Coursera Organizational Analisis Stanford University

Organizational Analysis: Calendar of Deadlines

Red font assignments: required of all students Yellow font assignments: required of Advanced Track students back to course website

Sun

Mon

Tue

September 2012 Wed

Thu

Fri 1

Sat

23

24

25

26

27

28 29 Due 10am (PST) - Watch Lecture and Complete Quiz - Post and Rate Questions

30

Sun 1

Mon 2

Tue 3

October 2012 Wed 4

Thu

Fri 5 6 Due 10am (PST) - Watch Lecture and Complete Quiz - Post and Rate Question 12 13 Due 10am (PST) - Watch Lecture and Complete Quiz - Post and Rate Question

Sat

10

11

14

15 16 Due 5pm (PST) - Peer Evaluation Training

17

18

19 20 Due 10am (PST) - Watch Lecture and Complete Quiz - Post and Rate Question

21

22

23

24

25

26 27 Due 10am (PST) - Watch Lecture and Complete Quiz - Post and Rate Question

28

29

30

31

November 2012

Sun

Mon

Tue

Wed 1

Thu

Fri 2 3 Due 10am (PST) - Watch Lecture and Complete Quiz - Post and Rate Question

Sat

5 6 Due 5.00pm (PST) - Paper #1

9 Due 10am (PST) - Watch Lecture and Complete Quiz - Post and Rate Question

10 Due at midnight (PST) - Paper #1 Peer Evaluations

11

12

13

14

15

16 17 Due 10am (PST) - Watch Lecture and Complete Quiz - Post and Rate Question

18

19 20 21 22 23 24 THANKSGIVING THANKSGIVING THANKSGIVING THANKSGIVING THANKSGIVING BREAK BREAK BREAK BREAK BREAK

25

26

27

28

29

30 Due 10am (PST) - Watch Lecture and Complete Quiz - Post and Rate Question

Sun

Mon

Tue

December 2012 Wed

Thu

Fri 1

Sat

3 4 Due 5.00pm (PST) - Paper #2

7 Due 10am (PST) - Watch Lecture and Complete Quiz - Post and Rate Question

8 Due at midnight (PST) - Paper #2 Peer Evaluations

10

11 Due 12pm Completed FINAL EXAM

12

13

14

15

Course Overview

Organizations are groups whose members coordinate their behaviors in order to accomplish a shared goal. They can be found nea rly everywhere in todays society: universities, start-ups, classrooms, hospitals, non-profits, government bureaus, corporations, restaurants, grocery stores, and professional associations are some of many examples of organizations. Organizations are as varied and complex as they are ubiquitous: they differ in size and internal structure; they can entail a multiplicity of goals and tasks (some of which are planned and others unplanned!); they are made up of individuals whose goals and motivations may differ from those of the group; and they must interact with other organizations and deal with environmental constraints in order to be successful. This complexity frequently results in a myriad of problems for organizational participants and the organizations survival. We can use organizational theories to systematicall y analyze how an organization operates and can best be managed. Organizational theories highlight certain features of an organizations structure and environment, as well as its processes o f negotiation, production, and change. Each provides a lens for interpreting novel organizational situations and developing a sense for how individual and group behaviors are organized. Theories are valuable for the analyst or manager because most organizational problems are unique to the circumstances and cannot be solved by simple rules of thumb. Armed with a toolset of organizational theories, you will be able to systematically identify important features of an organization and the events transforming it; choose a theoretical framework most applicable to the observed mode of organizing; and use that theory to determine which actions will best redirect the organization in desired directions. In sum, the course has three goals: to become familiar with a series of real-world organizational phenomena; to learn different theoretical perspectives that can elucidate these phenomena; and to apply these different ways of seeing and managing organizations to the cases. In such a f ashion, the course is designed to actively bridge theory and practice, exposing students to a variety of conceptual tools and ways to negotiate novel situations.

Course Timeline
This course investigates a series of case studies of educational institutions, non-profits, private firms, cooperatives and governmental organizations, and focuses on the change efforts and experiences occurring within them. In addition to going over the cases, the videos for each week will introduce a new theory for making sense of the complex social reality of these organizational contexts. Readings for each week will allow you to explore the theories and cases in more depth. The first week provides an overview of the organizational elements we will use as the basis for our analyses. Subsequent weeks progress through the field of organizational theory, from its early treatment of organizations as isolated units of decision-making, through current perspectives that focus on their interconnectivity. Course Topics: Week 1: Introduction Week 2: Decisions by rational and rule-based procedures Week 3: Decisions by dominant coalitions Week 4: Decisions in organized anarchies Week 5: Developing organizational learning and intelligence Week 6: Developing an organizational culture Week 7: Managing resource dependencies Week 8: Network forms of organization Week 9: Institutions and organizational legitimacy Week 10: Summary

Grading Policy and Assignment Timeline

This course has two tracks - basic and advanced. For more info about requirements and timeline of assignments, see Expectations and Grading and Course Calendar

Expectations and Grading

Students may have different time constraints and interests, so we present students with two requirement-tracks they can select from. The online course will follow the same schedule as the Stanford Organizational Analysis course, which meets on Fridays 2:15-5:05 pm Pacific Standard Time (PST).

Basic Track
For students wishing to develop basic literacy in organizational analysis - involves 2-3 hour time commitment per week The following tasks must be accomplished with an overall C grade or higher: Lectures & quizzes: You must view each weeks on-line video lectures and complete the within-lecture quizzes checking comprehension -- by 10AM PST every Friday. Forum participation : We want to encourage dialogue on the course content. Therefore, by 10AM PST every Friday, you are encouraged to post a question on the forum OR respond to someone elses post. As part of your participation grade, you must upvote at least one question each week that you would like me to personally address -- I will review the most popular questions and discuss them in regular "screen-side chats" videotaped and posted on-line.

