Evidence Based Management

Academy of Management Review 2006, Vol. 31, No. 2, 256–269. 2005 Presidential Address IS THERE SUCH A THING AS â€Å"EVIDENCEBASED MANAGEMENT†? DENISE M. ROUSSEAU Carnegie Mellon University I explore the promise organization research offers for improved management practice and how, at present, it falls short. Using evidence-based medicine as an exemplar, I identify ways of closing the prevailing â€Å"research-practice gap†Ã¢â‚¬â€the failure of organizations and managers to base practices on best available evidence. I close with guidance for researchers, educators, and managers for translating the principles governing human behavior and organizational processes into more effective management practice. Evidence-based management means translating principles based on best evidence into organizational practices. Through evidence-based management, practicing managers develop into experts who make organizational decisions informed by social science and organizational research—part of the zeitgeist moving professional decisions away from personal preference and unsystematic experience toward those based on the best available scientific evidence (e. . , Barlow, 2004; DeAngelis, 2005; LemieuxCharles & Champagne, 2004; Rousseau, 2005; Walshe & Rundall, 2001). This links how managers make decisions to the continually expanding research base on cause-effect principles underlying human behavior and organizational actions. Here is what evidence-based management looks like. Let’s call this exampl e, and true story, â€Å"Making Feedback People-Friendly. † The executive director of a health care system with twenty rural clinics notes that their performance differs tremendously across the array of metrics used. This variability has nothing to do with patient mix or employee characteristics. After interviewing clinic members who complain about the sheer number of metrics for which they are accountable (200 indicators sent This article is based on the address I gave at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management in Honolulu, Hawaii. Chuck Bantz, Andy Garman, Paul S. Goodman, Ricky Griffin, Bob Hinings, Paul Hirsch, Sharon McCarthy, Sara Rynes, Laurie Weingart, and John Zanardelli contributed ideas toward its development. 256 onthly, comparing each clinic to the 19 others), the director recalls a principle from a long-ago course in psychology: human decision makers can only process a limited amount of information at any one time. With input from clinic staff, a redesigned feedback system takes shape. The new system uses three performance categories— care quality, cost, and employee satisfaction—and provides a summary measure for each of the three. Over the next year, through provision of feedback in a more interpretable form, the health system’s performance improves across the board, with low-performing units showing the greatest improvement. In this example a principle (human beings can process only a limited amount of information) is translated into practice (provide feedback on a small set of critical performance indicators using terms people readily understand). Evidence-based management, as in the example above, derives principles from research evidence and translates them into practices that solve organizational problems. This isn’t always easy. Principles are credible only where the evidence is clear, and research findings can be tough for both researchers and practitioners to interpret. Moreover, practices that capitalize on a principle’s insights must suit the setting (e. g. , who is to say that the particular performance indicators the executive director uses are pertinent to all units? ). Evidence-based management, despite these challenges, promises more consistent attainment of organizational goals, including those affecting employees, stockhold- 2006 Rousseau 257 ers, and the public in general. This is the promise that attracted me to organizational research at the beginning of my career— but it remains unfulfilled. THE GREAT HOPE AND THE GREAT DISAPPOINTMENT It is ironic that I came to write this article in my role as the sixtieth Academy of Management president. â€Å"Management† was a nasty word in my blue collar childhood, where everyone in the family was affected by how the company my father worked for managed its employees. When the supervisor frequently called my father to ask him to put in more overtime in an already long work week, all of us kids got used to covering for him. If the phone rang when my father was home, he’d have us answer it. We all knew what to say if it was the company calling: â€Å"Dad’s not here. The idea of just telling the supervisor that he didn’t want to work never occurred to my father, or anyone else in the family. The threat of disciplinary action or job loss loomed large, reinforced by dinnertime stories about a boss’s abusive behavior or some inexplicable company action. From this vantage point, the term management connot es harsh and arbitrary behavior, with undertones of otherness. It is a far cry from the dictionary definition of management as â€Å"a judicious use of means to accomplish an end† (Merriam-Webster, 2005). I acquired a wholly new perspective on management and managers when I became a business school professor. First, many business students, even at the MBA level, have never experienced what it is like to work for a good manager. In the first business course I taught, in organizational behavior, I gave the students two assignments: (1) write about the worst boss you ever had, describing what made that person the worst and how it impacted you, and (2) write about the best boss you ever had, describing what made that person the best and how it impacted you. My MBA students with an average of five years of full-time work experience had no problem with assignment 1. For many of them, the assignment was cathartic, and they frequently exceeded its assigned page limit in writing vituperative portrayals of managers variously presented as self-centered, capricious, or otherwise lacking in capability or character. Assign- ment 2 was another matter. Many students had great difficulty thinking of anyone who qualified as â€Å"the best manager. † Over a third couldn’t think of any boss they could even describe as good. To the extent that people manage others the way they themselves have been managed, I came to worry about what the future held for these managers-in-the-making. Nonetheless, while these business students may never have had a great boss, they themselves still hoped to become one. (By the way, I have since abandoned this assignment in favor of more selfreflection on the manager students want to become and ways they can develop themselves to move closer to that ideal. ) Second, most business students have never worked for a great company either. There is the possibility that only dissatisfied people quit their jobs to study full time for an MBA, but in this regard I suspect availability bias. ) I never have had any difficulty getting students to share their experiences of dysfunctional organizational practices. However, when it comes to identifying a more functional way to motivate workers or restructure firms, they are often at a loss. Still, in-class discussions and students’ ow n future plans suggest that they do hope to join a company (or to start one) that is better managed than those they have worked for so far. In class and out, I have spent a lot of time helping students learn how to make a business case, with their future employers in mind, for creating financially successful firms that are good for people too. I have come to feel tremendous respect and affection for those students who have the personal aspiration to be a great manager in a great company. Out of these personal and professional experiences, I have nurtured my great hope—that, through research and education, we can promote effective organizations where managers make well-informed, less arbitrary, and more reflective decisions. My great disappointment, however, has been that research findings don’t appear to have transferred well to the workplace. Instead of a scientific understanding of human behavior and organizations, managers, including those with MBAs, continue to rely largely on personal experience, to the exclusion of more systematic knowledge. Alternatively, managers follow bad advice from business books or consultants based on weak evidence. Because Jack Welch or 258 Academy of Management Review April McKinsey says it, that doesn’t make it true. Several decades of research on attribution bias indicate that people have a difficult time drawing unbiased conclusions regarding why they are successful, often giving more credit to themselves than the facts warrant. Management gurus are in no way immune. ) Sadly, there is poor uptake of management practices of known effectiveness (e. g. , goal setting and performance feedback [Locke & Latham, 1984]). Even in businesses populated by MBAs from top-ranked universities, there is unexplained wide variation in managerial practice patterns (e. g. how [or if] goals are set, selection decisions made, rewards allocated, or training investments determined) and, worse, persistent use of practices known to be largely ineffective (e. g. , downsizing [Cascio, Young, & Morris, 1997; high ratios of executive to rankand-file employee compensation [Cowherd & Levine, 1992]). The result is a research-practice gap, indicating that the answer to this article’s title question is no—at least not yet. What it means to close this gap and how evidencebased management might become a reality are the matters I turn to next. THE â€Å"EVIDENCE-BASED† ZEITGEIST The phrase â€Å"evidence-based† is a buzzword in contemporary public policy, with all the risk of triteness and superficiality that buzzword status conveys. Let’s not be misled by its current popularity. Evidence-based practice has tremendous substance and discipline behind it. We can observe its impact in two fields highly influenced by legislative decisions: policing and secondary education. In evidence-based policing, community police officers are trained to treat criminal suspects politely, because doing so has been found to reduce repeat offenses (Sherman, 2002; Tyler, 1990). In evidence-based education, many secondary schools have restored the practice of social promotion, where students who have difficulty passing their courses, even after several tries, are advanced to the next grade level. Research indicates that social promotion’s benefits outweigh its costs, because a high school diploma increases the likelihood of subsequent employment and lowers the incidence of drug use, even among students who wouldn’t otherwise have qualified for that diploma (Jimerson, Anderson, & Whipple, 2002; National Association of School Psychologists, 2005). Evidence-based practice is a paradigm for making decisions that integrate the best available research evidence with decision maker expertise and client/customer preferences to guide practice toward more desirable results (e. g. , Sackett, Straus, Richardson, Rosenberg, & Haynes, 2000). Proponents are skeptical about experience, wisdom, or personal credentials as a basis for asserting what works. The question is â€Å"What is the evidence? â€Å"—not â€Å"Who says so? † (Sherman, 2002: 221). The answer, as the criminologist Lawrence W. Sherman indicates, can be graded from weak to strong, based on rules of scientific inference, where before-and-after comparisons are stronger than simultaneous correlations—randomized, controlled tests stronger than longitudinal cohort analyses. Strong evidence trumps weak, irrespective of how charismatic the evidence’s presenter is. Sherman sums it up: â€Å"We are all entitled to our own opinions, but not to our own facts† (2002: 223). Medicine is a success story as the first domain to institutionalize evidence-based practice. Evidence-based medicine is the integration of individual clinical expertise and the best external evidence. Its origins date back to 1847, when Ignaz Semmelweis discovered the role that infection played in childbirth fever. Semmelweis was vilified by physicians of the time for his assertion that it was doctors themselves who were infecting women by carrying germs between dead bodies and patients. Nonetheless, his work influenced the formulation of germ theory, which gained acceptance with the work of Lister and Pasteur forty years later (Wikipedia, 2005). Extensive infrastructures promote evidence-based health care (e. g. , the U. S. National Institutes of Health and Institute of Medicine, the Canadian Health Services Research Foundation, and the Cochrane Collaboration). Evidence-based-clinical care as a way of life in health care organizations is of relatively recent