Class 1
[BK] “The Meaning of Leadership” by Bernard M. Bass in The Leader’s Companion, pp. 37 – 38.
[OL] “The Two Essentials of Power” by James MacGregor Burns in Leadership, pp. 12 – 23.
Class 2
[OL] “Looking Forward but Learning from Our Past: Potential challenges to developing authentic
leadership theory and authentic leaders” by Cecily D. Cooper, pp. 475 – 493.
[BK] “Servant Leadership” by Robert K. Greenleaf in The Leader’s Companion, pp. 18 – 23.
[BK] “Situational Leadership” by Paul Hersey and Kenneth Blanchard in The Leader’s Companion, pp.
207 – 211.
[BK] “The Hero as King” by Thomas Carlyle in The Leader’s Companion, pp. 53 -54.
[BK] “Rulers and Generals are ‘History’s Slaves’ ” by Leo Tolstoy in The Leader’s Companion, pp. 55 – 59.
Class 3
[CR] “Leading in Times of Trauma” by Jane Dutton et. al..
[OL] “Key Points,” “The Power of Intuition” and “The Power of Mental Stimulation” by Gary Klein, in
Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions, p. 30, pp. 31 – 44, pp. 45 – 74.
Class 4
[OL] “Charismatic Authority” by Max Weber in The Theory of Social and Economic Organization, pp. 358
– 363.
[OL] “Origins of Charisma: Ties that Bind the Leader and the Led” by Manfred Kets de Vries, in
Charismatic Leadership: The Elusive Factor in Organizational Effectiveness, pp. 237 – 252.
Class 5
[CR] “Exercising Influence” by Linda Hill
[BK] “Transactional and Transforming Leadership” by James MacGregor Burns in The Leader’s
Companion, pp. 100 – 101.
Class 6
[BK] Leadership in Administration by Philip Selznick (Chapters 1 and 2)
[CR] “Why transformation efforts fail” by John Kotter, Harvard Business Review, March-April 1995.
Class 7 (Wednesday, October 10)
[BK] “Individual Attributes as Sources of Power” by Jeffrey Pfeffer in Managing with Power, pp. 165-185.
[CR] “Power Dynamics in Organizations” by Linda Hill
Class 8 (Friday, October 12)
[OL] “Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital” by James S. Coleman.
[CR] “Building Coalitions” by Herminia Ibarra.
[BK] “Sources of Power” pages 69 – 145 in Managing with Power by Jeffrey Pfeffer.
[CR] “Informal Networks: The Company Behind the Chart” by David Krackhardt and Jeffrey R. Hanson.
Class 9 (Monday, October 15)
[OL] Excerpts from The Prince by Machiavelli.
[CR] “Managers and Leaders: Are They Different” by Abraham Zaleznik.
Class 10 (Wednesday, October 17)
[CR] “Managing Your Boss” by John J. Gabarro and John P. Kotter.
Class 11 (Monday, October 22)
[OL] Excerpts from “Becoming a Leader: The Omaha Years,” by Dennis Dickerson, Militant Mediator:
Whitney Young, Jr. (Chapter 4)
[CR] “Managerial Networks” by Herminia Ibarra
Class 12 (Monday, October 29)
[OL] “Power” by Rosabeth Moss Kanter in Men and Women of the Corporation.
[CR] “The Power of Talk: Who Gets Heard and Why?” by Deborah Tannen
Class 13 (Wednesday, October 31)
[CR] “Managing Your Team” by Linda Hill.
[OL] “Will a Category Cue Affect You? Category Cues, Positive Stereotypes and Reviewer Recall for
Applicants” by Todd Pittinsky, Margaret Shih, and Nalini Ambady.
Class 14 (Friday, November 2)
[CR] “Using Logic to Make Your Argument” by Michael Hattersley
[CR] “Change through Persuasion” by David Garvin and Michael Roberto
Class 15 (Monday, November 5)
[CR] “Choosing Strategies for Change” by Leonard Schlesinger and John Kotter
[BK] “Timing is (Almost) Everything” by Jeffrey Pfeffer in Managing with Power, pp. 227 – 245.
Class 16 (Wednesday, November 7)
[CR] “Note on Organization Structure” by Nitin Nohria.
[OL] “Substitute for Hierarchy” by Ed Lawler.
[OL] “The Bureaucracy Busters” by Brian Dumaine.
[OL] “Restoring American Competitiveness: Looking for New Models of Organization” by Tom Peters.
[CR] “Making Differences Matter: A New Paradigm for Managing Diversity” by David A. Thomas and
Robin J. Ely
[OL] “The Role of the Founder in the Creation of Organizational Culture” by Edgar H. Schein in
Reframing Organizational Culture.
[OL] “The Smile Factory: Work at Disneyland” by John van Maanen in Reframing Organizational Culture.
[OL] “What is Culture?” by Edgar H. Schein in Reframing Organizational Culture.
Class 17 (Wednesday, November 14)
[CR] A Note for Analyzing Work Groups
Class 18 (Monday, November 19)
[CR] Evaluating an Action Plan
Class 19 (Monday, November 26)
[OL] “The Design of Work Teams” by J. Richard Hackman.
Class 20 (Wednesday, November 28)
[CR] Organizational Alignment: The 7S Model
Class 22 (Wednesday, December 5)
[OL] “The Bakeoff: Project Delta Claims to Create the Perfect Cookie” by Malcolm Gladwell
Class 23 (Friday, December 7)
[OL] “Beyond the Charismatic Leader: Leadership and Organizational Change” by David Nadler and
Michael Tushman.
[CR] “Why Change Programs Don’t Produce Change” by Michael Beer, Russell Eisenstat, and Bert
Spector.
[OL] “Creating Change” by Peter Senge and Katrin Kaeufer
Class 24 (Monday, December 10)
[CR] “Leadership for Change” Rosabeth Moss Kanter
Class 26 (Monday, December 17)
[OL] “Developing Your Leadership Pipeline,” by Conger and Fulmer (in class distribution)
“The Meaning of Leadership” by Bernard M. Bass in The Leader’s Companion
Leadership is a sophisticated concept, it doesn’t just mean formal power or “who’s the boss”
There are lots of definitions to what it means, can be ambiguous and overlap
Meaning of leadership may depend on the institution in which it is found
Matter of personality, influence, inducing compliance, persuasion, etc.
James MacGregor Burns, “The Two Essentials of Power”

The two essential of power are motive and resource. Lacking either one, power collapses

To understand the nature of leadership requires understanding the essence of power, for
leadership is a special form of power
Power and power wielders

The “power process” as a “process in which power holders (P) possessing certain motives and
goals have the capacity to secure changes in the behavior or a respondent (R), human or animal,
and in the environment by utilizing resources in their power based, including factors of skill,
relative to the targets of their power-wielding and necessary to secure changes.” (13)

“The motives of power wielders may or may not coincide with what the respondent wants done;
it is P’s intention that controls. Power wielders may or may not recognize respondents’ wants
and needs; if they do they may recognize them only to the degree necessary to achieve their
goals; ad if they must make a choice between satisfying their own purposes and satisfying
respondents’ needs, they will choose the former” (15)

THUS “power over other persons, we have noted, is exercised when potential power wielders,
motivated to achieve certain goals of their own, marshal in their power base resources that
enable them to influence the behavior of respondents by activating motives of respondents
relevant to those resources and goals. This is done in order to realize the purposes of the power
wielders, whether or not these are also the goals of the respondents. Power wielders also
exercise influence by mobilizing their own power base in such a way as to establish direct
physical control over others’ behavior, as in a war of conquest or thought measures of harsh
deprivation, but these are highly restricted exercises of power” (18)
Leadership and Leaders

In CONTRAST, “leadership over human beings is exercised when persons with certain motives
and purposes mobilize, in competition or conflict with others, institutional, political,
psychological and other resources so as to arouse, engage and satisfy the motives of followers.
This is done in order to realize goals mutually held by both leaders and followers...In brief,
leaders with motive and power bases tap followers’ motives in order to realize the purposes of
both leaders and followers.” (18)

“Leaders do not obliterate followers’ motives thought they may arouse certain motives and
ignore others. They lead other creatures, not things. All leaders are actual or potential power
holders, but not all power holders are leaders” (18)

“I define leadership as leaders inducing followers to act for certain goals that represent the
values and the motivations—the wants and needs, the aspirations and expections, of both
leaders and followers. And the genius of leadership lies in the manner in which leaders see and
act on their own and their followers’ values and motivations” (19)

“leaders address themselves to followers’ wants, needs and other motivations as well as to their
own, and thus they serve as an independent force in changing the makeup of the followers’
motive base through gratifying their motives” (20)
Two types of leadership

“transactional leadership” occurs when “one person takes the initiative in making contact with
others for the purpose of an exchange of valued things…each party to the bargain is conscious of
the power resources and attitudes of the other. Each person recognizes the other as a person.
Their purposes are related, at least to the extent that the purposes stand within the bargaining
process and can be advanced by maintaining that process. But beyond this the relationship does
not go. The bargainers have no enduring purpose that holds them together…A leadership act
took place, but it was not one that binds the leader and follower together in a mutual and
continuing pusuit of a higher purpose” (20)

“transforming leadership” occurs when “one or more persons engage with others in such a way
that leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation and morality…their
purposes, which might have started out as separate but related…become fused…transforming
leadership iltimately comes moral in that it raises te level of human conduct and ethical
aspiration of both leader and led, and thus it has a transforming effect on both…is dynamic
leadership in the sense that the leaders throw themselves into a relationship with followers who
will feel ‘elevated’ by it and often become more active themselves.” (20)
Measuring power and leadership

“my own measurement of power and leadership…:power and leadership are measured by the
degree of production of intended effects” (22)
Cecily D. Cooper, “Looking Forward but Learning from Our Past: Potential Challenges to Developing
Authentic Leadership Theory and Authentic Leaders”
Abstract: “recently researchers have introduced a new leadership construct, referred to as authentic leadership.
There has been considerable interest in this new area of study. Scholars conducting work on authentic leadership
believe that the recent upswing in corporate scandals and management malfeasance indicate that a new
perspective on leadership is necessary. In order to address these negative societal trends, proponents of authentic
leadership take a very normative approach, placing astrong emphasis on the creation of interventions to facilitate
the development of authenticity. We concur with the basic tenets of this initiative. However, in this article, we
note that it is premature to focus on designing interventions to develop authentic leaders before taking further
steps in defining, measuring and rigorously researching this construct. We draw attention to these issues with the
hope of insuring that any development initiatives that are implemented are practical and effective for leaders and
organizations” (475)

According to the author, before designing strategies for authentic leadership development,
scholars need to give careful consideration to four critical issues:

