Instructor:
Office:
William Ross, Ph.D.
416-A Wimberly Hall
Office Hours: 11:55 a.m. - 12:20 p.m. Monday-Thursday and by appointment.
Phone: (608) 785-8450 (if I'm in a meeting, you can leave a message).
E-Mail: wross@uwlax.edu
Web Pages: http://websites.uwlax.edu/wross/
Desire2Learn: http://www.uwlax.edu/d2l or https://uwlax.courses.wisconsin.edu/ (contains this syllabus, fill-in-the-blank versions of PowerPoint files, plus a few other useful class documents – to logon click “logon” and for your user name, please enter the first part of your CAMPUS email address. Your password is your student ID number).
Class Times: 8:30 a.m.- 11:50 a.m. Monday – Friday, 226 Wimberly Hall (a.k.a. “North Hall”)
Objectives: 1.
2.
To explore selected issues in management and organizational behavior.
These topics will be examined from both researchers' and practitioners' viewpoints.
To prepare you for graduate studies in management or a related field.
3. To help you become an informed manager and an informed U.S. citizen.
Text:
Overview of the Course:
Did you know that many businesses fail in spite of great products, financial resources, and technically knowledgeable staff? They fail due to "people problems?" Similarly, did you know that many organizations succeed because of intangible qualities, such as "teamwork?" Also, managers often make poor decisions because they fail to consider the changing environment in which they work; a new product introduced by a competitor, or a new regulation can fundamentally alter a company’s profitability.
This course seeks to help you gain information and insight in dealing with human behavior and management principles in modern organizations. Although the course focus is the business enterprise, many of the management principles also apply to nonprofit, volunteer, and government organizations.
The emphasis is on historical, environmental, psychological, and organizational influences on individual and group behavior; this field is sometime called "Organizational Behavior" or OB. These topics will be examined from researcher's perspectives (to prepare you for graduate school) and from practitioner's perspectives (so that after you receive your advanced degree, you can better manage corporations and nonprofit organizations).
In this course, we will examine how organizations function and why they function effectively or ineffectively.
Many business cases will be examined. We will be concerned with several levels of organizational behavior:
1. Self--How do people behave in organizations? To what extent is such behavior due to personality factors?
2. Others--How do other people behave in workgroups? How does their behavior affect you? Why?
3. Groups--How do groups work? What makes them function effectively? How do they interact with other groups? How can intergroup conflict be managed?
4. Organizations--How should organizations be designed? (This field is often called "Organizational Theory").
How do different environmental factors affect the functioning of the organization? How can poorly designed and functioning organizations be changed? (called "Organizational Development"--OD).
1

2.
3.
This course encompasses several "cognitive" (rational, technical, and intellectual) elements. Therefore you will read to understand these elements. However, the course also encompasses several "affective" (emotional) elements. These are difficult to teach by reading about them. Therefore, we will use some experiential exercises, cases, presentations, and role-playing situations to examine these elements.
Course Requirements:
1. Attendance. I have been teaching for over thirty years and I’ve seen that the easiest way to improve your course grade is to come to class. Therefore, I expect you to come to class.
Exams. Three in-class exams, given at the beginning of the class day, each constitute 25% of your course grade. Thus, the three exams constitute 75% of your grade.
Competitive Case Presentations.
Assume that you are on one of two competing consulting teams being considered by a client to help solve an organizational problem. The first consulting team must summarize the case to the class (do not assume that everyone in the class has read the case); the second team does not need to summarize it, but may summarize a few key points if they wish.
Next, your team will describe the THREE key problems as you see them (there may be more, but you must pick the three that you see as most important). For each, outline your recommended solutions to the three key problems. Your team’s analysis and solutions MUST relate the case to information from the textbook and the course; that is, you must go beyond simple “common sense” solutions and you should show that you understand and can apply course concepts and theories.
Imagine a chart with three column headings: “Problems  Theory  Solutions.”
Under that set of headings, imagine three different rows each with a problem, course concept, and solution. Thus, theoretical concepts should help you identify the problems and possible solutions.
After your team gives its presentation, the “client” will ask you at least two questions; after both teams present the three problems and solutions that each team identifies, the client will speedily select a “winning team,” identifying reasons for his decision.
