Relationship between Business Strategy and IT Strategy

Relationship between Business Strategy and IT Strategy BUSINESS-IT ALIGNMENT (BITA) The relationship between Business strategy and IT strategy and the influence of organisation culture on this strategic alignment in Saudi firms will form the basis of the research in this research. As such, the literature reviewed here will survey major research and practice in the business-IT strategic alignment domain for the purpose of deriving a research framework, or model, of business-IT strategic alignment that will unite the key principles contained within the literature. The intention is to develop a model simple enough for application that will provide a practical tool both for management and IT practitioners. 2.1 BITA A CHRONLOGICAL HISTORY Study on the strategic alignment concept will soon be reaching a quarter of a decades worth of knowledge. Henderson Sifonis (1988) began studying this notion during the late 80s when alignment emerged from a focus on strategic business planning and long-range IT planning where IT plans were created in support of corporate strategies Chan Reich (2007, p. 298). Nevertheless, strategic alignment has retained its interest and value in the business and IT communities and is still a popular topic today for organisations; perhaps even more so as technological advancement continues to dominate the exchange of information. Not surprisingly, its evolution has followed closely the developmental progress of IT itself which began with the operational era continuing through the re-engineering viewpoint and the new economy as figure 2.1 illustrates: The initial phase, the operational era, was concerned primarily with the operations that an organisation performed and focused on setting up mainframes, managing networks of PCs, and backing up organisational data. IT provided the nuts and bolts to facilitate automation of back-office functions through the development of software and had only a supportive role. Strategic alignment was thus viewed merely as a supporting act for every-day operations with its software applications. The second phase, re-engineering, arose from the increasing trend toward dependency on the automation of business processes by IT which not only offered back-office functions support but the promise of total automation within an organization as a whole through IT software applications. At this stage, IT was still viewed only as a supportive tool with no representation in the business end of an organisation. For example, business managers expressed their system needs which the IT department embraced and went on to develop and deploy a new software application in isolation. These early strategic alignment projects were not always successful. It was discovered that the development of software (with embedded processes) for automation of a business function was no guarantee of improvement over its earlier manual operation, indeed it could end up being more time-consuming and therefore less efficient as operators were not necessarily au fait with the application. There was not a full unde rstanding of what IT could do and how it could enhance a companys position beyond speeding up communications and thereby creating more ‘time for production or interfacing. A ‘Them and Us atmosphere prevailed with the ‘techies in a separate world to the mangers or drivers of the business, neither fully understanding the others needs [elements that are also considered further in the organisation culture aspect of this research and dealt with in the next chapter]. In the 1990s, Baets study of European banks (Baets, 1996) supported the findings of Vitale and colleagues ten years earlier (Vitale et al., 1986) that knowledge of IT had to be on a par with expert business knowledge for the two to create any comprehension and thereby effective application of strategic alignment in organisations. The third phase, new economy, saw IT commanding greater importance and status as organisations began to emerge that were embracing e-commerce. The demands of the new e-business projects required involvement of IT representatives in their management and strategic planning. The implementation of Internet technologies to augment business processes for productivity or profitability improvements brought the role of IT into the spotlight, according it recognition and strategic responsibility. Along with the newly elevated status of the old IT department there was a greater familiarity with technology and its capabilities and the prejudice that had previously scorned the ‘nerds dissipated somewhat as managers and personnel became more knowledgeable and the IT personnel more essential beyond a lab coat and a screwdriver [cf: artifacts causing division, Schein (1992) and Trompenaars (1997) in chapter 3]. Despite the current global economic crisis and the demise of the new economy IT con tinues to assume new responsibilities and organisations have even more need for strategic alignment projects. An IT department in 2010 must manage relations with partners and bear business responsibilities concerned with the development and customisation of software that will improve how a business functions; practice effective project management to control costs and maximise efficiency and ensure that the introduction of any new hardware or software support operations and infrastructure, â€Å" maintaining the crucial corporate data that helps managers throughout the enterprise to make intelligent and informed decisions Hoque (2002, p. 31). Kearns Lederer, (2003) and Seggie et al. (2006) agree that strategic alignment is a means to gain competitive advantage and Sabherwal Chan (2001), Wagner et al. (2005) and Zhou et al. (2008) further add that it improves organisational performance. 2.2 DEFINING BITA Determining a conclusive definition for alignment is as challenging as its function and application. There are many perspectives and multiple definitions including in chronological order: strategic alignment (Henderson and Venkatraman, 1993); harmony (Luftman, 1996); fit (Porter, 1996); bridge (Ciborra, 1997); integration (Weill and Broadbend, 1988); fusion (Smaczny, 2001); IS alignment (Chan et al., 2006; Benbya and McKelvey, 2006) business-IT alignment (Luftman, 2007); and IT alignment (Chan, 2007). It is understandable that there is such diversity as definitions depend on our understanding of language. The semantics involved are precarious because the new technologies are often described in technical terms and applying simplistic synonyms to explain the intention of alignment in the context of business IT in terminology that is understood without associated jargon is very difficult. Overall, the definitions offered, though they have nuances of difference between them, do relate to the improvement of organisational capability through technology. Broadbent and Weills (1993) early definition, purports that it is the degree to which information strategies support, stimulate and/or enable any business strategies. A later definition offered by Reich and Benbasat (1996) asserts much the same but frames it in terms of the missions of the IT and business objectives and plans on both sides. Luftman (2000) was the first to introduce the element of evolution into the definition and argued that it required strength [as the key element] from leadership, senior management and working relationships, combined with a complete understanding of the business and technical environments, fitting prioritisation, mutual trust, and of course, effective communication. Hirschheim and Sabherwals (2001) definition included the idea of a reciprocal arrangement as fundamental to its meaning and stated that alignment was the achieved between strategy and supporting structures that allowed both IS (information systems) and business to function and communica te responsively each way to one another. Most accepted definitions do highlight the alignment dichotomy described by Kearns and Lederer, (2000), where the argument is that the IS plan ought to align with the business plan (ISP-BP) and vice versa (BP-ISP) the business plan ought to align with the IS plan. Each perspective serves to increase the understanding of IT at organisational level and assist the prioritisation of IT projects. Reich and Benbasat (1996) were protagonists of the ISP-BP model, which they declared signified, IS managements comprehension of the business strategy. Whereas Bensaou and Earl (1998) contrarily preferred the BP-ISP alignment model as they believed it assumed a greater understanding on the part of the business comprehension of the IT aspects and thus the plan and the resources would ally more effectively together as a result of this knowledge, understanding and commitment. These elements are believed to be enablers of alignment (Luftman et al., 1999). In the definitions offered some view alignment as a specific happening or event and others regard it is an ongoing process. Duffy (2001) saw BITA as a process of achieving competitive advantage through a developed and sustained business and IT symbiosis. Maes et al. (2000) claimed BITA to be a continuous and continual process that involved management and design sub-processes with conscious and coherent interrelation of all elements and mechanisms within the business/IT relationship offering contribution to the ongoing performance of the organisation. Moodys (2003) definition saw BITA as a form of comprehensive resources management (people/ technology/ outside resources) that provides a set of IT services and capabilities that are in line with the business needs and priorities. And Senn (2003) was assured that each action executed by IT individuals was to focus on the creation and delivery of shareholder/stakeholder value through supporting business operations and/or achieving business goals. 