Prospectus A Case Study of Organizational Change Recipients’ Beliefs on the Adoption of Project Management Practices within an Organization Stephen C. Burgan Indiana Wesleyan University Ed.D. Organizational Leadership October 2010
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
1
Proposed title A Case Study of Organizational Change Recipients’ Beliefs on the Adoption of Project Management Practices within an Organization Abstract In today’s evolving business climate, organizational change initiatives are the focus of many operational business strategies. Research indicates that project management practices substantially enhance change initiatives. Yet, like other approaches to change initiatives, the successful implementation of project management remains elusive. In spite of substantial research supporting the benefits of utilizing project management practices, effective implementation of these practices remains elusive. One source of the failure to adopt project management practices is the change beliefs of the change recipients. The proposed research study will determine the organizational change recipients’ beliefs on the adoption of project management practices. Identification of these concerns can assist in selecting appropriate intervention strategies. The theoretical basis for this research study is the diffusion of innovation. During the diffusion process, individuals form attitudes based on their beliefs about the innovation, which then form their perceptions regarding the adoption of the innovation. The purpose of this study is to discover and understand the organizational change recipients’ beliefs on the adoption of project management practices. The primary qualitative strategy for this research is to use an exploratory, single case study utilizing a mixed methods approach with an embedded unit of analysis. The proposed mixed methods approach for this case study will utilize: (1) the Organizational Change Recipients’ Beliefs Scale (OCRBS) to determine what the organizational change recipients’ beliefs are, (2) semi-structured interviews to determine why the organizational change recipients’ believe that way, and (3) direct observation of behaviors in the
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
2
natural setting of a selected organization. The embedded unit of analysis of the organization will be based on stratified, purposeful sampling of executive management, project managers or leaders, and project participants. This proposed research design will facilitate comparisons among the three subgroups, and may provide organizational leaders and project management practitioners with insight into factors influencing the adoption of project management practices. Among the expected benefits of the study are the following: (a) a deeper understanding of organizational adoption of standards and methods, (b) insight into change recipients’ beliefs about change, and (c) a greater awareness of planning and executing implementation to successfully introduce change into an organization.
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
3
To keep pace in a constantly evolving business world, organizations often find it necessary to implement major enterprise-wide changes that affect their processes, products, and people. As such, organizational change initiatives are the focus of many operational business strategies (Chung & Hsu, 2010). To effectively lead and manage these organizational initiatives requires the use of project management practices (Lientz & Rea, 2002). In spite of substantial research supporting the benefits of standardized project management practices, effective adoption of these practices remains elusive (Martinsuo, Hensman, Artto, Kujala, & Jaafari, 2006). Failure to recognize the change beliefs of the change recipients is a possible source of failure to adopt project management practices. The theoretical basis for this research study is the diffusion of innovation. Everett Rogers (2003) defines the diffusion of innovation as "the process by which an innovation is communicated through channels over time among the members of a social system" (p. 11). During the diffusion process, individuals form attitudes based on their beliefs about the innovation, which then form their perceptions regarding the adoption of the innovation. The proposed research will investigate why organizations may or may not adopt standardized project management practices. The purpose of this study is to discover and understand the organizational change recipients’ beliefs on the adoption of project management practices. The primary qualitative strategy for this research is an exploratory, single case study utilizing a mixed methods approach with an embedded unit of analysis. The proposed mixed methods approach for this case study will utilize a survey to determine the organizational change recipients’ beliefs and semi-structured interviews and direct observation of behaviors to build an exhaustive case to determine the basis for the organizational change recipients’ beliefs. The Organizational Change Recipients’ Beliefs Scale (OCRBS) developed by Armenakis, Berneth,
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
4
Pitts, and Walker (2007), will be the survey instrument used for the proposed research study. The OCRBS is a psychometrically sound, self-report questionnaire consisting of twenty-four questions that can be used to assess the progress of organizational change efforts (Armenakis et al., 2007). Sampling of the organization will be based on stratified, purposeful sampling of executive management, project managers or project leaders, and project participants. This design approach will illustrate the variations between the embedded units of analysis and facilitate comparisons among the three subgroups (Patton, 2002). Because project management is increasingly used as a means to achieve an organization’s strategic objectives, it is important for organizational leaders to know and understand the organizational change recipients’ beliefs in regard to adoption of project management practices. The purpose of this proposed study is to discover and understand the organizational change recipients’ beliefs on the adoption of project management practices. This will add to the body of knowledge for organizational leadership by providing insights of the organizational change recipient’s beliefs on adopting project management practices. General Nature of the Problem To keep pace in a constantly evolving business world, organizations often find it necessary to implement major enterprise-wide changes that affect their processes, products, and people. A research study conducted by the Society of Human Resource Management (2007), found that ―more than four out of five organizations (82%) had implemented or planned to implement new processes, products, services and/or policies requiring organization-wide change management initiatives‖ (p. 1). Today’s organizations are impacted by a number of environmental factors such as competition, innovation, turbulence, complexity, and ubiquitous change (Chung & Hsu, 2010). Organizations must develop an ability to continuously and
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
5
