Scott A. Shane : winner of the Global Award for Entrepreneurship Research

Scott A. Shane is the 2009 winner of the Global Award for Entrepreneurship Research. In this article we discuss and analyze Shane’s most important contributions to the field of entrepreneurship. His contribution is extraordinarily broad in scope, which makes it difficult to pinpoint one or a few specifics that we associate with Shane’s scholarship. Instead, they can be summarized in the following three points. First, he has influenced what we view as central aspects of entrepreneurship. Shane has been a leading figure in redirecting the focus on entrepreneurship research itself. Second, he has influenced how we view entrepreneurship. Shane’s research is arguably theory driven and it applies and develops theoretical lenses that greatly improve our understanding of entrepreneurship. Third, he has contributed to how we conduct entrepreneurship research. Shane has been a forerunner in examining relevant units of analysis that are difficult to sample; research designs and databases specifically designed for studying entrepreneurial processes; and sophisticated analytical methods. This has contributed to advancing the methodological rigor of the field. Summing them up, the contributions are very impressive indeed.

Redundancy in interface design and its impact on intuitive use of a product in older users

Many older adults have difficulty using modern consumer products due to their complexity both in terms of functionality and interface design. It has been observed that older people also have more problems learning new systems. It was hypothesised that designing technological products that are more intuitive for older people to use can solve this problem. An intuitive interface allows a user’s to employ prior knowledge, thus minimizing the learning needed for effective interaction. This paper discusses an experiment investigating the effectiveness of redundancy in interface design. The primary objective of this experiment was to find out if using more than one modality for a product’s interface improves the speed and intuitiveness of interactions for older adults. Preliminary analysis showed strong correlation between technology familiarity and time on tasks, but redundancy in interface design improved speed and accuracy of use only for participants with moderate to high technology familiarity.

A collaborative approach to reading workshop in the middle years

Reflection Questions • How does the collaborative reading workshop approach engage students in higher order thinking and deep engagement with text? • How does the collaborative reading workshop approach support students to be active citizens and critically literate? • How does the interaction and collaborative thinking in this approach contribute to the students’ intellectual engagement and the teacher’s pedagogical rigor? • How could this approach be implemented or adapted at your school?

Passenger experience in an airport : an activity-centred approach

An airport is one of the largest and most complex systems in modern society. Observational field studies have been conducted to investigate passenger experiences in, and interactions within, an international airport. Based on these studies, this paper discusses how activities mediate people’s experiences in the airport. For example, moving through the security screening process is discussed from both passenger and staff perspectives. The applied coding scheme ensured research rigor. The findings illustrate that passenger activities are complex and shared, and only partially supported by current terminal design. Thus, this research has the potential to impact on airport design to facilitate passenger flow through airport precincts.