2.3 BITA PERSPECTIVES AND DIMENSIONS With the diversity of definitions offered to explain the meaning of the strategic alignment concept, as outlined in the previous section, there is a need to further explore the differences to discover why there is such variety. Part of the explanation may be that as the concept has evolved it has been closely linked to the evolution of technological capabilities. Attitudes have changed as organisations have adopted new technologies and personnel have become more familiar with their potential and their operation. These dynamics and the evolution of strategic alignment are reflected in the number of conceptualisations and their definitions will be analysed in the context of the differing perspectives afforded to them. BITA with regard to its perception as a strategy, an event, a continuous process, a performance indicator, an assessment tool, a social influence and as an operation will be briefly outlined below to expand on the definitions in the literature from their different dimensi ons. 2.3.1 BITA AS A STRATEGY It has been a tradition for literature to refer to Business-IT alignment as ‘strategic alignment. Considering it in these terms frames it as an intellectual notion rather than something more concrete or practical and as such it can be high-jacked to represent whatever strategy suits the organisation that is considering alignment. There is no harm in referencing alignment in this manner for it allows debate and therefore change, essential for evolution and adopting a ‘strategy suitable to the structure, culture and level of alignment required. By referring to it in this way however, the literature suggests that strategic alignment is dependent on the fit between IT strategy and business strategy, and on how the IS plans are established to support such a fit (Teo and King, 1997). Many authors in the strategic alignment field approach alignment purely at the strategic level, e.g. Baets (1992), Broadbent and Weill (1993), Chan et al. (1997), and Luftman (2003). At the core of their conceptualisations is the notion that business strategy itself must first be analysed and only thereafter be used to determine a complementary IT strategy. In this scenario the business strategy is paramount and the IT strategy contribution secondary, it is a means to an end rather than a means in its own right. However, despite the alignment between business strategy and IT strategy where emphasis is laid on defining IS strategy plans (Benbya and Mckelvey, 2006) strategic alignment continues to be problematical in many organisations. Thus, reaching an agreed definition that details IS strategic plans is important for strategic alignment; however, is it not enough on its own for the achievement of such alignment (van der Zee and de Jong, 1999). 2.3.2 STRUCTURAL TOPOLOGY AFFECTING BITA The literature often takes for granted the strategic element of the concept and delves further into its implications for organisations, concentrating on the behaviour and nature of BITA what it does when you introduce it [and also is a strong feature of the organisational culture types discussed in the following chapter]. This depends largely on what type of a structure into which it is introduced. A formal structure, an informal structure or a hybrid structure, each having its own merits and each being capable of effective function when the circumstances and environment are conducive to the choice made (Brown and Magill, 1994). Against their three identified structures, Earl (1989) identified five potentially suitable structures: centralized, business unit, business venture, decentralised, and federal. Tavakolian (1989) found a direct correlation between competitive and conservative strategies within an environment and the corresponding decentralised or centralised IT structures ev ident in an organisation and this finding is supported to some extent by Bergeron et al. (2001) with the caveat that it is not solely the complexity of structure that impacts performance but that other factors are influential too. Chans (2001) view is that informal structure, â€Å"†¦relationship-based structures that transcend the formal division of labour and coordination of tasks†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Chan, 2001, p67) can be just as effective as formal structure with the human element rather than intellectualised models and processes driving alignment, often with more impact and success than a formal arrangement. Structure, therefore can add a new dimension to the perspective of alignment as it places it in a setting that will impose its own constraints on the practice and execution of alignment exercises and ideals. 2.3.3 BITA AS AN END IN ITSELF For some authors it alignment doesnt seem to ‘do anything rather it is a business unit that lacks the dynamics others see in it. The implication is that it is something that is ‘brought in like an object concrete and physical and recognised by its static end state where some sort of equilibrium is achieved between the IT and business sides in an organisation. In the previous section, some of the definitions only present strategic alignment as an outcome achieved through the employment and adoption of different models, techniques and processes (Ortiz, 2003). Broadbent and Weill (1993), Chan et al. (1997), Luftman (2003) and Reich and Benbasat (1996), also see strategic alignment as something to be arrived at, a destination that is terminated when an optimal situation has been achieved. This may be a misunderstanding of the full meaning as the attitude that having strategic alignment the business married with the technology required for effective fulfillment of objectives cannot stand alone and it would be naà ¯ve to believe that BITA was a panacea for all business problems so perhaps the authors see it as an optimal achievement when all the other factors, or perspectives, also come into play to make BITA a worthwhile ‘thing in itself. 2.3.4 BITA AS A CONTINUING PROCESS If a business is static it will stagnate and if a business wishes to grow, like IT, it must always continue to evolve through a naturally occurring dynamics that are integral to the implementation of policies such as strategic alignment. Baets (1996), Luftman et al. (1999), and Rondinelli (2001) agree that these dynamics require constant monitoring and appropriate adjustment. Therefore, strategic alignment is not something attainable but something constantly in development, as it is variously described by Henderson and Venkatraman (1993), Baets 1996, Maes et al. (2000), Duffy (2001), Moody (2003), and Senn (2004). â€Å"An issue that has remained relatively unchallenged and unquestioned is how to align IT that is relatively fixed once implemented in an organization, with a business strategy and associated information requirements that are constantly in need of adjustment Galliers (2007, p. 228). Even within this perspective there are two schools of thought; the classical school of thought with emphasis on contingency adaptations and the ‘processual approach (Whittington, 1993) that emphasises the importance of addressing internal and power issues, particularly how cultural elements influence the formal elements of rationality and the decision process in strategic alignment and rejects IT as merely an adaptation but gives it greater weight as a resource. Furthermore, practitioners are being advised to adopt a view of strategic alignment as a continual process. In Pearlmans (2004) article advice to CIOs, in summary, is that they should communicate, demonstrate, lead, collaborate, govern and build if they wish to achieve alignment. 2.3.5 BITA FOR PERFORMANCE INDICATION It is the consideration of several authors that strategic alignment is not only a process but also a tool whereby they can reflect on the business value that organisations might possess, or not. In studies analysed the relationship between strategic alignment and competitive advantage or organisational performance were tracked, (Venkatraman, 1989; Sabherwal and Chan, 2001; Kearns and Lederer, 2003; Wagner, 2005; Seggie et al., 2006; Zhou, 2008). Tallon and Kraemer (2003) were responsible for the additional concept of business value being included as an element to the performance indication point of view of strategic alignment and analyse business value by relating it to organisational IT goals and measuring the IT return of investment from a strategic alignment viewpoint. 