DPLS 701 – Organizational Theory
Spring 2007                        3 credits

Professor: Chris Francovich, Ed.D.
Office Phone: 509-323-3592
E-mail: francovich@gonzaga.edu
Office hours: Please call for an appointment: 509-323-3592
Class Logistics: Friday Evenings from  6-10 in  RC 218
Dates: Jan. 12, 19; Feb. 2, 16; Mar. 2, 9, 30; Apr. 13

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 practices that arise from this confluence of perspectives will be the core focus of the course.

Three other voices will explore various aspects of this basic framework. 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.

Another voice on the boundary of modernist thinking is that of Margaret Wheatley. The 3^rd edition of her now famous book will explore the systems and complexity questions surrounding human communities.

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.

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 class.

My intentions & aims for the course:

• 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

• Participants will be expected to attend all class sessions. If you miss a class please inform me via email or phone prior to the missed class. Missing more than two classes will result in an incomplete and require either taking the class again or auditing it at some future time. (Participation - 10% of grade)
• Participants will be expected to complete a pre-course writing assignment summarizing and synthesizing the first section of the text by Hatch. Papers should be 3 to 4 pages in length excluding references. Please use 1 inch margins, 12 point Times New Roman font  and APA format This paper is due on or before the first class. There will be no exceptions. (5% of grade)
• Participants will complete a web based assignment on Blackboard requiring thoughtful reflection and feedback. (5% of grade)
• Participants will complete a mid-term paper on a topic related to the readings. More specific suggestions & criteria will be posted on Blackboard before the first class. This paper is due on February 19^th. Paper should be between 8 & 12 pages excluding title page. Please use 1 inch margins, 12 point Times New Roman font in APA format. (15% of grade).
• Participants will present in teams of 2 or 3 persons a 1 hour presentation summary and a facilitated class discussion of a book chapter from: Person-Environment Psychology: Models and Perspectives. This task will be assigned and materials provided at the first class meeting. The task also includes a 5 page paper. Please use 1 inch margins, 12 point Times New Roman font in APA format. Instructions will be posted on Blackboard before our second class meeting. (30% of grade)
• Write a capstone paper synthesizing the readings and discussions central to Organization Theory. This will be a 12 – 15 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 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. (35% of grade).  Due date is April 16^th.

Expectations and Assessment

Assessment of doctoral work in leadership studies is problematic for me. 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 in this class 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 classroom 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 class meetings and the style and density of expression of the readings.

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

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 - 0521663636

Wheatley, M. J. (2006). Leadership and the new science. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers Inc. ISBN - 1576753441

Other Readings will be provided via hardcopy and on Blackboard

Class Outline

Pre-Class Assignment:

• Read pp. IX – p. 60 in Organization Theory by Hatch. Prepare a 3 - 4 page synthesis and summary of the key ideas. Use APA format.
• Read Leadership and the New Science (LNS) - Wheatley pp. IX – 74

January 12

What is Organization Theory?

Housekeeping Issues - books, assignments, processes, etc.

Introductory Lecture & Dialogue – How is the organizational perspective related to Leadership and Leadership Theory? Review of Part 1 of Organization Theory by Hatch and the first part of LNS.

Readings for January 19 session:

January 19

Organization & Environment & Physics, fields, and the problem of ontological separation

Person Environment Psychology (PEP) Chapters 1 & 2 Presentations – Papers due at beginning of class.

Readings for February 2:

February 2

Social Structure of Organizations & Communities of Practice

PEP Presentation Chapters 3 & 4 (Papers due at beginning of class)

Readings for February 16:

February 16

Technology and Identity

PEP Presentation Chapters 5 & 6 (Papers due at beginning of class)

Readings for March 2:

March 2

Organizational Culture

PEP Presentation Chapters 7 & 8 (Papers due at beginning of class)

Readings for March 9:

• Hatch pp. 221 - 250
• Schein pp. pp. 85- 222

March 9

The Dimensions of Culture

Readings for March 30:

March 30

Power, Conflict, & Control

Readings for April 13:

April 13

Theory in Practice & Design

Summing up.

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.