1) defining and measuring the construct


2) determining the discriminant validity of the construct


once researchers create an appropriate measure for the authentic leadership construct,
it will then be necessary to determine its discriminant validity. Empirically testing
discriminant validity is necessary in order to ascertain whether the construct is
redundant with other similar constructs
3) identifying relevant construct outcomes (i.e. testing the construct’s nomological network


identifying the key dimensions of authentic leadership and creating a theoreticallybased definition of the construct
after suitable measures have been developed and discriminant validity analyses have
been conducted, research will need to further map the dimensions and subdimensions o
the nomological network of variables that may be associated with authentic leadership
4) ascertaining whether authentic leadership can be taught” (477)

authentic leadership is not like other areas of leadership for which competency sets
might be acquired in traditional training programs

alternatively, to begin to think about how to develop authentic leaders, we must think
outside the parameters of traditional leadership training. Specifically, the four major
issues which any authentic leadership development intervention must address are 1)
ensuring that the program itself, is genuine. 2) determining how “trigger events” can be
replicated during training, 3) deciding whether ethical decision-making can be taught
and 4) (if these first three issues can be addressed) determining who should participate
in authentic leadership training.
Conclusion: “although the purpose of this piece is to inform initiatives for the development of authentic leaders,
we suggest that the timinig of such an impetus may be somewhat premature given how little we know about this
construct. As we have argued here, if authentic leadership scholars have a sincere desire to develop leaders who
possess ethical, positive capabilities, they can best achieve this goal by conducting research on authentic
leadership and its development in a thorough, systematic, manner. By revisiting some of the challenges that
leadership researchers have faced in the past, we have identified a set of core concerns that we believe need to be
addressed before the study of authentic leaders and subsequently, their development can further progress.” (491)
“Servant Leadership” by Robert K. Greenleaf in The Leader’s Companion (p. 18-23)
Greenleaf asserts that his sense of the present leads him to believe that the roles of servant and leader can be
fused in one real person in all levels of staus or calling and that the servant-leader can live and be productive in the
real world of the present—his thesis is that more servants should emerge as leaders and that we ought to follow
servant-leaders

begins by discussing the role of Leo in the book Journey to the East by Hesse. The story is about a
group of men on a mythical journey who are accompanied by Leo, the servant. Leo does their
chores and provides them with inspiration through his singing. One day Leo disappears and the
group falls into disarray and abandons the journey. The narrator eventually finds Leo and
discovers that Leo, whom he had first known as servant, “was in fact the titular head of the
Order…a great and noble leader”

believes that this story represents that the great leader is seen as a servant first, “and that simple
fact is the key to his greatness”

“the servant leader is servant first. It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to
serve, to serve first. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead. That person is
sharply different from one who is a leader first, perhaps because of the need to assuage
an unusual power drive or to acquire material possessions. For such it will be a later
choice to serve—after leadership is established…the different manifests itself in the care
taken by the servant first to make sure tat other people’s highest priority needs are
being served”” (22)



thus at the heart of the individual is a desire to serve others rather than
increase their power. Their objective is to enhance the growth of individuals.
“if one is servant, either leader or follower, one is always searching, listening, expecting
that a better wheel for these times is in the making” (20)—this bottom up approach is
what makes a servant a good leader
He believes that the “best test” of leadership is:

“do those served grow as persons? Do they, while being served become healthier, wiser,
freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants? And what is the
effect on the least privileged in society? Will they benefit or at least not be further
deprived?” (22)

this type of leadership emphasizes collaboration, trust and the ethical use of power (the
mes we have discussed through out the semester)
“Situational Leadership” by Hersey and Blanchard in The Leader’s Companion (p. 207-211)
Situational Leadership holds that managers must use different leadership styles depending on the situation. The
model allows you to analyze the needs of the situation you are in and then use the most appropriate leadership
style (characterized in terms of the amount of direction and support that a leader gives to their followers).
Depending on the employees’ “readiness” (the ability and willingness of followers to perform a certain task) a
leader’s leadership style should vary from one person to another.


Identifies 4 developmental stages of “readiness” progressing from R1 to R4

R1: low ability (or competence), low willingness (or commitment)—generally lacking the
specific skills required and the motivation to tackle the task—unable and unwilling or
insecure

R2: Moderate competence, high commitment—unable but willing or confident)—
followers respond to leader’s assistance which builds confidence and commitment and
increases skills

R3: High Ability, Variable Willingness—they have learned to perform the task but then
go through a self-doubt stage where they question whether they can perform the task
without the help of the leader (causing variable commitment)

R4: High Ability, High Commitment—once the self doubt is overcome, the followers
move to the level of a peak performer
Depending on the development level of the followers, situational leadership prescribes the use
of one of four different combinations of task behavior (the extent to which the leader engages in
one way communication and tells the follower what to do) and relationship behavior (the extent
to which a leader engages in 2-way communication, listens, provides encouragement, facilitates
interaction and involves the followers in decision making)

S1: high task behavior, low relationship behavior—referred to as “Telling”: this is
appropriate for a group with a readiness level of R1 who lack the competence—provides
a clear specific direction and close supervision and addresses inability to do the task

S2: High Task Behavior, High relationship behavior—referred to as “selling”: This is
appropriate for a group with a readiness level of R2 (followers who have some
competence and are willing to learn)—is a coaching style that provides dual task
behavior (because of lack of confidence) but also supportive behavior to build
confidence and enthusiasm. Leader must keep the responsibility for and control over
decision-making untilt he group acquires the necessary task competence

S3: Low task behavior, High Relationship Behavior—referred to as “participating”: the
control over day-to day decision-making and problem solving shifts from leader to
followers. Appropriate for R3—people who are competent but have variable
commitment towards task which is a function of a lack of confidence or insecurity

S4: Low relationship and low task behavior—referred to as “delegating”: is appropriate
for a group with readiness level R4 who are able and willing and confident. In this style,
leaders discusses the problems with followers until a joint-agreement is achieved.
Decision-making process is delegated totally to the followers. Followers “run their own
show”

In summary, situational leadership describes a way of adapting leadership behaviors to features
of the situation and the followers. The key point is that the leader provides what is lacking in the
situation.

Emphasizes the theme we have discussed concerning the importance of fit between leadership
style and context
“The Hero as King” by Thomas Carlyle
Carlyle calls Kingship, the Commander over Men, the last form of Heroism. He, as Priest, Teacher, and all other
forms of Heroism, tells us what to do. All social procedure should be aimed at finding the Ablest Man and once
found, he should be made King and given absolute authority. The Ablest Man is the wisest, most just, noblest, and
most fit for Kingship. With that, we would have the perfect state.
“Rulers and Generals Are ‘History’s Slaves’” by Leo Tolstoy
Tolstoy argues, in this passage from War and Peace, that man lives consciously for himself, but is an unconscious
instrument in the attainment of historic, universal, aims of humanity, and as such, the more people a man is
connected with and the more power he has over others, the more he is caught up in the pursuit of man’s universal
and historic aims. His actions are predestined and inevitable. Therefore, a king is history’s slave. History uses
every moment of the life of kings as a tool for its own purposes. In historic events, the so-called great men are
labels giving names to events, and like labels they have but the smallest connection with the event itself. Every act
of theirs, which appears to them an act of their own will, is in an historical sense involuntary and is related to the
whole course of history and predestined from eternity.
“Leading in Times of Trauma” by Jane E. Dutton, et al.

Explains how leaders can foster an environment of compassion in their organizations in the aftermath of a
crisis (“organizational compassion”)

Compassionate leadership involves taking some public action that eases people’s pain and inspires others
to act as well.
2-Level Compassionate Institutional Response
1. Context for Meaning: leader creates an environment in which people can freely express and discuss the
way they feel
2. Context for Action: leader creates an environment in which those who experience or witness pain can find
ways to alleviate their own and others’ suffering
Meaning Amid Chaos
 After a crisis, people undertake deep soul-searching, looking for meaning
 The leader’s job is not to answer deep questions, but to provide an environment where people can openly
discuss them
 Things leader can do: show your own humanity and express your own emotions; be present, physically
and emotionally; take care of grieving people’s basic needs; communicate and reinforce organizational
values, reminding people of larger purpose; make symbolic gestures
Actions Amid Agony
 Creating a context for action can unleash an organization’s power to heal
 Prompt the organizational infrastructure to reinforce and institutionalize compassionate acts
 Things leader can do: model behaviors you want to see; reallocate resources to support people in need;
use existing infrastructure, networks, routines to address trauma-related problems (organizing groups,
locating resources, etc.); set up new routines or networks designed to accelerate aid in the event of a
crisis
Bottom-Up
 Recognize and support compassionate actions at the lower levels of a company
 Bottom-Up compassion can have a transformative effect; organizational compassion can be contagious
Case for Compassion
 Hard to document positive effect of compassion on employee retention and productivity, but employees
will reward companies that treat them humanely
 Conversely, ignoring compassion in the workplace, especially in times of trauma, can have devastating
effects
Use leadership to begin the healing process; foster an environment to find meaning and enable compassionate
action
[OL] "Key Points," "The Power of Intuition" and "The Power of Mental Stimulation" by Gary Klein, in Sources of
Power: How People Make Decisions, p. 30, pp. 31 – 44, pp. 45 – 74.
How People Make Decisions by:
The Power of Intuition and the Power of Mental Simulation gives examples of great decisions that were made and
the situations they were made in.
For example, the article mentions nurses, military men, and firefighters. They give situations where a person
making the decision just had a “feeling” or intuition and they acted on it. The article is arguing that this intuition
comes from experience and familiarity. The people making the decisions actually have developed a sense for what
is normal and have learned to act quickly on just an intuition that something in a situation is different. The article
uses interesting examples to prove this point.
Decisions based on intuition depend on:
-pattern matching
-familiarity
- Recognition
- quick and accurate understanding
ADVICE FOR COMPANY: Use this theory to argue for a training program with realistic situations and obstacles.
Also, this model is related to pattern- matching exercises.
The second part of the reading was the Power of Mental Simulation where a decision-maker can look at the
starting point and determine a strategy to reach a specific end. When doing this, many transition steps are
determined to ensure success. Part of these considerations is looking for factors that would effect the outcome
and changing or altering strategy to allow for the factors.
Weakness in Mental Simulation- Imagining contradictory evidence away
PUT INTO ACTION: Ask employees to imagine future of a new plan, ask police officer to imagine different situations
with the same end, imagine failures and its causes, also to imagine how consumers would react to a developed
product
“Charismatic Authority” by Max Weber
In The Theory of Social and Economic Organization
Charisma: certain quality of an individual that sets him apart from ordinary people and is treated as “endowed
with supernatural, superhuman, or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities…regarded as of divine origin
or as exemplary, and on the basis of them the individual concerned is treated as a leader” (i.e. prophets, leaders of
the hunt, heroes in war, shamans, saviors, etc.) with followers and disciples





FOLLOWERS: Having followers validates charisma; they worship and absolutely trust the leader. Genuine
charisma has followers who see it as their duty to embark on this charismatic mission.
CHARISMATIC SUSTAINABILITY: If proof of his charismatic qualities fails the leader for long, or if his
leadership fails to benefit his followers, his charismatic authority will likely disappear. The leader tends to
think his god or his magical or heroic powers have deserted him (“gift of grace”).
COMMUNAL ORGANIZATION: The organization surrounding such a leader is communal. The
administrative staff is not technically trained but rather chosen for their charismatic qualities. There is no
hierarchy, no appointment, no dismissal, no promotion. The leader simply intervenes as he sees fit. No
formal rules or regulations, only charismatic authority; true leaders preach, create, demand new
obligations. Charismatic authority is opposed to routine.
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS: Charisma is foreign to economic considerations, especially the routine
everyday economizing and rational cost analysis. Charismatic leaders are supported by gifts, bribes, and
other irregular unsystematic acquisitive acts.
Charisma is the greatest revolutionary force. Charisma involves a subjective or internal reorientation born
out of suffering, conflicts, or enthusiasm, resulting in radical alteration of the central system of attitudes
(tradition vs. charisma).
Routinization of Charisma


If charisma is to be sustained, it needs to be traditionalized or rationalized, or both
In its pure form, charismatic authority exists only in the process of originating, and is unstable
Origins of Charisma: Ties That Bind the Leader and the Led”
by Manfred F.R. Kets de Vries



