美國金融學留學生課程essay-Management class term paper

 

Paper.  For this semester’s paper assignment, you must read one of the following “popular management” books.  Then write a 7-11 page typed report (1.5 or double-spaced, 1-inch margins) relating the book to the course (note that you may have to ‘read ahead’ a bit in your textbook to see how some books relate to course topics that come after the due date for the paper).  These books are NOT on reserve but may be available at a local library and/or may be available for purchase at a bookstore.  Your paper is due as both hard copy and via e-mail at the beginning of class on Wednesday, November 16th at the beginning of class.  The paper constitutes 11% of your course grade.  

 

You may organize your paper in one of two ways (don’t feel you have to cover every topic mentioned in   the book in your report; after all, you only have 6-8 pages):  

 

Approach #1: (a) summary followed by (b) analysis, considering the same topics within each section; include a brief overview and conclusion.

Approach #2: organized by topic. Topic “a:” summary and analysis, topic “b:” summary and analysis, etc. and including a brief overview and conclusion.  

 

Either approach is fine.  However, the summary should only be about 1/3rd of the book.  The other 2/3rds should be analyzing the book.  Is it consistent with the textbook?  Is it consistent with scientific research?  (It helps if you read and cite scientific studies).  Is the book just repackaged ‘common sense’?  Is it too simplistic?  Piercing and keen insights?  Unworkable models? Muddy thinking?  Worthwhile advice?

方法1：（一）總結后跟（二）分析，考慮每個部分內相同的主題，包括一個簡短的概述和結論。

方法2：舉辦主題。主題“：”總結和分析，主題為“B：”總結和分析等，并包括一個簡短的概述和結論。

 

兩種方法都可以。然而，總結應該只有約三分之一個的書。其他2/3rds應該分析的書。它是與教科書相一致？它是與科研相一致？ （如果您閱讀和引用科學的研究）。是這本書只是重新包裝的“常識”？是不是太簡單了嗎？穿刺和敏銳的洞察力？行不通的模型？泥濘的思維？有價值的建議？

 

Remember:  Reading and taking notes on your chosen book is the easy (and smaller) part of the assignment.  The harder part is writing a paper relating the book to the scientific literature in Organizational Behavior, which will require additional research, thought, and organization.#p#分頁標題#e#

 

For your term paper assignment, you must read and write about one of the following books:

 

Amigoni, Michael, & Gurvis, Sandra (2009).  Managing the Telecommuting Employee. Adams. 336 pp.

 

Anderson, Dave (2011).  How to run your business ‘by the book’. Wiley. 252 pages. 

 

Anderson, Donald L. (2009). Organizational development:  The process of leading organizational change. Sage.

 

Barsh, Joanna, & Cranston, Susie. (2009). How remarkable women lead… Crown Business. 368 pp.  

 

Blair, R. (2011).  Nothing to lose, everything to gain.  Portfolio. 240 pages.

 

Bryant, Adam (2011). The corner office: Indispensable…lessons from CEOs… NY: Times Books. 272 pp.

 

Buchanan, Mike (2011). The glass ceiling delusion. LPS publishing. 312 pp.  A different perspective... 

 

www.400190.com Cardone, Michael, Jr. & Spurler, M. (2009). Business with soul: Creating a workplace rich in faith and values. Nashville: Thomas Nelson.  240 pages.   

 

Cloke, K., & Goldsmith, J. (2011). Resolving conflict at work, third ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 399 pp. 

 

Conner, R., & Smith, T. (2011). Change the [organizational] culture, change the game. Portfolio, 245 pp.

 

Demars, Nan (2011).  You’ve got to be kidding! How to keep your job without losing your integrity.  

 

Fuller, Ed. (2011). You can’t lead with your feet on the desk. Wiley: 208 pp. [Focus on hospitality industry.]

 

Furnham, Adrian (2011). Managing people in a downturn.  Palgrave Macmillan. 224 pages. The title is part-economics, part-pun in that some of the problems describe people spiraling downward out of control.

 

Gelsinger, Pat (2008). The Juggling Act:  Bringing Balance to Your Faith, Family, and Work. Nashville: David Cook Publishers. 256 pp.  Memoirs of a Silicon Valley executive.

 

Goldman, Alan (2009). Transforming Toxic Leaders. Stanford, CA: Stanford Business Books.  

 

Goldstein, Jeffrey, Hazy, James K., & Lichtenstein, Ben B. (2010).  Complexity and the nexus of leadership. Leveraging nonlinear science to create innovation.  Palgrave MacMillan.  224 pp.  ‘Chaos/complexity theory’ from the natural sciences applied (at least as a metaphor) to management.  

 

Guttman, Howard M. (2008). Great Business Teams: Cracking the Code... New York: Wiley. 256 pages.#p#分頁標題#e#

 

Hill, Alexander (2008). Just business.  Downers Grove, IL: IVP. 256 pages. 

