Employee Syllabus 2015 - Yale SOM Alumni · THE EMPLOYEE PERSPECTIVE MGT 420 PERSPECTIVES CORE,...

THE EMPLOYEE PERSPECTIVE

MGT 420

PERSPECTIVES CORE, SPRING TERM 2015

ROOM 2400

INSTRUCTORS E-MAIL OFFICE PHONE ASSISTANT

GEORGE E. NEWMAN [email protected] Room

#5457

432-1046 (office)

203-668-4851 (emergencies only)

Lacey D’Amato [email protected]

436-9263

LISA B. KAHN [email protected] Room #3512 432-5956 (office)

Marianne Castellon [email protected]

432-5970

SECTION DATES TIME COHORT

1 Mon/Wed 8:30 to 9:50 a.m. BLUE TAS: GENTILE, CHRISTOPHER [email protected]

GOODMAN, TAYLOR [email protected]

2 Mon/Wed 10:10 to 11:30 a.m. GOLD

TAS: APOSTOLOPOULOS, ALEX [email protected] KAPLUN, CATHERINE [email protected]

3 Mon/Wed 1:00 to 2:20 p.m. GREEN

TAS: GALIZIA, MARISSA [email protected] GERSHMAN, ERIC [email protected]

4 Mon/Wed 2:40 to 4:00 p.m. SILVER

TAS: ANDERSON, KESSON [email protected] ANDOLINA, MICHAEL [email protected]

EMPLOYEE PERSPECTIVE PROFESSORS NEWMAN & KAHN YALE SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT SPRING 2015

2

OVERVIEW OF COURSE On a daily basis, your employees will be confronted with innumerable decisions, each of which represents an opportunity to take (or not take) actions that support the organization’s goals and objectives. How your employees act when confronted with these decisions will depend in part on who they are as individuals — their values, beliefs, and capabilities. It will also depend on various aspects of the context, such as rewards and incentives, and the degree of connection between your employees’ actions and outcomes they personally regard as meaningful. Finally, it will depend on their relationship with you as a manager — whether they accept your authority as legitimate, find you credible, and come to internalize your objectives and values as their own. We will focus on each of these factors across three different subsections of the course:

• Establishing Employment Relationships. We begin by placing the manager’s relationship with employees in the broader context of an organization’s hiring strategy. Each member of an organization brings a unique set of values, preferences, and abilities to the organization. Successful alignment of employees’ actions and organizational goals will depend on the organization’s ability to make hires and design jobs that meet those objectives.

• Managing Employment Relationships. We then examine in closer detail some of the main levers that managers and organizations can use to encourage employees to act in ways that are consistent with organizational goals. Employees’ contributions will depend on the benefits (both extrinsic and intrinsic) they perceive as supporting (or undermining) organizational objectives.

• Transforming Employment Relationships. The third portion of the course considers the challenges of transforming employment relationships. Effective employment relationships require that managers successfully navigate the tension between continuity and change: preserving continuity through trust and consistent actions while at the same time being adaptable to shifts in strategy and the operating environment.

The choices you make in hiring, shaping employee incentives, and exercising interpersonal leadership will determine your ability to align your employees’ actions with the organization’s goals and objectives. The choices you make will also shape how empowered your employees feel to uphold their personal values and ethics on the job, even when confronted with pressures to do otherwise.


3

COURSE LOGISTICS AND GRADING Course Web site. All announcements, assignments, and course materials will be posted to the CLASSESv2 site: login to CLASSESv2 and access the “MGT 420 00 (S15)” tab. Please monitor the site regularly for updates and important class materials.

Grading. Course grades will reflect the following components:

Class participation: 30% Writing assignments: 20% Group Project: 20% Take-home final examination: 30%

Class Participation. Engagement and active participation by all class members is vital, particularly in a course focusing on employees. In-class discussions will leverage class members’ wealth of experience across diverse contexts; where relevant, please bring your own experiences and illustrations into class discussion. Your previous experience, both positive and negative, is an invaluable source of data.

Class participation grades will reflect an assessment of your total contribution to the learning environment. This reflects not just the frequency of your class contributions, but also: (1) their quality (ability to draw on course materials and your experiences productively; ability to advance or sharpen in-class discussion and debate; willingness to take risky or unpopular points of view; use of logic, precision, and evidence in making arguments); and (2) the professionalism of your conduct (attendance, punctuality, preparedness, respecting colleagues and their contributions, and refraining from conduct that is distracting).