2.3.6 ASSESSMENT USING BITA In response to the question: `how do organisations know how good their strategic alignment is? different authors have developed Maturity Models (MMs) (de Koning and der Mark, 2002; Duffy, 2001; Luftman, 2003; van der Raadt et al., 2005). MMs describe the development of a specific domain over time. This perspective is in itself a more mature outlook than other perspectives as it has to consider many of the dynamics before being able to construct an effective strategic alignment. Because of the in-built review and evaluation required for this perspective it has to look at all aspects that the alignment may affect. Researchwork and systems are subject to assessment and revision through these maturity models and their monitoring. On the basis of the assessments of those MMs, organisations can fine tune and calibrate their strategic alignment: Identify any alignment-related aspects/processes improvements required to obtain a higher level of strategic alignment maturity. Initiate any change processes to ensure that the identified improvements eventuate. In much the same way, acceptance of the cyclical nature of strategic alignment as posited by Burns (1996) ‘lead-lag model implies assessment in response to intermittent predictable and unpredictable changes as does the ‘punctuated equilibrium model of Sabherwal et al. (2001) where interruptions to stability demand a fresh look at the long term plan and goals of strategic alignment. 2.3.7 BITA AS A SOCIAL INFLUENCE If an organisation intends to work toward achieving strategic alignment it will necessitate communication that will involve negotiation, collaboration and mutual understanding elements not always present a specific organisational structure or culture. This communication can blur the boundaries of traditional or conventional approaches and therefore becomes a driving force behind social attitudes and perceptions. Chan (2002) and Huang and Hu (2007) uphold this view that maintaining effective communication in an organisation will impact on corporate strategic alignment culture. Concord must be developed for effective channels of communication, transparency in the exchange of knowledge and sharing of learning (Hoque, 2002; Daneva and Hu, 2007), and the use of informal communication is just as important a factor for adjustment and control (Mintzberg, 1993; Chan, 2002; vander Raadt et al., 2005), to generate an atmosphere of trust and an effective response to business needs from an IT pe rspective. Reich and Benbasats (2000) study further confirms that strategic alignment is more likely to succeed when business and IT executives have an [importantly] expressed and [understood] shared common vision of ITs contribution. 2.3.8 BITA AND OPERATIONS Strategic alignment [when it is all-encompassing and embraced by all as part of an organisational culture] necessarily involves organisational issues of communication, structure and, particularly, coordination processes that are operational to the business in specifically performed actions (Wieringa, 2008). Operational strategic alignment consists of aligning the operational activities of IT and business people with each other so that optimal IT support for business requirements is achieved. In this context, Peak and Guynes (2003) put the onus of success on the IT side of the equation, though it does imply some reciprocity in the initial communication of ‘quality requirements and they state that strategic alignment will only be attained when an organisations IT staff can deliver quality information and quality IT products and services to the business side. 2.4 BITA MODELS 2.4.1 MIT90S FRAMEWORK (1991) During the 1980s, research conducted at the world renowned MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) initiated interest in the academic community to the potential of the strategic power of IT. In the attempt to exploit the possibilities revealed in the model from the research it was suggested that radical innovation involving IT investment could carry substantial reward if key elements of strategy, structure, technology, management processes and individuals and their roles were kept in alignment (Morton, 1991). Organisation can be visualised as a set of five forces in dynamic equilibrium subject to external influences from the technological environment and the socio-economic environment. In this view, a core task of general management is to ensure that all five ‘forces (represented by the boxes), can flow without restriction or impediment in order to achieve the organisations goals and objectives. With management at the centre of the model its role is central too. Though some areas might not necessarily be in direct contact with each other they are connected via the management process which plays the principal role and ensures organisational response to shifts in demands from the external variables. 2.4.2 THE HENDERSON AND VENKATRAMAN STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT MODEL (1993) Henderson Venkatramans (1993) strategic model (Figure 2.3) is a widely used four-part illustration favoured by many researchers and organisations for the assessment of the level of alignment in a company. Each of the four parts [quarters] contain three distinct and individuals elements which, when collectively analysed, can be used to define each quarter operationally. These twelve elements- further expanded in Table 1 are used to establish the level and type of alignment within a corporation (Henderson Venkatraman, 1993; Papp, 1995). Table 1 Components of the Strategic Alignment Model Within the model it can be seen how external influences may affect change on either processes [lower sectors] or strategies [upper sectors]. A vertical link couples the upper and lowers sectors and shows the relationship between strategic fit to accommodate strategy with infrastructure. A horizontal link for functional integration shows how IT strategies must adapt as business strategies change, and displays the dependence and required response of each sector upon anothers adaptations particularly in relation to skills and operation. Giving focus to three of the four quarters of the model at a given time can permit a simultaneous address to both strategic fit and functional integration (Papp, 1995; Luftman et al., 1999). The SAM (Strategic Alignment Model) model has proven empirical authenticity and has provided valid conceptual and practical value (Goedvolk et al,. 1997; Avison et al., 2004). Nevertheless, it is subject to confines, eg, the applicability of the SAM model may vary depending on the IT-intensity of an industry and the assumptions expounded might not be relevant to the circumstances (Burn and Szeto, 2000). As mentioned, the model does have recognition and a number of scholars have further elaborated on it (e.g., Luftman et al., 1993). Goedvolk et al.s (1997) extension of the SAM model gave greater focus to technical and architectural attributes. Avison et al.s (2004) addition to the SAM model was able to provide practitioners and academics with further practical ways to attain alignment in their advocacy of examining projects retrospectively to determine alignment. This form of alignment monitoring, can allow pre-emption in a change in strategy and implementation of a new alignment perspective by re-allocation of project resources. The SAM model inspired Maes et al. (2000) to produce a framework that incorporates even more layers pertinent to function and strategy where information providers are separated from the systems providing information in a new information domain representing knowledge, [and exchange of information through] communication and coordination. Their third dimension addresses specific sub-architecture areas. 2.4.3 IS CAPABILITY AND ORGANISATIONAL PERFORMANCE MODEL (2004) Peppard and Wards model (2004) shows IS capability at the core of everything, inherently affecting competencies and emanating an influence on all areas that interrelate [business strategy/business operations/IT operations and services/IS/IT strategy] and impact upon the organisational performance. Such focus on the importance of this core element demonstrates the value IS capabilities can create and is therefore an organisation-wide responsibility that cannot be delegated to the IS function alone (Peppard et al., 2000). Peppard and Ward (2004) later asserted that though an organisation might envisage an IT based innovative strategy, it will be their IS capabilities that permit such a vision to come to fruition. 2.4.4 CO-EVOLUTIONARY IS ALIGNMENT (2006) By 2006 the model suggested by Benbya and McKelvey (2006) through its graphic presentation appears a more fluid representation suggesting, even visually, that there is more of a flow between relationships in alignment. It still addresses the need to analyse relationships between business and IT (horizontal IS alignment) but introduces a need to merge the views at different levels [strategic/operational/individual] of analysis (vertical IS alignment) through shared understanding and communication. The co-evolutionary IS alignment perspective conveys the necessity for mutual adaptation within a dynamic interplay of co-evolving elements. Co-evolution does not necessarily seek harmony between the elements but a respect for their position and the innovation that may result from the circumstances and environments in which they function. 