Docstoc

3

Document Sample
3 Powered By Docstoc
					                                             MG568, Change Management

                                                      COURSE SYLLABUS
                                                     4 April 2011 - 27 June 2011



Instructor Information
·     Michael N. Davis, M.A.
·     davismi@thomas.edu
·     Face-to-Face (F2F) Class Meetings: Monday, 4 April 2011 at 6pm; Monday, 16 May 2011 at 6pm; and, Monday, 20 June 2011 at
      6pm (Room 226)
·     Office Hours: Sundays, 8pm ET to 9pm ET via AIM Instant Messenger (my screen name is: careercoachdavis) & prior to and
      after our F2F Class Meetings

      AIM stands for AOL Instant Messenger. An instant message is similar to an email, but as it name suggests, it's much faster. Many
      instructors and students use AIM to chat back and forth without having to send emails. If you do not have AOL Instant
      Messenger, you can download the free service at http://www.aim.com.

Textbooks
Kotter, J. & Cohen, D. (2002). The Heart of Change: Real-Life Stories of How People Change Their Organizations. Boston:
Harvard Business School Press. (ISBN: 1-57851-254-9)

Kotter, J. & Rathgeber, H. (2005) Our Iceberg Is Melting. New York: St. Martin’s Press. (ISBN: 0-312-36198-X)
Case Studies (available at http://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/access/7719483 for a cost of $ 3.95 per case study)
Kotter, J. & Leahey, J. (1993). Changing the Culture at British Airways. Boston: Harvard Business Publishing. (Product #: 491009-
PDF-ENG)

Ibarra, H. & Sackley, N. (1999). Charlotte Beers at Ogilvy & Mather Worldwide (A). Boston: Harvard Business Publishing.
(Product #: 495031-PDF-ENG)

Charan, Ram. (2006). Home Depot’s Blueprint for Culture Change. Boston: Harvard Business Publishing. (Product #: R0604C-
PDF-ENG)

Konrad, A. & Mitchell, J. (2005). Christina Gold Leading Change at Western Union. Boston: Harvard Business Publishing.
(Product #: 906M07-PDF-ENG)

Supplementary Material
Supplied by the instructor and located on the Moodle course website or accessible via supplied website links

Course Prerequisites
N/A

Course Description
This course will bring in components of managing the organizational change process, along with making the transition from average
performance to outstanding performance as a company. The course will have a significant component on corporate consulting and
also cover the stress on individuals caused by change. Current business trends, including acquisition, the knowledge work generation,
outsourcing, working from remote locations, and the temporary workforce will also be covered.

Course Goals and Objectives
Upon completion of this course students should be able to:
· Identify and apply the principles of organizational change;
· Utilize various strategies to effectively lead change;
· Develop a model demonstrating how organizational change theory supports practices which lead organizational change;
· Craft and integrate a strategic planning approach for organizational culture, organizational structure, and the human processes
   supporting the culture and structure.
Grading Policies
Weekly Unit Work Flow Schedule:
   · Monday 12am Launch New Unit (ex., Monday, 4 April 2011 launches Unit 1)
   · Sunday 11:59pm Unit Wrap-Up (ex., Sunday, 10 April 2011 Unit 1 ends and Unit 1 assignments due)
Assignment Grading Breakdown:
    · Discussion Board Participation (10x50):           500 points maximum
    · Case Studies (4x50):                              200 points maximum
    · Team Change Presentations (2x75)                  150 points maximum
    · Class Meetings & Participation (3x50)             150 points maximum
    · Total Possible Points:                           1000 points possible

Graduate Grading System:

Letter Grade Suggested Numerical Equivalent Points
A            95-100                             4.00
A-           90-94                              3.67
B+           86-89                              3.33
B            83-85                              3.00
B-           80-82                              2.67
C+           76-79                              2.33
C            73-75                              2.00
F            0-72                               0.00
I            Incomplete
IF           Incomplete/Failure*
W            Withdrawn




Total Points Letter Grade

950-1000           A

900-940            A-

860-890            B+

830-850            B

800-820            B-

760-790            C+

730-750            C

0-729              F
Final Grade Determination (approximate):
    · Discussion Board Participation:                         50% of Total Possible Grade
    · Case Studies:                                           20% of Total Possible Grade
    · Team Change Presentations:                              15% of Total Possible Grade
    · Class Attendance & Participation:                       15% of Total Possible Grade