Seeks to answer the question of what psychological forces make for the mysterious, almost mystical, bind
between leader and led
Charismatic leaders appear at crisis points in history, and have a messianic quality; they are products of
their times, but they then succeed in shaping the forces that brought them to power
Charismatic Leaders create order out of disorder, providing new systems of coherence, continuity, and
justice; skilled at channeling diverging interests into a common goal, focus
Taking Advantage of the “Historical Moment”



To be effective, some congruence is needed between leader’s own concerns and societal concerns;
personal struggles become universally shared concerns
Leader must possess ability to draw upon and manipulate culture’s body of myth, and associate himself
with sacred symbols (cultural management)
Leader is legitimized by the perceptions of followers; followers project desires and hopes and ideals onto
leader, whether or not leader truly possesses or stands for those qualities
Influence of Transference


Appeal of leaders, according to Freud, is the return of the primal father; followers in times of crisis are
scared and abdicate responsibility, giving it to the leader and projecting their ideals onto him, leading to a
communal atmosphere with the leader at the top
3 types of Transference
1.
Idealization: followers idolize leaders, ascribing unrealistic qualities to them (regression
to seeing parents as all-powerful and perfect)
2.
Mirroring: leader seeks much attention and admiration, is idolized by followers, but
begins to believe unrealistic descriptions of himself and develops a sense of selfgrandiosity
Persecutory: leader cannot live up to followers’ idealization of him, and blames others
for his flaws to maintain his own ideal self-conception
3.
Exercising Influence by Linda Hill (p 74 in Course Reader)
To convert raw power into persuasive influence requires both empowering those who you depend on and
cultivating networks and enduring partnerships.. New managers erroneously focus on exerting their institutional
authority as a way to impact results, yet they soon realize that hands-on power does not equal influence. Trust and
credibility must be established before a manager can influence anyone; the best way to establish trust, change
attitudes and gain credibility is by empowering (sharing power) with subordinates. Credibility and trust are
functions of perceived competency and character, in addition to ability to empower. As for networks, Hill states
simply that “the primary way managers exercise influence and get things done is by providing resources and
services to others in exchange for resources and services they require” and thus, to exercise influence, managers
must cultivate mutually-beneficial networks to ensure exchanges of services, resources, or information. Three
important questions for managers to ask: whose cooperation do I need? Whose compliance do I need? Whose
opposition would prevent my success? Once you, as a manager, identify on whom you are dependent, envision
their own position: what are their goals (how are they different/aligned with your own) and what power do you
have to help them achieve their goals? Additionally, it is critical to identify what currencies you have and what
currencies others have so you are prepared to exchange (information, money, services, work-flow, high-profile
projects etc).
Having Power Ability to Empower Incr. Trust & Credibility Ability to Influence
LEADERSHIP IN ADMINISTRASTION (p.5-48)






Organizations and Institutions
 Administrative organizations has a formal set of rules and objectives
 Organization vs. Institution: Organization is an “expendable tool” engineered to do a job…
Institution is a natural product of social needs and pressures.
 We mostly see a mixture of both designed and responsive behavior (mix of organization and
institution characteristics)
Institutionalization according to the outside world become a social group!
 Aware of outside forces… dependence changes until reach a point of comfort and security. At
which point flexibility is gone, and institutionalization sets in.
 Adaptive change important! The occur as a result of unplanned situations… they are not
planned! Based on natural tendencies:
 Development of Ideology
 Dependence on and sustaining of Elites
 Expressing Interest groups
Institutionalization= to infuse with value! (and some self maintenance)
Leadership
 Work done to meet needs of social situation
 Does not have to be by someone in a formally high position
 Leadership is dispensable as the natural process of insititutionalization is eliminated or
controlled.
 Common faults: not setting goals, not fully infusing goals with
Decisions
 Technical or routine methods of addressing decisions that frequently occur
 Dynamic adaptation… occurs at that place where administration and policy meet.
Organization character~ emphasis on institutionalization (embodiment of value)
 Historical product—creation
 Integrated product—internally and externally
 Functional product—aids adaption
 Dynamic – new and active forces
Leading Change: Why transformation efforts fail, by John Kotter (p 107)
John Kotter is a retired Professor of Leadership at HBS and he examines why companies fail at change efforts.
This summary is copied nearly verbatim from an “exhibit” in his article (page 110 in course pack). There are eight
steps to initiating and implementing a transformation to an organization – failures can occur at any step, but over
50% occur at the first step. I)Establish a Sense of Urgency (examine market, discuss possible crises or timely
opportunities). II)Form a Powerful Guiding Coalition (assemble a group with enough power to lead the change
effort, encourage teamwork). III)Creating a Vision (create and articulate vision to direct the effort, develop
strategies to achieve the vision). IV)Communicating the Vision (Use every method to express vision and strategies,
teach desired behaviors by examples of the guiding coalitions). V)Empower Others to Act on the Vision (get rid of
obstacles to change, change systems that threaten success, encourage risk-taking and nonconventional ideas).
VI)Plan for and Create Short-Term Wins (plan for visible performance increases, recognize and reward employees
involved in those changes) VII)Consolidate Improvements and Produce More Change (use increased credibility to
extend changes, hire and promote employees who can implement and sustain vision, reinvigorate process with
new people, projects, tasks) VIII)Institutionalize New Approaches (articulate connections between the new
behaviors and corporate success, develop the means to ensure leadership development and succession).
“Managing with Power” in Jeffrey Pfeffer’s Managing with Power
Pfeffer analyzes the key attributes that allow certain individuals, such as Lyndon Johnson, to acquire and
sustain power in organizations. As they are interdependent bodies, it is imperative to master these abilities to
augment one’s positional power in the body. Johnson, primarily the ability to read other people—or sensitivity to
the strengths and weaknesses of others, epitomized much of these characteristics. This section is crucial when
explaining power in organization, and how an individual accumulates it. Here are the six individual attributes
Pfeffer discusses:






ENERGY AND PHYSICAL STAMINA: Whenever a staffer saw Lyndon Johnson coming up Capitol Hill, “he
was running.” He got to work earlier than everyone else, and really never left the job. Robert Moses,
Frank Stanton, and numerous others also fit this model of energetic, strong, leaders—allowing them to
outlast opponents and surpass them in intelligence, skill, and institutional knowledge.
FOCUS: “People who exercise great influence tend to focus their energies and efforts in a single
direction.” Energy is not endless; one must focus and avoid wasted effort. Johnson took this to the
extreme—always thinking of the Presidency, using every opportunity—social or political—to improve his
chances of success.
SENSITIVITY TO OTHERS: This is what Johnson was best at this—understanding others, their interests,
their desires, and how to reach them. If you reach them, you then know how to influence them—get their
vote, their support, and most of all, their allegiance. By 1951, Johnson, with just two years in the Senate,
was a chair of a subcommittee, respected member of the Southern Caucus, and close friend with Sen.
Richard Russell, “the power behind the Senate,” because he was the master of reading people and
knowing how to influence, cajole, and win them.
FLEXIBILITY: And then, one must change his/her behavior to align with the interests of others. It allows
someone to stay detached form the situation in order to do whatever necessary to focus on the ultimate
objective—influence and power.
ABLILITY TO TOLERATE CONFLICT: Power can be defined as the ability to overcome opposition—so on this
path, there is conflict. Don’t just “get along, go along,” but rather, assert one’s views and as a result, one
can obtain power in the situation as the prevailing, strongest opinion. Robert Moses was best at this—he
thrived in conflict, never backing down to get his goal in place.
SUBMERING THE EGO AND GETTING ALONG: But one must also build alliances and networks at the right
times. This change of behavior, and knowing when to change, involves almost all of the previous traits,
and is crucial.
Other ideas: In politics, there is a power vacuum that this leader can fill. These qualities foster effectiveness in the
organization. And finally, the currency of transactional leadership such as resides in informal networks, in one’s use
of these networks.
Power Dynamics in Organizations by Linda Hill (p 128)
Many claim that power corrupts, but powerlessness also corrupts. “Power” is the potential for a group or
individual to influence another group or individual. “Influence” is the exercise of power to change behaviors,
attitudes, and values. Managers face the triple challenge of interdependency, diversity, and power gaps; Hill
suggest “law of reciprocity” and networks as the dual solutions. Factors to prevent political conflict over resources
– in any organization – can include a common culture, shared goals, and strong leadership to maintain these.
There are also factors that precipitate additional strife, and they are: lack of unifying values, power vacuums, or
competition between units. “Power and influence are the mechanisms by which the inevitable political conflicts in
organizations get resolved.” Power derives from several places. First, positional power is often synonymous with
formal authority and stems from the person’s location in the hierarchy. Other dimensions of positional power
include: centrality in organization (information network or work-flow network), visibility, relevance to core
priorities and autonomy. Second, personal power derives from expertise and the perceived competency, one’s
historical track record of achievement and failure, the attractiveness of a person (behaviorally, physically, or
charisma) and the effort an individual puts in. To understand the power dynamics in an organization and analyze
or predict internal political conflict, one must identify the existing interdependencies and determine which sources
of power buttress relevant parties.
Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital,” by James Coleman