vintage, enjoying its greatest growth after 1990. (If you are wondering what physicians did before, the answer is what managers are doing now, but without medicine’s added advantages from common professional training and malpractice sanctions. ) The attributes of evidencedbased medicine provide a useful reference point 2006 Rousseau 259 for exploring what its counterpart in management might look like. By way of example, germ theory is widely understood by clinical care givers. It has led to broad application of infection control systems (gowns, sterile needles, and sterile instruments), medicines to avoid or cure infections, and supporting practices (handwashing). Its application has led to radical but important interpretations of seemingly distant events. Incidence of heart attack, for example, increases immediately after having one’s teeth cleaned. Reflecting on this correlation in light of germ theory led to recognition that teeth cleaning disperses mouth bacteria into the heart’s arteries. Certain bacteria in these arteries create conditions that give rise to heart attacks. Recognizing this causal link led to a risk-reducing solution: giving heart patients antibiotics to take before dental treatments as a preventive. This application of medical evidence involved cause-and-effect connections— how dental practice can disperse mouth bacteria into the heart’s arteries. It also required isolation of variations that affect desired outcomes, requiring knowledge of the mechanisms triggering heart attacks (and, in this case, knowledge that gum disease may itself trigger heart attacks [see, for instance, Desvarieux et al. 2005]). Yet more than scientific insight is needed to create evidence-based practice. In fact, only some physicians recommend this preventive action for their heart patients. Others may not see the risk as that great, are unaware of the finding, or merely have forgotten to make this preventive action part of their standard orders for cardiac patie nts. The involvement of other practitioners further complicates matters: dentists are not necessarily educated to inquire about heart conditions. Organizational factors affect whether evidence-based practice occurs. In health care settings certain features increase the likelihood that an at-risk patient will get the preventive medication. Social networks and organizational culture matter. It helps if the patient’s physician is part of a practice or a hospital where others recommend such preventive care. Similarly, impeding this evidence-based practice is the fact that dentists are unlikely to be in the same professional networks as physicians. In a hospital where medical leadership promotes evidencebased medicine, more physicians are likely to e aware of the finding. Such settings are also likely to have staff in-services to update physician knowledge where this practice might be discussed. Relatedly, participation in research increases the salience of the evidence base. It helps if physicians in the immediate environment have participated in clinical research and are engaged in one of the several online communities that review clinical evidence and then create and disseminate recommendat ions, which raises the next point: access to information on those practices the evidence supports. Physicians have online services that provide ready access to clinical practice best supported by research, based on the review and recommendation of health care experts (e. g. , Cochrane Collaboration). Such services capitalize on the information explosion and internet connections to build communities of practice enabling experts to communicate their knowledge, identify the best-quality evidence, and disseminate it broadly to care givers (Jadad, Haynes, Hunt, & Browman, 2000). Decision supports can be designed to make it easier to implement evidence-based practices. A patient care protocol might be written specifying that each heart patient and all post-op cardiac cases be advised of the need to premedicate before teeth cleaning, along with a prescription written for and given to the patient at discharge. This protocol might be formalized to the extent that a premedication instruction is written in each cardiac patient’s discharge orders. Last, a web of factors—individual (knowledge), organizational (access to knowledgeable others, support for evidence use), and institutional (dissemination of evidence-based practice)—promotes, sustains, and institutionalizes evidence-based medicine. Britain’s national health system, for example, promotes evidencebased practice using the Cochrane Collaboration’s recommendations as the standard. Medicare in the United States publishes information on whether hospitals use proven remedies in patient care (Kolata, 2004). In sum, features characterizing evidencebased practice include †¢ learning about cause-effect connections in professional practices; †¢ isolating the variations that measurably affect desired outcomes; 260 Academy of Management Review April creating a culture of evidence-based decision making and research participation; †¢ using information-sharing communities to reduce overuse, underuse, and misuse of specific practices; †¢ building decision supports to promote practices the evidence validates, along with techniques and artifacts that make the decision easier to execute or perform (e. g. , checklists, protocols, or standing orders); and †¢ having individual, organizational, and institutional factors promote access to knowledge and its use. Now let’s consider what such practice might mean for management and organizations. WHY EVIDENCE-BASED MANAGEMENT IS IMPORTANT AND TIMELY Evidence-based management is not a new idea. Chester Barnard (1938) promoted the development of a natural science of organization to better understand the unanticipated problems associated with authority and consent. Since Barnard’s time, however, we have struggled to connect science and practice without a vision or model to do so. Evidence-based management, in my opinion, provides the needed model to guide the closing of the research-practice gap. In this section I address why evidence-based management is timely and practical. Calling Attention to Facts: â€Å"Big E Evidence† and â€Å"little e evidence† An evidence orientation shows that decision quality is a direct function of available facts, creating a demand for reliable and valid information when making managerial and organizational decisions. Improving information continues a trend begun in the quality movement over thirty years ago, giving systematic attention to discrete facts, indicative of quality (e. g. , machine performance, customer interactions, employee attitudes and behavior [Evans & Dean, 2000]). This trend continues in recent developments regarding open-book management (Case, 1995; Ferrante & Rousseau, 2001) and the use of organizational fact finding and experimentation to improve decision quality (Pfeffer & Sutton, in press). In all the attention we now give to evidence, it helps to differentiate what might be called â€Å"Big E Evidence† from â€Å"little e evidence. † Big E Evidence refers to generalizable knowledge regarding cause-effect connections (e. g. , specific goals promote higher attainment than general or vague goals) derived from scientific methods—the focus of this article. Little e evidence is local or organization specific, as exemplified by root cause analysis and other fact-based approaches the total quality movement introduced for organizational decision making (Deming, 1993; Evans & Dean, 2000). It refers to data systematically gathered in a particular setting to inform local decisions. As the saying goes, â€Å"facts are our friends,† when local efforts to accumulate information relevant to a particular problem lead to more effective solutions. Although decision makers who rely on scientific principles are more likely to gather facts systematically in order to choose an appropriate course of action (e. . , Sackett et al. , 2000), fact gathering (â€Å"evidence†) doesn’t necessarily lead decision makers to use social science knowledge (â€Å"Evidence†) in interpretating these facts. In my introductory example of the health care system, the executive director might have concluded that the performance differences across t he twenty clinics were due to something about the clinics or their managers. It was his knowledge of a basic principle in psychology that gave him an alternative and, ultimately, more effective interpretation. However, systematic attention to local facts can prompt managers to look for principles that account for their observations. The opening example illustrates how scientific principles and local facts go together to solve problems and make decisions. Opportunity to Better Implement Managerial Decisions In highly competitive environments, good execution may be as important as the strategic choices managers make. Implementation is a strong suit of evidence-based management through the wealth of research available to guide effective execution (e. g. , goal setting and feedback [Locke & Latham, 1984]; feedback and redesign [Goodman, 2001]). Indeed, with greater orientation toward scientific evidence, health care management’s guidelines frequently reference social and organizational research on implementation (e. g. , Lemieux-Charles & Champayne, 2004; Lomas, Culyer, McCutcheon, 2006 Rousseau 261 McAuley, & Law, 2005). The continued wide variation we observe in how organizations execute decisions (e. g. , in goal clarity, stakeholder participation, feedback processes, and allowance for redesign) is remarkable, given the advanced knowledge we possess about effective implementation and what is at stake should implementation fail. Better Managers, Better Learning Given the powerful impact managers’ decisions have on the fate of their firms, managerial competence is a critical and often scarce resource. Improved managerial competence is a direct outgrowth of a greater focus on evidencebased management. Managers need real learning, not fads or false conclusions. When managers acquire a systematic understanding of the principles governing organizations and human behavior, what they learn is valid—that is to say, it is repeatable over time and generalizable across situations. It is less likely that what managers learn will be wrong. Today, the poor information commonly available to managers regarding the organizational consequences of their decisions means that experiences are likely to be misinterpreted— subject to perceptual gaps and misunderstandings. Consider the case of a supervisor who overuses threats and punishment as behavioral tools. A punisher who keys on the fact that punishing suppresses behavior can completely miss its other consequence—its inability to encourage positive behavior. Status differences and organizational politics make it unlikely that the punisher will learn the true consequences of that style, by limiting and distorting feedback. The reality is that managers tend to work in settings that make valid learning difficult. This difficulty is compounded by the widespread uptake of organizational fads and fashions, â€Å"adopted overenthusiastically, implemented inadequately, then discarded prematurely in favor of the latest trend† (Walshe & Rundall, 2001; 437; see also Staw & Epstein, 2000). In such settings managers cannot even learn why their decisions were wrong, let alone what alternatives would have been right. Evidence-based management leads to valid learning and continuous improvement, rather than a checkered career based on false assumptions. Organizational legitimacy is another product of evidence-based management. Where decisions are based on systematic causal knowledge, conditioned by expertise leading to successful implementation, firms find it easier to deliver on promises made to stockholders, employees, customers, and others (e. g. , Goodman & Rousseau, 2004; Rucci, Kirn, & Quinn, 1998). Legitimacy is a result of making decisions in a systematic and informed fashion, thus making a firm’s actions more readily justifiable in the eyes of stakeholders. Yet, given evidence-based management’s numerous advantages, why then is the research-practice gap so large? I next turn to the array of factors that align to perpetuate this evidence-deprived status quo. WHY MANAGERS DON’T PRACTICE EVIDENCE-BASED MANAGEMENT The research-practice gap among managers results from several factors. First and foremost, managers typically do not know the evidence. Less than 1 percent of HR managers read the academic literature regularly (Rynes, Brown, & Colbert, 2002), and the consultants who advise them are unlikely to do so either. Despite the explosion of research on decision making, individual and group performance, business