Organizational Culture and Employee Behavior 4

Central Michigan University

Master of Science in Administration (MSA) Program

Course Title: MSA 600 Administration Research and Report Methods

Submitted to: [Professor’s Name]

Submitted by: [Student’s Name]

[Street Address]

[City, State and Zip Code]

Work Phone: [703-555-1234]

Home/Cell Phone: [804-555-1111]

Email: [email protected]

Course Location: MSA600 Online

Submission Date: [Month, Day, Year]

Research Project Title: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY EXAMPLE

Is the United States Army’s Transition Team Preparation Program Effective?

A Program Evaluation

CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORSHIP:

I certify that I am the author of this paper and that any assistance I receive in its preparation is fully acknowledged and disclosed in this paper. I have also cited any sources from which I used data, ideas, or works, either quoted directly or paraphrased. I also certify that this paper was prepared by me specifically for this course.

Student’s Signature:

Instructor’s Comments:

Is the United States Army’s Transition Team Preparation Program Effective?

A Program Evaluation

MSA 600 Administrative Research and Report Methods

Submitted by:

Matthew Leonard

Project Instructor:

Dr. Thomas Kessler

March 2008

Table of Contents

Page Number

List of Tables ii

List of Figures ii

Chapter 1 Problem Definition 1

Chapter 2 Literature Review 7

Chapter 3 Research Methodology 15

Chapter 4 Data Analysis [Future]

Chapter 5 Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations [Future]

Terminology and Definitions Page 18

References Pages 19-22

Appendix A Permission to Conduct Study

Appendix B Transmittal Letter/Survey Instructions

Appendix C Survey/Interview Questions

Chapter 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research Approach

Given the importance that transition team’s hold in the overall success of Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom it is appropriate to research TT preparation in depth. By gathering data regarding key aspects of the current program and coupling that with data supplied by individuals who have performed the TT mission, this research seeks to determine if the United States Army’s Transition Team preparation program is effective.

In order to accomplish the objective this research will follow the program evaluation typography. This approach has been selected because there is a TT preparation program already in existence. However it is unclear as to whether the program is effective in fully meeting the needs of those who will perform the transition team mission.

Data will be collected using a combination approach. The combination will consist of a survey questionnaire and subject matter expert interviews. Using this combination method will yield data which may be readily categorized, thus serving to provide insights into the factors which lead to effective TT preparation.

Data Collection Approach and Procedures

Data to Be Collected

This research will collect data using survey questionnaire and interviews. The questionnaire will survey transition team members who have already performed a mission or are currently performing a mission. Interviews will be conducted with subject matter experts in the general areas of; the TT member selection and notification process; the program of instruction at Fort Riley; HN culture, customs and language instruction; as well as the incorporation of knowledge sharing resources into the preparation program.

The purpose of the questionnaire is to solicit feedback directly from those who have performed the TT mission. This feedback will inform the study as to the actual skill-sets required for mission success. It will also offer insights into whether these individuals feel adequate resources were available, if proper subjects were covered during the training program and if all subjects were covered in the necessary depth. Since these personnel now have real-world mission experience their input is vital to the evaluation of the training program.

The topic areas covered within the questionnaire include those related to the length of the training program, notification process, self-study opportunities prior to resident training, the value of various subject areas, the importance of foreign language ability and the value of open lines of communication with the personnel they were to replace in country.

Subject Matter Expert (SME) interviews will be conducted in order to collect data in several key areas. First, the SME research interviews will study the procedures related to the selection and notification of personnel for TT missions. It is important to understand the selection process in order to determine if it is effective at selecting individuals with the greatest aptitude for the TT mission. It is also important to understand the notification timeline to determine if it lends itself to the implied purpose of allowing the TT members to perform consistent and substantive individual self-study prior to resident training.

Secondly, an SME research interview will be conducted to discuss the resident training program of instruction (POI). A detailed look at the resident training is important to determining if the POI includes all subject matter which may be valuable. A detailed study of the training is also necessary in order to determine if the topics in the POI are covered in enough depth to ensure some useful level of proficiency.

