General Management



|[pic] |MOR 554 (Section 16700R) |

| |Leading Innovation and Change, Fall 2015 |

| |JKP – 212; Mon-Wed, 12:30 – 1:50 |

Terance J. Wolfe, Ph.D.

Email: Terance.Wolfe@marshall.usc.edu

Office: Bridge 307-F

Phone: 213.740.0765

FAX: 213.740.3582

Office Hours: Monday, 3:00 – 4:00PM; by appointment

Course Overview

GOAL:

The goal of this course is to enhance participant understanding of the nature and the processes of innovative organizations, and what it takes to lead and manage them as a process of change.

Whether you read Business Week, Fortune, Fast Company, the Wall Street Journal, or Inc., they each have their own annual list of the most innovative companies. Innovation has been one of the most widely and consistently written about topics in the popular business press for the past fifteen years. While financial meltdowns and recessions/depressions are episodic in the nature of their press coverage, the coverage of innovation has been consistent across economic cycles.

Innovation is considered the wellspring of American competitive advantage, whether it be through entrepreneur- or intrapreneur-ship. It is seen as the source of industry development, vitality and renewal. As such, it is essential that we develop an appreciation for what it is, how to do it, and how to diffuse, spread or otherwise internalize it as a core organizational capability. When seen in this way, innovation is nothing short of “change”. Thus, we are interested in understanding the requisites of an innovative organization, and what it takes to lead one

Organizations are always in pursuit of competitive advantage – at least they should be! Most would argue that the root of competitive advantage is differentiation. Regardless of public sector or private, profit or non, organizations have a need to differentiate themselves. Differentiation is dependent upon creativity and innovation and, more fundamentally, the acceptance and diffusion of innovation – both within the organization as well as the marketplace. Sustained competitive viability is dependent upon creating and innovating in a continuous way.

This course will review approaches to strategic, organizational, product/service, and process innovations. A variety of influences on innovation and change will be examined including the role of creativity, leadership, motivation, organizational culture, resistance, problem-solving and decision-making. Using case studies, class exercises, and action research projects, participants will develop their understanding of innovation and the management of change. The course will also utilize guest speakers and videos.

OBJECTIVES:

The objectives of this course focus on creativity, innovation and leading change or diffusion. The major objectives for the participants in this course are to:

1. Provide a knowledge base for understanding different types of organizational innovation.

2. Understand organizational and extra-organizational forces that influence innovation success.

3. Develop an appreciation of the processes and challenges of leadership and change management as they apply to innovation effectiveness.

Instructional Philosophy

The key to acquiring knowledge is involvement. As a graduate student, you are expected to participate actively, responsibly, and competently. Involvement will be in the form of discussion, questioning, analysis, reports and presentations, and problem-solving. I have high expectations for your participation. Involvement requires that you take the initiative to prepare adequately for each session through reading, exploring, and analyzing the assigned material.

Each student can achieve the course objectives through the following process:

1. Competent preparation -- demonstrated by active participation in assigned activities, including case preparation, analysis, and discussion.

2. Integration of subject matter -- demonstrated through oral and written reports.

3. Professional approach -- demonstrated by reflecting a mature, responsible, and managerial perspective to the analysis and understanding of organizations and the concepts under review. This may be evidenced by respect for the thoughts and contributions of your classmates as well as the instructor.

4. Attendance and Punctuality -- demonstrated by timely arrival for each class session, as well as timely delivery of course assignments.

Course Values

Several values will be useful for orienting yourself to the attitude and approach of the course. These include the following:

1. Attitude of experimentation

2. Orientation towards risk

3. Transcending boundaries and self-imposed limits

Course Format

The course will employ a variety of pedagogical approaches including lecture, discussion, in-class exercises, case analyses, videos, guest speakers and individual and team presentations.

Required Texts

Michalko, Michael. 2006. Thinkertoys: A Handbook of Business Creativity for the ‘90s, 2nd ed. Berkeley, CA: Ten Speed Press.



--------------------------------------

Moser-Wellman, Annette. 2001. The Five Faces of Genius: Creative Thinking Styles to succeed at Work. New York: Penguin.



--------------------------------------

Learning Style Inventory, Version 3. Boston, MA: TRG Hay/McBer. The LSI will be available for purchase from me by the 2nd class session.

--------------------------------------

Course Reader: A set of Harvard materials (articles and cases) available through on-line purchase from Harvard (I will send the access link later)

Texts of Interest

Adams, J. Stacy. 2001. Conceptual Blockbusting: A Guide to Better Ideas. Perseus Books.

