Leadership in the Process of Collaboration

Leadership in the Process of Collaboration Leadership is a relationship between those who aspire to lead and those who choose to follow (Kouzes et al., 2007). Leaders must master the dynamics of this relationship. They must learn how to mobilize others to want to struggle for shared aspirations. This means that leaders need to acquire the understanding, skills, and experience to collaborate successfully. Within this context, leaders move away from being the sole decision maker to involving others such as staff, and community members in the decision making process. I have looked deeply into the leader-constituent relationship. Through case analyses, books and journal articles, I have discovered that leaders at all levels follow rather similar paths as they guide others along pioneering journeys. By these studies, I was able to identify one of the most important practices common to most leadership achievements that is enabling others to act. This practice has stood the test of time, and it is available to anyone, in any organization or situation, who accepts the leadership challenge. This essay discusses the broader study that focused on collaboration in order to contextualize and highlight the findings related to the affective elements of collaborative leadership. The essay examines how the leader supports collaboration in their organisation to enlist and enable others to act and analyses the emotional competencies involved in. Finally, consideration is given to how leaders might be supported in the development and acquisition of the key skills required for affective leadership in their organisation. This essay also highlights the data related to how the leaders support collaboration. It specifically describes the perceptions that leaders and other stakeholders had regarding the role of the leader in fostering collaboration. The essay includes the description of behaviours exhibited by leaders and perceived by participants in the study as supporting collaboration. The purpose of the essay is to analyse these collaborative behaviours in terms of their emotional component. It is important to note that the goal of this study was not to examine emotional competencies of leadership. Data related to the affective domain of leaders work emerged as significant findings of the research question. Enlist others in a common vision by appealing to shared aspirations Motivation is what drives individuals to work in the way they do to fulfill goals, needs or expectations. These are numerous, varied and changing. (Bush, T. et al, p237) People can imagine an exciting, highly attractive future for their organization. Leaders may be driven by their clear image of possibility and what their organization could become. In this case, leaders passionately believe that they can make a difference. They create the way that no one else has ever produced. They uplift peoples spirits with an ennobling perspective about why they should strive to be better than they are today. This means that to create an organised movement as well as significant change, leaders need to enlist others. They also must appeal a shared aspiration because people will not follow until the vision is accepted as their own. Leaders must speak others language to enlist them in a vision. Leaders not only understand peoples needs but also have their interests at heart when they are to sign up for journeys into the future. Leaders breathe life into visions through vivid language and an effective style. Their own enthusiasm and excitement are contagious and spread from the leader to constituents. Their belief in and enthusiasm for the vision are the sparks that ignite the flame of inspiration. (Kouzes et al. 2007, p. 16-18) Breath life into your vision and align your dream with the peoples dream According to Kouzes et al. (2007) and Hallinger et al. (2002), people desire to do something that can make a profound difference to the future of their families, friends, and communities and their life as well. Therefore, leaders not only show the directions and set the standards but also effectively communicate a vision. Visions are about our strong desire such as ideals, hopes, dreams and aspirations to achieve something great. In communicating shared visions, leaders need to make them meaningful by awakening dreams, breathing life into them, and arousing the belief that they can get extraordinary things done before bringing these visions into the conversation. In order to make their visions become true, leaders need to keep people focused and excited about the meaning and significance of their work. Leaders have to animate the vision and make manifest the purpose so that others can see it, hear it and feel it. It is not leaders dream alone but is the peoples vision. Hall (2002) shows that they need to show how their individual and collective efforts could make a positive difference and make sure that each team member could repeat the vision not just by rote but also from the heart. This would enable them to realize these aspirations and make all people have the power within themselves to accomplish whatever they desire. Expand your communication and expressiveness skills to animate the vision Kouzes et al. (2007), Shriberg et al. (2005), Green (2000) and Ginsberg et al. (2003) show that to enlist others and arouse them to go decisively forward, leaders not only appeal to their ideas, animate the vision and breathe life into it but also help them understand how their own interests and dreams are aligned with the vision. The constituents will become internally motivated to commit their individual energies to its realisation if leaders recognise that their enthusiasm and expressiveness are indispensable factors in their efforts to generate commitment in their constituents. People always desire to work more effectively and find out the fastest way to achieve their common goals but it will be very difficult if the visions are not images in their mind. Therefore, to enlist others and inspire a shared vision, leaders must be able to paint word pictures that best portray the meaning of their vision and that others get a natural mental image of what things will be like in the future. To find the ways of giving expression to their collective hopes for the future, leaders face some challenges. Firstly, extraordinary things are often very difficult to get for leaders and their constituents. They may be dispirited while facing these difficulties. In this situation, leaders must recognise that their constituents look for them to demonstrate an enthusiastic and genuine belief in their capacity and supply the means to achieve and express optimism for the future to remain passionate despite obstacles. These mean that their vital tasks are to foster team spirit, breed optimism, promote resilience as well as renew faith and confidence. Thus, leaders must look the situation at the bright side and keep hope alive. They must strengthen their constituents belief that lifes struggle will produce a more promising future. (Kouzes et al. 2007, p. 147) Secondly, in mobilizing people to struggle for shared aspirations, their intensive enthusiasm is required to generate. Consequently, leaders are responsible for the energy of authentic excitement in their organization. They need to add more emotion by using all means of verbal and nonverbal expression to their words and their behavior to communicate with their constituents because it really makes their messages to be more memorable. In addition, the prerequisite to enlisting others in a shared vision is genuineness. The first place to look before taking to others about the vision of the future is in your heart (Kouzes et al., 2007, p. 151). If the vision is not leaders or they do not believe in what they are saying, it will be very difficult for them to enlist the others. As Staler (2005) point out, people identified specific communicative behaviours that the leader demonstrates which can support collaboration in the organisation. However, they felt that listening and openness are particularly important in providing support. Inherently, such behaviour is emotional work. Openness is related to the honest sharing and disclosure of information, both personal and professional. Similarly, Kouzes and Posner (1999) indicate that in order to become fully trusted, we must be open. Furthermore, when the leader takes the risk of being open, others are more likely to take a similar risk, thereby building interpersonal trust. The ability of the leader to foster such a safe environment, to promote and exemplify such a learning model is, in part, an emotional capacity. Foster collaboration by building trust and facilitating relationships In todays virtual organisations, cooperation can not be restricted to a small group of loyalists. It must include peers, managers, customers and clients, supplies, citizens. All those have a stake in the vision. (Kouzes et al., 2007, p. 20). Leaders have to know that to produce the good results people must feel a sense of personal power and ownership. Instead of the command and the control techniques of traditional management, the new effective way to enable others to act is to make people feel strong, capable, and committed by giving the power away. Show trust to build trust Need for trust working together, as Mayer, R. C. (1995) said, often involves interdependence, and people must therefore depend on others in various ways to accomplish their personal and organisational goals. The development of mutual trust provides one mechanism for enabling employees to work together more effectively. The emergence of self-directed teams and a reliance on empowered workers greatly increase the importance of the concept of trust (Golembiewski McConkie, 1975; Larson LaFasto, 1989). In the use of self-directed teams, trust must take the place of supervision because direct observation of employees becomes impractical. Further, a clear understanding of trust and its causes can facilitate cohesion and collaboration between people by building trust through means other than interpersonal similarity. According to Kouzes et al. (2007) and Grint (2003), trust must be at the heart of collaboration. Leaders have to be trust others if they want others to trust them. They can not lead without trust. Therefore, to create a climate of trust, leaders need to be the first to trust by being the first to open up, to show vulnerability and to let go of control. Self-confident and self-disclosure are also required to build interpersonal trust. Moreover, Dinham (2007) point out that leaders must understand that besides sharing information and resources to foster collaboration they need to care for others needs and interests that play a key ingredient to build the team around common purpose and mutual respect. They understand that mutual respect is what sustains extraordinary efforts. If leadership is built on trust and confidence, people will take risks to make changes and movements alive. Leaders have the most significant impact on their organisation, promote cooperative goals and build trust by engaging in frequent conversation. It is impossible for leaders to take their people or their organisation to the next level without meaningful, frequent, and consistent communication. Huber (2002) reveal that a collaborative environment leads to greater satisfaction of individuals within the organisation, and therefore enhances their performance. Yet a collaborative environment does not just emerge because one declares there will now be collaboration. It takes a great deal of trust and respect for this type of synergy to occur. A leader builds this trust by asking and utilizing others input, considering alternative perspectives, allowing others to make decisions, and communicating, communicating, communicating. When employees feel that they are trusted, they will become trustworthy. On the contrary, when individuals feel that they are not trusted, they will exhibit behaviors creating a toxic environment. In the book the Leadership Challenge, Kouzes and Posner point out that trust is the most significant predictor of individuals satisfaction with their organisation. Highly effective leaders recognise that it is not important for them to be right, but rather to listen, take advice, lose arguments, and in some cases follow. Through these behaviors trust is built and performance is maximized. Get people interacting to facilitate relationship The most genuine way to demonstrate your care and interest in others is to engage them in conversation. Frequent conversations build trust while learning about anothers