Somebody’s Mother Analysis

Somebody’s Mother, by: Mary Dow Brine, is basically about somebody’s mother. The title of this poem implies that you will probably be reading about a mother and what she does. When you think of a mother, you think of a woman maybe in her thirties with kids who are around age five through nine, and possibly not afraid of anything you throw at her. That’s what is expected of a mother right? The first two lines of this poem imply the physical features of the mother. She is bent with the chill of winter’s day, meaning that she is probably frail.Then we find out her feet are aged and slow, telling us again she’s old and frail. We also find out that she’s alone. She is standing near a crossing and waiting to cross, but afraid to do so. No one tries to help her in any sort of way or even looks at her. It’s like she’s invisible. The next ten lines are about some schoolboys who are shoveling snow and also passing her by as well as some c arriages passing in the street causing the woman not to cross. Suddenly, one of the schoolboys comes along and helps her cross the street.The woman is not at all scared by the boy. The boy then goes back to his friends and tells them that if his mother was in need that he hopes they would help her. The last few lines are about the woman praising God about how lovely and kind the boy was to her. This poem has few meanings to it, but they are deep in connotation. When the woman is standing at the cross walk unable to go, and scared that she might get run over if she does, that represents something in our lives. We want to do something, but there are obstacles in our way.For instance, if someone is searching and searching for a job and just doesn’t get one because of things happening in their life, then they are standing at the cross walk unable to cross. Also, the woman in the poem wants to cross the street, but it might be because she is too scared. We all have days where we w ant to do something but we are too scared. Even if it’s killing a spider! But there are more difficult things, like maybe asking someone to marry you but you just can’t find the nerve. Finally, when the boy comes to help the woman across the street, he symbolizes the help we have in our life.We have bad days, but we get through them based on support and guidance. Even if we are having a bad year, our family, friends and colleagues get us through it. That is what this poem is mainly about, the influence that others have on us to give us a little push and a helping hand. The attitude of this poem is sorrowful, joyful, and inspiring. At first, the poem sounds a bit depressing, but when school gets out, you get a little more hopeful. When the boy comes to help the old woman, he is described as â€Å"the gayest laddie of all the group†.When you read that particular line you instantly know this boy is bubbly and full of joy. Then when the boy helps the woman across th e street, you know he is a man of a helpful sort and would do anything to help if someone was in need. This poem starts sad, but then it completely shifts to a joyful and helpful point of view. You read about an old woman at a cross walk unable to cross the street, and how her physical features are very old. But then, some boys come out of school and you start to get interested.Then u see that one of the boys is the bubbliest one of his troop and you want to know how he fits in with the poem. The poem just shifted from helpless and sad, to hopeful and thankful. Then, the boy reaches out to the woman and wants to help her across the street and that implies a helpful shift. Helpless, sad, and thankful, and hopeful are completely different shifts, but the words are all a part of the poem. The main theme of this poem is that if you were the woman standing there alone at the crossing, and people were passing you by, how would you feel?Afraid, worried, or hesitant? These few words describ e what the woman is probably going through when people are passing her and not even sharing a glance with her. She’s invisible, and no one cares about her. Another theme is when you are going through tough times, you could always use a helping hand to get through it. The woman was waiting at the crossing and didn’t have the nerve to cross the street, because she needed guidance to do so. Everyone needs a helping hand every once in awhile.When the boy came and helped the woman, she wasn’t even afraid that a stranger walked up to her and asked her to cross the street! And after that, she went home and praised god for that boy who helped her! This is something that happens in our lives a good number of times. We are scared to do something and someone helps us through it. The prediction in the title was entirely wrong, but that’s what probably popped into some people’s heads! The woman is not at all in her thirties, nor did she have kids that were ages five through nine.The woman in the poem would probably be scared if something was thrown at her, like a hard task. But in the end, mother’s are still mother’s. They have kids who they usually love and would do anything they can to not hurt their children, and that’s what the woman in the poem is like. At the end of the day, Somebody’s Mother, By Mary Dow Brine is about an old woman who can’t find the nerve to cross the street. But when a bubbly boy comes to the rescue, she is neither scared nor worried, and she praises God that the boy is â€Å"somebody’s son with pride and joy†.