Christensen, Clayton. 1997. The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Christensen, Clayton & Raynor, Michael. 2003. The Innovator’s Solution: Creating and Sustaining Successful Growth. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Drucker, Peter. 1985. Innovation and Entrepreneurship. New York: HarperBusiness.

Keeley, Larry. 2013. Ten Types of Innovation: The Discipline of Building Breakthroughs. New York: Wiley

Kelley, Tom. 2001. The Art of Innovation. New York: Doubleday.

Kubie, Lawrence. 1961. The Neurotic Distortion of the Creative Process. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.

Leifer, Richard, McDermott, Christopher, Colarelli-O’Connor, Gina, Peters, Lois, Rice, Mark & Veryzer, Robert. 2000. Radical Innovation: How Mature Companies Can Outsmart Upstarts. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

May, Rollo. 1994. The Courage to Create. New York: WW Norton.

Moore, Geoffrey. 2002. Crossing the Chasm: Marketing and Selling High-Tech Products to Mainstream Customers. New York: HarperBusiness Essentials.

Pink, Daniel. 2005. A Whole New Mind: Moving from the Information Age to the Conceptual Age. New York: Riverhead Books.

Robinson, Alan & Stern, Sam. 1997. Corporate Creativity: How Innovation and Improvement Actually Happen. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.

Ray, Michael & Myers, Rochelle. 1988. Creativity in Business. Main Street Books.

Rogers, Everett. 2003. Diffusion of Innovations, 5th Edition. New York: Free Press.

Schrage, Michael. 2000. Serious Play: How the World’s Best Companies Simulate to Innovate. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Schrage, Michael. 2014. The Innovator’s Hypothesis: How Cheap Experiments are Worth More Than Good Ideas. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Schwartz, Peter. 1991. The Art of the Long View: Planning for the Future in an Uncertain World. New York: Doubleday.

Schwartz, Peter. 2003. Inevitable Surprises: Thinking Ahead in a Time of Turbulence. New York: Gotham Books.

Thackara, John. 2006. In the Bubble. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Toffler, A. 1970. Future Shock. New York: Bantam.

Tushman, Michael & Anderson, Philip (eds.). 1997. Managing Strategic Innovation and Change: A Collection of Readings. New York: Oxford University Press.

Van Der Heijden, Kees. 1996. Scenarios: The Art of Strategic Conversation. Chichester, England: John Wiley.

Requirements & Grading

To complete this course, you must receive a passing grade on each grading criterion. You will be evaluated based upon your performance relative to your classmates on the following criteria:

1. Advanced preparation of class assignments

2. Class participation 15%

3. Self-description project 15%

4. Research report (written and oral) 20%

5. Case synopsis (n = 1; 3-4 page case write-up) 10%

Subtotal Individual Evaluations 60%

6. Group Project

Professor Evaluation 20.0%

Peer Evaluation 12.5%

Class Rankings 7.5%

Subtotal Group Evaluations 40%

TOTAL 100%

EVALUATIONS

Assessments of student performance fall into two broad classes of evaluation: individual contributions, and group analyses and presentations.

A. Individual Evaluations (60%)

Each student has direct and complete control over sixty (60) percent of her/his final grade. There are four basic components of this grade: class participation (15%), self-description project (15%), research report (20%), and case synopsis (10%). Good performance on each of these is essential for overall individual success.

Class Participation (15%):

The primary instructional vehicle is discussion and engagement in classroom exercises and cases. The majority of class time will be devoted to these activities. Class participation is essential to course success. It is imperative, therefore, that students thoroughly prepare in advance of each class.

Self-Description (15%) – Understanding your personal creativity

Explore how your life experiences, thinking styles, imagination, attitudes and blocks to creativity (mental, emotional, cultural and organizational) influence your personal creative problem solving process.

a. Apply inventories and readings. Analyze your “right brain/left brain” styles. How do they affect the way you meet challenges, solve problems, think things through, exercise imagination, etc. Consider successes as well as failures.

b. Analyze influences (personal demographics, family, schools, employers, undergraduate major, career, sub-cultures, religion, etc.) on your creativity.

c. Discuss your thinking styles and attitudes in light of pertinent inventories (e.g., Learning Style Inventory (required), Five Faces (required), MBTI, etc).

d. Observe the way you approach creative challenges.

e. How does your style serve your creative potential? How does it hinder it?

f. How does all of this relate to your career and your work behavior, especially in regard to solving problems, realizing opportunities, expressing creativity and producing innovation?

g. Formulate and execute three or more learning experiments regarding your personal creative practice (to be discussed in class). Thinkertoys may be useful in this regard.

h. Develop an action plan for further enhancing/developing your personal creativity. Be sure to identify specific behaviors or pursuits you can undertake.