consciously transform themselves. Facing the pressures of global competition, rapid technological change, rapid product obsolescence, organizational downsizing, and complexity of multiple organizational initiatives, organizational change initiatives are the focus of many operational business strategies (Chung & Hsu, 2010). These major business trends, coupled with the need for organizations to continuously and consciously transform themselves, require the use of project management practices (Lientz & Rea, 2002). Project management can provide the knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to lead and manage these organizational change initiatives (Kerzner, 2003). Organizations that successfully adopt standard project management practices realize improved financial results (Englund, Graham, & Dinsmore, 2003; Kerzner, 2003; Center for Business Practices, 2006). Research by Dai and Wells (2004) and Martinsuo et al., (2006) support project management standards, methods, and training to deliver project results and meet budgets more consistently. In 2008, the Project Management Institute determined from a multi-method, multi-disciplinary research study, ―unequivocally that project management adds value‖ (Thomas & Mullaly, 2008, p. 349). Having ―uniform or standardized project management procedures, processes, and systems‖ (Thomas & Mullaly, p. 151) has the greatest impact on achieving value. The study provides explicit and compelling evidence of the value that organizations recognize when project management is appropriately implemented. In spite of substantial research supporting the benefits of standardized project management practices, effective implementation of these practices remains elusive (Martinsuo, et al., 2006). For example, research by the Center for Business Practices (2006) found that inconsistent project management practices remain one of the most prevalent challenges of today’s organizations. The degree of value in adopting project management practices is realized
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
6
when the implementation is appropriate to the organization’s need (Thomas & Mullaly, 2008). Thomas and Mullaly (2008) assert that ―the degree of value that organizations realize is determined by how well what is implemented meets the needs of the organization‖ (p. 360). Failure in the implementation of project management is evident with the continuing widespread underachievement of projects. In a study conducted by Englund, Graham, and Dinsmore, the majority of selected projects were found to have missed deadlines, budget overruns, and customer dissatisfaction due to ―lack of project management skill, methodology, and organizational support led to most projects being late, over budget, and not done to customer satisfaction‖ (2003, p. 10). Problem Statement Major business trends, such as global competition, rapid technological change, rapid product obsolescence, organizational downsizing, and complexity of multiple organizational initiatives require organizations to continuously and consciously transform themselves. Project management practices can provide the knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to lead and manage these organizational change initiatives. Although application of standard project management practices may be beneficial, the problem of widespread failure of implementation of project management practices continues (Crawford, 2006). Supplemental research has provided additional evidence that the failure of implementation resulting from corporate cultures or by individual project managers is slow or may not occur at all (Christensen, Marx, & Stevenson, 2006). However, the underlying reasons for slow or failed implementation have not been fully explained (Christensen, et al., 2006). Failure to recognize the change beliefs of the change recipients is a possible source of failure in the implementation of project management practices. The proposed case study
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
7
described in this prospectus investigates why organizations may or may not adopt standardized project management practices. Specifically, the research study will determine the organizational change recipients’ beliefs in the adoption of project management practices. Research Questions The purpose of this study is to discover and understand the organizational change recipients’ beliefs on the adoption of project management practices. Therefore, the research questions for this study are the following: 1. What are the organizational change recipients’ beliefs on the adoption of project management practices within an organization? 2. Why do the organizational change recipients believe that way? "We need to make sure that we understand what we know about project management (not just what we think we know), and what we need to learn‖ (Thomas, 2009, p. 130). The primary qualitative strategy for this research is a single case study utilizing a mixed methods approach with an embedded unit of analysis. In a qualitative study, the research question that asks what describes the phenomenon within its real life context (Creswell, 1998). This statement provides a justifiable rationale for conducting an exploratory study to develop relevant propositions for further inquiry (Yin, 2009). The second research question of why is more explanatory and likely to lead to the use of case studies (Creswell, 1998). Questions such as these bring the quantitative results in to clear focus through elaboration, rather than frequencies or incidence. The research will endeavor to provide organizational leaders and project management practitioners with insight into factors influencing the adoption of project management standards. Among the possible benefits of the study are the following (a) insight into the organizational change recipients’ beliefs about change, (b) an understanding of the innovation-diffusion process
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
8
concerning organizational change, and (c) an awareness of influencing factors surrounding the ability to effectively plan and execute the implementation to successfully introduce change into an organization. Definitions of Terms Conducting a research study on the adoption of project management practices necessitates the following definitions to assist in understanding the terms involved. Defining terminology serves to avoid misrepresentation of data and facts. The following terms are used throughout the study. These terms are defined in attempt to establish a foundation of meaning and understanding. Change agent – An individual whose influence can affect another individuals’ innovation-decision in a direction deemed desirable by the organization (Rodgers, 2003) Change beliefs – ―Precursors of cognitions, emotions, and intentions that determine buyin in the paradigms and behaviors of those who will be affected by the change‖ (Armenakis, et al., 2007, p. 482) Change recipients – Individuals impacted, positively or negatively, by the outcome of the organizational change initiative Executive management – Members of an organization having authority to authorize the expenditure of financial and human resources, and to adopt project management practices; a categorical variable for use as an embedded unit of analysis Organizational change – Modification of an organization’s structure or processes to improve performance, communication, decision-making, and problem-solving capabilities (Burke, 2008)
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
9
