Research Korner

PARTNERS IN INQUIRY: ETHICAL CHANGES IN TEAM RESEARCH

PARTNERS IN INQUIRY: ETHICAL CHANGES IN TEAM RESEARCH.     Introduction In this paper I explore some of the ethical challenges encountered during the course of team research. In ethics discourse, we often speak of ethical concerns toward our clients, sponsors, or "informants." But rarely does one read in the scholarly literature of concerns or issues involved in team research -- such as each team member's responsibilities toward one another, both during the course of the research and during the preparation and dissemination of results. One might hope that ethical behavior among team members would be a `given.' Unfortunately, both anecdotal evidence and my own personal experience indicate otherwise. Indeed,  has found that "... such problems occur quite often and seem to be regarded, even by those whose interests have been hurt, as an unnecessary but nonredressable evil of team research."(1) Research teams, of course, must grapple with much the same concerns with which individual researchers must deal -- namely, issues of confidentiality, informed consent, protection of human subjects, and obligations to all stakeholders.(2) However, team research, simply by virtue of its structural characteristics, presents additional ethical challenges not generally encountered by the individual researcher.(3) And of course, team research "... involves all the dynamics of groups -- developing roles, leadership, norms, cohesiveness, and balance between task and social dimensions."(4) There are many research situations that might fall under the rubric of `team research.' A research team may be composed entirely of anthropologists or it may include some members from a variety of academic disciplines. A team may comprise faculty and student researchers. A research team from one institution might collaborate with individuals or teams from other institutions, such as a university / college collaboration. It could be that academic researchers might conduct research with members of a community organization, or with practitioners, such as social workers. In the field of education, academic researchers might team with teachers in the classroom for the purpose of analyzing and improving classroom pedagogy. Finally, researchers from a variety of cultural backgrounds might form a partnership. "Collaboration" is often used to describe a wide variety of research situations. A team composed of a demographer, a statistician, and an anthropologist may be said to be "collaborative." However, it may well be that these individuals are, by and large, able to conduct their research independently, and given their different roles and levels of expertise, may not interact very closely. Yet another way in which the term "collaborative" is used is in the `new model' described by Carolyn Fluehr-Lobban and others in which the "subject" (or subjects) is participant in a far more active way than in what she refers to as traditional, colonial-style research.(5) There are many levels of involvement, however, and the distinction is important. As Margaret A. Gibson notes, collaboration with host communities, for example, can occur in the joint development of change strategies, in the joint administration of research funds, or in the form of partnership in the research itself.(6) For my purposes, collaboration will be used interchangeably with team research. I will limit my use of these phrases to those research situations in which team members are, at least ostensibly, considered equal partners in the research endeavor. For the purposes of this paper, I begin with  definition of team research as "... a collaborative endeavor [which] involves a group of researchers who come together, and pool their ideas, skills, energy, and time to pursue a mutual professional interest-joint research on a topic of common concern."(7) I modify this definition to include as well, those research situations in which academicians and community practitioners collaborate toward a `common' goal, such as improved services. In this model team members are, at least ostensibly, equal partners in the project, influencing each step of the research process. In the spirit of reflexive anthropology, I should state openly that my initial interest in this topic was borne of a painful and challenging personal experience some time ago as a member of a research team. Briefly, I was part of a multi-disciplinary team composed of five members conducting research in an elementary school. We had all agreed on the final products of our research: an oral presentation to our peers, a written paper for the professor, a (different) written report for the principal, and (if desired) a brief presentation to the faculty of the school. Un be known to us,  (a pseudonym for our team liaison) took it upon herself to give a copy of the report we had written for the professor to the principal. This is extremely problematic. Though we all used pseudonyms in the version given the professor, the school in question is extremely small and the principal, having been the gatekeeper, could easily determine who was spoken to and could, no doubt, attribute considerable portions of the data to specific faculty in his school. Of course we had promised our informants privacy in their responses and protection of confidentiality. But now, not only had confidences among team members been broken, but we (without our knowledge or consent) had violated our informants' confidentiality. And worse, some of the teachers were quite open and honest with how they felt about the inner workings of the school (including the principal). In the worst case scenario, some of our informants could potentially lose their jobs. I trust none lost their jobs, though I may never know. Needless to say, some of the team members were extremely angry and upset. "We" had violated our informants' trust and broken the cardinal ethical code of social science research. To bring the story to a close, we had a final meeting in which we all expressed our anger and concern. Jenna "seemed" to understand (problematic in itself) and apologized. But apologies do not erase what occurred and do not take away the guilt that has been dumped upon the rest of us. Nothing, it seemed, could have prepared me for the violation of trust and ethics thrust upon the team because of one individual's serious misstep. Background and Challenges It is interesting (and, I believe, quite telling) to note the considerable difficulty I had finding anthropological resources to complete this paper. A search of electronic databases using keywords such as "ethics" and "team research" yielded virtually no valuable hits. An applied anthropologist who has for several years held a conference on ethics in anthropology was also unable to offer concrete citations in which ethical issues in team research have been dealt with in the scholarly literature, though he agreed that it was clearly an important area.(8) After speaking with several colleagues and perusing the literature in a wide variety of disciplines, I have come to two conclusions. First, anthropologists are clearly discussing these issues in their writings and (in private?) among themselves. However, possibly because the primary topic of the article or chapter is generally not "ethics" per se, but educational research, cross-cultural research or a specific topic within, for example, medical anthropology, these pieces are not indexed under ethics and hence would not show up in electronic searches using `ethics' as a keyword. Secondly, despite the need, there is still a dearth of original research specifically on the topic of team research. I believe this can be attributed to our general hesitancy in the social sciences to openly and publicly discuss interpersonal `problems' and moral values. It is not that ethical challenges do not arise in team research. Participation on a research team or a quick informal survey of one's peers clearly indicates that indeed, most research teams encounter such challenges and somehow "muddle" through or not, as the case may be. Indeed, the membership of some teams will be reconstituted as a result of such problems during the course of the research project. However, as a group, we seem reluctant to turn the anthropological lens upon ourselves or to speak publicly about these types of challenges. Among sociologists, William Shaffir has referred to this as "studied inattention."