An evaluation of IS-impact utility and intuitiveness

This study is conducted within the IS-Impact Research Track at Queensland University of Technology (QUT). The goal of the IS-Impact Track is, "to develop the most widely employed model for benchmarking information systems in organizations for the joint benefit of both research and practice" (Gable et al, 2006). IS-Impact is defined as "a measure at a point in time, of the stream of net benefits from the IS [Information System], to date and anticipated, as perceived by all key-user-groups" (Gable Sedera and Chan, 2008). Track efforts have yielded the bicameral IS-Impact measurement model; the "impact" half includes Organizational-Impact and Individual-Impact dimensions; the "quality" half includes System-Quality and Information-Quality dimensions. The IS-Impact model, by design, is intended to be robust, simple and generalisable, to yield results that are comparable across time, stakeholders, different systems and system contexts. The model and measurement approach employs perceptual measures and an instrument that is relevant to key stakeholder groups, thereby enabling the combination or comparison of stakeholder perspectives. Such a validated and widely accepted IS-Impact measurement model has both academic and practical value. It facilitates systematic operationalisation of a main dependent variable in research (IS-Impact), which can also serve as an important independent variable. For IS management practice it provides a means to benchmark and track the performance of information systems in use. From examination of the literature, the study proposes that IS-Impact is an Analytic Theory. Gregor (2006) defines Analytic Theory simply as theory that ‘says what is’, base theory that is foundational to all other types of theory. The overarching research question thus is "Does IS-Impact positively manifest the attributes of Analytic Theory?" In order to address this question, we must first answer the question "What are the attributes of Analytic Theory?" The study identifies the main attributes of analytic theory as: (1) Completeness, (2) Mutual Exclusivity, (3) Parsimony, (4) Appropriate Hierarchy, (5) Utility, and (6) Intuitiveness. The value of empirical research in Information Systems is often assessed along the two main dimensions - rigor and relevance. Those Analytic Theory attributes associated with the ‘rigor’ of the IS-Impact model; namely, completeness, mutual exclusivity, parsimony and appropriate hierarchy, have been addressed in prior research (e.g. Gable et al, 2008). Though common tests of rigor are widely accepted and relatively uniformly applied (particularly in relation to positivist, quantitative research), attention to relevance has seldom been given the same systematic attention. This study assumes a mainly practice perspective, and emphasises the methodical evaluation of the Analytic Theory ‘relevance’ attributes represented by the Utility and Intuitiveness of the IS-Impact model. Thus, related research questions are: "Is the IS-Impact model intuitive to practitioners?" and "Is the IS-Impact model useful to practitioners?" March and Smith (1995), identify four outputs of Design Science: constructs, models, methods and instantiations (Design Science research may involve one or more of these). IS-Impact can be viewed as a design science model, composed of Design Science constructs (the four IS-Impact dimensions and the two model halves), and instantiations in the form of management information (IS-Impact data organised and presented for management decision making). In addition to methodically evaluating the Utility and Intuitiveness of the IS-Impact model and its constituent constructs, the study aims to also evaluate the derived management information. Thus, further research questions are: "Is the IS-Impact derived management information intuitive to practitioners?" and "Is the IS-Impact derived management information useful to practitioners? The study employs a longitudinal design entailing three surveys over 4 years (the 1st involving secondary data) of the Oracle-Financials application at QUT, interspersed with focus groups involving senior financial managers. The study too entails a survey of Financials at four other Australian Universities. The three focus groups respectively emphasise: (1) the IS-Impact model, (2) the 2nd survey at QUT (descriptive), and (3) comparison across surveys within QUT, and between QUT and the group of Universities. Aligned with the track goal of producing IS-Impact scores that are highly comparable, the study also addresses the more specific utility-related questions, "Is IS-Impact derived management information a useful comparator across time?" and "Is IS-Impact derived management information a useful comparator across universities?" The main contribution of the study is evidence of the utility and intuitiveness of IS-Impact to practice, thereby further substantiating the practical value of the IS-Impact approach; and also thereby motivating continuing and further research on the validity of IS-Impact, and research employing the ISImpact constructs in descriptive, predictive and explanatory studies. The study also has value methodologically as an example of relatively rigorous attention to relevance. A further key contribution is the clarification and instantiation of the full set of analytic theory attributes.

Music is a Wordless Knowing of Others : Resilience in Virtual Ensembles

Music making affects relationships with self and others by generating a sense of belonging to a culture or ideology (Bamford, 2006; Barovick, 2001; Dillon & Stewart, 2006; Fiske, 2000; Hallam, 2001). Whilst studies from arts education research present compelling examples of these relationships, others argue that they do not present sufficiently validated evidence of a causal link between music making experiences and cognitive or social change (Winner & Cooper, 2000; Winner & Hetland, 2000a, 2000b, 2001). I have suggested elsewhere that this disconnection between compelling evidence and observations of the effects of music making are in part due to the lack of rigor in research and the incapacity of many methods to capture these experiences in meaningful ways (Dillon, 2006). Part of the answer to these questions about rigor and causality lay in the creative use of new media technologies that capture the results of relationships in music artefacts. Crucially, it is the effective management of these artefacts within computer systems that allows researchers and practitioners to collect, organize, analyse and then theorise such music making experiences.

