5 year goals update

Time to revisit my 5 year goals.  Lately, there have been two major interconnecting questions consuming my plans for the future - 1) How should I focus my career? and 2) How to establish my financial security?

As I have mentioned several times before, I have been contemplating how to focus my career for the past year.  I have now come to a clear direction - developing myself into web technology guru helping others make good decisions with web technologies.  I'm not interested in being a specialist, like Facebook app guy or a eBay store expert.  Instead, I want to be knowledgeable enough across the e-commerce domain to be an effective consultant, researcher, and educator in utilizing web technologies strategically to improve business processes.  This is significantly different than my research agenda just 2 years ago, which included significant research in ethics.  While I'm still interested in ethics and will still does some research in that area, the switch to e-commerce aligns my research with my teaching and with my financial goals.

In the financial realm, I want to develop a system for wealth generation that is more recession proof and less dependent on stock fluctuations.  I am still worried about the economic condition of our country and where we might be 20-30 years from now.  There is also a large unknown as to how the university system might change in the coming years.  To address those concerns, I need to develop a system for wealth generation that can both build wealth rapidly and withstand economic upheaval, should it occur.

SMART 5 year goals:

1. Research and publish at least 10 articles in e-commerce. 2 were done this year, so only 8 more to go.
2. Get promoted to Associate Professor.  The research above will help with the above goal.  It will also help establish myself as an expert for my later initiatives, listed below.
3. Establish and promote several web based businesses generating at least $20k a year passive income.
4. Develop and market high quality training modules in e-commerce for my classes and to publish on YouTube.  I start my first round of recordings this summer.
5. Establish and promote a consulting/education business using the above training modules for marketing and earning at least $36k a year.
6. Establish a real estate investment business to invest earnings from other businesses.
7. Double household income - from the above initiatives and my wife returning to work.
8. Support and encourage my family with their goals.

The trick will be to devote enough time in my evenings and weekends to get the web businesses up and running.  To get there, I plan on using what I learn from 100grandbrand.com, internetbusinessmastery.com, smartpassiveincome.com, and whatever other resources I discover along the way.  In the process, I'll be developing knowledge to help with my classroom instruction and research.  The training modules are part of my e-commerce class I teach at ECU, so the time spent on those classes are part of my normal job responsibilities.  If they are successful, I might push myself to develop more modules above and beyond what's necessary for class.  Those modules could then be encapsulated into package deals to sell for aspiring small business owners and/or web developers.  In the real estate investments, I currently own a house in Michigan that I'm renting.  I also have experience with owning a duplex.  I plan to capitalize on that knowledge and expand my investments.  If I spend time setting things up right and only investing in high ROI items, I should be able to make descent returns with minimal effort.

And then there are my nice to get to goals, but not high priorities:

1. Write a book on productivity and goals
2. Write a autobiography on one of my major life decisions (Not saying what it is yet :)
3. Write a textbook or two
4. Publish an article in a top journal in my field

I have an endless supply of ideas and not nearly enough time to do them.  It's a great feeling.

3 down - 2 to go

In this my 300th post, I'm going to do a little happy dance.  I just received news that a 3rd article of mine this year was accepted for publication.  Only two more to go to reach my 2012 goal.  With two additional articles already under review, two articles over 75% complete, and several new projects in the works, I feel like a research rock star. 

What's even better, I am getting to the point where I can read my own research and objectively evaluate its quality.  It's a great feeling to be able to critically evaluate it, identify problem areas, and know how to fix those problem areas.  Pretty soon, I might actually be good at writing.

This summer my time will be split between up to 3 research projects.  That's not counting any time I may throw at a revise and resubmit should one arise.  Today, I'm working on Evaluating Information Systems Ethically: A Case for Objectivism."  My goal is to finish and submit this article by the end of May.  My social media project is also a top priority for me.  Although, we're in a holding pattern waiting to hear back from a potential sponsor.  Depending on how these two projects go, I have a third project in ethical decision making I can work on as well.

Research maniac

I've been on a tear with my research lately.  Since last semester ended, I have one article published, 2 under review and 2 more almost ready for submission.  At the rate this is going, I'll have completed my goal of 5 journal publications by the end of this year.  I also have 2 other articles in the pipeline that I'll hopefully complete in the next few months.  I'll have to work them in between what's coming next...
I'm starting two new research projects.  One will be on adoption and assimilation of Electronic Health Records.  It'll be a case study of various hospitals looking at the depth and breadth of EHR acceptance and usage by medical personnel.  The second, also a case study, will be looking at social media success and failure in engaging stakeholders. 