Also, prior to the day of hearing the case, each client must type and submit to me via e-mail a one- page case analysis, identifying the key problems, relevant theories, and possible solutions. This is to insure that each client has thought about the case prior to hearing the presentations. Only the client needs to submit this; the consultants do not (we will see the consultants’ ideas in their presentations).
You will each give two presentations as a “consultant” (10% of your grade each) and you will hear one case as a “client” (5% of your course grade). Together, these three cases (including the one-page paper) constitute a total of 25% of your course grade.
2

7.
5.
6.
2.
3.
4.
Grading Rubric for Case Presentations (Consultants):
1. Did consultants appear well-organized?
Did consultant team #1 effectively summarize the case, mentioning key facts and issues?
Did consulting teams identify reasonable and distinct problems as their “three key problems”?
Did consulting teams relate the three key problems to theories and concepts from the course, generally, and from recently-covered or about-to-cover-today chapter(s), in particular?
If concepts/theories are used that we have not yet discussed in class, were these defined/explained?
Did solutions seem reasonable for fixing each of the three problems?
Good: Were concepts/theories used to identify solutions (or at least related to solutions)?
Not Good: Or were solutions just “common sense” without any consideration of course concepts?
8.
9.
Did the solution(s) offered to fix one problem contradict solutions to another problem?
Did consultants handle client and audience questions effectively?
10. Did consultants go beyond simply solving three problems? For example, did they discuss potential problems that their solutions might cause and how to handle those? Did they consider potentially larger organizational issues related to implementing their solutions (i.e., what some call “showing systems thinking”)?
2.
3.
Grading Rubric for Case Presentations (Clients):
1. Did the case paper address the key problems and offer solutions based on the relevant course concepts and theories? ( Consider using the “Consultant Questions” as a guide when writing your paper.
)
Did you ask two questions of each Consulting team? Were the questions thoughtful, relating both to the case and to the presentation that the Consultant(s) offered?
When the decision as to the “winner” is announced to the class, what rationale is offered?
How thoughtful is the rationale? Does it go beyond merely stating “I liked one group’s solutions better than the other group’s solutions and offer reasons as to why you think it is a better set of solutions? Does your explanation reinforce the learning of the concepts and theories?
3

4. OPTIONAL EXTRA-CREDIT PAPER.
Because it is summer, and the course is not writing emphasis, there is NO term paper requirement for this class.
There is, however, an extra-credit optional term paper option (see information on the following pages for details). If you choose to complete this assignment, you must submit a 12-20 page typed paper on this topic. I will grade the paper and will offer extra credit for the course based upon your paper grade: F or D = 0%, C=+1%,
BC=+1.5%, B=+2%, AB=+3%, A=+4%. This could make the difference in your course grade, particularly if you do badly on one of the examinations. Your optional extra-credit paper will be due (by both e-mail and a “hard copy” in my mailbox in room 416 Wimberly Hall) on
Wednesday, June 17, 2015 at 11:00 a.m.
Please let me know before the semester ends if you are planning to write the paper so that I will not turn in a final course grade for you prematurely.
For your extra-credit term paper assignment, you must write about one of the following topics, relating it to topics covered in the course:
Topic #1: How are mobile telephones/smartphones (and apps) changing organizational behavior, management, and/or human resource management? Include a thorough literature review.
Topic #2: There are many “popular” books published each year that purport to tell you how to be successful as a manager or entrepreneur. Does the advice found in a “pop” management book correspond with the scientific research on the topic? Read and relate ONE of the following books (NOT on reserve; check your local bookstore) to the scientific research in organizational behavior (no more than 1/3 rd of your paper should be “book summary” – the rest should be your analysis, relating the book to other research – cite your sources):
(1) Howard Fero & Rebecca Herman (2014). Lead me out to the ballgame: Stories and strategies to develop major-league leadership.
(2) Chris Ducker (2014).
Virtual Freedom: How to work with virtual staff…
(3) Ben Horowitz (2014). The hard thing about hard things: Business when there are no easy answers.
(4) Martina Carroll-Garrisson (2014).
How to stop the bully at your workplace…
(5) Rev. T. D. Jakes (2005). Ten Commandments of Working in a Hostile Environment.