2.5 ASSESSMENT APPROACHES OF BITA In this section MMs (maturity models) are referred to that have been developed for the assessment of BITA. 2.5.1 DUFFYS MM (2001) Duffys (2001) MM is founded on the principle that a dependable, mutually compatible partnership between IT and business executives is elementary in order to achieve a worthwhile BITA. Without this premise there cannot be a successful desired outcome. Accepting that there is a level of interdependence between IT and business objectives, any schism or division between IT and non-IT areas would sabotage any efforts to establish alignment. This model is arranged about a series of key success drivers (the domains: human resources organisation and management/innovation and renewal strategy/IT/business architecture/IT/business partnership/operational excellence/ROI strategy management) which are operationalised in KPIs (key performance indicators) that each contain five contributory factors aspects designed to address explicit and significant questions within the KPI where it is included. The six domains are briefly explained below: Human resources organisation and management. In this domain reference is made to an organisations personnel and emphasis is given to the importance of workforce recruitment, retention and management by an organisation. Innovation and renewal strategy. The focus here is how innovative an organisation is with an emphasis on currency and validity having a bearing upon understanding when renewal is required to processes and capabilities in an organisation. IT/business architecture. This domain is concerned with the relationship and interaction of entities involved in the information and applications in the business environment of an organisation. IT/business partnership. This domain reflects how the recent upgrading of the role of the IT function affects an organisation â€Å"Technology is critical to business success and this co-dependency drives the need for the IT and non-IT executives to pursue a win/win relationship Duffy (2003, p. 4). Operational excellence. This domain deals with the performance outcomes of the organisation. Duffy recognises that operational excellence can only be achieved if an organisation can recognise the value of ideals embedded in learning and partnerships, and can respond to market demands promptly. ROI strategy and management. This domain investigates the importance of the metrics and processes required for efficient and effective financial management within organisations and accepting IT costs and benefits as having parity with business ones. Duffys six domains address the â€Å"IT and non-IT assertion as well as certain strategic elements within an organisation but there are no explicitly stated maturity levels for them. Instead, Duffy merges the six domains of the model into four BITA scenarios where organisations fall into the following categories: â€Å"uneasy alliance†, â€Å"supplier/consumer relationship†, â€Å"co-dependence/grudging respect†, and â€Å"united we succeed, divided we fail†. These laymans terms are loose at best and though intended to be descriptive only serve to confuse in their interpretation. Such scenarios are the maturity levels in the model. 2.5.2 LUFTMANS MM (2003) Luftmans model (2003) was constructed on the basis of practical experience and research into enablers and inhibitors of alignment (Luftman et al, 1999), incorporating reference to various other models [here listed chronologically and not in order of importance or influence]: Nolans stages of growth model (Nolan, 1979), SAM (Henderson and Venkatraman, 1993) and CMMs (Capability Maturity Model) reach and range concept of (Keen, 1996). Luftmans MM is an endeavour based in six domains (skills/technology scope/partnership/governance/competency measurements/communications) to discover a specific organisations BITA profile. A brief description of each domain follows: Skills: addresses practical human resources issues such as cross-training in IT and business issues regarding the cultural environment and its impact on innovation and organisational change. Technology scope: refers to how much provision of comprehensible and flexible infrastructure comes from IT, the implementation of emergent technol Relationship between Business Strategy and IT Strategy Relationship between Business Strategy and IT Strategy BUSINESS-IT ALIGNMENT (BITA) The relationship between Business strategy and IT strategy and the influence of organisation culture on this strategic alignment in Saudi firms will form the basis of the research in this research. As such, the literature reviewed here will survey major research and practice in the business-IT strategic alignment domain for the purpose of deriving a research framework, or model, of business-IT strategic alignment that will unite the key principles contained within the literature. The intention is to develop a model simple enough for application that will provide a practical tool both for management and IT practitioners. 2.1 BITA A CHRONLOGICAL HISTORY Study on the strategic alignment concept will soon be reaching a quarter of a decades worth of knowledge. Henderson Sifonis (1988) began studying this notion during the late 80s when alignment emerged from a focus on strategic business planning and long-range IT planning where IT plans were created in support of corporate strategies Chan Reich (2007, p. 298). Nevertheless, strategic alignment has retained its interest and value in the business and IT communities and is still a popular topic today for organisations; perhaps even more so as technological advancement continues to dominate the exchange of information. Not surprisingly, its evolution has followed closely the developmental progress of IT itself which began with the operational era continuing through the re-engineering viewpoint and the new economy as figure 2.1 illustrates: The initial phase, the operational era, was concerned primarily with the operations that an organisation performed and focused on setting up mainframes, managing networks of PCs, and backing up organisational data. IT provided the nuts and bolts to facilitate automation of back-office functions through the development of software and had only a supportive role. Strategic alignment was thus viewed merely as a supporting act for every-day operations with its software applications. The second phase, re-engineering, arose from the increasing trend toward dependency on the automation of business processes by IT which not only offered back-office functions support but the promise of total automation within an organization as a whole through IT software applications. At this stage, IT was still viewed only as a supportive tool with no representation in the business end of an organisation. For example, business managers expressed their system needs which the IT department embraced and went on to develop and deploy a new software application in isolation. These early strategic alignment projects were not always successful. It was discovered that the development of software (with embedded processes) for automation of a business function was no guarantee of improvement over its earlier manual operation, indeed it could end up being more time-consuming and therefore less efficient as operators were not necessarily au fait with the application. There was not a full unde rstanding of what IT could do and how it could enhance a companys position beyond speeding up communications and thereby creating more ‘time for production or interfacing. A ‘Them and Us atmosphere prevailed with the ‘techies in a separate world to the mangers or drivers of the business, neither fully understanding the others needs [elements that are also considered further in the organisation culture aspect of this research and dealt with in the next chapter]. In the 1990s, Baets study of European banks (Baets, 1996) supported the findings of Vitale and colleagues ten years earlier (Vitale et al., 1986) that knowledge of IT had to be on a par with expert business knowledge for the two to create any comprehension and thereby effective application of strategic alignment in organisations. The third phase, new economy, saw IT commanding greater importance and status as organisations began to emerge that were embracing e-commerce. The demands of the new e-business projects required involvement of IT representatives in their management and strategic planning. The implementation of Internet technologies to augment business processes for productivity or profitability improvements brought the role of IT into the spotlight, according it recognition and strategic responsibility. Along with the newly elevated status of the old IT department there was a greater familiarity with technology and its capabilities and the prejudice that had previously scorned the ‘nerds dissipated somewhat as managers and personnel became more knowledgeable and the IT personnel more essential beyond a lab coat and a screwdriver [cf: artifacts causing division, Schein (1992) and Trompenaars (1997) in chapter 3]. Despite the current global economic crisis and the demise of the new economy IT con tinues to assume new responsibilities and organisations have even more need for strategic alignment projects. An IT department in 2010 must manage relations with partners and bear business responsibilities concerned with the development and customisation of software that will improve how a business functions; practice effective project management to control costs and maximise efficiency and ensure that the introduction of any new hardware or software support operations and infrastructure, â€Å" maintaining the crucial corporate data that helps managers throughout the enterprise to make intelligent and informed decisions Hoque (2002, p. 31). Kearns Lederer, (2003) and Seggie et al. (2006) agree that strategic alignment is a means to gain competitive advantage and Sabherwal Chan (2001), Wagner et al. (2005) and Zhou et al. (2008) further add that it improves organisational performance. 