MGMT 620 Texas Technical College Management Paper

The Personal Case Part 2 paper should include the following sections: 1) a brief summary of the HR and Structural frames from Part 1, 2) Political frame analysis, 3) symbolic frame analysis, 4) a list of alternatives from which key players can choose to resolve the situation, and 5) a suggested action plan for key players (this should include an action plan for each key player).

In general, the paper should cover:

• Politics (e.g., conflict about issues, conflict between people, power, coalitions)
• Symbols (e.g., organizational culture, symbols, myths, organizational stories and rituals)
• Ethics, leadership, and change as appropriate (e.g., conflict over what is moral, leader behavior, resistance to change)
• Reflections on your own professional practice–This paper provides you with the opportunity to rethink a situation, and consider what could have been done differently, and how.

Although it is hard to predict how long your paper should be, you should probably expect to need 15-20 pages (double-spaced) to convey all of the required elements. This paper must include at least 10 outside sources that are well integrated into the paper and help more fully analyze the case. The maximum length allowed is 23 pages (title page, appendices and reference page/s not included in the total). It should be in APA style, and include an appropriate reference section. Please note that I strongly suggest that you read through chapters 19-20 as you develop this paper—it is especially helpful for thinking through the options and actions you intend to propose.

Introduction: Provide a brief explanation of the purpose of the paper.

Analysis: Provide a brief retelling of the HR and Structural frames but focus primarily on political and symbolic frames in Part 2. How are the Political and Symbolic frames and related key terms and concepts from our readings relevant to the issues/facts in this case? What do the “facts” of this case look like from the perspective of each of the key “players”? What is the source or basis for any understanding or misunderstanding that is evident in this case? What light can research, using credible source material, shed on the central issue(s) in this case? What needs to be resolved in this case? ***Using the charts and/or tables from the text can be very helpful in this section and should be included!

Alternatives: Based on your analysis, what alternatives do key “players” in this case have? What are the probable implications associated with each alternative? Be very specific in this section—what actions can each key player take, and what is the probable outcome of that action.

Recommended Action Plan: This section should address recommended actions for each of the key players. What action(s) do you recommend for each of the key players, including yourself? What portions of the analysis lead you to suggest this? It is important in this section, that you include steps necessary for the implementation of the action plan–Justify your recommendation.

Leadership Reflection: This section should address the recommended actions you would take if you were the leader and/or manager in your case. If you were a leader/manager one level or more above your current role and had sufficient information about the facts of the case, provide a detailed account of how you would address the situation in a way that would provide the best results, balancing the needs of individuals with the needs of the larger organization. In order to complete this section, you must include references to at least 4 concepts and/or theories included in the textbook or related materials.