In completing this assignment, you may find it interesting to visit the following sites:

Google “left brain – right brain test”. Select and complete one or more.

(highly recommended)





This paper should be approximately 5 pages, double-spaced, Times Roman 12 font. It is due at start of class Sept 17.

Research Paper (20%) – Understanding innovation:

Each participant (or pair) will submit a 5-10 page paper (double-spaced, 12-point font) and make an in-class oral presentation on a personally selected aspect of innovation. See Michalko, Chapter 3, Challenges, for some suggestions. ALL research reports are due no later than Nov 9.

There are three options for this assignment.

Option 1 – Process Innovation

Goal – Propose a modification to enhance the efficiency, effectiveness, satisfaction of a job or a work process.

Part I: Choose either a job or a process for analysis. Observe a work situation – either a job or a process – for 30-60 minutes. Write as much of the details of what you observe as possible. What do you understand about the nature of the job (the process) in terms of its purpose, goals, structure, flow, socio-technical interface, and outcomes. Include any observations or inferences about the required duties, responsibilities, reporting relationships, level of authority/responsibility, etc as a result of your observations? Think about the elements of the job (or process), as well as the context within which the task or process is performed (setting, physical and social environment, structural/hierarchical context, etc). Return to the same work situation at another point-in-time (preferably time delayed – 1-5 days). Capture your impressions rather than your observations. How do you imagine workers engaged in this job (process) feel about what they are doing? What are your feelings as the observer?

Part II: After completing Part I, interview two or more participants in this work setting to better understand their experience of the job (process). What do they enjoy the most about what they do? What do they enjoy the least? If it were up to them to redesign the work (process), what would they do differently? What would they keep the same?

Part III: Taking into account details, impressions, feelings, and the experiences of those who actually perform the job (process), how might this activity be accomplished in a different way? Explore this situation through the application of at least four (4) thinkertoys – at least two linear and at least two intuitive thinkertoys. Propose an alternative/innovative approach to the same work requirement.

Option 2 – Product or Service Innovation

Goal – Propose an innovative product or service capable of disrupting the current market. (You might think about identifying a current “irritant”. What kind of product or service could address this irritant?). You might consider pre-reading the Bower & Christensen article on disruptive innovation.

Part I: Identify an existing product or service of interest to you. What is the product’s (service’s) primary function? That is, what problem(s) does it solve? What are its distinguishing features or characteristics? Which features present the greatest market appeal? Why? Which features are less appealing? Why?

Part II: Identify two or more users of this product (service). Interview them about what they use the product for. What do they see as its most appealing features? Its least appealing features? What additional functionality, or other distinguishing features, would they like to see the product (service) do (or have) that it currently does not?

Part III: Brainstorm about alternative ways of providing the same (or enhanced) functionality or features. Explore this situation through the application of at least four (4) thinkertoys – at least two linear and at least two intuitive thinkertoys. How might this product (service) be redesigned to enhance its functionality, its features, and to improve its market appeal? What potential do you see for a “disruptive” innovation, that is, an innovation that fundamentally alters the playing field in this product (service) category? What would be the characteristics of this disruptive innovation? What do you estimate to be the market size for that need?

Option 3 – Business Concept Innovation

Goal - Propose a disruptive business model for satisfying an existing or as yet unmet, or even unidentified, need. Refer to Bower & Christensen and Kim & Mauborgne.

Part I: Identify an organization of interest – either an existent organization or one that you would propose. Identify that organization’s reason for being, that is, its mission. What is (would be) its primary purpose? What is (would be) its vision? What need is it satisfying (or does it hope to satisfy) in the market? Who has that need? What do you estimate to be the market size for that need?

Part II: Brainstorm alternative strategies for meeting the market need. Explore this situation through the application of at least four (4) thinkertoys – at least two linear and at least two intuitive thinkertoys. How might these strategies improve upon or enhance an organization’s ability to meet that need? How should the business model be changed in order for this strategy to be successful?

In all cases for your Research Projects, provide a specific summary of original data collected: demographics, summary of responses, etc.

Grading of the research paper will be based on the following criteria:

. Innovativeness!!!

. Major concepts identified and appropriately discussed

. Presentation to the class

. How well the material was understood and communicated to the class

. Response to questions

Research report in-class oral presentations are scheduled at various points throughout the term. You will have ten (10) minutes for your presentation. See syllabus for schedule.

