Solving Organizational Problems - Syllabus



Solving Organizational Problems1 CreditBU.930.630.XX[NOTE: Each section must have a separate syllabus.][Day & Time / ex: Monday, 6pm-9pm][Start & End Dates / ex: 8/20/18–10/15/18][Semester / ex: Fall 2018][Location / ex: Washington, DC]Instructor and Contact Information[Full Name][Email Address][Phone Number, ###- ###-#### (Optional)]Office Hours[Specify the day and time of the 2 hours that will be dedicated to office hours each week. For evening classes, faculty may wish to hold their office hours by phone or email. While faculty are permitted to state “and by appointment,” office hours should not be held exclusively by appointment.]Required Texts & Learning MaterialsRequired Books:Raisel, E. M., & Friga, P. N. (2002). The McKinsey mind: Understanding and implementing the problem-solving tools and management techniques of the world’s top strategic consulting firm. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Pfeffer, J., & Sutton, R. I. (2006). Hard facts, dangerous half-truths, and total nonsense: Profiting from evidence-based management. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.Required Readings:Selections from:Ferrari, B. T. (2012). Power listening: Mastering the most critical business skill of all. New York, NY: Penguin Group.Kahneman, D., Lovallo, D., & Sibony, O. (2011). The big idea: Before you make that big decision. Harvard Business Review, 89(6), 51–60.LaFasto, F. M. J., & Larson, C. (2001). When teams work best: 6,000 team members and leaders tell what it means to succeed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Course DescriptionThis course aims to equip GMBA Innovation for Humanity (I4H) teams with the fundamental knowledge and skills needed to thrive in their I4H projects and future organizational problem-solving endeavors. It differs from other management courses in its focus on the specific challenges faced by problem-solving teams (e.g., I4H teams) versus teams or individuals in other organizational settings (e.g., decision-making situations, organizational change efforts). It includes units intended to help students set up a problem-solving team for success, follow the iterative problem-solving process, adapt that process to manage scope and ambiguity, and both collect and evaluate the quality of problem-relevant evidence. Students will leave with foundational abilities needed to solve organizational problems.Prerequisite(s)NoneLearning ObjectivesBy the end of this course, students will be able to: Maximize the likelihood a problem-solving team will be successful.Define and redefine an organizational problem through an iterative process.Manage scope and ambiguity throughout a problem-solving project.Gather and evaluate the quality of problem-relevant evidence.To view the complete list of the Carey Business School’s general learning goals and objectives, visit the Carey website.Course Overview and StructureThis course, like Effective Communication, is fundamentally linked to I4H: The four in-person sessions in this course will impart the fundamental knowledge and skills needed for students to thrive in their I4H teams and beyond. We will strive to deliver the course lessons at the time they are needed in I4H. First, we’ll examine some problems that can threaten a team’s performance and develop some early-stage strategies to avoid them. Next, we’ll discuss and practice the iterative process of defining and redefining a problem in collaboration with a problem owner. Then, we’ll develop some strategies for managing project scope and ambiguity throughout a problem-solving project. The in-person section of the course (weeks 1-4) will conclude with a focus on problem-relevant evidence—in particular, how to gather evidence and evaluate its quality. As described in the next section, the final four weeks of this course (weeks 5-8) have a different purpose: to apply the course lessons to students’ I4H fieldwork. Throughout this course, we will follow the same basic learning approach grounded in exercises and student participation. We will also assume a yin-and-yang view of theory and practice, adopting psychologist Kurt Lewin’s dictum that, “There is nothing so practical as a good theory.” In short, we will seek to use evidence for the practical purpose of becoming better organizational problem-solvers. Overall, students will leave the course fully equipped to excel as members and leaders of problem-solving teams, including but extending beyond I4H.Weeks 5-8?of Solving Organizational Problems and Effective?CommunicationIn the final four weeks of the term, Dr. Steven Cohen and I will assist I4H teams in applying the course lessons to their I4H fieldwork and presentations. In particular, I will advise students on their problem definition and problem structuring, use of relevant evidence, and the logical coherence of their thinking. Dr. Cohen will advise students on their verbal and nonverbal presentation skills as well as their presentation materials. Any other questions should be directed to the relevant I4H instructor. Student teams may schedule 20-minute feedback sessions, as needed. These sessions can take place Monday through Friday, either virtually (e.g., via Skype) or in-person, but all team members must be present. Whenever possible, students should send the request at least three business days in advance. They must explain the purpose of the meeting and include available time slots (preferably, on more than one day) between 7:00 am-7:00 pm ET. Students are responsible for sending an agenda and sharing any relevant information prior to the meeting.AttendanceAttendance is required for all in-person sessions and will count toward students’ participation grades.AssignmentsYour grade will be calculated as follows:AssignmentLearning ObjectivesWeightParticipation 1, 2, 3, 420%Team contract 130%I4H problem assessment draft submission2, 320%I4H problem assessment final submission2, 3, 430%Total100%Participation: Students will be graded based on their attendance and participation in in-person class exercises and sessions. Participation in exercises will be evaluated in terms of students’ preparation and active engagement. Participation in class sessions will be evaluated in terms of the quality of students’ contributions to the discussion. High-quality comments have one or more of the following properties:Offer a different and unique, but relevant, perspective based on analysisHelp move the discussion and analysis forwardBuild upon the comments of classmatesTranscend the “I feel” syndrome—that is, include evidenceLink relevant concepts to current events or work experiencesSince organizational problem-solvers often need to respond “on their feet” to problem owners’ questions and demands, the instructor will also occasionally “cold call” students. The quality of student responses will also contribute to their participation grade. Overall, participation will count for 20% of student grades. Team contract: I4H team members will develop their own team contract for their upcoming fieldwork, along with a short written report describing the considerations that went