BUSINESS AND EDUCATION AS PUSH-PULL PROCESSES: AN ALLIANCE OF PHILOSOPHY AND PRACTICE

Arif, Mohammed

In the 1960s, the U.S. business community utilized the term "push/pull" to indicate whether or not industry should use the "one-size-fits all" or whether it should listen to consumers' needs and feedback as a system of producing and marketing products. As well, U.S. public education has become much more accountability-laden since the 1970s, partly because of shrinking budgets and partly because of society's growing penchant for more quality in curricular goods and services. Though there have been other "schools should be run as a business" treatises, this paper engages and elucidates "push-pull" as a bridge between both the education and business communities. Therefore, this paper traces the philosophical history of the first public schools in the United States and identifies their underlining questions of metaphysics, epistemology, and axiology. Using those questions, the paper examines the four major classical and teaching philosophies incorporated by our nation's schools and educators. The authors subsequently demonstrate how "push-pull" is not an exclusive business consideration, for that philosophical duality has existed in U.S. public institutions. Recently, the business concepts of Total Quality Management and Malcolm Baldrige Awards, updated "push-pull" programs, have entered the education landscape. These concepts have blended educational and business accountability and promoted a more customer-centric approach to our nation's schools. Finally, this paper concludes by forecasting how 21st century schools might use this "push-pull" alliance in future educational applications.

The U.S. public and higher education curriculum development process has become increasingly customer-centric in the past decade. In embracing this customer-centric approach, academia is imitating the process and success of industry. Weidmer and Harris (1997) summarize this new emphasis: "Customers are the students, parents, and the community, and quality schools of the 21st century must begin the process by understanding the needs of this customer base". Recently, some new measures taken by educators, point toward their customer-centric inclination. This paper analyzes the customer-centric and producer-centric approaches from industry, and draws an analogy to similar approaches used for curriculum development in academia. This paper not only analyzes the impact of the two approaches, and discusses their implications on the educational system, but it also traces the philosophical roots U.S. education has embraced from its western European roots. Based on these discussions, we forecast an important accountability driven direction for educational institutions.

Push and Pull Approaches

To understand the concept of customer-centric and producer-centric approaches, two terms need to be described. The first is the producer-centric approach, hereafter referred to as the push approach. Push approach is used for production of goods or services in anticipation of customer orders. This approach worked well for production-driven systems in which customers' needs were not incorporated into product design. Henry Ford's famous quote "You can have any car you want, as long as it is black, and model T", is a good indicator of the industrial psyche behind a push system. Push philosophy was very successful circa World War II. The reason for this success was due to producers' markets; anything manufactured in that era was consumed. Figure 1 illustrates the concept of a push system, where producers decided what to manufacture based on their judgment of true customer needs. Product design was given to manufacturing, and the finished product was shipped to market. Customers bought the product due to lack of choice in the marketplace, and producers had a complete control over quantity, quality and cost.

However, beginning in the 1970s, conditions changed. Consumers started demanding options, and a new customer-centric market developed. This customer-centric approach to production was called the pull approach. The quantity and the quality of the product developed were based on the market needs. In this approach, the production became a make-to-order process where customers informed producers about the needs, and the producers produced only what was needed.

Figure 2 illustrates the concept of a pull system. Today the process starts with customers conveying their needs to producers through surveys, focus groups, and brainstorming sessions. Producers design and produce products, meeting customers' quantity, quality, and cost needs. The results of implementing a pull system are higher customer satisfaction, lower inventory, lower cost, and a constantly changing product design to meet changing customers' needs.

Both systems have their advantages and disadvantages. The push system is more effective in dealing with fluctuating demand. Producers can store finished products in anticipation of demand or can create a new demand by supplying products in the finished goods inventory. Producers control the pace of product development. Any design changes are made infrequently, and done only when the current design becomes completely obsolete. The downside of this system is the promotion of monopoly due to producer's control on the product, and dissatisfaction among consumers for not getting what they want. On the other hand, the pull system forces producers to invest heavily into research and development in order to meet ever-changing customer's requirements. These actions result in an increase in product cost. However, the level of customer satisfaction is much higher, and final products are much more usable.

