Part 1: Individual Case Study Report
Task Description:
The purpose of this assignment is to apply and to integrate the theories, models and concepts
from the Managing OB course; to learn how to promote trustworthy, ethical behaviour in
organisations; and to further develop your written communication skills.
The Task:
Locally, nationally and internationally, there are many organisations whose failure has been
determined at least in part by key organisational behaviour and people factors. Recently, the
media has reported on a number of organisations that have engaged in unethical (wrong or
bad) or grossly incompetent behaviour where organisational behaviour and people issues played
a key role. For example, culture, leadership, and motivation and reward systems were
antecedents to Enron’s failure, which had severe consequences for its stakeholders.
What you are required to do:
1.
Choose a real case of an organisational failure (e.g., unethical or grossly incompetent
conduct). Describe briefly what happened, the context, and the consequences of the failure for
the organisation’s stakeholders.
2.
Analyse the organisational behaviour factors that contributed to the failure. These may be
individual, group or organisational factors such as inappropriate leadership style, lack of
teamwork, poor communication from management, decision-making processes, insufficient
participation and consultation, and so on). Your analysis should include a relevant analytical
framework (e.g. SWOT or stakeholder analysis).
3.
Describe what the organisation did post-failure to prevent a reoccurrence and to recover the
organisation’s reputation and stakeholder’s trust. Evaluate the effectiveness of the
organisation’s response to the failure, and make recommendations for what could have been
done better and/or moving forward. In making these recommendations, be pragmatic and
specific (i.e. make recommendations that are viable and within the organisation’s capacity to
implement).
–
Evaluate the effectiveness of the organisation’s action or response or failure
–
Make recommendations (viable) for what could have been better and/or
moving forward.
In conducting your analysis:
1.
Apply relevant models, concepts, theories and literature in the field of organisational
behaviour. You are expected to incorporate relevant research and theory from the broader
organisational behaviour literature (e.g., journal articles and/or books), not just the text and
course materials (in addition to ‘other’ sources, your reference list should include a minimum
of ten journal articles and media/company reports);
2.
Conduct desk research to obtain information and/or data and examples to illustrate and
support your analysis, evaluation and recommendations (e.g. media reports, interviews,
independent investigation reports, organisational reports, etc.).
Choosing a Case:
•
The organisational failure must have occurred in the last 10 years.
•
It is recommended that you choose a case where the failure was of considerable magnitude.
That is, the failure caused some kind of harm to one or more of the organisation’s
stakeholders (e.g. employees, customers, shareholders, suppliers, the community, the
organisation’s board etc).
•
You may not analyse a case that has been used in class (e.g. Google, Nike), nor may you
derive your analysis from an existing case study.
•
Beyond these requirements, the choice of case is at your discretion. Students are expected to
select a case they are familiar with (e.g. from personal experience, or through their network).
Note, all ‘personal’ case information will be treated as private and confidential.
•
Use a media source that describes a problem or failure
Deliverable:
Project Report.
Your project report should not exceed 2,500 words. Appendices and references are not
included in the word count; however you cannot assume that appendicised material will be read
in detail. Please include a word count on the front page of your assignment and ensure that you
reference appropriately. Assignments below/exceeding the word limit in excess of 10% will be
penalised. Referencing and citations in the report should follow the AMJ referencing style.
Report Structure:
–
Introduction: Aim/Purpose, brief outline of how will you present your report.
–
Context (case/organisation) and problem: SWOT, PESTEL, Stakeholder
analysis.
–
Analysis of the problem based on organisational behavioural factors (analytical
frameworks).
–
Recommendations:
•
What did the organisation do to address the problem?
•
Evaluate the effectiveness of their actions.
•
Your own recommendations.
–
Conclusion: Summary, key points, don’t bring in new content
Criteria & Marking:
Case Description & Data 20%
•
Clear and informative description of the organisational failure and its consequences
•
Quality and relevance of information, material and data on the case
•
Accurate and insightful interpretation
Analysis & Evaluation 45%
•
Rigorous analysis and evaluation of the systemic OB-related factors contributing to the failure
•
Effective application of relevant course concepts, models, and theories
•
Demonstrated understanding of course material
•
Use of data and examples to support analysis
Evaluation of Organisational Response and Recommendations 25%
•
Description of the organisation’s response
•
Quality of evaluation of the effectiveness of the organisation’s response
•
Quality of recommendations: effectiveness, feasibility, and specificity
•
Logical alignment between analysis, evaluation and recommendations
Presentation 10%
•
Professional appearance of report and appendices
•
Succinct, clear, and lively writing
•
Appropriate referencing
•
Logical organisation of report (headings, sections)
•
Appropriate use of tables, figures, summaries, appendices
Part 2: Annotated Bibliography
Task Description:
The annotated bibliography must list and summarise articles relevant to the topic you choose for
your Individual Organisational Problem Analysis (part 1). The summaries must concisely and
accurately present the main arguments or issues raised in each reference. The key criterion for
including a reference in the list is its relevance to the topic. For this assignment, only five
journal articles, published in 2002 or later, should be included.
The Task:
The purpose of this assessment item is to help you to develop an understanding of
contemporary research on the topic of your main assignment for this course. Your job is akin to
that of an investigator who has a problem to be solved and looks for clues on the causes and
consequences of the problem. You will use the existing management literature as your toolkit to
develop an understanding of the problem you will be tackling in your main assignment. This
annotated bibliography must feed into your individual organisational problem analysis. In the
annotated bibliography you will do the groundwork that will enable you to analyse the
organisational problem more effectively.
What you are required to do:
Briefly, there are several steps you should follow when completing this assessment item.