(6) Judy Robinett (2014). How to be a power connector.
(7) Ruma Bose & Lou Faust (2011). Mother Teresa, CEO: Unexpected principles for practical leadership.
(8) Jeanne Brett (2014). Negotiating globally.
(9) Rich Karlgaard (2014). The soft edge: Where companies find lasting success.
(10) John Kotter (2014). Accelerate: Building strategic agility for a faster-moving world.
(11) Nick Morgan (2014). Power Cues: The Subtle science of leading groups, persuading others, and
Maximizing your personal impact.
(12) Anassi Bari, M. Chaochi, & Tommy Jung (2014). Predictive analytics for dummies.
(13) Samuel Chang (2015).
Leadership pain: Classroom for growth.
(14) Ann Dunwoody (2015).
A Higher Standard: Leadership from America’s first female four-star general.
(15) Cheryl A. Bachelder (2015). Dare to serve: How to drive superior results.
Topic #3: What is “The Glass Cliff?” How does this relate to organizational behavior?
References to get you started:
(1) Ryan, M.K., & Haslam, S. A. (2007). The Glass Cliff: Exploring the dynamics surrounding the appointment of women to precarious leadership positions. Academy of Management Review, 32 (2), 549-572.
(2) Bruckmüller, S. & Branscombe, N. R. (2010) The glass cliff: When and why women are selected as leaders
In crisis contexts. British Journal of Social Psychology 49 (3), 433-451.
(3) Mulcahy, M., & Linehan, C. (2014). Females and Precarious Board Positions: Further Evidence of the
Glass Cliff. British Journal of Management, 25 (3), 425-438.
4

Topic #4: How does music affect/relate to organizational behavior? Design a research study using
Songza.com as the source of the music. (Don’t forget the literature review!)
Topic #5: Relate academic “Signaling Theory” to Organizational Behavior.
References to get you started:
(1) Connelly, B. L., Certo, S. T., Ireland, R. D., & Reutzel, C. R. (2011). Signaling theory: A review and assessment. Journal of Management , 37 (1), 39-67.
(2) Spence, M. (1973). Job market signaling. Quarterly journal of Economics , 87 (3), 355-374.
Topic #6:
What is “Distributed Cognition” Theory? How does it relate to management?
References to get you started:
(1) Hutchins, Edward (1995). Cognition in the wild. Boston: MIT Press.
(2) Huebner, Bryce (2014). Macrocognition. New York: Oxford Press.
(3) Bardone, Emanuele (2011). Seeking Chances. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Your extra-credit term paper grade will be based upon the following criteria:
(A) Adequate (but not excessive) summary..................
(B) Clearly stating your position on all the
10%
(C) important issues....................................................
Quality of arguments (logic, etc.) .........................
(D) Outside research (referencing articles, books, cases, theories, or research)
10%
40%
I expect TEN or more references for each paper......
(E) Addressing opposing arguments (if any)..................
(F) Style (e.g., are the sentences clear?), grammar (e.g., do you know when to use "there," "their,"
20%
10% and "they're"?), reference page, misc.................... 10%
-----
100%
Helpful Termpaper Suggestions:
All papers should include at least ten different references. All ten references should be cited within the text at least once as you use them. The general rule is, "if you borrow an idea or research finding, then cite the source, even if it is not a direct quote." For example, suppose I cited a study showing that most supervisors divide their subordinates into "ingroup" and "outgroup" members. I might write:
"It has been demonstrated that leaders do not treat all of their workers alike: research shows that most supervisors divide their subordinates into ingroup and outgroup members (Dansereau, Cashman, and
Graen, 1973). Other work suggests that, (1) taking OB courses in college (Jones, 1990) and (2) working quickly toward a clearly-stated objective (Forrest, 1992) are also important for good leader-member relations."
Note that these were not direct quotes, but I cited the sources where I got my ideas. That way the reader knows which ideas were borrowed from which sources.
The works you cite should also appear at the end of your paper in a reference list. All works in the reference list should also be cited in the paper. Thus, I do NOT want to see a vague "Bibliography"--I want to know which ideas in the paper go with each source.