Late Assignment Policy:
    · Discussion Board Participation:             No Late Assignments Accepted
    · Team Change Presentations:                  No Late Assignments Accepted
    · Class Attendance & Participation:           No Make-Ups for Missed Classes
    · Case Studies:
            - Work that is submitted 1 - 6 calendar days AFTER its due date may be graded down a maximum of 10%.
            - Works that is submitted 7 - 21 days AFTER its due date may be graded down a maximum of 20%.
            - Work that is submitted more than 21 days AFTER its due date will receive an automatic zero.
Academic Dishonesty: All work submitted to meet course requirements is expected to be the student’s own work. A student guilty
of academic dishonesty in any form is subject to disciplinary action which may include, but is not limited to, failing the class. If a
student violates the academic honesty policy described in the college catalog, the penalty could range from failing the assignment to
failing the class depending on the seriousness of the violation.

Academic Assistance: Students who believe they will need accommodations for a disability should contact me and Suzanne Pooler,
the Assistant Dean for Graduate and Continuing Education, as soon as possible


Assignment Grading Rubrics
Discussion Board Guidelines & Grading Rubric
Discussion Board Guidelines
To ensure your success as a contributor to discussions and as a student in this class, we suggest the following guidelines for posting:
· Your original posting for each DB assignment should be 100 words minimum in length.
· Be clear about which message you're responding to. Refer to specific passages or ideas in the course or text that have sparked your interest.
· Log-on and participate in each DB three to five times per unit.
· Respond to a minimum of two classmate postings per unit.
· Your 1st posting each week/unit must be made no later than Thursday.
· Respond to classmate and instructor comments to your original DB posting.
· Make sure your contribution adds something new to the discussion. A simple "I agree" may be your initial response, but think about how you
    can take the conversation to the next level.
· Make your posting clear and easy to follow by dividing longer messages into paragraphs.
· Address classmates by name or user name, and sign your own messages.
· Feel free to pose new questions to your classmates within your own message.
· Use correct spelling, capitalization, grammar, syntax, and punctuation.
Sample DB Question and Answers
The following are some examples of acceptable and unacceptable responses to Discussion Questions:

Sample Question: "The author claims that the Internet has changed teaching. How would you respond to this assertion?"

Unacceptable: "I agree."

Unacceptable: "I think the author is off her rocker on this point. I can't stand it when techies try to write about education."

Acceptable: "I agree with Becky’s basic point--that is, I think she's right that the advent of the Internet means dramatic changes in how we teach. But
I think she's so concerned with whether technology is going to replace teachers that she misses an essential point. Teachers must change themselves
to use the Internet effectively. The Internet will never replace teachers and it will never be a successful tool unless teachers make it one."
Acceptable: "I disagree with Becky. The Internet has not changed teaching any more than the printing press changed teaching, or modern
instructional design has changed teaching. New ideas about teaching and new technologies help us deliver good teaching more effectively. They may
help us understand more fully what we're delivering. They may help us reach more students. But the essence of good teaching remains the same."

Discussion Board Grading Rubric
45-50 points: Participant posts meaningful and thoughtful responses to discussion board questions on five (5) separate days per unit; participant
communicates thoughts clearly and checks to ensure appropriate spelling and grammar of posts; participant appropriately cites references; participant
posts responses to several other participants throughout the week which are thoughtful; participant challenges others and responds to others’
challenges in a respectful manner

40-44 points: Participant posts thoughtful and meaningful responses to discussion board questions on four (4) separate days per unit; participant
thoughts may be less clearly organized or misspelled, but are understandable; participant posts responses to classmate postings three (3) times per
week; participant challenges others and responds to others challenges in a respectful manner

35-39 points: Participant posts minimum responses to discussion board questions on three (3) separate days per unit and does not demonstrate
thoughtful responses to questions; participant posts consist mainly of "I agree" statements or do not add original thought to discussion; participant
posts responses to classmate postings two (2) times per week; participant responses are unclear, poorly spelled, or difficult to understand; if
participant challenges others or responds to others challenges, it is done so in a respectful manner

0-34 points: Participant does not participate; participant responses are unintelligible and/or participant does not respond to requests for improved
clarity; numerous spelling, grammar, syntax, and/or punctuation errors; participant is disrespectful towards other students in his/her challenges or
responses to challenges

Case Studies Grading Rubric
45-50 points: Participant completes assignment on schedule (see Late Assignment Policy); participant communicates thoughts clearly and checks to
ensure appropriate spelling, punctuation, and grammar; participant meets or exceeds required analysis and word length of assignments; participant
followed APA format.

