Management Theories and Practices: Past, Current and Futureemphasizes Gosling and Mintzberg's Action Mindset portion of "The Five Minds of a Manager" article.
t.
Final Project Guidelines Management Theories and Practices: Past, Current and Future emphasizes Gosling and Mintzberg's Action Mindset portion of "The Five Minds of a Manager" article. NOTE: This project will take the action mindset and synthesize the components discussed in each unit; how management and change is not mechanistic, but a decision-making process with the variables of culture, motivation, and systems thinking, and how management theory places an influence. It is more than a “mechanistic schedule of steps of formulation followed by implementation.” Action and reflection are blended, a need for energized action is necessary but not without structure. For the Final Project (submitted in Unit 6), you will write a 10-12 page referenced paper (this translates into approximately 2 pages for each unit), in APA format, assessing how the action mindset integrates with the topic of each unit. ** You were encouraged to start this paper after you complete Unit 1 and update it after each unit thereafter to eliminate a large amount of work at the end of the term. Answer these questions for each unit: 1. How does the action mindset integrate with the topic of the unit? 2. What specific content from the unit contributes or doesn’t contribute to the action mindset? 3. Does the action mindset add value to the unit’s topic or not? For Unit 1, connect the three questions to the foundations of management theory (Taylor, Fayol, Selznick, etc.). For Unit 2, connect the three questions to how the evolution of organizational thought has taken shape (Organic vs. mechanistic systems, putting people first, etc.). For Unit 3, connect the three questions to how the internal and external environments shape the action of a manager (family/work balance, toxic managers, emotional intelligence). For Unit 4, connect the three questions to how the strategy an organization adopts affects productivity, profits and its people (globalization, business ethics, work-out strategy, theories X & Y). For Unit 5, connect the three questions to how the design an organization adopts affects productivity, profits, and its people (systems thinking, strategic imperatives, organizational structure and design). For Unit 6, connect the three questions to organizational culture, learning, and change. **See the analytic rubric below for grading criteria. Example to help with each section: (You can use these sentence stems to help you formulate your final paper or use other versions that more appropriately fit the content you wish to highlight from each unit’s materials. These are meant to be guidelines to help, but are in no way mandatory.) Unit 2 Example: Evolution of organizational thought has evolved over time from… The action mindset integrates with the evolution of organizational thought in that… Author (year) state that…which contributes to the Gosling & Mintzberg’s (2003) action mindset by… Gosling & Mintzberg’s (2003) action mindset adds value to the evolution of organizational thought because… **As with all papers, include an introductory paragraph to open the paper as well as a conclusion. One inch margins, double-spacing, proper set up for the title page and reference page, etc. are all expected as well. Unit 6 Final Project: Assignment Checklist: Be sure your paper includes each of these 4 parts: 1. Interpret Gosling and Mintzberg’s Action Mindset 2. Illustrate how the action mindset integrates with the topic of each unit 3. Show how the topics of each unit contribute or not contribute to the action mindset 4. Demonstrate how the action mindset does or does not add value to each unit’s topics Rubric: Apply theoretical knowledge to organizational and managerial problems Analytic Rubric No Progress 0 Introductory 1 Emergent 2 Practiced 3 Proficient 4 Mastery 5 Total Points Interpret Gosling and Mintzberg’s Action Mindset Student work demonstrates no understanding or progress towards achievement of this outcome. Student work demonstrates the ability to list a few of the components to Mintzberg’s Action Mindset. Student work demonstrates the ability to explain some of the aspects of Mintzberg’s Action Mindset. Student work demonstrates the ability to discuss (at the level of comprehension) many aspects of Gosling and Mintzberg’s Action Mindset. Student work demonstrates the ability to incompletely interpret Gosling and Mintzberg’s Action Mindset. Student work demonstrates the ability to accurately interpret Gosling and Mintzberg’s Action Mindset. Illustrate how the action mindset integrates with the topic of each unit Student work demonstrates no understanding or progress towards achievement of this outcome. Student work demonstrates the ability to list a few of the components to the action mindset. Student work demonstrates the ability to explain how the action mindset integrates with some of the units. Student work demonstrates the ability to discuss (at the level of comprehension) how the action mindset integrates with most of the units. Student work demonstrates the ability to partially illustrate how the action mindset integrates with the topic of each unit. Student work demonstrates the ability to fully illustrate how the action mindset integrates with the topic of each unit. Show how the topics of each unit contribute or not contribute to the action mindset Student work demonstrates no understanding or progress towards achievement of this outcome. Student work demonstrates the ability to list ways that a few of the units contribute or not contribute to the action mindset. Student work demonstrates the ability to explain