Thirdly, an SME interview will be conducted to specifically inform the study about HN culture, customs and language training. The interview will seek to rate the value that knowledge and competency in these areas offers to TT missions. It will also compare how much material is currently being trained versus what could be trained in these areas in order to provide enhanced and useable skill-sets to the TT members.

Fourthly, SME interviews will be conducted to study knowledge sharing resources and procedures. The interview will determine what resources are available to the TT members and when they have access to it. The interview will also determine if the use of this resource is formalized, and if knowledge sharing resources are being effectively integrated into the POI.

Overall the SME interviews will look at the methods, objectives, content and resources which are part of the TT program. This data will then be compared to the data collected via the survey questionnaire from the TT members themselves, based up on their actual mission experiences. Together this entire data set will inform the study as to the effectiveness of the current TT preparation program and, also, will lead to recommendations for changes designed to make the program more effective.

Data Collection Procedures – The Survey Questionnaire

The survey questionnaire will be made available to TT members. Because all TT members are part of the U.S. military, no children will be part of the sample. While some members of the military responding to the survey may be stationed overseas, the survey will not be conducted in foreign countries or conducted with foreign nationals as participants. The researcher has no supervisory relationship with the survey population and is not a part of the TT members’ military chain of command.

The survey questionnaire sample population should ideally be derived form the entire universe of TT members. This would include individuals who have either completed at TT mission or who are currently participating in one. From a comprehensive list of the entire universe, a sample population would be selected using randomization techniques. However, given the limitations inherit with the provisions of the Privacy Act of 1974, the government is not legally able to provide contact information for TT personnel. Therefore another technique will be used to gather survey data.

A viable alternative to reaching current and former TT members is though the use of an internet-based transition team forum. Under the Army’s Battle Command Knowledge System (BCKS) many forums have been set-up to allow for the sharing of knowledge, experiences and best practices among personnel. Persons interesting in joining a BCKS forum must apply for membership. Membership in the BCKS forums is open only to members of the military and civilians working directly for the military. The BCKS system has a forum specifically tailored for TT members’ use.

This research will utilize the TT forum as a method for reaching the target population. The study will post an invitation on the forum which will solicit participation in the questionnaire. Through the invitation, the TT forum population will be given website link which will take them to an independent survey web site. From the survey site respondents will be able to participate in the survey in an anonymous fashion.

As a secondary method of attaining survey responses the survey population will be provided via the forum. Along with the web link, TT forum members will have the option of requesting and returning the survey questionnaire via email. The researchers email address will be provided within the forum invitation for this purpose.

It is important to offer the email option to the TT forum population as many military members may be somewhat distrustful of responding on a commercially based web site. While the email option does not allow for complete anonymity, confidentiality will be maintained by the removal of the email address and any other identification information from the printed survey. The names or other identifying information of survey respondents will not appear within this research. Additionally, the electronic files of the actual surveys will be erased 12 months following the completion of the study.

While the survey technique described above is not ideal for attaining a random, representative population sample, it is the most viable given the constraints of privacy laws. A more complete discussion of the limitations of the survey methods are contained in the section entitled: “Survey Methodological Limitations” later in this chapter.

The survey questionnaire is contained in Appendix C of the research project. The survey was designed specifically for this research and has not been tested for validity or reliability.

The survey cover letter and instructions are contained in Appendix B. These documents contain details regarding the research methodology and also include information regarding the confidentiality of responses. The documents will be posted on the commercial web site along with the survey. For email participants, the cover letter and instructions will be included with the survey as part of one complete document file.

Data Collection Procedures – SME Interviews

The second method of collecting data for the research will be the use of Subject Matter Expert interviews. These personnel are considered SMEs as they possess detailed knowledge of the TT preparation program, its procedures or in a subject area related the program.

All of the SME interview subjects are members of the U.S. military or civilians who work directly for the military. Therefore, no children will be part of the interview process.

The interviews will not be conducted in foreign countries or conducted with foreign nationals as participants. The researcher has no supervisory relationship with the interview population and is not a part of the SMEs military chain of command.

The SME interviews will occur over the telephone as these personnel are located in different locations across the United States. An overview of the data to be collected for the SME interviews was articulated in the section: “Data to Be Collected” earlier in this chapter.

