Research Prospectus

Prospectus

A Case Study of Organizational Change Recipients’

Beliefs on the Adoption of Project Management Practices within an Organization

Stephen C. Burgan

Indiana Wesleyan University

Ed.D. Organizational Leadership

October 2010

Running title: ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE RECIPIENTS’ BELIEFS 1

BurganS_Prospectus_10-05-10_v7 (PUBLIC)

Proposed title

A Case Study of Organizational Change Recipients’ Beliefs on the Adoption of Project

Management Practices within an Organization

Abstract

In today’s evolving business climate, organizational change initiatives are the focus of

many operational business strategies. Research indicates that project management practices

substantially enhance change initiatives. Yet, like other approaches to change initiatives, the

successful implementation of project management remains elusive. In spite of substantial

research supporting the benefits of utilizing project management practices, effective

implementation of these practices remains elusive. One source of the failure to adopt project

management practices is the change beliefs of the change recipients. The proposed research

study will determine the organizational change recipients’ beliefs on the adoption of project

management practices. Identification of these concerns can assist in selecting appropriate

intervention strategies. The theoretical basis for this research study is the diffusion of

innovation. During the diffusion process, individuals form attitudes based on their beliefs about

the innovation, which then form their perceptions regarding the adoption of the innovation. The

purpose of this study is to discover and understand the organizational change recipients’ beliefs

on the adoption of project management practices. The primary qualitative strategy for this

research is to use an exploratory, single case study utilizing a mixed methods approach with an

embedded unit of analysis. The proposed mixed methods approach for this case study will

utilize: (1) the Organizational Change Recipients’ Beliefs Scale (OCRBS) to determine what the

organizational change recipients’ beliefs are, (2) semi-structured interviews to determine why the

organizational change recipients’ believe that way, and (3) direct observation of behaviors in the



natural setting of a selected organization. The embedded unit of analysis of the organization will

be based on stratified, purposeful sampling of executive management, project managers or

leaders, and project participants. This proposed research design will facilitate comparisons

among the three subgroups, and may provide organizational leaders and project management

practitioners with insight into factors influencing the adoption of project management practices.

Among the expected benefits of the study are the following: (a) a deeper understanding of

organizational adoption of standards and methods, (b) insight into change recipients’ beliefs

about change, and (c) a greater awareness of planning and executing implementation to

successfully introduce change into an organization.



To keep pace in a constantly evolving business world, organizations often find it

necessary to implement major enterprise-wide changes that affect their processes, products, and

people. As such, organizational change initiatives are the focus of many operational business

strategies (Chung & Hsu, 2010). To effectively lead and manage these organizational initiatives

requires the use of project management practices (Lientz & Rea, 2002). In spite of substantial

research supporting the benefits of standardized project management practices, effective

adoption of these practices remains elusive (Martinsuo, Hensman, Artto, Kujala, & Jaafari,

2006). Failure to recognize the change beliefs of the change recipients is a possible source of

failure to adopt project management practices.

The theoretical basis for this research study is the diffusion of innovation. Everett Rogers

(2003) defines the diffusion of innovation as "the process by which an innovation is

communicated through channels over time among the members of a social system" (p. 11).

During the diffusion process, individuals form attitudes based on their beliefs about the

innovation, which then form their perceptions regarding the adoption of the innovation. The

proposed research will investigate why organizations may or may not adopt standardized project

management practices. The purpose of this study is to discover and understand the

organizational change recipients’ beliefs on the adoption of project management practices.

The primary qualitative strategy for this research is an exploratory, single case study

utilizing a mixed methods approach with an embedded unit of analysis. The proposed mixed

methods approach for this case study will utilize a survey to determine the organizational change

recipients’ beliefs and semi-structured interviews and direct observation of behaviors to build an

exhaustive case to determine the basis for the organizational change recipients’ beliefs. The

Organizational Change Recipients’ Beliefs Scale (OCRBS) developed by Armenakis, Berneth,



Pitts, and Walker (2007), will be the survey instrument used for the proposed research study.

The OCRBS is a psychometrically sound, self-report questionnaire consisting of twenty-four

questions that can be used to assess the progress of organizational change efforts (Armenakis et

al., 2007). Sampling of the organization will be based on stratified, purposeful sampling of

executive management, project managers or project leaders, and project participants. This

design approach will illustrate the variations between the embedded units of analysis and

facilitate comparisons among the three subgroups (Patton, 2002).

Because project management is increasingly used as a means to achieve an organization’s

strategic objectives, it is important for organizational leaders to know and understand the

organizational change recipients’ beliefs in regard to adoption of project management practices.

The purpose of this proposed study is to discover and understand the organizational change

recipients’ beliefs on the adoption of project management practices. This will add to the body of

knowledge for organizational leadership by providing insights of the organizational change

recipient’s beliefs on adopting project management practices.

General Nature of the Problem

To keep pace in a constantly evolving business world, organizations often find it

necessary to implement major enterprise-wide changes that affect their processes, products, and

people. A research study conducted by the Society of Human Resource Management (2007),

found that ―more than four out of five organizations (82%) had implemented or planned to

implement new processes, products, services and/or policies requiring organization-wide change

management initiatives‖ (p. 1). Today’s organizations are impacted by a number of

environmental factors such as competition, innovation, turbulence, complexity, and ubiquitous

change (Chung & Hsu, 2010). Organizations must develop an ability to continuously and



consciously transform themselves. Facing the pressures of global competition, rapid

technological change, rapid product obsolescence, organizational downsizing, and complexity of

multiple organizational initiatives, organizational change initiatives are the focus of many

operational business strategies (Chung & Hsu, 2010).

