APPROVAL OF 100% COURSEWORK_205KM

COURSE PLANNER

COURSE PLANNER: SEMESTER JULY 2010 – NOV 2010

Course : Information Management and Organisational Behaviour Course Code : 205KMContact Hours : 3 hours per weekNumber of Weeks : 26 weeksTotal Student Study Hours : 200 hours (Lectures + self study)Pre-requisite Module : 101KM or equivalent

Lecturer : Mohammad Sofian Hashim, Muhammad Firdaus bin Muhammad Sabri

E-mail : [email protected], [email protected]

Textbook : Ivancevich, J.M., Konopaske, R and Matteson, M.T. ( 2011) Organizational Behavior and Managementl.

9th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill

Aims and Summary

The module aims to provide an understanding of the practical and professional issues associated with information management and organizational behaviour and how these relate to effective management practice. The module demonstrates the application of behavioural science within the workplace, relating to information management, and it emphasizes the role of management as a core integrating activity. It will provide an understanding of the human aspects of the management of change, especially where these relate to information management

Intended Module Learning Outcomes

On completion of this module, the student should be able to:

1. Assess the need for effective management techniques within the organization and propose appropriate tactics and strategies for competitive advantage.

2. Evaluate the role of information systems within an organization and recommend appropriate management and organizational behaviour approaches for the information system function.

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

3. Assess practical and professional issues associated with information management and organizational behaviour and how these relate to the effectiveness of an organization.

Method of Assessment

Assessment Weight (%)Learning Outcomes

1 2 3Individual Assignment

i) Written essay ii) Case Study

2020

Group Final Projecti) Project Report

60

Total 100

Assessment

Composition of Internal module mark : 100% courseworkPass requirement : Module mark must be at least 40%Composition of External module mark : 100%

Scheme of Work (SEMESTER 1/TERM 1)

Week Lecture Assessment

1-2 Introduction to management (revisited) Group/individual assignment description & handouts

3 PART 1: THE FIELD OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

CHP 01.Introduction to Organizational Behavior

Allocation of group project and presentation

4 CHP 02.Organizational Culture

Case Study#1

Drexler’s World Famous Bar-B-Que

Page 32

5 PART 2: UNDERSTANDING AND MANAGING INDIVIDUAL BEHAVIOR

CHP 03. Individual Differences and Work Behavior

Submission/presentation of Case Study#1

Case Study#2 Organizational Culture: Life or Death

Page 62

6 CHP 04.Perceptions, Attributions, and Emotions


Case Study#3

Personality Testing: Yes or No?

Page 92

7 CHP 05.Motivation


Case Study#4

A Management Style That Made an Impression

Page 116

8 CHP 06.Job Design, Work, and Motivation


Case Study#5

Comparing Co-Workers against Each Other: Does This Motivate Employees?

Page 146

31/08/2010 PUBLIC HOLIDAY – INDEPENDENCE DAY

1 DAY

9-11 CHP 07.Evaluation, Feedback and Rewards


Case Study#6

The Hovey and Beard Company Case

Page 176

08/09/2010-19/09/2010

*MID SEMESTER BREAK & HARI RAYA PUASA HOLIDAY

1 ½ WEEKS

12 CHP 08.Managing Misbehavior


Case Study#7

Making Choices about Rewards

Page 210

13 CHP 09Managing Individual Stress


Case Study#8

Dealing with Violence at Work

Page 236

14-16 REVISION WEEK Submission/presentation of Case Study#8 (week14)

SUBMISSION OF INDIVIDUAL

ASSIGNMENT (WEEK 15)18/10/2010-22/10/2010

FINAL EXAMINATION

Scheme of Work (SEMESTER 2/TERM 2)

PART 3: GROUP BEHAVIOR AND INTERPERSONAL INFLUENCE

CHP 10.Groups and Teams

Case Study#9

No Response from Monitor 23

Page 271

CHP 11.Managing Conflict and Negotiations

Case Study#10

Electrolux Cleans Up

Page 307

CHP 12.Power, Politics, and Empowerment

Case Study#11

Conflict at Walt Disney Company: A Distant Memory

Page 337

PART 4: ORGANIZATIONAL PROCESS

CHP 13.Communication

Case Study#12

The Power and Politics of Privacy on Social Networking Sites

Page 366

CHP 14.Decision Making

Case Study#13

The Road to Hell

Page 401

CHP 15.Leadership

Case Study#14

Bank of America CEO under Pressure

Page 437

PART 5: ORGANIZATIONAL DESIGN, CHANGE, AND INNOVATION CHP 16.Organizational Structure and Design