Writing Assignments and Homework. There will be two brief writing assignments, which involve writing up short answers (no more than 3 pages total) to preparation questions assigned in conjunction with particular cases we will discuss in class. Please print these out and bring them to class on the day that they are due.

1) The first assignment pertains to the case (Portman Hotel) we will discuss in

Session #4 on Wednesday, January 21st. This assignment is due in class on Wednesday, January 21st.

2) The second assignment pertains to the “Contrasting Incentive Programs” (Session #8) where we will discuss Lincoln Electric alongside pay-for-performance programs in education on Wednesday, February 4th. This assignment is due in class on Wednesday, February 4th.

Group Project. The goal of this project is to provide an opportunity for class members to apply the key principles covered in this course to an actual business context. Class members will form groups of 4 and will select one of the following organizations: Google, Doctors Without Borders, IBM, eBay. The group will identify a key issue or challenge facing this organization


4

that is related to a concept from Employee. Groups should also draw on material from the first semester of the core as well as information gathered from external sources.

The aim of this project is to apply principles from this class to help inform a detailed analysis of the HR strategy of this organization – i.e., based on what you have learned here, what can the organization do to better understand this issue and address it? The final project will consist of slide deck aimed at a 20-minute presentation (20 slides max) that provides a clear and concise summary of the topic and the recommended course of action. The slides should also include detailed annotated notes, such that the presentation itself can be evaluated as a stand-alone package.

The projects will be due by 6:00 pm on Friday, February 13th. Top presentations for each organization will be selected to present in-class on Wednesday, February 18th (groups will be notified on the Monday before). For further details please see page 17 of the syllabus.

Final Exam. A take-home exam (open book, open notes) will be distributed in class and made available on CLASSESV2 on February 23rd, after our last class session. Your written exam will be submitted electronically through the course web site and is due five days later by 6:00 p.m. on Saturday, February 28th. The final exam is an individual effort. Seating Chart. To facilitate learning class members’ names and managing class discussion, the instructors will rely on a seating chart for your cohort based on where each person chooses to sit on the first day of class. If you have a seating preference, you are encouraged to arrive early on the first day of class to secure a seat that is to your liking. To ensure that you receive credit for attendance and class participation, please sit only in the seat assigned to you on the seating chart (which will be posted on the class web site).

Attendance. Missing a class. Attendance at every class session is expected and will be tracked by the TAs. There is a “cushion” for one absence. However, additional absences will adversely affect your course grade at an increasing rate.

Attending a different section. If you attend another section, you will not lose credit for that day. To take advantage of this, give advance notice (at least one day before) to the TA for your cohort as well as the TA of the cohort you wish to sit in on. However, this option should be used very sparingly, only in the case of an unavoidable conflict. Laptops and other Technologies. To make the learning environment as engaging as possible for everyone, we will enforce SOM’s default policy regarding technology in the classroom, which is to refrain from using laptops, cell phones, PDAs, and the like during class. Summaries of important points will be made available to you for each class session, so you should not need to take copious notes during class, thereby allowing you to focus on and participate in class discussion.


5

CLASS SCHEDULE OVERVIEW

Class Date Topic Case

PART 1: ESTABLISHING EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIPS

1 1/12 Introduction Slade Plating

2 1/14 Investing in Talent EcoLab

3 1/16 Signaling and Selection SG Cowen

4 1/21 Job Design Portman Hotel *1st assignment due*

PART 2: MANAGING EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIPS

5 1/26 Monetary Incentives Safelite Arck Systems

6 1/28 Intrinsic Motivation

7 2/2 Compensation Tools SAS

8 2/4 Contrasting Incentive Programs

Lincoln Electric Teachers

*2nd assignment due*

PART 3: TRANSFORMING EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIPS

9 2/9 Gender and Diversity Ann Hopkins

10 2/11 Guest Speaker: Tig Gilliam

11 2/16 Preserving Values Through Change Namaste Solar

12 2/18 *Group Project Presentations*

13 2/23 Employment and Ethics Milgram Experiments


6

OUTLINE OF CLASS MEETINGS AND ASSIGNMENTS

I. ESTABLISHING EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIPS Session 1 (Monday, Jan. 12): Introduction to Employee (GN) The first day will provide a detailed overview of the course. We will discuss the focus of Employee, our teaching goals and the expectations/timeline for the class. We will also discuss ‘Slade Plating.’ This case highlights a difficult management decision opportunity in which the values and norms of an internal social system conflict with broader management policies. Reading: Baron and Kreps, Strategic Human Resources: Frameworks for General

Managers (hereafter, BK), Chapter 2. Case: Slade Plating [HBS #9-496-018] Preparation Questions:

1. From a managerial point of view, what, if anything, should Mr. Porter, the production manager, do about the Plating Department?