These major business trends, coupled with the need for organizations to continuously and

consciously transform themselves, require the use of project management practices (Lientz &

Rea, 2002). Project management can provide the knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to lead

and manage these organizational change initiatives (Kerzner, 2003). Organizations that

successfully adopt standard project management practices realize improved financial results

(Englund, Graham, & Dinsmore, 2003; Kerzner, 2003; Center for Business Practices, 2006).

Research by Dai and Wells (2004) and Martinsuo et al., (2006) support project management

standards, methods, and training to deliver project results and meet budgets more consistently.

In 2008, the Project Management Institute determined from a multi-method, multi-disciplinary

research study, ―unequivocally that project management adds value‖ (Thomas & Mullaly, 2008,

p. 349). Having ―uniform or standardized project management procedures, processes, and

systems‖ (Thomas & Mullaly, p. 151) has the greatest impact on achieving value. The study

provides explicit and compelling evidence of the value that organizations recognize when project

management is appropriately implemented.

In spite of substantial research supporting the benefits of standardized project

management practices, effective implementation of these practices remains elusive (Martinsuo,

et al., 2006). For example, research by the Center for Business Practices (2006) found that

inconsistent project management practices remain one of the most prevalent challenges of

today’s organizations. The degree of value in adopting project management practices is realized



when the implementation is appropriate to the organization’s need (Thomas & Mullaly, 2008).

Thomas and Mullaly (2008) assert that ―the degree of value that organizations realize is

determined by how well what is implemented meets the needs of the organization‖ (p. 360).

Failure in the implementation of project management is evident with the continuing widespread

underachievement of projects. In a study conducted by Englund, Graham, and Dinsmore, the

majority of selected projects were found to have missed deadlines, budget overruns, and

customer dissatisfaction due to ―lack of project management skill, methodology, and

organizational support led to most projects being late, over budget, and not done to customer

satisfaction‖ (2003, p. 10).

Problem Statement

Major business trends, such as global competition, rapid technological change, rapid

product obsolescence, organizational downsizing, and complexity of multiple organizational

initiatives require organizations to continuously and consciously transform themselves. Project

management practices can provide the knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to lead and

manage these organizational change initiatives. Although application of standard project

management practices may be beneficial, the problem of widespread failure of implementation

of project management practices continues (Crawford, 2006). Supplemental research has

provided additional evidence that the failure of implementation resulting from corporate cultures

or by individual project managers is slow or may not occur at all (Christensen, Marx, &

Stevenson, 2006). However, the underlying reasons for slow or failed implementation have not

been fully explained (Christensen, et al., 2006).

Failure to recognize the change beliefs of the change recipients is a possible source of

failure in the implementation of project management practices. The proposed case study



described in this prospectus investigates why organizations may or may not adopt standardized

project management practices. Specifically, the research study will determine the organizational

change recipients’ beliefs in the adoption of project management practices.

Research Questions

The purpose of this study is to discover and understand the organizational change

recipients’ beliefs on the adoption of project management practices. Therefore, the research

questions for this study are the following:

1. What are the organizational change recipients’ beliefs on the adoption of

project management practices within an organization?

2. Why do the organizational change recipients believe that way?

"We need to make sure that we understand what we know about project management (not

just what we think we know), and what we need to learn‖ (Thomas, 2009, p. 130). The primary

qualitative strategy for this research is a single case study utilizing a mixed methods approach

with an embedded unit of analysis. In a qualitative study, the research question that asks what

describes the phenomenon within its real life context (Creswell, 1998). This statement provides

a justifiable rationale for conducting an exploratory study to develop relevant propositions for

further inquiry (Yin, 2009). The second research question of why is more explanatory and likely

to lead to the use of case studies (Creswell, 1998). Questions such as these bring the quantitative

results in to clear focus through elaboration, rather than frequencies or incidence.

The research will endeavor to provide organizational leaders and project management

practitioners with insight into factors influencing the adoption of project management standards.

Among the possible benefits of the study are the following (a) insight into the organizational

change recipients’ beliefs about change, (b) an understanding of the innovation-diffusion process



concerning organizational change, and (c) an awareness of influencing factors surrounding the

ability to effectively plan and execute the implementation to successfully introduce change into

an organization.

Definitions of Terms

Conducting a research study on the adoption of project management practices

necessitates the following definitions to assist in understanding the terms involved. Defining

terminology serves to avoid misrepresentation of data and facts. The following terms are used

throughout the study. These terms are defined in attempt to establish a foundation of meaning

and understanding.

Change agent – An individual whose influence can affect another individuals’

innovation-decision in a direction deemed desirable by the organization (Rodgers, 2003)

Change beliefs – ―Precursors of cognitions, emotions, and intentions that determine buy-

in in the paradigms and behaviors of those who will be affected by the change‖ (Armenakis, et

al., 2007, p. 482)

Change recipients – Individuals impacted, positively or negatively, by the outcome of the

organizational change initiative

Executive management – Members of an organization having authority to authorize the

expenditure of financial and human resources, and to adopt project management practices; a

categorical variable for use as an embedded unit of analysis

Organizational change – Modification of an organization’s structure or processes to

improve performance, communication, decision-making, and problem-solving capabilities

(Burke, 2008)



Organizational change initiative – Activities that achieve various organizational strategic

goals or objectives and expend financial, capital, and human resources of an organization

Opinion leader – An individual who is able to influence other individuals’ attitudes or

beliefs informally in a desired way with relative frequency (Rodgers, 2003)

Project manager or project leader – Organizational member designated to manage or lead

others (or both) within a project environment to expected project outcomes based on defined and

accepted objectives: a categorical variable for use as an embedded unit of analysis

Project management – ―The application of knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to

project activities to meet project requirements‖ (Project Management Institute, 2008, p. 6)

Project management practices – Individualized, discrete knowledge, skills, tools, and

techniques as defined in A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, 4th

ed. (2008)

Project management practitioner – Organizational member who performs various

activities within a project environment that lead to project outcomes based on defined and

accepted objectives; a categorical variable for use as an embedded unit of analysis

Assumptions Guiding the Study

The early stage of formulating a research study is written with a set of assumptions about

the study. These assumptions guide the approach to the proposed study in regard to its scope,

size, and scale. One initial assumption is that the organization described in this proposed

research study seeks to adopt and institutionalize project management practices. This

assumption is based on the belief that the organizational leaders understand that project

management practices result in tangible and intangible benefits. Achieving value from the

adoption of project management practices is the result of a successful implementation of project

management practices that are appropriate to the organization, given its organizational context



and the established objectives for undertaking the change initiative. Another assumption is that

the external environment, within which the organization operates, along with the organization’s

internal structure and practices, may influence the adoption and implementation of project

management practices.

