Organizational Theory Analysis Report

Running head: ORGANIZATIONAL THEORY ANALYSIS
REPORT 1
ORGANIZATIONAL THEORY ANALYSIS REPORT 15M7
A2: LASA - Organizational Theory Analysis Report
B7438 Holistic Management in Organizations
Name
Argosy University, San Diego Campus
M7 A2: LASA - Organizational Theory Analysis Report
B7438 Holistic Management in Organizations
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of writing this assignment is to conduct a literature
review of the Bolman and Deal model of four frameworks for
leadership (1997) and also to analyze Celestial Corporation
case. Organizations today are facing challenges and
opportunities due to the constantly changing world of business
(Padma & Nair, 2009). Meyer and Allen (1997) states that the
biggest challenge for the researchers will be to determine how
commitment is affected by the many changes such as increased
global competition, re-engineering and downsizing that are
occurring in the world of work. Bolman and Deal sifted through
the complex theories and literature and combined with their own
analyses, theories and experience devised a four-frame model as
a way of understanding organizations and leadership within
organizations (McCabe, 2003). The model’s design depends
upon multi-frame thinking and application. Each frame is an
important piece of an organization or organizational life.
Bolman and Deal (2007) suggest that each individual has
personal as well as preferred frames that they use for
information gathering, making judgments and to explain
behavior.

LITERATURE REVIEW
Four Frame Model
The Four Frames outlined by Bolman and Deal are: Structural,
Human Resource, Political and Symbolic.
The Structural frame focuses on the architecture of the
organization. The structural frame is a task-oriented frame,
considered as more traditional approach to manage and design
organizations. This approach is thought to be most useful when
goals and information are clear, when cause-effect relations are
well understood, when technologies are strong and there is little
conflict, low ambiguity, low uncertainty, and a stable legitimate
authority (Bolman & Deal, 2007).
The Human Resource (HR) frame is more about understanding
people and their relationships. The HR frame examines the
interplay between organizations and people (Zolner, 2010). This
approach purports that organizations may be highly productive,
creative and energizing places. The leader who operated from
this perspective empowers people through participation and
makes possible attempts to satisfy people’s need to do a job
well.
The Political frame emphasizes power, competition, scarce
resources; and sees organizations as jungles. The political
leader should be able to deal with political reality of
organizations.
The Symbolic frame assumes that humans will create and use
symbols to make meaning out of chaos, clarity out of confusion
and predictability out of mystery (Zolner, 2010). This frame
focuses on meaning and faith. This context engages the heart
and head of the members and it focuses on ritual, ceremony,
story, play and culture (Defoe, 2013).
Maslow's Theory
According to Maslow, a person's needs are the main motivator
that drives a human. The original hierarchy of needs five-stage
model includes (McLeod, 2007):
1. Biological and Physiological needs - air, food, drink, shelter,

warmth, sex, sleep.
2. Safety needs - protection from elements, security, order, law,
stability, freedom from fear.
3. Social Needs - belongingness, affection and love, - from
work group, family, friends, romantic relationships.
4. Esteem needs - achievement, mastery, independence, status,
dominance, prestige, self-respect and respect from others.
5. Self-Actualization needs - realizing personal potential, self-
fulfillment, seeking personal growth and peak experiences.
Maslow’s theory could be aligned with the Human Resource
frame from ‘Four Frame Model’ proposed by Bolman and Deal.
Herzberg's Theory
According to Herzberg there are two factors that cause
motivation and demotivation in an organization. Herzberg’s
theory referred motivation as the job enrichment factor, and
demotivation as hygiene factors. Hygiene factors are referred to
as work conditions, policies, administrative efficiency, style of
supervision, and relationship between employees. According to
Herzberg, hygiene factors are demotivators (Furnham et al.,
2009).
Four Frame Model Analysis
As Bolander (2011) explains, there is not an organization on
earth (or space for that matter) that does not have to deal with
politics. Organizational politics is often equated with the
devious, the underhand, the cunning, and the manipulative.
Political activity has thus been viewed by some as a field of
"dirty tricks," to be avoided and eradicated, and not as an aspect
of organizational behavior to be incorporated systematically
into theoretical perspectives (Buchanan & Badham, 1999).
Claver-Cortés et al. (2012) examined the characteristics of
organizational structure that relate to hybrid competitive
strategies. They found out that hybrid competitive strategy
influences firm performance in a positive manner. Mintzberg
argues that organizations display eight structural configurations