Barriers of Research Utilization for Nurses

C L I N I C A L N U R S I N G IS S U E S Bridging the divide: a survey of nurses’ opinions regarding barriers to, and facilitators of, research utilization in the practice setting Alison Margaret Hutchinson BAppSc, MBioeth PhD Candidate, Victorian Centre for Nursing Practice Research, School of Nursing, University of Melbourne, Australia Linda Johnston BSc, PhD, Dip N Professor in Neonatal Nursing Research, Royal Children’s Hospital, Melbourne, and Associate Director, Victorian Centre for Nursing Practice Research, Melbourne, Australia Submitted for publication: 4 March 2003 Accepted for publication: 29 August 2003Correspondence: Alison M. Hutchinson School of Nursing University of Melbourne 1/723 Swanston St Carlton, VIC 3053 Australia Telephone: ? 61 3 8344 0800 E-mail: [email  protected] com H U T C H I N S O N A . M . & J O H N S T O N L . ( 2 0 0 4 ) Journal of Clinical Nursing 13, 304–315 Bridging the divide: a survey of nurses’ opinions regarding barriers to, and facilitators of, research utilization in the practice setting Background. Many researchers have explored the barriers to research uptake in order to overcome them and identify strategies to facilitate research utilization.However, the research–practice gap remains a persistent issue for the nursing profession. Aims and objectives. The aim of this study was to gain an understanding of perceived in? uences on nurses’ utilization of research, and explore what differences or commonalities exist between the ? ndings of this research and those of studies that have been conducted in various countries during the past 10 years. Design. Nurses were surveyed to elicit their opinions regarding barriers to, and facilitators of, research utilization.The instrument comprised a 29-item validated questionnaire, titled Barriers to Research Utilisation Scale (BARRIERS Scale), an eight-item scale of facilitators, provision for respondents to record additional barriers and /or facilitators and a series of demographic questions. Method. The questionnaire was administered in 2001 to all nurses (n ? 761) working at a major teaching hospital in Melbourne, Australia. A 45% response rate was achieved. Results. Greatest barriers to research utilization reported included time constraints, lack of awareness of available research literature, insuf? ient authority to change practice, inadequate skills in critical appraisal and lack of support for implementation of research ? ndings. Greatest facilitators to research utilization reported included availability of more time to review and implement research ? ndings, availability of more relevant research and colleague support. Conclusion. One of the most striking features of the ? ndings of the present study is that perceptions of Australian nurses are remarkably consistent with reported perceptions of nurses in the US, UK and Northern Ireland during the past decade. Relevance to clinical practice.If the use of res earch evidence in practice results in better outcomes for our patients, this behoves us, as a profession, to address issues surrounding support for implementation of research ? ndings, authority to 304 O 2004 Blackwell Publishing Ltd Clinical nursing issues Barriers to, and facilitators of, research utilization change practice, time constraints and ability to critically appraise research with conviction and a sense of urgency. Key words: barriers to research utilization, facilitators of research utilization, research dissemination, research implementation, research utilizationIntroduction and background For over 25 years research utilization has been discussed in the nursing literature with growing enthusiasm and amid increasing calls for the use of research ? ndings in practice. Additionally, the evidence-based practice movement, which emanated in the early 1990s (Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group, 1992) has highlighted the importance of incorporating research ? ndings into pra ctice. Furthermore, controversy surrounding the achievement of professional status has resulted in an increased awareness of the need for a research-based body of knowledge to underpin nursing practice.Gennaro et al. (2001, p. 314) contend: Using research in practice not only bene? ts patients but also strengthens nursing as a profession. If nursing is truly a profession, and not just a job or an occupation, nurses have to be able to continually evaluate the care they give and be accountable for providing the best possible care. Evaluating nursing care means that nurses also have to evaluate nursing research and determine if there is a better way to provide care. Twelve years prior, Walsh & Ford (1989) warned that the professional integrity of nursing was threatened by dependence upon experience-based practice.Similarly, Winter (1990, p. 138) cautioned that conduct of nursing practice in this manner is ‘the antithesis of professionalism, a barrier to independence, and a detrim ent to quality care. ’ Winter therefore, recommended that nurses ‘evaluate their status as research consumers, to identify problems in this area, and to develop means to better use research ? ndings’ (p. 138). Evidence-based practice, which should comprise the use of broad ranging sources of evidence, including the clinician’s expertise and patient preference (Sackett et al. , 1996), includes the use of research evidence as a subset (Estabrooks, 1999).Consistent with the classi? cation of knowledge utilization, three types of research use have been outlined (Stetler, 1994a,b; Berggren, 1996). The ? rst is described as ‘instrumental use’ and involves acting on research ? ndings in explicit, direct ways, for example application of research ? ndings in the development of a clinical pathway. The second is termed ‘conceptual use’ and involves using research ? ndings in less speci? c ways, for example changing thinking. The ? nal type o f research use, described as ‘symbolic use’, involves the use of research results to support a predetermined position.The nursing literature is replete with examples of limited use of research in practice and discussion surrounding perceived barriers to research utilization (Hunt, 1981; Gould, 1986; Closs & Cheater, 1994; Lacey, 1994). Despite this, the phenomenon of the research–practice gap, the gap between the conduct of research and use of that research in practice, remains an issue of major importance for the nursing profession. Many researchers have explored the barriers to research uptake in order to overcome them and identify strategies to facilitate research utilization (Kirchhoff, 1982; MacGuire, 1990; Funk et al. 1991a,b, 1995b; Closs & Cheater, 1994; Hicks, 1994, 1996; Lacey, 1994; Rizzuto et al. , 1994; Hunt, 1996; Walsh, 1997a,b). Hunt (1981) suggested that nurses fail to utilize research ? ndings because they do not know about them, do not understa nd them, do not believe them, do not know how to apply them, and are not allowed to use them. According to Hunt (1997), the barriers to research utilization and, therefore, to evidence-based practice fall into ? ve main categories: research, access to research, nurses, process of utilization and organization.Self-reported utilization of research is one method that has frequently been implemented to elicit the extent of research utilization. Responses to selected research ? ndings have been used to elicit and explore respondents’ awareness and use of respective ? ndings (Kete? an, 1975; Berggren, 1996). Numerous researchers have also undertaken to investigate, through self-reporting, the opinions of nurses’ in regard to barriers to research utilization in the practice setting. Funk et al. (1991b) explored research utilization in the US using a postal questionnaire titled the Barriers to Research Utilization Scale (BARRIERS Scale).Their purpose was to develop a tool to a ssess the perceptions of clinicians, administrators and academics in regard to barriers to research utilization in clinical practice. Rogers’ (1995) model of ‘diffusion of innovations’, a theoretical framework, which describes the process of communication, through certain channels within a social network, of an idea, practice or object over time, was used to develop a 29-item scale. The questionnaire was sent out to a random sample of 5000 members of the American Nurses’ Association with a resulting response rate of 40%. 305O 2004 Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Journal of Clinical Nursing, 13, 304–315 A. M. Hutchinson and L. Johnston On the data generated, Funk et al. (1991b) undertook an exploratory factor analysis, to elicit a four-factor solution which closely corresponded with Rogers’ (1995) ‘diffusion of innovations’ model. The factors translated into characteristics of the adopter comprising the nurse’s research values, s kills and awareness; the organization incorporating setting barriers and limitations; the innovation including qualities of the research; and communication including accessibility and presentation of the research.Items associated with the clinical setting, a characteristic of the organization, were perceived as the main barriers to research utilization. These included the views that nurses lack suf? cient authority to implement change; nurses have insuf? cient time to implement change; and there is a lack of cooperation from medical staff. Approximately 21% of the respondents in this study were classi? ed as administrators. Over three quarters of the items on the BARRIERS Scale were rated as great or moderate barriers by over half the administrators. The administrators identi? d factors relating to the nurse, the organizational setting and the presentation of research among the greatest barriers. Overall, they cited the organizational setting as the greatest barrier to research use. Approximately 46% of the respondents were classi? ed as clinicians (nurses working in the clinical setting). The clinicians overwhelmingly identi? ed factors associated with the organizational setting as being the greatest barriers to research utilization. They rated all eight factors associated with the setting in the top 10 barriers to research utilization.The clinicians rated perceived ‘lack of authority to change patient care procedures’, ‘insuf? cient time on the job to implement new ideas’ and being ‘unaware of the research’ as the top three barriers to research utilization. The BARRIERS Scale (Funk et al. , 1991b) has been used extensively since it was developed in 1991, as one method to explore the perceived in? uences on nurses’ utilization of research ? ndings in their practice. At least 17 studies that employed the BARRIERS Scale to elicit opinions of nurses regarding barriers to research utilization in practice have been rep orted in the nursing literature.Most studies reported the barriers in ranked order according to the percentage of respondents who rated items as moderate or great barriers. Insuf? cient time to read research and/or implement new ideas was rated in the top three barriers in 13 studies (Funk et al. , 1991a, 1995a; Carroll et al. , 1997; Dunn et al. , 1997; Lewis et al. , 1998; Nolan et al. , 1998; Rutledge et al. , 1998; Retsas & Nolan, 1999; Closs et al. , 2000; Parahoo, 2000; Retsas, 2000; Grif? ths et al. , 2001; Marsh et al. , 2001; Parahoo & McCaughan, 2001).A perceived lack of authority to change patient care procedures was reported in the top three barriers in eight studies (Funk et al. , 1991a; Walsh, 1997a; Nolan 306 et al. , 1998; Closs et al. , 2000; Parahoo, 2000; Retsas, 2000; Marsh et al. , 2001; Parahoo & McCaughan, 2001). In eight studies, the item ‘statistical analyses are not understandable’, was cited in the top three barriers (Funk et al. , 1995b; Dunn et al. , 1997; Walsh, 1997a,b; Rutledge et al. , 1998; Parahoo, 2000; Grif? ths et al. , 2001; Marsh et al. , 2001). ‘Inadequate facilities for implementation’ was cited in the top three barriers in ? e studies (Kajermo et al. , 1998; Nolan et al. , 1998; Retsas, 2000; Grif? ths et al. , 2001; Marsh et al. , 2001). Finally, the item ‘lack of awareness of research ? ndings’ was reported in the top three barriers in four studies (Funk et al. , 1991a, 1995a; Carroll et al. , 1997; Lewis et al. , 1998; Retsas & Nolan, 1999). It is acknowledged that these studies comprised varying populations of nurses, employed differing sampling methods, used sample sizes ranging from 58 to 1368 respondents and resultant response rates ranged from 27 to 76%.In some studies, minor rewording of a limited number of items in the tool had been undertaken. Furthermore, some studies included only 28 of 29 barrier items included in the original BARRIERS Scale. Factor analysis, a stat istical technique aimed at reducing the number of variables by grouping those that relate, to form relatively independent subgroups (Crichton, 2001; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001), was undertaken in a limited number of these studies. In the UK, Dunn et al. (1997) tested the factor model proposed by Funk et al. (1991b), using con? rmatory factor analysis, a complex statistical technique used to test a heory or model (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001). Attempts to load each item onto a single identi? ed factor were found to be unsuccessful and they concluded that the US model was inappropriate for their data. Closs & Bryar (2001) further explored the appropriateness of the BARRIERS Scale for use in the UK through exploratory factor analysis. The model identi? ed included the following four factors: bene? ts of research for practice, quality of research, accessibility of research, and resources for implementation. Finally, Marsh et al. (2001) tested, using con? matory factor analysis, a revised v ersion of the BARRIERS Scale. The revision comprised minor changes in wording such as substitution of the term ‘administrator’ with the term ‘manager’. A factor structure that was not possible to interpret resulted and they concluded that the model proposed by Funk et al. (1991b) was not supported and had limited subscale validity in the UK setting. In the light of these ? ndings and those of Dunn et al. (1997), Marsh et al. (2001) suggested that the factor model arising from the original BARRIERS Scale was not sustained in the international context.However, in Australia, Retsas & Nolan (1999) undertook an exploratory factor analysis resulting in a three-factor solution comprising: (i) nurses’ perceptions about the usefulness of research in O 2004 Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Journal of Clinical Nursing, 13, 304–315 Clinical nursing issues Barriers to, and facilitators of, research utilization clinical practice, (ii) generating change to practice based on research, and (iii) accessibility of research. Again, in Australia, a four-factor solution arose from another exploratory factor analysis undertaken by Retsas (2000).The resulting factors were conceptualized as: accessibility of research ? ndings, anticipated outcomes of using research, organizational support to use research, and support from others to use research. Given these ? ndings in the Australian context, an exploratory factor analysis was employed in the present study to explore what model would arise from data generated using the BARRIERS Scale. The aim of the present study was to gain an understanding of perceived in? uences on nurses’ utilization of research in a particular practice setting, and explore what differences or commonalities exist between the ? dings of this research and those of studies which have been conducted during the past 10 years in various countries around the world. This study was undertaken as part of a larger study designed to exp lore the phenomenon of research utilization by nurses in the clinical setting. The relative importance of barrier and facilitator items and the factor model arising from this data will in? uence development of future stages of this larger study. who then took responsibility for distribution. It cannot be guaranteed, however, that this process in fact resulted in all nurses receiving the questionnaire.The questionnaire included the 29-item BARRIERS Scale in addition to an eight-item facilitator scale and a series of demographic questions. The respondents were asked to return completed questionnaires in the self-addressed envelope supplied, by either placing them in the internal mail or placing them in the ‘return’ box supplied in their ward or department. Return of completed questionnaires implied consent to participate and all responses were anonymous. Setting The setting for this study was a 310-bed major teaching hospital offering specialist services in Melbourne, Aus tralia. SampleApproximately 960 nurses work in the organization. All Registered Nurses working during the 4-week distribution time frame were invited to complete the questionnaire. This self-selecting, convenience sample therefore, excluded nurses on leave at the time of the study. The study The research question addressed in this study was: What are nurses’ perceptions of the barriers to, and facilitators of, research utilization in the practice setting? Instrument The questionnaire comprised three sections. The ? rst section contained the 29 randomly ordered items from the Barriers to Research Utilization Scale (Funk et al. 1991b), which respondents were asked to rate, on a four-point Likert type scale, the extent to which they believed each item was a barrier to their use of research in practice. The options included 1 ? ‘to no extent’, 2 ? ‘to a little extent’, 4 ? ‘to a moderate extent’ and 5 ? ‘to a large extent’. A â €˜no opinion’ ? 3 option was also given. The respondents were then asked to nominate and rate (1 ? greatest barrier, 2 ? second greatest barrier, and 3 ? third greatest barrier) the items they considered to be the top three barriers.Further to this, the respondents were given the opportunity to list and rate, according to the above-mentioned Likert scale, any additional items they perceived to be barriers. The second section of the survey contained eight items (Table 4), which respondents were asked to rate according to the extent to which they considered them to be a facilitator of research utilization using the Likert scale described above. The respondents were also asked to nominate and rate, from 1 to 3, the items they considered to be the three greatest facilitators of research utilization.Again, the respondents were given the opportunity to list and rate, according to the 307 Method A survey design was chosen to elicit opinions of nurses. This method was selected bec ause the ‘BARRIERS Scale’, a validated questionnaire, based on the work of Funk et al. (1991b), and designed to elicit nurses’ views about barriers to, and facilitators of, research utilization in their practice, was found to have high reliability. Approval to use the tool was gained from the authors. Permission was also given to include questions crafted by the investigators to elicit nurses’ opinions about facilitators of research utilization.Approval to conduct the project was sought and granted by the hospital research ethics committee to ensure the rights and dignity of all respondents were protected. Nurses working during the 4-week survey distribution time frame (n ? 761) were invited to complete the self-administered questionnaire. It was intended that every nurse receive a personally addressed envelope containing the questionnaire and a self-addressed return envelope. To facilitate this, the envelopes were hand delivered to a nominated nurse on ea ch ward or department O 2004 Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Journal of Clinical Nursing, 13, 304–315A. M. Hutchinson and L. Johnston Likert scale, perceived facilitators not listed in the survey. Section 3 of the survey included a series of demographic questions. Validity Content validity, i. e. whether the questions in the tool accurately measure what is supposed to be measured (LoBiondo-Wood & Haber, 1998), of the instrument was supported by the literature on research utilization, the research utilization questionnaire developed by the Conduct and Utilization of Research in Nursing Project (Crane et al. , 1977), and data gathered from nurses. Input was also gained from experts in the ? ld of research utilization, nursing research, nursing practice and a psychometrician to establish face validity, i. e. whether the tool appears to measure the concept intended (LoBiondo-Wood & Haber, 1998), and content validity from an extensive list of potential items. Those items for which face and content validity were established were retained. Further to piloting of the instrument, two additional items were included and some minor rewording of other items resulted. The BARRIERS Scale has been found to have good reliability, with Cronbach’s alpha coef? ients of between 0. 65 and 0. 80 for the four factors, and item-total correlations from 0. 30 to 0. 53 (Funk et al. , 1991b). Cronbach’s alpha is a measure of internal consistency, which is related to the reliability of the instrument. A Cronbach’s alpha of †¡0. 7 is considered to be good. Internal consistency is the extent to which items in the scale measure the same concept (LoBiondo-Wood & Haber, 1998). Item total correlations refer to the relationship between the question or item and the total scale score (LoBiondo-Wood & Haber, 1998). Data analysisData analysis was performed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (version 10. 0; SPSS Inc. , Chicago, IL, USA) software. Frequency and descriptive statistics were employed to describe the demographic characteristics of respondents. Analysis of these data indicated that a wide cross section of nursing staff responded to the questionnaire. Factor analytic procedures were employed to reduce the 29 barrier items to factors. The ‘no opinion’ responses (coded to be in the centre of the scale) were included in the factor analytic procedure, on the basis of statistical advice.Suitability of the data for undertaking factor analysis is determined by testing for sampling adequacy and sphericity. The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy at 0. 83 was in excess of the recommended value of 0. 6 (Kaiser, 1974), indicating that the 308 correlations or factor loadings, which re? ect the strength of the relationship between barrier items, were high. The Bartlett test of sphericity at 2118. 3 was statistically signi? cant (P < 0. 001). On the basis of these results, factor analysis was considered appropriate.The factor analysis method employed consisted of principal component analysis (PCA), a method of reducing a number of variables (barrier items) to groupings to aid interpretation of the underlying relationships between the variables (Crichton, 2000) whilst capturing as much of the variance in the data as possible. PCA revealed eight components with an eigenvalue exceeding one, indicating that up to eight factors could be retained in the ? nal factor solution. Inspection of the scree plot, a plot of the variance encompassed by the factors, failed to provide a clear indication for the number of factors to include.Eight factors were considered too many to be meaningful, thus factor solutions from two to seven factors were explored. A solution comprising four factors was considered most meaningful. Examination of the factor loadings was then undertaken to determine which items belonged to each factor. Consistent with the procedure employed by Funk et al. (1991b), items were considered to have loaded if they had a factor loading of 0. 4 or more. Varimax rotation, a statistical method employed to simplify and aid interpretation of factors, was then applied.Whilst factor analysis assists in reducing the number of variables to groupings and aids in interpretation of the underlying structure of the data, it does not identify the relative importance of individual items. Thus, while one factor may account for the largest amount of variance in the factor solution it does not mean that the items within that factor are the greatest barriers to research utilization. In order to determine the relative signi? cance of each barrier item, the number of respondents who reported them as a moderate or great barrier was calculated and items were ranked accordingly.Additional barriers recorded by participants were grouped thematically. Similarly, to determine the relative signi? cance of each facilitator item, the number of respondents who reported them as a moderate or great facilitator was calculated and items were ranked accordingly. Additional facilitators recorded by participants were grouped thematically. Results Demographics A total of 317 nurses returned the questionnaires, representing a 45% response rate, assuming that all nurses did, in fact, receive a personally addressed envelope. The age range of respondents was 43 years (minimum ? 1 years, O 2004 Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Journal of Clinical Nursing, 13, 304–315 Clinical nursing issues Barriers to, and facilitators of, research utilization maximum ? 64 years) while the range in years since registration was 42 years. The demographic characteristics of the nurses (Table 1) were consistent with those of the State of Victoria’s nursing workforce (The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 1999). Factor analysis A four-factor solution was selected as the most appropriate model arising from PCA of the 29 barrier items. This accounted for 39. % of the total variance in re sponses to all barrier items. The factor groupings including the loading for each barrier item and the titles allocated to each factor are included in Table 2. According to the correlation coef? cient or factor loading measure of †¡0. 4, two items, ‘research reports/articles are not published fast enough’, and ‘the research has not been replicated’, failed to load on any of the four factors. Table 1 Nurse demographics (n ? 317) Variable Gender Male Female Missing Age (years) Experience Registered Nurse (years) Clinical experience (years) Years since most recent quali? ation Highest quali? cation Division 2 certi? cate for registration Division 1 hospital certi? cate for registration Tertiary diploma/degree for registration Specialist nursing certi? cate Graduate diploma Masters by coursework Masters by research Others (including education and management quali? cations) Missing Principle job function Clinical Administrative Research Education Others Mis sing Research experience Yes No Missing N (%) Mean (SD) 24 (7. 6) 291 (91. 8) 2 (0. 6) 33. 8 (9. 73) 12. 6 (9. 95) 11. 35 (8. 8) 4. 28 (6. 52) 14 (4. 4) 23 (7. 3) 104 (32. 8) 26 34 9 1 87 (8. 2) (10. 7) (2. 8) (0. 3) (27. ) Factor 1, comprising eight items with loadings of 0. 73 to 0. 43, includes items relating to characteristics of the organization that in? uence research-based change. Eight items loaded onto factor 2 with loadings of 0. 66 to 0. 40. These items are associated with qualities of research and potential outcomes associated with the implementation of research ? ndings. Factor 3 with seven items loading 0. 60 to 0. 41, relates to the nurse’s research skills, beliefs and role limitations. Factor four refers to communication and accessibility of research ? ndings onto which ? ve items loaded 0. 67 to 0. 42.The four factor groupings comprising setting, nurse, research and presentation, generated in the US study 10 years ago (Funk et al. , 1991b), were similar to gr oupings that arose from factor analysis in the present study (Table 2). Cronbach’s alphas were calculated for each factor generated. For factors 1–3 the alpha coef? cients were 0. 75, 0. 74 and 0. 70, respectively, demonstrating good reliability. The alpha coef? cient for factor 4 was lower at 0. 54. The total scale alpha was 0. 86, which indicates that the scale can be considered reliable with this sample. Item-total correlations ranged from 0. 1 to 0. 