The first subject area to be explored using SME interviews is the TT member selection and notification process. The questions selected will help determine the effectiveness of this aspect of the program. Information will be sought regarding; the criteria team member selections are based upon, centralized selection versus command quotas, the notification methods, instructions recommendations given to the individuals selected, the timeline between notification, report date and the start of resident training, and the how team members are given access to self study material and other resources. The research will also seek to determine the point at which TTs are normally notified of the specific mission they will be performing and how far in advance of deployment they are provided with contact information for the TT they will be replacing.

The SME experts who will best be able to provide data in this area will be the Personnel and Operations Officers from the 1st Infantry Division at Fort Riley, Kansas.

The second area to be explored using SME interviews is that of the resident training program itself. The interview questions will determine the training objectives, the major areas of instruction provided, the amount of time dedicated to each area, as well as utilization of competency testing. Information will also be sought as to how much formalized instruction is provided or available which is tailored to each TTs specific mission; the actual province they will be assigned, and the specific host nation unit and unit leaders which the TT will be working alongside.

The SME expert who will best be able to provide data in this area will be the Operations Officer from the 1st Infantry Division at Fort Riley, Kansas.

The third area to be explored using SME interviews is language, culture and customs training. The questions will find how much material is currently being trained in these areas as part of the current TT preparation program, what the objective of this training is, and to determine if the objective is appropriate for the TT mission. The interviews will also seek to rate the importance of this training to the mission and also to explore options as to how the program might be structured in order to increase competency in these areas.

The SME expert who will best be able to provide data in this area will be the Dean of Field Support and Special Programs from the Defense Language Institute, Monterey, California.

The fourth area to be studied thorough SME interviews will be the knowledge sharing resources available to the TT members. The questions will seek to inform the study about the resources are available to the TT members, the method for accessing information, formalized POIs for self-study, the integration of lessons learned knowledge into instructor led blocks of instruction, mechanisms for tracking self-study participation, and any tests which validate levels of knowledge acquired from the knowledge sharing resources and programs.

The SME experts who will best be able to provide data in this area will be the Knowledge Management Advisor, Fort Riley, Kansas and the Operations Officer from the 1st Infantry Division at Fort Riley, Kansas.

Proposed Approach for Data Analysis and Synthesis

The data collected from SME interviews will provide background on the current transition team training program. This data will allow for the objective characterization of the existing program.

Timeline graphics will be used to display the selection, notification and resident training portion of the preparation process. This will be displayed in conjunction with both the expectations of self-study as well as the other obligations of the transition team members which are happening concurrently in the timeline.

For the resident training phase bar graphs will illustrate the time which is allotted to each block of formal instruction. This will be instructive as it will bring clarity to the issue of weighting or subject emphasis. The weighting or lack of weighting in different areas can then be compared against the response data gathered from the transition team member surveys. Where there is significant disagreement between the program weighting and the survey responses, this will indicate an area of possible concern and perhaps ineffectiveness.

The survey questionnaire is structured so as to allow for the analysis and comparison of data using several different methods. All of the survey questions will lend themselves to bar graph representation. Most survey questions also lend themselves to statements of percentages.

The bar graphs will be instructive, and will be especially useful for illustrative purposes when either juxtaposed against or in agreement with data gathered from the SME interview responses. The statements of percentages will allow for simple characterization of responses.

It is expected that the number of completed survey responses will total more than 35. Therefore the sample should lend itself to standard statistical methodologies. Additionally, the survey questions are structured so as to allow for the statistical analysis of most question responses. These statistics are parametric and the data will fall within a normal distribution.

Many of the responses will be analyzed using points of central tendency along with the determination of standard deviation. The statistical methods will allow us to make some inferences about the entire population of transition team members.

Therefore by analyzing the results of the survey responses the study will be able to determine what facets of transition team preparation are considered vital by TT veterans. This determination will allow the research to rate the overall effectiveness of the transition team training program in its current configuration and allow for the creation of recommendations for changes which will make the program more effective.

Methodological Limitations

Methodological Limitations – Survey Questionnaire

The limitations of the survey rest with the sampling methodology. The non-availability of an entire population list, comprehensive or otherwise, means that randomization techniques cannot be used to draw a random sample population. The non-availability of population lists also prevents the use of population stratification. For instance, stratification would allow for the use of random sub-samples that would insure representation of separate sub-groups. These sub-groups could be officers versus non-commissioned officers, or combat arms personnel versus combat support personnel.

