UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

An analysis of skill requirements in data processing environments Mantha, Robert William 1978

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1978_A4_6 M35.pdf [ 4.48MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0094235.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0094235-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0094235-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0094235-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0094235-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0094235-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0094235-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0094235-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0094235.ris

Full Text

AN ANALYSIS OF SKILL fiEQUIBEMENTS IN DATA PBOCESSING ENVIRONMENTS by ROBERT WILLIAM MANTHA B.Math., U n i v e r s i t y of B a t e r l o c , 1976 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE BEQUIBEMENTS FOB THE DEGREE OF MASTEB OF SCIENCE IN BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION i n The F a c u l t y o f Graduate S t u d i e s {Commerce and Business A d m i n i s t r a t i o n ) We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the r e q u i r e d standard THE UNIVERSITY OF EEITISH COLUMBIA June, 1978 © Robert W i l l i a m Mantha, 1978 I n p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l l m e n t of the requirements f o r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree t h a t the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and study. I f u r t h e r agree t h a t permission f o r e x t e n s i v e copying of t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted to the Head of my D i v i s i o n o r h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s understood that copying or p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be allowed without my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . D i v i s i o n of Accounting and Management Information Systems f a c u l t y of Commerce and Business A d m i n i s t r a t i o n The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 Hebrook P l a c e Vancouver, B.C. Canada, V6T 1W5 ABSTRACT The purpose of t h i s study was t o examine the s k i l l s deemed t o be u s e f u l to data p r o c e s s i n g managers and to systems a n a l y s t s i n data p r o c e s s i n g environments of v a r y i n g l e v e l s of m a t u r i t y . . The s u b j e c t s of the study were 35 data p r o c e s s i n g managers and 50 systems a n a l y s t s from a sample of 35 companies of v a r y i n g s i z e and of v a r y i n g experience with e l e c t r o n i c data p r o c e s s i n g (EDP). The r e s e a r c h method used t o gather the data was the mail q u e s t i o n n a i r e . Two q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were developed: one to measure an EDP organization»s r e l a t i v e m a t u r i t y i n terms of data p r o c e s s i n g , and one to measure EDP p r a c t i t i o n e r s 1 p e r c e i v e d u s e f u l n e s s of 99 data p r o c e s s i n g s k i l l s i n terms of t h e i r own job p o s i t i o n . The r e s u l t s obtained i n d i c a t e t h a t data processing managers and systems a n a l y s t s of both more and l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s p e r c e i v e d g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s as being more u s e f u l than s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s . In p a r t i c u l a r , people, o r g a n i z a t i o n and s o c i e t y s k i l l s were pe r c e i v e d to be the most u s e f u l to data p r o c e s s i n g managers, whereas people, o r g a n i z a t i o n s and system s k i l l s were p e r c e i v e d t o be the most u s e f u l to systems a n a l y s t s . Model and computer s k i l l s were perceived to be the l e a s t u s e f u l to both groups of p r a c t i t i o n e r s . Data p r o c e s s i n g managers of more mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s p e r c e i v e d people and s o c i e t y s k i l l s t o be more u s e f u l than d i d t h e i r c o u n t e r p a r t s i n l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s . F i n a l l y , g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s were p e r c e i v e d t o be more u s e f u l t o data p r o c e s s i n g managers than to systems a n a l y s t s , whereas s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s were perc e i v e d t o be more u s e f u l to systems a n a l y s t s than t o data p r o c e s s i n g managers. The i m p l i c a t i o n of t h i s study on u n i v e r s i t y c u r r i c u l a i n i n f o r m a t i o n systems i s t h a t u n i v e r s i t i e s should prepare t h e i r i n f o r m a t i o n systems graduates t o s o l v e people and o r g a n i z a t i o n problems r a t h e r than t e c h n i c a l problems. However, i t was pointed out i n t h i s study t h a t a good t e c h n i c a l background i s necessary t o f u n c t i o n e f f e c t i v e l y as an EDP p r a c t i t i o n e r i n the data processing community. Th e s i s S u p e r v i s o r i v TABLE OF CONTENTS Paqe CHAPTER I . INTRODUCTION 1 O b j e c t i v e Of The Study ................................ 1 Review Of Related S t u d i e s 1 Stage Model Of EDP Growth 7 O r g a n i z a t i o n a l M a t u r i t y ............................... 11 S k i l l Requirements Of Data P r o c e s s i n g Managers ........ 13 S k i l l Requirements Of Systems A n a l y s t s 14 S k i l l Requirements Of Managers Versus A n a l y s t s ........ 17 CHAPTER I I . METHOD 19 Mail Questionnaire Survey 19 The Methodology ..................................... 19 The Covering L e t t e r ................................. 21 The Follow-up Process ............................... 25 The Maturity Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ............................ 26 The EDP S k i l l Q u e s t i o n n a i r e 28 S t a t i s t i c a l Procedures ................................ 32 CHAPTER I I I . RESULTS 34 EDP O r g a n i z a t i o n Sample 34 Data P r o c e s s i n g Managers .............................. 38 T e s t i n g Of The Hypotheses 38 A d d i t i o n a l F i n d i n g s ................................. 40 Systems A n a l y s t s 41 T e s t i n g Of The Hypotheses 41 A d d i t i o n a l F i n d i n g s 44 EBP Managers And Systems A n a l y s t s ..................... 45 Ranking Of The S k i l l C a t e g o r i e s ....................... 48 CHAPTER IV. DISCUSSION 49 Data P r o c e s s i n g Managers 49 Systems A n a l y s t s 53 EDP Managers And Systems A n a l y s t s 54 I m p l i c a t i o n s For U n i v e r s i t y C u r r i c u l a 57 REFERENCES . 60 APPENDICES ... ..... .. 62 APPENDIX A. MATURITY QUESTIONNAIRE 63 APPENDIX B. SKILL QUESTIONNAIRE .... .. ................... 69 APPENDIX C. COVERING LETTER ............................. 84 APPENDIX D. FOLLOW-UP CARD .............................. 87 V LIST OF TABLES Page TABLE I . Hank Ordering Of Seven And Three S k i l l Categ-o r i e s Based On Category Mean E a t i n g s By Employee/Supervisors And Users ....................... 5 TABLE I I . D i s t r i b u t i o n Of S k i l l s By Category ......... 30 TABLE I I I . EDP Managers - Mean Scores, Gener-a l i s t / S p e c i a l i s t S k i l l s By More/Less Mature EDP Orga-Xixzctt 10ns *••••••••*••••••••••*** •••••*«•**•••••*••*•• - 38 TABLE IV. EDP Managers - Mean Scores, S k i l l Categ-o r i e s By O r g a n i z a t i o n a l M a t u r i t y 40 TABLE V. Systems A n a l y s t s - Mean Scores, Gener-a l i s t / S p e c i a l i s t S k i l l s By More/Less Mature EDP Orga-n i z a t i o n s ............................................ 42 TABLE VI. Systems A n a l y s t s , Banking Of Variance Scores By O r g a n i z a t i o n a l M a t u r i t y .................... 43 TABLE VII. Systems A n a l y s t s - Mean Sco r e s , S k i l l C a t e g o r i e s By O r g a n i z a t i o n a l M a t u r i t y ................ 45 TABLE V I I I . EDP Managers And Systems A n a l y s t s - Mean Scores, Managers/Analysts By G e n e r a l i s t / S p e c i a l i s t S k i l l s ....... ............................... ........ . 46 TABLE IX. Mean Scores, EDP Managers/Systems A n a l y s t s By S k i l l C a t e g o r i e s .................................. 47 TABLE X. EDP Managers And Systems A n a l y s t s , Eanking Of S k i l l s By Category ................................ 48 v i M S T OF FIGURES Page FIGUBE I. P i c t o r i a l D e s c r i p t i o n Of The F i r s t Four Hypotheses ........................................... 14 v i i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS T h i s study would not have been p o s s i b l e without the much a p p r e c i a t e d h e l p , a d v i c e , and encouragement of my t h e s i s committee: Dr. Izak Benbasat (chairman). Dr. A l b e r t S. Dexter, and Dr. Dean Uyeno. In a d d i t i o n , I would l i k e to o f f e r s p e c i a l thanks to the O.B. C. Commerce F a c u l t y members who, during the past two year s , have given me the o p p o r t u n i t y of de v e l o p i n g and extending my knowledge and a b i l i t i e s i n a c o n g e n i a l and sup p o r t i v e atmosphere. 1 CHAPTER I IlilODjyCTIQN O b j e c t i v e Of The Study The o b j e c t i v e of t h i s study i s to examine the s k i l l s deemed to be u s e f u l to data processing managers and systems a n a l y s t s i n data p r o c e s s i n g environments of d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s of maturity. Review Of Related S t u d i e s In 1972 the A s s o c i a t i o n f o r Computing Machinery (ACM) Curriculum Committee on Computer Education f o r Management presented i t s r e p o r t of c u r r i c u l u m recommendations f o r graduate p r o f e s s i o n a l programs i n i n f o r m a t i o n systems. 1 The r e p o r t o u t l i n e d the need f o r p r o f e s s i o n a l proqraas i n i n f o r m a t i o n systems and determined the knowledge and a b i l i t i e s r e g u i r e d by i n f o r m a t i o n system s p e c i a l i s t s to work e f f e c t i v e l y i n t h e i r f i e l d . These a b i l i t i e s were grouped i n t o s i x s k i l l c a t e g o r i e s : people, models, systems, computers, o r g a n i z a t i o n s and s o c i e t y . Based on these s k i l l requirements the committee developed a 13 1 Ashenhurst R.L., Curriculum Becomjendations f o r Graduate ££S.ig§sional Programs i n Information Systems. Communications of the ACM,~May 19727 V o l T 15, No. 5, pp. 363-398. 2 course academic program o u t l i n i n g course c o n t e n t s , r e l a t i o n s h i p s between cou r s e s , course p r e r e q u i s i t e s , course r e f e r e n c e m a t e r i a l s , e t c . In t h e i r r e p o r t , the committee s t r e s s e d t h a t i n f o r m a t i o n systems w i l l be s u c c e s s f u l only i f a balance i s s t r u c k between the emphasis placed on o r g a n i z a -t i o n a l and t e c h n i c a l f a c t o r s . They reco g n i z e d two d i s t i n c t systems development a c t i v i t i e s ; i n f o r m a t i o n a n a l y s i s and systems design. Information a n a l y s i s was d e f i n e d as being concerned with the d e t e r m i n a t i o n of i n f o r m a t i o n needs and the p a t t e r n s of i n f o r m a t i o n flow which s a t i s f y t h e s e needs, whereas systems design r e l a t e d to the t r a n s l a t i o n o f s p e c i f i e d i n f o r m a t i o n requirements i n t o a d e t a i l e d implementation plan which c o u l d be r e a l i z e d with hardware and software. The committee's c u r r i c u l u m t r i e d t o g i v e the student a good knowledge of both the systems a n a l y s i s area ( i e . o r g a n i z a -t i o n a l systems) and the systems design area {ie. computer systems). The c u r r i c u l u m recommendations were based on the b e l i e f t h a t e x p e r t i s e i n o n l y one of the two areas was inadequate and t h a t an understanding of both types of systems ( o r g a n i z a t i o n a l and computer) was needed t o become a competent e l e c t r o n i c data p r o c e s s i n g (EDP) p r a c t i t i o n e r . a study undertaken by the U n i v e r s i t y of Minnesota*s Management In f o r m a t i o n Systems Eesearch Center (MIS8C) souqht t o e m p i r i c a l l y t e s t ACM*s recommendations by surveying EDP p r a c t i t i o n e r s t o determine what s k i l l s they possessed, what s k i l l s were thought t o be u s e f u l , and how employees, s u p e r v i s o r s and users v a r i e d i n t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n s of the 3 s k i l l s t h a t were possessed and deemed t o be u s e f u l . 2 The r e s e a r c h e r s c l u s t e r e d 97 s k i l l s i n t o the s i x s k i l l c a t e g o r i e s mentioned i n the ACM r e p o r t . They argued t h a t t h r e e of these s k i l l c a t e g o r i e s ( o r g a n i z a t i o n s , people, s o c i e t y ) , c o n t a i n e d many s k i l l s which were more c l o s e l y r e l a t e d t o the i n f o r m a t i o n a n a l y s i s a c t i v i t y and three others (systems, computers, models), were more c l o s e l y r e l a t e d t o the systems design a c t i v i t y . T h e r e f o r e , they regrouped the s k i l l s i n t o two major c l u s t e r s which correspond to these two b a s i c a c t i v i t i e s , c a l l i n g them g e n e r a l i s t and s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s . The study i n t r o d u c e d a new s k i l l category c a l l e d •performance* which d i d n ' t o v e r l a p with the g e n e r a l i s t or s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s . Nine hundred and eighty-one s u b j e c t s from f o u r t e e n f i r m s were c a t e g o r i z e d as employees, s u p e r v i s o r s , o r users w i t h i n one of twelve data p r o c e s s i n g p o s i t i o n s r a n g i n g from MIS d i r e c t o r t o j u n i o r prograflmer. The f i r m s surveyed had hardware expenditures averaging s l i g h t l y over $75,00 0 per month. „ The Info r m a t i o n Systems d i r e c t o r r e p o r t e d through the v i c e - p r e s i d e n t of A d m i n i s t r a t i o n or Management S e r v i c e s . One coul d i n f e r t h a t these were l a r g e and mature data processing environments: By e v o l u t i o n a r y l e v e l of system f e d e r a t i o n a c t i v i t y ; by t o t a l budgeting a c t i v i t y ; by r e p o r t i n g s t r u c t u r e s ; by the currency of t y p i c a l hardware and software systems; but p r i n c i p a l l y through i n t e r a c t i o n with o r g a n i z a t i o n a l 2 Henry R.M., Dickson G.W., L a S a l l e J . , Human fiesources f o r MIS; A Report of Research, MISBC-HP-74-01, Management Information Systems Research Center, U n i v e r s i t y o f Minnesota, 1974. personnel and enhanced r o l e s of users and a n a l y s t s and/or programmer/analysts the o r g a n i z a t i o n s surveyed tend toward what persons would g e n e r a l l y l a b e l "MIS environments". 3 Each p a r t i c i p a t i n g data processing employee r a t e d the s k i l l s he/she possessed on a f o u r point s c a l e . Each p a r t i c i p a n t s u p e r v i s o r and user r a t e d the s k i l l s a c t u a l l y possessed and s k i l l s deemed u s e f u l to the EDP employees. Table I g i v e s the rank o r d e r i n g o f s k i l l s g iven by employees, s u p e r v i s o r s and u s e r s . The study concluded t h a t the ACM course recommendations appear t o be too t e c h n i c a l l y o r i e n t e d and t h a t based on t h e i r survey t h e r e was a more pronounced need f o r performance, people and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s k i l l s . The r e s e a r c h e r s s p e c u l a t e d t h a t s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s would c o n t i n u e to be i n demand i n s m a l l t o medium s i z e data p r o c e s s i n g o r g a n i z a t i o n s . However, they d i d not have enough e m p i r i c a l r e s u l t s to support t h i s c l a i m s i n c e they had only surveyed l a r g e r o r g a n i z a t i o n s . In i t s r e p o r t , the ACM a l s o s t a t e d t h a t there was a need f o r both systems a n a l y s i s ( g e n e r a l i s t ) and systems design ( s p e c i a l i s t ) s k i l l s f o r s m a l l e r o r g a n i z a t i o n s : For some o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s i t u a t i o n s the f o r e g o i n g model of the development process may seem too e l a b o r a t e . A s i m p l e r v e r s i o n i s one where an i n f o r m a t i o n c e n t e r i s run as a s e r v i c e by a group of h i g h l y capable t e c h n i c i a n s with " a p p l i c a t i o n s programmers" developing programs f o r t h i s c e n t e r which manipulate o r g a n i z a t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n as r e q u i r e d by the other departments. More and more i t appears t h a t t h i s s i m p l e r model i s inadequate even f o r s m a l l e r o r g a n i z a t i o n s because of the demands of the i b i d , page 9. 5 TABLE I BANK OBDEBING OF SEVEN AND THREE SKILL CATEGORIES BASED ON CATEGORY MEAN EATINGS BY EMPLOYEE/SUPERVISORS AND USERS "TT" SKILLS POSSESSED BY EDP EMPLOYEES SKILLS USEFUL TO EDP EMPLOYEES + BANK | EMPLOYEE/ SUPERVISOR I USER EMPLOYEE/ SUPERVISOR USER 4-1 J Performance I Performance | i Performance I Performance 2 |People |Computers | I People I People 3 |Systems |Systems | |Systems JSystems 4 | O r g a n i z a t i o n J People | I O r g a n i z a t i o n IOrganization 5 JComputers I O r g a n i z a t i o n J | Computers JComputers 6 I S o c i e t y J S o c i e t y | |S o c i e t y 1 Models 7 |Models (Models | I Models I S o c i e t y ++ 1 I Performance I G e n e r a l i s t I S p e c i a l i s t I 1 J Performance 2 { G e n e r a l i s t 3 j S p e c i a l i s t J Perform an ce S p e c i a l i s t G e n e r a l i s t Performance G e n e r a l i s t S p e c i a l i s t • XX Source: f o r MIS;. Henry R.M., Dickson G. W.