(9) That my search was somewhat difficult is not necessarily a bad thing. In addition to forcing me to speak with colleagues about the "nitty gritty" of their experiences, I broadened my research horizons and was able to include sources from a variety of other disciplines also grappling with ethical issues in team research, particularly communication science, psychology, organization behavior, public health, and qualitative sociology. Issues and "Resolutions" In this section I discuss some of the issues encountered by members of various team partnerships. I begin with a general discussion of the kinds of ethical dilemmas teams face during the course of their research. This will be followed by a discussion of a case study, one of the very few I was able to locate in the scholarly literature. The section will conclude with an exploration of different types of team research and ethical challenges which seem particularly salient to these cases. When possible, I will indicate "resolutions" team members have found to deal with the ethical challenges they faced. Speaking of research with exploited or oppressed groups Phillipe Bourgois stated, "It would be dangerous and arrogant to think that there are definite answers to any of these ethical/moral questions. We need to discuss them and think about them in both practical and theoretical terms."(10) In a similar spirit, then, I assert that far from devising prescriptions applicable for all situations, it is in the process of discussing our experiences and concerns that we gain the most benefit from ethical discourse. The research team might usefully be thought of as having a lifespan that includes inception, fieldwork, analysis, write up, dissemination, and afterlife (both for the researchers and for the participants). Factors such as age, sex, ethnicity, class, training, experience, inclination, and circumstance all play a role in the field. Following the initial involvement in which members are brought together by a common professional interest, members begin setting goals. The group will need to negotiate a "leader" (the proverbial `buck' has to stop somewhere) and the exact focus of the research, if these have not already been established, all of which will be to some extent a product of the capabilities and interests of the individual members. Additional issues to be discussed include budget, timelines, and individual responsibilities. These discussions are vital. Invariably there will be differences of opinion. However, as Ken Erickson and Donald Stull point out, "The discussions need to happen, the disagreements must be aired, and the tensions created by disciplinary, theoretical, or professional difference must be diffused, if not eliminated."(11) Particularly at this stage, team building is essential: "Team dynamics are an integral, if not always explicit, part of the research process, and they will govern research outcomes to a great degree."(12) The organizational structure also makes an impact on the dynamics of the team, be it formal and hierarchical or diffuse and egalitarian, The relative status of team members can be a source of conflict as can the role of leadership. Moreover, conflicting demands of family, work, and the field can present seemingly insurmountable problems for team members. For example, Shaffir and his colleagues were conducting an evaluation of a new model in the education of medical students. Unfortunately, "Time became an important issue between members on matters of commitment and contribution" and the initial team was disbanded.(13) Communication, as with most human enterprises, is key. Shaffir and his colleagues have noted that "in retrospect, most of our difficulties would have been ameliorated or solved with regular and open communication."(14) As is the case with much qualitative, social science research, informed consent can be problematic. The research team may not have full knowledge of the types of events that will unfold during the study, and hence must acknowledge that research can be unpredictable. Thus, issues of informed consent are best negotiated at various points in the research cycle. This should be clear to all participants at the outset of the research endeavor. An additional `gray' area concerns the issue of confidentiality. True confidentiality may be difficult to maintain, particularly as regards the publication of results.  claim, for example, that "... community anonymity is not inherently more ethical than identification...."(15) Their point is a valid one and team members should carefully consider whether disguising both the individual and the community is of greater value. It is also strongly recommended that team members discuss the possible implications of a variety of outcomes of the research and when writing up results, provide the opportunity to members to respond to drafts. A general issue involved in team research is what  refer to as social loafing.(16) Those of us who have worked in teams are probably familiar with persons who, for whatever reason, either fail to carry their own weight or do not follow through on their responsibilities.  make the distinction between "musketeers" and "stooges." Musketeers are team members you will happily collaborate with again on a future project. Stooges, on the other hand, cannot be depended on. As the authors note, this is a case of "forewarned is forearmed."(17) In an example of a partnership between communities and primary health care professionals, one team member has commented on the "clash of professional and community standards, objectives, and perspectives, which [resulted] in fragmented service" for the community.(18) Indeed, differences in values, experience, and communication style can be problematic and individuals must be willing to make intellectual shifts and to deal directly with conflicts. Case Study: The Punjabi Education Project An illustrative example of ethical challenges in team research comes from  collaborative educational ethnography undertaken to improve educational opportunities for Sikh children.(19) Initiated by the school district, the "Punjabi Education Project" was a collaborative effort that included the South Asian immigrant community, the local educational agency, a community-based organization, and an educational anthropologist. Punjabi children in Valleyside, California made up 13% of the student population in the district. A disparity in academic achievement between Punjabi students and "Valleysiders" (the white population) based on junior high competency tests coupled with mounting tensions between Valleysiders and Punjabis, both in school and in the community, caused increasing concern among local educators and community leaders. It was thought that a collaborative project involving all parties would yield data from which educators could make decisions to improve educational outcomes for Punjabi students. As well, community members both in the school and out believed that such an undertaking would serve to help bring disparate groups together and improve community relations. The Research Team, then, comprised two Punjabi Sikhs (one junior, one senior), local Punjabi educators, Punjabi community leaders, the Sikh Temple of Valleyside, a Sikh co-investigator, and two research assistants, one young Sikh woman, and one recent graduate of an East Coast college ( doesn't note the latter's ethnic background). Thus the team was mixed in age, sex, ethnic identity, and educational background. Though all participated in the research, as  notes, not all collaborators shared equal power or control. Gibson is quick to point out that neither the quantity nor the quality of data gathered would have been possible had the project been conducted by a single researcher. However, she is strikingly honest about some of the problems the team encountered. For example, she notes that the team spent endless hours bogged down in trying to agree on theory and method. Their commitment to consensus was found to be extremely time consuming. Another difficulty was that the field note-taking of some team members was found wanting. Thus Gibson found that she had to take the time to interview the team members. They also decided to record interviews which allowed for later, multiple analysis. Perhaps the most serious problem encountered was that the principal investigator () and the Punjabi co-principal investigator could not agree on the analysis and presentation of the results. The district would not endorse the co-investigator's report and this only served to reinforce notions of discrimination against the Punjabi minority. In addition, there were problems with the administration of the grant. Believing that it would heighten the support of the community, the grant was `housed' at the Punjabi community organization that was