strategy, and other domains directly tied to organizational practices, few practicing managers access this work. (I note, however, that of the four periodicals the Academy publishes, it is the empirical Academy of Management Journal to which company libraries most widely subscribe. So there is some recognition that this research exists! ) Evidence-based management can threaten managers’ personal freedom to run their organizations as they see fit. A similar resistance characterized supervisory responses to scientific management nearly 100 years ago, when Frederick Taylor’s structured methods for improving efficiency were discarded because they were believed to interfere with management’s prerogatives in supervising employees. Part of this pushback stems from the belief that good management is an art—the â€Å"romance of leadership† school of thought (e. g. , Meindl, Erlich, & Dukerich, 1985), where a shift to evidence and analysis connotes loss of creativity and autonomy. Such concerns are not unique: physicians have wrestled with similar dilemmas, expressed in 62 Academy of Management Review April the aptly titled article â€Å"False Dichotomies: EBM, Clinical Freedom and the Art of Medicine† (Parker, 2005). Managerial work itself differs from clinical work and other fields engaged in evidencebased practice in important ways. First, managerial decisions often involve long time lags and littl e feedback, as in the case of a recruiter hiring someone to eventually take over a senior position in the firm. Years may pass before the true quality of that decision can be discerned, and, by then, the recruiter and others involved are likely to have moved on (Jaques, 1976). Managerial decisions often are influenced by other stakeholders who impose constraints (Miller, 1992). Obtaining stakeholder support can involve politicking and compromise, altering the decision made, or even whether it is made at all. Incentives tied to managerial decisions are subject to contradictory pressures from senior executives, stockholders, customers, and employees. Last, it’s not always obvious that a decision is being made, given the array of interactions that compose managerial work (Walshe & Randall, 2001). A manager who declines to train a subordinate, for example, may not realize that particular act ultimately may lead the employee to quit. Evidence-based management can be a tough sell to many managers, because management, in contrast to medicine or nursing, is not a profession. Given the diverse backgrounds and education of managers, there is limited understanding of scientific method. With no formally mandated education or credentials (and even an MBA is no guarantee), practicing managers have no body of shared knowledge. Lacking shared scientific knowledge to add weight to an evidence-based decision, managers commonly rely on other bases (e. g. , experience, formal power, incentives, and threats) when making decisions acceptable to their superiors and constituents. Firms themselves—particularly those in the private sector— contribute to the limited value placed on science-based management practice. Although pharmaceutical firms advertise their investment in biotechnology and basic research, the typical business does not have the advancement of managerial knowledge in its mission. Historically leading corporations such as Cadbury, IBM, and General Motors were actively engaged in research on company selec- tion and training practices, employee motivation, and supervisory behavior. Their efforts contributed substantially to the early managerial practice evidence base. But few organizations today do their own managerial research or regularly collaborate with those who do, despite the considerable benefits from industry-university collaborations (Cyert & Goodman, 1997); the globally experienced time crunch in managerial work and the press for short-term results have reduced such collaborations to dispensable frills. Nonetheless, hospitals participate in clinical research and school systems evaluate policy interventions. In contrast to more evidence-oriented domains, such as policing and education, management is most often a private sector activity. It is less influenced by public policy pressures promoting similar practices while creating comparative advantage via distinctiveness. Businesses are characterized by the belief that the particulars of the organization, its practices, and its problems are special and unique—a widespread phenomenon termed the uniqueness paradox (Martin, Feldman, Hatch, & Sitkin, 1983). Observed among clinical care givers and law enforcement practitioners too, the uniqueness paradox can interfere with transfer of research findings across settings—unless dispelled by better education and experience with evidencebased practice (e. g. , Sackett et al. , 2000). Yet, despite all these factors, the most important reason evidence-based management is still a hope and not a reality is not due to managers themselves or their organizations. Rather, professors like me and the programs in which we teach must accept a large measure of blame. We typically do not educate managers to know or use scientific evidence. Research evidence is not the central focus of study for undergraduate business students, MBAs, or executives in continuing education programs (Trank & Rynes, 2003), where case examples and popular concepts from nonresearch-oriented magazines such as the Harvard Business Review take center stage. Consistent with the diminution of research in behavioral course work, business students and practicing managers have no ready access to research. No communities of experts vet research regarding effective management practice (in contrast to the collaboratives that vet health care, criminal justice, and educational research [e. . , Campbell Collaboration, 2006 Rousseau 263 2005; Cochrane Collaboration, 2005]). Few MBAs encounter a peer-reviewed journal during their student days, let alone later. Consequently, it’s time to look critically at the role we educators play in limiting managers’ knowledge and use of research evidence. EVIDENCE-BASED MANAGEMENT AND OUR ROLE AS EDUCATORS My biggest surprise as the Academy president turned out to be the most frequent topic of emails sent to me by Academy members: complaints about our journals from self-identified teaching-oriented members. A typical email goes like this: â€Å"I want to let you know what a waste the Academy journals are. There’s nothing in them at all pertinent to my teaching. The Academy should be for everybody, not just researchers. † My first response was to feel guilty (why hadn’t I seen this? ). But then I started to think more deeply about what this message implies. It says that educators aren’t finding ideas in journals that cause them to change what they teach. This might mean that current research is irrelevant to what’s being taught if educators focus on other topics. It could mean that the kind of information research articles provide about principles or practices is insufficient to determine what settings or circumstances their findings apply to. Or it could even mean that professors aren’t updating their course material when research findings differ from what they teach. These emails prompted me to wonder what exactly we are teaching. If we are teaching what research findings support, the content of a class has to change from time to time, with new evidence or better-specified theory. The concern that prompted this address stemmed from these emails: the role we educators play in the research-practice gap. How Professors Contribute to the ResearchPractice Gap Management education is itself often not evidence based, something Trank and Rynes implicitly recognize (2003) as the â€Å"dumbing down† of management education. They also persuasively demonstrated that, in place of evidence, behavioral courses in business schools focus on general skills (e. g. , team building, conflict man- agement) and current case examples. Through these stimulating, ostensibly relevant activities, we capture student interest, helping to deflect the criticism â€Å"How is this going to help me get my first job? † Business schools reinforce this by relying heavily on student ratings instead of assessing real learning (Rynes, Trank, Lawson, & Ilies, 2003). Stimulating courses and active learning must be core features of training in evidence-based management, because these educational features are good pedagogy. The manner and content of our approaches to behavioral courses perpetuate the research-practice gap. Weak Research-Education Connection Pick up any popular management textbook and you will find that Frederick Herzberg’s work lives, but not Max Weber’s. Herzberg’s longdiscredited two-factor theory is typically included in the motivation section of management textbooks, despite the fact that it was discredited as an artifact of method bias over thirty years ago (House & Wigdor, 1967). I asked a famous author of many best-selling textbooks why this was so. â€Å"Because professors like to teach Herzberg! † he answered. Students want updated business examples but can’t really tell if the research claims are valid. † This conversation suggests that professors are likely to teach what they learned in graduate school and not necessarily what current research supports. (Since many management professors are adjuncts valued for their practical experience but are from diverse backgrounds, even educators of comparable professional age may not share scien tific knowledge. ) I suspect that the persistence of Herzberg will continue until all the professors who learned the twofactor theory in graduate school (c. 960 –1970) retire. However, business schools may discourage inclusion of some well-substantiated topics because they don’t â€Å"sound† managerial. Paul Hirsch, the well-known sociologist, tells the story that when he flies business class, his seatmates ask what he does for a living. When he identifies himself as a business school professor, the next customary question is â€Å"What do you teach? † As a sociologist steeped in Weber and the century of research he spawned, Paul used to say, â€Å"Bureaucracy. † His seatmates frequently 264 Academy of Management Review April moved to the opposite wing at that point, until Paul wised up and found a more appealing response: â€Å"Management† (personal communication). Paul notes that managers still need to understand bureaucratic processes, so he hasn’t changed what he teaches— only what he calls it. I do this too: I no longer call socialization, training, and rules â€Å"substitutes for leadership† (Kerr & Jermier, 1978), having found that the last thing a would-be manager wants to hear is how he or she can be replaced. The implications are clear. We frame, and perhaps even slant, what we teach to make it more palatable. Can it be we are on that slippery slope of avoiding teaching the most current social science findings relevant to managers and organizations, from downsizing to ethical decision making, because we fear our audience won’t like the implications? Failure to Manage Student Expectations Student expectations do drive course content, and current evidence indicates that there is a strong preference for turnkey, ready-to-use solutions to problems these students will face in their first jobs (Trank & Rynes, 2003). What efforts do we make to manage these expectations? Unless students are persuaded to value sciencebased principles and their own role in turning these principles into sound organizational practice, it will be nigh impossible for faculty to resist the pressure to teach only today’s solutions. We might start by asking students who they think updates more effectively—practitioners trained in solutions or in principles. Effective practices in 2006 need not be the same as those in 2016, let alone 2036, when the majority of today’s business students will still be working. If we teach solutions to problems, such as how to obtain accurate information on a worker’s performance, students will acquire a tool—perhaps, for example, 360-degree feedback. Yet they won’t understand the underlying cognitive processes (whether feedback is task related or self-focused), social factors (the relationships between ratees and raters), and organizational mechanisms (used for developmental purposes or compensation decisions), which explain how, when, and why 360-degree feedback might work (or not). Imagine a doctor who knows to prescribe antibiotics to patients with bronchitis (a common recommendation in the 1980s before recognition of antibiotic overuse [Franklin, 2005]) but doesn’t understand the basic physiology that can lead other therapies to be comparable, more effective, or have fewer downsides. In the case of feedback, basic social science research is quite robust regarding how feedback impacts behavior (Kinicki & Kreitner, 2003). Such knowledge is likely to generate broader utility and more durable solutions over time than training in any particular feedback tool. Lack of Models for Evidence-Based Management Case methods are de rigueur in business schools, helping to develop students’ analytic skills and familiarity with conditions they will face as practicing managers. The cases that I find most effective are those that have an individual manager as a protagonist (as opposed to those that describe an organization without developing one or two central personalities). A central character creates tension and evokes student identification with the events taking place. That character is typically a manager, who can be the change agent responsible for solving the problem or a catalyst for the dysfunctional behavior on which the cases focuses. Either way, students have a model—a positive or negative referent—from which they can learn how to behave (or not) in the future. As with most complex behaviors, from parenting to managing, people learn better when they have competent models (Bandura, 1971). Nonetheless, in twenty-five years of using cases in class, I cannot recall a single time in which a protagonist reflected on research evidence in the course of his or her decision making. No Expectation for Updating Evidence-Based Knowledge Throughout the Manager’s Career Upon graduation, few business students recognize that the knowledge they may have acquired can be surpassed over time by new findings. Although social science knowledge continues to expand, business school training does not prepare graduates to tap into it. Neither students nor managers have clear ideas of how to update their knowledge as new evidence emerges. 