Micro Organizational Theory – MB850
Department of Organization Studies, BostonCollege
Fall 2003, Thursday1-3:30 p.m.
Professor Judy Clair Office: Fulton 433Phone: (617) 552-0451
Email: Office Hours: Monday 1-2 p.m. or by appointment
Course Description
This Ph.D. seminar is intended for beginning doctoral students. The major purpose of the course is to introduce students to some of the traditional as well as innovative topics of research in the micro side of organizational behavior and theory. The micro side of organizational behavior and theory draws primarily from the field of psychology to theorize regarding individual, interpersonal, and group level issues within the workplace. However, this area of research also draws from additional disciplines, such as sociology, anthropology, and political science. The field of organization studies is enormous; thus, my humble goal is only to provide you with a jumping-off point from which you can start to join “good conversations” within the field, as well as an ability to move forward in your learning beyond the necessary limits of this class. The readings draw more heavily from contemporary research; however, I also provide a dose of the older “classics” throughout the syllabus.
Amultiple perspective approach that embraces a range of epistemological and methodological research traditions is central to this class[1]. This multi-paradigm approach will allow students to develop a rudimentary ability to thoughtfully put the research that they encounter into a paradigmatic context and to critique research by drawing from multiple paradigmatic perspectives. We will not get heavily into epistemology or methodology; however, our discussions will aim to familiarize you with the different epistemological and methodological approaches to theory and empirical research.
By the end of this course you should have:
a)a road map of a good number of research streams in the micro side of the field of organization studies;
b)budding analytical and conceptual skills;
c)an understanding of some of the epistemological and methodological research traditions within the field;
d)increased abilities for theorizing and researching in the micro side of the field; and
e)improved abilities to lead and facilitate classroom learning and discussions.
Preparing For Class
This class runs as a seminar. Each student needs to be prepared to discuss all of the required readings for each class session. You also will be provided with a list of resource readings (see the end of the syllabus). Though not required, these lists of resource readings are provided should you want to explore a topic in greater depth.
Our job together will be to create a “good conversation” about the topic being covered on a particular day and to help each other mindfully engage with each of the readings. So, preparation for class is likely to require that you carefully read each article more than once so that you develop a through understanding of the author’s arguments as well as a more developed critique of the article, its contributions, and limitations. In addition to our critiques of readings, we will want to understand what is being attempted, what has been accomplished, and what the readings are suggesting about further extensions, refinements, and empirical research.
Course Requirements
Class Leadership. Each student will facilitate a discussionregarding one article duringeach class session. This approach ensures that allstudents will be involved in class leadership across the entire semester. Students will be responsible for being the most knowledgeable student in the session about their assigned article. Students should prepare several discussion questions for their article to productively guide our discussion of it. Further, each student will also be responsible for distributing a handout to the other students, no longer than one page,that provides highlights of key points of their assigned article for that week. (Students should keep these for their files, as they will likely be a resource for comprehensive exams or future research!).
Please feel free to run discussion questions and summaries by me for feedback and advice.
Research Paper. Every student will complete one research paper. The paper may be either:
(1)A conceptual/theoretical paper suitable for publication in the Academy of Management Review, or;
(2)A research proposal of the type suitable for the Academy of Management Journal. No data or analysis is necessary; however, your research design, sources of data, and proposed analyses should be presented showing how you would empirically test your hypotheses (or build theory, depending upon your research approach). Although no data collection is expected for this assignment, students should develop a proposal with the expectation that they will pursue this project in the near future.
The paper topic must be related to micro-OB as broadly defined in this course. The paper should be 20-25 double-spaced pages, not including charts, graphs, and references. You should follow the style guide of the Academy Journals (available online at
A 2-3 page proposal for your paper is due at the start of class on Oct. 9. Though short, this proposal is important because it lays out the conceptual rationale for your paper topic. We will spend part of class that day discussing your proposals and providing initial feedback to one another.
