GBUS 874 – Cases in Leadership
Summer Session 2013: June 24 – 28
Course Syllabus
“The function of the University is to enable you to shed details in favor of principles.”
Alfred North Whitehead, Principicus Mathematica
Class Time: - MTWRF 08:30 to 16:30 - ED 514.
Instructor: Ron Camp II, Ph.D.
Office: Education Building, Room ED 540.6
Phone: 337-2387
Fax: 585-4805
Email: ronald.camp@uregina.ca
Office Hours:
Feel free to make an appointment for a time that suits your schedule, or you can reach the professor by email or
telephone.
Special Needs:
If there is any student in this course who, because of a disability, may have a need for accommodations, please
come and discuss this with the professor, as well as contacting the Coordinator of Special Needs Services at
585-463l.
Overview:
This one week module is intended to provide you with different perspectives on leadership and the ways in
which the concept of “Leadership” differs from that of “Management”. The emphasis of the course will be on
case studies and a centerpiece simulation which will allow us to examine leadership through the conceptual
lenses supplied by the assigned readings. The emphasis will be on looking at management (broadly defined)
and organizations as complex socio-technical systems.
The main goal for this course is to provide students with an understanding of the theory underlying the practice
of leadership. A secondary goal for this course is for students to develop the basic decision-making skills
associated with leadership. In order to facilitate these goals, students will be exposed to a variety of information
and experience through readings and business cases.
Assignments, Readings, & Exercises:
You will be working primarily from the readings and cases listed below. Concepts and their application may
appear simple on the surface, but typically are more subtle, complex and difficult to apply. To understand the
material covered in this course, it is crucial that you read the ARTICLES BEFORE JUNE 18 and the CASES
BEFORE JUNE 25 so that you can contribute thoughtfully to the class discussions and exercises. It is also
essential that you note and prepare these assignments prior to class meetings in the manner indicated by the
syllabus. It is also important that you re-read each case before the class date when it will be discussed.
June 2012 [GBUS 874: CASES IN LEADERSHIP]
Required Readings:
Text:
Blanchard. (2007). Leading at a Higher Level. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Articles:
Collins, J. & Poras, J. (1991). “Organizational vision and visionary organizations.” California
Management Review, 34(1): 30-52. (available through ABI/Inform UR library)
Green, Stephen, Fred Hassan, Jeffrey Immelt, Michael Marks, & Daniel Meiland. (2003). “In Search of
Global Leaders.” Harvard Business Review Article # R0308B.
Hill, Linda A. (1994). “Exercising Influence.” Harvard Business School Note # 494080.
Hill, Linda A. & Nancy Kamprath. (1998). “Beyond the Myth of the Perfect Mentor: Building a
Network of Developmental Relationships.” Harvard Business School Note # 9-491-096.
Negron, J. (2003). How to Write a Case Study. GTTP.org. (available through ABI/Inform UR library)
Parks, Sharon D. (2005). “Leadership for a Changing World: A Call to Adaptive Work.” HBS Press
Chapter # 2384BC.
Rooke, David & William R. Torbert. (2005). “Seven Transformations of Leadership.” Harvard Business
Review Article # R0504D.
Senge, P. (2000). “The leadership of profound change.” SPC Ink: 1-3. (available through ABI/Inform
UR library)
Snook, Scott A. (2007). “Leader(ship) Development.” Harvard Business School Note # 408064.
Cases:
Snook, Scott A. & Jeffrey T. Polzer. (2004). “The Army Crew Team” HBS Case 9-403-131
Kotter, John P. (1983). “Fred Henderson.” HBS Case 9-480-043
John P. Kotter (1980). “A Day with Fred Henderson.” Case Video # 9-881-502
Kotter, John P. (1993) “Renn Zaphiropoulos.” HBS Case # 9-480-044
John P. Kotter (1980). “A Day with Renn Zaphiropoulos.” Case Video # 9-881-501.
Polzer, Jeffrey T. & Alison Berkley Wagonfeld. (2004). “Flextronics: Deciding on a Shop Floor System for
Producing the Microsoft Xbox.” HBS Case # 9-403-090.
Slaughter, Kathleen E., Jeffrey Gandz & Nigel Goodwin. (2007). “John Meredith of Hutchison Port Holdings.”