2. Is your answer to the question above the same or different if you consider the same question from an ethical point of view?


7

Session 2 (Wednesday, Jan. 14): Investing in Talent (LK) Building a highly trained and effective workforce can yield a strong competitive advantage, and many firms you have worked for employ this strategy. This strategy is only effective if the firm can retain its top talent. To the extent that job mobility is simply a part of life, it is important that managers build organizational capabilities through processes that remain embedded in the organization, not just through people. Today we will draw lessons from an example of one manager's dealings with the threat of employee defection.

Case: Ecolab, Inc. [HBS #9-396-371] Preparation Questions:

1. How does Ecolab make money? What are its competitive advantages and core competencies?

2. As a newly appointed president and COO, where should Al Schuman focus his attention?

3. As the case comes to a close, do you have any lingering concerns about Ecolab going forward?


8

Session 3 (Friday, Jan. 16): Signaling, Screening, and Selection (LK) As with almost any kind of economic exchange, employment relationships involve private information, which would be useful for the other party in the exchange to possess. For example, the person interviewing you for a summer internship would like to know if this is actually your #12 choice among the 13 openings for which you’ve applied. In this session, we will examine theories regarding signaling and screening processes in employment by which each party attempts to gain access to private information held by the other. We consider how firms and employees can use these processes to their respective advantage in numerous facets of matching individuals to jobs. Reading: HR World Editors, "30 Interview Questions You Can't Ask and 30

Sneaky, Legal Alternatives to Get the Same Info," HR World, Dec 15, 2007: http://www.hrworld.com/features/30-interview-questions-111507/

Case: SG Cowen: New Recruits [HBS #9-402-028] Assignment:

By 5:00pm on Thursday, January 15th, please answer the following very brief online survey: http://yale.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_1Y8digYhymBGY72. We will discuss the results in class.

Preparation Questions: 1. Cowen has chosen to recruit at prestigious business schools, but not among the very top tier

schools. Is this a wise decision? Why or why not? 2. How would you evaluate hiring at SG Cowen on the following criteria:

a) Hiring process (techniques used and how they are sequenced and implemented) b) Hiring criteria c) Alignment of hiring process and criteria with business strategy d) Cost effectiveness

3. What is the value of “informational interviews,” given that they are costly and not used to screen people?

4. Which of the four candidates do you think has the highest “upside”? Who has the lowest “downside”? How should this affect Cowen’s hiring decision?


9

Session 4 (Wednesday, Jan. 21): Job Design (GN) Employees’ decisions about whether or not to support organizational goals obviously depend on the tangible and intangible rewards that employees perceive. How a job is designed will affect the “costs” or difficulties the job incumbent experiences in trying to realize those rewards, as well as the ease and precision with which successful performance can be assessed. Accordingly, one cannot think about incentives (or selection) independently of how tasks are assigned to particular jobs. In this session, we focus on how job design affects motivation and behavior, both for the jobholder and for her/his manager. Reading: BK, Chapter 13 Case: Portman Hotel Company [HBS #9-489-104] Preparation Questions:

1. What is Portman’s strategy for competing successfully in its chosen market? What does that market look like?

2. What behaviors, skills, and attitudes will the hotel need from its people, particularly the personal valets, to execute its strategy?

3. How do Portman Hotel’s practices help/hinder development of the requisite workforce skills and behaviors?

4. What problems is the hotel experiencing? What are their symptoms and causes?

Written Assignment: In no more than three single-sided pages, answer the following questions and hand in your write-up at the start of class on Wednesday, January 21st. If you prefer, your answer may be a single essay, rather than separate responses to each part of the question:

a) In choosing between a ‘slight tinkering,’ a ‘radical surgery,’ or a ‘complete abandonment’ of the current HR policy, what should Portman choose? Provide a detailed explanation.

b) What should Portman do? Be very specific. Identify the top three priorities they should focus on and why; what specific steps should be taken and in what sequence?

c) How much money should management invest to address the hotel’s difficulties? Provide estimates of what your recommendations are likely to cost, including any assumptions you have made.