Final exam: At the end of the course, after the final lecture, you are required to take an on-line final exam that assesses how well you comprehend the course material as posted in the on-line lectures. On-line final exams must be completed by 12 Noon PST, December 11.

Advanced Track Requirements

For students wishing to develop an in-depth capacity for analysis and application -- involves 10-12 hour time commitment per week In addition to completing the basic track requirements above, you must accomplish the following tasks with an overall C grade or higher: Paper writing: Write 2 essay papers (1500-2500 words) that present and analyze a case using the theoretical lens presented that week. You will submit the first paper by 5pm PST on November 5 and it must concern a theory presented in weeks 4-6. You will submit the second paper by 5pm PST on December 3 and it must concern a theory presented weeks 7-9. Potential questions are listed on the page of the readings for each week, but you should feel free to come up with similar questions of your own. Peer evaluation: A key part of your learning experience will involve evaluating papers written by your peers. Between October 1 and October 15, you will be trained to perform peer evaluation by using a standardized grading rubric to accurately evaluate a set of papers already graded by the course instructors. Armed with this knowledge, you will be asked to apply the rubric to your own paper and to those of 3 of your peers within 5 days of the paper deadline (by November 10 for the first paper and by December 8 for the second paper). See Papers and Peer Feedback for more details about the paper writing and peer evaluation process. Recommended: Read the listed course texts (found here). Engaging with the readings will allow you to reach deeper understanding and ownership of the concepts of the course. The readings are provided at the minimal possible price, and are sometimes free.

Expectations
Within each class session I will assume students have read the free case materials, viewed the weekly video, taken the within-lecture quiz, posted a question on the forum, responded to others on the forum and rated some of the posted questions. I believe this will make the class a far more interactive and engaging experience for everyone involved. I would like your help making the forums as much of a civil and welcoming learning environment as possible. To this end, please

Be friendly and considerate when talking to your fellow students. Use up-votes to bring attention to thoughtful, helpful posts. Search before you post. Post in the appropriate sub-forum. More specifically, I would like you to follow Stanfords Code of Conduct in your interactions and to follow the Honor Codes of both Stanford and Coursera when submitting your work. This means participants are expected to conduct themselves in a professional manner and not plagiarize their work. It also means we all have a duty - for the good of the community - to report peers who violate these policies. Violators of the honor code and / or code of conduct will be removed from the course and fail to acquire a certificate of completion.

Grading
We will calculate grades using the following ratios: Basic track 50% Final exam (Graded as % correct) 50% Participation (#/20 below) Lecture-quizzes (#/10 weeks completed) Forum rating of questions (#/10 weeks rated) Basic certificates will be awarded to students with an overall grade of C or greater (> 72%); grades will be posted on your certificate. Advanced track 60% Papers (Average of 2 paper grades, #/24 see paper grading rubric) 20% Final exam (Graded as % correct) 20% Participation (#/20 below) Lecture-quizzes (#/10 weeks completed) Forum rating of questions (# /10 weeks rated) Advanced certificates will be awarded to students with an overall grade of C or greater (> 72%); grades will be posted on your certificate. The grading scale for each track will be as follows: A+ = 10098% A=9794% A=9390% B+ = 8987% B=8683% B=8280% C+ = 7977% C=7673% C=7270% D+ = 6967% D=6663% D=6260% F= below 59% or any fail Late policy: You will be docked of your assignment grade every day (24 hours) it is late. You will also be docked of your assignment grade every day (24 hours) you are late on completing the peer evaluations. Hence, a paper that is graded as an A will be a B if it is 1 day late, or if you are late 1 day in performing peer evaluations; and a posting that is one day late will be afforded credit. Assignments turned in 4 days late will receive a failing grade or 0 credit for that week.

Papers and Peer Feedback

Goals
Writing critical arguments and developing the capacity for evaluating others' written work is a central piece of the analyst and managers skill-set. Papers in this course will be case studies that give you the chance to analyze a unique organizational problem. You will choose an organizational theory that highlights certain features of the case and draws out particular change processes. These theories have frequently been applied to other cases where different managerial solutions were found. Theories help us organize all these accounts and classify them in ways we can readily access. By reflecting on the theory, we come to recognize a class of organizational phenomena and processes where a treasure trove of solutions could apply we go beyond our own experience to that of many others. A good analyst can use theories to access all sorts of solutions. Advanced Track students will be developing the capacity to articulate a case and critically apply a theory in order to identify solutions most people hadnt considered before. By critical I dont mean negative. Rather, I mean reflective considering the nuances of the case, as well as the strengths and weaknesses of the theory. Going through the analysis process in a written paper will allow you to more carefully think through and reflect upon your reasoning. The peer evaluation process will give you the chance to read and learn from your fellow course participants. Peer evaluation gives you the opportunity to grow as a group. If each of you takes the time to consider the ways that your peers can improve their arguments and analyses of organizational phenomena, then all of you will receive thoughtful feedback on your own work. Questions and comments about the peer feedback process can be raised in the Peer Feedback section of the discussion forum.

Process and Timeline

To indicate your interest in participating in the paper writing and peer feedback process, go to the peer assessment system course page and follow the instructions there. Due to the design of the system, you will need to sign up by Sept 30 at midnight PST in order to participate in training. As shown on the course calendar, during weeks 2-3 of the course (Oct 1 - Oct 15) you will become familiar with the criteria for papers by applying the grading rubric to a series of papers written by former students of mine. This training period will let you see how others have written critical reflection papers and allow you compare your evaluations with those of the instructor and teaching assistants. To officially complete the training period, you will need to grade at least 4 papers. In week 4-6 (Oct 15-Nov 5), you will go on to write your own paper, applying one of the theories from those weeks to a case of your choice. The page that lists the readings for each week includes a prompt for a paper topic, and they will also be restated on the assignment page in the peer evaluation system. You will then have until Nov 10 to give feedback to three of your classmates papers, and to grade your own paper as well. In weeks 7 -9 (Nov 11 - Dec 3), you will write a second paper and participate in a final round of peer and self-evaluation, due on Dec 8. Please remember, you will not receive a grade for your paper until you complete your peer evaluation assignments! You can submit papers either by entering text directly into a field in the peer assessment system, or by uploading a PDF of your paper after you've written it in your favorite document editor (if you don't have one yet, GoogleDocs and OpenOffice are both free). You will be able to save your drafts and submit multiple times up until the deadline. This process is also described in the peer assessment system course page.