In many articles and texts published recently, parallels between the business and public/higher education have been communicated (Montano and Utter, 1999). Product consumers have been compared to students, and business owners or producers have been compared to teachers. To provide a historical backdrop of this paper, we will explore historical and philosophical deliberations regarding how our public and higher educational institutions have built their own "push-pull" debates. Those debates suggest U.S. schools have been divided over whether curriculum should feature "push or pull" methodologies, and they involve several educational philosophies.

Preface and Orientation

The educational systems in the United States have often been compared to various business systems. Critics of our K-12 and higher education systems have even suggested that schools be run strictly as business ventures. Such talk has dissipated somewhat; however, most modern critics suggest U.S. public and higher education institutions should be more accountable to their students and the society in which these people will live and work. Since the advent of Franklin Bobbitt's scientific curriculum in the early 20th century, critics have talked of the concept of social efficiency (Kliebard, 1986). Those same critics and their modern colleagues contend U.S. schools have been inherently set up with either "push or pull-type" philosophies-derived and traced to Western European roots. U.S. public and higher education teachers use push educator philosophies of Perennialism or Essentialism, derived from classical philosophies of Idealism and Realism, authoritarian systems that are teacher and institution-oriented, focused, and driven. However, other educators use a pull system of Progressivism or Social Reconstructionism, derived from the classical philosophies of Pragmatism and Existentialism, non-authoritarian types that are student and culture-oriented, focused, and driven. These two systems, though both answer questions about metaphysics, epistemology, and axiology, are diametrically opposed in their educational aim, curriculum, and, eventually, into their societal implications.

Philosophical Questions

The Greek word "philosophia" is translated as an abiding love of learning, while the complementary Latin word "currere" is defined as an academic race to be run. Western European and especially United Kingdom schools embraced both concepts as part of their cultural heritage-specifically they used them in their elementary and secondary schools' via three specific philosophical inquiries (Ornstein and Levine, 2000, pp. 389-392). Included were questions of what was real (metaphysics), how to gain knowledge (epistemology), and what values were most important (axiology). In the 17th century, selected British citizens boarded the Mayflower and subsequently traveled to the American colonies. Those first Europeans not only came to settle the land, they also established the first 17th century colonial schools-dame, Latin grammar, academies, and colleges, schools that mirrored and featured the mother country's two dominant, classical philosophies.

Idealism and Perennialism

Idealism was the first of the classical philosophies, and it is at the epicenter of the academic equivalent of modern push concepts. Idealism, spoken by Socrates in his monologues, then translated and transcribed by Plato, maintained reality was spiritual, mental, and unchanging. Epistemology was gained by rethinking tried and true ideas, and axiology was deemed absolute and eternal, beyond human scope. Germany's George Hegel and America's Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau later echoed Aristotle's work, and they wrote extensively regarding the spirituality of the universe, as well as the adherence of a moral authority much beyond mortals (Carnochan, 1993, p. 119). Religion and the concept of God were associated with Idealism, for man was seen only a temporal being.

The first of the two teaching philosophies equivalent to the modern business community's push metaphor was (authoritarian) Perennialism. Begun in the 1930s, Perennialism, deeply rooted in Realism, sought to educate rational people, and the curricula often were time-honored systems of texts like Mortimer Adler's Paideia Proposal, or more recent examples like William Bennett's The Book of Virtues or E.D. Hirsch's Cultural Literacy. The former concluded there were specific texts cultured persons should read and study, while the latter proposed a series of time-honoured people, events, and texts to be consulted to become literate (Ornstein and Levine, 2000, pp. 410-417). Both relied on learning specific subjects or books as a means of cultural knowledge and progress.

Realism and Essentialism

Realism, the second of the classical philosophies, was built upon some of Idealism's constructs, but added important contrasts. To begin, Aristotle, this philosophy's architect, gained notoriety as one of the first scientific proponents. That is to say, he suggested reality was objective, not spiritual, and was made up of natural laws composed of measurable matter. People gained knowledge via the use of senses to gain intellectuality, while values were idealistic in format, but were based on nature's laws and thus could be acquired. Later Realists included Sir Thomas Aquinas in the Middle-Ages, who formed a type of religious realism, and Alfred North Whitehead, who continued realist traditions to date (Ornstein and Levine, 2000, pp. 395-397). All realists believed humanity could learn about and comprehend the real world, and that knowledge was the basis of individual growth and maturity. The scientific method was utilized to demonstrate the parameters, worth, and use of Realism, as opposed to Idealists' reliance on authority, whether temporal or spiritual.