Big project ventures: facilitating a collaborative planning and implementation process

This book is based on a study of a complex project proposal by governments and corporations for a futuristic city, the Multifunction Polis (MFP). It encompasses issues and challenges symptomatic of growth initiatives in the global competitive environment. Academic rigor is applied using corporate strategy and business principles to undertake a detailed analysis of the project proposal & feasibility study and to subsequently construct practical guidelines on how to effectively manage the interpretation & implementation of a large-scale collaborative venture. It specifically addresses a venture which involves fragmented groups representing a diversity of interests but which aspire to related goals and, to this end, there is a need for cooperation & synergy across the planning process.This is an easy to read book of general interest and well suited to practitioners and academics alike. Its relevance is far-reaching, extending to venture situations defined by location, industry, community or social interest, the context, scale and scope of the project, and the role of organization management, project management, market and industry development and public policy. flap text of book

Ways of telling : research methodology for fashion textiles design

Research methodology in the discipline of Art & Design has been a topic for much debate in the academic community. The result of such avid and ongoing discussion appears to be a disciplinary obsession with research methodologies and a culture of adopting and adapting existing methodologies from more established disciplines. This has eventuated as a means of coping with academic criticism and as an attempt to elevate Art & Design to a ‘real academic status’. Whilst this adoption has had some effect in tempering the opinion of Art & Design research from more ‘serious’ academics the practice may be concealing a deeper problem for this discipline. Namely, that knowledge transfer within creative practice, particularly in fashion textiles design practice, is largely tacit in nature and not best suited to dissemination through traditional means of academic writing and publication. ----- ----- There is an opportunity to shift the academic debate away from appropriate (or inappropriate) use of methodologies and theories to demonstrate the existence (or absence) of rigor in creative practice research. In particular, the changing paradigms for the definitions of research to support new models for research quality assessment (such as the RAE in the United Kingdom and ERA in Australia) require a re-examination of the traditions of academic writing and publication in relation to this form of research. It is now appropriate to test the limits of tacit knowledge. It has been almost half a century since Michael Polanyi wrote “we know more than we can tell” (Polanyi, 1967 p.4) at a time when the only means of ‘telling’ was through academic writing and publishing in hardcopy format. ----- ----- This paper examines the academic debate surrounding research methodologies for fashion textiles design through auto-ethnographic case study and object analysis. The author argues that, while this debate is interesting, the focus should be to ask: are there more effective ways for creative practitioner researchers to disseminate their research? The aim of this research is to examine the possibilities of developing different, more effective methods of ‘telling’ to support the transfer of tacit knowledge inherent in the discipline of Fashion Textiles Design.

Elicitator : a user-friendly, interactive tool to support scenario-based elicitation of expert knowledge

Expert elicitation is the process of determining what expert knowledge is relevant to support a quantitative analysis and then eliciting this information in a form that supports analysis or decision-making. The credibility of the overall analysis, therefore, relies on the credibility of the elicited knowledge. This, in turn, is determined by the rigor of the design and execution of the elicitation methodology, as well as by its clear communication to ensure transparency and repeatability. It is difficult to establish rigor when the elicitation methods are not documented, as often occurs in ecological research. In this chapter, we describe software that can be combined with a well-structured elicitation process to improve the rigor of expert elicitation and documentation of the results

Observing the relevance of an information systems success model

This paper contributes to the rigor vs. relevance debate in the Information Systems (IS) discipline. Using the Action Research methodology, this study evaluates the relevance of a rigorously validated IS evaluation model in practice. The study captures observations of operational end-users employing a market leading Enterprise System application for procurement and order fulfillment in an organization. The analysis of the observations demonstrates the broad relevance of the measurement instrument. More importantly, the study identifies several improvements and possible confusions in applying the instrument in the practice.

Methods used in cross-cultural comparisons of vasomotor symptoms and their determinants

Methodological differences among studies of vasomotor symptoms limit rigorous comparison or systematic review. Vasomotor symptoms generally include hot flushes and night sweats although other associated symptoms exist. Prevalence rates vary between and within populations, but different studies collect data on frequency, bothersomeness, and/or severity using different outcome measures and scales, making comparisons difficult. We reviewed only cross-cultural studies of menopausal symptoms that explicitly examined symptoms in general populations of women in different countries or different ethnic groups in the same country. This resulted in the inclusion of nine studies: Australian/Japanese Midlife Women's Health Study (AJMWHS), Decisions At Menopause Study (DAMeS), Four Major Ethnic Groups (FMEG), Hilo Women's Health Survey (HWHS), Mid-Aged Health in Women from the Indian Subcontinent (MAHWIS), Penn Ovarian Aging Study (POAS), Study of Women's Health Across the Nation (SWAN), Women's Health in Midlife National Study (WHiMNS), and Women's International Study of Health and Sexuality (WISHeS). These studies highlight the methodological challenges involved in conducting multi-population studies, particularly when languages differ, but also highlight the importance of performing multivariate and factor analyses. Significant cultural differences in one or more vasomotor symptoms were observed in 8 of 9 studies, and symptoms were influenced by the following determinants: menopausal status, hormones (and variance), age (or actually, the square of age, age2), BMI, depression, anxiety, poor physical health, perceived stress, lifestyle factors (hormone therapy use, smoking and exposure to passive smoke), and acculturation (in immigrant populations). Recommendations are made to improve methodological rigor and facilitate comparisons in future cross-cultural menopause studies.