2.2 DEFINING BITA Determining a conclusive definition for alignment is as challenging as its function and application. There are many perspectives and multiple definitions including in chronological order: strategic alignment (Henderson and Venkatraman, 1993); harmony (Luftman, 1996); fit (Porter, 1996); bridge (Ciborra, 1997); integration (Weill and Broadbend, 1988); fusion (Smaczny, 2001); IS alignment (Chan et al., 2006; Benbya and McKelvey, 2006) business-IT alignment (Luftman, 2007); and IT alignment (Chan, 2007). It is understandable that there is such diversity as definitions depend on our understanding of language. The semantics involved are precarious because the new technologies are often described in technical terms and applying simplistic synonyms to explain the intention of alignment in the context of business IT in terminology that is understood without associated jargon is very difficult. Overall, the definitions offered, though they have nuances of difference between them, do relate to the improvement of organisational capability through technology. Broadbent and Weills (1993) early definition, purports that it is the degree to which information strategies support, stimulate and/or enable any business strategies. A later definition offered by Reich and Benbasat (1996) asserts much the same but frames it in terms of the missions of the IT and business objectives and plans on both sides. Luftman (2000) was the first to introduce the element of evolution into the definition and argued that it required strength [as the key element] from leadership, senior management and working relationships, combined with a complete understanding of the business and technical environments, fitting prioritisation, mutual trust, and of course, effective communication. Hirschheim and Sabherwals (2001) definition included the idea of a reciprocal arrangement as fundamental to its meaning and stated that alignment was the achieved between strategy and supporting structures that allowed both IS (information systems) and business to function and communica te responsively each way to one another. Most accepted definitions do highlight the alignment dichotomy described by Kearns and Lederer, (2000), where the argument is that the IS plan ought to align with the business plan (ISP-BP) and vice versa (BP-ISP) the business plan ought to align with the IS plan. Each perspective serves to increase the understanding of IT at organisational level and assist the prioritisation of IT projects. Reich and Benbasat (1996) were protagonists of the ISP-BP model, which they declared signified, IS managements comprehension of the business strategy. Whereas Bensaou and Earl (1998) contrarily preferred the BP-ISP alignment model as they believed it assumed a greater understanding on the part of the business comprehension of the IT aspects and thus the plan and the resources would ally more effectively together as a result of this knowledge, understanding and commitment. These elements are believed to be enablers of alignment (Luftman et al., 1999). In the definitions offered some view alignment as a specific happening or event and others regard it is an ongoing process. Duffy (2001) saw BITA as a process of achieving competitive advantage through a developed and sustained business and IT symbiosis. Maes et al. (2000) claimed BITA to be a continuous and continual process that involved management and design sub-processes with conscious and coherent interrelation of all elements and mechanisms within the business/IT relationship offering contribution to the ongoing performance of the organisation. Moodys (2003) definition saw BITA as a form of comprehensive resources management (people/ technology/ outside resources) that provides a set of IT services and capabilities that are in line with the business needs and priorities. And Senn (2003) was assured that each action executed by IT individuals was to focus on the creation and delivery of shareholder/stakeholder value through supporting business operations and/or achieving business goals. 2.3 BITA PERSPECTIVES AND DIMENSIONS With the diversity of definitions offered to explain the meaning of the strategic alignment concept, as outlined in the previous section, there is a need to further explore the differences to discover why there is such variety. Part of the explanation may be that as the concept has evolved it has been closely linked to the evolution of technological capabilities. Attitudes have changed as organisations have adopted new technologies and personnel have become more familiar with their potential and their operation. These dynamics and the evolution of strategic alignment are reflected in the number of conceptualisations and their definitions will be analysed in the context of the differing perspectives afforded to them. BITA with regard to its perception as a strategy, an event, a continuous process, a performance indicator, an assessment tool, a social influence and as an operation will be briefly outlined below to expand on the definitions in the literature from their different dimensi ons. 2.3.1 BITA AS A STRATEGY It has been a tradition for literature to refer to Business-IT alignment as ‘strategic alignment. Considering it in these terms frames it as an intellectual notion rather than something more concrete or practical and as such it can be high-jacked to represent whatever strategy suits the organisation that is considering alignment. There is no harm in referencing alignment in this manner for it allows debate and therefore change, essential for evolution and adopting a ‘strategy suitable to the structure, culture and level of alignment required. By referring to it in this way however, the literature suggests that strategic alignment is dependent on the fit between IT strategy and business strategy, and on how the IS plans are established to support such a fit (Teo and King, 1997). Many authors in the strategic alignment field approach alignment purely at the strategic level, e.g. Baets (1992), Broadbent and Weill (1993), Chan et al. (1997), and Luftman (2003). At the core of their conceptualisations is the notion that business strategy itself must first be analysed and only thereafter be used to determine a complementary IT strategy. In this scenario the business strategy is paramount and the IT strategy contribution secondary, it is a means to an end rather than a means in its own right. However, despite the alignment between business strategy and IT strategy where emphasis is laid on defining IS strategy plans (Benbya and Mckelvey, 2006) strategic alignment continues to be problematical in many organisations. Thus, reaching an agreed definition that details IS strategic plans is important for strategic alignment; however, is it not enough on its own for the achievement of such alignment (van der Zee and de Jong, 1999). 2.3.2 STRUCTURAL TOPOLOGY AFFECTING BITA The literature often takes for granted the strategic element of the concept and delves further into its implications for organisations, concentrating on the behaviour and nature of BITA what it does when you introduce it [and also is a strong feature of the organisational culture types discussed in the following chapter]. This depends largely on what type of a structure into which it is introduced. A formal structure, an informal structure or a hybrid structure, each having its own merits and each being capable of effective function when the circumstances and environment are conducive to the choice made (Brown and Magill, 1994). Against their three identified structures, Earl (1989) identified five potentially suitable structures: centralized, business unit, business venture, decentralised, and federal. Tavakolian (1989) found a direct correlation between competitive and conservative strategies within an environment and the corresponding decentralised or centralised IT structures ev ident in an organisation and this finding is supported to some extent by Bergeron et al. (2001) with the caveat that it is not solely the complexity of structure that impacts performance but that other factors are influential too. Chans (2001) view is that informal structure, â€Å"†¦relationship-based structures that transcend the formal division of labour and coordination of tasks†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Chan, 2001, p67) can be just as effective as formal structure with the human element rather than intellectualised models and processes driving alignment, often with more impact and success than a formal arrangement. Structure, therefore can add a new dimension to the perspective of alignment as it places it in a setting that will impose its own constraints on the practice and execution of alignment exercises and ideals. 2.3.3 BITA AS AN END IN ITSELF For some authors it alignment doesnt seem to ‘do anything rather it is a business unit that lacks the dynamics others see in it. The implication is that it is something that is ‘brought in like an object concrete and physical and recognised by its static end state where some sort of equilibrium is achieved between the IT and business sides in an organisation. In the previous section, some of the definitions only present strategic alignment as an outcome achieved through the employment and adoption of different models, techniques and processes (Ortiz, 2003). Broadbent and Weill (1993), Chan et al. (1997), Luftman (2003) and Reich and Benbasat (1996), also see strategic alignment as something to be arrived at, a destination that is terminated when an optimal situation has been achieved. This may be a misunderstanding of the full meaning as the attitude that having strategic alignment the business married with the technology required for effective fulfillment of objectives cannot stand alone and it would be naà ¯ve to believe that BITA was a panacea for all business problems so perhaps the authors see it as an optimal achievement when all the other factors, or perspectives, also come into play to make BITA a worthwhile ‘thing in itself. 