60. Although a low correlation between some items and the total score was evident, deleting any of these items would have resulted in a reduction in reliability of the scale. Relative importance of barrier and facilitator items The percentages of items perceived by nurses’ as great or moderate barriers are summarized in Table 3. The respondents were also given the opportunity to list and rate any additional perceived barriers not included in the questionnaire. About 27% (85) of respondents documented a total of 1 74 barriers. However, analysis revealed that only 11% (36) of respondents actually identi? d additional barriers. The remainder had reiterated or reworded barrier items already included in the tool. The additional barrier items listed by respondents were grouped into themes, which included funding, organizational commitment, research training, implementation strategy and professional responsibility. The percentages of items perceived by nurses’ as great or moderate facilitators are summarized in Table 4. The respondents were also given the opportunity to list and rate additional perceived facilitators. Eighteen per cent (57) of respondents took the opportunity to record a total of 90 facilitators. Of these, 7. % (24) actually identi? ed additional facilitators whereas the remainder had rephrased or repeated items already included in the tool. Consistent with the themes identi? ed for the additional barriers were funding, organizational commitment, active participation in rese arch 309 19 (6. 0) 252 28 6 10 15 6 (79. 5) (8. 8) (1. 9) (3. 2) (4. 7) (1. 9) 207 (65. 3) 105 (33. 1) 5 (1. 6) O 2004 Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Journal of Clinical Nursing, 13, 304–315 A. M. Hutchinson and L. Johnston Table 2 BARRIERS Scale factors and factor loadings US factor groupings Factor loadings Communalities Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4Barrier item Factor 1: Organizational in? uences on research-based change Physician will not cooperate with implementation Administration will not allow implementation The nurse does not feels she/he has enough authority to change patient care procedures The facilities are inadequate for implementation Other staff are not supportive of implementation The nurse feels results are not generalizable to own setting The nurse is unwilling to change/try new ideas Factor 2: Qualities of the research and potential outcomes of implementation The research has methodological inadequacies The literature reports con? cting results The conclu sions drawn from the research are not justi? ed The research is not relevant to the nurse’s practice The nurse is uncertain whether to believe the results of the research The research is not reported clearly and readably Statistical analyses are not understandable The nurse feels the bene? ts of changing practice will be minimal Factor 3: Nurses’ research skills, beliefs and role limitations The nurse sees little bene? for self The nurse does not feel capable of evaluating the quality of the research There is not a documented need to change practice The nurse does not see the value of research for practice The amount of research information is overwhelming The nurse is isolated from knowledgeable colleagues with whom to discuss the research There is insuf? cient time on the job to implement new ideas Factor 4: Communication and accessibility of research ? dings Research reports/articles are not readily available Implications for practice are not made clear The nurse is unaware of the research The relevant literature is not compiled in one place The nurse does not have time to read research Setting Setting Setting Setting Setting Setting Nurse 0. 55 0. 52 0. 42 0. 42 0. 34 0. 39 0. 36 0. 73 0. 71 0. 56 0. 54 0. 53 0. 49 0. 43 0. 09 0. 10 0. 06 0. 11 0. 17 0. 30 0. 01 A0. 02 A0. 01 0. 31 A0. 04 0. 19 0. 23 0. 41 0. 09 A0. 04 0. 05 0. 33 0. 02 0. 01 A0. 09 Research Research Research Presentation Research Presentation PresentationNurse 0. 46 0. 38 0. 44 0. 43 0. 46 0. 33 0. 33 0. 46 0. 17 0. 11 0. 11 0. 22 0. 27 0. 11 A0. 04 0. 36 0. 66 0. 59 0. 57 0. 55 0. 53 0. 49 0. 47 0. 40 0. 03 0. 12 0. 30 A0. 13 0. 32 0. 18 0. 03 0. 38 0. 00 0. 04 A0. 05 0. 25 0. 07 0. 19 0. 32 A0. 14 Nurse Nurse Nurse Nurse * Nurse Setting Presentation Presentation Nurse Presentation Setting 0. 57 0. 45 0. 35 0. 55 0. 29 0. 31 0. 38 0. 45 0. 47 0. 33 0. 25 0. 31 0. 23 A0. 04 A0. 04 0. 15 0. 05 0. 31 0. 28 0. 01 0. 06 A0. 04 0. 13 0. 22 0. 39 0. 26 0. 14 0. 47 A0. 01 0. 11 A0. 17 0. 00 0. 31 0. 09 0. 3 A0. 14 0. 60 0. 58 0. 57 0. 55 0. 51 0. 42 0. 41 0. 00 A0. 09 0. 16 0. 13 0. 26 0. 04 0. 21 0. 09 A0. 04 0. 15 0. 16 0. 31 0. 67 0. 60 0. 54 0. 45 0. 42 Two items, ‘research reports/articles are not published fast enough’ and ‘the research has not been replicated’, did not load at the 0. 4 level in this analysis. *The item, ‘the amount of research information is overwhelming’ failed to load on any factor in the Funk et al. model. process – experience, strategy to ensure project completion, implementation strategies, and professional attitude.Discussion The present study generated a four-factor solution with similarities to that produced in the US by Funk et al. (1991b) and in the UK by Closs & Bryar (2001). The ? rst factor comprises characteristics of the organization and re? ects health professional and other resource support for change 310 associated with the implementation of research ? ndings. More broadly , the theme ‘organizational commitment’ identi? ed following analysis of the additional perceived barriers listed by respondents, appears to be associated with this factor.Organizational commitment, many respondents felt, would facilitate mobilization of resources to promote change. Factor 2 relates to qualities of research and potential outcomes associated with the implementation of research ? ndings. This factor re? ects the nurse’s reservations about reliability and validity of research ? ndings and conclusions, O 2004 Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Journal of Clinical Nursing, 13, 304–315 Clinical nursing issues Table 3 BARRIERS Scale items in rank order Barriers to, and facilitators of, research utilization Barrier items The nurse does not have time to read research There is insuf? ient time on the job to implement new ideas The nurse is unaware of the research The nurse does not feel she/he has enough authority to change patient care procedures Statistica l analyses are not understandable The relevant literature is not compiled in one place Physicians will not cooperate with the implementation The nurse does not feel capable of evaluating the quality of the research The facilities are inadequate for implementation Other staff are not supportive of implementation Research reports/articles are not readily available The nurse feels results are not generalizable to own setting The amount of research information is overwhelming Implications for practice are not made clear The research is not reported clearly and readably The research has not been replicated The nurse is isolated from knowledgeable colleagues with whom to discuss the research Administration will not allow implementation The research is not relevant to the nurse’s practice The literature reports con? icting results The nurse feels the bene? s of changing practice will be minimal The nurse is uncertain whether to believe the results of the research Research reports/ar ticles are not published fast enough The nurse is unwilling to change/try new ideas The research has methodological inadequacies The nurse sees little bene? t for self There is not a documented need to change practice The nurse does not see the value of research for practice The conclusions drawn from the research are not justi? ed Reporting item as moderate or great barrier (%) 78. 3 73. 8 66. 2 64. 7 64. 1 58. 7 56. 1 55. 8 52 52 50. 8 50. 8 45. 7 45. 5 43. 3 41. 3 41 35 34. 4 34 31. 9 30. 9 30. 6 29. 4 25. 5 23. 3 22. 1 17 13. 8 Item mean score (SD) 4. 06 3. 9 3. 64 3. 51 3. 56 3. 51 3. 41 3. 3 3. 23 3. 16 3. 19 3. 09 3. 07 3. 0 3. 01 3. 16 2. 76 2. 88 2. 67 2. 87 2. 52 2. 58 2. 81 2. 34 2. 85 2. 25 2. 27 1. 9 2. (1. 21) (1. 3) (1. 4) (1. 39) (1. 32) (1. 26) (1. 33) (1. 39) (1. 3) (1. 29) (1. 35) (1. 26) (1. 35) (1. 22) (1. 25) (1. 14) (1. 49) (1. 18) (1. 28) (1. 11) (1. 3) (1. 29) (1. 21) (1. 34) (1. 0) (1. 26) (1. 24) (1. 21) (1. 02) Responding ‘no opinion’ or non- response (%) 0. 9 1. 6 1. 6 0. 9 3. 8 13 7. 6 3. 5 8. 8 6. 3 6. 3 3. 5 6. 9 5 8. 2 26. 1 3. 8 19. 6 4. 4 18. 9 3. 5 4. 7 25. 2 2. 2 32. 5 3. 5 8. 5 1. 6 21 Table 4 Facilitator items in rank order Reporting item as moderate or great facilitator (%) 89. 6 89. 5 84. 8 82. 3 82. 0 81. 4 81. 3 78. 2 Number (%) responding ‘no opinion’ or non-response 8 (2. 5) 6 9 6 10 (1. 8) (2. 8) (1. 8) (3. 2)Facilitator item Increasing the time available for reviewing and implementing research ? ndings Conducting more clinically focused and relevant research Providing colleague support network/mechanisms Advanced education to increase your research knowledge base Enhancing managerial support and encouragement of research implementation Improving availability and accessibility of research reports Improving the understandability of research reports Employing nurses with research skills to serve as role models Item mean score (SD) 4. 52 (0. 93) 4. 39 4. 21 4. 11 4. 15 (0. 94) (1. 02) (1. 13) (1. 08) 4. 12 (1. 11) 4. 16 (1. 1) 4. 04 (1. 22) 5 (1. 5) 8 (2. 5) 9 (2. 9)O 2004 Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Journal of Clinical Nursing, 13, 304–315 311 A. M. Hutchinson and L. Johnston in addition to bene? ts of use of ? ndings in practice. Factor 3 focuses on characteristics of the nurse. In particular, this factor is associated with the nurse’s beliefs about the value of research and their research skills, in addition to the limitations of their role. The fourth factor is concerned with characteristics of communication. The focus of this factor centres on access to research ? ndings and understanding of the implications of ? ndings. The issues encompassed within this factor re? ect organizational barriers to access, and research presentation barriers.These factors are congruent with the concepts characterized in Rogers’ (1995) model of ‘diffusion of innovations’, including characteristics of the adopter, organization, innovation and communication , on which the BARRIERS Scale was developed. Two barrier items, ‘research reports/articles are not published fast enough’ and ‘the research has not been replicated’, failed to load suf? ciently onto a factor and were subsequently discarded. Exclusion of these items from the model re? ects their minimal signi? cance in relation to the underlying dimensions of the factors. That these items were ranked 23 and 16, respectively, is not surprising because they become less relevant when there is a perceived lack of time to read research and implement change as re? cted in the top two nominated barriers to research utilization. It is also important to note that over one quarter of respondents selected the ‘no opinion’ option or failed to respond to both of these items, which further suggests their lack of importance to respondents. The majority of respondents in this study rated approximately 40% of the barriers items as moderate or great barriers. Thi s is compared with the majority of nurse clinicians in the US (Funk et al. , 1991a) and nurses in the UK (Dunn et al. , 1997), who rated about 65% of the barrier items as moderate or great barriers. Overall, this group of Australian nurses perceived there to be fewer barriers to esearch utilization than their colleagues in the UK or US, with a mean score of 43. 7% of respondents rating all the barriers as moderate or great. In the UK (Walsh, 1997a) and the US (Funk et al. , 1991a) mean scores of 59. 8 and 55. 7%, respectively, re? ect the proportion of respondents who rated all barriers as moderate or great. Possible in? uences such as time, population, nursing education programmes should be acknowledged when considering these comparisons. Content analysis of the data comprising additional perceived barriers elicited ? ve new themes respondents associated with barriers to research utilization. Revision of the instrument to re? ect the themes identi? d and changes that have occurred over the past 10 years may be warranted to achieve a more valid scale for the setting in which it was used in this study. The addition of items consistent with changes in the availability of technological resources, information availability and use, and education may enhance the content validity of the scale. The ranking of perceived barriers in practice resulting from this study showed considerable consistency with rankings reported in other studies, as previously discussed. The top three barriers reported in 12 other studies fell within the top 10 barriers identi? ed in this study. Furthermore, two of the top three barriers in an additional two studies fell within the top 10 barriers identi? ed in the present study. The barrier item ‘there is insuf? ient time on the job to implement new ideas’ was reported within the top three barriers in 13 studies, including this and another Australian study (Retsas, 2000). When Spearman’s rank order correlation coef? cients were generated to compare the rank ordering of perceived barriers, a strong positive correlation between this and several other studies was evident (Table 5). Whilst acknowledging differences in nursing populations, sample size, sampling methods, response rates, and minor variations in item wording and number, this suggests a large degree of consistency regarding Study Funk et al. (1991a) Funk et al. (1995a) Dunn et al. (1997) Rutledge et al. (1998) Lewis et al. (1998) Kajermo et al. (1998) Retsas & Nolan (1999) Parahoo (2000) Retsas (2000) Closs et al. 2000) Parahoo & McCaughan (2001) Grif? ths et al. (2001) Location USA USA UK USA USA Sweden Australia Northern Ireland Australia UK Northern Ireland UK r 0. 866 0. 779 0. 835 0. 816 0. 879 0. 719 0. 884 0. 837 0. 801 0. 762 0. 799 0. 