Proposal for New Course
Shared by: warwar123
ORLD 5054 Strategy Development as a Learning Process in Organizations Fall 2004 Professor: Lyle Yorks Office: 210a Zankel Phone: (212) 678 3820 E-Mail: firstname.lastname@example.org Office Hours: Wednesday 7:00 to 5:00; Thursday 5:00 to 7:00 Course Objectives: The purpose of this course is three fold: 1) to provide graduate students with a good foundation for understanding the concept of strategy and strategic thinking as it applies to organizations (private and public, for profit and not-for-profit) and individual action for effective performance within organizational settings; 2) to expose students to models and processes for understanding the emergence of strategy as processes of individual, group, and organizational learning; and 3) to develop an understanding of how to develop the linkages between learning, human resource development, and knowledge management with organizational strategy. Students participate in a number of experiential activities designed to make the strategy concept applicable to their particular organizational setting. Accordingly students should leave the course with: • the ability to demonstrate strategic thinking; • being able to demonstrate the use of one or more models of facilitating strategic thinking as a learning process; • an understanding of how to couple HRD initiatives to organizational strategy for purposes of enhancing strategic success. Course Description: This course provides graduate students with a comprehensive view of organizational strategy from a learning perspective. The position taken is that strategy is an emergent phenomenon that continually undergoes adjustments as the task environment of the organization changes. Accordingly, development of strategy is viewed as a problem of organizational learning and the development of effective strategy that is supported by members of the organization as a learning challenge for the organization. The course provides students with an opportunity for developing a strategic perspective, examining various models for facilitating the development of strategic initiatives through learning inventions, and developing an understanding of how to link human resource development and organizational learning practices to strategic initiatives. Extensive group discussion will focus on how strategic thinking relates to both the development of emergent strategy and the linkage of learning initiatives to the organizational strategies. Text and Readings: Pietersen, W. (2002). Reinventing Strategy: Using Strategic Learning to Create and Sustain Breakthrough Performance. New York: Wiley Books Additionally, the following articles are downloadable from the Harvard Business School Publishing Web Site for a fee: de Geus, A. 1988. Planning as learning, Harvard Business Review, 66 2), 70-74. Hamel, G. and Prahalad, C.K. 1989. Strategic intent. Harvard Business Review, May- June: 63-76. Hamel, G. and Prahalad, C.K. 1993. Strategy as stretch and leverage. Harvard Business Review, 79(3) 75-84. Hinterhuber, H. & Popp, W. 1992. Are You a Strategist or Just a Manager? Harvard Business Review, January-February, 105-113. Isenberg, D.J. 1987. The tactics of strategic opportunism. Harvard Business Review, 65: 92-97 Kaplan, R. S. & Norton, D. R. 1992. The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that Drive Performance, Harvard Business Review, 70(1) Kaplan, R.S. & Norton, D. R. Double-Loop Management: Making Strategy A Continuous Process. Balanced Scorecard Report, Reprint No. B0007A Mintzberg, H. 1994. The Fall and Rise of Strategic Planning. Harvard Business Review, 72(1). Mintzberg, H. 1987. Crafting Strategy, Harvard Business Review, 65(4): 66-75. Prahalad, C.K. & Hamel, G. 1990.The Core Competence of the Corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68(3): 79-91. Porter, M. 1997. How Competitive Forces Shape Strategy, Harvard Business Review, 75(4). Porter, M. 1996. What is strategy? Harvard Business Review. 74(6): Wack, P. Scenarios: Uncharted waters ahead. Harvard Business Review, 63(5): 72-79. Additional suggested readings. Barney, J.B. 1991a. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17:99-129 Barney, J. B. 1991b. Types of competition and the theory of strategy: Towards an integrative framework. Academy of Management Review, 11: 791-800. Bartlett, C. A., Ghoshal, S. 2002. Building Competitive Advantage Through People. Sloan Management Review. Winter, 34-41. Bartunek, J. 1984. Changing interpretative schemes and organizational restructuring: The example of a religious order. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29: 355- 372. Beer, M. & Eisenstgat, The Silent Killers of Strategy Implementation and Learning. Sloan Management Review. Burgelman, R.A. 1983. A model of the interaction of strategic behaviour corporate Context, and the concept of strategy. Academy of Management Review, 8: 61-70. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Making fast decisions in high velocity environments. Academy of Management Journal, 32: 543-576. Eisenhardt, K. Kahwajy, J., & Bourgeois, L. J. Conflict and Strategic Choice: How Top Management Teams Disagree. (On Reserve) Leavy, B. 1998. The concept of learning in the strategy field.. Management Learning, 29, pp. 447-466. Lorange. P. & Murphy, D.C. 1983. Strategic and human resources: Concepts and practice. Human Resource Management. XXII: 111-133. Marshall, R.B., & Yorks, L. 1994. Planning for a restructured, revitalized organization. Sloan Management Review. 