10

II. MANAGING EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIPS Session 5 (Monday, Jan 26): Monetary Incentives (LK) In this session, we will explore when and how monetary incentives should be implemented. We will look in detail at how one firm’s decision to adopt a performance pay plan affected both the organization and its employees. We will also compare and contrast pay for performance plans in two merging firms. We will discuss a variety of other pay for performance schemes learn how to think systematically about which schemes work in which settings. Readings: Prendergast, Canice "Paying for Performance," Financial Times, London

(UK): Dec. 13, 1999 Cases: Performance Pay at Safelite Auto Glass (A) [HBS #800-291] Arck Systems [HBS #9-911-056] Preparation Questions: 1. Why was the productivity of the Safelite installers so low? Does the proposed PPP plan

address these problems? Does it create new problems? 2. A number of elements of Arck and Lux’s compensation and pay-for-performance plans are

different. What are the features that differ across the two plans? Why do you think the two companies’ compensation plans are so different? More broadly, which of the differences in the two companies' compensation plans should most concern Bryan Mynor?

3. Should Mynor propose scaling back Lux Software’s commission accelerators? Are there

other changes to Lux Software’s compensation plan he should consider?


11

Session 6 (Wednesday, Jan. 28): Intrinsic Motivation (GN) The previous class examined different monetary strategies that organizations can utilize to improve employee performance. In this session, we will examine the psychological research on incentives and motivation. Specifically, we will focus on a) the circumstances under which monetary reward systems can have unanticipated and dysfunctional effects, b) the underlying psychological factors that may lead monetary incentives to reduce performance, c) other kinds of non-monetary incentives that can improve performance, and d) the strategies that managers can utilize to increase intrinsic motivation. Readings: Ryan, Richard and Deci, Edward, “Self-determination theory and the

facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being.” American Psychologist, Jan., 2000.

McGregor, D. “The human side of enterprise” Management Review,

November, 1957. Assignment:

By 5:00pm on Tuesday, January 27th, please answer the following very brief online survey: http://yale.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_5pgA2YEXgPM6EDz. We will discuss the results in class, but your individual answer will remain completely confidential.

Preparation Questions:

1. How do the issues raised by Ryan and Deci apply in the workplace? Can you predict when incentives might be more or less effective in raising the level of employee performance?

2. How does intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation relate to a person’s desire to fulfill basic versus higher-order needs?

3. What steps can organizations take to increase intrinsic motivation in the workplace?


12

Session 7 (Monday, Feb. 2): Compensation Tools (LK) In this session, we examine some principles from economics and agency theory regarding how to create a harmony of interests between employees and those who own or control an organization. We will consider the kinds of rewards and controls that managers can use toward this end and the strengths and weaknesses of different ways of measuring and rewarding performance. We also discuss non-monetary compensation as an important lever in HR management. Readings/Video: Kaplan, David, “SAS, A new no. 1 best employer,” Best Companies to

Work for 2010, CNN Money, Jan 22, 2010, vieable at: http://money.cnn.com/2010/01/21/technology/sas_best_companies.fortune/index.htm

SAS video: http://money.cnn.com/video/fortune/2010/01/20/f_bctwf_sas.fortune/

“Doing well by being rather nice,” The Economist, Nov 29, 2007, viewable at: http://www.economist.com/node/10208507

Lohr, “At a Software Powerhouse, the Good Life is Under Siege,” New York Times (November 22, 2009), viewable at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/22/business/22sas.html?_r=2&hp=&pagewanted=all and http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2009/11/22/business/1122-SAS_12.html

Preparation Questions:

1. What is different about the way SAS manages people and projects, compared to other software firms?

2. Is the firm's compensation system effective? Why or why not?

3. Why does Goodnight provide such a seemingly generous benefits package?

4. Could the SAS approach work in other high tech organizations? In other cultures?

5. Do you think the SAS culture and HR system will be an asset or a liability in coping with the competitive challenges described by Lohr in the New York Times article?


