The Core ideas of change management

The Core ideas of change management It is in the nature of people to be afraid of change. In our everyday life we normally establish routines and become comfortable with the way things just happen. The idea of potential change of the patterns of behavior makes us feel uncomfortable, brings uncertainty and risk in the everyday life. As social entities, corporations are no different. Daily work schedules and process organisation become part of the corporate identity and gradually slow down the speed needed to remain competitive and be a winner. According to Tabrizi (2007), To stay competitive, a player must be dynamic in the marketplace, constantly revising its own strategy in response to the strategies of its opponents, as well as aligning itself with the changing demands of its customers. The organizations that can most quickly respond to the marketplace, particularly those that adapt faster than their competitors, are the ones that make it to the top. Key concepts In general, reviewing the initial reasons for change, it can be reactive, when organizations respond to external factors, and proactive, when companies initiate the process of change themselves. However, no matter what the initial reasons were, once the process has started, we can be sure that change in one part of the company invariably will affect people and processes in all other parts. Moreover, a thorough change can influence, or be influenced by the organizational mission and strategy, structure, products and processes, its employees and culture, technology and know-how employed. Change can be provoked by external or internal factors, or a combination of both. External factors may be changes in demand of consumers, threatening actions of competitors and suppliers, newcomers in the business, MAs, changes in the legal and political environment, new technologies, changes on the labor market, etc. The internal factors can be found within the company itself and may result from redefined mission and strategy, need for major changes in the culture and management style, need for improvement of quality and efficiency, etc. There are lots of algorithms and prescriptions about how exactly shall changes be implemented. In order to get deeper understanding of the contemporary methods, first we will examine the basic change management theories and approaches. Theoretical foundations The three main theoretical schools are differentiated by the addressed levels of change individual, group or organizational level. These are The Individual Perspective School, The Group Dynamics School and The Open Systems School (Burnes, 2009). Individual Perspective school According to Burnes (2009), the Individual Perspective School is divided into two main movements Behaviorists and Gestalt-Field theorists. Both of them address organizational changes on individual level. The main idea of the Behaviorists is that peoples reactions are closely interrelated with their interaction with the environment. One of the first Behaviorists, Pavlov, stated that all behavior is learned and all individuals actions are led by the expected results. Through his well known experiment with the dog that associated the sound of the bell with food, Pavlov proved that one can easily manage peoples behaviour through external stimuli and reward. The other movement, the Gestalt-Field theorists, argues that human actions could not be product only of the surrounding environment, but from the interpretation of this environment through changing the understanding of the situation and modifying the external stimuli. Group Dynamics School According to Cummings and Worley (2009), The Group Dynamics School emphasizes on the implementation of organizational change on a group level. Its founder Kurt Lewin argued that the individual will respond to the groups interactions and pressure and will adapt to its culture and behaviour, accepting its values, norms and roles. Open Systems school The main focus of the Open Systems School is the organisation as a whole, composed of a number of interconnected sub-systems (Burnes, 2009). The different parts and subsystems are interacting with each other and with the environment. Mullins (2008) writes that most important is to achieve an overall synergy within the organization, rather than optimizing the performance of any one individual part. Approaches to change The three basic approaches to change management are the Planned approach, the Emergent approach and the Contingency approach (Burnes, 2009). Contingency approach The basic principle of the Contingency approach is that there is no one best way to change. Change has to be applied in line with the environment and the organisation has to adapt to it. The contingency approach examines the effectiveness of different models, techniques and methods of change management and advises to choose according to the situation. Planned approach The basic idea of the planned approach is that organizations shall first identify areas where changes are required and initiate a process of its implementation (Burnes, 2009). It was launched in the 40s in the work of Kurt Lewin, who developed the most popular models of planned change: Action Research and Three-Phase Model. The approach has been widely used since the 80s. The Action research model is based on the statement that change requires action, and action is based on analysing the situation correctly. The Three step model is based on three phases of implementation: unfreezing moving refreezing. The Planned approach represents a more general prescription about how change should happen in a world much more ideal than the world we know today. As the contemporary situation is changing rapidly, the chance that the environment has changed again during the implementation of your change plan and has made it useless, is extremely high. That is why, I consider the Emergent Approach much more effective and useful. Emergent approach The Emergent approach is focused on the assumption that change is a continuous. According to Dawson (2002), organizational change is a persistent, open-ended process of adaptation to changing environment. It emerges in an unpredictable and unplanned fashion. Maybe the most distinctive feature of the approach is the bottom-up approach of control, i.e. that the employees are most closely involved with the process with the change process (Dawson, 2002). The approach requires a major change in the traditional role of the managers. Unlike the planned approach, here, the role of the manager is not to initiate and control the process, but rather to assist and facilitate it. In order to summarize the main models of implementation, Burnes (2009) has chosen the three most practical models of emergent change: Kanters Ten Commandments for Executing Change, Kotters Eight-Stage Process for Successful Organisational Transformation and the Seven Steps model of Luecke. In order to illustrate the overall impact that emergent change has on organizations, I have chosen the case of Ken Freeman, who made Corning Clinical Labs from a business in shambles to the industry leader in the size (Appendix I). CASE STUDY Ken Freeman, Corning clinical labs, Appendix I Change and the Manager External and Internal Approaches to Change As we have already outlined in the previous part of the work, change can be planned or unplanned (emergent). Planned change is sought when the organisation deliberately attempts to make internal changes to meet specified goals or to pursue a set of strategies (French et al, 2008). However, not all change in organisations happens as a result of intended direction. Unplanned change is provoked by some external triggers such as market forces, economic crises, economic opportunities or social changes. Unplanned change occurs spontaneously and without the organisations provocation. The appropriate goal in managing unplanned change is to act immediately once the change is recognized, to minimize any negative consequences and maximize any possible benefits. (French et al, 2008) However, no matter whether the changes were planned or unplanned, in order to implement a successful and thorough change management plan, there shall be sufficient dissatisfaction with the existing situation, strong attraction to moving towards a more desirable position, desire to formulate a strategy that will realize the vision (French et al, 2008). Change may be triggered by internal or external forces: External forces may be changes in the demand for the organizations products as a result of changing consumer preferences, action by competitors, government etc., threatening tactics of competitors by aggressively cutting prices, newcomer in the market, political or legal changes, changes in the terms of trade (tariffs, exchange rates), lack of skilled employees, etc. (Martin, 2005) Internal forces should theoretically, be more clear and predictable. For example changes in strategy as a result of revised mission or goals, need for cultural changes, changes in the management style, need for improvement in quality, efficiency, standards, need to cut costs (Martin, 2005). However, according to Mabey and Salaman (1995), irrespective of the initial reasons for the change, change is characterized by two important dimensions: firstly, the scale of change (from fine tuning through to corporate transformation) and secondly the style of change (collaborative through to coercive). Selected models of Change Organizations typically respond to the challenges of the above described external and internal triggers with the help of various programs, each designed to overcome obstacles and enhance business performance. According to Luecke (2003), these programs fall into one of the following four categories: Cultural change Cultural changes focus on the human side of the organization. It handles with the general approach of doing business and the relationship between the management and the employees. A typical example for cultural change is changes in the mission and vision of the company and the organizational development. In order to illustrate the overall impact on the company that cultural changes may produce, I have chosen the example with ATT and NCR. Case study ATT and NCR (Apendix II) Structural change Structural changes address the structure of the organisation and the design of jobs and working arrangements as the key levers of change. According to Mabey and Salamn (1995), structural changes are triggered by an organisations inability to fully realize the strategy it is following due to administrative deficiencies caused by a mismatch between the new strategy and the existing structure (Mabey Salaman, 1995). Luecke argues that these programs treat the organization as a set of functional parts-the machine model. Through mergers and acquisitions, between companies, reengineering of units, reconfiguring of divisions, managers try to improve the overall performance and results. A classic example of redesigning the whole management structure in order to complement the strengths of the top people, is provided by Google (Appendix III). CASE STUDY GOOGLE, Appendix III Cost cutting The third program for change is cost cutting. Its core idea is to eliminate non-essential and non-profitable activities. This can be done through reengineering of the structure, decrease of the personnel, focusing on the production of profitable items, etc. Process change Process change aims at making processes faster, more effective, more reliable, less costly. These programs focus on altering how things get done (Luecke, 2003). Examples include reengineering a loan approval process, approaches to handling customer warranty claims, production processes, etc. Attitudes to Change 3.1. Reactions to change In general, there are different reactions to the proposed change process and according to them people are split into three main different groups supporters, apathetic and resistors. According to French et al (2008), change initiatives are typically met by some resistance. Resistance to change is any attitude or behaviour that reflects a persons unwillingness to make or support a desired change. The reasons for this reaction are manifold people are afraid of the unknown, many of them dont understand the need for change, or some may even think that the proposed change goes against the values held by members in the organisation. These reactions outline the need to consider also changes in the culture of the organisation, including changes in members values and beliefs. French et al (2008) outline also another perspective of resistance to change in their work, namely to see resistance as feedback that can be used by the change agent to help accomplish his objectives. The essence of this notion is to recognise that when people resist change they are defending something important that appears to be threatened by the change attempt (French et al, 2008). There is no universal recipe on how could resistance to change be overcome, however, considering the limitations of this paper, one example method illustrated also by a brief case study will be presented in the third part of this paper, The People Problem, which shall give the essence that could be followed. Gender and Change Management Preece, Steven Steven (1999) describe several studies that have concluded that women are more likely than men to display characteristics which would make them good team players. The authors cite a survey conducted in the company Bass, designed specifically to examine gender-related issues in public house management. According to the survey, women appeared to focus on teamworking 82 % of them answered that they find it beneficial due to issues such as the mutual development of ideas, helping each other and problem solving. In the same time, only 65% of the men stated to have positive attitude against team work. These results evidence that women are in general better teamplayers than men and consequently may experience a greater impact in the changeover of the company they are employed with. Case study ATT and NCR (Apendix III) What aspects of the external change environment did Jerre Stead and his advisers choose to focus on? Could they have defined the external environment in a different way, perhaps using scenario planning techniques discussed above, which would have allowed them to construct other, more realistic scenarios? By way of illustration, had they been less US- and head office-centric, could they have created a more accurate picture of the organization and its problems, one that would haveallowed them to see the potential for the problems they would create in Scotland, their key subsidiary location? The central point of this message is that managers are active agents, not merely passive recipients of abstract and external market forces. Good managers understand how to enact their environment in order to control it through more intuitive and creative interpretations, re-definitions and action (Weick, 2001). Weick argues that managers are often better advised to act their way into thinking, by taking smaller, incremental steps and learning from them, rather than think their way into acting through top-down, transformational planning strategies such as those depicted in the ATT case. The dangers of a top-down, planning-then-action approach are twofold. The first danger is that by making big changes there is little chance for learning to occur because you dont really know which of the many components of the change had the most effect. The second danger, and more likely consequence, is that by constructing a plan that is complex you are likely to fall into the trap of paralysis by analysis. The key point is that culture, once understood, is treated as a highly manageable feature of organizations. This seemed to be the perspective of Jerre Stead, the CEO of ATT (GIS) in the case study. Such unitary assumptions and analysis may have a degree of validity in certain contexts, but in others they are likely to be misplaced and misleading. Ask yourself the questions in the ATT case: (1) How realistic were the assumptions made by Stead regarding the potential to create a unified culture in the company? (2) Were leadership and communications all that was necessary to overcome barriers to change? Perhaps he could have taken a different view, distinguishing between: à ¢-   the corporate culture, which is essentially what managers want the organization to be like, similar to the concept of corporate identity in Chapter 6 and more amenable to control; and Chapter 9 Managing organizational change 385 à ¢-   the organizational culture and subcultures, which are more akin to the notions of organizational identity in Chapter 6, and which are less amenable to control, for a variety of reasons. Bearing in mind the preceding health warnings, and the concerns expressed about the concept of unitary cultures, managers need to have a set of sophisticated techniques to identify and manage their organizational cultures. For example, in the ATT case, Jerre Stead and his colleagues might have benefited from constructing alternative scenarios of what the organization might have looked like. More importantly, they would clearly have benefited from an understanding of the nature of the different subcultures in the various subsidiaries of ATT (GIS). The People Problem The real change comes from the people. Individuals are those who create, implement and support change processes. Unless people are involved, committed and prepared to adapt and learn, objectives, plans and future desired states will be likely to founder on the rocks of resistance (Rosenfeld Wilson, 1999). Any transformation of significance will create people issues. And the more significant the transformation and the impact on the people, the greater is the need for full involvement (Burnes, 2009). A successful implementation of turn-around organisational transformation requires not only good planning, but also understanding of the human part. Discipline is a key factor for success; however, it demands strict data collection and analysis, planning, and implementa ­tion discipline as a redesign of strategy, systems, or processes. The main goal of this work is concerned with the role people play in managing strategic change how they do it. Role of the management Typically, the people at the top of any organisation are seen by others employess, stakeholders and outside observers as intimately associated with strategic change, whenever such occurs. Therefore, the overall role of management in the process of change is highly significant (Johnson, Scholes Whittington, 2008). 