and corresponding coordinating mechanisms. Matheson (2009)
stated “Such structural configurations are shaped by a variety of
contingency factors, especially power and environmental ones.”
Freeman (2011) provided alternatives to the economic man
image of human behavior and incorporated those alternative
images which are based on motivational needs into utility
analysis. McClelland & Burnham (2003) researched that power
is essential to good management. People who want power only
to further their own careers, rather than the goals of the
organization, tend to have subordinates who are loyal to them
but not to the company, making them less effective on the whole
(McClelland & Burnham, 2003). Padma & Nair (2009)
suggested that creating a strong culture in an organization
where employees could be more committed, leads to a
successful organization.
Bolman and Deal’s four frame model also supports and used the
work of Douglas McGregor (1960) to develop theory of the
Human Resource Frame. McGregor focused on the manager’s
assumptions about their subordinates. He translated these and
developed “Theory X” and “Theory Y”. These two different
theories show different ways of thinking about workers, their
relationship with the organizations, and how that relationship
gets the organization’s work accomplished (Defoe, 2013). The
Human Resource Frame involves human personality and its
relation to management practice.
Bolman and Deal (2007) view organizations as machines,
families, jungles, and theater. Bolman & Deal’s frames can be
used at the planning stage of a change initiative to help
diagnose organizational needs, to identify institutional
challenges and contexts, and to devise appropriate actions
(McLeod, 2007). The four frame model can also be used to
revisit and reframe unsuccessful initiatives. A combination of
these four perspectives is very important while implementing a
change initiative. Finally, each frame can be understood as a
unique set of central tensions that must be reconciled in making
choices about structure, people, politics, and symbols (Gallos,

2006). The four frame model offers knowledge to individuals
about alternative perspectives, appreciation for their potential
contribution, opportunities to practice looking at the same
situation through multiple lenses, and strategies for cross-frame
diagnosis and reflection.
CELESTIAL CORPORATION CASE
Baba et al. (2004) defines Globally Distributed Team as an
interdependent work group comprised of culturally diverse
members based in two or more nations who share a collective
responsibility for making or implementing decisions related to a
firm’s global strategy. The focus of this paper is cognitive
convergence in a globally distributed team (GDT), defined as
the process by which cognitive structures of distributed team
members gradually become more similar over time.
Baba et al. (2004) analyzed Celestial Corporation (fictitious
name) as a Fortune 500 firm that manufactures and sells
products for consumer markets all over the world. During the
1990s, Celestial experienced increasing pressure from rising
global competition in its markets around the world. Threatened
with declines in market share and profits for some of its major
brands, the company engaged in rethinking its strategy. A key
outcome of this process was a plan for global restructuring,
called ‘Global 2020.’ This plan would transform the firm’s
traditional geographical and functional structures to make them
fully global with respect to product manufacturing, marketing,
and services (Baba et al., 2004).
Structural frame Analysis
Virtual (Globally Distributed) team challenges
The biggest disadvantage that any virtual team can suffer from
is the lack of efficiency in communication, partly due to
constraints in virtual communication mediums. This is also
primarily due to the fact that humans communicate better when
they are able to communicate with their body language.

