Macro Organizational Science II
(OS8621, SOCY6090, PSYC6621)
Fall, 2007
Fretwell, 206 Wednesday 2:00-4:45 p.m.
Instructor:
Office:
Office Hours:
Beth A. Rubin
Fretwell 490M
W 10-12 and by appointment
Email:barubin@uncc.edu
Phone: 687-6215
Course Description and Objectives
This course introduces students to macro-level theory and research on organizations. This field of
inquiry is vast covering a wide range of topics, disciplines, theories and methodological
approaches, so the process of winnowing it down is necessarily arbitrary. As listed in the
catalogue, readings will introduce theory and research on organizational theory, organizational
culture, organizational development and change, organizations and their environments and
several other topics that I think are interesting and important to understanding organizations. The
field of organizational studies, science, etc is inherently interdisciplinary so even when much of
the literature is drawn from sociology sources, that literature itself is based in not only the
disciplines represented in our program but also anthropology and economics among others. The
goals of this course are to introduce students to some of the central theory and research
motivating inquiry into macro-organizational studies. A second goal is to develop further students’
own research. A third goal is to enhance students’ written and oral skills.
Format, Teaching Philosophy and Requirements
As do all of my classes, this class requires that students attend, read assigned readings, discuss
them in class, and write. I have tried to keep the reading to a minimum so that we have time to
delve deeply into each week’s assigned literature. This course does not require examinations.
The format of the class is a graduate seminar. A graduate seminar includes participation as a
crucial component of the learning process. I do not adopt the “empty vessel” model of teaching;
that is, students are not empty vessels into which a professor pours accumulated knowledge.
That model has little to do with learning. Rather, learning requires active engagement with the
material and with other class participants. We will learn a great deal in this class from each
other’s ideas and through working through our shared and divergent understandings of the
material. The bottom line here is that I will rarely lecture and we will all share in the discussion of
material.
For most classes, we will take a break 2/3rds of the way into the class. After the break, if we have
not yet done so, our discussion will turn to a research and application “brainstorming” session.
That is, we’ll talk about what research and application ideas the literature generates (vis-à-vis
what you are already doing or new things). We’ll ask how we, as a group, or individual, would
extend, test, challenge or otherwise engage empirically with the material discussed in the first
part of the class. What do our different approaches to organizational studies yield? Our
discussions will cover such issues as necessary data, hypothesis development, construct
development, variable construction, etc. Likewise, we’ll ask what the research or theory implies
for practice. Ultimately, most of us study organizations in order to improve them in one way or
another so the application component is crucial. My hope is that some of these discussions might
actually produce a collective project (or multiple such projects).
There are myriad ways to organize the reading for this class. It has turned out to be heavily
theoretical. I have found, though, that a strong theoretical base, and a deep and varied theoretical
toolbox, serves scholars well. Theory should provide us with ample hypothesis development
material; if it does not, it’s not good theory. Trying to explore how we would test these theories is
1
good social science exercise and reinforcement for what you have been doing in the other
classes.
I ordered two texts at the Campus Bookstore (under SOCY 6090) but suggest that you can find
them on line for less than the bookstore will charge.
 Scott, Richard 2003 Organizations: Rational, Natural and Open Systems, Fifth
Edition. Prentice Hall. ISBN 013016559.
 Perrow, Charles 1986 Complex Organizations: a Critical Essay. Third Edition,
Random House, ISBN: 0 394344979.
 The rest of the reading is either on-line or I will loan my copy for students to
copy. Those items marked with an asterisk * are the ones not easily available
on-line.
Discussion Memoranda:
To facilitate the quality of the discussion, each student will prepare a memo that provides a
mechanism to grapple concretely with the assigned reading. Use the memos to develop ideas
informally over time and to put into words impressions and thoughts that seem worth developing.