Organizational change initiative – Activities that achieve various organizational strategic goals or objectives and expend financial, capital, and human resources of an organization Opinion leader – An individual who is able to influence other individuals’ attitudes or beliefs informally in a desired way with relative frequency (Rodgers, 2003) Project manager or project leader – Organizational member designated to manage or lead others (or both) within a project environment to expected project outcomes based on defined and accepted objectives: a categorical variable for use as an embedded unit of analysis Project management – ―The application of knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to project activities to meet project requirements‖ (Project Management Institute, 2008, p. 6) Project management practices – Individualized, discrete knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques as defined in A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, 4th ed. (2008) Project management practitioner – Organizational member who performs various activities within a project environment that lead to project outcomes based on defined and accepted objectives; a categorical variable for use as an embedded unit of analysis Assumptions Guiding the Study The early stage of formulating a research study is written with a set of assumptions about the study. These assumptions guide the approach to the proposed study in regard to its scope, size, and scale. One initial assumption is that the organization described in this proposed research study seeks to adopt and institutionalize project management practices. This assumption is based on the belief that the organizational leaders understand that project management practices result in tangible and intangible benefits. Achieving value from the adoption of project management practices is the result of a successful implementation of project management practices that are appropriate to the organization, given its organizational context
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
10
and the established objectives for undertaking the change initiative. Another assumption is that the external environment, within which the organization operates, along with the organization’s internal structure and practices, may influence the adoption and implementation of project management practices. Achieving a common definition for what is known as project management may not be the same across and within organizations. According to the Project Management Institute’s A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, 4th ed. (2008), project management is defined as ―the application of knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to project activities to meet project requirements‖ (p. 6). The assumption made for this study is that the term, project management, is understood to be the same across all organizations. This study will use a broad definition of project management that includes ―project management processes, training, and toolsets to incorporate any disparities that may exist in terminology or definition‖ (Thomas & Mullaly, 2008, p. 145). Another assumption concerns the various factors that affect the population and sample size of the research study. Acceptance, authorization, and availability will determine the selection of a representative organization to participate in this study. Literature Review Creswell (1998) states, ―the strongest and most scholarly rationale for a research study follows from a documented need in the literature for increased understanding and dialogue about an issue‖ (p. 94). Literature review can develop a justification for a study by identifying how the work will address an important need or unanswered question (Maxwell, 2005). Maxwell states that prior research can inform the researcher regarding decisions about methods, suggesting alternative approaches, or revealing potential problems and their solutions. ―The shape of project management research in the future will be built on prior research and will need to be
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
11
appropriate to the current trends in the practice of project management and the world of work‖ (Thomas, 2009, p. 130). Project management research in the future will grow from the foundation of current project management research, stimulated by the needs of project management practices applicable to what is required to manage projects successfully. Review of Project Management Research indicates that project management practices substantially enhance change initiatives. Lientz and Rea, (2002), assert that the need to implement major enterprise-wide changes requires the extensive use of project management practices. Project management is increasingly used as a means to achieve an organization’s strategic objective(s) (Lientz & Rea, 2002). According to Ward (2000), project management is the discipline of applying knowledge, skills, tools, and management techniques to project activities to meet or exceed the needs and expectations of project sponsors and stakeholders. The Project Management Institute (2008) defines project management as ―the application of knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to project activities to meet the project requirements‖ (p. 6). Modern project management evolved in the 1990’s with an emphasis on establishing standard practices as formalized organizational competencies (Crawford, 2006). Kerzner (2003) stated, ―Project management is no longer viewed as a system internal to the organization. Project management is now viewed as a competitive weapon that brings quality and value-added to the customer‖ (p. xi). The purpose of this study is to discover and understand the organizational change recipients’ beliefs on the adoption of project management practices. Early research in project management focused on improving specific individual tools and techniques of project management or on understanding how various project management tools and techniques support project effectiveness or performance (Thomas, 2009). By the early 2000’s, the interest changes
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
12
from managing projects to integration of project management concepts into organizational management (Thomas, 2009). "Recently, the focus in project management literature has shifted from performing project management to integrating it into the organization" (Thomas, 2009, p. 131). Ives (2005) found that there is little research related to the effective fit of projects into organizations. The Ives study is limited, as it includes in-depth interviews of only four people (Ives, 2005). Review of Organizational Change Management Today, virtually every organization faces significant change. Organizations in all industries encounter some form of global competition, technological change, product obsolescence, or downsizing (Chung & Hsu, 2010). Unfortunately, organizational change is difficult, and most attempts to initiate and implement change fail (Black & Gregersen, 2003). One problem, identified by Black & Gregersen (2003), is the tendency of companies to focus on looking for the convenient way to reduce resistance to change, rather than addressing roots of the failure. In research on organizational culture, Kaliprasad (2006) found that resistance to adoption is prevalent in a culture built on tradition and stability rather than a focus on responsiveness and flexibility. Kaliprasad (2006) stated that to be successful, a company must create a structure that supports an environment comfortable with change adoption. Whether large or small organizational change initiatives are undertaken, executive management creates the expectation that organizational members should be able to continuously adapt to these changes (Caldwell, Herold, & Fedor, 2004). Due to the increasing amount and complexity of organizational changes, a substantial literature base has emerged that examines various change phenomena (Armenakis & Bedeian, 1999). However, much of the literature fails to investigate an organization’s resistance-for-change to determine if adoption of the proposed
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
13