into it. Instructions about the content of the contract will be provided in class and are available on Blackboard, but teams will ultimately define the content of their own contracts. Feedback will be provided so that students can revise and use their contracts for I4H. The grade for this assignment will reflect adherence with the rules (see Blackboard) and the likelihood that a team’s contract will foster an effective problem-solving team dynamic, as discussed in class. The team contract will count for 30% of student grades.I4H problem assessment (both draft and final): In this assignment, students will directly apply the iterative problem-solving process to their own I4H projects. In the draft submission, they will attempt an initial definition of the problem that their I4H problem owner is facing. This submission serves as a checkpoint and an implicit reminder about the need to iterate when defining the problem. The draft submission will account for 20% of student grades. In the final submission, students will revise their problem definition to account for any feedback from the problem owner and/or new information learned. This version will also include at least an initial assessment of the evidence that might be relevant to their upcoming I4H fieldwork. The final submission will account for 30% of student grades. The grade for both parts of this assignment will reflect the extent to which each team “makes the most” of the available information from I4H; is clear, concise, and comprehensible; and reflects the iterative process discussed in class. More information about both parts will be available on Blackboard.GradingThe grade of A is reserved for those who demonstrate extraordinarily excellent performance as determined by the instructor. The grade of A- is awarded only for excellent performance. The grades of B+, B, and B- are awarded for good performance. The grades of C+, C, and C- are awarded for adequate but substandard performance.?The grades of D+, D, and D- are not awarded at the graduate level (undergraduate only). The grade of F indicates the student’s failure to satisfactorily complete the course work.Please note that for Core and Foundation courses, a maximum of 25% of students may be awarded an A or A-; the grade point average of the class should not exceed 3.3. For Elective courses, a maximum of 35% of students may be awarded an A or A-; the grade point average of the class should not exceed 3.4. (For classes with 15 students or fewer, the class GPA cap is waived.)Tentative Course CalendarBelow is a detailed course calendar. Since the structure and scheduling of this course are unique, please review it carefully. The instructor reserves the right to alter course content and/or adjust the pace to accommodate class progress.ClassDateTopicActivitiesDue Before ClassDo After ClassRequired Reading After Class1Introduction and setting up a problem-solving team for successC-SuiteVisit from I4HPre-course surveyTeam contractMalvuwasi caseNarrated slideshow: Logic TreesRaisel & Friga (2002): Introduction, Chapter 6LaFasto & Larson (2001): Chapter 32The iterative problem-solving process IMalvuwasi ITeam contractI4H problem assessment draft submissionMalvuwasi caseRaisel & Friga (2002): Chapters 1–2Ferrari (2012): Chapters 1–63The iterative problem-solving process IIMalvuwasi III4H problem assessment draft submissionI4H problem assessment final submissionCarter Racing caseRaisel & Friga (2002): Chapters 7–84Gathering and evaluating evidenceCarter RacingPICOCI4H problem assessment final submissionConsult with instructor on I4H projects as necessaryRaisel & Friga (2002): Chapters 3–4Pfeffer & Sutton (2006)Kahneman et al. (2011)5-8Teams consult with instructor on I4H projects as necessary--------Carey Business School Policies and General InformationBlackboard SiteA Blackboard course site is set up for this course. Each student is expected to check the site throughout the semester as Blackboard will be the primary venue for outside classroom communications between the instructors and the students. Students can access the course site at . Support for Blackboard is available at 1-866-669-6138.Disability Support ServicesAll students with disabilities who require accommodations for this course should contact Disability Support Services at their earliest convenience to discuss their specific needs. If you have a documented disability, you must be registered with Disability Support Services (carey.disability@jhu.edu or 410-234-9243) to receive accommodations. For more information, please visit the Disability Support Services webpage.Academic Ethics PolicyCarey expects graduates to be innovative business leaders and exemplary global citizens. The Carey community believes that honesty, integrity, and community responsibility are qualities inherent in an exemplary citizen. The objective of the Academic Ethics Policy (AEP) is to create an environment of trust and respect among all members of the Carey academic community and hold Carey students accountable to the highest standards of academic integrity and excellence.It is the responsibility of every Carey student, faculty member, and staff member to familiarize themselves with the AEP and its procedures. Failure to become acquainted with this information will not excuse any student, faculty, or staff from the responsibility to abide by the AEP. Please contact the Student Services office if you have any questions. For the full policy, please visit the Academic Ethics Policy webpage.Student Conduct CodeThe fundamental purpose of the Johns Hopkins University’s regulation of student conduct is to promote and to protect the health, safety, welfare, property, and rights of all members of the University community as well as to promote the orderly operation of the University and to safeguard its property and facilities. As members of the University community, students accept certain responsibilities which support the educational mission and create an environment in which all students are afforded the same opportunity to succeed academically. Please contact the Student Services office if you have any questions. For the full policy, please visit the Student Conduct Code webpage.Student Success CenterThe Student Success Center offers free online and in-person one-on-one and group coaching in writing, presenting, and quantitative courses. For more information on these services and others, or to book an appointment, please visit the Student Success Center website.Other Important Policies and ServicesStudents are encouraged to consult the Student Handbook and Academic Catalog and Student Services and Resources for information regarding other policies and services.Copyright StatementUnless explicitly allowed by the instructor, course materials, class discussions, and examinations are created for and expected to be used by class participants only.?The recording and rebroadcasting of such material, by any means, is forbidden. Violations are subject to sanctions under the Academic Ethics Policy. ................
................

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

Google Online Preview   Download