values, interests, concerns, and desires. People do not perform at their greatest levels when in isolation. Shribersg et al. (2005) argue that it is important that an organization provides opportunities to interact whether it is though social events, common meeting spaces, or regular staff meetings. Some leaders may see frequent social opportunities as wasteful or non-productive; the reality is an organization cannot develop shared priorities or reach common goals if there are not opportunities to interact both personally and professionally. In addition, Kouzes and Posner (2007) and Shriberg et al. (2005) showed that a sense of interdependent community in which everyone coordinate their efforts and need the others to be successful is one of the most crucial components to cooperation and collaboration. To bind others into cooperative efforts, a specific reason for being together must be provided by sharing and developing cooperative goals. It is also necessary for leaders to establish and keep the norms of reciprocity and fairness in their mind to improve relationship and decrease stress while working together. While people keeping the common goal in their mind, leaders need to help them to understand that they can not achieve the group outcomes unless they all play successfully their individual parts. People need to know that the long-term benefits of common group are more significant than the short-term benefits of working alone. There are many things that no one can gain on their own, but they can easily accomplish by working together. Moreover, Kouzes et al. (2007) pointed out that: group goals, reciprocity, and promoting joint efforts are all essential for collaboration to occur, but what is critical is positive face-to-face interaction. Nowadays, with the great help from technology people have many ways to connect with the others such as the emails, instant messages, and video conferences. However, the most effective interaction to build trust and promote teamwork is face-to-face conversation frequently. Durable and regular interactions between people make them always remember about how they have treated and have been treated by others. This helps them to have positive feelings on the rest of their group, which may be a solid foundation for success. Some people claim that face-to-face connection takes considerable amount of time, but despite this disadvantage, leaders need to make it one of their leadership imperatives because of the effectiveness it brings to them. Strengthen others by increasing self-determination and developing competence To allow people to feel more powerful and ultimately be more productive, it is critical to increase their ability to influence. This may be done through increasing their signature authority, reducing unnecessary approval steps, eliminating rules when possible, and assigning non-routine jobs. Unfortunately, in many organizations employees are charged with tremendous amounts of responsibility yet are not able to influence their environment to efficiently and effectively get the job done well. Employees must feel that they have the freedom to move around freely and maneuver resources necessary to accomplish an assigned task. (Jill Tomac) Creating a climate in which people are involved and feel important is at the heart of strengthening others. Leaders must make sure that everyone involve in all the group work. They need to listen to the opinions of others carefully and then help them to build up their capabilities as well as update their own information and perspective. When people are trusted and have more discretion, more authority, and more information, they are much more likely to use their energies to produce extraordinary results. (Kouzes et al., p. 21) Moreover, one key to success is that in order to gain respect leaders must also show respect for others. Jill Tomac shows that leaders are those individuals who are not widely known; they have very little interest in placing themselves in the forefront but are quite happy having their successors in the spotlight. In effect, these leaders create stars all around them, allowing others the glory. As a result, each member of the organization is performing at his/her maximum potential and bringing the organisation to new levels of achievement. Leaders recognise the importance of empowering others, through sharing information and assigning responsibility while enforcing accountability. A leaders ability to understand and appreciate others perspectives can be the critical distinguishing factor between a success and failure. Leaders who prefer to work by themselves and do not engage or believe in those around them have great difficulty achieving their goals. They have a tendency to share power and provide choice; allowing others the latitude to make choices and take responsibility. Of course, i t is valuable to provide the expectations, parameters, direction, and skill building needed to be successful. However, beyond that people must feel that they have the respect and trust of their superiors to get the job done. Effective leaders use their power in service to others through strengthening and supporting them. In effect, leaders turn subordinates into leaders themselves enabling people to consider variables, make choices, and act on their own initiative. As Kouzes and Posner state Leaders strengthen others when they give their power away, when they make it possible for constituents to exercise choice and discretion, when they develop competence to excel, when they assign critical tasks, and when they offer visible support. Increase individual accountability to enhance self-determination To help people increase accountability and then enhance self-determination, leaders need to act by following a scientific process. Firstly, as Riley et al. (2003) said, people can not finish their work as their group desire and can not make a difference if they have no freedom of choice about what they do as well as the way that they think fit. Thus, leaders need to help them to recognise their abilities and assign them to roles that they are comfortable by listening to their ideas and suggestions. By this way, every group member can bring value to the whole team and be responsible for their work Secondly, leaders must design work proactively to allow others discretion and choice. It means that people must have the latitude in decisions what they desire and believe should be done in their own creative and flexible ways. By this way, leaders can empower and strengthen others to do their best. Thirdly, personal accountability is a critical factor of collaboration. It seems to be a contradiction between cooperation and personal accountability as some peoples opinions. They argue that they will take less responsibility for their action while working collectively because others do their parts of work for them. Although they have a point in thinking that, their opinions are not true. This is because the team do not accept the slackers unless they increase their own responsibility. People are forced powerfully to do well by the expectations of the rest of their group. Therefore, by promoting collaboration, leaders simultaneously increase individual accountability. (Kouzes et al. 2007). Offer training support to develop competence Leithwood et al. (2003) indicate that when increasing the authority and influence a person has within the organization, it is critical for people to develop the needed skills and knowledge to perform effectively. It is foolish to ask people to begin making decisions or take actions that they have never been assigned before without preparing them to be successful. Through training, coaching, and mentoring staff, they will not only increase their abilities but also their interest and dedication to their work. (Jill Tomac) Valuing people means not only listening to what they have to say or contribute, but taking their input and using it to solve problems or make decisions. To value the contribution of other people, the leader supports the collaborative process by focusing on the interdependent nature of their work (Staler, 2005). However, as noted by Beatty (2000a), and the studies of Blase and Blase (2000), leaders may feel concerned about losing control while letting go of control. Therefore, they need to understand about shared responsibility. Advocacy for collaboration includes the promotion of beliefs, goals, and information about the value of collaboration. A principal advocates for collaboration by conveying the ongoing visible endorsement of, and participation, in collaborative activities (Leonard and Leonard 2001). As previously mentioned, when principals model collaboration they build credibility, because their actions are consistent with their words or they do what they say they will do. However, to set an example, principals need to be clear about their values and beliefs; they must know what they stand for. According to Kouzes and Posner (1999) thats the say part. Advocacy then might take the form of conveying information on the attributes and goals of collaboration or describing the decision making model for implementation. People say that the leaders advocacy for collaboration helps to support the process are in accordance with Gerbers view (1991: 48), that effective advocacy puts collaboration on the launching pad for take-off in the school. Goleman (1998) introduced the term emotional competency to describe learned, job-related capabilities or skills that individuals develop based upon their emotional intelligence. As Goleman (1995) identified, five domains of emotional intelligence are self-awareness, managing emotions, motivating oneself, empathy, and adeptness in relationships. People agreed that in collaboration, workplace skills related to emotional intelligence are required leadership competencies. Staler (2005) show that to understand others, leaders need to actively listen to their ideas and sympathise with their feelings, perspectives and concerns. In other word, the artful skill of understanding another persons perspective depends upon a communication skill such as emotional competencies. Emotional self-awareness that is also identified to relate to competencies is a crucial skills in collaboration. According to Goleman (1998), people who know their emotions engage in accurate self-assessment, and have a strong sense of their own self-worth. Having the courage to speak out is an emotional competency based on self-confidence. The development of self-awareness meant discovering their own voice and coming to their own sense of power. It also means that in a collaborative situation people need to recognise the strengths that they bring to the group (Slater, 2005). In addition, Options, latitude, and accountability fuel peoples sense of power and control over their lives. Yet as necessary as enhancing self-determination is, it is insufficient. Without the knowledge, skills, information, and resources to do a job expertly, without feeling competent to skillfully execute the choices that it requires, people feel overwhelmed and disable. (Kouzes et al. 2007). Without education, training and coaching to develop their skills, people may not know how to exercise their knowledge to operate their critical tasks because they are scared of making mistake. Therefore, leaders not only increase the latitude and discretion of their constituents but they also need to raise expenditures on training. This means that the group members need be understood and then to receive training in both basic and expert skills and problem-solving techniques. These investments will develop peoples competences and foster their confidence. They may be more qualified, more capable and more effective in taking their part of common work. Basing on understanding how the contextual factors of others jobs perform to designed their works to help them know what is expected of them is another important way that leaders can strengthen their constituents. Thus, leaders must to: provide sufficient training and technical support so that people can complete their assignments successfully. Enrich their responsibilities so that they experience variety in their task assignments and opportunities to make meaningful decisions about how their work gets accomplished. Create occasions for them to network with others in the organisation. Involve them in programmes, meetings, and decisions that have a direct impact on their job performance. (Kouzes et al. 2007, p. 264) Conduct coaching conversations to foster self-confidence As Kouzes et al. (2007) said, without adequate self-confident, people can not convince to take challenges. They will feel powerless