912 P 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 Coef? cient of determination (%) 75 61 70 66 77 52 78 70 64 58 64 83 Table 5 Barrier rank order correlations 312 O 2004 Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Journal of Clinical Nursing, 13, 304–315 Clinical nursing issues Barriers to, and facilitators of, research utilization nurses’ perceptions of the relative importance of the barrier items. Marsh et al. 2001) however, caution against international comparisons with the original US data because changes in nursing education and roles, technology, funding and collaboration with other disciplines since then, may invalidate such comparisons. Nonetheless, despite these changes, the ? ndings of the present study have consistencies with not only the US data of 1991 but also more recent studies in the US, UK, Sweden, Northern Ireland and Australia (Table 5). Thus, notwithstanding the increasing momentum of the evidence-based practice movement in recent years, the pursuit of professional status by the nursing profession, the move of nursing education to the tertiary sector, increased access to systematic reviews and research databases, the research – practice gap persists.In the light of the plethora of research and theoretical literature on the research–practice gap and issues surrounding research utilization, it is of concern that nurses’ perceptions of the barriers to research utilization appear to remain consistent. In particular, issues surrounding support for implementation of research ? ndings, authority to change practice, time constraints and ability critically to appraise research continue to be perceived by nurses as the greatest barriers to research utilization. This raises important questions. Firstly, do such perceptions re? ect the reality of contemporary nursing? Or rather, do they represent unchallenged, traditionally held and ? rmly entrenched beliefs, which are founded on an understanding of nursing in a socio-historic context that is no longer relevant? If such perceptions do, in fact, re? ct the reality of current day nursing practice, despite the changes and progress that have been ma de in health care and nursing over the last decade, it behoves us, as a profession, to address the issues related to time, authority, support and skills in critical appraisal with conviction and a sense of urgency. Contextual issues including the socio-political environment, organizational culture and interprofessional relations need to be taken into serious consideration when exploring and formulating potential strategies to overcome these barriers. The hospital in which this study was conducted has since undertaken to explore and develop strategies to address and overcome barriers to, and reinforce and strengthen facilitators of research utilization highlighted in the ? ndings. ther studies using the BARRIERS Scale, may re? ect a response bias. That is, nurses with a positive attitude to research may have been more likely to complete the questionnaire. Internal consistency, the extent to which items in the scale measure the same concept (LoBiondo-Wood & Haber, 1998), of the tool w as reasonable, although not as high as that reported by Funk et al. (1991b). For seven items, more than 10% of the respondents nominated ‘no opinion’ or failed to respond. Furthermore, this study was conducted in one organization; the ? ndings are therefore context speci? c, which makes it dif? cult to generalize to other settings. However, there is consistency over ime and between countries in regard to nurses’ perceptions of the barriers to research utilization. Conclusion In order to gain an understanding of perceived in? uences on nurses’ utilization of research in a particular practice setting, nurses were surveyed to elicit their opinions regarding barriers to, and facilitators of, research utilization. Many of the perceived barriers to research utilization reported by this group of Australian nurses are consistent with reported perceptions of nurses in the US, UK and Northern Ireland during the past decade. Time was the most important barrier percei ved by nurses in this study, which is re? ected by responses to the items, ‘the nurse does not have time to read research’ and ‘there is insuf? ient time on the job to implement new ideas’, resulting in them being ranked as the top two barriers to research utilization. Consistent with this ? nding was the ranking of facilitator item ‘increasing the time available for reviewing and implementing research ? ndings’ as the most important facilitator to research utilization. The employment of qualitative research methods, such as observation and interview, will contribute further to our knowledge about barriers to, and facilitators of, research utilization by nurses by allowing deeper exploration of experiences, perception and issues faced by nurses in the utilization of research in their practice.Fundamental questions about whether nurses’ perceptions actually re? ect the reality of the current context of nursing need to be further investiga ted. Future research should also examine issues surrounding the use of time by nurses. Questions exploring how much additional time nurses require in order to read the relevant literature and how nurses can be given more time to implement new ideas, need to be addressed. Issues related to nurses’ perception of their authority to change patient care procedures, the support and cooperation afforded by doctors and others, the facilities and availability of resources, and their skills in critical appraisal, also require further 313 LimitationsReporting bias associated with the self-report method raises questions about the extent to which the responses accurately represent nurses’ perceptions of the barriers to research utilization. The low response rate achieved in this study, although consistent with response rates reported in several O 2004 Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Journal of Clinical Nursing, 13, 304–315 A. M. Hutchinson and L. Johnston exploration. Investigatio n of the information-seeking behaviour of nurses, the means by which they gain and synthesize new research knowledge and the way in which they apply that knowledge to their decision making, will further contribute to our understanding of the research–practice gap phenomenon.Measurement of the actual extent of research utilization by nurses in the practice setting presents a major challenge for researchers in this ? eld. Acknowledgements The authors thank Sandra Funk for her permission to use the BARRIERS Scale for the purpose of this study. We wish to acknowledge and thank the nurses who completed the questionnaire. The authors also wish to acknowledge the statistical assistance provided by Ms Anne Solterbeck, Statistical Consulting Centre, Department of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne. Contributions Study design: LJ, AMH; data analysis: AMH; manuscript preparation: AMH, LJ; literature review: AMH. References Berggren A. 1996) Swedish midwives’ awareness of, attitudes to and use of selected research findings. Journal of Advanced Nursing 23, 462–470. Carroll D. L. , Greenwood R. , Lynch K. , Sullivan J. K. , Ready C. H. & Fitzmaurice J. B. (1997) Barriers and facilitators to the utilization of nursing research. Clinical Nurse Specialist 11, 207–212. Closs S. J. & Bryar R. M. (2001) The barriers scale: does it ‘fit’ the current NHS research culture? NT Research 6, 853–865. Closs S. J. & Cheater F. M. (1994) Utilization of nursing research: culture, interest and support. Journal of Advanced Nursing 19, 762–773. Closs S. J. , Baum G. , Bryar R. M. , Griffiths J. & Knight S. (2000) Barriers to research implementation in two Yorkshire hospitals.Clinical Effectiveness in Nursing 4, 3–10. Crane J. , Pelz D. C. & Horsley J. A. (1977) Conduct and Utilization of Research in Nursing Project. School of Nursing, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. Crichton N. (2000) Information point: p rincipal component analysis. Journal of Clinical Nursing 9, 815. Crichton N. (2001) Information point: factor analysis. Journal of Clinical Nursing 10, 550–562. Dunn V. , Crichton N. , Roe B. , Seers K. & Williams K. (1997) Using research for practice: a UK experience of the barriers scale. Journal of Advanced Nursing 26, 1203–1210. Estabrooks C. A. (1999) Will evidence-based nursing practice make practice perfect?Canadian Journal of Nursing Research 30, 273–294. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group (1992) A new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. Journal of the American Medical Association 268, 2420–2425. Funk S. G. , Champagne M. T. , Wiese R. A. & Tornquist E. M. (1991a) Barriers to using research findings in practice: the clinician’s perspective. Applied Nursing Research 4, 90–95. Funk S. G. , Champagne M. T. , Wiese R. A. & Tornquist E. M. (1991b) Barriers: the barriers to research utilization scale. Applied Nursing Research 4, 39–45. Funk S. G. , Champagne M. T. , Tornquist E. M. & Wiese R. (1995a) Administrator’s views on barriers to research utilization.Applied Nursing Research 8, 44–49. Funk S. G. , Tornquist E. M. & Champagne M. T. (1995b) Barriers and facilitators of research utilization. Nursing Clinics of North America 30, 395–407. Gennaro S. , Hodnett E. & Kearney M. (2001) Making evidencebased practice a reality in your institution: evaluating the evidence and using the evidence to change clinical practice. MCN, the American Journal of Maternal/Child Nursing 26, 236–244. Gould D. (1986) Pressure sore prevention and treatment: an example of nurses’ failure to implement research findings. Journal of Advanced Nursing 11, 389–394. Griffiths J. M. , Bryar R. M. , Closs S. J. , Cooke J. , Hostick T. , Kelly S. Marshall K. (2001) Barriers to research implementation by community nurses. British Journal of Community Nursing 6, 501–510. Hicks C. ( 1994) Bridging the gap between research and practice: an assessment of the value of a study day in developing research reading skills in midwives. Midwifery 10, 18–25. Hicks C. (1996) A study of nurses’ attitudes towards research: a factor analytic approach. Journal of Advanced Nursing 23, 373–379. Hunt J. (1981) Indicators for nursing practice: the use of research findings. Journal of Advanced Nursing 6, 189–194. Hunt J. (1996) Barriers to research utilization. Journal of Advanced Nursing 23, 423–425. Hunt J. 1997) Towards evidence based practice. Nursing Management 4, 14–17. Kaiser H. (1974) An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika 39, 31–36. Kajermo K. N. , Nordstrom G. , Krusebrant A. & Bjovell H. (1998) Barriers to and facilitators of research utilization, as perceived by a group of registered nurses in Sweden. Journal of Advanced Nursing 27, 798–807. Ketefian S. (1975) Application of selected nursing research findi ngs into nursing practice: a pilot study. Nursing Research 24, 89–92. Kirchhoff K. T. (1982) A diffusion survey of coronary precautions. Nursing Research 31, 196–201. Lacey A. (1994) Research utilization in nursing practice: a pilot study.Journal of Advanced Nursing 19, 987–997. Lewis S. L. , Prowant B. F. , Cooper C. L. & Bonner P. N. (1998) Nephrology nurses’ perceptions of barriers and facilitators to using research in practice. ANNA Journal 25, 397–405. LoBiondo-Wood G. & Haber J. (1998) Nursing Research. Methods, Critical Appraisal and Utilization. Mosby, St Louis, MO. MacGuire J. M. (1990) Putting nursing research findings into practice: research utilization as an aspect of the management for change. Journal of Advanced Nursing 15, 614–620. 314 O 2004 Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Journal of Clinical Nursing, 13, 304–315 Clinical nursing issues Marsh G. W. , Nolan M. & Hopkins S. 2001) Testing the revised barriers to research utiliz ation for use in the UK. Clinical Effectiveness in Nursing 5, 66–72. Nolan M. , Morgan L. , Curran M. , Clayton J. , Gerrish K. & Parker K. (1998) Evidence-based care: can we overcome the barriers? British Journal of Nursing 7, 1273–1278. Parahoo K. (2000) Barriers to, and facilitators of, research utilization among nurses in Northern Ireland. Journal of Advanced Nursing 31, 89–98. Parahoo K. & McCaughan E. M. (2001) Research utilization among medical and surgical nurses: a comparison of their self reports and perceptions of barriers and facilitators. Journal of Nursing Management 9, 21–30. Retsas A. 2000) Barriers to using research evidence in nursing practice. Journal of Advanced Nursing 31, 599–606. Retsas A. & Nolan M. (1999) Barriers to nurses’ use of research: an Australian hospital study. International Journal of Nursing Studies 36, 335–343. Rizzuto C. , Bostrum J. , Suter W. N. & Chenitz W. C. (1994) Predictors of nursesâ€⠄¢ involvement in research activities. Western Journal of Nursing Research 16, 193–204. Rogers E. M. (1995) Diffusion of Innovations. The Free Press, New York. Rutledge D. N. , Ropka M. , Greene P. E. , Nail L. & Mooney K. H. (1998) Barriers to research utilization for oncology staff nurses and nurse managers/clinical nurse specialists. Oncology Nursing Forum 25, 497–506.Barriers to, and facilitators of, research utilization Sackett D. L. , Rosenberg W. M. C. , Gray J. A. M. , Haynes R. B. & Richardson W. S. (1996) Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. British Medical Journal 312, 71–72. Stetler C. B. (1994a) Problems and issues of research utilization. In Nursing Issues in the 1990’s (Strickland O. L. & Fishman D. L. eds). Delmar, New York, pp. 459–470. Stetler C. B. (1994b) Refinement of the Stetler/Marram model for application of research findings to practice. Nursing Outlook 42, 15–25. Tabachnick B. G. & Fidell L. S. (2001) Using Multivariate Statistics. Allyn & Bacon, Needham Heights, MA.The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (1999) National Health Labour Force Series. Number 20 – Nursing Labour Force 1999. The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Canberra. Walsh M. (1997a) How nurses perceive barriers to research implementation. Nursing Standard 11, 34–39. Walsh M. (1997b) Perceptions of barriers to implementing research. Nursing Standard 11, 34–37. Walsh M. & Ford P. (1989) Rituals in nursing: ‘we always do it this way’. Nursing Times 85, 26–35. Winter J. C. (1990) Brief. Relationship between sources of knowledge and use of research findings. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing 21, 138–140. O 2004 Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Journal of Clinical Nursing, 13, 304–315 315