2.3.4 BITA AS A CONTINUING PROCESS If a business is static it will stagnate and if a business wishes to grow, like IT, it must always continue to evolve through a naturally occurring dynamics that are integral to the implementation of policies such as strategic alignment. Baets (1996), Luftman et al. (1999), and Rondinelli (2001) agree that these dynamics require constant monitoring and appropriate adjustment. Therefore, strategic alignment is not something attainable but something constantly in development, as it is variously described by Henderson and Venkatraman (1993), Baets 1996, Maes et al. (2000), Duffy (2001), Moody (2003), and Senn (2004). â€Å"An issue that has remained relatively unchallenged and unquestioned is how to align IT that is relatively fixed once implemented in an organization, with a business strategy and associated information requirements that are constantly in need of adjustment Galliers (2007, p. 228). Even within this perspective there are two schools of thought; the classical school of thought with emphasis on contingency adaptations and the ‘processual approach (Whittington, 1993) that emphasises the importance of addressing internal and power issues, particularly how cultural elements influence the formal elements of rationality and the decision process in strategic alignment and rejects IT as merely an adaptation but gives it greater weight as a resource. Furthermore, practitioners are being advised to adopt a view of strategic alignment as a continual process. In Pearlmans (2004) article advice to CIOs, in summary, is that they should communicate, demonstrate, lead, collaborate, govern and build if they wish to achieve alignment. 2.3.5 BITA FOR PERFORMANCE INDICATION It is the consideration of several authors that strategic alignment is not only a process but also a tool whereby they can reflect on the business value that organisations might possess, or not. In studies analysed the relationship between strategic alignment and competitive advantage or organisational performance were tracked, (Venkatraman, 1989; Sabherwal and Chan, 2001; Kearns and Lederer, 2003; Wagner, 2005; Seggie et al., 2006; Zhou, 2008). Tallon and Kraemer (2003) were responsible for the additional concept of business value being included as an element to the performance indication point of view of strategic alignment and analyse business value by relating it to organisational IT goals and measuring the IT return of investment from a strategic alignment viewpoint. 2.3.6 ASSESSMENT USING BITA In response to the question: `how do organisations know how good their strategic alignment is? different authors have developed Maturity Models (MMs) (de Koning and der Mark, 2002; Duffy, 2001; Luftman, 2003; van der Raadt et al., 2005). MMs describe the development of a specific domain over time. This perspective is in itself a more mature outlook than other perspectives as it has to consider many of the dynamics before being able to construct an effective strategic alignment. Because of the in-built review and evaluation required for this perspective it has to look at all aspects that the alignment may affect. Researchwork and systems are subject to assessment and revision through these maturity models and their monitoring. On the basis of the assessments of those MMs, organisations can fine tune and calibrate their strategic alignment: Identify any alignment-related aspects/processes improvements required to obtain a higher level of strategic alignment maturity. Initiate any change processes to ensure that the identified improvements eventuate. In much the same way, acceptance of the cyclical nature of strategic alignment as posited by Burns (1996) ‘lead-lag model implies assessment in response to intermittent predictable and unpredictable changes as does the ‘punctuated equilibrium model of Sabherwal et al. (2001) where interruptions to stability demand a fresh look at the long term plan and goals of strategic alignment. 2.3.7 BITA AS A SOCIAL INFLUENCE If an organisation intends to work toward achieving strategic alignment it will necessitate communication that will involve negotiation, collaboration and mutual understanding elements not always present a specific organisational structure or culture. This communication can blur the boundaries of traditional or conventional approaches and therefore becomes a driving force behind social attitudes and perceptions. Chan (2002) and Huang and Hu (2007) uphold this view that maintaining effective communication in an organisation will impact on corporate strategic alignment culture. Concord must be developed for effective channels of communication, transparency in the exchange of knowledge and sharing of learning (Hoque, 2002; Daneva and Hu, 2007), and the use of informal communication is just as important a factor for adjustment and control (Mintzberg, 1993; Chan, 2002; vander Raadt et al., 2005), to generate an atmosphere of trust and an effective response to business needs from an IT pe rspective. Reich and Benbasats (2000) study further confirms that strategic alignment is more likely to succeed when business and IT executives have an [importantly] expressed and [understood] shared common vision of ITs contribution. 2.3.8 BITA AND OPERATIONS Strategic alignment [when it is all-encompassing and embraced by all as part of an organisational culture] necessarily involves organisational issues of communication, structure and, particularly, coordination processes that are operational to the business in specifically performed actions (Wieringa, 2008). Operational strategic alignment consists of aligning the operational activities of IT and business people with each other so that optimal IT support for business requirements is achieved. In this context, Peak and Guynes (2003) put the onus of success on the IT side of the equation, though it does imply some reciprocity in the initial communication of ‘quality requirements and they state that strategic alignment will only be attained when an organisations IT staff can deliver quality information and quality IT products and services to the business side. 2.4 BITA MODELS 2.4.1 MIT90S FRAMEWORK (1991) During the 1980s, research conducted at the world renowned MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) initiated interest in the academic community to the potential of the strategic power of IT. In the attempt to exploit the possibilities revealed in the model from the research it was suggested that radical innovation involving IT investment could carry substantial reward if key elements of strategy, structure, technology, management processes and individuals and their roles were kept in alignment (Morton, 1991). Organisation can be visualised as a set of five forces in dynamic equilibrium subject to external influences from the technological environment and the socio-economic environment. In this view, a core task of general management is to ensure that all five ‘forces (represented by the boxes), can flow without restriction or impediment in order to achieve the organisations goals and objectives. With management at the centre of the model its role is central too. Though some areas might not necessarily be in direct contact with each other they are connected via the management process which plays the principal role and ensures organisational response to shifts in demands from the external variables. 2.4.2 THE HENDERSON AND VENKATRAMAN STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT MODEL (1993) Henderson Venkatramans (1993) strategic model (Figure 2.3) is a widely used four-part illustration favoured by many researchers and organisations for the assessment of the level of alignment in a company. Each of the four parts [quarters] contain three distinct and individuals elements which, when collectively analysed, can be used to define each quarter operationally. These twelve elements- further expanded in Table 1 are used to establish the level and type of alignment within a corporation (Henderson Venkatraman, 1993; Papp, 1995). Table 1 Components of the Strategic Alignment Model Within the model it can be seen how external influences may affect change on either processes [lower sectors] or strategies [upper sectors]. A vertical link couples the upper and lowers sectors and shows the relationship between strategic fit to accommodate strategy with infrastructure. A horizontal link for functional integration shows how IT strategies must adapt as business strategies change, and displays the dependence and required response of each sector upon anothers adaptations particularly in relation to skills and operation. Giving focus to three of the four quarters of the model at a given time can permit a simultaneous address to both strategic fit and functional integration (Papp, 1995; Luftman et al., 1999). The SAM (Strategic Alignment Model) model has proven empirical authenticity and has provided valid conceptual and practical value (Goedvolk et al,. 