Achieving a common definition for what is known as project management may not be the

same across and within organizations. According to the Project Management Institute’s A Guide

to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, 4th

ed. (2008), project management is defined as

―the application of knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to project activities to meet project

requirements‖ (p. 6). The assumption made for this study is that the term, project management,

is understood to be the same across all organizations. This study will use a broad definition of

project management that includes ―project management processes, training, and toolsets to

incorporate any disparities that may exist in terminology or definition‖ (Thomas & Mullaly,

2008, p. 145). Another assumption concerns the various factors that affect the population and

sample size of the research study. Acceptance, authorization, and availability will determine the

selection of a representative organization to participate in this study.

Literature Review

Creswell (1998) states, ―the strongest and most scholarly rationale for a research study

follows from a documented need in the literature for increased understanding and dialogue about

an issue‖ (p. 94). Literature review can develop a justification for a study by identifying how the

work will address an important need or unanswered question (Maxwell, 2005). Maxwell states

that prior research can inform the researcher regarding decisions about methods, suggesting

alternative approaches, or revealing potential problems and their solutions. ―The shape of

project management research in the future will be built on prior research and will need to be



appropriate to the current trends in the practice of project management and the world of work‖

(Thomas, 2009, p. 130). Project management research in the future will grow from the

foundation of current project management research, stimulated by the needs of project

management practices applicable to what is required to manage projects successfully.

Review of Project Management

Research indicates that project management practices substantially enhance change

initiatives. Lientz and Rea, (2002), assert that the need to implement major enterprise-wide

changes requires the extensive use of project management practices. Project management is

increasingly used as a means to achieve an organization’s strategic objective(s) (Lientz & Rea,

2002). According to Ward (2000), project management is the discipline of applying knowledge,

skills, tools, and management techniques to project activities to meet or exceed the needs and

expectations of project sponsors and stakeholders. The Project Management Institute (2008)

defines project management as ―the application of knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to

project activities to meet the project requirements‖ (p. 6). Modern project management evolved

in the 1990’s with an emphasis on establishing standard practices as formalized organizational

competencies (Crawford, 2006). Kerzner (2003) stated, ―Project management is no longer

viewed as a system internal to the organization. Project management is now viewed as a

competitive weapon that brings quality and value-added to the customer‖ (p. xi).

The purpose of this study is to discover and understand the organizational change

recipients’ beliefs on the adoption of project management practices. Early research in project

management focused on improving specific individual tools and techniques of project

management or on understanding how various project management tools and techniques support

project effectiveness or performance (Thomas, 2009). By the early 2000’s, the interest changes



from managing projects to integration of project management concepts into organizational

management (Thomas, 2009). "Recently, the focus in project management literature has shifted

from performing project management to integrating it into the organization" (Thomas, 2009, p.

131). Ives (2005) found that there is little research related to the effective fit of projects into

organizations. The Ives study is limited, as it includes in-depth interviews of only four people

(Ives, 2005).

Review of Organizational Change Management

Today, virtually every organization faces significant change. Organizations in all

industries encounter some form of global competition, technological change, product

obsolescence, or downsizing (Chung & Hsu, 2010). Unfortunately, organizational change is

difficult, and most attempts to initiate and implement change fail (Black & Gregersen, 2003).

One problem, identified by Black & Gregersen (2003), is the tendency of companies to focus on

looking for the convenient way to reduce resistance to change, rather than addressing roots of the

failure. In research on organizational culture, Kaliprasad (2006) found that resistance to

adoption is prevalent in a culture built on tradition and stability rather than a focus on

responsiveness and flexibility. Kaliprasad (2006) stated that to be successful, a company must

create a structure that supports an environment comfortable with change adoption.

Whether large or small organizational change initiatives are undertaken, executive

management creates the expectation that organizational members should be able to continuously

adapt to these changes (Caldwell, Herold, & Fedor, 2004). Due to the increasing amount and

complexity of organizational changes, a substantial literature base has emerged that examines

various change phenomena (Armenakis & Bedeian, 1999). However, much of the literature fails

to investigate an organization’s resistance-for-change to determine if adoption of the proposed



change will succeed (Porras & Robertson, 1992). Organizational change begins by changing the

attitudes of individuals, not the other way. Even the most ardent believers in organizational

change have agreed that, at minimum, organizational change requires some individual early

adopters (Black & Gregersen, 2003). Just as in the marketplace, a new product almost never

succeeds immediately; it requires early adopters to achieve traction or momentum.

Organizations are the same, moving organizational members, to the point of adopting change, is

the role of the change agent. By understanding the readiness-level for organizational change, the

effectiveness of the change agent will depend on the culture of the organization (Worley &

Lawler, 2006). Worley and Lawler proposed that organizations must become comfortable with

adopting change; so comfortable that adopting change is an expected mode of conducting

business.