Case Study#15

Rotating Leaders: Orpheus Orchestra

Page 474

CHP 17.Managing Organizational Change and Innovation

Case Study#16

Nucor Corporation: Innovation, Change, and Motivation

Page 546

QUESTION FOR EACH COURSEWORK

1. INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENTS (WRITTEN ESSAYS)

a. CHAPTER 2

Drawing on your own experiences and observations, contrast any significant aspect management and organizational behaviour (e.g motivation and rewards, nature of work groups, application of technology, systems of control) in either: (i) private enterprise and public sector organizations; or (ii) production and service organization.

b. CHAPTER 3

The speed at which organizations are undergoing change places continuous pressure on individual at work. Given the changing nature of organizations, explain fully what actors you would take into account in attempting to successfully manage individuals at work.

c. CHAPTER 4

In the work situation the process of perception and selection of stimuli can influence a manager’s relationship with other staff. Detail fully and with supporting examples the principles to bear in mind in perceiving other people, and the dynamics of interpersonal perception.

d. CHAPTER 5

Job satisfaction is a complex concept, which can mean different things to different people, and is difficult to measure objectively. Set out clearly your own explanation of job satisfaction, what you see as the main dimensions of job satisfaction and how you believe it can best be measured.

e. CHAPTER 10

As a senior manager in a large service organization, explain fully the measures you would take in order to help secure harmonious working relationship and effective teamwork within a multi-cultural and diverse workforce. What particular difficulties might you envisage?

f. How people behave and perform as members of a group is as important as their behaviour or performance as individuals. Drawing on your own experiences, discuss critically how working in a group can be both psychologically rewarding as well as potentially demanding for the individual.

g. CHAPTER 15

Given what you know and have learnt about public sector organizations and their styles of management, explore ways in which the nature and quality of leadership appears to differ from that in the private sector. What conclusion you draw from these differences.

f. CHAPTER 16

Display characteristics of a bureaucracy. To what extent is there anything positive to be said for bureaucratic structures? Discuss its relevance to the present-day situation.

2. CASE STUDY (INDIVIDUAL)

Case 1The Nice Trap

In these pages we’ve already noted that one downside of agreeableness is that agreeable people tend to have lower levels of career success. Though agreeableness doesn’t appear to be related to job performance, agreeable people do earn less money. Though we’re not sure why this is so, it may be that agreeable individuals are less aggressive in negotiating starting salaries and pay raises for themselves.

Yet there is clear evidence that agreeableness is something employers value. Several recent books argue in favor of the “power of nice” (Thaler & Koval, 2006) and “the kindness revolution” (Horrell, 2006). Other articles in the business press have argued that the sensitive, agreeable CEO—as manifested in CEOs such as GE’s Jeffrey Immelt and Boeing’s James McNerney—signals a shift in business culture (Brady, 2007). In many circles, individuals desiring success in their careers are exhorted to be “complimentary,” “kind,” and “good” (for example, Schillinger, 2007).

Take the example of 500-employee Lindblad Expeditions. It emphasizes agreeableness in its hiring decisions. The VP of HR commented, “You can teach people any technical skill, but you can’t teach them how to be a kindhearted, generous-minded person with an open spirit.”

So, while employers want agreeable employees, agreeable employees are not better job performers, and they are less successful in their careers. One might explain this apparent contradiction by noting that employers value agreeable employees for other reasons: They are more pleasant to be around, and they may help others in ways that aren’t reflected in their job performance. While the former point seems fair enough—agreeable people are better liked—it’s not clear that agreeable individuals actually help people more. A review of the “organizational citizenship” literature revealed a pretty weak correlation between an employee’s agreeableness and how much he or she helped others.

Moreover, a 2008 study of CEO and CEO candidates revealed that this contradiction applies to organizational leaders as well. Using ratings made of candidates from an executive search firm, these researchers studied the personalities and abilities of 316

CEO candidates for companies involved in buyout and venture capital transactions. They found that what gets a CEO candidate hired is not what makes him or her effective. Specifically, CEO candidates who were rated high on “nice” traits such as respecting others, developing others, and teamwork were more likely to be hired. However, these same characteristics—especially teamwork and respecting others for venture capital CEOs—made the organizations that the CEOs led less successful.

Questions

1. Do you think there is a contradiction between what employers want in employees (agreeable employees) and what employees actually do best (disagreeable employees)? Why or why not?