I'm new to case studies, but find the method to be better suited for my personallty.  Why didn't I do this more in graduate school?   One of my strengths is the ability to integrate large amounts of information and make sense of it all.  That was in part how I was able to discover my central purpose in life.  Now I want to apply those skills to research.  I'm finding lots of great resources, including one of my collaborators, Paul Schwager, who has done some case studies before.  I'm also reading the classic case study manual called Case Study Research: Design and Methods by Robert Yin.  I also discovered a great resource in another ECU faculty member who does tons of qualitative research.  

The way things are looking, I'll have my hands full for the summer and fall.  With any luck though, I can move quickly and accomplish the existing and new research effectively. 

Follow me on Twitter

For my blog readers,

You can follow me on Twitter @tryreason.  I regularly tweet about web development, with occasional tweets on productivity, economics, philosophy, science, and other cool stuff. 

I call this research.  No seriously!  I'm starting a research project on using social media in business.  In order to fully understand the platforms, I have to actively engage in them.  Don't worry, I'm not collecting any data from this profile ;)

Research in universities - the good and bad

I've heard a number of folks condemn research at universities.  They say that they publish or perish institutions with little to no emphasis on teaching.  To some extent they are correct.  But then why has research gained such wide influence in academia?  Indeed, why do research at all?  And where does it go wrong?  Here are my thoughts.

Let's start with the reasons for research:

• Research is necessary to maintain and grow knowledge.  When I research, it is impossible for me to get published unless I stay abreast of what is going on in industry and within academic journals.  I must read tons of articles, discerning who has said what, why it is important, and how it applies to my thoughts and industry.  Research requirements force me to learn.  And as knowledge expands over time, new discoveries often replace old ideas.  By staying current with research, I stay in better touch with reality.
• Research (usually) pushes professors to think objectively and scientifically.   I have received rejections from a number of journals.  Sad, but true.  Often these rejections highlight flaws in my thinking or flaws in the way I present my claims.  While I occasionally disagree with reviewer comments, they have in large been well done.  Their comments push me to improve my research methods, thinking, and writing skills to avoid biases, subjective interpretations, and sloppy writing.
• Research helps verify that a PhD was not an accident, fluke, or an aberration from a diploma mill.  Because let's face it, not all PhD's are equal.  The research requirements at many universities independently verifies a professor's knowledge and ability to think.  By using blind peer-reviewed journal publications, universities can better assess a professor's expertise while avoiding conflicts of interest, confirmation biases, and group think. 
• Related to the previous points, research output becomes a measure of expertise.  This expertise is not always what academics like to pretend it is, as I explain later, but is important in assessing a professor's competence.   It establishes a professor as an expert in their field.

So where do these noble ambitions go wrong.  Let's me start with what I believe every university core mission should be - education.  Surprisingly (or maybe not that surprisingly) that's not always true.  Be that as it may, most of my concerns center around this issue:

• To a large extent, and often contrary to many university missions, research is still emphasized more than teaching.  I have not heard of a single university that requires new faculty to take an introductory course on "how to teach". That's not to say I haven't had some excellent classes on certain techniques and technologies, such as writing in the curriculum and online education technologies. But there has been no single introduction to teaching course required. Even during my interview process, only one school required me to teach a class in front of students. And when it comes to tenure decisions, research can make or break you, but "adequate" teaching skills often suffice.
• Research can often be tangential to what you teach.  This is in part because research is so specialized that its difficult to find topics that readily translate into class topics.  In my web development class, I spend maybe 95-98% of my time talking about technology and business processes that have existed for 10 years or more.  It is important that I do that, so the students understand the fundamentals.  Yet, in most academic journals, 10 years ago is old news and not worthy of publication.  While I do research in the area I teach - web technologies, most of my topics are so specialized that no undergraduates and few graduates could comprehend the topic, much less appreciate the new knowledge. 
• By its nature, research emphasizes depth not breadth of knowledge.  I get zero credit for my background in science, nor my significant reading and understanding of philosophy or economics.  And yet those experiences help me develop examples for class material that integrates knowledge across disciplines, enriching the education experience. 
• Nor do I get credit if I develop an external websites, do significant consulting, or create popular workshops or seminars in my field.  These can all be used as means of demonstrating expertise (assuming I am in demand), but are rarely considered in tenure decisions.  This is unfortunate because often some of the richest learning occurs when doing an activity, not just observing someone else doing an activity.  What better way for a professor to build his understanding of a subject than to actually do it.