to make choices and to face opposition because they do not believe in their skills as well as they are not sure to make decisions. The lack of self-confident also leads to the lack of self-determination. Therefore, fostering the confidence for people to accomplish their tasks is critical in the process of strengthening others. Similarly, Gold (1998) and Northouse (2010) point out that leaders must take a careful look at what people are doing and communicate to them that they can be successful if they persevere in their works. It is true that by helping people learn from their skills and experiences, leaders act as coaches. If coaching occurs regularly, people will become more capable because of being encouraged to broaden their skills and experiences. Jill Tomac indicates that to foster self-confidence, leaders create stars all around them. Rather than shine the spotlight on themselves, they sing the praises of others. Effective leaders need to find out what others doing well, then thank them for their contribution, and finally sharing it with others. CONCLUSION Evidences in this essay reveal the need for leaders to enlist and enable others to act in the process of collaboration. To this end, leaders need appropriate professional development of the fundamental abilities that are required in facilitating groups, reaching consensus as well as team building. In this way, leaders must develop new skills, behaviours, and essential knowledge. Firstly, to enlist others, leaders breathe life in to the shared vision that is meaningful to them. They make people feel proud to be a part of extraordinary common work. Secondly, to foster collaboration, leaders must create a climate of trust and facilitate effective relationship by getting people interacting. They must develop cooperative goals to make senses of collective purpose. Thirdly, to strengthen others, leaders have to extend power and responsibility to them. They develop others competence and confidence as well as enhance self- determination by offer training and coaching support. Accordingly, this essay has explored a crucial practice of leaders that is to enable others to act, in which collaboration is the central component. Understanding and managing the emotional aspects of the collaborative process is a challenge for leaders who wish to work in collaborative ways. The success of collaborative reform efforts and the improvement of organization performance rely on the leaders skilful implementation of the collaborative process. Consequently, further studies that examine the emotions of leadership would enhance our understanding of how leaders competencies in the affective domain can be used to build the capacity for leading in the modern time.

Application of Balanced Scorecard

A Case Study: Application of the Balanced Scorecard in Higher Education by Andrea Mae Rollins A dissertation submitted to the faculty of San Diego State University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Educational Leadership June 28, 2011 iii Copyright  © 2011 by Andrea Mae Rollins v DEDICATION This work is dedicated to my brother Jason, from as early as I can remember he has always been proud of his little sister and her accomplishments; his pride, his love, and his support will forever be cherished and means more than he will ever know, and To my grandmother Dollie, who sacrificed so much in order to provide for me the life I needed; she taught me to be kind and generous and to ask for help when needed, but most importantly she taught me anything is possible, and To my dear friends, who give me more credit than I deserve and love me unconditionally; I am extremely fortunate to have such a wonderful group of amazing women in my life, and To Fred, who never gave up on me; his confidence in my abilities gave me the strength to push through all obstacles and make it to the finish line. v ABSTRACT The purpose of this study was to examine the application of the Balanced Scorecard as a management tool within the External and Business Affairs (EBA) unit at University of California, San Diego (UCSD). Specially, the study sought to examine how the Balanced Scorecard was communicated throughout the organization, how the data are used within the organization, and how the data are used for decision making, paying particular attention to the four perspectives of UCSD’s EBA’s personalized Balanced Scorecard.These four perspectives are financial/stakeholder, internal processes, innovation and learning, and the customer. This descriptive case study, a review of program records, a quantitative survey and qualitative interviews with EBA employees utilizing the constant comparative method and descriptive statistics, identified four l essons learned: the truly informed employees are at the top of the organization and they find value in the Balanced Scorecard, most employees are unaware of availability and usefulness of the Balanced Scorecard data, even an unbalanced Scorecard improves business operations and the annual performance evaluation process is an opportunity to reinforce the Balanced Scorecard. The study includes three recommendations for EBA.The recommendations are EBA leadership needs to communicate the Balanced Scorecard process, outcomes, and application with greater clarity to all employees in the organization; there needs to be an institutional plan for sustainability of the Balanced Scorecard to ensure it transcends the current people and environment; and the Balanced Scorecard process within EBA must be flexible for future organizational evolution. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE ABSTRACT.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LIS T OF TABLES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF FIGURES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER 1—INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Background: The Balanced Scorecard. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Site of the Case Study: University of California, San Diego. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . External and Business Affairs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Problem Statement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Definition of Terms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Significance of Thi s Study.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Purpose Statement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Theoretical Framework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Research Questions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Limitations of the Study.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Delimitations of the Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Role of the Researcher. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Organization of the Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER 2—REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Roles and Expectations of Higher Education. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Higher Education in California. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v x xi xii 1 1 4 6 9 10 11 12 12 14 14 15 15 15 17 17 19 vii Reengineering Education. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Performance Funding.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Accreditation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Organizational Structure and Management Tools. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Total Quality Management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Malcolm Baldrige Award Framework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Balanced Scorecard. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Balanced Scorecard and Higher Education. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Organizational Change and the Case Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER 3—METHODOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Research Design.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Research Questions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Setting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Participants.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Data Collection and Analysis.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Interviews.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Survey. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Program Records. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Data Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Timeline. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ethical Principles Based on Human Subjects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Role of the Researcher. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 22 24 28* 28 29 30 33 34 36 37 37 38 38 40 41 42 44 45 46 47 47 48 viii Limitations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER 4—FINDINGS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Participant Profiles.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Survey. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Interviews.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Source of Findings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Program Records. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Survey. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Interviews.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Historical Perspective. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Implementation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lessons Learned.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recent Changes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Interview Themes.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Tool With Many Names.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Communication Is an Individual Choice. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An Unbalanced Balanced Scorecard. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Impact Is Personal.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Visionaries Can Be Found at All Leve ls. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER 5—DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lessons Learned.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 48 50 51 51 54 56 56 57 60 61 61 63 64 64 65 66 69 72 74 77 78 79 ix Informed Employee. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Availability and Usefulness. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Unbalanced Scorecard. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Performance Evaluation Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Theoretical Framework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Communicate With Clarity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sustainability Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Flexibility.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Future Research. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Process Mapping. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Balanced Scorecard Implementation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Balanced Scorecard Components.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Traditional Academic Unit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Quantitative Outcome Measures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . REFERENCES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDICES A. Vice Chancellor—External and Business Affairs Organization Chart.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. Balanced Scorecard Example.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 86 88 92 95 97 98 99 100 102 102 103 103 104 104 105 106 112 113 LIST OF TABLES PAGE Table 1. External and Business Affairs’ Personalized Balanced Scorecard. . . . . . . . Table 2. Unit Affiliation of Survey Participants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 3. Years of Service of Survey Participants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 4. Position of Survey Participants.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 5. Interview Participants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 6. Survey Responses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 52 53 54 56 58 i LIST OF FIGURES PAGE Figure 1. The Balanced Scorecard visual created by Kaplan and Norton.. . . . . . . . . 