5

Examples of references:
(1) For a book :
Jones, G. (1999). I was a miserable failure before I took OB: Just look at me now! Atlanta: New Publishers.
(2) For journal articles :
Dansereau, F., Cashman, J. & Graen, G. (1973). Instrumentality theory and equity as complementary approaches in predicting the relationship of leadership and turnover among managers.
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 10, 184-200.
Forrest, N. B. (January 16, 2002). My motto for success: "Get there firstest with the mostest." Journal of
Vague Generalizations, 14, 128-131.
Note that the underlined number is the volume number; the other numbers are page numbers. So 14, 128-131 means "volume 14, pages 128-131."
(3) For Internet sources :
Use the internet web address in the location where you would put the publisher of a printed document.
U.S. Meaningless Lists staff (2015). 2015 Top Undergraduate Basketweaving Programs.
U.S. Meaningless Lists. http://www4.usnews.com/usmlists/edu/college/cat12mk.htm
Accessed: May 4, 2006 via ABI-Inform Database.
.
At least three of your references should come from "scholarly" sources (e.g., scholarly books, journals such as
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Academy of Management Journal , or Journal of Applied Psychology ) rather than "popular" sources (e.g., Fortune, Business Week ). This will help you develop your skills at finding applications for research as well as helping you keep up with the latest developments in this scientific field.
Papers without adequate references will be penalized and papers without any citations earn grades of "F" or "D."
The reason for this policy is to insure that you adequately understand the literature on the topics you discuss, and to keep your paper from sounding like a "paraphrase" of only one or two sources.
Remember that you need to start researching your paper today!
Papers are to be completed individually and responses should be typed. The University has several microcomputer laboratories available for you to do word processing. Use 1" margins and either double-space the paper or use block-paragraph style (like this syllabus).
Guidelines for grading papers:
As you write your paper, please consider the following:
"F" papers tend to have the following characteristics:
1.
2.
3.
The papers are dishonest and/or simply copy huge chunks of material.
They ignore key points of discussion and readings. the author hasn't got a clue as to what the topic even means (e.g., I once had a student whose paper on "applications of management science to x" was poor because he did not bother to discover that there was a difference between modern "management science" a la MGT 395, and the "scientific management" of the 1910s -- his paper was all about Frederick Taylor!)
They are "fluff" and haven't attempted to consider the scientific literature. 4.
5.
6.
They contain serious factual errors.
They were written the night before and read like a sloppy "first draft" rather than a polished, formal paper (I once gave an "F" to a paper whose author confessed that he had started writing the paper two hours before class began -- it showed!)
6

"D" papers tend to have the following characteristics:
1.
2.
3.
Despite obvious effort, the author is "way off."
The paper simply uses description; there is no analysis.
The paper contains factual errors.
"C" papers tend to have the following characteristics:
1. The formal paper correctly answers questions, but makes little attempt to integrate ideas into a coherent whole (thesis) through use of a logical, structured format with clear introduction, middle, and conclusion to the paper.
2.
3.
The formal paper does not show me where the author stands on the issue. (However, note that you cannot claim "your own experience" as one of your ten sources as one student tried to do many years ago.)
The formal paper is well structured and integrated, but examples and evidence to
4. support the thesis are missing, incorrect, unscientific, or irrelevant.
The formal paper is well structured and integrated, but does not address, then refute, any counterarguments (if appropriate for that topic).
The paper uses only a few sources and/or does not cite its sources clearly. 5.
"B" papers tend to have the following characteristics:
1. The formal paper is well written and appropriately considers the issues raised above.
2.
3.
However, the quality is not sufficient to give it an "A."
New concepts and vocabulary are not sufficiently integrated into the paper.
Other important perspectives and/or issues are insufficiently explored, as relevant to the topic.
4.
5.
There are minor problems with technical aspects of the paper (citations, grammar, spelling, etc.).
The paper does not use ten different sources and/or does not cite them clearly.
"A" papers tend to have the following characteristics:
1. They fulfill all of the technical requirements of the assignment.
2.
3.
4.
New concepts and vocabulary are used appropriately and are well-integrated.
Other perspectives (and counterarguments, if appropriate) are addressed.
New and/or interesting connections between the course and library research are made; personal perspectives are incorporated into the paper where appropriate.