13

Session 8 (Wednesday, Feb. 4): Contrasting Incentive Programs (GN) In this session we will compare and contrast two similar incentive programs that have yielded very different results: piece-rate pay at Lincoln Electric and performance-based pay for public school teachers. Lincoln Electric is perhaps one of the most frequently taught cases in business schools and is often hailed as a “gold standard” of successful HR management. By contrast, a very similar performance-based incentive program for teachers has been quite controversial and arguably, less successful. In this class we will critically analyze each of these programs through the lens of the material covered in earlier sessions, in order to try to understand how seemingly similar incentive programs can yield such radically different results. Case 1: Lincoln Electric Organization (HBS #9-376-028) Case 2: Fryer, Roland, “Teacher Incentives and Student Achievement: Evidence

from New York City Public Schools,” forthcoming in Journal of Labor Economics

Otterman, Sharon, “New York City Abandons Teacher Bonus Program” The New York Times, (July 17, 2011) http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/18/education/18rand.html

Additional Lincoln Electric Part 1 Resources: Lincoln Electric Part 2

Problems with merit pay for teachers NPR Podcast Teachers

Written Assignment:

In no more than three single-sided pages, answer the following questions and hand in your write-up at the start of class on Wednesday, February 4th. If you prefer, your answer may be a single essay, rather than separate responses to each part of the question: a) What are the similarities and differences between Lincoln’s reward system and incentive

program for teachers in the NYC study? What other similarities/differences exist between these two organizations in terms of selection, employee retention, job security, etc.?

b) Why has incentive pay been successful for employees at Lincoln Electric, but less so teachers? What have been the employee’s reactions to these programs?

c) For each organization (Lincoln and Teachers), how well are its’ HR policies aligned with its

workforce, culture, and organizational goals?


14

III. TRANSFORMING EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIPS Session 9 (Monday, Feb. 9): Gender and Diversity in the Workplace (Guest: V. Brescoll) This class focuses on a variety of issues related to gender and diversity issues related to organizations. We will discuss the Ann Hopkins case which focuses on employee “fit” and promotion. We will also examine strategies that organizations can use to effectively promote and manage diverse workforces. Case: Ann Hopkins (A) (1997). Harvard Business School Press. Readings: IBM’s Diversity Strategy: Bridging the Workplace and the Marketplace (2004).

Harvard Business School Press. Assignment:

By 1:00pm on Friday, Feb. 6th, please answer the following online survey: (url will be posted on classes v2). We will discuss the results in class. It is important that you carefully read the case and other readings before filling out the web response survey.

Optional readings: Berg, D. (2002). Bringing oneself to work: A Jew reflects. Journal of Applied Behavioral

Science, 38, 397-415. Williamson, A D. (2000). Is this the right time to come out? Harvard Business Review. Meyer, E. (2009). Leading across cultures at Michelen (A). INSEAD Press.


15

Session 10 (Wednesday, Feb 12): Special Guest, Tig Gilliam

Mr. Tig Gilliam is an expert in human resource management and employee motivation. He has over 25 years of senior executive experience with industry-leading companies including Adecco SA, IBM, and PwC. At Adecco, the world's leading workforce solutions company, Mr. Gilliam served as CEO of Adecco Group North America, and led the $1.1B acquisition and integration of MPS Group, a global professional staffing business. While at IBM, he served in various management positions including Global Leader of the Supply Chain Management Consulting. He was also member of the Integration and Values Team – a hand-selected group of senior executives chosen to lead the integration of IBM’s businesses across geographies according to the organization’s core values. At PwC Consulting, Mr. Gilliam held various leadership roles including Global Leader of Consumer Products and Retail Industries. His consulting activities were focused on operations improvement, technology enablement, organizational change and performance management. Today, he is a Partner at AEA Investors LP, a middle market private equity firm, where he focuses on Consumer Products, Business Services and Supply Chain Management investments. He serves on the Board of Directors of Lennar, Inc. (NYSE:LEN) and Work Market, a Union Square Ventures portfolio company. Mr. Gilliam’s visit will surely prove to be an informative look at ‘Employee’ through the eyes of an industry expert.