3 xii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my dissertation committee for their support and patience in the completion of this study. Thank you to Dr. Fred McFarlane for always making time to hear me. There were many excuses used, but you never seemed frustrated or disappointed but rather your continued support kept me motivated and committed. Thank you to Dr. Shaila Mulholland for continuously pushing me a bit further and your continued support while doing so. Thank you to Dr. Mark Tucker for your careful review of this work and your sound advice and guidance.I would a lso like to thank Dr. Angela Song and the UCSD community. Dr. Song, throughout this entire process, if felt as though I had a partner in you. Your generosity in terms of sharing your time and knowledge meant a lot and was a significant contributor to my success. To the UCSD community, thank you for your honesty and openness. Lastly, I want to thank my friends and family. Thank you for always believing in me. Your encouragement and support helped make this possible. A final thanks goes to Bailey and Hershey for their unconditional love, especially in those moments when I had little time and attention for them; they rode this wave with me. CHAPTER 1—INTRODUCTION Steven Covey is quoted as saying, â€Å"People and their managers are working so hard to be sure things are done right, that they hardly have time to decide if they are doing the right things† (Rohm, 2002, p. 1). Managing an organization is a balancing act. This balancing act requires the organization and all its members to ensure the development of good business strategies that allow for efficient operations and practices. The Balanced Scorecard is a performance management tool that assists the organization in finding its balance (Rohm, 2002). According to Kaplan and Norton (2007), â€Å"The balanced Scorecard supplemented traditional financial measures with criteria that measured performance from three additional perspectives—those of customers, internal business, and learning and growth† (p. 2).This case study examines the application of The Balanced Scorecard in External and Business Affairs (EBA) at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD). Specifically, it looks at the personalized Balanced Scorecard that UCSD developed for their implementation. Background: The Balanced Scorecard The Balanced Scorecard, developed in 1992, provides organizations with an opportunity to measure more than financial performance indicators. Kaplan and Norton (1992) developed the Balanced Scorecard so that â€Å"managers should not have to choose between financial and operational measures† (p. 71). The development of the balanced scorecard was in response to a changing and more competitive environment where executives felt traditional measures of financial performance were not sufficient.The Balanced Scorecard was designed as a model for measuring several dimensions of 2 performance. The model provided managers with a format that allowed them the opportunity to incorporate additional perspectives beyond financial performance measures. By using this model, organizations are able to complement their financial measures with additional nonfinancial performance measures for the purpose of planning future growth and creating an organization with more collaborative leadership (Kaplan & Norton, 2007). Kaplan and Norton (1992) completed a yearlong research project that was comprised of 12 companies that they described as being at the leading edge of performance manage ment.The result of this yearlong research project is the Balanced Scorecard, which is an assessment tool comprised of a set of measures that go beyond the traditional measures of financial criteria to include measures that are inclusive of both financial and operational indicators. The Balanced Scorecard â€Å"provides answers to four basic questions: 1) How do customers see us? 2) What must we excel at? 3) Can we continue to improve and create value? and 4) How do we look to shareholders? † (Kaplan & Norton, 1992, p. 72). Kaplan and Norton argue that by giving managers the answers to these four basic questions, they will have multiple measures to judge the performance of their organization, but will not be overloaded by a large number of measures. Additionally, the variety of measures requires the financial and operational leaders to work together.The Balanced Scorecard serves as an easy tool for determining whether the success in one area occurs to the detriment of another, as well as identifying if success in one area is associated with strong performance in another area (Kaplan & Norton, 1992). By considering the four perspectives altogether, the Balanced Scorecard indicates when a process that serves a benefit to your customers may in fact hinder the 3 organization from the innovation and learning perspectives. Figure 1 is a visual of the tool Kaplan and Norton created to describe the Balanced Scorecard. Figure 1. The Balanced Scorecard visual created by Kaplan and Norton. Adapted from â€Å"The Balanced Scorecard: Measures That Drive Performance,† by R. S. Kaplan & D. P.Norton, January-February 1992, Harvard Business Review, p. 72. The tool provides the four questions of the Balanced Scorecard in relationship to one another and links the questions to the perspective to which they are responding. Additionally, the Balanced Scorecard provides the format for tracking the data, which they break up into goals and measures. The four perspectives are: Financial, Internal Business, Innovation and Learning, and Customer (Kaplan & Norton, 1992). These four questions are the foundation of the Balanced Scorecard. Goal setting and tracking 4 measures help to make the Balanced Scorecard a successful performance measurement tool for organizations.Site of the Case Study: University of California, San Diego In recognition of its â€Å"innovative approach to cutting costs, solving problems, and increasing efficiency† (UCSD, 2003, para. 1) the University of California, San Diego was inducted into the Balanced Scorecard Hall of Fame in 2003 (External and Business Affairs [EBA], 2011b). Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton founded the Palladium Group (2010), a global organization that provides, among other services, consulting in strategy and performance management. The Palladium Group developed the Balanced Scorecard Hall of Fame, which honors organizations that have achieved performance excellence through the use of the Balanced Scorecard.There is a formal application process, and the selection criteria requires an organization to have implemented the Balanced Scorecard methodology, have completed a breakthrough in performance results for at least 24 months, and have provided a testimonial that the organization’s success is, at least in part, due to the Kaplan-Norton approach. In 2010, there were more than 130 current Hall of Fame Members. Members included domestic and international organizations. They were presented in the following industry groups: consumer, education and nonprofits, energy and utilities, financials, government, healthcare, materials and industrials, and telecommunications and information technologies (The Palladium Group, 2010). In 2003, UCSD was the first university to be added to the Hall of Fame.The recognition came 10 years after adopting the performance management system in 1993. There are only two other universities that have been inducted into the 5 Hall of Fame. These two universities are the University of Leeds located in the United Kingdom and the International Islamic University of Malaysia. University of California, San Diego, one of the 10 campuses in California’s University of California system, was founded in 1960. University of California, San Diego is highly regarded nationwide as both an outstanding institution of higher learning and as a top tier research institution. In the 2011 â€Å"America’s Best Colleges Guidebook,† issued by U. S.News and World Report (as cited in UCSD, 2010a), UCSD was ranked as the 7th best public university in the nation. In 2010, there were five Nobel Prize winners among UCSD’s faculty body (UCSD, 2010a). University of California, San Diego has significant ties to the local community, specifically related to the amount of jobs it provides for members of the local community. University of California, San Diego is the third largest employer in San Diego County, employing nearly 26,000 em ployees. Its faculty and alumni have contributed to at least 193 start-up companies in the San Diego community. The impact of the research at UCSD extends throughout California, which notes that â€Å"UC San Diego contributes more than $7. billion in direct and indirect spending and personal income each year to the California economy and generates 39,400 jobs, based on an independent study conducted by CBRE Consulting released in† 2008† (UCSD, 2010a, para. 7). The work of the students, faculty, researchers and alumni has a local, state, and national influence and a global reach. The campus consists of six undergraduate colleges, five academic divisions and five graduate and professional schools. In the fall of 2010, the total campus enrollment was 29,899 students. The annual revenues for UCSD are approximately $2. 6 billion with 22% of the revenues 6 coming from federally funded research and 11. 5% coming from the State of California (UCSD, 2010a).The Washington Monthly is a different ranking guide that ranks higher education organizations on an annual basis on their contribution to the public good. The categories for the college guide and rankings for the award are Social Mobility—recruiting and graduating low income students; Research—producing cutting-edge scholarship and PhDs; and Service—encouraging students to give something back to their country. In 2010, UCSD ranked number one on the Washington Monthly list. Washington Monthly explains their rankings are unlike U. S. News and World Reports and other guides because they do not look at what colleges can do for the individual but rather what the colleges do for the country (â€Å"College Guide,† 2010).External and Business Affairs The mission of UCSD focuses primarily on education and research. The leadership structure of the university is divided into seven vice chancellor areas. Three of the vice chancellor areas hold academic appointments and directly serve the education and research mission of UCSD. The other four vice chancellor areas serve this mission, as well, but in more of a peripheral role. The External and Business Affairs (EBA) vice chancellor area serves the university by providing leadership and management for the business and administrative functions. Despite the fact that UCSD is recognized by the Balanced Scorecard Hall of Fame, only EBA has implemented the Balanced Scorecard.The overall mission of EBA is â€Å"raising financial support for UCSD’s research, teaching and patient care, while delivering superior service to our stakeholders in a responsive and cost-effective manner† (EBA, 2011a, para. 1). The organizational units in the EBA 7 include Administrative Computing and Telecommunications, Human Resources, Business and Fiscal Services, Housing, Dining and Hospitality Services, Alumni Affairs, University and Health Sciences Development, and the UCSD Foundation and Advancement Services. A full description of the organizational unit is found in Appendix A. Currently, Steven W. Relyea serves as the Vice Chancellor for EBA.Through his leadership, UCSD’s EBA adopted the Balanced Scorecard in 1993. When honored as a member of the Balanced Scorecard Hall of Fame in 2003, UCSD had saved more than $6 million since the Balanced Scorecard was adopted. Mr. Relyea is quoted as saying: The Balanced Scorecard process provides UCSD with a roadmap which indicates where it should focus its energies, priorities, and resources in providing administrative services for UCSD. During difficult budgetary times, this approach is indispensable. While some may have viewed an approach such as the Balanced Scorecard as optional in the past, many will find it a key to survival in this era of shrinking funds. (UCSD, 2003, para. ) Stemming from the basic four questions outlined by Kaplan and Norton (1992) in the Balanced Scorecard (i. e. , â€Å"1) How do customers see us? 2) What must we excel at? 3) Can we continue to improve and create value? and 4) How do we look to shareholders? † [p. 72]), UCSD created four perspectives for the focus of their Balanced Scorecard tool. The four perspectives of UCSD’s Balanced Scorecard focus on: the financial/stakeholder, the internal processes, innovation and learning, and the customer. These four perspectives link to Kaplan and Norton’s questions as follows: the financial/stakeholder perspective responds to Kaplan and Norton’s question number four; the internal process perspective