Inevitably, virtual teams may face obstacles due to restrictions
of the Internet which in turn may lead to incorrect assumptions
if a message is not laid out clearly. Failure to properly
communicate and clearly address messages or emails could lead
to frustration and eventually failure.
Poor leadership can result in the failure of any team, whether
virtual or not; however, it becomes a much more prominent
problem in virtual teams. Messages must be sent across
accurately and clearly. Inability to effectively communicate to
members of the team can all greatly affect a project.
Virtual teams should only consist of competent and experienced
team members due to the distance factor which can overtly
affect the timing and completion date of a project. Projects are
more likely to fail if the team consists of individuals who are
lazy or lack sufficient knowledge to complete their assigned
tasks. It only takes one incompetent team member to have a
negative effect on the rest of the team (Pinjani, 2007).
The Problems with Virtual Teams in Celestial Corporation
Baba et al. (2004) observed that “globally distributed work
often utilizes a team format versus another type of small group
arrangement specifically because of the need to bring together
knowledge from disparate sources.” One component of the plan
involved the globalization of Celestial’s major customer
relationship teams, including the Voila-dedicated team. This
team would be transformed from one that was essentially
Franco-centric to one that was global both in terms of the
composition and location of the core team, and its scope of
responsibility.
There was a communication problem to communicate virtually.
An important difference between the original team and the new
globally distributed team was the fact that the former did
business following the French model, while Morris expected the
latter to follow the American business model. The French tend
to rely on long-term, personal relationships and networks for
the conduct of daily business, and generally respect the

organizational hierarchy for purposes of communication and
coordination (Hall, 1990).
The trust factor was also an issue in mentioned scenario while
dealing with virtual team. Previously, members of the original
team in Paris relied on their French team leader’s personal
contacts within Voila to carry out many business tasks. U.S.
businesspeople tend to be action-oriented and thus focused
pragmatically on getting the job done; the organizational
hierarchy may be more or less salient, depending upon corporate
culture and the conditions at hand (Stewart, 1991).
Lack of direction was also noted for the newly merged Celestial
Voila–Jardin global team. In the meantime, there were
proprietary restrictions on information that could be shared
between the companies while they were still separate legal
entities. This created an awkward situation in which it was not
clear exactly who at Celestial should be speaking with whom at
the customer companies about what. This ultimately resulted
into less productivity.
Human Resource Frame Analysis
Effective use of cross cultural teams can provide a source of
experience and innovative thinking to enhance the competitive
position of organizations. However, cultural differences can
interfere with the successful completion of projects in today’s
multicultural global business community. To achieve project
goals and avoid cultural misunderstandings, project managers
should be culturally sensitive and promote creativity and
motivation through flexible leadership. Two leading studies of
cross-cultural management have been conducted by Geert
Hofstede and Fons Trompenaars (Anbari et al., 2004). Both
approaches propose a set of cultural dimensions along which
dominant value systems can be ordered. These value systems
affect human thinking, feeling, and acting, and the behavior of
organizations and institutions in predictable ways. The two sets
of dimensions reflect basic problems that any society has to
cope with but for which solutions differ. They are similar in

some respects and different in others. The dimensions can be
grouped into several categories (Anbari et al., 2004):
1) Relations between people. Two main cultural differences
have been identified. Hofstede distinguishes between
individualism and collectivism. Trompenaars breaks down this
distinction into two dimensions: universalism versus
particularism and individualism versus communitarianism.
2) Motivational orientation. Societies choose ways to cope with
the inherent uncertainty of living. In this category Hofstede
identifies three dimensions: masculinity versus femininity,
amount of uncertainty avoidance, and power distance.
3) Attitudes toward time. Hofstede distinguishes between a
long-term versus a short-term orientation. Trompenaars
identifies two dimensions: sequential versus synchronic and
inner versus outer time.
Cultural diversity creates additional challenges. Basic concepts
about the nature and meaning of work (Lipnack, & Stamps,
1999). Members from different cultural backgrounds may
demonstrate divergent preferences for social interaction norms,
which can create difficulties in executing processes related to
task integration (Maznevski & Chudoba, 2000).
Each of the two factions on the global team was bolstered by its
proximity in space to two distinctive but roughly equivalent
centers of power: one in Paris near the Voila headquarters and
one in the United States at the Celestial headquarters. In each
case, the factional leader had strong historical and cultural ties
to his respective power center, and these leaders used their
power center affiliations to create what we call power clusters -
concentrations and/or networks of people and resources tied
together by linguistic, cultural, and historical ties which the
leaders manipulated in support of their own interests. Couture’s
power cluster was concentrated in Paris and included links to
Voila; he mobilized Francophone allies within this cluster to
advance his interest in maintaining authority. Morris’s cluster
was distributed across the U.S., Asia, and Paris, and he likewise
utilized his authority to establish and maintain linkages among