Guidelines for Writing and Evaluating High-Quality Papers

To develop coherent, informed, and insightful arguments you will need to write clearly; succinctly articulate your chosen case and theory; draw compelling connections between the case and theory; and consider the strengths, weaknesses, and implications of your application of the theory to the case. Elements to consider when writing and evaluating papers are summarized in two forms:

The Paper Criteria describes the elements to consider in terms of Style (Writing and Argument) and Content (Case, Theory, Linkage and Critique) The Grading Rubric breaks down each of the Style and Content categories into grading levels that range from Excellent to Fail

Calculating Grades
After you submit each of your two papers, you will be asked to apply the grading rubric to your own paper and to 3 of your peers papers. Each papers grade will be based on the peer median score, and we will use self-assigned grades when they are within 10% of the peer-median (we will only take higher self-assessments so you are rewarded for accurate grading).

Criteria for Paper Evaluation

The criteria I ask students to apply to one another's work are those that most analysts and scholars would agree are essential to developing a coherent, informed and insightful argument. Criteria are divided into two categories: style and content. Style encompasses clear and well-thought out writing, whereas content includes the articulation of your chosen case and theory, and the connections that you draw between the two.

The capacity to develop strong arguments will have great returns to you as an analyst or manager -- it will also benefit you beyond this course and the domain of organizations. Practicing these skills in this course and considering the feedback you get from your peers will serve you well in many other spheres of your life where it helps to articulate reasons well and support them with evidence and careful reflection. The criteria listed below are a broad overview of the areas your writing and feedback should cover during the feedback process, you will be asked to provide a numerical score for each area. Guidelines for each grading level are described in the rubric. The criteria are also available as a PDF or Word document if you would like to print a copy or save it separately.

Style
1. Writing
A clear writing style makes it much easier to follow an argument. It is essential that every paper demonstrate a clear writin g style. Its hard to follow an argument when the writing is poor so spelling, grammar, topic-strings, and the use of active verbs and direct statements often renders the presented text far more coherent. My criteria for clear writing draws on other courses that teach non-fiction writing, like the Little Red Schoolhouse. Elements to consider a. Spelling (use your favorite document editor GoogleDrive and OpenOffice are free alternatives to Microsoft Word) b. Grammar (use your favorite document editor GoogleDrive and OpenOffice are free alternatives to Microsoft Word) c. Use of subject-strings in paragraphs: e.g., The firm was named X. It successfully processed y into z. Because of its success, the firm lasted 20 years. d. Use of active verbs: e.g., instead of they were following others, say they followed others. e. Avoidance of gerunds & nominalizations: e.g., minimize words ending in ing or ion.

2. Argumentation
Every paper needs to present a coherent and convincing argument. My criteria for a convincing argument is that is defines a topic, relates an issue concerning it, states a claim on how it can be resolved (thesis), and then presents quality evidence in support of this claim. These criteria for quality argumentation are derived from courses on rhetoric, and from books that I've found especially useful in laying out a convincing argument, particularly How to Read a Book (Mortimer Adler and Charles Van Doren) and The Craft of Research (Wayne C. Booth, Gregory G. Colomb, and Joseph M. Williams). Elements to consider a. Topic definition: does the paper concern an organizational phenomenon? (e.g., decision making with partial information) b. Issue statement: does the paper describe an issue concerning the topic that motivates the paper? (e.g., Some administrations decide well, others less sowhy do they vary?) c. Thesis / argument: does the paper take a stand, make a claim, argue a solution to the problem? (e.g., Firms that decide well with partial information involve internal and external members of the organization at key decision junctures...A rational actor perspective helps elucidate this process well, and suggests better means of management.) d. Use of evidence: does the paper use evidence to support its argument and is the evidence adequate?

Content
3. Case
Your chosen case should be clearly and succinctly articulated. The sequence of events should follow a general narrative or story arc that describes a process or mechanism of change, and identifies the actors, organizational elements, and environmental factors that are most relevant to that process. Elements to consider a. Case narrative / plot: what is the general story of the organizational case? b. Causation / inference: how does this organization change and through what factors? c. Organizational elements: what are concrete examples of organizational elements in the case? Which apply and do not apply?

4. Theory
You should clearly outline the theory and define its basic elements. This can be done in a separate section from the case description, or integrated into the story arc. Generally, I find that the latter creates a more compelling and coherent piece of writing - as you develop your narrative, you can use the elements of the theory to frame the features of the case. Elements to consider a. General theory: what is the general argument and perspective of the theory? b. Causation / inference: where are the leverage points for organizational action? How does this theory characterize organizational change as happening? c. Organizational elements: what organizational elements are most relevant to the theory? And in what situations does it (not) apply?

5. Linkage
You should apply the theory to the case by considering how the organizational features and processes that are emphasized by theory are reflected in the case. When evaluating linkage, I look for whether the writers a pplication has some coverage (did they select a case irrelevant to the theory, did they only discuss one facet of the theory in the case, etc?); if it was done correctly (did they get it right?); and if they summarized the overall applicability of the theory to the case. Elements to consider a. Coverage: Is the application of the theory to the case thorough? Did the paper discuss all aspects of the case where the theory could be brought to bear? b. Accuracy: Is the theory applied correctly? c. Explanatory power: is the theory presented in a way that helps elucidate the case?

