The Heller School for Social Policy and Management
BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY
HS526 Organizational Theory and Behavior
Fall Semester 2015
Instructors: Jon Chilingerian, Ph.D., Jody Hoffer Gittell, Ph.D.
Coordinating Instructor: Jon Chilingerian
Office Hours: Chilingerian: Room 204 Mon (2-5) Tue (12-1:45), Wed (9-12); Gittell: Room 206, Wed
(12:30-2)
Time of Class: Wed 2:00-4:50
NOTE: SOME OF THE LATER SESSIONS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE
_______________________________________________________________________
Course Description:
This course introduces students to organization theory and behavior from a policy and management
perspective. The literature of organization theory addresses itself to the questions about the external
environment that organizations operate within as well as the strategies and processes adopted by
organizations. One basic question to which all course readings is related is: What role do
organizations play in creating and delivering more effective policy outcomes?
In order to meet policy objectives and achieve high performance outcomes, organizations must solve
some basic challenges:










Strategic Design and the Congruence Model
Decision Making and Leadership
Coordinating Work
Autonomy or Control?
Power, Politics and Resource Dependence
Organizational Pathologies, Organizational Culture and Entrapment
Organizational Change and The Role of Chance in Behavior
Organizational Learning - Is It Possible and If So How?
Conflict - Resolution or Revolution?
Diversity and New Technologies - How They Challenge Organizations
During the semester we will examine a number of major perspectives on the nature and process of
organization, and how they help us to understand these challenges.
The course fulfills a requirement of the renewed AHRQ Training Grant. The course is open to all
doctoral students. No prior knowledge of organization theory is required. All that is required is that
students be prepared to engage in intensive reading and thinking about theories that might contribute
to their own research.
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
1
Course Objectives:
The purpose of this course is to develop the student’s ability to conduct theory-based research on
organizations. This starts with the ability to form research questions and hypotheses that are informed
by existing theories and by the student's experience. The course will cover the major theoretical
perspectives on organizations and link these to contemporary empirical organizational studies. Special
focus is placed on exploring in depth the link between theory and research exhibited in this empirical
work to enable students to develop the capability of using theory to guide their own research. We will
encourage you to identify hypotheses in each of the theories we read about, and encourage you to
develop hypotheses that are potentially relevant to your own work, from multiple theoretical
perspectives.
This course has the following broad goals.
1. to develop an awareness and understanding of what organization theory is and why it is
important in providing analytical lenses to see (or ignore) phenomenon
2. to review how some major theorists have analyzed organizations
3. to develop a critical attitude to the literature, understanding levels of, and units of,
organizational analysis
4. to develop an integrative and creative point of view about organizations
5. to learn how to develop testable hypotheses about organizations from existing theories and
from your experience
6. to develop your ability to use theory to design your own research involving organizations and
the social policy world at large.
Course Readings:
See syllabus below. Additional readings may be recommended in response to discussion in class and
student input and interest.
Course Requirements:
1. Reading To Prepare for Each Class. Students are expected to read materials assigned for class,
before each class, and to engage in thoughtful discussion.
2. Thoughts and Questions. Before each class, each student will submit one thought and one
question that has arisen from their reading of the materials for that class. These will be posted
(anonymously) at the start of class to inform our discussion.
3. Presentation. Each student will be required to make a twenty minute presentation in class. Select a
theory you want to review, sign up in advance, and coordinate with the other students who have
signed up for that week. Be prepared to lead the class discussion after your presentation.
4. Final Paper and Presentation. Each student will be required to write a final paper that
serves as preparation for the comprehensive exams. The paper will:
 Outline a policy or management challenge
 Introduce one or two theories that help to address that challenge
 Propose hypotheses consistent with those theories that can be tested empirically
 Summarize the data you would collect, and methods you would use, to test these hypotheses
 Give a 10 minute presentation of this paper in the final two weeks of class
 Submit final paper one day following your presentation
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
2
Grading Scheme:




Weekly thoughts and questions posted online
One presentation plus leading class discussion
Active class participation
Final paper and presentation
.
Total
= 10 points
= 10 points
= 10 points
= 20 points
= 50 points
Grades to be Satisfactory (40-50 points) or Unsatisfactory (less than 40 points)
Provisions for Feedback:
Students will get credit each week for posting Thoughts and Questions about the readings.
Students will receive quantitative and qualitative feedback on their presentation and leadership of class
discussion, and also on their final paper and presentation.
Academic Integrity:
Violations of University policies on academic integrity, described in Section 3 of Rights and
Responsibilities, may result in failure in the course or on the assignment, and could end in suspension
from the University. If you are in doubt about the instructions for any assignment in this course, you
must ask for clarification.
Notice: If you have a documented disability and require any accommodations, please bring them to
my attention prior to the second meeting of the class. If you have any questions about learning or
other disabilities, please contact the disabilities coordinator for The Heller School.
Books on Order at Bookstore:
Required Books*
Shared Books**
*Schein, Edgar H. 2010. Organizational Culture and Leadership, fourth edition. ISBN: 978-0-47019060-9, Jossey-Bass.
*Godwyn, M. and Gittell, J.H. Sociology of Organizations: Structures and Relationships. SAGE
Publications.
*Pfeffer, J. and G. Salancik. 2003. The External Control of Organizations. Stanford University
Press
*Miles, Jeffrey. Management and Organization Theory: A Jossey Bass Reader. 2012. San
Francisco: Josey Bass.
*Hatch, MaryJo. Organization Theory: Modern, Symbolic and Postmodern Perspectives. Oxford.
** Social Network Analysis: A Handbook (third edition) 2009. Thousand Oaks: SAGE ISBN:
978-0-7619-6339-4
Recommended Books***
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
3
***Northhouse, P.G. 2012. Leadership: Theory and Practice (sixth edition). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.
***Pfeffer, J. Managing with Power. Politics and Influence in Organization. Harvard Business
School Press. 1992
*** Hatch, M.J. with Cunliffe, A.L. Organizational Theory (2006) second edition by. Oxford
University Press, ISBN 0-19-926021-4
***March J. and H. Simon. 1956. Organizations.
***Barbasi, A. 2003. Linked. Penguin Book.
***Galbraith, J. 2000. Designing the Global Corporation. San Francisco: Jossey Bass
***Pfeffer, J. 1980. Organizational Theory. New York: Wiley.
***Hershey and Blanchard. 1990.
Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Management of Organizational Behavior. Englewood
***Katz, D. and R. Kahn. 1978. Social Psychology or Organizations. New York: Wiley.
***Mintzberg, H. 1979. The Structuring of Organizations. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
***Pfeffer, J. 1997. New Directions in Organizational Theory: Problems and Prospects. New
York: Oxford University Press
***Price, J. and Mueller, C. 1986. Handbook of Organizational Measurement. Pitman
Publishing.
***Scott, R., Davis, G. Organizations and Organizing: Rational, Natural, and Open System
Perspectives. by W. Richard Scott, Gerald F. Davis. Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River: New
Jersey ISBN 0-13-195893-3 (2007)
***Thompson, J.D. 1967. Organizations in Action: The Social Science Bases of
Administrative Theory. New York: McGraw Hill Book Company.
*** Tosi, H.L. 2009. Theories of Organization. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
***Thompson, J.D. 1967. Organizations in Action: The Social Science Bases of
Administrative Theory. New York: McGraw Hill Book Company.
***Weick, K.E. 1979. The Social Psychology of Organizing. Reading, MA: AddisonWesley Publishing.
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
4
Overview of Course Schedule
Class and
Date
Class 1
(9/2)
Class 2
(9/9)
Class 3
(9/16)
Class 4
(9/30)
Class 5
(10/7)
Class 6
(10/14)
Class 7
(10/21)
Class 8
(10/28)
Class 9
(11/4)
Class 10
(11/11)
Class 11
(11/18)
Class 12
(12/2)
Class 13
(12/9)
Topic
Lead Instructor(s)
The Political, Cultural, and Strategic Design
Perspectives and the Congruence Model
Decision-Making and Leadership
Chilingerian
Coordinating Work
Gittell
Autonomy or Control?
Gittell
Power and Politics & Resource Dependence
Chilingerian
Organizational Pathologies, Organizational Culture and
Entrapment
Organizational Change and the Role of Chance in
Organizational Behavior
Organizational Learning - Is It Possible and If So How?
Chilingerian
Conflict - Resolution or Revolution?
Gittell
Diversity and New Technologies - How They Challenge
Organizations
Integration of Theories
Gittell
Presentations of Final Papers
Chilingerian/Gittell
Presentations of Final Papers
Chilingerian/Gittell
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
Chilingerian
Chilingerian
Gittell
Chilingerian/Gittell
5
September 2, 2015 Class 1: The Political, Cultural, and
Strategic Design Perspectives and the Congruence Model
Topic 1. Organizations as Complex Systems: The Role of Formal and
Informal Structures
In Class Video Case:
Terror at the Taj Mahal Tower and Palace Hotel in Bombay
Case Two: Barbara Norris: Leading Change in the General Surgery Unit
Introduction:
What is a systems’ perspective and what are formal and informal structures? Formal & Informal
organizational structures are not just descriptions of social networks, information flows and reporting
relationships in organizations, they are tools for coordination. We will look at formal and informal
ways to coordinate organizational activities, with a particular focus on organizational incentives.
On the night of November 26, 2008, 10 armed individuals from “the Army of the Righteous” entered
Mumbai, India (formerly Bombay) and attacked multiple locations. The Taj Mahal Palace Hotel and
the Oberoi Trident Hotel were prime targets and nearly 1800 guests and employees were captive.
Over three nights and two days 159 people were killed and 211 were wounded across the city. During
this siege 34 people died at the Taj Hotel.
Both the Taj and Oberoi hotels underwent devastating attacks. However, something unique happened
at the Taj Hotel; they praised for strategic thinking and quick teaming. At the expense of their own
safety, the Taj employees and managers acted quickly. Doors were locked to keep the terrorists at
bay.. Why did the people in the Taj organization behave the way they did—luck or by design?
The learning objectives are:
1. To understand what we mean by organizational theory & behavior by analyzing a real
organizational event involving devastating attack and self-less behavior.
2. To review the basic elements of organizational design: people, structures, and tasks
Questions:
1. What is organizational theory and behavior? How much of Taj employee behavior is explained
by national culture, the hospitality industry, the family atmosphere of the hotel, rules and
procedures? What do the casualty rates of the two hotels teach us?
2. If you want to understand what a science is, you should look in the first instance not as its
theories or its findings, and certainly not at what its apologists say about it; you should look at
what the practitioners of it do. (Clifford Geertz “The Interpretation of Cultures,” p. 5)
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
6
Topic 2. The Congruence Model
The first half of this session will introduce a conceptual model to sharpen our organizational
diagnostic skills. The congruence model was developed by Michael Tushman and David Nadler and
Charles O'Reilly. The model is a framework for analyzing the architecture of an organization, and
facilitating researchers' ability to diagnose and fix problems. The model postulates that strategy,
people, informal structures and culture, critical tasks, formal structures and executive leadership
should be aligned if an organization is to be effective or achieve high levels of performance.
The congruence model is a way to organize your diagnostic observations about organizations. It
should also accommodate power and politics and culture. Bloom and Van Reenen are trying to
measure organizational practices and connect them with performance. It reveals the difficulty of
measuring organizational variables. Are we convinced?
Required Readings:



Tushman, M.L. & O’Reilly, C. A. 2007. Managerial Problem Solving: A Congruence Approach,”
Chapter 4, pp 1-44 in Tushman, M.L. & O’Reilly Winning through innovation: a practical guide to
leading organizational change and renewal. Boston: Harvard Business School Press
Ancona, D. et al. 2005. “The Organization as Strategic Design,” “The Political Lens,”“The
Cultural Lens.” In “Organizational Behavior and Processes”. Second Edition. SouthWestern College Publishing, Cincinnati.
“Evidence for a Collective Intelligence Factor in the Performance of Human Groups.”
Woolley A.W. et al., Science 29 October 2010
Discussion Questions:
1. What does a systems view mean to you? What lessons do you learn about strategic design and
congruence: incentives, motivation, leadership, organizational structures and managerial
practices in the Lincoln case?
2. How would you use Congruence Theory as a conceptual model for your work?
Topic 3. Organization Theory And Behavior: How Do We Study It?
The following 5 published manuscripts are published in the top tier “A” journals in
organizational science. This will be a very brief discussion, if time permits.
Skim all or Read any two of the following based on your interests


Bensaou, Ben, M., Galunic, Charles, Jonczyk-Sedes, Claudia. 2013. Players and
Purists: Networking Strategies and Agencies of Service Professionals. Organization
Science. DOI.org/10.1287/orsc.2013.0826Net
Bloom, N., Van Reenen. J. Measuring and Explaining Management Practices Across
Firms and Countries (2007). Quarterly Journal of Economics. Vol. cxxii Issue 4.
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
7