these Anglophone colleagues as a means to overpower Couture
and further his own agenda.
It is significant that the successful negotiation of a consensus
on means–end interdependence took place largely in the absence
of the two key leaders. Couture left the team (and the company)
after the crisis, and Morris then stayed out of the way. The
resulting reduction in competition between power holders whose
personal struggle did so much to foster distrust on the team also
may have facilitated the negotiation of task interdependence.
Political Frame Analysis
Celestial executive, James Morris and his team implemented a
new merchandising methodology known as Product Family
Management (PFM) with the customer. PFM is an innovative
system of management practices that creates a strategic business
plan around specific families of products. The introduction of
PFM required Morris to reorganize not only the customer
relationship, but also the internal relations on his own customer
team. Study of the situation at Voila convinced Morris that PFM
was the solution for improving relationships with that retailer as
well. In 1998, his recommendations for reorganizing the work
of Celestial’s Voila customer team were approved by Celestial’s
corporate leadership, and Morris was named head of Celestial’s
new global customer team for Voila.
Morris used his power to recruit Cathleen Drummond, who had
previously worked with him at Americart and was highly skilled
at implementing PFM and a talented member of the
organizational development group at corporate headquarters,
who had a wealth of experience leading organizational change
at Celestial, Geraldine (Gerry) Hanover.
Another change required by PFM involved day-to-day customer
interface. Just as Henri Couture controlled access to Voila’s top
management, each functional manager on the Celestial customer
team had a more or less exclusive relationship with his or her
functional counterpart at Voila.
Leadership of the PMF effort posed another threat. As a PFM
expert with eight years experience implementing the new

technique, Cathleen Drummond would become prominent in
directing the multifunctional team. In the past, only Henri
Couture held the director title, and he was accustomed to being
the undisputed authority. Having two directors on the team
seemed to him like a loss of face, and potentially status and
power as well.
Cathleen Drummond had her 8 years of experience with PFM to
draw upon, and Morris had led the Celestial– Americart team
during implementation of PFM at that retailer. But the French
team members in Paris claimed to have equally valuable
knowledge of the Voila organization and the French consumer.
Also, James Morris ordered French nationals in Paris to work
with Drummond to figure out how to link their two projects
together, and he gave team members a short deadline for
reaching an agreement.
Each of the two factions on the global team was bolstered by its
proximity in space to two distinctive but roughly equivalent
centers of power: one in Paris near the Voila headquarters and
one in the United States at the Celestial headquarters. In each
case, the factional leader had strong historical and cultural ties
to his respective power center, and these leaders used their
power center affiliations to create what we call power clusters -
concentrations and/or networks of people and resources tied
together by linguistic, cultural, and historical ties which the
leaders manipulated in support of their own interests.
Symbolic Frame Analysis
Collectivist societies will have more emotional dependence of
members on their organizations, when in equilibrium -
organization is expected to show responsibility on members.
Extreme individualism is seen in the US; in fact in US
collectivism is seen as "bad". Other cultures and societies than
the US will therefore seek to resolve social and organizational
problems in ways different from the American one. Hofstede
brings that society's expectations of Individualism/Collectivism
will be reflected by the employee inside the organization.

As we discussed earlier, the trust factor was also an issue in
mentioned scenario while dealing with virtual team. Previously,
members of the original team in Paris relied on their French
team leader’s personal contacts within Voila to carry out many
business tasks.
In order to decrease the tension between Celestial and Voila,
The French and American management should come together
and work together to achieve clearly defined goals. The French
and Americans now were able to work out a substantive
agreement, with concrete activities and goals, for merging their
two approaches under a new name - Produits Exemplaires - a
negotiated term that brought together elements from both the
French and American perspectives. Roles and responsibilities
must be clearly defined and organizational learning should be
motivated in order to avoid any miscommunication or
misinterpretation of organizations’ clearly defined goals.
REFRAMING ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE (STRATEGY
DEVELOPMENT FOR A PROBLEMATIC ISSUE)
Structural frame analysis explained number of issues with
Celestial Corporation including poor leadership, lack of
technology, lack of proper communication, lack of trust between
team members, lack of direction, unclear roles and
responsibilities and overall poor management. To be successful
means knowing how to use your talent and resources to best
advantage, and it's very difficult to "win" if you don't have this
game plan in place.
In order to solve problematic issues, a detailed strategic plan
needs to be developed. A good strategy will take into account
existing barriers and resources (people, money, power,
materials, etc.). It will also stay with the overall vision,
mission, and objectives of the initiative. Often, an initiative will
use many different strategies--providing information, enhancing
support, removing barriers, providing resources, etc. to achieve
its goals. Objectives outline the aims of an initiative; what