1.
You must first decide what the topic or focus of your main assignment will be. Once you
have decided on the problem or issue, you are going to examine the behavioural factors
that may contribute to the problem. (Explanations may, for example, include
inappropriate leadership style, lack of teamwork, poor communication from management,
decision-making processes, insufficient participation and consultation, and so on).
2.
You must then search for articles on this issue. Read the articles thoroughly, think
seriously about the messages they deliver and their persuasiveness, and, assess how the
articles relate to each other and your topic.
3.
Finally, you must construct a summary that presents the major issues raised in the
articles included in your annotated bibliography. This summary must present an
argument or position in relation to the topic. If the articles you have chosen do not assist
you to develop this argument, discard them.
In conducting your bibliography:
1.
You must choose the topic for your organisational analysis. We strongly urge you to use
this opportunity to begin to develop the central argument of your analysis.
2.
The challenges in writing the bibliography are to identify the best possible set of relevant
journal articles, to read each article thoroughly and to identify the main argument being
presented. You must establish that the article makes an important contribution to the
topic, and write a concise and accurate summary of its content. The skills required to
complete these tasks are vitally important for academic study and professional
development.
3.
You need to summarise five (5) articles published from 2002 onwards and submit the
first page of each of them (and the abstract, if it is not on the front page) with your
paper. You will need to refer to databases in the library to search for relevant material.
PsychINFO®, SCOPUS®, Web of Science® and ABI-Inform®, would be suitable
databases to start. Do not under any circumstances use just an abstract obtained from a
web or CD ROM search – you must read the full text of every article.
Deliverable:
What does an annotated bibliography look like?
Your bibliography should not exceed 2200 words and should be presented in three main parts,
as follows:
a)
Introduction (approximately 100-200 words): This section should describe the
topic you have chosen and provide a brief rationale for your choice. You should describe
the scope of the bibliography and clearly specify any aspects of the topic that it will not
address.
b)
The bibliography: The bibliography itself should present the full citation of each
of the five references. Each citation should be followed by an accurate and
representative summary of approximately 200 words. You should include for each article
a brief review of its strengths and weaknesses. The following is an example of the form
that a citation and summary should take:
Dutton, J.E., J.M. Dukerich & C.V.Harquail. 1994. Organizational images and
member identification. Administrative Science Quarterly 39(2): 239-263. The basic
premise of this article is that an individual’s identification with an organisation is a
function of two forces: (i) the individual’s beliefs about the distinct, central, and
enduring features of the organisation, and
(ii) the individual’s beliefs about what
outsiders think of the organisation. They refer to the former as
“perceived organisational identity” and to the latter as “construed external image”.
The authors argue that the strength of organisational identification is determined by
the extent to which the organisational identity and external image contribute to the
individual’s self-esteem, self-distinctiveness, and self-continuity. Individuals tend to
identify with organisations that help them enhance their self-esteem, provide them
with a sense of uniqueness, and help them maintain their self-image.
The key strength of this article is that it provides a fairly comprehensive model of
organisational identification. The authors integrate research from areas such as
social identity, self-concept, and organisational identity. The article, however, does
not recognise the realities of the modern workplace wherein individuals may have
multiple demands for identification, such as the case of a person who holds two
part-time jobs. The article also assumes identification with a monolithic
organisation, while in reality individuals may tend to identify primarily with their
workgroup.
c)
Overall summary and conclusions (approximately 1,000 words): This final
section should state the central argument you are making and use the reference material
to substantiate your position. It should present your understanding of the topic, identify
key variables, and suggest potential solutions or interventions drawn from the literature
you have discussed. You should even-handedly, but critically, evaluate the evidence
presented in each article and integrate it into a representative summary.
(d)
Appendix: Please copy and paste the front pages (and abstracts where they are
not reproduced on the front page) of the articles in your bibliography and include them in
an appendix. Note that these are not included in the word count for this piece of
assessment. Each one should be clearly labelled with a full citation of its source, using
the AMJ Style.
Criteria & Marking:
Introduction (10%)
2-3: Introduction poor; does not provide appropriate framing
4: Muddled; lacking clarity and direction
5: Introduces topic in generic way without specific mention of relevance
6: Clear statement of purpose; aims/ objectives are stated; relevance of topic is discussed.
7: Excellent statement of purpose; clearly stated aims/objectives; relevance of topic is clear.
Use of research skills to identify & summarise key articles (25%) 2-3:
Articles are incomplete and/or not high quality.
4: Articles are of variable quality and relevance.
5: Articles are related and generally good quality; summaries identify key issues.
6: Articles are generally relevant to topic, draws from mostly high-quality sources; provides an
overview of each article; demonstrates understanding of key issues.
7: Articles are relevant to topic; draws from high-quality sources; clearly articulated overview of
each article; demonstrates clear understanding of key issues.
Quality of integrated argument supported by literature (50%)
2-3: Poorly constructed argument and inadequate integration of referenced sources.
4: Failure to identify key issues in argument construction; Overuse of quotations.
5: Mixed quality of integration showing some lack of understanding of key issues; overuse of
some sources
6: Argument draws from a range of sources; appropriate citations used, mostly correctly. 7:
Argument is well integrated drawing from a range of sources; appropriate citations correctly
used.
Professional Presentation (15%)
2-3: Lacks professional layout; major/multiple errors in spelling.
4: Poor layout, inadequate sentence construction and paragraph formation.
5: Minor errors in spelling and /or grammar.
6: Spelling and grammar checked and mostly accurate; clear layout and format.
7: Spelling and grammar checked and fully accurate; well written; clear layout and format.