SYLLABUS - Brandeis University · Web view“Online Organization of the LGBT Community in Singapore," presented at the International Communication Association Conference, Montreal,

The Heller School for Social Policy and ManagementBRANDEIS UNIVERSITY

HS526 Organizational Theory and BehaviorFall Semester 2015

Instructors: Jon Chilingerian, Ph.D., Jody Hoffer Gittell, Ph.D. Coordinating Instructor: Jon ChilingerianOffice Hours: Chilingerian: Room 204 Mon (2-5) Tue (12-1:45), Wed (9-12); Gittell: Room 206, Wed (12:30-2)Time of Class: Wed 2:00-4:50

NOTE: SOME OF THE LATER SESSIONS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE_______________________________________________________________________Course Description: This course introduces students to organization theory and behavior from a policy and management perspective. The literature of organization theory addresses itself to the questions about the external environment that organizations operate within as well as the strategies and processes adopted by organizations. One basic question to which all course readings is related is: What role do organizations play in creating and delivering more effective policy outcomes?

In order to meet policy objectives and achieve high performance outcomes, organizations must solve some basic challenges:

Strategic Design and the Congruence Model Decision Making and Leadership Coordinating Work Autonomy or Control? Power, Politics and Resource Dependence Organizational Pathologies, Organizational Culture and Entrapment Organizational Change and The Role of Chance in Behavior Organizational Learning - Is It Possible and If So How? Conflict - Resolution or Revolution? Diversity and New Technologies - How They Challenge Organizations

During the semester we will examine a number of major perspectives on the nature and process of organization, and how they help us to understand these challenges.

The course fulfills a requirement of the renewed AHRQ Training Grant. The course is open to all doctoral students. No prior knowledge of organization theory is required. All that is required is that students be prepared to engage in intensive reading and thinking about theories that might contribute to their own research.

HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015 1

Course Objectives: The purpose of this course is to develop the student’s ability to conduct theory-based research on organizations. This starts with the ability to form research questions and hypotheses that are informed by existing theories and by the student's experience. The course will cover the major theoretical perspectives on organizations and link these to contemporary empirical organizational studies. Special focus is placed on exploring in depth the link between theory and research exhibited in this empirical work to enable students to develop the capability of using theory to guide their own research. We will encourage you to identify hypotheses in each of the theories we read about, and encourage you to develop hypotheses that are potentially relevant to your own work, from multiple theoretical perspectives.

This course has the following broad goals. 1. to develop an awareness and understanding of what organization theory is and why it is

important in providing analytical lenses to see (or ignore) phenomenon2. to review how some major theorists have analyzed organizations3. to develop a critical attitude to the literature, understanding levels of, and units of,

organizational analysis4. to develop an integrative and creative point of view about organizations5. to learn how to develop testable hypotheses about organizations from existing theories and

from your experience6. to develop your ability to use theory to design your own research involving organizations and

the social policy world at large.

Course Readings:See syllabus below. Additional readings may be recommended in response to discussion in class and student input and interest.

Course Requirements:1. Reading To Prepare for Each Class. Students are expected to read materials assigned for class, before each class, and to engage in thoughtful discussion. 2. Thoughts and Questions. Before each class, each student will submit one thought and one question that has arisen from their reading of the materials for that class. These will be posted (anonymously) at the start of class to inform our discussion.

3. Presentation. Each student will be required to make a twenty minute presentation in class. Select a theory you want to review, sign up in advance, and coordinate with the other students who have signed up for that week. Be prepared to lead the class discussion after your presentation.

4. Final Paper and Presentation. Each student will be required to write a final paper that serves as preparation for the comprehensive exams. The paper will: Outline a policy or management challenge Introduce one or two theories that help to address that challenge Propose hypotheses consistent with those theories that can be tested empirically Summarize the data you would collect, and methods you would use, to test these hypotheses Give a 10 minute presentation of this paper in the final two weeks of class Submit final paper one day following your presentation


Grading Scheme: Weekly thoughts and questions posted online = 10 points One presentation plus leading class discussion . = 10 points Active class participation = 10 points Final paper and presentation = 20 points

Total = 50 points

Grades to be Satisfactory (40-50 points) or Unsatisfactory (less than 40 points)

Provisions for Feedback:Students will get credit each week for posting Thoughts and Questions about the readings. Students will receive quantitative and qualitative feedback on their presentation and leadership of class discussion, and also on their final paper and presentation.

Academic Integrity: Violations of University policies on academic integrity, described in Section 3 of Rights and Responsibilities, may result in failure in the course or on the assignment, and could end in suspension from the University. If you are in doubt about the instructions for any assignment in this course, you must ask for clarification.

Notice: If you have a documented disability and require any accommodations, please bring them to my attention prior to the second meeting of the class. If you have any questions about learning or other disabilities, please contact the disabilities coordinator for The Heller School.

Books on Order at Bookstore:Required Books* Shared Books**

*Schein, Edgar H. 2010. Organizational Culture and Leadership, fourth edition. ISBN: 978-0-470-19060-9, Jossey-Bass.

*Godwyn, M. and Gittell, J.H. Sociology of Organizations: Structures and Relationships. SAGE Publications.

*Pfeffer, J. and G. Salancik. 2003. The External Control of Organizations. Stanford University Press

*Miles, Jeffrey. Management and Organization Theory: A Jossey Bass Reader. 2012. San Francisco: Josey Bass.

*Hatch, MaryJo. Organization Theory: Modern, Symbolic and Postmodern Perspectives. Oxford.