6. Critique
You should critique the application of the theory to the case by considering the strengths of the theory - how does it shed light on the case? - as well as its weaknesses of the theory - are there organizational features or actors in the case that don't fit into the framework of the theory? Were there events in the case that

the theory wouldn't have predicted? A top-scoring paper will also reflect on whether there are broader lessons that can be drawn from the application to the theory of the case - are there similar or different situations where the theory could be extended? Elements to consider a. Strengths: What are the strengths of the theorys application to the case? b. Weakness: What are the limits and weaknesses of the theorys application to the case? c. Extensions: Can the theory have extended relevance to other cases like it, or to cases different from it?

Peer Assessments
Title Assignment starts Sat 22 Sep 2012 4:49:26 AM BRT Mon 15 Oct 2012 9:00:00 PM BRT Submission deadline Mon 1 Oct 2012 3:59:00 AM BRT Mon 5 Nov 2012 11:00:00 PM BRST Mon 3 Dec 2012 11:00:00 PM BRST Tue 16 Oct 2012 3:59:00 AM BRT Evaluation starts Mon 1 Oct 2012 5:00:00 AM BRT Tue 6 Nov 2012 12:00:00 AM BRST Tue 4 Dec 2012 12:00:00 AM BRST Tue 16 Oct 2012 5:00:00 AM BRT Evaluation deadline Mon 15 Oct 2012 9:00:00 PM BRT Sat 10 Nov 2012 5:59:00 PM BRST Sat 8 Dec 2012 5:59:00 PM BRST Tue 30 Oct 2012 4:59:00 AM BRST Go to assignment Go to assignment

Organizational Analysis: Peer grading Training (Weeks 2 - 3) Organizational Analysis: Peer grading Homework 1 (weeks 4 - 6)

Organizational Analysis: Peer grading Homework 2 (weeks 7 - 9)

Sun 11 Nov 2012 7:00:00 AM BRST Mon 8 Oct 2012 6:20:00 PM BRT

Peer Grading Training -- Round II

Summary Tables

These tables provide brief summaries of each of the organizational theories discussed in the course.

Summary Table for Weeks 1-5 (PDF, Word) Summary Table for Weeks 6-10 (to come)

Note-taking Templates

I will spend time in the lecture videos walking through summary tables of the theories and cases. To develop your own version of the theories and cases, you can use the note-taking templates below. Filling out the tables yourself is a powerful learning tool because you are making the ideas your own. You can also use the case summary table to organize your analyses of issues within the organizations you participate in daily! Theory note-taking template (PDF, Word) Case note-taking template (PDF, Word)

About Us

Instructor

Daniel A. McFarland
Dan is an Associate Professor of Education, Sociology, and Organizational Behavior at Stanford University, and is the founding director of Stanfords certificate program in Computational Social Science. He holds a Ph.D. in sociology from the University of Chicago and has published widely on organizational behavior in sociologys top journals. Dan has taught courses in organizational behavior and social network analysis at Stanford for over a decade and received a 2006 award for student advising in the Graduate School of Education. When Dan is not having a blast studying organizations, he can be found spending time with his family, coaching a soccer team of six year olds, making mosaics, or running around campus with his dog, Isabelle. You can learn more about Dan and his research here.

Teaching Assistants
Charles Gomez
Charlie is a doctoral student at Stanford University, where he is pursuing a dual Ph.D. in Organization Studies and Global Comparative Education, with minors in Political Science and Sociology. Charlie is interested in the globalization of academia and its effects on the creation and the diffusion of knowledge worldwide. When Charlie isn't organizing classes on organizations (how "meta" is that?!), he enjoys the mashup dance scene in San Francisco, traveling to tropical locales, and promising to eventually sign up for a 10K in the near future. He also has a huge soft spot for English Bulldogs. You can learn more about Charlie and his work here.

Daniel Newark
Dan is a doctoral student in Organization Studies at Stanford University, where he also received an MA in economics, focusing on behavioral and experimental economics. Dan is interested in how individuals and organizations make and justify decisions. Outside of academic life, Dan enjoys walking around cities, Stanford sports, and the occasional tango dance. The internet has no additional information about Dan, so if you want to learn more about him, you will have to ask him or one of his friends.

Emily Schneider
Emily is a doctoral student at Stanford in Learning Sciences and Technology Design. She is infinitely curious about how humans acquire new knowledge and skills. Emily is fascinated by the ways that technology can augment individual and collective intelligence - towards that end, her research explores online learning and teaching, with the goal of developing tools for collaboration and personalized learning. When she doesn't have her nose buried in a laptop, Emily can probably be found riding her bike around the streets of San Francisco.

Note-taking Templates

I will spend time in the lecture videos walking through summary tables of the theories and cases. To develop your own version of the theories and cases, you can use the note-taking templates below. Filling out the tables yourself is a powerful learning tool because you are making the ideas your own. You can also use the case summary table to organize your analyses of issues within the organizations you participate in daily! Theory note-taking template (PDF, Word) Case note-taking template (PDF, Word)

Welcome! I am Daniel McFarland, Professor of Education, Sociology and Organizational Behavior at Stanford University, and I am delighted to be your instructor for "Organizational Analysis." There are additional graduate teaching assistants Emily, Charlie and another Dan - who will frequently visit the class forums and introduce themselves. I hope that by the end of this course, you will have a general sense of organizational theories and how they can help you better understand and manage organizational problems. This week, I will introduce you to the concept of an organization and offer a conceptual framework through which you can recognize their modes of variation. Organizations are everywhere and they widely differ. Moreover, many of our social problems are organizational in

nature. This is why we need to study organizations and to take courses on them all so we develop a better understanding of the world we live in and how to better manage it. The Coursera site for this course will open late Sunday evening, after which I hope all of you will go to the discussion forums and introduce yourself to this huge community of fellow learners. You'll also be able to access the course materials and begin viewing the first week's lectures. Looking forward to ten great weeks of reading, discussing and learning with you about organizations! Daniel McFarland Thu 20 Sep 2012 10:25:00 PM BRT

