Organisational behavior

| December 24, 2015

ASSIGNMENT 3 – BRIEF:
Question/Task:
Write an analytical / argumentative essay addressing the following question:
How do organisations change?

Due dates (deadlines):
• Submission: Monday, Jan 11th by 9:00 (electronic) and 15:00 (paper)

Part of Learning Portfolio for the final submission (85% of the final mark). Assignment 3 is worth 60% of the Learning Portfolio (51% of

the final mark). See the module Outline for details on the Learning Portfolio and what is required for the final submission.

Guidance:
1) Remember, an analytical / argumentative essay is a text based on academic sources, pursuing a line of argument with clear reasoning. It

is based on reliable supporting evidence and examples that all support the thesisthesis / claim made in the essay.
2) Give your text a catchy, illustrative title. You can use first person (‘I’) while writing. Doing so is not outside the realm of being

‘academic’. You can also write in third person, but not stifle your text with excessive formality. Avoid passive voice where possible.
3) Include your thesis statement in the introduction. You can be as explicit as using the following template: ‘In this essay I argue that

… ‘.
4) Keep in mind this is not a very long essay. Have a clear focus on one or two ideas and engage with it/them in detail. You cannot cover

everything, however interesting the ideas might be. Part of the task in this assignment is to focus on something specific and discuss it

in some detail. The word limit is 2000 words (+10% max). The list of references is not included in the word limit.
5) Be sure to engage directly with the academic readings for seminars or the supplementary readings. You are encouraged to do your own

research and identify other suitable academic sources. Do not explicitly rely on textbooks or popular business books for this assignment,

use only academic sources for your analysis. Use the textbook(s) only as a guide to literature (they are very good tool for that purpose,

pay attention to both the citations in the text and the suggested additional readings – and remember the resources on the companion

website). You can and in many situations should use articles in newspapers and magazines as examples and illustrations.
6) Use in-text references where appropriate and list all your sources in a List of References at the end, using the Harvard referencing

style.

What kind of assignment is Assignment 3?
This assignment takes the form of an analytical essay (aka, argumentative essay). This means that you are to make an argument in your

essay (that is, make a claim, have a reason for the claim and support it with evidence). You decide what you want to argue on the basis of

the independent reading you will do for your essay. The topics/questions for the analytical essay will be posted on Moodle and discussed

in Seminar 9 in Week 11. The analytical essay should focus on themes in lectures 7, 8, 9 and/or 10 (from culture to power), but also refer

to relevant aspects of the topics covered earlier in the module. On how to develop an analytical essay, see for example

http://www.wikihow.com/Write-an-Analytical-Essay and https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/685/05/.

Assessment
In this assignment students are asked to write a an argumentative/analytical essay. The aim of the assignment is to combine the elements

of Assignment 1 (close but still descriptive engagement with literature) and Assignment 2 (application and critical adaptation of ideas in

literature to a real life situation) and combine them with a more rigorous, analytical approach to the topic at hand to form an argument.

Good answers might take a stand in favour or in opposition to a specific issue or perspective that they then investigate. Although the

question addresses change, any and all of the lecture themes of culture, change itself, leadership or power and control lend themselves to

discussion on this question. In any of these cases, the answer presents a rationale and follows a line of argument based on a meaningful

thesis. The essay draws on academic sources and it will also show some independent research initiative where the student has gone further

a field in search of suitable literature.

Excellent answers are, in addition, well-structured, coherent texts that show a firm grasp of the question. These answers have a clear

focus while acknowledging the other possibilities and approaches. The text is persuasive and best answers show firm grasp of the problem

at hand and approach it from novel and innovative perspectives. Referencing in excellent answers is careful and the reference list in

Harvard style is coherent and complete.
Lecture: Culture
(Dr PasiAhonen)

Organizational culture is often put forward as a key to organizational success, with management encouraged to manipulate culture for

business advantage. We consider the popular, scientific and critical literature on organizational culture to consider the practical and

ethical aspects of the relationship between culture and management.

Required pre-reading:
King and Lawley, Chapter 7

Seminar 7 preparation (Week 9):
This week we will do peer reviews of Assignment 2 drafts. Please bring a printed copy (double spaced, printed on one side of the sheet

only) of your full, complete draft of Assignment 2. During this session, you will read an assignment written by someone else and discuss

the work and suggest improvements.

Additional Readings:
Ackroyd, S. and Crowdy, PA. (1990). “Can culture be managed? Working with “raw” material: the case of the English Slaughterman,

Personnel Review, 19(5): 3-13.
Grey, C. (2009) A Very short, Fairly Interesting and Reasonably Cheap Book About Studying Organizations, 2nd Edition. London Sage.