** Social Network Analysis: A Handbook (third edition) 2009. Thousand Oaks: SAGE ISBN: 978-0-7619-6339-4

Recommended Books***


***Northhouse, P.G. 2012. Leadership: Theory and Practice (sixth edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

***Pfeffer, J. Managing with Power. Politics and Influence in Organization. Harvard Business School Press. 1992

*** Hatch, M.J. with Cunliffe, A.L. Organizational Theory (2006) second edition by. Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-926021-4

***March J. and H. Simon. 1956. Organizations.

***Barbasi, A. 2003. Linked. Penguin Book.

***Galbraith, J. 2000. Designing the Global Corporation. San Francisco: Jossey Bass

***Pfeffer, J. 1980. Organizational Theory. New York: Wiley.

***Hershey and Blanchard. 1990. Management of Organizational Behavior. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

***Katz, D. and R. Kahn. 1978. Social Psychology or Organizations. New York: Wiley.

***Mintzberg, H. 1979. The Structuring of Organizations. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

***Pfeffer, J. 1997. New Directions in Organizational Theory: Problems and Prospects. New York: Oxford University Press

***Price, J. and Mueller, C. 1986. Handbook of Organizational Measurement. Pitman Publishing.

***Scott, R., Davis, G. Organizations and Organizing: Rational, Natural, and Open System Perspectives. by W. Richard Scott, Gerald F. Davis. Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River: New Jersey ISBN 0-13-195893-3 (2007)

***Thompson, J.D. 1967. Organizations in Action: The Social Science Bases of Administrative Theory. New York: McGraw Hill Book Company.

*** Tosi, H.L. 2009. Theories of Organization. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

***Thompson, J.D. 1967. Organizations in Action: The Social Science Bases of Administrative Theory. New York: McGraw Hill Book Company.

***Weick, K.E. 1979. The Social Psychology of Organizing. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing.


Overview of Course Schedule

Class and Date

Topic Lead Instructor(s)

Class 1(9/2)

The Political, Cultural, and Strategic Design Perspectives and the Congruence Model

Chilingerian

Class 2(9/9)

Decision-Making and Leadership Chilingerian

Class 3(9/16)

Coordinating Work Gittell

Class 4(9/30)

Autonomy or Control? Gittell

Class 5(10/7)

Power and Politics & Resource Dependence Chilingerian

Class 6(10/14)

Organizational Pathologies, Organizational Culture and Entrapment

Chilingerian

Class 7(10/21)

Organizational Change and the Role of Chance in Organizational Behavior

Chilingerian

Class 8(10/28)

Organizational Learning - Is It Possible and If So How? Gittell

Class 9(11/4)

Conflict - Resolution or Revolution? Gittell

Class 10(11/11)

Diversity and New Technologies - How They Challenge Organizations

Gittell

Class 11(11/18)

Integration of Theories Chilingerian/Gittell

Class 12(12/2)

Presentations of Final Papers Chilingerian/Gittell

Class 13(12/9)

Presentations of Final Papers Chilingerian/Gittell


September 2, 2015 Class 1: The Political, Cultural, and Strategic Design Perspectives and the Congruence ModelTopic 1. Organizations as Complex Systems: The Role of Formal and Informal Structures

In Class Video Case: Terror at the Taj Mahal Tower and Palace Hotel in BombayCase Two: Barbara Norris: Leading Change in the General Surgery Unit

Introduction:

What is a systems’ perspective and what are formal and informal structures? Formal & Informal organizational structures are not just descriptions of social networks, information flows and reporting relationships in organizations, they are tools for coordination. We will look at formal and informal ways to coordinate organizational activities, with a particular focus on organizational incentives.

On the night of November 26, 2008, 10 armed individuals from “the Army of the Righteous” entered Mumbai, India (formerly Bombay) and attacked multiple locations. The Taj Mahal Palace Hotel and the Oberoi Trident Hotel were prime targets and nearly 1800 guests and employees were captive. Over three nights and two days 159 people were killed and 211 were wounded across the city. During this siege 34 people died at the Taj Hotel.

Both the Taj and Oberoi hotels underwent devastating attacks. However, something unique happened at the Taj Hotel; they praised for strategic thinking and quick teaming. At the expense of their own safety, the Taj employees and managers acted quickly. Doors were locked to keep the terrorists at bay.. Why did the people in the Taj organization behave the way they did—luck or by design?

The learning objectives are:1. To understand what we mean by organizational theory & behavior by analyzing a real

organizational event involving devastating attack and self-less behavior.2. To review the basic elements of organizational design: people, structures, and tasks

Questions:

1. What is organizational theory and behavior? How much of Taj employee behavior is explained by national culture, the hospitality industry, the family atmosphere of the hotel, rules and procedures? What do the casualty rates of the two hotels teach us?

2. If you want to understand what a science is, you should look in the first instance not as its theories or its findings, and certainly not at what its apologists say about it; you should look at what the practitioners of it do. (Clifford Geertz “The Interpretation of Cultures,” p. 5)


Topic 2. The Congruence Model

The first half of this session will introduce a conceptual model to sharpen our organizational diagnostic skills. The congruence model was developed by Michael Tushman and David Nadler and Charles O'Reilly. The model is a framework for analyzing the architecture of an organization, and facilitating researchers' ability to diagnose and fix problems. The model postulates that strategy, people, informal structures and culture, critical tasks, formal structures and executive leadership should be aligned if an organization is to be effective or achieve high levels of performance.

The congruence model is a way to organize your diagnostic observations about organizations. It should also accommodate power and politics and culture. Bloom and Van Reenen are trying to measure organizational practices and connect them with performance. It reveals the difficulty of measuring organizational variables. Are we convinced?

Required Readings:

Tushman, M.L. & O’Reilly, C. A. 2007. Managerial Problem Solving: A Congruence Approach,” Chapter 4, pp 1-44 in Tushman, M.L. & O’Reilly Winning through innovation: a practical guide to leading organizational change and renewal. Boston: Harvard Business School Press

Ancona, D. et al. 2005. “The Organization as Strategic Design,” “The Political Lens,”“The Cultural Lens.” In “Organizational Behavior and Processes”. Second Edition. South-Western College Publishing, Cincinnati.

“Evidence for a Collective Intelligence Factor in the Performance of Human Groups.” Woolley A.W. et al., Science 29 October 2010

Discussion Questions:

1. What does a systems view mean to you? What lessons do you learn about strategic design and congruence: incentives, motivation, leadership, organizational structures and managerial practices in the Lincoln case?

2. How would you use Congruence Theory as a conceptual model for your work?

Topic 3. Organization Theory And Behavior: How Do We Study It?

The following 5 published manuscripts are published in the top tier “A” journals in organizational science. This will be a very brief discussion, if time permits.

Skim all or Read any two of the following based on your interests

Bensaou, Ben, M., Galunic, Charles, Jonczyk-Sedes, Claudia. 2013. Players and Purists: Networking Strategies and Agencies of Service Professionals. Organization Science. DOI.org/10.1287/orsc.2013.0826Net

Bloom, N., Van Reenen. J. Measuring and Explaining Management Practices Across Firms and Countries (2007). Quarterly Journal of Economics. Vol. cxxii Issue 4.


