You are on page 1of 17

COURSE PLANNER

COURSE PLANNER: SEMESTER JULY 2010 – NOV 2010

Course : Information Management and Organisational Behaviour


Course Code : 205KM
Contact Hours : 3 hours per week
Number of Weeks : 26 weeks
Total 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 : sofian@kptm.edu.my, firdaus@kptm.edu.my

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.
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
Learning Outcomes
Assessment Weight (%) 1 2 3
Individual Assignment
i) Written essay 20  
ii) Case Study 20  

Group Final Project


i) Project Report 60   

Total 100

Assessment

Composition of Internal module mark : 100% coursework


Pass 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 Allocation of group project


ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR and presentation

CHP 01.
Introduction to Organizational
Behavior

4 CHP 02. Case Study#1


Organizational Culture
Drexler’s World Famous
Bar-B-Que

Page 32
5 PART 2: UNDERSTANDING AND Submission/presentation
MANAGING INDIVIDUAL BEHAVIOR of Case Study#1

CHP 03. Case Study#2


Individual Differences and Work
Behavior Organizational Culture: Life
or Death

Page 62

6 CHP 04. Submission/presentation


Perceptions, Attributions, and of Case Study#2
Emotions
Case Study#3

Personality Testing: Yes or


No?

Page 92

7 CHP 05. Submission/presentation


Motivation of Case Study#3

Case Study#4

A Management Style That


Made an Impression

Page 116

8 CHP 06. Submission/presentation


Job Design, Work, and Motivation of Case Study#4

Case Study#5

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

Page 146

31/08/2010 PUBLIC HOLIDAY – 1 DAY


INDEPENDENCE DAY
9-11 CHP 07. Submission/presentation
Evaluation, Feedback and Rewards of Case Study#5

Case Study#6

The Hovey and Beard


Company Case

Page 176

08/09/2010 *MID SEMESTER BREAK & HARI 1 ½ WEEKS


- RAYA PUASA HOLIDAY
19/09/2010

12 CHP 08. Submission/presentation


Managing Misbehavior of Case Study#6

Case Study#7

Making Choices about


Rewards

Page 210

13 CHP 09 Submission/presentation
Managing Individual Stress of Case Study#7

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 Case Study#9


INTERPERSONAL INFLUENCE
No Response from Monitor
CHP 10. 23
Groups and Teams
Page 271

CHP 11. Case Study#10


Managing Conflict and Negotiations
Electrolux Cleans Up

Page 307

CHP 12. Case Study#11


Power, Politics, and Empowerment
Conflict at Walt Disney
Company: A Distant
Memory

Page 337

PART 4: ORGANIZATIONAL Case Study#12


PROCESS
The Power and Politics of
CHP 13. Privacy on Social
Communication Networking Sites

Page 366

CHP 14. Case Study#13


Decision Making
The Road to Hell

Page 401

CHP 15. Case Study#14


Leadership
Bank of America CEO
under Pressure
Page 437

PART 5: ORGANIZATIONAL Case Study#15


DESIGN, CHANGE, AND
INNOVATION Rotating Leaders: Orpheus
CHP 16. Orchestra
Organizational Structure and Design
Page 474

CHP 17. Case Study#16


Managing Organizational Change and
Innovation 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 1
The 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 2
Natural 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

1. INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENTS (WRITTEN ESSAYS)

Evaluate the role of information systems within an organization and recommend


appropriate management and organizational behaviour approaches for the information
system function.

Objectives
Upon 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.

2. CASE STUDY (INDIVIDUAL)

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.

Marking
40 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 title
b) Must have clearly identified product or service/core business
c) Overall quality, creativity, ability to encapsulate the project idea and degree of
challenge
d) 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 advice
1. 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

1. INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENTS (WRITTEN ESSAYS)

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 Launches straight into essay The introduction is perfunctory Clearly understands and states
Introduction (10%) with no attempt to introduce or with a limited attempt to define the key issues of the essay.
define the topic. (1-3) the scope of the essay. (4-6) (7-10)

Body of Essay

Logical Development This is confused and This could be better organised The essay develops a logical
(10%) disorganised so that the story with the sequence of some argument and marshals ideas
is obscure. (1-3) material being rather illogical. clearly. (7-10)
(4-6)