2006 Rousseau 265 There are few models of what an â€Å"expert† manager knows that a novice does not (see Hill, 1992, for an exception). In contrast, expert nurses are known to behave in very different ways from novices or less-than-expert midcareer nurses (Benner, 2001). They more rapidly size up a situation accurately and deal simultaneously with more co-occurring factors. In the professions, extensive postgraduate development exists to deepen expertise to produce a higher quality of practice. In contrast, business schools often imply that MBAs know all they need to know when they graduate. WHAT WE CAN DO TO CLOSE THE RESEARCH-PRACTICE GAP There is a lot we can do to close the researchpractice gap, both as individual educators and through working collectively. Manage Student Expectations We can manage student expectations with regard to the role of behavioral course work in the student’s broader career. I often introduce myself to full-time students by telling them that the easiest teaching I do has always been to executives, because these experienced managers come to the program convinced that human behavior and group processes are the most critical things they need to learn. At this point in their careers, our full-time students can only be novices whose expertise will grow with time and active effort on their part to understand the dynamics of behavior in organizations. Try asking students what the difference is between ten years of experience and one year of experience repeated ten times. Then let them imagine what ten years of experience in becoming more expert on behavior and group processes in organizations would look like (the types of job, people, settings, etc. ). Let them also imagine this for one year repeated ten times. Reflecting on these contrasting visions of their careers gives students an opportunity to raise their expectations of themselves as professional managers. There are various related means for managing expectations, including the creation of learning contracts based on the learner’s anticipated future roles, the behavioral knowledge and skills these roles will necessitate, and how that knowledge and skill will be acquired in the course (Goodman, 2005). It is easier to do this as part of a larger curriculum framed by anticipated future roles—the would-be-manager’s story (Schank, 2003). Important also is the next feature: providing models of evidence-based practice and evidence-based managers. Provide Models of Evidence-Based Practice We need to model evidence-based practice in our teaching and in the curriculum. Psychological research on learning offers a useful guide for course/curriculum practices (e. g. , Kersting, 2005). These include exposing the learner to models of competent evidence-based managers. I have been fortunate to encounter such a person. John Zanardelli is the CEO of Asbury Heights, the Methodist Home for the Aged, Mt. Lebanon, Pennsylvania. I first met John in an executive course on change management at Carnegie Mellon. He peppered me with questions about skills, information, and management tactics and wanted to know the research support behind my answers. Trained as an epidemiologist, John understands the scientific method and regularly looks for scientific corroboration of ideas he comes across in popular management books and from self-proclaimed experts. (Not surprisingly, the calls for evidence-based management largely have come from health care professionals and scholars [e. g. , DeAngelis, 2005; Kovner, Elton, & Billings, 2005]. I knew that I was seeing an unusual manager, to say the least, when John, faced with the need to redesign his organization’s compensation practices, went off to the Carnegie Mellon library to read J. Stacy Adams’ equity theory! His organization’s vision statement is built around the concept â€Å"Where Loving Care and Science Come Together. † Managers such as John Zanardelli provide exemplars of the complex set of proficiencies required to b ecome a master management practitioner. Using them as examples reinforces the notion that the typical twenty-something student is a novice taking first steps along the path to becoming an expert (e. . , Benner, 2001; Hill, 1992). Active practice, self-reflection, and feedback are core learning principles (Schon, 1983). ? Developing student competence through active practice entails project work supported by ongoing reflection and debriefing regarding what constitutes valid learning and effective behavior. Similarly, our educational practices, 266 Academy of Management Review April courses, and curricula need that same reflection and evolution to effectively model evidencebased teaching. Promote Active Use of Evidence Students need to know that evidence is available, and they need to learn how to apply it. This necessitates a balance between teaching principles—that is, cause-effect knowledge—and practices—that is, solutions to organizational problems—though the mix is subject to dispute (Bennis & O’Toole, 2005). In the spirit of making the course tell a story students can understand and participate in, a course conveying how a novice becomes an expert manager, like any good story, involves a succession of experiences, trials, failures, and successes (Schank, 2003). That story line is marked by the acquisition of distinctly different kinds of knowledge. There is declarative knowledge regarding principles or cause-effect relationships. Students can acquire principles in a variety of ways. They might address the appropriateness of group incentives versus individual incentives by locating evidence in a textbook, in journals, or online. Informing students of the â€Å"evidence† through lectures and books has its place, but there is value in identifying and deriving the principles themselves from the sources that will remain available to them throughout their careers. Students can learn a good deal from actively accessing evidence, using it to solve problems, reflecting—and trying again. Indeed, one of the most powerful forms of learning may be deriving principles from experience and reflection, as when students review cases and then derive the principles governing the underlying outcomes (Thompson, Gentner, & Loewenstein, 2003). Thompson and her colleagues found that students learned better when they developed principles from cases than when they derived solutions, a finding consistent with basic psychological research on learning (Anderson, Fincham, & Douglass, 1997). Actually using evidence takes a metaskill— the ability to turn evidence-based principles into solutions. A form of procedural knowledge, a solution-oriented approach to evidence use is comparable to product design, where end users and knowledgeable others familiar with the situation in which the product will be used jointly participate in specifying its features and functionality. Perhaps one of the first products of behavioral research in organizations was the revolving spindle restaurants use to convey customer orders to the kitchen. William Foote Whyte (1948) discovered that status differences between restaurent wait staff (typically female) and the (male) chef led to conflicts, because chefs disliked taking orders from women. The revolving order spindle to which waitresses could attach an order and spin it in the direction of the kitchen allowed customer orders to be conveyed impersonally, reducing workplace conflict and improving communication. Other researchbased products include decision supports such as checklists to guide a performance review or action plans to conduct meetings in ways that build consensus (e. . , Mohrman & Mohrman, 1997), effectively translating the evidence into guides for action. Build Collaborations Among Managers, Researchers, and Educators As the saying goes, it takes a village to educate people. Changing how we educate managers in professional schools necessitates a collective attitude and behavior shift among educators, researchers, current managers, and recruiters. Pfeffer and Sut ton’s (in press) book calls attention to managerial heroes—people who use evidence to turn troubled companies around and/or to create sustained successes. As in the case of any change in collective attitudes (Gladwell, 2002), turning evidence-based management from a practice of a prophetic few into the mainstream requires champions— credible people like Pfeffer and Sutton’s managerial heroes—to advertise its value. Networks of individuals, excited by what evidence-based management makes possible, need to exist to disseminate it to others. One such collaborative network might parallel the Cochrane Collaboration in medicine and the Campbell Collaboration in criminal justice and education. Such a community has been advocated to promote evidenced-based management of health care organizations [Kovner et al. , 2005], suggesting that communities of experts might effectively be built around the management of specific kinds of organizations. ) Each represents a worldwide community of experts created to provide ready access to a particular 2006 Rousseau 267 body of evidence and the practices it supports. Community members, p ractitioners as well as researchers, collaborate in summarizing stateof-the-art knowledge on practices known to be important. Information is presented in sufficient detail regarding evidence and sources of outcome variation to reduce underuse, overuse, and misuse. While these communities are geographically distributed, they also sponsor face-to-face meetings to promote community building, commitment, and learning. Their major product is online access to information, designed for easy use. EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE CAN BE MISUNDERSTOOD On a cautionary note, the label evidencebased practice can be misapplied. It can be used to characterize superficial practices (another company’s so-called best practice or the latest tool consultants are selling). Alternatively, it can be used as a club (the kind with a nail in it) to force compliance with a standard that may not be universally applicable. One downside of poor implementation of evidence-based medicine is the challenge the British health care system has faced owing to the use of the Cochrane Collaboration’s recommendations to regulate clinical care decisions, with enforcement of the recommendations regardless of their suitability for particular patients (Eysenbach & Kummervold, 2005). Evidence-based practice is not onesize-fits-all; it’s the best current evidence coupled with informed expert judgment. OUR OWN ZEITGEIST PROMOTING EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE OF MANAGEMENT Forty years elapsed between Semmelweis’s discoveries and the formulation of germ theory. One hundred years later, even basic infectionreducing practices such as hand washing still are not consistently performed in hospitals (Johns Hopkins Medicine, 2004). Considering the personal growth and social and organizational changes evidence-based