Bresman, Henrik. 2010. Changing Routines: A Process Model of Vicarious Group Learning in
Pharmaceutical R&D. Academy of Management Journal. Vol. 565, No. 1, 35-61.
Cronqvist, Henrik & Yu, Frank. 2015. Shaped by Their Daughters: Executives, Female
Socialization, and Corporate Social Responsibility. Unpublished Manuscript, SSRN, Social
Science Electronic Publishing.
Petriglieri, Jennifer Louise. 2015. Co-Creating Relationship Repair: Pathways to
Reconstructing Destabilized Organizational Identification. Administrative Science Quarterly.
Downloaded March 25, 2015. DO. 10.1177/0001839215579234
Discussion Questions:
1. Explain Bloom, N. , Van Reenen's approach to measuring performance. Does it connect with
"congruence" theory?
2. Compare and contrast the methods in the other studies. Are you convinced?
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
8
September 9, 2015 Class 2: Decision Making & Leadership
Theory
Topic 4. Decision-Making & Leadership Theory
Video Case:
Wagner Dodge
Required Readings:
Decision Making.
 Tversky, Amos., Kahneman, Daniel. 1974. Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.
Science. September 27: 185(4157): 1124-31
Leadership
 Avolio, Bruce, J,. Walumwa, Fred, O., Weber, Todd, J. 2009. Current Theories, Research, and
Future Directions. Ann. Review of Psychology. 60:21-49.
 Chilingerian, J. 1994 “Managing Strategic Issues and Stakeholders: How Modes of Executive
Attention Enact Crisis Management.” The Strategic Management Society. pp189-213.
 Kippenburg, Daan, Van., Sitkin, Sim. 2013. A Critique of Charismatic Transformational
Leadership Research: Back to the Drawing Board? Academy of Management Annals. Vol 17,
No1, 1-60.
 Yukl, Gary. 2012. Effective Leadership Practices: What we Know and What Questions We Need
to Address. Academy of Management Perspectives.
Introduction:
This session will introduce some of the early ideas on the heuristics of decision making that launched
the new field of behavioral economics and focus on what effective leaders do? And how can we study
them? Some argue that leadership is about many things, but above all leaders can be judged on the
quality of their decision-making. When we talk about leadership, we will introduce a fair process and
collective intelligence models of leading. I will introduce some contingency theories of leadership and
the situational Hersey Blanchard model, based on the idea that appropriate leader behavior depends on
the performance readiness of the leader’s direct reports and followers. Readiness refers to the degree
of motivation, competence, experience, commitment and confidence in accepting responsibility.
Finally, goal theory runs to the heart of this situational model of leading, and goal theory is one of the
strongest bodies of literature in organizational science.
Recommended Reading:
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
9







Fair Process: Managing in the Knowledge Economy. (Jan 2003) W. Chan Kim & Renee
Mauborgne. HBR
Latham, Gary and Locke, Edwin. "Goal setting--A Motivational Technique That Works"
Latham, Gary and Locke, Edwin. "Enhancing the Benefits and Overcoming the Pitfalls of
Goal Setting."
House, R., & Baetz, M. (1979). “Leadership: Some Empirical Generalizations and New Research
Directions”, in B. Staw (ed.) Research in Organizational Behavior, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press:
341-423.
Hershey and Blanchard. 1990. Management of Organizational Behavior. Englewood Cliffs:
Prentice Hall.
House, R., W. Spangler, and J. Woycke. 1991. “Personality and charisma in the U.S. presidency:
A psychological theory of leader effectiveness,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 36: 364-396.
Northhouse, P.G. 2012. Leadership: Theory and Practice (sixth edition). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
10
September 16, 2015
Class 3: Coordinating Work
Topic 5. Coordinating Work
Relational Mapping (in class): Identify a work process you are familiar with that is highly
interdependent, uncertain and time constrained, requiring high levels of coordination for
successful completion. You will create a relational map of this work process using
techniques introduced in class, and identify strong and weak ties in the coordination
network.




Identify a core work process that requires coordination and identify the workgroups involved
in the process
Conduct a preliminary assessment of relational coordination across the workgroups involved
in that process
Visualize areas of strength and opportunity for improvement, as a precursor to measuring
relational coordination
Learn in a preliminary way the tools for measuring relational coordination and insights for
using the results to create positive change.
Recommended Readings: (choose 3 of the following from Sociology of Organizations:
Structures and Relationships, unless otherwise indicated)


Mary Parker Follett (1949). “The Process of Control," in Freedom and Co-ordination:
Lectures in Business Organization by Mary Parker Follett. London: Management Publications
Trust, Ltd.
James March and Herbert Simon (1958). “The Division of Work," in Organizations. New
York: Wiley.
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
11







Jay Galbraith (1972). “Organization Design: An Information Processing View," in
Organization Planning: Cases and Concepts. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin.
Linda Argote (1981). “Input Uncertainty and Organizational Coordination in Hospital
Emergency Units," Administrative Science Quarterly.
Karl Weick and Karlene Roberts (1993). “Collective Mind in Organizations: Heedful
Interrelating on Flight Decks," Administrative Science Quarterly.
Gittell, Jody Hoffer (2002). "Coordinating Mechanisms in Care Provider Groups: Relational
Coordination as a Mediator and Input Uncertainty as a Moderator of Performance Effects,"
Management Science. Available on LATTE.
Samer Faraj and Yin Xiao (2006). “Coordination in Fast Response Organizations,"
Management Science.
Jody Hoffer Gittell, Rob Seidner and Julian Wimbush (2010). “A Relational Model of How
High Performance Work Systems Work," Organization Science.
Jody Hoffer Gittell (2016). Transforming Relationships for High Performance: The Power of
Relational Coordination. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press. Selected prepublication
chapters available on LATTE.
Further Readings:



Crowston, Kevin and Eva Kammerer (1998). “Coordination and Collective Mind in Software
Requirements Development.” IBM Systems Journal, 372:227–45.
Gittell, Jody Hoffer (2011). “New Directions for Relational Coordination Theory.” Pp. 74–94,
Oxford Handbook of Positive Organizational Scholarship, edited by Kim Cameron and
Gretchen Spreitzer. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wageman, Ruth (1995). “Interdependence and Group Effectiveness.” Administrative Science
Quarterly, 40:145–80.
Discussion Questions:
1. What does coordination look like when it occurs through a relational process? What does it
look like when it occurs through a mechanistic or bureaucratic process?
2. How would you design an organization that combines the advantages of relational and
bureaucratic approaches to coordination?
3. Follett distinguishes between achieving coordination as an additive total versus a relational
total. Consider a work process you are very familiar with that involves workers from multiple
functions and perhaps from multiple organizations. How would they achieve coordination as
relational total versus an additive total?
4. Mutual respect is an important factor in relationships and an important dynamic in relational
coordination. Is there a difference between mutual respect in professional relationships
compared to personal relationships?
5. Shared knowledge is another important dynamic in relational coordination. What is meant by
shared knowledge? How much and what kind of shared knowledge is needed for achieving
coordination as a relational total rather than an additive total? Is there a situation where
knowledge may not be shared across participants but relational coordination occurs
nevertheless?
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
12
September 30, 2015
Class 4: Autonomy or Control?
Topic 6. Autonomy or Control?
Video Case (to be viewed and discussed in class): "Command and Control vs.
Mission Command: Transforming Leadership in the US Military"
Recommended Readings: (choose 3 of the following from Sociology of Organizations:
Structures and Relationships, unless otherwise indicated)












Taylor, F.W. (1911). “Fundamentals of Scientific Management," Scientific Management, pp.
9-29. New York: Harper and Row.
Follett, M.P. (1949). “The Basis of Authority," Freedom and Co-ordination: Lectures in
Business Organization by Mary Parker Follett, pp. 34-46. London: Management Publications
Trust, Ltd.
McGregor, D. (1960). “Theory Y: The Integration of Individual and Organizational Goals,"
The Human Side of Enterprise, pp. 45-57. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Aoki, M. (1990). “Toward an Economic Model of the Japanese Firm," Journal of Economic
Literature, 28: 1-27.
Batt, R. (1999). “Work Organization, Technology and Performance in Customer Service and
Sales," Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 52: 539-564.
Lipman-Blumen, J. (1992). “Connective Leadership: Female Leadership Styles in the 21st
Century Workplace," Sociological Perspectives, 35(1): 183-203.
Sweeney, P., Thompson, V. and Blanton, H. (2009). “Trust and Influence in Combat: An
Interdependence Model," Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39(1): 235–264.
Jensen, M. and Meckling, W. (1976). “Theory of the Firm: Managerial, Agency Costs and
Ownership Structure," Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4): 305-360. Available on LATTE.
Williamson, O. (1993). "Calculativeness, Trust and Economic Organization," Journal of Law
and Economics, 36: 453-486. Available on LATTE.
Gittell, J.H. (2001). “Supervisory Span, Relational Coordination and Flight Departure
Performance: A Reassessment of Post-Bureaucracy Theory," Organization Science, 12(4):
467-482. Available on LATTE.
Baker, G., Gibbons, R. and Murphy, K. (2002). "Relational Contracts and the Theory of the
Firm," Quarterly Journal of Economics. Available on LATTE.
Gibbons, R. and Henderson, R. (2013). "Relational Contracts and Organizational
Capabilities," Organization Science. Available on LATTE.
Further Readings:

Battistelli, Fabrizio and Giuseppe Ricotta (2005). “The Rhetoric of Management Control in
Italian Cities: Constructing New Meanings of Public Action,” Administration & Society, 36:
661-687.
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
13













Herbst, P.G. (1976). “Non-Hierarchical Forms of Organization,” Acta Sociologica, 19(1): 6575.
Spreitzer, Gretchen, Suzanne C. de Janasz and Robert E. Quinn (1999). “Empowered to Lead:
The Role of Psychological Control in Leadership,” Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20:
511-526.
Aoki, Masahiko (1990). “Toward an Economic Model of the Japanese Firm," Journal of
Economic Literature, 28: 1-27.
Carson, J.B., Paul E. Tesluk and Jennifer A. Marrone (2007). “Shared Leadership in Teams:
An Investigation of Antecedent Conditions and Performance,” Academy of Management
Journal, 50(5): 1217-1234.
Denhardt, Janet B. and Kelly B. Campbell (2006). “The Role of Democratic Values in
Transformational Leadership,” Administration & Society, 38: 556-572.
Edwards, Richard (1979). Contested Terrain: The Transformation of the Workplace in the
Twentieth Century. New York: Basic Books.
Follett, Mary Parker (1949). “Coordination,” in Freedom and Co-ordination: Lectures in
Business Organization by Mary Parker Follett, pp. 61-76. L. Urwick (ed.). London:
Management Publications Trust, Ltd.
Follett, Mary Parker (1949). “The Process of Control,” in Freedom and Co-ordination:
Lectures in Business Organization by Mary Parker Follett, pp. 77-89. L. Urwick (ed.).
London: Management Publications Trust, Ltd.
Gouldner, Abner (1954). Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy. Glencoe, IL.
Leibenstein, Harvey (1987). Inside the Firm: The Inefficiencies of Hierarchy. Boston:
Harvard University Press.
Merton, Robert (1957). Social Theory and Social Structure. Glencoe, IL.
Milgrom, Paul and John Roberts (1992). Economics, Organization and Management.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Stone, Katherine (1975). “The Origin of Job Structures in the Steel Industry,” in Labor Market
Segmentation, Richard Edwards, Michael Reich and David Gordon (eds.). Lexington Books.
Discussion Questions
1. What are the differences between a relational and bureaucratic approach to control? What are
the advantages and disadvantages of each approach?
2. How do organizations influence the way that control is carried out? How do individuals and
their backgrounds influence the way that control is carried out? How does the larger society
influence the way that control is carried out?
3. In your experience, are women more likely to take a relational approach to control, relative to
men? Explain.
4. How would you characterize principal/agent theory - a relational or bureaucratic approach to
control? Or something different entirely?
5. Is relational contract theory a relational approach to control, as its name would suggest? Why
or why not? Do you see relational contract theory as a fundamental critique of principal/agent
theory or as a minor revision of that theory?
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
14
October 7, 2015 Class 5: Power & Politics and Resource
Dependence
Topic 7. Power and Influence in Organizations
Video Case:
Heidi Roizen
Required Readings:



Ancona, D. et al. 2005. “The Political Lens.” In “Organizational Behavior and
Processes”. Second Edition. South-Western College Publishing, Cincinnati.
Pfeffer, J. 1992. “Managing with Power”. Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
Chapters 1 - 2.
Kouzes & Mico. “Domain Theory: An Introduction to Organizational Behavior”
Introduction:
The central theme of this session is how the political lens helps us to see a different side of
organizational life. Any organization with scarce resources and interdependent individuals will
produce different opinions on what the goals of the organization should be, and on how those goals
should be met. The central theme of this session is that understanding the nature of power, how to get
it and how to use it, are essential for any manager to be effective.
Pfeffer says power is essential to initiate and sustain goal-directed action. Yet, organizations with
scarce resources and interdependent individuals will produce different opinions on the organizational
goals and how those goals should be met. Consequently, building and wielding power, negotiating
and forming alliances maybe essential for any manager to be effective.
In the first 50 minutes, we will discuss how a technology entrepreneur, Heidi Roizen, builds and
wields influence in different situations. Heidi Roizen worked as a mentor capitalist at SOFTBANK
Venture Capital. She maintains an amazing professional network and leverages that network to help
others (and herself). She discusses how she uses e-mail, parties and newsletters to gain access and
connect people. Her relational and interpersonal skills teach us some key lessons about developing and
exercising power and influence.
Study Questions:
1. What bases of power did Heidi Roizen use? How does she exercise influence?
2. How does a political lens help us to understand organizational behavior?
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
15
Topic 8. Resource Dependence Theory
Required Readings: (*select 1)



Pfeffer, J. and G. Salancik. 2003. The External Control of Organizations. Stanford University
Press
Hillman A, Withers M, Collins B. Resource Dependence Theory: A Review. Journal of
Management. 2009;35(6):1404-27.
Davis G, Cobb J. Resource Dependence Theory: Past and Future. In: Lounsbury M, editor.
Research in the Sociology of Organizations. Bingley, England: Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.
; 2010.
Student Presentations: How does RDT hold up as a theory? see question 6
*Casciaro, T. & Piskorski, MJ. 2005. Power imbalance, mutual dependence and constraint
absorption: A closer look at resource dependence theory. Administrative Science Quarterly,
50: 167-199.
*Guler.T. 2007. Throwing good money after bad? Political and institutional influences on
sequential decision making in the venture capital industry. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 51 (2): 248-285.
*Santos, F.M., Eisenhardt, K.M. 2009. Constructing markets and shaping boundaries:
entrepreneurial agency in nascent fields. Academy of Management Journal, 52: 643-671.
Introduction:
The organization-environment approach taken by Resource Dependence Theory has developed in
the direction of ever more detailed specifications of the content of the environment. In its most
extreme form, the environment is depicted as specific to organizations, and the interorganizational
network, rather than the organization itself, becomes the object of study.
Pfeffer and Salancik’s work is an outgrowth of open-systems theory and social-psychological
theories of exchange. In Chapter 1 Pfeffer and Salacik explain how an external constraint
perspective on organizational action differ from an intendedly rational perspective and a
random/emergent perspective? In Chapter 3, Pfeffer and Salancik discuss several concepts that
affect the power of a focal organization: resource criticality, resource importance, magnitude of
resource exchange, concentration of resource control, discretion over the resource, and asymmetric
dependence. In chapter three, they explain the key types of interdependence (behavioral,
competitive, and symbiotic). WE will look at what recent studies are finding about RDT theory.
Discussion Questions:
1. What is the intellectual heritage of RDT? What relationship do the above concepts have to each
other and the power of the focal organization? (Hint: you might find it useful to diagram these
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
16
relationships.) What is the unit of analysis in the model outlined in Chapter 3? Is this model
parsimonious? How might it be improved?
2. How well do the authors (Casciaro, T. & Piskorski; Guler; and Santos, F.M., Eisenhardt, K.M) test
the RDT model? How well do these studies operationalize the model’s key concepts and test the
relationships between these concepts? How does each paper extend or concentrate on a specific aspect
of these theories? Do they integrate or disintegrate the concepts of the theory? How might these
studies be improved? What are the implications of these results for transaction costs and resource
dependence theories? What additional data and statistical tests would help you integrate these
perspectives?
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
17
October 14, 2015 Class 6: Organizational Pathologies,
Organizational Culture & Entrapment
Topic 9. Pathologies of Organizations
Case: Investigation into Mid-Staffordshire Foundation Trust
Introduction:
While political will and skill are central to being an effective manager, there is a dark side to power.
What explains the behavior of the managers and professional in Mid-Staffordshire Trust? Is this was
an extreme situation? Does compliance to authority inevitably lead to organizational disaster?
We will briefly discuss the events concerning the Mid-Staffordhire Case.
Required Readings:


Schein, Edgar H. 2010. Organizational Culture and Leadership, fourth edition. ISBN: 978-0470-19060-9, Jossey-Bass.
Weick, K.E. and K.M. Sutcliffe. 2003. “Hospital as Cultures of Entrapment: A Reanalysis of
the Bristol Royal Infirmary,” California Management Review, Winter.
Study Questions:
1. What happened at Mid-Staffordshire Foundation Trust?
2. What did the Bristol Hospital case teach us?
3. According to Weick and Sutcliffe, how do organizations like Bristol
Topic 10: Organizational Culture
Required Readings:

Ancona, D., et al. Three Perspectives on Organizations – “Perspective 3. The Cultural
Perspective on Organizations” 2004. Southwest Publishing.
Introduction:
There are probably more definitions of culture than there are people studying it. Culture is an elusive
concept, but one with tremendous face validity—everyone understands what culture is, but that
understanding is often vague and fuzzy. In this session we will discuss one useful methodology to
study culture and see how it helps us understand how to change a culture. Bristol Hospital is one of
the best examples of an organization that had to change its culture. We will analyze the way cultures,
and the core values on which it is based, are shaped over time and think about how organizational
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
18
culture might affect innovation. Where should a leader focus attention? What is the sequence of
change?
Study Questions:
1. Try to analyze an organization in your area of interest with Schein's Methodology.
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
19
October 21, 2015 Class 7: Organizational Change and the Role
of Chance in Organizational Behavior
Topic 11. Social Networks
Required Readings:
Case: Ling He (handout)
Introduction:
This session is in two parts. First we will talk about network theory. Barbabasi and colleagues have
developed a stunning new algorithm to change networks. What are the implications? We will try to
analyze Ling He.
Homework: Map the work processes and informal social networks in Ling He