This article seems fairly irrelevant was never mentioned in class. It is briefly summarized below:
 Social action composed of two parts: 1) actor as socialized, action governed by social norms
(sociologist interpretation); 2) actor as having goals independently developed and wholly selfinterested (economist interpretation)
 Coleman’s definition of social action synthesizes these two viewpoints: “social capital” accepts
principle of ration action and accounts for actions of individuals in particular contexts and the
development of social organizations
 Social Capital as a resource for action: has three forms:
 Obligations and expectations: obligations to and expectations of others can dictate
one’s behavior and depend on the “trustworthiness of the social environment”
 Information channels: potential for information that inheres in social relations;
information provides a basis for action
 Social norms: norms and effective sanctions can constitute powerful form of social
capital
“Sources of Power” in “Managing with Power” p 111-145
Social Network Position
Power is a function of one’s position in the social network, and of the power of those you are connected to
Well placed to receive and communicate information, make the right friends
Control of information flow
Centralized structures (one hub) good for well-structured tasks, and all-channel structures (everyone talks to
everyone) good for unstructured tasks
Physical centrality is important: example of person who’s office is next to bathroomgets to see everyone
Interdependence is key to influence as it puts you in a central communication position (though it also makes you
depend on others more for your work)
The Nature of Formal Authority
Power to lead is conferred “by the governed”—they have to respect your decision
Milgram shock experiments—people’s willingness to comply with authority figures’ requests
Any team environment requires a team plan of action, which requires a formal authority to determine (or else
everyone would be acting uncoordinatedly)
People in formal positions of power can often be assumed to be more skilled and knowledgeable (assuming they
had to climb the ladder to get where they are)
Position implies credentials (so some people can fake their creds and still be left in positions of power)
People tend to follow established cultural norms, including that of listening to formal authority
People tend to be nicer when they have more power (and powerless people are not happy)
Authority and reputationi established early on will maintain itself and snowball
Winning in arguments gives you the reputation of being a winnerchallenged less
Informal Networks by David Krackhardt and Jeffrey R. Hanson
Thesis: “Much of the real work of companies happens despite the formal organizations”
It is important, as a manger, to understand these networks because they can enhance the efficient process of a
business but also has the power to stall it. As a metaphor, the skeleton of the company is the formal structure
(hierarchy, et al.) and the central nervous system is its informal sector. Mangers need to uses analysis to gain a
map of this network, discovering three types of networks and utilizing them: the advice network that shows
prominent players that can solve problems, the trust network that comes into play in crisis, and the
communication network that shows general connection between employees.
The rest of the article analyzes how a manger can use network analysis to help them. The important message,
however, is that “what matters is the fit, whether networks are in sync with company goals.” A manager must look
at this “map” and make sure everyone is on the same page, must fix a situation if, for example, there are two
different cultures emerging, which may conflict with each other. Other problems include: imploded relationships—
between departments of mangers, irregular communication patters, fragile structures, and most importantly,
network holes that must be glued back together. One must revamp the informal networks if there are problems,
but first, the manager must know what these informal networks are.
This relates to social capital theory with the leaders we discussed later in the year: Part II, Influence and
Persuasion. Katherine Graham and how she worked with her staff is a good example.
“Managing Your Boss” by John J. Gabarro and John P. Kotter.
In order to effectively Manage Your Boss you must:
1.
Understand Your Boss
1. His: Goals and Objectives
2. Pressures
3. Strengths, Weaknesses, Blind Spots
4. Preferred Work Style
2.
Understand Yourself
1. Your: Strengths & Weaknesses
2. Personal Style
3. Way you respond to authority
You then combine these two sources of information to
3.
Develop a Relationship
1. It is based on: Compatible Work Styles
2. Mutual Expectations
3. Flow of Information
4. Dependability and Honesty
5. Good use of Time and Resources
Managerial Networks by Herminia Ibarra (p 223)
A managerial network is “the set of relationships critical to your ability to get things done, get ahead, and
develop personally and professionally.” Networking refers to the activities associated with developing and
managing these relationships. There are three types of networks. First, task networks involve the exchange of jobrelated resources. Second, career networks are made up of people who provide guidance and direction. Third,
social networks involve friends, or people with common backgrounds or interests. A manager has a core network
made of long-term, high-reciprocity ties as well as short-term, instrumental ties, in addition to the extended
network of distance or indirect acquaintances. If you are connected to a person in your network, you also open all
the resources of all the branches of his/her network through indirect connection. Building a useful network hinges
on two dimensions: similarity (common group, values or interests) and exchange (swapping your currencies for
their resources etc). Managers should strive to always assist those in their network in hopes of ensuring
reciprocity as well as working to increase social capital as well.
“Power” by Rosabeth Moss Kanter in Men and Women in the Corporation
Kanter says that power in organizations means “autonomy and freedom of action. The powerful can afford to risk
more, and can afford to allow others their freedom.” People who are powerful have the credibility to get things
done. On an individual basis, power works in a cycle: power brings more power and powerlessness brings more
powerlessness. Women are often caught in cycles of powerlessness. People who prefer men as their leaders
actually just prefer their power: people “bet” that men are more likely to be successful power-holders than
women. People have stereotypes that women leaders are bossy, but bossiness is actually a characteristic
attributed to powerlessness. Women managers often are assigned to manage relatively powerless subordinates,
and because these powerless subordinates take out their frustration by resisting their managers, the managers
might have to adopt a more coercive leadership style, thus perpetuating negative stereotypes of women leaders.
Leadership thus reflects situation more than sex.
“The Power of Talk: Who Gets Heard and Why” by Deborah Tannen
The way you say things is crucial, and this affects how people interpret what you say. Women have a different
style of speaking, which can make them seem less self-assured and competent than they really are. This style is
called linguistic style, which means a person’s characteristic speaking pattern, “a set of culturally learned signals by
which we not only communicate what we mean but also interpret others’ meaning and evaluate one another as
people.” The place in which you are also affects this: a woman in Texas was seen as confident and outgoing, but in
Washington D.C., people thought she was shy; both of these judgments were made based on the how long she
paused before speaking. You can also say the same thing in different ways that convey the relative status of the
speakers: “Sit down!” (shows you have higher status, you know the person well, or you are angry) vs. “I would be
honored if you would sit down” (shows great respect or great sarcasm). There are some differences in linguistic
style between men and women: women are more reluctant to take credit for things for fear of bragging; women
are more likely to downplay their accomplishments; men are more likely to minimize their doubts; women are
more likely to ask questions; and men are more worried about losing face. As a leader, it is important that one
moves beyond linguistic style to make sure one understands what is actually being said.
“Managing Your Team” by Linda Hill
Teamwork is necessary to make and implement high-quality decisions. A manager must manage the team’s
boundary (those outside the team) and the team itself. An effective team has three characteristics: 1) the team’s
output meets the standards of those who have to use it, 2) the team experience contributes to the personal wellbeing and development of the team members, and 3) the team experience enhances the capability of the team
members to work and learn together in the future. To design the team, the manager must set the agenda,
determine the coordination the team members (baseball team/surgical team/Henry Ford assembly line, football
team/symphony orchestra, or tennis-doubles team/improvisational jazz ensemble), figure out the team
composition and structure, facilitate the team process, shape the team’s culture, and coach and guide the team
along the way. There are a few managing paradoxes a manager will have to deal with: 1) embrace individual
differences and collective identity and goals, 2) foster support and confrontation among team members, 3) focus
on performance and learning and development, 4) balance managerial authority and team member discretion and
autonomy, and 5) remember that because of their formal authority, managers are not ultimately members of the
team. People working in transnational teams must be aware that nationality influences people’s assumptions,
perceptions, knowledge, values, demeanor, and thus their behavior on transnational teams. Diversity can increase
ambiguity, complexity, and confusion, but at the same time, diverse groups can be more creative and invent more
options and solutions than homogenous groups.
[OL] “Will a Category Cue Affect You? Category Cues, Positive Stereotypes and
Reviewer Recall for Applicants” by Todd Pittinsky, Margaret Shih, and Nalini Ambady.
Summary: This was a psych study on how stereotypes influence performance, focusing on gender and ethnicity.
Research question: “Most empirical research on stereotypes and recall has examined how a single social category
of a target can influence a perceiver’s recall. Will subtle cues of one or another social category of a target lead
reviewers to markedly different recall?”
Basis: “Common cultural stereotypes hold that Asians have superior quantitative skills compared to other ethnic
groups and that women have inferior quantitative skills compared to men. Participants reviewed the college
application of a female Asian American high school senior, which included her score on the math scholastic
aptitude test (SAT).”
Findings: When cued about her gender as a female, it resulted in “participants recalling significantly lower math
performance for the applicant, while cues of her ethnic category resulted in participants recalling significantly
higher math performance, compared to a control condition for which neither category was cued.”
Conclusion: “Positive stereotypes can influence reviewer recall, and subtle category cues can result in markedly
different recall of an applicant. Findings suggest that category cues and multiple social categories are underappreciated aspects of stereotyping in general and stereotyping.”
“Using Logic to Make Your Argument” by Michael Hattersley
Hattersley provides some lessons on using logic to make your argument.
Two types of logical argument:
1.
2.
Deductive: sweeping major premise minor premise conclusion
Inductive: minor premises (data) major premise (trend/principle) conclusion
Both follow “given, since, therefore”
1.
2.
3.
Given: That we all agree on this basic problem (deductive) OR That we have assembled this body of data
(inductive)
Since: Addressing this problem with benefit us (deductive) OR This data demonstrates the following trend
or principle (inductive)
Therefore: We should take this course of action.
To make a good argument, you must check each part, especially the given to make sure everybody agrees on it.
Five types of argumentative strategies:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Argue from Definition: major premise has a definite meaning (i.e. given the light is red, and since red
lights mean stop, therefore I will stop)
Argue from Cause and Effect: gives a why answer to problem (i.e. Given we are losing customers to X, and
since X did so by lowering prices, therefore we should lower prices)
Argue from Experience: rely on past (i.e. Given that in the past higher interest rates drove sales up, and
since the interest rate just went up, therefore sales will go up)
Argue from Identity: identifying with another entity (i.e. Given that our quality is the same as our
competitors’, and since their sales went up when they began advertising quality, therefore we should
advertise quality)
Argue from Analogy: using an analogy as explanation (i.e. Given that employees are upset, and since a
boiling pot is likely to explode, therefore we should address their concerns immediately)
Extra Note: Make sure to include “unless” in your arguments (i.e. Given this, and since that, therefore we should
do this unless X)
Four types of evidence to support arguments:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Facts and Figures: data, surveys, costs, expertise, etc.
Appeal to common knowledge: using agreed upon truths, definitions, etc.
Anecdotal Evidence: specific instance of a larger pattern
Appeal to authority: citing a higher-up, an expert, etc.
[CR] “Change through Persuasion” by David Garvin and Michael Roberto pp 313 – 322
Main Point: “There is a powerful lesson in all this for leaders. To create a receptive environment, persuasion is
the ultimate tool. Persuasion promotes understanding; understanding breeds acceptance; acceptance leads to
action. Without persuasion, even the best of turnaround plans will fail to take root.”



Why a persuasion campaign?
 Differentiation from the past
How to accomplish?
 4-part communications strategy: set the stage, create a frame through which information and
messages are interpreted, manage the mood so that employees’ emotional states support
implementation and follow-through, provide reinforcement to ensure that the desired changes
take hold without backsliding.
 Enable routines but crush dysfunctional routines (serve as barriers to action) – described as the
toughest challenge faced by leaders during a turnaround.
Example:
 Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC) in Boston lead in a turnaround by Paul Levy.
 Article shows how Levy accomplished each part of the 4-part strategy above.
[CR] “Choosing Strategies for Change” by Leonard Schlesinger and John Kotter pp 326-337
Main Point: Today, managers must lead their organizations through more change than ever before. There is no
one strategy for implementing change, but rather many factors must be considered.




Diagnosing Resistance (managers need to understand why people may object to change)
 Possibilities include: self-interest, misunderstanding & lack of trust, different assessments, low
tolerance for change.
Dealing with Resistance (managers underestimate how they can positively influence specific groups
during change)
 Possibilities include: education & communication, participation, support, negotiation,
manipulation, coercion
Managers need to vary their approach depending on the situation (specifically situational factors)
 Including: amount & kind of resistance expected, position btw initiator & resistors, who is capable
of designing the change and has the energy to implement it, what are the stakes.
What managers should do: conduct org. analysis that identifies situation, conduct analysis of factors
relevant to producing the needed changes, select a change strategy, monitor implementation process.
[BK] “Timing is (Almost) Everything” by Jeffrey Pfeffer in Managing with Power, pp. 227 – 245.
Main Point: In utilizing the strategies and tactics of power and influence, it is crucial to determine not only what
to do but when to do it.