Position of OPEC Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3750 words

Position of OPEC - Essay Example OPEC has found its geopolitical strength and has realized its power suddenly and has become an important force playing an important part in regions like Asia and Africa. It has brought the huge multinational oil companies under control who could have done so many wrong acts otherwise, but now they all are on their knees, OPEC has made them merely impotent in the decision-making process, which is a good sign as there aim of profitability can disturb many other economies. It has forced the Western nations to have its favor on numerous occasions. There is a growing recognition in the Western world that the industrialized countries cannot solve the problems of chronic inflation and economic stagnation permanently unless they force OPEC to abandon its stand of raising oil prices ever higher and disrupt supplies to the oil consuming nations, but imagine what they could have done if OPEC was not there. The dependence on OPEC increased considerably in the United States during the last decade and a half. According to a study by the Federal Energy Administration (FEA), U.S. oil imports raised 150 percent between 1968 and 1973, from about 2.5 million barrels a day in 1968 to 6.3 mb/d in 1973. Imports from the Arab oil producing countries were raised to 31.9 percent in 1976 from a negligible 2 percent of total U.S. oil imports in 1970. On the whole, the reliance of the United States on foreign oil had increased disturbingly. In 1970, the United States depended on foreign oil for 23 percent of its total oil consumption, which was quite clearly showing what could have happened in no oil situation. In 1974, the figure was raised to 37 percent, and in 1976, oil imports were about 44 percent of total U.S. consumption. In 1977, the oil imports reached the pinnacle at an average of 8.7 mb/d. That represented approximately 48 percent of the total domestic supply, which averaged 18.4 mb/d in th at year. The FEA's figures also showed that the consumption of oil in United States was raised by 3.7 percent in 1976 as compared to 1975, with gasoline use advancing at 6.7 percent and distillate by 7.9 percent. At the same time, the domestic production during 1975 and 1976 had decreased from 8.24 mb/d of crude oil to 7.93 mb/d. The nation's refineries ran at 86 percent of capacity in that period compared to 87.1 percent in 1975, which is a considerable difference in the short run. It has also been identified that the Arab nations and Nigeria were increasing their share of the U.S. market while the nation's traditional suppliers such as, Venezuela and Canada were contributing a smaller share, fundamentally because of the high price of Canadian oil and the restricted output of Venezuela. It was for the first time in 1976 that Saudi Arabia had overtaken Venezuela as the United State's chief overseas supplier of crude oil. On the other hand countries like Algeria and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) have all increased their shipments, while Canada is pointing out its shipments to the United States. The conditions took a big change during 1979-1981. Suddenly, the oil crisis gave a rise to the oil surplus, it was perhaps due to the remarkable changes in the balance between demand and supply which is the base of economics and also famous for changing any country's fate.