A complete, well-developed draft of the paper is due at the start of class on Nov. 6. Please bring two copies to class. Your paper will be assigned to one of your classmates for peer review and will be returned to you at the start of class on Nov. 20. I will also provide you with feedback.
The final stage of your paper will involve two steps. First, you will make a formal presentation of your paper on Dec. 4 to your classmates as well as a group of colleagues (Ph.D. students and professors). Second, you will respond to the feedback and make final revisions to the paper before turning in your final draft on Dec. 11. You will submit your revised paper as well as specific responses to your reviewer’s comments on a separate attachment.
Peer Review. You will review one of the research papers of your peers. You are to assume that you are conducting a review for AMR or AMJ (see for advice to reviewers of AMR and AMJ). Your review should be constructively critical and make specific suggestions for improvement to the author. The review should address quality of conceptualization, research design (if appropriate), integration of appropriate literature, and grammatical/structural issues. Your review should be no longer than 3 single-spaced pages. You will receive the paper at the start of class on Nov. 6. You will submit a copy of the review to me and to the author at the start of class on Nov. 20.
Grading
Assignment /Weight
(2) Research Papera. Proposal / 5%
b. Paper Draft / 10%
c. Final Paper / 35%
d. Presentation / 15%
(3) Feedback to Peer on Their Paper Draft / 5%
(4) Class Participation / 30%
Summary Schedule
Date / Topic / DeliverablesSeptember 4 / Introduction: TheoryBuilding and Major Paradigms in Organizational Behavior / Readings
September 11 / (The Debate Over) Individual Dispositions / Readings
September 18 / Cognition and Sensemaking / Readings
September 25 / Emotions and Emotional Expression in Organizations / Readings
October 2 / Motivation / Readings
October 9 / Extra Role Behaviors: Initiative and Individual Agency at Work / Readings
Paper Proposal Due
October 16 / The “Dark Side” of Workplace Behaviors / Readings
October 23 / Stress, Burnout, & Coping / Readings
October 30 / Socialization and Social Influence / Readings
November 6 / Demography and Diversity in Organizations / Readings
Paper Draft Due
November 13 / Organizational and Work Attachments / Readings
Date / Topic / Deliverables
November 20 / Leadership / Readings
Provide Written Feedback to Peer on their Paper Draft
November 27 – no class / no class / no class
December 4 / Presentations / Presentations
December 11 / Final Paper Due & Party!! / Final Paper Due & Party!!
Readings
Sept. 4Introduction: TheoryBuilding and Major Paradigms in Organizational Behavior
Pfeffer, J. 1998. Understanding organizations: Concepts and controversies. In D. Gilbert, S. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), pp. 773-777, Handbook of social psychology (4th edition). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Martin, J. 2000. Hidden gendered assumptions in mainstream organizational theory and research. Journal of Management Inquiry, 9: 207-216.
Gioia, D.A. & Pitre, E. 1990. Multiparadigm perspectives on theory building. Academy of Management Review, 15: 584-602.
VanMaanen, J. 1995. Style as theory. Organization Science, 6(1): 133-143.
Optional: See articles by Pfeffer and VanMannen in the resource section at the syllabus’ end to continue with the debate characterized through VanMannen, above.
Sept. 11(The Debate Over) Individual Dispositions
Davis-Blake & Pfeffer. 1989. Just a mirage: The search for dispositional effects in organizational research. Academy of Management Review, 14: 203-224.
House, Shane & Herold. 1996. Rumors of the death of dispositional research are vastly exaggerated. Academy of Management Review, 21: 203-224.
Chatman, J. 1989. Improving interactional organizational research: A model of person-organization fit. Academy of Management Review, 14: 333-349.
Kilduff, M. & Day, D.V. 1994. Do chameleons get ahead: The effects of self-monitoring on managerial careers. Academy of Management Journal, 37: 1047-1060.
Judge, T.A. & Bono, J.E. 2001. Relationship of core self-evaluation traits – self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability – with job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86: 80-92.