Bresman, Henrik. 2010. Changing Routines: A Process Model of Vicarious Group Learning in Pharmaceutical R&D. Academy of Management Journal. Vol. 565, No. 1, 35-61.

Cronqvist, Henrik & Yu, Frank. 2015. Shaped by Their Daughters: Executives, Female Socialization, and Corporate Social Responsibility. Unpublished Manuscript, SSRN, Social Science Electronic Publishing.

Petriglieri, Jennifer Louise. 2015. Co-Creating Relationship Repair: Pathways to Reconstructing Destabilized Organizational Identification. Administrative Science Quarterly. Downloaded March 25, 2015. DO. 10.1177/0001839215579234


1. Explain Bloom, N. , Van Reenen's approach to measuring performance. Does it connect with "congruence" theory?

2. Compare and contrast the methods in the other studies. Are you convinced?


September 9, 2015 Class 2: Decision Making & Leadership Theory

Topic 4. Decision-Making & Leadership Theory

Video Case:

Wagner Dodge

Required Readings:

Decision Making. Tversky, Amos., Kahneman, Daniel. 1974. Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.

Science. September 27: 185(4157): 1124-31

Leadership Avolio, Bruce, J,. Walumwa, Fred, O., Weber, Todd, J. 2009. Current Theories, Research, and

Future Directions. Ann. Review of Psychology. 60:21-49. Chilingerian, J. 1994 “Managing Strategic Issues and Stakeholders: How Modes of Executive

Attention Enact Crisis Management.” The Strategic Management Society. pp189-213. Kippenburg, Daan, Van., Sitkin, Sim. 2013. A Critique of Charismatic Transformational

Leadership Research: Back to the Drawing Board? Academy of Management Annals. Vol 17, No1, 1-60.

Yukl, Gary. 2012. Effective Leadership Practices: What we Know and What Questions We Need to Address. Academy of Management Perspectives.

Introduction:

This session will introduce some of the early ideas on the heuristics of decision making that launched the new field of behavioral economics and focus on what effective leaders do? And how can we study them? Some argue that leadership is about many things, but above all leaders can be judged on the quality of their decision-making. When we talk about leadership, we will introduce a fair process and collective intelligence models of leading. I will introduce some contingency theories of leadership and the situational Hersey Blanchard model, based on the idea that appropriate leader behavior depends on the performance readiness of the leader’s direct reports and followers. Readiness refers to the degree of motivation, competence, experience, commitment and confidence in accepting responsibility. Finally, goal theory runs to the heart of this situational model of leading, and goal theory is one of the strongest bodies of literature in organizational science.

Recommended Reading:

Fair Process: Managing in the Knowledge Economy. (Jan 2003) W. Chan Kim & Renee Mauborgne. HBR


Latham, Gary and Locke, Edwin. "Goal setting--A Motivational Technique That Works" Latham, Gary and Locke, Edwin. "Enhancing the Benefits and Overcoming the Pitfalls of

Goal Setting." House, R., & Baetz, M. (1979). “Leadership: Some Empirical Generalizations and New Research

Directions”, in B. Staw (ed.) Research in Organizational Behavior, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press: 341-423.

Hershey and Blanchard. 1990. Management of Organizational Behavior. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

House, R., W. Spangler, and J. Woycke. 1991. “Personality and charisma in the U.S. presidency: A psychological theory of leader effectiveness,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 36: 364-396.

Northhouse, P.G. 2012. Leadership: Theory and Practice (sixth edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications


September 16, 2015 Class 3: Coordinating WorkTopic 5. Coordinating Work

Relational Mapping (in class): Identify a work process you are familiar with that is highly interdependent, uncertain and time constrained, requiring high levels of coordination for successful completion. You will create a relational map of this work process using techniques introduced in class, and identify strong and weak ties in the coordination network.

Identify a core work process that requires coordination and identify the workgroups involved in the process

Conduct a preliminary assessment of relational coordination across the workgroups involved in that process

Visualize areas of strength and opportunity for improvement, as a precursor to measuring relational coordination

Learn in a preliminary way the tools for measuring relational coordination and insights for using the results to create positive change.

Recommended Readings: (choose 3 of the following from Sociology of Organizations: Structures and Relationships, unless otherwise indicated)

Mary Parker Follett (1949). “The Process of Control," in Freedom and Co-ordination: Lectures in Business Organization by Mary Parker Follett. London: Management Publications Trust, Ltd.

James March and Herbert Simon (1958). “The Division of Work," in Organizations. New York: Wiley.

Jay Galbraith (1972). “Organization Design: An Information Processing View," in Organization Planning: Cases and Concepts. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin.


Linda Argote (1981). “Input Uncertainty and Organizational Coordination in Hospital Emergency Units," Administrative Science Quarterly.

Karl Weick and Karlene Roberts (1993). “Collective Mind in Organizations: Heedful Interrelating on Flight Decks," Administrative Science Quarterly.

Gittell, Jody Hoffer (2002). "Coordinating Mechanisms in Care Provider Groups: Relational Coordination as a Mediator and Input Uncertainty as a Moderator of Performance Effects," Management Science. Available on LATTE.

Samer Faraj and Yin Xiao (2006). “Coordination in Fast Response Organizations," Management Science.

Jody Hoffer Gittell, Rob Seidner and Julian Wimbush (2010). “A Relational Model of How High Performance Work Systems Work," Organization Science.

Jody Hoffer Gittell (2016). Transforming Relationships for High Performance: The Power of Relational Coordination. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press. Selected prepublication chapters available on LATTE.

Further Readings:

Crowston, Kevin and Eva Kammerer (1998). “Coordination and Collective Mind in Software Requirements Development.” IBM Systems Journal, 372:227–45.

Gittell, Jody Hoffer (2011). “New Directions for Relational Coordination Theory.” Pp. 74–94, Oxford Handbook of Positive Organizational Scholarship, edited by Kim Cameron and Gretchen Spreitzer. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Wageman, Ruth (1995). “Interdependence and Group Effectiveness.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 40:145–80.