Case Synopsis (10%)

Each participant will select one of the assigned cases and submit a 3-4 page double-spaced synopsis. A synopsis should address each of the following points:

• What is the broader environmental and organizational context within which this need for innovation occurs?

• What forces are driving, and what forces are restraining, the development of innovation?

• What processes/approaches are used to address innovation?

• What is the role of leadership in this situation; i.e., how does leadership support, inhibit, or otherwise impact the pursuit of innovation?

• What are the outcomes (results) of the innovation initiative?

• What are, or what could be, appropriate measures of innovation effectiveness or success in this situation?

• What type(s) of innovation is (are) the focus of the case?

• What makes this innovation case particularly interesting to you?

• How does this case contribute to your understanding of innovation and/or innovation processes in organizations? (Type, process/technique, organizational conditions, leadership, change/diffusion, etc)

• What are your specific innovation take-aways from this case?

B. Team Evaluations – Group Analysis and Presentation (40%)

Forty-five (45) percent of each individual’s grade is a function of her/his ability to work with others and make contributions toward collective analyses and presentations. An essential attribute of organizational success, and a quality often stressed by recruiters, is the ability to work effectively with others. This course allows you to develop your skills in contributing to task groups and collective performance. It does this through a written group project and oral presentation.

The purposes of the group project are to enable each student, through individual effort and group interaction, to (1) explore different aspects of the innovation process, and (2) apply that understanding to real-world situations. To achieve these purposes, students will form themselves into groups of four-five students each. Group projects will be jointly evaluated by the professor (55% of the project, 25% of the total grade) and team and class members (45% of the project, 20% of the total grade).

Requirements: The organizational and extra-organizational forces that influence the selected type of innovation should be identified and illustrated. Appropriate processes for the management of change should be proposed that address the role of leadership, motivation, organizational culture, resistance, problem-solving and decision-making.

Innovation and Diffusion

Choose a significant issue (pollution, outsourcing, HIV/AIDS, globalization, global warming, prison overpopulation, etc.) and propose a creative/innovative way of addressing it including an action plan for buy-in and diffusion.

1. Define the issue.

2. Identify at least three different perspectives (or frames) from which this issue can be viewed.

3. How might these different “framings” lead to alternative problem definitions and solutions?

4. Explore your selected situation through the application of at least four (4) thinkertoys – at least two linear and at least two intuitive thinkertoys.

5. Present a solution and a plan for action.

Be creative and innovative in your classroom presentation. Consider multiple forms of media, engagement, etc. Prepare a report and deliver a group classroom presentation.

Written and Oral Report (20%)

Each group will prepare a 20-30 page written report (typed, double-spaced, edited, spell-checked, paginated), and present it to the class as a whole. Each group will have 30 minutes to present (this assumes 4 project teams). Groups should plan for approximately twenty-five (25) minute presentations, and five (5) minutes of questions and discussion. (NOTE – this may vary depending on final enrollment numbers). Written projects are due from all groups at the start of class on Wednesday, December 1. Late submissions will be penalized (one full letter grade).

Class Rankings (7.5%).

Each team presentation will be ranked by the rest of the class from 1 (most effective) to 5 (least effective). The team ranked most effective will receive an A+; the team ranked least effective will receive a B-. The remaining teams will be distributed in between. Seven and one-half (7.5) percent of your total grade, and seventeen (17) percent of your group grade, will be assessed through class rankings.

Peer Evaluations (12.5%)

As one might expect, group assignments pose evaluation problems as to the contributions of individual members -- a problem well acknowledged in the literature on organizational economics. Specifically, this poses a problem of ``opportunism’’ or ``shirking’’ in team production. To control for such opportunism, each team member’s performance will be evaluated by every other member; that is, by those who are most likely to know, and therefore most capable of evaluating, individual contributions to group effort. Twelve and one-half (12.5) percent of your total grade, and twenty-eight (28) percent of your group grade, will be assessed through peer evaluation. Anonymous peer evaluations are due at the final class session. See attached peer evaluation form. NOTE: the total number of A’s per group is constrained – see below.

It is important to be aware that the distribution of ``A’s’’ within a group is constrained; this includes A+, A, and A-.

You cannot assign A’s (of any form) to more than 60% of your total group members.

A 4-person group cannot have more than two A’s, 5-person = 3 A’s, 6-person = 4 A’s, 7-person = 4 A’s.

Please review the peer evaluation form in advance so that you understand the criteria and the conditions of peer evaluations.