Use these memos to address ideas, concepts and arguments you found stimulating, frustrating,
worth remembering etc. Use them to raise questions, concerns and disagreements with ideas
encountered and particularly useful to your long-term learning; use them to make connections,
linkages and to identify contradictions between and among other ideas. Because I will read them
each week, the memos also provide an opportunity to receive individualized feedback. Part of
each seminar period should be devoted to having students raise points and questions from their
memos as a basis for group discussion. Memos are graded on a + or 0 scale. Please submit
them electronically both to me and the discussion facilitator, by Tuesday, 5:00 p.m. These
memos should be relatively short (1-2 double spaced pages). Please send this memo to me and
the other class members (barubin@uncc.edu) as WORD attachments (not as e-mail text).
Discussion Leader:
Beginning with the 4th week of class (9/12) each student will facilitate at least one (and probably
two, depending on class size) of the topics for discussion. The discussion leader is responsible
for summarizing, briefly, the content of the assigned reading, then using her or his own and
classmates’ memos to interpret and evaluate the merits and shortcomings of the organizational
perspective in the reading. Emphasis should be on an interactive exchange among students and
not on delivering a lecture. Discussion leaders are encouraged to draw on literature in addition to
the required readings. Note: memos are required beginning the second week of class.
Final Paper
The final portion of each student’s grade will be a paper that can take one of a number of forms.
Some of these may be collaborative.
1. The first paper option is to write a research proposal that would serve as a draft of an
NSF dissertation improvement grant. The last two weeks of class will be devoted to
proposal development.
2. A second option is to work on a paper that builds on prior research you have conducted.
Students choosing this option must demonstrate how the paper will draw on and
demonstrate mastery of the material from this class.
3. A third paper option is to write a literature review. This option is for those who want to
read more deeply into one of the areas from this class.
All students must discuss their paper choice with me and obtain my approval. Papers
submitted for a grade that have not received my approval, whether collaborative or not will
not be accepted.
2
Final Memo
The final evaluative assignment for this class is a memorandum of 4-6 pages that each student
will write (on her or his own) that reflects on ways in which the material in this class may be useful
in pursuing her or his personal research agenda.
Grading
The grade for this class will be based on the following:
Weekly Memos
Discussion leadership and
participation
50%
Final Paper
Final memo
40%
10%
Course Policies
1. Because this class meets only once a week and each session includes material that
is experiential thus cannot be retrieved from books or articles, and because I put
such a high premium on participation, attendance is expected, its absence will lower
the final grade.
2. I do not accept late assignments. In fairness to all students, I do not provide special
opportunities to turn in assignments late or early.
3. Students should arrive on time and not leave early unless previously cleared with me.
4. Okay, this isn’t a policy, but it is an important point of information. I am a fairly direct
(perhaps blunt, not always tactful) communicator. I urge you to talk with me about
your interests, your concerns, your issues with this class. Be willing to disagree, get
in an argument, and know that it is all good preparation for your professional life both
inside and outside of the academy. I am open to what you have to say despite the
passion and commitment with which I may say some things and with which I may
disagree (or agree!) with what you say. My definition of good teaching is when I can
learn something new from my students. Then I’ve done my job.
Academic Integrity:
Students are obligated to honor the Code of Student Academic Integrity. The current UNC
Charlotte Catalog includes the following:
"The UNC Charlotte Code of Student Academic Integrity governs the responsibility of
students to maintain integrity in academic work, define violations of the standards, describes
procedures for handling alleged violations of the standards, and lists applicable penalties. The
following conduct is prohibited in that Code as violating those standards.
A.
Cheating. Intentionally using or attempting to use unauthorized materials, information,
notes, study aids or other devices in any academic exercise. This definition includes
unauthorized communication of information during an academic exercise.
B.
Fabrication and Falsification. Intentional and unauthorized alteration or invention of any
information or citation in an academic exercise. Falsification is a matter of altering
3
information while fabrication is a matter on inventing or counterfeiting information for use
in any academic exercise.
C.
Multiple Submission. The submission of substantial portions of the same academic work
(including oral reports) for credit more than once without authorization.
D.
Plagiarism. Intentionally or knowingly presenting the work of another as one's own (i.e.,
without proper acknowledgment of the source). The sole exception to the requirement of
acknowledging sources is when the ideas, information, etc. are common knowledge.
E.