The complementary teaching philosophy to Realism was another 1930s movement, Essentialism. This movement's aim was not to read specific texts for cultural cognizance, but rather to find how individuals could gain more useful practical job skills. Curricula extended to any subject or area which made learners more complete and productive consumers. Essentialist proponents did not disdain academia per se; however, they focused more on real-life applications. Franklin Bobbitt studied and wrote "active" and practical curriculum that resulted in U.S. students getting better jobs or finding efficiency in their daily lives. Arthur Bestor subsequently concerned himself with a back-to-basics movement, one that would do away with any subject not of particular and practical use for students who were to be contributing job-holding and tax-paying citizens (Kliebard, 1986, pp. 260-264).

Pragmatism and Progressivism

On the other hand, pull theorists, also focused on the questions of metaphysics, epistemology, and axiology, and utilized two separate classical philosophies, the first of which was Pragmatism. Pragmatism has the distinction of being the only classical philosophy conceived and constructed in the United States. Partly because of the growing base of scholarship and publications in the 19th century as the U.S. colonies progressed from status as West England and became a governmental and economic force in the world market, the studies of Idealism and Realism coalesced into Pragmatism. Pragmatism is a philosophy that stipulated if any factors of metaphysics, epistemology, or axiology were useful and "worked," then they became part of the philosophy. If any parts did not work, they were summarily dropped. The U.S. was growing rapidly, there was little time given to classical thoughts; rather, the prevailing notion was that as long as there were profitable "ends," any "means" to achieve that status was justified. For Pragmatists, metaphysics was the melding of individuals' experiences into their environments, while epistemology was the use of that newfound scientific knowledge, and axiology was situational at best, relative at least. Influenced by Charles Darwin's treatise on evolution, men like Charles Peirce, who associated the scientific method to it, and William James, who utilized it with psychology, were credited with writing and popularizing Pragmatism.

The teaching philosophy born out of Pragmatism was (non-authoritarian) Progressivism. Progressivism was the product of John Dewey's life-long work as an educator of young people. He believed all teachers could and should educate students around their intellect, interests, and needs. Instead of trying to fit any particular curriculum directly on children featured in all authoritarian curricula, Dewey mandated U.S. public school classrooms should be a series of activities or projects that interested the young people who studied them (Willis et. al, 1994, pp.251-253). As well, he felt the experiences young people brought to academe would complement the experiences they took away from their formal schooling.

Existentialism and Social Reconstructionism

The fourth and last of the classical philosophies was Existentialism, a distinctively different European philosophy that took Pragmatism one step further than relativity. Born out of the turmoil and consternation of World Wars I and II, this philosophy suggested "existence precedes essence," Jean-Paul Sartre's words celebrating each individual. With Albert Camus, Sartre postulated humans have no choice in entering this world; however, they have the abilities to search for their own means and theories of the meaning of life and the search for truth. Since this philosophy became a personal search for identity, Existentialists viewed reality as subjective, epistemology only as a personal search for choices, and axiology was the ultimate expression of free will.

The teaching philosophy developed from Sartre and Camus' Existentialism is (non-authoritarian) Social Reconstructionism. Developed by such educational and social reformers as William Counts and Theodore Brameld, this theory promoted students rights for individualized and experiential education formats; however, it also suggested curricula should embrace more than just students' wishes and needs. Social Reconstructionists believed U.S. public schools' courses of study should concentrate on concerns for the social melioration. They maintained public school curricula should be concerned with and contribute to such issues as world peace, health care, and literacy. This teaching philosophy suggested lessons could be of any sort, and should include selected facets of Progressivism, Perennialism and Essentialism; however, the main foci should be betterment of local, regional, national, and international relations. These four constitute the theory basis of our U.S. schools, and thus, our whole educated society.