located in a nearby city. As it turns out, however, the co-principal investigator was a founding member and the current president: of this community organization. This relationship proved to create a major difficulty. The co-principal investigator was, of course, drawing a salary due to his role on the research team; there was no financial support in the budget for the other association directors of the organization. This created considerable tension and jealousy among board members who felt there should be some financial remuneration for themselves, or at least for the organization. The board of directors split in two and one group even resorted to litigation. At the time of the article's publication, the issue had not yet been resolved. Unbeknownst to Gibson, the co-investigator had been a somewhat controversial figure in his home community. Thus, the project became caught in Punjabi community politics. Research Partnerships: Variations on a Theme The Practice Research team, in which academic researchers team up with practitioners offering a service (such as social workers), has additional ethical issues with which it must concern itself. For example, issues of practice (what service is offered, who develops the intervention, who decides when/if the intervention will be altered), design, and measurement must be considered. As well, team development (roles, relationships, responsibilities), determining the intervention, making decisions about the control of practice and research, and sharing the results also must be dealt with. This can be especially challenging in the case of practice research, considering the sometimes disparate goals of academics and practitioners. For example, the academic social work researcher may be most concerned with having a publishable final product. On the other hand, the practitioner may be little concerned with such a focus. For his / her part, the practitioner is primarily concerned with more effective service delivery to clients. It takes an open, honest, and flexible team to adequately resolve such seemingly disparate goals. Multidisciplinary research is perhaps the most common type of partnership in the social sciences in our decade. "The effective coordination of multidisciplinary or team research requires both an understanding of and respect for the methods of the contributing disciplines."(20) This, of course, may be much more easily said than done. However, as noted throughout this paper, open communication and flexibility seem to be key in such an undertaking. A special kind of partnering, cross-cultural research holds a great deal of promise, both in terms of gaining cross-cultural data and in developing cross-cultural theories.(21) Though she is speaking specifically of the case of immigrant health care and clinical research, I believe  comments are applicable to the case of cross-cultural research. She and her colleagues assert that whenever teams are composed of more than one "culture," one must be especially cognizant of translation issues, culturally relevant value conflicts, and the cultural background of team members.(22) In addition, and perhaps more so in the case of cross-cultural research, team members must grapple with the notion of ethical imperialism.(23) Are ethics absolute and universally applicable across cultures or are ethical standards relative? If the latter, are we guilty of ethical imperialism if we "force" our notions of ethical behavior on persons from other cultures who may delineate ethical behavior differently? Such questions harken back to concepts of personhood, autonomy, and self-determination and are best considered and discussed among team members prior to the beginning of the actual research. Another type of team research is what Jrefer to as Insider / Outsider Research.(24) This type of research seems particularly useful in schools, community groups, and work organizations, in short, when change is sought or action-oriented research projects are conducted. Insider / Outsider research involves team partnerships in which the "insider" is co-researcher with the "outsider." In the case of teacher-researcher partnerships, for example, teachers join with one another and an "outside" researcher to systematically study their own practice. Although we in anthropology have a tradition of focusing on the "insider's view" we haven't necessarily done so to the extent of treating the "insiders" as co-researchers who together frame the questions, gather and interpret the data, and co-create the presentation of the results. Bartunek and Louis provide numerous examples of successful insider/outsider partnerships.(25) As with most team research, gaining access to the research site and managing the interpersonal differences that arise from the heterogeneity of theorizing can present ethical challenges. And as Bartunek and Louis point out, maintaining the separation between team members necessary to produce a marginal perspective requires continual focus.(26) In addition, differences in values, experience, and communication style can create problems. As noted earlier in this paper, team members must be willing to make intellectual shifts and to deal directly with conflicts. In the case of insider/outsider research, it is particularly important for the "insider" to avoid `going stranger' and concomitantly, the "outsider" to not `go native.' That is, for effective research, the insider must not fall to the temptation to accept uncritically the outsider's perspective. Nor should the outsider become so involved that he / she glosses over controversial issues. Thus, it is essential that all team members maintain their own perspective while having a healthy respect for the unique perspective of others. Bartunek and Louis point out three additional areas of potential ethical problems.(27) First, the insider may be unfamiliar with the process of academic publishing and special attention may need to be given to this area at the outset. Indeed, while it may be virtually mandatory for the outsider to publish in a peer-reviewed journal (to obtain tenure, for instance), the insider may not at all be interested in having the results published in a "public" forum. Second, "insiders" may expect that their team members will not "air dirty laundry." In a now-famous example, some of  informants in his initial research that led to the publication of Street Corner Society,(28) which dealt with the social structure of an Italian neighborhood in Boston, have recently challenged him in court for violating their rights. Third, the insider/outsider research team may find that it will need to disseminate its findings to multiple audiences. These issues are best discussed at the outset of the project. According to Bartunek and Louis, insider/outsider research is on the rise in the humanities, and social and behavioral sciences, particularly with trends such as participatory action research, feminist approaches, post-modern approaches, and narrative inquiry.(29) As Lenore Manderson and Ruth Wilson have pointed out      ... relationships between study communities and researchers are negotiated                                                                on a continuing basis. Permission is granted conditionally, revisited, and                                                                 re-evaluated on a regular basis. Increasingly, we are asked ... to provide                                                                evidence of purpose of the value of our work to the subject community; of                                                                  the mechanisms we will use to consult with and continually inform community                                                               members; of our choice of research assistants, instrumentation, and                                                                        preservation of documents; of our management and analysis of data; and of                                                                 the mechanisms we might use for analytic and interpretive purposes.(30)                                                                  Team research, particularly that which fully involves the community, can go a long way toward meeting these objectives. What do the Professional Codes say? In the 1983 (revised) version of the "Professional and Ethical Responsibilities" of the Society for Applied Anthropology (SfAA) we notice the focus specifically on social science colleagues.