practice requires, our own evidence-based management zeitgeist still has plenty of time to run. The first challenge is consciousness raising regarding the rich array of evidence that can improve effectiveness of managerial decisions. Educating opinion leaders, including prominent executives and educators, in the nature and value of evidence-based approaches builds champions who can get the word out. Updating management education with the latest research must be ongoing, demanding that educators and textbook writers apprise themselves of new research findings. The onus is on researchers to make generalizability clearer by providing better information in their reports regarding the context in which their findings were observed. All parties need to put greater emphasis on learning how to translate research findings into solutions. In the case of researchers, too much information that might affect the translations of findings to practice remains tacit, in the apparent minutiae research reports omit, known only to the researcher. Educators need to help students acquire the metaskills for designing solutions around the research principles they teach. Managers must learn how to experiment with possible evidence-based solutions and to adapt them to particular settings. We need knowledgesharing networks composed of educators, researchers, and manager/practitioners to help create and disseminate management-oriented research summaries and practices that best evidence supports. Building a culture in which managers learn to learn from evidence is a critical aspect of effective evidence use (Pfeffer & Sutton, in press). Developing managerial competence historically has been viewed as a training issue, underestimating the investment in collective capabilities that is needed (Mohrman, Gibson, & Mohrman, 2001). The promises of evidence-based management are manifold. It affords higher-quality managerial decisions that are better implemented, and it yields outcomes more in line with organizational goals. Those who use evidence (E and e) and learn to use it well have comparative advantage over their less competent counterparts. Managers, educators, and researchers can learn more systematically throughout their careers regarding principles that govern human behavior and organizational actions and the solutions that enhance contemporary organizational performance and member experience. A focus on evidence use may also ultimately help to blur the boundaries between researchers, educators, and managers, creating a lively community with many feedback loops where information is sys- 268 Academy of Management Review April tematically gathered, evaluated, disseminated, implemented, reevaluated, and shared. The promise of evidence-based management contrasts with the staying power or stickiness of the status quo. Like the QWERTY keyboard created for manual typewriters, but inefficient in the age of word processing, management-asusual survives, despite being out of step with contemporary needs. Failure to evolve toward evidence-based management, however, is costlier than mere inefficiency. It deprives organizations, their members, our students, and the general public of greater success and better managers. Please join with me in working to make evidence-based management a reality. REFERENCES Anderson, J. R. , Fincham, J. M. , & Douglass, S. 1997. The role of examples and rules in the acquisition of a cognitive skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23: 932–945. Bandura, A. 1971. Social learning theory. New York: General Learning Press. Barlow, D. H. 2004. Psychological treatments. American Psychologist, 59: 869 – 878. Barnard, C. I. 1938. Functions of the executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Benner, P. 2001. From novice to expert: Excellence and power in clinical nursing practice (commemorative ed. ). Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley. Bennis, W. G. , & O’Toole, J. 2004. How business schools lost their way. Harvard Business Review, 82(3): 96 –104. Campbell Collaboration. 2005. http://www. campbellcollaboration. org/, accessed December 5. Cascio, W. F. , Young, C. E. , & Morris, J. K. 1997. Financial consequences of employment-change decisions in major U. S. corporations. Academy of Management Journal, 40: 1175–1189. Case, J. 1995. Open-book management: The coming business revolution. New York: Harper Business. Cochrane Collaboration. 2005. http://www. cochrane. org/ index0. htm, accessed December 5. Cowherd, D. , & Levine, D. I. 1992. Product quality and pay equity between lower-level employees and top management: An investigation of distributive justice theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37: 302–320. Cyert, R. M. , & Goodman, P. S. 1997. Creating effective university-industry alliances: An organizational learning perspective. Organizational Dynamics, 25(4): 45–57. DeAngelis, T. 2005. Shaping evidence-based practice. APA Monitor, 35(3): 26 –31. Deming, W. E. 1993. The new economics for industry, government, and education. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Desvarieux, M. , Demmer, R. T. , Rundek, T. , Boden-Abala, B. , Jacobs, D. R. , Jr. , Sacco, R. L. , & Papapanou, P. N. 2005. Periodontal microbiota and carotid intima-media thickness: The oral infections and vascular disease epidemiology study (INVEST). Circulation, 111: 576 –582. Evans, J. R. , & Dean, J. W. , Jr. 2000. Total quality: Management, organization, and strategy (2nd ed. ). Cincinnati: South-Western Publishing. Eysenbach, G. , & Kummervold, P. E. 2005. Is cybermedicine killing you? The story of a Cochrane disaster. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 7(2): article e21. Ferrante, C. J. , & Rousseau, D. M. 2001. Bringing open book management into the academic line of sight. In C. L. Cooper & D. M. Rousseau (Eds. ), Employee versus owner issues (Trends in Organizational Behavior Series), vol. 8: 97–116. Chichester, UK: Wiley. Franklin, D. 2005. Antibiotics aren’t always the answer. New York Times, August 30: D5. Frieze, I. H. 1976. Causal attributions and information seeking to explain success and failure. Journal of Research in Personality, 10: 293–305. Gladwell, M. 2002. The tipping point: How little things can make a big difference. New York: Back Bay Books. Goodman, P. S. 001. Missing organizational linkages. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Goodman, P. S. 2005. The organizational learning contract. Working paper, Tepper School of Business, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh. Goodman, P. S. , & Rousseau, D. M. 2004. Organizational change that produces results. Academy of Management Executive, 18(3): 7–19. Hill, L. A. 1992. B ecoming a manager: How new managers master the challenges of leadership. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. House, R. J. , & Wigdor, L. A. , 1967. Herzberg’s dual-factor theory of job satisfaction and motivation. Personnel Psychology, 23: 369 –389. Jadad, A. R. Haynes, R. B. , Hunt, D. , & Browman, G. P. 2000. The internet and evidence-based decision-making: A needed synergy for efficient knowledge management in health care. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 162: 362–365. Jaques, E. 1976. (Reprinted in 1993. ) A general theory of bureaucracy. London: Gregg Revivals. Jimerson, S. R. , Anderson, G. , & Whipple, A. 2002. Winning the battle and losing the war: Examining the relation between grade retention and dropping out of high school. Psychology in the Schools, 39:441– 457. Johns Hopkins Medicine. 2004. Expert on hospital infections talks about hand washing. http://www. opkinsmedicine. org/Press_releases/2004/10_28_04. html, October 28. Kersting, K. 2005. Integrating research into teaching. APA Monitor, 35(1): 19. Kerr, S. , & Jermier, J. M. 1978. Substitutes for leadership: Their meaning and measurement. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 22: 375– 403. 2006 Rousseau 269 and quality in human service work: 33– 46. Munich: Hampp. Kinicki, A. , & Kreitner, R. 2003. Organizational behavior: Key concepts, skills and best practices. New York: McGrawHill. Kolata, G. 2004. Program coaxes hospitals to see treatments under their noses. New York Times, December 2: A1, C8. Kovner, A. R. , Elton, J. J. , & Billings, J. D. 2005. Evidence-based management. Frontiers of Health Services Management, 16(4): 3–24. Lemieux-Charles, L. , & Champagne, F. 2004. Using knowledge and evidence in healthcare: Multidisciplinary perspectives. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Locke, E. A. , & Latham, G. P. 1984. Goal setting: A motivational technique that works. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Lomas, J. , Culyer, T. , McCutcheon, C. , McAuley, L. , & Law, S. 2005. Conceptualizing evidence for health system guidance. Final report to Canadian Health Services Research Foundation, Ottawa, Ontario. Martin, J. , Feldman, M. , Hatch, M. , & Sitkin, S. B. 1983. The uniqueness paradox in organizational stories. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28: 438 – 453. Meindl, J. R. , Erlich, S. B. , & Dukerich, J. M. 1985. The romance of leadership. Administrative Science Quarterly, 30: 78 – 101. Miller, G. J. 1992. Managerial dilemmas: The political economy of hierarchy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mohrman, S. A. , Gibson, C. B. , & Mohrman, A. M. 2001. Doing research that is useful to practice: A model and empirical exploration. Academy of Management Journal, 44: 357–375. Mohrman, S. A. , & Mohrman, A. M. Jr. 1997. Designing and leading team-based organizations: A workbook for organizational self-design. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. National Association of School Psychologists (NASP). 2005. Position statement on grade retention and social promotion. www. nasponline. org/information/pospaper_ graderetent. html, accessed November 24. Parker, M. 2005. False dic hotomies, EBM, clinical freedom and the art of medicine. Medical Humanities, 31: 23–30. Pfeffer, J. , & Sutton, R. I. In press. Hard facts, dangerous half-truths, and total nonsense: Profiting from evidencebased management. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Rousseau, D. M. 2005. Evidence-based management in health care. In C. Korunka & P. Hoffmann (Eds. ), Change Rucci, A. J. , Kirn, S. P. , & Quinn, R. T. 1998. The employeecustomer-profit chain at Sears. Harvard Business Review, 76(1): 82–97. Rynes, S. L. , Brown, K. G. , Colbert, A. E. 2002. Seven common misconceptions about human resource practices: Research findings versus practitioner beliefs. Academy of Management Executive, 18(3): 92–103. Rynes, S. L. , Trank, C. Q. , Lawson, A. M. , & Ilies, R. 2003. Behavioral coursework in business education: Growing evidence of a legitimacy crisis. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2: 269 –283. Sackett, D. L. , Straus, S. E. , Richardson, W. S. , Rosenberg, W. , & Haynes, R. B. 2000. Evidence-based medicine: How to practice and teach EBM. New York: Churchill Livingstone. Schank, R. C. 2003. Every curriculum tells a story. Unpublished manuscript, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh. ? Schon, D. 1983. The reflective practioner: How professionals think in action. London: Temple Smith. Sherman, L. W. 2002. Evidence-based policing: Social organization of information for social control. In E. Waring & D. Weisburd (Eds. ), Crime and social organization: 217– 248. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction. Staw, B. , & Epstein, L. 2000. What bandwagons bring: Effects of popular management techniques on corporate performance, reputation, and CEO pay. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43: 523–556. Thompson, L. , Gentner, D. , & Lowenstein, J. 2003. Avoiding missed opportunities in managerial life: Analogical training more powerful than individual case training. In L. L. Thompson (Ed. ), The social psychology of organizational life: 163–173. New York: Psychology Press. Trank, C. Q. , & Rynes, S. L. 2003. Who moved our cheese? Reclaiming professionalism in business education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2: 189 – 205. Tyler, T. 1990. Why people obey the law. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Walshe, K. , & Rundall, T. G. 2001. Evidence-based management: From theory to practice in health care. Milbank Quarterly, 79: 429 – 457. Whyte, W. F. 1948. Human relations in the restaurant industry. New York: McGraw-Hill. Denise M. Rousseau ([email  protected] edu) is past president of the Academy of Management and H. J. Heinz II Professor of Organizational Behavior and Public Policy at Carnegie Mellon University, jointly in the Heinz School of Public Policy and Management and the Tepper School of Business.