Sept. 18Cognition and Sensemaking
Walsh, 1995. Managerial and organizational cognition: Notes from a trip down memory lane. Organization Science, 6: 280-321.
Ashforth, B.E. & Fried, Y. 1988. The mindlessness of organizational behaviors. Human Relations, 41: 305-329.
Staw, B.M., Sandelands, L.E. & Dutton, J.E. 1981. Threat-rigidity effects in organizational behavior: A multilevel analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26: 501-524.
Weick, K.E. 1993. The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The Mann Gulch disaster. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38: 628-652.
Sept. 25Emotions and Emotional Expression in Organizations
Sutton, R.I. 1991. Maintaining norms about expressed emotions: The case of bill collectors. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36: 245-268.
Martin, J., Knopoff, K., & Beckman, C. 1998. An alternative to bureaucratic impersonality and emotional labor: Bounded emotionality at the Body Shop. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43: 429-469.
Rafaeli, A. & Sutton, R.I. 1989. The expression of emotion in organizational life. In L.L. Cummings and B.M. Staw (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, 11: 1-42. Greenwich, Conn.: JAI Press.
Elsbach, K.D. & Barr, P.S. 1999. The effects of mood on individuals’ use of structured decision protocols. Organization Science, 10: 181-198.
Oct. 2Motivation
Mitchell, T.R. 1982. Motivation: New directions for theory, research, and practice. Academy of Management Review, 7: 80-88.
Mitchell, T.R. 1997. Matching motivational strategies with organizational contexts. In L.L. Cummings and B.M. Staw, Research in Organizational Behavior, 19: 57-149. Greenwich, CN: JAI Press
Kanfer, R. & Heggestad, E.D. 1997. Motivational traits and skills: A person-centered approach to work motivation. In L.L. Cummings and B.M. Staw, Research in Organizational Behavior, 19: 1-56.
Donovan, J.J. 2001. Work motivation. In Anderson et al. (Eds.), Handbook of industrial, work and organizational psychology, pp. 53-76. Thousand Oaks, Ca: Sage.Jones
Seo, M.G., Barrett, L.F. & Bartunek, J.M. 2003. The role of affective experience in work motivation. In press,Academy of Management Review.
Oct. 9Extra Role Behaviors: Initiative and Individual Agency At Work
Van Dyne, L., Cummings, L.L., & McLeanParks, J. 1995. Extra-role behaviors: In pursuit of construct and definitional clarity (a bridge over muddied waters). In L.L. Cummings and B.M. Staw (Eds), Research in Organizational Behavior, 17: 215-285. San Francisco, CA: JAI Press.
Farh, J.L., Earley, P.C., & Lin, S.C. 1997. Impetus for action: A cultural analysis of justice and organizational citizenship behavior in Chinese society. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42: 421-444.
Wrzesniewski, A. & Dutton, J.E. 2001. Crafting a job: Revisioning employees as active crafters of their work. Academy of Management Review, 26: 179-201.
Prasad, P. & Prasad, A. 2000. Stretching the iron cage: The constitution and implications of routine workplace resistance. Organization Science, 11: 387-403.
Oct. 16The “Dark Side” of Workplace Behaviors
Greenberg, J. 1990. Employee theft as a reaction to underpayment inequality: The hidden costs of pay cuts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75: 561-568.
Andersson, L.M. & Pearson, C.M. 1999. Tit for tat?: The spiraling effect of incivility in the workplace. Academy of Management Review, 24: 452-471.
Robinson, S.L. & Bennett, R.J. 1995. A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: A multidimensional scaling study. Academy of Management Journal, 38: 555-572.
Bacharach, S.B., Bamberger, P.A., & Sonnenstuhl, W.J. 2002. Driven to drink: Managerial control, work-related risk factors, and employee problem drinking. Academy of Management Journal, 45(4): 637-658.
Oct. 23Stress, Burnout, & Coping
Meyerson, D.E. 1994. Interpretations of stress in institutions: The cultural production of ambiguity and burnout. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39: 628-653.