Eliciting Expert Knowledge in Conservation Science

Expert knowledge is used widely in the science and practice of conservation because of the complexity of problems, relative lack of data, and the imminent nature of many conservation decisions. Expert knowledge is substantive information on a particular topic that is not widely known by others. An expert is someone who holds this knowledge and who is often deferred to in its interpretation. We refer to predictions by experts of what may happen in a particular context as expert judgments. In general, an expert-elicitation approach consists of five steps: deciding how information will be used, determining what to elicit, designing the elicitation process, performing the elicitation, and translating the elicited information into quantitative statements that can be used in a model or directly to make decisions. This last step is known as encoding. Some of the considerations in eliciting expert knowledge include determining how to work with multiple experts and how to combine multiple judgments, minimizing bias in the elicited information, and verifying the accuracy of expert information. We highlight structured elicitation techniques that, if adopted, will improve the accuracy and information content of expert judgment and ensure uncertainty is captured accurately. We suggest four aspects of an expert elicitation exercise be examined to determine its comprehensiveness and effectiveness: study design and context, elicitation design, elicitation method, and elicitation output. Just as the reliability of empirical data depends on the rigor with which it was acquired so too does that of expert knowledge.

Observational research and verbal protocol methods

This paper describes observational research and verbal protocols methods, how these methods are applied and integrated within different contexts, and how they complement each other. The first case study focuses on nurses’ interaction during bandaging of patients’ lower legs. To maintain research rigor a triangulation approach was applied that links observations of current procedures, ‘talk-aloud’ protocol during interaction and retrospective protocol. Maps of interactions demonstrated that some nurses bandage more intuitively than others. Nurses who bandage intuitively assemble long sequences of bandaging actions while nurses who bandage less intuitively ‘focus-shift’ in between bandaging actions. Thus different levels of expertise have been identified. The second case study consists of two laboratory experiments. It focuses on analysing and comparing software and product design teams and how they approached a design problem. It is based on the observational and verbal data analysis. The coding scheme applied evolved during the analysis of the activity of each team and is identical for all teams. The structure of knowledge captured from the analysis of the design team maps of interaction is identified. The significance of this work is within its methodological approach. The maps of interaction are instrumental for understanding the activities and interactions of the people observed. By examining the maps of interaction, it is possible to draw conclusions about interactions, structure of knowledge captured and level of expertise. This research approach is transferable to other design domains. Designers will be able to transfer the interaction maps outcomes to systems and services they design.

What is a good project manager? Reconceptualizing the “do” : an Aristotelian perspective