Subject relevance (15%) Essay contains too much Some irrelevant / repetitive All material relevant to the subject
irrelevant/repetitive subject material. (6-10) of the essay. (11-15)
matter. (1-5)

Strength and depth of Far too much reliance on Little personal input. Mainly in Clear and informed analysis of
analysis. (20%) written sources - undigested précis of written sources. Some subject matter. (15-20)
material incorporated. Little analysis. (8-14)
analysis. (1-7)

Use of Sources (10%) Little evidence of any Most reference material covered. Shows good grasp of all relevant
supporting evidence. (1-3) (4-6) references. (7-10)

Concluding Section

Conclusions (10%) Essay comes to an abrupt end Conclusions rather perfunctory. Good concluding section drawing
without a proper concluding (4-6) together the various points made.
section. (1-3) (7-10)

Other Features

References (10%) Very few or no references in References are not always References are always properly
text or listed. (1-3) properly and appropriately cited and appropriately cited and listed.
and listed. (4-6) (7-10)

Spelling (5%) Far too many spelling errors. Most words are correctly spelt. All words are correctly spelt.
(1-2) (3-4) (5)

Grammar and Syntax (5%) Grammar and syntax need A few misuses of words and No errors of syntax and grammar.
urgent attention. (1-2) occasional errors of sentence (5)
construction. (3-4)

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

2. CASE STUDY (INDIVIDUAL)

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

Logical Development This is confused and This could be better organised The essay develops a logical
(10%) disorganised so that the story with the sequence of some argument and marshals ideas
is obscure. (1-3) material being rather illogical. clearly. (7-10)
(4-6)

Subject relevance (10%) Essay contains too much Some irrelevant / repetitive All material relevant to the subject
irrelevant/repetitive subject material. (6-10) of the essay. (11-15)
matter. (1-5)

Strength and depth of Far too much reliance on Little personal input. Mainly in Clear and informed analysis of
analysis. (10%) written sources - undigested précis of written sources. Some subject matter. (15-20)
material incorporated. Little analysis. (8-14)
analysis. (1-7)

Use of Sources (5%) Little evidence of any Most reference material covered. Shows good grasp of all relevant
supporting evidence. (1-3) (4-6) references. (7-10)

Spelling (5%) Far too many spelling errors. Most words are correctly spelt. All words are correctly spelt.
(1-2) (3-4) (5)

Grammar and Syntax (5%) Grammar and syntax need A few misuses of words and No errors of syntax and grammar.
urgent attention. (1-2) occasional errors of sentence (5)
construction. (3-4)

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


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 Launches straight into The introduction is Clearly states the key
area (10%) report with no attempt to perfunctory with a limited objectives of the report
state the objectives of attempt to define the (7-10)
the report (1-3) objectives of the report (4-6)

Body of Report

Logical Development This is confused and This could be better The report develops a
(5%) disorganised so that the organised with the sequence logical argument and
story is obscure. (1-2) of some material being rather marshals ideas clearly.
illogical. (3-4) (5)

Subject relevance (5%) Report contains too Some irrelevant / repetitive All material relevant to
much irrelevant/repetitive material. (3-4) the subject of the report.
subject matter. (1-2) (5)

Strength and depth of Far too much reliance on Little personal input. Mainly Clear and informed
analysis (10%) written sources - in précis of written sources. analysis of subject
undigested material Some analysis (4-6) matter (7-10)
incorporated. Little
analysis (1-3)

Use of Sources (5%) Little evidence of any Some reference material Shows good grasp of all
supporting evidence covered (3-4) relevant references. (5)
(1-2)

Concluding Section

Conclusions (10%) Report comes to an Conclusions rather Good concluding section


abrupt end without a perfunctory. (4-6) drawing together the
proper concluding various points made. (7-
section (1-3) 10)

Other Features

References (5%) Very few or no References are not always References are always
references in text or properly and appropriately properly and
listed. (1-2) cited and listed (3-4) appropriately cited and
listed (5)

Spelling (5%) Far too many spelling Most words are correctly All words are correctly
errors. (1-2) spelt. (3-4) spelt. (5)

Grammar and Syntax Grammar and syntax A few misuses of words and No errors of syntax and
need urgent attention. occasional errors of sentence grammar. (5)
(5%) (1-2) construction. (3-4)

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)

Additional Comments, (if any)

You might also like