35(4): 81-91. Osono, E. The Strategy Making Process as Dialogue, (On Reserve) Yorks, L. (2004). Strategy Making as Learning, Ch 3, L. Yorks, Strategic Human Resource Development. Southwestern. Course Requirements: Two major papers are required in the course. The purpose of the first paper is to have students demonstrate familiarity with the core issues of strategy development from an emergent organizational learning perspective. The purpose of the second paper is for the student to demonstrate his or her ability to apply the basic concepts of strategic thinking to his or her area of practice. In addition students are expected to actively participate in assigned class activities that help clarify the concepts and competencies being presented in the course. These will include certain "mini-assignments" that will provide "data" for class discussion and help with the second paper assignment. These assignments must be completed in a satisfactory way and are considered part of the class participation component of the course grade. First Paper: Core Issues in Strategy Development In writing the paper be sure to address the following: 1) How you define strategy; 2) What is meant by emergent strategy; 3) How strategic intent influences performance 4) The links between strategic intent and learning 5) The implications of your arguments above for your own organization (or an organization with which you are familiar)? Be sure to ground your writing in the literature and class discussions. Length guidelines: approximately 15 to 20 pages. See expectations below. Due: Oct 27 Second Paper: Application to a Field Setting In many ways this paper is an extension of the first. Consider an organization with which you are familiar. Propose a process for making strategy in that setting. Provide some "data" points to illustrate your thinking. You will want to work on this paper in parallel with the first paper and utilize the mini-assignments worked on throughout the semester. This paper will include: 1) Overview of positioning the process as a learning strategy 2) Inhibiting and facilitating factors in the setting 3) Discussion of emergent strategy and how it is/can be detected 4) Possible alternative futures 5) The process for working with strategic development teams 6) An "enrollment" process for developing political support 7) Reflections of what you have learned from applying the concepts Approximate length: 15 pages Due date: Dec. 15 Grading: The above papers will provide me with approximately 30-40 pages of thoughtful professional work. Along with your participation in class activities and discussion will provide me with a basis for assessing your general knowledge of the field and understanding of core issues. Final grades will be determined as follows: First Paper: 35% of final grade Second Paper: 35% of final grade Class participation: 30% of final grade See “Expectations” section of the syllabus for further discussion of performance expectations and grading standards. Course Outline: Introduction and course overview. Sept. 8 The concept of strategy and strategy thinking. Sept. 15 & 22 Readings: Pietersen, Chaps. 2 & 3 Barney, 1991a Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage Journal of Management, 17:99-129 Barney, 1991b Types of competition and the theory of strategy. Academy of Management Review, 11: 791-800. Hamel & Prahalad. Strategic intent. Harvard Business Review, May- June: 63-76. Hinterhuber, H. & Popp, W. (1992). Are You a Strategist or Just a Manager? Harvard Business Review, January-February, 105-113. Porter, What is strategy? Harvard Business Review. 74(6) Prahalad. & Hamel The Core Competence of the Corporation. . Harvard Business Review, 68(3): 79-91. The Art of Good Strategy Making. Sept. 29 & Oct. 6 Readings: Chapter to be distributed in class. Hamel, G. and Prahalad, C.K. 1993. Strategy as stretch and leverage. Harvard Business Review, 79(3) 75-84. Kisenhardt, K. Kahwajy, J., & Bourgeois, L. J. Conflict and Strategic Choice: How Top Management Teams Disagree. (On Reserve) Detecting Emergent Strategizing. Oct. 13 Readings: Pieterson Chapt. 4 & 5 Mintzberg. Crafting Strategy, Harvard Business Review, 65(4): 66-75. Mintzberg The Fall and Rise of Strategic Planning Harvard Business Review, 72(1). Osono, E. The Strategy Making Process as Dialogue, (On Reserve) Developing Strategic Intent: Exploring competencies and building the performance model. Oct. 20 Readings: Pietersen, chapt 6 Hamel & Prahalad, Strategic intent, Harvard Business Review, May- June: 63-76. Strategy Development as Organizational Learning Oct. 27 & Nov. 3 Readings: de Geus, Planning as learning Harvard Business Review, 66, (2), 70- 74. Eisenhardt, Making fast decisions in high velocity environments Academy of Management Journal, 32: 543-576. Leavy, B. 1998. The concept of learning in the strategy field. Management Learning, 29, pp. 447-466. Wack, Scenarios: Uncharted waters ahead. Harvard Business Review, 63(5): 72-79. Yorks, L. (2004). Strategy Making as Learning, Ch 2, L. Yorks, Strategic Human Resource Development. Southwestern. Nov 17th No Class Meeting Managing Alternative Futures through Strategic Adaptability and Opportunism. Dec. 1 Readings: Isenberg, The tactics of strategic opportunism, Harvard Business Review, 65: 92-97 Strategy Making Closure and Implementation. Dec. 8 Readings: Pietersen, Chapt. 