(31) Here, the focus seems to be on not impeding the activities of our colleagues as well as not impeding the flow of information among participants. It is interesting that the statement is "To our social science colleagues." This wording would seem to indicate an awareness that applied anthropologists often find themselves involved in research (and practice) situations with colleagues from a variety of academic disciplines. In contrast, the 1988 version of the "Ethical Guidelines for Practitioners" of the National Association of Practicing Anthropologists (NAPA) addresses the call to "our colleagues, anthropologists and others."(32) At first glance, this could indicate a wider purview than that of the SfAA. However, the NAPA guidelines continue, "we have a responsibility to conduct our work in a manner that facilitates their activities or does not unjustly compromise their ability to carry out professional work." This seems quite close to the SfAA statement. The NAPA guidelines, however, do not deal with "flow of information" in this context. It is worthy of note though, that they do specifically mention the need to be aware of and respectful of not only the methodologies and theoretical stances of our nonanthropologist colleagues, but as well, the possibility of different ethical requirements implicit in their disciplines. The American Anthropological Association (AAA) code of 1998 does not explicitly treat team research.(33) The major headings include "Responsibility to people whose lives and cultures anthropologists study," "Responsibility to the public," "Responsibility to the discipline," "Responsibility to students and trainees," "Responsibility to employers, clients, and sponsors," and "Responsibilities to governments." It is clear from these headings that the AAA code was written primarily with non-applied anthropologists in mind. Nonetheless, ethics in team research may be inferred from certain items under the heading "Responsibility to the discipline." Issues such as accurate reporting and attribution are included here as is the recognition of the need for those who participate in cross-disciplinary research to be informed of "... the requirements of the nonanthropological colleagues with whom they work." It is not clear to this author, however, exactly what is meant by "the requirements." Conclusion: So How Shall We Proceed? Clearly, the potential benefits to be derived from team research are enormous. Research partnerships can produce rich, comprehensive, trustworthy results. Particular research areas rich for collaboration include education, development, and health. Since team research is emergent, communal, craft-like, highly interactive, and always tentative, there are no real "answers" to ethical questions.(34) As we have seen, ethical codes are not formulaic.(35) So how do we proceed without clear "answers"? How can we avoid the ethical challenges engendered by team efforts? I believe that we can learn from the experiences of ourselves and others. , for example, recommended that "... with jointly authored reports it is advisable to discuss in advance how disagreements will be resolved regarding analysis, report composition, recommendations, and authorship of future publications."(36) Respect and humor also go a long way towards preventing undue problems in the field.says of collaborative and participatory research: "... enormous amounts of patience, suppression of ego-involvement, and skills in human relations [are] required for such work."(37) It is also recommended that teams who have not worked together before      News from the Web   	 Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

PARTNERS IN INQUIRY: ETHICAL CHANGES IN TEAM RESEARCH

PARTNERS IN INQUIRY: ETHICAL CHANGES IN TEAM RESEARCH. Introduction In thi...

Why is Health Important to Me?

Why is Health Important to Me?    Majority of us want to live longer in order to do the things that we enjoy to do with our loved ones and friends.  Some, do not want to get sick because they are  traumatized of getting stuck in the hospital,   afraid of the sight of the syringe and cannot take the  taste of various medicines , and most of all,  do not have the financial capacity to maintain the medical treatment needed  to be able to get back into normal  state of health.   Hence,   to avoid this to happen, giving significant importance to one’s health is very crucial to achieve a healthy mind and body. Medically speaking, health is a state of physical, mental and social well-being of a person. And, it is very important for everybody to stay healthy.  I believe that the most valuable gift that God gave us is   our health, next to our family.    Remember, that man was created by God because he strongly believed that    man is the most valuable asset   in this world.  Human beings are the most powerful force that makes the world go round. And, health failure can mean failure on everything for a man.      In short, the main causes of health problems these days are improper diet, mental, emotional and physical stress, poor hygiene and environment, unhealthy lifestyle and poor outlook in life.  But, there are still ways to avoid this to happen to anyone, just try to do all the opposites of all these causes. Purposely,   to be able to achieve one’s dream, a person must work hard to earn his or her living decently, as well as in order to sustain the daily basic needs in life for survival. Hence, everyone needs to be healthy in order to fulfill efficiently and effectively all these tasks. The physical and mental functions of a person is very vital in every field, whether you are a student or professional.  A healthy body and mind go hand in hand to live a happy and productive life, as well as to be able to touch other people’s lives by means of healthy interaction with them. .      For me, to stay healthy is my major responsibility to myself, to my family, and to the society at large.  I should know how to protect it from any harmful elements that will gradually ruin my health state in the long run.     Health and happiness go hand in hand to be able to live happily and successfully.  Therefore  I must  see to it that my body and mind  meet the  day to day routine   like  waking up early in the morning; inhaling  fresh air in the morning and  just taking a  brisk walk  are very important  but basic health regimen that a person must do everyday;   if he or she wants to really avoid serious illnesses like heart disease, high blood pressure, diabetes among others to occur in  the body.  In addition to that, eating a balance diet meal that includes a large portion of vegetables and fruits daily is the most   preventive measure from any disease.   I know that this time and age, it is a bit harder to avoid     attending  parties, as well as to drink  alcohol, so as to  smoking;  nonetheless,  a person can still drink  alcohol in a very minimal way,  too much alcohol  gives a harmful effect to one’s body. Better replace alcohol by plenty of fresh juices and water; they are excellent detoxifiers in the body.   More than that, smoking is a big NO for me.  It only pollutes one’s lungs that lead to various diseases, and even leads to cancer.   One more thing, having enough hours of sleep at night is recommendable to avoid health problems in the near future.  Consequently,  my busy schedule  always   gives me stress, that is the main reason, that whenever I   get  free time, I  find time to go to greener places that can make me relax and loosen up from the  long and hard days work.   And, the most important therapy of all is to bond with your loved ones and family.    The presence of my loved ones, their encouragement words, their affection and caring are more than enough to   ease your worries away.  In the same way, it is the best effective treatment of releasing all the burn outs and stress that I feel towards   my job and other things.   For some cases,    I can even release my problems to my close friends whom I trust and can really give me advice for the betterment of myself, and what best decision  I should make on a some issues.    Above all, prayer and is the most   powerful weapon or way   to   release one’s worries and problems in life.  Keep in mind, being freed from illnesses makes a person look good and attractive, as well as it makes the person feel good about him/herself. Seemingly, even a healthy person gets older, his/her body can still recover from any regular wear and tear that brought by aging. References: http://www.buzzle.com/articles/why-is-it-important-to-be-healthy.html http://www.livestrong.com/article/421588-why-is-it-important-to-stay-healthy-throughout-your-life/ News from the Web   	 Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Why is Health Important to Me?