responds to question number two; the innovation and learning perspective responds to question number three; and the customer perspective responds to question number one. University of California, San Diego prides itself on being a strategic, forward-thinking organization. University of California, San Diego’s EBA kept this framework as their foundation when personalizing the four perspectives and outlining their foci for the implementati on and application of the Balanced Scorecard. External and Business Affairs values these four perspectives (see Table 1) as tools and provides the organization with the following foci to further define the perspectives.Table 1 External and Business Affairs’ Personalized Balanced Scorecard Perspective Financial/Stakeholder Internal Process Innovation and Learning Customer Focus Looking Backwards Process Performance Employee Satisfaction and Wellness Customer Satisfaction University of California, San Diego has described their benefits from the Balanced Scorecard as the ability to align customer priorities with business priorities, the ability to track progress over time, the method for the evaluation of process changes, the method for identification of opportunities for initiatives and partnerships, the source for accountability to constituents, and the source for the development of action plans and setting strategic direction. University of California, San Diego as an institu tion benefits by the application of the Balanced Scorecard within EBA. Despite EBA being the only vice chancellor area that has implemented and applied the Balanced Scorecard, the benefits extend through all areas of the institution given that the services EBA provides to faculty and staff extends throughout the entire institution. Problem Statement In tight fiscal times, challenges and expectations increase for higher education organizations. The concept of a higher education organization running more like a corporation serves as a basis for criticism of the organization. In tight fiscal times, critics are extremely outspoken about the business of higher education. They challenge everything from the manner in which higher education organizations are organized and their funding decisions, to their staffing choices.Higher education organizations are viewed as a key component in overcoming tight fiscal times, therefore providing hope for the nation. However, their resources do not inc rease while their expectations by the students and other customers do increase over time. Higher education organizations face external pressures to adapt and manage change by utilizing market and business strategies. The financing of higher education organizations is cyclical. Therefore, tight fiscal times are either on the horizon or currently present for most publically supported higher education organizations. Alexander (2000) described this issue when discussing the concept of higher education accountability.He stated that â€Å"a new economic motivation is driving states to redefine relationships by pressuring organizations to become more accountable, more efficient, and more productive in the use of publicly generated resources† (p. 411). A related perspective is provided by Kotler and Murphy (1981), who wrote about tight fiscal times in higher education in the 1980s. Almost 30 years later their arguments are still very relevant given the cyclical nature of the 10 finan cing of higher education. They viewed the economic condition as a motivator, rather than seeing only setbacks and challenges. They looked at the economic condition as an opportunity to strategically move the organization forward. When fiscal times are tight, they see opportunities for higher education organizations.From their perspective, tight fiscal times are opportunities for planning and strategizing about the organization’s future. If the higher education organization can look introspectively and begin to analyze their current situation rather than focusing simply on daily operations, they can look to the future and find new opportunities (Kotler & Murphy, 1981). Presently higher education organizations face dilemmas of accountability. They are challenged to operate more strategically and are tasked with finding greater process efficiencies. Green (2003) argued that traditional approaches for managing higher education organizations are no longer relevant. Organizations n eed to reengineer themselves to be relevant in today’s society.Higher education organizations must identify, explore, and implement strategies that can assist them in responding to these new expectations. In 1993, when EBA implemented the Balanced Scorecard, it was partially in response to tight fiscal times and increased federal regulations. Consistent with Green’s argument, EBA was looking for a way to reengineer their organization in order to respond to the challenges of disappearing resources and increased regulation while finding a way to be strategic and accountable. Definition of Terms The following terms were used in this study. 1. Balanced Scorecard refers to the performance management tool developed by Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton in 1992. 11 2.Balanced Scorecard foci refer to the foci established at UCSD in conjunction with their personalized Balanced Scorecard perspectives. 3. Balanced Scorecard perspectives refer to the personalized Balanced Scorec ard at UCSD. 4. External Business and Affairs (EBA) refers to the vice chancellor unit at UCSD that has implemented the Balanced Scorecard. 5. Higher Education organizations refer to public and private nonprofit 2-year colleges and public and private nonprofit 4-year universities. 6. University of California, San Diego (UCSD) refers to the study site for this case study. 7. Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) is the accrediting commission for Senior Colleges and Universities in the Western Region of the United States.Significance of This Study In light of the current and future expectations, higher education organizations require examples of successful implementation and adaptation of management strategies that address the need to become more productive, accountable and efficient. The Balanced Scorecard, which utilizes measures beyond financial performance, is a tool that can assist higher education organizations to become more efficient and accountable. This case stu dy took an in-depth look at the application of the Balanced Scorecard in units within the EBA vice chancellor area at UCSD. The results of the case study will provide other higher education organizations with a detailed view of how the Balanced Scorecard is communicated throughout the units, examples of what type of data elements are 12 tracked, and how these data elements are used for decision making.This detailed view of the Balanced Scorecard application will be useful for higher education administrators who are both internal and external to UCSD. For current UCSD administrators, this study provided them with a new view of the Balanced Scorecard. For external higher education administrators, this study will provide them with another model for doing business. This detailed view will provide them with examples of how one higher education organization has applied their Balanced Scorecard and impacted its performance. Purpose Statement This case study examined the application of the Balanced Scorecard as a management tool, and explored how the Balanced Scorecard and UCSD’s EBA personalized perspectives/foci were communicated throughout the organization.The results identified the data elements that the Balanced Scorecard tracks and described how the data were used for decision making. This case study paid particular attention to the four perspectives of UCSD’s EBA which were personalized for their application. These four perspectives are financial/stakeholder, internal processes, innovation and learning, and the customer. Theoretical Framework This study was informed by Bolman and Deal’s Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership. Bolman and Deal, in 2008, the fifth release of work that was first published in 1984, provide a four-frame model that views â€Å"organizations as factories, families, jungles, and temples† (p. vii).The four frames are the structural frame, the human resource frame, the political frame, and th e symbolic frame. A frame, 13 as defined by Bolman and Deal, is a mental model. It is â€Å"a set of ideas and assumptions that you carry in your head to help you understand and negotiate a particular territory† (p. 11). Frames are necessary so individuals within organizations can quickly create a mental model of their current situation so they know how to appropriately navigate the situation. Bolman and Deal explain that although it is key to have mental models (i. e. , frames in order to negotiate day to day situations), it is also important for individuals to have the ability to break frames; they call this â€Å"reframing. They argue that learning to apply all four frames creates a deeper appreciation and understanding of the organization. Bolman and Deal (2008) outline the frames with the following descriptions. The structural frame or the â€Å"factory† emphasizes organizational architecture and the formal roles and relationships in an organization. The â€Å"s tructure† of an organization is found in an organization’s organizational charts, the linear or vertical relationships that have been defined and provided to employees. The human resources frame or the â€Å"family† emphasizes relationships, particularly interpersonal relationships. The human resource frame is concerned with the individual in the organization, their feelings and their needs.The political frame or the â€Å"jungle† refers to the political nature of an organization including the struggles of power, competition, and coalition building, as well as including the much needed negotiation and consensus building. The symbolic frame or â€Å"temples† refers to the â€Å"informal culture† of the organization. The symbolic frame emphasizes symbols and rituals within an organization. In the context of the case study, it was important for the researcher to have an understanding of organizational theory. These four frames were selected by t he researcher to guide her research design and methodology and to provide her lens for gathering and analyzing data due to the fact that the four frame 14 model provided by Bolman and Deal are inclusive of the entire organization.The theory they have been working on since 1984 provided an appropriate context to study the Balanced Scorecard at UCSD; it describes the organization in four competing and complementary frames, similar to the concept of the Balanced Scorecard. Research Questions In order to understand the application and management of the Balanced Scorecard in UCSD’s EBA, the following questions were answered through this case study: 1. How are the four perspectives of the Balanced Scorecard communicated in the EBA? 2. How are the data from the Balanced Scorecard used within the organization of the EBA? 3. What impact does the Balanced Scorecard have on decision making in the EBA?Limitations of the Study A limitation of this study is that all higher education organi zations operate in a very distinct and unique manner. It may be difficult for some higher education organizations to find connections to this case study given the differences in mission, size, operations, and organizational structures of their institution when compared to UCSD. A second limitation is that since EBA is primarily a financial and administration unit within a high education organization, their processes and applications may not work for nonfinancial units. 15 Delimitations of the Study A delimitation of this study was the study site. The researcher selected UCSD based on proximity and familiarity.Within UCSD, the EBA is the only vice chancellor area that has adopted Balanced Scorecard. The other six vice chancellor areas have not adopted the Balanced Scorecard. Another delimitation of the study was that the researcher focused only on the Balanced Scorecard performance management tool rather than other performance management tools which are utilized at UCSD in the other vice chancellor areas. Role of the Researcher The researcher is currently a Director at UCSD in the Health Sciences Vice Chancellor area. The Health Sciences’ organizational unit has not adopted the Balanced Scorecard as a management tool; however, the researcher works with offices on a regular basis that have adopted the Balanced Scorecard.The researcher was invested in this case study because she wanted to gain a greater understanding of how the Balanced Scorecard has been implemented and how this can be modeled throughout UCSD and other higher education organizations nationwide. Even though she is an employee at UCSD, she attempted to be unbiased and fair. Organization of the Study This research study is organized in five chapters. Chapter 1 includes an introduction to the study, the purpose statement, the significance of this study, research questions, definition of terms, the limitations and delimitations of the study, and the role of the researcher. Chapter 2 includes a review of the literature and research on the Balanced Scorecard and its role in higher education. Chapter 3 includes a discussion of 16 the methodology that was used in the study.Chapter 4 includes the results and analysis that emerged from the study. Finally, Chapter 5 includes a summary of the study and lessons learned and recommendations based on the findings. 