Week 1 - Beginnings Welcome to Organizational Analysis announcement page! I recommend students begin by exploring all the tabs on the left side of this page. There you will find an overview, a description of course requirements, readings, lectures and descriptions of peer grading. Massive open online courses are very new, and we're attempting to pilot features that improve the online learning experience further. In particular, we are attempting to bring a social science and humanities course to the online environment and preserve some of the experience of carefully reading, writing, and discussing shared materials. To this end, the course is the usual length of a Stanford class (10 weeks), and the readings have been made accessible to everyone and at the most affordable rate we could acquire. In addition, we are piloting peer grading so that many thousands of persons can write papers, consider the quality of their peers' arguments, and receive constructive feedback on their own work. We are also asking everyone to participate heavily in the forums so that participants enter a dialogue over the ideas presented in the course. As with all new ventures, there are certain to be problems along the way. We'll work hard to quickly address all of them, and we are most appreciative of any and all help participants can offer. Last, I just want to say that I think the context of massive open online courses afford us a new learning opportunity -one where the greatest resource is the crowd-sourcing of information rather than the material I am able to offer on my own. To this end, I hope everyone feels free to contribute to the course wiki in ways that help us compile your knowledge about organizations. For example, one simple idea is to catalogue summaries of the readings so persons unable to purchase them can get a better sense for what they cover. Another might be to create an open online case library and video library that can be used for the instruction and study of organizational phenomena. I think it would be a great triumph if we can use the collective knowledge of course participants to develop a knowledge resource we can leave behind for persons interested in organizations more generally. So let's begin! Dan Mon 24 Sep 2012 1:25:00 AM BRT

UPDATES Dear All, Welcome to Organizational Analysis! Thank you for your enthusiasm and participation thus far. It s remarkable just how international our class is, not to mention how many different study groups have already emerged!

Moreover its great to see how crowdsourcing is helping us rapidly improve the course. With every comment and vote, you help us learn what works and doesn't work, plus many of you are making suggestions on how to resolve issues so we can address them in rapid succession! In response to your feedback weve made a variety of changes and updates to the course: (1) The grading policy has changed: you need not post a question / comment every week, but its recommended as we want to encourage participation and dialogue on the forums. Your participation requirement is to rate a question or comment each week. That way we establish a minimal dialogue and I have a sense of where the class wants more information. (2) Cleaner versions of the readings are posted: We worked hard to find cleaner versions of the readings and Pearson agreed to lighten the watermarking down to 15%. If you already purchased the readings, then you should be able to access the new and improved version without incurring additional cost. (3) On the readings more generally: please note they are *recommended* for participants in the advanced track and are not required. I erred on selecting the best references I could find, and then tried to work with publishers to provide them for free or to at least cut their costs. The agreements they offered were unprecedented, and especially with a course that entails so many different texts. However, I am sorry to say we couldnt secure more affordable agreements. Its frustrating because I know costs are great for students in developing countries. SIPX is now renegotiating the contracts with publishers so that future versions of this course are even more affordable for international students. But for now, our hands are tied. In the meantime, here are a couple suggestions on how to access the recommended readings: a. Select only what you need: I recommend you view the video lectures and decide which week you are most interested in writing a paper or learning more. Then try and find a way to access those readings either through SIPX or via solutions offered in the forums. b. Find another means to access the content: Some of you are finding ways to access the readings from where you are and are willing to provide this information to your peers. Even one student offered to buy another students packet! I greatly appreciate these gestures, so please post those solutions on the forum and up-vote them so they go to the top of the list. Again, many thanks for your feedback and comments. Please keep them coming - were eager to offer you the best learning experience we can! Best Regards, -Dan Mon 24 Sep 2012 8:41:00 PM BRT

Register on the Peer Feedback System Hi Everyone, Were excited to use the peer feedback system on Coursera so many thousands of students can submit and assess the quality of written papers. The system is new, and the interface may be a little clunky at first, so please bear with us! **Who should use the peer feedback system and attempt its assignments?** Its only required for the advanced track students, but I think everyone should participate in the training period so they can read some example papers from weeks 2-3 that apply organizational theories to cases. Plus, becoming

familiar with the grading rubric will help you learn what most people look for in a clearly presented argument. I think many of you will find it useful to see a well thought out set of criteria upon which to judge the quality of paper (it may even take some of the mystery away!). **How do I register to use the peer feedback system?** Go to the peer feedback system and begin the first assignment by entering your initials. Then stop. You are now registered! If you do this before September 30, then between Oct 1 and Oct 15, all the registered students will be asked to re-enter the first assignment so as to read and evaluate 4 or more papers using our grading rubric. The system should give you feedback stating how close your grades match those assigned by the instructors you will need to accurately evaluate 4 papers but can go on to evaluate more if youd like to see more example or get more practice. Then thats it for the peer assessment training. **What if I forget to register?** If you dont register before September 30, dont worry. You will have a chance to do peer assessment training in weeks 4-6 when the first paper assignment is due. However, that means you will be asked to learn peer grading on 4 papers, then submit a paper, and then perform peer grading on 3 papers and your own thats quite a lot to do! Thats why we recommend you register to use the peer feedback system now and spread out the course tasks in smaller, manageable chunks. And if you decide you dont want to write papers thats fine too you can always complete the basic track requirements and still get a certificate. Its all up to your interests and the time you have available! My Best, Dan Wed 26 Sep 2012 1:38:00 PM BRT