Ivey Case # 9B07C027 (global leader)
Rowe, W. Glenn & Hari Bapuji. (2006) “Compassion Canada.” Ivey Case # 9B03M008
2
June 2012 [GBUS 874: CASES IN LEADERSHIP]
Howell, Jane M. & Laura Erskine. (2001). ”Spar Applied Systems - Anna's Challenge.” Ivey Case # 9A97C003
Crossan, Mary M. & Nick Bontis (2003). “Visioning at Xerox Canada.” Source : Ivey Case #
9A95M015
Visioning at Xerox Canada (A Speech by Diane McGarry) - Ivey Video # 7A95M015
Nohria, Nitin & Tony Mayo (2002) NerveWire, Inc. HBS Case # 9-402-022
Nitin Nohria (2002) “NerveWire: A Tale of Two Executives” Case Video, DVD # 9-403-800
Price, Alan & Nitin Nohria (2002) “Kirk Arnold” HBS Case # 9-402-020
Price, Alan & Nitin Nohria (2002) “Malcolm Frank” HBS Case # 9-402-021
Jacobs, Scott & Prescott C. Ensign. (2006). “Sun Microsystems.” Ivey Case # 9B06M023
Grading
1. Exam – (30% of course grade)
There will be 1 exam administered in this course, worth 30% of your final course grade. The exam will be at
the end of the week. This exam will be based primarily on application of the reading material and class
discussions to specific issues identified in the Sun Microsystems case.
2. Case Analysis Write-Ups – (20% of course grade)
Students must complete two homework case assignments. For each of these two assigned cases you will be
required to prepare a 2-page (maximum) written case analysis. The first write-up, regarding “Army Crew
Team,” is due at the beginning of the class on June 25. The second case write-up, regarding “Spar Applied
Systems,” is due at the beginning of the class on June 28. (Keep a copy of the write-ups for the class
discussion.)
Each write up should be typed, double-spaced, using 12-point Times-Roman font, and with 2.5 cm margins.
Unless otherwise indicated in class, write-ups should consist of three parts. The first part (1/2 page) is a
summary of one immediate issue in the case. In this section, briefly identify one main issue/point/problem
raised in the case that is germane to the readings and the assigned case questions. In this section fully describe
who was involved, doing what, in what sequence, with whom and the outcomes that chain of events resulted in.
The second (1/2 page) part of the write-up is your analysis. In this section, briefly explain how the case issue
described above relates to the specific course concepts. Explain how or why these issues are significant from a
leadership perspective. The third part (1 page) consists of your recommendations. Based on the case questions
and specific issues you addressed in the previous two sections, briefly outline one or two possible
solutions/actions for this case. For each write-up assume that you are a consultant writing a memo to the key
decision maker in the case. What should the decision maker in the case do? (Additional directions are provided
for each case write-up on UR Courses.)
3. Leadership Paper – Annotated Bibliography & Leadership Case (30% of course grade)
Annotated Bibliography (10%): Each student is required to complete a critical annotated bibliography of the
course readings. The first part of this report should cover the factors that affect leadership as described in the
assigned readings. The second part of the report should provide a critical synthesis of these readings leading to
a statement of what it means to be an effective leader. Each report should be 10-14 pages, double-spaced, using
Times-Roman 12 point font. Margins should be one inch. The report is due by e-mail on June 18.
3
June 2012 [GBUS 874: CASES IN LEADERSHIP]
Alphabetize your bibliographic entries. After each bibliographic entry, write a brief paragraph of approximately
5-6 sentences in length. This paragraph will summarize the content of the source, present its overarching thesis,
and evaluate the usefulness of the source. What is the main content of the source? What types of evidence does
the author use? What is the author’s main viewpoint/argument? How does the source relate to other relevant
sources? Overall, how useful is this source for your research topic? For complete directions for this assignment
refer to directions posted on UR Courses.
Leadership Case (20%): The second part of this leadership paper is to develop your own 2-4 page leadership
case. Take a topic and, based on your observations and experience, analyze a leadership situation at work or a
situation you are otherwise familiar with, using concepts in your annotated bibliography. The case should lead
the reader to apply these concepts to make a leadership decision or a set of recommendations (e.g. this could be
a case on how a leader creates stress for his/her staff and what he/she can do through the application of
appropriate leadership principles to alleviate this stress). I prefer that the paper not involve interviewing or
distributing a questionnaire. Do not identify people by name. Cases are due via e-mail by July 17.