Why is Health Important to Me? Majority of us want to live longer in order to do the things that we enjoy to do with our loved ones ...

Organisation Essay

Essay   An organisation is a complex system, which, internally, is composed of interrelated and interdependent parts, and externally, is affected by certain factors (or it may be the other way around-it is the organisation that has an impact on external factors).  (Accel-Team, 2003) Further, an organisation is a group of people that is organized so as to achieve a common goal or set goals. (McNamara, 1999) Ideally, there are certain features that an organisation considers and establishes in relation to its goals, features which may either be explicit (deliberate and recognized) and implicit (operating unrecognized): vision, mission, values, strategic goals, strategies, and systems and processes that are aligned with the achievement of goals. (McNamara, 1999) Vision pertains to the image formed in the minds of the organisation’s members-images on how the organisation should be working and how things appear when everything is going smoothly in the organisation. (McNamara, 1999) Mission, on the other hand, refers to the overall purpose of the organisation, with which the operations of the organisation are based. (McNamara, 1999) As for the values, these refer to the priorities in the nature of how the organisation carry out its activities, and more importantly, values constitute the personality or the culture of an organisation. (McNamara, 1999) Moreover, strategic goals refer to the several overall accomplishments that organisation members try to achieve as they work toward their mission, while strategies are the overall general approaches that organisations usually follow to reach their goals. (McNamara, 1999) Finally, an organization has subsystems, like departments, programs, divisions, teams, which are usually characterised by plans, policies and procedures; “subsystems” that have unique duties of their own in the organisation, and they work, alongside other subsystems, to achieve the common, overall goals of the organisation in their specified ways or nature of work. (McNamara, 1999) Accordingly, it is useful to make a distinction between the basic nature of an organisation and the operating mechanisms that implement and reinforce this basic structure. (Lorsch, 1970, p. 1) Central issues in the organisation, such as the division and assignment of work among positions, groups, departments, divisions, etc., and the achievement of coordination essential in accomplishing the total organisational objectives are included in the design of the basic structure of an organisation. (Lorsch, 1970) Lorsch (1970) further discussed: “Choices made about these issues are usually publicised in organisation charts and job descriptions. If we recognise that behaviour in an organisation is influenced by a system of variables (technical, individual, social and organisational inputs), it is obvious that such formal documents are only one method of signalling to individuals what behaviour is expected of them. Nevertheless, this method is important because it is so widely used by managers to define and communicate their expectations of other organisation members.” (p. 1) On the other hand, operating mechanisms refer to structural variables an organisation can use to indicate to their members what is expected of them, to motivate them in performing his or her assigned task in achieving organisation’s goals, and to encourage them to participate in joint activities, which include the control procedures, information systems, reward and appraisal systems, standardised rules and procedures, and spatial arrangements. (Lorsch, 1970, pp. 1-2) Consequently, there are certain approaches that have been advance through the years in relation to the structural design of an organisation, which include the conventional approach and the systemic approach. (Lorsch, 1970) Under the conventional approach are ideas mostly developed by a group of organisational theorists known as the classicists, which include theorists like Fayol, Gulick, Urwick, and Mooney. (Lorsch, 1970, p. 2) Basically, ideas yielded by these theorists are based on the assumption that the motivating factor for men to do as they are directed is money. (Lorsch, 1970) With regard to work division, most of the classical theorists suggested the division of work by function, with the exception of Gulick, who suggested that the work of an organisation can be divided on several bases: by function, by product, by territory, by time. (Lorsch, 1970) In addition, these writers emphasised economic and technical efficiency, and the only human variable that was given attention was the limited intellectual capacity of an individual; to cope up with this limitation, the division of labour was promoted. (Lorsch, 1970) In addition, these writers said coordination among members of an organisation was not a major problem: “Work was to be divided so that the sub-goals of various units would add up to the overall organizational goals. Any remaining coordinating issues would be handled through the management hierarchy. Since people followed the direction of their superiors, the management hierarchy was the only coordinating device necessary.” (p. 2) However, even though this approach has been widely used, it has harsh limitations: it provides little help in designing a task with intrinsic motivation; it is of limited value in dealing with the multiple levels of division of work among large corporations; and managers have become more aware that the management hierarchy is not sufficient as a mechanism to achieve the coordination required in an organisation since the goals of individuals and units do not automatically add up to the total goals of the organisation. (Lorsch, 1970, pp. 2-3) Due to these shortcomings, other organisational theorists, which came to know as behavioural scientists, began conducting research that considers the motivational and collaborative issues left unattended by classical theorists. In lieu of this development, the behavioural scientists said the individual is motivated by self-actualization, which follows that he will look for more complicated and engaging jobs, and this factor must be taken into account in the division of work. (Lorsch, 1970) Also, the individual is motivated by social needs, thus, it is important to form an organisation into a structure where participation of each individual belonging to a unified work group in decision-making is the accepted norm. (Lorsch, 1970, p. 3) In relation to the systemic approach to the design of organisational structure, the two studies earlier advanced towards these realms are that of Burns and Stalker (1960) and Woodward (1965). According to Burns and Stalker (1960), there was more reliance on formal rules and procedures, decisions were made at the higher levels of the organisation, and the spans of supervisory control were narrow in the stable industry. Woodward (1965), on the other hand, said that in the more dynamic industry, spans of supervisory control were wider, less attention was paid to formal procedures, and more decisions were reached at the lower levels of the organisation. However, even though these studies consider the structure of an organisation as one variable system that affects behaviour in organisations, they do not provide a thorough conceptual framework essential for analysing and solving structural design problems. (Lorsch, 1970) In 1990s, management studies came to view organizations from a systems perspective due to tremendous changes facing organizations and how they operate, and this new perspective brought about major changes in the studies of and approaches to organizations. (McNamara, 1999) A system, accordingly, is a set of parts or subsystems joined together to accomplish an overall goal, which has input, processes, outputs and outcomes, and has an ongoing feedback among these different parts  of parts; thus, when one part of the system is removed, the nature of the system is changed. (McNamara, 1999) In relation, one of the significant breakthroughs in understanding the complex world of systems is the systems theory. (McNamara, 1999) The systems theory is the “trans-disciplinary study of the abstract organization of phenomena, independent of their substance, type, or spatial or temporal scale of existence, [which] investigates both the principles common to all entities and the models [that] can be used to describe them.”  (Heylighen and Joslyn, 1992) It was proposed in the 1940s by Ludwig von Bertalanffy, who stressed out that real systems continuously evolves since they interact with and are open to their environment, thus acquiring qualitatively new properties through emergence, and was supplemented by William Ross Ashby in the 1950s. (Heylighen and Joslyn, 1992) Systems theory focuses on the arrangement of and relations between parts that connect them into a whole, rather than reducing an entity into parts or elements. (Heylighen and Joslyn, 1992)  The developments of systems theory are varied, which includes conceptual foundations and philosophy, mathematical modeling and information theory, and practical applications. (Heylighen and Joslyn, 1992) The application of this theory is called systems analysis, which  aims to identify the possible courses of action, together with their risks, costs and benefits; also, it applies systems principles to facilitate decision-making with regards to problems of identifying, reconstructing, optimising, and controlling a system (usually a socio-technical organization), at the same time considering multiple objectives, constraints and resources. (McNamara 1999, and Heylighen and Joslyn 1992) Accordingly, the systems theory brought a new perspective for managers to understand patterns and events in their organisations. In the past, managers typically focus on one part, then afterwards moves to another part to focus upon; thus, the catch was, managers often create generalisations for the whole organisation, but fails to realise that even though an organisation may have a department that can very well operate independently, these departments may not integrate well together, which in turn, may result to major problems for the organisation. (McNamara, 1999) But with the systems theory, more managers becomes aware of the various parts of an organisation, in particular, the interrelations of the parts, they now give more attention to ongoing matters and feedbacks, they analyse problems through the recognition of larger patterns of organisations and not the separate pieces of the organisation, they focus on want they want from their organisations, and finally, they concentrate on structures that provoke behaviours, which determine events, rather than reacting to events. (McNamara, 1999) However, at present, tools and communication technologies are definitely shaping organisations. (Harris, 1993) Since technology is a foundation of organisational activity, and information is the instrument for reducing uncertainty in an organisation, having an understanding on the impact of the new communication and information technology is therefore essential. (Harris, 1993) Accordingly, there are three phases in the introduction of machines into organisations: mechanisation, automation and information technology. (Harris, 1993) We are witnessing mechanisation when an individual operates a machine that is substituted for the mechanical capabilities of an individual; the greater the technological complexity, the lower the human input. (Harris, 1993, p. 462) When a technology is being developed into a more sophisticated technology, where machines are capable of self-regulation and acts as substitutes for an employee’s sensory mechanisms, automation occurs. (Harris, 1993, p. 462; Laufer, 1984, p. 11) Harris (1993) further discussed: “there is a synergistic relationship between people and machines…with mechanization, employees either facilitate the machine's operation (e.g., operators, maintenance) or coordinate the people/machine process (e.g., managers, supervisors). Second, as the technology advanced to create automated machines, people changed from merely being an extension of the machine to managing the machines (computer-aided manufacturing [CAM]). In some cases, the machines relieved individuals of laborious tasks (e.g., repetitive functions -- peeling potatoes; meticulous detail work -- bad potatoes). In other cases, machines have taken over because they do a better job (e.g., printers for computers, detail work).” (p. 463) On the other hand, Robey (1991) said information processing is a fundamental element of all organizational activity. However, since all parts of modern organisations are affected by the new technologies, the use of mediated communication techniques has had a deep impact in an organisation. (Harris, 1993) Information technologies are systems that can process, transfer, store, analyse and communicate information, and these include all types of computing and communications hardware and software (Davis & Olson, 1985, p. 29; Harris, 1993). “As individuals utilize the new communication technologies, the richness of the media seems to have an impact of individual satisfaction.” (Harris, 1993, p. 464) However, the new technologies, accordingly, will not replace media richness since it stays as an important element in communication satisfaction. (Harris, 1993) Media richness refers to "the speed of feedback permitted by the medium, the number and types of sensory channels utilized by the medium, the perceived personalities of the source when communicating over the medium, and the richness of language used with the medium" (Komsky, 1991, p. 314; Harris, 1993, p. 464). Harris further discussed: “the concept of richness is important because predictions are that people enjoy greater communication satisfaction with a richer media. So, richness is one means for organizing our understanding of the new communication technologies.” (Harris, 1993, p. 464) In relation, there are five types of information systems: communication, operational, decision support, and interorganisational. (Harris, 1993, p. 474) “Each of these provides an organization with important opportunities for growth. With the transnational nature of most corporations, the new technology will continue to be a major force.” (Harris, 1993, p. 474) To supplement human communication, the communication systems are designed. (Harris, 1993) On the other hand, the operational systems are designed to help with the structural aspects of work; through these systems, routine activities can be examined to identify the source of inefficiencies. (Harris, 1993) Also, since procedures have become standardised through the operational systems, a great deal of time and effort can be reduced. (Harris, 1993) However, overdependence on operational systems may lead to a significant amount of depersonalisation in the organisation. (Robey, 1991; Harris, 1993) Now, control systems are used for data collection and entry, and also, they are used to monitor and evaluate organisational performance. (Harris, 1993) While decision support systems, on the other hand, operate as extensions of the planning and decision-making processes; these kinds of systems range from relatively simple data support systems to complex forms of expert systems. (Harris, 1993, p. 468)  However, due to the complexity of managerial decision making, decision support systems have limited application. (Luconi, Malone, & Scott-Morton, 1984; Harris, 1993). Further, these systems can be troublesome and worse, can lead to a loss of productivity since it intends to take the place of decision making, which is a very complex thing. (Kaye & Sutton, 1985; Harris, 1993) Finally, interorganisational systems are information systems that are designed to link different organisations. (Harris, 1993) Through the cooperation with the design and use of interorganisational systems, organisations have been able to increase their competitive advantage. (Johnston & Vitale, 1988; Harris, 1993)             However, with these technological advancements, there are also arguments that have been raised concerning their impacts. Some of the issues include access to information (because of new technologies, access to information, which was only available to top-level or middle managers before, was increased that decision-making can now be made by those close to the situation), power and relationships (a major shift of power has occurred because of the impact of technology), and impact on users (like isolation, decreased motivation, and uncertainty). (Harris, 1993)     References:   Accel-Team. (2003). The Organization as a System. In Accel-Team.com.           