success would look like in achieving the vision and mission. By
contrast, strategies suggest paths to take (and how to move
along) on the road to success. That is, strategies help you
determine how you will realize your vision and objectives
through the nitty-gritty world of action.
Celestial Corporation needs to write vision and mission
statements and to set objectives, developing strategies involves
brainstorming and talking to community members. Making
meetings a place where all members feel that their ideas are
listened to and valued, and where constructive criticism may be
openly voiced. To help meet these goals, you might post some
"ground rules" so people feel free to express themselves.
Ground rules might include:
· One person speaks at a time
· No interrupting each other
· Everyone's ideas are respected
Celestial Corporation’s targets of change include all of the
people who experience (or are at risk for) this issue or problem
addressed by your initiative. Remember to be inclusive; that is,
include everyone who is affected by the problem or issue or
whose action or inaction contributes to it. It is helpful to review
your mission, vision, and objectives to ensure that your
strategies are all aligned with the goals expressed in your
previous work.
Business Ethics and Social Responsibilities
Celestial Corporation can manage ethics in their workplaces by
establishing an ethics management program. Some business
ethicists disagree that codes have any value. Usually they
explain that too much focus is put on the codes themselves, and
that codes themselves are not influential in managing ethics in
the workplace. Many ethicists note that it's the developing and
continuing dialogue around the code's values that is most
important.
The ethics program is essentially useless unless all staff
members are trained about what it is, how it works and their
roles in it. The nature of the system may invite suspicion if not

handled openly and honestly. Social responsibility and business
ethics are often regarding as the same concepts. However, the
social responsibility movement is but one aspect of the overall
discipline of business ethics. Businesses have developed a
system of social responsibility that is tailored to their company
environment. If social responsibility is maintained within a
company than the employees and the environment are held equal
to the company’s economics. Maintaining social responsibility
within a company ensures the integrity of society and the
environment are protected.
KEY FINDINGS AND SUMMARY
1) In case study there appear to be two distinct periods of
performance in terms of team effectiveness criteria. The first
period runs from Morris’s construction of the global team
through the point at which the Voila executives rejected the
PFM pilot, resulting in the ‘videoconference from hell’. The
second period begins with the aftermath of the videoconference
through the end of the case study.
2) During each of these performance periods there were
distinctive patterns of cognitive convergence and divergence.
3) Americans were too fast in implementing and forcing PFM
even though Voila wasn’t ready for PFM.
4) Technical as well as physical resources were not available
for professional communication.
5) ‘Video conference from hell’ was a great lesson learned for
Celestial Corporation.
6) The video crisis proved that their partisan struggle did not
‘work’ (i.e., it did not lead one side to be declared the winner,
and instead made them all losers). Both parties learned this
lesson simultaneously, not through knowledge sharing, but
through parallel participation in a crisis experience that helped
to create similar cognitive structures across the team.
7) Morris redefined the task as one that Drummond could direct
more or less on her own; Couture resisted this power move by