Being Early & Moving Fast: don’t give the opposition time to get mobilized.
Delay: one of the best ways to stop something is to delay it (esp. by calling for further study)
The Waiting Game: making others wait can increase your power.
Deadlines: deadlines are a great way to get things accomplished, and counter delay tactics.
Order of Consideration: if you have two proposals, present the weaker proposal first, to ensure the
stronger proposal is more favorably received.
Propitious Moments: look for the right moment to act as it may affect the outcome.
CR] “Note on Organization Structure” by Nitin Nohria.
Organization structure serves the following functions:
1.
2.
3.
Defines “specialization, standardization, and departmentalization of tasks and functions”
Coordinates activities, such as “hierarchical supervision, formal rules and procedures, and training and
socialization”
Defines the organization for others to understand
Central concepts
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Division of labor
Coordination mechanisms—vertical vs. horizontal, e.g. assembly line
Distribution of decision rights
Organizational boundaries—e.g. do customers interact with the manufacturing plant or only the sales
force?
Informal structure
Political structure
Legitimate basis of authority
Organizational Structure—Basic Forms
1.
2.
3.
4.
Functional form—divided by function, e.g. engineering dept. with internal pyramid, marketing dept. with
internal pyramid, etc.
Divisional Form—divisions are treated as separate business, each retaining their own depts. One
disadvantage is that it loses economies of scale.
Hybrid Forms—combine functional and divisional
Matrix Form—need benefits of functional and divisional so individuals are in a dual hierarchy, e.g. an
engineer is part of the engineering dept., but then is assigned to a project in another division. After the
project is done, s/he goes back to the engineering dept. to be assigned to another project. This is done
when an organization “feels pressure for the shared and flexible use of people and equipment.
Substitutes for Hierarchy – Edward E. Lawler III
Hierarchies serve certain functions:
-Motivating -Recordkeeping -Coordinating
-Assigning Work -Making Personnel Decisions
-Providing Expertise
-Setting Goals -Planning -Linking communications
-Training/Coaching -Leading -Controlling
A combination of practices performed together can often eliminate the need for extensive hierarchy. These are:
1.Work Design
Instead of dividing labor into routine standardized labor, when work is designed around whole products or
services, much of the need for a supervisor to coordinate work and motivate workers disappears. The work becomes intrinsically interesting and challenging, and a team is self managing. A drawback is the
considerable amount of skill building and team building required to make them effective.
2.Information Systems Technology
Computers can be excellent training resources. They can allow workers to perform recordkeeping themselves,
and can provide the control needs of the senior management who wish to access information.
3.Financial Data
The distribution of financial data to work teams can enhance their awareness of the economic priorities and
results of the organization.
4.Reward System Practices
Gain-sharing and profit sharing encourage teamwork and cooperation and skill based pay serve to improve
motivation and skills of the employee
5.Supplier/Customer Contact
Gettign performance feedback from customers is critical in allowing and motivating workers to take
responsibility for their work
6.Training
On the job peer training can reduce the need for many special staff groups
7.Emergent Leadership
Leaders emerging in work groups can provide a sense of motivation and direction to that group.
*It is Important to point out that which of these strategies can be implemented depend on the work environment,
what kind of work the company does and what technology it uses.
*Eliminating Hierarchy require that the senior managers adopt a management philosophy that states their
commitment to pushing decision making and information to the lowest levels of the organization.
*In short, hierachy is not inevitable. It is a manufactured ned. As such the need for it can be substantially reduced
by utilizing the above strategies
“Making Differences Matter: A New Paradigm for Managing Diversity” by David Thomas and Robin Ely





A more diverse workforce is good for business:
 Diversity will increase organizational effectiveness, lift morale, grant greater access to new
market segments, and enhance productivity.
Diversity as the varied perspectives and approaches to work that members of different identity groups
bring
Benefits of diversity depends on how a company defines diversity and what it does with the experiences
of being a diverse organization
Challenge to benefits of diversity: the leadership’s vision of the purpose of a diversified workforce
Importance of 1) commitment to learning more about environment/structure/tasks of organization; 2)
giving improvement-generating change priority over security of familiarity
Role of the Founder in the creation of Organizational Culture by Schein
SHORT SUMMARY





Organizations created when a founder has an entrepreneurial idea, creates core group with common
vision, logistically create organization, and finally bring in others as history is built and they learn how to
grow
Culture and assumptions create stability, hard to change once set
Founders have biggest impact on how group solves external problems and grows and on how it internally
organizes itself
The 3 case examples show how organizations begin to create cultures through founders’ actions, learned
and developed through various mechanisms, often based on teachings of leaders.
Whatever solves problems and causes stability becomes the “culture”
EXTENDED DETAILS




















Example case of Jones Food Company
Strong ideas for running grocery chain, always looked at customer needs (clean stores, display trust by
issuing credit, took back any returned product) and enforced with visible management
Power centralized in Jones, all stocks were held by family
Interested in developing good managers and compensated them well, but would not share stock
Jones wanted open communication and high trust levels but family members given key managerial
positions and favored treatment, another mutual protection society formed by other managers
Jones did not perceive his own inconsistencies in culture, did not see how no stock options, rewarding of
family members caused other managers to quit
When Jones dies, company experienced turmoil
Basic philosophies of how to run stores were embedded and remained
After several failed family and outsider CEOs, brought on an inside manager who finally stabilized
company. He had strong understanding of culture and family dynamics
Example case of Action Company
Successful technology manufacturing organization under founder Murphy
Murphy believed strong ideas come from anyone, but on one individual can determine if idea is correct,
so action only taken after idea been debated by several
Decision making and implementation group oriented but managerial responsibilities and evaluations are
individual
Open culture, people can challenge their bosses, open cubicles instead of offices, no strong status
symbols
Maximizing individual creativity and decision quality worked and company grew
But as it grew, hard to always negotiate with groups on action, disorganized
Murphy believed in need for organization and hierarch, but people could still challenge ideas and were
rewarded if successful
Murphy encouraged competing overlapping markets, but this undermined open communication and
knowledge sharing, hard to negotiate decisions
Hiring practices reflected culture of individualistic people who can argue for their ideas
Leads to family culture, people comfortable and secure in sharing idea. But this is hard to maintain as
company grew

This shows power of founder’s assumptions, now they are trying to adapt to growing circumstance




Example case of Smithfield Enterprises
Founder Smithfield built chain of financial service organizations that used sophisticated techniques
He was creative conceptualizer, believed in getting others to invest, build, and manage company
He would not put much of his own money because he believed that idea is only good if he can get others
to invest in it
Unlike Jones, he lost interest once idea of the ground and allowed others to run, just happy to see its
success, used same model to start other ventures
Not much corporate culture because no group with shared history or learning experiences
This shows that it is not automatic that founders impose themselves on organizations



The Smile Factory: Work at Disneyworld by Van Maanen




Disney sells product of happy emotions
This “feeling business” operates by the bottom employees who interact with customers most
Depends on the animated workforce so “the smile factory” has cultural rules
Focused look at Disneyland rider operators, largest category of hourly workers on payroll


Stock appearance of operators: Exact appearance rules defined in handbook
Most are single, white, males and females, skinny and attractive, token minorities, minimal interaction
with customers required so just need to look neat

Status order: Workers’ assigned jobs are all ranked and have certain status based on uniforms, break
privileges, and people wanting jobs that require more skills (tour guide vs. concession stand employee)

Social life: people tend to stay in their status rankings socially as well, cross dating often occurs, lots of
social interactions during and outside of work




Swiftly learned codes of conduct: culture is officially defined
Language is strictly taught and followed (ex. saying guests vs. customers)
Strong training enforcing company propaganda
Suspicious managers, coworkers, and customers maintain that worker is doing job and “smiling” or being
happy



This culture has little room for personal experimentation and innovation
Emotionless management: Workers go into a numb mode when always asked to be happy
Disneyland has very defined and accepted work roles and culture. Workers are trained, paid, and told to
be nice and happy. Although this does not always happened, it is almost an achievement to see how much
it actually is maintained.
What is Culture? Schein
SHORT SUMMARY

This paper basically looks at what the concept of culture actually means and how we can measure or
practically apply it


It focuses on conceptual issues involved in defining organizational culture and defines it explicitly as:
 A pattern of shared basic assumptions
 Invented, discovered, or developed by a given group
 As it learns to cope with its problems of external adaptation and internal integration
 That has worked well enough to be considered valid
 Is to be taught to new members of the group as the
 Correct way to perceive, think and feel in relation to those problems
It also explains a process to study culture suggesting an outsider can use a motivated insider group to
decipher culture
EXTENDED DETAILED

There are several competing conceptual and practical definitions of culture:
1. Survey Research approach: starts with a conceptual definition and then measures it through individual
questionnaires; the questionnaires probably do not adequately cover the conceptual dimensions. This
could mean culture is like personality, and the culture concept will show us the uniqueness of
organizations
2. Analytical Descriptive approach: breaks culture down analytically into components. This is good for
research, but not for a conceptual strategy.
3. Ethnographic approach: uses intense observation with interview data and cultural insiders. This shows
uniqueness but since it is limited to culture being enacted in observable behavior, it leaves out examining
the concept of culture.
Why do we need the concept of culture?








Culture implies stability: certain phenomena persisted over time and display stability
Culture emphasizes conceptual sharing: similarity of outlook and consensus in group meaning some
sharing going on
Culture implies patterning: lots of patterns in societies observed
Culture implies dynamics: the perpetuation of observed regularities and patters over time
Culture implies all aspects of group life: virtually everything we do is colored by a shared way of looking at
things
The author believes one gets a better sense of culture when coming from a “clinical perspective” or a
consultant perspective rather than a researcher
His formal definition of culture:
 A pattern of shared basic assumptions
 Invented, discovered, or developed by a given group
 As it learns to cope with its problems of external adaptation and internal integration
 That has worked well enough to be considered valid
 Is to be taught to new members of the group as the
 Correct way to perceive, think and feel in relation to those problems
Culture is a property of a human group and the shared common learning output of facing problems of
external adaptation and internal integration





Dynamic model of learning process: founder starts with beliefs, values, and assumptions and teaches new
members through various mechanisms. Group either succeeds, repeats, and culture is formed or fails and
dissolves.
Beliefs = how things are, values = how things should be, assumptions = provide meaning and structure
Learning: from mistakes for what not to do, learning from predictable patterns
Culture is manifested and can be studied at different levels
Best to use a motivated insider group to decipher culture
A Note for Analyzing Work Groups
**Work groups are the building blocks of organizations


We will be looking into the factors that shape the development, dynamics, and effectiveness of taskperforming groups, specifically group culture.
Sample Work Group: the new product team of the Merit Corporation
Background







Family-owned and operated for three generations.
Current CEO is John Kirschner grandson of the company’s founder
 He is currently thinking about his legacy for the future
Merit was known for their generous employee benefits (health and pension plans)
Turnover was generally low and employee morale was high
Middle Managers were from outside the firm and were carefully selected. Most had MBAs
It held a dominant position in the kids’ furniture market
*New Product Design* was their weakness
Problems



Differentiation became a huge deciding factor in this business
Customers were becoming more demanding about design, quality, and safety the product life cycles
were shortening
Competition was heightening
 Household furniture manufacturers were venturing into this market
 Low-cost producers placed pressure on costs
Solution Strategy


New Products group was essential to their success
Kirshner was going to form a group of 6-8 people with diverse and unorthodox backgrounds to come up
with new product ideas
Group Context
These will affect how the group will function



organization’s strategy
organization’s history
physical setting




customers, suppliers, and competitors
labor market
financial markets
cultural, political, and legal systems
Some issues
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
This new product development is going to be a major endeavor of this company, thus other might have a
problem with Kirschner bringing in outsiders to do this
Line managers will probably resist change to existing procedures
Kirschner decided to create this new leadership without consulting his people, thus he does not have their
full support
a. Not that big of an issue b/c Kirschner has the credibility and social capital necessary to introduce
the change
b. He is a descendant of respected founders, and has an impressive track record of his own
c. He is considered a champion of change
Kirschner is considering giving this new group the fourth floor for their location, because there is nowhere
else he can put them
a. This might create “us versus them” issues
b. Or the plans they create may be different from the plans the people downstairs make
Basically, they need support from the rest of the organization to succeed in establishing this new plan
a. Kirschner’s decision met no initial resistance, but there was skepticism
b. A internal political conflict quieted most of the managers
The members of the New Products Development (NPD) team:
1.
8.
Christopher Kane
a. Kane was the nominal group head.
Andrew Jacobson
a. Worked in large corporate environments, so he was more of a systematic person
b. Very outspoken
John O’Hara
a. Used his artistic ability to translate ideas into 3D drawings
Robert Vidreaux
a. He encouraged the group to look for “cutting edge ways in which things could be done”.
b. He was skilled in resolving potentially disruptive issues about the group’s process of working
together.
Susanne Tashman
Joan Waters
a. Waters soon became the informal co-leader, drawing upon her organizational expertise
Matthew Kiris
a. He was used to long-term complex projects
b. Never worked for a for-profit company
c. He privately favored a more “exploratory attack” to the task but didn’t want to make suggestions
Raynor Carney

Kirshner believed that they would perform best if given extensive freedom and encouragement
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.