Abuse of Academic Materials. Intentionally or knowingly destroying, stealing or making
inaccessible library or other academic resource material.
F.
Complicity in Academic Dishonesty. Intentionally or knowingly helping or attempting to
help another commit an act of academic dishonesty.
The complete text of The UNC Charlotte Code of Student Academic Integrity provides a full
explanation of these definitions, and a description of procedures used in cases where student
violations are alleged. This code may be modified from time to time. Users are advised to
contact the Office of the Dean of Students to assure they consult the most recent edition."
(SOURCE: The University of North Carolina at Charlotte Undergraduate and Graduate
Catalog 1999 - 2001. Office of Academic Affairs. p. 375).
_____________________________________________________________
Tentative Schedule of Topics and Readings
8/22
Reading: Syllabus
For this first week, the reading is recommended, but not required.
 Haveman, Heather 2000 “The future of organizational sociology: forging
ties among paradigms.” Contemporary Sociology 29:754-756
 Scott, W. Richard. 2004 “Reflections on a half-century of organizational
sociology.” Annual Review of Sociology (ARS) 30:1-21.
 Pfeffer, Jeffrey 1997 “Development and scope of organizational studies.”
Chapter 1 of New Directions for Organization Theory, Oxford University
Press. [I am reading this for the first time—as is the case with many of the
assigned readings. I will probably require this book next time I teach the
course].*
8/29
Organizational Theory
 Weber “Bureaucracy” (Because, as DiMaggio says “from which all else in
organization studies flows). Otherwise, I’ve been highly selective and have not
assigned much of the historical literature influential in the development of
macro- organizational studies.*
 Scott, Organizations Preface, Chapters 1-4, 12, 13
9/5
Organizational Theory continued
 Perrow, Complex Organizations. New York: Random Chapters 1-5
9/12
Organizational Theory: The New Institutionalists
Facilitator__________________________________
 Zucker, Lynne 1987 “Institutional theories of organization” Annual Review of
Sociology 15:443-64.
 Meyer, John W. and Brian Rowen 1977 “Institutionalized organizations: formal
structure as myth and ceremony,” American Sociological Review (ASR) 83:5577.
4
 DiMaggio, Paul and Walter W. Powell. “The iron cage revisited: institutional
isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields” ASR 48:147-60.
 Haveman, Heather A. and Hayagreeva Rao. 1997. “Structuring a theory of
moral sentiments: Institutional and organizational co-evolution in the early
thrift industry.” American Journal of Sociology. 102: 1606-1651.
9/19
Organizational Culture and climate
Facilitator__________________________________
 Ouchi, William G. 1985 “Organizational Culture” Annual Review of Sociology
11: 457-83.
 Smircich, Linda 1983 “Concepts of culture in organizational analysis” ASQ
28:339-358.
 Denison, D. R. and A. K. Mishra 1995 “Toward a theory of organizational
culture and effectiveness. “ Organization Science 6:204-223.
 Martin, Joanne 2002. Chapters 1-3 of Organizational Culture, SAGE [for those
of you interested in the topic, I recommend buying the book]*
9/26
Organizational Culture cont.
Facilitator__________________________________
 Pettigrew, 1979. “On studying organizational culture” ASQ 24:570-581.
 Swidler, Ann 1986 “Culture in action: symbols and strategies.” American
Sociological Review 51:273-86.
 Barley, Stephen 1983 “Semiotics and the study of occupational and
organizational cultures.” ASQ 28:-393-314.
 Weick, K.E. 1993. “The collapse of sense-making in organizations.” ASQ
38:628-52.
10/3
Organizational Culture, structure and temporal processes
Facilitator__________________________________
 Rubin, B. 2007. “Time-work discipline in the 21st century” Pp 1-26 in Research
in the Sociology of Work: Workplace Temporalities. Elsevier*
 Ancona, D., and C Chong. 1996 “Entrainment: pace, cycle and rhythm in
organizational behavior.” Research in Organizational Behavior 19: 251-284.
 Perlow, L. 1998. “Boundary control: the social ordering of work and family time
in a high-tech corporation.” Administrative Science Quarterly 43: 428-357.