1. What does coordination look like when it occurs through a relational process? What does it look like when it occurs through a mechanistic or bureaucratic process?

2. How would you design an organization that combines the advantages of relational and bureaucratic approaches to coordination?

3. Follett distinguishes between achieving coordination as an additive total versus a relational total. Consider a work process you are very familiar with that involves workers from multiple functions and perhaps from multiple organizations. How would they achieve coordination as relational total versus an additive total?

4. Mutual respect is an important factor in relationships and an important dynamic in relational coordination. Is there a difference between mutual respect in professional relationships compared to personal relationships?

5. Shared knowledge is another important dynamic in relational coordination. What is meant by shared knowledge? How much and what kind of shared knowledge is needed for achieving coordination as a relational total rather than an additive total? Is there a situation where knowledge may not be shared across participants but relational coordination occurs nevertheless?


September 30, 2015 Class 4: Autonomy or Control?Topic 6. Autonomy or Control?

Video Case (to be viewed and discussed in class): "Command and Control vs. Mission Command: Transforming Leadership in the US Military"

Recommended Readings: (choose 3 of the following from Sociology of Organizations: Structures and Relationships, unless otherwise indicated)

Taylor, F.W. (1911). “Fundamentals of Scientific Management," Scientific Management, pp. 9-29. New York: Harper and Row.

Follett, M.P. (1949). “The Basis of Authority," Freedom and Co-ordination: Lectures in Business Organization by Mary Parker Follett, pp. 34-46. London: Management Publications Trust, Ltd.

McGregor, D. (1960). “Theory Y: The Integration of Individual and Organizational Goals," The Human Side of Enterprise, pp. 45-57. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Aoki, M. (1990). “Toward an Economic Model of the Japanese Firm," Journal of Economic Literature, 28: 1-27.

Batt, R. (1999). “Work Organization, Technology and Performance in Customer Service and Sales," Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 52: 539-564.

Lipman-Blumen, J. (1992). “Connective Leadership: Female Leadership Styles in the 21st Century Workplace," Sociological Perspectives, 35(1): 183-203.

Sweeney, P., Thompson, V. and Blanton, H. (2009). “Trust and Influence in Combat: An Interdependence Model," Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39(1): 235–264.

Jensen, M. and Meckling, W. (1976). “Theory of the Firm: Managerial, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure," Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4): 305-360. Available on LATTE.

Williamson, O. (1993). "Calculativeness, Trust and Economic Organization," Journal of Law and Economics, 36: 453-486. Available on LATTE.

Gittell, J.H. (2001). “Supervisory Span, Relational Coordination and Flight Departure Performance: A Reassessment of Post-Bureaucracy Theory," Organization Science, 12(4): 467-482. Available on LATTE.

Baker, G., Gibbons, R. and Murphy, K. (2002). "Relational Contracts and the Theory of the Firm," Quarterly Journal of Economics. Available on LATTE.

Gibbons, R. and Henderson, R. (2013). "Relational Contracts and Organizational Capabilities," Organization Science. Available on LATTE.

Further Readings:

Battistelli, Fabrizio and Giuseppe Ricotta (2005). “The Rhetoric of Management Control in Italian Cities: Constructing New Meanings of Public Action,” Administration & Society, 36: 661-687.


Herbst, P.G. (1976). “Non-Hierarchical Forms of Organization,” Acta Sociologica, 19(1): 65-75.

Spreitzer, Gretchen, Suzanne C. de Janasz and Robert E. Quinn (1999). “Empowered to Lead: The Role of Psychological Control in Leadership,” Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20: 511-526.

Aoki, Masahiko (1990). “Toward an Economic Model of the Japanese Firm," Journal of Economic Literature, 28: 1-27.

Carson, J.B., Paul E. Tesluk and Jennifer A. Marrone (2007). “Shared Leadership in Teams: An Investigation of Antecedent Conditions and Performance,” Academy of Management Journal, 50(5): 1217-1234.

Denhardt, Janet B. and Kelly B. Campbell (2006). “The Role of Democratic Values in Transformational Leadership,” Administration & Society, 38: 556-572.

Edwards, Richard (1979). Contested Terrain: The Transformation of the Workplace in the Twentieth Century. New York: Basic Books.

Follett, Mary Parker (1949). “Coordination,” in Freedom and Co-ordination: Lectures in Business Organization by Mary Parker Follett, pp. 61-76. L. Urwick (ed.). London: Management Publications Trust, Ltd.

Follett, Mary Parker (1949). “The Process of Control,” in Freedom and Co-ordination: Lectures in Business Organization by Mary Parker Follett, pp. 77-89. L. Urwick (ed.). London: Management Publications Trust, Ltd.

Gouldner, Abner (1954). Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy. Glencoe, IL. Leibenstein, Harvey (1987). Inside the Firm: The Inefficiencies of Hierarchy. Boston:

Harvard University Press. Merton, Robert (1957). Social Theory and Social Structure. Glencoe, IL. Milgrom, Paul and John Roberts (1992). Economics, Organization and Management.

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Stone, Katherine (1975). “The Origin of Job Structures in the Steel Industry,” in Labor Market

Segmentation, Richard Edwards, Michael Reich and David Gordon (eds.). Lexington Books.

Discussion Questions

1. What are the differences between a relational and bureaucratic approach to control? What are the advantages and disadvantages of each approach?

2. How do organizations influence the way that control is carried out? How do individuals and their backgrounds influence the way that control is carried out? How does the larger society influence the way that control is carried out?

3. In your experience, are women more likely to take a relational approach to control, relative to men? Explain.

4. How would you characterize principal/agent theory - a relational or bureaucratic approach to control? Or something different entirely?

5. Is relational contract theory a relational approach to control, as its name would suggest? Why or why not? Do you see relational contract theory as a fundamental critique of principal/agent theory or as a minor revision of that theory?


October 7, 2015 Class 5: Power & Politics and Resource DependenceTopic 7. Power and Influence in Organizations

Video Case:

Heidi Roizen

Required Readings:

Ancona, D. et al. 2005. “The Political Lens.” In “Organizational Behavior and Processes”. Second Edition. South-Western College Publishing, Cincinnati.

Pfeffer, J. 1992. “Managing with Power”. Harvard Business School Press, Boston. Chapters 1 - 2.