Where did things go wrong?  The traditional research paradigm developed when the humanities and hard sciences represented the core of higher eduction.  At the time, research was not as specialized, so new findings were far more applicable to undergraduate and graduate courses.  As universities included more professional development programs, like engineering, business, medicine, and law, scientific research continued to serve as the primary determinate of expertise.  Simulatenously, the basic theories and frameworks became well established, so new research focused on ever more abstract and abtuse subjects. 

There is no question that professors need to deeply understand the concepts in their field (be experts) and universities need verification of that expertise.  Because there are established and rigorous methods for judging expertise, those measures are emphasized.  But who says they cannot adapt new means of measuring expertise.  Let's not forget that establishing expertise is only part of the problem.  Professors need to know which of their fields' core concepts are most important for students to understand. They need to know how best to present those concepts.  And they need to do it effectively.  These pedagogical skills are not adequately emphasized. 

I'm not sure I have an answer to what I see as a dilmema in higher education today.  I certainly see room for more pedagogical research, especially in schools nominally claiming to be "teaching" oriented.  I also think more consideration should be given to establishing objective measures of teaching effectiveness.  The current system of student evaluations is widely known to be useless, yet it persists.  I also see room for more avenues establishing and maintaining expertise within a given field, especially in the business schools where I reside. 

What do you think?

IT Governance

Here's a topic that I've been struggling to conceptualize lately.  What does information technology (IT) governance mean and why is it important?  This is another of my thinking out loud posts, so please feel free to offer any helpful suggestions for improving my understanding.

IT governance stems from the concept of business governance.  And the term governance is borrowed from the political concept of governing a nation.  When governing a nation, the government sets and establishes the freedoms and constraints on individual action and decision making.  I'm not saying this is the best definition of government, but it is my working premise.  Similarly, business and IT governance set the context for decision-making in organizations by setting freedoms and constraints.

Governance in both these contexts is differentiated from management and strategy.  Strategy can be described as the long term goals and objectives of an organization.  Established by the executives, this vision of the company's future drives lower level tactical and operational objectives.  Management involves the implementation of these long-term goals and objectives.  It involves the directing the people and resources so as to achieve the desired goals efficiently and effectively.  In my understanding of governance, it provides the framework for how to make management level decisions.

For example, a strategic goal may be to facilitate IT growth through outsourcing partnerships with major consulting firms.  At the managerial level, the expectation would be that decisions that require IT growth should strongly consider outsourcing partnerships.  The problem comes from ensuring that managers throughout the organization enact the strategic goal in similar and congruent fashions.  The solution to this problem is developing a governance board the creates frameworks for decision-making and reviewing major decisions to ensure compliance.  In the case of outsourcing partnerships, the governance board might establish policies for reviewing consulting companies in an objective and systematic way to ensure that the best partnership is established, that the existing partnerships are given full consideration, and that the IT solution is congruent with the overall strategy.  They may further review outsourcing proposals to ensure they meet the appropriate criteria and constraints.

Every organization will govern IT in unique ways.  Some will be very strict and require every new IT project to be approved by an IT governance board.  Some will only require medium and large project approval, say projects over $100,000 budget.  Some organizations will have primarily business managers on the IT governance board, while other organizations will stock the board with primarily IT managers.  Some organizations will have very weak governance, enabling local decision-making with few constraints, while other organizations will have a strong centralized governance.

IT governance becomes an essential part of an organization as it grows too large for a single person to confirm and direct the implementation of strategy by managers.  While the traditional hierarchical management structure works for simple strategies, the sprawl of today's organizations makes for radical differences in implementation of IT resources unless a governance board directs and reviews lower level decisions.  Furthermore, efficiency from economies of scale can only be gained when the entire organization uses the same IT infrastructure, which is only possible if a centralized decision making unit provides the necessary framework.