Pull System in Education

Whereas Progressivism and social Reconstructionalism describe pull characteristics in theory, Edward Deming's Total Quality Management (TQM) system expressed pull system in the business world. His definition of TQM is: "TQM is a structured system for creating organization-wide participation in planning, and implementing a continuous improvement process to meet, and exceed customer needs" (GOAL/QPC, 1991, p.). TQM is a pull system because the magnitude of acceptable quality was defined by customers. Producers used this magnitude as a benchmark to regulate activities throughout the production process, in turn ensuring the quality of the final product to be as close to what customers demanded. The factors that acted as drivers to implement TQM in education:

1] declining enrollment (Ray, 1996);

2] declining quality (Chao and Dugger, 1996);

3] facilitating change (Wiedmer and Harris, 1997);

4] increasing tuition;

5] changing demographics;

6] advancing technology;

7] intensifying competition among institutions;

8] demanding better quality graduates by employers; (Bosner, 1992; Rubach and Stratton, 1994);

9] declining retention rates;

10] recording students dissatisfaction with the overall service quality (Montano and Utter, 1999); and,

11] increasing governmental concern of rising tuition costs (Bosner, 1992).

After applying TQM to education, several implementation challenges have emerged. Some of the issues include the following:

1] lukewarm response from the liberal arts community (Cobb, 1993);

2] many concerns about change of focus and goals of higher education from pursuit of understanding to a job-placement service (Ray, 1996); and,

3] individual preferences and the loyalty towards personal teaching as well as research of the faculty members (Benke and Hermanson, 1992; Hubbard, 1994).

These challenges have forced the academic community to re-evaluate the applicability of TQM to education and look at alternate philosophies.

Although experiments with these systems are still ongoing, a new quality movement has augmented TQM. The Malcolm Baldrige Awards (MBA) was established in 1987 for manufacturing and service industries; and is given by the President of the United States to businesses that apply and are judged to be outstanding in seven areas:

1] leadership;

2] strategic planning;

3] customer and market foci;

4] information and analyses;

5] human resource foci;

6] process management; and

7] business results "http://www.quality.nist.gov".

Since its inception in 1987, the MBA has played a vital role in helping thousands of U.S. companies improve not only their products and services, their customers' satisfaction, and their profit motives, but also their overall performance ("http://www.quality.nist.gov"). Education was added to the possible recipient areas in 1999, and the MBA were envisioned as standards of quality to improve the efficiency of select U.S. organizations. The criteria have been designed to help schools enhance their competitiveness by focusing on two goals:

1] delivering ever improving value to customers; and,;

2] improving total organizational performance ("http://www.quality.nist.gov")

The highlight of MBA alignment, whether school or business referred to "consistency" of plans, processes, information, resource decisions, actions, results, analysis, and learning to support key organization-wide goals. Effective alignment requires a common understanding of purposes and goals and use of complementary measures and information for planning, tracking, analysis, and improvement at three levels: the organizational level/senior leader level; the key process level; and the program, school, class, or individual level" ("http://www.quality.nist.gov" www.quality.nist.gov). Prior to implementation, stakeholders and their needs are identified. Stakeholders for an educational institute are students, parents, employers, society, and teachers. After identifying stakeholder needs, a plan is devised and implemented to address all seven areas of the Baldrige award as described in the following paragraphs.

The first area is leadership. Based on the stakeholders and their needs, the leadership has to decide the following:

1] how to set and deploy short and long term directions for performance expectations;

2] how to create an environment to promote ethical values;

3] how to review organizational performance against the goals dictated by stakeholder needs;

4] how to improve leadership effectiveness in order to achieve organizational goals, and

5] how to accomplish ethical practices in all transactions and interactions with students and other stakeholders like employers, society etc. "http://www. quality.nist.gov" ).

The second area, strategic plan addresses the following issues:

1] what are the steps, participants, and time horizons for short and long term strategic planning process;

2] how does the strategic plan address current and future students, external factors and partners, current and future technology requirements, strengths and weaknesses in terms of faculty, staff and other resources, and student learning and development assessment;

3] what are the short and long term strategic objectives, and

4] how all the components of the strategic objectives balance the needs of the stakeholders ("http://www.quality.nist.gov").

The third area, customer and market focus, addresses the following issues:

1] how to determine the student segment and markets the educational program will address;

2] how to determine the current and future stake holder's needs and expectations;

3] how to keep the listening and learning methods to identify the stakeholders and their needs current;

4] how to maintain a complaint management system for the stakeholders, and

5] how to determine the level of satisfaction of the students and stakeholders ("http://www.quality.nist.gov " ).

The fourth area, measurement and analysis of organizational performance, deals with the following issues:

1] how to gather and integrate data and information for organizational decision making;

2] how to select measures/indicators for performance analysis;

3] what analysis has to be performed on the data;

4] how are the results of analysis communicated to the entire organization, and

5] how does the organization keeps the performance measurements reflective of the current conditions ("http://www.quality.nist.gov").