The non-availability of a population list therefore requires the use of a quasi “pull method” for executing the survey questionnaire. That is interested parties must take action, for instance linking to the survey site or requesting the email survey to participate. This runs contrary to the normal “push method” for surveying where a questionnaire is pushed out to the sample population. The fact that this methodology requires increased action on the part of potential respondents will limit participation to some degree.

Also, because the invitation and survey are internet based, it will only reach the segment of the TT population having internet access. Further, aside from possible “word of mouth” marketing amongst team members, the survey invitation will be seen for the most part only by those who participate in the TT forum.

Having responses heavily weighted in TT forum membership may also result in somewhat skewed responses. It may be reasonable to assume that the population which participates in the TT forum likely shares personality traits that may not be completely representative of the entire TT population. For example, because they participate in the forum, the respondents may possess an increased proclivity towards proposing change or challenging the status quo. Therefore responses may be inordinately weighted towards the suggestion of change.

However, because of the members’ likely personality traits, their proactive participation in the TT forum and the fact that there will be 2 options available for the survey’s completion, it is expected that there will be significant response to the invitation. For the purpose of this research significant response will be defined as greater than 35 completed surveys returned. A sample of this size, or greater, means that a statistical z-test will not be required and the responses will lend themselves to statistical analysis.

In order to insure the significant response rate, both the invitation and the survey will be made available on the forum and web site for a period of 4 weeks. Making the survey available for this long of a period is important due to the pull nature of the survey, coupled with the expectation that the population does not visit the forum daily.

Methodological Limitations - SME interviews

There are a few methodological limitations inherit to the SME interviews. One limitation is that these interviews will be conducted over the telephone. This means that there is less chance for building a rapport with the interview subject. Building a rapport during an interview may allow for an increase in the dissemination of useful information and the possibility of self disclosure. Conducting interviews via the telephone also means that there is no opportunity to evaluate any non-verbal cues or communication which may accompany interview answers.

Another limitation to the SME interviews is possible bias by the interviewee. This is possible due to the fact that all of the SMEs are stakeholders to some extent in the existing transition team training program. The SMEs may feel some level of ownership in certain aspect of the status quo. Therefore they may take some of the questions as a form of criticism to a program they may have had a role in creating. Because of this they may even consider some of the questions to be difficult, leading or perhaps even hostile. Therefore the issues of ownership and possible bias may result in slightly skewed or watered down responses to any questions which may be subjective or ask for the subjects’ opinion.

References

BDM Corporation. (1980) A study of strategic lessons learned in Vietnam: the soldier. vol 7. Vienna,Va.: BDM Corp.

Clarke, J. J. (1988) Advice and support: the final years: 1965-1973. Washington: US Army Center of Military History.

Collins J. L., Jr. (1975). The development and training of the South Vietnamese Army: 1950-1972. Washington: Department of the Army.

Cushman, J. H. (1972). Senior debriefing report of Major General John H. Cushman. San Francisco: HQ, Delta Regional Assistance Command.

Dawkins, P. M. (1979). The United States Army and the ‘other’ war in Vietnam: a study of the complexity of implementing organizational change. PhD. diss. Princeton University.

Fehrenbach, T.R. (1963). This Kind of War: A Study in Preparedness. New York: The Macmillian Company.

Hausrath, A. H. (1957). The KMAG advisor: role and problems of the military advisor in developing an indigenous army for combat operations in Korea. Chevy Chase, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Operations Research Office.

Hickey, G.C., Dr. (1965) The American military advisor and his foreign counterpart: the case of Vietnam. Santa Monica: The Rand Corporation.

Hudlin, I. C. (1965). Advising the advisor. Military Review, Nov 1965, 94-96.

Jones, R. A. (1965). The nation-builder soldier of the sixties. Military Review, Jan 1965, 63-67.

Ramsey, R.D., III. (2006). Advising indigenous forces: American advisors in Korea, Vietnam, and El Salvador. Fort Leavenworth: Combat Studies Institute Press.

Ray, J. F. (1965). The district military advisor. Military Review, May 1965, 3-8.