change will succeed (Porras & Robertson, 1992). Organizational change begins by changing the attitudes of individuals, not the other way. Even the most ardent believers in organizational change have agreed that, at minimum, organizational change requires some individual early adopters (Black & Gregersen, 2003). Just as in the marketplace, a new product almost never succeeds immediately; it requires early adopters to achieve traction or momentum. Organizations are the same, moving organizational members, to the point of adopting change, is the role of the change agent. By understanding the readiness-level for organizational change, the effectiveness of the change agent will depend on the culture of the organization (Worley & Lawler, 2006). Worley and Lawler proposed that organizations must become comfortable with adopting change; so comfortable that adopting change is an expected mode of conducting business. This segment of organizational change management research is becoming increasingly important as evidence shows that most change initiatives result are unsuccessful, and in looking for a possible cause for this failure, researchers are pointing to the readiness-for-change as a possible source (Porras & Robertson, 1992). Given this assertion, change management experts are now advocating a greater emphasis on planning for change to effectively manage the change process, improving the adoption and sustainability of the change initiative (Worley & Lawler, 2006). The results of this study will add to the organizational leadership body of knowledge by providing insights of the organizational change recipients’ beliefs on adopting project management practices. Review of Diffusion of Innovation Theory The theoretical basis for this research study is the diffusion of innovation theory. The researcher posits that to ―demonstrate the particulars of the study will serve to illuminate larger
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
14
issues and therefore hold potential significance for that field‖ (Marshall & Rossman, 2006, p. 12). Everett Rogers (2003) defines the diffusion of innovation as "the process by which an innovation is communicated through channels over time among the members of a social system" (p. 11). An innovation is defined as "an idea, practice, or object that is perceived as new, whether or not it is objectively new as measured by the lapse of time since its first use or discovery‖ (Rogers, 2003, p. 12). The four theories that explain the diffusion of innovation include: (1) the innovationdecision process, (2) individual innovativeness, (3) rate of adoption, and (4) the perceived attributes (Rodgers, 2003). This study utilizes the innovation-decision process as the theoretical basis for understanding the adoption of project management practices in an organization. The innovation-decision process The innovation-decision process (see Figure 1) outlines the process and the five stages of Knowledge Stage
Persuasion Stage
Decision Stage
Implementation Stage
Confirmation Stage
Figure 1. The five stages of the Innovation-Decision Process knowledge, persuasion, decision, implementation, and confirmation. The innovation-decision process offers a consistent process by which an innovation is diffused in societies (Rogers, 2003). The innovation-decision process also provides a framework for the stakeholders to successfully plan and sustain the adoption and implementation of the innovation. In the context of this study, the innovation would be project management and societies would be the selected organization. The decision to adopt an organizational change initiative, such as project management practices, requires adjustments in individual perceptions (Armenakis et al., 2007). Rogers
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
15
asserts that the diffusion process operates at the organizational as well as the individual level (Rogers, 2003). Individuals proceed through various stages of the innovation-decision process, ranging from knowledge of an innovation, to forming an attitude about the innovation, making a decision about adoption or rejection, implementing the new idea, and finally seeking confirmation of this decision (Rogers, 2003). During the knowledge stage, the potential adopter seeks information about the innovation. In the persuasion stage, individuals form attitudes based on their beliefs about the innovation, which then form their perceptions regarding the adoption of the innovation. During the decision stage, the individual engages in decision-making activities that lead to the adoption or rejection of the innovation. The implementation stage occurs when an adopter puts the innovation to use. In the confirmation stage, the adopter seeks reinforcement for the decision already made. According to Armenakis et al., (2007), understanding the beliefs of the change recipients impacted by the proposed change can improve the effectiveness of planning and implementing the organizational change initiative. ―A belief is an opinion or a conviction about the truth of something that may not be readily obvious or subject to systematic verification‖ (Armenakis et al., 2007, p. 483). The change recipients’ beliefs toward an innovation form a favorable or Change Beliefs Knowledge Stage
Persuasion Stage
Decision Stage
Implementation Stage
Confirmation Stage
Figure 2. Illustration of where the Change Recipients’ Beliefs toward an innovation occurs within the Innovation-Decision Process unfavorable attitude toward the innovation between the knowledge and decision stage (see Figure 2) in the innovation-decision process (Rodgers, 2005). Rodgers states that attitudes are a BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
16
collection of an individual’s beliefs about an innovation that predisposes his or her actions. Armenakis et al., (2007) calls these beliefs (cognitions, emotions, and intentions) as ―precursors to behavior reactions‖ (p. 483). During the persuasion stage is when an individual’s mental activity is based on affective or feelings about the innovation (Rodgers, 2003). According to Rodgers (2003), ―it is at the persuasion stage that a general perception of the innovation is developed‖ (p. 175). Within the innovation-decision process, the importance of the change recipients and their roles are crucial to the adoption of the innovation. Moving the change recipients through the various stages of the adoption process relies on the use of change agents, opinion leaders, and a diffusion network. Change agents are often responsible for creating the need for change and its subsequent implementation within the organization. Another critical role involved in the innovation-decision process is the opinion leader. Rogers (2003) defined opinion leaders as individuals who are able to informally influence an adopter’s attitude or behavior with relative frequency. Opinion leaders increase the rate of adoption, and transfer innovation information across various diffusion networks. Research Methods and Procedures The primary strategy for this research is an exploratory, single case study utilizing a mixed methods approach with an embedded unit of analysis. The goal is to develop pertinent propositions for further inquiry. The researcher has chosen a mixed methods approach because the research topic has yet to be explored. The findings from the research study conducted by the Project Management Institute support this design decision. "We need to make sure that we understand what we know about project management (not just what we think we know), and what we need to learn‖ (Thomas, 2009, p. 130). According to Yin (2009), understanding can be
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
17