Available at:             [http://www.accelteam.com/business_process/systems_analysis_05.  html]. Accessed: [02/02/04].   Burns, T. and Stalker, G.M. (1961). The Management of Innovation. London:      Tavistock Publications. Davis G. B., & Olson M. H. (1985). Management information systems: Conceptual foundations ( 2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Harris, Thomas E. (1993). Applied Organizational Communication: Perspectives, Principles, and Pragmatics. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence     Erlbaum Associates.   Heylighen, Francis and Joslyn, Cliff. (1992). What is Systems Theory? In Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University     Press.   Johnston H. R., & Vitale M. R. ( 1988). Creating competitive advantage with interorganizational information systems. In MIS Quarterly, 12, pp. 153                - 166 . Kaye A. R., & Sutton M. J. D. ( 1985). "Productivity and quality of working life for office principles and implications for office automation". In     Office: Technology and People, 2, pp. 267 - 286 . Komsky S. H. ( 1991). "A profile of users of electronic mail in a university".  In Management Communication Quarterly, 4, pp. 310 - 340 .   Lorsch, Jay W. (1970). Introduction to the Structural Design of    Organizations. In Dalton, G. W., Lawrence, P.R. and Lorsch, J.W.           (eds), Organizational Structure and Design. Homewood, IL: R. D. Irwin.   Luconi F. L., & Malone T. W., & Scott-Morton M. S. (1984). Expert systemsand expert support systems: The next challenge for management. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.   McNamara, Carter. (1999). Basic Definition of Organization. In Management     Assistance Programs (MAP) for Nonprofits. Available at:           [http://www.mapnp.org/library/org_thry/org_defn.htm]. Accessed:    [02/02/04].   McNamara, Carter. (1999). Thinking About Organizations as Systems.  In Management Assistance Programs (MAP) for Nonprofits. Available at:             [http://www.mapnp.org/library/org_thry/org_sytm.htm]. Accessed:        [03/02/04]. Robey D. ( 1991). Designing organizations ( 3rd ed.). Homewood, IL: Irwin. Woodward, Joan. (1965). Industrial Organization: Theory and Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.                 News from the Web   	 Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Organisation Essay

Essay An organisation is a complex system, which, internally, is composed of interrelated and interdependent parts, and externa...

Global Monetary System

Global Monetary System   Global monetary system today             The global financial system (GFS) is comprise of institutions and regulations that act on international level through global institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) as well as the central banks and finance ministries. According to Crane et al (1995), the function of the financial system is primarily to facilitate the allocation and deployment of economic resources across borders and time in an uncertain environment. Today, the global financial system continues to be shaky regardless of the continuous effort of the government to stimulate the entire system. Beams (2005) noted that although the resilience of the global financial system prevails because of the continued improvement of the corporate, financial and household sectors in many countries, there are several malevolent conditions that could contribute to the downfall. This was made possible by the growth of complex financial instruments aimed at spreading risk and thereby increasing instability especially during market fluctuations. Not to mention, such instruments are dependent on quantitative mathematical models for value, assessment and pricing. Another thing, even though risk management had been strengthened and became more sophisticated, financial institutions are still heavily dependent on having ready access to liquidity during ‘market stresses’. Other danger area is the eagerness of banks and financial institutions to consider increasing risk in the search for greater profits even in the face of declining opportunities.   Shostak (2005) also suggest that the purchasing power of money cannot be established hence this speculative flow of money is causing the instability within the global financial system. The root cause of the problem now points to the paper fiat standard, directly relating with the gold standard. Originally, the premise is that the paper money was not regarded as money but just a representative of money which was gold. Various paper certificates were introduced and were claims on gold stored with the banks. This, however, opens the scope for fraudulent practices especially of banks. To avoid hyperinflation and hence avoid the collapse of banks and the financial system, this means on-going and ever growing monetary pumping of the central banks to keep the system stable. Nevertheless, this leads to persistent declines in the purchasing power of money to boom-bust cycle which in turn destabilizes the entire monetary system. As Malliaris (2002) puts it, there is the recent challenge for economists and policymakers to create a global financial system that offers great exchange rate stability without sacrificing international capital mobility. There are three ways to do such: 1) strengthening the international financial architecture to bring stability especially to the emerging nations, 2) creating a money union in NAFTA and extending such to other countries, and 3) coordinating economic policies among the US, EU and Japan for the purpose of stabilizing key global currencies. Sharma (2009) accounts the call of UNCTAD to overhaul the global financial system through weeding out financial instruments with no social returns and improving regulation of commodity futures exchanges so that it can provide reliable price signals to producers and consumers. Foreign exchange market According to Pollard, the determinants of an international currency are the following: 1) size of the economy, 2) importance in international trade, 3) size, depth, liquidity and openness of domestic financial markets, 4) convertibility of the currency and 5) macroeconomic policies. While Bergsten cited five key factors that determine whether a currency will play a global role: 1) size of its underlying economy and global trade, 2) the economy’s independence from external constraints, 3) the avoidance of exchange controls, 4) the breadth, depth and liquidity of the economy’s capital and 5) the economy’s strength, stability and external position.             