Search results

The first in a series on goal‐based information modelling, this paper presents a literature review of two goal‐based measurement methods. The second article in the series will build on this background to present an overview of some recent case‐based research that shows the applicability of the goal‐based methods for information modelling (as opposed to measurement). The third and concluding article in the series will present a new goal‐based information model – the goal‐based information framework (GbIF) – that is well suited to the task of documenting and evaluating organisational information flow.

Following a literature review of the goal‐question‐metric (GQM) and goal‐question‐indicator‐measure (GQIM) methods, the paper presents the strengths and weaknesses of goal‐based approaches.

The literature indicates that the goal‐based methods are both rigorous and adaptable. With over 20 years of use, goal‐based methods have achieved demonstrable and quantifiable results in both practitioner and academic studies. The down side of the methods are the potential expense and the “expansiveness” of goal‐based models. The overheads of managing the goal‐based process, from early negotiations on objectives and goals to maintaining the model (adding new goals, questions and indicators), could make the method unwieldy and expensive for organisations with limited resources. An additional challenge identified in the literature is the narrow focus of “top‐down” (i.e. goal‐based) methods. Since the methods limit the focus to a pre‐defined set of goals and questions, the opportunity for discovery of new information is limited.

Much of the previous work on goal‐based methodologies has been confined to software measurement contexts in larger organisations with well‐established information gathering processes. Although the next part of the series presents goal‐based methods outside of this native context, and within low maturity organisations, further work needs to be done to understand the applicability of these methods in the information science discipline.

This paper presents an overview of goal‐based methods. The next article in the series will present the method outside the native context of software measurement. With the universality of the method established, information scientists will have a new tool to evaluate and document organisational information flow.

Cross-functional integration has been an important factor for manufacturing firms' performance outcomes. The study aims to expand previous research by investigating the moderating role of goal-based incentive systems in the relationship between cross-functional integration and competitive performance.

Based on multi-source data from 269 manufacturing firms around the world, regression analysis is used to test the proposed research model.

The authors' findings suggest that cross-functional integration enhances manufacturers' innovation and operational performance. Moreover, cross-functional integration has a stronger impact on operational performance when firms implement a well-designed goal-based incentive system. However, the authors find that the goal-based incentive system does not moderate the relationship between cross-functional integration and innovation performance.

The study, by investigating the fit between goal-based incentive systems and cross-functional integration, provides practical insights into the ways that firms apply cross-functional integration and goal-based incentive systems to enhance competitive performance.

Although the relationship between leadership behaviors and team reflexivity has been investigated in prior research, little is known about the dimensions of reflective leadership or leadership behaviors that facilitate reflection in a group or organization. This paper aims to examine the interrelated characteristics of reflective leadership behaviors that promote team learning using survey data.

Because this research was exploratory in nature, a research model was developed based on the preliminary research. The research model was tested using a quantitative study of 507 employees in 98 teams.

Results of regression analyses of a group-level study revealed three types of reflective leadership – open reflection, problem-based reflection and goal-based reflection – and found that only the open reflection and goal-based reflection were positively related to team learning.

As reflective leadership has not been examined in previous studies, the research model and the measurement scales were developed based on preliminary research in the present research.

Team leaders need to understand that goal-based reflection plays a central role in reflecting on their work because it may provide members with criteria to recognize whether they are on the right track.

The present research revealed three dimensions of reflective leadership that had not been adequately investigated previously.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate new welfare indicators, which no longer rely solely on the gross domestic product but provide a more holistic understanding of welfare encompassing aspects such as health status, social inclusion or environmental quality. So far, it remains, however, questionable to what degree these new indicators can serve as an actual political morality.

To assess this question, this paper proposes to turn to the distinction between right-based, duty-based and goal-based approaches. Assessing welfare in these terms not only suggests itself because of the consequentialist connotations of those alternative formulations that call for happiness or well-being, but also because the distinction allows to consider them in view of some of the central social goods and concerns.

The analysis shows mixed results. It, first, shows that welfare as political morality is best captured in terms of goals. Still, whatever new indicator one chooses, it must not be conceived as a mere aggregation of particular interests, nor should individuals be sacrificed for the sake of an overall good. This makes it important that subjective rights that function as a counterweight are strengthened.

The assessment of the new welfare indicators in these terms has not been undertaken so far, although they fit the purpose ideally. Thus, from the originality of the method, the originality of the findings follows so that the analysis provides neat categories and conclusions.

As increasing numbers of people with disabilities return to the community, it is necessary to equip them with skills to succeed in this technological world. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the effect of attendance, satisfaction, goal achievement, and transportation on a goals-based computer-training program for people with physical disabilities (n=130).

Regressions, distribution comparisons, and correlations were retrospectively conducted on data from a computer-training program for people with disabilities. Participants were aged 20-100 and were diverse in terms of education, diagnoses, and living situation.