Cordes, C.L. & Dougherty, T.W. 1993. A review and integration of research on job burnout. Academy of Management Review, 18: 621-656.
Schaubroeck, J. & Merritt, D.E. 1997. Divergent effects of job control on coping with work stressors: The key role of self-efficacy. Academy of Management Journal, 40: 738-754.
Edwards, J.R. 1992. A cybernetic theory of stress, coping and well-being in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 17: 238-274.
Kahn, W. 1993. Caring for the caregivers: Patterns of organizational caregiving. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38:
Oct. 30Socialization and Social Influence
Van Maanen, J. & Schein, E.G. 1979. Toward a theory of organizational socialization. In B.M. Staw and L.L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, 1: 209-264. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Louis, M.R. 1980. Surprise and sensemaking: What newcomers experience in entering unfamiliar organizational settings. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25: 226-251.
Ibarra, H.1999. Provisional selves: Experimenting with image and identity in professional adaptation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44: 764-791.
Chatman, J. 1991. Matching people and organizations: Selection and socialization in public accounting firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36: 459-484.
Morrison, E.W. 2002. Newcomers’ relationships: The role of social network ties during socialization. Academy of Management Journal, 45(6): 1149-1160.
Nov. 6Demography and Diversity in Organizations
Ashforth, B.E. & Humphrey, R.H. 1995. Labeling processes in the organization: Constructing the individual. In L.L. Cummings & B.M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, 17: 413-461. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Clair, J.A., Beatty, J.E., & MacLean, T. In press. Out of sight but not out of mind: Managing invisible social identities in the workplace. Academy of Management Review.
Harrison, D.A., Price, K.H., Gavin, J.H., & Florey, A.T. 2002. Time, teams, and task performance: Changing effects of surface- and deep-level diversity on group functioning. Academy of Management Journal, 45(5): 1029-1045.
Ely, R. J. & Thomas, D.A. 2001. Cultural diversity at work: The effects of diversity perspectives on work group processes and outcomes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46: 229-273.
Polzer, J.T., Milton, L.P., & Swann Jr., W.B. 2002. Capitalizing on diversity: Interpersonal congruence in small work groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47: 296-324.
Nov. 13Organizational and Work Attachments
Dutton, J.E., Dukerich, J.M. & Harquail, C.V. 1994. Organizational images and member identification. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39: 239-263.
Kahn, W.A. 1990. Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33: 692-724.
Elsbach, K. D. 1999. An expanded model of organizational identification. In B.M. Staw and L.L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, 21: 163-200. Greenwich, CN: JAI Press.
Pratt, M. 2000. The good, the bad, and the ambivalent: Managing identification among Amway distributors. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(3): 456-493.
Brockner, J. Tyler, T.R., & Cooper-Schneider, R.C. 1992. The influence of prior commitment to an institution on reactions to perceived unfairness: The higher they are, the harder they fall. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37: 241-261.
Nov. 20Leadership
Den Hartog, D.N. & Koopman, P.L. 2001. Leadership in organizations. In Anderson, N. Ones, D.S., Sinangil, H.K. & Viswesvaran, C. (Eds). 2001. Handbook of industrial, work, and organizational psychology (vol. 2). Thousand Oaks, Ca: Sage. pp. 166-187.
Pfeffer, J. 1981. Management as symbolic action: The creation and maintenance of organizational paradigms. In L.L. Cummings & B.M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, 3: 1-52. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Weber, R., Camerer, C., Rottenstreich, Y. & Knez, M. 2001. The illusion of leadership: Misattribution of cause in coordination games. Organization Science, 12(5): 582-598.
Sparrowe, R.T. & Liden, R.C. 1997. Process and structure in leader-member exchange. Academy of Management Review, 22: 522-552.
House, R.J., Spangler, W.D. & Woycke, J. 1991. Personality and charisma in the U.S. presidency: A psychological theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36: 364-396.