# L a S a l l e J . , Human 1 JL§J2fi££ of Research* MISRC-»P-74-0 iT Information Systems 1974, page 14. Research Center, U n i v e r s i t y of Resources Management Minnesota, c o n s t a n t l y changing o r g a n i z a t i o n a l environment, by v i r t u e of n a t u r a l e v o l u t i o n o f p r a c t i c e s , and of the c o n s t a n t l y changing i n f o r m a t i o n p r o c e s s i n g environment, by v i r t u e of the dynamics of computer technology. O r g a n i z a t i o n s and computer complexes are both systems undergoing constant t r a n s i t i o n , and i n f o r m a t i o n p r o c e s s i n g f u n c t i o n s must be developed along s i m i l a r l y s y s t e m a t i c l i n e s t o cope with the s i t u a t i o n . * 6 The present study i s an attempt to determine what s k i l l s a r e r e g u i r e d by o r g a n i z a t i o n s of v a r i o u s s i z e s and l e v e l s of maturity. Can the Minnesota study c o n c l u s i o n s be a p p l i e d to s m a l l e r data processing o r g a n i z a t i o n s ? Are the needs f o r human s k i l l s d i f f e r e n t i n data p r o c e s s i n g o r g a n i z a t i o n s of v a r y i n g l e v e l s of maturity? These are v a l i d q u e s t i o n s t o be asked i n a Canadian cont e x t , where th e r e are fewer l a r g e EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n s . In a d d i t i o n , t h e r e i s an ever i n c r e a s i n g p r o l i f e r a t i o n of small systems implemented i n s m a l l e r and s m a l l e r o r g a n i z a t i o n s . The i m p l i c a t i o n s of such questions as a i d s i n d e v e l o p i n g graduate c u r r i c u l a i n Information and Computer Systems are important. U n i v e r s i t i e s may be t r a i n i n g graduates i n I n f o r m a t i o n Systems which do not possess t h e s k i l l s r e g u i r e d to f u n c t i o n e f f e c t i v e l y i n the area of data p r o c e s s i n g . T h i s study w i l l t r y to analyze the impact of the maturity l e v e l s of EDP orga-n i z a t i o n s on the s k i l l requirements of two data processing p o s i t i o n s : the data p r o c e s s i n g manager and the systems a n a l y s t . * op c i t , page 368. 7 Stage Model Of EDP Growth The stage h y p o t h e s i s was o r i g i n a l l y s t a t e d by Nolan i n 1973.5 I t was based on the r e s u l t s of a r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t a t the Harvard Business School which showed t h a t the p a t t e r n of EDP expenditures based on the budgets of three companies, when p l o t t e d over time, was "S" shaped. T h i s h y p o t h e s i s was l a t e r questioned by L u c a s . 6 Nolan b e l i e v e d that the "S" shape r e f l e c t s how the o r g a n i z a t i o n l e a r n s to a s s i m i l a t e EDP technology. Based on t h i s c urve, Nolan d i s t i n g u i s h e s 4 stages of growth: Stage 1 - i n i t i a t i o n , slow steady growth; Stage 2-c c n t a g i o n , high e x p o n e n t i a l growth; Stage 3 - c o n t r o l , absolute d e c l i n i n g growth; and Stage 4 - i n t e g r a t i o n , managed steady growth. At each stage the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the tasks f o r managing the EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n were d i f f e r e n t . These t a s k s were d e f i n e d as c o n t r o l l i n g , o r g a n i z i n g and planning the EDP e f f o r t . 5 Nolan B.L., Managing the Computer fiescurce: A Stage BYigthesis* Communications of the ACM, J u l y 11973, "vol. 16, Nc. 7, p. 379. * Lucas e m p i r i c a l l y t e s t e d the M S n shaped curve hypothesis. He found t h a t data on EDP budgets f o r 29 C a l i f o r n i a c o u n t i e s f a i l e d to support both the Nolan "S" curve h y p o t h e s i s and the use of budgets as a b a s i s f o r a stage model. Lucas H.C., J r . , Sutton J.A., The Stage, Hypothesis aM Sz Curve: Some C o n t r a d i c t o r y Evidence. Communications o f the ACM, A p r i l 1977, V o l . 20, No. 4, pp. 254-259. 8 The stage h y p o t h e s i s was r e s t a t e d by Nolan and Gibson a f t e r conducting a more i n t e n s i v e study of the "growth processes" a t work at each stage.? They d e f i n e d t h r e e growth pr o c e s s e s : 1) b u i l d i n g an a p p l i c a t i o n s p o r t f o l i o , 2) b u i l d i n g an EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n , and 3) b u i l d i n g an EDP planning and c o n t r o l system. The t h i r d growth process i n c l u d e d the pl a n n i n g and c o n t r o l t a s k s of the f i r s t stage hypothesis statement. The second growth process corresponded t o the o r g a n i z i n g task and the f i r s t was a new growth process which d i d not correspond to any previous d e s c r i p t i v e task ( s ) . L a t e r i n 1975, based on c o n s u l t i n g work with ten l a r g e companies, Nolan i n t r o d u c e d a f c u r t h growth process c a l l e d "user awareness".* T h i s process represented the extent t o which users develop an understanding and awareness of the o p p o r t u n i t i e s and l i m i t a t i o n s of computer technology. Following i s a b r i e f d e s c r i p t i o n of the growth processes and t h e i r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i n the f o u r stages. <1) I n i t i a t i o n . The computer i s i n t r o d u c e d i n t o the o r g a n i -z a t i o n and manual systems are slowly c o n v e r t e d to the automated media. The a p p l i c a t i o n s a t t h i s stage are f u n c t i o n a l and are j u s t i f i e d by t h e i r c o s t s a v i n g s . The f Gibson C.F., Nolan R.L., M a n a j l M the Four Stages of EDP Growth, Harvard Business Review, January-February 1974, V c l 7 52, No. 1, pp. 76-88. 8 Nolan R.L., Norton D.P., The EDP O r g a n i z a t i o n Stage A n a l y s i s , D.P. Management C o r p o r a t i o n , 1975, { p r o p r i e t a r y paper). 9 e l e c t r o n i c data p r o c e s s i n g (EDP) o r g a n i z a t i o n i s t e c h n o l o g i c a l l y s p e c i a l i z e d t o i n c r e a s e hardware e f f i c i e n c y . Management c o n t r o l i s l a x and c o s t s a re not s c r u t i n i z e d c l o s e l y . The user does not p a r t i c i p a t e i n the EDP e f f o r t and has a "hands o f f " a t t i t u d e towards the computer. (2) Contagion. The excess of computing c a p a c i t y a c q u i r e d when the company f i r s t i n i t i a t e d an EDP f a c i l i t y , combined with the l u r e of broader and more advanced a p p l i c a t i o n s , t r i g g e r a p e r i o d of r a p i d expansion. The type of a p p l i c a t i o n s p r o l i f e r a t e i n an uncoordinated manner i n a l l areas of the organization.., The EDP o r g a n i -z a t i o n g u i c k l y b u i l d s a s t a f f of user o r i e n t e d programmers to develop a v a r i e t y o f a p p l i c a t i o n s . EDP management c o n t r o l s are r e l a t i v e l y n o n - e x i s t e n t . Economic j u s t i f i c a t i o n of p r o j e c t s and e f f e c t i v e implementation standards are ignored., The user i s eager t o p a r t i c i p a t e ; however he overestimates p o t e n t i a l b e n e f i t s of a p p l i c a t i o n s . (3) C o n s o l i d a t i o n . Rapid and u n c o n t r o l l e d EDP development give s r i s e to i n e v i t a b l e system problems as w e l l as concern by upper management f o r the r a p i d l y r i s i a q c o s t s of the EDP a c t i v i t y . EDP manaqement becomes c o n t r o l o r i e n t e d and puts heavy emphasis on the e f f i c i e n c y of system o p e r a t i o n s . E x i s t i n g a p p l i c a t i o n s are 10 c o n s o l i d a t e d and there i s very l i t t l e new system development. f o r m a l i z e d c o n t r o l mechanisms are i n t r o d u c e d and the user i s held accountable f o r a p p l i c a t i o n development and o p e r a t i o n a l c o s t s . (4) I n t e g r a t i o n . In t h i s stage the EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n has reached maturity. The emphasis i s on i n t e g r a t i n g the a p p l i c a t i o n s with the needs of the o r g a n i z a t i o n . O n - l i n e and data base systems are i n t r o d u c e d . The EDP o r g a n i z a -t i o n has become s p e c i a l i z e d i n v a r i o u s areas such as on-l i n e time s h a r i n g systems, data base technology and t e l e p r o c e s s i n g . Formal planning and c o n t r o l s t r u c t u r e s e x i s t at t h i s s t a g e . The user i s capable of l e a d i n g i n system design and i s e f f e c t i v e l y held accountable and r e s p o n s i b l e f o r h i s a p p l i c a t i o n s . I t was assumed t h a t as an o r g a n i z a t i o n moves from stage I to stage IV, i t becomes more mature. Stated otherwise, orga-n i z a t i o n s d i s p l a y i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of stage IV are c o n s i d e r e d to be more mature than o r g a n i z a t i o n s d i s p l a y i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of stage I . Therefore, the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s d e s c r i b i n g each stage can be used as a means of measuring an EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n ' s maturity. 11 O r g a n i z a t i o n a l M a t u r i t y The c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Nolan»s stage model and the maturity assumptions s t a t e d i n the previous s e c t i o n were used to develop e l e v e n EDP maturity c r i t e r i a . These c r i t e r i a were then used to develop the EDP maturity q u e s t i o n n a i r e which i s i n c l u d e d i n Appendix A and s i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n Chapter I I . F o l l o w i n g i s a d e s c r i p t i o n of the eleven c r i t e r i a : (1) Monthly Expenditures on Hardware. O r g a n i z a t i o n s which have l a r g e expenditures on hardware tend to be more mature than o r g a n i z a t i o n s which have s m a l l e r expenditures. {2} EDP H i s t o r y . More mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s tend t o have more experience with computers and computer technology. (3) P o s i t i o n i n O r g a n i z a t i o n a l S t r u c t u r e . EDP departments i n more mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s are placed at a hi g h e r l e v e l i n the o r g a n i z a t i o n , whereas l e s s mature EDP departments tend t o be l o c a t e d under a f u n c t i o n a l a u t h o r i t y . (4) Oser Awareness. More mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s have users which are more i n t e r e s t e d and capable of p a r t i c i p a t i n g a c t i v e l y i n the systems development e f f o r t . (5) Bole of Sen i o r Management. Senior management p l a y s a gr e a t e r r o l e i n the o v e r a l l 12 planning and c o n t r o l of the more mature EDP o r g a n i z a -t i o n s . (6) O b j e c t i v e s e t t i n g . More mature EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n s have more formal EDP o b j e c t i v e s which are t i e d t o o v e r a l l o r g a n i z a t i o n a l o b j e c t i v e s . (7) EDP Department Performance E v a l u a t i o n . The e v a l u a t i o n of more mature EDP departments i s based l e s s on c l e r i c a l c o s t savings and more on o v e r a l l c o n t r i b u t i o n to the o r g a n i z a t i o n a l goals as s t a t e d i n the o v e r a l l o r g a n i z a t i o n a l p l a n . (8) Budgeting Process. More mature EDP departments have a fo r m a l budgeting process i n t e g r a t e d with the o v e r a l l o r g a n i z a t i o n a l p r i o r i t i e s . (9) EDP Pla n n i n g . , More mature EDP departments have a formal EDP plan i n t e g r a t e d with the o v e r a l l o r g a n i z a t i o n a l p l a n . (10) EDP C o n t r o l Mechanisms. More mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s use a charge-out system, en f o r c e formal documentation standards and r e q u i r e p e r i o d i c p r o j e c t r e p o r t s . (11) P o r t f o l i o mix. More mature EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n s have a p o r t f o l i o which would i n c l u d e more t a c t i c a l and s t r a t e g i c l e v e l i n f o r m a t i o n systems than l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s . 13 Seme of the above c r i t e r i a may fee b e t t e r i n d i c a t o r s of maturity than o t h e r s . N e v e r t h e l e s s , f o r each c r i t e r i o n there w i l l be some e x c e p t i o n s where an o r g a n i z a t i o n would normally be c o n s i d e r e d as "mature" but would not s a t i s f y t h a t p a r t i c u l i a r c r i t e r i o n . T h e r e f o r e , a combination of the c r i t e r i a would not be as s e n s i t i v e t o d i f f e r e n t p a r t i c u l a r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of p a r t i c u l a r o r g a n i z a t i o n s and would g i v e a b e t t e r r e a d i n g o f an o r g a n i z a t i o n ' s maturity than any s i n g l e c r i t e r i o n . S k i l l Requirements Of Data P r o c e s s i n g Managers Hypothesis I. Managers of more mature EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n s w i l l p e r c e i v e a g r e a t e r u s e f u l n e s s f o r g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s than f o r s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s . Hypothesis I I . Managers of l e s s mature EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n s w i l l p erceive a g r e a t e r u s e f u l n e s s f o r s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s than f o r g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s . Hypothesis I I I . Managers of more mature EDP o r g a n i z a -t i o n s w i l l p e r c e i v e a g r e a t e r u s e f u l n e s s f o r g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s than w i l l managers of l e s s mature EDP o r g a n i z a -t i o n s . Hypothesis IV. Managers of l e s s mature EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n s w i l l p e r c e i v e a g r e a t e r u s e f u l n e s s f o r s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s than w i l l managers of more mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s . Nolan s t a t e s t h a t the l a r g e r the EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n , the mere managerial ( g e n e r a l i s t ) s k i l l s and the l e s s t e c h n i c a l ( s p e c i a l i s t ) s k i l l s the data p r o c e s s i n g manager w i l l r e q u i r e . 9 9 Nolan R.L., P l i g h t o f the EDP Manager? Harvard Business Review, May-June 1973, pp. 143-152. 14 He argues t h a t l e s s mature EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n s w i l l r e q u i r e man-agers to perform many of the t e c h n i c a l f u n c t i o n s of systems a n a l y s t s and proqrammers, whereas more mature o r q a n i z a t i o n s w i l l r e q u i r e managers t o perform more managerial and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e f u n c t i o n s . The above f o u r hypotheses are described i n F i g u r e I. I t i s hypothesized t h a t the EDP managers mix of s k i l l s p e r c e i v e d t c be u s e f u l l w i l l c o n t a i n more g e n e r a l i s t and l e s s s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s f o r more mature EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n s , and more s p e c i a l i s t and l e s s g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s f o r l e s s mature EDP o r a n i z a t i c n s . FIGURE I PICTORIAL DESCRIPTION OF THE FIRST FOUR HYPOTHESES EDP MANAGER'S SKILL MIX LESS MATURE MORE MATURE ORGANIZATIONAL MATURITY S k i l l Requirements Of Systems A n a l y s t s Hypothesis V., Systems A n a l y s t s i n more mature EDP orga-n i z a t i o n s w i l l p e r c e i v e a gre a t e r u s e f u l n e s s f o r gener-a l i s t s k i l l s than w i l l Systems A n a l y s t s i n l e s s mature EDP o r q a n i z a t i o n s . 15 One of the main c h a r a t e r i s t i c s of maturing o r g a n i z a t i o n s i s t he i n c r e a s e d p e n e t r a t i o n of computerized i n f o r m a t i o n systems throughout the o r g a n i z a t i o n . Consequently, systems a n a l y s t s i n more mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s w i l l need to e f f e c t i v e l y i n t e r a c t with v a r i o u s people i n a l l f u n c t i o n a l a r e a s . They w i l l need a b e t t e r understanding of the o r g a n i z a t i o n ' s s t r u c t u r e , f u n c t i o n s , and i n f o r m a t i o n needs. I t i s hypothesized t h a t the a n a l y s t s of more mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s w i l l r e q u i r e more g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s than a n a l y s t s i n l e s s mature o r q a n i z a t i o n s s i n c e most a p p l i c a t i o n s i n the l a t t e r o r -g a n i z a t i o n s would be s e r v i n g one f u n c t i o n a l a r e a . , One of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Nolan's stage hypothesis i s t h a t o r q a n i z a -t i o n s i n stage I ( l e s s mature) use the computer i n one f u n c t i o n a l area ( u s u a l l y a c c o u n t i n g ) . T h e r e f o r e , a n a l y s t s i n such o r g a n i z a t i o n s w i l l r e q u i r e l e s s g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s than a n a l y s t s i n more mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s . Hypothesis VI. Systems A n a l y s t s i n l e s s mature EDP orga-n i z a t i o n s w i l l p e r c e i v e a g r e a t e r u s e f u l n e s s f o r s p e c i a l -i s t s k i l l s than w i l l Systems A n a l y s t s i n more mature or-g a n i z a t i o n s . A n a l y s t s i n l e s s mature f i r m s w i l l o f t e n be "proqrammer/analysts" and w i l l r e q u i r e more systems development/desiqn s k i l l s which are h i q n l y s p e c i a l i z e d . In l e s s mature o r q a n i z a t i o n s there w i l l be l e s s d i v i s i o n of l a b o r and a n a l y s t s w i l l need to perform many of the t e c h n i c a l t a s k s which would be performed by proqrammers i n more mature o r g a n i -z a t i o n s . Consequently, a n a l y s t s w i l l r e q u i r e more s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s than t h e i r c o u n t e r p a r t s i n more mature o r q a n i z a t i o n s . 