5.
6.
Use scientific evidence appropriately.
Are interesting (and perhaps even creative) and are of very high quality.
Course Grading Policy:
To summarize, your grade equals
(.25 x points from Mid-Term Exam #1)
+
+
+
+
+
+
(.25 x points from Mid-Term Exam #2)
(.25 x points from Final Exam)
(.10 x points from the first Competitive Case Presentation – as a consultant)
(.10 x points from the second Competitive Case Presentation – as a consultant)
(.05 x points from the third Competitive Case Presentation + one-page paper – as a client)
-----
100%
Extra Credit if you choose to write a term paper (up to 4%).
7

Letter grades for each exam, etc. will be assigned in the following manner:
●First, I will find the scores of the top 5% of the class plus a perfect score.
●Second, I will take the average of these top scores (at the end of the semester, I will use the sum of
these averages as the reference point for calculating course grades).
●Third, I will find the following cutoffs:
92% of the average will be the lower cutoff for an "A"
89% of the average will be the lower cutoff for an "AB"
82% of the average will be the lower cutoff for a "B"
79% of the average will be the lower cutoff for a "BC"
70% of the average will be the lower cutoff for a "C"
65% of the average will be the lower cutoff for a "D"
Scores lower than 65% will be considered failing ("F").
Also, scores lower than 60% of the total possible points (e.g., 120 out of 200) will be considered failing, regardless of the "curve." So there is an absolute minimum number of points needed to pass the course.
Note: There is no rounding upward. The grade you earn is the grade you get.
Example:
The test had 40 items. The top scores (three out of fifty-eight enrolled) were 40, 39, and 37. Kristine made a 36, Boris made a 31, and Dudly made a 26. What grade did each make?
The mean of the top scores was 38.67
The lower cutoff for an A = (.92 x 38.67) = 35.6
The lower cutoff for an AB =(.89 x 38.67) = 34.4
The lower cutoff for a B = (.82 x 38.67) = 31.7
The lower cutoff for a BC =(.79 x 38.67) = 30.6
The lower cutoff for a C = (.70 x 38.67) = 27.1
The lower cutoff for a D = (.65 x 38.67) = 25.1
-Kristine earned an "A" and was thrilled ("I got an A!")
-Boris made an "BC" and was irritated with the UW-L Faculty Senate for imposing such an
ambiguous grade on him ("What's this BC stuff? Is it a B or is it a C? I can't deal with this;
I'm suing the UW-L administration for mental anguish.")
-Dudly made a "D", whereupon he dropped out of college and joined a flea-infested commune full of
UW-Madison hippie dropouts from the late 1970s; he spends his days making tie-died socks and standing at street corners shouting advice to people who are already far happier than he.
Advantages of this grading system:
1. Your score is not compared to any arbitrary number of points. This solves the problem of a test that is too hard for the entire class.
2. In a larger class, you are not compared to the top student but rather to the top 5% of the students in the class. This reduces the likelihood that one "superstar" will alter the curve so much that a reasonable grade is beyond the reach of the mere mortal.
3.
There are no fixed percentages of "A"s, "B"s, etc. It is possible for everyone who works very hard to get an "A."
8

Date
Course Reading List
Topic
May 25 M Memorial Day – No Class!
May 26 Tu Course overview; History of Management Thought
___ ____Reading Assignment
Ch. 1 & 2
May 27 W
*Additional Reading: “Mr. Edens Profits from Watching his Workers”
at Electronic Banking System, Inc. (from Jones & George
Management, seventh edition, pp. 69 – 70; see D2L).
Contemporary
The manager as a person: Attitudes, Emotions, Personality & Values Ch. 3 & 4
*Additional Reading: Wiltermuth, S. S. & Tiedens, L. Z. (Sept., 2011).
“Incidental anger and the desire to evaluate.”
Organizational Behavior &
Human Decision Processes, vol. 116, no. 1, pp. 55-65. Available from
Elsevier ScienceDirect via Murphy Library databases. Direct link: http://libweb.uwlax.edu:2113/science/article/pii/S0749597811000483
# Competitive Case Presentation: “Dissatisfaction at Blair, Incorporated”
Consultants: E. A. (Team 1) vs.