1.1. Change Management at the Top According to Mullins (2008), the successful management of change is a key factor of organisational performance and effectiveness and should emanate from the top of the organisation. The people at the top of the company are responsible for the strategy and philosophy, the culture, for creating and sustaining a healthy climate and establishing and directing appropriate organisational processes. The successful implementation of change demands positive action from top management and a style of transformational leadership in order to gain a commitment to change (Mullins, 2008). Extremely important management features and capabilities are effective communication skills, ability for recognizing and releasing the potential of everyone involved with the change, setting a good personal example, self-pacing to avoid unnecessary stress. 1.2. Managers and leaders However, top managers may be the initiators but are not always the real leaders of the change process. Luecke (2003) argues that leaders create an appealing vision of the future and then develop a logical strategy for making it a reality. They also motivate people to pursue the vision, even in the face of obstacles. Managers, on the other hand, have the job of making complex tasks run smoothly. Managers are those who elaborate and implement process details, assure resources and direct the process. John Kotter has described the relationship of leadership andmanagement in a simple two-by-two matrix, shown below (Luecke, 2003): The main idea of the matrix is that long-term transformation process requires involvement both from leaders and managers and that transformation goes nowhere when both leadership and management are found wanting (Luecke, 2003). 1.3. Middle managers Middle managers are the implementers of strategy. Their role is to put into realization the direction established by top management by making sure that resources are allocated and controlled appropriately, monitoring performance and behaviour of staff and, where necessary, explaining the strategy to those reporting to them (Johnson, Scholes Whittington, 2008) Role of Employees According to Brill and Worth (1997), in order to make the change effort work, we must learn how to capitalize on positive human qualities, such as trust, idealism, and dedication, and mitigate the impact of those other natural human traits (suspicion, stubbornness, anxiety) that often undermine the change process. The role of employees is most obvious in cases where the chosen approach to change is bottom-up, not top-down. Strictly speaking, bottom-up change can not only be implemented from the lower levels of the hierarchy, but also initiated from the employees. However, Burnes (2009) argues that there is little point in encouraging staff to identify change opportunities unless they are also encouraged to implement them. The need for using the bottom-up approach is evident when taking the emergent approach to change. Having in mind the rapid pace of environmental changes, they need to be dealt with speedily and be treated locally, in order to achieve optimal and timely success. Role of Stakeholders In the process of change stakeholders are not actively participating, however, gaining their support is extremely important. In a turnaround situation it is crucial that key stakeholders, like the major financing bank, trade unions and some key clients are kept clearly informed of the situation and the following improvements as they are being made. Moreover, a clear assessment of the power of different stakeholder groups may become vitally important, especially when implementing major transformations (Johnson, Scholes Whittington, 2008). The support of powerful stakeholder groups can help to build a strong fundament, especially in cases where the change agent does not have a strong personal power base from which to work. Dealing with Difficult People Understanding the roles of the participants in the process and showing them the right direction to the desired change is the a major part of the transformation. However, as already outlined in the previous part of this work, change imposed by others feels threatening rather than exciting and the lack of choice makes people feel powerless and leads to stress and defensive behaviour (Mabey Salamen, 1995). That is why, the earlier in the process the resistance agents are found, the better the whole process can be managed. French et al (2008) have outlined the following general approaches for dealing with difficult people: Education and communication discussions, presentations, demonstrations; Participation and involvement allow others to help design and implement changes, contribute ideas; Facilitation and support providing emotional support, actively listening to problems, training; Negotiation and agreement offering incentives, working out trade-offs, special benefits; Manipulation and cooptation influence others, selective information, buying off leaders; Explicit or implicit coercion using force, threatening (French et al, 2008). Resistance to change as resource of new ideas Resisters to change are problematic and typically, when something goes wrong, they are the first that are blamed for the disaster. However, this is not only pointless, but leads also to destructive management behaviours mangers may become defensive, uncommunicative, competitive (Ford Ford, 2009). Strong leaders can hear and learn from their critics and understand that even difficult people can provide valuable input when treated with respect and let to communicate their point of view. An example of such situation is presented in Appendix IV a brief case study about Alison, IT executive, aiming to implement a major change in the computer system of the hospital she was employed with. CASE STUDY Alison, Appendix IV Linking Strategic and Operational Change In the previous chapters of this work, I have examined the theoretical grounds, the major approaches to change, the roles of the different participants in the change process. However, no matter how good the plan for change may be, the most critical part, i.e. the bottleneck remains the implementation of the transformation. According to Luecke (2003), 70 percent of change initiatives fail to meet their objectives. Kotter has also written that If you were to grade them using the old fashioned A,B,C,D, and F, Id be surprised if an impartial jury would give 10% of these efforts an A. But Im not saying that 90% deserve a D either.What is tragic is that there are so many C-pluses. Its one thing to get a C-plus on a paper; its another when millions of dollars or thousands of jobs are at stake (Luecke, 2003). Implementing Strategic change Burnes (2009) argues that the implementation of change is a two-way process of ensuring that strategic decisions lead to operational changes and on the other hand, operational changes influence strategic decisions. The process of implementation may follow the models either of Planned or Emergent approaches. Although that by many, including Burnes (2009), there are no universal rules for leading change, supporters of panned and emergent approach propose sequence of actions to be adopted, which could facilitate and give a structure to the implementation of the strategic changes. Pettigrew Whipp (Burnes, 2009) propose a simplified model of actions to be taken in order to structure the change process: Kanter and Kotter (Burnes, 2009) also propose some ideas for implementation of change. However, I consider that Luecke has given the most practical recipe for action. His model consists of seven steps: Step 1. Mobilize Energy and Commitment through Joint Identification of Business Problems and Their Solutions Step 2. Develop a Shared Vision of How to Organize and Manage for Competitiveness Step 3. Identify the Leadership Step 4. Focus on Results, Not on Activities Step 5. Start Change at the Periphery, Then Let It Spread to Other Units without Pushing It from the Top Step 6. Institutionalize Success through Formal Policies, Systems, and Structures Step 7. Monitor and Adjust Strategies in Response to Problems in the Change Process (Luecke, 2003). For me, this approach is very close to the practice, as it is very much result-oriented and in reality results are the real measures of success, not plans and theories. In order to illustrate this consideration, please refer to Appendix V, a case study about Xerox. CASE STUDY XEROX, APPENDIX V The role of the Change agent In the process of change there are always factors limiting the implementation of the changes in the operational level. According to Mabey and Salaman, (1995) an important factor for successful implementation of strategy into operational level is the formal and informal presence of a change agent. According to Rosenfeld and Wilson (1999), change agents are the individuals or groups of individuals whose task is to effect the desired change. They can be both internal and external to the organisation. The agent acts as intermediary and his responsibilities may range from complete collaboration with staff to acting as absolute authority and expert. Internal change agents are mostly experts in the field, to who people trust. External agents may have political credibility and support, however, often lack the detailed knowledge of the company (Rosenfeld Wilson, 1999). Considering the complexities involved with change, the range of abilities and expertise of the change agent could be significant. Vital to the success of the change agent is also the support from the senior management of the company. Change agents see the need for change and articulate it effectively to others. They are critical catalysts for a change initiative and should be placed in key positions (Luecke, 2003). Here are some of the most important implications of change agents: articulate the need for change; are accepted by others as trustworthy and competent; see and diagnose problems from the perspective of their audience; motivate people to change; work through others in translating intent into action; stabilize the adoption of innovation; and foster self-renewing behavior in others so that they can go out of business as change agents (Luecke, 2003). People suitable for this job can be professional change agents like those working in the HR consultancy companies, or people from the business. They can also be produced like GM did in the past. Luecke (2003) describes the case: General Motors attempted something very similar in its joint venture with Toyota: the NUMMI small car assembly plant in California. That plant was run according to Toyotas world-beating production methods, and GM rotated manufacturing managers through the plant to learn Toyotas methods and, hopefully, bring a working knowledge of those methods back to Detroit. Reflecting on Change in Different Contexts

Internalism vs Externalism :: essays research papers

Internalism vs. Externalism Knowledge can be achieved either through the justification of a true belief or for the substantive externalist, through a â€Å"natural or law like connection between the truth of what is believed and the person’s belief† (P.135). Suppose a man named George was implanted with a chip at birth, which causes him to utter the time in a rare Russian dialect. His girlfriend Irina, who happens to speak the same Russian dialect, realizes that every time she taps his shoulder, he tells her the time and he is always right. She knows that he is right because she checks her watch. Because she thinks this is cute, she never tells him what it is that he is saying. One day, Irina’s watch breaks but instead of getting it fixed, she just taps George on the shoulder whenever she needs to ask for the time. We may ask ourselves whether it is appropriate to claim that George has knowledge of the time every time he utters it. The answer is NO. Irina has been amused by his Russian utterances and has thus never told him what the words he says mean in English. So if Irina were to ask George what time it was, in English, he would be unable to tell her without looking at a watch or clock. This is due to the fact that when he speaks the time in Russian, his mind is not really referring to the time. The chip implanted in his brain clearly calculates the time on its own, not requiring the use of any of his bodily functions. The only interaction that the chip would have with George is to cause him to utter the appropriate numbers. So, since his brain is not involved in any calculating processes and all he does is utter the time in a foreign language, it is clear that George does not understand what he is saying. Without understand, it is obvious that he cannot form a belief based on what he are sa ying. If the requirement for knowledge is a true belief that is either justified or connected by natural law to a factual truth, then in the absence of a belief, there can be no knowledge. We may also ask ourselves whether Irina knows the time. The answer once again is NO. She believes that she knows the time because whenever she has tapped George on the shoulder, he has given her the correct time.

The Objective of Total Quality Management Essay -- Total Quality Manag

The Objective of Total Quality Management Total Quality Management(TQM) is an organisational process that actively involves every function and every employee in satisfying customers needs, both internal and external. TQM works by continuously improving all aspect of work through structured control, improvement and planning activities that are carried out in concern with guiding ideology that focuses on Quality and Customer Satisfaction as the top priorities. There has been many arguments that TQM succeeds only by incorporating a concern about quality for the customers throughout the organisation. The truth of this statement and those facts that disagree with this statement will be look into and discuss in more detail to achieve the success of TQM. TQM recognises that the Customer is at the center of every activity. The customer may be external or internal. The key is to determine the gap between what the customer needs and what the system delivers. Once the gap is recognised, it would be systematically reduced and results in never-ending improvement in customer satisfaction at every level. TQM depends on and creates a culture in an organisation which involves everybody in quality improvement. Everyone in the company can affect quality but must first realise this factor and have the techniques and tools which are appropriate for improving quality. Thus TQM includes the marketing and dissemination of quality and methods not only within the organisation and customers but also to suppliers and other partners. The general view to achieve success in TQM could be summarised as below: Quality as strength Quality in all processes The importance of management The involvement, commitment and responsibility of everybody Continuous improvement Zero defects Focus on prevention rather than inspection Meeting the needs of target customers Recovery Benchmarking A prerequisite for successful quality improvement is first, to understand how quality is perceived and valued by customers. 4 ‘Q' Design Quality Technical Quality Production Quality Delivery Quality Functional Quality Relational Quality Image Experiences Expectation Customer Perceived Quality ... ...ccess. Ownership and the Elements of Self-Management Total quality programmes are founded on the principal that people want to own the problems, the process, the solution and ultimately the success associated with the quality improvement. Psychologically, the ownership advocated by TQM ties in the development in organisational design away from traditional models of imposing management control over employees' behaviour. Recognition and Rewards TQM system considers the rewards and recognition to be critical to a company's programme, particularly when greater involvement of staff is required. Positive reinforcement through recognition and rewards is essential to maintain achievement and continuous improvement through participative problem-solving projects. The Quality Delivery Process TQM is not just the awareness of quality for the customers. It demands the implementation of a new system. Finally, the main objective of TQM may put the customer at the center of every activity and consider the process as customer driven, but all other factors which do not involve the customers have to be taken into consideration for the successful implementation of TQM.