 

Hesselbein, Frances & Goldsmith, Marshall (Eds., 2009). The Organization of the Future 2:  Visions, Strategies, & Insights on Managing in a New Era. Wiley. Twenty-six authors offer ideas. 

  

Knight, L. R. (2011).  Powerful women:  They’re not men… Createspace.  208 pages.

 

Koller, F. (2011). Spark: How old-fashioned values drive a 21st Century corporation [Lincoln Electric].  

 

Langer, Arthur M. (2010). Information Technology and Organizational Learning: Managing Behavioral Change through Technology and Education, Second Edition. CRC Press. 

 

Latting, Jean K., & Ramsey, V. J. (2009). Reframing Change: How to Deal with Workplace Dynamics, Influence Others, and Bring People Together to Initiate Positive Change.  NY: Praeger.  226 pages.   The title “says it all”…but you still need to read the book for the details.

 

Lencioni, Patrick (2004).  Death by Meeting:  A leadership fable.  San Francisco:  Jossey-Bass.  OK, so it probably hasn’t won any awards yet as “great literature.”  Does it makes some good points? 260 pages.

 

Littman, Jon (2009). I hate people! Kick loose from the overbearing…jerks at work… Little, Brown, 272 pp. 

 

Loehr, A., & Kaye, J. (2011). Managing the unmanageable: How to motivate... Career Press. 256 pages.

 

Lowe, Graham (2011). Creating healthy organizations.  University of Toronto Press. 256 pages. 

 

Lutz, Bob (2011). Car guys vs. bean counters. Portfolio/Penguin. 256 pp.  Who should lead auto makers?

 

Maney, K., Hamm, S., & O’Brien, J. (2011).  Making the world better: The ideas that shaped a century – and a company [IBM].   IBM Press.  350 pages.

 

Meig, H. (2001).  The social psychology of expertise.  Psychology Press.  224 pp. 

 

Mintzberg, Henry (2009). Managing. Berrett-Koehler. Reflections on management and leadership from a scholar who is able to bridge theory and practice. Based on interviews with managers.

 

Nadler, Reldan S. (2010). Leading with emotional intelligence. McGraw-Hill. 336 pages.

 

Oakes, K., & Galagan, P. (Eds., 2011). The executive guide to integrated talent management.  ASTD.

 

Overbeck, Jennifer, Mannix, E., & Neale, M. (2011). Negotiation and groups.  Emerald. 259 pages.#p#分頁標題#e#

 

Pollard, C. William (2006). Serving Two Masters?  HarperCollins. An executive at ServiceMaster for 25 years reflects on managerial and business success as well as “the meaning of life.”  Reactions?

 

Reiman, T. (2008). The power of body language: How to succeed in every business situation. 352 pp.

 

Richards, G. (2011). Warehouse management.  Kogan. 352 pages.

 

Rigby, R. (2011). 28 Business thinkers who changed the world.  Kogan. 232 pages.

 

Romero, Steven (2011). Eliminating ‘us’ and ‘them’: Making IT and business one. Apress. 264 pages. 

 

Saj-Nicole, Joni, & Bayer, Damon (2010). The Right Fight: How Great Leaders Use Healthy Conflict to Drive Performance, Innovation, & Value. NY: HarperCollins.  256 pp. 

 

Shearhouse, Susan H. (2011). Conflict 101: A manager’s guide to resolving problems so everyone can get back to work. AMACOM.  272 pages.  

 

Tobutt, C. (2011). Alcohol at work: Managing alcohol problems & issues in the workplace. Gower. 266 pp. 

 

Tracy, Brian (2010). How the best leaders lead. NY: AMACOM. 256 pages.  

 

Vischer, Phil (2006).  Me, Myself, & Bob.  Nashville:  Nelson.  260 pages.  This the story of a business called Big Idea (ever see the NBC children’s show called “Veggietales”?) how it succeeded and then failed.  

 

Vukotich, George (2011). Ten Steps to successful change management.  ASTD. 250 pages. 

 

Your term paper grade will be based upon the following criteria:

(A) Adequate (but not excessive) summary................................. 10%

(B) Clearly stating your position on all the important issues  ........... 10%

(C) Quality of arguments (logic, etc.) ....................................... 40%

(D) Outside research (referencing articles, books, cases, theories, or 

research)  I expect TEN or more references for each paper......... 20%

(E) #p#分頁標題#e#Addressing opposing arguments (if any)................................ 10%

(F) Style (e.g., are the sentences clear?), grammar (e.g., do you know

when to use "there," "their,"  and "they're"?), reference page, misc. 10%

                                                         

Helpful Termpaper Suggestions:

Papers should have at least ten different references.  All ten references should be cited within the text at least once as you use them.   The general rule is, "if you borrow an idea or research finding, then cite the source, even if it is not a direct quote."  For example, suppose I cited a study showing that most supervisors divide their subordinates into "ingroup" and "outgroup" members.  I might write:

 

"It has been demonstrated that leaders do not treat all of their workers alike:  research shows that most supervisors divide their subordinates into ingroup and outgroup members (Dansereau, Cashman, and Graen, 1973).  Other work suggests that, (1) taking OB courses in college (Jones, 1990) and (2) working quickly toward a clearly-stated objective (Forrest, 1992) are also important for good leader-member relations."