Reminder! Hi Everyone! I really enjoyed reading your excellent discussion threads on the lecture material this week! I'll try and discuss some of them in my screen-side chat later tonight. ANNOUNCEMENTS: (1) **Please remember to register for peer assessment training!** (see prior announcement) (2) Also, I wanted to let everyone know **we are leaving Week 1 lectures and quizzes up until next Friday** in case new students need extra time getting started. (3) We posted the in-video quizzes in stand-alone formats so people downloading the lectures can complete them **Each week, you only need to do the in-video quiz OR the stand alone quiz** (and both are graded % complete, not % correct). DISCUSSION FORUM: I've been reading your discussion threads and am impressed with the quality of dialogue! Several of you have rightly remarked that it's overwhelming to keep up with all of them. I am told that's typical of a highly active forum in its first week. I have a few ideas on how to improve the organization of the discussion forums as we go forward. First, I will create a

new forum for general discussion every week much like we have for the lectures (so "Week 2 General Discussion", "Week 3 General Discussion"...). That way we can drop old issues and topics so as to focus on current ones. If you have an old thread you want continued, then just summarize the prior conversation and restart it as a new thread. Second, I want to encourage everyone to use "Tags". Tags are basically keywords or topic-labels that you affix to your thread. If enough of us do this, then we can search by those tags to see all the posts concerning each topic of interest. Third, I will soon set up a new forum on "Shared Resources" where we begin some threads compiling information on various topics of interest: e.g., free case write-ups; other readings on organizations; etc. Organizationally yours, -DM Fri 28 Sep 2012 1:48:00 PM BRT

Readings

While the video lectures give you an overview of the organizational theories and some potential applications, engaging with the readings will allow you to reach deeper understanding and ownership of the concepts of the course. This is why completing the readings is recommended for the Advanced Track certificate. Each week has about 100 pages of suggested reading. The majority of these are primary texts rather than secondary compilations, because textbook compilations tend to massage the original ideas into the editor's argument, and I want you to leave with a toolkit of theories that you feel have some distinctiveness from one another. The readings in each week fall into one of three categories: Theory Detailed exploration of a lens for highlighting certain features of an organizations structure and environment, as well as i ts processes of negotiation, production, and change Application Scholarly applications of an organizational theory to a real-world phenomenon Case Narrative about an organizational issue or process The videos will heavily deconstruct the more dense theory readings, but the organizational cases will hopefully be fairly straightforward.

Readings by Week
All of the readings for the course are available electronically, with the exception of one book assigned in Week 8 ( Governing by Network: The New Shape of the Public Sector, Goldsmith and Eggers). Each of the links below includes:

the readings for that week, with links to access digital copies on SIPX (available free or at a nominal cost -- see below for details on access and pricing) questions to reflect on as you read - review these and keep them in mind to make for a more informed and productive reading experience prompts for a paper if you choose to write on the theories for that week a link to a list of supplementary readings for the topic, in case you want to explore in further depth Week 1 : Introduction Week 2 : Decisions by rational and rule-based procedures Week 3 : Decisions by dominant coalitions Week 4 : Decisions by organized anarchies Week 5 : Developing organizational learning and intelligence Week 6 : Developing an organizational culture Week 7 : Managing resource dependencies Week 8 : Network forms of organization Week 9 : Institutions and organizational legitimacy Week 10 : Summary Full list of readings (and associated questions) as a single document -- [PDF] [Word] All readings available digitally on SIPX Supplementary readings as a single document -- [PDF] [Word]

Accessing readings: cost and logistics

This is a free course and great care was taken to choose quality readings at the lowest possible cost to you. We have worked closely with the publishing companies to negotiate the lowest acceptable price for paying royalties to the copyright holders. As a result, many are free - and others are available at a discounted rate. The link by each reading will take you to SIPX, a repository for digital works. You will need to provide your email address to create a SIPX account. If you have a .edu email address, please sign up with it - you may receive extra discounts as a result. Once you have made your account, you can select individual works that you would like to access for the course. If an article or book excerpt is provided for free, you will be given immediate access to a PDF copy; if not, then you will

need to pay for it via Paypal or credit card, and then you will be given access to the PDF. These copies will be licensed for your personal use only - please do not redistribute them. See the SIPX FAQ for more information and a direct link to ask questions about the system. Readings range in price from free to US$17 (for a book). If you choose to purchase all of the readings, you can expect to pay just over US$100. You may also want to explore other means of finding the readings - for example, through an account with your school or public library, for sale by a private vendor like Amazon, or elsewhere on the web. I will try to provide a more thorough summary lecture of readings that are costly or less available. We can also make them more a part of the screen-side chats in class.

Created Mon 25 Jun 2012 2:48:56 PM BRT Last Modified Tue 25 Sep 2012 12:47:28 AM BRT

Week 1 Readings: Organizational Elements and Organizing Narratives

Theory Scott, Richard. 2003. The Subject is Organizations, Chapter 1 (pp. 3-30) of Organizations: Rational, Natural and Open Systems, 5th Edition, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. (PDF on SIPX -- also includes selections for weeks 3, 7 and 9) Case Metz, Mary Haywood. 1986. Adams Avenue School for Individually Guided Education. Chapter 4 (pp. 57-103) in Different by Design: The Context and Character of Three Magnet Schools. Routledge: New York. (PDF on SIPX)

Reading Reflection Questions How do these readings fit your experiences in organizations? Think about your experiences in educational, governmental, non-profit, and for-profit organizations. Think about the elements of these organizations their goals, technology (curriculum), social structure (roles and rules), participants, and salient environment. What seemed to matter most? Many organizations try to change or reform how organizing is done. Think about how various reforms treat and characterize organizations. What organizational elements are seen as central to a reform? What level / unit of analysis is of concern? What is the boundary to an organization and a reform effort? Who and what matters in the environment? What makes for a successful or unsuccessful reform? What kind of account would you give for an organization and its reforms? Would you characterize the organization as rational, natural, or open system? Paper Prompt (example) Consider Metz account of a magnet school and its organization. How do Scotts organizational elements and rational-natural-open models apply? Do they help you think more richly about the context? Your paper should succinctly articulate your chosen case and theory; describe how the organizational features and processes which are emphasized by the theory are reflected in the case; and consider the strengths, weaknesses, and implications of the theory's application to the case. See paper criteria for more detailed guidance and expectations.