Kouzes & Mico. “Domain Theory: An Introduction to Organizational Behavior”

Introduction:

The central theme of this session is how the political lens helps us to see a different side of organizational life. Any organization with scarce resources and interdependent individuals will produce different opinions on what the goals of the organization should be, and on how those goals should be met. The central theme of this session is that understanding the nature of power, how to get it and how to use it, are essential for any manager to be effective.

Pfeffer says power is essential to initiate and sustain goal-directed action. Yet, organizations with scarce resources and interdependent individuals will produce different opinions on the organizational goals and how those goals should be met. Consequently, building and wielding power, negotiating and forming alliances maybe essential for any manager to be effective.

In the first 50 minutes, we will discuss how a technology entrepreneur, Heidi Roizen, builds and wields influence in different situations. Heidi Roizen worked as a mentor capitalist at SOFTBANK Venture Capital. She maintains an amazing professional network and leverages that network to help others (and herself). She discusses how she uses e-mail, parties and newsletters to gain access and connect people. Her relational and interpersonal skills teach us some key lessons about developing and exercising power and influence.

Study Questions:

1. What bases of power did Heidi Roizen use? How does she exercise influence?

2. How does a political lens help us to understand organizational behavior?


Topic 8. Resource Dependence Theory

Required Readings: (*select 1)

Pfeffer, J. and G. Salancik. 2003. The External Control of Organizations. Stanford University Press

Hillman A, Withers M, Collins B. Resource Dependence Theory: A Review. Journal of Management. 2009;35(6):1404-27.

Davis G, Cobb J. Resource Dependence Theory: Past and Future. In: Lounsbury M, editor. Research in the Sociology of Organizations. Bingley, England: Emerald Group Publishing Ltd. ; 2010.

Student Presentations: How does RDT hold up as a theory? see question 6

*Casciaro, T. & Piskorski, MJ. 2005. Power imbalance, mutual dependence and constraint absorption: A closer look at resource dependence theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50: 167-199.

*Guler.T. 2007. Throwing good money after bad? Political and institutional influences on sequential decision making in the venture capital industry. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51 (2): 248-285.

*Santos, F.M., Eisenhardt, K.M. 2009. Constructing markets and shaping boundaries: entrepreneurial agency in nascent fields. Academy of Management Journal, 52: 643-671.

Introduction:

The organization-environment approach taken by Resource Dependence Theory has developed in the direction of ever more detailed specifications of the content of the environment. In its most extreme form, the environment is depicted as specific to organizations, and the interorganizational network, rather than the organization itself, becomes the object of study.

Pfeffer and Salancik’s work is an outgrowth of open-systems theory and social-psychological theories of exchange. In Chapter 1 Pfeffer and Salacik explain how an external constraint perspective on organizational action differ from an intendedly rational perspective and a random/emergent perspective? In Chapter 3, Pfeffer and Salancik discuss several concepts that affect the power of a focal organization: resource criticality, resource importance, magnitude of resource exchange, concentration of resource control, discretion over the resource, and asymmetric dependence. In chapter three, they explain the key types of interdependence (behavioral, competitive, and symbiotic). WE will look at what recent studies are finding about RDT theory.


1. What is the intellectual heritage of RDT? What relationship do the above concepts have to each other and the power of the focal organization? (Hint: you might find it useful to diagram these


relationships.) What is the unit of analysis in the model outlined in Chapter 3? Is this model parsimonious? How might it be improved?

2. How well do the authors (Casciaro, T. & Piskorski; Guler; and Santos, F.M., Eisenhardt, K.M) test the RDT model? How well do these studies operationalize the model’s key concepts and test the relationships between these concepts? How does each paper extend or concentrate on a specific aspect of these theories? Do they integrate or disintegrate the concepts of the theory? How might these studies be improved? What are the implications of these results for transaction costs and resource dependence theories? What additional data and statistical tests would help you integrate these perspectives?


October 14, 2015 Class 6: Organizational Pathologies, Organizational Culture & EntrapmentTopic 9. Pathologies of Organizations

Case: Investigation into Mid-Staffordshire Foundation Trust

Introduction:

While political will and skill are central to being an effective manager, there is a dark side to power. What explains the behavior of the managers and professional in Mid-Staffordshire Trust? Is this was an extreme situation? Does compliance to authority inevitably lead to organizational disaster?

We will briefly discuss the events concerning the Mid-Staffordhire Case.

Required Readings:

Schein, Edgar H. 2010. Organizational Culture and Leadership, fourth edition. ISBN: 978-0-470-19060-9, Jossey-Bass.

Weick, K.E. and K.M. Sutcliffe. 2003. “Hospital as Cultures of Entrapment: A Reanalysis of the Bristol Royal Infirmary,” California Management Review, Winter.

Study Questions:

1. What happened at Mid-Staffordshire Foundation Trust? 2. What did the Bristol Hospital case teach us?3. According to Weick and Sutcliffe, how do organizations like Bristol

Topic 10: Organizational Culture

Required Readings:

Ancona, D., et al. Three Perspectives on Organizations – “Perspective 3. The Cultural Perspective on Organizations” 2004. Southwest Publishing.

Introduction:

There are probably more definitions of culture than there are people studying it. Culture is an elusive concept, but one with tremendous face validity—everyone understands what culture is, but that understanding is often vague and fuzzy. In this session we will discuss one useful methodology to study culture and see how it helps us understand how to change a culture. Bristol Hospital is one of the best examples of an organization that had to change its culture. We will analyze the way cultures, and the core values on which it is based, are shaped over time and think about how organizational


culture might affect innovation. Where should a leader focus attention? What is the sequence of change?

Study Questions:

1. Try to analyze an organization in your area of interest with Schein's Methodology.


October 21, 2015 Class 7: Organizational Change and the Role of Chance in Organizational BehaviorTopic 11. Social Networks

Required Readings:

Case: Ling He (handout)

Introduction:

This session is in two parts. First we will talk about network theory. Barbabasi and colleagues have developed a stunning new algorithm to change networks. What are the implications? We will try to analyze Ling He.