The fifth area, human resources deals with the following issues:

1] faculty and staff are capable of satisfying stakeholder requirements;

2] faculty and staff attend regular training sessions to enhance their skills in order to, meet the changing stakeholder needs, and

3] faculty and staff performance measurement tools reflect stake holder needs ("http://www.quality.nist.gov").

The sixth area, process management, deals with the following issues:

1] what is the process of designing educational programs and student services;

2] how does the design process for educational programs and student services address stakeholder needs;

3] how to incorporate a measurement plan that makes use of formative and summative assessment;

4] what are the delivery processes for educational programs and student services, and what are their key performance requirements;

5] what key observations and indicators are used to monitor and improve the delivery of your key educational programs and student services, and

6] how to improve educational programs and offerings as well as student services in order to meet the ever changing stakeholder needs ("http://www.quality.nist.gov").

The seventh and final section deals with business results in the following areas:

1] customer satisfaction;

2] financial and marketplace performance;

3] human resources;

4] supplier and partner performance, and

5] operational performance. The category also examines how the organization performs relative to its competitors ("http://www.quality.nist.gov").

The key driver for all seven factors taken into account for a Baldrige award is stakeholder needs. Therefore, for an educational institute to fulfill the requirements to be a recipient, it should teach what market/employers/community demands, it should deliver the instructions how these stakeholders want it delivered, and it should provide adequate customer service in order to assure satisfaction among stakeholders.

The history of this paper has thus far been developed in two distinct, yet complementary modes. We showed the recent emergence of the business community's "push-pull" theory. These theories suggest U.S. manufacturers have either produced a "one-size fits all" product (push), or listen to customer's demands for them (pull). They have either created what they believed to be a market for their products, or they have reacted to their customers' needs for those products.

Second, this paper examined the philosophical traditions handed from western European countries to their American counterparts. These traditions began with questions of reality, knowledge, and values carried over to the classical philosophies of Idealism, Realism, Pragmatism, and Existentialism. The corresponding teaching philosophies, Perennialism, Essentialism, Progressivism, and Social Reconstructionism were examined to show how each has inherent "push-pull" properties. If American schools are equated to the business community, the "products" of American education are students of our nation's schools will be equivalent to factories, administration and faculty will be supervisors, and society as well as employers, will be customers. American business push-pull, we contend, have deep-seated roots in U.S. public education, the training grounds for all business people.

We concentrated our next section on TQM and the Malcolm Baldrige awards. These two movements which have gained popularity in education recently, are pull-type systems. The former was devised in 1980s, and concentrated on delivering more quality business products based on customer needs and requirements. The latter, via a seven step program became the most recent business pull program. Further, in 1999, the Baldrige awards included an educational site to the established business division begun in 1987. Because of this national academic recognition, our paper suggests the future of public and higher education will include more "push-pull" phenomena but will also emphasize more pull methodologies. No longer is accountability a word or concept exclusive to the business community.

Conclusion

The names, titles and effects of "push vs. pull" as styles of producer or consumerled business practices have been in effect since the 1960s. This paper has drawn an analogy between U.S. "pull-push" business philosophies and their K-12 and higher educations equivalents. American businesses have moved from push-type of systems where producers produced one size fits all type of products to pull-type systems where customers' needs are of primary importance. We are now seeing a similar influence of pull philosophy in academia. Research indicates growing concern of accountability, an increasing emphasis of customer service, and a new zeal to produce quality products-students.

However, U.S. public educational intellectual communities have had similar titles, efforts, and styles since U.S. schools began in 1620. This paper began by reflecting and tracing American and European history of asking questions-metaphysics, epistemology, and axiology-regarding the four classical philosophies: Idealism, Realism, Pragmatism, and Existentialism. Coalescing the first two post-20th century teaching philosophies, Perennialism and Essentialism as authoritarian based, produced push equivalents from their classical roots. As well, by intertwining the third and fourth post 20th century teaching philosophies, Progressivism, and Social Reconstructionism, resulted in non-authoritarian based pull equivalents. The "push vs. pull" metaphor is being discovered and/or formulated for public school curricula, from official, state or federally mandated long term efforts, to educator-delivered, daily constructs.