List of additional readings on this topic

Created Tue 11 Sep 2012 7:40:08 PM BRT Last Modified Sun 23 Sep 2012 8:13:29 PM BRT

Week 1 Additional Readings (Organizational Elements and Organizing Narratives)

Perrow, Charles. 1986. Complex Organizations: A Critical Essay. (An iconoclastic look at the history of Organizational Theory in America.) Pfeffer, Jeffrey. 1998. Understanding Organizations: Concepts and Controversies, in D. Gilbert, S. Fiske, and G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology, Vol. 2, New York: McGraw-Hill, 733-777. Scott, W. R. 2003 (5th ed). Organizations, Rational, Natural, and Open Systems. Prentice Hall.

Created Fri 21 Sep 2012 3:53:54 PM BRT Last Modified Sun 23 Sep 2012 8:15:53 PM BRT

Week 2 - Welcome This week's class introduces some basic models of decision making, and Graham Allison's application of organizational theories to the Cuban missile crisis. This seminal work is what got me interested in organizational theories. I loved the way he provided a richer understanding of the case with each additional theory he applied to explain the phenomenon. His book on the matter is even more insightful and interesting. I hope his work becomes a model for you as we go through the course and the case materials. Also, for many of you peer assessment training will begin this week. I hope you enjoy reading papers that apply organizational theories to the cases described in weeks 2 and 3 of this course. If you did not sign up in time for the peer assessment training, don't worry, you will have another chance to sign up and complete it in week 4. Note: In an effort to control sprawl in the discussion forums, we are offering weekly forums on the lectures and weekly forums for general discussion. We'll monitor as many threads as we can, but we will focus our attention on the threads in the weekly forums that are up-voted the most. Also, please note I will try and start a thread each week in the lecture section by positing one of the core questions about the readings. Please feel free to start your own threads, and especially ones on the particular readings of each week. I will try to respond to those in my weekly screen-side chats. Thank you for your great enthusiasm and cooperation! I look forward to reading your thoughts! Mon 1 Oct 2012 1:41:00 AM BRT

Help us learn how to help you learn!

We're in the midst of a revolution in sharing knowledge, and you are leading the charge! Open online courses have an enormous amount of potential for global learning. But we're still in the early stages, and we want to understand how to make things even better moving forward. A big piece of this is more information about you, our students: who you are, how you learn, where you're starting, and where you want to end up. Can you share this information with us by filling out a short 10-minute survey?

Here is the survey! If that link does not work, here is the URL: https://class.coursera.org/organalysis-2012001/quiz/attempt?quiz_id=55 Please know that your responses will be kept confidential and will only be reported in the aggregate. Note also that responding to the survey is voluntary, and it will not affect your grade in the course. However, this is very important information to us, and we hope you choose to contribute so we can learn how to make online education better for everyone in the future! Thanks for taking the time! Best Wishes, Dan Wed 3 Oct 2012 1:06:00 PM BRT

Week 2 Readings: Decisions by Rational and Rule-Based Procedures

Theory March, James G. 1999. "Understanding How Decisions Happen in Organizations." Chapter 2 in The Pursuit of Organizational Intelligence, pp. 13-38. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers. (PDF on SIPX) Application Allison, Graham T. 1969. Conceptual Models and the Cuban Missile Crisis. The American Political Science Review 63, 3:689-718. (PDF on SIPX) Case Shipps, Dorothy. 2003. The Businessmans Educator: Mayoral Takeover and Nontraditional Leadership in Chicago, in Powerful Reforms with Shallow Roots, ed. Larry Cuban and Michael Usdan, pp. 16-3437 (NY: Teachers College Press). (PDF on SIPX) Bryk, Tony. 2003. No Child Left Behind, Chicago-Style. In Peterson, P. W., and West, M. The Politics and Practice of School Accountability. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, pp. 242-268. (PDF on SIPX)

Reading Reflection Questions Many decisions were probably made in the organizations you belonged to. In your experience, how many of those decisions were based on a logic of consequence (means-end rational calculations) or a logic of appropriateness (principle-based decisions)? Who made decisions in these organizations, when, and in what situations? What went into making them? Was there a succession of interrelated decisions or even stages to organizational decision-making? Did actors learn and adapt from experience or forget and make the same mistakes?

Compare the rational actor model to the organizational behavior model. What are the main tenets of each theory according to Allison? What organizational elements does each emphasize? Do they focus on different units of analysis? What consequences and preferences matter? What rules, identities, or values matter? How do the rational actor model and the organizational behavior model apply to the Chicago cases? Who is doing the decision-making? What influences the decision process? Are options weighed? What occurs and what does not? What theory would take a lot of extra data, a different perspective, etc, to have a better hold? As a manager, how would you use rational actor and organizational behavior models to successfully manage an organization? What is the danger of using only these models? Paper Prompt (example) Apply the rational actor model and/or the organizational behavior model to one (or both) of the Chicago reform cases OR compare and contrast the applicability of the two theories using the Chicago case(s). Note their strengths and weaknesses. Your paper should succinctly articulate your chosen case and theory; describe how the organizational features and processes which are emphasized by the theory are reflected in the case; and consider the strengths, weaknesses, and implications of the theory's application to the case. See paper criteria for more detailed guidance and expectations.