This segment of organizational change management research is becoming increasingly

important as evidence shows that most change initiatives result are unsuccessful, and in looking

for a possible cause for this failure, researchers are pointing to the readiness-for-change as a

possible source (Porras & Robertson, 1992). Given this assertion, change management experts

are now advocating a greater emphasis on planning for change to effectively manage the change

process, improving the adoption and sustainability of the change initiative (Worley & Lawler,

2006). The results of this study will add to the organizational leadership body of knowledge by

providing insights of the organizational change recipients’ beliefs on adopting project

management practices.

Review of Diffusion of Innovation Theory

The theoretical basis for this research study is the diffusion of innovation theory. The

researcher posits that to ―demonstrate the particulars of the study will serve to illuminate larger



issues and therefore hold potential significance for that field‖ (Marshall & Rossman, 2006, p.

12). Everett Rogers (2003) defines the diffusion of innovation as "the process by which an

innovation is communicated through channels over time among the members of a social system"

(p. 11). An innovation is defined as "an idea, practice, or object that is perceived as new,

whether or not it is objectively new as measured by the lapse of time since its first use or

discovery‖ (Rogers, 2003, p. 12).

The four theories that explain the diffusion of innovation include: (1) the innovation-

decision process, (2) individual innovativeness, (3) rate of adoption, and (4) the perceived

attributes (Rodgers, 2003). This study utilizes the innovation-decision process as the theoretical

basis for understanding the adoption of project management practices in an organization.

The innovation-decision process

The innovation-decision process (see Figure 1) outlines the process and the five stages of

knowledge, persuasion, decision, implementation, and confirmation. The innovation-decision

process offers a consistent process by which an innovation is diffused in societies (Rogers,

2003). The innovation-decision process also provides a framework for the stakeholders to

successfully plan and sustain the adoption and implementation of the innovation. In the context

of this study, the innovation would be project management and societies would be the selected

organization.

The decision to adopt an organizational change initiative, such as project management

practices, requires adjustments in individual perceptions (Armenakis et al., 2007). Rogers

Knowledge

Stage Persuasion

Stage

Decision

Stage

Implementation

Stage Confirmation

Stage

Figure 1. The five stages of the Innovation-Decision Process



asserts that the diffusion process operates at the organizational as well as the individual level

(Rogers, 2003). Individuals proceed through various stages of the innovation-decision process,

ranging from knowledge of an innovation, to forming an attitude about the innovation, making a

decision about adoption or rejection, implementing the new idea, and finally seeking

confirmation of this decision (Rogers, 2003).

During the knowledge stage, the potential adopter seeks information about the

innovation. In the persuasion stage, individuals form attitudes based on their beliefs about the

innovation, which then form their perceptions regarding the adoption of the innovation. During

the decision stage, the individual engages in decision-making activities that lead to the adoption

or rejection of the innovation. The implementation stage occurs when an adopter puts the

innovation to use. In the confirmation stage, the adopter seeks reinforcement for the decision

already made.

According to Armenakis et al., (2007), understanding the beliefs of the change recipients

impacted by the proposed change can improve the effectiveness of planning and implementing

the organizational change initiative. ―A belief is an opinion or a conviction about the truth of

something that may not be readily obvious or subject to systematic verification‖ (Armenakis et

al., 2007, p. 483). The change recipients’ beliefs toward an innovation form a favorable or

unfavorable attitude toward the innovation between the knowledge and decision stage (see

Figure 2) in the innovation-decision process (Rodgers, 2005). Rodgers states that attitudes are a

Knowledge

Stage Persuasion

Stage Decision

Stage Implementation

Stage Confirmation

Stage

Figure 2. Illustration of where the Change Recipients’ Beliefs toward an innovation

occurs within the Innovation-Decision Process

Change Beliefs



collection of an individual’s beliefs about an innovation that predisposes his or her actions.

Armenakis et al., (2007) calls these beliefs (cognitions, emotions, and intentions) as ―precursors

to behavior reactions‖ (p. 483). During the persuasion stage is when an individual’s mental

activity is based on affective or feelings about the innovation (Rodgers, 2003). According to

Rodgers (2003), ―it is at the persuasion stage that a general perception of the innovation is

developed‖ (p. 175).

Within the innovation-decision process, the importance of the change recipients and their

roles are crucial to the adoption of the innovation. Moving the change recipients through the

various stages of the adoption process relies on the use of change agents, opinion leaders, and a

diffusion network. Change agents are often responsible for creating the need for change and its

subsequent implementation within the organization. Another critical role involved in the

innovation-decision process is the opinion leader. Rogers (2003) defined opinion leaders as

individuals who are able to informally influence an adopter’s attitude or behavior with relative

frequency. Opinion leaders increase the rate of adoption, and transfer innovation information

across various diffusion networks.

Research Methods and Procedures

The primary strategy for this research is an exploratory, single case study utilizing a

mixed methods approach with an embedded unit of analysis. The goal is to develop pertinent

propositions for further inquiry. The researcher has chosen a mixed methods approach because

the research topic has yet to be explored. The findings from the research study conducted by the

Project Management Institute support this design decision. "We need to make sure that we

understand what we know about project management (not just what we think we know), and

what we need to learn‖ (Thomas, 2009, p. 130). According to Yin (2009), understanding can be



facilitated with a case study approach in order to study individuals in their natural settings. The

case study method is chosen to understand the real life phenomenon in depth by understanding

encompassed, important, contextual conditions. Yin asserts that the case study's unique strength

is its ability to consider a full variety of evidence of documents, artifacts, interviews, and

observations.

Critique of a Case Study Approach

As a research approach, case studies are considered by some to be a less desirable form

of inquiry due to their lack of rigor (Yin, 2009). A methodical research design that explicitly

provides a logical set of research protocols can be used to judge the quality and rigor of the

proposed research. ―Case study designs need to maximize their quality through four critical

conditions related to design quality: (a) construct validity, (b) internal validity, (c) external

validity, and (d) reliability‖ (Yin, p. 24). According to Yin, construct validity is achieved by

identifying correct operational measures for the concepts being studied. Internal validity, not

used for descriptive or exploratory studies, seeks to establish a causal relationship. External

validity defines the domain in which a study's findings can be generalized. Reliability

demonstrates that the procedural aspects of the study can be repeated with the same results.

