DPLS 701su08 Organizational Theory
DPLS 701 - Organizational Theory
Summer 2008 3 Credit
Professor: Chris Francovich, Ed.D.
Office Phone: (509) 323-3592
Office hours: Please call for an appointment
email: francovich@gonzaga.edu
Meeting Times: Mondays 6 - 10 pm
Meeting Dates: June 23, 30, July 7, 11, 14 (Fri), 21, 28
Course Overview
The course explores the foundations of organizational theorizing and practice. The text by Hatch explores organizational theory from modernist, symbolic, and postmodern perspectives. The symbolic and postmodern perspectives are theoretical perspectives acting on and responding to modernist practices that have become increasingly institutionalized over the past 200 years. These relationships and the theories and practices that arise from this confluence of perspectives will be the core focus of the course.
Other voices will explore various aspects of this basic framework. Shirky’s book is a current analysis of how social tools are changing the very basis for organizing. How organizations adapt to these changes remains to be seen.
Edgar Schein’s work reflects (in my view) on of the most powerful voices of modernist thought in relation to both organizations and leadership. His work will explore the depths of modernist frameworks and practices alive today in organizations.
The work by Etienne Wenger on Communities of Practice is an attempt to develop a model of the organization or community that reflects the symbolic interactionist perspective as it tries to map behavior and practice with meaning and identity. Building off modernist perspectives this work explores, through an ethnography of a claims processing unit in a large insurance company, the intersection of the structures and rules of existing institutions with the always alive and changing nature of people working, thinking, and making meaning.
We will also read a text grounded in the perspective of ecological psychology. This reading will be a group project with selected groups each reading and reporting on a chapter of the text throughout the semester. These materials will be provided to participants at the first meeting.
Other readings will be provided that touch on and extend the discussion of the postmodern perspective. Underlying all of these perspectives is an orientation toward holism, the biological basis of mental processes, and a social constructionist perspective toward knowledge and identity. Be prepared for discussion, dialogue, and engagement.Course Structure
This course is composed of reading, writing, discussion, lecture, group activities, and video. We will form small working groups during the first meeting that will remain intact throughout the course. These groups or cohorts will serve multiple functions. Among them are:
· Content & process support - group participants will have an opportunity to discuss readings, past discussions, and meeting assignments.
· Paper review and editing - Prior to turning in completed papers each person’s paper will be read and edited by their peers in a structured editing activity. The DPLS course paper rubric (see Blackboard under Assignments) will be introduced and used as the context for this joint editing process. It is recognized that underlying good writing is both clarity of thought and an adequate grasp of concepts and frameworks. These forums used in conjunction with my own critique of student work will assist in the development of sound scholarship.
· Project and activity work - One of our first activities will be for groups to develop an agreement about group process and individual responsibilities. Other group activities will be developed.
Most 4 hour meetings will open with an overview of the readings. Small group discussions of course notes and readings will then follow. We will generally take a 20-30 minute break. Following the break we will work on projects, conduct full group debriefs, continue discussion, or review readings or video presentations.
It is also my habit to prepare interpretive notes of the readings and make them available on Blackboard prior to our meeting. I use these notes to frame my ideas for dialogue when we meet. I also hope that my interpretations inspire students to interpret and analyze the readings from their own perspectives. I then prepare a number of slides based on my notes to stimulate discussion and/or communicate concepts and ideas.My intentions & aims for the course:
· To absorb and reflect on the possibilities of current innovations in social tools – peer to peer networking and a general decline in the cost of organizing (transaction costs).
· To develop a working knowledge of the history & concepts of organization theory as it relates to leadership studies.
· To develop an understanding of person-environment psychology as a bridge to practical strategies for living, leading, and working in organizations.
· To understand both conceptually and historically the role of modernist theories of organizations & groups.
· To understand both conceptually, personally, and historically the role of symbolic, interactionist, and social theories of organizations & groups.
· To survey, discuss, and develop an understanding of postmodern interpretations of organization theory as well as issues of power and diversity in organizations,
· To connect a leadership theory of transformation to organization theory and the possibility of transformative change in both private and public organizations and institutions.
Expectations, Assignments, & Grading
· Please read all assignments and my course notes posted on Blackboard. These notes are meant to be an initial factor in the reading triangulation strategy that involves the author(s) work, your interpretation of that work, my interpretation, and finally our collective interpretation. This process is much more effective when all participants commit to doing the reading. Also, please read (at a minimum) the reading notes of the people that are in your assigned group. Some group activities will be structured around these notes.