A. H. (Team2)
Client: J. G.
Consultants:
Client:
May 28 Th The manager as a person: Personality & Values;
Multicultural & Global Work Environments
*Additional Reading: Davis, K.L. (April 30, 2010). Executive Session:
David Green, founder of Oklahoma City-based Hobby Lobby. [Oklahoma
City] Journal Record. Available via ABI-Inform. Link: https://libweb.uwlax.edu/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=
2026783941&sid=1&Fmt=1&clientId=3845&RQT=309&VName=PQD
Ch. 4 & 5
# Competitive Case Presentation: “The Road to Hell…”
Consultants: J. G. (Team 1) vs.
Client:
D. N. (Team 2)
A. Y. & M. T.
9

June 3 W
May 29 F The manager as an Individual Decision Maker ; Time Management
Also see PowerPoint file on “Ethics & Corporate Social Responsibility” [D2L]
Ch. 6
# Competitive Case Presentation: “Dilemma at the Den”
Consultants: N. A. &
Whoever Adds #2
(Team 1) vs.
Client:
E. R. (Team 2);
A. O.
Followed by…
Motivation Concepts & Applications
June 2 Tu Foundations of Group Behavior; Effective Groups & Teams
*Additional Reading: Peters, D. (2013, July/Aug.) Virtually there
(plus “How to run a virtual meeting”). CMA Magazine, 87 (4), pp. 29-31
Available via Ebscohost MasterFile Premier database:
Ch. 7 & 8 http://web.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=28&sid=3d52eeb6-5e9c-4a0c-8c1b-
3cfd12db75c6%40sessionmgr110&hid=123&bdata=JkF1dGhUeXBlPWlwLHVpZCZzaXRlPWVob3N0LW xpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#db=f5h&AN=89333008 OR https://libweb.uwlax.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,uid&d b=f5h&AN=89333008&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Ch. 9 & 10
# Competitive Case Presentation: “A Challenge for Mr. Walsh”
Consultants: M. T.
& M. Z. (Team 1) vs.
Client:
A. O. & P. L. (Team 2);
A.S.
# Competitive Case Presentation: “Horseplay at the Textbook Processing Center”
Consultants: A.V. & A.H. (Team 1) vs.
Client:
J.G. & A.Y. (Team 2);
E.T. & E.R.
Group Decision Making; Groupthink; Organizational Communication
# Competitive Case Presentation: “And we wonder why…” [version 2.1]
Consultants: D.N. &
Whoever Adds #1
__________ (Team 1) vs.
Client:
M.R. & H.H.. (Team 2);
A.G.
Ch. 11
*Additional Reading: Hutchison, P., Jetten, J., & Gutierrez, R. (2011).
Deviant but desirable: Group variability and evaluation of atypical group members.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 47, Issue 6, pp. 1155-1161.
Available via Elsevier Science Direct: http://libweb.uwlax.edu:2113/science/article/pii/S0022103111001727
10

June 9 Tu
June 4 Th Leadership
*Additional reading on “Servant-Leadership.”
Mayer, D. M., Bardes, M., & Piccolo, R. F. (2008). Do servant-leaders help satisfy follower needs? An organizational justice perspective. European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology , 17(2), 180-197. doi:
10.1080/13594320701743558. Available via Ebscohost Business Premier at: https://libweb.uwlax.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direc
t=true&db=buh&AN=31579766&login.asp&site=ehost-live
Ch. 12
June 8 M
#Competitive Case Presentation: “Arctic Mining Consultants”
Consultants: Z.X. (Team 1) vs.
Client:
M.T. (Team 2);
D.N.
Followed by…
Organizational Power & Politics
Managing Organizational Conflict & Negotiation;
Planning & Organizational Structure
Ch. 13
Ch. 15
*Additional reading: Wulf, J. (2012, Fall). The flattened firm:
Not as advertised. California Management Review, 55 (1), 5-23.
Available at Murphy Library via EbscoHost Business Source Premier: http://web.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=43&sid=3d52eeb6-5e9c-4a0c-8c1b-
3cfd12db75c6%40sessionmgr110&hid=123&bdata=JkF1dGhUeXBlPWlwLHVpZCZzaXRlPWVob3N0LW xpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#db=buh&AN=82743350 OR https://libweb.uwlax.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,uid&d b=buh&AN=82743350&site=ehost-live&scope=site
# Competitive Case Presentation: “Kingston Company”
Consultants:
Client:
(Team 1) vs.