Mentoring Programs for At-Risk Youth

The word mentor derives its origin from a character in Homer’s epic poem The Odyssey. When Odysseus, King of Ithaca, went to fight in the Trojan War, he entrusted the care of his Kingdom to Mentor. Mentor served as the teacher and overseer of Odysseuss’ son, Telemachus.1 In our society today, mentors generally are volunteers who are committed to helping students or youth identified as â€Å"at-risk† and/or as a potential dropout get back on track—academically, socially, mentally and physically. The specific roles of mentors are multifaceted and varied. Mentors are big brothers/sisters, role models, friends and confidantes. Their goal is to make a connection and then, using that connection, convey a positive message to their mentee. Mentors build self-esteem, motivate and help young persons set goals and work toward accomplishing those goals. There is little doubt of the importance of mentoring programs and the benefits they yield. Studies of existing programs indicate that youth who participate in mentoring relationships have better attendance and attitude toward school; less drug and alcohol use; improved social attitudes and relationships; more trusting relationships and better communication with their parents; and a better chance of going on to higher education.2 Unfortunately, all those who could be benefiting from having a mentor are not. According to Mentoring in America 2005: A Snapshot of the Current State of Mentoring, â€Å"Of the 17.6 million young people who could especially benefit from having a mentor, only 2.5 million were in formal, one-on-one mentoring relationships.† 3 In the state of Connecticut, over 160,000 children—or 25 % of Connecticut’s youth—are in life situations that place them at risk for personal and academic failure.4  These situations include poverty, inadequate early childhood experiences and preparation for school, family drug use, violence, involvement in the criminal justice system and lack of access to needed social and mental health services. Government, community and civic groups and individuals are trying to change that; trying to make a difference. Since 1989, The Governor’s Prevention Partnership has worked with the State of Connecticut, Connecticut's corporate and business communities and other public, private and community organizations to provide the leadership and resources to assist 387 schools, 249 community organizations and 93 businesses in efforts to keep the children of the state safe, successful and drug-free.5 This is being accomplished, in part, through the following programs. The Connecticut Mentoring Partnership Created in 1977, The Connecticut Mentoring Partnership (CMP) challenges business leaders to help create a statewide mentoring initiative as a prevention strategy to protect youth from drug use, school failure and other related problems. The program provides leadership, resources and training to schools, businesses, community and faith-based organizations throughout the state in an effort to increase mentoring partnerships and promote safe, quality mentoring programs. The Partnership also works to: Raise public awareness: CMP has partnerships with NBC30, CBS Radio, Buckley Radio and others, a statewide media campaign recruits mentors during National Mentoring Month in January. Raising awareness of the importance of mentoring is also done year-round. A toll-free number, 1-877-CT-MENTOR, provides information on mentoring and ties into a statewide database of mentoring programs. Recruit and refer mentors: Business and community groups are assisted in recruiting their workforce or members to serve as mentors. Develop new mentoring resources, including public and private funding; advocate and promote public policies and legislation that strengthen mentoring; and collect and track data. Activities and services of the CMP include: The Mentoring Training Institute; technical assistance and support on Connecticut Quality Standards for mentoring programs and assistance on program design; resources and mentor recruitment, screening, training and program design; Regional Mentoring Networks for program providers; mentor recruitment and a toll-free Mentor Referral Line; annual mentoring showcase conference and workshops; The Mentoring Corporate Honor Roll and Corporate Mentoring Round Table that promotes, supports and recognizes corporate involvement; and program evaluation tools and resources. Since 1997, CMP has created over 200 new programs and more than 3,000 new mentoring relationships. Since 2001, 70 schools and businesses have joined the Partnership’s School Business Mentoring Alliance and 90 companies have been recognized through the 2005 Mentoring Corporate Honor Roll.6 The Urban Mentoring Initiative The Urban Mentoring Imitative (UMI) was created in 2005 in partnership with the state of Connecticut. Over the next two years—2006-2007—the CMP will initiate a mentoring expansion effort in Hartford, Waterbury, Norwich, Bridgeport, New Haven, New Britain and Windham. During that time, The UMI will be responsible for attempting to significantly increase the number of mentors for at-risk children in those communities. This will be done by increasing the capacity of existing mentoring programs to reach more children; developing new mentoring programs and models to address existing gaps; and identifying and accessing additional resources. The two-year funding appropriated by the State legislature will be matched by corporate and private sector monies secured by The Governor’s Prevention Partnership. Project Choice Mentoring Program Project Choice Mentoring Program (PCMP) is dedicated to helping the youth of the City of Hartford. Its mission is to empower committed delinquent youth to make positive life choices that will enable them to maximize their personal potential and be successful in their community. â€Å"The program provides caring mentors who are fully trained and supported by the professional staff of Project Choice and Nutmeg Big Brothers Big Sisters,† according to Eddie Perez, Mayor of Hartford, CT. â€Å"Project Choice mentors strive to be a positive support system to the youth as well as to the family by forming a relationship based on trust and respect. This allows Project Choice mentors to advocate for the youth in academic, community and family settings while opening doors of opportunity that otherwise would not be available to them.†7 Project Choice started as an idea of David Norman in August 2001 at the Connecticut Juvenile Training School (CJTS). Norman took on the challenge of becoming a positive role model for one â€Å"in need† youth. Over time, the youngster responded to Norman’s efforts with improved behavior, causing others to notice the change. As a result, the idea of role model became more widely accepted and the term was gradually changed to mentor. This acceptance allowed Norman and others to work with more youth at the CJTS facility and Project Choice was born. Project Choice works with Connecticut’s Juvenile Justice and â€Å"at-risk† youth between the ages of 11 and 21. The program operates on a â€Å"buy-in† premise. It is completely youth-driven, ensuring that the youth have the option to â€Å"buy-in† (or participate). No participant is forced, mandated or court ordered to be part of the mentoring process. In 2003, Project Choice partnered with Nutmeg Big Brothers Big Sisters (NBBBS). Today, PCMP also is partnered with Boys ; Girls Clubs of America and together with NBBBS, work under the umbrella of Connecticut’s Department of Children and Families, Bureau of Adolescent and Transitional Services. Project Choice also is networked with the One-on-One Mentoring Program. Project Choice again expanded its resources by establishing a formal collaboration with Project Connect. Project Connect specializes in presenting alternative choices to youth and reinforcing the belief that positive behavior yields positive rewards. Youth Fair Chance, Inc. This national project is funded by the Department of Labor. Established on a case-management basis, this Connecticut program targets individuals between the ages of 14 and 25. Focus is on computer, job and life skills training; tutoring, which is conducted four times a week; and informal mentoring. There are no specific project guidelines for the mentoring program, which currently operates on an as-needed basis. Set up within a peer-to-peer mentor atmosphere, Yale University students occasionally provide assistance. Other services offered by Youth Fair Chance include day care, summer employment assistance, support groups, high school diploma equivalency classes and recreational activities. Four youth program areas are presently being developed that will focus on gender-specific prevention programs for female youth. During the 2005-2006 academic school year a follow-up evaluation of the school-based mentoring program was conducted by the Connecticut Mentoring Partnership. One hundred and ninety mentored youth from seven school systems were evaluated.8 The evaluation was viewed as a pilot or exploratory study that would serve as a stepping stone for future evaluations and mentoring research. Overall, the results were positive. The state’s mentoring programs seem to be reaching those individuals who are somewhat academically at-risk and are subsequently able to sustain or improve their academic performance during the course of a mentoring relationship. Footnotes 1Reh, F. John. Mentors and Mentoring: What Is a Mentor? Retrieved December 1, 2006, from http://management.about.com/cs/people/a/mentoring.htm. 2Mentoring in America 2005: A Snapshot of the Current State of Mentoring. Results of a poll on mentoring commissioned by MENTOR. Retrieved December 1, 2006, from http://www.mentoring.org/leaders/partnerships/index.php?s=CT. 3http://www.mentoring.org/leaders/partnerships/index.php?s=CT. 4The Governor’s Partnership Program; Connecticut Mentoring Program. Retrieved on December 1, 2006, from http://www.preventionworksct.org/mentor.html. 5http://www.preventionworksct.org/mentor.html. 6http://www.preventionworksct.org/mentor.html. 7Project Choice Mentoring Program. Received from http://www.projectchoicementor.org/index.htm. 8Connecticut Mentoring Partnership 2005-2006 Evaluation Results Executive Summary. Received December 1, 2006, from http://www.preventionworksct.org.