Homework: Map the work processes and informal social networks in Ling He

Liu, Barabasi, et alia. Controllability of Complex Networks. Nature (May 2011) Social Network Analysis: A Handbook (especially chapters 2, 5 & 7)

Topic 12. Emergence and the Role of Chance in Organizational Behavior

Introduction:

What is the role of chance in organizational behavior? The range of emergent is enormous—traffic jams, organizational community, new industries, multi-agent systems and the emergence of norms and leadership that emerge in groups and teams. Perhaps chance and “necessity” together may offer a reasonable alternative to the purposive, resource dependent, and random models of organizational behavior. We will discuss these ideas.

Required Readings:

Chilingerian, J. 2008. “Origins of DRGS: A Technical, Cultural, Political Story.” Weick, K. 1976. “Educational Organizations as Loosely Coupled Systems.” Administrative

Science Quarterly, 21, 1-19. Lichtenstein, Benyamin. (2014) Generative Emergence: A New Discipline of Organizational,

Entrepreneurial, and Social; Innovation. Chapter 2. Oxford University Press. Padgett, John, F., Powell, Walter., 2011. The Problem of Emergence. In The Emergence of

Organizations and Markets, edited by Powell and Padget. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Lichtenstein, Benyamin. (2014) Generative Emergence: Chapter 4.

Further Readings:


Brass DJ, Galaskiewicz J, Greve HR, Tsai W. Taking Stock of Networks andOrganizations: A Multilevel Perspective. The Academy of Management Journal.2004;47(6):795-817.

Cohen, M.D. and J.G. March, et al. 1972. “A garbage can model of organizational choice,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(1-25).

Oliver C. Determinants of Interorganizational Relationships: Integration andFuture Directions. The Academy of Management Review. 1990;15(2):241-65.

Orton JD, Weick KE. Loosely Coupled Systems: A Reconceptualization. TheAcademy of Management Review. 1990;15(2):203-23.

Meyer, J. and B. Rowan. 1977. “Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony,” American Journal of Sociology.

Powell W. Neither Market nor Hierarchy: Network Forms of Organization.Research in Organizational Behavior. 1990;12:295-336.


October 28, 2015 Class 8: Organizational Learning - Is It Possible and If So How?Topic 13. Organization Learning

Recommended Readings: (choose 4 of the following from Sociology of Organizations: Structures and Relationships)

Chris Argyris (1976). “Single-Loop and Double-Loop Models in Research on Organizational Decision-Making,” Administrative Science Quarterly.

Paul DiMaggio and Walter Powell (1983). “The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organization Fields,” American Journal of Sociology.

Barbara Levitt and James March (1988). "Organizational Learning,” Annual Review of Sociology.

Amy Edmondson (2002). “The Local and Variegated Nature of Learning in Organizations: A Group-Level Perspective,” Organization Science.

Joyce K. Fletcher, Lotte Bailyn and Stacy Blake Beard (2009). “Practical Pushing: Creating Discursive Space in Organizational Narratives,” in Critical Management Studies at Work: Negotiating Tensions between Theory and Practice, Julie Wolfram Cox, Tony G. LeTrent-Jones, Maxim Voronov and David Weir (eds.). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Katherine Kellogg (2009). “Operating Room: Relational Spaces and Micro-institutional Changes in Surgery,” American Journal of Sociology, 115(3): 657-711.

Further Readings:

Briscoe, Forrest and Sean Safford (2008). “The Nixon-in-China Effect: Activism, Imitation and the Institutionalism of Contentious Practices.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 53(3): 460–91.

Durant, Robert (2007). “Toxic Politics, Organizational Change and the ‘Greening’ of the U.S. Military: Toward a Polity-Centered Perspective.” Administration & Society, 39: 409–46.

Fiol, C. Marlene and Marjorie Lyles (1985). “Organizational Learning.” Academy of Management Review, 10(4): 803–13.

Holmes, Janet, Stephanie Schnurr and Meredith Marra (2007). “Leadership and Communication: Discursive Evidence of a Workplace Culture Change.” Discourse & Communication, (4): 433–51.

Huber, George P. (1991). “Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatures.” Organization Science, 2(1): 88–115.



1. Consider the impact of the bureaucratic and relational organizations on organizational learning. Which would you predict is more effective at supporting organizational learning? Why?

2. Describe a situation where organizational change occurred, but not organizational learning. Describe another situation where organizational learning occurred, but not organizational change. How would you explain these phenomena theoretically?

3. How does diversity affect an organization’s ability to learn or to change? 4. How can organizations foster psychological safety? What are the expected effects of

psychological safety? What are the expected effects of its absence? 5. What are the advantages of the relational organizational form for learning and change?

Advantages of the bureaucratic organizational form? How would you combine these organizational forms in an organization to promote organizational learning and change?

6. For organizational change to be successful is it more important to change formal structures, or patterns of belief and behaviors? If you were to engage in a change effort, which would you focus on? Why? If both, how would you sequence your efforts? Why?


November 4, 2015 Class 9: Conflict - Resolution or Revolution?Topic 14.


Karl Marx (1887, 1967). Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, Volume 1. New York: International Publishers.

Mary Parker Follett (1926/1942). “Constructive Conflict” in Dynamic Administration: The Collected Papers of Mary Parker Follett. New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers.

Louis Pondy (1967). "Organizational Conflict: Concepts and Models," Administrative Science Quarterly.

W. Peter Archibald (2009). “Marx, Globalization and Alienation: Received and Underappreciated Wisdoms," Critical Sociology.

Brenda Johnson (2009). “Racial Inequality in the Workplace: How Critical Management Studies Can Inform Current Approaches," Critical Management Studies at Work: Negotiating Tensions Between Theory and Practice, in Julie Wolfram Cox, Tony G. LeTrent-Jones, Maxim Voronov and David Weir (eds.). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.

John O. Ogbor (2000). “Mythicizing and Reification in Entrepreneurial Discourse: Ideology-Critique of Entrepreneurial Studies," Journal of Management Studies.

Further Readings:

Hochschild, Arlie (2003). The Managed Heart: Commercialization of Human Feeling. 2nd ed., Berkeley: University of California Press.

Stoudt, Margaret (2010). “Back to the Future: Toward a Political Economy of Love and Abundance,”Administration & Society, 42:3.

