The dissemination of project management practices is consolidating project as a great mean of achieving an organization's strategic plan (PMI, 2008, p. 10). But there are no resources and funds available to all, and competition among alternative projects is increasing. Funding institutions, government agencies, and credit rating organizations started considering project risk in project evaluation, instead of only using financial metrics such as ROI (Return on Investment) or NPV (Net Present Value). In order to obtain resources needed to implement projects, and thus contribute to an organization's objectives, it is necessary to identify the risks that have greater influence on project approval. This study applied the Importance-Performance Analysis (Martilla & James, 1977) to identify the main risk identification deficiencies for Information Technology (IT) project managers who apply for resources or funding approval. The identification was made possible by measuring IT project managers' perceptions of (1) the level of importance, or positive influence, which different risk categories have in project approval; (2) the level of performance they believe to have in the identification of these risks, meaning prior detection and registering; and (3) the gap between the measured levels of importance and performance. A survey listing 28 risk categories belonging to a validated risk taxonomy and 5-point Likert scales with different levels of importance and performance were presented to IT project managers from the central Illinois area. A total of 38 professionals answered the survey instrument, and verification of exclusion criteria resulted in an adjusted sample of 32 subjects. Descriptive statistics were used to compare mean values for each category, determining the gap between importance and performance levels for every category. The risk categories that presented the top three scores for importance were Scope uncertainty, Legal/regulatory, and Financial. The risk categories that represented the three greatest deficiencies or gaps (importance versus performance) for IT project approval were Contractual, Complexity, and Scope uncertainty.

The role of Claudius in Shakespeare's The Tragedy of Hamlet has traditionally been affixed with the label of villain, coupled with a presumption of malice. This prejudice has plagued the role, relegating it to shallow melodrama throughout the majority of the play's 440 odd-year history. Although it has now become more commonplace to see him portrayed as a capable, intelligent, even initially likable king, this has only been the case for the past 50 years or so, and even so the label of villain and the assumption of malice persist and prevail even in contemporary practice. While the author is reluctant to insist on the benevolence of the King as imperative, they do contend that Claudius should not be portrayed as a villain. Doing so undermines the primary conflict - that of Hamlet vs. Claudius - cripples the possibilities for exploration of the King as a role, hinders the potential for Hamlet's journey, and absolves the viewer of active engagement by playing directly into expectations. Within this thesis, consideration of historical analysis and editorial tradition are utilized in order to demonstrate a progressively encompassing disregard that has led to the role's neglect. An account of the 2006 University of Central Florida Conservatory Theatre production is used to validate the necessity of avoiding a villainous portrayal of the King. A brief description of the author's ideal Claudius explores the realm of possibility opened by such non-villainous portrayal, and potential for the role's complexity is examined through a thorough voice/text analysis and brief discussion of Jaques Lecoq's movement equilibrium theory via appendices.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.