Annotated Refernces list final

Organizational and media stress among professional football players: Testing an Achievement Goal Theory Model This article includes a study that was to investigate media and coach- athletes stress that would be experienced by the professional football players by examining or testing the goal theory model. The study was about 82 football players that had to complete some questionnaires. In conclusion the study shows that the coaches of the professional football players are advised to reduce the emphasis on performance that would reduce the stress.The information in this article is objective because it was all based on some issues that happened with professional football players. The goal of this article would be showing how much these players receive. Hint the article would be useful for me in writing the paper. The article relates very much to my topic which is about stress for athletes, so I will be able to write more about what causes these athletes to have stress. Stress-Related B reathing Problems: An Issue for Elite Swimmers The article talks about a problem that elite swimmers might have stress because of breathing problems.The article showed a study that number of swimmers who have this problem is increasing. The study in the article showed 24 elite swimmers in two different swim clubs in Norway. The study explains that swimmers Will have breathing problems when they have higher intensity in their workouts and going to school above that would cause more stress in their daily life. I believe that that information is all objective because the article showed a study that occurred to some swimmers.

Methods and Research in Communication Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Methods and Research in Communication - Essay Example ar (2003) sought to explore the dynamics and challenges of the Middle East conflict and the role of the media in either contributing to the conflict or determining its course. One central question that is raised by the study involves the nature of contribution by the media in a cultural conflict. The study also questions the possibility of the existence of the element of bias in media coverage of conflict in the Middle East. Another important question raised by the study involves the capacity of the media to provide avenues that might be used for successful resolution of conflicts. Shinar (2003) adopted an explorative case study design with particular focus on the Palestinian-Israel conflict. The main hypothesis of the study was that the media involvement in conflict basically seeks ways of resolution. The study explored various models of conflict resolution in terms of their respective levels of efficacy to the Israel-Palestinian situation. Some of the historical incidents of the conflict were matched with the models with the objective of determining the patterns of the situation with the view of predicting possible scenarios for the future. The results of the study showed that the media involvement in conflict takes multiple forms and objectives. The media does not always engage in conflicts with the purpose of resolving the conflict. Sometimes the media basically seeks to transform the nature of conflict to match its own peculiar objectives. The study conducted by Melone, Terzis & Beleli (2005) focussed on the different roles that the media plays in a conflict situation. The hypothesis of the study was that the shape of any particular conflict is essentially determined by the manner in which the media participates in the conflict. The major assumption of the study is that responsible and ethical journalism will always produce positive results for the media whereas unethical journalistic practices have the capacity to escalate tensions and conflicts. The

Product design overview Coursework Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Product design overview - Coursework Example The design places open drawers underneath the table with elevated sides and fluid mechanical structure for easy and minimal effort in sliding the drawers and for tagging along of the product. With no doubts, this concept of a product is actually possible to render. The product is viable and can be made by the Just Add Glue workers who have certain limitations because there are already existing counter tables with drawers that are industry made by workers with basic molding tools. Although existing, these counters are made of driftwood and tiles which make these existing counter drawers hard to maneuver, not made for mobility, and are not geared for the elderly people. These existing counters are hard and heavy to open the drawers, and impossible to tag along because of the material. On the contrary, the Tag-along product is actually a portable counterpart of these kitchen counters that already exist. This can be produced by the JAG workforce since simple molding tools can produce the Tag-along table. The feasibility of this project is unquestionable as it can be easily moved along in the kitchen while storing all the kitchen necessities. It is lightweight which makes the target consumers, which are old people, taken into consideration. The target market is real because there is a need for elderly people to be effort efficient when they move about the kitchen. As seen in the Survey Results Analysis, there were actually real people who were willing to pay the average of 60$ from 67% of the senior respondents for the Tag-along Table product. These consisted of 47% who thought 60$-80$, 20% of the respondents who were willing to pay 40$-60$, These target market range from the 50-80 year old elderly people in the suburbs of Eastern and Western Sydney. According to Australian Bureau of Statistics In June 2010, there has actually

Critique Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 9

Critique - Essay Example rrupt practices act which was formed with an intention of stopping bribery of foreign official ad prohibit Us citizens and firm from making improper payments to foreign officials. The National Free trade agreements were designed between three countries to remove taxes on products traded and also helped protect copyrights, patents and trademarks. Another similarity is that all this organizations have some sort of controversies and criticisms. At some point it has failed to achieve its goals, interest and objectives. At some point each of this organizations have impacted negatively on the welfare of people in terms of equity, cost – benefits analysis such increasing the rate of crimes, unemployment, increase in social crimes. For example, the removal of taxes on product makes the local industries lose a substantial market share due to foreign stiff competition from superior products. The United Nations Security Council at some time enacts sanctions meant to benefit only its members at the expense of other non-members. The IMF on then other hand offers credit in an unfair manner such as imposing heavy and unfair terms and conditions on the funds to be lent. The member states in all these papers that both members have voting rights and take part in decision making process that affects the operations of each of the organi zations. However, there are different between paper one and paper two. First countries formed in paper one are from Europe for example, the European union which is formed in Europe while in paper two the organizations formed are from America notably the United states of America. It can also be pointed out that the formation of those organization in paper one is signed and ratified by the member states unlike in paper two where the only the head of states are endowed with authority of signing of the agreement. Another notable difference is that those organizations in paper two have been formed to indentify and promote the rights of consumers of

Case Study Computers R Us Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Case Study Computers R Us - Assignment Example In regard to the initiatives set up by the company to boost satisfaction levels of the customers, loyalty rewards came out as the best initiative so far with an average satisfaction level of 5.6452 out of 10 it was followed by the response time at 4.3714, both level of advice and communication level stood at below 4 out of 10. There was however no any association between age groups and the overall satisfaction level. The study could have been limited by the fact that the questionnaires were emailed and there was no direct contact between the researcher and the respondents to verify their answers. Computers R Us, a computer manufacturer and retailer recently launched a service and repair division, CompleteCare, for its portable/laptop/notebook computers. This division promised to provide a rapid response to customer’s technical enquiries and warranty repairs. As a result of this, Computers R Us has been receiving multiple complaints about CompleteCare at the Computers R Us call centre. To address these issues, a study was proposed and the research overseen by the management of Computers R Us. It was found that customer satisfaction was a contributing factor to the issues experienced in the CompleteCare division. Consequently, the management of Computer R Us developed several possible initiatives to improve customer satisfaction to a minimum level of 6 out of 10 To collect this data, a simple random sample of 500 customers was selected from a sampling frame. A sampling frame includes the actual list of individuals included in the population (Nesbary, 2000). Of the 500 customers that were sent surveys, 420 responded. The response rate was computed as follows; Structured questionnaire constructed in English language was used to collect data with a total of eight items six of which touched on customer satisfaction. The questionnaire consisted of four sections: Five ethical concerns as outlined by Crowhurst and Dobson (1993) were

Statistics Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words - 2

Statistics - Assignment Example For ratio or interval scale data, the median is suitable than the mean if the sample or population size is small and the data is scattered (Cohen 229). The concept is interesting because it identifies ignorance that lead to unnecessary or inaccurate data description that is common in statistical reports. It has informed me of the need for precision in reporting data through selection of a single and suitable descriptive statistics for reporting. Pearson correlation helps in investigating and understanding possible associations, strength of association, and directions of associations between a pair of variables. Investigating the relationship between households’ weekly income and corresponding weekly expenditure is a potential study for the Pearson correlation. In the study, weekly income is the independent variable, X, while weekly expenditure is the dependent variable, Y. A stratified random sampling design is be used to identify participants from different ranges of income and paired data recorded for each household. Area of residence, with the effects of social class, is the basis of stratification and correlation analysis informs data analysis with r and r2 values as the key statistics. A positive r value, such as +0.7, is expected and this shows that household income and income expenditure have a strong positive correlation. This means that increase in the value of one variable leads to corresponding increase in the value of another. The r2 value indicates reliability of the proposed relationship and shows percentage of the data that the relationship explains. In this case, r2 is 0.49 and means that the correlation coefficient explains 49 percent of the analyzed data (Weinberg and Abramowitz 130). T-test for independent samples can be used to investigate effects of training on an organization’s sales representatives. Two groups would be involved in the study. One group, the treatment group, is a sample of 20 sales representatives from a

Environmentally Sustainable Business Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