Online Privacy as a Corporate Social Responsibility- an Empirical Study

Business Ethics: A European Review Volume 20 Number 1 January 2011 Online privacy as a corporate social responsibility: an empirical study Irene Pollach Aarhus School of Business, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark Information technology and the Internet have added a new stakeholder concern to the corporate social responsibility (CSR) agenda: online privacy. While theory suggests that online privacy is a CSR, only very few studies in the business ethics literature have connected these two.Based on a study of CSR disclosures, this article contributes to the existing literature by exploring whether and how the largest IT companies embrace online privacy as a CSR. The ? ndings indicate that only a small proportion of the companies have comprehensive privacy programs, although more than half of them voice moral or relational motives for addressing online privacy. The privacy measures they have taken are primarily compliance measures, while measures that stimulate a stakeholder dialogu e are rare.Overall, a wide variety of approaches to addressing privacy was found, which suggests that no institutionalization of privacy practices has taken place as yet. The study therefore indicates that online privacy is rather new on the CSR agenda, currently playing only a minor role. Introduction Since the 1990s, companies striving to be good corporate citizens have had to devise strategies to address issues such as pollution, energy use, waste production, animal testing, child labor, sweatshops, workforce diversity, or advertising to children.It has become a de-facto standard for very large corporations to publish social reports documenting how they address these issues in the marketplace, the workplace, the supply chain, and the community in order to ful? ll their role as good corporate citizens (Snider et al. 2003). The advent of the Internet has not only revolutionized many business models but has also rede? ned what it means to be a good corporate citizen (Post 2000), as most of the above issues are of little relevance to companies dealing with data and technology.One issue of public concern that has become highly relevant for IT companies is online privacy (De George 2000, Johnson 2006). doi: 10. 1111/j. 1467-8608. 2010. 01611. x Information privacy denotes an individual’s right to decide what information is made available to others (Westin 1967). Privacy is thus guaranteed only if individuals know that data are collected about them and if they have control over this data collection and the subsequent use of the data (Foxman & Kilcoyne 1993, Caudill & Murphy 2000). In the United States, privacy-related legislation exists only for health care, ? ancial services, and children on the Internet (Bowie & Jamal 2006), while many aspects of data collection and user control in electronic commerce are still unregulated (Fernback & Papacharissi 2007). Countries of the European Union, meanwhile, protect privacy more strictly (Baumer et al. 2004), which has proven to be a hurdle for US technology companies operating in Europe. In 2008, for example, technology giant Google encountered problems in several European countries with its data handling practices (O’Brien 2008).Despite legislative efforts in Europe, data privacy violations have occurred in a number of 88 r 2010 The Author Business Ethics: A European Review r 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. , 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main St, Malden, MA 02148, USA Business Ethics: A European Review Volume 20 Number 1 January 2011 large organizations, including, for example, the largest German bank, DeutscheBank (Neate 2009), or T-Mobile UK (Wray 2009). The problems with privacy legislation are that it is dif? ult to identify violations of these laws and that the law may lag behind what is technologically feasible. For the above reasons, global companies have some discretion over how much privacy they grant users and how much they reveal about their data handlin g practices to their users. This discretion adds extra complexity to the moral issue of whether companies take advantage of their powerful position by collecting and using data from users to further their own business interests, for example by sending out unsolicited promotional e-mails or selling user data (Pollach 2005).The discretion companies can exercise when it comes to information privacy and the ethical implications of this discretion entail that information privacy is a question of corporate morality. While theoretical work on corporate social responsibility (CSR) suggests that privacy could be a meaningful addition to a corporate CSR program, little is known about corporate practices. This paper therefore sets out to explore whether and how companies whose core business is based on data and technology are embracing information privacy as a CSR. The ? dings suggest that information privacy is emerging as an element of CSR programs, but that there is a great deal of variety regarding the adoption of privacy as a CSR. The paper ? rst discusses the moral issues behind information privacy on the Internet, reviews the literature on corporate responses to people’s privacy concerns, and then looks at the literature on privacy as a CSR. After describing the sample and the methodology underlying this study, the results are presented and their implications are discussed. The ethics of information privacyThe very core of electronic and mobile commerce revolves around technology, digitization, and the exchange of information, which poses a number of ethical problems (Zonghao 2001). A particular challenge to information handling in electronic commerce is the trade-off between collecting data for the sake of transparency and not collecting data for the sake of privacy (Introna & Pouloudi 1999). Another challenge is the trade-off between collecting data for the sake of pro? ts and not collecting data for the sake of privacy.As commercial transactions on the I nternet or through mobile phones are commonly based on credit-card payments and the shipment of goods to the buyer’s home address, the balance is tipped towards the need for disclosure rather than the safeguard of privacy. However, companies collect not only personally identifying information (PII) from transactions but also collect PII when users register themselves, use online services, participate in sweepstakes or surveys, or send inquiries to the company. In addition to PII, companies collect anonymous click-stream 1/2 data and compile anonymous user pro? es when Internet users navigate the companies’ websites (Kelly & Rowland 2000). Through the collection of IP addresses, PII can also be combined with anonymous click-stream data in order to obtain very comprehensive user pro? les (Payne & Trumbach 2009). The easier access to and increased mobility of data have made information a commodity that is bought and sold by data brokers (Spinello 1998). It is therefore al so possible for companies to buy datasets of user information from data brokers and merge them with the data they have collected themselves.Companies may use the data they collect from customers and visitors on their websites merely to execute transactions, recognize users when they return to the site, and improve their website design based on users’ interests. But companies may equally use such data for purposes other than those they were collected for. For example, they may target banner ads at users, harass users with unsolicited commercial e-mails, or share this information with third parties (Han & Maclaurin 2002). A growing body of literature documents people’s concerns about privacy violations in online transactions (e. . Culnan & Armstrong 1999, Phelps et al. 2000, Sheehan 2002, Norberg & Horne 2007, Norberg et al. 2007). Essentially, these concerns stem from the imbalance in power between companies as data collectors and users as data providers. While companie s have superior knowledge of what user data are collected and how they are r 2010 The Author Business Ethics: A European Review r 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 89 Business Ethics: A European Review Volume 20 Number 1 January 2011 handled, users may not even be aware that data are collected, let alone that they are combined into user pro? les. hus not suited to enhance user privacy or engender trust among Internet users. Corporate response to privacy At the turn of the century, some companies began to introduce chief privacy of? cers (Awazu & Desouza 2004). Their tasks include gathering information about social and legal aspects of privacy, devising the company’s privacy strategy, disseminating information about corporate data handling practices to internal and external stakeholders, and representing the company’s commitment to privacy (Kayworth et al. 2005). Another corporate response to information privacy is privacy policies posted on commercial websites (Sama & Sho af 2002).The original idea behind privacy policies on websites was that companies would disclose how they handle the data they collect from users, while users would carefully read through the explanation of the company’s data handling practices, understand their consequences, and then make an informed decision about divulging personal data or not (Ciocchetti 2007). In reality, privacy policies contain legalese, tech-speak, and other obfuscating language patterns that obscure questionable data handling practices (Pollach 2005, Fernback & Papacharissi 2007).Internet users have been found not to read privacy policies for the above reasons (Milne & Culnan 2004). Privacy policies are sometimes supplemented with privacy seals awarded by private-sector institutions (e. g. BBBOnline, TRUSTe, WebTrust) or accounting ? rms. These seals indicate that companies comply with responsible standards of data handling, as de? ned by the awarding institution (Smith & Rupp 2004). Consumers still have to read and understand the privacy policy, as the seal alone does not guarantee that the data handling practices of the company comply with an individual’s privacy preferences (Rifon et al. 2005).The problem with privacy seals is also that they do not effectively protect users from privacy breaches. The sealawarding institution may not know about a privacy breach or, if it does learn about it, can only revoke the seal, but has no means to help people regain lost privacy (Shapiro & Baker 2001). These measures are Information privacy as a CSR Carroll (1979) categorized corporate social responsibilities into economic, legal, ethical, and philanthropic responsibilities, arguing that making a pro? t is the quintessential responsibility of companies, together with their adherence to legal regulations. According to this classi? ation, information privacy can be categorized as an ethical responsibility, given that legislation is insuf? cient to govern corporate decision making i n all areas of data handling. This is elaborated on by Mintzberg (1983), who suggested that areas where CSR comes into play are those ‘where existing legislation needs compliance with its spirit as well as its letter [and] where the corporation can fool its customers or suppliers or the government through its superior knowledge’ (p. 12). If a company decides to address information privacy, it may not just do so because privacy is an ethical corporate responsibility. Rather, Aguilera et al. 2007) argue that companies accept responsibility for social issues for three different reasons: (1) moral reasons determined by morality-driven values; (2) relational reasons driven by the company’s concern about stakeholder relationships; and (3) instrumental reasons driven by corporate self-interest. Moral motives are enacted particularly by individuals with organizational decision-making power who have strong morality-based values. Relational motives are grounded in a compan y’s desire to promote and balance stakeholder interests, thereby building trust, maximizing stakeholder wealth, and gaining social legitimacy (Aguilera et al. 007). Instrumental approaches are self-interest driven, seeking to achieve greater competitiveness and protecting the corporate reputation (Aguilera et al. 2007). The latter approach corresponds to Jones’ (1995) argument that companies that manage to earn the trust of their stakeholders will be able to secure a competitive advantage through savings on monitoring costs, bonding costs, transaction costs, and search costs arising from managing the various corporate stakeholder groups. Instrumental motives 90 r 2010 The Author Business Ethics: A European Review r 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.Business Ethics: A European Review Volume 20 Number 1 January 2011 can also be driven by the desire to preempt costly government regulations (Aguilera et al. 2007). The strategy literature follows the instrumental approach to CS R, arguing that companies to which a particular responsibility is highly relevant can bene? t from integrating this responsibility into their overall strategies. Burke & Logsdon (1996) list the following conditions in order for CSR to bring strategic advantages to the ? rm: the chosen CSR issue is central to the company’s mission, is voluntarily embraced, brings bene? s to both the ? rm and to the public at large, is addressed in a proactive manner, and is visible to external stakeholders. It has also been argued that CSR initiatives can bring sustainable competitive advantages in the form of a ? rst-mover advantage (Lieberman & Montgomery 1998). However, for this advantage to emerge, the company must not only be the ? rst one to address a particular CSR comprehensively but must also continuously seek to enhance what it has achieved in order to secure this advantage (Tetrault Sirsly & Lamertz 2008).The strategy literature therefore suggests that companies in the information t echnology industry could bene? t from embracing online privacy as a CSR, especially if they make this commitment visible to external audiences. Although theory suggests that privacy could be a relevant CSR theme for particular companies, very few empirical studies have addressed the link between information privacy and CSR. They include Sharfman et al. ’s (2000) survey among managers on how important they consider a number of social issues, including the protection of privacy.However, in the exploratory factor analysis they conducted, privacy was eliminated from further analyses. Fukukawa & Moon (2004) included information privacy as an indicator of CSR in their study of CSR activities reported by companies in Japan. In addition, Chaudhri’s (2006) case study of global citizenship at Hewlett-Packard mentions privacy as one area the company has included in its CSR agenda. In previous theoretical work, Carroll (1998) has highlighted the protection of online privacy rights as one area where the law lags behind ethical thinking and morality comes into play.Finally, Post (2000) examined the changing role of corporate citizenship in the 21st century and pointed to customer privacy as a new issue of CSR. To date, there is no article that empirically studies in what ways information privacy is actually addressed as a CSR. Research design This study explores whether and how companies are embracing online privacy as a social responsibility, focusing on what measures they claim to have taken and how they communicate these to their external stakeholders in their CSR disclosures.In view of the lack of previous research in this area, this study is exploratory in nature. Accordingly, its goal is to identify the variety of corporate practices rather than to compare and contrast companies. The starting point for the analysis are the three processes of CSR included in Basu & Palazzo’s (2008) process model of sense-making: (1) the reasons a company states for engaging in speci? c CSR activities, (2) the kind of behavior a company displays to live up to its CSR commitments, and (3) the way in which a company regards its relationships with its stakeholders.This section ? rst describes the sample and the data and then goes on to explain the methodology that was applied to analyze the data. Sample The sample consists of the largest companies from IT-related industries, as they are most closely intertwined with information through the hardware, software, or services they provide. To them, information privacy could be a meaningful strategic element of their CSR programs in two different