2. Often, the effects of personality depend on the situation. Can you think of some job situations in which agreeableness is an important virtue? And in which it is harmful?

3. In some research we’ve conducted, we’ve found that the negative effects of agreeableness on earnings is stronger for men than for women (that is, being agreeable hurt men’s earnings more than women’s). Why do you think this might be the case?

Case 2Natural Disaster and the Decision that Follow

Jeff Rommel’s introduction to Florida could be described as trial by hurricane. Rommel took over Florida operations in 2004 for Nationwide Insurance. Over a 2-month period in 2004, Florida experienced its worst hurricane season in history—four major hurricanes (Charley, Frances, Ivan, and Jeanne) slammed the state, causing an estimated $40 billion in damage. In the hurricanes’ wake, Nationwide received more than 119,000 claims, collectively worth $850 million.

Although dealing with those claims was difficult, even more difficult was Rommel’s later decision to cancel approximately 40,000 homeowners’ policies. Nationwide received a huge amount of media attention as a result, almost all negative. In reflecting on the decision, Rommel said, “Pulling out was a sound business decision. Was it good for the individual customer? No, I can’t say it was. But the rationale was sound.”

Hurricanes aren’t the only weapons in nature’s arsenal, and the insurance industry is hardly the only industry affected by nature. Consider the airline industry. American Airlines has 80,000 employees, 4 of whom make decisions to cancel flights. One of them is Danny Burgin. When weather systems approach, Burgin needs to consider a host of factors in deciding which flights to cancel and how to reroute affected passengers. He argues that of two major weather factors, winter snowstorms and summer thunderstorms, snowstorms are easier to handle because they are more predictable.

Don’t tell that to JetBlue, however. On February 14, 2007, JetBlue was unprepared for a snowstorm that hit the East Coast. Due to the lack of planning, JetBlue held hundreds of passengers on its planes, at JFK, in some cases for as long as 10 hours (with bathrooms closed!). To the stranded travelers, JetBlue’s tepid offer of a refund was just

as outrageous. For an airline that prided itself on customer service and had regularly been rated as the top U.S. airline in customer satisfaction, it was a public relations disaster. Linda Hirneise, an analyst at J.D. Power, said, “It did not appear JetBlue had a plan.” In defending the airline, JetBlue’s founder and CEO, David Neeleman, said, “Is our good will gone? No, it isn’t. We fly 30 million people a year. Ten thousand were affected by this.” In responding to another interviewer, he said, “You’re overdoing it. Delta screwed people for two days, and we did it for three and a half, okay? So go ask Delta what they did about it. Why don’t you grill them?” Eventually, though, Neeleman himself was affected by it, and he stepped down.

Source: Based on M. Blomberg, “Insuring the Nation,” Gainesville (Florida) Sun (February 27, 2006), pp. 1D, 8D; M. Trottman, “Choices in Stormy Weather,” Wall Street Journal (February 14, 2006), pp. B1, B2; C. Salter, “Lessons from the Tarmac,” Fast Company, May 2007, pp. 31–32; and D. Q. Wilber, “Tale of Marooned Passengers Galvanizes Airline Opponents,” Washington Post (February 16, 2007), p. D1.

Questions

1. Insurance companies in the state of Florida earned record profits in 2006, suggesting that Nationwide’s decision to cancel policies in light of the calm hurricane seasons (in Florida) in 2005–2007 may have cost the company potential revenue and customer goodwill. Do you think Rommel’s quote about making a “sound business decision” reveals any perceptual or decision-making biases? Why or why not?

2. Review the section on common biases and errors in decision making. For companies such as Nationwide, American Airlines, and JetBlue that must respond to natural events, which of these biases and errors are relevant and why?

3. How do you think people like Rommel, Burgin, and Neeleman factor ethics into their decisions? Do you think the welfare of policy owners and passengers enter into their decisions?

3. GROUP PROJECT

Assess the need for effective management techniques within the organization and propose appropriate tactics and strategies for competitive advantage.

Recommend an appropriate strategy for implementng change in an organisation.

Coverage: The overall organizational behaviour topics in the syllabus. Students can choose any topics. Student should exploit the ideas they have acquired to produce a good grade research.

INSTRUCTION OF EACH COURSEWORK


Evaluate the role of information systems within an organization and recommend appropriate management and organizational behaviour approaches for the information system function.