1997; Avison et al., 2004). Nevertheless, it is subject to confines, eg, the applicability of the SAM model may vary depending on the IT-intensity of an industry and the assumptions expounded might not be relevant to the circumstances (Burn and Szeto, 2000). As mentioned, the model does have recognition and a number of scholars have further elaborated on it (e.g., Luftman et al., 1993). Goedvolk et al.s (1997) extension of the SAM model gave greater focus to technical and architectural attributes. Avison et al.s (2004) addition to the SAM model was able to provide practitioners and academics with further practical ways to attain alignment in their advocacy of examining projects retrospectively to determine alignment. This form of alignment monitoring, can allow pre-emption in a change in strategy and implementation of a new alignment perspective by re-allocation of project resources. The SAM model inspired Maes et al. (2000) to produce a framework that incorporates even more layers pertinent to function and strategy where information providers are separated from the systems providing information in a new information domain representing knowledge, [and exchange of information through] communication and coordination. Their third dimension addresses specific sub-architecture areas. 2.4.3 IS CAPABILITY AND ORGANISATIONAL PERFORMANCE MODEL (2004) Peppard and Wards model (2004) shows IS capability at the core of everything, inherently affecting competencies and emanating an influence on all areas that interrelate [business strategy/business operations/IT operations and services/IS/IT strategy] and impact upon the organisational performance. Such focus on the importance of this core element demonstrates the value IS capabilities can create and is therefore an organisation-wide responsibility that cannot be delegated to the IS function alone (Peppard et al., 2000). Peppard and Ward (2004) later asserted that though an organisation might envisage an IT based innovative strategy, it will be their IS capabilities that permit such a vision to come to fruition. 2.4.4 CO-EVOLUTIONARY IS ALIGNMENT (2006) By 2006 the model suggested by Benbya and McKelvey (2006) through its graphic presentation appears a more fluid representation suggesting, even visually, that there is more of a flow between relationships in alignment. It still addresses the need to analyse relationships between business and IT (horizontal IS alignment) but introduces a need to merge the views at different levels [strategic/operational/individual] of analysis (vertical IS alignment) through shared understanding and communication. The co-evolutionary IS alignment perspective conveys the necessity for mutual adaptation within a dynamic interplay of co-evolving elements. Co-evolution does not necessarily seek harmony between the elements but a respect for their position and the innovation that may result from the circumstances and environments in which they function. 2.5 ASSESSMENT APPROACHES OF BITA In this section MMs (maturity models) are referred to that have been developed for the assessment of BITA. 2.5.1 DUFFYS MM (2001) Duffys (2001) MM is founded on the principle that a dependable, mutually compatible partnership between IT and business executives is elementary in order to achieve a worthwhile BITA. Without this premise there cannot be a successful desired outcome. Accepting that there is a level of interdependence between IT and business objectives, any schism or division between IT and non-IT areas would sabotage any efforts to establish alignment. This model is arranged about a series of key success drivers (the domains: human resources organisation and management/innovation and renewal strategy/IT/business architecture/IT/business partnership/operational excellence/ROI strategy management) which are operationalised in KPIs (key performance indicators) that each contain five contributory factors aspects designed to address explicit and significant questions within the KPI where it is included. The six domains are briefly explained below: Human resources organisation and management. In this domain reference is made to an organisations personnel and emphasis is given to the importance of workforce recruitment, retention and management by an organisation. Innovation and renewal strategy. The focus here is how innovative an organisation is with an emphasis on currency and validity having a bearing upon understanding when renewal is required to processes and capabilities in an organisation. IT/business architecture. This domain is concerned with the relationship and interaction of entities involved in the information and applications in the business environment of an organisation. IT/business partnership. This domain reflects how the recent upgrading of the role of the IT function affects an organisation â€Å"Technology is critical to business success and this co-dependency drives the need for the IT and non-IT executives to pursue a win/win relationship Duffy (2003, p. 4). Operational excellence. This domain deals with the performance outcomes of the organisation. Duffy recognises that operational excellence can only be achieved if an organisation can recognise the value of ideals embedded in learning and partnerships, and can respond to market demands promptly. ROI strategy and management. This domain investigates the importance of the metrics and processes required for efficient and effective financial management within organisations and accepting IT costs and benefits as having parity with business ones. Duffys six domains address the â€Å"IT and non-IT assertion as well as certain strategic elements within an organisation but there are no explicitly stated maturity levels for them. Instead, Duffy merges the six domains of the model into four BITA scenarios where organisations fall into the following categories: â€Å"uneasy alliance†, â€Å"supplier/consumer relationship†, â€Å"co-dependence/grudging respect†, and â€Å"united we succeed, divided we fail†. These laymans terms are loose at best and though intended to be descriptive only serve to confuse in their interpretation. Such scenarios are the maturity levels in the model. 2.5.2 LUFTMANS MM (2003) Luftmans model (2003) was constructed on the basis of practical experience and research into enablers and inhibitors of alignment (Luftman et al, 1999), incorporating reference to various other models [here listed chronologically and not in order of importance or influence]: Nolans stages of growth model (Nolan, 1979), SAM (Henderson and Venkatraman, 1993) and CMMs (Capability Maturity Model) reach and range concept of (Keen, 1996). Luftmans MM is an endeavour based in six domains (skills/technology scope/partnership/governance/competency measurements/communications) to discover a specific organisations BITA profile. A brief description of each domain follows: Skills: addresses practical human resources issues such as cross-training in IT and business issues regarding the cultural environment and its impact on innovation and organisational change. Technology scope: refers to how much provision of comprehensible and flexible infrastructure comes from IT, the implementation of emergent technol

Catholic Social Justice Essay: Embryonic Stem Cell Research

As Christians we are instilled with the belief that all life is sacred from the moment of conception. But what if science could develop a cure for degenerative diseases using research which contradicts the firm beliefs of the Catholic Church. Could you trade your beliefs for a cure? The research into stem cells is proposing this very solution to modern day society. As technology gets more advanced we are constantly gathering more and more information about the science of human life. With this in mind however, who gets to decide when the cost of breaching human rights and decency out weighs the benefits. Embryonic stem cell research takes excess embryos from in-vitro fertilization and aborted fetuses to conduct research. The research is invasive and leads to the death of the fetus. How can we as Catholic’s who are called to be socially just promote this research when it challenges our beliefs to such a degree. The research of embryonic stem cells is a desecration to the validit y and sacredness of human-life and is therefore murder of human beings. The means of gaining material for this research promotes disrespect for the dignity of human life, murder, and also interferes with God’s plan for humanity. There are three main types of stem cell research which are currently being studied today. These types include umbilical-cord stem cells, adult stem cells, and embryonic stem cells. Due to their capability to develop into basically any kind of cell, stem cells exhibit a great promise in scientific experimentation. Scientists are pushing these forms of research due to the promise of finding cures for diseases such as Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, stroke, spinal cord injuries, and other conditions and diseases. (Smith and Kaczor 48). The... ...Perf. Jim Carrey and Steve Carell. Twentieth Century Fox, 2008. Motion Picture. Human Embryo Experimentation. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, Bonnie Barbour, 2002. Print Irving, Dianne N. â€Å"Stem Cell Research: some Pro’s and Con’s.† physiciansforlife.ca. N.d. Web. 1 Jan 2011. Richert, Scott P. â€Å"The Catholic Church’s Teaching on Stem-Cell Research.† catholicism.about.com. N.d. Web. 1 January 2011. Smith, Janet E and Christopher Kaczor. Life Issues Medical Choices. Cincinnati: St. Anthony Messeger Press, 2007. Print. The English Standard Version Bible:   Containing the Old and New Testaments with Apocrypha.   Oxford:   Oxford UP, 2009.   Print. The Gospel of Life, Evangelium vitae. Pope John Paul II, March 25, 1995.

