duke of Rutland, IV., p. 545.
448. “The style of Lord Ros of Roos continued to be still used (wrongfully) by the Earls of Rutland, as, indeed, it was until a much later period, and the wellknown divorce of John Manners ... was granted to him ... under the designation of Lord Roos, to which he was not entitled.” (G. E. C[ockayne’s] Peerage.)
449. On the death of the sixth Earl of Rutland, the Barony of Ros of Hamlake expired, and the old Barony of Ros devolved upon his daughter, Katherine, who married George Villiers, first Duke of Buckingham. She died in or before 1663, and
was succeeded in the title (of Ros) by her son George Villiers, second Duke of Buckingham (Burke’s Peerage and G. E. C[ockayne’s] Peerage).
450. After his death she married Sir William Langhorn, Bt.
451. Historical MSS. Commission, MSS. of Duke of Rutland, Vol. IV.
452. Ibid., II., p. 19.
453. The latter is probably for the whole of this period in respect of the Chapel. In 1733 a separate entry is made for Burges and the Chapel.
454. Reproduced here.
455. See p. 42.
456. The licence was granted in 1630 (see p. 43).
457. This ran parallel to Great Queen Street, 197 feet distant therefrom.
458. The above particulars are taken from Recovery Roll, 9 Chas. I. (Easter) (201). Rot. 23.
459. Indenture dated 9th August, 1633, between Geo. Gage and the Lady Alice Dudley (Close Roll, 10 Chas. I. (2652)).
460. Then (under the indenture of 9th August, 1633, mentioned above) charged with a rent of £150 a year, during the life of Lady Dudley (Chancery Proceedings, Series II., 409–73).
461. See Chancery Proceedings, Bridges, 562–24. Suit of Sir Edw. Stradling.
462. Such was the statement made by Weld in answer to the claim advanced by Sir Edward Stradling, junr., grandson of the other Sir Edward, who, however, suggested that the transaction was a mortgage containing a proviso for redemption for £416. (Chancery Proceedings, Bridges, 562–24).
463. Parton (Hospital and Parish of St. Giles-in-the-Fields, p. 138) mentions a tablet at one end of Wild Street, with an inscription suggesting that the east side of the street was finished in 1653. This fits in quite well with the above-mentioned facts.
464. It is mentioned as “the way ... leading on the back side of Drury Lane from Princes Streete to Queene Streete” in Indenture of 13th August, 1629, between Richard Holford and Sir Edw. Stradling (Close Roll, 5 Chas. I. (2800)).
465. The date of the lease to Ittery (see p. 93).
466. Weld’s own name, though usually spelt with an “ e ” is also found in the forms: Wild, Wield, Weild.
467. Indenture between Richard Holford and Edward Stratton (Close Roll, 1658 (3984)).
468. Weld having been ordered to build a wall to prevent back avenues to his chapel, at his house, was in 1679 accused of having evaded the order by leaving a
door in the wall, “whereby there will be as free access to the chapel as before.” (Historical MSS. Commission, House of Lords MSS. App. to 11th Report, Part II., p. 127).
469. Blemundsbury, p. 384.
470. The lease was not held directly by the ambassadors; see particulars of a mortgage of Weld House, 20 June, 1665, wherein was reserved a lease made on 10 May, 1678, by Weld of the ambassador’s house to Augustine Coronell for 10 years at a rent of £300. (Chancery Proceedings, Bridges, 438–48).
471.
Lady Francis Weld and Mr. Humphrey Weld 2 10 0 2 0 0
Sir John Wray. 1 0 0 1 0 0
472. “John Corrance ... sheweth that ... Humphry Weld, of Weld Street, esq., ... built these several messuages, viz. ... and two other messuages scituate in Weld Street, with two coach houses, stables and hay lofts over, being at the further end of a garden in his, Humphry’s, possession, and by indenture of 17th May, 1665, demised them to John, Lord St. John, of Basing, Earle of Wilts and Marquis of Winchester, for twenty yeares, at a rent of £160; and also one other house in Weld Street, which messuage with the use of a house of office at the end of a garden of Weld’s called the Back garden, and the use of a pumpe in a stable yard thereto adjoyning in common with his other tenants by indenture of July 31st, 1671, Weld demised to Thomas Hawker, of St. Giles, gentleman, for 11¼ years at a rent of £30.” (Chancery Proceedings, Bridges, 465–184).
473. See previous note.
474. Worsley’s residence was the last house but one in Great Queen Street, and the premises held by him in Wild Street obviously backed on to his residence.
475. Hospital and Parish of St. Giles-in-the-Fields, p. 248.
476. It is impossible to make the entries in the Hearth Tax Rolls agree with all the particulars of occupations given by Parton, and copies of the deeds from which he quotes have not come to light in the course of the investigations for this volume.
477. “Finding them, however, to be too numerous, they ventured to apprehend only some few that stood outmost, and hurrying them away as fast as they could, by the time they were well within my gates, the rest made after them, attempted to break open my doors, fell upon the watchmen, broke their halberts, flung brickbats and stones up against my house, cried out: ‘This is the grand justice that hangs and quarters us all, and caused Jones and Wright to be executed the last sessions,’ divided themselves into two parties, sent one to beset the back lane behind my garden, having information given them that I sent prisoners out that way to avoid a