ways. First, they may embrace privacy as a social responsibility in the way they collect and use data.Second, technology does not just violate privacy, it can also enhance privacy. Accordingly, IT companies may engage in corporate social innovation and develop privacy-enhancing products or commit themselves to educating consumers about privacy protection. Clea rly, other large companies, such as retailers, operate online as well, but were not considered for this study, as data and information are not at the core of their activities. Large companies were chosen, as these companies are believed to serve as lead innovators in their industries. All IT-related companies from Europe 2010 The Author Business Ethics: A European Review r 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 91 Business Ethics: A European Review Volume 20 Number 1 January 2011 and the United States listed among the Fortune Global 500 and the ? rst 1,000 companies of the Forbes 2000 company rankings were included in the sample. Neither of the two rankings includes ‘information technology’ as an industry. Rather, both include a number of industries that deal with information and technology. These include Computer and Data Services, Computer Software, Computers & Of? e Equipment, Network and Other Communications Equipment, and Telecommunications from the Fortune Global 500 list and Software & Services, Technology Hardware & Equipment, and Telecommunications Services from the Forbes 2000 list. A few IT companies listed in these two rankings could not be included in the analysis, as they had been acquired by another company since the publication of the rankings. Also, the two rankings overlap to a substantial extent, so that the ? nal sample amounted to a total of 95 IT companies. On each company’s website, the CSR section was accessed.If there was no such section, sections dedicated to the company background, mission and values, or ethics were accessed. The goal was to download all texts pertaining at least loosely to CSR and, if available, the latest CSR report. An important criterion was that privacy-related information was collected only if it was framed as a CSR issue. Privacy policies, which are a standard element of every commercial website, were not collected, as their existence alone does not represent a commitment to social responsibility. Of the 95 companies in the initial sample, 30 companies mention privacy in their CSR discourse.The analysis is thus based on these companies (see Appendix A). Their texts range from 21 to 2,367 words in length. Methods This exploratory study draws on both a positivist approach and a constructivist approach in order to look at the data as holistically as possible (cf. Jick 1979). When studying textual data, the fundamental difference between the two traditions is that the positivist tradition sees language as a transmitter of information, while the social constructionist tradition holds that people consciously and unconsciously create social realities when they use language. Accordingly, the textual data were ? st studied using quantitative content analysis, which systematically records the frequency of particular content features. Because of its quantitative, systematic nature, content analysis de-contextualizes the words from the discourse that is examined and therefore has no mean s to interpret its ? ndings within a wider context. The ? ndings of the content analysis were therefore combined with a discourse analysis and are presented together. The combination of content analysis and discourse analysis has also been suggested by researchers in linguistics (van Dijk 1985, Herring 2004), sociology (Markoff et al. 974), and information systems (Trauth & Jessup 2000). In this study, the results of both analyses together provide a much richer picture of corporate practices than one analysis alone could furnish. This is important, given the absence of previous research on privacy and CSR. Content analysis systematically condenses texts into content categories by applying a coding scheme that produces quantitative indices of textual content (Krippendorff 1980, Weber 1985, Kolbe & Burnett 1991, Neuendorf 2002).The content analysis conducted as part of this study records in a systematic and exhaustive manner which companies in the sample have implemented which measure s to improve user privacy. The approach chosen for this analysis uses factual codes, which capture precisely de? ned facts, as opposed to thematic codes, which capture themes addressed in a prede? ned textual unit (Kelle & Laurie 1995). The factual codes pertain to privacy measures companies have actually taken, but exclude those that companies plan to implement in the future.With no existing coding scheme available, a preliminary coding scheme was developed from the data by examining the texts in the sample inductively (cf. Strauss & Corbin 1990) for measures that companies have taken to secure user privacy. Overall, 41 different measures were identi? ed. The measures were recorded dichotomously as being either present (1) or absent (0). They are listed in Table 2 together with the results. The qualitative approach chosen here was discourse analysis, following a social constructionist tradition, which views discourse as a social action that is shaped by and shapes the context in wh ich it occurs (van Dijk 1997a).Discourse analysis is a 92 r 2010 The Author Business Ethics: A European Review r 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Business Ethics: A European Review Volume 20 Number 1 January 2011 method of textual analysis that focuses on how and why language is used in a particular way (van Dijk 1997b). It is based on the premise that people intentionally and unintentionally construct social realities when they engage in discourse. They use language in their roles as members of particular social groups, professions, institutions, or communities but also construct such roles when they use language in social situations (van Dijk 1997a).Similarly, organizational texts can be constructive and constitutive of realities just like text or speech of individuals (Fairclough 2005). Discourse analysis typically pays attention to language features such as repetitions, pronouns, passive voice, nominalizations, modal verbs, agent–patient relations in sentences, and attitudi nal lexis in order to study the roles assigned to the participants in the discourse, the power relations between them, and the foregrounding or the backgrounding of concepts and events.The discourse analysis conducted here examines how companies present themselves as responsible companies when it comes to privacy and data handling. Basu & Palazzo’s (2008) process model of CSR has guided the analysis and therefore also provides the structure of the results section. Accordingly, the results section starts with the companies’ reasons for including privacy in their CSR programs, then presents privacy measures companies have taken as part of their CSR initiatives, and ultimately studies the relationships with the various stakeholders that are affected by the company’s privacy practices.The reasons for including privacy and the stakeholder relationships are analyzed in the form of a discourse analysis. The analysis of the privacy measures is based on a content analysi s, but enhanced with qualitative insights, as needed. Aguilera et al. ’s (2007) classi? cation of moral, relational, and instrumental CSR motives. Table 1 shows this categorization together with the text passages where these motives were expressed.The moral motives found include the understanding that Internet users have privacy rights, which the company wants to observe, and the acknowledgement that the company has the responsibility to protect the data they gather from Internet users. Relational motives include the recognition that customers have a desire for privacy, which the company seeks to meet, and the expectation that privacy protection will help the company win customers’ trust. Ultimately, one company expects to bene? t from its privacy program in that it expects to gain a reputational advantage from privacy protection. CSR behaviorThe content analysis revealed 41 different measures companies had taken to support user privacy (see Table 2). They have been gr ouped into four categories, which are discussed below. One company has implemented 19 of these measures, and nine companies have implemented eight, nine, or 10 different measures. At the other end of the spectrum, there are two companies that have not implemented a single measure, but still talk about privacy in the context of CSR. Further, eight companies have implemented one or two measures, and nine companies have implemented between three and seven measures.Most commonly, a measure was taken by only one company (19 measures) or two companies (six measures). The measure taken most frequently was taken by 15 companies. Thus, there is a broad variety in how companies address privacy. It is also worth noting that it is not necessarily the biggest companies in the industry that have taken lead roles in protecting user privacy. When ranking all companies according to their ranks on the Forbes 2000 and the Fortune Global 500 lists, one can see that the company with the highest number o f privacy measures ranks among the top three on both the Forbes and the Fortune list.The other two companies among the top three in the Fortune and Forbes rankings have implemented only one and three measures, respectively. The three companies Results Reasons for privacy as CSR The texts were examined for indications of why the companies include privacy in their CSR programs. Only 13 companies voiced their motivation for engaging in privacy protection, presenting different reasons why they engage in CSR. The communicated motives have been grouped according to r 2010 The Author Business Ethics: A European Review r 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 3 Business Ethics: A European Review Volume 20 Number 1 January 2011 †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â ‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. Table 1: Communicated motives for corporate privacy programs Motive Moral Explanation Three companies acknowledge that people have a right to privacy Quotations ‘To us, the right to privacy includes the right of individuals to have a voice in the use and dissemination of their personal information. ‘A person has the right to control what information about him or her is collected and to determine how that information is used. ’ ‘Con? dentiality and security of consumer data . . . are areas safeguarded by PT in order to respect the freedom and basic rights of each individual’ ‘We feel a strong responsibility to help ensure a safer, more enjoyable Internet, while addressing the challenges to privacy and security posed by today’s new media. ’ ‘Companies have a responsibility to ensure that the information they hold about their customers and employees is protected, stored, transferred, and used i n a responsible manner. ‘Microsoft takes seriously its responsibility to help address the security and privacy challenges of the information-based society, from viruses and spyware to spam and online identity theft. ’ ‘Respect for privacy is part of our commitment to observe high standards of integrity and ethical conduct in all our operations’ ‘Protecting our customers’ privacy is a priority. We understand and respect your desire to protect your personal information. ’ ‘The protection of personal information is a very high expectation among our customers, and to meet it, we . . .. ‘Externally, Sabre is committed to building customer relationships based on trust, and that includes recognizing the importance of protecting personal information. ’ ‘Consumer trust and con? dence is critical to Cisco’s business and to any technology and Internet-related business; as a result, the industry must protect citizensà ¢â‚¬â„¢ privacy. ’ ‘[We] have to acquire a ‘license to operate’ by conducting our business in a decent and responsible way. ’ ‘Security and reliability form the basis of Telekom Austria Group’s stable and successful customer relationships.The Group therefore gives top priority to protecting the integrity and con? dentiality of sensitive data. ’ ‘Main opportunities: Enhance customer and employee trust, . . . support brand/reputation. ’ Four companies hold that they have a responsibility to protect the data they gather from Internet users Relational Two companies recognize that customers have a desire for privacy that needs to be met Four companies view privacy protection as a means to winning customer trust InstrumentalOne company states that it expects to gain a reputational advantage from its privacy program †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. that have implemented the second highest number of privacy measures occupy ranks #77, #87, and #173 on the Fortune Global 500 list and ranks #49, #518, and #782 on the Forbes 2000 list, which indicates that it is not necessarily the biggest companies in the IT industries that embrace information privacy.An investigation of the relationship between the number of measures taken and length of the privacy text on the corporate website revealed a correlation of 0. 77. This suggests that text length is an indicator of how important the issue is to a company. At the same time, it also shows that the companies generally do not talk at length about privacy without having taken relevant measures. One category of measures pertains to the companies’ internal affairs. They address processes, employee conduct, and, to a small extent, suppliers.The measures mentioned most frequently are the 94 r 2010 The Author Business Ethics: A European Review r 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Business Ethics: A European Review Volume 20 Number 1 January 2011 †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. Table 2: The content of corporate privacy programs Internal Physical protection of data Procedural/administrative protection of data Electronic/technical protection of data Privacy policy Privacy is part of the code of conduct Privacy of? e(r) Privacy board/working group Employee training Disciplinary action for employee misconduct Privacy newsletter for employees Employee monitoring Privacy included in employment contract Onl ine resources for employees Ethics hotline for privacy questions Internal privacy campaign Limited employee access to data Online reporting of privacy incidents Regular review of systems and processes Regular review of privacy policy Binding third parties to privacy agreements Reviewing third-party privacy practices Privacy newsletter for customers Guidance/information for consumers Resources for parental control & child safety Privacy e-mail address Integrating privacy into product development Privacy blog Involving stakeholders in design of privacy policy Supporting IS education at schools and universities Publishing privacy research papers Supporting law making Supporting industry self-regulation Working with industry Working with governments Working with NGOs, think tanks Political action committee (PAC) Compliance with laws Exceeding laws Compliance with Safe Harbor Compliance with GRI Privacy seal 6 2 3 15 8 7 3 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 5 3 5 2 1 10 5 2 8 1 1 1 1 2 1 5 6 10 1 11 1 4 1 4 79 External 30 Collaborations 25 Compliance 21 †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. existence of a privacy policy and privacy training, privacy being part of the code of conduct, privacy of? cers, physical data protection, and regular review of systems and processes. All other measures taken internally were taken by one, two, or three companies each, for example measures encouraging employees to report privacy violations and to comply with relevant guidelines. Two different measures pertaining to suppliers or other third parties were identi? ed, namely that the company reviews privacy practices of those partners and that these outsiders are bound to a privacy agreement.The second category of measures contains those directed towards external stakeholders. They include r 2010 The Author Business Ethics: A European Review r 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 95 Business Ethics: A European Review Volume 20 Number 1 January 2011 primarily guidance for consumers regarding Internet privacy. Five companies take measures that address parents’ concerns about their children’s privacy. In addition to providing