Another concern regarding case studies is that they provide little basis for scientific

generalization. External validity is alleged to be an obstacle in conducting case studies. Critics

claim that single cases offer a poor basis for generalizing by attempting to contrast the study’s

findings to a larger universe or population. According to Yin, the similarity between a study’s

findings and a larger population is incorrect when dealing with case studies (p. 43). The

response to this concern is that case studies are ―generalizable to theoretical propositions and not

to populations or universes‖ (Yin, 2009, p. 15). Yin (2009) asserts that ―in doing a case study,



your goal will be to expand and generalize theories (analytic generalization) and not to

enumerate frequencies (statistical generalization)‖ (p. 15). This study will utilize analytic

generalization to explore the diffusion of innovation theory, which can be used to compare

empirically the results of the investigation.

Single and Multiple Case Study Designs.

In conducting a qualitative study, the researcher must consider whether to study a single

case or multiple cases. Creswell (1998) argues that ―the study of more than one case dilutes the

overall analysis; the more cases an individual studies, the greater the lack of depth in any single

case" (p. 63). A potential vulnerability of a single case design is that a case may later turn out

not to be the case it was thought to be at the outset (Yin, 2009). Because of the flexibility in a

case study approach, the intended research design may no longer be appropriate for the research

questions being asked. This means that the initial research questions may have one orientation,

but as the case study proceeds, a different orientation may emerge, and the evidence will address

different research questions. Yin (2009) asserts that single case designs require careful

consideration to minimize the chances of misrepresentation and to maximize the access needed

to collect the case study evidence. Operational protocols and procedures must be established and

caution must be exercised to ensure the case is relevant to the issues and questions of interest to

the research prior to the commencement of the case study or selection of the case site.

Both single and multiple case designs have distinct advantages and disadvantages in

comparison to single case designs. An advantage of multiple cases is that the findings are often

considered more compelling, and the overall study is regarded as more robust (Yin, 2009). A

significant disadvantage when undertaking a multiple case study is that it ―can require extensive

resources and time beyond the means of a single student or independent research investigator;



therefore, the decision to undertake multiple case studies cannot be taken lightly‖ (Yin, p. 53).

"What motivates the researcher to consider a large number of cases is the idea of

generalizability, a term that holds little meaning for most qualitative researchers" (Yin, p. 142).

Choice of a single case design.

The conceptual framework for choosing a research design is primarily a model of what is

happening in the case, and why. This focus on meaning is central to what is known as the

interpretive approach to social science (Maxwell, 2005, p. 22). For this reason, the researcher

has chosen a single-case design. The researcher is interested in the physical events and

behaviors taking place, how the participants make sense of these, and how their understanding

influences their behaviors. The researcher will select an organization, or a unit thereof, to study.

A key step in designing and conducting a single case study is defining the case itself (the

holistic design) and the unit of analysis (Yin, 2009). The preference for a single case design can

be strengthened by using an embedded design. An embedded design consists of subunits of

analyses, which can ―add significant opportunities for extensive analysis, enhancing the insights

into the single case‖ (Yin, 2009, p. 52). In the context of this study, the embedded unit of

analysis will be executive management, project managers or project leaders, and project

management practitioners. Another design decision for strengthening the single case design is to

conduct a mixed methods approach. The mixed methods approach ―forces the research methods

to share the same research questions, to collect complementary data, and to conduct counterpart

analyses‖ (Yin, 2009, p. 63). Mixed methods studies can permit researchers to address more

complicated research questions and collect a richer, stronger array of evidence than can be

accomplished by any single method alone. Yin (2009) states that an embedded case study design

confirms that certain kinds of case studies already represent a form of mixed methods research.



The proposed mixed methods approach for this case study will utilize a quantitative survey to

determine the organizational change recipients’ beliefs, and semi-structured interviews, and

direct observation to build an in-depth case to determine why the organizational change

recipients’ believe that way.

Organization Change Recipient Beliefs Scale

―To strategically change your organization, you must first change individuals‖ (Black &

Gregersen, 2003, p. 2). Unlocking individual change starts and ends with the beliefs that

subjects carry in their heads. Black and Gregersen (2003), claim that our beliefs direct our

behavior. If organizational leaders cannot change the individuals’ beliefs, they will not be able

to change the organization as a whole. As a result, successful organizational change requires a

focus on individuals and understanding of their beliefs in regard to change.

The Organizational Change Recipients’ Beliefs Scale (OCRBS) developed by

Armenakis, et al., (2007), is the chosen survey instrument to be used for the proposed study. The

OCRBS is a psychometrically sound, self-report questionnaire consisting of twenty-four

questions to assess the progress of organizational change efforts (Armenakis et al., 2007). The

instrument determines the degree of acceptance among the change recipients, identifies

deficiencies in specific change beliefs, and provides a basis for planning and executing the

implementation (Armenakis et al., 2007). The advantages of the OCRBS are as follows: (a)

assesses five beliefs that have been identified as relevant from previous change literature, (b) can

be used concurrently with other change instruments, and (c) can be used during the three major

phases of organizational change—readiness, adoption, and institutionalization (Armenakis et al.,

2007). The researcher has obtained permission from the authors of the instrument and SAGE

Publications via the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. to use the OCRBS in this study.