40-44 points: Participant completes assignment on schedule (see Late Assignment Policy); participant communicates most thoughts clearly and
checks to ensure appropriate spelling, punctuation, and grammar; participant meets required analysis and word length of assignments; participant
followed APA format.

35-39 points: Participant completes assignment on schedule (see Late Assignment Policy); participant communicates some thoughts clearly, but has
spelling, punctuation, and grammar errors; participant fails to meet required analysis and word length of assignments; participant attempted to follow
APA format.

0-34 points: Participant fails to complete assignment on schedule (see Late Assignment Policy); participant struggles to communicate some thoughts
clearly, and has numerous spelling, punctuation, and/or grammar errors; participant fails to meet required analysis and word length of assignments;
participant did not follow APA format.

Team Change Presentations Grading Rubric
65-75 points: Teammates complete the project on schedule (see Late Assignment Policy); teammates communicate thoughts clearly and check to
ensure appropriate spelling, punctuation, and grammar; teammates meet or exceed required word length and format for the project; teammates use an
effective PowerPoint format.

55-64 points: Teammates complete the project on schedule (see Late Assignment Policy); teammates communicate most thoughts clearly and check
to ensure appropriate spelling, punctuation, and grammar; teammates generally meet required word length and format for the project; teammates use
an effective PowerPoint format.

45-54 points: Teammates complete the project on schedule (see Late Assignment Policy); teammates communicate some thoughts clearly, but have
spelling, punctuation, and grammar errors; teammates fail to meet required word length and format for the project; teammates use an effective
PowerPoint format.

0-44 points: Teammates fail to complete the project on schedule (see Late Assignment Policy); teammates struggle to communicate some thoughts
clearly, and have numerous spelling, punctuation, and/or grammar errors; teammates fail to meet required word length and/or format for the project;
teammates do not use an effective PowerPoint format.

Class Attendance & Participation Grading Rubric
45-50 points: Participant has read assigned chapters, and has completed assigned assessments and case studies; participant offers
meaningful and thoughtful responses to discussion questions; participant communicates thoughts clearly, using proper grammar;
participant appropriately cites references when appropriate; participant responds to other participants throughout the class session;
participant challenges others and responds to others’ challenges in a respectful manner

40-44 points: Participant has read assigned chapters, and has completed assigned assessments and case studies; participant is reluctant
to offer meaningful and thoughtful responses to discussion questions; participant communicates thoughts for the most part in a clear
manner, using proper grammar; participant appropriately cites references when appropriate; participant responds to other participants
occasionally during class session; participant challenges others and responds to others’ challenges in a respectful manner

35-39 points: Participant struggles to recall content of assigned chapters, and did not complete assigned assessments and/or case
studies; participant offers mostly "I agree" statements or does not add original thought to discussion; participant responses are difficult
to understand; if participant challenges others or responds to others challenges, it is done so in a respectful manner

0-34 points: Participant has not read assigned chapters, and has not completed assigned assessments and/or case studies; participant
does not participate; participant responses are unintelligible and/or participant does not respond to requests for improved clarity;
participant is disrespectful towards other students in his/her challenges or responses to challenges




                                          Course Schedule & Assignments
Unit 1            Unit Schedule: Mon., 4 April 2011 at 12am to Sun., 10 April 2011 at 11:59pm
                  Theme: Course Introduction, Introduce the Kotter & Cohen Model for Leading Change
                  Reading(s): Kotter & Cohen, Preface, Acknowledgements, Intro (pages ix to 14)
                  1st F2F Class Meeting: Monday, 4 April 2011 at 6pm (Room 226)

Unit 2            Unit Schedule: Mon., 11 April 2011 at 12am to Sun., 17 April 2011 at 11:59pm
                  Theme: Step 1 – Increased Urgency
                  Reading(s): Kotter & Cohen, Step 1 (pages 15 to 36) and Kotter & Rathgeber (pages ix to 43)
                  Discussion Board: Our Iceberg Is Melting – “Sense of Urgency”