16

Session 11 (Monday, Feb. 16): Preserving Values through Change (GN) In this session we will examine the challenges that arise when changes in the external environment threaten to undermine an organization’s ethics and values. Specifically, we will discuss how organizations can navigate potentially drastic changes in organizational structure without sacrificing their distinctive values and commitments. Readings: Austin, James E., and Herman B. Leonard. "Can the Virtuous Mouse and the

Wealthy Elephant Live Happily Ever After?" California Management Review 51, no. 1 (fall 2008): 77–102.

Case: Namaste Solar [HBS #910-M49] Preparation Questions:

1. What is the problem or issue facing Jones and Namasté Solar?

2. What criteria should the group use in reaching a decision?

3. What are the advantages and disadvantages of the options identified in the case as Path A, Path B and ��Path C?

4. What do you think the organization should do next, and why?


17

Session 12 (Wednesday, Feb. 18): Group Projects

GROUP PROJECTS Overview: The goal of this project is to apply the key insights from this course to an actual business context. Class members will form teams of 4 and will select an organization from the following: Google, Doctors Without Borders, IBM, eBay. Variance in class size may require one or two groups to have five team members.

Organization Selection: A maximum of 5 projects about each organization will be allowed (per cohort). These will be available on a “first come, first serve” basis. In other words, you should form groups and determine which organization you would like to analyze as quickly as possible. Once you have made a selection, please email your TAs with a list of the group members and the organization that your group has selected. Method: Each group will identify a key issue or challenge facing this organization that is related to a concept from this course. In doing research about the organization, groups should draw on material from the first semester of the core as well as information gathered from external sources (e.g., popular press articles, online resources, etc.). The aim of this project is to apply principles from this class to help inform a detailed analysis of the HR practices of this organization. Throughout, your team should reference frameworks or phenomena discussed in this course that help you to understand this particular issue/ challenge. Additionally, how does this situation to other things you have learned in the core?

Final Product: The final project will consist of slide deck aimed at a 20-minute presentation (20 slides max). The slide deck will be evaluated not only on depth and overall quality of the analysis, but also on its clarity and persuasiveness as a presentation. Therefore, it is critical that the .ppt provide a clear and concise summary of the issue and the recommended course of action. The slides should also include detailed annotated notes (in the “note view” of power point), such that the presentation itself can be evaluated as a stand-alone package. The projects will be due by 6:00 pm on Friday, February 13th. In each cohort section, the top four projects will be selected (one from each organization) to present in-class on Wednesday, February 18th. TAs will notify the selected groups via email by Monday, February 16th. Those groups should come prepared to present their work to the class on Wednesday. The top group from each company will be treated to a victory party at BAR, hosted by George and Lisa.


18

Session 13 (Monday, Feb. 23): Employment and Ethics (GN) In the final session, we take a step back and consider some of the more fundamental principles of human behavior. We draw on the classic Milgram experiments to explore how the organizational context can induce us to take actions that contravene our own values and beliefs. The Milgram experiments are among the most famous experiments ever carried out in psychology. Conducted at Yale in the 1960s, they provide powerful (some might say shocking…) insights into how authority, group norms, and the structuring of a task can elicit behavior that is inconsistent with an individual’s conception of self and therefore inconsistent with what the individual wants to do. We will then use the Milgram experiment as a foundation for discussing ethical principles pertaining to the employment relation, particularly the exercise of managerial control. Readings: Staw and Ross, “Understanding Behavior in Escalation Situations.”

Science 246 (October 13, 1989): 216–20. Phillips and Margolis, "Toward an Ethics of Organizations," Business

Ethics Quarterly 9 (October, 1999): 619–38. Case: Obedience to Authority: The Milgram Experiments (video to be posted on

CLASSESv2 for viewing before class) Preparation Questions: 1. What factors do you think produced such strong tendencies for Milgram’s experimental

subjects to deliver electric shocks they believed to be harmful and dangerous? 2. What analogues do you see, if any, between the experimental situation Milgram created and

real-world organizations?

3. What can/should organizations and individuals do to minimize the likelihood of authority being exercises excessively and abusively? How effectively do you think such issues were handled in the last organization where you worked?

Employee Syllabus 2015 - Yale SOM Alumni · THE EMPLOYEE PERSPECTIVE MGT 420 PERSPECTIVES CORE,...

Documents

Transcript of Employee Syllabus 2015 - Yale SOM Alumni · THE EMPLOYEE PERSPECTIVE MGT 420 PERSPECTIVES CORE,...