ways that some of the units contribute or not contribute to the action mindset. Student work demonstrates the ability to discuss (at the level of comprehension) the ways that most of the units contribute or not contribute to the action mindset. Student work demonstrates the ability to minimally show how the topics of each unit contribute or not contribute to the action mindset. Student work demonstrates the ability to clearly show how the topics of each unit contribute or not contribute to the action mindset. Demonstrate how the action mindset does or does not add value to each unit’s topics Student work demonstrates no understanding or progress towards achievement of this outcome. Student work demonstrates the ability to list the ways that action mindset does or does not add value to a few of the units. Student work demonstrates the ability to explain the ways that action mindset does or does not add value to some of the units. Student work demonstrates the ability to discuss (at the level of comprehension) the ways that action mindset does or does not add value to many of the units. Student work demonstrates the ability to partially demonstrate how the action mindset does or does not add value to each unit’s topics. Student work demonstrates the ability to critically demonstrate how the action mindset does or does not add value to each unit’s topics. Mean The world of the manager is complicated and confusing. Making sense of it requires not a knack for simplification but the ability to synthesize insights from different mind-sets into a comprehensible whole.The . Five Minds of a Manage onathan Gosling and ^ ^ -^byjonathan Gosling and Henry Mintzberg 54 THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE of a major Canadian com-pany complained recently that he can't get hisengineers to think like managers. It's a common complaint, but behind it lies an uncommonly important question: What does it mean to think like a manager? Sadly, little attention has been paid to that question in recent years. Most of us have become so enamored of "leadership" that "management" has been pushed into the background. Nobody aspires to being a good manager anymore; everybody wants to be a great leader. But the separation of management from leadership is dangerous. Just as management without leadership encourages an uninspired style, which deadens activities, leadership without management encourages a disconnected style, which promotes hubris. And we all know the destructive HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW power of hubris in organizations. So let's get back to plain old management. The problem, of course, is that plain old management is complicated and confusing. Be global, managers are told, and be local. Collaborate, and compete. Change, per- petually, and maintain order. Make the numbers while nurturing your people. How is anyone supposed to rec- oncile all this? The fact is, no one can. To be effective, managers need to face the juxtapositions in order to ar- rive at a deep integration of these seemingly contradic- tory concerns. That means they must focus not only on what they have to accomplish but also on how they have to think. Managers need various "mind-sets." Helping managers appreciate that was the challenge we set for ourselves in the mid-1990s when we began to develop a new master's program for practicing managers. We knew we could not rely on the usual structure of MBA education, which divides the management world into the discrete business functions of marketing, finance, ac- counting, and so on. Our intention was to educate man- agers who were coming out of these narrow silos; why push them back in? We needed a new structure that en- couraged synthesis rather than separation. What we came up with-a structure based on the five aspects of fhe man- agerial mind - has proved not only powerful in the class- room but insightful in practice, as we hope to demon- strate in this article. We'll first explain how we came up with the five managerial mind-sets, then we'll discuss each in some depth before concluding with the case for interweaving the five. NOVEMBER 2003 55 The Five Minds of a Manager The Five Managerial Mind-Sets The Intemational Federation of Red Cross and Red Cres- cent Societies, headquartered in Geneva, has a manage- ment development concern. It worries that it may be drifting too far toward a fast-action culture. It knows that it must act quickly in responding to disasters every- where-earthquakes and wars, floods and famines-but it also sees the need to engage in the slower, more delicate task of building a capacity for action that is careful, thoughtful, and tailored to local conditions and needs. Many business organizations face a similar problem - they know how to execute, but they are not so adept at stepping back to reflect on their situations. Others face the opposite predicament: They get so mired in thinking about their problems that they can't get things done fast enough. We all know bureaucracies that are great at plan- ning and organizing but slow to respond to market forces, just as we're all acquainted with the nimble companies that react to every stimulus, but sloppily, and have to be constantly fixing things. And then, of course, there are those that suffer from both afflictions-for example, firms whose marketing departments are absorbed with grand positioning statements while their sales forces chase every possible deal. Those two aspects establish the bounds of manage- ment: Everything that every effective manager does is sandwiched between action on the ground and reflection in the abstract. Action without reflection is thoughtless; reflection without action is passive. Every manager has to find