16 Hypothesis VII. Systems A n a l y s t s from both more and l e s s mature EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n s (combined) w i l l p e r c e i v e a g r e a t e r u s e f u l n e s s f o r g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s than f o r spe-c i a l i s t s k i l l s . Systems a n a l y s t s design systems "to s a t i s f y o r g a n i z a t i o n a l needs and t h e r e f o r e must be competent with s o c i a l systems ( r e l a t e d to g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s ) as w e l l as with t e c h n i c a l systems ( r e l a t e d t o s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s ) . I n the U n i v e r s i t y of Minnesota's MISRC study, i t was s t a t e d t h a t " s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s would be e l e v a t e d , f o r example, over g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s f o r both s e n i o r and j u n i o r programmers. At a l l other p o s i t i o n s g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s were deemed more useful." 1° I t i s t h e r e f o r e hypothesized here, i n accordance with the r e s u l t s of the Minnesota study, that systems a n a l y s t s w i l l have a g r e a t e r need f o r g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s than f o r s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s . Hypothesis V I I I , Systems Analysts i n l e s s mature orga-n i z a t i o n s w i l l o b t a i n a lower v a r i a n c e of s c o r e s r a t i n g the p e r c e i v e d u s e f u l n e s s o f s k i l l s than a n a l y s t s i n more mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s . One of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s mentioned i n the stage a n a l y s i s i s the i n c r e a s i n g s p e c i a l i z a t i o n of EDP personnel as the o r g a n i z a t i o n matures. In stage I there i s l e s s d i v i s i o n of laiaor; the personnel perform a wider v a r i e t y of t a s k s than i n stage IV.. A p p l y i n g t h i s t o systems a n a l y s t s , t h i s sould mean th a t a n a l y s t s i n l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s would p e r c e i v e the need f o r a wide range of s k i l l s , whereas a n a l y s t s i n more mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s would p e r c e i v e the need f o r g r e a t e r *o HISBC-BP-74-01, p. 15. 17 e x p e r t i s e i n a fewer number of s k i l l s . The v a r i a n c e of scores r a t i n g the perceived u s e f u l n e s s of a l l s k i l l s (both g e n e r a l i s t and s p e c i a l i s t ) w i l l be used as an i n d i c a t o r of the degree of s k i l l s p e c i a l i z a t i o n p e r c e i v e d to be u s e f u l by the respondent. A low v a r i a n c e would i n d i c a t e a low degree of s p e c i a l i z a t i o n and a high v a r i a n c e would i n d i c a t e a h i g h degree of s p e c i a l i z a t i o n . S k ^ l l Requirements Of Managers Versus A n a l y s t s Hypothesis IX. EDF Managers w i l l p e r c e i v e a g r e a t e r use-f u l n e s s f o r g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s than w i l l Systems A n a l y s t s . Hypothesis X. Systems A n a l y s t s w i l l p e r c e i v e a g r e a t e r u s e f u l n e s s f o r s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s than w i l l EDP Managers. Hypothesis XI. People, O r g a n i z a t i o n and S o c i e t y s k i l l s w i l l each be p e r c e i v e d as being more u s e f u l t o EDP Man-agers than to Systems A n a l y s t s , Hypothesis XII. Systems, Computer and Model s k i l l s w i l l each be perceived as being more u s e f u l to Systems A n a l y s t s than to EDP Managers. The U n i v e r s i t y of Minnesota's MISRC study d i d not compare s k i l l requirements across job p o s i t i o n s . Because of i n h e r e n t d i f f e r e n c e s between the t a s k s performed by EDP managers and systems a n a l y s t s , i t i s expected that t h e r e w i l l be a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the u s e f u l n e s s a t t r i b u t e d to the v a r i o u s s k i l l s . In p a r t i c u l a r , managers are expected to p e r c e i v e a g r e a t e r u s e f u l n e s s f o r g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s than systems a n a l y s t s , and a n a l y s t s are expected t o p e r c e i v e a g r e a t e r u s e f u l n e s s f o r s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s than EDP managers. 18 In order to make a f i n e r d i s t i n c t i o n between s k i l l s . Hypothesis XI and XII were formulated using the s i x s k i l l c a t e g o r i e s . I t i s hypothesized that people, o r g a n i z a t i o n and s o c i e t y s k i l l s w i l l each be more u s e f u l to managers than to a n a l y s t s and t h a t systems, computers and model s k i l l s w i l l each be more u s e f u l to systems a n a l y s t s than to managers. 19 CHAPTER I I M a i l Questionnaire Survey The Methodology The purpose of t h i s study i s t o gather data on the s k i l l s deemed to be u s e f u l by data p r o c e s s i n g managers and systems a n a l y s t s i n a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e sample of data p r o c e s s i n g o r g a n i -z a t i o n s . The mail q u e s t i o n n a i r e was s e l e c t e d as the best method of accomplishing t h i s g o a l . There a r e advantages and disadvantaqes t o using mail q u e s t i o n n a i r e s . The key to succeeding with t h i s technique i s to i n v e s t time and resources i n the c a r e f u l p l a n n i n g of the data gathering process. T h i s method i s a c o s t - e f f e c t i v e way o f g a t h e r i n g s e l f -r e p o r t e d data. The q u e s t i o n n a i r e may be sent to a l a r g e number of people a t minimal c o s t . The respondent does not f e e l pressured to answer as with an i n t e r v i e w , and i t may r e s u l t i n a f e e l i n g of p r i v a c y and anonymity which could i n c r e a s e the v a l i d i t y of responses. Some of the disadvantages of the method are that respondents may m i s i n t e r p r e t q u e s t i o n s and w i l l tend to d i s t o r t answers i n t h e i r , or the r e s e a r c h e r ' s , f a v o r . The i m p l i c a t i o n s of these disadvantaqes are that q u e s t i o n s must be 20 very c a r e f u l l y worded and the r e s e a r c h e r must he aware of p o t e n t i a l b i a s e s . However, low response r a t e i s the main disadvantage most o f t e n a t t r i b u t e d to m a i l q u e s t i o n n a i r e s . Charach s t a t e s t h a t a low response r a t e i s p r i m a r i l y due t o poor q u e s t i o n n a i r e d e s i g n , 1 1 He d e s c r i b e s a methodology which., he c l a i m s , w i l l o b t a i n a high response r a t e even with q u e s t i o n n a i r e s exceedinq f i f t e e n paqes i n l e n q t h . T h i s c l a i m was put to the t e s t i n t h i s study. A f t e r havinq unsuccess-f u l l y d i s t r i b u t e d 60 q u e s t i o n n a i r e packaqes a t a meetinq of data p r o c e s s i n q manaqers, a n a l y s t s , and other members of the data p r o c e s s i n q community, 1 2 i t was decided t o f o l l o w the methodology developed by Charach. Q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were mailed t o respondents i n a package c o n t a i n i n g a c o v e r i n g l e t t e r , one f i v e page q u e s t i o n n a i r e , t h r e e f o u r t e e n page q u e s t i o n n a i r e s and a r e t u r n envelope. The packaqe was p e r s o n a l l y addressed to an e x e c u t i v e i n the'' data p r o c e s s i n q department of the o r q a n i z a t i o n surveyed. T h i s e x e c u t i v e (which we termed, data p r o c e s s i n q manager) was requested t o f i l l out the f i v e page o r g a n i z a t i o n a l p r o f i l e q u e s t i o n n a i r e and one f o u r t e e n page EDP s k i l l q u e s t i o n n a i r e . 1 3 The e x e c u t i v e was then asked to g i v e . the two remaining EDP 1 1 Charach L,, An E x p l o r a t o r y I n v e s t i g a t i o n Toward The Development Of A He search Design-••For • A Study Of Youth f o r k T r a n s i t i o n , unpublished master's t h e s i s . U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1977. , 1 2 None o f the 60 q u e s t i o n n a i r e s d i s t r i b u t e d by a member of the e x e c u t i v e of a l o c a l data p r o c e s s i n g a s s o c i a t i o n was returned. 21 s k i l l q u e s t i o n n a i r e s to two of h i s systems a n a l y s t s f o r completion. We w i l l now d e s c r i b e the c o v e r i n g l e t t e r and both q u e s t i o n n a i r e s i n g r e a t e r d e t a i l . The C o vering L e t t e r Each package was accompanied by a hand s i g n e d , p e r s o n a l i z e d c o v e r i n g l e t t e r , p r i n t e d with carbon r i b b o n on a t y p e w r i t e r - t e r m i n a l by computer on U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, F a c u l t y of Commerce and Business A d m i n i s t r a t i o n l e t t e r h e a d , * * The l e t t e r was p u r p o s e f u l l y not r i g h t j u s t i f i e d , i n order t o c o n c e a l the f a c t t h a t i t was computer produced. The l e t t e r was signed by Dr. A.S. Dexter who i s a member of the author's t h e s i s committee. I t was f e l t t h a t a member of the Commerce F a c u l t y would add more importance t o the q u e s t i o n n a i r e and would q i v e a b e t t e r j u s t i f i c a t i o n t c the respondent f o r spending time answering i t , than a graduate student would., Vocino looked at the d i f f e r e n c e i n response r a t e s when sending a c o v e r i n g l e t t e r s igned by a w e l l known person i n the d i s c i p l i n e as compared to sending a c o v e r i n g l e t t e r on u n i v e r s i t y s t a t i o n a r y s i g n e d by a l e s s w e l l known i n d i v i d u a l . He s t a t e d t h a t : "The d i f f e r e n c e was f a r l e s s than expected and suggests t h a t endorsements from "big-name" personages might r e s u l t i n only marginal b e n e f i t s " . 1 5 i 3 see appendices A and B r e s p e c t i v e l y , i * see Appendix C. 22 T h e r e f o r e , based on these r e s u l t s , i t was decided net t o s o l i c i t the f u l l endorsement of the p r e s i d e n t of the a s s o c i a t i o n which cooperated with us by forwarding the names and addresses of i t s members. One o f the major uses of the c o v e r i n g l e t t e r i s to t r a n s m i t t o the respondent the value of h i s responses. T h i s means t h a t the r e s e a r c h e r must overcome the repondent's f e e l i n g t h a t he i s one of many "numbers"., For t h i s reason, the c o v e r i n g l e t t e r was hand signed and p e r s o n a l i z e d . Each l e t t e r had the name and address cf the respondent typed (by computer) with the same typeface as the body of t h e l e t t e r . Matteson compared response r a t e s between respondents r e c e i v i n g a form l e t t e r and respondents r e c e i v i n g a p e r s o n a l i z e d l e t t e r . * * He found t h a t the r e t u r n r a t e f o r the p e r s o n a l i z e d l e t t e r was 31.9% as opposed t o 22.0% f o r the form l e t t e r . The l e t t e r 1 s f i r s t paragraph gave an i n t r o d u c t i o n t o the l e t t e r and v a r i e d depending on the source of the respondent's name and address. Seme l e t t e r s r e f e r r e d t o the a s s o c i a t i o n from which some o f the names and addresses o r i g i n a t e d , o t hers r e f e r r e d t o a source person, and others to a previous meeting or phone c a l l between the r e s e a r c h e r and the respondent. 1 5 Vocino T., Three V a r i a b l e s In S t i m u l a t i n g ResponsesTo Mailed Q u e s t i o n n a i r e s , J o u r n a l o f Marketing, October 1977, p.76. 1 6 Matteson M.T., JTyjae Of T r a n s m i t t a l L e t t e r And Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Color as Two V a r i a b l e s I n f l u e n c i n g Response Rates In A- M a i l Survey, J o u r n a l of Ap p l i e d Psychology, 1973, No. 4, pp. 535-536. 23 Since the l e t t e r was s t o r e d on computer, i t was r e l a t i v e l y s imple t o make the r e q u i r e d m o d i f i c a t i o n s . , The second paraqraph i n t r o d u c e d the purpose of the study. I t was f e l t t h a t many of these respondents would be aware of the problems of r e c r u i t i n g u n i v e r s i t y graduates who do not possess the necessary data p r o c e s s i n g s k i l l s . The paragraph mentioned t h a t the u n i v e r s i t y was aware of the problem and t h a t an e f f o r t was being made to s o l v e i t . The purpose c f the paragraph was t o r e l a t e the study t o an i s s u e which might have been of i n t e r e s t t o the respondent and to s t r e s s the importance o f the study. The l e t t e r t r i e d t o c a t e r to the respondent's u n s e l f i s h n e s s r a t h e r than emphasizing p o t e n t i a l b e n e f i t s t o him. In a study by Dill m a n , i t was found t h a t a c o v e r i n g l e t t e r which conveyed an image of s o c i a l u t i l i t y , was more e f f e c t i v e than an e g o i s t i c a l l e t t e r . 1 7 T h i s i s e s p e c i a l l y t r u e f o r respondents of middle and higher socio-eccnomic s t a t u s , as was found by Champion and S e a r . 1 8 The next paragraph d e s c r i b e d the package contents and the purpose o f the two q u e s t i o n n a i r e types and s p e c i f i e d who was t o complete what q u e s t i o n n a i r e s . S i n c e the r e s e a r c h e r was not a v a i l a b l e t o answer q u e r i e s , i t was important t h a t the survey 1 7 Dillman D.A., I n c r e a s i n g M a i l Questionnaire Res Large Samples Of The General P u b l i c , P u b l i c Opinion Q u a r t e r l y , 1972, pp. 254-257. 1 8 Champion D., Sear A.M., Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Response Rate: A M e t h o d o l o g i c a l A n a l y s i s . S o c i a l F orces, 1969, V o l . 47, pp. 335-339. 24 be as s e l f - e x p l a n a t o r y as p o s s i b l e . F o r t h i s reason, i n t r u c t i o n s r e l a t i n g to which i n d i v i d u a l was t o complete which q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were i n c l u d e d i n both the c o v e r i n g l e t t e r and i n the i n s t r u c t i o n sheet attached to each q u e s t i o n n a i r e . The f i f t h paraqraph assured the respondent t h a t no more than t w e n t y - f i v e minutes were needed t o complete the survey. T h i s i s p a r t i c u l a r l y important with t h i c k e r q u e s t i o n n a i r e packages. For example, even though the s k i l l g u e s t i c n n a i r e was voluminous, i t was composed of many s h o r t guestions which tcok no more than a few seconds each t o answer, r e s u l t i n g i n a s h o r t o v e r a l l q u e s t i o n n a i r e completion time.. The paraqraph a l s o pointed out t h a t the respondent would not i n c u r any out-of-pocket c o s t s , s i n c e the r e t u r n envelope was pre-stamped. Pre-stamping has two e f f e c t s : the f i r s t , i s t h a t the respondent does not need t o i n c u r e x t r a c o s t s f o r postage; second, i t enhances the impression t h a t the study i s worthwhile. I t i s p a r t i a l l y f o r t h i s reason t h a t f i r s t c l a s s postaqe was used, both f o r sending' packages and f o r the r e t u r n envelopes. The other advantage of f i r s t c l a s s postage i s t h a t the p o s t - o f f i c e w i l l make some e f f o r t t o forward the packaqes or r e t u r n them i f a respondent i s not l o c a t a b l e . The next paragraph of the l e t t e r was very important. I t assured the respondent of the c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y of h i s responses. T h i s was to induce b e t t e r responses and minimize s e l f - r e p o r t b i a s . The paragraph a l s o o f f e r e d the research r e s u l t s t o the respondent. T h i s r e p a i d the respondent f o r h i s time, and i n c r e a s e d h i s involvement i n the p r o j e c t by 25 p r o v i d i n g him with feedback. The Follow-up Process One of the advantages of having the names and addresses of p o t e n t i a l respondents (besides being able to send p e r s o n a l i z e d c o v e r i n g l e t t e r s ) , i s t h a t the r e s e a r c h e r may p e r s i s t i n h i s e f f o r t s t o o b t a i n responses. As s t a t e d i n Charach, the follow-up process i s the key t o o b t a i n i n g high response r a t e s using m a i l q u e s t i o n n a i r e s . 1 9 In t h i s study, a post-card was sent to the respondents f i v e days a f t e r the q u e s t i o n n a i r e was m a i l e d . 2 0 One s i d e of the c a r d c o n s i s t e d of the r e s e a c h e r ' s name and address, the respondent's computer p r i n t e d a d d r e s s - l a b e l and a stamp. The r e v e r s e s i d e , i d e n t i f i e d the u n i v e r s i t y , the f a c u l t y and the study. The f i r s t paragraph expressed the wish t h a t the respondent had a c t u a l l y r e c e i v e d the package and thanked those who had a l r e a d y responded. The l a t t e r was i n c l u d e d to give the respondent the impression t h a t a number of managers had r e t u r n e d the completed q u e s t i o n n a i r e and that he had not. In r e a l i t y , only two of the 61 packages sent had been r e t u r n e d when the post-cards were mailed out. The second paragraph gave the respondent the o p p o r t u n i t y of phoning the r e s e a r c h e r i n the e v e n t u a l i t y t h a t he had not 1 9 i b i d , page 7 3. 2 0 see Appendix D. 26 r e c e i v e d , had l o s t the q u e s t i o n n a i r e package, or to c l a r i f y some t e c h n i c a l i t i e s r e l a t e d to the q u e s t i o n n a i r e . T h i s was a l s o t o assure him t h a t the r e s e a r c h e r was a v a i l a b l e f o r c o n s u l t a t i o n and was s e r i o u s i n h i s endeavour. The next step i n the follow-up was sending a second post-c a r d (the same one as above), one week a f t e r the f i r s t , to those o r g a n i z a t i o n s who had not yet responded. The e f f e c t s of t h i s l a s t reminder were l i n i m a l . , Since a s a t i s f a c t o r y sample s i z e had been a c h i e v e d , no other f o l l o w - u p methods were used. The M a t u r i t y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e In the survey documentation, the maturity g u e s t i c n n a i r e was c a l l e d the " O r g a n i z a t i o n P r o f i l e Q u e s t i o n n a i r e " . 