4. Class Participation – (20% of course grade)
Students are expected to prepare for each class and to participate fully. Participation, defined broadly, includes
attendance both in class and group meetings. High levels of participation would include active participation in
class discussions (especially when that involves drawing others into the discussion) and might also include
bringing information from outside sources (work/life experience, journal/magazine/newspaper articles, books,
etc.) that enrich the learning experience of the class.
Marks for classroom contribution will be allocated in the following manner:
Exceeds Expectations
17-20 Students in this category provide leadership in and out of the classroom and work toward enhancing the
interpersonal dynamics of the class. Rather than dominating the setting, they act as facilitators, bringing
others into the discussion.
Meets Expectations
14-16 For showing an active interest in class activities and participating in classroom discussions; for regularly
making insightful comments which help others to understand the course material; for being a positive
group member, etc.
Does not Meet Expectations
0-13 10-13 For attending class on a regular basis and only occasionally contributing to the classroom
experience.
< 10 For failing on all of the previously identified ways of contributing.
4
June 2012 [GBUS 874: CASES IN LEADERSHIP]
Participation Quality. To facilitate active participation by everyone, it is important that class members have a
shared vision of what constitutes a contribution.
Contribution can be and is:
 Making observations that integrate concepts and discussions.
 Citing relevant personal examples.
 Asking key questions that lead to revealing discussions.
 Engaging in devil’s advocacy: Disagreeing with the instructor when the difference of opinion serves as
both counterpoint and a way of exploring all sides of a concept, issue, or practice.
 Working with others to come to a common understanding of the topics – in and out of the classroom.
 Pulling your own weight on group projects and participating enthusiastically in classroom group
activities: Being an active participant in group discussions.
By extension, contribution is not continuously dominating class and group discussions. It also means listening
to what others say – they have a right to contribute (and you may even learn something!).
Academic Issues
Late Assignments
Points will be deducted from late assignments.
Misconduct
As per the university’s handbook for students, each student is expected to do his/her own work and to refrain
from engaging in any dishonest activity. This includes both giving and receiving assistance on exams and/or
plagiarism on assignments. Any instance of academic misconduct, which includes using unauthorized materials
for assistance during quizzes or exams or any testing period (this includes electronic translators – paper versions
of dictionaries may be used), or misrepresenting another person’s work to be your own, may result in immediate
expulsion from the class, with a permanent grade of XF being placed on your transcript: the definition of XF on
the transcript shows you were failed as a result of academic misconduct, and the course will count as a grade of
zero toward your GPA. There is no discretion in this matter for the instructor. The Associate Dean for Graduate
Studies handles these cases.
5
June 2011 [GBUS 874: CASES IN LEADERSHIP]
EMBA 874 Timetable
Monday, June 24
8:30
9:45
10:00
11:45
12:45
2:15
2:30
4:30
Case write-up 1 due
Opening Session:
Framework for
Leadership
Tuesday, June 25
Reading Discussion
Break
Lunch
Case 3: Flextronics:
Deciding on a shop floor
system for producing the
Microsoft Xbox
Break
Case 1: Army Crew
Team (continued)
Break
Case 2a: Fred Henderson Case 4: John Meredith:
2b: Renn Zaphiropoulos Hutchinson Port
Article: Managers &
Holdings
leaders: Are they
different?
Lunch
Case 1: Army Crew
Team
Reading Discussion
Thursday, June 27
Case 6: Spar Applied
Systems
Friday, June 28
Case 8: Nervewire
Case write-up 2 due
Break
Reading Discussion:
Wednesday, June 26
Break
Case 3: Flextronics:
Deciding on a shop floor
system for producing the
Microsoft Xbox (cont’d)
End
End
Lunch
Reading Discussion
Break
Case 5: Compassion
Canada
End
Break
Break
Case 6: Spar Applied
Systems (cont’d)
Lunch
Case 8a: Kirk Arnold
(Nervewire)
Lunch
Case 7: Visioning at
Xerox Canada
Break
Case 8b: Malcolm Frank
(Nervewire)
Break
Reading Discussion:
Case Exam: Sun
Synthesis and integration Microsystems
of key leadership
concepts
End
End
Annotated Bibliography: Due June 17, 2011
Own Case: Due July 17, 2011
6