Not that all is rosy using governance boards.  There can be problems when governance boards become so restrictive that business units end up adopting new technologies that are not best for them, even if the technology is best for another business unit.  I saw an example of this at one of the consulting projects I worked on years ago.  Our client had adopted SAP's ERP system.  While we were implementing our proprietary project management system, their governance board was questioning whether they should scrap our project and use SAP's project management system.  However, the business unit with whom we were working strongly recommended against using this ERP module because it did not met their business needs.  We finished implementing our software before this disagreement was resolved, but articulates what I see as a potential problem with governance boards.

As part of this process in understanding IT governance, a colleague and I will, over the next couple years, start a research project looking at IT governance, particularly a subset called data governance, in a variety of organizations.  Some of the research questions we want to answer are: What, if any, are the relationships between governance structures and management practices?  What, if any, are the relationships between governance structures and methodology?  What, if any, are the relationships between governance structures and external regulations?  Since my colleague and I are both IT ethics researchers, our larger research question will be how does ethical and political theories influence data governance structures?  And how do those structures enable or prohibit ethical decisions in organizations?  We may also explore how various ethical perspectives of senior executives impact the choice of governance boards or how the ethical perspectives of the governance board impacts the choice of directives.  There are a number of angles we can pursue that should hopefully enable a better understanding of the role of ethics in IT organizations and suggest best practices for enabling organizational success.

Research update

While I did not keep the pace of article submission I had originally hoped over the spring, I did make significant progress.  

• I currently have 3 articles under review, with a fourth ready to submit today.
• I have two articles that I am editing and should submit for review before I move in July. 
• A coauthor is editing a seventh article .  The article is ambitious and geared toward perhaps one of the most prestigious journals in management, Academy of Management Review.  So my coauthors and I want to take our time and do it right.  While I am hopeful we can complete it this fall, I am willing to work on it however long it takes to prepare it for submission.
• An eighth research project has data collected.  Hopefully, one of my coauthors will have time to analyze the data this summer as I have too much else on my plate at the moment.
• And I just started brainstorming a ninth project with a new research partner.  Our tentative title is "Do CIOs care about ethics?"  This one would be another ambitious project, aiming for the top journal in our discipline, MIS Quarterly, so our timeline requires at least 2 to 3 years.

The hard part for me will be not pursuing all of the billion other project ideas I have floating around in my head.  Perhaps if I could find more collaborators and research partners, I would take on more projects, but I have been guilty in the past with not completing research projects (like my dissertation, which I finished sufficiently to graduate, but not well enough for submission to a journal) before moving on to new projects.  I will not make that mistake again.  If someone is interested in collaborating, here are some ideas that I would be interested in:

Ethics:

"How does a person's ethical perspective impact his or her response to privacy violations/ approach to online transactions/ group dynamics/ evaluation of IS resources/ etc.?"

"Are businessmen aware of their implicit ethical beliefs?"

"How does a student's implicit ethical perspective impact their participation and success in class?"

Decision making:

"How do individuals parse through large search results in order to make effective decisions?"

"What impact do explicit and implicit beliefs (especially ethical beliefs) have on the identification of alternative solutions to a problem?"

Pedagogical:

"What order of presentation is most effective for meaningful learning of MIS concepts?"

"What understanding of MIS concepts do students have upon entering an Intro to MIS class?"

"How Academic Service Learning introduces a false alternative?"

Choosing between Career Paths

I love my job as an academic.  However, this morning I realized that I have been conflicted on how to spend my time during breaks (i.e. winter break, spring break, and summers).  There are two possible ways to focus my attention, each leading to two rewarding career paths, as either the philosopher-writer or the consultant-business owner.  I'm afraid that if I try to do both, I'll fail at both because these are part time emphasizes.  To do them well, I need to focus all my time and effort on one to maximize the return on my investment.

With the philosopher-writer career, my specialization in Objectivism could be maximized so that I could write research articles applying the philosophic principles to information systems.  There are very, very few professors in information systems with this specialization, so I would have wide opportunities for contributions.  I have re-considered applying to the Objectivist Academic Center as a means of improving my core understanding of Objectivism and improve my skills as a writer.  As I progress in my career, I would like to write several books, both textbooks and popular press books, with my particular interest in information systems history and the conceptual approach to education.  

