語系:
繁體中文
English
說明(常見問題)
回圖書館首頁
手機版館藏查詢
登入
回首頁
切換:
標籤
|
MARC模式
|
ISBD
How National Security Professionals ...
~
Dicks, Teresa L.
FindBook
Google Book
Amazon
博客來
How National Security Professionals Prioritize Competing and Contradictory Requirements: Delphi Design Consensus.
紀錄類型:
書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:
How National Security Professionals Prioritize Competing and Contradictory Requirements: Delphi Design Consensus./
作者:
Dicks, Teresa L.
出版者:
Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2019,
面頁冊數:
270 p.
附註:
Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 80-12, Section: A.
Contained By:
Dissertations Abstracts International80-12A.
標題:
Management. -
電子資源:
http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=13862861
ISBN:
9781392291023
How National Security Professionals Prioritize Competing and Contradictory Requirements: Delphi Design Consensus.
Dicks, Teresa L.
How National Security Professionals Prioritize Competing and Contradictory Requirements: Delphi Design Consensus.
- Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2019 - 270 p.
Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 80-12, Section: A.
Thesis (D.M.)--University of Phoenix, 2019.
This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
The U.S. national security establishment, developed to fight the Cold War, has not seemed to adapt itself successfully to address new challenges in the 21st century. Instead, leaders have relied on the military instrument of national power at the expense of other instruments. National security professionals (NSPs) comprise the arsenal used to develop whole-of-government strategies to achieve national security objectives. While members of each organization need to work together to solve national security issues, competing priorities often make collaborative decisions difficult. The purpose of this qualitative Delphi design study was to gain consensus from civilian and military NSPs regarding suggested ways to balance competing or contradictory priorities between departments and/or agencies when working together on an issue of national interest. Using expert panelists from each instrument of national power, this Delphi design provided an iterative process to search for consensus. After three rounds of surveys, five solutions emerged as the top candidates with a convergence towards consensus to answer purpose of this research. The top five solutions for decision makers were as follows: (a) spearhead an ethos of trust and transparency; (b) have an open door policy with unfettered access to the decision maker; (c) have a process for testing new ideas; (d) enlist "failure as an option" mindset; and (e) define cross-functional (i.e., diverse areas of expertise) teams in all instruments. These five strategies could be used to assist national security leadership in finding innovative approaches for solving complex problems that face NSPs.
ISBN: 9781392291023Subjects--Topical Terms:
516664
Management.
How National Security Professionals Prioritize Competing and Contradictory Requirements: Delphi Design Consensus.
LDR
:02780nmm a2200337 4500
001
2264687
005
20200511121255.5
008
220629s2019 eng d
020
$a
9781392291023
035
$a
(MiAaPQ)AAI13862861
035
$a
(MiAaPQ)phoenix:11025
035
$a
AAI13862861
040
$a
MiAaPQ
$c
MiAaPQ
100
1
$a
Dicks, Teresa L.
$3
3541810
245
1 0
$a
How National Security Professionals Prioritize Competing and Contradictory Requirements: Delphi Design Consensus.
260
1
$a
Ann Arbor :
$b
ProQuest Dissertations & Theses,
$c
2019
300
$a
270 p.
500
$a
Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 80-12, Section: A.
500
$a
Publisher info.: Dissertation/Thesis.
500
$a
Advisor: Stein, Irene F.
502
$a
Thesis (D.M.)--University of Phoenix, 2019.
506
$a
This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
520
$a
The U.S. national security establishment, developed to fight the Cold War, has not seemed to adapt itself successfully to address new challenges in the 21st century. Instead, leaders have relied on the military instrument of national power at the expense of other instruments. National security professionals (NSPs) comprise the arsenal used to develop whole-of-government strategies to achieve national security objectives. While members of each organization need to work together to solve national security issues, competing priorities often make collaborative decisions difficult. The purpose of this qualitative Delphi design study was to gain consensus from civilian and military NSPs regarding suggested ways to balance competing or contradictory priorities between departments and/or agencies when working together on an issue of national interest. Using expert panelists from each instrument of national power, this Delphi design provided an iterative process to search for consensus. After three rounds of surveys, five solutions emerged as the top candidates with a convergence towards consensus to answer purpose of this research. The top five solutions for decision makers were as follows: (a) spearhead an ethos of trust and transparency; (b) have an open door policy with unfettered access to the decision maker; (c) have a process for testing new ideas; (d) enlist "failure as an option" mindset; and (e) define cross-functional (i.e., diverse areas of expertise) teams in all instruments. These five strategies could be used to assist national security leadership in finding innovative approaches for solving complex problems that face NSPs.
590
$a
School code: 0850.
650
4
$a
Management.
$3
516664
650
4
$a
Organizational behavior.
$3
516683
650
4
$a
Military studies.
$3
2197382
690
$a
0454
690
$a
0703
690
$a
0750
710
2
$a
University of Phoenix.
$b
School of Advanced Studies.
$3
3184515
773
0
$t
Dissertations Abstracts International
$g
80-12A.
790
$a
0850
791
$a
D.M.
792
$a
2019
793
$a
English
856
4 0
$u
http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=13862861
筆 0 讀者評論
館藏地:
全部
電子資源
出版年:
卷號:
館藏
1 筆 • 頁數 1 •
1
條碼號
典藏地名稱
館藏流通類別
資料類型
索書號
使用類型
借閱狀態
預約狀態
備註欄
附件
W9416921
電子資源
11.線上閱覽_V
電子書
EB
一般使用(Normal)
在架
0
1 筆 • 頁數 1 •
1
多媒體
評論
新增評論
分享你的心得
Export
取書館
處理中
...
變更密碼
登入