· Participants will be expected to attend all sessions. If you miss a meeting please inform me via email or phone prior to the missed meeting. Missing more than two meetings will result in an incomplete and require either taking the course again or auditing it at some future time. (Participation - 10% of grade)
· Participants will be expected to complete a pre-course writing assignment on Shirky’s book Here Comes Everybody. Specific guidelines are on Blackboard under course Assignments (15%)
· Participants will present in teams of 2 or 3 persons a 1 hour presentation summary and a facilitated discussion of a book chapter from: Person-Environment Psychology: Models and Perspectives. This task will be assigned and materials provided at the first meeting as well as made available on Blackboard. Instructions will be posted on Blackboard before our second meeting. (15% of grade)
· Participants will post interpretive reading notes to the Blackboard Discussion Center before each class (except the first one) under their assigned group names (your name will be on the Discussion Thread under each group. See the Assignments link for further information. (15% of grade)
· Write a capstone paper synthesizing the readings and discussions central to Organization Theory. This will be a 10 – 13 page paper (excluding title page and references). Please use 1 inch margins, 12 point Times New Roman font in APA format. You can exercise wide latitude and judgment in writing the paper but it must be grounded in one or more of the three broad perspectives of the course (Modernist, Symbolic, and Postmodern). Your paper should include references citing course materials but also should include references and sources not found in the assigned course materials. (45% of grade). Due date is July 31.
Expectations and Assessment
Assessment of doctoral work in leadership studies is challenging. Interdisciplinary work dealing with complex and sometimes contested theories and concepts requires (from my perspective) a tolerance for uncertainty, ambiguity, and contingency. I am also struck by the need for a high degree of self-directed behavior on the part of doctoral students and candidates. I would like my teaching style, assessment policy, and rubrics to support and facilitate self-direction.
However, behind my questions about assessment and uncertainty in evaluating anyone in an absolute manner there does reside (in my view) a set of skills that serve to hold and shape work with language in a complex world. I believe we need a grammar, syntax, and semantics of clarity, coherence, depth, and breadth. My assumption at the beginning of the term is that all of the students taking this course possess the requisite skills, talents, and propensities needed to be clear, cogent, and complete. I admit that the standards I refer to are objectively stated and subjectively enacted. My assessment will be based on the quality and content of expressed thought as exhibited in both written assignments and presentations and participation.
Grading Criteria for Written Work (adapted from the DPLS Academic papers rubric)
Content Criteria:
The content of papers should reflect the level and style of content in readings and discussions. There is an expectation that doctoral students will reach outside of their comfort zone in terms of appropriation of ideas, concepts, and frameworks. The substance of papers and other writings will be weighed against the general level of discourse in meetings and the style and density of expression of the readings. On the other hand, papers should not be too complicated are wide in scope. The art of scholarly writing is (in part) to go into a narrow area deeply and show its relevance to the wider literature.Thought and Expression Criteria
Student writing should raise vital questions or issues, formulating them clearly and precisely. I will be looking for evidence of breadth and depth and the insightful, in-depth analysis of complex ideas. Main points should be developed and supported with relevant information and references that are appropriately incorporated.
The organization and logic of your writing is critical. The expectation is for well focused, well organized, and well reasoned conclusions. The writing should flow with the reader not getting lost or having to work to determine what you are saying.
There is also an expectation that your writing/thinking has an open and inclusive character when exploring alternative systems of thought, recognizing and assessing, as appropriate, their assumptions, implications, and/or practical consequences.
Technical Criteria
Your writing should be clear and demonstrate a high level of vocabulary through careful word choice. Sentences should be constructed skillfully and purposefully. Transitions between paragraphs and sections are important and will evaluated for their efficacy in weaving your concepts, themes, and purposes together. Summaries and conclusions are also vital elements of good writing and will be evaluated based on their appropriateness and effectiveness.
Of course grammar, punctuation, and spelling are expected to be flawless. Careful proof reading of your paper is a basic expectation.
Papers, unless otherwise noted are to be completed in APA style. References should be cited properly within the text and a complete reference list must be provided. Appropriate use of headings will also be noted.
Point/Grade correspondence:
95-100% = A
90-94.99% = A-
85-90% = B
80-84.99% = B-Required Texts
Shirky, C. (2008). Here comes everybody : The power of organizing without organizations. New York: Penguin Press. ISBN - 9781594201530
Hatch, M. J. a. C., A.L (2006). Organization Theory: Modern, symbolic, and postmodern perspectives. (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN - 0199260214
Schein, E. (2004). Organizational Culture and Leadership San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. ISBN: 0787975974
Wenger, E. (1999). Communities of practice; Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN - 0521663636Other Readings will be provided via hardcopy and on Blackboard
(To be provided) Walsh, B.W., Craik, K. H, Price R.H., (Eds) (2000) Person-Environment Psychology: New Directions and Perspectives. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers (We will discuss this book and project at the first meeting.
Meetings Outline
Pre-Meeting Assignment:
· Read Here Comes Everybody
· Write 3 page response (see Blackboard)
June 23rd
Organization Theory
Housekeeping Issues – group selections, PEP assignments, processes, etc.