Chapter 3 ‘Organizational Culture and Self-Management’
Harris, LC and Ogbonna, E (2002). “The Unintended Consequences of Culture Interventions: A Study of Unexpected Outcomes” British Journal

of Management, 13: 31-49.
Meek, V.L. (1988). “Organizational Culture: Origins and Weaknesses”. Organization Studies, 9(4): 453-473.
Ogbonna, E and Harris, LC (1998). “Managing Organizational Culture: Compliance or Genuine Change?” British Journal of Management, 9: 273

-288.
Pfeffer, J. (1997). New Directions for Organizational Theory: Problems and Prospects. Oxford: Oxford University Press, chapter 5,

Mechanisms of Social Control.
Smircich, L. (1983). “Concepts of Culture and Organizational Analysis”. Administrative Science Quarterly 28(3):339-358.
Wilson, EM (2001). “Organizational Culture”, chapter 9 in Wilson, EM (Ed). Organizational Behaviour Reassessed: the impact of gender”,

London: Sage.
Woodall, J. (1996). “Managing culture change: can it ever be ethical?” Personnel Review, 25(6): 26-40.
Lecture: Change in Organisations
(Dr PasiAhonen)

‘Change’ is one of the frequently deployed buzzwords today. We have already encountered in our discussion of post-bureaucratic

organizations and the notion of ‘flexibility’. ‘Change’ is something that nations, organizations and people alike are supposed to be able

to not only deal with but, increasingly, to join and ‘get on board with’, to embrace. At the same time, much of organizational literature

and management practice is based on the assumption of resistance and the task of management is to overcoming it. In this lecture and the

related reading we will examine the notion of change (and resistance to change) and the ways in which ideas about change have changed.

Required pre-reading:
King and Lawley, Chapter 11

Seminar 8 preparation (Week 10):
Debate: Can, and should, organizational culture and its change be managed?

Read and make notes on at least two of the additional readings from last week (lecture 7, see ‘Additional reading’ above) or this week

(lecture 8, see ‘Additional reading’ below) that relate to change and organizational culture. What claims do the articles make? What are

the reasonings? What kind of evidence do they provide to support their claim? Based on this analysis, develop your own claim to answer the

debate question above. You claim should be based on careful reasoning and be supported by evidence (from the readings).

Additional reading:
Balogun J (2006) Managing change: Steering a course between intended strategies and unanticipated outcomes. Long Range Planning 39(1): 29

-49.
Cappelli P, Bassi L, Katz H, Knoke D, Osterman P and Useem M (1997) Change at work. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press,

Incorporated.
Donaldson G (1994) Corporate restructuring: Managing the change process from within. Harvard Business School Press.
Hirsch PM and De Soucey M (2006) Organizational restructuring and its consequences: Rhetorical and structural. Annual Review of Sociology

32(1): 171-189.
Lewin K (1951) Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers. Oxford: Harpers.
Massey D and Meegan R (1982) The anatomy of job loss: The how, why and where of employment decline. London: Methuen.
Maclean M, Harvey C, Sillince JAA and Golant BD (2014) Living up to the past? Ideological sensemaking in organizational transition.

Organization 21(4): 543-567.
Schatzki, Theodore R, (2006) On Organizations as they happen. Organization Studies, 27(12): 1863-1873.
Schein, Edgar H, (2006) From Brainwashing to Organizational Therapy: A Conceptual and Empirical Journey in Search of ‘Systemic’ Health and

a General Model of Change Dynamics. A Drama in Five Acts. Organization Studies. 27(2): 287-301.
Stensaker I and Falkenberg, J (2007) Making sense of different responses to corporate change. Human Relations 60(1): 137-177.
Üsdiken B, Kipping M and Engwall L (2011) Historical perspectives on organizational stability and change: Introduction to the special

issue. Management & Organizational History 6(1): 3-12.

Lecture: Leadership
(Dr PasiAhonen)

‘Leadership’ is regularly offered both as the solution to organizational ills as well as their sole solution. Even the financial crisis

that gripped much of the Western world in 2008 has been attributed to lack of leadership. This lecture will explore such questions as what

is leadership, where does it come from, what can it provide and what are its limitation?

Required pre-reading:
King and Lawley, Chapter 12

Seminar 9 preparation (Week 11):
Revise your feedback for Assignment 1 and make some notes for Assignment 3 so that you have focal points for the seminar discussions. You

are best able to benefit from the general feedback on Assignment 1 and the tips and tricks for Assignment 3 if you have these assignments

fresh in your mind.