Van Maanen, John (1990). “The Smile Factory: Work at Disneyland.” Pp. 58–76 in Reframing Organizational Culture, edited by Peter J. Frost et al. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Walton, Richard and Robert McKersie (1965). A Behavioral Theory of Labor Negotiations: An Analysis of a Social Interaction System. New York: McGraw-Hill (reprinted in 1991 by Cornell University Press).


1. Which model of organizational conflict do you find most compelling, and why?2. Why is conflict theory a “critical” perspective? How is this perspective developed in critical

management studies?3. What are some of the potential negative and positive outcomes of organizational conflict?

What are some of the factors that determine whether conflict results in primarily negative or positive outcomes?


4. Conflict theory grew out of Marx’ observations of the Industrial Revolution. The Industrial Revolution changed the class system, the relations of production, and the means of production. How has the technological revolution impacted the class system and relations and means of production? How do these changes impact the structure and relationships of organizations?

5. Values can both cause conflict and shape the perception of conflict. Discuss the role of values in the cause and meaning of a major conflict in the United States and a major conflict internationally.


November 11, 2015 Class 10: Diversity and New Technologies - How They Challenge Organizations

Topic 15.

Recommended Readings: (choose 2 of the following papers from Sociology of Organizations: Structures and Relationships)

Elin Kvande and Bente Rasmussen (1995). “Women’s Careers in Static and Dynamic Organizations," Acta Sociologica.

Mark Maier (1997). “We Have to Make a MANagement Decision: Challenger and the Dysfunctions of Corporate Masculinity," Managing the Organizational Melting Pot: Dilemmas of Workplace Diversity. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Kristen Schilt (2006). “Just One of the Guys? How TransMen Make Gender Visible at Work," Gender and Society, 20(4): 465-490.

Stella Nkomo (1992). “The Emperor has no Clothes: Rewriting Race in Organizations," Academy of Management Review, 17(3): 487-513.

Anshuman Prasad (1997). “The Colonizing Consciousness and Representations of the Other: A Postcolonial Critique of the Discourse of Oil," in Managing the Organizational Melting Pot: Dilemmas of Workplace Diversity. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Kirstin H. Griffin and Michelle R. Hebl (2002). “The Disclosure Dilemma for Gay Men and Lesbians: ‘Coming Out’ at Work," Journal of Applied Psychology.

Dennis Gilbride, Robert Stensrud, David Vandergoot and Kristie Golden (2003). “Identification of the Characteristics of Work Environments and Employers Open to Hiring and Accommodating People with Disabilities," Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin.

Any readings on Intersectionality are welcomed here as well.

Further Readings:

Heath, Melanie (2003). “Soft-Boiled Masculinity: Renegotiating Gender and Racial Identities in the Promise Keepers Movement.” Gender & Society, 17(3): 423–44.

Kanter, Rosabeth Moss (1993). Men and Women of the Corporation. New York: Basic Books. Ortleib, Renate and Barbara Sieben (2010). “Migrant Employees in Germany: Personnel

Structures and Practices.” Equality, Diversity and Inclusion, 29(4): 364–79. Park, Jaihan, Eva Malachi, Orit Sternin and Roni Tevet (2009). “Subtle Bias against Muslim

Job Applicants in Personnel Decisions.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 39(9): 2174–90.


1. How do concepts and approaches used in Western academic scholarship help to maintain the political and intellectual dominance of Western cultures and people?

2. What are the pros and cons of quantitative methodologies versus qualitative methodologies?


3. Stella M. Nkomo and Anshuman Prasad both critique the discourse of diversity by arguing that it contributes to the continued subjugation of marginalized populations. Compare their positions and describe the strengths and weaknesses of their arguments.

4. Some would argue that individuals shape organizations as much as organizations shape the individuals within them. Discuss the relationship between dominant groups and subgroups from this interactionist perspective.

5. The inclusiveness of marginalized groups in organizations (e.g., people with disabilities) can be viewed as both challenging the power system and also maintaining it. Describe both views. Which would you say is the stronger position and why?

6. Is there a difference between representation and inclusion? Explain your answer.

Topic 16. New Technology, Social Media and Emerging Communities


Sherry Turkle (1994). “Constructions and Reconstructions of Self in Virtual Reality: Playing in the MUDs,” Mind, Culture and Activity.

Jonathan Bach and David Stark (2004). “Link, Search, Interact: The Co-Evolution of NGOs and Interactive Technology,” Theory, Culture & Society.

Joanna C. Dunlap and Patrick R. Lowenthal (2009). “Tweeting the Night Away: Using Twitter to Enhance Social Presence,” Journal of Information Systems Education.

Albert Jacob Meijer (2008). “E-mail in Government: Not Post-Bureaucratic but Late Bureaucratic Organizations,” Government Information Quarterly.

James Farrer and Jeff Gavin (2009). “On-line Dating in Japan: A Test of Social Information Processing Theory,” CyberPsychology and Behavior.

Joe Phua (2008). “Online Organization of the LGBT Community in Singapore," presented at the International Communication Association Conference, Montreal, Canada, May.

Further Readings:

Matzat, Uwe (2009). “A Theory of Relational Signals in Online Groups.” New Media & Society, 11(3): 375–94.

Shaw, Adrienne (2009). “Putting the Gay in Games: Cultural Production and GLBT Content in Video Games.” Games and Culture, 4(3): 228–53.

Suarez, David (2009). “Nonprofit Advocacy and Civic Engagement on the Internet.” Administration & Society, 41:267–89.


1. Albert Jacob Meijer found use of email did not radically change the structures of bureaucratic organizations to become less hierarchical and more heterarchical. Joanna C. Dunlap and Patrick R. Lowenthal found that newer social media (e.g., Twitter) increases “just-in-time”


communications. Describe how and why new technologies affect organizations differently with regard to change, communication and relationships.

2. Sherry Turkle explains that new technologies promote the creation of multifaceted identities, essentially increasing diversity within individuals. How does (or doesn’t) the expansion of diversity at the individual level alter the definitions and meaning of diversity at the societal level? What impact do these fluid identities and expanded conceptualizations of diversity have on organizational conflict?

3. Some of the authors in this section claim that people can be more themselves online, while others claim that online interaction encourages participants to try on new identities. Explain various ways that new technologies can impact self-identity and self-development.

4. What is the relationship between social media, uncertainty, trust and interdependence? Would you argue this relationship is different in bureaucratic organizational form versus the relational organizational form? Why or why not?