facilitated with a case study approach in order to study individuals in their natural settings. The case study method is chosen to understand the real life phenomenon in depth by understanding encompassed, important, contextual conditions. Yin asserts that the case study's unique strength is its ability to consider a full variety of evidence of documents, artifacts, interviews, and observations. Critique of a Case Study Approach As a research approach, case studies are considered by some to be a less desirable form of inquiry due to their lack of rigor (Yin, 2009). A methodical research design that explicitly provides a logical set of research protocols can be used to judge the quality and rigor of the proposed research. ―Case study designs need to maximize their quality through four critical conditions related to design quality: (a) construct validity, (b) internal validity, (c) external validity, and (d) reliability‖ (Yin, p. 24). According to Yin, construct validity is achieved by identifying correct operational measures for the concepts being studied. Internal validity, not used for descriptive or exploratory studies, seeks to establish a causal relationship. External validity defines the domain in which a study's findings can be generalized. Reliability demonstrates that the procedural aspects of the study can be repeated with the same results. Another concern regarding case studies is that they provide little basis for scientific generalization. External validity is alleged to be an obstacle in conducting case studies. Critics claim that single cases offer a poor basis for generalizing by attempting to contrast the study’s findings to a larger universe or population. According to Yin, the similarity between a study’s findings and a larger population is incorrect when dealing with case studies (p. 43). The response to this concern is that case studies are ―generalizable to theoretical propositions and not to populations or universes‖ (Yin, 2009, p. 15). Yin (2009) asserts that ―in doing a case study,
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
18
your goal will be to expand and generalize theories (analytic generalization) and not to enumerate frequencies (statistical generalization)‖ (p. 15). This study will utilize analytic generalization to explore the diffusion of innovation theory, which can be used to compare empirically the results of the investigation. Single and Multiple Case Study Designs. In conducting a qualitative study, the researcher must consider whether to study a single case or multiple cases. Creswell (1998) argues that ―the study of more than one case dilutes the overall analysis; the more cases an individual studies, the greater the lack of depth in any single case" (p. 63). A potential vulnerability of a single case design is that a case may later turn out not to be the case it was thought to be at the outset (Yin, 2009). Because of the flexibility in a case study approach, the intended research design may no longer be appropriate for the research questions being asked. This means that the initial research questions may have one orientation, but as the case study proceeds, a different orientation may emerge, and the evidence will address different research questions. Yin (2009) asserts that single case designs require careful consideration to minimize the chances of misrepresentation and to maximize the access needed to collect the case study evidence. Operational protocols and procedures must be established and caution must be exercised to ensure the case is relevant to the issues and questions of interest to the research prior to the commencement of the case study or selection of the case site. Both single and multiple case designs have distinct advantages and disadvantages in comparison to single case designs. An advantage of multiple cases is that the findings are often considered more compelling, and the overall study is regarded as more robust (Yin, 2009). A significant disadvantage when undertaking a multiple case study is that it ―can require extensive resources and time beyond the means of a single student or independent research investigator;
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
19
therefore, the decision to undertake multiple case studies cannot be taken lightly‖ (Yin, p. 53). "What motivates the researcher to consider a large number of cases is the idea of generalizability, a term that holds little meaning for most qualitative researchers" (Yin, p. 142). Choice of a single case design. The conceptual framework for choosing a research design is primarily a model of what is happening in the case, and why. This focus on meaning is central to what is known as the interpretive approach to social science (Maxwell, 2005, p. 22). For this reason, the researcher has chosen a single-case design. The researcher is interested in the physical events and behaviors taking place, how the participants make sense of these, and how their understanding influences their behaviors. The researcher will select an organization, or a unit thereof, to study. A key step in designing and conducting a single case study is defining the case itself (the holistic design) and the unit of analysis (Yin, 2009). The preference for a single case design can be strengthened by using an embedded design. An embedded design consists of subunits of analyses, which can ―add significant opportunities for extensive analysis, enhancing the insights into the single case‖ (Yin, 2009, p. 52). In the context of this study, the embedded unit of analysis will be executive management, project managers or project leaders, and project management practitioners. Another design decision for strengthening the single case design is to conduct a mixed methods approach. The mixed methods approach ―forces the research methods to share the same research questions, to collect complementary data, and to conduct counterpart analyses‖ (Yin, 2009, p. 63). Mixed methods studies can permit researchers to address more complicated research questions and collect a richer, stronger array of evidence than can be accomplished by any single method alone. Yin (2009) states that an embedded case study design confirms that certain kinds of case studies already represent a form of mixed methods research.
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
20
The proposed mixed methods approach for this case study will utilize a quantitative survey to determine the organizational change recipients’ beliefs, and semi-structured interviews, and direct observation to build an in-depth case to determine why the organizational change recipients’ believe that way. Organization Change Recipient Beliefs Scale ―To strategically change your organization, you must first change individuals‖ (Black & Gregersen, 2003, p. 2). Unlocking individual change starts and ends with the beliefs that subjects carry in their heads. Black and Gregersen (2003), claim that our beliefs direct our behavior. If organizational leaders cannot change the individuals’ beliefs, they will not be able to change the organization as a whole. As a result, successful organizational change requires a focus on individuals and understanding of their beliefs in regard to change. The Organizational Change Recipients’ Beliefs Scale (OCRBS) developed by Armenakis, et al., (2007), is the chosen survey instrument to be used for the proposed study. The OCRBS is a psychometrically sound, self-report questionnaire consisting of twenty-four questions to assess the progress of organizational change efforts (Armenakis et al., 2007). The instrument determines the degree of acceptance among the change recipients, identifies deficiencies in specific change beliefs, and provides a basis for planning and executing the implementation (Armenakis et al., 2007). The advantages of the OCRBS are as follows: (a) assesses five beliefs that have been identified as relevant from previous change literature, (b) can be used concurrently with other change instruments, and (c) can be used during the three major phases of organizational change—readiness, adoption, and institutionalization (Armenakis et al., 2007). The researcher has obtained permission from the authors of the instrument and SAGE Publications via the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. to use the OCRBS in this study.