17 CHAPTER 2—REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE The roles and expectations of higher education organizations have significantly changed in the last decade. Higher education organizations are expected to provide a multitude of services in addition to providing the highest quality education for their students. Higher education organizations are expected to serve as a significant contributor to the nation’s economic state. They are expected to contribute to their communities via the students they educate.The students should transition quickly into productive workers in society as both skilled and knowledge workers. They a re expected to contribute via technology advances and business start ups that emerge from academic research. Stemming from the academic research, they are expected to contribute via innovations that lead to new products, services, and new collaboration with industry (Berdahl, 2009; Douglass, 2010a; Gumport & Sporn, 1999; Serrano-Valarde, 2010). Role and Expectations of Higher Education The new roles of the higher education organizations and the expectations placed on them have stemmed from societal expectations, public polices, and technological innovations.Higher education organizations are seen as a spark that once ignited can create vast benefits for society. This new role and the expectations of higher education organizations have created a need for university leaders to become increasingly accountable and to develop organizational structures that can support and fulfill current and future expectations. Higher education organizations are now being assessed on their ability to pr oblem solve, their ability to provide a high quality product in a low cost environment, their ability to continue to maintain a level of access despite budget cuts, and to produce graduates as knowledgeable and skilled workers in a reasonable 18 timeframe.The demands upon higher education organizations require them to become more strategic in nature, and to explore discussions of restructuring, resource management, and quality assurance. Despite the new expectations, higher education organizations are not expected to receive additional funding or secure new funding streams. Rather, the reality is their operating budgets will continue to decrease (Gumport & Sporn, 1999). As an example, it was reported in January 2011 that higher education organizations in California should expect budget cuts of approximately $1. 4 billion for fiscal year 2011-2012 (Keller, 2011). Higher education organizations are increasingly challenged to meet these new expectations, given the current budget situat ion and the forecast of a bleak financial future.It is the opinion of many that 2011 and future years may be equally as troubling financially as the recent reductions higher education organizations have faced (Atkinson, 2009; Douglass, 2010a, 2010b). According to Douglass (2010b), the demand for higher education and societal gains from higher education organizations go up during economic downturns. There is an important relationship between the need to educate students and provide support for academic research and the funding available during times of economic downturn. Douglas (2010b) argues, â€Å"Education funding and enrollment capacity may be as important as any other policy level to cope with the economic downturn† (p. 2).Additional or continual budget cuts simply provide further limitations on the higher education organization’s ability to meet these new expectations. The current budget cuts will have a significant impact on graduation rates and future worker sh ortages. Douglass (2010b) continues his argument, speaking specifically about the state of affairs of higher education in California by stating, â€Å"[It is] undergoing a possibly 19 significant redefinition, driven solely by severe budget cuts and without a long-term strategic plan† (p. 9). Higher Education in California Focusing on the state of affairs of higher education in California, Douglass (2010a) describes the near collapse of the system.The near collapse has been brought on by the state’s fiscal weakness and therefore a lack of funding to its three-tiered structure, the University of California System, the California State University System, and the California Community College System. Public support for student funding has plummeted in California and, despite the continued growth of applicants, the three-tiered system is unable to accommodate qualified students. In addition to their capacity issues, California is challenged by its inability to graduate stud ents, which continues to add to the worker shortage in the state. Many students in California are displaced and looking to nonprofit (i. e. , National University) and for-profit universities (i. e. , the University of Phoenix and Argosy University) to fill the void left by the state-supported three-tiered system.The number of displaced students is predicted to continue to grow given that the population in California will increase exponentially in the next 40 years. The U. S. Census Bureau (2010) cites the current population in California at 36,961,664. It is projected to reach 60 million by 2050 (California Department of Finance, 2007; Douglass, 2010a; U. S. Census Bureau, 2010). Douglass (2010c) describes the for-profit universities as providing a lesser quality product. It may be more accessible, but it often comes with a larger cost and a decreased level of quality. The movement to for-profit universities as a result of lack of access is not unique to California or the United Sta tes.Douglass (2010c) describes this phenomenon as the â€Å"Brazilian Effect. † The Brazilian 20 Effect is â€Å"when public education cannot keep pace with the growing public demand for access and programs. For-profits rush to fill that gap, and become a much larger provider† (Douglass, 2010c, p. 5). The Brazilian Effect is usually more prevalent in developing nations—nations that consist of large areas of high poverty rates, low high school graduation rates, and limited access to higher education. The research indicates this is more prevalent in countries such as Brazil, Korea, and Poland. California presently is experiencing these same qualities seen in developing nations.Douglass (2010c) argues the Brazilian Effect is presently being seen in California. In a response to California’s near collapse, Douglass (2010b) argues for a smart growth plan. This smart growth plan â€Å"seek[s] clear goals such as degree attainment rates, with an appropriate rest ructuring of higher education, containment of costs for taxpayers and students, and a seriously revised funding model† (Douglass, 2010b, p. 18). Of concern for California’s three-tiered system is its lack of management, vision, and planning for the future. It is this lack of a strategic plan that Douglass referred to that opens the door for extensive criticism surrounding the management of higher education organizations.The Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) serves as the accreditation body for higher education organizations in the state of California and other western states and territories. The chief goals of the senior commission of WASC, which serves as the accrediting body for 161 institutions in California, Hawaii, and the Pacific Basin, are the promotion of institutional engagement in issues of educational effectiveness and student learning, the development of a culture of evidence that informs decision making, and the fostering of an active inter change among public and independent institutions (WASC, n. d. a). Under these goals, WASC can support higher 21 education organizations in their development of â€Å"smart growth plans† if they choose such a plan during the assessment of the organization.The WASC describes their purpose as assessing academic quality, educational effectiveness and institutional structures, processes, and resources (WASC, n. d. b). However, it does not appear this has translated to successful management and leadership in higher education organizations in California. Reengineering Education As a result of the new expectations for higher education organizations, attempts have begun to occur to reengineer higher education organizations to achieve closer alignment with market principles and management strategies, which have proven successful in the private sector. Green (2003) suggested that supporters of this â€Å"reengineering† movement include leaders from educational administration, sta te governments, and the business world.He argued that â€Å"traditional approaches to higher education organizations and management are increasingly out of step with demographic trends, technological innovations, and the accelerating pace of change found in other sectors of society† (p. 196). Green labeled most higher education organizations as â€Å"bureaucratic† based on their organizational structure of being rigid, hierarchal, and inflexible. Kotler and Murphy (1981), who wrote on the topic 30 years ago, also depicted higher education organizations in a similar fashion. They described higher education organizations as being â€Å"characterized by a high concentration of professionals and usually a significant amount of organizational inflexibility† (p. 472). Kotler and Murphy also acknowledged that management strategies in higher education organizations do not parallel the processes in a business setting.Keeling, Underhile, and Wall (2007) discussed the silo nature of higher education organizations. They suggested the silos are 22 due to a primarily vertical organizational structure, where members of the organization are often competing amongst themselves for scarce resources. Green (2003) provided an alternate option to a â€Å"bureaucracy,† that being â€Å"adhocracy. † An â€Å"adhocracy,† a term popularized by Alvin Toffler in 1970 (as cited in Travica, 1999), is a flexible organization, which operates collaboratively with cross-functional teams and matrix management. An adhocracy represents an organizational structure of the future; not many examples of true adhocracies exist.Performance Funding Another option being explored by some is the concept of performance funding. Performance funding is the mechanism of being paid based on the higher education organization’s accomplishments. Alexander (2000) explained that â€Å"this transformation has resulted from the realization that to strengthen their compe titive positioning, states and nations must increase their involvement in the development of human capital and research through higher education† (p. 412). Consistent with the increased expectations of higher education organizations, there has also been a change in the interaction between higher education organizations and the government.Governments are seeking a greater level of production from higher education organizations, as well as an increased level of accountability and efficiency in the organization’s use of public funds. Similar to societal expectations, the government’s expectation of higher education organizations has increased in terms of the organization’s return on its investment. The government expects expanded access and enrollment growth and is continuing to seek out new ways to measure productivity and efficiency in higher education organizations. Performance based funding has seen its largest increase in the last decade. In 2000, three- quarters of 23 the states linked a portion of the state funding for higher education to performance measures.Higher education organizations continue to find themselves responsible to new state-mandated measures which require tracking and reporting of those measures (Petrides, McClelland, & Nodine, 2004). Liefner (2003) wrote about performance funding. He suggested that