5. What role can new technology have in organizational learning and change? Is it a new structure? Or a tool for learning? Or both? Explain your thinking.


November 18, 2015 Class 11: Un Assortiment de Tout...: Learning Integration Topic 17.

Required Readings:

Miles, Jeffrey. Management and Organization Theory: A Jossey Bass Reader. 2012. San Francisco: Josey Bass. [Select 2-3 theories that interest you and we will discuss, along with other theories of interest from throughout the semester]

Introduction:

Today is a learning integration session. How can we develop interesting organizational studies using the theories and tools discussed so far? In this session we will discuss quantitative and qualitative methods that help us to understand and explain organizations.

Discussion Questions

1. How would you explain the origins of a significant policy success in your field?2. Select a few theories from the semester as a whole, including the Miles book, that interest you. How would you use them either separately, or in combination, for your research? 3. Which hypotheses, or competing hypotheses, would you formulate, related to your research? 4. Would these hypotheses be testable? Using qualitative and/or quantitative methods?5. Would the results of testing these hypotheses be helpful for improving social policy? For improving the leadership of organizations? For improving existing theories?


AN UNDERGROUND GUIDE TO ORGANIZATIONAL SCIENCE METHODS

(with thanks to Dr. John V. Maanen and Dr. Calvin Morrill)

Orienting Questions

--What is the relationship between particular methods and theoreticalapproaches in organizational studies?

--How do research questions and hypotheses shape the kinds of methods that are used to study organizations and vice versa?

A. Orientations

Bryman, Alan. 1989. Research Methods and Organization Studies. Boston, MA: UnwinHyman.

Webb, Eugene, and Karl E. Weick. 1979. “Unobtrusive Measures in OrganizationalTheory: A Reminder.” Administrative Science Quarterly 24: 650-659.*

Stablein, Ralph. 1996. “Data in Organization Studies.” Pp. 509-525 in Handbook ofOrganization Studies, Stuart Klegg, Cynthia Hardy, and Walter R. Nord, eds. London:Sage Publications.

See the journal, Organizational Research Methods (1998 - present).

B. Institutionalism

Schneiberg, Marc, and Elisabeth A. Clemens. 2006. “The Typical Tools for the Job:Methods in Organizational Institutionalism.” Forthcoming in How Institutions Change,edited by Walter W. Powell & Daniel L. Jones. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

C. Narrative Analysis

Czarniawska, Barbara. 1997. Narrating the Organization: Dramas of InstitutionalIdentity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Boje, David. 2001. Narrative Methods for Organizational and Communication Studies.Thousand Oaks: Sage.

D. Network Analysis

Nohria, Nitin, and Robert G. Eccles, eds. 1992. Networks and Organizations: Structure,Form, and Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Rogers, Everett., and D. Lawrence Kincaid. 1981. Communication Networks: Toward aNew Paradigm for Research. NY: Free Press.


Freeman, Linton C., Douglas R. White, and A. Kimball Romney. 1992. ResearchMethods in Social Network Analysis. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.

Wasserman, Stanley, and Katherine Faust. 1994. Social Network Analysis: Methodsand Applications. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Marsden, Peter V. 1990. “Network Data and Measurement.” Annual Review of Sociology16: 435-463.*

E. Organizational Ecology and Demography

Hannan, Michael T., and John Freeman. 1989. “Methods.” Pp. 147-198 inOrganizational Ecology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Carroll, Glenn R., and Michael T. Hannan. 2000. “Methods of Corporate Demography.”Pp. 83-278 in The Demography of Corporations and Industries. Princeton, NJ: PrincetonUniversity Press.

F. Organizational Ethnography

Morrill, Calvin, and Gary Alan Fine. 1997. “Ethnographic Contributions toOrganizational Sociology.” Sociological Methods and Research 25: 424-451.*

Morrill, Calvin. 1995. “Anatomy of an Ethnography of Business Elites.” Pp. 229-255 inThe Executive Way: Conflict Management in Corporations. Chicago: University ofChicago Press.

Morrill, Calvin, David B. Buller, Mary K. Buller, & Linda K. Larkey. 1999. "Toward anOrganizational Perspective on Identifying and Managing Formal Gatekeepers."Qualitative Sociology 22: 51-72.

Schwartzman, Helen B. 1993. Ethnography in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.

Feldman, Martha S. 1995. Strategies for Interpreting Qualitative Data. Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage.

Feldman, Martha S., Jeannine Bell, and Michelle Tracy Berger. 2003. Gaining Access: APractical and Theoretical Guide for Qualitative Researchers. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira.

Scott, W. Richard. 1965. “Field Methods in the Study of Organizations.” Pp. 261-304 inHandbook of Organizations, James G. March, ed. Chicago: Rand McNally.*

Dingwall, Robert, and P. M. Strong. 1986. “The Interactional Study of Organizations: ACritique and Reformulation.” Urban Life 14:205-232. (also relates to institutionalism)


Van Maanen, John. 1979. “The Fact of Fiction in Organizational Ethnography.”Administrative Science Quarterly 24 539-550.*

Hertz, Rosanna, and Jonathan B. Imber, eds. 1995. Studying Elites Using QualitativeMethods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

G. Experimentalism and Psychometric Scaling

Morrill, Calvin, and Ellen Snyderman. 1997. “It’s Not What You Do, But Who You Are:Informal Social Control, Social Status, and Normative Seriousness in Organizations." Sociological Forum 12: 519-543. (factorial survey/quasi experimentalism)*

Morrill, Calvin, and Cheryl King Thomas. 1992. "Organizational Conflict Managementas Disputing Process: The Problem of Social Escalation." Human CommunicationResearch 18: 400-428. (psychometric scaling/self-report)*

Keppel, Geoffrey. 1991. Design and Analysis: A Researcher’s Handbook, 3rd Edition.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

H. Action Research

Eden, Colin, and Chris Huxham. 1996. “Action Research for the Study of Organizations.” Pp. 526-542 in Handbook of Organization Studies, Stuart Klegg, Cynthia Hardy, and Walter R. Nord, eds. London: Sage Publications.


Documents

SYLLABUS - Brandeis University · Web view“Online Organization of the LGBT Community in Singapore," presented at the International Communication Association Conference, Montreal,