Additional Readings:
Barnard CI (2003/1948) The nature of leadership. Organization and management: Selected papers. London and New York: Routledge, pp: 81-111.
Bligh MC, Kohles JC and Pillai R (2011) Romancing leadership: Past, present, and future. The Leadership Quarterly 22(6): 1058-1077.
Bresnen MJ (1995) All things to all people? Perceptions, attributions, and constructions of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly 6(4):

495-513.
Browning, B. W. (2007) Leadership in Desperate Times: An Analysis of Endurance: Shackleton’s Incredible Voyage through the Lens of

Leadership Theory. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 9(2): 183-198.
Cunliffe AL and Eriksen M (2011) Relational leadership. Human Relations 64(11): 1425-1449.
Denis J-L, Langley A and Sergi V (2012) Leadership in the plural. The Academy of Management Annals 6(1): 211-283.Eubanks D, Brown A and

Ybema S (2012) Leadership, identity, and ethics. Journal of Business Ethics 107(1): 1-3.Fairhurst GT (2009) Considering context in

discursive leadership research. Human Relations 62(11): 1607-1633.
Fairhurst GT (2011) Discursive approaches to leadership. In: Bryman A, Collinson D, Grint K, Jackson B and Uhl-Bien M (eds) The SAGE

handbook of leadership. Los Angeles, CA and London: SAGE, pp: 495-507.
Ford J, Harding N and M L (2008) Leadership as identity: Constructions and deconstructions. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Gordon, R. (2011). Leadership and power. In A. Bryman, D. Collinson, K. Grint, B. Jackson & M. Uhl-Bien (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of

leadership (pp. 195-202). Los Angeles, CA and London: SAGE.
Herman, S. (2007) Leadership training in a “not-leadership” society. Journal of Management Education 31(2); 151-155.
Liu H and Baker C (2014) White knights: Leadership as the heroicisation of whiteness. Leadership. Published online before print.
Lynham, S. A., and Chermack, T. J. (2006) Responsible Leadership for Performance: A Theoretical Model and Hypotheses. Journal of

Leadership & Organizational Studies, 12(4): 73-88.
Madsen, S. R., and Gygi, J (2005) An interview with John H. Zenger on extraordinary leadership. Journal of Leadership and Organization

Studies, 11(3): 119-125.
O’Reilly D and Reed M (2010) Leaderism: An evolution of managerialism in UK public service reform. Public Administration 88(4): 960–978.
Stogdill RM (1975) The evolution of leadership theory. Academy of Management Proceedings 1975(1): 4-6.

Lecture: Power, Surveillance and Control
(Dr PasiAhonen)

Power is an inherent property of organizational life, and takes several different forms. In this session we will move on from two notions

introduced in BE400: the notion of power as influence, and the notion of management as control. We will discuss the levers of power as

well as introducing dimensions of power beyond the behavioural, considering the moral and ethical aspects of drawing these dimensions.

Required pre-reading:
King and Lawley, Chapters 4 and 13

Seminar?
There is no seminar that directly relates to the topic of this week. There is, of course, a seminar in Week 11 (see above for details).

Additional Readings:
Ailon, G. (2006). What B would otherwise do: A critique of conceptualizations of ‘power’ in organizational theory. Organization, 13(6),

771-800.
Barker, J.R. (1993). Tightening the iron cage: concertive control in self-managing teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38: 408-437.
Bouquet, C., &Birkinshaw, J. (2008). Managing power in the multinational corporation: How low-power actors gain influence. Journal of

Management, 34(3), 477-508.
Clegg, S.R. (2009). Managing power in organizations: The hidden history of its constitution. In S. R. Clegg & M. Haugaard (Eds.), The SAGE

handbook of power (pp. 310-331). London: SAGE.
Denis, J.-L., Langley, A., & Rouleau, L. (2006). The power of numbers in strategizing. Strategic Organization, 4(4), 349-377.
Essamel, M. and Willmott, H. (1998). Accounting for teamwork: A critical study of group-based systems of organizational control.

Administrative Science Quarterly, 43: 358-396.
Göhler, G. (2009). ‘Power to’ and ‘power over’. In S. R. Clegg & M. Haugaard (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of power (pp. 27-39). London: SAGE.
Kärreman D and Alvesson M (2009) Resisting resistance: Counter-resistance, consent and compliance in a consultancy firm. Human Relations

62(8): 1115-1144.
Knights, D and McCabe, D. (2003). Governing through teamwork: Reconstituting subjectivity in a call centre. Journal of Management Studies

40(7):1587-1619.
Lukes, S. (2005). Power: A Radical View (2nd ed.). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
McCabe D (2009) Strategy-as-power: Ambiguity, contradiction and the exercise of power in a UK building society. Organization 17(2): 151-

175.
Pfeffer, J. (1997). New Directions for Organizational Theory: Problems and Prospects. Oxford: Oxford University Press, chapter 6,

Developing and Exercising Power and Influence.
Sewell, G. (1998). The discipline of teams: the control of team-based industrial work through electronic and peer surveillance.

Administrative Science Quarterly, 43: 397-428.
Torfing, J. (2009). Power and discourse: Towards an anti-foundationalist concept of power. In S. R. Clegg & M. Haugaard (Eds.), The SAGE

handbook of power (pp. 40-53). London: SAGE.

Category: Essay

About the Author (Author Profile)