also redefining the task as one that would be done with Voila,
but not the Americans.
8) Much of our knowledge, whether represented as declarative,
procedural, or evaluative; is cognitively connected to beliefs
whose external validation is based upon personal experience,
inter-subjective agreement, and/or social construction
9) Evidence of successful efforts to share and/or acquire
declarative and procedural knowledge about PFM and its
context were evident throughout the case.
10) Much of our knowledge begins as personal belief that is
validated through culturally appropriate processes.
11) Many organizational pr actices that are transferred globally
reflect combinations of knowledge and belief that are not easily
separated.
12) The meanings of declarative and procedural knowledge shift
when crossing cultural boundaries, so that things that appear
objective or ‘accurate’ in one context may take on a subjective
complexion or be considered ‘wrong’ in another.
13) Evaluative knowledge (phronesis) may have a significant
influence on the sharing and conversion of declarative and
procedural knowledge in a cross-cultural context. Phronesis
reflects a judgment about choices, given certain interests.
14) Eventual collaboration between Americans and French to
create a single unified phronesis produced better results than
were realized when this schism existed.
15) In cross-cultural contexts the factors that are relevant to the
sharing of knowledge in global work should be expanded to
include evaluative knowledge, or phronesis, and the beliefs
upon which it is founded.
CONCLUSION
Baba et al. (2004) concluded that “We set out to explore two
issues concerning the relationship between cognition and
performance: first, whether globally distributed teams are an
effective organizational structure for knowledge sharing; and
second, whether shared cognition improves global team
performance. To these questions we respond with a qualified

yes.” Team members based in different cultures can bring
together divergent bodies of knowledge whose integration
yields new organizational capabilities, but only after they
recognize both the existence and the validity of their
differences.
Global project management can succeed through effective
leadership, cross-cultural communication, and mutual respect.
Without them, it is destined to fail. International projects that
use effective cross-cultural teams can provide a source of
experience and innovative thinking to enhance the competitive
position of their companies, and to resolve potential
communication barriers. Multi-cultural projects are becoming
the norm. More and more projects are being executed
successfully using multicultural teams. To achieve project goals
and avoid potential risks, project managers should be culturally
sensitive and promote creativity and motivation through flexible
leadership.
References
Anbari, F. T., Khilkhanova, E. V., Romanova, M. V., &
Umpleby, S. A. (2004). Cross cultural differences and their
implications for managing international projects. Journal of
International Business and Economics, 2(1). Retrieved from
http://www.gwu.edu/~umpleby/recent_papers/2003_cross_cultur
al_differences_managin_international_projects_anbari_khilkhan
ova_romanova_umpleby.htm
Baba, M. L., Gluesing, J., Ratner, H., & Wagner, K. H. (2004).
The contexts of knowing: Natural history of a globally
distributed team. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(5),
547-587. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/224880144?accountid=3489
9
Bolman, L. G., Deal, T. E. (11/2007). Reframing
Organizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership, 4th Edition,
4th Edition [VitalSource Bookshelf version]. Retrieved from
http://online.vitalsource.com/books/9781118178102

Buchanan, D., & Badham, R. (1999). Politics and organizational
change: The lived experience. Human Relations, 52(5), 609-
629. Retrieved from
9
Bolander, J. (2011). How to deal with organizational politics.
Retrieved from http://www.thedailymba.com/2011/02/28/how-
to-deal-with-organizational-politics/
Claver-Cortés, E., Pertusa-Ortega, E., & Molina-Azorín, J.,F.
(2012). Characteristics of organizational structure relating to
hybrid competitive strategy: Implications for performance.
Journal of Business Research, 65(7), 993. Retrieved from
99
Defoe, D. (2013, May 31). Understanding organizations using
the four frame model: Factories or machines [structure], family
[human resources], jungle [politics], and theatres, temples or
carnivals [symbols]. Retrieved from
http://www.psycholawlogy.com/2013/05/31/understanding-
organizations-using-the-four-frame-model-factories-or-
machines-structure-family-human-resources-jungle-politics-and-
theatres-temples-or-carnivals-symbols/
Freeman, K. B. (2011). Human needs and utility maximization.
International Journal of Social Economics, 38(3), 224-236.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03068291111105174
Furnham, A., Eracleous, A., & Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2009).
Personality, motivation and job satisfaction: Hertzberg meets
the big five. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 24(8), 765-779.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02683940910996789
Gallos, J. V. (2006). Reframing Complexity: A Four
Dimensional Approach to Organizational Diagnosis,
Development, and Change. Organization Development: A
Jossey-Bass Reader. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Retrieved
from
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=we
b&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CDEQFjAD&url=http%3A%2