He only required a biweekly progress report and a monthly financial report so the executive committee
could be kept up to date.
He only structure he imposed was having one person report directly to him, which he appointed group
head – Christopher Kane
These people did not know each other at all and did not know what was expected of them on a daily basis
 They realized that they had different methods of doing the work and different ideas in general
 They had different working styles
 Kane and Tashman were used to wearing suits to work
 O’Hara always wore jeans and a tee-shirt
 Waters dressed casually
 Carney could work comfortably only in stacks of clutter
 Jacobson was “compulsively neat”
 Kiris worked better with music in the background
 Waters and Tashman preferred a quiet work environment
Design Factors



He has provided a direction for the group to pursue – to develop new products that meet the need for
value-priced, durable, multipurpose children’s furniture.
He set the group apart physically and in their reporting relationship to him
Design Factors fall under 3 categories:





These are the basic architecture of a group
The design factors and group context factors are interrelated and interdependent, in which a change in
one affects the others
 Group composition
 Task design
 Formal organization
Group Composition
 They are diverse in pretty much everything
 Heterogeneous groups often find it more difficult to integrate their efforts and work productively
at the outset
 The NPD found out that they had much in common
 They agreed to share the leadership function as needed, although Kane was the
designated leader
 Kane liked seeing his team members as peers, thus he was relieved he didn’t have to be
“dictator”
Task Design
 This is the second major design factor influencing a group’s development and effectiveness
 This includes: required activities, interactions, interdependencies, variety and scope, and
autonomy
 Kirschner is aware he is giving them the responsibility to split the tasks and figure out how to
perform their work most effectively. Self-managed team
 Sometimes they wished they had a leader who would provide a clearer and more
compelling sense of what it was expected
Formal Organization


This deals with the formal organizational policies and procedures within which the group
operates: structure, systems, and staffing
 This is the one team leaders and members have the least control over
 Careful analysis is the first step in creating the conditions that will increase the
likelihood that the group will prosper
In analyzing what a manager should do versus what a manger can do to improve the
performance of a work group, we distinguish among three levels of control
 What he or she has complete control over and can change at will
 What he or she can change with the support and assistance of others
 What he or she has little or no control over to change
Group Culture




This becomes the “rules” for how members are to behave and get their work done
They have begun to work together and emerged as a team, as they attempt to adapt to their
circumstances
Norms
 Group norms are the “ought tos” or shared expectations and guidelines for how group members
should behave.
 Groups develop norms concerning:
 Distribution of power and influence
 Communication patterns within the team
 What topics are considered legitimate for discussion
 How conflicts are managed
 Groups tend to punish with some form of social censure
Roles
 Roles define the sets of behavioral expectations for particular members of a group or for those
holding certain positions in it
 Waters has emerged as an informal leader
 Vidreaux is elected to take on the leadership functions of monitoring the group’s
process and resolving conflicts
 Carney has become a social deviant
 Group leaders tend to embody the group’s core values and norms
Results




Within its first year of existence, orders dramatically increased, and the product captured a significant
percentage of a market niche
It is not enough for the group to be pleased with its output, the people who use it makes the output
acceptable or unacceptable
It also has to satisfy individual needs and help members develop
It should help enhance the capability of the members to work and learn together in the future
Kirshner’s Retirement


When Joe Donaldson replaced Kirshner, he felt that NPD had no additional new products and was
concerned with a couple of other problems
 He moved the NPD group downstairs in which he equipped them with upgraded computers,
greater admin and tech support
 And team’s budget was increased
Problems with the changes
 NPD culture began to change
 NPD began to complain about feelings of inadequacy and dissatisfaction
 Within two months, individuals began leaving for other companies
Conclusion



Donaldson wanted to make his mark quickly and build up credibility, and thought NPD was losing
momentum
 He modified some of the group’s key design factors, which destroyed the group culture
Group culture arises from the interaction of the 3 design factors
 Group’s composition
 Task Design
 Formal organization within which the group is located
Group culture has a direct impact on team effectiveness
Evaluating an Action Plan
Key Elements of Action Planning




Analysis and diagnosis of the situation (opportunity or problem)
Identification of likely outcomes and contingencies (the “what ifs”) in order to clarify your diagnosis and
goals
Periodical reassessment and revision of plan in response to new information
Concreteness in identifying earlier steps and flexibility in later ones. (Envision long and plan short.)
Criteria for Evaluating an Action Plan
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Define your objectives (short and long-term)
Make sure the assumptions underlying your strategy are valid and reliable. Make sure your action plan is
consistent with your analysis, feasible given the situation (timing in particular), and realistic given your
sources of power and ability to exercise influence.
Assess the likely outcomes of your action plan by considering necessary trade-offs, and the stakes and
risks involved for you and other stakeholders.
Examine the timing and sequence of the action plan including if urgent matters are being addressed first,
if there are incremental steps in your plan to reduce unnecessary risk, and if any early steps unnecessarily
rule out future alternatives.
Consider possible contingencies and plan for them by assessing the likelihood of success at each step and
developing alternatives if the likelihood is low.
Put in place a process that will ensure that you will periodically reevaluate and modify the action plan if
necessary.
Make time to reflect on and learn from your experience about yourself and your situation.
The Design of Work Teams
**The use of quality circles, autonomous work groups, project teams, and management task forces, suggest that
the use of groups is a popular and useful way of getting things done in organizations
**It is important to note that these groups can also be a negative asset in that they waste time and enforce norms
of low productivity
**Three steps: Input, Process, Output
Normative Model of group effectiveness


We first focus on work-group effectiveness
Then we identify potentially manipulative aspects of the group
Descriptive Research on Group Behavior and Effectiveness









A general framework for generalizations that chart what happens in groups reliably, validly, and relatively
comprehensively
This framework classifies both input and output variables in 3 sets
 Those that describe the group as a whole
 Those that describe the individual group members
 Those that describes the environment the group operates
We analyze the performance difference by comparing the interaction process of the two groups
The input-process link in the framework deals with the effects of the group composition variables
Output-process emphasized the impact of group interaction on the attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors of
individual group members
Input-output research
 The relationships obtained appear to depend substantially on the properties of group task being
performed
 Findings for one type of task does not hold the same for the rest
Implications for team effectiveness
 Existing generalizations about group behavior are neither strong enough or stable enough to
serve as guides for managerial practice
 Group effectiveness and input/output variables tend to highly dependent or relatively weak on a
particular task
The choice of variables
 When appropriately conceived and executed, laboratory research can generate powerful tests of
conceptual propositions
 Personal and interpersonal variables and to hold constant or ignore contextual variables
 The major contextual influence in the laboratory is the experimenter
 He or she decides where to conduct the study, recruits the subjects and form them into
groups, selects and assigns the group task
 In the interest of good experimental practice, some variables may most powerfully affect what
happens in groups, thereby making it impossible to learn about their effects
The role of group process
 The descriptive emphasis – when social psychologists study group interaction, they focus on
group processes that develop naturally




These help us understand how groups function in the laboratory and field settings
where the data were collected
 Usefulness as a point of intervention
 Process interventions are quite popular in consultative work
 It is easy to see wasted time and effort, dysfunctional conflict among members, and a
variety of other process problems with group members
 Research findings on the efficacy of process interventions tells us:
 Interventions that focus directly and primarily on the quality of relationships among
members usually succeed in changing member attitudes
 Interventions that structure group interaction to minimize opportunities for "process
losses" do improve team effectiveness for certain kinds of groups and tasks
 Research findings regarding process interventions suggest that structured techniques
that minimize process losses (or reduce their effects) can be helpful.
Stages of Managerial Work in creating an effective group
 Stage one: Prework
 Establishing and analyzing the work to be done
 Determining the level of authority the group will have
 Assessing the cost benefits, and feasibility of using a team to do the work
 Stage two: Creating performance conditions
 Designing the group task
 Selecting group members
 Providing contextual support
 Arranging for needed material resources
 Stage three: Forming and building the team
 Helping the group establish its boundaries
 Legitimizing and assisting with task redefinition process
 Assisting in the development of group norms and member roles
 Stage four: Providing ongoing assistance
 Providing opportunities for the group to renegotiate aspects of its performance
situation
 Providing process assistance as needed to promote positive group synergy
 Providing opportunities for the group to learn form its experiences
Authority of different work groups
 Area of Management Responsibility
 Design of the organizational context
 Design of the group as a performing unit
 Monitoring and managing performance processes
 Area of group Responsibility
 Executing the task
 Manager-led work teams
 Self-managing work teams
 Self-designing work teams
 In general, self-designing work teams require the least amount of supervision from the
management, while the manager-led work teams require the most
Three criteria to assess team effectiveness
 The productive output
 It should meet or exceed the performance standards of the people who receive and
review the output
 The social processes used in carrying out the work should maintain or enhance the capability of
members to work together on subsequent team tasks
 The group experience

It should satisfy rather than frustrate the personal needs of group members
Implications of Management on Teams