Movements like TQM and MBA further strengthen pull-based systems and their public school applications. This paper has drawn a philosophical analogy between business and education; however, further research is needed to update and reinforce these claims. Researchers should concentrate on current public and higher education enrollment trends. We suggest the most important trends are public school curriculum influences, students' choice of majors in higher education, and employers' influence on content and instructional modes.

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adler, M. (1982). The Paideia Proposal: An Educational Manifesto. New York: Macmillan.

This text is Adler's complement to his Great Books editions, and it includes several important updates to his classical works.

Benke, R.J and Harmanson, R.H., (1992). TQM in the Classroom. Management Accounting. October, 14-15.

This paper discusses the implications of implementing TQM in a classroom.

Bennett, W. (1993). The Book Of Virtues. New York: Simon And Schuster.

Mr. Bennett has included a number of pieces of literature he posits as morally worthwhile reading for young readers.

Bosner, C.F. (1992). Total Quality Education?. Public Administrative Review. 52(5), 504-512.

This paper introduces the term Total Quality Education which is the application of TQM in education.

Carnochan, W.B. (1993). The Battleground Of The Curriculum. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.

In this work readers will find an excellent description of the curriculum wars that have taken place in the U.S. over the last two centuries. The bibliography is especially helpful.

Chao, C. Y. and Dugger, J. C. (1996). A Total Quality Management Model for Instructional Supervision in Vocational Technical Programs. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education. Summer (33), 23-35.

This paper examines the impact of TQM in vocational technical programs. This paper proposes that the requirements of the employers be the sole criteria for deciding the curriculum of vocation education.

Cobb, G.W. (1993). Reconsidering Statistics Education: A NSF Conference. Journal of Statistics Education. 1(1).

This paper examines the application of statistical quality control in teaching statistics in the classroom.

GOAL/QPC. (1991). Education & Total Quality Management: A Resource Guide. Methuen, MA.

This a handbook which describes the application of TQM to many operations.

Hirsch, E.D. (1987). Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs To Know. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

This text is one of the cornerstones in modern Perennialism, and the author has provided ample explanations for his thoughts and philosophy.

Hubbard, D.L. (1994). Can Higher Education Learn from Factories?. Quality Progress. May, 93-97.

This is one of the first papers that draws a parallel between the quality principles on the shop-floor and the possibility of implementing them in educational institutes.

Kliebard. H. M. (1986). The Struggle for the American Curriculum 1893-1958. New York: Routledge.

This text was one of the first and still one of the best historical references regarding the development of U.S. public school curriculum, and it includes an exhaustive bibliography.

Montano, C. B. and Utter, G. H. (1999). Total Quality Management in Higher Education. Quality Progress. August, 32(8), 52-59.

This article analyzes the implications of implementing TQM in the non-instructional end of a university.

Ornstein, A.C. & Levine, D.U. (2000). Foundations of education. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.

An excellent history and philosophy text for both students and researchers. There are abundant scholarly resources and web sites in all chapters.

Ray, M. A. (1996). Total Quality Management in Economic Education: Defining the Market. The Journal of Economic Education. Summer (27), 276-283.

This paper examines who is the customer, who is the producer, and what is the market if TQM is implemented in education.

Rubach, L. and Stratton, B. (1994). Teaming Up to Improve U.S. Education. Quality Progress. February, 65-68.

This article proposes that the use of teams be encouraged to improve the quality of the American educational institutes.

Wiedmer, T. L. and Harris, V. L. (1997). Implications of Total Quality Management in Education. The Education Forum, Summer (61), 314-318.

This paper examines the post implementation results of the application of TQM in education and suggests possible improvements.

Willis, G., Schubert, W.H, Bullough, R. Jr., Kridel, C., & Holton, J.T. (Eds.). (1994). The American Curriculum, A Documentary History.

This compendium of virtually every significant document in U.S. public school history is the only book of its kind. The primary materials are well chosen, and the various explanations and research to this field are excellent resources.

MOHAMMED ARIF

Department of Business Administration, Carthage College, Kenosha, WI 53140, E-mail: [email protected]

FREDERICK M. SMILEY

Department of Education, Carthage College, Kenosha, WI 53140, E-mail: [email protected]

DENNIS J. KULONDA

Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Systems, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL 32816, E-mail: [email protected]

Copyright Project Innovation Summer 2005
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved