syllabus - brandeis university · web viewpaul dimaggio and walter powell (1983). “the...

The Heller School for Social Policy and ManagementBRANDEIS UNIVERSITY

HS526 Organizational Theory and BehaviorFall Semester 2017

Instructors: Jon Chilingerian, Ph.D., Jody Hoffer Gittell, Ph.D. Coordinating Instructor: Jon ChilingerianClassroom: G3Office Hours: Chilingerian: Room 204 Mon (2-5) Tue (12-1:45), Wed (9-12); Gittell: Heller 206, Wed (12:30-2)Time of Class: Wed 2:00-4:50_______________________________________________________________________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 at Multiple Levels Power, Politics and Resource Dependence Organizational Pathologies, Organizational Culture and Entrapment Autonomy, Control and Interdependence Organizational Change and The Role of Chance in Behavior Organizational Learning and Change at Multiple Levels Organizational and Social Conflict - Resolution or Revolution? Diversity and New Technologies - Organizational Challenges and Opportunities

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 2017 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, lead some discussions and to engage in thoughtful discussion. 2. Post-Class Discussions. We would like you to engage in a weekly post-class discussion after each class.

3. Presentation. Each student will be required to make two twenty minute presentations in class. Select a book or 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 20 minute presentation of this paper in the final two weeks of class Submit final paper by December 7


Grading Scheme: Weekly post-class discussion questions/hypotheses & insights = 10 points Two presentations plus leading several class discussions . = 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 post-class discussions about the readings and lectures. Students will receive feedback on their presentation 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*

*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.

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

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


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)August 30Class 1

Decision Making Units and Decision Theories Chilingerian

September 6Class 2

The Political, Cultural, and Strategic Design Perspectives and Performance Theories

Chilingerian

September 13Class 3

Leadership Theory and Cultural Perspectives Chilingerian

September 20Class 4

Coordinating Work at Multiple Levels Gittell

September 27Class 5

Autonomy, Control, and Interdependence Gittell

October 4Class 6

Power, Politics & Resource Dependence Theory Chilingerian

October 18Class 7

Organizational Change and Social Networks Theory

Chilingerian

October 25Class 8

Organizational Learning and Change at Multiple Levels

Gittell

November 1Class 9

Organizational Conflict - Resolution or Revolution?

Gittell

November 8Class 10

Diversity and New Technologies - Organizational Challenges and Opportunities

Gittell

November 15Class 11

Presentations of Final Papers & Integration of Theories

Chilingerian/Gittell

November 29Class 12

Presentations of Final Papers & Integration of Theories


No Class December 7

Submission of Final Papers (if you have not by then)



August 30, 2017 Class 1: Decision Making Units and Decision Theories

Topic 1. Strategic Thinking & Decision-Making Units

The concept of a people working together as decision making units (DMU) will be introduced as a basic building block of organizations. This introductory session will introduce some of the early ideas on the heuristics of decision making, how biases can distort judgement, and trip up your brain. The work of Kahneman and Tversky launched the new field of decision neuroscience and behavioral economics. They discovered that human brains assess what is going on via pattern recognition, and then “reacts” to it with emotional tags stored in memory. We will also review some findings in social science about emotion, perception, persuasion and influence.

Once we understand a DMU, think about questions such as: What processes do people in DMUs use to come to decisions? How do people in people in DMUs differentiate facts from assumptions? How do people in DMUs form ideas about what will happen in the future? How do people in DMUs evaluate the consequences and likelihood of an outcome?

Case: The Future of Bio-Pasteur

Question: Should BioPasteur introduce the drug Yes or No? Why?

Over 5 years, BioPasteur invested nearly all of its profits on DIASTOP—a drug that could cure type 1 and type 2 Diabetes and was intended to be patient-centered. This break-through drug created much excitement--endocrinologists and primary care physicians were looking forward to its introduction. The drug was extensively tested and there were a very, very few complications (.3% were hospitalized). *(If you feel you need more information, let me know what specific issues/questions you have. Otherwise, please decide.)

Required Readings: Read: The Future of Bio-Pasteur Tversky, Amos., Kahneman, Daniel. 1974. Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.

Science. September 27: 185(4157): 1124-31 Miles, Jeffrey. Management and Organization Theory: A Jossey Bass Reader. 2012. San

Francisco: Josey Bass. [Miles Book: Chapters 14, 16, 20, 24, 29 and 32]

Recommended Readings: Max H. Bazerman and Don A. Moore, Judgment in Managerial Decision Making , 8th ed. (New York: Wiley, 2013). & Daniel Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow (New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 2011).

Questions: 1. What biases most affect organizational decision making? How do biases manifest? Are some more likely to be encountered under certain conditions?


September 6, 2017 Class 2: The Political, Cultural, and Strategic Design Perspectives and Performance Theories Topic 2. 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 Bombay

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 focus on organizational incentives. To put these ideas into a organizational context, we will look at a Taj Mahal case in class.

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 does what in 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?

Topic 3. The Congruence Model and The Complementarity 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. The model also reveals the difficulty of measuring organizational variables.

Required Readings:

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

Lewin, Arie., Minton, John. Determining Organizational Effectiveness: Another Look, and An Agenda for Research. May 1986. Management Science. Vol 32. NO. 5. pp. 514-538

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.

Miles, Jeffrey. Management and Organization Theory: A Jossey Bass Reader. 2012. San Francisco: Josey Bass. Chapters 1, 10, 15, 25, 26, 27, and 38.

Study Questions:

1. Read the Wooley et al paper on collective intelligence. Look on-line and see recent papers and evidence. Is this a convincing theory?

2. What does a system view mean to you? What are complex adaptive systems? 3. What lessons do you learn about strategic design and congruence: incentives, motivation,

leadership, organizational structures and managerial practices in the Taj Case (shown in class) 4. How would you use Congruence Theory as a conceptual model for your work?


September 13, 2017 Class 3: Leadership Theory and Cultural PerspectivesVideo Case: Followership as Leadership & Wag Dodge

Topic 4. Leadership: Effective Styles and Attention Structures

We will focus on the key ingredients to leadership: task and relational behavior and introduce the concept of leadership attention structures. We will introduce a situational leadership model connects leadership style with organizational effectiveness. The Hersey Blanchard model is based on the idea that appropriate leader behavior depends on the readiness of the leader’s direct reports and followers. Readiness refers to the degree of motivation, competence, experience, commitment and confidence in accepting responsibility. As the readiness of followers improves, the leader’s behavior should also change. When we talk about leadership, we will introduce a fair process and collective intelligence models of leading. 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.

Topic 5: Organizational Culture

Required Readings:

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. 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 organizational culture in your area of interest with Schein's methodology.

Required Readings:

Leadership Yukl, Gary. 2012. Effective Leadership Practices: What we Know and What Questions We Need

to Address. Academy of Management Perspectives.


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.

Chilingerian, J. 1994 “Managing Strategic Issues and Stakeholders: How Modes of Executive Attention Enact Crisis Management.” The Strategic Management Society. pp189-213.

Miles, Jeffrey. Management and Organization Theory: A Jossey Bass Reader. 2012. San Francisco: Josey Bass. Chapters: 4, 8, 15, 16, 22, 31, and 34

Culture Reading Schein, Edgar H. 2010. Organizational Culture and Leadership, fourth edition. ISBN: 978-0-

470-19060-9, Jossey-Bass. Ancona, D., et al. Three Perspectives on Organizations – “Perspective 3. The Cultural

Perspective on Organizations” 2004. Southwest Publishing.

Recommended Reading for Future Work:

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

Future Directions. Ann. Review of Psychology. 60:21-49. Weick, K.E. and K.M. Sutcliffe. 2003. “Hospital as Cultures of Entrapment: A Reanalysis of

the Bristol Royal Infirmary,” California Management Review, Winter. 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 20, 2017 Class 4: Coordinating Work at Multiple Levels Topic 5. Coordinating at Multiple Levels

Guest Speaker: Elisabeth Okrant, Vice President, Massachusetts Behavioral Health

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, found in 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. Chapters 2 and 3. 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.

Potential Discussion Questions (feel free to offer others):

1. How do interdependence and uncertainty influence how we coordinate work? 2. What is a relational approach to coordination? A bureaucratic approach? A "relational

bureaucratic" approach?3. How would you design an organization that combines the advantages of relational and

bureaucratic approaches to coordination?4. Follett distinguishes between achieving coordination as an additive total versus a relational

total. Consider a work process you are familiar with that involves multiple functions and perhaps multiple organizations. How would they achieve coordination as relational total?

5. Shared knowledge is an 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 27, 2017 Class 5: Autonomy, Control and InterdependenceVideo Case (to be viewed and discussed in class): "Command and Control vs. Mission Command: Transforming Leadership in the US Military"

Odierno, R.T. (2012). Mission Command by the Chief of Staff of the Army. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2l1I8hY9Wo. Available online.


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.

Waddimba, A., Scribani, M., Krupa, N., Jenkins, P. & May, J. (2016). "Resilience Among Employed Physicians and Mid-Level Practitioners in Upstate New York," Health Services Research. Available on LATTE.

Gittell, JH (2016). "Relationships as a Source of Resilience Amidst Health Care System Change," Health Services Research. Available on LATTE.