In the other career track, I would focus on developing a deep understanding of application of concepts, specifically in Internet technologies, cloud computing, and Internet marketing.  My research would focus more on human computer interaction with Internet technologies.  I would spend more time learning about various development frameworks, project management concepts, and analysis and design practices.  Consulting engagements could flow from these skills.  As my career progresses, I would start some small businesses to capitalize on industry needs and supplement my financial plan.

Up until now, I have been explicitly leaning towards the former path, but realized that the latter path kept creeping into my to-do list.  So here I explicitly acknowledge my dual interests.  Both career paths have equal interest at this point.  Both have good research opportunities and continuing cash flows.  Both would challenge me in new and exciting ways.  Both fit within my central purpose in life.  But my focus must ultimately rest with one or the other.  Which to choose?  I don't know, but I may be talking with a number of people in the future to help me make my decision.

4 article possibilities

As I expand on an article I wrote on the hierarchy of concepts in education, it occurred to me (after reading the reviews from my conference proceeding) that reviewers of most business education journals may find the article less "innovative" (and less worthy of publication) than Ayn Rand' theory of concepts really is.  To that end, I want to transition my original article into a comparison between Objectivism's philosophy of education and other dominant theories.  There are several possible directions I can take and would like your input as to which to pursue:

1. Subjective experience versus Objective knowledge
Subjective experience in education is an artifact of Dewey's philosophy of education.  My original paper could be transitioned to this relatively easily, but the contents may be a bit abstract for the journals I have in mind.  I would still have a difficult sell, but one that I believe is possible.

2. Team work versus Individual work
Team work is very popular topic in business education journals.  Team work in and of itself is not a bad thing to incorporate into the classroom, if an objective of the class is to improve communication, collaboration, and planning skills.  However, it is a poor means of building knowledge of concepts.  Relating the theory of knowledge to team work can offer some tantalizing propositions, but will require much more effort to transition the article.

3.  Academic service learning (ASL)
I've written about my experiences with ASL before and its good and bad aspects.  This topic would be a variation of the first option, but far more publishable.  But it would also require much more effort to transition the article.  In fact it would probably be better to start this one from scratch.

4. Classifications versus Cause-effect relationships
While the meat of my article would remain essentially untouched, the introduction would require some magical writing to convince readers of the problem without empirical data to support my assertion.  Essentially, I've found that most textbooks in IS focus almost exclusively on classifying technologies, nearly completely ignoring cause-effect relationships.   The lack of cause-effect relationships means principles are never addressed.  So students know what technologies are called, but not how to use them appropriately.

Of course, I could write an article on each of these topics (and may eventually), but right now, I need to take the paper I've started and get it published. Any thoughts?

University research

What passes for research these days?

While exploring the titles of grant titles for the "New Faculty Research Grant" at EMU, I was amazed by the titles of some research projects that received grants.  (Note: I received the same grant in 2009 and have a great deal of respect for the research committee and provost decisions.  Yet, these projects left me shaking my head.)

Here are some titles I found particularly difficult to understand:
"Early Modern Pornographies"
"Community & Culture: Creating a Plan for Washtenaw County"
"Improving Student Achievement Through an Afterschool Knitting Program"
"Contingency Management for Smoking Cessation Among Sorority Members"
"Gathering the Gossips"

Cheating on exams

I have really been amazed at the audacity of students when it comes to cheating on exams.  Yesterday, I had a programming exam where one student attempted to use an "expert" via a web site.  Two years ago, it was a group of students who started yelling out answers during an exam when I had to step out of the classroom for a minute. Its invariably the worst students that cheat - or at least get caught cheating.  Usually, though, the good students do not need to nor  want to.  They believe grades are earned, not granted.  

I would love to do a research project exploring the relationship between ethical perspectives and propensity to cheat. 

My typical writing process

The following set of posts are my edited notes from the Writing Across the Curriculum workshop I recently completed.


My typical wring process for research articles: 
I generally start with a research proposal.  In this proposal, I start with various research questions that have a common theme, perform a literature review of the area, develop hypotheses, design the method for answering hypotheses, and identify analysis to be used.  I generally seek some feedback from other academics at various points in this process, either one-on-one or at conferences.

Once I am satisfied with the proposal, I conduct the research and analysis.  With the results, I complete the paper, by adding discussion and conclusion.  Then its back to editing, editing, and more editing.  Lastly, I start the publishing process.