F%2Fwww.joangallos.com%2Fwp-
content%2Fuploads%2F2007%2F08%2Freframing-complexity-
a-four-dimensional-approach.doc&ei=11noU-
rEMMr4oASY4ICoBg&usg=AFQjCNHQU1yYsVzA_v8ps0gerw
dqsbYA2g&bvm=bv.72676100,d.cGE
Hall, S. (1990). Cultural identity and diaspora. Retrieved from
http://sites.middlebury.edu/nydiasporaworkshop/files/2011/04/D
-OA-HallStuart-CulturalIdentityandDiaspora.pdf
Lipnack, J., & Stamps, J. (1999). Virtual teams: The new way to
work. Strategy & Leadership, 27(1), 14-19. Retrieved from
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/eb054625
Maznevski, M. L., & Chudoba, K. M. (2000). Bridging space
over time: Global virtual team dynamics and effectiveness.
Organization science, 11(5), 473-492. Retrieved from
http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1008
&context=mis_facpubs&sei-
redir=1&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fscholar.google.com%2Fschol
ar%3Fq%3DMaznevsky%2B%2526%2BChudoba%252C%2B200
0%26btnG%3D%26hl%3Den%26as_sdt%3D0%252C5#search=
%22Maznevsky%20%26%20Chudoba%2C%202000%22
McCabe, P. (2003). Bolman and Deal's Four-Frame Analysis:
Case Study. Retrieved from
http://samples.essaypedia.com/papers/bolman-and-deals-four-
frame-analysis-case-study-4249.html
McClelland, D. C., & Burnham, D. H. (2003, 01). Power is the
great motivator. Harvard Business Review, 81, 117-126.
Retrieved from
9
McLeod, S. A. (2007). Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. Retrieved
from http://www.simplypsychology.org/maslow.html
McLeod, S. (2007). Bolman & deal frameworks. Retrieved from
http://dangerouslyirrelevant.org/2007/06/bolman_deal_fra.html
Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1997). Commitment in the
workplace: Theory, research, and application. Sage. Retrieved
from

http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=jn4VFpFJ2qQC
&oi=fnd&pg=PR8&dq=Meyer+and+Allen+%281997%29+&ots=
IWJ111rqg4&sig=KcNVfrxmMoFeGcaDbrd28-
Mt8cA#v=onepage&q=Meyer%20and%20Allen%20%281997%2
9&f=false
Matheson, C. (2009). Understanding the policy process: The
work of henry mintzberg. Public Administration Review, 69(6),
1148-1161. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-
6210.2009.02072.x
Padma, R. N., & Nair, V. (2009). ORGANIZATIONAL
CULTURE AND ITS IMPACT ON ORGANIZATIONAL
COMMITMENT IN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE
ORGANIZATIONS. Global Management Review, 4(1), 32-39.
Retrieved from
http://web.a.ebscohost.com.libproxy.edmc.edu/ehost/detail/detai
l?sid=989d7b8a-5dbb-445b-9f6f-
ddcb449a21b7%40sessionmgr4003&vid=0&hid=4114&bdata=Jn
NpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=bth&AN=55424640
Pinjani, P. (2007). Diversity in global virtual teams: A
partnership development perspective. (Order No. 3273319, The
University of North Carolina at Greensboro). ProQuest
Dissertations and Theses, , 247-n/a. Retrieved from
9. (304832262).
Stewart, G. B. (1991). The Quest for Value: The EVA.
Management Guide. Retrieved from
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=1_IgYUASxJwC
&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq=Stewart+%26+Bennett,+1991&ots=XRn
nDrSuu7&sig=Q7xJ5rY9j1EMFp4S2_H96lOKHDY#v=onepage
&q=Stewart%20%26%20Bennett%2C%201991&f=false
Zolner, J. (2010). The four frames: An idea that sticks.
Retrieved from
http://www.gse.harvard.edu/ppe/enews/hihe/10hihe1/frames.htm
l

Organizational Theory Analysis Report

Organizational Theory Analysis Report

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Organizational Theory Analysis Report

Similar to Organizational Theory Analysis Report (20)

More from toltonkendal

More from toltonkendal (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Organizational Theory Analysis Report