Department: program: professor: Telephone Number: Office Location: Office Hours: Email: Website: co



Download 2.91 Mb.
Page3/4
Date conversion21.02.2016
Size2.91 Mb.
1   2   3   4

1. Learning Goals/Objectives: Provide an overview of the forms of inter-organizational networks and the tasks for managers and organizations in creating and maintaining networks. Learners will:

Identify the elements, actors, and institutions that comprise the environment of an organization in general and for infrastructure protection systems in particular.

• Recognize the role of networks in contemporary public administration generally and in infrastructure protection.

• Identify alternative forms and purposes of inter-agency networks and tasks required to maintain networks.

• Consider some of the specific ways that an agency adapts to its environment — structurally and programmatically.

• Begin to recognize how coordination is achieved in complex, inter-agency and intergovernmental settings, and what adaptations organizations make to adjust or coordinate.

• Identify the difficulties in achieving inter-agency coordination and the consequences of failure to coordinate.
2. Discussion Questions:
• What are the groups and institutions that comprise the environment of infrastructure systems you are most concerned with? Who are the actors?

• What are some of the specific ways that an agency adapts to its environment — structurally and programmatically? How has your agency adapted over time?

• What are some alternative forms of inter-agency networks with which you work?

• Why do the governance forms described by Milward and Provan differ? How specifically to they support different network forms?

• What governance form describes how your networks function? What are the strengths of these forms?

• What are some of the difficulties in achieving coordination in the inter-agency setting in which you work? What are some of the consequences of failure to coordinate?


3. Required Reading:
Hal Rainey, Understanding and Managing Public Organizations, Chapter 4: Analyzing the Environment of Public Organizations.
Donald Chisholm, Coordination without Hierarchy: Informal Structures in Multiorganizational

Systems, Chapter 4, (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989).
Brinton Milward and Keith Provan, A Manager's Guide to Choosing and Using Collaborative Networks, (IBM Center for the Business of Government, 2006), http://www.searchca.net/users/FolderData/%7B9C1F4A33-677E-4ACE-805A-ACCC0B8F4380%7D/ProvanReport.pdf.
14

Donald Moynihan, “Combining Structural Forms in the Search for Policy Tools: Incident

Command Systems in U.S. Crisis Management,” Governance, 21(2), (2008), 205-229.
4. Recommended Additional Readings:
Robert Agranoff, Leveraging Networks: A Guide for Public Managers Working Across Organizations, (Arlington, VA: IBM Center for the Business of Government, 2003), http://www.businessofgovernment.org/report/leveraging-networks-guide-public-managers- working-across-organizations.
Marcus Abrahamsson, Henrik Hassel, and Henrik Tehler, “Towards a System-Oriented Framework for Analysing and Evaluating Emergency Response,” Journal of Contingencies & Crisis Management, 18(1), (2010), 14-25.
5. Case for Discussion: Select one of the working groups in the site below and determine the kind of network it is by applying one of Milward and Provan’s types. What pressures does this put on the network partners? What governance tasks are important? What governance elements are in evidence?
U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Critical Infrastructure Partnership Advisory Council

Working Groups by Sector, http://www.dhs.gov/files/committees/gc_1277402017258.shtm.
Alternative Case for Discussion: John J Kiefer and Robert S Montjoy, “Incrementalism before the Storm: Network Performance for the Evacuation of New Orleans,” Public Administration Review, 66 (Special Issue, December 2006), 122-130, http://www.library.eiu.edu/ersvdocs/4735.pdf.
What type and form of network was intended in this case? What kinds of impediments to the creation of a pre-event, planning network are evident? What were the network failings? What would a hierarchical process have looked like? Who would the actors have been? Would a hierarchical solution have worked better? Why (not)?

15
LESSON 7 TOPIC: COLLECTING AND MANAGING INFORMATION FOR DECISION-MAKING AND LEARNING


1. Learning Goals/Objective: Raise awareness of information management and information processing as important tasks for public managers. Learners will:

• Recognize the formal and informal sources of information about organizational results that are available to public managers.

• Identify some of the impediments to the collection and distribution of information about results.

• Consider the ways that information is distributed, stored, retrieved, and used in learning for increased program effectiveness.

• Recognize the political context for learning and the incentives for learning.