According to WAC, the stages of writing development:
Prewriting (brainstorming, planning, outlining, lists, reading and reviewing other successful approaches to writing in a genre)
Drafting - Free writing, writing sections/chunks, fill in an outline, audience
Revising – restructuring arguments, adding/deleting sections, rethinking, and rewriting
Proofreading – spelling and grammar checks, reading carefully, having someone else read it
Publishing – sharing the work with an audience
Reflecting – helps writers to analyze their own writing process.

Concepts in learning

I recently ran across two educational psychologists, Ausubel and Novak, that argue for a conceptual basis for learning.  While philosophically, they differ in their definition of concepts with Objectivism, they offer an approach to learning that focuses on conceptual understanding of knowledge, the relationship between concepts and the necessity of context when presenting information to students.  This approach emphasizes the importance of "meaningful learning" as opposed to "rote learning". 

According to Ausubel and Novak, meaningful learning occurs only when new concepts are carefully defined, when examples of the concept  relate to a learner's context, and if the new concept is integrated with the learner’s prior conceptual framework.  Because learners have free will, they must be motivated to integrate the knowledge.  In rote learning, the learner memorizes the conceptual definitions or memorizes the links between concepts without real understanding.  Such rote learning is quickly forgotten.  Meaningful learning and rote learning exist on a continuum.

While I am still in the early stages of reviewing Ausubel's and Novak's research, it looks like a promising research stream.  It reminds me of the approach used at the VanDamme Academy.  If anyone is familiar with their work, I would love to hear your thoughts.

Business ethics research

Last weekend, I attended the academic conference Decision Sciences Institute's annual meeting.  There I presented a paper detailing my research in ethics.  I also attended a couple other sections within the business ethics track and came away very dismayed.

Here is a sampling of the research:
In one paper, the author argued that executive pay is too high.  Her solution?  When hiring new CEOs in weak companies, offer the CEO a high salary the first year that progressively diminishes ever year there after.  I couldn't think of a worse "solution".  CEOs would have no motivation for long term return, only a very short sighted view of corporate turn around.  After a year, CEOs would likely look elsewhere for employment. The expense of trying to find a new CEO every year would actually increase CEO pay over the long run, not decrease it.

In another paper, the title seemed to start in the right direction, questioning bribery in undeveloped and developing countries.  However, throughout the presentation the presenter never questioned the underlying cause of bribery.   And so, the presenter tried to justify the "relationship" between business and government, ultimately destroying her argument against bribery.  She did not understand that the government should be a protector of individual property rights, not the regulator of property. 

In another paper, the authors condemned the accounting profession for various fraud cases made public recently.  They argued that accountants conducting external audits on companies should include fraud detection services.  Now, fraud detection is generally a good thing.  However, their arguments rested on the notion that fraud detection would serve the "public good".  That's complete nonsense.  Their argument would have been much stronger if they had appealed to the selfish board of directors, on behalf of the shareholders, demanding fraud detection from external audits.

There were a few snarly comments about selfishness.  But all-in-all, my paper was positively received, in part because I merely introduced a means of measuring selfishness and selflessness, but didn't argue for or against any one perspective.  My long term goal being the demonstration of utilizing various ethical perspectives when making decisions and the ultimate consequence. 

Research paper reviews

There is nothing so humbling as having your research reviewed by other academics. As a new PhD, I am still learning the ropes of writing quality research papers. While I understand the concepts involved, communicating those concepts with well structured papers is a learning process that I have not mastered yet.

And while there is some temptation to accept a lower quality journal for an outlet of my research, it would not push me to be the best writer that I can be. This is important for me, as I would like to master the writing part so that I may have a bigger impact with the research I have planned for the future. If I succumb to the temptation of writing with lower quality and accepting lower quality journals as a result, few people will read my research or take it seriously. Since one of my goals is to write papers utilizing and promoting the Objectivist philosophy, I do not want it to be marginalized. It will not do myself or the philosophy an favors.

Business ethics research - a good sign

A little update on my research. With the help of a couple research partners, we developed and tested an instrument for measuring ethical perspectives. These six perspectives are altruism, utilitarianism, tribalism, Machiavellianism, Hedonism, and Rational Egoism. In the case of rational egoism, the items are consistent with Objectivism's ethical beliefs.