Failure to adhere to this constraint will result in ALL team members receiving a “B” for their peer evaluations

If I do not receive a complete set of peer evaluations from a team, the entire team will receive a “C” for their peer evaluations

BEGINNING THE COURSE

In preparation for the successful launch of this class, please do the following:

Read Michalko, Thinkertoys

Warning

Preface to the New Edition

The Barking Cat (Introduction)

Chapters 1 – 4

Chapters 38 – 39

Practice “creative affirmations” as suggested on pages 9-10

Explore your creativity FUDS through “Tick-Tock” (pps 4-7)

Select two (or more) “Mind Pumping” exercises from Chapter 2. Practice them, and come prepared to share and discuss your experiences in class.

Complete the Five Faces of Genius Profiler (pages 13-20, Annette Moser-Wellman, The Five Faces of Genius), and email me each of your Five Faces scores by 3:00PM, Sunday, August 30.

Read The Five Faces of Genius in its entirety prior to class, Wednesday, September 2. We will do an in class exercise on Sept 3 that requires that you be familiar with all Five Faces.

Journals and Resource Materials

|ACADEMIC |POPULAR PRESS |

| | |

|Academy of Management Journal |Barons |

| | |

|Academy of Management Review |Business 2.0 |

| |(out of print, but CNN online archives) |

|Administrative Science Quarterly | |

| |

|American Sociological Review |2 |

| | |

|Business Horizons |Business Week |

| | |

|California Management Review |Fast Company |

| | |

|Harvard Business Review |Forbes |

| | |

|Human Relations |Fortune |

| | |

|Journal of Applied Behavioral Science |Inc. |

| | |

|Journal of Management Inquiry |The Futurist |

| | |

|Journal of Organizational Change Management |Wall Street Journal |

| | |

|Management Science | |

| | |

|Organizational Dynamics | |

| | |

|Organization Science | |

| | |

|Organization Studies | |

| | |

|Sloan Management Review | |

| | |

Term Project Resources

The following materials may be useful points-of-departure for your term project research.

Business Concept / Strategy

Brown & Eisenhardt, Competing on the Edge

Christensen, The Innovator’s Dilemma

Christensen, The Innovator’s Solution

Hamel, Leading the Revolution

Kim & Mauborgne, Blue Ocean Strategy

Verganti, Design-Driven Innovation

Organization / Structure

Ashkenas, et al, The Boundaryless Organization

Hock, Birth of the Chaordic Age

Pasternack & Viscio, The Centerless Corporation

Semler, Maverick

People

Adams, Conceptual Blockbusting

Fletcher & Olwyler, Paradoxical Thinking

May, The Courage to Create

O’Keeffe, Business beyond the Box

Senge, et. al., Presence: Human Purpose and the Field of the Future

Product/Process

Goldenberg & Mazursky, Creativity in Product Innovation

Pisano, The Development Factory

Managing Change

Gladwell, The Tipping Point

Grove, Only the Paranoid Survive

Jacobs, Real Time Strategic Change

Moore, Crossing the Chasm

Nadler, Champions of Change

Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations (5th ed)

General

Johnson, Where Good Ideas Come From

Senge, Kleiner, Roberts, Ross & Smith, The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook

Business Week

California Management Review

Fast Company

Fortune

Sloan Management Review

Wall Street Journal

Academic Integrity Policy

The Marshall School is committed to upholding the University’s Academic Integrity code as detailed in the SCampus Guide. It is the policy of the Marshall School to report all violations of the code. Any serious violation or pattern of violations of the Academic Integrity Code will result in the student’s expulsion from the degree program.

It is particularly important that you are aware of and avoid plagiarism, cheating on exams, fabricating data for a project, submitting a paper to more than one professor, or submitting a paper authored by anyone other than yourself. If you have doubts about any of these practices, confer with a faculty member.

Resources on academic dishonesty can be found on the Student Judicial Affairs Web site (.). The “Guide to Avoiding Plagiarism” addresses issues of paraphrasing, quotations, and citation in written assignments, drawing heavily upon materials used in the university’s writing program. “Understanding and avoiding academic dishonesty” addresses more general issues of academic integrity, including guidelines for adhering to standards concerning examinations and unauthorized collaboration. The “2005-2006 SCampus” () contains the university’s student conduct code.

Students with Disabilities

Any student requesting academic accommodations based on a disability is required to register with Disability Services and Programs (DSP) each semester. A letter of verification for approved accommodations can be obtained from DSP. Please be sure the letter is delivered to me as early in the semester as possible. DSP is located in STU 301 and is open 8:30 a.m. – 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. The phone number for DSP is (213) 740-0776.