On Leadership
 If a group has been designed well and helped to begin exploring the group norms and member
roles it wishes to have, questions of internal leadership should appear naturally.
 The manager's role, then, is to make sure a group confronts the leadership issue directly (even if
members would prefer to deal with it implicitly or avoid it entirely), not to resolve it for the
group.
 A manager interested in encouraging a group to work hard, for example, would try to make the
group task more motivationally engaging. And he or she would try to provide more (or more
potent) positive consequences contingent on hard, effective work.
Organizational Alignment: The 7S Model
To be effective, an organization must have a high degree of “fit” or internal alignment, among its seven key
elements – each S must be consistent with and reinforce the other S's.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Strategy
1. What is the company's competitive advantage(ex. quality, service)
2. What are the Company's key strategic priorities(penetrating new markets)
Structure
1. What is the basic structural form(Divisional, Matrix, Functional, Network)
2. How centralized vs. decentralized is the organizationa
3. Wthat is the relative status and power of the organizational sub units
Systems
1. Does the organization have the systems it needs to run its business(ability to monitor custormer
satisfaction)
2. What are the management systems that top management pays closest attention to
Staffing
1. How does the organization recruit and develop its people
2. What are the demographics of the management team
3. Where are the strongest and weakest leaders found in the organization(in which functions)
Skills
1. What business activities is the company distinctively good at performing
2. What new capabilities does the organization need to develop, and which ones does it need to
“unlearn” to compete in the future
Style
1. How does top management make decisions(participatory vs top down)
2. How do managers spend their time( formal meetings, informal conversations)
Shared Values
1. Do people have a shared understanding of the company's vision, and why the company exists.
2. What types of issues receive the most and least top management attention(short run vs long
run)
Important Implications
1.
2.
3.
Manyfacors influence an organization's effectiveness and its ability to change. A leader is wise to
recognize the full range of elements and focus on the ones that will have the greatest effect
All Seven Variables are Interconnected. It is difficult to change one without having to adjust the others.
There is no starting point for a change effort. The importance of each S varies with each situation.
“The Bakeoff” by Malcolm Gladwell
Steve Gundrum is the head of Mattson, one of the country’s leading food research-and-development firms,
located in Silicon Valley. Mattson created the shelf-stable Mrs. Fields Chocolate Chip Cookie, the new Boca Burger
products for Kraft Foods, and many other innovations in the food industry. Gundrum launched Project Delta to
create the world’s greatest cookie – one that is nutritious and yet tastes as indulgent as the premium cookies
offered on supermarket shelves. Gundrum decided to hold a bakeoff between three teams. He wanted to
challenge the assumption that there was just one way of inventing something new and so decided that each of the
three teams would use a different methodology of invention:
The first team, known as the XP team after the “extreme programming” movement in the software industry,
consisted of two Mattson associates – Peter Dea and Dan Howell – acting as partners like two computer
programmers work passing the keyboard back and forth between them. The second team, known as Team
Stuckey, represented “managed” research-and-development consisting of a traditional hierarchical team headed
by Barb Stuckey, an executive vice-president of marketing at Mattson. The third team, known as the Dream Team,
was based on the open-source movement used in the development of Linux and the idea that “a thousand people
working for an hour each can do a better job than a single person working for a thousand hours.” The Dream Team
consisted of 15 expert food-industry bakers and scientists from outside Mattson collaborating online with the
group’s recommendations carried out by Mattson staffers.
Much like in Ideo’s lengthy and uninhibited brainstorming process, the Dream Team produced 34 diverse ideas. In
contrast, Team Stuckey and the XP team stuck to developing a few ideas from the onset. The Dream Team’s large
brainstorming process, however, became chaotic and produced conflicts and disagreements between its members.
Each member felt like “one of fifteen cogs in a machine” and were not enjoying the process. The Dream Team’s 15
talented members brought a large pool of expertise but this advantage was cancelled out by the chaos and friction
created in trying to agree on and develop an idea. When the votes were counted, Team Stuckey’s strawberry
cobbler cookie beat the Dream Team’s oatmeal caramel cookie. In contrast to Ideo’s philosophy, Gundrum
concluded that while the open-source model works great for projects in which the goals and technical hurdles are
clearly defined like Linux, designing something truly new and innovative requires leaps and connections between
ideas that can only happen in an environment quiet enough to allow the team to think.
[OL] “Beyond the Charismatic Leader: Leadership and Organizational Change” by David Nadler and Michael
Tushman.
The authors argue that today, “discontinuous organizational change” is immensely important because
“organizations need to manage through periods of both incremental as well as revolutionary change.” The authors
contend that the “executive is a critical actor in the drama of organizational change,” providing numerous
examples. However, the article’s thesis posits: “Vision and/or charisma is not enough to sustain large-system
change. While a necessary condition in the management of discontinuous change, we must build a model of
leadership that goes beyond the inspired individual; a model that takes into account the complexities of systemwide change in large, diverse, geographically complex organizations. We must attempt to develop a framework for
the extension of charismatic leadership…”
The authors use figure 1 (right) to classify types of organizational changes. They say that strategic changes are
necessary; re-creations are risky, and reorientations are associated with more success because they are done with
the time necessary to create coalitions and proceed with adequate planning.
The authors then affirm the importance of a charismatic leader, which they define in figure 2 (right). However,
they outline the limitations of charismatic leadership on page 8. These include unrealistic expectations, reluctance
to disagree with the leaders, need for continuing magic, potential feelings of betrayal, disenfranchisement of next
levels or management, and limitations of range of the individual leader.
The authors then say that charismatic leadership must be bolstered by instrumental leadership, through attention
to detail on roles, responsibilities, structures, and rewards. They also say that because “organizations are too large
and complex for any ne executive and/or senior team to directly manage, responsibility for large system change
must be institutionalized throughout the management team. The leadership of strategic organization change must
be pushed throughout the organization to maximize the probability that managers at all levels own and are
involved in executing the change efforts and see concrete benefits of making the change efforts work.” Figure 4
below effectively summarizes the multi-faceted change leadership that the authors advocate.
“Why Change Programs Don’t Produce Change” by Michael Beer et al
There are two misconceptions about organizational change that explains why most top-down companywide
change programs fail to work. The first is the fallacy of programmatic change – the belief that changes in
employee attitudes leads to changes in behavior, which when repeated leads to company-wide change. The
second is the misconception that employee behavior is changed through changes in the formal structure and
systems of an organization. In actuality, individual behavior is shaped by the roles people play in organizations.
Thus, successful organizational change occurs through task alignment, achieved by reorganizing employee roles,
responsibilities, and relationships to solve specific work problems – not by changing abstractions like
“participation” or “culture.” Thus, organizational change usually starts at the periphery of organizations in a few
divisions or units far from the management core and later spreads to other units and eventually top-level
management.
Successful organizational change requires that three factors be addressed: commitment, coordination (between
teams, divisions), and competencies (knowledge and skills required). Companywide change programs usually only
address one or two of these and, when they fail, can detract from the credibility of the change effort and from
commitment among employees and managers to change. Organizational change must rather come from focus on
task alignment, which is easiest in small business units where goals and tasks are clearly defined. Task alignment
can be achieved through a sequence of six steps carried out by general managers called the critical path, which
produces a self-reinforcing cycle of commitment, coordination, and competence. These steps are:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Mobilizing commitment to change through joint diagnosis of business problems. A shared diagnosis
developed among a unit’s management team mobilizes the initial commitment necessary to begin the
change process.
Developing a shared vision of how to organize and manage for competitiveness. This includes defining
new roles and responsibilities but not changing the formal structure like titles and compensation.
Fostering consensus for the new vision, competence to enact it, and cohesion to move it along. This
includes encouraging enthusiasm and support among managers, providing formal training programs when
asked for by employees, and replacing managers who have demonstrated that they cannot function in the
new organization.
Spread revitalization to all departments without pushing it from the top. In this step, it is important to
allow each department find its own way to the new organization instead of forcing it upon them in order
to preserve commitment.
Institutionalize revitalization through formal policies, systems, and structures. Examples are a
implementing a new information system, creating or changing positions and titles.
Monitoring and adjusting strategies in response to problems in the revitalization process through
oversight and planning teams, regular employee attitude surveys.
In effective organizational change, top management creates a climate for change without imposing it from topdown. Important strategies for supporting change are:




Creating a market for change by setting high standards as dictated by competitive forces and holding
managers accountable for fundamental changes in how they use human resources.
Use of successfully revitalized units as organizational models for the entire company by identifying them,
providing them with the best managers and resources, and highlighting them as examples to follow
through visits, conferences, and educational programs.
Developing career paths that encourage leadership development by making leadership an important
criterion for promotion and managing people’s careers to develop it.
Being willing to change when the critical time comes for top-management to align with the revitalized
units of the organization.
Companies must keep in mind that change requires a unit-by unit learning process rather than a series of programs
and persistence over a long period of time as opposed to quick fixes.
[OL] “Creating Change” by Peter Senge and Katrin Kaeufer
In this article, the authors identify 10 forces that impede change. They claim that each arises as a consequence of
some measure of success in a change process. “Sustaining change,” they write, “requires understanding the
sources of these forces and having ways to deal with them…Great leaders learn how to work with the full range of
forces crucial to long-term change.”
Below is a list of all of the 10 forces the authors identify, grouped as they are in the article.
Challenges of Initiating
1.
2.
3.
4.
Time: “We don’t have time for this stuff.”
Help: “We have no help” or “We’re wasting our time.”
Relevance: “This stuff isn’t relevant.”
Walking the talk: “They’re not walking the talk.”
Challenges of Sustaining
5.
6.
7.
Fear and anxiety: “This isn’t good.”
Measurement: “This stuff isn’t working.”
True believers (“We have the way”) and non-believers (“They are acting like a cult.”)
Challenges of Redesigning – these challenges include concentration of power and centralized control in shaping
strategy and purpose.
8. Governance: “They (the powers that be) never let us do this stuff.”
9. Diffusion: “We keep reinventing the wheel.”
10. Strategy and purpose: “What are we here for?”
The authors conclude by saying that “these challenges clarify the roles that different leaders play in initiating and
sustaining change.”
“Leadership for Change” Rosabeth Moss Kanter
There are seven important skills exhibited by successful change masters
1.Sensing Needs & Opportunities: Tuning into the environment
Be mindful. Identify problems at an early stage before they escalate
2.Kaleidoscope Thinking: Stimulating Breakthrough Ideas
Challenge the Pattern or Status quo
3.Setting the Theme: Communicating Inspiring Visions
Turn idea into inspiring, big picture vision
4.Enlisting Backers & Supporters: Getting Buy In, Building Coalitions
Constantly communicate with and appeal to powerholders
5.Developing the Dream: Nurturing the Work Team
Let team form identity naturally. Then constantly supply and support team to help it maintain focus
6.Mastering the Difficult Middles: Persisting and Persevering
"Everything can look like a failure in the middle" Be Flexible Push Forward Dont Give Up
7.Celebrating Accomplishment: Making Everyone a Hero
Initiative & Innovation thrive on Celebration
*Change is not just a decision, its an ongoing campain
*A leader must choose the change rhythm that is appropriate for that context
Lisa Benton Case Summary
In my opinion, the Lisa Benton case study is really not that important (sorry). The major point is bosssubordinate relationships and, by extensions, interpersonal relationships period. Regardless, the story is kind of
interesting (and not because it was the only case study in which major characters were more than likely getting it
on). The summary is as follows: while Lisa Benton she attended Harvard Business School, worked as the first
female manager for Right-Away stores, a company where she won accolades for her “roll-up-your sleeves”
approach and charmed the president, Scott Kingston, so much that he offered her a full-time job at Right-Away
stores after she graduated. However, she was also offered a job at Houseworld’s Care Division, appealing because
of its classical and famous excellent marketing training. She chose to turn down the higher salary and a bigger
position partly because of her worries of taking on too much responsibility and partly because of Right-Away’s
rundown warehouse and lack of other female manager and, instead, joined Houseworld. At Houseworld, she was
charmed by the friendly and professional people she met initially but ended up under Deborah Linton, who
immediately made it clear she was biased against Harvard MBAs. The friendly people she had met didn’t
remember her name, she felt the reception from her boss was “cool and disinterested,” and, to make matters
worse, her Associate Product Manager, Ron Scoville, was condescending. She was also working on a product, Pure
& Fresh, she felt was unnecessary. What follows in the case study is a series of run-ins and experiences with
Scoville and Linton, where pretty much each time Benton feels overshadowed, overwhelmed, and unwanted. This
leads to the end of the case study, where she considers calling back Right-Away Stores President Kingston and
telling she made a mistake.
The point of the whole case is, ultimately, the personalities. Linton, Benton’s boss, obviously has an inferiority
complex. She never understands Benton and is definitely inexperienced in managing people. She seems
overwhelmed, overworked, and may or may not (I’m voted definitely) is doing the hanky-panky with Scoville.
Scoville, Benton’s coworker, is even less of a people person. He’s difficult to work with and, unlike Linton, has what
could best be called a superiority complex. His ego, frustration with not being promoted, and bizarre misfit status
at the company comes together to annoy (and confuse) the heck out of Benton. Finally, Benton herself seems to
have a clip on her shoulder. She has higher expectations for the job than she should have had and clearly has
trouble asserting herself. She never conveys her potential and is overtly defensive. Finally, she also seems like she’s
trying too hard to please people and be liked by them.
In the end (though not in the case study), Scoville and Linton ended up leaving and Benton got the position of
Product Manager a full 9 months earlier than is usual. She had the potential, then. So? It would have been best if
she had managed upward, assuming responsibility for her own career and development. She should probably have
handled Linton differently, understand what she wanted, what pressures existed, and what the stakes were.
Ultimately, a boss is in many ways dependent on his or her subordinate- for the knowledge he/she delivers, as a
source of information, and as a sounding board. If the subordinate realizes his or her sources of power, having
skills that are tough to replace, specialized knowledge or information, and centrality to the organization, etc…,
then the subordinate should be able to build a partnership with his or her boss. (This is all, for the most, adapted
from Ager’s slides in class).
Katherine Graham
Abstract: Katherine Graham (Kay), the protagonist of this Harvard Business School Case, arrived largely untested in
1963 to the Presidency of the Post Company when her husband Phil passed away. Kay’s speedy transformation
from a “silent partner watching from the sidelines,” to an inspirational and transformational leader should prove a
lesson for us all. Katherine Graham (Kay) was thrust into a situation without preparation and with much animosity.
Yet through her transformational leadership as exemplified by her hiring Bradlee, handling the Watergate Scandal,
and preempting the Pressman’s Strike, Kay led the Post to unprecedented success. Although her leadership style
may prove uncomfortable to those acculturated by masculine norms, she proved remarkably effective and left the
Post in excellent position for her son, Don Graham, to take over.
Email David Wyman (dkwyman@fas) if interested in the whole case report.
Building Coalitions
In my opinion, this is a really important article. Honestly, it can apply to almost any form of relationship
between anyone trying to do anything. Which means we can apply it to almost any case study.
The main point: bringing people whose interests vary greatly into an alliance “can be one of the most effective
methods of finding and maintaining a support network for your agenda.” In other words, it’s crucial to know how
to build effective coalitions to get things done. This HBS article summarizes the kinds of people you’re going to be
faced with and how to get them on board.
So, it’s important to first, figure out what your agenda is and then whose support you need. Then, deciding whom
to focus your energy on and how to get those key players on board are the crux of building a coalition. There are
five types of people the article discusses: allies, opponents, bedfellows, fence sitters, and adversaries. What
follows is a brief description of these five types of people and an abridged version from the article of what to do
with them.
ALLIES: “the people with whom you feel most comfortable expressing your ideas and thoughts.”
Involving allies:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Affirm agreement on the purpose or project
a. Communicate your objective
b. Confirm their support
Reaffirm the quality of your relationship
a. Be honest
b. When you like what they do – tell them!
Acknowledge doubts and vulnerabilities
a. Own up to your own mistakes
Ask for advice and support
a. Secure confirmation on your approach
b. Enlist their aid with respect to your adversaries
c. Listen, listen, listen to their ideas
OPPONENTS: people “you have a comfortable relationship with,” but “due to your respective positions, you often
disagree.” Though you share high trust, you also show low agreement. Your opponents, the article states, “give
you the rare opportunity to challenge the strength of your vision in a trustworthy atmosphere.” Be careful, it
warns, not to jump to conclusions! They may be more willing to support you than you think.
Influencing Opponents:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Affirm your foundation of trust
a. Communicate honestly
b. Preserve the integrity of your relationship
State your position
a. Be honest about your agenda and goals
b. Initiate a productive conversation
Try to state their position
a. Communicate your understanding of their position
b. Acknowledge your disagreements
Engage them in a problem-solving dialogue
a. Gather their insights
BEDFELLOWS: the people “who are aligned with our objectives but, when we have contact with them, don’t give us
the whole story.” That is, unlike with your opponents, with them you have high agreement, but low trust. In
conversation with Bedfellows, you have to be careful to clearly lay out the boundaries of your relationship- they
share your position on a particular issue, but you also share a rocky history.
Encountering Bedfellows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Affirm agreement on the purpose of your project
a. Communicate your objective
b. Reaffirm mutual goals
Acknowledge the caution that exists
a. Frame your hesitancy impersonally
b. Focus their attention on the project, not personalities
Clearly state your expectations
a. Establish an honest foundation
b. Be clear about how you will work together
Ask bedfellows to do the same (state their expectations, that is)
Try to negotiate the terms of your relationship
a. Have a conversation free of threats
b. Secure confirmation on your approach
FENCE SITTERS: the people who “simply refuse to take a stand. They are friendly and tend to be good listeners.”
The basic point of this section is that Fence Sitters often consume a disproportionate amount of your time,
influence, and energy. At their heart, they have doubt. So “encourage them to take a stand, but don’t force them.”
Encouraging Fence Sitters:
1.
2.
3.
State your position
Ask where they stand
a. Listen carefully- often their indecision will reveal a wish for more info
b. Recognize the value of their cautious approach
Apply gentle pressure
a. Express your frustration with their neutrality
b. Ask them to continue to think about the issue
c. Ask what it might take to earn their support
ADVERSARIES: finally, these are the people with whom “attempts at negotiation agreement and negotiating trust
have failed.” This section basically tells you that adversaries take up an “enormous percentage of your emotional
energy and time” and that usually, this investment is “futile.”
Letting Adversaries Go:
1.
2.
3.
State your position
a. Communicate honestly and clearly
b. Give it your best shot
Try to state their position
a. Attempt to communicate your understanding of their position in a reasonable way
b. Acknowledge that alternate views exist
c. Your goal is NOT conversion, simply understanding
Identify your contribution to the problem
a. Try to diffuse existing hostility
4.
b. Take responsibility for your actions
c. Allow third parties to support you
d. Preserve your integrity
End meeting with your plans, but no demands
a. Expect nothing but an exchange of information
Excerpts from Machiavelli’s The Prince
Going to be honest here, I sparknote-d these instead of read them again. But, not only are they relevant, they’re
also interesting. Especially if the case study has anyone in power who sees the “ends as justifying the means.” Here
goes:
CHAPTER XIV: THAT WHICH CONCERNS A PRINCE ON THE SUBJECT OF THE ART OF WAR
Apparently, the point is that the only thing a prince needs to study is the art of war because, of course, that’s
the primary disciple of the ruler. Machiavelli gives an analogy of a man who is armed and another who isn’t. The
man who is armed would reasonably not feel like he has to do what the unarmed man says and, similarly, the
unarmed man would reasonably not feel all that safe and probably suspicious. A prince who doesn’t understand
warfare, Machiavelli says, is like the unarmed man trying to lead the armed.
CHAPTER XVII: CONCERNING CREULTY AND CLEMENCY, AND WHETHER IT IS BETTER TO BE LOVED THAN FEARED
Machiavelli says if a prince shows compassion unwisely and doesn’t adequately punish disloyal subjects, then
he creates an atmosphere of disorder. Because people get away with things, crime happens. And crime affects the
entire community (whereas executions harm only the individual who committed the crime). Thus, Machiavelli says,
some measure of cruelty is necessary. Though it should, of course, also be tempered with “humanity and
prudence.” Machiavelli then considers where it is preferable for a prince to be feared or loved. THIS IS THE KEY TO
THE WHOLE READINGS AND MACHIAVELLI IN GENERAL, YO. Ideally, Machiavelli says, the prince should be both
loved and feared- but this is really tough to attain. If forced to choose, it is better to be feared than loved. Because
people, by and large, are “covetous of gain.” In times of danger that is only remote, they’ll stand by the prince. But
if real danger happens, they’ll turn against him. The bond of love, Machiavelli argues, is way more easily broken
than the fear of punishment, which is always effective.
At the same time, though, it’s really important to balance creating fear with inducing hatred. All punishments
should always be properly justified. Never, Machiavelli warns, take another man’s woman (I’m not making this up)
because this breeds hatred (she’s my boo, not yours!). Machiavelli closes the important chapter off with the fact
that, with one’s army, there’s never such a thing as too much cruelty. It’s necessary to keep it disciplined and
united (12 O’Clock High, anyone?).
CHAPTER XVIII: CONCERNING THE WAY IN WHICH PRINCES SHOULD KEEP FAITH
Machiavelli ultimately argues here that though honoring one’s word is praiseworthy, history proves princes
have achieved more success by being cunning, crafty, and tricking others. Machiavelli defines fighting in two ways:
by law or by force. Law comes naturally to men, and force to animals. To succeed, the prince must ideally learn to
fight both with laws and with force- be half man and half beast. Raaargh!
A prince must break his promises when they put him at a disadvantage. Since men are, Machiavelli says,
naturally deceitful, a prince must, himself, be a master of deception. At the same time, the prince should always be
careful and exude a virtuous aura. He should APPEAR as a “compassionate, trustworthy, kind, guileless and pious
ruler.” But, Machiavelli knows all of these are neither possible or desirable. Most men, though, will believe in a
prince’s virtues if he appears to act virtuously. People judge princes solely on appearance and results. So, no one
cares if he occasionally uses evil to achieve his goals.
CHAPTER XV: CONCERNING THINGS FOR WHICH MEN, AND ESPECIALLY PRINCES, ARE PRAISED OR BLAMED
Ultimately, Machaivelli says a prince shouldn’t concern himself with living virtuously, but instead just act like it
to achieve the most practical benefit. It’s unrealistic to assume a prince would possess all the qualities deemed
“good” by man. A prince should instead be focused most on safeguarding his state and “bad” characteristics are
sometimes needed to achieve it. Basically, a prince shouldn’t be influenced at all by condemnation from other
men.
CHAPTER XXV: WHAT FORTUNE CAN EFFECT IN HUMAN AFFAIRS, AND HOW TO WITHSTAND HER
Machiavelli says that, contrary to popular belief, fortune only controls half of one’s actions- while free will
determines the other half. Fortune, he continues, is only dangerous when the prince hasn’t planned ahead to
avoid it. A prince must be willing to adjust to time and circumstance unlike most men, who usually stay on the
course that brought them success in the past.
Jeffrey Pfeffer – Managing with Power (pg. 69 – 110)














Pfeffer hopes to analyze whether sources of power are dependent on individual characteristics or ones
location in an organization – believes that being in the right place is more essential
What is power…Control over resources, control and access to information, and formal position
Situational factors – people tend over attribute power to personal characteristics
Power enables people to be different – it produces a more self confident and aggressive behavior
Structural perspectives of power argue that power is derived where each person stands in the division of
labor and the communication system of the organization
Situational power argues that one possesses power simply by being in the right place – by being in a
position of authority, or in a position to broker transactions. Some are more successful than others at
their tasks and that is where personal characteristics come in.
Being in the right place at the right time – argues that if Regan and Johnson had switched era’s neither
would have been elected because their personal characteristics appealed to the public and national
parties at that specific time in history.
New Golden Rule, Allies, resources
Golden Rule - – “The person with the gold makes the rules” – example – Robert moses
Resources - believed to be anything that is valuable – Lyndon Johnson used the little congress and the
press as sources of power to transform himself – important to always control resources and to make them
more valuable once you are in possession of them.
Resources become important – provide the necessary attention to the resource to generate its best value
Allies – one of the most important resources to any member of an organization. Organizations are
frequently large, interdependent, and complex systems, in which it is difficult to get things done by
yourself. It is essential to have loyal, trusted, supporters to help carry out your plans.
Coalition partners are built through promotions and hiring appointments – by helping other to obtain
power one gains power themselves.
Building alliances by doing favors – by doing favors for people whose support you need – important to
capitalize on the norm of reciprocity.