Reay, T. et al (2017). "Getting Leopards to Change Their Spots: Co-Creating a New Professional Role Identity," Academy of Management Journal. Available on LATTE.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2l1I8hY9Wo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2l1I8hY9Wo

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.

Potential Discussion Questions (feel free to offer others)

1. What is meaning of auonomy when work is highly interdependent? What happens to the traditional concept of control when work is highly interdependent?

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

3. In your experience, are women more likely to take a relational approach to control, relative to men? Less likely? Or equally likely? Suggest a hypothesis, and a theoretical rationale for that hypothesis.


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 4, 2017 Class 6: Power & Politics and Resource Dependence Theory

Topic 7. Power and Influence in Organizations

Video Case: Nixon By Nixon ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbWataLl9k8 )

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.

Miles, Jeffrey. Management and Organization Theory: A Jossey Bass Reader. 2012. San Francisco: Josey Bass. Chapters 37 and 40

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.

The Nixon by Nixon: In His Own Words documentary is a bizarre portrait of a former president of the United States and the pathology of power whose behavior nearly ruined a generation. This “capable” and “potential” leader’s presidency was toppled owing to tape recordings he ordered that recorded his own words. Strange indeed. The case reveals the relationship between power and a leader’s sense of being. In this case, Nixon saw his world divided into allies or enemies. The New York times said it reveals a familiar portrait of a closeted monster who was “paranoid, vicious, racist, sexist, anti-Semitic, with a casual disregard for anything besides his own standing.” In a democracy, it matters whom we elect to the presidency.

Study Questions:

1. What bases of power did Nixon use? How did he exercise influence?

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


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbWataLl9k8

Topic 8. Resource Dependence Theory 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.

To discuss resource dependence theory we will ask 3 students to present.

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?

*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.

Discussion Questions:

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 18, 2017 Class 7: Organizational Change: Social Network & Diffusion Theory Topic: Social Network Method & Theory

Required Readings:

Case: Ling He (handout)

Guest Speaker: Andy Wilson, MPH, MA

Introduction:

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

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) Chilingerian, J. 2008. “Origins of DRGS: A Technical, Cultural, Political Story.” Miles, Jeffrey. Management and Organization Theory: A Jossey Bass Reader. 2012. San

Francisco: Josey Bass. Chapters: 9, 23, 30 and 36

Topic 12. Finding Theories Relevant to Your Social Policy Work

Introduction:

The last part of the class will focus on the Miles book. 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?

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]

Discussion Questions 1. Drawing upon Miles, how would you explain the origins of a significant policy success in

your field? See my paper on the “The Origins of DRGs.”


October 25, 2017 Class 8: Organizational Learning and Change at Multiple Levels Guest Speaker: Anne Douglass, Professor, University of Massachusetts Boston


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

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.

Leslie Perlow, Jody Hoffer Gittell and Nancy Katz (2004). "Contextualizing Patterns of Work Group Interaction: Toward A Nested Theory of Structuration," Organization Science. Available on LATTE.

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.

Jody Hoffer Gittell (2016), Transforming Relationships for High Performance: The Power of Relational Coordination. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press, Chapter 6. Available on LATTE.

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

2. How can organizations foster psychological safety? What are the expected effects of psychological safety for learning and change? What are the expected effects of its absence?

3. 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?

4. For organizational change to be successful is it more important to change formal structures, or relational patterns of beliefs 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 1, 2017 Class 9: Organizational and Social Conflict - Resolution or Revolution?

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

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.

Callie Watkins Liu (2017). .......

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 a particular country and a major conflict across countries.


November 8, 2017 Class 10: Diversity and New Technologies - Organizational Challenges and Opportunities

Diversity in Organizations

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.

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 thinking.7. How does intersectionality help us to understand diversity in organizations, and in the larger

organizational context?

New Technology, Social Media and Emerging Communities

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

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. Can you propose some hypotheses that are testable in your research context?

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 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? How would you develop and test this hypothesis?

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 15 & November 29, 2017 Classes 11-12: Presentation of Final Papers and Integration of TheoriesIntroduction:

During these two classes, you will present your organization theory papers. You will get 20 minutes to present, then take questions. The following day you will receive feedback from the professors and from one other student.

How can we develop testable hypotheses using the theories and tools discussed so far? We will also discuss research designs, including both quantitative and qualitative methods, that we can use to test these hypotheses.


Appendix A: 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. We will not have time to discuss but you can refer to them.

Recommended Readings

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

Appendix B: 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 of


Chicago 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.


syllabus - brandeis university · web viewpaul dimaggio and walter powell (1983). “the...

Documents