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE

Dr. Wolfe is the founder and principal of AE2GIS Group providing consultation services in strategy-driven performance and change management, as well as the design, delivery, and evaluation of management and executive development programs. Dr. Wolfe has consulted for a variety of organizations in the public and private sectors both domestically and abroad (client listing available upon request).

Consultation and Executive Development services include strategy-driven performance management, organizational assessments, change management, conflict resolution, interpersonal communication, leadership and top management team development, work force diversity, and strategic planning. Dr. Wolfe has provided a variety of supervisory, managerial, and executive development workshops in the aerospace, high tech, and telecommunications industries, and for the US Department of Defense in West Germany.

Dr. Wolfe served as Assistant Director of Computing Services at the UCLA Anderson Graduate School of Management where he formulated and implemented a strategic computing and information systems plan.

Dr. Wolfe has a broad network of executives, and local and national elected representatives in Taiwan and Thailand where he also provides educational and consulting services. Currently, he serves as executive consultant to the President of Sripatum University, Bangkok, Thailand.

ACADEMIC EXPERIENCE

Dr. Wolfe began teaching at the University of Maryland in 1976. He spent four years in West Germany with the University of Maryland’s European Division. He has held teaching responsibilities at UCLA, Pepperdine, California State University, and the California School of Professional Psychology where he taught in the Organizational Psychology doctoral program and served as the Acting Director of the Organizational Psychology PhD Program. He has taught a wide variety of management and organizational psychology courses at the undergraduate, MBA, and Ph.D. levels.

Currently, Dr. Wolfe serves as adjunct faculty in the Executive MBA Program at Pepperdine University, the MA in Management at Dominican University, as well as in the executive doctoral program in Strategic Leadership in the College of Organizational Studies at CSPP/Alliant University. Most recently, Dr. Wolfe has given invited presentations to Executive Development Programs in Thailand and Taiwan.

Dr. Wolfe has authored/co-authored book chapters and journal articles, serves as an ad hoc reviewer for academic journals and conferences, and has presented at conferences in the US and abroad. His current research is on strategic mindsets, the development of strategic sense-making, and dimensions of high performance management. He is a member of the Academy of Management, Western Academy of Management, Strategic Management Society, World Future Society, World Affairs Council, Asian Business League, Los Angeles Venture Association, and the Empowering Work/Action Research Network.

EDUCATION

Ph.D., Organization & Human Systems Development, Anderson Graduate School of Management, UCLA

B.S. and MBA, Old Dominion University, Virginia

COMMUNITY SERVICE

Dr. Wolfe is active with the National Conference for Community and Justice (NCCJ), and the Museum of Tolerance, organizations committed to prejudice reduction and combating bias, where he facilitates intergroup dialogue. As pro bono service, he developed a multicultural campus community in the Pasadena Unified School District. He served as a member of an LAUSD Steering Committee charged with developing a multicultural relations course. Dr. Wolfe sits on the Boards of Directors of two non-profit educational organizations – Olive View-UCLA Medical Center Foundation, and Ashay: Educational Resources for a Multicultural World. He also sits on the Programs Subcommittee of the Board for Project Angel Food, and the Institutional Review Board at Olive View-UCLA Medical Center.

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Rank order each of the members of your group INCLUDING yourself on each of the items below (1 is best, 2 is next best, etc.). The Peer Evaluation counts towards each student’s final grade. Use the back of this form for required comments as per the guidance at the bottom of this page.

Please list each of your group members below in alphabetical order by last name. Be sure to include yourself.