2 1 The respondent was t o l d t h a t the q u e s t i o n n a i r e was designed t o allow the r e s e a r c h e r t o get a b e t t e r p i c t u r e (or " p r o f i l e " ) of the o r g a n i z a t i o n s surveyed. I t was f e l t t h a t c a l l i n g i t a "ma t u r i t y " q u e s t i o n n a i r e would c r e a t e unnecessary s e l f - r e p o r t b i a s . Both the maturity and EDP s k i l l q u e s t i o n n a i r e s had an attached i n s t r u c t i o n sheet. On t h i s sheet the respondent i d e n t i f i e d the name of h i s f i r m and h i s job p o s i t i o n or t i t l e . The name of the f i r m was needed to i d e n t i f y which o r g a n i z a -t i o n s had responded and the job t i t l e of the respondent was to make sure t h a t he was indeed a "data p r o c e s s i n g manager". The 2 1 see Appendix A. 27 name of the respondent was not necessary and was not requested. However, i f the respondent wished a copy of the re s e a r c h r e s u l t s , he was asked to a t t a c h h i s business car d t o th e q u e s t i o n n a i r e . T h i s o b v i o u s l y hindered anonymity, but i t was b e l i e v e d that the assurance of c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y i n the c o v e r i n q l e t t e r was s u f f i c i e n t t o a l l e v i a t e any f e a r s of response d i s c l o s u r e and that anonymity was not a c r u c i a l i s s u e . Most qu e s t i o n s r e q u i r e d t h a t the respondent s e l e c t an answer a l t e r n a t i v e aionq many, whereas a few other q u e s t i o n s r e q u i r e d that he e n t e r percentaqes o r weiqhts. A paragraph warninq t h a t the l a t t e r q u e s t i o n s were more d i f f i c u l t to answer was i n c l u d e d i n the i n s t r u c t i o n sheet. As a r e s u l t a l l respondents answered these questions even thouqh they were r e l a t i v e l y more arduous than the m u l t i p l e choice q u e s t i o n s . The o r q a n i z a t i o n p r o f i l e questions were developed from t h e eleven maturity c r i t e r i a d i s c u s s e d i n c h a p t e r I . Each quest i o n t r i e d t o measure the o r g a n i z a t i o n a g a i n s t the c r i t e r i a by r e q u e s t i n g the manager t o s e l e c t an a l t e r n a t i v e which best d e s c r i b e d the s i t u a t i o n i n h i s o r g a n i z a t i o n . In most questions the a l t e r n a t i v e s were ranked i n ascendinq order o f maturity based on the c r i t e r i a s t i p u l a t e d i n Chapter I . For example, the que s t i o n r e l a t e d to " o b j e c t i v e s e t t i n g " had as f i r s t a l t e r n a t i v e , " o b j e c t i v e s are s e t i n f o r m a l l y by the EDP manaqer", the second, " o b j e c t i v e s are s e t f o r m a l l y by the EDP manaqer", which would be considered more mature, t o the l a s t a l t e r n a t i v e , " o b j e c t i v e s are d e r i v e d from o v e r a l l 28 business o b j e c t i v e s i n c o o p e r a t i o n with top management". T h i s was done to allow the respondent to p o s i t i o n h i m s e l f on the maturity "continuum" f o r each c r i t e r i o n . . At the end of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e , the respondent was given the o p p o r t u n i t y to comment on the relevance of the guestions with r e s p e c t to the s i t u a t i o n i n h i s o r g a n i z a t i o n . T h i s helped the r e s e a r c h e r determine i f there were any weak p o i n t s i n the q u e s t i o n n a i r e which c o u l d be c o r r e c t e d by using proper q u e s t i o n weighting f a c t o r s and to demonstrate to the respondent t h a t the q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were c a r e f u l l y analyzed. The EDP S k i l l Q u e s t i o n n a i r e The i n s t r u c t i o n page of the EDP s k i l l q u e s t i o n n a i r e d e s c r i b e d the q u e s t i o n n a i r e purpose and gave an example of each of i t s two types of s k i l l s : those beginning with " A M l i t y to ..." and those beginning with "Knowledqe of . , . " . 2 2 These two c a t e g o r i e s d i d not r e p r e s e n t d i f f e r e n t s k i l l types but were simply d i f f e r e n t f o r m u l a t i o n s . The respondent was r e g u i r e d to c i r c l e a number from one to f i v e , i n d i c a t i n g h i s p e r c e i v e d u s e f u l n e s s of the s k i l l from "of no use" represented by "1" t o "of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y " represented by "5". An example of the f i r s t f o r m u l a t i o n would be: 2 2 see appendix B. 29 A b i l i t y t o present i n w r i t i n g a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n of part of a p r o j e c t . of no use 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y and of the second: Knowledge of fundamentals of p r o b a b i l i t y theory, of no use 1 2 3 4 5 of absolute n e c e s s i t y The i n s t r u c t i o n sheet c l e a r l y i n d i c a t e d that the r e s e a r c h e r was i n t e r e s t e d i n the p e r c e i v e d u s e f u l n e s s of the s k i l l f o r the job p o s i t i o n held by the respondent and not i n h i s possessed s k i l l l e v e l . In the U n i v e r s i t y of Minnesota's Management Information Systems Research Center {MISRC) study d i s c u s s e d i n Chapter I, i t was found t h a t " s k i l l s were g e n e r a l l y c o n s i s t e n t w i t h i n p o s i t i o n s as t o mean rank o r d e r i n g o f s k i l l s possessed versus s k i l l s u s e f u l " . 2 3 T h i s researcher b e l i e v e d t h a t t h i s was t r u e because respondents would not l i k e l y rank the u s e f u l n e s s of a s k i l l f o r t h e i r j ob, s i g n i f -i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t l y from the s k i l l l e v e l possessed i f they were asked t o rank both a t the same time. T h e r e f o r e , i t was f e l t t h a t a s k i n g a respondent to rank the u s e f u l n e s s of a s k i l l i n r e l a t i o n t o h i s own work r a t h e r than ranking h i s own s k i l l l e v e l , would reduce s e l f - r e p o r t b i a s and would i n c r e a s e response o b j e c t i v i t y . The q u e s t i o n n a i r e c o n s i s t e d of 99 g u e s t i o n s which were d i v i d e d i n t o two groups. P a r t I of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e qrouped 2 3 MISRC-WP-74, p.15. 30 62 s k i l l s beginning with " A b i l i t y t o . . . " and Part I I grouped 37 s k i l l s s t a r t i n g with "Knowledge o f . . . " . In order to f a c i l i t a t e the respondent's task i t was decided net to i n t e r m i x the s k i l l s which had the two d i f f e r e n t f o r m u l a t i o n s . Of the 99 d i f f e r e n t s k i l l s , 46 were g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s and 53 were s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s . These s k i l l s c o u l d a l s o be c l a s s i f i e d f u r t h e r using the s i x c a t e g o r i e s (people, o r g a n i z a -t i o n s , s o c i e t y , systems, computers, and models) developed i n the ACS C u r r i c u l u m Committee r e p o r t d i s c u s s e d i n Chapter I. T a b l e I I i l l u s t r a t e s the d i s t r i b u t i o n of the s k i l l s w i t h i n the v a r i o u s c a t e g o r i e s . , TABLE I I DISTRIBUTION OF SKILLS BY CATEGORY I 'I 1 T 1 ) CATEGORY | GENERALIST | SPECIALIST | TOTAL | | + 1 i 4 I People j 9 | 0 | 9 | I O r g a n i z a t i o n s ! 17 | 0 I 17 J I S o c i e t y J 3 | 0 I 3 ( j Systems J 15 I 10 J 25 | I Computers j 1 | 34 I 35 | i Models | 1 | 9 | 10 | j p f- -I -j 1 TOTAL | 46 | 53 J 99 J * i 1 i j The great m a j o r i t y of s k i l l s were a subset of the 111 s k i l l s developed f o r the U n i v e r s i t y o f Minnesota's MISRC study. Fourteen o f the study's 111 s k i l l s belonged to a c a t e g o r y c a l l e d 'performance'. These s k i l l s , which c o u l d not 31 be c l a s s i f i e d as s p e c i a l i s t or g e n e r a l i s t , were c o n s i s t e n t l y ranked higher than the o t h e r s . 2 * A f t e r c l o s e r a n a l y s i s i t was observed t h a t these performance s k i l l s were so e s s e n t i a l t h a t the respondent had to give them a high u s e f u l n e s s s c o r e . Example of these were: " A b i l i t y to perform t a s k s a c c u r a t e l y " , " A b i l i t y t o work independently with l i m i t e d s u p e r v i s i o n " , and " A b i l i t y t o p l a n and o r g a n i z e work assignments". Since these s k i l l s f a i l e d to d i s c r i m i n a t e between respondents and were c o n s i s t e n t l y ranked above the other s k i l l s , they were not i n c l u d e d i n t h i s study's s k i l l s e t . C e r t a i n s k i l l s were c o n s i d e r e d not to be very important or were of ab s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y i n any work environment, and were not i n c l u d e d . An example of the former would be "Knowledge of p r o f e s s i o n a l data processing a s s o c i a t i o n s " , and an example of the l a t t e r , " A b i l i t y t o communicate with ethers verbally.'? S k i l l s r e l a t e d t o t o p i c s which have surfaced s i n c e the MISBC study was undertaken, such as "data bases" and " s t r u c t u r e d programming", were added t o the s e t . The 99 s k i l l s were randomly in t e r m i x e d w i t h i n P a r t I and Part I I . Consequently, the respondent c o u l d not adopt a p a t t e r n of response f o r a c e r t a i n s k i l l category and had t o be more a t t e n t i v e i n h i s e v a l u a t i o n of each s k i l l . see Table I , Chapter I. 32 S t a t i s t i c a l Procedures I n order t o de r i v e a ma t u r i t y s c o r e f o r an o r g a n i z a t i o n , the raw score of each maturity guestion was converted to a percentage o f i t s maximum a t t a i n a b l e s c o r e . T h i s was done so t h a t a gues t i o n scored on a s i x p o i n t s c a l e would not c a r r y more weight than a gu e s t i o n scored on a fou r p o i n t s c a l e . The i n d i v i d u a l l y a d j u s t e d s c o r e s were added to form the o r g a n i z a -t i o n s o v e r a l l maturity s c o r e . Scores were s o r t e d and the median was chosen as the d i v i d i n g p o i n t between the scores of the mature and l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s . A s e n s i t i v i t y t e s t was performed on t h i s r a n k i n g by varying the weights of the c r i t e r i a . There were no s i g n i f i c a n t changes observed i n the ranking. The r a n k i n g was considered to be a good r e p r e -s e n t a t i o n of the r e l a t i v e m a t u r i t i e s of the o r g a n i z a t i o n s surveyed. The s k i l l data was entered i n t o two computer f i l e s . One f i l e c o n t ained manager data and the other systems a n a l y s t data. Both f i l e s c o n s i s t e d of the employee's company number 2 5 and h i s 99 s k i l l s c o r e s . These two f i l e s were combined t o produce two new f i l e s . The f i r s t , c o n t a i n e d the mean score of managers and a n a l y s t s f o r g e n e r a l i s t and s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s . The second, contained the mean s c o r e s of managers and a n a l y s t s f o r each of the s i x s k i l l c a t e g o r i e s . A l l hypotheses, except 2 5 Companies were s e q u e n t i a l l y assigned an i n d i v i d u a l number as t h e i r completed q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were r e c e i v e d . 33 Hypothesis VIII (which was r e l a t e d to s c o r e v a r i a n c e ) , were t e s t e d using t ~ t e s t s . , The t e s t s were performed using SPSS. 2 6 In order t o t e s t Hypothesis V I I I , the v a r i a n c e a c r o s s the 99 s k i l l s f o r each a n a l y s t was computed. The s e t of v a r i a n c e s o f a n a l y s t s working f o r more mature EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n s was compared to the s e t of v a r i a n c e s of a n a l y s t s working f o r l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s u s i n g the Mann-Whitney 0 t e s t (non-parametric t e s t ) . The t - t e s t was not used to compare the v a r i a n c e s because the assumption of independence of scores f o r each a n a l y s t could not be made. In a d d i t i o n , the t - t e s t was l i m i t e d to comparing d i f f e r e n c e s i n means. T h e r e f o r e , scae of the b a s i c assumptions u n d e r l y i n g the t - t e s t were v i o l a t e d . The Mann-Whitney U t e s t employs the a c t u a l ranks of the o b s e r v a t i o n s as a d e v i c e f o r t e s t i n g hypotheses about the i d e n t i t y of two p o p u l a t i o n d i s t r i b u t i o n s . With regard to the Mann-Whitney U t e s t , Winkler and Hays s t a t e d : " I t i s a good, r e l a t i v e l y powerful a l t e r n a t i v e to the usual T t e s t f o r e q u a l i t y of means". 2 7 I t s main advantage, which made i t a p p e a l i n g f o r t h i s study, was t h a t i t d i d not assume that the hypotheses were r e l a t e d t o means of p o p u l a t i o n s . 2 6 Nie N.H. e t a l . , S t a t i s t i c a l Package For The S o c i a l S c i e n c e s . McGraw H i l l Bock Co., 1975. 2 7 Winkler R.L., Hays W.L., S t a t i s t i c s : P r o b a b i l i t y , I n f e r e n c e And D e c i s i o n . Holt, R i n e h a r t and Whinston, Second E d i t i o n , 1S75, p.854. 34 CHAPTES I I I fiESULTS EDP O r g a n i z a t i o n Sample T h i r t y - f i v e companies ret u r n e d useable q u e s t i o n n a i r e s . 2 8 The o v e r a l l sample on which the s t a t i s t i c a l t e s t s were performed c o n s i s t e d of 35 data p r o c e s s i n q manaqers and 50 systems a n a l y s t s . T e s t s were a l s o performed on a subset of these 35 companies by e l i m i n a t i n q t h r e e of the companies which had scored immediately above and t h r e e which had scored immediately below the median maturity score, There was no s i q n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the r e s u l t s ; consequently, i t was decided to use the whole sample r a t h e r than use a subset. F c l l o w i n q i s a d e s c r i p t i o n of a t y p i c a l more mature EDP o r q a n i z a t i o n which responded to the survey and r e t u r n e d a completed maturity q u e s t i o n n a i r e . The o r g a n i z a t i o n has been using computers f o r over 15 years. I t s monthly EDP hardware budget i s i n the $20,000 to $50,000 range. A s i z e a b l e p o r t i o n of i t s users <40SI) can a c t i v e l y p a r t i c i p a t e i n the systems design a c t i v i t y , but are h i g h l y dependent on the EDP s t a f f . Very few are capable of planning and l e a d i n g a systems design p r o j e c t . Senior 2 8 Sixty-one q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were mailed out i n the second d i s t r i b u t i o n attempt. As was d i s c u s s e d i n the previous chapter, the f i r s t attempt was not s u c c e s s f u l . 35 management i s i n v o l v e d i n the EDP e f f o r t through a s t e e r i n g committee. The EDP department i s independent of any ether f u n c t i o n a l department. EDP o b j e c t i v e s are d e r i v e d from o v e r a l l business o b j e c t i v e s i n c o o p e r a t i o n with top management. The department i s evaluated based on i t s c o n t r i b u t i o n to o r g a n i z a t i o n a l goals as s t a t e d i n the o v e r a l l o r g a n i z a t i o n a l plan. The EDP budget i s viewed with ether investments and i s based on o r g a n i z a t i o n a l p r i o r i t i e s . The EDP department develops s t r u c t u r e d plans l i n k e d t o o v e r a l l o r -g a n i z a t i o n a l plans i n c o o p e r a t i o n with the p l a n n i n g ccmaittee or department. The department charges i t s users f o r i t s s e r v i c e s , e n f o r c e s documentation standards, and r e q u i r e s p e r i o d i c proqress r e p o r t s from i t s p r o j e c t l e a d e r s and/or systems a n a l y s t s . The o r g a n i z a t i o n ' s p o r t f o l i o mix c o n s i s t s of approximately 80% o p e r a t i o n a l support systems, 15% management c o n t r o l systems, and 5% planning systems. 8e can see from the above that many of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s belonq t o Nolan's stage IV, while e t h e r s belonq to the other three staqes. T h i s would i n d i c a t e that t h i s t y p i c a l "more mature" o r q a n i z a t i o n approaches stage IV but c o u l d not be c l a s s i f i e d as a f u l l y mature stage IV o r g a n i -z a t i o n . T h i s was to be expected, s i n c e there are very few, i f any, EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n s , e s p e c i a l l y i n Canada or more s p e c i f i c a l l y i n the Vancouver area, which c o u l d s a t i s f y the c r i t e r i a developed by Nolan d e s c r i b i n g a f u l l y mature, stage IV o r g a n i z a t i o n . I t i s f o r t h i s reason that t h i s chapter w i l l compare the r e s u l t s o f "more" and " l e s s " mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s 36 r a t h e r than "mature" and "immature" o r q a n i z a t i o n s . Even thouqh the U n i v e r s i t y of Minnesota's MISRC study d i d not q i v e many- d e t a i l s d e s c r i b i n g the o r q a n i z a t i o n s they surveyed, they mentioned t h a t the averaqe monthly hardware expenditures on EDP averaqed s l i q h t l y over $75,000, which i s somewhat more than the $40,000 averaqe obtained f o r the more mature o r q a n i z a t i o n s i n t h i s study. Hith r e s p e c t to other non-budqetary c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , such as r e p o r t i n g s t r u c t u r e s , the o r g a n i z a t i o n s i n both s t u d i e s c o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d e q u i v a l e n t i n terms of maturity. A d e s c r i p t i o n of a t y p i c a l l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n f e l l o w s . The o r g a n i z a t i o n has been using computers f o r the past 6 or 7 years. I t s monthly EDP hardware budget i s between $2,000 and $5,000., Most of the o r g a n i z a t i o n ' s users are not capable or are not i n t e r e s t e d i n p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the systems design a c t i v i t y . , Senior managememt i s very l i t t l e i n v o l v e d with EDP, The data p r o c e s s i n g department i s under the accounting f u n c t i o n i n the o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e , EDP o b j e c t i v e s are set by the data p r o c e s s i n g manager only. The e v a l u a t i o n of the EDP department i s based mostly cn c o s t s a v i n g s (50%) , user s a t i s f a c t i o n (25%), and meetinq budqets (25%). Budqets are determined by the EDP manager with a p p r o v a l by top manaqement. . There i s no formal planning performed by the department, but the EDP manaqer may be developinq i n f o r m a l plans. The o r q a n i z a t i o n does not charge out f o r i t s s e r v i c e s , there are no enforced documentation standards, and a n a l y s t s are not r e q u i r e d to hand i n p e r i o d i c 37 p r o j e c t progress r e p o r t s . The mix of a p p l i c a t i o n systems i n c l u d e s o p e r a t i o n a l support systems (85%) and management c o n t r o l systems (15%). The above o r g a n i z a t i o n c o u l d be c l a s s i f i e d as a stage I o r g a n i z a t i o n and i s c o n s i d e r e d i n t h i s study to be a " l e s s mature" o r g a n i z a t i o n . 