ObjectivesUpon completion of this project, the students will be able to: present ideas in a form of writing demonstrate overall understanding of human aspect of management argue/comment issues raised in organizational behaviour

Format essay questions individual basis

Marking 50 x 2 = 100 marks i.e. 20% of the component.


Assess the need for effective management techniques within the organization and propose appropriate tactics and strategies for competitive advantage.

Objectives: to apply the knowledge learned into situation/ organization to propose appropriate tactics and strategies for improving performance in the organization of the case. to write ideas well.

Coverage Students prepare written report

Format Individual assessment to encourage freewill thinking question of situation and opinion active observers, attendance in class discussion, consultation, presentation

and seminar.

Marking40 x 2 = 80 marks i.e 20% of the component

3. GROUP PROJECT

Objectives to demonstrate some pattern of organizational behaviour in the company of

their choice. to study the factors that contribute to the overall performance and

effectiveness of the organisation. to encourage effective teamwork in producing a quality project work to apply creative presentation skills ideas in forms of oral, visual aid and

writing reports.

Format Two groups are chosen as observers for each group presenter. They are

required to participate in question and answer session. (see presentation evaluation sheet)

Students are required to write a full report thus suggesting solutions to the organization based on their research

Produce standard documentation such bibliography, appendix. Each group are given 10 – 15 minutes to present (including Q & A sessions)

Marking report 60 marks, presentation and teamwork 40 marks 100 marks i.e. 40% of the component.

Write 30 – 32 pages on the project that consists of the following:a) The project should have suitable titleb) Must have clearly identified product or service/core businessc) Overall quality, creativity, ability to encapsulate the project idea and degree of

challenged) Students/group has to find any issues which related to management and

organizational behavior based on their selected company.e) Use an appropriate method/theory i.e Maslow, Herzberg, Theory X & Y, or

SWOT to identify problems and potential solutions or had been implemented by the selected company (have to discuss)

f) References (using Harvard styles)

Words of advice1. Students/groups are advised to pay attention to the project report requirements

to gain good marks. Consultations with the lecturer are very much encouraged.2. The group should report the progress of the project fortnightly and marks are

awarded for each consultation/report.3. Students/groups are required to report to the supervisor in the case of

uncooperative member or the kind in the group.

Important date:Presentation of project: 4 – 6 October 2010 (week 13)Submission of report: 20 October 2010 (week 15)

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA FOR EACH COURSEWORK ITEM


205KM Information Management and Organizational Behavior – Individual Essay Assessment Profile

Course: …………………………………………………… Date due: ……………………………

Subject area: …………………………………………………………………………………………………...

I declare that this coursework is my own individual work. Cheating is a serious academic offence. I have read and agree to abide by the University guidance on academic honesty.

Introductory Section

Interpretation of Title and Introduction (10%)

Launches straight into essay with no attempt to introduce or define the topic. (1-3)

The introduction is perfunctory with a limited attempt to define the scope of the essay. (4-6)

Clearly understands and states the key issues of the essay. (7-10)

Body of Essay

Logical Development (10%)

This is confused and disorganised so that the story is obscure. (1-3)

This could be better organised with the sequence of some material being rather illogical. (4-6)

The essay develops a logical argument and marshals ideas clearly. (7-10)

Subject relevance (15%) Essay contains too much irrelevant/repetitive subject matter. (1-5)

Some irrelevant / repetitive material. (6-10)

All material relevant to the subject of the essay. (11-15)

Strength and depth of analysis. (20%)

Far too much reliance on written sources - undigested material incorporated. Little analysis. (1-7)

Little personal input. Mainly in précis of written sources. Some analysis. (8-14)

Clear and informed analysis of subject matter. (15-20)

Use of Sources (10%) Little evidence of any supporting evidence. (1-3)

Most reference material covered. (4-6)

Shows good grasp of all relevant references. (7-10)

Concluding Section

Conclusions (10%) Essay comes to an abrupt end without a proper concluding section. (1-3)

Conclusions rather perfunctory. (4-6)

Good concluding section drawing together the various points made. (7-10)

Other Features

References (10%) Very few or no references in text or listed. (1-3)

References are not always properly and appropriately cited and listed. (4-6)

References are always properly and appropriately cited and listed. (7-10)

Spelling (5%) Far too many spelling errors. (1-2)

Most words are correctly spelt. (3-4)

All words are correctly spelt. (5)

Grammar and Syntax (5%) Grammar and syntax need urgent attention. (1-2)

A few misuses of words and occasional errors of sentence construction. (3-4)

No errors of syntax and grammar. (5)

Length (5%) Far too long or too short. (1-2) The length could have been better. (3-4)

The length was correct for the subject matter. (5)

Mark Awarded............................................ Assessor: ________________________(minus any penalty)…………………………Final mark awarded ……………………… (may be subject to change by the subject assessment board)

Additional Comments, (if any)


205KM Information Management and Organizational Behavior – Individual Case Study Assessment Profile

Course: …………………………………………………… Date due: ……………………………

Subject area: …………………………………………………………………………………………………...