Socialization Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words - 1

Socialization - Essay Example Why? Because man is free on god’s earth. But man can enjoy this freedom only in America. Therefore, when I noticed that President was going, instead of bringing them to the discussion table to solve problems of terrorism, to impose his will upon other nations such as Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. through war, I opposed him. But for the same reason, I support Mr. Barrack Obama who is more flexible. Further I learnt about my father’s influence on me, when I read about the concept of political socialization. I learnt that political socialization is a concept in political study. It mainly deals with the psychological development processes by which a man, in modern society, adopts and internalizes various features, of a political culture, such as political attitudes, political beliefs, political values, behavior patterns and habits. Indeed the internalization of these political features teaches a man to belong to a political community. Therefore, it basically determines the doctrinal and behavioral aspects of a political community. Indeed political socialization is the summation of all the evaluative, cognitive and affective internalization and orientation -of a man’s consciousness in his or her childhood and adolescence- towards a political system. The political socialization starts from one’s childhood. A child’s political socialization begins with th e influence of various agents such â€Å"parents, family, Friends, Teachers, Media, Genders, Religion, Race, Age, and Geography†. They play very fundamental roles to impact a child’s political beliefs. These agents are often classified into two groups: primary group and secondary group. Political socialization of a man is â€Å"determined by the face-to-face interactions of a man with the primary agents† such as parents, family members, friends, etc. The primary agents are supposed to be in direct contact with the primary. On the

Major Greek philosophers Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words - 1

Major Greek philosophers - Essay Example length response to appropriately expound upon; however, for purposes of this brief question and answer essay, the enumerated philosophers will be limited to the three most influential classical Greek philosophers Aristotle, Plato, and Socrates. Plato’s â€Å"Republic† deals specifically with the definition and discussions relating to the idea of justice. Although such a topic may seem rather narrow, Plato seeks to discuss each and every aspect of morality and justice as it applies to the individual as well as within the apparatus of the city/state in question. Similarly, Plato’s work â€Å"Apology† is Plato’s own version of the speech that was given by his idol and mentor Socrates with relation to the charges brought before him with regards to â€Å"corrupting the youth†. In this way, the work itself can be seen as an autobiographical analysis and retelling of the way that Socrates sought to defend himself through the rhetoric of his words and the speech he gave before the rulers of the city. Ultimately, the charges that Socrates faced dealt with casting doubt into the minds of the young with regards to the gods that the individuals within the culture so fervently believed in. Building upon Plato’s earlier work with regards to the â€Å"Republic†, Aristotle, his student, wrote a work entitled â€Å"Politics† which called into question the way in which political philosophy and ethics were two inseparable terms that must be understood jointly in order to draw inference onto the way in which Greek society ultimately worked. As the title implies, the root Greek word of â€Å"Polis† is used as a means of giving the title of the work the underlying meaning of â€Å"things ultimately related to the city†. The similarities are of course the importance that key attributes of goodness and virtue play in whether or not a given system will itself be functional and ethical. However, going beyond merely answering this question, Aristotle’s work sought to detail the

Influence about Hungarian folk music in Liszt rhapsody no.2 Research Paper

Influence about Hungarian folk music in Liszt rhapsody no.2 - Research Paper Example The first Hungarian creations of Liszt were made during his stay in Vienna and Paris, yet these works, specifically the two movements of Zum Andenken, are anything but thoughtful compositions (Arnold 18). Besides the record of a Hungarian-influenced Schubert tune, Liszt was unable to give much attention to the music of his native land until his homecoming as an adult (Gervers 385). Liszt’s return to his homeland in 1839-1840 was vital to the development of his personal musical technique. In spite of his German roots, embraced French traditions, and mother tongue, Liszt had not stopped to proclaim himself a Hungarian (Loya 28). It was in the course of these visits, famous as the revered national champion of romantic nationalism at a time of Hungary’s fight for cultural and national autonomy, that he started to return to his Hungarian origins with more fervent sentiments. The early portrayals of the national music of Hungary that Liszt was not able to forget eventually became more meaningful to him than sheer oddity. This form of distinctive national music at its peak at the moment was certainly not folk music, but an expression of global ancestry. Zoltan Kodaly and Bela Bartok would uncover the early Hungarian peasant music much later in the first half of the 20th century (Walker 54). The national music had emerged from an enlisting music, or verb unkos, that had thrived since the latter part of the 18th century (Gervers 386). This paper discusses the influence of Hungarian folk music on Liszt’s rhapsody no. 2 or, generally, on his Hungarian rhapsodies. Simply numerous, roughly the same tunes, are the prerequisite components of folk music. An example of this folk music is the Hungarian village’s music. Those who are slightly familiar with contemporary Hungarian village melodies are aware that their songs have obvious resemblance in relation to structure and cadence. The two major classifications of Hungarian village

Evaluation Design of grant application assignment

Evaluation Design of grant application - Assignment Example It will be crucial for this evaluation to capture the resources available at the time of commencement. The evaluation will seek to capture the number of people who will have received the content of the awareness campaign and the media through which they received the information. It shall assess how much crime will have been prevented thus far compared with the rate of crime in Philadelphia before the implementation of the project (Bestsinger et. al., 2004). Additionally, the evaluation will measure the number of partnerships that the implementation will have garnered thus far. In regards to the performance objectives, the evaluation will seek to determine the number of Philadelphia community members who will be attending training. The number of training sessions and their frequency will be documented. The evaluation shall seek to document how the activities of the project are filed. Philadelphia community members shall be assessed for how much they will have learnt on the use and maintenance of surveillance cameras. Crime reports will be scrutinized in order to capture how much will have originated from the general population and not from investigations initiated by the Philadelphia Police Department (Bestsinger et. al., 2004). In terms of impact, data will be collected on both the unintended and intended outcomes of the Residential Surveillance Cameras Installation Project. The short-term, mid-term and long-term outcomes will be captured during evaluation. Specifically, Philadelphia residential premise owners will be assessed for change in attitudes and beliefs about crime and crime prevention (Bestsinger et. al., 2004). There will be an evaluation team that will be charged with the collection of crime facts and figures. The team will be composed of five members who will have thorough knowledge of the technical aspects of

Explain How Far Wilfred Owen Challenges the Notion that it is Sweet Essay

Explain How Far Wilfred Owen Challenges the Notion that it is Sweet and Noble to Die For Your Country Using The Poems Dulce et - Essay Example Even after a war ends the violent and troubling memories keep haunting a soldier’s mind. Sometimes when the soldier becomes physically disabled he is unable to carry out the normal activities of life and to such a man what remains are only the memories with which he has to live throughout. When the young children in their schools are told how noble it is to fight for one’s land and people, it might sound really righteous but the truths which unfold as one takes a closer look at the consequences of war especially on the lives of those noble doers, one is bound to be discouraged and all motivations in favor of warfare seem meaningless in front of sheer humanity. He draws out visual images in some of his poems, where the physical, and mental suffering of the troops are vividly described. In the war poems, ‘Dulce et Decorum Est’ and ‘Disabled’ he challenges the notion that dying for one’s country is sweet and noble. The poem ‘Dulce et Decorum Est’ describes just another day in the World War I when the soldiers are marching towards their place of rest but at that very moment gas bombs begin to drop around them. They hurry for their masks and weapons but some of the ravaged bodies fail to save themselves from the attack. The author writes in a personal tone and tells the readers what he witnesses as vividly as possible with frequent use of similes –â€Å"But someone still was yelling out and stumbling,/ And flound'ring like a man in fire or lime† (Owen, line9). He focuses the description now on a single person who dies in the attack and this vision continuously haunts him in his dreams later on. He gradually shifts from first person to third person and then to second person in his address. Towards the end the poet conveys to the people at home their experience of violence and distress and wishes that they could witness the same. At the very beginning he stressed upon the very appearance of the people marching towards their place of rest. He does not address the men as soldiers or warriors; rather he compares them to old beggars and hags. He even uses the metaphoric comparison between their walk and the term ‘cursed’ which he uses to describe the miserable conditions as they march through the muddle trenches. The experience seemed to have them under some kind of a curse. The poet at times uses the technique of creating a caesura or a pause in a line of the poem in order to signify the realism precisely. The language is brief and curt as he mentions ‘Men marched asleep’ (Owen,line4). This sentence makes the men look like ghost figures walking in the dark. They are so exhausted that they almost are falling asleep. The poet uses alliterations I the form of repeated words beginning with ‘l’ – â€Å"Many had lost their boots/But limped on, blood-shod. All went lame; all blind† (Owen, line4). The words indicate they were cover ed in blood and therefore the war has enveloped their physical and mental forms. The idea here is to put forth the dragging effect on the readers just as the fatigued soldiers dragged themselves towards the tent. He changes drastically the motion by using brief lines: â€Å"Five-nines/that dropped behind. Gas!/Gas! Quick boys!†(Owen, line7), which generates the effect of fast action amidst the slow movements. Suddenly there seems to be a rush for safety. The fear struck cries and bombs falling all around leads to the environment, which brings on merciless deaths that render a stomach