performance funding should be defined at the organization level. Governments should allow higher education organizations the ability to manage their organization on an individual basis and define goals based on the historical and culturally accepted framework of the organization versus being forced by an external body. Petrides and colleagues (2004) concurred with Liefner. Their research suggested responses to external mandates are not necessarily drivers of performance.External mandates are becoming more and more prominent in higher education funding provided by the federal government. Field (2010) explained, in an a rticle in The Chronicle of Higher Education, that President Obama, more than his predecessors, is demanding results in exchange for funding. She explains that some administrators have seen this as meddling in their academic affairs. She states, â€Å"Not surprisingly, the plans met with skepticism from colleges. Some community-college leaders worried that benchmarking could shift the balance of power from state and local governing boards to Washington, setting the stage for federal meddling in curricula† (para. 18).Advocates, however, are praising him for increased accountability and assessment. The article concludes by explaining that higher education organizations will need to make the case for the funding they receive. This could be viewed as another form of performance funding; but regardless how you label it, this requires higher education organizations to have an infrastructure that supports data gathering and metrics in order to be able to respond to the 24 requirement s from the federal government to obtain funding that is required to run their organization. Accreditation A historically accepted manner to evaluate the quality of higher education organizations is accreditation.Accreditation is defined by the federal government as: Recognition that an institution maintains standards requisite for its graduates to gain admission to other reputable institutions of higher learning or to achieve credentials for professional practice. The goal of accreditation is to ensure that education provided by institutions of higher education meets acceptable levels of quality. (U. S. Department of Education, Office of Postsecondary Education, n. d. , para. 1) The Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA, 2003) described accreditation as â€Å"a process of external quality review used by higher education to scrutinize colleges, universities and educational programs for quality assurance and quality improvement† (p. 4).In the United States, there are multiple bodies of accreditation for higher education organizations. Accreditation is regional, national, and specialized to individual disciplines. The definitions provided by the federal government and the CHEA speak specifically of quality. Quality within higher education organizations, however, has as many definitions as the number of people you ask. From the accreditator’s perspective, quality focuses more on the educational product delivered to the student rather than providing a direct linkage to the new expectations higher education organizations are facing. Specifically, the WASC, Senior Commission identifies four standards for accreditation.These are Standard I: Defining Institutional Purposes and Ensuring 25 Educational Objectives; Standard II: Achieving Educational Objectives Through Core Functions; Standard III: Developing and Applying Resources and Organizational Structures to Ensure Sustainability; and Standard IV: Creating an Organization Committed to Learnin g and Improvement (WASC, n. d. c). Within each standard, there are references to leadership, vision, and strategic planning. However, none of the standards clearly articulates these new expectations, let alone the evaluation requirements to determine whether or not higher education organizations are meeting these expectations.The lack of focus provided by accreditation bodies on these new expectations, higher education organizations’ role in contributing to the nation’s economic state perpetuates the systematic issues higher education organizations face with little accountability, inefficient practices, and insufficient leadership. Higher education organizations, in order to maintain appropriate accreditation, are required to meet the WASC defined standards. If accountability, efficiency, and strategic leadership was clearly defined and articulated in terms of the new expectations of higher education organizations by WASC, then we would see an increased number of highe r education organizations with these strengths.As indicated by the literature, the current state of higher education in America, as we looked specifically at California, is volatile. The current budget state, the societal expectations, the lack of resources and bureaucratic organizational structures show higher education to be at a state of necessary change. Higher education organizations continue to cling to organizational systems and structure that have served them in the past, but these systems and structures are unstable and lack the forward-thinking, strategic 26 leadership that is necessary for higher education organizations to survive, let alone thrive and evolve into organizations that can be successful today and into the future.Organizational Structure and Management Tools Despite the trend for accreditation to focus on program outcomes, quality is not explored in terms of higher education’s role in the nation’s economic state either via the student’s p roductivity in the workforce or via academic research. Given this notion that accreditation is not providing higher education organizations with a checklist for evaluation, organizations are forced to find ways to manage this internally. In order to meet the new expectations, higher education organizations must examine their organizational structure and management strategies to restructure, change, and implement management tools that will allow them to evaluate how well they are responding to the new expectations.Keeling and colleagues (2007) discuss higher education organizations in the following manner: The organization of institutions of higher education has been seen as operating with ambiguous purposes in vertically oriented structures that are only loosely connected. The rationale for this ambiguity is twofold: (1) to allow for creative thinking, and (2) to respect and even encourage the autonomy of different disciplines. But ambiguity of purpose and vertical organization are at odds with thinking and expectations in an era of accountability and assessment, in which cross-institutional, or horizontal, reporting and measurement of institutional performance are highly regarded and increasingly demanded. (p. 22) 27 Keeling and colleagues’ argument was consistent with the new expectations of higher education organizations.The current structure of higher education organizations no longer fit in this era of accountability, efficiency, and productivity. Serrano-Valarde (2010) provided a similar argument, when she discussed the role of management consultants in higher education organizations. She described the new expectation of higher education as a shift that occurred in the mid-1990s. The shift, she explained, was a â€Å"shift in the perception of responsibility to society . . . to [provide] a locus for individual development, transmission of civic values and basic research . . . to became directly accountable for the nation’s economic well-be ing† (p. 126). Serrano-Valarde discussed the role of management consultants in the academic culture within higher education organizations.Prior to the shift of perception that Serrano-Valarde wrote of in 2010, Kotler and Murphy (1981) discussed the need for higher education leaders who had the strategic vision to serve as change agents. More than 30 years prior to Serrano-Valarde describing the need for management consultants, Kotler and Murphy argued â€Å"few leaders are able and willing to focus systematically on change; they are largely taken up in today’s operations and results† (pp. 470-471). This inability to lead change in higher education organizations still exists 30 years later, and Serrano-Valarde explained that this has created a need for management consultants who, once inserted in the organization, can serve as the change agents that most higher education organizations are lacking. Management consultants, regardless of the cause or their presence, open the door for higher education organizations to explore and implement strategies similar to business. The exploration of these strategies is necessary as a response to the new expectations of higher education organizations: the need for greater accountability, 28 efficiency, and productivity. Gumport and Sporn (1999) described opportunities within higher education organizations, which allow for the injection of management strategies, the opportunities for â€Å"quality expectations [which] focus on public accountability, student learning, faculty productivity and performance, program effectiveness, and institutional evaluation† (p. 11).They acknowledged, however, that management strategies primarily benefit the administrative structures and processes within higher education organizations. They argued that over time the strategies may reach and therefore benefit the academic side of the organization, as well. Common management strategies explored in higher education organi zations include Total Quality Management (TQM), the Baldrige Program Award, and the Balanced Scorecard. Total Quality Management Total Quality Management provides higher education organizations an opportunity to improve quality, increase performance, and decrease cost by utilizing the mechanisms of continuous improvement and cultural change throughout the organization (Chaffee & Sherr, 1992).According to Lozier and Teeter (1996), the early adopters of TQM, in the mid 1980s, were largely community and technical colleges; the training component of their missions fit nicely with the principles of TQM. Lozier and Teeter explain, in order for higher education organizations to appropriately implement TQM, they need to first define quality as it relates to their organization. Secondly, the need to define their mission and vision and lastly implement processes which allow for continuous improvement. Total Quality Management relies on a total transformation of the organization, which is ofte n difficult for higher education organizations which do not 9 operate in the pure top-down model like much of the corporate world where TQM has shown to be most successful. The Malcolm Baldrige Award Framework The award, which is a government program initially developed for industry, was converted into an award for education organizations in 1999. The Malcolm Baldrige Award evaluates organizations on seven categories including Leadership, Strategic Planning, Customer Focus, Measurement, Analysis and Knowledge Management, Workforce Focus, Operations Focus and Results (Karathanos & Karathanos, 2005). Since 2001, the recipients of the Baldrige award have been mixed between K-12 schools and higher education organizations.The award recipients have been recognized for their improvement of academi

Nursing and the quality care

The work environment in which nurses provide care to patients can determine the quality and safety of patient care. As the largest health care workforce, nurses apply their knowledge, skills, attitude, and experience to care for the various and changing needs of patients. A large part of the demands of patient care is centered on the work of nurses. When care falls short of standards, whether because of resource allocation (e.g., workforce shortages and lack of needed medical equipment) or lack of appropriate policies and standards, nurses shoulder much of the responsibility. This reflects the continued misunderstanding of the greater effects of the numerous, complex health care systems and the work environment factors.Understanding the complexity of the work environment and engaging in strategies to improve its effects is essential to higher-quality, safer care. In this paper I will discuss one strategy geared at improving that many are supporting, nationwide, while looking at the e ffects it has on the professional nursing practice. The work environment in which nurses provide care to patients can determine the quality and safety of patient care. As the largest health care workforce, nurses apply their knowledge, skills, attitude, and experience to care for the various and changing needs of patients. A large part of the demands of patient care is centered on the work of nurses.