I declare that this coursework is my own individual work. Cheating is a serious academic offence. I have read and agree to abide by the University guidance on academic honesty.

Body of Essay




The essay develops a logical argument and marshals ideas clearly. (7-10)

Subject relevance (10%) Essay contains too much irrelevant/repetitive subject matter. (1-5)


All material relevant to the subject of the essay. (11-15)

Strength and depth of analysis. (10%)

Far too much reliance on written sources - undigested material incorporated. Little analysis. (1-7)

Little personal input. Mainly in précis of written sources. Some analysis. (8-14)

Clear and informed analysis of subject matter. (15-20)

Use of Sources (5%) Little evidence of any supporting evidence. (1-3)

Most reference material covered. (4-6)

Shows good grasp of all relevant references. (7-10)

Spelling (5%) Far too many spelling errors. (1-2)



Grammar and Syntax (5%) Grammar and syntax need urgent attention. (1-2)



Length (5%) Far too long or too short. (1-2) The length could have been better. (3-4)

The length was correct for the subject matter. (5)

Mark Awarded............................................ Assessor: ________________________(minus any penalty)…………………………Final mark awarded ……………………… (may be subject to change by the subject assessment board)


3. GROUP PROJECT

205KM Information Management & Organizational Behaviour -Group Presentation and Report Assessment Profile

Assesses the learning outcome “Analyze a contemporary international economic policy issue”

Members of group: ......................................................................................................

Topic area: ....................................................... Date submitted: ................................

Students Declaration

We declare that this coursework is our own individual work. Cheating is a serious academic offence. We have read and agree to abide by the University guidance on academic honesty.

Signatures......................................................................................................................(All students in the group must sign above) Mark Awarded Student handout /40

Report /60 (minus any penalty)

Final Mark /100 ( %)

(Final mark may be subject to change by the subject assessment board)

Student Handout/Presentation (40%)

(5 = excellent, 4 = good, 3 = satisfactory, 2 = poor, 1 = very poor)

Clarity of objectives /5

Logical development of ideas /5

Relevant information and argument /5

Clarity of conclusions /5

Bibliography/References /5

Coherence of group /5

Handling of questions /5

Clarity/layout of slides (handout) /5

Overall handout mark /40

(cont. overleaf)

Report Assessment (60%)

Statement of Objectives

Interpretation of subject area (10%)

Launches straight into report with no attempt to state the objectives of the report (1-3)

The introduction is perfunctory with a limited attempt to define the objectives of the report (4-6)

Clearly states the key objectives of the report (7-10)

Body of Report




The report develops a logical argument and marshals ideas clearly. (5)

Subject relevance (5%) Report contains too much irrelevant/repetitive subject matter. (1-2)


All material relevant to the subject of the report. (5)

Strength and depth of analysis (10%)

Far too much reliance on written sources - undigested material incorporated. Little analysis (1-3)

Little personal input. Mainly in précis of written sources. Some analysis (4-6)

Clear and informed analysis of subject matter (7-10)

Use of Sources (5%) Little evidence of any supporting evidence (1-2)

Some reference material covered (3-4)

Shows good grasp of all relevant references. (5)

Concluding Section

Conclusions (10%) Report comes to an abrupt end without a proper concluding section (1-3)

Conclusions rather perfunctory. (4-6)

Good concluding section drawing together the various points made. (7-10)

Other Features

References (5%) Very few or no references in text or listed. (1-2)

References are not always properly and appropriately cited and listed (3-4)

References are always properly and appropriately cited and listed (5)

Spelling (5%)

Grammar and Syntax

(5%)

Far too many spelling errors. (1-2)



Grammar and syntax need urgent attention. (1-2)



Intermediate assessments are indicated by a tick on the line separating the boxes

Mark Awarded(__/60)............................................ Assessor: ________________________(minus any penalty) …………………………Final mark awarded ……………………… (may be subject to change by the subject assessment board)


Documents

APPROVAL OF 100% COURSEWORK_205KM