Concerns-Based Adoption Model

Another research instrument considered for this research study that measures

organizational change and adoption is the Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM). Based on

research on the change process for educators by Fuller (1969) and change theories by Lewin

(1951), Hall & Texas Univ., (1974) conceptualized the process known as the Concerns-Based

Adoption Model (CBAM). CBAM is based on concern-based theory that change is a

progression of events that may be predictable (Hall & Texas Univ., 1974). According to the

Concerns Based Adoption Model (CBAM), educators will experience concerns during the

process of adopting an educational innovation. Identification of these concerns can assist in

selecting appropriate interventions strategies.

The CBAM describes a process of teacher change. The CBAM is composed of three

parts: Stages of Concern, Levels of Use, and Innovation Configuration (Hall & Texas Univ.,

1974). It emphasizes the adoption of educational innovation through the lens of developmental

changes in the potential adopter’s beliefs and practices. Stages of Concern deals with expressed

adopter concerns and issues related to his or her experience with, or perception of, the

innovation. The Stages of Concern analyzes the educator’s feelings, observations, problems,

successes, and failures while progressing through the change process of innovation adoption.

When originally developed, CBAM emphasis was on the process entailed when

educational institutions become involved in adopting innovations (Roach, Kratochill, & Frank,

2009). Where diffusion of innovation theory is broadly interested in the process of diffusion in

any setting, CBAM was developed to describe the adoption-decision of teachers in an

educational institution. Due to its limitations toward educational innovation, the CBAM was

discarded as a model for this research study.



Data Collection

The qualitative aspect of this study will consist of two data collection techniques, semi-

structured interviewing and direct observation. The researcher will conduct semi-structured

interviews of executive management, project managers, and project participants. Semi-

structured interviews are conducted with a fairly open framework which allows for focused,

conversational, two-way communication. The semi-structured interviews will be pre-designed

with questions based on the five change beliefs. Other interview questions will evolve during the

interview, allowing both the researcher and the person being interviewed the flexibility to probe

for details or discuss issues.

In addition, the researcher will conduct direct observations. This case study will take

place in the natural setting of the selected organization, creating the opportunity for direct

observation. Such observations provide the researcher with additional data (Yin, 2009). During

site visits, the researcher will utilize informal direct observation techniques when administering

the OCRBS assessment and conducting interviews. According to Yin, ―observational evidence

is often useful in providing additional information about the topic being studied‖ (p. 110).

Data Analysis

―Simply observing and interviewing does not ensure that the research is qualitative; the

qualitative researcher must also interpret the beliefs and behaviors of participants‖ (Janesick,

2000, p. 387). The study design will incorporate an embedded single-case study using a mixed

methods design to conduct research with overlapping triangulation of quantitative and qualitative

data collection methods (Yin, 2003). In the embedded single-case study, three unique groups,

consisting of executive management, project managers, and project practitioners, will be

investigated to understand their change beliefs on the adoption of project management.



The Use of Triangulation.

Yin states that, ―a major strength of case study data collection is the opportunity to use

many different sources of evidence‖ (Yin, 2009, p. 114). This study will utilize a data collection

and analysis method called data triangulation. Data collection and analysis protocol will involve

assessing the change recipients’ beliefs using the OCRBS, semi-structured interviews, and direct

observations as qualitative data to confirm findings. Data triangulation diminishes potential

problems of internal validity because the multiple sources of evidence essentially provide

multiple measures of the same phenomenon (Yin, 2009). Triangulation helps to maximize

internal validity and the reliability of the data.

Quantitative Data Analysis

The quantitative aspect of this study will assess the five change beliefs of executive

management, project managers, and project participants utilizing the Organizational Change

Recipients Beliefs Scale. Descriptive statistics will be used to express the quantitative data in a

study. Descriptive statistics will enable comparisons across the three embedded units of

analysis, throughout the organization. Descriptive statistics are typically distinguished from

inferential statistics in that inferential statistics, the data analysis is attempting to reach

conclusions that extend beyond the immediate data alone. The goal of this study will be to

expand and generalize theories (analytic generalization), not to enumerate frequencies (statistical

generalization).

Qualitative Data Analysis

Qualitative content analysis involves a process designed to condense raw data into

categories or themes based on the data collected from the semi-structured interviews.

Interpretation of the interviews will involve attaching significance to the data, making sense of



the findings, and ―imposing order on an unruly but surely patterned world‖ (Patton, 2002, p.

480). This process uses inductive reasoning, by which themes and categories emerge from the

data through the researcher’s examination and comparison. Qualitative content analysis includes

inductive reasoning (Patton, 2002). Analytic induction will be used for verifying theories and

propositions of the five change beliefs on the adoption-decision process in the diffusion of

innovation theory.

Direct Observation.

Qualitative research is concerned with understanding and interpreting another person's

social world through accessing their lived experiences. In addition to semi-structured interviews,

the researcher will collect data through direct observation. Observations in a qualitative study

are intentionally unstructured. The researcher can take advantage of new and potentially

significant objects and events as they present themselves. The principle form of data collected

from direct observation is field notes, which detail behaviors, conversations, or setting

characteristics as recorded by the researcher. Analyses of informal direct observations will

utilize interpretations the researcher makes of the observed phenomena.

Patton (2002) describes the processes of inductive analysis as ―discovering patterns,

themes, and categories in one’s data, according to an existing framework‖ (p. 453), which

contrasts with deductive analysis where the analytic categories are stipulated beforehand.

According to Patton, the researcher may generate ―analyst-constructed typologies‖ to reflect the

understandings expressed by the participants. As patterns, themes, and categories emerge from

the data, the researcher will employ a coding scheme to maintain organization of the collected

data.