information, companies also solicit consumer feedback on privacy matters. Two companies highlight that they have an e-mail address to which people can send privacy concerns and inquiries, and one company involves stakeholders in the design of its privacy policy.The inclusion of privacy considerations in product development was embraced by eight companies. Another group of measures pertain to the participation in industry initiatives and collaborations. Ten companies mention a variety of privacy forums, centers, associations, think tanks, and institutes in which they are involved, in cluding for example, the Electronic Privacy Group, the European Privacy Of? cers Forum, or the Liberty Alliance. Some of them also state that they cooperate with other companies and governments. However, the nature of this cooperation remains unclear, and in some places, the cooperating institutions are not even mentioned.Ultimately, a few US companies express their views on privacy legislation. As part of the measures they have taken, three companies take an active stance for either privacy legislation or self-regulation. Both of these viewpoints are visions at this point, as there is neither privacy legislation nor a functioning model of self-regulation in the United States. The two viewpoints are as follows: ‘We also believe that governments must ? nd improved ways to enforce laws against data breach, misuse and fraud, and help consumers pursue those who mishandle their personal information. . . . HP was one of the ? rst companies to embrace the idea of a comprehensive U. S . privacy law. ‘Because disparate and multiple privacy rules place a heavy burden on global companies, we support a model of industry self-regulation (as opposed to government intervention) in which innovative tools give consumers greater choice in both protecting their personal data and understanding how it may be collected and used. ’ they comply with all relevant privacy laws. As compliance with laws is a legal rather than an ethical responsibility according to Carroll’s (1979) classi? cation of corporate responsibilities, only going beyond the law can qualify as a CSR initiative. Dressing up a legal responsibility as an ethical responsibility casts doubt over the sincerity of these efforts.In fact, one of these 11 companies has implemented no other privacy measure apart from legal compliance. There is only one company that vows to exceed legal requirements: ‘HP is pioneering an approach to the protection and responsible use of personal information. This effort goes beyond compliance with the law. ’ Only a minority of companies have adopted the privacy standards of outside organizations, such as GRI or privacy seal programs. Stakeholder relationships The measures identi? ed above relate to a number of internal and external stakeholder groups, including employees, consumers, parents, industry, suppliers, governments, advocacy groups, and the community at large.However, the analysis of the measures does not reveal anything about the relationships with stakeholders, and in some cases, the stakeholder group to which a particular measure was addressed was not even mentioned. This section therefore focuses speci? cally on the stakeholder groups to which the companies express some form of consideration. This could be in the form of protection measures, information provision, cooperation, or merely by expressing an awareness of their stakes in privacy. In addition to an account of these overt commitments to stakeholders, a discourse analysis is used to uncover discursively constructed relationships with stakeholders. Table 3 lists the various stakeholder groups identi? d, together with their stake in privacy, the number of companies that made a commitment toward each stakeholder group, and an example of such a commitment. This table is different from the results presented in Table 2 in that it was not concrete actions that guided this analysis, but the awareness of stakeholder concerns. We ? nd that companies recognize primarily the stakes of their customers and employees, who exercise a direct and economic in? uence on the company and can therefore be labeled Even companies that do not take a stance on the legislation vs. self-regulation debate emphasize compliance with legislation. Eleven companies state that 96 2010 The Author Business Ethics: A European Review r 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Business Ethics: A European Review Volume 20 Number 1 January 2011 †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. Table 3: Addressing stakeholder concerns Stakeholder GroupStake # Primary Customers/ Protection of 25 Users their data Employees Suppliers/ Vendors Training Guidelines 14 6 Example ‘In order to help our customers address these issues, we have begun to develop guidance documents to help customers understand which parts of our technology may have privacy applications. ‘We work hard to ensure that Sun employees have the information they need to apply our privacy protection standards in their work. ’ ‘When it is necessary for business reasons to share a person’s information with third parties such as network service providers and marketing campaign partners, we work together to ensure that we main tain the highest privacy standards. ’ ‘We met with government of? cials and regulators in all regions to understand their concerns and initiatives and to help them fully appreciate the potential implications for privacy of new technologies. ’ ‘We are working with other industry participants . . . to develop solutions that help us reach both of these objectives. ‘In 2007, we formed our Stakeholder Advisory Council (SAC) comprising respected experts from a variety of nongovernmental organizations. ’ ‘Symantec is committed to helping parents keep their kids cybersafe. We believe that in the same way that we educate our children about the risks of drugs, smoking, or violence, it is critical that we educate them about the importance of safe computing. ’ ‘We tap this internal resource to offer programs that bene? t our local schools and communities. We are also in the process of implementing an employee-led education program. †™ Secondary Government Industry Advocacy groups Parents Compliance with laws; expertise in data handling Cooperation Cooperation 6 6 3 Protection of 5 their children’s data Expertise 1 Schools/ communities †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. ‘primary stakeholders’ according to Ansoff (1965). However, there are also companies that talk about privacy in a CSR context, but do not voice a commitment to these two primary stakeholder groups. Of the 30 companies, ? ve do not state that they do anything to improve the privacy situation of their customers and 16 do not make such a commitment toward their employees. Suppliers, who are also primary stakeholders, are addressed to a smaller extent. We can also see that the companies in the sample largely neglect their secondary stakeholders, i. e. those groups who do not directly in? uence a company’s core business (Ansoff 1965).Only a maximum of six companies interact with each secondary stakeholder group, such as parents or governments. On the surface, all companies studied engage in a discourse characterized by care and concern for privacy. In particular, emotion-laden words like help, understand, respect, concern, and safe abound across all texts studied. For example: ‘Protecting our customers’ privacy is a priority. We understand and respect your desire to protect your personal information. ’ ‘And as the 24 A 7 demands of the Internet Age threaten to overwhelm customers with complexity, they need trusted and reliable companies to help them make sense of technology and put it to use to make their lives better. ’The tone becomes even more concerned when companies address their relationship with parents and children: ‘We understand the responsibility and concern of parents who worry about their children’s exposure to inappropriate content and potentially dangerous interactions on the Web. ’ ‘Protecting our children . . . We believe that in the same way that we educate our children about the risks of drugs, smoking, or violence, it is critical r 2010 The Author Business Ethics: A European Review r 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 97 Business Ethics: A European Review Volume 20 Number 1 January 2011 that we educate them about the importance of safe computing. ’ In the second example, the pronoun ‘we/our’ adds to the concerned tone by promoting a sense of collegiality and shared affection.The same is also achieved in other places, when companies use this inclusive form of ‘we’ to reduce the distance between themselves and their outside stakeholders: ‘Our individual sensitivities about how our information is tr eated . . . are not uniform’ or ‘Sun is committed to investigating and addressing the privacy challenges . . . associated with our increasingly digital way of life. ’ In such statements, companies reduce the power distance between themselves and their stakeholders. The inclusive ‘we’ is also an indicator of positive politeness (Brown & Levinson 1987), indicating how writers conceptualize their audiences and what kind of distance writers create between themselves and their audience.While some companies use the inclusive ‘we,’ others talk about companies in general, e. g. ‘all businesses are responsible for . . . ,’ which includes themselves only implicitly and distances themselves from these events. Mostly, though, companies make themselves the causal agents: ‘we must address these concerns by helping to protect . . .. ’ Notably, one company draws its audiences into the discourse by always addressing them directl y, e. g. ‘We understand and respect your desire to protect . . .. ’ All together, the different voices present in these texts suggest that companies have different levels of self-awareness and different understandings of their role in this process.Less variety exists in the distance to the audience, which is – apart from one exception – not explicitly present in the discourse. This suggests that companies do not consider their CSR activities to be dialogic in nature. Another kind of discourse is found in 10 of the companies’ texts studied. This discourse reveals that some companies are actually interested in ? nding a balance between users’ privacy interests and their own business interests rather than protecting privacy unconditionally. They seek to achieve a balance between customers’ privacy interests and ‘business priorities,’ ‘business requirements,’ ‘business needs,’ their ‘values,â₠¬â„¢ or their ‘ability . . . to reap the bene? ts of online interactions. Business interests are also communicated implicitly: ‘our goal is simple: to balance the interests and concerns of our customers’ private information with their interest in receiving quality service and information about useful new products. ’ Alternatively, one company mentions only one weight of the balance, without saying what the other weight is: ‘that we are striking the right balance for our customers’ and ‘to reach balanced results. ’ The discourse of balance is a manifestation of the companies’ power, given that it is they who decide when this balance is reached. Interestingly, this kind of discourse has nothing to do with the motivations they express.Two companies, for example, have voiced moral motives, but also engage in this discourse of balance, as does the one company that has indicated an instrumental motive. It is also worth noting that not a single European company in the sample engages in this discourse of balance. Discussion The literature review has highlighted that users are concerned about privacy and that companies do not respond in a manner that eases stakeholder concerns. The companies chosen for this study are all active in the hardware, software, or telecommunications industries, in which data play a crucial role. Thus, information privacy, and in particular online privacy, is a central issue in their business conduct.The content analysis has revealed that only a small proportion of the largest IT companies comprehensively address privacy as a social responsibility. In the sample, we ? nd both companies that have taken a number of relevant actions to address user privacy and companies that have only taken one or two concrete measures, but nevertheless present privacy as part of their CSR program. A substantial proportion of the measures they have taken fall into the area of compliance and employee condu ct (e. g. guidelines, policies, monitoring, and reporting), while measures that stimulate a stakeholder dialogue or represent corporate social innovation are found less frequently.Further, some companies reveal that they seek to strike a balance between their own business interests and their stakeholders’ privacy needs. The sample even contains companies that 98 r 2010 The Author Business Ethics: A European Review r 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Business Ethics: A European Review Volume 20 Number 1 January 2011 voice moral motives for framing online privacy as a CSR, while at the same time indicating that they are interested in striking a balance between users’ privacy interests and their own business interests. We have also seen that some of the privacy measures are actually intended to ful? ll legal responsibilities rather than ethical ones.Thus, some companies in the sample voice concerns and a commitment to help, but do not take privacy to the level of an ethical responsibility (cf. Carroll 1991). At the same time, companies load their privacy discourse with emotive terms suggesting concern, commitment, and a desire to help. While this kind of language is typical of CSR messages and can almost be expected (cf. Pollach 2003), it is still in contrast to the results of the content analysis, which has shown that comprehensive privacy programs are for the most part non-existent. The ? ndings also indicate that companies have chosen a wide variety of approaches to information privacy. In fact, many of the different measures denti? ed were taken by one, two, or three companies only. Thus, little mimicry and no institutionalized practices have emerged yet. In uncertain environments, companies have a tendency to model themselves after other companies that are more successful or more respected. This mimicry leads to institutionalized practices that help companies to obtain legitimacy (DiMaggio & Powell 1983). The environment in which the sample compan ies operate can be characterized as uncertain, as there is no comprehensive privacy legislation as yet and privacy is, to some extent, at each company’s discretion. For mimicry behavior to occur, it must be clear to the ? m that adopting a certain practice brings competitive advantages (DiMaggio & Powell 1983). In the case of privacy, an institutionalization of voluntary privacy practices could mean that privacy regulation is preempted. However, as not every company in the sample, and maybe in the industry as a whole, is pro self-regulation, some companies may decide not to adopt privacy practices voluntarily, despite the fact that they care about user privacy. Privacy may be on its way to mature from the ethics/compliance focus to a more responsive, proactive focus, but at the moment, it plays a minor role as a CSR. This point is also re? ected in the ? nding that companies address primarily consumer oncerns and step up employee training, while all other stakeholder groups i n privacy play a subordinate role. Companies may not have recognized the bene? ts to be gained from engaging with secondary stakeholder groups, e. g. from cooperating with industry partners. At the same time, companies may have been too occupied with implementing privacy standards internally, so that their privacy efforts do not involve secondary stakeholders as yet. These internal compliance measures are clearly the sine qua non for a company’s external privacy activities, such as participation in industry initiatives. This study is not without limitations. One clear limitation is that the data stem from corporate selfreports, which are problematic (cf.Podsakoff & Organ 1986) in that they are based on what the company reveals rather than what is actually true. This could mean that companies overstate their activities. At the same time, companies may not have mentioned the particular measures they have taken, because they did not consider them important enough. Also, the samp le size could have been larger, but the small sample size also serves to illustrate that privacy is just about to begin to play a role in CSR programs of technology-oriented companies. APPENDIX A: COMPANIES Adobe Agilent ATT Belgacom British Telecom Cisco Computer Associates Dell Deutsche Telekom Electronic Data Systems France Telecom HP IBM Microsoft Motorola Nokia Oracle IN THE SAMPLE 2010 The Author Business Ethics: A European Review r 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 99 Business Ethics: A European Review Volume 20 Number 1 January 2011 Portugal Telekom Royal KPN Sabre Sprint Sun Symantec Telefonica Telekom Austria Telia Sonera Verizon Virgin Vodafone Xerox References Aguilera, R. V. , Rupp, D. , Williams, C. A. and Ganapathi, J. 2007. ‘Putting the S back in CSR: a multilevel theory of social change in organizations’. Academy of Management Review, 32:3, 836–863. Ansoff, I. 1965. Corporate Strategy. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Awazu, Y. and Desouza, K. C. 2004. â €˜The knowledge chiefs: CKOs, CLOs and CPOs’. European Management Journal, 22:3, 339–344. Basu, K. and Palazzo, G. 2008. Corporate social responsibility: a process model of sensemaking’. Academy of Management Review, 33:1, 122–136. Baumer, D. L. , Earp, J. B. and Poindexter, J. C. 2004. ‘Internet privacy law: a comparison between the United States and the European Union’. Computers and Security, 23:5, 400–412. Bowie, N. and Jamal, K. 2006. ‘Privacy rights on the internet: self-regulation or government regulation? ’. Business Ethics Quarterly, 16:3, 323–342. Brown, P. and Levinson, S. C. 1987. Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Burke, L. and Logsdon, J. M. 1996. ‘How corporate social responsibility pays off’. Long Range Planning, 29:4, 495–502. Carroll, A. B. 1979. A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance’. Academy of Management Review, 4:4, 497â€⠀œ505. Carroll, A. B. 1991. ‘The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders’. Business Horizons, 34:4, 39–48. Carroll, A. B. 1998. ‘The four faces of corporate citizenship’. Business and Society Review, 100:1, 1–7. Caudill, E. M. and Murphy, P. E. 2000. ‘Consumer online privacy: legal and ethical issues’. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 19:1, 7–19. Chaudhri, V. A. 2006. ‘Organising global CSR: a case study of Hewlett-Packard’s e-inclusion initiative’. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 23, 39–51. Ciocchetti, C. A. 2007. E-commerce and information privacy: privacy policies as personal information protectors’. American Business Law Journal, 44:1, 55–126. Culnan, M. J. and Armstrong, P. K. 1999. ‘Information privacy concerns, procedural fairness, and impersonal trust: an empirical investigation’. Organizatio n Science, 10:1, 104–115. De George, R. T. 2000. ‘Business ethics and the challenge of the information age’. Business Ethics Quarterly, 10:1, 63–72. DiMaggio, P. J. and Powell, W. W. 1983. ‘The iron cage revisited: the institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational ? elds’. American Sociological Review, 48:2, 147–160. Fairclough, N. 2005. Critical discourse analysis, organizational discourse, and organizational change’. Organization Studies, 26:6, 915–939. Fernback, J. and Papacharissi, Z. 2007. ‘Online privacy as legal safeguard: the relationship among consumer, online portal, and privacy policies’. New Media and Society, 9:5, 715–734. Foxman, E. R. and Kilcoyne, P. 1993. ‘Information technology, marketing practice, and consumer privacy: ethical issues’. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 12:1, 106–119. Fukukawa, K. and Moon, J. 2004. ‘A Japanese m odel of corporate social responsibility? A study of website reporting’. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 16, 45–59. Han, P. and Maclaurin, A. 2002. Do consumers really care about online privacy? ’. Marketing Management, 11:1, 35–38. Herring, S. C. 2004. ‘Computer-mediated discourse analysis: an approach to researching online behavior’. In Barab, S. A. , Kling, R. and Gray, J. H. (Eds. ), Designing For Virtual Communities in the Service of Learning: 338–376. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Introna, L. D. and Pouloudi, A. 1999. ‘Privacy in the information age: stakeholders, interests and values’. Journal of Business Ethics, 22:1, 27–38. 100 r 2010 The Author Business Ethics: A European Review r 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Business Ethics: A European Review Volume 20 Number 1 January 2011 Jick, T. D. 1979. Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: triangulation in action’. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 602–611. Johnson, D. 2006. ‘Corporate excellence, ethics, and the role of IT’. Business and Society Review, 111:4, 457–475. Jones, T. M. 1995. ‘Instrumental stakeholder theory: a synthesis of ethics and economics’. Academy of Management Review, 20:2, 404–437. Kayworth, T. , Brocato, L. and Whitten, D. 2005. ‘What is a chief privacy of? cer? ’. Communications of AIS, 16, 110–126. Kelle, U. and Laurie, H. 1995. ‘Computer use in qualitative research and issues of validity’. In Kelle, U. (Ed. ), Computer-Aided Qualitative Data Analysis. Theory, Methods and Practice: 19–28. London: Sage. Kelly, E. P. nd Rowland, H. C. 2000. ‘Ethical and online privacy issues in electronic commerce’. Business Horizons, 43:3, 3–12. Kolbe, R. H. and Burnett, M. S. 1991. ‘Contentanalysis research: an examination of applications with directives for improving research reliability and objectivity’. Journal of Consumer Research, 18:2, 243–250. Krippendorff, K. 1980. Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Lieberman, M. B. and Montgomery, D. B. 1998. ‘Firstmover (dis)advantages: retrospective and link with the resource-based view’. Strategic Management Journal, 19:12, 1111–1125. Markoff, J. , Shapiro, G. and Weitman, S. R. 1974. Toward the integration of content analysis and general methodology’. In D. Heise (Ed. ), Sociological Methodology: 1–58. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Milne, G. R. and Culnan, M. J. 2004. ‘Strategies for reducing online privacy risks: why consumers read (or don’t read) online privacy notices’. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18:3, 15–29. Mintzberg, H. 1983. ‘The case for corporate social responsibility’. Journal of Business Strategy, 4:2, 3–15. Neate, R. 2009. ‘Deutsche Bank admits possible privacy breaches. ’ The Telegraph, July 23. Neuendorf, K. A. 2002. The Content Analysis Guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Norberg, P. A. and Horne, D. R. 2007. ‘Privacy attitudes and privacy-related behavior’.Psychology and Marketing, 24:10, 829–847. Norberg, P. A. , Horne, D. R. and Horne, D. A. 2007. ‘The privacy paradox: personal information disclosure intentions versus behaviors’. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 41:1, 100–126. O’Brien, K. J. 2008. ‘Privacy laws trip up Google’s expansion in parts of Europe. ’ New York Times, November 18. Payne, D. and Trumbach, C. C. 2009. ‘Data mining: proprietary rights, people and proposals’. Business Ethics: A European Review, 18:3, 241–252. Phelps, J. , Nowak, G. and Ferrell, E. 2000. ‘Privacy concerns and consumer willingness to provide personal information’. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 19:1, 27–41. Podsakoff, P.M. and Orga n, D. W. 1986. ‘Self-reports in organizational research: problems and prospects’. Journal of Management, 12:4, 531–544. Pollach, I. 2003. Communicating Corporate Ethics on the World Wide Web: A Discourse Analysis of Selected Company Websites. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. Pollach, I. 2005. ‘A typology of communicative strategies in online privacy policies: ethics, power and informed consent’. Journal of Business Ethics, 62:3, 221–235. Post, J. E. 2000. ‘Moving from geographic to virtual communities: global corporate citizenship in a dot. com world’. Business and Society Review, 105:1, 27–46. Rifon, N. J. , LaRose, R. and Choi, S. M. 2005. Your privacy is sealed: effects of web privacy seals on trust and personal disclosures’. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 39:2, 339–362. Sama, L. M. and Shoaf, V. 2002. ‘Ethics on the web: applying moral decision making to the web’. Journal of Business Ethics, 36:1–2 , 93–103. Shapiro, B. and Baker, C. R. 2001. ‘Information technology and the social construction of information privacy’. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 20:4, 295–322. Sharfman, M. P. , Pinkston, T. S. and Sigerstad, T. D. 2000. ‘The effects of managerial values on social issues evaluation: an empirical examination’. Business and Society, 39:2, 144–182. Sheehan, K. B. 2002. ‘Toward a typology of internet users and online privacy concerns’.The Information Society, 18:1, 21–32. Smith, A. D. and Rupp, W. T. 2004. ‘Online privacy policies and diffusion theory perspectives: security or chaos? ’. Services Marketing Quarterly, 25:3, 53–75. r 2010 The Author Business Ethics: A European Review r 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 101 Business Ethics: A European Review Volume 20 Number 1 January 2011 Snider, J. , Hill, R. P. and Martin, D. 2003. ‘Corporate social responsibility in the 21st centu ry: a view from the world’s most successful ? rms’. Journal of Business Ethics, 48:2, 175–187. Spinello, R. A. 1998. ‘Privacy rights in the information economy’. Business Ethics Quarterly, 8:4, 723–742. Strauss, A. L. nd Corbin, J. 1990. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Tetrault Sirsly, C. A. and Lamertz, K. 2008. ‘When does a corporate social responsibility initiative provide a ? rst-mover advantage? ’. Business and Society, 47:3, 343–369. Trauth, E. M. and Jessup, L. M. 2000. ‘Understanding computer-mediated discussions: positivist and interpretive analyses of group support system use’. MIS Quarterly, 24:1, 43–79. van Dijk, T. A. 1985. ‘Levels and dimensions of discourse analysis’. In van Dijk, T. A. Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Vol. 2: 1–12. London: Academic Press. van Dijk, T. A. 1997a. Discourse as interaction in society’. In van Dijk, T. A. Discourse as Social Interaction: 1–37. London: Sage. van Dijk, T. A. 1997b. ‘The study of discourse’. In van Dijk, T. A. Discourse as Structure and Process, Vol. 1: 1–34. London: Sage. Weber, R. P. 1985. Basic Content Analysis. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Westin, A. F. 1967. Privacy and Freedom. New York, NT: Atheneum. Wray, R. 2009. ‘T-Mobile con? rms biggest phone customer data breach. ’ The Guardian, November 17. Zonghao, B. 2001. ‘An ethical discussion on the network economy’. Business Ethics: A European Review, 10:1, 108–112. 102 r 2010 The Author Business Ethics: A European Review r 2010 Blackwell

Learning Theories Essay

This chapter takes a brief look at the two major categories of learning theories (behaviorism and constructivism), the major theorists within those categories, and the implications of those theories for the use of multimedia and communications and information technology for learning purposes. A separate section within the chapter provides a brief overview of learning based upon neuroscience and recent discoveries about the functioning of the brain. A series of links are provided to further resources on learning theory, neuroscience, and the brain. pic] Our Technological Revolution and the Implications for the Way We Learn We have all experienced a learning moment when we were so focussed or engulfed in the learning, that everything else did not matter. Candidly, the raison d’etre or motivation for our focus may have been that we had a boss or teacher breathing down our neck or an impending exam was to quantify our level of knowledge or intelligence or a particular moment neces sitated that a skill be learned very quickly. Regardless of the motivating factors for this moment of focussed learning, the experience is what psychologists Mihaly Czikszentmihalyi and Ellen Langer label in their respective theories, as moments of â€Å"optimum flow† or â€Å"mindfulness†. According to psychologist Mihaly Czikszentmihalyi, optimum flow occurs when: Alientation gives way to involvement, enjoyment replaces boredom, helplessness turns into a feeling of control, and psychic energy works to reinforce the sense of self, instead of being lost in the service of external goals. (Czikszentmihalyi, 1990, p. 9) Replicating such moments of optimum flow is the job of educators regardless of the domain, whether it be school, the workplace in job training, or the military, etc. Moreover, certain learning theorists are advocating the greater use of technology, namely computers, in learning situations because they see enormous potential of computer technology to replicate these optimum moments of flow. Learning is a personal act. We each place our own personal stamp on how we learn, what we learn and when we learn. We in effect have our own learning style. Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences which acknowledges learning as an holistic experience is, at present, one of the most well known descriptors of human cognitive profiles. The act of learning is paradoxical in nature. It can at times appear to be a very simple act. So simple, that we do not question its presence in how we go about our daily activities, for it is natural to our existence as learning organisms. Yet, when we encounter difficulties in learning something, we no longer take the learning process for granted. It is only then that our metacognition or awareness of how we learn is heightened. Learning is taken for granted as a natural process. As simple a process it may seem, the root of understanding how we learn is not as straight forward. The existence of numerous definitions and theories of learning attest to the complexity of this process. A random sampling of any educational psychology text will illustrate the variance in views to what exactly is learning and how we do learn. In Educational Psychology: An Introduction, for example, the authors write, â€Å"Learning implies a change in the individual as a result of some intervention. It may be viewed as an outcome or as a process. (Belkin and Gray, 1977, p. 211) While this definition reflects a behaviorist view of learning, for it equates learning as an outcome, it is a starting point for the authors to expand their description of learning into many other realms, namely the different theories of learning. They in effect, devote a whole chapter of their text just to describe the many ways of defining learning. While it may seem somewhat premature to evaluate the aforementioned definition of learning and to equate it with a specific theory, it is important to recognize that â€Å"intervention† in the learning process can imply many different things. The degree of intervention, by who or what and how, are the defining factors of a learning theory. These factors help distinguish the many different theories. As you will see these theories are not stagnant. They are evolving and changing as we discover new ways of viewing human cognition. â€Å"The mechanistic model of the mind of the behavior era has given way to the logical-computational model favored by artificial intelligence and cognitive science theorists† (McLellan, 1996, p. 6). Don Tapscott, in his book Growing Up Digital: The Rise of the Net Generation, argues that we are now in a digital era of learning. According to Tapscott, a transformation in learning is taking place from what he labels â€Å"broadcast† learning to â€Å"interactive† learning. No longer are today’s generation of learners satisfied in being the passive recipients of the traditional teaching process, rather, they want to discover it for themselves by becoming interactive with the learning. The net generation children using GlobaLearn [a web site], are beginning to process information and learn differently than the boomers before them. New media tools offer great promise for a new model of learning – one based on discovery and participation. (Tapscott, 1998, p. 127) Tapscott’s thesis that the â€Å"technological revolution† is permeating every aspect of our lives forces us to examine the use of computer technology as learning devices. Such rapid social, economic and general lifestyle change, due in essence to the technological revolution, begs the question – based on learning theory, why does the use of computers as a â€Å"learning† tool make sense? This chapter will answer this question by profiling the many learning theories. [pic] The Spectrum of Learning Theories As a review of