being used by top and middle management. Nutt (p. 235) argues that '... intervention is the best way to implement strategic decisions'
             The following paper will compare and contrast these four implementation approaches and argue the reason as to why intervention is a more valuable way for managers to be successful in implementing strategic decisions and attaining managerial objectives.
             Firstly, it is important to note that the four implementation approaches, their frequency of use by top and middle managers, and their success demonstrates how managers implement strategic decisions and the outcomes to be achieved. Nutt (p. 223) argues that top and middle management were using the same types of approaches but in different proportions and with different results. Therefore Nutt's analyses of the research findings are predominantly discussed as differences between top and middle management which concluded that top managers seemed to be more successful mainly because of the implementation approach they used.
             The study measured success by three main indicators; Adoption, Value and efficiency. Nutt (p.220) defined these three success indicators as follows:
             Adoption: Is if a decision is put to use. Based on other research conducted by scholars two measures were created called sustained and complete adoption. Sustained adoption adds ultimate adoption and deletes ultimate rejections
             Value: Are the benefits the decision has to the organisation. Measured by secondary informants being asked to provide value ratings. A questionnaire with an anchored scale with five anchors was used to collect the ratings. The scale anchors defined as a rating of 5 as outstanding and a rating of 1 as poor.
             Efficiency: The duration taken to implement the decision. Obtained by a questionnaire asking to determine the time from need recognition to development of the plan and the elapsed time from the development of the plan to full use or ...