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
21
Concerns-Based Adoption Model Another research instrument considered for this research study that measures organizational change and adoption is the Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM). Based on research on the change process for educators by Fuller (1969) and change theories by Lewin (1951), Hall & Texas Univ., (1974) conceptualized the process known as the Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM). CBAM is based on concern-based theory that change is a progression of events that may be predictable (Hall & Texas Univ., 1974). According to the Concerns Based Adoption Model (CBAM), educators will experience concerns during the process of adopting an educational innovation. Identification of these concerns can assist in selecting appropriate interventions strategies. The CBAM describes a process of teacher change. The CBAM is composed of three parts: Stages of Concern, Levels of Use, and Innovation Configuration (Hall & Texas Univ., 1974). It emphasizes the adoption of educational innovation through the lens of developmental changes in the potential adopter’s beliefs and practices. Stages of Concern deals with expressed adopter concerns and issues related to his or her experience with, or perception of, the innovation. The Stages of Concern analyzes the educator’s feelings, observations, problems, successes, and failures while progressing through the change process of innovation adoption. When originally developed, CBAM emphasis was on the process entailed when educational institutions become involved in adopting innovations (Roach, Kratochill, & Frank, 2009). Where diffusion of innovation theory is broadly interested in the process of diffusion in any setting, CBAM was developed to describe the adoption-decision of teachers in an educational institution. Due to its limitations toward educational innovation, the CBAM was discarded as a model for this research study.
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
22
Data Collection The qualitative aspect of this study will consist of two data collection techniques, semistructured interviewing and direct observation. The researcher will conduct semi-structured interviews of executive management, project managers, and project participants. Semistructured interviews are conducted with a fairly open framework which allows for focused, conversational, two-way communication. The semi-structured interviews will be pre-designed with questions based on the five change beliefs. Other interview questions will evolve during the interview, allowing both the researcher and the person being interviewed the flexibility to probe for details or discuss issues. In addition, the researcher will conduct direct observations. This case study will take place in the natural setting of the selected organization, creating the opportunity for direct observation. Such observations provide the researcher with additional data (Yin, 2009). During site visits, the researcher will utilize informal direct observation techniques when administering the OCRBS assessment and conducting interviews. According to Yin, ―observational evidence is often useful in providing additional information about the topic being studied‖ (p. 110). Data Analysis ―Simply observing and interviewing does not ensure that the research is qualitative; the qualitative researcher must also interpret the beliefs and behaviors of participants‖ (Janesick, 2000, p. 387). The study design will incorporate an embedded single-case study using a mixed methods design to conduct research with overlapping triangulation of quantitative and qualitative data collection methods (Yin, 2003). In the embedded single-case study, three unique groups, consisting of executive management, project managers, and project practitioners, will be investigated to understand their change beliefs on the adoption of project management.
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
23
The Use of Triangulation. Yin states that, ―a major strength of case study data collection is the opportunity to use many different sources of evidence‖ (Yin, 2009, p. 114). This study will utilize a data collection and analysis method called data triangulation. Data collection and analysis protocol will involve assessing the change recipients’ beliefs using the OCRBS, semi-structured interviews, and direct observations as qualitative data to confirm findings. Data triangulation diminishes potential problems of internal validity because the multiple sources of evidence essentially provide multiple measures of the same phenomenon (Yin, 2009). Triangulation helps to maximize internal validity and the reliability of the data. Quantitative Data Analysis The quantitative aspect of this study will assess the five change beliefs of executive management, project managers, and project participants utilizing the Organizational Change Recipients Beliefs Scale. Descriptive statistics will be used to express the quantitative data in a study. Descriptive statistics will enable comparisons across the three embedded units of analysis, throughout the organization. Descriptive statistics are typically distinguished from inferential statistics in that inferential statistics, the data analysis is attempting to reach conclusions that extend beyond the immediate data alone. The goal of this study will be to expand and generalize theories (analytic generalization), not to enumerate frequencies (statistical generalization). Qualitative Data Analysis Qualitative content analysis involves a process designed to condense raw data into categories or themes based on the data collected from the semi-structured interviews. Interpretation of the interviews will involve attaching significance to the data, making sense of
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
24
the findings, and ―imposing order on an unruly but surely patterned world‖ (Patton, 2002, p. 480). This process uses inductive reasoning, by which themes and categories emerge from the data through the researcher’s examination and comparison. Qualitative content analysis includes inductive reasoning (Patton, 2002). Analytic induction will be used for verifying theories and propositions of the five change beliefs on the adoption-decision process in the diffusion of innovation theory. Direct Observation. Qualitative research is concerned with understanding and interpreting another person's social world through accessing their lived experiences. In addition to semi-structured interviews, the researcher will collect data through direct observation. Observations in a qualitative study are intentionally unstructured. The researcher can take advantage of new and potentially significant objects and events as they present themselves. The principle form of data collected from direct observation is field notes, which detail behaviors, conversations, or setting characteristics as recorded by the researcher. Analyses of informal direct observations will utilize interpretations the researcher makes of the observed phenomena. Patton (2002) describes the processes of inductive analysis as ―discovering patterns, themes, and categories in one’s data, according to an existing framework‖ (p. 453), which contrasts with deductive analysis where the analytic categories are stipulated beforehand. According to Patton, the researcher may generate ―analyst-constructed typologies‖ to reflect the understandings expressed by the participants. As patterns, themes, and categories emerge from the data, the researcher will employ a coding scheme to maintain organization of the collected data.