38 Data P r o c e s s i n g Managers T e s t i n g Of The Hypotheses The q u e s t i o n n a i r e r e s u l t s r e l a t e d t o the f i r s t f o u r hypotheses are summarized i n Tab l e I I I . TABLE I I I EDP MANAGERS - MEAN SCOBES GENEBALIST/SPECIALIST SKILLS BY MOBE/LESS MATUBE EDP OBGANIZATIONS GENERALIST SKILLS I ' HOBS MATUBE ORGANIZATIONS LESS MATUBE n=17 4. 145 n=18 3.907 4.022 n=35 SPECIALIST n=17 2.606 n=18 2.472 2. 537 n=35 n=34 3.375 n=36 3.189 N=7 0 Hypothesis I was s t r o n g l y supported <p<.001). 2 9 Managers 2 9 When not s p e c i f i e d , "p" i s understood to be the l e v e l of s i g n i f i c a n c e of a one t a i l e d t - t e s t . 39 of more mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s ranked the u s e f u l n e s s c f gener-a l i s t s k i l l s on average 1.6 times h i g h e r than they ranked the u s e f u l n e s s cf s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s . T h i s would i n d i c a t e t h a t these managers were performing more managerial and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e than t e c h n i c a l tasks. The same was t r u e f o r managers o f l e s s mature EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n s . These managers assigned a l a r g e r u s e f u l n e s s score t o g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s than t o s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s <p<.001). They a l s o ranked the u s e f u l -ness of g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s 1.6 times higher than s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s . T h e r e f o r e Hypothesis I I was not supported. He can observe from T a b l e I I I , that managers of more mature EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n s p e r c e i v e d g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s as being more u s e f u l than d i d managers of l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s <p<.03), thereby s u p p o r t i n g Hypothesis I I I . On the ether hand. Hypothesis IV was not supported. The p e r c e i v e d u s e f u l -ness of s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s was not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t between managers of mature and l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s . To summarize: (1) Managers of both more and l e s s mature EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n s p e r c e i v e d g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s t o be more u s e f u l than spe-c i a l i s t s k i l l s . (2) Managers of more mature EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n s p e r c e i v e d gen-e r a l i s t s k i l l s to be more u s e f u l than d i d managers of l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s . (3) There was no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the per c e i v e d u s e f u l n e s s of s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s between managers of both 40 l e v e l s of matu r i t y . A d d i t i o n a l F i n d i n g s A d d i t i o n a l t e s t s were made t o compare the u s e f u l n e s s of each of the s i x s k i l l c a t e g o r i e s , i n d i v i d u a l l y , between man-agers o f more and l e s s mature EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n s . These r e s u l t s are summarized i n Table IV. TABLE IV EDP MANAGERS - MEAN SCORES SKILL CATEGORIES BY ORGANIZATIONAL MATURITY | CATEGORY I I-I JPeople I Systems I Computers |O r g a n i z a t i o n s I Models I S o c i e t y I MORE MATURE n=17 LESS MATURE n=18 4.679 3.578 2. 541 4. 249 2.358 4. 137 4. 401 3. 393 2.431 4.071 2. 088 3.703 People and s o c i e t y s k i l l s were considered t o be s i g n i f -i c a n t l y more u s e f u l t o managers o f mature EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n s than to managers of l e s s mature EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n s ( r e s p e c t i v e l y , p<.02, p<.04). I t must be noted t h a t model s k i l l s were assigned t h e lowest score of a l l s k i l l s . T h e r e f o r e , even though they were p e r c e i v e d to be s i g n i f i c a n t l y 41 more u s e f u l t o managers of more mature than to managers of l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s from a s t a t i s t i c a l point of view, t h e i r u s e f u l n e s s was not of a p r a c t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e . There was no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the perceived u s e f u l n e s s of computer and system s k i l l s between the managers of the two groups. gysteas A n a l y s t s T e s t i n g Of The Hypotheses The survey r e s u l t s r e l a t e d t o Hypotheses V, VI and VII are summarized i n Table V. The r e s u l t s suggest t h a t t h e r e was no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the p e r c e i v e d u s e f u l n e s s of g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s between a n a l y s t s of more and l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s . Consequently, Hypothesis V was r e j e c t e d . I t was a l s o found t h a t t h e r e was no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the s p e c i a l -i s t s k i l l requirements of a n a l y s t s i n more and l e s s mature EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n s . T h e r e f o r e , these r e s u l t s f a i l t o support Hypothesis VI., In a d d i t i o n , a n a l y s t s i n both more and l e s s mature EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n s ranked g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s as being s i g n i f i c a n t l y more u s e f u l (p<.001) than s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s , thereby s u p p o r t i n g Hypothesis VII. The r e s u l t s of the Mann-Whitney U t e s t performed to t e s t Hypothesis V I I I are i n c l u d e d i n Table VI. These r e s u l t s show 42 TABLE V SYSTEMS ANALYSTS - MEAN SCORES GENEBALIST/SPECIALIST SKILLS BY MORE/LESS MATURE EDP ORGANIZATIONS GENERALIST SKILLS SPECIALIST i 1 1 I n=28 | n=28 ] n=56 MORE MATURE | 3.822 | 3.085 I 3.453 OIGAIIZAIIQSS | i 1 I n=22 | n=22 | n=44 LESS MATURE J 3.927 | 3.072 1 3.500 i j i 3.868 3.080 n=50 n=50 N=100 t h a t t h e median v a r i a n c e a c c r o s s the 99 s k i l l r a t i n g s (computed f o r each i n d i v i d u a l respondent) f o r a n a l y s t s of l e s s mature EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n s was s i g n i f i c a n t l y l a r g e r than the median v a r i a n c e f o r a n a l y s t s i n more mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s (p<*02). T h i s f a i l s t o support Hypothesis V I I I . F u r t h e r a n a l y s i s r e v e a l e d t h a t the high v a r i a n c e o f the a n a l y s t s of l e s s mature EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n s was due to s c o r i n g the perc e i v e d u s e f u l n e s s of a c e r t a i n subset of s k i l l s s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower than the a n a l y s t s * o v e r a l l mean sc o r e s . T h i s subset was composed of 16 s k i l l s which were a l l s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s , 8 43 TABLE VI SYSTEMS ANALYSTS BANKING OF VABIANCE SCORES BY ORGANIZATIONAL MATURITY I I |ORGANIZATION | MEAN JTYPE | RANK I i I 1 | MORE MATURE J 21.36 i I |LESS MATURE } 30.77 I 1 i 1 : belonging t o the computer s k i l l category and 8 belonging t o the model s k i l l c ategory. Examples o f these s k i l l s a r e: " A b i l i t y t c program i n s i m u l a t i o n type languages (GPSS, SIMULA, SIMSCRIPT)", " A b i l i t y to use i n t e r a c t i v e debugging f a c i l i t i e s ( a v a i l a b l e on time-sharing systems)", "Knowledge of micro-programming", "Knowledge o f matrix a l g e b r a " , and "Knowledge o f set the o r y " . A n a l y s t s i n more mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s tended t o give these s k i l l s a s c o r e which was c l o s e r to t h e i r o v e r a l l mean, whereas a n a l y s t s of l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s assigned a s i g -n i f i c a n t l y lower score to these h i g h l y s p e c i a l i z e d s k i l l s . S i n c e the mean s c o r e s o f a n a l y s t s of more and l e s s mature or-g a n i z a t i o n s were approximately equal (see Table V), a s i q n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n v a r i a n c e s r e s u l t e d . The same t e s t f c r v a r i a n c e s was performed f o r manaqers and th e r e were no 44 s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s found. Ther e f o r e to summarize: (1) There was no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e p e r c e i v e d use-f u l n e s s of both g e n e r a l i s t and s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s between systems a n a l y s t s o f more and l e s s mature EDP o r g a n i z a -t i o n s . (2) Systems a n a l y s t s i n both mature and l e s s mature EDP orga-n i z a t i o n s perceived a g r e a t e r u s e f u l n e s s f o r g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s than they d i d f o r s p e c i a l i s t s l c i l l s . (3) Systems a n a l y s t s i n l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s had a higher score v a r i a n c e i n terms of p e r c e i v e d u s e f u l n e s s of s k i l l s than a n a l y s t s of more mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s . a d d i t i o n a l F i n d i n g s T e s t s were performed to compare the u s e f u l n e s s of the each of the s i x s k i l l c a t e g o r i e s , i n d i v i d u a l l y , between a n a l y s t s of more and l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s . These r e s u l t s are summarized i n Table VII, There were no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s f o r any of the s k i l l c a t e g o r i e s between a n a l y s t s of more and l e s s mature EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n s . 45 TABLE VII SYSTEMS ANALYSTS - MEAN SCORES SKILL CATEGORIES BY ORGANIZATIONAL MATURITY ] CATEGORY I MORE MATURE! LESS MATURE n=28 Jn=22 i \— 1 IPeople t Systems jComputers |Or g a n i z a t i o n s I Models I S o c i e t y I 4. 150 3. 801 3.080 3. 848 2.382 3.297 4.161 3. 916 3. 084 3. 973 2. 181 3. 379 EDP Managers And Systems A n a l y s t s The survey r e s u l t s r e l a t e d t o Hypotheses IX and X are summarized i n Table V I I I . G e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s were pe r c e i v e d as being s i g n i f i c a n t l y more u s e f u l t o EDP managers than t o systems a n a l y s t s (p<.06), thereby s u p p o r t i n g Hypothesis IX. Systems a n a l y s t s p e r c e i v e d a s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r u s e f u l n e s s f o r s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s than d i d EDP managers (p<.001), thereby s u p p o r t i n g Hypothesis X. Tab l e VIII shows t h a t g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s were perc e i v e d as being s i g n i f i c a n t l y more u s e f u l than s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s f o r both EDP managers and systems a n a l y s t s (p<,001). The survey r e s u l t s r e l a t e d to Hypothesis XI and XII are summarized i n Table IX. 46 TABLE VI I I EDP MANAGERS AND SYSTEMS ANALYSTS - MEAN SCORES MANAGERS/ANALYSTS BY GENERALIST/SPECIAL1ST SKILLS GENERALIST SKILLS SPECIALIST EDP MANAGERS SYSTEMS ANALYSTS i i J n=35 J n=50 ! n=85 1 4.022 J 3.868 j 3.931 I n=35 I n=50 n=85 1 2.537 J 3.080 j 2.856 j 3.279 3. 474 n=70 n=100 N=170 People, o r g a n i z a t i o n and s o c i e t y s k i l l s were pe r c e i v e d to be s i g n i f i c a n t l y more u s e f u l t o EDP managers than they were to systems a n a l y s t s ( r e s p e c t i v e l y , p<.001, p<.01, p<.001), thereby supporting Hypothesis XI. Systems and computer s k i l l s were p e r c e i v e d t o be s i g n i f i c a n t l y more u s e f u l t o systems a n a l y s t s than to EDP managers (p<.Q01 i n both c a s e s ) . There was no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the p e r c e i v e d u s e f u l n e s s of model s k i l l s between managers and a n a l y s t s . To summarize: (1) G e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s were p e r c e i v e d as being s i g n i f i c a n t l y more u s e f u l t o EDP managers than to systems a n a l y s t s . 47 TABLE IX MEAN SCORES EDP MANAGERS/SYSTEMS ANALYSTS BY SKILL CATEGORIES 1 CATEGORY I I MANAGERS n=35 ANALYSTS n = 50 i j People 1 Systems |Computers JOr g a n i z a t i o n s j Models j S o c i e t y 1 i 4.536 3. 483 2. 484 4. 157 2.220 3.914 4. 155 3.851 3.082 3.903 2. 294 3.440 Systems a n a l y s t s perceive6 a g r e a t e r u s e f u l n e s s f o r spe-c i a l i s t s k i l l s than d i d EDP managers. People, o r g a n i z a t i o n and s o c i e t y s k i l l s were p e r c e i v e d t o be more u s e f u l t o EDP managers than they were to systems a n a l y s t s . Computer and systems s k i l l s were perc e i v e d to be more u s e f u l t o systems a n a l y s t s than to EDP managers. There was no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the perc e i v e d use-f u l n e s s of model s k i l l s . 48 Eankinc| of The S k i l l C a t e g o r i e s Table X shows the ranking and mean s c o r e s of the 6 s k i l l c a t e g o r i e s (people, systems, computers, o r g a n i z a t i o n s and models) f o r EDP managers and systems a n a l y s t s . These ranks were s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t at the 0.05 l e v e l ( 2 - t a i l e d t e s t ) . Managers of more and l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s d i d not TABLE X EDP MANAGEfiS AND SYSTEMS ANALYSTS BANKING OF SKILLS BY CATEGORY BANK EDP MANAGERS People [4.536] SYSTEMS ANALYSTS People £4.155] O r g a n i z a t i o n s [4. 157] S o c i e t y [3.914] O r g a n i z a t i o n s [3.903] Systems [3.851 ] Systems £ 3. 483] S o c i e t y C 3.440] Computers [2. 484] Models [2.220] Computers [ 3.082] Models t2.294] a s s i g n d i f f e r e n t ranks to the s i x s k i l l c a t e g o r i e s than above. The same was t r u e f o r systems a n a l y s t s . A comparison of the above ranks with those of the U n i v e r s i t y of Minnesota»s MISBC study w i l l be made i n the next chapter. 49 CHAPTER IV DISCISSION Data P r o c e s s i n g Managers The t e s t s performed on the hypotheses sere d i v i d e d i n t o t h r e e groups: those concerned s o l e l y with the data processing managers, those concerned s o l e l y with the systems a n a l y s t s , and those comparing the s k i l l requirements of managers and a n a l y s t s . The t e s t s on the f i r s t group i n d i c a t e d t hat g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s were s i g n i f i c a n t l y more u s e f u l t o data processing man-agers than were s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s . T h i s h e l d t r u e f o r man-agers of both more and l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s , supporting the r e s u l t s obtained by the U n i v e r s i t y of Minnesota's MISRC study which looked o n l y at l a r g e r (more mature) o r g a n i z a t i o n s . However, the f i n d i n g s f a i l e d t o support Nolan's hypothesis t h a t the s k i l l mix of managers of s m a l l e r o r g a n i z a t i o n s would c o n t a i n more t e c h n i c a l s k i l l s , and t h a t the s k i l l mix of man-agers of l a r g e r o r g a n i z a t i o n s would c o n t a i n more managerial skills. 3° The r e s u l t s of the present study i n d i c a t e d that r e g a r d l e s s of the o r g a n i z a t i o n a l maturity l e v e l , g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s where p e r c e i v e d as being more important t o data 30 Nolan R.L., P l i g h t Of The EDP lana,3.§£* Harvard Business Review, May-June 1973, pp. 143-152. 