Liu, Barabasi, et alia. Controllability of Complex Networks. Nature (May 2011)
Social Network Analysis: A Handbook (especially chapters 2, 5 & 7)
Topic 12. Emergence and the Role of Chance in Organizational Behavior
Introduction:
What is the role of chance in organizational behavior? The range of emergent is enormous—
traffic jams, organizational community, new industries, multi-agent systems and the
emergence of norms and leadership that emerge in groups and teams. Perhaps chance and
“necessity” together may offer a reasonable alternative to the purposive, resource dependent,
and random models of organizational behavior. We will discuss these ideas.
Required Readings:





Chilingerian, J. 2008. “Origins of DRGS: A Technical, Cultural, Political Story.”
Weick, K. 1976. “Educational Organizations as Loosely Coupled Systems.” Administrative
Science Quarterly, 21, 1-19.
Lichtenstein, Benyamin. (2014) Generative Emergence: A New Discipline of Organizational,
Entrepreneurial, and Social; Innovation. Chapter 2. Oxford University Press.
Padgett, John, F., Powell, Walter., 2011. The Problem of Emergence. In The Emergence of
Organizations and Markets, edited by Powell and Padget. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
Press.
Lichtenstein, Benyamin. (2014) Generative Emergence: Chapter 4.
Further Readings:
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
20






Brass DJ, Galaskiewicz J, Greve HR, Tsai W. Taking Stock of Networks and
Organizations: A Multilevel Perspective. The Academy of Management Journal.
2004;47(6):795-817.
Cohen, M.D. and J.G. March, et al. 1972. “A garbage can model of organizational choice,”
Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(1-25).
Oliver C. Determinants of Interorganizational Relationships: Integration and
Future Directions. The Academy of Management Review. 1990;15(2):241-65.
Orton JD, Weick KE. Loosely Coupled Systems: A Reconceptualization. The
Academy of Management Review. 1990;15(2):203-23.
Meyer, J. and B. Rowan. 1977. “Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and
ceremony,” American Journal of Sociology.
Powell W. Neither Market nor Hierarchy: Network Forms of Organization.
Research in Organizational Behavior. 1990;12:295-336.
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
21
October 28, 2015 Class 8: Organizational Learning - Is It
Possible and If So How?
Topic 13. Organization Learning
Recommended Readings: (choose 4 of the following from Sociology of Organizations:
Structures and Relationships)






Chris Argyris (1976). “Single-Loop and Double-Loop Models in Research on Organizational
Decision-Making,” Administrative Science Quarterly.
Paul DiMaggio and Walter Powell (1983). “The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional
Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organization Fields,” American Journal of
Sociology.
Barbara Levitt and James March (1988). "Organizational Learning,” Annual Review of
Sociology.
Amy Edmondson (2002). “The Local and Variegated Nature of Learning in Organizations: A
Group-Level Perspective,” Organization Science.
Joyce K. Fletcher, Lotte Bailyn and Stacy Blake Beard (2009). “Practical Pushing: Creating
Discursive Space in Organizational Narratives,” in Critical Management Studies at Work:
Negotiating Tensions between Theory and Practice, Julie Wolfram Cox, Tony G. LeTrentJones, Maxim Voronov and David Weir (eds.). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Katherine Kellogg (2009). “Operating Room: Relational Spaces and Micro-institutional
Changes in Surgery,” American Journal of Sociology, 115(3): 657-711.
Further Readings:





Briscoe, Forrest and Sean Safford (2008). “The Nixon-in-China Effect: Activism, Imitation
and the Institutionalism of Contentious Practices.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 53(3):
460–91.
Durant, Robert (2007). “Toxic Politics, Organizational Change and the ‘Greening’ of the U.S.
Military: Toward a Polity-Centered Perspective.” Administration & Society, 39: 409–46.
Fiol, C. Marlene and Marjorie Lyles (1985). “Organizational Learning.” Academy of
Management Review, 10(4): 803–13.
Holmes, Janet, Stephanie Schnurr and Meredith Marra (2007). “Leadership and
Communication: Discursive Evidence of a Workplace Culture Change.” Discourse &
Communication, (4): 433–51.
Huber, George P. (1991). “Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the
Literatures.” Organization Science, 2(1): 88–115.
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
22
Discussion Questions:
1. Consider the impact of the bureaucratic and relational organizations on organizational learning.
Which would you predict is more effective at supporting organizational learning? Why?
2. Describe a situation where organizational change occurred, but not organizational learning.
Describe another situation where organizational learning occurred, but not organizational
change. How would you explain these phenomena theoretically?
3. How does diversity affect an organization’s ability to learn or to change?
4. How can organizations foster psychological safety? What are the expected effects of
psychological safety? What are the expected effects of its absence?
5. What are the advantages of the relational organizational form for learning and change?
Advantages of the bureaucratic organizational form? How would you combine these
organizational forms in an organization to promote organizational learning and change?
6. For organizational change to be successful is it more important to change formal structures, or
patterns of belief and behaviors? If you were to engage in a change effort, which would you
focus on? Why? If both, how would you sequence your efforts? Why?
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
23
November 4, 2015 Class 9: Conflict - Resolution or Revolution?
Topic 14.
Recommended Readings: (choose 4 of the following from Sociology of Organizations:
Structures and Relationships)






Karl Marx (1887, 1967). Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, Volume 1. New York:
International Publishers.
Mary Parker Follett (1926/1942). “Constructive Conflict” in Dynamic Administration: The
Collected Papers of Mary Parker Follett. New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers.
Louis Pondy (1967). "Organizational Conflict: Concepts and Models," Administrative Science
Quarterly.
W. Peter Archibald (2009). “Marx, Globalization and Alienation: Received and
Underappreciated Wisdoms," Critical Sociology.
Brenda Johnson (2009). “Racial Inequality in the Workplace: How Critical Management
Studies Can Inform Current Approaches," Critical Management Studies at Work: Negotiating
Tensions Between Theory and Practice, in Julie Wolfram Cox, Tony G. LeTrent-Jones, Maxim
Voronov and David Weir (eds.). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.
John O. Ogbor (2000). “Mythicizing and Reification in Entrepreneurial Discourse: IdeologyCritique of Entrepreneurial Studies," Journal of Management Studies.
Further Readings:




Hochschild, Arlie (2003). The Managed Heart: Commercialization of Human Feeling. 2nd ed.,
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Stoudt, Margaret (2010). “Back to the Future: Toward a Political Economy of Love and
Abundance,”Administration & Society, 42:3.
Van Maanen, John (1990). “The Smile Factory: Work at Disneyland.” Pp. 58–76 in Reframing
Organizational Culture, edited by Peter J. Frost et al. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Walton, Richard and Robert McKersie (1965). A Behavioral Theory of Labor Negotiations: An
Analysis of a Social Interaction System. New York: McGraw-Hill (reprinted in 1991 by
Cornell University Press).
Discussion Questions:
1. Which model of organizational conflict do you find most compelling, and why?
2. Why is conflict theory a “critical” perspective? How is this perspective developed in critical
management studies?
3. What are some of the potential negative and positive outcomes of organizational conflict?
What are some of the factors that determine whether conflict results in primarily negative or
positive outcomes?
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
24
4. Conflict theory grew out of Marx’ observations of the Industrial Revolution. The Industrial
Revolution changed the class system, the relations of production, and the means of production.
How has the technological revolution impacted the class system and relations and means of
production? How do these changes impact the structure and relationships of organizations?
5. Values can both cause conflict and shape the perception of conflict. Discuss the role of values
in the cause and meaning of a major conflict in the United States and a major conflict
internationally.
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
25
November 11, 2015 Class 10: Diversity and New Technologies How They Challenge Organizations
Topic 15.
Recommended Readings: (choose 2 of the following papers from Sociology of Organizations:
Structures and Relationships)








Elin Kvande and Bente Rasmussen (1995). “Women’s Careers in Static and Dynamic
Organizations," Acta Sociologica.
Mark Maier (1997). “We Have to Make a MANagement Decision: Challenger and the
Dysfunctions of Corporate Masculinity," Managing the Organizational Melting Pot: Dilemmas
of Workplace Diversity. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Kristen Schilt (2006). “Just One of the Guys? How TransMen Make Gender Visible at Work,"
Gender and Society, 20(4): 465-490.
Stella Nkomo (1992). “The Emperor has no Clothes: Rewriting Race in Organizations,"
Academy of Management Review, 17(3): 487-513.
Anshuman Prasad (1997). “The Colonizing Consciousness and Representations of the Other: A
Postcolonial Critique of the Discourse of Oil," in Managing the Organizational Melting Pot:
Dilemmas of Workplace Diversity. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Kirstin H. Griffin and Michelle R. Hebl (2002). “The Disclosure Dilemma for Gay Men and
Lesbians: ‘Coming Out’ at Work," Journal of Applied Psychology.
Dennis Gilbride, Robert Stensrud, David Vandergoot and Kristie Golden (2003).
“Identification of the Characteristics of Work Environments and Employers Open to Hiring
and Accommodating People with Disabilities," Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin.
Any readings on Intersectionality are welcomed here as well.
Further Readings:




Heath, Melanie (2003). “Soft-Boiled Masculinity: Renegotiating Gender and Racial Identities
in the Promise Keepers Movement.” Gender & Society, 17(3): 423–44.
Kanter, Rosabeth Moss (1993). Men and Women of the Corporation. New York: Basic Books.
Ortleib, Renate and Barbara Sieben (2010). “Migrant Employees in Germany: Personnel
Structures and Practices.” Equality, Diversity and Inclusion, 29(4): 364–79.
Park, Jaihan, Eva Malachi, Orit Sternin and Roni Tevet (2009). “Subtle Bias against Muslim
Job Applicants in Personnel Decisions.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 39(9): 2174–90.
Discussion Questions:
1. How do concepts and approaches used in Western academic scholarship help to maintain the
political and intellectual dominance of Western cultures and people?
2. What are the pros and cons of quantitative methodologies versus qualitative methodologies?
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
26
3. Stella M. Nkomo and Anshuman Prasad both critique the discourse of diversity by arguing that
it contributes to the continued subjugation of marginalized populations. Compare their
positions and describe the strengths and weaknesses of their arguments.
4. Some would argue that individuals shape organizations as much as organizations shape the
individuals within them. Discuss the relationship between dominant groups and subgroups
from this interactionist perspective.
5. The inclusiveness of marginalized groups in organizations (e.g., people with disabilities) can
be viewed as both challenging the power system and also maintaining it. Describe both views.
Which would you say is the stronger position and why?
6. Is there a difference between representation and inclusion? Explain your answer.
Topic 16. New Technology, Social Media and Emerging Communities
Recommended Readings: (choose 2 of the following from Sociology of Organizations:
Structures and Relationships)






Sherry Turkle (1994). “Constructions and Reconstructions of Self in Virtual Reality: Playing in
the MUDs,” Mind, Culture and Activity.
Jonathan Bach and David Stark (2004). “Link, Search, Interact: The Co-Evolution of NGOs
and Interactive Technology,” Theory, Culture & Society.
Joanna C. Dunlap and Patrick R. Lowenthal (2009). “Tweeting the Night Away: Using Twitter
to Enhance Social Presence,” Journal of Information Systems Education.
Albert Jacob Meijer (2008). “E-mail in Government: Not Post-Bureaucratic but Late
Bureaucratic Organizations,” Government Information Quarterly.
James Farrer and Jeff Gavin (2009). “On-line Dating in Japan: A Test of Social Information
Processing Theory,” CyberPsychology and Behavior.
Joe Phua (2008). “Online Organization of the LGBT Community in Singapore," presented at
the International Communication Association Conference, Montreal, Canada, May.
Further Readings:



Matzat, Uwe (2009). “A Theory of Relational Signals in Online Groups.” New Media &
Society, 11(3): 375–94.
Shaw, Adrienne (2009). “Putting the Gay in Games: Cultural Production and GLBT Content in
Video Games.” Games and Culture, 4(3): 228–53.
Suarez, David (2009). “Nonprofit Advocacy and Civic Engagement on the Internet.”
Administration & Society, 41:267–89.
Discussion Questions:
1. Albert Jacob Meijer found use of email did not radically change the structures of bureaucratic
organizations to become less hierarchical and more heterarchical. Joanna C. Dunlap and
Patrick R. Lowenthal found that newer social media (e.g., Twitter) increases “just-in-time”
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
27
2.
3.
4.
5.
communications. Describe how and why new technologies affect organizations differently with
regard to change, communication and relationships.
Sherry Turkle explains that new technologies promote the creation of multifaceted identities,
essentially increasing diversity within individuals. How does (or doesn’t) the expansion of
diversity at the individual level alter the definitions and meaning of diversity at the societal
level? What impact do these fluid identities and expanded conceptualizations of diversity have
on organizational conflict?
Some of the authors in this section claim that people can be more themselves online, while
others claim that online interaction encourages participants to try on new identities. Explain
various ways that new technologies can impact self-identity and self-development.
What is the relationship between social media, uncertainty, trust and interdependence? Would
you argue this relationship is different in bureaucratic organizational form versus the relational
organizational form? Why or why not?
What role can new technology have in organizational learning and change? Is it a new
structure? Or a tool for learning? Or both? Explain your thinking.
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
28
November 18, 2015
Class 11: Un Assortiment de Tout...:
Learning Integration
Topic 17.
Required Readings:

Miles, Jeffrey. Management and Organization Theory: A Jossey Bass Reader. 2012. San
Francisco: Josey Bass. [Select 2-3 theories that interest you and we will discuss, along with
other theories of interest from throughout the semester]
Introduction:
Today is a learning integration session. How can we develop interesting organizational studies using
the theories and tools discussed so far? In this session we will discuss quantitative and qualitative
methods that help us to understand and explain organizations.
Discussion Questions
1. How would you explain the origins of a significant policy success in your field?
2. Select a few theories from the semester as a whole, including the Miles book, that interest you. How
would you use them either separately, or in combination, for your research?
3. Which hypotheses, or competing hypotheses, would you formulate, related to your research?
4. Would these hypotheses be testable? Using qualitative and/or quantitative methods?
5. Would the results of testing these hypotheses be helpful for improving social policy? For improving
the leadership of organizations? For improving existing theories?
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
29
AN UNDERGROUND GUIDE TO ORGANIZATIONAL SCIENCE METHODS
(with thanks to Dr. John V. Maanen and Dr. Calvin Morrill)
Orienting Questions
--What is the relationship between particular methods and theoretical
approaches in organizational studies?
--How do research questions and hypotheses shape the kinds of methods that are used to study
organizations and vice versa?
A. Orientations

Bryman, Alan. 1989. Research Methods and Organization Studies. Boston, MA: Unwin
Hyman.
Webb, Eugene, and Karl E. Weick. 1979. “Unobtrusive Measures in Organizational
Theory: A Reminder.” Administrative Science Quarterly 24: 650-659.*
Stablein, Ralph. 1996. “Data in Organization Studies.” Pp. 509-525 in Handbook of
Organization Studies, Stuart Klegg, Cynthia Hardy, and Walter R. Nord, eds. London:
Sage Publications.
See the journal, Organizational Research Methods (1998 - present).
B. Institutionalism
Schneiberg, Marc, and Elisabeth A. Clemens. 2006. “The Typical Tools for the Job:
Methods in Organizational Institutionalism.” Forthcoming in How Institutions Change,
edited by Walter W. Powell & Daniel L. Jones. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
C. Narrative Analysis
Czarniawska, Barbara. 1997. Narrating the Organization: Dramas of Institutional
Identity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Boje, David. 2001. Narrative Methods for Organizational and Communication Studies.
Thousand Oaks: Sage.
D. Network Analysis
Nohria, Nitin, and Robert G. Eccles, eds. 1992. Networks and Organizations: Structure,
Form, and Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Rogers, Everett., and D. Lawrence Kincaid. 1981. Communication Networks: Toward a
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
30
New Paradigm for Research. NY: Free Press.
Freeman, Linton C., Douglas R. White, and A. Kimball Romney. 1992. Research
Methods in Social Network Analysis. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
Wasserman, Stanley, and Katherine Faust. 1994. Social Network Analysis: Methods
and Applications. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Marsden, Peter V. 1990. “Network Data and Measurement.” Annual Review of Sociology
16: 435-463.*
E. Organizational Ecology and Demography
Hannan, Michael T., and John Freeman. 1989. “Methods.” Pp. 147-198 in
Organizational Ecology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Carroll, Glenn R., and Michael T. Hannan. 2000. “Methods of Corporate Demography.”
Pp. 83-278 in The Demography of Corporations and Industries. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
F. Organizational Ethnography
Morrill, Calvin, and Gary Alan Fine. 1997. “Ethnographic Contributions to
Organizational Sociology.” Sociological Methods and Research 25: 424-451.*
Morrill, Calvin. 1995. “Anatomy of an Ethnography of Business Elites.” Pp. 229-255 in
The Executive Way: Conflict Management in Corporations. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Morrill, Calvin, David B. Buller, Mary K. Buller, & Linda K. Larkey. 1999. "Toward an
Organizational Perspective on Identifying and Managing Formal Gatekeepers."
Qualitative Sociology 22: 51-72.
Schwartzman, Helen B. 1993. Ethnography in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Feldman, Martha S. 1995. Strategies for Interpreting Qualitative Data. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Feldman, Martha S., Jeannine Bell, and Michelle Tracy Berger. 2003. Gaining Access: A
Practical and Theoretical Guide for Qualitative Researchers. Walnut Creek, CA: Alta
Mira.
Scott, W. Richard. 1965. “Field Methods in the Study of Organizations.” Pp. 261-304 in
Handbook of Organizations, James G. March, ed. Chicago: Rand McNally.*
Dingwall, Robert, and P. M. Strong. 1986. “The Interactional Study of Organizations: A
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
31
Critique and Reformulation.” Urban Life 14:205-232. (also relates to institutionalism)
Van Maanen, John. 1979. “The Fact of Fiction in Organizational Ethnography.”
Administrative Science Quarterly 24 539-550.*
Hertz, Rosanna, and Jonathan B. Imber, eds. 1995. Studying Elites Using Qualitative
Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
G. Experimentalism and Psychometric Scaling
Morrill, Calvin, and Ellen Snyderman. 1997. “It’s Not What You Do, But Who You Are:
Informal Social Control, Social Status, and Normative Seriousness in Organizations." Sociological
Forum 12: 519-543. (factorial survey/quasi experimentalism)*
Morrill, Calvin, and Cheryl King Thomas. 1992. "Organizational Conflict Management
as Disputing Process: The Problem of Social Escalation." Human Communication
Research 18: 400-428. (psychometric scaling/self-report)*
Keppel, Geoffrey. 1991. Design and Analysis: A Researcher’s Handbook, 3rd Edition.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
H. Action Research
Eden, Colin, and Chris Huxham. 1996. “Action Research for the Study of Organizations.” Pp. 526-542
in Handbook of Organization Studies, Stuart Klegg, Cynthia Hardy, and Walter R. Nord, eds. London:
Sage Publications.
HS526a Syllabus Fall 2015
32