Results indicated that people with physical disabilities from diverse demographic and -contextual backgrounds could participate in a goals-based computer-training program. Factors that affected the computer-training program included method of transportation (p=0.034), perception of goal achievement (p=0.000), and attendance rates (p=0.001). A strong correlation was found between support available for computer use and continued computer use (p=0.000).

Goals-based computer-training approaches that are client-centered may lead to increased perceptions of goal achievement and program satisfaction for people with disabilities, which could be used as outcomes to monitor success of such programs. It is also important to consider the effect of transportation and attendance rates on computer-training programs. However, results of this study were limited by its retrospective nature.

This study provides empirical data on factors that affect goals-based computer-training programs and evidence for the efficacy of such programs for individuals with disabilities. This can be used for program development and future research.

Projects have high stakes in how they are categorized. The final place of a project within a classification scheme depends on the inclusion or exclusion of certain classification criteria. So far, many researchers and organizations have used a variety classification criteria to construct different project classification schemes. However, most of these classification criteria have been taken for granted and the process of selecting them to categorize projects still remains a black box. The purpose of this paper is to open the black box of classification process and explain how it is reflected in picking the classification criteria.

Drawing on insights from cognitive psychology’s literature, the authors examine the main views of classification process to provide insight into the unknown or implicit reasons that one might have to pick particular attributes as project classification criteria.

The authors argue that classification occurs in the eye of the beholder; it is not only the project’s features per se but also the classifier’s “goals, ideal and preference” or “knowledge of causal relations” that are reflected in the classification criteria.

By elaborating the classification process, the authors brought the project context into the big picture of classification and provide a more rational, and coherent picture of how project classification works. This contributes to a theoretical blind spot, raised by prior researchers, related to the selection of project classification criteria.

Understanding classification processes will reduce the ambiguities, inconsistencies and multiple interpretations of project categories and help practitioners increase their projects’ visibility and legitimacy within an already established classification scheme. These implications help organizations in addressing some of the main obstacles to using categorization in project management practice.

The review of prior work in the category research literature and the insights from this paper will provide project management scholars with a useful toolbox for future research on project classification, which has long been understudied.

The growing use of teams in the workplace has led to an increasing number of incentive systems designed to motivate team performance. The present paper reviews such incentive systems, including: team gainsharing/profit‐sharing incentive systems; team goal‐based incentive systems; team discretionary bonus systems; team skill incentive systems; team member skill incentive systems; team member goal‐based incentive systems; and team member merit incentive systems. Evidence regarding the effectiveness of each team incentive system is reviewed. Generally, two factors affect the usefulness of a given team incentive system: team interdependence (both within and between teams) and team type (i.e., full‐ or part‐time). Based upon these factors, guidelines for the implementation of each team incentive system are provided.

From the point of view of computing environments, the paper aims to present a goal‐based contextual problem detection and management (GCPDM) method whose core benefit in its extendability of detection capability to deal with unpredicted problems.

Approaches the subject by designing a goal graph, designing actions, designing achievable relations between actions and goals, defining contextual factors of each action, defining CCGs and implementing the GCPD engine.

That self‐managed, as opposed to traditional, software is designed to avoid runtime failures by adapting to unpredictable situations.

This paper presents a GCPDM method.

This paper examines how some specific psychological characteristics and stress levels of small and medium-sized enterprise (SME) key decision-makers (founders/managers) (KDMs) influence firm goal attainment based on two firm aspiration types.

This study hypothesizes that perceived resilience, social skills (self-promotion, ingratiation, expressiveness, social adaptability), and stress of SME KDMs will differently influence firm performance goal achievement based on firm historical versus social aspirations. IBM AMOS v27 is used to test these hypotheses on survey data of 267 Australian SME KDMs.

The study reveals that KDMs’ perceived resilience, social skills and stress differentially impact the achievement of firm performance goals when selecting firm-level historical and social aspirations. Resilience and some specific social skills can even have a detrimental effect on achieving firm goals when applying historical and social aspirations. Historical aspirations are based on the firm’s performance history, while social aspirations are based on the performance of a reference group of competitor firms. The differences in the relationship between these characteristics and the two aspiration types are also explained. Furthermore, the study reveals the important role of perceived stress levels in achieving firm performance goals, using both aspiration types.

This study is the first to investigate how the perceived use of some specific psychological characteristics of SME KDMs influence the ability to meet firm performance goals based on the discretionary use of historical and social aspirations and the relationship between these aspiration types. In this context, the paper explains the reasons for the differences and similarities in their use. Thus, this study provides an important empirical contribution to research on the emergent domain of micro-foundational SME goals.

The technical support team at a small European software firm was in virtual revolt. The product that they supported was error‐prone and after three rounds of redundancies morale was at an all time low. With the arrival of a new management team, the support manager was given the remit to drastically improve productivity and increase the revenue potential of the department. Through a case‐based approach, both qualitative and quantitative methods are used to evaluate the applicability of the goals, questions, indicators, measures (GQIM) approach in a field environment, illustrating the practical application of the conceptual work on goal‐based methodologies that was previously presented in this journal (2002).