50 p r o c e s s i n g managers than s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s . The discrepancy between Nolan's hypothesis and these f i n d i n g s could be e x p l a i n e d by the f a c t t h a t i n l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s , managers would have l i t t l e use f o r the h i g h l y s p e c i a l i z e d s k i l l s (eg. model s k i l l s ) i n c l u d e d i n t h i s study. Consequently, the " t e c h n i c a l " s k i l l s of Nolan's hypothesis would not correspond to the " s p e c i a l i s t " s k i l l s of both the U n i v e r s i t y o f Minnesota's MISBC study and the present study. One can o n l y t r y t o e x p l a i n t h i s discrepancy, s i n c e Nolan d i d not d e s c r i b e i n any d e t a i l what was meant by the word " t e c h n i c a l " . The r e s u l t s a l s o i n d i c a t e d t h a t g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s were pe r c e i v e d t o be more u s e f u l t o managers of more mature o r g a n i -z a t i o n s than they were to managers of l e s s mature o r g a n i z a -t i o n s . T h i s r e f l e c t e d the a d d i t i o n a l a d m i n i s t r a t i v e and man-a g e r i a l t a s k s assumed by managers of more mature o r g a n i z a -t i o n s . The p e r c e i v e d u s e f u l n e s s of s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s remained low and was not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t between managers; r e g a r d l e s s of o r g a n i z a t i o n a l m a t u r i t y . T h i s would i n d i c a t e t h a t a b a s i c knowledge of the more s p e c i a l i z e d a s p e c t s of data p r o c e s s i n g i s necessary f o r managers but t h a t the requirements f o r these s k i l l s do not vary a c r o s s o r g a n i z a t i o n s of varying l e v e l s of maturity. In a d d i t i o n , some of the s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s were very s p e c i a l i z e d and were of l i t t l e use to man-agers of both more and l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s (eg. most of the model s k i l l s and many of the computer s k i l l s ) . Consequently, these s k i l l s d i d not d i f f e r e n t i a t e between both 51 groups o f managers and t h e r e f o r e c o n t r i b u t e d to t h i s lack of d i f f e r e n c e i n perceived u s e f u l n e s s f o r s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s . T e s t s were made t o compare the u s e f u l n e s s of each of the s i x s k i l l c a t e g o r i e s {people, systems, computers, o r g a n i z a -t i o n s , models, and s o c i e t y ) , between managers cf more and l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s . People and s o c i e t y s k i l l s were p e r c e i v e d t o be s i g n i f -i c a n t l y more u s e f u l t o managers c f mere mature EDP o r g a n i z a -t i o n s than to managers of l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s . T h i s i s t o be expected s i n c e a manager of a more mature o r g a n i z a t i o n must have a good understanding and an a b i l i t y to work with the people under him, as w e l l as with h i s peers and s u p e r i o r s . These s k i l l s are even more important i n an o r g a n i z a t i o n where there are many sub o r d i n a t e s and where t h e r e i s a need to c o o r d i n a t e the uses of data p r o c e s s i n g r e s o u r c e s between the many i n t e g r a t e d f u n c t i o n a l areas of the o r g a n i z a t i o n . Because more mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s are o f t e n l a r g e r , t h e i r use of computers may a f f e c t more people (e.g. c r e d i t c a r d companies)-. The managers of such EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n s must be aware of the s o c i e t a l i m p l i c a t i o n s of using t h e i r computers. The r e c e n t i n t r o d u c t i o n of p r i v a c y l e g i s l a t i o n i s a case at p o i n t . Such l e g i s l a t i o n would be of importance to those orga-n i z a t i o n which maintain l a r g e data backs on i n d i v i d u a l s . These o r g a n i z a t i o n s w i l l o f t e n be, based on our c r i t e r i a , more mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s . O r g a n i z a t i o n and model s k i l l s were a l s o perceived as being more u s e f u l to managers of more mature EDP o r g a n i z a -52 t i c n s , though t h i s f i n d i n g was o n l y s i g n i f i c a n t a t the 0,10 l e v e l . Both managers of more and l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s r e q u i r e a good understanding of t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n s . However, more mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s are o f t e n l a r g e r , more complex and f a r more i n t e g r a t e d . In s m a l l e r , l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s , a p p l i c a t i o n s are independent, each a p p l i c a t i o n having i t s own data f i l e s . There are no i n t e r a c t i o n s between the systems themselves or between t h e i r f i l e s . In more mature o r g a n i z a -t i o n s , a p p l i c a t i o n s become h i g h l y i n t e q r a t e d , o f t e n with a common database. T h e r e f o r e , a b e t t e r understanding of the v a r i o u s f u n c t i o n s w i t h i n the o r q a n i z a t i o n i s needed to s a t i s f y v a r i o u s and o f t e n c o n f l i c t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n needs. In a d d i t i o n , more mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s are e v a l u a t e d based cn t h e i r o v e r a l l c o n t r i b u t i o n to o r g a n i z a t i o n a l g o a l s . consequently, managers must have a good understanding of these g o a l s , of the means of a t t a i n i n g them, and of the r o l e of t h e i r department i n t h i s attainment. S i m i l a r l y , EDF planning must be done i n accordance with the o v e r a l l o r g a n i z a t i o n a l plan (as s p e c i f i e d i n the c r i t e r i a of a more mature o r g a n i z a t i o n i n chapter I ) . T h i s r e q u i r e s a b e t t e r understanding of the o v e r a l l o r g a n i z a -t i o n than i f the EDP department d i d not develop any p l a n s , or d i d so without c o n s i d e r i n g other departments. More mature o r -g a n i z a t i o n s w i l l a l s o use more s o p h i s t i c a t e d systems i n v o l v i n g advanced mathematical modelling techniques (e.g. . Operations Research, Management S c i e n c e ) . The managers of these o r g a n i -z a t i o n s w i l l r e q u i r e a b e t t e r knowledge of modelling s k i l l s than t h e i r c o u n t e r p a r t s i n l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s . 53 However, model s k i l l s were the l e a s t important of a l l s k i l l s . T h e r e f o r e one must not a t t a c h too great an importance to these modelling s k i l l s ; they are not n e c e s s a r i l y of p r a c t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e . Systems and computer s k i l l s were pe r c e i v e d to be e q u a l l y u s e f u l by managers of both more and l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s . AS was d i s c u s s e d above, t h i s would i n d i c a t e t h a t EDP managers r e q u i r e a b a s i c s e t of t e c h n o l o g y - r e l a t e d s k i l l s which are not dependent on the maturity of t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n . T h i s set of s k i l l s allows them t o i n t e r a c t with members of the data p r o c e s s i n g community (e.g. vendors) and with t h e i r own more t e c h n o l o g i c a l l y - o r i e n t e d subordinates. Svstems A n a l y s t s As was the case f o r data p r o c e s s i n g managers, g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s were perc e i v e d to be more u s e f u l t o systems a n a l y s t s than s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s , f o r a n a l y s t s of both more and l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s . T h i s f i n d i n g i s a l s o i n agreement with the U n i v e r s i t y of Minnesota's MISSC study. The r e s u l t s would i n d i c a t e t h a t the p o s i t i o n of systems a n a l y s t i s o r i e n t e d towards s o l v i n g o r g a n i z a t i o n a l problems r a t h e r than t e c h n i c a l problems. The p e r c e p t i o n of u s e f u l n e s s of g e n e r a l i s t and spe-c i a l i s t s k i l l s by systems a n a l y s t s was not dependent on the maturity of t h e i r EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n s . The same was t r u e about t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n s of the u s e f u l n e s s of the s i x s k i l l c a t e g -o r i e s . However, t h e r e were s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n the 54 v a r i a n c e s of s c o r e s r a t i n g the p e r c e i v e d u s e f u l n e s s of the 99 s k i l l s . Systems a n a l y s t s i n l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s had a higher score v a r i a n c e when ra n k i n g the u s e f u l n e s s of the EDP s k i l l s than t h e i r c o u n t e r p a r t s i n more mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s . The reason being t h a t systems a n a l y s t s i n l e s s mature o r g a n i -z a t i o n s ranked a subset of h i g h l y s p e c i a l i z e d s k i l l s s i g n i f -i c a n t l y lower than t h e i r o v e r a l l mean. I t i s t o be expected t h a t c e r t a i n h i g h l y s p e c i a l i z e d s k i l l s , such as the knowledge of s i m u l a t i o n languages, would not be as u s e f u l to a n a l y s t s i n l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s . With the e x c e p t i o n of these few s k i l l s , the s e t of s k i l l s r e q u i r e d by a n a l y s t s d i d not d i f f e r i n r e l a t i o n t o o r g a n i z a t i o n a l maturity. EBP Managers And Systems A n a l y s t s As hypothesized, g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s were perceived to be more u s e f u l to data p r o c e s s i n g managers than to systems a n a l y s t s and s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s were pe r c e i v e d to be more u s e f u l to a n a l y s t s than to managers. To f u r t h e r r e f i n e the comparison between managers and a n a l y s t s ; people, o r g a n i z a -t i o n , and s o c i e t y s k i l l s were pe r c e i v e d t o be s i g n i f i c a n t l y more u s e f u l t o managers while systems and computer s k i l l s were more u s e f u l t o a n a l y s t s than to managers. T h i s i s to be expected because o f the d i f f e r e n c e s i n the tasks performed by p r a c t i t i o n e r s i n both EDP p o s i t i o n s . Model s k i l l s were p e r c e i v e d to be the l e a s t u s e f u l by both a n a l y s t s and managers. There was no s i g n i f i c a n t 55 d i f f e r e n c e i n the assigned u s e f u l n e s s scores f o r model s k i l l s by managers and a n a l y s t s . EDP managers and systems a n a l y s t s have l i t t l e disagreement as to which s k i l l s are the most u s e f u l . People and o r g a n i z a t i o n s k i l l s are r e s p e c t i v e l y ranked f i r s t and second ( i n descending order of u s e f u l n e s s ) . There i s a s l i g h t v a r i a t i o n i n the rank assi g n e d t o systems and s o c i e t y s k i l l s between managers and a n a l y s t s . Managers ranked s o c i e t y s k i l l s as being more u s e f u l than systems s k i l l s , and a n a l y s t s ranked system s k i l l s higher than s o c i e t y s k i l l s . The main d i f f e r e n c e between the ranks found i n t h i s study and those found i n the U n i v e r s i t y of Minnesota»s MISRC study was t h a t s o c i e t y s k i l l s were c o n s i d e r e d to be more u s e f u l f o r both data processing managers and a n a l y s t s than they were i n the MISRC study. T h i s d i f f e r e n c e may be due to the s m a l l number (3) of these s k i l l s and t o t h e i r b e t t e r " q u a l i t y " i n t h i s study. Systems s k i l l s which were ranked between people and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s k i l l s i n the MISRC study, were c o n s i d e r e d to be as u s e f u l as o r g a n i z a -t i o n a l s k i l l s to systems a n a l y s t s (3.90 f o r o r g a n i z a t i o n s k i l l s and 3.85 f o r systems s k i l l s ) , but were con s i d e r e d to be l e s s u s e f u l than o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s k i l l s t o data p r o c e s s i n g man-agers (4.15 f o r o r g a n i z a t i o n s k i l l s and 3.48 f o r systems s k i l l s ) . T h e r e f o r e , systems s k i l l s were c o n s i d e r e d to be s l i g h t l y l e s s u s e f u l i n t h i s study. There were no d i f f e r e n c e s between the ranks of managers of more and l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s . The same was t r u e f o r a n a l y s t s . Conseguently, even though the o r g a n i z a t i o n s c f the 56 MISBC were, on the average, l a r g e r (which c o u l d be considered as a s u r r o g a t e f o r maturity) than those of t h i s study, t h i s cannot e x p l a i n the d i s c r e p a n c y i n the ranks. However, the MISBC study was undertaken 5 years ago. In those f i v e years, systems evolved as o r g a n i z a t i o n s were c a r e f u l not to make the expensive mistakes of the 1960's., The r o l e of the user was enhanced and the b e h a v i o u r a l a s p e c t s of i n f o r m a t i o n systems became more important i n both academic and b u s i n e s s c i r c l e s . T h i s c o u l d e x p l a i n why systems s k i l l s were ranked lower i n t h i s study than i n the MISBC study, and s o c i e t y s k i l l s were ranked higher. U n f o r t u n a t e l y , the average s c o r e s obtained on these s k i l l c a t e g o r i e s i n the MISBC study were not p u b l i s h e d and thus a comparison across s k i l l s was not p o s s i b l e . The s i m i l a r i t i e s between the two s t u d i e s are t h a t people s k i l l s were co n s i d e r e d t o be the most u s e f u l s k i l l s whereas computer and model s k i l l s were considered to be the l e a s t u s e f u l . 57 I m p l i c a t i o n s For U n i v e r s i t y C u r r i c u l a The study has shown t h a t g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s , or more s p e c i f i c a l l y those r e l a t e d t o people and o r g a n i z a t i o n s , were deemed to be the most u s e f u l to data p r o c e s s i n g managers and systems a n a l y s t s , whereas s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s such as computer and model s k i l l s were c o n s i d e r e d to be the l e a s t u s e f u l . There were no major d i f f e r e n c e s between the s k i l l requirements c f EDP p r a c t i t i o n e r s i n more and l e s s mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s . One can i n f e r from these r e s u l t s that u n i v e r s i t i e s should prepare those students i n t e r e s t e d i n data p r o c e s s i n g and i n f o r m a t i o n systems to s o l v e people and o r g a n i z a t i o n - r e l a t e d problems r a t h e r than t e c h n i c a l problems. Technology remains important but only as one of many t o o l s the EDP p r a c t i t i o n e r must have with him. Technology i s a means to an end, not an end i n i t s e l f . In the r e p o r t of the ACM d e c r i b e d i n c hapter I , i t was mentioned t h a t i n f o r m a t i o n systems would be s u c c e s s f u l only i f a balance was s t r u c k between the emphasis placed on o r g a n i z a -t i o n a l and t e c h n i c a l f a c t o r s , and t h a t systems i n the past had f a i l e d because o r g a n i z a t i o n a l f a c t o r s had been too o f t e n ignored. Based on t h i s premise, a t h i r t e e n - c o u r s e graduate c u r r i c u l u m was developed. Of the 13 c o u r s e s , 6 courses were r e l a t e d to g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s and 7 courses were r e l a t e d t o s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s . The r e p o r t a l s o d e s c r i b e d p o s s i b l e p o s i t i o n s i n i n f o r m a t i o n systems which c o u l d be f i l l e d by i n d i v i d u a l s possessing the s k i l l s o u t l i n e d i n the ACM 58 c u r r i c u l u m . The present study looked at two of these p o s i t i o n s : EDP manager and systems a n a l y s t . The r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d seem t o i n d i c a t e t h a t the ACM c u r r i c u l u m recommendations placed too much emphasis on the t e c h n i c a l aspects of i n f o r m a t i o n systems. Based on t h i s study, i t would seem t h a t more emphasis should be placed on a c q u i r i n g people, o r g a n i z a t i o n a l , and s o c i e t y s k i l l s r a t h e r than s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s . For example, model s k i l l s , which were assig n e d a very low s c o r e i n both the MISBC study and i n t h i s study, have a f u l l course d e d i c a t e d t o them i n the ACM c u r r i c u l u m . T h i s course c o u l d be combined with other courses or become a p r e r e q u i s i t e t o an MIS graduate program. Graduate proqrams i n i n f o r m a t i o n systems, such as the one o f f e r e d a t u.B.C., which place a heavy emphasis on the managerial and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a s p e c t s of MIS, seem to be w e l l s u i t e d to s a t i s f y the present s k i l l requirements of data p r o c e s s i n q manaqers and systems a n a l y s t s . Benbasat and Dexter looked at the i n f o r m a t i o n systems courses o f f e r e d i n Canadian business s c h o o l s , and found that the courses appeared to be manaqerial and n o n - t e c h n i c a l i n n a t u r e . 3 1 T h i s i s encouraging. However, a c l o s e r study of the courses r e v e a l e d t h a t very few schools o f f e r e d courses concerned with t h e l e g a l and s o c i e t a l a s p e c t s of i n f o r m a t i o n 3 1 Benbasat, I . , Dexter, A.S., 1 Proposed Program For Management Illl o f l ^ t i c n Systems Education In Schools Of Business , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Faculty o f Commerce and Business A d m i n i s t r a t i o n working paper #471, A p r i l 1978. 59 systems. The present study i n d i c a t e d t h a t s o c i e t y - r e l a t e d s k i l l s were c o n s i d e r e d to toe very u s e f u l t o EDP p r a c t i t i o n e r s , e s p e c i a l l y t o those of more mature o r g a n i z a t i o n s . In a d d i t i o n , very few s c h o o l s o f f e r e d courses which were s p e c i f i c a l l y r e l a t e d t o people s k i l l s . For example, t h e r e d i d not seem to be any courses o f f e r e d i n Canadian business s c h o o l s , which combined the knowledge of both the MIS and Or-g a n i z a t i o n a l Behaviour f i e l d s of study, or the MIS f i e l d and the O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Development f i e l d , which concerns i t s e l f s p e c i f i c a l l y with the i n t r o d u c t i o n of change and m o d i f i c a t i o n of o r g a n i z a t i o n s . The r e s u l t s of t h i s study would i n d i c a t e t h a t r e s e a r c h i n t o the development of courses of t h i s nature seems necessary. Both the MIS EC study and t h i s study found t h a t p e o p l e - r e l a t e d s k i l l s were h i g h l y u s e f u l , more u s e f u l than any purely MIS r e l a t e d s k i l l s . T h i s should be taken i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n by the developers of MIS c u r r i c u l a . As computers penetrate deeper and deeper i n t o a l l f u n c t i o n a l areas of the o r g a n i z a t i o n , the need f o r s k i l l s and knowledge i n i n f o r m a t i o n systems w i l l i n c r e a s e . The problems which w i l l be encountered w i l l not be t e c h n i c a l problems, but people and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l problems. T h e r e f o r e , i t i s s a f e to expect an even g r e a t e r emphasis on the need f o r g e n e r a l i s t s k i l l s from EDP p r a c t i t i o n e r s i n the f u t u r e . 