Reference no: EM133478458

Assignment: Theory of Power Case Study

All leaders must wrestle with power. Write an 8-10-page, double-spaced case study (not including cover page and reference page). Referencing course readings, inductively construct a theory (reference how to conduct a grounded theory method) of power that explores, describes, identifies, defines, traces, summarizes, analyzes, interprets, and explains a single power-rich contentious event/incident that you personally experienced in your voluntary or paid leadership in an organization or team (e.g., firing, hostile takeover, conflict, reorganization, board fight, mission drift, rightsizing, deinstitutionalization, revolt, change, power struggle...). This may be related to your dissertation topic as long as you personally experienced the event.

Task

I. Choose the Case: Select the power event and explain why you chose it (1/2 page)

II. Set the Stage: Explore and describe (quantitatively and qualitatively) the context, antecedent conditions, individuals, groups, teams, organizations, and potential causal factors affecting the power outcome of interest. Describe how contextual and institutional ambiguity, human diversity, and capital resource scarcity affects the case inputs that may affect the outcome (2 pages)

III. Operationalize the Ideas: Identify and define all power-related concepts (e.g., power, legitimacy, influence...) operationalized in the event; definitions must be grounded in the literature (1 page)

IV. Unpack the Event: Trace (reference how to process-trace) the step-by-step process and timeline as the power event unfolded from start to finish, identify important agent decisions, institutional structures, independent variables/factors, and causal mechanisms that affected the outcome. It will help you tell your story to create a social network political map (reference how to create a social network diagram; you can do this in Word, drawing software, or on paper and import a picture of it), identifying all the players (nodes) (who is in the game), the connections (ties) that bind them together (directly, indirectly, strength), the power (clout, authority, legitimacy, capital resources available to each), and their interests (what they want). Then, organize the players in a two-dimensional diagram with an x power axis and y interest axis (see Bolman & Deal, 7th Edition, pp. 216-217; you can do this in Word, drawing software, or on paper and import a picture of it). Referencing your event tracing, map, and diagram, carry out these tasks (3 pages):

i. Which side of the power event were you on and how did you decide to take that position and why?

ii. Explain how different players tried to influence other players to meet their interests. Which players did you attempt to influence to meet your interests? How and why did you try to influence them? Was it effective?

iii. Identify which players opposed you, what means they used, and why. Explain what tactics you used to "keep those enemies close."

iv. Did you have a plan of attack going into the event? Was it effective? Did you have to make mid-course corrections? Did you have a plan B? What was it?

v. How did you generate cheerleaders for your interests through wooing others to your side by being perceived as creditable, competent, and sensible? Did the opposing side do it better?

vi. How did you horse trade as needed using value creating and value claiming tactics?

V. Build the Theory: Summarize your unified explanatory theory limited to this event by offering 3-5 insights on how your theory explains how the inputs resulted in the outcome; make causal (e.g., necessity, sufficiency, magnitude, frequency, intensity...) claims about the most important factors and causal mechanisms responsible for the outcome (1 page)

VI. Apply the Theory: Write a creative counterfactual description of how the case might have occurred differently had your theory insights been considered in the incident. What would have made your attempts to influence other players more effective? What could you have done differently to be more effective in "keeping your enemies close?" (1 page)