Environmentally Sustainable Business - Essay Example Other initiatives include development of aero-engines that are friendlier to the environment and airframes that are efficient. The aviation industry has also developed ways of assisting communities and passengers comprehend the concept of climate change and pollution resulting from use of the airlines. Aviation Industry players are undertaking the initiatives to mitigate the negative environmental effects caused by the activities in the aviation industry. The activist stage explain that societal issues caused by businesses or organizations are new and very few people understand the extent of their good or bad sides to the society. As a result, activists are ignored because they are not supported by facts or evidence. Proponents of the new societal issues are normally ignored or dismissed by the business community and authority. The proponents championing for societal rights are activists (Zadek 2004). According to the SA (2009) report, issues of environmental challenges had already emerged in the UK aviation industry, and the authorities, airlines and the communities have negotiated mitigation measures. This stage had been by-passed because powerful coalition was underway to deal with the environmental challenges of aviation industry. The coalition is comprised of airlines, Airport Operators Association (AOA), the British Air Transport Association (BAT), the Society of British Aerospace Companies (SBAC) and NATS (AS 2009). The second stage is the emerging stage. This stage recognises that the political and media community know and understand the societal issues. There are research bodies that emerge to study the cropping societal issues in the UK aviation caused by aviation activities and processes. The second stage has also been by-passed because climate change, noise and air pollution have become common knowledge in the United Kingdom especially among air operators. Researches have also been commissioned while monitoring and evaluation frameworks have been

Evidence, Proof and argument Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3250 words

Evidence, Proof and argument - Essay Example As the jury, it is your duty to decide fairly, dispassionately and impartially based on the evidence presented by the prosecution4 since the burden of proving the guilt of defendant Duncan lies with the prosecution5 and owing to this stringent requirement, its case must stand and fall on its own merits. The prosecution cannot assert that the evidence for the defence is weak. Any claim therefore by the prosecution that this defendant has not established a valid defence should not be entertained. I would like to emphasize that the duty to prove the guilt of this defendant is the sole responsibility of the prosecution6. This defendant need not do anything since the law presumes his innocence until proven otherwise. However, Members of the jury, I would likewise caution you that the proof required of the prosecution is not absolute certainty that this defendant has committed the grievous act he is accused of. The prosecution is simply required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt(fn-case) that this defendant is guilty. Judgment beyond a reasonable doubt simply requires moral certainty that this defendant committed the offence charged. ... With that as a backdrop, let us proceed with the task at hand. This defendant is indicted for the murder of Simon Chapman by allegedly plunging the knife into the victim’s heart with intent to hurt and cause him serious harm. The death of Simon Chapman allegedly resulted from the acts of this defendant who was then 15 years old. Allow me, Members of the Jury to walk you through the undisputed facts—the decedent, Simon Chapman and his friend Christopher Jones (Jones) were sitting in a coach aboard a train late at night when two boys, defendant Duncan Moore and David Parker (David) were smoking and running about the train passing from one carriage to another. Christopher Jones chided the boys for smoking and to which they replied to â€Å"fuck off†. At this point, David—the younger of the two—decided to pester Jones by grabbing his briefcase. A commotion ensued where Jones pushed David who retaliated with a punch landing on the Jones’ face. As Jones was about to hit David again, Duncan intervened. The ruckus is now between Jones and Duncan. They were throwing punches at each other when decedent Chapman arose from his sleep and seeing that Jones was being hit by Duncan, he, in turn, struck Duncan with his umbrella. Duncan fell on his back and decedent Chapman straddled him, the two went on throwing punches against each other when the fracas stopped. Decedent Chapman was stabbed with the use of a kitchen knife. Thereafter, two boys alighted on the next train stop. Based on this undisputed facts, you shall decide if this defendant stabbed the victim or is there a probability that somebody else on that train who could be the culprit. Before we move on to the evidence presented by either side, it is important that I discuss the

Concepts of Morality Essay Example for Free

Concepts of Morality Essay Define and compare the concepts of morality, law, and religion by explaining the source of each and whether one or all rely upon each other. Morality has to do with our ideas regarding what is right and what is wrong and how right and wrong behavior should be punished and rewarded. http://www. education. com/reference/article/moral-concepts-children/. As with the law and religion parts, they rely upon each other by the minds of many people. When religious leaders speak out on moral topics, their opinions are often treated with special deference. They are regarded as â€Å"moral experts. † This raises the question of: â€Å"Whether morality depends in some way on religion? † The answer to this question may be of considerable practical importance. If morality does depend on religion, the process of secularization, in the course of which religious belief and practice wither away, seems to pose a serious threat to morality. Most of the discussion in this entry will address the issue of whether moral requirements (obligations) and prohibitions (wrongness) depend on a deity of the sort to which the major monotheisms of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are committed. Discussions of whether morality depends on religion frequently focus exclusively on the deontological domain. Deontology consists of a system of requirements, permissions, and prohibitions. It is structurally similar to systems of law. Hence it’s natural to think of deontology as the domain of moral law. The question arises as to whether moral laws binding force depends on the authority of a divine lawgiver or religion belief expert. http://www. highbeam. com/doc/1G2-3446801737. html.

Claudius Speech - Hamlet Essay Example for Free

Claudius Speech Hamlet Essay Claudius, the former ruler, husband of his sister and brother of the recently perished king gives a speech at the beginning of Act I. II of Hamlet. Shakespeare’s use of literary devices allows the reader to comprehend the intentions behind Claudius’s figurative language within his coronation speech. The opening scene in Hamlet portrays Denmark to currently be critically unstable and with militaristic chaos; however, in Claudius’s speech he disposes that idea and conveys confidence in the stability of the nation. This chronological set up introduces the theme of appearance vs.  reality as Claudius efforts to manipulate the kingdom into trusting that he has everything under control is carried mischievously yet successfully throughout his speech. Aware of the presence of the rightful king, young Hamlet, Claudius commences his speech with an ambiguous line that strikes the attention of Hamlet. Once he is aware of young Hamlet’s attention, he continues to approach the courthouse. He seemingly shows a state of grief as he acknowledges his dead brother. â€Å" My dear brother’s death† the use of alliteration makes us aware that Claudius has used that line several times before in order to show a sign of loss. He wants to appear that has suffered too from this death, he mentions that â€Å" the memory be green† this metaphor is placed to represent the idea that the memory is fresh and it has not been long since he perished, while also leaving a gruesome image of the old kings decomposing body. His first use of anti-thesis is then exposed in line 6, when he mentions â€Å" the wisest sorrows† in that line he is understanding those in grief but reminding them to think of themselves and the future of Denmark instead. After respectfully mentioning the death of Hamlet, and expressing his condolence to the kingdom he deceitfully moves on to the second important announcement: his wedding. Uneasy, Claudius is trying to go about his speech like a metaphorical obstacle course hoping there is no interference or opposition, while still being able to appear as confident. Efficaciously, he presents his marriage â€Å" Therefore our sometime sister, now our queen, Th’ imperial jointress to this warlike state. † Using the state of war as his alaby to the marriage of his brother’s wife he is able to convince the courthouse that it is for the greater good and that his actions are a form of self-sacrifice for the nation. Continuing to justify his marriage as a cause and affect matrimony instead of acts of incest he mentions the â€Å" mirth in funeral † and â€Å"dirge in marriage†. This literary device is important within his speech because it is his second antithesis, and a paradoxical clause. In this he is suggesting that he brought happiness to this sad event for the benefit of his people. â€Å"In equal scale, weighing delight and dole† Claudius is trying to banish the aura of unsteadiness and declares balance. He makes up for the sorrow of his dead brother, by marrying his sister. Even though it is an obvious unusual event, Claudius reflects enough confidence as king and successfully manages avoid any opposition. A good strategy used was his the frequent use of â€Å" we†. This indicated that the king was not only speaking for himself, but he was speaking for everyone like a good statesman would. In reality however, he was doing so to make everyone aware that it was of â€Å" better wisdoms† to agree with him, and that those with worst wisdoms would not face good consequences. Claudius gently expresses his supreme control over Denmark and threatens anyone who dares oppose him in a non-aggressive way. He later finalizes the topic of marriage by dismissing the awkward topic of the table like a typical political â€Å" For all, our thanks† As king, Claudius then addresses the issues with Norway. Assertively, he informs the kingdom of his plan of action. He repeats the line â€Å" dear brother’s death† giving it little sentimental value. He then quickly states that Norway believes that Denmark is â€Å" disjoint and out of frame. † He assures the courthouse that the case is not so, and that they will successfully deal with Fortibras. The irony behind that is that Denmark is weak, regardless of what Claudius wants his people to believe. In order to seem like a man of action Claudius puts his future plan forward â€Å" Thus much the business is we have here writ to Norway, uncle of young Fortibras. † By doing that he convinces many that he is a potent king. Writing to Norway makes him seem like he is aware of what he is doing and that the nation does not need to worry. To complement his assurance he appoints two messengers to deliver a letter, this is significantly important because his objective is to prove to the court that he trusts his officials, ironically thought, he is purposely sending two people incase of a betrayal. Claudius’s speech had a successful outcome. He was able to gently hide his inner insecurities and expose himself as a good statesman and valiant leader. His word usage was essential to the deliverance of his speech as it allowed him to get his awkward points across like unusual marriage to his sister. His use of antithesis did make the reader question the sincerity of his grief, but it did not seem to affect the opinion of the courthouse. He showed clear superiority over everyone within the courthouse, especially Hamlet, while making himself clear that he would not tolerate any disagreement of his coronation. Most importantly, he put an action plan forward and proved himself as king.