the literature of learning theories will illustrate there are many labels being used to describe the many theories. Moreover, there are many theorists associated with each approach. A categorization of these labels and theorists will help in understanding these fundamental theories. The spectrum of learning theories consists of many approaches or ways of explaining how humans learn. A description of each of these theories will suffice in providing you with enough knowledge to critically examine the use of computer technology as a learning device. The resume of each theory will consist of: †¢ the associated names of the theory †¢ a description of the theory †¢ theorists associated with the theory †¢ hyperlinks on the World Wide Web Diagram #1: The two extremes Behaviorism   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Constructivism The extremes of this learning theory spectrum are represented by respectively, the Behaviorist and Constructivist theories of learning. As theories trying to explain the same thing, they are bipolar based on their respective views of how knowledge is acquired and the intervention of tools of learning (teachers or instructors). As a context to better understand all of the theories of learning presented in this chapter, examine these two extremes first and then place the remaining theories onto the spectrum. [pic] Behaviorism The Associated Names of this Theory: Behaviorism labelled as a teaching approach is often referred to as directed instruction. As you compare this theory with the Constructivist view of learning, this label will become self-evident. Also in contrast to Constructivism, it has been labelled an objectivist theory of learning. Theorists associated with Behaviorism: J. B Watson E. L Thorndike B. F Skinner A Description of Behaviorism: The concern or emphasis of Behaviorism is observable indicators that learning is taking place. Contrasting this view of learning is the emphasis of cognitive psychologists who equate learning with the mental processes of the mind. Behaviorists do not deny the existence of these mental processes. In fact, they acknowledge their existence as an unobservable indication of learning. The focus of Behaviorism is on the conditioning of observable human behavior. J. B Watson, the father of Behaviorism, defined learning as a sequence of stimulus and response actions in observable cause and effect relationships. The behaviorists’ example of classical conditioning demonstrates the process whereby a human learns to respond to a neutral stimulus in such a manner that would normally be associated with an unconditioned stimulus. The supporting example often cited with classical conditioning is the case of Pavlov’s dog. The focus of Pavlov’s experiment was the digestive process in animals. In conducting the experiment, Pavlov noticed that the dog would salivate (response), upon hearing the ringing of a bell. This occurred because the dog had learned to associate its unconditional stimuli (normally feeding), with the neutral stimuli of the bell ringing simultaneously with the feeding process. Watson, believed that the stimuli that humans receive may be generated internally (for example hunger), or externally (for example, a loud noise). B. F. Skinner expanded on the foundation of Behaviorism, established by Watson, and on the work of Edward Thorndike, by focussing on operant conditioning. According to Skinner, voluntary or automatic behavior is either strengthened or weakened by the immediate presence of a reward or a punishment. â€Å"The learning principle behind operant conditioning is that new learning occurs as a result of positive reinforcement, and old patterns are abandoned as a result of negative reinforcement. † (Belkin and Gray, 1977, p. 9) In his book entitled, The Technology of Teaching, Skinner wrote: The application of operant conditioning to education is simple and direct. Teaching is the arrangement of contingencies of reinforcement under which students learn. They learn without teaching in their natural environments, but teachers arrange special contingencies which expedite learning, hastening the appearance of behavior which would otherwise be acquired slowly or making sure of the appearanc e of behavior which otherwise never occur. (Skinner, 1968, p. 4) Skinner believed that more complex learning could be achieved by this process of contingencies and reinforcement â€Å"†¦ through successive stages in the shaping process, the contingencies of reinforcement being changed progressively in the direction of the required behavior. † (Skinner, 1968, p. 10) Applying the theoretical principles of Behaviorism to learning environments, it is easy to recognize that we have many â€Å"behaviorist artifacts† in our learning world. A dissection of the traditional teaching approaches used for years would reveal the powerful influence that Behaviorists have had on learning. The concept of directed instruction, whereby a teacher is providing the knowledge to the students either directly or through the set up of â€Å"contingencies†, is an excellent example of the Behaviorist model of learning. The use of exams to measure observable behavior of learning, the use of rewards and punishments in our school systems, and the breaking down of the instruction process into â€Å"conditions of learning† (as developed by Robert Gagne), are all further examples of the Behaviorist influence. With the advent of the computer in school, C. A. I. , or computer-assisted instruction has become a prominent tool for teaching, because from a Behaviorist perspective, it is an effective way of learning. CAI uses the drill and practice approach to learning new concepts or skills. The question acting as the stimulus, elicits a response from the user. Based on the response a reward may be provided. The â€Å"contingencies† of learning are translated into different levels of the program. Rewarding the user to a different level for correct responses follows exactly the approach of operant conditioning. Educators have espoused CAI as an effective teaching approach because it allows for self-paced instruction and it liberates them from the direct instruction of all their students so as to focus on those students with particular needs. Hyperlinks to Behaviorist Web Pages: http://www. coe. uh. edu/~srmehall/theory/theory. html http://tecfa. unige. ch/edu-comp/edu-s94/contrib/schneider/learn. fm. html#REF13085 http://www. sil. org/lingualinks/library/literacy/fre371/vao443/TKS2569/tks347/tks734/ http://mse. byu. edu/ipt301/jordan/learnterm_b. html [pic] Constructivism: The Associated Names of this Theory: Constructivsm is recognized as a unique learning theory in itself. It however, may be associated with cognitive psychology because as a theory of learning it focuses on a learner’s ability to mentally construct meaning of their own environment and to create their own learning. As a teaching practice it is associated with different degrees of non-directed learning. The term constructivsm is linked to Cognitive and Social Constructivsm. Theorists associated with Constuctivism: John Dewey Lev Vygotsky Jean Piaget Jerome Bruner Seymour Papert Mitchell Resnick A Description of Constructivism: The merits of Behaviorist learning theory and of their teaching practices are well documented. They have served well in teaching a growing North American population over the past six decades. Behavioral learning theory manifested itself in creating a systematic approach to teaching. Robert Gagne and Leslie Briggs, in their book, Principles of Instructional Design, combined Behaviorist principles of learning with a cognitive theory of learning named Information-Processing. The focus of the latter theory in this combination was of the internal processing that occurred during a learning moment. The design of instruction must be undertaken with suitable attention to the conditions under which learning occurs. With reference to the learner, learning conditions are both external and internal. These conditions are in turn dependent upon what is being learned. How can these basic ideas be used to design instruction ? How can they be applied to the design of single lessons, of courses, and of entire systems of instructions ? (Gagne and Briggs, 1974, p. 14) Gagne and Briggs’ principles of instructional design broke down the teaching process into a systematic process of nine steps. It is in effect, this type of systematic approach to teaching that acted as the catalyst for the creation of another view of the way humans learn. Behaviorist learning theory had served its purpose and its approach and goals were becoming outdated according to Constructivists like Seymour Papert. Constructivist learning theory sought to improve on what Behaviorist learning theory had already established by focussing on the motivation and ability for humans to construct learning for themselves. It viewed Behaviorism as being too teacher centered and directed. Constructivists regarded the educational system as a process of matching skill objectives with test items. It was void of meaningful learning. They also saw the teaching process focus too much on individual work rather than on group work. The final critique of Behaviorist learning theory from the Constructivist perspective helped define the core of Constructivism. To imply that knowledge is separate to the human mind and that it must be transferred to the learner in a teacher centered approach fundamentally was counter to the Constructivist theory of learning. Constructivists believe that all humans have the ability to construct knowledge in their own minds through a process of discovery and problem-solving. The extent to which this process can take place naturally, without structure and teaching is the defining factor amongst those who advocate this learning theory. Jean Piaget, a Swiss psychologist, observed human development as progressive stages of cognitive development. His four stages, which commence at infancy and progress into adulthood, characterize the cognitive abilities necessary at each stage to construct meaning of ones environment. Seymour Papert, psychologist and contemporary critique of Behaviorist teaching methods, writes in his book, The Children’s Machine: Thus, constructionism, my personal reconstruction of constructivism has as its main feature the fact that it looks more closely than other educational -isms at the idea of mental construction. It attaches special importance to the role of constructions in the world as a support for those in the head, thereby becoming less of a purely mentalist doctrine. (Papert, 1993, p. 42) As the inventor of LOGO, the programming tool for children, Papert too believed that children as learners have a natural curiosity to construct meaning of their world. The educational system as Papert saw it was too structured and it stifled this natural curiosity. The means by which children were being taught relegated them to a role of passive recipients of the teaching hence, they were not motivated to construct any learning for themselves. Learning according to Constructiv ists is a question of motivating an individual to attach new meaning to past cognitive experiences. According to Papert: It [constuctivsm] does not call in question the value of instruction as such. That would be silly: Even the statement (endorsed if not originated by Piaget) that every act of teaching deprives the child of an opportunity for discovery is not a categorical imperative against teaching, but a paradoxically expressed reminder to keep it in check. The constructionist attitude to teaching is not at all dismissive because it is minimalist – the goal is to teach in such a way as to produce the most learning for the least teaching. Of course, this cannot be achieved simply by reducing the quantity of teaching while leaving everything unchanged. The principle other necessary change parallels an African proverb: If a man is hungry you can give him a fish, but it is better to give him a line and teach him to catch fish himself. (Papert, 1993, p. 139) Papert’s desire to have children become motivated learners, critical thinkers, problem-solvers and metacognitionists is to be achieved through educational reform that provides the learner with the necessary tools to participate and to take ownership of the learning process. According to Papert, the computer is the appropriate tool to achieve such desired educational reform. These desired objectives of Papert and others who share the Constructivist view of learning are coming closer to reality as more people discover the power of computer technology. From Donald Tapscott’s perspective, Papert’s desired reality is happening now, as a paradigm shift to more interactive learning due to the exploitation of the digital media is taking place in our learning institutions. Tapscott cites eight shifts in learning today: †¢ From linear to hypermedia. †¢ From instruction to construction and discovery. †¢ From teacher-centered to learner-centered education. †¢ From absorbing material to learning how to navigate and how to learn. †¢ From school to lifelong learning. †¢ From one-size-fits-all to customized learning. †¢ From learning as torture as learning as fun. †¢ From the teacher as transmitter to the teacher as facilitator. Hyperlinks to Constructivist Web Pages: http://www. tcimet. net/mmclass/summer/CHPTales. tm http://www. coe. uh. edu/~srmehall/theory/construct. html http://www. gwu. edu/~tip/bruner. html http://www. mamamedia. com/areas/grownups/people/seymour. html http://www. mamamedia. com/areas/grownups/home_alt. html http://lynx. dac. neu. edu/home/httpd/t/tjohnson/papert%20history. htm [pic] Fitting the other Theories onto the Spectrum The two extremes of the spectrum have been outlined (refer to diagram #2). Inherent within each of these two extremes are related theories. Diagram #2: (Spectrum Summary) Behaviorism   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Constructivism   Directed Instruction   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Non-directed Instruction Objectivist   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Constructivist Teacher-centered   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Learner-centered Behavioral observations   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Cognitive operations Focus on the individual   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Ã‚   Group work is emphasized More focussed on one approach   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   More holistic in approach Fundamentally, Constructivism is a cognitive learning theory because of its focus on the mental processes that construct meaning. Other learning theories equated with cognitive psychology are: Information-Processing theory, Scaffolding theory (associated with the Russian philosopher Lev Vygotsky) and Brain-based learning theory (associated with neuroscientists such as Marian Diamond and Robert Sylwester and educator Susan Kovalik). Information-Processing theory regards human learning as being analogous to a computer and its ability to store memory. As humans we process information initially with our senses. This information is either processed into our short term memory or it is lost. If this information is used and practised it is only then put into long term memory. Lev Vygotsky thought that our cognitive development was directly related to our social development. The culture we live in influences our social and cognitive development according to Vygotsky. He further recognized the differences of how the world is seen by children and by adults. Vygotsky labelled this difference in cognitive ability as the â€Å"zone of proximal development†. The job of educators was to identify this zone and to find out where the child was situated in this zone and build upon their specific level through a â€Å"scaffolding† process. Building from what the learner knows is in essence, anchoring the learning on past experience. Such anchoring is fundamental to Constructivist theory of learning. Computer technology is viewed by Seymour Papert as an excellent means to anchoring learning to meaningful experiences. The complexity of understanding how humans learn is reflective of our complexity as biological, social and cognitive animals. Many theories exist, all focussing on different aspects of our make-up as humans. Each theory is an attempt to explain how we learn, act and behave: Sigmund Freud focussed on our sub-conscious, Skinner on our observable behavior, cognitive