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
25
Data collection, analysis, and interpretation are integrated and iterative processes. As categories, themes, and coding schemes are being developed, the process of inductive interpretation begins. Interpretation brings meaning and coherence to the themes, patterns, and categories, developing linkages and a story line that makes sense (Marshall, C. & Rossma, G., 2006). Patton states (2002, p. 480), ―Interpretation means attaching significance to what was found, making sense of the findings, offering explanations, drawing conclusions, extrapolating lessons, making inferences, considering meanings, and otherwise impossible order.‖ Theoretical Proposition The theoretical basis for this research study is the diffusion of innovation. The four theories that explain the diffusion of innovation include: (1) the innovation-decision process, (2) individual innovativeness, (3) rate of adoption, and (4) the perceived attributes. This study utilizes the innovation-decision process as the theoretical basis for researching the adoption of project management with an organization. The innovation-decision process also provides a framework for the stakeholders to successfully plan and sustain the adoption and implementation of the innovation. In the context of this study, the innovation would be project management practices and societies would be the selected organization intended to adopt project management practices. Site Selection and Sampling The purpose of this single case study is to discover and understand the organizational change recipients’ beliefs on the adoption of project management practices. The proposed single case study design is based on a representative organization that is considering, or in the process of, adopting project management practices or that is in the process of adopting project management practices. One of the key and yet most difficult aspect of a case study approach is
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
26
gaining access to a social setting that is relevant to the research problem (Bryman, 2008). The objective is to select an organization that represents a typical organization among many different organizations, such as a manufacturing firm believed to be typical of many manufacturing firms in the same industry, a construction organization typical of many construction organizations. As an exploratory research study, the findings are to be analytically generalizable about the experiences of the observed phenomenon (Yin, 2009). According to Yin (2009) and the potential vulnerability of a single case design, there will be several factors established during the research design to qualify an organization, or its individuals members, to participate in the study. The initial qualifying criterion will be that executive management and project management practitioners recognize the value in the adoption of project management practices. The second qualifying criterion concerns the various logistical factors that affect the access and data collection procedures. Acceptance, authorization, and availability will determine the selection of a representative organization to participate in this research study. Based on the Armenakis et al., (2007) recommendation for future research, this researcher will add three categorical variables that ask the participants their job role based on a pre-defined set of multiple-indicators. The three categorical variables would distinguish between executive management (organizational members who have decision-making authority), project managers or project leaders (organizational members who are designated to manage or lead others within a project), and project management practitioners (organizational members who perform project activities). Establishing these three categorical variables strengthens the single case study design and enables the inclusion of an embedded unit of analysis. Multiple-indicators used within a self-completion questionnaire will provide a better measure or operational
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
27
definition of the change beliefs (Bryman, 2008). The multiple-indicators will subdivide the five change beliefs to more clearly define the various levels of influence that are needed to successfully implement an organizational change. It is the opinion of Armenakis et al., (2007) that subdividing the change beliefs is essential to assess and help build the necessary support for the organizational change. To further strengthen the proposed single case study, the researcher will conduct a mixed methods approach. The proposed mixed methods approach for this case study will utilize (1) the OCRBS to determine the organizational change recipients’ beliefs and (2) semi-structured interviews to determine the reason(s) why the organizational change recipients’ believe that way. For completing the OCBRS, sampling of the organization (the holistic design) will be based on stratified purposeful sampling. The goal of stratified purposeful sampling is to sample participants so that those sampled are relevant to the research questions that are being posited (Bryman, 2008). In this study, stratified purposeful sampling will be based on the three categorical variables of executive management, project managers or leaders, and project participants. The stratified purposeful sampling will illustrate possible variations between the embedded units of analysis and facilitate comparisons between the three subgroups (Patton, 2002). In contrast to the OCRBS, semi-structured interviews will be utilized to permit the research participants to describe what is meaningful and salient to them based on the predetermined change beliefs defined in the OCRBS instrument. Semi-structured interviewing ―promotes standardization of both asking questions and the recording of the answers‖ (Bryman, 2008, p. 194). As a form of naturalistic inquiry, inductive analysis will allow patterns to emerge that exists in the phenomenon being investigated (Patton, 2002). Semi-structured interviewing
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
28
will reduce errors due to variation in the asking of the questions and greater accuracy in and ease of processing the respondents’ answers. Final determination of population and sample size will be established during the proposal development for this study. Data collection will be achieved by the researcher, with the consent of the organization’s management, with scheduled meetings designated to complete the twentyfour question, paper-based OCRBS survey instrument and semi-structured interviews. Quantitative data analysis will be performed utilizing IBM® SPSS® Statistics v18.0. Qualitative data analysis will be performed utilizing computer-aided qualitative analysis software (NVivo v8.0). Contribution to the Field of Organizational Leadership ―Getting a new idea adopted, even when it has obvious advantages, is difficult‖ (Rodgers, 2003, p. 1). So is the case for the adoption of project management practices. As project management is increasingly used as a means to achieve an organization’s strategic objective, it is important for organizational leaders to know and understand that the adoption of project management practices constitutes in and of itself an organizational change initiative. Research on organizational change is becoming increasingly important as evidence shows that most change initiatives result in failure. As the number of failures continues to increase, researchers are pointing to the readiness for change as a possible source (Porras & Robertson, 1992). Given this assertion, change management experts are now advocating a greater focus on planning for change to effectively manage the change process to improve the adoption and sustainability of the change initiative (Worley & Lawler, 2006). This study utilizes Rogers’s (2003) diffusion of innovation theory as the theoretical basis for this study. Within the diffusion of innovation, Rogers (2003) states that the innovation-
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
29
decision process is used to gather information about an innovation and reduce uncertainties about its advantages and disadvantages. This study will specifically investigate the persuasion stage of the innovation decision process, which allows an individual to exhibit a belief (favorable or unfavorable) about the innovation. Utilizing Rodger’s recommendation to conduct a point of adoption study, this study will incorporate the beliefs of the change recipients to effectively plan and execute how the innovation would be implemented (Rogers, 2003). A qualitative study such as this would add to the literature on organizational leadership about the change beliefs concerning the adoption and diffusion of project management in organizations. The expected benefits of the study are the following: (a) insight into the five change recipients’ beliefs that could aid or hinder the proposed organizational change to adopt project management, (b) an understanding of the persuasion stage of the innovation-diffusion process for whether or not the adoption of project management, and (c) a greater awareness to adequately plan and execute the implementation to successfully introduce change into an organization. The research findings would provide valuable information for decision makers on how to effectively communicate the necessary change messages to successfully adopt project management into an organization.