ALPHA by LAST NAME

Group Members: A. ________________________________________________

B. ________________________________________________

C. ________________________________________________

D. ________________________________________________

E. ________________________________________________

F. ________________________________________________

G. ________________________________________________

|Rating Criterion / Group Member |A |B |C |D |E |F |G |

|1. Quality of contribution to group discussions | | | | | | | |

|2. Quality of contribution to writing the assignment | | | | | | | |

|3. Quality of contribution to organizing the assignment | | | | | | | |

|4. Quality of initiative when something needed to get done. | | | | | | | |

|5. Reliability in completing assigned responsibilities | | | | | | | |

|6. Amount of effort put forth. | | | | | | | |

|7. Commitment to the group | | | | | | | |

|8. Leadership, motivation provided to the group. | | | | | | | |

|9. Emphasis on getting the task done. | | | | | | | |

|10. Emphasis on cooperation and working well with others. | | | | | | | |

|11. Would want to work with this group member again. | | | | | | | |

|TOTAL | | | | | | | |

|Assign an alphabetical grade to each member of the group based | | | | | | | |

|on your OVERALL impression of her/his contribution to the | | | | | | | |

|group’s performance. You may assign a group member any grade | | | | | | | |

|from 0 to A+. However, you cannot assign A’s to more than 60% | | | | | | | |

|of your total group members. A 4-person group cannot have more | | | | | | | |

|than two A’s, 5 person = 3 A’s, 6 person = 4 A’s, 7 person = 4 | | | | | | | |

|A’s. | | | | | | | |

On the following page, provide at least three directly observable behaviors that represent what you believe each team member did well, AND at least three behaviors that you observed that represent areas for improvement/development for each team member. This is NOT about personalities, but rather it is about those behaviors that are in service and supportive of successful team work and those behaviors that are not.

|A:___________________ |

| |

|Did Well (behaviors): |

| |

| |

|Area for improvement/development (behaviors): |

| |

| |

| |

|B:___________________ |

| |

|Did Well (behaviors): |

| |

| |

|Area for improvement/development (behaviors): |

| |

| |

| |

|C:___________________ |

| |

|Did Well (behaviors): |

| |

| |

|Area for improvement/development (behaviors): |

| |

| |

| |

|D:___________________ |

| |

|Did Well (behaviors): |

| |

| |

|Area for improvement/development (behaviors): |

| |

| |

| |

|E:___________________ |

| |

|Did Well (behaviors): |

| |

| |

|Area for improvement/development (behaviors): |

| |

| |

| |

|F:___________________ |

| |

|Did Well (behaviors): |

| |

| |

|Area for improvement/development (behaviors): |

| |

| |

MOR 554 – Leading innovation & change, Fall 2015

|Schedule of Sessions, Readings and Deliverables – Mondays & Wednesdays, 12:30 – 1:50, JKP 212 |

|Week |DATE |TOPIC & READINGS |IN-CLASS |

|1 |Aug 24-26 |INTRODUCTION / OVERVIEW | |

| | |Michalko. Warning; Preface (xi-xv); The Barking cat (xvii – xx); Initiation: C1 – C4; Endtoys: C38 – |Review Chap 2: Mind Pumping. Practice two or more exercises, and come |

| | |C39 |prepared to discuss in class |

|2 |Aug 31 |TAPPING INTO THE RIGHT SIDE – “ART” AS A FORM FOR GETTING TO KNOW YOU |Personal introductions based on Personal History interviews and drawings |

| |Sept 2 |INTRODUCTION (continued) | |

| | |How Schools Kill Creativity | |

|3 |Sep 7 |LABOR DAY – A Holiday Already??? | |

| |Sept 9 |CREATIVITY I – Five Faces | |

| | |Moser-Wellman. Five Faces of Genius – Read All |Come prepared to do an in-class exercise based upon your “Dominant |

| | |Complete the Five Faces of Genius Profiler (pps. 13 – 20). |Faces”. |

| | |Email me your Five Faces Profile Scores – top three (p 18), and your LSI style no later than 3:00PM, | |

| | |Sunday, Aug 30 | |

|4 |Sept 14 |Guest Speaker: Sherry Phelan, PhD, The Art of the Mandala | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| |16 |CREATIVITY II – “Wicked Problems” | |

| | |Amabile & Khaire, Creativity and the Role of the Leader, HBR |Five Faces Exercise 2 |

| | |Beckman & Barry, Innovation as a Learning Process, CMR | |

|Week |DATE |TOPIC & READINGS |IN-CLASS |

|5 |Sept 21-23 |MENTAL MODELS & FRAMES | |

| | |Senge, The Leader’s New Work: Building Learning Organizations, SMR, Fall 1990 |Jie Liang Phone Home (A) & (B) |

| | |Burgelman & Grove, Strategic Dissonance, CMR, Winter 1996 |NOTE – this case NOT for case write-up |

|6 |Sept 28 |INNOVATION – An Introduction | |

| | |Drucker, The Discipline of Innovation, HBR, 1985/2002 |Self-description projects due (9/28) |

| | |Skarzynski & Gibson, Building a Systemic Innovation Capability, HBS, 2008 |(must include Learning Style Inventory and Five Faces) |

| | |Hustin & Sakkab, Connect & Develop: Inside P&G’s New Model for Innovation, HBR, March 2006 | |