Ray, R.D. (2004). Center for military history and strategic analysis cold war oral history project. Interview. http://www.vmi.edu/archives/Adams_Center/RayR/RayR_intro.asp .

Sawyer, R.K. (1962). Military advisors in Korea: KMAG in peace and war. Washington: U.S. Army Center for Military History.

Stewart, E. C. (1965). American advisors overseas. Military Review, Feb 1965, 3-9.

U.S. Army. (2006). Army Special Operations Forces. Washington: HQ, Department of the Army.

U.S. Army. (2008). Operations. Washington: HQ, Department of the Army.

U.S. Army Special Warfare School. (1966). Program of instruction for military assistance training course (MATA). Fort Bragg, NC: U.S. Army Special Warfare School.

U. S. Military Assistance Command, Vietnam. (1966). Report on interview program of US Army advisors in Vietnam. San Francisco: United States Military Assistance Command, Vietnam.

U.S. Military Assistance Command, Vietnam. (1967). Command history 1966. vol. 2. San Francisco: U.S. Military Assistance Command, Vietnam.

U.S. Military Assistance Command, Vietnam. (1968). Command history 1967. vol. 2. San Francisco: U.S. Military Assistance Command, Vietnam.

U.S. Military Assistance Command, Vietnam. (1971). Command history 1970. vol. 2. San Francisco: U.S. Military Assistance Command, Vietnam.

Appendix B – Survey Questionnaire

(Sample: current and former transition team mission personnel)

This purpose of this survey questionnaire is to gather information from the experiences and opinions of personnel who have performed transition team missions.

Demographic Data

Pay Grade: ______ Component: □ AC □ RC Branch ______

Gender: □ Male □ Female

Trans Team duty title: ___________________________

Type of mission (e.g. Infantry, Logistics, etc) _________________

When did you complete transition team training at Ft. Riley (mo/yr) _______

Survey

1. How long was your resident training for your TT assignment?

□ 4 weeks □ 5-8 weeks □ 9-12 weeks □ 13-16 weeks □ >16 weeks

2. How long was your notification prior to your report date for resident training?

□ 0-4 weeks □ 5-8 weeks □ 9-12 weeks □ 13-16 weeks □ >16 weeks

3. Prior to reporting, how many hours did you spend on your own studying the following subjects?

Tactics: ____ TT Lessons Learned: ____ TT Related News Articles, etc : ____

Host Nation Culture/Customs: ____ Host Nation Language: _____

Geography of Country for mission: _____

Specific Province where you would be assigned: _____

Info on the specific Host Nation staff members and unit for your mission: _____

Other (please list any relevant areas / hours spent):

4. How far in advance of deployment were you given information on the specific TT mission you would be performing?

□ > 6 weeks □ 5-6 weeks □ 3-4 weeks □ 1-2 weeks □ < 1 week

5. How far in advance of deployment were you given contact information for members of the team you would be replacing?

□ 3-4 weeks □ 2-3 weeks □ 1-2 weeks □ < 1 week □ not given

6. While you were CONUS, how many times did you correspond with members of the specific Transition Team you were replacing?

□ no contact □ 1-3 times □ 4-6 times □ 7-9 times □ >9 times

Comments:

7. As a result of your resident training, approximately how many words did you learn in the Host Nation language?

□ 0-5 words □ 6-25 □ 26-50 □ 51- 75 □ >75

8. As result of your deployment, approximately how many words did you learn in the Host Nation language?

□ 0-5 words □ 6-25 □ 26-50 □ 51- 75 □ >75

9. How valuable do you feel it is for TT members to be able to speak enough of the Host Nation language to engage in simple conversation?

□ not valuable □ somewhat valuable □ valuable □ I highly recommend

10. I feel that the length of instruction / preparation for my TT assignment:

□ should’ve been shorter □ was about right □ should’ve been longer

11. Do you agree with the following statement: “If the lengths of certain blocks of instruction during resident training were to be significantly increased it would better prepare our soldiers for their TT mission.”

□ don’t agree □ somewhat agree □ strongly agree

Comments:

12. What blocks of resident training instruction, if any do, you feel should be significantly increased it to better prepare Soldiers for their TT mission.