List of additional readings on this topic

Created Fri 14 Sep 2012 1:02:21 AM BRT Last Modified Sun 23 Sep 2012 8:13:52 PM BRT

Week 2 Additional Readings (Decisions by Rational and Rule-Based Procedures)

Becker, Markus C. Organizational Routines: A Review of the Literature. Industrial and Corporate Change 13, 4: 643-677. (rule following) Cicourel, Aaron. The Social Organization of Juvenile Justice, chapters 4, 5. Cyert, Richard and James G. March. 1963 [1992]. A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Prentice-Hall, Ch. 7. Lortie, Dan. Schoolteacher. (teachers as limited problem solvers) March, James G., and Herbert Simon. 1958. Organizations. McGraw-Hill, Ch. 6, Cognitive Limits on Rationality. Simon, Herbert A. 1969 [1998 3rd ed]. The Sciences of the Artificial, ch. 2, 4. MIT Press. Sizer, Theodore. 1984. Horaces Compromise. (teachers as limited problem solvers) Vaughan, Diane. The Challenger Launch Decision. Wildavsky, Aaron. The Politics of the Budgetary Process, ch. 2.

Created Fri 21 Sep 2012 3:56:27 PM BRT Last Modified Sun 23 Sep 2012 8:16:21 PM BRT

Week 3 - Welcome This week we'll be learning how stakeholders reach agreements and make decisions when they have inconsistent preferences and identities. A primary means of accomplishing this is through coalitions or what Allison called, "Bureaucratic Politics." The cases will concern policy-making efforts where seeming polar opposites somehow find a way to agree and work together. I'm hoping the cases will involve processes of organizing you recognize in your own countries and organizations! A few notes this week:

(1) A neat article: A student in the class (thanks Karen!) sent me the following link to an interesting article about Graham Allison and the Cuban Missile Crisis. Enjoy! (2) Peer assessment training: (i) For all of you already registered to do the peer assessment training, you have one week left to complete it. Just go back into the "Peer Feedback System" and select "Go to assignment" for the top selection and start grading papers! (ii) **For all of you who missed the last deadline** here is another chance! Go to the "Peer Feedback System" and select "Peer Grading Training -- Round II" and sign up by submitting your initials. You should see a bar across the top of the page that says "Your work was submitted.". Then there is a link to "review your work" if you want to confirm that your initials are, in fact, there. Sign up will close Oct 15 @ midnight PST. On Oct 16 at 1AM training will commence and you have until Oct 29 @ midnight PST to finish it. If you miss that, you'll need to wait until you submit your first paper in weeks 4-6. (4) Course survey: If you haven't completed the course survey, please do. If the embedded link does not work, here is the URL: https://class.coursera.org/organalysis-2012-001/quiz/attempt?quiz_id=55 It's important information and will help us learn how to tailor this course to other students like you in the future.

Many thanks and see you on the forums! -DM Mon 8 Oct 2012 8:31:00 PM BRT

Help us learn how to help you learn!

We're in the midst of a revolution in sharing knowledge, and you are leading the charge! Open online courses have an enormous amount of potential for global learning. But we're still in the early stages, and we want to understand how to make things even better moving forward. A big piece of this is more information about you, our students: who you are, how you learn, where you're starting, and where you want to end up. Can you share this information with us by filling out a short 10-minute survey? Here is the survey! If that link does not work, here is the URL: https://class.coursera.org/organalysis-2012001/quiz/attempt?quiz_id=55

Please know that your responses will be kept confidential and will only be reported in the aggregate. Note also that responding to the survey is voluntary, and it will not affect your grade in the course. However, this is very important information to us, and we hope you choose to contribute so we can learn how to make online education better for everyone in the future! Thanks for taking the time! Best Wishes, Dan Wed 3 Oct 2012 1:06:00 PM BRT Week 3 Readings: Decisions by Dominant Coalitions

Theory Scott, Richard. 2003. The Dominant Coalition (pp. 296-303) of Organizations: Rational, Natural and Open Systems, 5th Edition, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. (PDF on SIPX -- also includes selections for weeks 1, 7 and 9) Application Hula, Kevin W. 1999. Lobbying Together: Interest Group Coalitions in Legislative Politics. Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press (chapters 1-5, 7, and 9 [pp.1-77, 93-107, 122-135]). (PDF on SIPX) from last week -- review 3rd model: Allison, Graham T. 1969. Conceptual Models and the Cuban Missile Crisis. The American Political Science Review 63, 3:689-718. (PDF on SIPX) Case Quinn, Rand. 2005. The Politics of School Vouchers: Analyzing the Milwaukee Parental Choice Plan. Stanford University School of Education Case. (PDF on SIPX) Witte, John. 1999. The Milwaukee Voucher Experiment: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. Phi Delta Kappan, September: 59-64. (PDF on SIPX) Hurricane Katrina -- Wikipedia article

Reading Reflection Questions Compare the organizational behavior model to the governmental politics / coalition model. Apply them to the Chicago, Milwaukee, and Hula cases (esp. education lobbying). How can a coalition form when multiple actors have inconsistent preferences and identities? How is agreement even tenuously accomplished? Is school and non-profit governance the result of strange bedfellows? What about home-schooling advocates (secular and fundamentalist groups) and voucher programs (Milwaukees African American community and Republican politicians)? Can coalitions have extended lives? If you are a manager of a coalition, what can you do to manage it successfully?

Paper Prompt (example) Use the coalition/conflict approach to analyze the Milwaukee case or one like it. Be critical and discuss the strengths and weaknesses afforded by this theoretical perspective in elucidating the case. Your paper should succinctly articulate your chosen case and theory; describe how the organizational features and processes which are emphasized by the theory are reflected in the case; and consider the strengths, weaknesses, and implications of the theory's application to the case. See paper criteria for more detailed guidance and expectations.

List of additional readings on this topic

Created Fri 14 Sep 2012 1:02:29 AM BRT Last Modified Sun 23 Sep 2012 8:14:16 PM BRT