60 REFERENCES [ 1 ] Ashenhurst R.L., Curriculum gecommendatiops f o r Graduate P r o f e s s i o n a l Programs i$ Information Systems, Communi-c a t i o n s of the ACM, May 1972, V o l . 15, No. 5, pp. 363-398. [ 2 ] Benbasat, I . , Dexter, A.S., A Proposed Program For Management Information Sjr£tem,s Education I n S p o o l s ~0f Business, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, F a c u l t y of Commerce and Business A d m i n i s t r a t i o n working paper #471, A p r i l 1978. [ 3 ] Champion £., Sear A.M., Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Response pate; A M e t h o d o l o g i c a l A n a l y s i s . S o c i a l Forces, 1969, V o l . UT, pp. 335-339. [ 4 ] Charach L., An E x p l o r a t o r y I n v e s t i g a t i o n Toward The Development Of A Research Design F o r " k Stndy Of~ Youth Work T r a n s i t i o n . unpublished master's t h e s i s . U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, 1977. £ 5 ] Dillman D.A., I n c r e a s i n g M a i l Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Response Jja Large Samples o f The General P u b l i c . P u b l i c Opinion Q u a r t e r l y , 1972, pp. 254-257. £ 6 ] Gibson C.F., Nolan R. L. , Managing the Four Stages of EDP Growth. Harvard Business Review, January-February 1974, V o l . 52, No. 1, pp. 76-88. £ 7 ] Henry R.M., Dickson G.W., L a S a l l e J . , Human Resources f o r MISi A Report of Research. MISRC-WP-74-01, Management Info r m a t i o n Systems Research Center, U n i v e r s i t y of Minnesota, 1974., £8] Lucas B.C., J r . , Sutton J.A., The Stage Hypothesis and S-Curve^_ Some C o n t r a d i c t o r y Evidence. Communications of the ACM, A p r i l 1977, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 254-259. £ 9 ] Matteson M.T. , Type Of T r a n s m i t t a l L e t t e r And Q u e s t i o n n a i r e C o l o r As Two V a r i a b l e s I n f l u e n c i n g Response Rates In A M a i l . J o u r n a l of Ap p l i e d Psychology, 1973, No. 4, pp. 535-536. £ 10 3 Nie N.H. et a l . , S t a t i s t i c a l Package For The S o c i a l S c i e n c e s . McGraw H i l l Book Co., 1975. 61 £11] Nolan S.L. , P l i g h t Qf The EDP Manager. Harvard Business Review, May-June 1973, pp. 143-152. [ 1 2 ] Nolan R.L., Managing the Computer Resource: A Stage Hypothesis, Communications of the ACM, J u l y 1973, V o l . 16, No. 7, p. 379. £13] Nolan R.L., Norton D.P., The EDP O r g a n i z a t i o n Stafle A n a l y s i s . D.P. Management C o r p o r a t i o n , 1975, ( p r o p r i e t a r y paper) £14] Vocino T., Three V a r i a b l e s In S t i m u l a t i n g Responses To Mailed Q u e s t i o n n a i r e s . J o u r n a l of Marketing, October 1977, p.76. £15] Winkler R.L., Hays 8.L., S t a t i s t i c s ; P r o b a b i l i t y , I n f e r e n c e And D e c i s i o n , H o l t , Rinehart and Whinston, Second E d i t i o n , 1975, p.854. APPENDICES APPENDIX A 64 EDP S K I L L SURVEY  O R G A N I Z A T I O N P R O F I L E Q U E S T I O N N A I R E ( t o be c o m p l e t e d b y t h e d a t a p r o c e s s i n g m a n a g e r o n l y ) Name o f f i r m : P l e a s e i n d i c a t e y o u r j o b p o s i t i o n / t i t l e : T h i s q u e s t i o n n a i r e w i l l a l l o w u s t o g e t a b e t t e r p i c t u r e o f y o u r EDP o r g a n i z a t i o n . Some q u e s t i o n s r e q u i r e t h a t y o u s e l e c t among p o s s i b l e a n s w e r a l t e r n a t i v e s . I n t h e s e c a s e s p l e a s e c i r c l e t h e number o f t h e c h o i c e a l t e r n a t i v e y o u s e l e c t . O t h e r q u e s t i o n s r e q u i r e t h a t y o u e n t e r p e r c e n t a g e s o r w e i g h t s . We r e a l i z e t h a t t h e s e q u e s t i o n s a r e m o r e d i f f i c u l t t o a n s w e r , b u t we w o u l d a p p r e c i a t e i f y o u c o u l d d e t e r m i n e t h e s e p e r c e n t a g e s o r w e i g h t s as a c c u r a t e l y a s p o s s i b l e . P l e a s e g i v e an a n s w e r f o r e a c h q u e s t i o n . I f y o u w i s h t o r e c e i v e a c o p y o f t h e r e s e a r c h r e s u l t s p l e a s e a t t a c h y o u r b u s i n e s s c a r d t o t h i s p a g e . T h a n k y o u f o r p a r t i c i p a t i n g . 65 ORGANIZATIONAL PROFILE QUESTIONNAIRE 1) Monthly expenditures on hardware (includes maintenance) Please indicate the mean monthly rental cost of computing hardware in your organization for the past 12 months (use rental equivalent i f leased or purchased). 1. $1 to $1,999 2. $2,000 to $4,999 3. $5,000 to $9,999 4. $10,000 to $19,999 5. $20,000 to $49,999 6. $50,000 and over. 2) EDP history Please indicate the number of years your organization has been using computers. 1. less than 3 years 2. 3 to 6 years 3. 7 to 10 years 4. 11 to 15 years 5. over 15 years. 3) User awareness (management users) Please indicate the percentage of users in your organization who are: 1. % Not interested or capable of participating in the systems design activity. 2. % Capable of participating in the design activity but are highly dependent on the EDP staff. 3. % Capable of actively participating in the design activity. 4. % Capable of planning and leading a systems design project. 100% TOTAL 4) Role of senior management Which of the following best describes the role of senior management relative to the EDP department in your organization. 1. There is very l i t t l e involvement of senior management. 2. Senior management is supportive and encourages growth. 3. Senior management is involved through a steering committee or other similar body. 4. Senior management has overall control of the EDP activity. 2 66 5) Position in organizational structure Please indicate the organizational location of your computer activity (department). Other Operating Department Management Marketing Manu-facturing Accoun Financ ting/ e 1 1. location 1. In Accounting department. 2. location 2. In Operating department such as Marketing, Manufacturing, etc. 3. location 3. Reporting to top management. 4. location 4. Independent department. Please also enclose a photo copy of an organizational chart depicting the location of the DP/IS function in your organization. 6) Objective setting Which of the following best describes the means of determining the EDP objectives in your organization. 1. Objectives are set informally by the EDP manager. 2. Objectives are set formally by the EDP manager. 3. EDP objectives are set by top management. 4. Objectives are derived from overall business objectives in cooperation with top management. 3 67 7) EDP department performance evaluation Please indicate the weights attached (by your superiors) to the following EDP department evaluation criteria. Weights are decimal numbers between 0 and 1.0 (eg. 0.35) which must add up to 1.0. 1. Costs savings due to clerical staff reduction or increased efficiency of operation support systems. 2. User satisfaction. 3. Meeting budgets. 4. Contribution to organizational goals as stated in overall organizational plan. 1.0 TOTAL 8) Budgeting Process Which of the following best describes the EDP budgeting, process in your organization. 1. There is no formal budgeting performed in the EDP organization. 2. Budgets are determined by the EDP manager. 3. Budgets are set by senior management. 4. Budgets are viewed with other investments and are based on organizational priorities. 9) EDP Planning Which of the following best describes the EDP planning process in your organization. 1. Little or no planning done in the EDP department. 2. Informal planning performed by EDP manager. 3. Formal plans are developed by the EDP manager. 4. Formal structured plans are developed and are linked to the overall organizational plans in cooperation with the planning committee or department. 10) EDP control mechanisms Please circle answer: a) Does your organization use a charge-out system? Yes No b) Are there formal program documentation standards in your organization which are enforced? Yes No c) During project implementation is the project leader or systems analysts required to hand in periodic progress reports? Yes No 4 68 11) Portfolio mix Please indicate the approximate percentage of the EDP budget spent on the following three categories of systems (includes both development and maintenance): 1. 7o Operational Support Systems. Systems which perform the routine transaction level activity required in the daily operation of the organization and report on the operational status of the firm so that management is aware of day-to-day activities, (includes order entry systems, invoicing, payroll, etc.) 2. % Management Control Systems. Systems which provide control information required by managers of departments, profit centers, etc. to measure performance, track the efficiency and effectiveness of operations, decide on control actions, formulate new decision rules to be applied by operational personnel, allocate resources and provide for coordination betv/een several departments, (includes manufacturing cost control systems, sales analysis systems, etc.) 3. % Planning Systems. Systems which provide information for strategic level management (top management). This infor-mation will permit these managers to carry out their planning activities, such as formulating and revising company objectives, determining long-term goals (over 3 years) and establishing company policies, (includes financial planning systems, corporate models, etc.) 100% TOTAL 12) If you felt uncomfortable answering any of the above questions, ie. the answer choices did not correspond to the situation in your organization, please comment below and on the back of this page. Thank you. APPENDIX B SKILL QDESTIONNAIBE 70 EDP S K I L L S U R V E Y EDP S K I L L Q U E S T I O N N A I R E ( t o be completed by b o t h data p r o c e s s i n g managers and systems a n a l y s t s ) Name o f f i r m : P l e a s e c h e c k y o u r p o s i t i o n / t i t l e ; D a t a P r o c e s s i n g M a n a g e r S y s t e m s A n a l y s t i f o t h e r , p l e a s e i n d i c a t e : _ _ _ _ _ _ i / 71 EDP SKILLS QUESTIONNAIRE T h i s q u e s t i o n n a i r e w i l l h e l p us determine the r e l a t i v e u s e f u l n e s s o f v a r i o u s s k i l l s which are r e l a t e d t o i n f o r m a t i o n p r o c e s s i n g . You w i l l be asked to rank the u s e f u l n e s o f each s k i l l d e s c r i b e d i n t h i s q u e s t i o n n a i r e on a 1 to 5 s c a l e . For example: A b i l i t y to w r i t e d e t a i l e d program s p e c i f i c a t i o n s , of no use 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y I f you f e l t t h a t t h i s s k i l l was a b s o l u t e l y n e c e s s a r y t o e f f e c t i v e l y perform the d u t i e s r e l a t e d t o your j o b p o s i t i o n , you would c i r c l e "5". On the other hand i f you f e l t t h a t t h i s s k i l l was i r r e l e v a n t and would not i n any way, c o n t r i b u t e to the e f f e c t i v e f u n c t i o n i n g o f someone i n your j o b p o s i t i o n , then you would c i r c l e "1". I f your f e e l i n g s were not as c a t e g o r i c a l you would c i r c l e "2", "3" or "4" depending on t h e i r d i r e c t i o n . The q u e s t i o n n a i r e i s d i v i d e d i n t o two p a r t s . The f i r s t p a r t c o n t a i n s s k i l l s which begin with " A b i l i t y t o " (as i n the example above). The second p a r t c o n t a i n s s k i l l s which b e g i n w i t h "Knowledge o f " . An example of the l a t t e r would be: Knowledge of microprogramming, of no use 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y Both types of s k i l l q u e s t i o n s are answered i n the same f a s h i o n . T h e r e f o r e i f the knowledge of a c e r t a i n t o p i c was p e r c e i v e d to be of ab s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y you would c i r c l e "5", i f i t was o f no use, you would c i r c l e "1". We would l i k e to emphasize t h a t we are MOT a s k i n g whether YOU possess these s k i l l s , but we are ask i n g you to r a t e the u s e f u l n e s s of the s k i l l f o r the job p o s i t i o n you h o l d (whether you possess the s k i l l or n o t ) . PLEASE GIVE AN ANSWER FOR EACH SKILL Thank you f o r p a r t i c i p a t i n g . 72 PART I (please c i r c l e answer) 1. A b i l i t y to i d e n t i f y i n an on-going o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s i t u a t i o n the key i s s u e s and problems of a g i v e n f u n c t i o n a l a r e a ( p r o d u c t i o n , f i n a n c e , marketing, e t c . ) . of no use 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 2. A b i l i t y to communicate and i n t e r a c t with non-computer o r i e n t e d people. of no use 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 3. A b i l i t y to gather data and prepare long range i n f o r m a t i o n systems p l a n s . of no use 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 4. A b i l i t y to a n a l y z e and determine c o s t s and b e n e f i t s o f p r o j e c t s ( i n f o r m a t i o n s y s t e m s ) t o user. of no use 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 5. A b i l i t y to a n a l y z e and e v a l u a t e programming languages f o r s e l e c t i n g most a p p r o p r i a t e l a n g u a g e f o r a g i v e n problem. of no use 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 6. A b i l i t y to a n a l y z e and e v a l u a t e d i f f e r e n t software packages, of no use 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 7. A b i l i t y to a n a l y z e and e v a l u a t e d i f f e r e n t hardware c o n f i g u r a t i o n s . of no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 8. A b i l i t y t o c o n s u l t t h e l i t e r a t u r e to s e l e c t the most a p p r o p r i a t e d a t a b a s e management s y s t e m f o r a s e t o f a p p l i c a t i o n s ( o r o r g a n i z a t i o n ) . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 73 9. A b i l i t y to develop the major a l t e r n a t i v e s i n s p e c i f y i n g an i n f o r m a t i o n p r o c e s s i n g system, i n c l u d i n g data f i l e s and communication s t r u c t u r e s . of no use 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 10. A b i l i t y to use program t e s t i n g a i d s ( s p e c i a l debugging packages, t r a c e s , and snapshots). of no use 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y -11. A b i l i t y to make "rough-cut" f e a s i b i l i t y e v a l u a t i o n s o f proposed new techniques or a p p l i c a t i o n s o f c u r r e n t t e c h n o l o g y . of no use 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 12. A b i l i t y to grasp the f a c t s and f e e l i n g s of what i s spoken, of no use 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 13. A b i l i t y to use d i r e c t and random f i l e t e c h n i q u e s . of no use 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 14. A b i l i t y to prepare c l e a r and u s e f u l documentation (programs and procedures w i t h i n programs, systems e t c . ) . of no use 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 15. A b i l i t y to program i n assembly type languages (BAL, COMPASS). of no use 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 16. A b i l i t y to d e s i g n l o g i c a l data bases (determine data t y p e s , r e c o r d types, r e l a t i o n s h i p s between data items e t c . ) . of no use 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 17. A b i l i t y to develop s p e c i f i c a t i o n s f o r a major i n f o r m a t i o n system, a d d r e s s i n g a g i v e n o r g a n i z a t i o n a l need, and determine the breakdown i n t o manual and computer-based p a r t s . of no use 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 74 18. A b i l i t y t o d e s c r i b e and i d e n t i f y i n d i v i d u a l a n d g r o u p b e h a v i o u r ( e g . d e s c r i b e a n d i d e n t i f y w o r k i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p s among p e o p l e i n a n o r g a n i z a t i o n a l e n v i r o n m e n t ) . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 19. A b i l i t y t o u s e s o r t and u t i l i t y p a c k a g e s . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 20. A b i l i t y t o e v a l u a t e t h e s o c i a l c o n s e q u e n c e s o f a p r o p o s e d s y s t e m . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 21. A b i l i t y t o p r e p a r e e f f e c t i v e u s e r d o c u m e n t a t i o n f o r e i t h e r a p o r t i o n o f a s y s t e m o r an e n t i r e s y s t e m . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 22. A b i l i t y t o p r e d i c t a l t e r n a t i v e f u t u r e b e h a v i o u r o f i n d i v i d u a l s a n d g r o u p s ( e . g . p r e d i c t i n d i v i d u a l s ' r e a c t i o n s t o o p e r a t i n g c h a n g e s ) . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 23. A b i l i t y t o p r o g r a m i n f i l e o r i e n t e d l a n g u a g e s (COBOL, RPG). o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 24. A b i l i t y t o e f f e c t c h a n g e i n work r e l a t i o n s h i p s . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 25. A b i l i t y t o a n a l y z e p r o g r a m s o u t l i n e d b y t h e s y s t e m s a n a l y s t s f o r d e t a i l e d d e s i g n and c o n s t r u c t i o n . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 26. A b i l i t y t o r e c o g n i z e t h e a p p r o p r i a t e m a n a g e m e n t s c i e n c e ( o p e r a t i o n s r e s e a r c h ) m o d e l f o r s i t u a t i o n s c o m m o n l y e n c o u n t e r e d . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 . 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 75 2 7 . A b i l i t y t o u s e s e q u e n t i a l a n d index s e q u e n t i a l f i l e t e c h n i q u e s . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y " 2 8 . A b i l i t y t o view, d e s c r i b e a n d d e f i n e any s i t u a t i o n as a s y s t e m . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 2 9 . A b i l i t y t o d e v e l o p p o s i t i v e a n d n e g a t i v e impacts o f a s p e c i f i e d i n f o r m a t i o n s y s t e m on s p e c i f i e d p a r t s o f t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 3 0 . A b i l i t y t o w r i t e d e t a i l e d p r o g r a m s p e c i f i c a t i o n s . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 3 1 . A b i l i t y t o s p e c i f y e l e m e n t s a n d r e l a t i o n s h i p s o f i n f o r m a t i o n i n v a r i o u s f u n c t i o n a l s e g m e n t s . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 3 2 . A b i l i t y t o manage a c o m p u t e r b a s e d s y s t e m s p r o j e c t ( t e a m o r g a n i z a t i o n , c o s t a n d s c h e d u l e c o n t r o l , e t c . ) . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 3 3 . A b i l i t y t o a n a l y z e c o m m u n i c a t i o n s y s t e m s ( e s t i m a t e l i n e a n d t e r m i n a l r e q u i r e m e n t s , v o l u m e and m e s s a g e l e n g t h , q u e u e s , e t c . ) . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 3 4 . A b i l i t y t o r e c o g n i z e and remove p e r s o n a l i t y p r o b l e m s w h i c h i n t e r f e r e w i t h j o b c o m p l e t i o n . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 3 5 . A b i l i t y t o f o r m u l a t e and s o l v e s i m p l e management s c i e n c e t y p e m o d e l s ( l i n e a r p r o g r a m m i n g , d y n a m i c p r o g r a m m i n g , q u e u i n g , e t c . ) . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 76 3 6 . A b i l i t y to formulate and s o l v e complex s i m u l a t i o n models, of no use 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 3 7 . A b i l i t y to g a i n the c o n f i d e n c e and support o f o t h e r s i n work r e l a t i o n s h i p s . of no use 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 3 8 . A b i l i t y to perform economic analyses ( c o s t / b e n e f i t s t u d i e s ) of proposed resource commitments f o r a p r o j e c t . of no use 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 3 9 . A b i l i t y to c r e a t e , m a i n t a i n and i n t e r r o g a t e f i l e s . of no use 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 4 0 . A b i l i t y to c a l c u l a t e cost/performance t r a d e o f f s i n a system, of no use 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 4 1 . A b i l i t y to prepare sample data f o r programs and t e s t runs, of no use 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 4 2 . A b i l i t y to gather i n f o r m a t i o n s y s t e m a t i c a l l y w i t h i n an o r g a n i z a t i o n , g i v e n s p e c i f i e d i n f o r m a t i o n needs and/or s p e c i f i e d i n f o r m a t i o n flows. of no use 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 4 3 . A b i l i t y to program i n s c i e n t i f i c or a l g o r i t h m i c type languages (FORTRAN, PL / 1 ) of no use 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 4 4 . A b i l i t y to develop (design and implement) data bases u s i n g a g e n e r a l i z e d data base management system (IMS, TOTAL, ADABAS, IDS) . of no use 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 77 4 5 . A b i l i t y t o p r o g r a m i n s i m u l a t i o n t y p e l a n g u a g e s ( G P S S , S I M U L A , S I M S C R I P T ) . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y : 4 6 . A b i l i t y t o i d e n t i f y p o s s i b l e s h o r t term and long term e f f e c t s o f a s p e c i f i e d a c t i o n o n o r g a n i z a t i o n a l g o a l s . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 4 7 . A b i l i t y t o e v a l u a t e s y s t e m p e r f o r m a n c e a n d make a d j u s t m e n t s t o s y s t e m a f t e r i m p l e m e n t a t i o n . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 4 8 . A b i l i t y t o c o n v e r t e x i s t i n g p r o g r a m s f r o m o n e s y s t e m t o a n o t h e r ( l a n g u a g e t o l a n g u a g e , c o m p u t e r t o c o m p u t e r ) . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 4 9 . A b i l i t y t o a p p l y t h e " s y s t e m v i e w p o i n t " i n d e p t h w i t h i n t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 5 0 . A b i l i t y t o i n t e r v i e w o t h e r s . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 5 1 . A b i l i t y t o r e v i s e e x i s t i n g p r o g r a m s ( i n c l u d i n g d e b u g g i n g a n d r e f i n e m e n t ) . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 5 2 . A b i l i t y t o u s e i n t e r a c t i v e d e b u g g i n g f a c i l i t i e s ( a v a i l a b l e o n t i m e - s h a r i n g s y s t e m s ) . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 53. A b i l i t y t o d e v e l o p s t r u c t u r e d ( m o d u l a r ) p r o g r a m m e s , o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 78 5 4 . A b i l i t y t o r e c o g n i z e , u n d e r s t a n d , and c o m m u n i c a t e t h e m e a n i n g a p a r t i c u l a r e v e n t h a s f o r y o u . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 5 5 . A b i l i t y t o d e s i g n a n d u s e d e c i s i o n t a b l e s . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 5 6 . A b i l i t y t o d e s i g n and u s e f l o w c h a r t s (system a n d p r o g r a m ) , o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 5 7 . A b i l i t y t o d e s i g n and u s e r u n and g r i d c h a r t s . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 5 8 . A b i l i t y t o d e s i g n and u s e I / O l a y o u t s . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 5 9 . A b i l i t y t o s p e c i f y , g i v e n i n f o r m a t i o n n e e d s a n d s o u r c e s , s e v e r a l a l t e r n a t i v e s e t s o f i n f o r m a t i o n t o m e e t n e e d s . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 6 0 . A b i l i t y t o d e s i g n s o f t w a r e a n d h a r d w a r e c o n f i g u r a t i o n s . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 6 1 . A b i l i t y t o p r e s e n t i n w r i t i n g a summary o f a p r o j e c t f o r management a c t i o n ( s u i t a b l e t o s e r v e as a b a s i s f o r d e c i s i o n ) . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 6 2 . A b i l i t y t o p r e s e n t i n w r i t i n g a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n o f p a r t o f a p r o j e c t . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y T h e s k i l l s i n t h i s p a r t o f t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e b e g i n w i t h " K n o w l e d g e o f P l e a s e r a t e t h e s e s k i l l s a s y o u d i d 79 f o r t h o s e o f P A R T I . PART I I ( p l e a s e c i r c l e a n s w e r ) 1 . K n o w l e d g e o f " o u t s i d e " c o m p u t e r s e r v i c e s ( i n f o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g c o n s u l t a n t s , s o f t w a r e h o u s e s , a p p l i c a t i o n packages e t c . ) . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 2 . K n o w l e d g e o f i n v e n t o r y c o n t r o l m o d e l s . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 O f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 3 . K n o w l e d g e o f c o r p o r a t e p o l i c y and l i n e s o f a u t h o r i t y a n d r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 4 . K n o w l e d g e o f o p e r a t i n g s y s t e m s ( s c h e d u l i n g a l g o r i t h m s , m e m o r y a n d f a c i l i t i e s m a n a g e m e n t , i n t e r r u p t s y s t e m s ) . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 5 . K n o w l e d g e o f s e a r c h i n g t e c h n i q u e s ( s e q u e n t i a l , b i n a r y , d i r e c t o r y ) 1 o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 6. K n o w l e d g e o f t h e means t o i n s u r e t h e s e c u r i t y a n d i n t e g r i t y o f p r o g r a m s a n d d a t a d u r i n g and a f t e r p r o g r a m i m p l e m e n t a t i o n . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 7. K n o w l e d g e o f t h e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n / d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n i s s u e a n d i t s i m p l i c a t i o n s o n t h e EDP f u n c t i o n as w e l l a s o n t h e w h o l e o r g a n i z a t i o n . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 8. K n o w l e d g e o f f u n d a m e n t a l s o f p r o b a b i l i t y t h e o r y , o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 80 9 . K n o w l e d g e o f p e r f o r m a n c e e v a l u a t i o n t e c h n i q u e s ( s i m u l a t i o n p a c k a g e s , h a r d w a r e and s o f t w a r e m o n i t o r s ) . o f n o use 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y " 1 0 . K n o w l e d g e of e x i s t i n g c o m m u n i c a t i o n s f a c i l i t i e s ( l i n e t y p e s , e x c h a n g e s , u t i l i t i e s ) . o f no use 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 1 1 . K n o w l e d g e o f t h e p r i v a c y i s s u e a n d i t s i m p l i c a t i o n s on d a t a b a n k s ( b o t h p r i v a t e a n d p u b l i c ) . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 1 2 . K n o w l e d g e o f s o r t i n g t e c h n i q u e s ( r a d i x , m e r g e , b u b b l e , t r e e ) . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 1 3 . K n o w l e d g e o f m u l t i l i n k e d d a t a s t r u c t u r e s ( t r e e s , m u l t i l i s t s , i n v e r t e d l i s t s , h i e r a r c h i e s , n e t w o r k s e t c . ) . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 1 4 . K n o w l e d g e o f d a t a g a t h e r i n g t e c h n i q u e s ( i n t e r v i e w s , o b s e r v a t i o n , s a m p l i n g and o t h e r s ) . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 1 5 . K n o w l e d g e o f a c c o u n t i n g p r a c t i c e s a n d p r o c e d u r e s . of no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 1 6 . K n o w l e d g e o f m a t r i x a l g e b r a . of no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 17. K n o w l e d g e of queuing theory. of no use 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 81 1 8 . K n o w l e d g e o f d i f f e r e n t i a l c a l c u l u s a n d o p t i m i z a t i o n . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 1 9 . K n o w l e d g e of t i m e - s h a r i n g o p e r a t i n g systems Cconcepts and f a c i l i t i e s ) . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 2 0 . K n o w l e d g e of t h e f u n c t i o n of p u r p o s e f u l o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e a n d t h e m a j o r a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r t h a t s t r u c t u r e . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 2 1 . K n o w l e d g e o f c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f a u x i l i a r y s t o r a g e d e v i c e s ( s t o r a g e c a p a c i t y , e t c . ) : t a p e , d i s k d r u m . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 2 2 . K n o w l e d g e o f p r o j e c t p l a n n i n g and c o n t r o l t o o l s . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 2 3 . K n o w l e d g e o f j o b c o n t r o l l a n g u a g e s ( c o d i n g a n d t e c h n i q u e s ) , o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 2 4 . K n o w l e d g e o f c o m p u t e r o p e r a t i o n s management ^ s c h e d u l i n g , d a t a e n t r y , s y s t e m o p t i m i z a t i o n , c o m p u t e r s e c u r i t y * e t c . ) . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 2 5 . K n o w l e d g e o f s o u r c e s f o r u p d a t i n g k n o w l e d g e o f t e c h n o l o g y , o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 2 6 . K n o w l e d g e o f c o m p u t e r p e r s o n n e l management. ( i n c e n t i v e s y s t e m s , l e a d e r s h i p s t y l e s , p e r f o r m a n c e m e a s u r e m e n t , e t c . ) . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y • 82 2 7 . K n o w l e d g e o f i n p u t - o u t p u t d e v i c e s (types a v a i l a b l e , g e n e r a l m a r k e t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ) . o f no use 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y " 2 8 . Knowledge o f m i c r o p r o g r a m m i n g . o f no use 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 2 9 . / K n o w l e d g e o f m u l t i p r o g r a m m i n g and m u l t i p r o c e s s i n g . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 3 0 . K n o w l e d g e o f " i n n e r w o r k i n g s " o f . c o m p i l e r s , i n t e r p r e t e r s a n d o t h e r " t r a n s l a t o r s - ; ,'-:>-o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 of . a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 3 1 . K n o w l e d g e o f t h e i m p a c t o f c o m p u t e r s o n i n d u s t r i a l , c l e r i c a l a n d m a n a g e r i a l p o s i t i o n s . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e , n e c e s s i t y 3 2 . K n o w l e d g e o f m i n i c o m p u t e r s . o f no u s e 1 2 . 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 3 3 . K n o w l e d g e o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n a c c e s s m e t h o d s a n d t h e i r g e n e r a l f e a t u r e s t o s u p p o r t t e r m i n a l / t e l e p r o c e s s i n g a p p l i c a t i o n s . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 of a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 34. K n o w l e d g e o f t h e s t r u c t u r e d p r o g r a m m i n g c o n c e p t a n d o f i t s i m p l i c a t i o n s o n s y s t e m s d e v e l o p m e n t . o f no u s e 1 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 35 . . . K n o w l e d g e o f e l e m e n t a r y s t a t i s t i c s . .-. o f n o . u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 83 3 6 . K n o w l e d g e o f s e t t h e o r y . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y 3 7 . K n o w l e d g e o f g e n e r a l s y s t e m s t h e o r y ( o p e n / c l o s e d s y s t e m s , s y s t e m b o u n d a r i e s , f e e d b a c k c o n c e p t ) . o f no u s e 1 2 3 4 5 o f a b s o l u t e n e c e s s i t y APPENDIX C THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA 2075 WESBROOK MALL V A N C O U V E R , B.C., C A N A D A V6T 1W5 FACULTY OF COMMERCE AND BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION J u n e 7 t h , 1978 M r . S . Q . A l e x a n d e r D a t a P r o c e s s i n g M a n a g e r C a n a d i a n B u g g y - W h i p Company 1900 Memory L a n e , V i c t o r i a , B . C . NOT 1A1 D e a r M r . A l e x a n d e r , The e x e c u t i v e o f t h e V a n c o u v e r c h a p t e r o f t h e XXXX h a s k i n d l y c o o p e r a t e d w i t h us i n t h i s s t u d y , u n d e r t a k e n b y t h e F a c u l t y o f Commerce o f U B C , and h a v e f o r w a r d e d y o u r name i n t h e h o p e t h a t y o u may be o f h e l p t o u s . Many d a t a p r o c e s s i n g e x e c u t i v e s h a v e m e n t i o n e d t o me t h a t u n i v e r s i t y g r a d u a t e s d o n o t p o s s e s s t h e s k i l l s w h i c h a r e r e q u i r e d t o f u n c t i o n e f f e c t i v e l y i n t h e d a t a p r o c e s s i n g f i e l d . We a t UBC a r e c o n c e r n e d a b o u t t h i s and w o u l d l i k e t o t a k e a few m e a s u r e s t o s o l v e t h i s p r o b l e m . T h e f i r s t s t e p we p r o p o s e i s t o s u r v e y a c r o s s - s e c t i o n o f t h e d a t a p r o c e s -s i n g i n d u s t r y t o d e t e r m i n e t h e s k i l l s p e r c e i v e d as i m p o r t a n t b y d a t a p r o c e s s i n g m a n a g e r s and s y s t e m s a n a l y s t s t o be e f f e c t i v e i n t h e i r w o r k . T h i s q u e s t i o n n a i r e p a c k a g e w h i c h i s p a r t o f t h a t s u r v e y , c o n t a i n s two t y p e s o f q u e s t i o n n a i r e s : t h e " O r g a n i -z a t i o n P r o f i l e " q u e s t i o n n a i r e and t h e " E D P S k i l l s " q u e s t i o n -n a i r e . The " O r g a n i z a t i o n P r o f i l e " q u e s t i o n n a i r e i s t o be c o m p l e t e d b y t h e d a t a p r o c e s s i n g m a n a g e r s a n d w i l l be u s e d t o g e t a p r o f i l e o f t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n s s u r v e y e d . The " E D P S k i l l s " q u e s t i o n n a i r e i s t o be c o m p l e t e d b y b o t h d a t a p r o -c e s s i n g m a n a g e r s and s y s t e m s a n a l y s t s and w i l l be u s e d t o d e t e r m i n e t h e u s e f u l n e s s o f s k i l l s r e l a t e d t o d a t a p r o c e s -s i n g . We w o u l d a p p r e c i a t e i f y o u c o u l d f i l l o u t b o t h t h e " O r g a n i z a t i o n P r o f i l e " and t h e " E D P S k i l l s " q u e s t i o n n a i r e s and s e l e c t two o f y o u r s y s t e m s a n a l y s t s t o e a c h f i l l o u t one o f t h e r e m a i n i n g two " E D P S k i l l s " q u e s t i o n n a i r e s . The q u e s t i o n n a i r e s w i l l not take more than 25 minutes of you and your systems' a n a l y s t s time to f i l l out. Once completed, p l e a s e m a i l the four q u e s t i o n n a i r e s i n the p r e -p a i d r e t u r n envelope. You may be assured t h a t a l l i n f o r m a t i o n obtained w i l l be used s p e c i f i c a l l y f o r r e s e a r c h purposes and under no c i r -cumstances w i l l i n d i v i d u a l responses be d i s c l o s e d . Comple-ted q u e s t i o n n a i r e s w i l l be machine-processed c e n t r a l l y f o r use i n t h i s study o n l y . However, we would be d e l i g h t e d to send you a summary of the r e s e a r c h r e s u l t s . I f you wish a copy p l e a s e a t t a c h your business card to the returned ques-t i o n n a i r e s . We would be g r a t e f u l i f you c o u l d r e t u r n the completed package to us as soon as p o s s i b l e . We would l i k e to take t h i s o p p o r t u n i t y to thank you i n advance f o r t a k i n g p a r t i n t h i s study and to emphasize t h a t we do need your c o o p e r a t i o n . S i n c e r e l y yours, A l b e r t S. Dexter A s s o c i a t e P r o f e s s o r ASD/rm 87 APPENDIX D FOLLCH-UP CARD 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0094235/manifest

Comment

Related Items