(please rank order with 1 being the most important to increase)

1. ____________________________________

2. ____________________________________

3. ____________________________________

4. ____________________________________

□ None – don’t increase any instruction

13. Please rank order (1 being the highest) what should receive the most emphasis and/or time during resident training?

_____ Tactics

_____ TT Lessons Learned

_____ Force protection

_____ Host Nation unit SOPs, etc

_____ Rudimentary ability speaking Host Nation Language

_____ Host Nation Culture/Customs

_____ Geography of Country of assignment

_____ Geography of Province of assignment

_____ Info on the specific Host Nation staff members and unit for your mission

Other (list/rank):

13. While CONUS, how valuable would it be for TT members to regularly correspond with members of the specific Transition Team they will be replacing?

□ not valuable □ somewhat valuable □ valuable □ I highly recommend

14. Do you agree with the following statement: “If the Army made transition teams / advisors a functional area or part of the force structure, it would allow for more preparation, training and higher levels of proficiency.”

□ don’t agree □ somewhat agree □ strongly agree

Thank you for taking the time to respond to this survey. Your input will greatly impact the quality of the recommendations resulting from this research.

Appendix B – Subject Matter Expert 1 - Interview Questions

(Dean of Field Support and Special Programs, Defense Language Institute, Monterrey, California)

This purpose of this SME interview is to gather information regarding language, culture and customs training.

1. How many hours of language training does each transition team member receive at Fort Riley?

2. What is the objective of this training?

3. Is there a competency test following the language training?

4. How many hours of host nation specific culture training does each transition team member receive at Fort Riley?

5. What is the objective of this training?

6. Is there a competency test following the culture training?

7. How many hours of host nation specific customs training does each transition team member receive at Fort Riley?

8. What is the objective of this training?

9. Is there a competency test following the customs training?

10. Is there a practical test for the culture, customs or language training?

11. What happens if a student fails any of this training?

12. How important is culture and customs knowledge to maintaining a positive rapport with host nation counterparts?

13. How important is a rudimentary ability in host nation language to establishing a positive rapport with host nation counterparts?

14. In general could a rudimentary ability in Arabic or Farsi be taught to the average person in 16 or 20 weeks using half days for instruction and interactive tools? How many half days would be necessary?

Appendix B – Subject Matter Expert 2 - Interview Questions

(Personnel Officer responsible for Transition Team selections, Human Resources Command, Forward Cell, Ft Riley, Kansas.)

This purpose of this SME interview is to gather information regarding the procedures related to the selection and notification of personnel for TT missions

1. What is the process for the selection of TT members?

2. Is this process done centrally or are quotas given to commands to fill?

3. What are the qualification criteria upon which team member selections are based?

4. Are certain previous assignments considered or weighted in the selection?

5. Are any personality or aptitude tests administered during the process?

6. Is proficiency in any foreign language considered a qualification discriminator?

7. Are Armed Forces Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) or the Defense Language Aptitude Battery (DLAB) scores considered?

8. What is the normal timeline between notification, report date and the start of training?

9. What instructions or self study recommendations provided to the TT members upon selection for the assignment?

10. At what point are team members provided access to self study material and other resources?

11. At what point are TT members normally notified of the specific mission they will be performing?

12. How far in advance of deployment are TT members provided with contact information for members of the TT they will be replacing?

Appendix B – Subject Matter Expert 3 - Interview Questions

(Operations Officer, the 1st Infantry Division at Ft Riley, Kansas.)

This purpose of this SME interview is to gather information regarding the transition team resident training POI of the program at Fort Riley, Kansas

1. What are the objectives of the overall transition team POI? Is there a mission statement or vision statement related to this program?

2. What are the major areas of instruction provided and how many hours are dedicated to each area?

3. Which areas of instruction utilize post tests to measure competency?

4. If a student fails a competency test what is the SOP for remedial training?

5. What percentage of students are recycled or dropped from the training program for academic reasons?

6. What percentage of resident instructors are former transition team members?

7. How many hours of instruction are dedicated to host nation culture and customs training?

8. Is there a competency test following HN culture and customs training?

9. How many hours of instruction are tailored directly to the study of a transition teams’ specific mission?

10. Is there a competency test following TT specific mission training?

11. How many hours of instruction are tailored directly to the study of the province geography for a specific transition teams’ mission?