7 & 8 Beer, M. & Eisenstgat, The Silent Killers of Strategy Implementation and Learning. Sloan Management Review. Kaplan, R. S. & Norton, D. R. 1992. The Balanced Scorecard— Measures that Drive erformance, Harvard Business Review, 70(1) Kaplan, R.S. & Norton, D. R. Double-Loop Management: Making Strategy A Continuous Process. Balanced Scorecard Report, Reprint No. B0007A Kaplan & Norton, Using the balanced scorecard as a strategic management system. Kaplan & Norton, Double-Loop Management: Making Strategy A Continuous Process. Linking Human Resource Development to Strategy. Dec. 15 Readings: Pietersen, Chap. 11. Bartlett, C. A., Ghoshal, S. Building Competitive Advantage Through People. Sloan Management Review. Winter 2002. 34-41. Lorange & Murphy, Strategy and human resources: Concepts & practice. Human Resource Management. XXII: 111- 133. Marshall & Yorks, Planning for a restructured, revitalized Organization. Sloan Management Review. 35(4): 81-91. General course expectations The following are the instructor’s general expectations about student participation in the course: o Students are to come to class prepared for the discussions, by having done all requisite reading in advance. o Active class participation is expected of all students. Students are strongly encouraged to provide relevant information from their own experiences or other materials they have read; probe for clarification; make connections among the readings; and integrate ideas. The quality of participation, not the just the quantity, will be assessed. o Students are to attend all classes. Students are to give advance notice, if possible, of any expected absence or provide immediate follow-up, if they are unexpectedly absent. Students who miss more than two classes will be asked to complete additional assignments in order to gain additional experience. o If as student misses a class, he or she is responsible for obtaining all notes and materials. o Assignments are to be completed on time. o The quality of the writing and as well as the content will be assessed for this course. All students are advised to carefully proofread all grammar and spelling prior to turning in assignments. If a paper does not meet course expectations, the student will be asked to rewrite the paper. All students have the option of not doing the rewrite and accepting a lesser grade. o There are several style features that are required --all papers must be paginated --all paragraphs must be indented 5-7 spaces --subheadings should be used to break up topics in the paper, helping to organize the flow and facilitate reading --citations and references should follow APA guidelines o Group discussions are an integral part of the course. Students will be assessed on their ability to participate in and facilitate good group dynamics, throughout small group and whole class discussions. This includes respectful listening, support and encouragement of all colleagues, as they test out ideas and opinions in an academic learning environment. Grading criteria Grade will be assigned to papers based on the following criteria, adapted from one used by other faculty in the department. It should help to clarify my expectations for your writing. A paper An “A” paper is rich in content and quality of writing. It is meaty and dense with information. It makes all points well, and is thought provoking. It is complete and integrates all the ideas raised, rather than leaving tangents unresolved. It is presented in a cogent manner, with an engaging opening paragraph, good transitions, and tight, fresh and cogent phrasing. It has careful organization and development, with a clear beginning, middle and conclusion. B paper A “B” paper provides substantial information and is well written. Its points are logically ordered, well developed and unified around a clear organizing principle. It has a well developed beginning and conclusion. It is concise, with some of the finesse of an “A” paper, and is somewhat successful in convincing a reader of its points. C paper A “C” paper is generally competent in meeting the specifications of the assignment and having few mechanical errors. Its content is thin, commonplace, and too dependent upon vague generalities. The writing is uneven, without a well-developed beginning and conclusion, and has choppy sentences, with repetitions and redundancies. It lacks intellectual rigor, and is mediocre in establishing a stand on an issue. It leaves many ideas dangling and is not very successful in convincing the reader. D paper A “D” paper is ineffective in how it develops a subject and is written. It is often a summary of information rather than an analysis of information, and may miss parts of the required assignment. The sentences and overall organization are frequently awkward and ambiguous. There may also be frequent grammar and spelling errors.