Additional Resources
Introduction: TheoryBuilding and Major Paradigms in Organizational Behavior
Rousseau, D. 1997. Organizational behavior in the new organizational era. In J.T. Spence, J.M. Darley, & D.J. Foss (eds.), Annual Review of Psychology, (vol. 48, pp. 515-546). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.
Dent, E.B. 2002. The messy history of OB&D: How three strands came to be seen as one rope. Journal of Management History, 40(3): 266-280.
Porter, L.W. 1996. Forty years of organizational studies: Reflections from a micro perspective. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41: 262-269.
Alvesson, M. & Deetz, S. 2000. Alternative social science research perspectives. Doing Critical Management Research: Chapter 2, pp. 23-48. London: Sage.
Bacharach, S.B. 1989. Organizational theories: Some criteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 14: 496-515.
Sutton, R.L. & Staw, B.M. 1995. What theory is not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40: 371-384.
Weick, K.E. 1989. Theory construction as disciplined imagination. Academy of Management Review, 14: 516-531.
Pfeffer, J. 1993. Barriers to the advance of organizational science: Paradigm development as a dependent variable. Academy of Management Review, 18: 599-620.
Whetten, D. 1989. What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, 14: 490-495.
Pfeffer, J. 1995. Mortality, reproducibility, and the persistence of styles of theory. Organization Science, 6(6): 681-686.
Van Maanen, J. 1995. Fear and loathing in organization studies. Organization Science, 6(6): 687-692.
The Debate Over Individual Dispositions
Barrick, M.R. & Mount, M. 1991. The big five personality dimensions & job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44: 1-26.
Davis-Blake, A. & Pfeffer, J. 1996. Situational determinism? – One step forward, two steps back? Academy of Management Review, April: 340-343.
Shane, S.A., Herold, D.M., & House, R.J. 1996. Situational determinism? – One step forward, two steps back? Academy of Management Review, April: 343-345.
Meglino, B. & Ravlin, E. 1998. Individual values in organizations: Concepts, controversies, and research. Journal of Management, 24: 351-389.
Staw, B. 2002. The dispositional approach to job attitudes: An empirical and conceptual review. In B. Schneider & B. Smith (Eds.), Personality and Organization. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.
Staw, B., Bell, N. & Clausen, J. 1986. The dispositional approach to job attitudes: A lifetime longitudinal test. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31: 56-77.
Cognition and Sensemaking
Weick, K.E. 1995. Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gioia & Poole. 1984. Scripts in organizational behavior. Academy of Management Review, 9: 449-459.
Humphrey, R. 1985. How work roles influence perception: Structural-cognitive processes and organizational behavior. American Sociological Review, 50: 242-252.
Malle, B. 1999. How people explain behavior: A new theoretical framework. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3: 23-48.
Tetlock, P.E. 2000. Cognitive biases and organizational correctives: Do both disease and cure depend on the politics of the beholder? Administrative Science Quarterly, 45: 293-326.
Bougon, M., Weick, K., & Binkhorst, D. 1977. Cognition in organizations: An analysis of the Utrecht Jazz Orchestra. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22: 606-639.
Emotions and Emotional Expression in Organizations
Rafaeli, A.Sutton, R.I. 1987. Expression of emotion as part of the work role. Academy of Management Review, 12: 23-37.
Hochschild, A.R. 1979. Emotion work, feeling rules, and social structure. AJS, 85: 551-575.
Hochschild, A.R. 1983. The managed heart. BerkeleyLos Angeles, CA: University of California Press.
Fineman, E. (Ed.) 2000. Emotion in organizations (2nd Edition). London: Sage.
Lord, R.G. ,Kimoski, R.J., & Kanger, R. (Eds.) 2002. Emotions in the workplace: Understanding the structure and role of emotions in organizational behavior. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ashkanasy, N.M. Hartel, C.E. & Zerbe, W.J. 2000. Emotions in the workplace: Research, theory and practice. Westport, CN: Quorum Books.
Cropanzo, R., James, K. & Konosvsky, M.A. 1993. Dispositional affectivity as a predictor or work attitudes and job performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior ,14: 595-606.