12. Is there a competency test following the TT province specific geography training?

13. How many hours of instruction are tailored to the study of the specific leadership personnel in the host nation unit a TT will be working with?

14. Is there a competency test following the training on specific leadership personnel in the host nation unit a TT will be working with?

Appendix B – Subject Matter Expert 4 - Interview Questions

(Knowledge Management Advisor, Fort Riley, Kansas)

This purpose of this SME interview is to gather information regarding the knowledge sharing resources available to the TT members.

1. What knowledge sharing resources are available to the TT members?

2. What is the method for accessing information?

3. At what point are TT members given information about accessing the TT knowledge sharing resources?

4. Are there one or more formalized POIs for self-study using the knowledge systems?

5. Are there any tests given which validate the levels of knowledge students acquire from the TT knowledge system?

6. Are transition team students’ utilization of the TT knowledge system tracked?

7. Is there a formalized method for incorporating lessons learned posted on the TT forum into the transition team resident training POI?

Appendix C – Web / E-Mail Survey

Cover letter to be included in the web invitation and E-Mail (if applicable)

The purpose of this study is to research the effectiveness of the United States Army transition team preparation program.

By collecting data and opinions from you we hope to be able to evaluate the United States Army transition team preparation program, and also, make recommendations which may lead to enhancements to the program.

The attached questionnaire should not take more than 10 - 15 minutes to answer. An informed consent form is also included to explain the procedures used that will maintain your confidentiality and to explain other concerns you may have.

This information is being gathered as part of a research paper for Matt Leonard, a Master’s degree candidate with Central Michigan University: Off-Campus Program. The completed research paper and/or executive summary may also be made available to senior leaders within the U.S. Army.

Your responses will be maintained solely by the researcher and will be kept confidential. No respondent names or other identifying information will be published in the research paper.

Thank you for taking the time to provide information which may prove useful to enhancing the transition team preparation program.

You may complete the survey via this website, e-mail your completed survey questionnaire to [email protected] or mail a hardcopy to:

Matt Leonard

47591 Watkins Island Sq

Potomac Falls, VA 20165-7491

We would like to have responses by no later than 24 June 2008. Please include an e-mail address or phone number in your return mail if you would be willing to be contacted to clarify any of the answers you provide. Thank you again for taking the time to provide your valuable insights.

Appendix C – Informed Consent Form – Web / E-Mail Survey

Informed Consent to Participate in a Research Study

Title of Project: A Program Evaluation of the United States Army’s Transition Team Preparation Program.

Name of Investigator: Matthew Leonard Phone: (770) 313-8329

Institutional Affiliation: The researcher is a graduate student in the Masters of Science in Administration program and Central Michigan University. This research is being conducted in fulfillment of degree requirements at Central Michigan University.

Invitation to Participate: You are invited to participate in this research study. The following information is provided to help you make an informed decision on whether or not to participate. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to ask.

Purpose: We hope that by collecting data from you we will be able to evaluate the United States Army transition team preparation program, and also, make recommendations which may lead to enhancements to this program.

Subjects: This survey questionnaire is being made available to you because you have been involved in a transition team mission. Your experience and opinions are relevant to informing this study as to the procedures, methodology and program of instruction for an optimal transition team preparation program.

Confidentiality: Any information obtained during this study that could identify you or your organization will be kept strictly confidential. Should email be used to return the survey, the email address will be removed from any printed hard-copy of your responses. Further, the electronic email messages will be deleted 12 months following the completion of the study. Information provided by survey respondents will not be attributed to individual’s names in the research paper. Respondent comments, if used, will appear as respondent 1, 2, or 3, and so on.

Right to Refuse or Withdraw: You may change your mind about being involved in the study and can quit after the study has started. If the study design or use of the data is changed, you will be so informed and your consent obtained for the revised research study.

Questions: If you have any questions at this time, please ask them. If you have additional questions later, please contact Matthew Leonard at [email protected]. Thank you for taking the time to help us evaluate the transition team preparation program.

By returning this survey, I have voluntarily decided to participate in this research project as a subject and I have read and do understand the information provided above.