2. Discussion Questions:
• What are some formal and informal sources of information about the health of the infrastructure security in place? How is this information collected? Shared? What networks exist for communicating this information?

• What are some of the impediments to the collection and distribution of information about the state of the critical infrastructure you work with? What can you take from the readings so far about how to make the information collection more robust?

• How is information distributed, stored, retrieved, and used in learning for increased program effectiveness? Where is information lost?

• What needed information is not collected? What might be done to overcome the barriers to collecting this information?


3. Required Reading:
Doris Graber, The Power of Communication, Chapter 2: Building Information Bases: Resources and Obstacles.
James March, Lee Sproull, and Michal Tamuz, “Learning from Samples of One or Fewer,” in

Organizational Learning, edited by Michael Cohen and Lee Sproull, (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage,

1996).
Michael Morris and Paul Moore, “The Lessons We (Don't) Learn: Counterfactual Thinking and Organizational Accountability after a Close Call,” Administrative Science Quarterly 45(4), (2000), 737-71.


Robert D. Behn, “Why Measure Performance? Different Purposes Require Different Measures,” Public Administration Review, 63(5), (September/October, 2003), 586-606, http://www.ie.bilkent.edu.tr/~ie102/Behn%20(2003).pdf.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1540-6210.00322/pdf.

16
Thomas Birkland, “Learning and Policy Improvement after Disaster: The Case of Aviation

Security,” American Behavioral Scientist, 48(3), (November 2004), 341-364.


4. Recommended Additional Reading:
Herbert Kaufman, Administrative Feedback: Monitoring Subordinates' Behavior, (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1973).
George Huber, “Organization Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatures,” Organizational Science 2(1), (1991), 88-115, http://users.business.uconn.edu/jgoodman/MGMT%206201%20Assigned%20Readings%202008

/8%20Organizational%20learning/Huber%201991.pdf.
Donald F. Kettl, “Managing on the Frontiers of Knowledge: The Learning Organization,” in New Paradigms for Government, edited by Patricia W. Ingraham and Barbara S. Romzek, (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1994).
5. Case for Discussion: Patrick O'Neil, “High Reliability Systems and the Provision of a Critical Transportation Service,” Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 19(3), (September 2011), 158-168. “Key to the effectiveness of this HRS structure is vertical and horizontal information flow supported by multiple dedicated organizations created to identify, analyze, and mitigate precursors that might threaten system operations and reliability.”
Consider this case in light of what you have read about information collection and distribution. What contributions do dedicated learning systems make? What accounts for their effectiveness?

17
LESSON 8 TOPIC: DECISION-MAKING AND STRATEGIC PLANNING


1. Learning Goals/Objectives: Provide an overview of decision processes, including search and choice criteria, especially as they rest upon information and communication systems. Learners will:

• Become aware of the prevalence of bounded and routine decision processes and the content and consequences of preprogrammed routines.

• Consider the range of prescriptive and descriptive models designed to guide our understanding of how decisions should be or are made. Compare these with research on how most decisions in public organizations are made.

• Learn about the forms of facilitated decision processes, and their advantages and limitations.

• Recognize the forms of decision processes that comprise strategic planning and management procedures.
2. Discussion Questions:
• What examples of preprogrammed decisions can you find in your organizations? What are their virtues? What options are limited as a result? When do routines change? What happens to change the program? Consider this in light of High Reliability processes.

• What instances of the full rational planning model can you think of in your agency? Is incrementalism or satisficing more common?

• What would you do to improve the quality of incremental processes in your organization?

How can the negotiation process improve?

• What would you do to improve the quality of satisficing processes in your organization?

How can the search process be improved?

• Can you find examples of “Garbage Can” decision making? What finally led to a decision?

• What are some of the forms of facilitated decision processes you use in your agency? What are their advantages and limitations?

• What decision processes are typical in strategic planning? Note how these processes are dependent on communication and information collection and processing? What can be done to improve the quality of the strategic process?

• How can you change strategic plans into strategic management? What is needed to do this?

What examples can you find in your organization of doing so?
3. Required Reading:

Hal Rainey, Understanding and Managing Public Organizations, Chapter 7, pp. 179-200. Doris Graber, The Power of Communication, Chapter 6: Foundations for Sound Decisions. Andrew H. Van de Ven and Andre L. Delbecq, “The Effectiveness of Nominal, Delphi and



Interacting Group Decision Making Process,” Academy of Management Journal, 17(4), (1974),

605-621.