| | |Thinkertoys: Linear – C7, C10, C18; Intuitive – C26, C29, C33 | |

| |Sept 30 |OUTTHINKING | |

| | |Guest Speaker: Leslie DaCruz, Stradeation | |

|7 |Oct 5 |MESSES, PAIN POINTS AND INNOVATIVE RESPONSES | |

| | |Guest Speaker: Jim Beddows, PARC | |

| |Oct 7 |BUSINESS CONCEPT INNOVATION I | |

| | |Kim & Mauborgne, Value Innovation: The Strategic Logic of High Growth, HBR, Jan – Feb 1997 |The Evolution of the Circus Industry (A) |

| | |Kim & Mauborgne, Creating New Market Space, HBR, Jan – Feb 1999 |NOTE – this case NOT for case write-up |

| | | | |

|8 |Oct 12 |BUSINESS CONCEPT INNOVATION II |Individual presentations of understanding the creativity/ innovation |

| | | |process, n = 4 |

| |Oct 14 |MIX & MATCH: OBSERVATION, INTERPRETATION, IDEATION |California Science Center Exercise |

|Week |DATE |TOPIC & READINGS |IN-CLASS |

|9 |Oct 19 |SCIENCE CENTER REPORT OUTS | |

| |Oct 21 |PRODUCT / SERVICE INNOVATION |GLO-SHO |

| | |Bower & Christensen, Disruptive Technologies: Catching the Wave, HBR, Jan – Feb 1995 |Nintendo’s Disruptive Strategy: Implications for the Video Game Industry |

| | |Berry, et al, Creating New Markets through Service Innovation, SMR, Winter 2006 |El Bulli: The Taste of Innovation |

| | | | |

|10 |Oct 26 |PROCESS INNOVATION | |

| | |Pisano, A Framework for Process Development |The Boeing Company: Moonshine Shop |

| | | |Individual presentations of understanding the creativity/ innovation |

| | | |process, n = 4 |

| |Oct 28 |INNOVATING IN LARGE ORGANIZATIONS | |

| | |Guest Speakers: Mark Skidmore & Robert Narumi, Raytheon | |

|11 |Nov 2 |ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION | |

| | |Mintzberg & Van der Heyden, Organigraphs: Drawing How Companies Really Work, HBR, 1999 |Oticon A/S: Project 330 |

| | |Malone, Bringing the Market Inside, HBR, 2004 | |

| | | |Individual presentations of understanding the creativity/ innovation |

| | | |process, n = 4 |

| |Nov 4 |INNOVATION & INCUBATORS | |

| | |Guest Speakers: Kevin Randolph & Ed Beres | |

| | |Los Angeles Cleantech Incubator (LACI) | |

|Week |DATE |TOPIC & READINGS |IN-CLASS |

|12 |Nov 9 |THE INNOVATIVE ORGANIZATION | |

| | |Moss-Kanter, Teaching Old Companies New Tricks: The Challenge of Managing New Streams within the |Innovation at Timberland: Thinking Outside the Shoebox |

| | |Mainstream, HBS, 2002 |Individual presentations of understanding the creativity/ innovation |

| | |Nonaka, The Knowledge Creating Company, HBR, 1991 |process, n = 4 |

| |Nov 11 |DIFFUSION OF INNOVATION | |

| | |Gourville, Note on Innovation Diffusion: Rogers’ Five Factors, HBS, 2006 |Innovation at LEGO Group (A) (not for write-up) |

| | |Hansen & Birkinshaw, The Innovation Value Chain, HBR, 2007 |Innovation at LEGO Group (B) (Write-up OK) |

| | |Kim & Mauborgne, Tipping Point Leadership, HBR, 2003 |Innovation at 3M |

|13 |Nov 16 |LEADERSHIP | |

| | |Re-read Senge (see week 4), The Leader’s New Work: Building Learning Organizations, SMR, Fall 1990 |Leading Innovation at Kelvingrove (A) |

| | |Hill, et al, Unlocking the Slices of Genius in Your Organization: Leading for Innovation, HBSP, 2010 |Managing Innovation at Nypro |

| | |Kim & Mauborgne, Blue Ocean Leadership, HBR, May, 2014 | |

| |Nov 18 |Guest Speaker: Frank Yang, Founder & CEO, simplehuman (11/19) | |

|14 |Nov 23 |INTEGRATION & REVIEW | |

| |Nov 25 |THANKSGIVING BREAK | |

|15 |Nov 30- |FINAL TEAM PRESENTATIONS |Team Presentations – ALL |

| |Dec 1 | |Final Team Project Reports Due |

[pic][pic][pic]

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download