Essay on Native American Sound Instruments - 1633 Words

quot;Native American Sound Instrumentsquot; Through my own personal experiences and teachings from Native Americans, that have offered to enlighten me, Ive gathered that there is a sacred nature rich in spirit and soul to them. The Native American lives religion as a way of life. Children of the tribe grow up in this world of spirituality and learn from example that religion can come as easily as taking a breath every day. This is no attempt to lead into the topic of religion, yet it needs to be known that the Native American sound instruments are used as a part of that religion or spirituality. There are many sound instruments used by Native Americans, but they vary accordingly from tribe to tribe. The Native American sound†¦show more content†¦One reason a drum is thought of having medicine is when the drum is made from cedar. The Cedar tree has been known as a powerful healing tree and thus this medicine is passed on to the drum as a sort of healing energy. The other reason that a drum is thought to have medicine i s because of what type of skin is used. Elk, deer, buffalo, horse, and moose, just to name a few, all have some kind of significance when it comes to being used on a drum. To the First Nations, deer is considered to have a connection to the circulatory system. To be more precise, the Heart, the heart can be left unattended for long periods of time. This lack of attention can lead to high poverty in the sense that there is never enough time, never enough money, or never enough love. Native Americans believe that Deer opens the heart to allow them the teachings of trust and to allow them to empower the power of love and wisdom. They feel that drumming with Deer has the medicine to Rodriguez 3 remind them that they live in a universe filled with more than enough of every thing that is needed. Drumming with Deer helps when the feeling of being unloved engulfs someone, it in turn reminds them of the laws of circulation. In other words, when one is feeling unloved then its time to love others and all things, and soon that love will be returned tenfold. Drumming with Buffalo is used when one seeks to gain wisdom and guidance from their Ancestors by opening theShow MoreRelatedNative American Musical Instruments And Music980 Words   |  4 PagesNative American Musical Instruments are about natives getting together and playing there instruments. They play them on holidays and birthdays, also they play whenever they want entertainment. It’s a tradition for them. Their instruments are not metal like ours, so it doesn t sound like ours either. Their instruments have a whole different tune and sound. Native Americans love to play their instruments. Its one of their favorite things to do. I am writing about Native American musical instrumentsRead MoreNative American Instruments Essay879 Words   |  4 PagesNative American Musical Intruments are about natives getting together and playing there instruments. They play them on holidays and birthdays, also they play whenever they want entertainment. It’s a tradition for them. There instruments are not metal like ours so it doesn t sound like ours either. There instruments have a whole different tune and sound. Native americans love to play there instruments. Its one of their favorite things to do. I am writing about Native american musical instrumentsRead More Native American Flutes Essay1016 Words   |  5 PagesAlthough Native Americans are known for their voice being a vital instrument, most rituals, songs, and dances are accompanied by an assortment of instruments such as, drums, rattles, flutes. Every instrument has it is own meaning and a purpose. In this section, the significance of these instruments as well as their structure and functionality is explored. The drums are a vital aspect to the Native American culture; they understand the drum to be more than an instrument. In a web article writtenRead MoreMusic Of Native American Culture879 Words   |  4 Pagesof Native American Culture. It is used in many different ways, such as expressing one’s feelings or through the use of self-expression. There are unique collection of instruments that are played in ceremonial events, recreation, and even through healing. Some of these instruments are drums, flutes, rattles, and other percussion instruments. The voice is also used quite a lot and may even be the most important one because it is the backbone of music made in Native American Cultures. Native AmericanRead MoreNative American Music Essay1034 Words   |  5 PagesNative American Music In chapter ten, author Bruno Nettle takes the reader to the town of Browning, Montana, where he is about to witness a modern Native American ceremony. As he observes, he notices that only one-half of the people there are actual Native Americans. The rest are are white tourists and innocent observers just like himself. Eventually, somewhere around eighteen singing groups appear from different tribes and reservations. They will be summoning the dancers into what isRead MoreMusic and Cultural Identity 1245 Words   |  5 Pagesback to the United States to be slaves on plantations. Slaves were more prone to loose a sense of their own culture because every new aspect of their lives was forced upon them, therefore they were undoubtedly forced to abandon their native culture and accept the American ways. However, some were able to preserve their sense of culture through the use of their music while living amongst culturally diverse people. Music is a very effective way to preserve a c ulture because it embodies many aspects ofRead MoreNative Peoples: Learning About The Extensive Native American Culture691 Words   |  3 PagesNative Peoples Magazine, which was published in the year 1987, is an American Indian magazine that is distributed bi-monthly with the cost of $19.95 for 6 issues or $36.00 for 12 issues. The goal of this magazine is to reach out to people all around the world. Native Peoples Magazine portrays the arts and lifestyles, Native American artists, cooks, fashion designers, and their culture. The magazine can be used as a travel guide for many people. According to the Mailing List Finder of Native PeoplesRead MoreNative American Tradition Culture Of Native Indians1338 Words   |  6 Pagesand music, and Native American is no exception. First, the native music related many aspects such as ritual, life and work. They like to combine music with dance, and the Native American music always created rich percussion instruments. For example, the hand dru m, log drum, water drum and rattle, etc. The Powwow is an important festival and ritual for the Native American, and it is a symbol of the tradition culture of Native Indians. Powwow, is a social gathering by the Native American tribes, and theyRead MoreThe Native American Culture Of Native Americans1335 Words   |  6 Pagesand music, and Native American is no exception. First, the native music related many aspects such as ritual, life and work. They like to combine music with dance, and the Native American music always created rich percussion instruments. For example, the hand drum, log drum, water drum and rattle, etc. Powwow is an important festival and ritual for the Native American, and it is a symbol for the tradition culture of Native Indians. Powwow, is a social gathering by the Native American tribes, and theyRead MoreNative American Arts756 Words   |  3 PagesNative Americans treasure one thing in their culture the most; the arts. Native American art is the works crea ted by the natives of North America. Art can come in many forms, but are most present in the visual arts and melodic arts, which can then fall under several categories. Art is considered a symbol of Native American heritage and the overall culture of world art. It has been a major part of their lives for thousands of years. The Native American arts serve the purpose of self-expression, which