This instrument is designed to measure the amount participants agree or disagree with various statements consistent with each ethical perspective. Philosophers, such as Diana Hsieh, vetted the statements for accuracy (I do not presume that she supports or does not support the final version of the instrument, but she did have many valuable comments that helped to improve it).

Of over 200 business students, split evenly between undergraduate and graduate, the rational egoist perspective had the highest average ranking of the six perspectives (although most individuals still utilize mixed perspectives.)

Overall, I see this as good news. While its true that most individuals are confused about ethics, I believe that business students in particular are receptive to Objectivist ethics.

I also plan on expanding on this research stream, by improving the instrument, discovering how well it fits within current theory, and how well it predicts behaviors of business folks.

Stimulus bill will destroy medicine

via Gus van Horn, an article by Betsy McCaughey highlighting some provisions placed into the stimulus bill that will directly effect our health care.

Several aspects of this bill are particularly scary. According to Betsy:

"But the bill goes further. One new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective."

My interpretation...no longer will a doctor be able to do what is in your best interest as his patient. Now the doctor must do what is in the best interest of the federal government. You may think that this will minimally affect your health. You would be wrong. Tom Daschle, who is strongly behind this part of the bill, wants to limit medical technology. Betsy states its all in Daschle's book.

"The stimulus bill does that, and calls it the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research (190-192). The goal, Daschle’s book explained, is to slow the development and use of new medications and technologies because they are driving up costs. He praises Europeans for being more willing to accept “hopeless diagnoses” and “forgo experimental treatments,” and he chastises Americans for expecting too much from the health-care system." [Bold added]

What is so horrific is that most people will not directly see the effects. They will continue to go to their doctors and continue to see care, but they will not see the lost opportunities in medical breakthroughs, nor hear about the missed medical procedures that doctors are not allowed to do because our federal government does not deem it acceptable.

If you feel as strongly about these issues as I do, please contact your politicians and let them know what you think.

Philosophy of Education

This summer I plan on conducting a thorough review of education philosophies (one of my goals for 2008). Below are the books and subjects I plan on reading. Does anyone have further suggestions?

Philosophy of education study plan

Plato

• Republic

Montessori

• The Montessori Method

Piaget

• Inhelder, B. and J. Piaget (1958). The Growth of Logical Thinking

from Childhood to Adolescence. New York: Basic Books

Steiner

• The Education of the Child

Froebel

• FROEBEL'S CHIEF WRITINGS ON EDUCATION

Dewey

• Democracy and Education (1916)

• How We Think (1910)

Peikoff

• Philosophy of Education lecture series

Great Books of the Western World
Trivium/Quadrivium
Taking Children Seriously
Unschooling

As I review each book and subject, I'll write up my analysis here.

Research is tough

Nothing is harder to write than your own misguided attempts at research, especially when you know that the article you're writing is scheduled to be presented at a conference.

But it also serves as a valuable lesson learned. I don't want to look bad even if I am just learning something new, so I'm more motivated to do research right the first time. It's bad enough to know that I did a poor job, but showing off my poor work does have much appeal. If it wasn't so necessary for me to go to the conference in order to meet people and inquire about jobs, I probably won't submit this paper.

Yet this realization can serve as a launching point for conversation with other professors. Hopefully, something will come of it.

Viable Values

For one of my class assignments, I have decided to write an article that uses Tara Smith's meta-ethical discussion in Viable Values as a foundation for analyzing ethics in IT.

First let me compliment Smith on a job well done. Her masterful analysis of various ethical theories is a treasure to behold. Although there are several places I think her arguments could be stronger (given my limited knowledge of these theories), it is the overall product that is important. More than anything I'm surprised, not that Smith could do this, but that it took this long for an objectivist philosopher to offer such a devastating critique of alternate theories. While I know Rand laid the foundation, she obviously had no interest in digging into the particulars. But with so many PhDs in philosophy associated with the objectivist movement, I figured there would be more in depth analysis would have been done the same. Instead, I saw a lot of me too-isms, essentially focusing on just Ayn Rand's words and ignoring the rest of the world. While developing Objectivism is a worthwhile cause, many philosophers outside the objectivist movement have little or limited respect for Rand because her articles tended to be short and not detailed. If Objectivism is to take prominence in field of ideas, critiques such as Tara's will put it there. That is why I'm able to write my article, because her book gave me the tools necessary to complete an argument.