Data collection, analysis, and interpretation are integrated and iterative processes. As

categories, themes, and coding schemes are being developed, the process of inductive

interpretation begins. Interpretation brings meaning and coherence to the themes, patterns, and

categories, developing linkages and a story line that makes sense (Marshall, C. & Rossma, G.,

2006). Patton states (2002, p. 480), ―Interpretation means attaching significance to what was

found, making sense of the findings, offering explanations, drawing conclusions, extrapolating

lessons, making inferences, considering meanings, and otherwise impossible order.‖

Theoretical Proposition

The theoretical basis for this research study is the diffusion of innovation. The four

theories that explain the diffusion of innovation include: (1) the innovation-decision process, (2)

individual innovativeness, (3) rate of adoption, and (4) the perceived attributes. This study

utilizes the innovation-decision process as the theoretical basis for researching the adoption of

project management with an organization. The innovation-decision process also provides a

framework for the stakeholders to successfully plan and sustain the adoption and implementation

of the innovation. In the context of this study, the innovation would be project management

practices and societies would be the selected organization intended to adopt project management

practices.

Site Selection and Sampling

The purpose of this single case study is to discover and understand the organizational

change recipients’ beliefs on the adoption of project management practices. The proposed single

case study design is based on a representative organization that is considering, or in the process

of, adopting project management practices or that is in the process of adopting project

management practices. One of the key and yet most difficult aspect of a case study approach is



gaining access to a social setting that is relevant to the research problem (Bryman, 2008). The

objective is to select an organization that represents a typical organization among many different

organizations, such as a manufacturing firm believed to be typical of many manufacturing firms

in the same industry, a construction organization typical of many construction organizations. As

an exploratory research study, the findings are to be analytically generalizable about the

experiences of the observed phenomenon (Yin, 2009).

According to Yin (2009) and the potential vulnerability of a single case design, there will

be several factors established during the research design to qualify an organization, or its

individuals members, to participate in the study. The initial qualifying criterion will be that

executive management and project management practitioners recognize the value in the adoption

of project management practices. The second qualifying criterion concerns the various logistical

factors that affect the access and data collection procedures. Acceptance, authorization, and

availability will determine the selection of a representative organization to participate in this

research study.

Based on the Armenakis et al., (2007) recommendation for future research, this

researcher will add three categorical variables that ask the participants their job role based on a

pre-defined set of multiple-indicators. The three categorical variables would distinguish between

executive management (organizational members who have decision-making authority), project

managers or project leaders (organizational members who are designated to manage or lead

others within a project), and project management practitioners (organizational members who

perform project activities). Establishing these three categorical variables strengthens the single

case study design and enables the inclusion of an embedded unit of analysis. Multiple-indicators

used within a self-completion questionnaire will provide a better measure or operational



definition of the change beliefs (Bryman, 2008). The multiple-indicators will subdivide the five

change beliefs to more clearly define the various levels of influence that are needed to

successfully implement an organizational change. It is the opinion of Armenakis et al., (2007)

that subdividing the change beliefs is essential to assess and help build the necessary support for

the organizational change.

To further strengthen the proposed single case study, the researcher will conduct a mixed

methods approach. The proposed mixed methods approach for this case study will utilize (1) the

OCRBS to determine the organizational change recipients’ beliefs and (2) semi-structured

interviews to determine the reason(s) why the organizational change recipients’ believe that way.

For completing the OCBRS, sampling of the organization (the holistic design) will be based on

stratified purposeful sampling. The goal of stratified purposeful sampling is to sample

participants so that those sampled are relevant to the research questions that are being posited

(Bryman, 2008). In this study, stratified purposeful sampling will be based on the three

categorical variables of executive management, project managers or leaders, and project

participants. The stratified purposeful sampling will illustrate possible variations between the

embedded units of analysis and facilitate comparisons between the three subgroups (Patton,

2002).

In contrast to the OCRBS, semi-structured interviews will be utilized to permit the

research participants to describe what is meaningful and salient to them based on the

predetermined change beliefs defined in the OCRBS instrument. Semi-structured interviewing

―promotes standardization of both asking questions and the recording of the answers‖ (Bryman,

2008, p. 194). As a form of naturalistic inquiry, inductive analysis will allow patterns to emerge

that exists in the phenomenon being investigated (Patton, 2002). Semi-structured interviewing



will reduce errors due to variation in the asking of the questions and greater accuracy in and ease

of processing the respondents’ answers.

Final determination of population and sample size will be established during the proposal

development for this study. Data collection will be achieved by the researcher, with the consent

of the organization’s management, with scheduled meetings designated to complete the twenty-

four question, paper-based OCRBS survey instrument and semi-structured interviews.

Quantitative data analysis will be performed utilizing IBM® SPSS® Statistics v18.0.

Qualitative data analysis will be performed utilizing computer-aided qualitative analysis software

(NVivo v8.0).

Contribution to the Field of Organizational Leadership

―Getting a new idea adopted, even when it has obvious advantages, is difficult‖ (Rodgers,

2003, p. 1). So is the case for the adoption of project management practices. As project

management is increasingly used as a means to achieve an organization’s strategic objective, it is

important for organizational leaders to know and understand that the adoption of project

management practices constitutes in and of itself an organizational change initiative. Research

on organizational change is becoming increasingly important as evidence shows that most

change initiatives result in failure. As the number of failures continues to increase, researchers

are pointing to the readiness for change as a possible source (Porras & Robertson, 1992). Given

this assertion, change management experts are now advocating a greater focus on planning for

change to effectively manage the change process to improve the adoption and sustainability of

the change initiative (Worley & Lawler, 2006).

This study utilizes Rogers’s (2003) diffusion of innovation theory as the theoretical basis

for this study. Within the diffusion of innovation, Rogers (2003) states that the innovation-



decision process is used to gather information about an innovation and reduce uncertainties about

its advantages and disadvantages. This study will specifically investigate the persuasion stage of

the innovation decision process, which allows an individual to exhibit a belief (favorable or

unfavorable) about the innovation. Utilizing Rodger’s recommendation to conduct a point of

adoption study, this study will incorporate the beliefs of the change recipients to effectively plan

and execute how the innovation would be implemented (Rogers, 2003).