18
Paul C. Nutt, “Types of Organizational Decision Processes,” Administrative Science Quarterly,

29(3), (September 1984), 414-450.
Theodore Poister, “Strategic Planning and Management in State Departments of Transportation,”

International Journal of Public Administration, 28(13), (2005), 1035-56.
Louise Comfort, “Crisis Management, in Hindsight: Cognition, Communication, Coordination and Control,” Public Administration Review, 67 (December Supplement), (2007), 189-197.
4. Case for Discussion: Electronic Hallway: Hurricane Katrina: A Man-Made Crisis?

http://hallway.evans.washington.edu/cases/hurricane-katrina-man-made-crisis.

Many factors, historical, geologic, and cultural, contributed to the effects of Hurricane Katrina. Based on the evidence in this case and on your growing understanding of organizational and inter-organizational information flows and decision processes, identify some of the organizational and managerial contributions to the disaster. What lessons about information management, organizational learning, and decision-making could be applied in this case? How might the adoption of any of these lessons have altered the trajectory of events? What would have made their adoption more likely?


4. MID-TERM EXAM Distributed — Due next class meeting.

19
LESSON 9 TOPIC: GETTING MOTIVATED: MOTIVES, INCENTIVES, AND INDIVIDUAL BEHAVIOR IN



AGENCIES
1. Learning Goals/Objectives: Provide an introduction to the key concepts and theories of work motivation, especially in public organization settings that rely upon commitment to public service and duty. Learners will:

• Recognize the theories of motivation that inform the creation of incentives and benefit systems in public organizations.

• Recognize the special incentives and stresses of emotionally-engaging public service work.

• Identify the effects of performance management on motivation and incentive systems.

• Consider the implications of theories of public service motivation for organizations committed to critical infrastructure protection and service in the time of crisis.
2. Discussion Questions:
• What are the incentives that are most important to you? What about your job gets you up and out to work in the morning?

• What formal incentives are there in your organization? What other characteristics of the job or worksite serve to motivate you and your colleagues? What motivation theories explain the effect of these incentives and how they might be made more effective?

• In what ways does work with critical infrastructures constitute emotional labor? What other kinds of stressors are common? What means of stress relief do you see in the workforce around you?

• How is your work quality monitored? How aware are people in your organization of how their work is evaluated? What effects does this have on motivation in your agency? How could work monitoring and evaluation be improved?

• How important is the concept of “Public Service Motivation” among those in your organization? What particular forms does it take? How is it expressed?

• What untapped sources of motivation are there in agencies devoted to critical infrastructure protection? How might managers make better use of these sources of motivation?


3. Required Reading:
Hal Rainey, Understanding and Managing Public Organizations, Chapter 9: Understanding People in Public Organizations: Values and Motives, and Chapter 10: Understanding People in Public Organizations: Theories of Work Motivation and Work-Related Attitudes.
Mary E. Guy, Sharon H. Mastracci, and Meredith A. Newman, Emotional Labor: Putting the

Service in Public Service, Chapter 1: Emotional Labor and Public Service, 69-75, (2008).
James L Perry, Debra Mesch, and Laurie Paarlberg, “Motivating Employees in a New Governance Era: The Performance Paradigm Revisited,” Public Administration Review, 66(4), (Jul/Aug 2006), 505-514, http://glennschool.osu.edu/faculty/brown/home/810/Class%20Materials/Perry.pdf.

20
Michael W. Brand et al., “Public Health’s Response: Citizens’ Thoughts on Volunteering,”



Disaster Prevention and Management, 17(1), (2008), 54-6.
4. Recommended Additional Reading:
W. Michael Dunaway and Gregory L. Shaw, “The Influence of Collaborative Partnerships on Private Sector Preparedness and Continuity Planning,” Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 7(1), (2010), 1-17.
Christine Kane-Urrabazo, “Duty in a Time of Disaster: A Concept Analysis,” Nursing Forum,

42(2), (April-June 2007), 56-64.

1   2   3   4


The database is protected by copyright ©essaydocs.org 2016
send message

    Main page