Unit 3            Unit Schedule: Mon., 18 April 2011 at 12am to Sun., 24 April 2011 at 11:59pm
                  Theme: Step 2 – Build The Guiding Team
                  Reading(s): Kotter & Cohen, Step 2 (pages 37 to 60) and Kotter & Rathgeber (pages 46 to 55)
                  Discussion Board: Our Iceberg Is Melting – “Guiding Team”

Unit 4            Unit Schedule: Mon., 25 April 2011 at 12am to Sun., 1 May 2011 at 11:59pm
                  Theme: Step 3 – Get The Vision Right
                  Reading(s): Kotter & Cohen, Step 3 (pages 61 to 82) and Kotter & Rathgeber (pages 58 to 69)
                  Discussion Board: Our Iceberg Is Melting – “Get The Vision Right”
                  Case Study #1: Changing the Culture at British Airways

Unit 5            Unit Schedule: Mon., 2 May 2011 at 12am to Sun., 8 May 2011 at 11:59pm
                  Theme: Step 4 – Communicate for Buy-In
                  Reading(s): Kotter & Cohen, Step 4 (pages 83 to 102) and Kotter & Rathgeber (pages 72 to 81)
                  Discussion Board: Our Iceberg Is Melting – “Communicate For Buy-In”

Unit 6            Unit Schedule: Mon., 9 May 2011 at 12am to Sun., 15 May 2011 at 11:59pm
                  Theme: Step 5 – Empower Action
                  Reading(s): Kotter & Cohen, Step 5 (pages 103 to 124) and Kotter & Rathgeber (pages 84 to 97)
                  Discussion Board: Our Iceberg Is Melting – “Empower Action”
                  Case Study #2: Charlotte Beers at Ogilvy & Mather Worldwide

Unit 7            Unit Schedule: Mon., 16 May 2011 at 12am to Sun., 22 May 2011 at 11:59pm
                  Theme: Step 6 – Create Short-Term Wins
                  Reading(s): Kotter & Cohen, Step 6 (pages 125 to 142) and Kotter & Rathgeber (pages 100 to 107)
                  Discussion Board: Our Iceberg Is Melting – “Create Short-Term Wins”
                  2nd F2F Class Meeting: Monday, 16 May 2011 at 6pm (Room 226) (TCA #1 Presentations)

Unit 8            Unit Schedule: Mon., 23 May 2011 at 12am to Sun., 29 May 2011 at 11:59pm
                Theme: Step 7 – Don’t Let Up
                Reading(s): Kotter & Cohen, Step 7 (pages 143 to 160) and Kotter & Rathgeber (pages 110 to 117)
                Discussion Board: Our Iceberg Is Melting – “Don’t Let Up”
                Case Study #3: Home Depot’s Blue Print for Culture Change

Unit 9          Unit Schedule: Mon., 30 May 2011 at 12am to Sun., 5 June 2011 at 11:59pm
                Theme: Step 8 – Make Change Stick
                Reading(s): Kotter & Cohen, Step 8 (pages 161 to 177) and Kotter & Rathgeber (pages 120 to 123)
                Discussion Board: Our Iceberg Is Melting – “Make It Stick”

Unit 10         Unit Schedule: Mon., 6 June 2011 at 12am to Sun., 12 June 2011 at 11:59pm
                Theme: We See, We Feel, We Change
                Reading(s): Kotter & Cohen, We See, We Feel, We Change (pages 179 to 186)
                Discussion Board: See/Feel/Change vs. Analyze/Think/Change
                Case Study #4: Christina Gold Leading Change at Western Union

Unit 11         Unit Schedule: Mon., 13 June 2011 at 12am to 19 June 2011 at 11:59pm
                Theme: Course Wrap-Up
                Discussion Board: Reflections on Leading Change

Course Wrap-Up: 3rd & Final F2F Class Meeting: Monday, 20 June 2011 at 6pm (Room 226) (TCA #2 Presentations)

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:160
posted:6/19/2011
language:English
pages:6
pengtt pengtt
About Those docs come from internet,if you have the copyrights of one of them,tell me by mail fkuept@163.com,I just want more peo learn more knowledge.Thank you!