A qualitative study such as this would add to the literature on organizational leadership

about the change beliefs concerning the adoption and diffusion of project management in

organizations. The expected benefits of the study are the following: (a) insight into the five

change recipients’ beliefs that could aid or hinder the proposed organizational change to adopt

project management, (b) an understanding of the persuasion stage of the innovation-diffusion

process for whether or not the adoption of project management, and (c) a greater awareness to

adequately plan and execute the implementation to successfully introduce change into an

organization. The research findings would provide valuable information for decision makers on

how to effectively communicate the necessary change messages to successfully adopt project

management into an organization.



References

Armenakis, A., & Bedeian, A. (1999). Organizational change: A review of theory and

research in the 1990s. Journal of Management, 25(3), 293-315.

doi:10.1177/014920639902500303

Armenakis, A., Bernerth, J., Pitts, J., & Walker, H. (2007). Organizational change recipients'

beliefs scale. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 43(4), 481-505.

doi:10.1177/0021886307303654

Black, J. S. & Gregersen, H. B. (2003). Leading strategic change: Breaking through the brain

barrier. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bryman, A. (2008). Social research methods. 3rd

ed. Oxford, NY: Oxford Press.

Burke, W. (2008). Organizational change: Theory and practice, 2nd

ed. Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage Publications.

Caldwell, S., Herold, D., & Fedor, D. (2004). Toward an understanding of the relationships

among organizational change, individual differences, and changes in person-environment

fit: A cross-level study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 868-882.

doi:10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.868

Center for Business Practice Research. (2006). Project management: The state of the

industry. J. Cabanis–Brewin (Ed.). Havertown, PA.

Christenson, C., Marx, M., & Stevenson, H. (2006). The tools of cooperation and change.

Harvard Business Review, 84(10). 73-80. Retrieved from

http://0-web.ebscohost.com.oak.indwes.edu/

Chung, Y. & Hsu, Y. (2010). Research on the correlation between Design for Six Sigma

implementation activity levels, new product development strategies, and new product



development performance in Taiwan’s high-tech manufacturers. Total Quality

Management. 21(6). 603-616. DOI: 10.1080/14783363.2010.483073

Crawford, L. (2006). Developing organizational project management capability: Theory and

practice. Project Management Journal, 37(3). 74-86. Retrieved from


Creswell, J. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among the five traditions.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Dai, C., & Wells, W. (2004). An exploration of project management office features and their

relationship to project performance. International Journal of Project Management,

22(7), 523–532. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2004.04.001

Englund, R., Graham, R., & Dinsmore, P. (2003). Creating the project office: A manager’s guide

to leading organizational change. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.

Fuller, F. (1969). Concerns of teachers: A developmental conceptualization. American

Educational Research Journal, 6(2), 207-226.

Hall, G., & Texas Univ. A. (1974). The concerns-based adoption model: A developmental

conceptualization of the adoption process within educational institutions. Retrieved from

ERIC database.

Ives, M. (2005). Identifying the contextual elements of project management within organizations

and their impact on project success. Project Management Journal, 36(1). 37-50.

Retrieved from http://0-web.ebscohost.com.oak.indwes.edu/

Janesick, V. (2000). The choreography of qualitative research design: Minuets, improvisations,

and crystallization. In N. Denzin and Y Lincoln (eds.), Handbook of qualitative research,

2nd

Ed. ( pp. 379-399). Lincoln. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.



Kaliprasad, M. (2006). The human factor II: Creating a high performance culture in an

organization. Cost Engineering, 48(6). 27-34. Retrieved from


Kerzner, H. (2003). Strategic planning for a project office. Project Management Journal, 34(2),

13–25. Retrieved from http://0-web.ebscohost.com.oak.indwes.edu/

Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lientz, B. P. & Rea, K. P. (2002). Project management for the 21st century, 3

rd ed. New York:

Academic Press.

Marshall, C. & Rossman, G. B. (2006). Designing Qualitative Research, 4th

ed. London: SAGE

Publication.

Martinsuo, M., Hensman, N., Artto, K., Kujala, J., & Jaafari, A. (2006). Project–based

management as an organizational innovation: Drivers, changes, and benefits of adopting

project–based management. Project Management Journal, 37(3). 87-97. Retrieved from


Maxwell, J. A. (2005). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach, 2nd

ed. London:

Sage Publications.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods, 3rd

ed. London: Sage

Publications.

Porras, J. I. & Robertson, P. J. (1992). Organizational development: Theory, practice and

research. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Project Management Institute. (2008). A guide to the project management body of knowledge.

Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.



Roach, A., Kratochwill, T., & Frank, J. (2009). School-based consultants as change facilitators:

Adaption of the concerns-based adoption model (CBAM) to support the implementation

of research-based practices. Journal of Educational & Psychological Consultation, 19(4),

300-320. Retrieved from ERIC database.

Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovation, 5th

ed. New York: Free Press.

Society for Human Resource Management. (2007). 2007 Change Management: Survey Report

(SHRM 07-0180). Retrieved from http://shrm.org/research/

Thomas, J. T. (2009). Shaping the future of project management research. In D. Cleland & B.

Bidanda (Eds.), Project management: Circa 2025. (pp. 129-152). Newtown Square, PA:

Project Management Institute.

Thomas, J. & Mullaly, M. (2008). Researching the value of project management. Newtown

Square, PA: Project Management Institute.

Ward, J. L. (2000). Project management terms: A working glossary, 2nd

ed. Arlington, VA: ESI

International.

Worley, C., & Lawler III, E. (2006). Designing organizations that are built to change. MIT

Sloan Management Review, 48(1). 19-23. Retrieved from


Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and method. Newbury Park, CA: Sage

Publications.

Research Prospectus

Documents

Transcript of Research Prospectus