UNIVERSITY OF LETHBRIDGE
FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT
MANAGEMENT 3360
ORGANIZATION THEORY
Section A
Instructor:
Dr. John M. Usher
Term: Spring 2007
Office:
E582
Time: MW 15:05 to 16:20
Telephone:
329-2759
Room: AH176
E-mail:
john.usher@uleth.ca
Office hours: MW 13:30 – 15:00
______________________________________________________________________________
Course Objectives:
This course is about organizations and the linkages among their environments, strategies and
structures. How and why organizations function as they do will be described in a framework
designed to improve organizational effectiveness. The course will focus on the aggregate
behaviour of people in various organizations - business, government, education, professions.
This course builds on the material covered in MGT2030 which deals with the behaviour of
individuals and small groups in organizations - a “micro” focus. MGT3360 will use an
integrative “macro” focus to diagnose and analyze how the successful implementation of
organizational strategies is often contingent upon achieving a good fit between specific
environmental factors and organizational structure and process variables.
Course Materials:
Daft, Richard L. Organization Theory and Design, 9th edition, (8th edition may also be
used if available.), St. Paul MN: West Publishing, 2007. ISBN: 0-324-40542-1
Basis of Evaluation
1.
2.
3.
4.
Group Presentation
Mid term examination
Group Assessment
Final examination
20%
35%
10%
35%
100%
Grade Distributions
A+
A
A-
95-100
90-94
86-89
B+
B
B-
82-85
78-81
74-77
C+
C
C-
70-73
66-69
62-65
D+
D
F
58-61
50-57
00-49
Course Structure and Requirements:
Group Presentation: Students will be required to work in groups of their own choosing to
prepare and present a case analysis from the text. Group size will be 5 students. Group members
may be ‘fired’ for cause by a majority of the group following consultation with me. There is no
alternative work for credit available to fired members. Do not find yourself in this situation.
Teamwork is a critical managerial skill set. Presentations will be structured as follows:
(1) A 15-20 minute overview / interpretation of the case facts ending with a summary of the key
issues facing the organization. Creativity (game shows, videos, skits, etc.) is highly encouraged
for this segment but you should be sure that form does not overwhelm substance.
(2) Each presenting group will also have the responsibility of providing a list of questions about
the case to be answered by the other groups in the class. You will assign each non-presenting
group a different question that applies the theory of the current chapter (and previous chapters if
appropriate) and the taking up of these questions by the presenting group will constitute the
analysis / diagnosis segment of their presentation. Questions that should be avoided include those
which call for conclusions such as specific recommendations or details of implementation as
these are the job of the presenting group. Upon assigning the analysis questions, members of the
presenting group will circulate among the non-presenting groups to provide advice and general
assistance during the 15-20 minutes available for these groups to work on their responses. Before
your presentation begins please provide me with a list of the questions that you expect the
other groups to answer and ensure that I am aware which groups will be assigned which
questions. I will gladly review your proposed questions before you finalize them for class use.
Just email them to me, drop by during office hours or make an appointment for this purpose.
(3) Upon reconvening the class, the presenting group will call upon a spokesperson from each
non-presenting group in turn to provide their response to the assigned question. After each
response, a member of your presenting group will comment on the answer provided and discuss
in detail how you handled that question. You are the experts after all!
(4) During the final segment of the presentation, the presenting group provides details of how
they would resolve the issues of the case: alternative courses of action that were considered (with
the pro's & con's of each), the recommended course of action (which of the alternatives was
chosen), and implementation details (demonstrating the feasibility of putting your
recommendation into action.) Examine your alternatives carefully to ensure that they are true
alternatives, i.e. it is not possible to do more than one at the same time. A hint: if you find that
you are recommending more than one of your alternatives, your thinking may have gone astray.