Pollard described that the size of the country’s economy is important because it determines the potential use of the currency in international markets. Economic size is linked with the importance of a country in international trade and the size of its financial markets. Both Pollard and Bergsten agreed with the criteria for a currency to be considered an international trade. Specifically, the foreign exchange or what Hill (2008) referred to as the institutional arrangements that govern exchange rate. The value of a currency is determined by the interaction between the demand and supply of the currency relative to the demand and supply of other currencies. The global monetary system continues to decline when exchange rate fluctuates resulting for currency rates to go up and down. Monetary strategies are specifically important as the global economy grows providing both the opportunity for prosperity and decline of economic markets worldwide (Kelly, 2006). There is the necessity therefore to safeguard the worth of a specific currency in any other currency. A specific scenario for this, the euro’s rise will convert an international monetary system that has been dominated by the dollar since World War 2 into a bipolar regime. Hence the structure and politics of international financial cooperation will change dramatically. The exchange rates between the euro and the dollar will pose a significant policy challenge. The United States and the rest of the world should reject any attempt by Europe to substantially undervalue the euro’s start-up rate. It would represent a blatant effort by Europe to export its high unemployment and to enable the euro to become a strong currency without any significant cost to its competitive position. Factors that contribute to economic prosperity             With the global financial system and currency at the realm, economic prosperity depends heavily on profitability and investment while also limiting financial risks of dealing with foreign currencies. International economic compliances especially those that are mandated by WTO, World Bank and IMF could protect the interests of nation-members including aspects of stabilizing financial structures, import-export balance, access to world markets and etc. As well, the possibility of economic stagnation is relatively high for non-integrationists since the concentration of currencies are mostly inward-bounded. Nonetheless, the expanded access to international financial law and accounting firms under the agreement will strengthen structures of banks and insurance companies and the financial sector as a whole. Further, the financial structure in general preferred to put their trust regarding money matters on governments with leaders and political systems that are not corrupt. The concept is that democratic countries must better access to monetary policies and financial systems and representation is the preference to avenues in the pursuit of favorable policies. However, the initial evaluation of the financial capability of the nation is needed. So that, that domestic financial, administrative and political capabilities will be devoted to national concerns that must be adequately address. Considering such premise, economic development that promotes economic equality and reduces poverty is brought by government efficiency that controls the overall market and the internal financial systems. Factors that contribute to economic decline From an econometric perspective, the economic relationship between the North and the South has transcended beyond the geopolitical blocs. Evaluating the outcomes of economic interdependence must mean to look at different parameters that separate the two. For the North, the main determinants are GDP, inflation rates, interest rates, price of primary products and strength of currency and for the South, the determinants are exports, imports, balance of payments, reserves, capital flows and the exchange rate. From this alone, we can define the extent of interdependence between the two. Notably, the economic expansion in the North is relatively felt by the South and the increase in external debts in the South affects the North – positively and negatively. For example, amplified South indebtedness has an uphill pressure on the world interest rates that will eventually devalue them. In effort to reduce cost in the North and maximize the profitability in all industries the North will resort to cheap costs of manufacturing and production which is vested on the devalued South like in the many cases of sweatshops and labor-intensive factories. As we move into the continuum, the high interest rates will reduce aggregate supply in the North and will turn to the South for cheap labors. The decrease demand for inventories of primary products and the fall in commodity prices will follow hurting the South in terms of trading and international competence. The North will be affected as well but limited to aggregation of supply. Evidently, the interdependence in the context of North and South has beneficial effects on the North and detrimental results to the South. Though the North significantly provided for the employment, poverty, death and malnutrition, the harmful effects are far greater than the benefits. To wit, there had been no progress on the standard of living of the South and they remain poor albeit the economic agendum.    Further, the reason behind the evolution of international trade systems is axis on factor proportions followed by the input-output form of international exchange that bridge many otherwise geographically-scattered regions. The focus is on different countries’ resources endowments apparent for the choice of technology and production, consumption and trade within unified framework. Practically, production and consumption happens between dyadic constructs as the exchange of goods or trade takes place making possible the extension of economic equilibrium to international levels. Not only the concept had change, the way people define trade now consists of services and investments. The growing importance of bartering complicates the main idea that trade happen in dyadic fashion. It now enters the sphere of multi-faceted, contextual aspects and importantly yearns for set of guiding schemas thus the international trade system. Since international trading is visibly export-oriented and the fact that it is comprise of many industries and sectors, there is the growing demand for a regulating body.   Recommendations for managing global prosperity To wit, capital flows doesn’t guarantee sound economic performance in the long run. What is needed is a ‘sound overall development strategy’ or the initiative to focus energy on the agendas that could contribute to on future plans towards global financial integration. In principle, had banks and companies in Asia’s emerging markets not been allowed to borrow freely on foreign currency, they would not have built up huge foreign currency debts, and international creditors could not have demanded repayment just as liquidity was drying up and foreign currency was becoming very expensive. Asian markets then should be well-regulated for its economy to weather strong financial markets. The country also need export earnings to support foreign debt repayments. Impoverishment is further by other factors such as indecisive bank systems and prolonged political instability that limits national power to protect domestic endeavors from insurgency and other external financial threats. The impact of debt forgiveness or the financial bailout from richer economies could only provide for the continuum of rigidity of poorer countries. Governments will be inclined to acquire loans which are beyond their means and thus cultivate a loan-dependent environment. On capital flows, the concern is on the magnitude of the dependency of national currency as it could be influenced by the capital inflows of stronger foreign currencies. This, essentially, implicates the exchange rate and specific industries and sectors such as financial and credit and banking, respectively. Other concerns would include protection of interests and the people, financial security, operational power and influence and bias tended on the developed nations since they are also funding sources or donors at one point. References Beams, N. (2005). Global financial system faces growing risks. World Socialist Website, International Committee of Fourth International (ICFI). Crane, D. B., Bodie, Z., Froot, K. A., Mason, S. P., Perold, A. F. and Merton, R. C. (1995). The Global Financial System: A Functional Perspective. Boston, USA: Harvard Business Press. Malliaris, A. G. (2002). The Global Monetary System: Its Weaknesses and the Role of the IMF, the EU and NAFTA. North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 13: 72-92. Sharma, A. B. (2009). UNCTAD calls for overhaul of global monetary system. The Financial Express Online. Shostak, F. (2005). Why the present monetary system cannot be reformed? Brookes News Bulletin, 15 August, Monday. News from the Web   	 Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Global Monetary System

Global Monetary System Global monetary system today The global financial system (GFS) is comprise of institutions an...