Introductory Lecture & Dialogue – How is the organizational perspective related to social tools relevant to organizational theory? Discuss and review papers.
Readings for June 30th session:
· Read pp. IX – p. 100 in Organization Theory by Hatch
· Assigned groups read chapters in Person Environment Psychology handouts
· Wenger pp. 1 – 142
· Palmer on Dewey & Bentley (on Blackboard in 1st Meeting folder)
June 30th
The Environment, Communities of Practice, Structures & Structuring
Film – The Corporation
Person Environment Psychology (PEP) Chapters 1 & 2 Presentations
Readings for July 7:
· Hatch pp. 101-139
· Wenger pp. 143 – 222
· Hatch & Schultz (On Black board in 2nd Meeting Folder)
· Assigned groups read chapters in PEP handouts and prepare for presentation
July 7
Technology & Identity
PEP Presentation Chapters 3&4
Readings for July 11:
· Hatch pp. 141-173
· Schein pp. pp. XI – 84
· Cooper & Burrell (on Blackboard in 3rd Meeting Folder)
· Assigned groups read chapters in PEP handouts and prepare for presentation
July 11
Organizational Culture
PEP Presentation Chapters 5 & 6
Readings for July 13:
· Hatch pp. 175-219
· Schein pp. 85- 222
· Assigned groups read chapters in PEP handouts and prepare for presentation
July 14
Physical & Conceptual Dimensions of Culture
PEP Presentation Chapters 7 & 8
Readings for July 18:
· Hatch pp. 221-250
· Schein pp. 223 – 418
July 21
Power, Conflict, Control, Leadership and Change
Readings for July 25:
· Hatch pp. 251-345
July 28
Review of readings and closure Some Related Literature:Agre, P. (1997). Computation and human experience. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Argyris, C. (1993). Knowledge for Action: A guide to overcoming barriers to organizational change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Argyris, C. (1999). On Organizational Learning. Malden. Massachusetts: Blackwell Business.
Barker, R. G. (1968). Ecological psychology: Concepts and methods for studying the environment of human behavior. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1991). Reframing Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice (R. Nice, Trans.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Bowker, G. C., Leigh-Starr, S., Turner, W., Gasser Les, & Eds. (1997). Social Science, Technical Systems, and Cooperative Work: Beyond the great divide. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Brown, J., & Duguid, P. (2001). Knowledge and Organizations: A Social-Practice Perspective. Organization Science, 12(2), pp.198-213.
Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (1993). Stolen Knowledge. Educational Technology, 33(3), 10-15.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
Burke, W. W. (2002). Organization Change: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Douglas, M. (1986). How institutions think. Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press.
Hawken, P., Lovins, A., & Lovins Hunter, L. (1999). Natural Capitalism: Creating the next industrial revolution. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.
Heft, H. (2001). Ecological Psychology in Context: James Gibson, Roger Barker, and the Legacy of William James's Radical Empiricism. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Heifetz, R. A. (1994). Leadership Without Easy Answers. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Ho, M.-W. (1991). The role of action in evolution: Evolution by process and the ecological approach to perception. Cultural Dynamics, 4(3), 336-354.
Hofstede, G. (1997). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind - Intercultural Cooperation and its Importance for Survival. New York: McGraw Hill.
Illich, I. (1973). Tools for conviviality. Berkeley, CA: Heyday Books.
Jaques, E. (2002). The Life and Behavior of Living Organisms: A General Theory. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice. Boston, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning; Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Maturana, H., & Varela, F. (1987). The tree of knowledge; The biological roots of human understanding. Boston, MA: Shambhala.
Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, Self, and Society: From the standpoint of a social behaviorist (C. W. Morris, Ed.). The University of Chicago Press.
Nonaka, I. (1997). A new organizational structure. In L. Prusak (Ed.), Knowledge in Organizations (pp. 99-135). Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Rousseau, D. M. (1997). Organizational behavior in the new organizational era. Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 515 -532).
Salomon, G. (. (1993). Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schein, E. (1997). Three cultures of management: The key to organizational learning in the 21st century. WWW (Cambridge, MA), http://learning.mit.edu/res/wp/three.html.
Searle, J. (1995). The construction of social reality. New York: The Free Press.
Stacey, R. D., Griffin, D., & Shaw, P. (2000). Complexity and management: Fad or radical challenge to systems thinking?. London: Routledge.
Starr, P. (1982). The social transformation of American medicine. New York: Basic Books.
Strauss, A. L. (1993). Continual permutations of action. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.
Suchman, L. A. (1987). Plans and Situated Actions : The Problem of Human-Machine Communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wertsch, J. V. (1998). Mind as Action. New York: Oxford University Press.