The time available for each presentation including Q&A and final comments will be 60-65
minutes. Time management is in the hands of the presenting group and excessively long or short
presentations will be reflected in the grade assigned. The 65 minute time limit is to allow a
minimum of 10 minutes at the end of your presentation so that I can comment briefly on your
performance. Grading of the presentation and Q&A segment will be based on the attached
guideline (Appendix 1) which I and each of the other groups will complete for each presentation
to yield a composite score: My score + average of other group scores = group presentation score.
Group Assessment: Since the participation of non-presenting groups is crucial to the success of
each case, part of your grade will depend on my assessment of the degree of preparation, quality
of analysis and attendance of your group when it is not presenting. This is an “evaluation by
exception” activity. If the majority of your group is in attendance, you appear to have read and
discussed the case before coming to class and your responses show good understanding of the
course material each time, you will get full marks. For each exception to these criteria, I will
deduct marks.
Course Outline:
Jan 8
Introductions and syllabus review
Jan 10
Organizations and Organization Theory
Read:
Chapter 1
Exercise:
You’ll play the role, so why not pick the part?
Jan 15
Strategy, Organization Design and Effectiveness
Read:
Chapter 2
Case:
Airstar Inc.
Jan 17
Case:
Jan 22
Fundamentals of Organization Structure
Read:
Chapter 3
Jan 24
Case:
Jan 29
The External Environment
Read:
Chapter 4
Case:
Genesco
Jan 31
Case:
Feb 5
Interorganizational Relationships
Read:
Chapter 5
Exercise:
Ugli Orange
*Hand out essay questions for mid term
Feb 7
Case:
Feb 12
Designing Organizations for the International Environment
Read:
Chapter 6
*Assign Chpt. 7 Workbook exercise: Bistro Technology
Feb 14
Mid-Term Exam:
Feb 19
Reading Week
Feb 21
Reading Week
Feb 26
Return and review Mid-Term results
Feb 28
Manufacturing and Service Technologies
Read:
Chapter 7
Workbook exercise: Bistro Technology
Mar 5
Case:
Mar 7
Organization Size, Life Cycle and Decline
Read:
Chapter 9
Workbook exercise: Control mechanisms
The Maclean’s Survey
UofL Faculty of Management structure
The Paradoxical Twins
Hugh Russell, Inc.
(Do in class)
(Do in class)
(Group #1)
(Group #2)
Wednesday, Feb 14th
Acetate Department
(Group #3)
Mar 12
Case:
Sunflower Incorporated
Mar 14
Organizational Culture and Ethical Values
Read:
Chapter 10
Corporate culture video exercise
Mar 19
Case:
Mar 21
Innovation and Change
Read:
Chapter 11
Case:
Southern Discomfort
Mar 26
Case:
Mar 28
Decision Making Processes
Read:
Chapter 12
Case:
The Dilemma of Aliesha State College
Apr 2
Case:
Apr 4
Conflict, Power and Politics
Read:
Chapter 13
Workbook exercise: How do you handle conflict?
Apr 10
*Hand out essay questions for final
Does this Milkshake Taste Funny?
Shoe Corporation of Illinois
Cracking the Whip
(Group #4)
(Group #5)
(Group #6)
(Group #7)
Appendix 1
PRESENTATION EVALUATION FORM
DATE:
CASE:
GROUP:
Scale: 1 = poor; 2 = barely adequate; 3 = average; 4 = very good; 5 = excellent
1. Did each group member have a full bio up front & adequate role?
12345
2. Was an overview / agenda provided and timing well managed?
12345
3. How creative was the group’s portrayal of the case facts?
12345
4. Did the group facilitate appropriate use of current chapter theory?
12345
5. Did the group use theory from previous chapters where appropriate?
12345
6. What was the quality of the group’s proposed solution?
12345
7. Was a workable plan of action developed for implementation?
12345
8. Was supporting PowerPoint clear, informative and engaging?
12345
9. What was the quality / depth of the group’s assigned questions?
12345
10. How well did the group work with the other groups in the Q&A?
12345
Total Marks:
Additional Comments:
/50