Monkey King

Monkey king is a one of the most widely known Chinese mythological creature. It was first appeared in the novel called Xi You Ji (Journey to the West). As the legend begins, the Monkey King is born from the earth and known as the stone monkey. Then he entered a cave which other monkeys are not brave enough to get into. The stone monkey was the only one to do so and they declared him King. Day by day, he feared that he would soon die and began a quest. It was on this journey that he learned the secrets of Martial Arts and immortality. At the same time, his behavior makes the gods in the heaven very angry. So they decide to catch him in order to make sure that they can take control of him. Unfortunately, due to fact that monkey king is a skilled fighter no one can defeat him. Eventually, these gods call upon Buddha to help them. The Buddha decides to let the monkey help a Monk to get the sutras. Along the way, the Monkey King is filled with antics of trickery, deceit, disobedience†¦ and yet through it all, he still helps the monk and can be seen as overall having a good heart. It's just in his nature to play. We all like him because everyone in the society wants to live a life like monkey king. When he is angry, he needn’t to hide his temper. When he is sad, it is possible for him to cry loudly without thinking other things. So the monkey king is an ideal character of us. Throughout history, the story has been a major part of Chinese culture. It has been made into a famous Chinese Opera, which is still being performed today. It has also been made into a cartoon which is still popular among teenagers. The cartoon called Havoc in the Heavenly Kingdom is Chinese first comedy cartoon. Millions of Chinese children hear the story of the monkey king before they go asleep. And millions of children buy the toy of the cute monkey because of monkey king.

The Roman Architecture And Engineering - 1798 Words

Imagine what the world would be like today; it would be a huge mess if we didn t have roads or helpful structures that we take for granted every day and barely even think about, what we don t think about is the history behind these unique frames of stone, concrete, and wood. In 476 C.E. when Rome fell to the barbaric tribes, the Roman Empire was done for, and had no chance of coming back to greatness; so why is it still looked upon as an amazing feat of ruling? A legacy is a reminder of something, like an empire, that was once great and inspired many things today, the way Roman architecture and engineering has. If we didn t have any of these great Roman architectural feats, then many people today wouldn t have a roof over their heads, and it would take much longer to get from place to place. The Roman legacies were the Roman architecture and engineering that has inspired and impacted millions of structures and helpful inventions. I think that it is safe to say that Roman architecture and engineering has had the greatest impact on today s society. The three most important Roman architectural feats are arches and aqueducts, the Coliseum, and Roman roads. These three inspirational Roman structures and feats of engineering has inspired thousands of modern-day buildings that we visit and use every day. Arches are an important legacy of the Roman Empire. The Romans realized that arches used less material than walls, which saved money and space! It saved spaceShow MoreRelatedThe Influence of Roman Engineering and Architecture1573 Words   |  7 PagesThe ingeniousness and beauty of Roman architecture has not been lost on us in the 2000 years since it was built. Even today, we still marvel at what incredible builders the Romans were, and at the sheer scale and integrity of many of their projects. It is hard to argue that today’s architecture will maintain the same lasting grandeur as that which the Romans built. If we can still respect and admire the grandeu r of Rome as it was in it’s day, one can only imagine how much of an influence peopleRead MoreHum100 - Artistic Themes from Ancient Cultures: Greece and Rome1237 Words   |  5 PagesArtistic Themes from Ancient Cultures: Greece and Rome It is hard to think of the ancient world without looking at the Greek and Roman empires. Although similar, the Greek and Roman empires are two different cultures. They existed from 500 B.C.E. to 500 C.E. (Fiero, 2006). One constant in both cultures was their pursuit of perfection in their art and architecture. This paper will examine this pursuit of perfection in both cultures and how their impact is felt in the modern age. One of the mostRead MoreBuilding Concrete Structures Of Building Solid Stone Buildings1128 Words   |  5 PagesFor smaller buildings, concrete s strength freed the floor plan from rectangular cells to a more free-flowing environment. Most of these developments are described by Vitruvius writing in the first century AD in his work De Architectura. Ancient Roman concrete was a mixture of lime mortar, sand with stone rubble, pozzolana, water, and stones, and stronger than previously-used concrete. The ancient builders placed these ingredients in wooden frames where it hardened and bonded to a facing of stonesRead MoreHan And Roman Attitudes Towards Technology1411 Words   |  6 Pagesa variety of ways like how both empires allowed non-government workers to practice engineering and other crafts that dealt with technology. However, during the first century of B.C.E the Han and Roman empires had many differences with their attitudes towards technology. For example, the Roman empire was against engineering and advancements in technology as it had government officials speak out against engineering and being a craftsman while the Han Empire was for technology and had government, officialsRead MoreIn ancient Rome, architecture and engineering were highly regarded. It contributed much to Rome’s1200 Words   |  5 Pagesancient Rome, architecture and engineering were highly regarded. It contributed much to Rome’s development, power, as well as the longevity of such an immense and substantial empire. Architecture displayed an immense amount of workmanship as well as innovation. This is seen through Rome engineers as they created the concept of concrete, constructed the famous Roman aqueducts, and the luxurious Roman baths. Roman’s were clearly superior engineers compared to their competitors because Roman engineers developedRead MoreRoman Empire : The Greatest Social And Political Center Of Western Civilization1478 Words   |  6 Pagesits height, the Roman Empire was the greatest social and political center in western civilization. The empire survived for about 500 years, from 31 BCE to 476 CE. The land under Roman rule surrounded the Mediterranean Sea; its territory reached from Europe to the western part of the Middle East to the northern part of Africa. As Kathryn Hinds said in The Ancien t Romans, â€Å"Ancient Rome has always been famous for its great achievements in architecture and engineering.† Roman architecture eventually becameRead MoreEvolution Of Architecture Throughout The Centuries Essay1420 Words   |  6 PagesEvolution of Architecture Introduction The purpose of this paper is to examine the evolution of architecture throughout the centuries. By studying this evolution and change in mostly materials and techniques, but also designs, we can develop a better understanding of our own modern architecture and trace its roots back to the centuries before us. This paper will be taking a special look at the Roman, Medieval, Victorian and Modern time periods to give a good general view of how we’ve taken fromRead MoreRoman Architecture And Its Impact On Modern Architecture1076 Words   |  5 Pagesviewed as a long lasting landmark which paved the way for new and challenging architecture to come (How Roman architecture influenced modern architecture [sa]). According to Tony Rook (2013: [sp] ch.2) the typical Roman temple shows the Etruscan tradition combined with the Greek one. Although some of their premature concepts were acquired from the ancient Greeks and Egyptians, Roman architects transformed the body of architecture for all time to come, offering buildings and structures that has never beenRead MoreThe Importance Of Neoclassical Architecture In Europe1077 Words   |  5 Pagesprogressed throughout the Renaissance was architecture. In particular, the neoclassical architecture and the architects and building structures they applied to mark a rebirth of classical culture, using many ancient Roman forums. Another advance was the scientific progression of medicine, and how legalising human dissections, improved the understanding of human anatomy which then enhanced health of the population. The advancement of neoclassical architecture during the Renaissance benefit the developmentRead MoreUnited States And Territorial States924 Words   |  4 Pagessupport the population and governing powers – and has a standing military – that helps conquer, helps enforce the rule of the state on the new territory, and minimize uprisings. In this essay I will describe three key empires: the Romans, the Aztecs, and the Incas. The Roman were a culturally underdeveloped group, one of several city-states aligned with the city-state of Etrua, and was under Etruscan rule for around 200 years before they rebelled. Subsequently they took the Etruscan’s place as leaders