In Social Science (Organization Studies, Economics, Management Science, Strategy, International Relations, Political Science…) the quest for addressing the question “what is a good practitioner?” has been around for centuries, with the underlying assumptions that good practitioners should lead organizations to higher levels of performance. Hence to ask “what is a good “captain”?” is not a new question, we should add! (e.g. Tsoukas & Cummings, 1997, p. 670; Söderlund, 2004, p. 190). This interrogation leads to consider problems such as the relations between dichotomies Theory and Practice, rigor and relevance of research, ways of knowing and knowledge forms. On the one hand we face the “Enlightenment” assumptions underlying modern positivist Social science, grounded in “unity-of-science dream of transforming and reducing all kinds of knowledge to one basic form and level” and cause-effects relationships (Eikeland, 2012, p. 20), and on the other, the postmodern interpretivist proposal, and its “tendency to make all kinds of knowing equivalent” (Eikeland, 2012, p. 20). In the project management space, this aims at addressing one of the fundamental problems in the field: projects still do not deliver their expected benefits and promises and therefore the socio-economical good (Hodgson & Cicmil, 2007; Bredillet, 2010, Lalonde et al., 2012). The Cartesian tradition supporting projects research and practice for the last 60 years (Bredillet, 2010, p. 4) has led to the lack of relevance to practice of the current conceptual base of project management, despite the sum of research, development of standards, best & good practices and the related development of project management bodies of knowledge (Packendorff, 1995, p. 319-323; Cicmil & Hodgson, 2006, p. 2–6, Hodgson & Cicmil, 2007, p. 436–7; Winter et al., 2006, p. 638). Referring to both Hodgson (2002) and Giddens (1993), we could say that “those who expect a “social-scientific Newton” to revolutionize this young field “are not only waiting for a train that will not arrive, but are in the wrong station altogether” (Hodgson, 2002, p. 809; Giddens, 1993, p. 18). While, in the postmodern stream mainly rooted in the “practice turn” (e.g. Hällgren & Lindahl, 2012), the shift from methodological individualism to social viscosity and the advocated pluralism lead to reinforce the “functional stupidity” (Alvesson & Spicer, 2012, p. 1194) this postmodern stream aims at overcoming. We suggest here that addressing the question “what is a good PM?” requires a philosophy of practice perspective to complement the “usual” philosophy of science perspective. The questioning of the modern Cartesian tradition mirrors a similar one made within Social science (Say, 1964; Koontz, 1961, 1980; Menger, 1985; Warry, 1992; Rothbard, 1997a; Tsoukas & Cummings, 1997; Flyvbjerg, 2001; Boisot & McKelvey, 2010), calling for new thinking. In order to get outside the rationalist ‘box’, Toulmin (1990, p. 11), along with Tsoukas & Cummings (1997, p. 655), suggests a possible path, summarizing the thoughts of many authors: “It can cling to the discredited research program of the purely theoretical (i.e. “modern”) philosophy, which will end up by driving it out of business: it can look for new and less exclusively theoretical ways of working, and develop the methods needed for a more practical (“post-modern”) agenda; or it can return to its pre-17th century traditions, and try to recover the lost (“pre-modern”) topics that were side-tracked by Descartes, but can be usefully taken up for the future” (Toulmin, 1990, p. 11). Thus, paradoxically and interestingly, in their quest for the so-called post-modernism, many authors build on “pre-modern” philosophies such as the Aristotelian one (e.g. MacIntyre, 1985, 2007; Tsoukas & Cummings, 1997; Flyvbjerg, 2001; Blomquist et al., 2010; Lalonde et al., 2012). It is perhaps because the post-modern stream emphasizes a dialogic process restricted to reliance on voice and textual representation, it limits the meaning of communicative praxis, and weaking the practice because it turns away attention from more fundamental issues associated with problem-definition and knowledge-for-use in action (Tedlock, 1983, p. 332–4; Schrag, 1986, p. 30, 46–7; Warry, 1992, p. 157). Eikeland suggests that the Aristotelian “gnoseology allows for reconsidering and reintegrating ways of knowing: traditional, practical, tacit, emotional, experiential, intuitive, etc., marginalised and considered insufficient by modernist [and post-modernist] thinking” (Eikeland, 2012, p. 20—21). By contrast with the modernist one-dimensional thinking and relativist and pluralistic post-modernism, we suggest, in a turn to an Aristotelian pre-modern lens, to re-conceptualise (“re” involving here a “re”-turn to pre-modern thinking) the “do” and to shift the perspective from what a good PM is (philosophy of science lens) to what a good PM does (philosophy of practice lens) (Aristotle, 1926a). As Tsoukas & Cummings put it: “In the Aristotelian tradition to call something good is to make a factual statement. To ask, for example, ’what is a good captain’?’ is not to come up with a list of attributes that good captains share (as modem contingency theorists would have it), but to point out the things that those who are recognized as good captains do.” (Tsoukas & Cummings, 1997, p. 670) Thus, this conversation offers a dialogue and deliberation about a central question: What does a good project manager do? The conversation is organized around a critic of the underlying assumptions supporting the modern, post-modern and pre-modern relations to ways of knowing, forms of knowledge and “practice”.