 Bluedorn, A. C., T.J. Kalliath, M.J. Strube and G.D. Martin. 1999
“Polychronicity and the Inventory of Polychronic Values (IPV).” Journal of
Managerial Psychology 14, 205-230.
 Rubin, B. A. 2007 “New Times Redux: layering time in the new economy” Pp.
527-548 in Research in the Sociology of Work: Workplace Temporalities.
Elsevier*
10/10
Organizations and their Environments
Facilitator__________________________________
 Scott, Organizations, Chapters 6 and 8
 Perrow, Chapter 6
 Aldrich, Howard and Jeffrey Pfeffer 1976 “Environments of organizations.”
ARS 2:79-105.
 Hannan, Michael T., and John Freeman. 1977. The population ecology of
organizations. American Journal of Sociology. 82: 929-964.
10/17
Organizational Structure-Bureaucracy, Governance and Power
Facilitator__________________________________
 Scott, Chapter 11
5
 Bell, Richard, Henry Walker and David Willer 2000 “Power, influence and
legitimacy in organizations: implications of three theoretical research
programs.” Research in the Sociology of Organizations 17:131-177.*
 Pfeffer, Jeffrey. 1997. “Developing and exercising power and influence.” Pp.
136-155 in New Directions for Organizational Theory: Problems and Prospects
by Jeffrey Pfeffer. Oxford: Oxford University Press.*
 Ibarra. Herminia. 1993 “Personal networks of women and minorities in
management: a conceptual framework” Academy of Management Review
18:56-87.
10/24
Organizational Change-technology, structure
Facilitator__________________________________
 Scott, Chapters 9-10
 Barley, Stephen 1990 “The alignment of technology and structure through
roles and networks.” Administrative Science Quarterly 35:61-103.
 Morrill, Calvin 1991 “Conflict Management, honor and organizational change.”
American Journal of Sociology 97:585-621.
10/31
Organizational Change and Development
Facilitator__________________________________
 Hage, J.T. 1999 “Organizational innovation and organizational change.”
Annual Review of Sociology 25”597-622/
 Haveman, Heather A. 1993. Follow the leader: Mimetic isomorphism and
entry into new markets. Administrative Science Quarterly. 38: 593-627.
 Feldman, Martha S., and Brian T. Pentland. 2003. “Reconceptualizing
organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change.” Administrative
Science Quarterly. 48: 94-118.
 Weick, K. E. and Quinn, R. E. 1999 “Organizational development and change”
Annual Review of Psychology 50 361-386.
11/7
New Organizational Forms
Facilitator__________________________________
 Scott, Organizations, Chapter 7
 Smith, Vicki 1997 “New forms of work organization.” ARS 23:315-59.
 Podolny, Joel M. and Karen L. Page. 1998 “Network forms of organization.”
Annual Review of Sociology 24-57-76
 Cobb, P. Denise and Beth A. Rubin 2006 “Contradictory interests, tangled
power and disorganized organization.” Administration and Society 38: 79-112.
11/14
Diversity in Organizations
Facilitator__________________________________
 DiTomaso, Nancy, Corinne Post and Rochelle Parks-Yancy. 2007 “Workforce
diversity and inequality: power, status and numbers.” ARS 33:1-22.
 Kanter, Rosabeth Moss. 1977. “Some effects of proportions of group life:
skews, rations and responses to token women.” American Journal of
Sociology 82: 862-900.
 Martin, Joanne. 1990. “Deconstructing organizational taboos: the suppression
of gender conflict in organizations.” Organizational Science 1:339-359.
 Reskin, Barbara F., and Debra Branch McBrier. 2000. Why not ascription?
Organizations' employment of male and female managers. American
Sociological Review 65: 210-233.
11/21
No Class-Thanksgiving Break
6
11/28-12/5
Proposal/Paper Development
Required Reading:
 National Science Foundation “Grant Proposal Guide.”
http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=gpg
 IOC website (and any others that might be of interest).
http://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=5378&org=SES&from=hom
e
 Meet with Professor Rubin about papers
12/12
Final Exam Due between 2 and 4:45
7