C.D. (Team 2)
H.H..
Consultants: E.T. (Team 1)
Client:
(Team 2)
Whoever Adds #1
Reducing Absenteeism & Turnover; Organizational Culture
Consultants: A.S. & P.L.
Clients:
Whoever Adds #1
Ch. 16
11

June 10 W Human Resource Management
Ch. 17
Human Resource Management Review,
21,
http://libweb.uwlax.edu:2068/ehost/detail?sid=86f62cc8-1b59-48c5-87bb-
1090d2b464b8%40sessionmgr113&vid=3&hid=112
Consultants:
Clients:
Consultants:
(Team 1) vs.
Clients:
&
Whoever Adds #2
(Team 2)
June 11 Th Organizational Change;
Just in time for the final exam: “Stress” Ch. 18
*Additional Reading: Mujtaba, B., Lara, A., King, C., Johnson, V., &
Mahanna, T.. (2010). Stress at Work in a Slowing Economy. Journal of
Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 15 (2), 26-42. The data aren’t surprising or complex; perhaps the value of the article is that it has a nice summary of common terms and lists found in the “stress” literature – so you too can know “the lingo of stress!” ABI-Inform link: https://libweb.uwlax.edu/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=2059165321&sid=1&
Fmt=6&clientId=3845&RQT=309&VName=PQD
Consultants:
(Team 1)
Client:
(Team 2)
Consultants:
(Team 1)
Client:
(Team 2)
June 17 Wednesday Optional Extra-Credit Term Paper is due by 11:00 a.m.
12

A. S.
M. T.
E. T.
A. V.
Z. X.
A. Y.
M. Z.
Name
E.A.
N. A.
C. D.
J. G.
A. G.
H. H.
A. H.
P. L.
D. N.
A. O.
E. R.
M. R.
Whoever Adds #1
Whoever Adds #2
Consulting Team #1
May 27 W (Blair)
May 29 F (Dilemma)
June 11 Th (Devon)
May 28 Th (Road)
June 8 M ( Kingston )
May 27 W (Ed)
June 2 Tu (Horseplay)
June 9 Tu ( Borderline )
June 3 W (wonder)
June 11 Th (Brady)
June 11 Th (Devon)
June 10 W (Montana)
June 9 Tu ( Borderline )
June 2 Tu (Walsh)
June 8 M (L.E.S.)
June 2 Tu (Horseplay)
June 4 Th (Arctic)
June 10 W (Nurses)
June 2 Tu (Walsh)
June 3 W (wonder)
May 29 F (Dilemma)
Consulting Team #2 Clients
June 9 Tu ( Borderline )
June 8 M (L.E.S.)
June 8 M ( Kingston )
June 2 Tu (Horseplay)
June 10 W (Montana)
June 3 W (wonder)
May 27 W (Blair)
June 2 Tu (Walsh)
May 28 Th (Road)
June 2 Tu (Walsh)
May 29 F (Dilemma)
June 3 W (wonder)
June 10 W (Nurses)
June 11 Th (Brady)
May 27 W (Ed)
May 27 W (Blair)
June 3 W (wonder)
June 8 M ( Kingston )
June 8 M (L.E.S.)
June 11 Th (Devon)
June 4 Th (Arctic)
May 29 F (Dilemma)
June 2 Tu (Horseplay)
June 11 Th (Devon)
June 11 Th (Devon)
June 4 Th (Arctic)
June 11 Th (Brady)
May 27 W (Ed)
June 11 Th (Devon)
June 10 W (Montana)
June 10 W (Montana)
June 2 Tu (Horseplay) May 28 Th (Road)
June 10 W (Nurses)
June 9 Tu (
Borderline
)
June 10 W (Nurses)
June 9 Tu ( Borderline )
June 8 M (L.E.S.)
June 3 W (wonder)
June 2 Tu (Walsh)
June 11 Th (Brady)
June 2 Tu (Horseplay)
_
13