psychologists on our mental processes, humanistic psychology on our social and interpersonal development. Howard Gardner took a more holistic approach in describing our cognitive profiles. His classification of human intellectual ability into seven intelligences incorporates many aspects of psychology to define the cognitive behavior of humans. Before moving on to Multiple Intelligences , refer to the following hyperlinks for information on other learning theories. http://mse. byu. edu/ipt301/jordan/learning. html [pic] Theory of Multiple Intelligences: Human intelligence should not be equated solely with linguistic or logical-mathematical intelligence alone, according to Howard Gardner. As the author of a new way of looking at human intelligences, Gardner, a Harvard professor, identified a total of seven different intelligences that humans may possess. His list includes: †¢ Linguistic intelligence †¢ Logical-mathematical intelligence †¢ Spatial intelligence †¢ Musical intelligence †¢ Bodily-kinesthetic †¢ Interpersonal intelligence †¢ Intrapersonal intelligence Gardner is working on more intelligences that qualify as cognitive processes: â€Å"Multiple intelligences theory, on the other hand, pluralizes the traditional concept†(Gardner, 1993, p. 15) Gardner’s fascination with human intelligence and how the brain works was started with an investigation of people who had experienced brain damage of some sort. He recognized that not all abilities, whether cognitive or motor-sensory, were eliminated from the individual’s repertoire despite having endured some form of brain damage. Gardner hypothesized that we possess more than one form of intelligence. The theory of multiple intelligences provides a more holistic view of the intelligence of humans. Gardner advocates that we may all attempt to develop each of these intelligences to our optimum level. However, we may be more adept in only certain of these intelligences. We may however, aspire through practice and development to improve in the remaining intelligences. The use of technology appeals to this view of intelligence in that Gardner’s theory acknowledges that cognition is not a linear process. The computer as a learning tool has enormous potential in developing the different forms of intelligences of Gardner’s theory. Hyperlinks to Multiple Intelligences Web Pages: http://www. athena. ivv. nasa. gov/curric/weather/adptcty/multint. html [pic] Learning Theories and the Brain What is Learning? Learning is the process by which we receive and process sensory data, encode such data as memories within the neural structures of our brain, and retrieve those memories for subsequent use. The variety of information stored within such memories is enormous, including such items as: how to control your sphincter muscle until a socially appropriate occasion, how to identify mommy in a crowd, how to ride a bicycle, what is the shortest path to grandmother’s house without going near the lair of the wolf, what is the tune for Beethoven’s Ode to Joy, and what a philosopher means when she says â€Å"The cat is on the mat. All learning takes place within the brain, and as our understanding of the underlying structures and processes of the brain increases we can begin to apply that knowledge to improve our construction of learning environments. Our ability to describe and understand the basic processes by which our brain learns has been enhanced by recent technological developments and by the accumulation of long-term studies in human and animal populations. Of particular benefit has been the development of brain-imaging techniques that allow us to observe the operation of normal human brains during the performance of a variety of tasks. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and similar technologies have allowed researchers to map neural activity during sensory data processing and monitor the transfer of information into long-term memory. Researchers have also made great strides in determining the basic mechanisms that underlie the transmission of information within the brain. Such research on brain structure, neural transmitters, and the process by which memories are stored and retrieved have allowed the development of neuro-physiological models of learning. Although neuroscience has provided us with an increasingly rich and accurate descriptive theory of learning within the brain, we still need prescriptive theories of how to maximize the efficiency and capacity of human learning. To some extent all learning theories are prescriptive and seek to minimize the time required to transfer information into memory and maximize the efficiency of retrieving that information. Our current knowledge of the brain, and our speculations regarding the evolutionary function of learning, should assist such prescriptive theories in designing learning environments that provide for maximum learning efficiency. In particular, prescriptive theories informed by our current knowledge of neuroscience should allow us to evaluate the role of multimedia in learning environments. We should also be able to maximize the impact of multimedia in such environments through application of learning theories and our knowledge of the human brain. Learning environments should not be construed simply as the traditional formal classroom within the context of institutionalized public education. Such environments occur within the workplace, the home, and other social institutions as communication and information technology continues to penetrate Western society. We should also be aware that the use of multimedia will have an impact upon the development of the human brain, particularly when such techniques are used with children and adolescents whose brains are still developing and maturing. [pic] The Brain The three-pound universe that is our brain consists of more than 100 billion neurons and the associated structures that organize, nourish, and protect their functioning. Each neuron may have between 5,000 and 50,000 connections to other neurons, forming a dense connective mat that allows the storage of enormous amounts of information. It is important to remember that structures within the brain continue to develop until late adolescence and that neurons will continue to grow connections to other neurons throughout adult life. [pic] Brain Structures The diagram above shows four basic structures in the brain that are important for bodily functions and for learning and memory. The brain stem is primarily concerned with basic survival functions and the regulation of body systems. The cerebellum is involved in the performance of automatic movement patterns (walking, running, touch-typing, and other physical skills that can become part of automatic procedural memory). The limbic system is responsible for the processing of short-term memory into long-term memory as well as the generation and regulation of emotions. The cerebral cortex is the area of the brain in which sensory data is received and analyzed, decisions are made, and behavioral responses are activated. Information is received from the major sensory organs of the body: eyes, ears, nose, tongue, and skin; and is held briefly in sensory memory. The further processing of that information appears to be dependent upon the state of emotional arousal of the brain and the utility of such information for potential survival. Long-term memories are generated through the growth and spread of neural connections between those modular structures that contain the memory (Sylwester, 1995, pp. 89-90). The more often such structures are activated and the stronger the connections become to associated structures, the more easily such memories are retrieved and used by the brain in decision making and conscious thought. To some extent the driving forces behind the way our brain processes sensory input and makes decisions are the survival imperatives that accompanied human physical and cultural evolution. Our brains reflect the importance that survival places upon evaluating potential threat situations, making a quick response, and focusing all body resources on support of those functions that may lead to continued survival. In high-threat situations the focus of the brain will be almost exclusively upon what is identified as the potential threat while the body shuts down relatively unimportant systems to concentrate on those involved in the fight-or-flight response. Low-threat situations allow the brain to sample and evaluate a broader spectrum of sensory input and to analyze such input for future use. Thus a large looming shadow in the cave mouth tends to generate fear, prompting the body to shut down digestion, pump more adrenaline, and prepare the cerebellum to handle the process of running while the cerebral cortex looks for places to hide or make a stand. Strong negative emotion tends to evoke the fight-or-flight physiological and mental responses that shut down high-level cognition. A premium should therefor be placed upon the reduction of those factors within a learning environment that give rise to negative emotions. At the same time, sensory input that does not receive attention is not available for processing through short-term into long-term memory. Clearly a balance must be struck between too much and too little stimulation in learning situations. Some stimulation and motivation is necessary for the learner to pay attention to the data that they are required to learn; on the other hand too much stimulation (particularly in a negative context) is liable to create anger or fear as an emotional response, either of which can serve to reduce the amount of learning carried out within the environment. It appears that the limbic system plays an important part in the process of storing information as long-term memories. Those activities that provide an emotionally supportive environment may well have a positive effect upon the processing of information into long-term storage and subsequent retrieval of those memories. Group activities, co-operative learning, role-playing, and simulations tend to provide emotional support and emotional context for learning. Retrieval of long-term memories is enhanced when a large number of connections have been established between the neural modules that store such memories. To some extent our growing knowledge about the organization of the brain tends to support those theories of learning that can generally be labeled as constructivist. That is, situated knowledge that is connected to a large number of other memories is more apt to be recalled than is unconnected knowledge that has been learned by rote. Because the process of creating connections between ideas and memories is essentially carried out through a process of rehearsal and review, learners should be encouraged to review knowledge that is being learned and attempt to build connections to that knowledge that is already easily retrieved from long-term memory. Such cognitive tools as narration, story-telling, constructing metaphors, and making comparisons are strategies that help to build and maintain connections. The construction of knowledge is essentially the growing of connections between the neural modules that contain individual memories. [pic] Implications for Learning Theory If the apparent symmetry between contemporary brain-based learning theories and constructivism is accurate, then basic guiding principles of constructivism should be used in designing learning environments. These principles include: 1. Learning is a search for meaning. Therefore, learning must start with the issues around which students are actively trying to construct meaning. 2. Meaning requires understanding wholes as well as parts. Parts must be understood in the context of wholes. Therefore the learning process focuses on primary concepts, not isolated facts. 3. In order to teach well, we must understand the mental models that students use to understand the world, and the assumptions that support those models. 4. The purpose of learning is to construct one’s own meaning, not to have the â€Å"right† answers by repeating someone else’s meaning. Learning is inherently inter-disciplinary, and the only valuable assessment of learning is assessment that is part of the learning process and that provides students with information on the quality of their learning. (On Purpose Associates, 1998b) Such learning environments should also be designed around the ideas that come forward from brain-based learning. That is, they should employ the three instructional techniques associated with brain-based learning: â€Å"orchestrated immersion, where learning environments are created that fully immerse students in a learning experience; relaxed alertness, where an effort is made to eliminate fear while maintaining a highly challenging environment; and active processing, where the learner consolidates and internalizes information by actively processing it† (On Purpose Associates, 1998a). Learning environments constructed with these principles in mind will tend to be organized around thematic units featuring knowledge in depth and the exploration of projects that have real meaning for the participating learners. [pic] Implications for Multimedia How should we then use multimedia presentations of information to effectively learn in the context of current brain-based learning theory? The communications and information technology that constitutes contemporary multimedia platforms has some significant advantages in creating a learning environment, but there are some pitfalls that must be accounted for as part of the learning process. Multimedia, at its best, allows us to bring the real world to the learner through the use of sound and video. Such connection to the real world should serve as a factor in motivating students, and as a factor in providing them with additional connections to other knowledge structures. At the same time, multimedia allows students to experience information through multiple modes of presentation. Such multi-modal learning should help to build connections within the learner’s brain if only because multiple modes of reception will engage different areas of the learner’s brain. Contemporary multimedia platforms allow a greater degree of learner control and more freedom for the learner to undertake self-directed exploration of the material. Such self-directed learning is likely to be more meaningful and more connected to existing knowledge structures within the learner’s brain. Therefore, we should see advantages for learning programs that include multimedia presentations. Learners should also gain from the possibility of self-paced instruction based upon contemporary multimedia learning technology. Whenever possible, immediate feedback should be built into a multimedia program to assist students in forming correct connections prior to reinforcing connections between new and old information incorporated within existing knowledge structures. Designers of multimedia instructional packages should take comfort in the strengths of multimedia, but they should also be aware of potential problems in using multimedia with learners. Although current multimedia technology allows excellent presentation in both video and audio modes, and provides some tactile feedback through the use of keyboards, there is little to offer students who need tactile experience ? multimedia is essentially a bimodal presentation strategy unless additional work is done to prepare material for students. Even the best multimedia programs cannot provide the total stimulation that natural environments provide? we have yet to incorporate smell or taste into such presentations, and tactile sensations are still limited. More importantly, there is a clear danger that multimedia programs may be used to substitute for interaction with other learners. We should not be seduced by technical virtuosity or cutting-edge visual and aural effects, there is still a need for human interaction and emotional support. Above all else, we should beware of the tendency to substitute passive learning for active learning. Multimedia provides significant advantages in presenting information to learners, particularly if sufficient resources have been invested to create presentations that make full use of current technology. Presentation of information, no matter how technically sophisticated, is not enough; learners must interact with content to construct their own meanings and integrate new knowledge into the dense web of neural connections that is mind and memory. [pic]