 

Note that these were not direct quotes, but I cited the sources where I got my ideas.  That way the reader knows which ideas were borrowed from which sources.

 

The works you cite should also appear at the end of your paper in a reference list.  All works in the reference list should also be cited in the paper.  Thus, I do NOT want to see a vague "Bibliography"--I want to know which ideas in the paper go with each source.  

 

Examples of references:

(1)  For a book--

Jones, G. (1999).  I was a miserable failure before I took Organizational Behavior:  Just look at me now!  Atlanta:  New Publishers.

 

(2)  For journal articles--

Dansereau, F., Cashman, J. & Graen, G. (1973).  Instrumentality theory and equity as complementary approaches in predicting the relationship of leadership and turnover among managers.  Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 10, 184-200.

 

Forrest, N. B. (January 16, 2011).  My motto for success:  "Get there firstest with the mostest."  Journal of Vague Generalizations, 14, 128-131.#p#分頁標題#e#

 

Note that the underlined number is the volume number; the other numbers are page numbers.  So 14, 128-131 means "volume 14, pages 128-131."

 

 (3)  For internet sources--

Use the internet web address in the location where you would put the publisher of a printed document.

U.S. Meaningless Lists staff (2009). 2009 Top Undergraduate Basketweaving Programs.

U.S. Meaningless Lists.   Accessed: May 4, 2010 via ABI-Inform Database.

 

At least three of your references should come from "scholarly" sources (e.g., scholarly books, journals such as Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Academy of Management Journal, or Journal of Applied Psychology) rather than "popular" sources (e.g., Fortune, Business Week).  This will help you develop your skills at finding applications for research as well as helping you keep up with the latest developments in this scientific field.

 

Papers without adequate references will be penalized. The reason for this policy is to insure that you adequately understand the literature on the topics you discuss, and to keep your paper from sounding like a "paraphrase" of only one or two sources.  Remember to start researching your paper today!

 

Papers are to be completed individually and responses should be typed.  Use 1" margins and either double-space the paper or use single-spaced block-paragraph style (like this syllabus).

 

Guidelines for grading papers:

As you write your paper, please consider the following:

"F" papers tend to have the following characteristics:

1. The papers are dishonest and/or simply copy huge chunks of material.

2. They ignore key points of discussion and readings.

3. The author hasn't got a clue as to what the topic even means (e.g., I once had a student whose paper on "management science"  was poor because he did not bother to discover that there was a difference between modern "management science" a la MGT 395, and Frederick Taylor’s "scientific management" of the 1910s!)

4. They are "fluff" and haven't attempted to consider the scientific literature.

5. The papers contain serious factual errors.

6. They were written the night before and read like a sloppy "first draft" rather than a polished, formal paper. #p#分頁標題#e#

 

"D" papers tend to have the following characteristics:

1. Despite obvious effort, the author is "way off" in understanding the material.

2. The paper simply uses description; there is no analysis.

3. The paper contains factual errors.

 

"C" papers tend to have the following characteristics:

1. The formal paper correctly answers questions, but makes little attempt to integrate ideas into a coherent whole (thesis) through use of a logical, structured format with clear introduction, middle, and conclusion to the paper.

2. The formal paper does not show me where the author stands on the issue.  (However, note that you cannot claim "your own experience" as one of your ten sources as one student tried to do many years ago.)

3. The formal paper is well structured and integrated, but examples and evidence to support the thesis are missing, incorrect, unscientific, or irrelevant.

4. The formal paper is well structured and integrated, but does 

not address, then refute, any counterarguments (if appropriate for that topic).

"B" papers tend to have the following characteristics:

1. The formal paper is well written and appropriately considers the issues raised above.  However, the quality is not sufficient to give it an "A."

2. Course concepts and vocabulary are not sufficiently integrated into the paper.

3. Other important perspectives and/or issues are insufficiently explored, as relevant to the topic.

4. There are minor problems with technical aspects of the paper (citations, grammar, spelling, etc.).

 

"A" papers tend to have the following characteristics:

1. They fulfill all of the technical requirements of the assignment.

2. New concepts and vocabulary are used appropriately and are well-integrated.

3. Other perspectives (and counterarguments, if appropriate) are addressed.

4. New and/or interesting connections between the course and library research of the scientific literature are made; personal perspectives are briefly incorporated into the paper where appropriate.

5. Use scientific evidence appropriately.

6. Such papers are interesting (and perhaps even creative) and are of very high quality.