Analysis of Kingfisher. Essay Example for Free

Analysis of Kingfisher. Essay Introduction: Kingfisher Airline is a private airline based in Bangalore, India. The airlines owned by Vijay Mallya of United Beverages Group. Kingfisher Airlines started its operations on May 9, 2005 with a fleet of 4 Airbus A320 aircrafts. The airline currently operates on domestic routes. The destinations covered by Kingfisher Airlines are Bangalore, Mumbai, Delhi, Goa, Chennai, Hyderabad, Ahmedabad, Cochin, Guwahati, Kolkata, Pune, Agartala, Dibrugarh, Mangalore and Jaipur. In a short span of time Kingfisher Airline has carved a niche for itself. The airline offers several unique services to its customers. These include: personal valet at the airport to assist in baggage handling and boarding, accompanied with refreshments and music at the airport, audio and video on-demand, with extra-wide personalized screens in the aircraft and three-course gourmet cuisine. Kingfisher is one of only 6 airlines in the world to have a 5 star rating from Sky tax, along with Asian Airlines, Malaysia Airlines, Qatar Airways, Singapore Airlines and Cathay Pacific Airways. In a short span of time Kingfisher Airline has carved a niche for itself. The airline offers several unique services to its customers. These include personal valet at the airport to assist in baggage handling and boarding, exclusive lounges with private space, accompanied with refreshments and music at the airport, audio and video on-demand, with extra-wide personalized screens in the aircraft, sleeper seats with extendable footrests, and three-course gourmet cuisine. HISTORY Kingfisher Airlines is a subsidiary of the UB Group, one of the largest beverage companies in the world. The branding of the airline is linked to that of Kingfisher Beer, India’s largest brewery. The airline, which is headed by the charismatic Dr Vijay Mallya, took to the skies in May 2005, and attracted attention for its high quality product with personal in flight entertainment in every seat; custom interior designs for each aircraft; valet assistance at airports and complimentary hot food and beverages. The airline initially operated a single class service but subsequently introduced a highly acclaimed First Class, allowing it to compete with Jet Airways for the high yield corporate market. In addition to its A320 family aircraft used on domestic routes, Kingfisher Airlines also operates ATR-72 turboprops on regional sectors. Under current Indian regulations, which require airlines to operate 5 years domestic service before being granted international rights, Kingfisher will not be permitted to operate overseas until 2010. However, the airline has very clear international ambitions, with an order book for 45 wide body aircraft, including A330s, A340s, A350s and A380s. In just over two years, Kingfisher Airlines has achieved a market share of 10% and has one of the most aggressive expansion plans of all Indian carriers during 2007. In Jun-07, it dramatically increased its influence in the market with the acquisition of a 26% shareholding in India’s largest LCC, Air Deccan, for approximately USD130 million, and an open offer for a further 20%. Through schedule coordination and joint operations in ground handling, training, and maintenance, the carriers are projecting annual cost savings of over USD70 million. There will also be greater coordination between the two brands, with Air Deccan to adopt the Kingfisher image in its logo and to switch to a red, rather than a blue color scheme. The combined Kingfisher/Deccan group has a market share of just over 30% and a product range spanning from the price-sensitive, first-time flyer, to the high yield business traveler, making I tone of the key pillars of the airline industry. The airline which started its operation on 9th May 2005, following the lease of 4 Airbus A320 aircraft. As of July 2007, Kingfisher operates only on domestic routes; however it has announced plans to start flights to the USA with Airbus A380 aircraft. The airline is  owned by the United Beverages Group under the leadership of Vijay Mallya (which also owns the popular Indian beer of the same name). The airline promises to suit the needs of air travelers and to provide reasonable air fares. Kingfisher Airlines main luxury component is its In-Flight Entertainment System, a first among Indian airlines. The airliners in-flight Mobile Phone and Internet Services will be provided by On Air starting 2008 for long haul flights. VISION â€Å"The Kingfisher Airlines family will consistently deliver a safe, value-based and enjoyable travel experience to all our guests.† VALUES  Safety  This is our overriding value. In our line of business, there is no compromise. Service  We are all in the hospitality business; we must always seek to serve our guests and gain their trust, goodwill and loyalty. Happiness  We seek to build an organization with people who choose to be happy, and will Endeavour to influence our guests and co-workers to be happy too. Teamwork  We will succeed or fail as a team. Each one of us must respect our colleagues regardless of their rank, and we must work together to ensure our mutual success. Accountability  Each one of us will be held accountable for the successful execution of our duties, commitments and obligations, and we will strive to lead by example. MISSION Kingfisher Airlines will have Fly the Good Times approach and this will reflect in the experience we will offer to passengers. SERVICES DOMESTIC Kingfisher First The domestic Kingfisher First seats have a 48 inch seat pitch and a 126 degree seat recline. There are laptop and mobile phone chargers on every seat. Passengers can avail of the latest international newspapers and magazines. There is also a steam ironing service on board Kingfisher First cabins. Every seat is equipped with a personalized IFE system with AVOD which offers a wide range of Hollywood and Bollywood movies, English and  Hindi TV programmers’, 16 live TV channels and 10 channels of Kingfisher Radio. Passengers also get BOSE noise cancellation headphones. Domestic Kingfisher First is only available on selected Airbus A320 family aircraft. Kingfisher Class The domestic Kingfisher Class has 32-34 inch seat pitch.  Every seat is equipped with personal IFE systems with AVOD on-board the Airbus A320 family aircraft. As in Kingfisher First, passengers can access movies, English and Hindi TV programmers’, a few live TV channels powered by Dish TV, and Kingfisher Radio. The screen is controlled by a controller-console on the seat armrest. Ear cup headphones are provided free of cost to all passengers. The default channel shows, alternating every few seconds, the aero plane’s ground speed, outside temperature, altitude, distance and time to destination, the position of the aircraft on a graphical map, and one or more advertisements. Passengers are served meals on most flights. Before take-off, passengers are served bottled lemonade. Economy class meal on-board a Kingfisher Airlines domestic flight. Kingfisher Red After Kingfisher Airlines acquired Air Deccan, its name was changed to Simplify Deccan and subsequently to Kingfisher Red. Kingfisher Red is Kingfisher Airlines low-cost class on domestic routes. A special edition of Cine Blitz magazine is the only reading material provided. Kingfisher Airlines is the first airline in India to extend its King Club frequent flyer program to its low-cost carrier as well. Passengers can earn King Miles even when they fly Kingfisher Red, which they can redeem for free tickets to travel on Kingfisher Airlines or partner airlines. INTERNATIONAL Kingfisher First The international Kingfisher First has full flat-bed seats with a 180 degree recline, with a seat pitch of 78 inches, and a seat width of 20-24.54 inches.[32] Passengers are given Merino wool blankets, a Salvatore Ferragamo toiletry kit, a pyjama to change into, five-course meals and alcoholic beverages. Also available are in-seat massagers, chargers and USB connectors. Every Kingfisher First seat has a 17 inch widescreen personal television with AVOD touch screen controls and offers 357 hours of programming content spread over 36 channels, including Hollywood and Bollywood movies along with 16 channels of live TV, so passengers can watch their favorite TV programmers’ live. There is also a collection of interactive games, a jukebox with customizable playlists and Kingfisher Radio. Passengers are given BOSE noise cancellation headphones. The service on board the Kingfisher First cabins includes a social area comprising a full-fledged bar staffed with a bartender, a break-out seating area just nearby fitted with two couches and bar stools, a full-fledged chef on board the aircraft and any-time dining. A turn-down service includes the conversion of the seat into a fully flat bed and an air-hostess making the bed when the passenger is ready to sleep. Both Kingfisher First and Kingfisher classes feature mood lighting on the Airbus A330-200 with light schemes corresponding to the time of day and flight position. Kingfisher Class  The international Kingfisher Class seats offer a seat pitch of 34 inches, a seat width of 18 inches and a seat recline of 25 degrees (6 inches). Passengers get full length modacrylic blankets, full size pillows and meals. Each Kingfisher Class seat has a 10.6 inch widescreen personal television with AVOD touch screen controls. The IFE is similar to that of the international Kingfisher First class. It can also be controlled by a detachable remote-control console fitted in the armrest. This device can be used to control the IFE, reading-lights, play games and even has a credit-card swipe for shopping on Kingfishers Air Boutique. It also has a facility for sending text-messages, though the service isnt provided by Kingfisher. CARGO Kingfisher Xpress Kingfisher Xpress is a new Door-to-Door cargo delivery service from Kingfisher Airlines. Kingfisher Xpress same day service will be Indias  first and only same day delivery by air service. In-flight entertainment Kingfishers IFE system is the Thales Top Series i3000/i4000 on-board the Airbus A320 family aircraft, and Thales Top Series i5000 on-board the Airbus A330 family aircraft provided by the France-based Thales Group. Kingfisher was the first Indian airline to have in-flight entertainment (IFE) systems on every seat even on domestic flights. All passengers were given a welcome kit consisting of goodies such as a pen, facial tissue and headphones to use with the IFE system. Now, passengers of Kingfisher class are not given welcome kits but, as mentioned earlier, a complimentary bottle of lemonade and earphones for use with the IFE are still given. The in flight magazines are special editions of magazines owned by Mallyas media publishing house (VJM Media) viz. Hi! Blitz for domestic flights and Hi! Living for international flights. Initially, passengers were able to watch only recorded TV programming on the IFE system, but later an alliance was formed with Dish TV to provide live TV in-flight.[34] And in a marked departure from tradition, Kingfisher Airlines decided to have an on-screen safety demonstration using the IFE system; however the conventional safety briefing by the flight attendants still exists on many flights. King Club The Frequent-flyer program of Kingfisher Airlines is called the King Club in which members earn King Miles every time they fly with Kingfisher or its partner airlines, hotels, car rental, finance and lifestyle businesses. There are four levels in the scheme: Red, Silver, Gold and Platinum levels. Members can redeem points for over a number of schemes. Platinum, Gold and Silver members enjoy access to the Kingfisher Lounge, priority check-in, excess baggage allowance, bonus miles, and 3 Kingfisher First upgrade vouchers for Gold membership. Platinum members get 5 upgrade vouchers. Kingfisher Lounge Kingfisher Lounges are offered to Kingfisher First passengers, along with King Club Silver and King Club Gold members. Lounges are located in: Bangalore International Airport Chennai International Airport  Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport (Mumbai) Cochin International Airport (Kochi) Indira Gandhi International Airport (Delhi) London Heathrow Airport Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose International Airport (Kolkata) Rajiv Gandhi International Airport (Hyderabad) However, note that the airline has suspended operation in London, Kochi, Kolkata and Hyderabad. AWARDS AND ACHIEVEMENTS Kingfisher Airlines frequent flyer programme, King Club has won Top Honors at the 21st Annual Freddie Awards in the Japan, Pacific, Asia and Australia region. King Club has won the Freddie Awards 2008 in the following categories: Best Bonus Promotion Best Customer Service Best Member Communications (First Runner-up) Best Award Redemption (First Runner-up) Best Elite Level (Second Runner-up) Best Website (Second Runner-up) Program of the Year (Second Runner-up) Kingfisher Airlines has received three global awards at the Skytrax World Airline Awards 2010 Named Best Airline In India / Central Asia; Best Cabin Crew – Central Asia. Kingfisher RED named Best Low Cost Airline in India / Central Asia. NDTV Profit Business Leadership Award for Aviation. Indias only 5 Star airline, rated by Skytrax and 6th airline in the world. Rated Indias Second Buzziest Brand 2008 by The Brand Reporter. Ranked amongst Indias Top Service Brands of 2008 by Pitch Magazine. Voted as Indias Favorite Airline. Rated as Asia Pacifics Top Airline Brand. Brand Leadership Award. Economic Times Avaya Award 2006 for Excellence in Customer Responsiveness. Indias No. 1 Airline in customer satisfaction by Business World. Rated  amongst Indias most respected companies by Business World. Rated amongst Indias 25 Innovative Companies by Plan man Media in 2006. The Best Airline and Indias Favorite Carrier in a Survey conducted by IMB for The Times of India. Best New Domestic Airline for Excellent Services and Cuisine by Pacific Area Travel Writers Association (PATWA). Service Excellence 2005-2006 for a New Airline by Skytrax. Ranked third in the survey on Indias Most Successful Brand launch of 2005 under the Brand Derby Survey conducted by Business Standard. Busiest Brands of 2005 by agency fans and The Brand Reporter. Rated amongst the Top Ten Internet Advertisers by Yahoo. Rated amongst the top ten in the Best Television Commercial Jingles by NDTV. Best New Airline of the Year Award for 2005 by Centre for Asia Pacific Aviation (CAPA) Award in the Asia-Pacific and Middle East region. Listed in the top 100 most trusted brand in The Brand Trust Report. POLITICAL FACTORS 1) Open sky policy 2) FDI limits: 100% for Greenfield airports 74% for the existing airports 100% through special permission 49% for airlines ECONOMICAL FACTORS 1) Contribution to the Indian economy. 2) Rising cost of fuel. 3) Investment in the sector of aviation. 4) The growth of the middle income group family affects the aviation sector. SOCIAL FACTORS 1) Development of cities leads to better services and airports. 2) Employment opportunities. 3) Safety regulations. 4) The status symbol attached to a plane travel. TECHNOLOGICAL FACTORS 1) The growth of e-commerce and e-ticketing. 2) Satellite based navigation system. 3) Modernisation and privatisation of the airports. 4) Developing green field airports with private sector for example in Bangalore the airport corporation limited. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS 1) The increase in the global warming. 2) The sudden and unexpected behavior of the atmosphere and the dependency on whether. 3) Shortage of the infrastructural capacity 4) Tourism saturation. LEGAL FACTORS 1) FDI limits 2) Bilateral treaties 3) Airlines acquisitions and the leasing cost. STRENGTHS Strong brand value and reputation in the minds of customers. Quality of the service. Route rationalization. First airline to have a new fleet of airbuses. Quality and continuous innovation. WEAKNESSES Still a not in profit organization. High ticket pricing. Facing a tough competition from competitors. OPPORTUNITIES The expanding tourism industry. The non penetrated domestic market. International market. Untapped air cargo market. THREATS Competitors Infrastructure issues. Fuel price hike. Tourism saturation Economic slowdown. Promotions and sponsorship declining. STP ANALYSIS SEGMENTATION Geographic Region Density Social Classes Income Level TARGETING Kingfisher First company executives Kingfisher Class lower middle, upper middle, lower upper segment POSITIONING Lifestyle Benefits Quality P’s PRODUCT Fleet Size Aircrafts International Foray PROMOTIONS Advertisements Magazine and Newspaper ads Exposure at non-corporate event Participation in International Air shows Endorsing celebrities like Katrina Kaif and Yana Gupta PRICE Dynamic pricing model Multiple fare levels Uniform rules No hidden restrictions. Pricing model 8 different levels Discounts provided from time to time PEOPLE Backbone of the brand Extensive trainings Hospitality industry and consider their customer as guests Interpersonal skills, aptitude, and service knowledge PLACE Online Booking www.flykingfisher.com Online Booking Yatra.com, MakeMyTrip.com, ezeego1.com Credit Cards Debit Cards Payment SMS / Call Outlets in every major city and at every airport across the country PHYSICAL EVIDENCE Personal valets Exclusive lounge space Hi! Blitz Gourmet cuisine world class cabin crew 5 trendy video- Fun TV; 10 music stations -Kingfisher Radio PROCESS Booking the ticket online booking or tele-booking or from any of the kingfisher outlet COMPETITORS Company Sales (Rs.Million) Current Price Change (%) P/E Ratio Market Cap.(Rs.Million) 52-Week High/Low Jet Airways (I) 127768.30 305.85 6.38 0.00 26405.26 518/167 Spice Jet 28795.08 29.50 8.66 0.00 14288.32 43/15 Kingfisher Airlines 62333.79 12.95 2.78 0.00 8747.08 44/13 Global Vectra Helico 2315.75 9.70 -0.10 0.00 135.80 26/9 Jagson Airlines 97.25 4.10 2.50 0.00 82.69 10/3 MARKET SHARE PROFIT LOSS STATEMENT Mar11 Mar10 Mar09 Mar08 Jun07 12 Months 12 Months 12 Months 12 Months 12 Months INCOME: Sales Turnover 6,233.38 5,067.92 5,269.17 1,456.28 1,800.21 Excise Duty 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NET SALES 6,233.38 5,067.92 5,269.17 1,456.28 1,800.21 Other Income 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL INCOME 6,422.58 5,140.00 5,863.60 1,504.92 1,830.19 EXPENDITURE: Manufacturing Expenses 3,466.83 2,911.81 3,715.47 1,297.51 1,597.06 Material Consumed 56.69 40.89 51.19 43.79 45.94 Personal Expenses 680.54 689.38 825.42 244.96 247.72 Selling Expenses 659.07 687.02 683.82 85.00 17.90 Administrative Expenses 426.21 418.41 546.47 110.20 154.00 Expenses Capitalised 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Provisions Made 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL EXPENDITURE 5,289.34 4,747.51 5,822.36 1,781.46 2,062.61 Operating Profit 944.04 320.41 -553.19 -325.17 -262.40 EBITDA 1,133.24 392.49 41.24 -276.54 -232.42 Depreciation 203.02 162.80 133.20 18.28 17.67 Other Write-offs 38.01 54.49 38.39 18.31 26.25 EBIT 892.20 175.20 -130.35 -313.13 -276.34 Interest 2,340.32 2,245.59 2,029.33 434.44 466.05 EBT -1,448.12 -2,070.39 -2,159.68 -747.57 -742.39 Taxes -455.35 -700.00 -546.38 -494.45 3.40 Profit and Loss for the Year -992.76 -1,370.39 -1,613.30 -253.12 -745.79 Non Recurring Items -107.62 -405.38 4.47 64.98 312.12 Other Non Cash Adjustments 72.99 31.28 0.00 -0.9 14.09 Other Adjustments 0.00 97.27 0.00 0.97 0.00 REPORTED PAT -1,027.40 -1,647.22 -1,608.83 -188.14 -419.58 KEY ITEMS Preference Dividend 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Equity Dividend 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Equity Dividend (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Shares in Issue (Lakhs) 4,977.79 2,659.09 2,659.09 1,357.99 1,354.70 EPS Annualised (Rs) -20.64 -61.95 -60.50 -18.47 -30.97 CASHFLOW STATEMENT Particulars Mar11 Mar10 Mar09 Mar08 Jun07 Profit Before Tax -1,520.78 -2,417.92 -2,155.21 -682.59 -416.18 Net Cash Flows from Operating Activity -2.23 -1,665.09 -645.78 -541.52 -552.58 Net Cash Used in Investing Activity 38.05 235.13 206.63 13.82 119.48 Net Cash Used in Financing Activity -81.72 1,464.55 290.11 -9.23 993.68 Net Inc/Dec in Cash and Cash Equivalent -45.90 34.60 -149.04 -536.93 560.57 Cash and Cash Equivalent Beginning of the Year 206.47 171.87 320.91 817.05 256.47 Cash and Equivalent End of the Year 160.57 206.47 171.87 280.12 817.05 BALANCE SHEET Particulars Mar11 Mar10 Mar09 Mar08 Jun07 Liabilities 12 Months 12 Months 12 Months 12 Months 12 Months Share Capital 1,053.83 370.39 371.02 145.89 135.47 Reserves Surplus -4,005.02 -4,268.84 -2,496.36 52.99 249.23 Net Worth -2,951.19 -3,898.45 -2,125.35 198.87 384.70 Secured Loans 5,184.53 4,842.43 2,622.52 592.38 716.71 Unsecured Loans 1,872.55 3,080.17 3,043.04 342.00 200.00 TOTAL LIABILITIES 4,105.88 4,024.15 3,540.21 1,133.26 1,301.41 Assets Gross Block 2,254.26 2,048.14 1,891.80 322.33 340.77 (-) Acc. Depreciation 682.37 493.62 316.29 43.55 33.74 Net Block 1,571.89 1,554.51 1,575.52 278.78 307.03 Capital Work in Progress. 673.35 980.60 1,630.95 346.25 357.62 Investments. 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.41 Inventories 187.65 164.88 147.25 48.64 61.62 Sundry Debtors 440.53 322.49 229.84 27.16 35.24 Cash And Bank 252.36 206.47 171.87 280.12 817.05 Loans And Advances 5,380.19 4,604.31 3,640.42 832.48 149.76 Total Current Assets 6,260.73 5,298.13 4,189.37 1,188.41 1,063.68 Current Liabilities 4,463.86 3,908.03 3,814.63 687.31 449.15 Provisions 62.11 46.77 45.55 9.52 6.94 Total Current Liabilities 4,525.97 3,954.80 3,860.18 696.83 456.09 NET CURRENT ASSETS 1,734.76 1,343.34 329.19 491.58 607.59 Misc. Expenses 125.84 145.64 4.51 16.64 28.75 TOTAL ASSETS (A+B+C+D+E) 4,105.88 4,024.15 3,540.21 1,133.26 1,301.41 FUTURE STRATEGIES Market Penetration Can tie up with Corporate and Government Companies by Providing Unique Travel Solutions for Professional and Personal Use. Can implement programs implemented by South West Airlines to penetrate market. Product Development Seek additional distribution channels such as more tie ups and Collaboration. Collaboration with international carriers, bilateral discussions over seats and code sharing between the carriers. Market Development Special offerings for first time fliers. Try to find out new customer group such as old-retired persons. Diversification Can enter into other Transport Services like Bus Services between Major Cities and Other Services. PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION Current Indian scenario : Air travel For majority of people preference-No frills – low cost airlines Kingfisher competing with both the â€Å"no frills low cost† airlines as well as those with frills. Three unique classes of service :– Kingfisher First (Business class) Kingfisher Class (Premium economy) Kingfisher Red (Low fare) Current segmentation based on social class income level Social classes: which use full carrier services and those which use first class services of the railways Income level : Low cost carrier for those who travel by first class railway Problem with positioning Brand relates to Lifestyle RECOMMENDATIONS Needs to change brand perception Currently perceived as Lifestyle slogan Red color of crew :Reflects Royalty Over dependence on brand image of Mr. Mallaya Jet airways : Reflects professionalism Advertisement reflecting Value for Money Gain operational efficiencies through alliances as with Jet Airways Leverage Upon: New fleet, Unmatched flight service Innovative ideas-LIVE TV with 16 channels Air Boutique, in Kingfisher Airlines A joint promotion, i.e. using MakeMyTrip services and flying Kingfisher Airlines. By partnering with Kingfisher Airlines, further convenience in travel is offered at no extra cost- Added value Fleet size expansion SUGGESTION Reduce the labor cost Simplify the flight operations Offer more transparent pricing Get smart on fuel The process of acquiring spice jet if complete would make kingfisher the largest player in the aviation industry Different modes of pricing should be taken care of. CONCLUSION After doing a study of this project representing on Kingfisher Airlines, I have come to a conclusion that Kingfisher Airlines is one of the largest and most widespread airlines of the country providing its services not only in India as well as outside India also. It has alliance with many other airlines in this sector. Kingfisher Airlines offers world class services to the customer at a nominal rate. The national carrier takes immense pride in having successfully played a pivotal role in making various facets of India popular with the people of the world and acting as the country’s cultural ambassador. The airline uses the services of one of the advanced plans been operated in the world. To sum up I would like to say that Kingfisher Airlines is serving its customer in an appreciated way and going to be in the list of best services providers in coming years.