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
30
References Armenakis, A., & Bedeian, A. (1999). Organizational change: A review of theory and research in the 1990s. Journal of Management, 25(3), 293-315. doi:10.1177/014920639902500303 Armenakis, A., Bernerth, J., Pitts, J., & Walker, H. (2007). Organizational change recipients' beliefs scale. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 43(4), 481-505. doi:10.1177/0021886307303654 Black, J. S. & Gregersen, H. B. (2003). Leading strategic change: Breaking through the brain barrier. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Bryman, A. (2008). Social research methods. 3rd ed. Oxford, NY: Oxford Press. Burke, W. (2008). Organizational change: Theory and practice, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Caldwell, S., Herold, D., & Fedor, D. (2004). Toward an understanding of the relationships among organizational change, individual differences, and changes in person-environment fit: A cross-level study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 868-882. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.868 Center for Business Practice Research. (2006). Project management: The state of the industry. J. Cabanis–Brewin (Ed.). Havertown, PA. Christenson, C., Marx, M., & Stevenson, H. (2006). The tools of cooperation and change. Harvard Business Review, 84(10). 73-80. Retrieved from http://0-web.ebscohost.com.oak.indwes.edu/ Chung, Y. & Hsu, Y. (2010). Research on the correlation between Design for Six Sigma implementation activity levels, new product development strategies, and new product
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
31
development performance in Taiwan’s high-tech manufacturers. Total Quality Management. 21(6). 603-616. DOI: 10.1080/14783363.2010.483073 Crawford, L. (2006). Developing organizational project management capability: Theory and practice. Project Management Journal, 37(3). 74-86. Retrieved from http://0-web.ebscohost.com.oak.indwes.edu/ Creswell, J. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among the five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Dai, C., & Wells, W. (2004). An exploration of project management office features and their relationship to project performance. International Journal of Project Management, 22(7), 523–532. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2004.04.001 Englund, R., Graham, R., & Dinsmore, P. (2003). Creating the project office: A manager’s guide to leading organizational change. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons. Fuller, F. (1969). Concerns of teachers: A developmental conceptualization. American Educational Research Journal, 6(2), 207-226. Hall, G., & Texas Univ. A. (1974). The concerns-based adoption model: A developmental conceptualization of the adoption process within educational institutions. Retrieved from ERIC database. Ives, M. (2005). Identifying the contextual elements of project management within organizations and their impact on project success. Project Management Journal, 36(1). 37-50. Retrieved from http://0-web.ebscohost.com.oak.indwes.edu/ Janesick, V. (2000). The choreography of qualitative research design: Minuets, improvisations, and crystallization. In N. Denzin and Y Lincoln (eds.), Handbook of qualitative research, 2nd Ed. ( pp. 379-399). Lincoln. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
32
Kaliprasad, M. (2006). The human factor II: Creating a high performance culture in an organization. Cost Engineering, 48(6). 27-34. Retrieved from http://0-web.ebscohost.com.oak.indwes.edu/ Kerzner, H. (2003). Strategic planning for a project office. Project Management Journal, 34(2), 13–25. Retrieved from http://0-web.ebscohost.com.oak.indwes.edu/ Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Lientz, B. P. & Rea, K. P. (2002). Project management for the 21st century, 3rd ed. New York: Academic Press. Marshall, C. & Rossman, G. B. (2006). Designing Qualitative Research, 4th ed. London: SAGE Publication. Martinsuo, M., Hensman, N., Artto, K., Kujala, J., & Jaafari, A. (2006). Project–based management as an organizational innovation: Drivers, changes, and benefits of adopting project–based management. Project Management Journal, 37(3). 87-97. Retrieved from http://0-web.ebscohost.com.oak.indwes.edu/ Maxwell, J. A. (2005). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach, 2nd ed. London: Sage Publications. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods, 3rd ed. London: Sage Publications. Porras, J. I. & Robertson, P. J. (1992). Organizational development: Theory, practice and research. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Project Management Institute. (2008). A guide to the project management body of knowledge. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)
Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS
33
Roach, A., Kratochwill, T., & Frank, J. (2009). School-based consultants as change facilitators: Adaption of the concerns-based adoption model (CBAM) to support the implementation of research-based practices. Journal of Educational & Psychological Consultation, 19(4), 300-320. Retrieved from ERIC database. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovation, 5th ed. New York: Free Press. Society for Human Resource Management. (2007). 2007 Change Management: Survey Report (SHRM 07-0180). Retrieved from http://shrm.org/research/ Thomas, J. T. (2009). Shaping the future of project management research. In D. Cleland & B. Bidanda (Eds.), Project management: Circa 2025. (pp. 129-152). Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute. Thomas, J. & Mullaly, M. (2008). Researching the value of project management. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute. Ward, J. L. (2000). Project management terms: A working glossary, 2nd ed. Arlington, VA: ESI International. Worley, C., & Lawler III, E. (2006). Designing organizations that are built to change. MIT Sloan Management Review, 48(1). 19-23. Retrieved from http://0-web.ebscohost.com.oak.indwes.edu/ Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and method. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)