DOCSLIB.ORG

27Th Annual Teaching Public Administration Conference

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

27th Annual Teaching Public Administration Conference February 12 -14, 2004 Madison, Wisconsin Conference Papers 27th Annual Teaching Public Administration Conference Table of Contents 1. Using Metaphorical Analysis to Communicate Understanding Through Ambiguity –Abbey 2. Putting Organizational Theories to the Test – Allen, Heidemann, Ingles, Mills 3. XHR—Classroom as Organization - Cunningham 4. Using Customer Value to Guide Competitive Higher Education Marketing Strategies – Dunning (ppt) 5. Balancing Outputs and Outcomes: A Survey of MPA Graduates – Evans, Lowery 6. Team-Based Real-Time Case Study Pedagogy: Teaching and Learning How to Analyze Public Policy Problems – Ewalt 7. A Model of Outreach and Partnership: Ohio’s CPM Program – Killian, Coombs 8. Community-based Quality of Life Indicators: A Service Learning Exercise in a Graduate Statistics Class – Lowery 9. Gender and Communication Style: What Public Administrators Know and Need to Know – Mills, Wandell 10. Student Support Services in the Virtual MPA Program - Rosell 11. The Performance of Small Study Groups within the Jordanian Culture – Sarayah 12. Teaching MPA Students Using a Distance Learning Format: Techniques to Promote Academic Integrity – Shetterly, Dunning 13. Action Learning in Public Administration: A Case Study from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service – Wicks, Stieglitz 14. The Lessons I Have Learned: The Classroom Simulation - Zinner Using Metaphorical Analysis to Communicate Understanding Through Ambiguity Robert F. Abbey, Jr. Associate Professor, Troy State University It's all a question of a story. We are in trouble just now because we do not have a good story. We are in between stories. The Old Story--- the account of how the world came to be and how we fit into it--- is not functioning properly, and we have not learned the New Story. The Old Story sustained us for a long period of time. It shaped our emotional attitudes, provided us with life's purpose, and energized action. It consecrated suffering, integrated knowledge, guided education. We awoke in the morning and knew where we were. We could answer the questions of our children. We could identify crime, punish criminals. Everything was taken care of because the story was there. It did not make men good, it did not take away the pains or stupidities of life, or make for unfailing warmth in human association. But it did provide a context in which life could function in a meaningful manner. We are between stories. A fundamental shift in basic beliefs and assumptions about the nature of things and the human condition is going on. Because those beliefs and assumptions are among the foundations of human existence, when they change, radical shifts in individual values and societal conditions will follow. Morgan (1980) presents a strong case that science of all kinds, whether nominalist or realist in its basic orientation, is primarily metaphorical. It is through the use of metaphor that scientists seek to create knowledge about the world. The metaphors which theorists choose as a basis for detailed theorizing usually derive from very fundamental, and often implicit, core assumptions about ontology and human nature. In selecting different metaphors for elaborating their theories, they implicitly commit themselves to an epistemological position which places the emphasis upon particular kinds and forms of knowledge. Debates about epistemology largely hinge around the advocacy of different kinds of metaphoric insight as a means of capturing the nature of the social world. As Morgan (1980) has argued, these differing ideological perspectives are inherent in the different kinds of metaphors which are used to tie specific theorizing to root views of reality. This approach to understanding reality has been used by Jones (1982) and Gregory (1988) to understand the nature of physics. Toffler (1980) employed the metaphor of waves (first, second, third) to explain the evolution of civilization and provided a way to envision the future; this metaphor was then adopted by Maynard and Mehrtens (1993) and applied to the business sector as the fourth wave. Tides were utilized by Light (1997) to explain the “reforms” associated with administering to the public. Hateley and Schmidt (1997; 2000) have used the metaphors of peacocks, pigeons, and penguins to explore the nature of diversity and stereotyping. Terry (1997) applies the theater metaphor as an aid in understanding public administration. MacKenzie (1998) provides the most powerful use of metaphor when he describes his corporate life as “orbiting the giant hairball!” Ozzie Smith (“The Wizard of Oz”) (2002) uses the metaphor of a baseball to describe and understand his life and his rise to ascendancy in baseball itself. Using the concepts and principles advanced by Lakoff and Johnson (1980) and separately by Morgan (1980; 1986), students are challenged to conceptualize their organizations using the metaphors advanced by Gannon (2004). The appendix to this paper describes the requirements for a term paper in an organizational behavior course. This paper will explore the use of metaphorical analysis to understanding organizations in general (see Figure 1) and to understanding organizational behavior in particular. Examples will be drawn from student papers and shared as a possible way to teach communication of understanding of organizations through ambiguity. Bibliography Gannon, Martin. (2004). Understanding Global Cultures: Metaphorical Journeys Through 28 Nations, Clusters of Nations, and Continents. 3rd Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Gregory, Bruce. (1988). Inventing Reality: Physics as Language. New York, NY: John Wiley. Hateley, Barbara, and Schmidt, Warren H. (1997). A Peacock in the Land of Penguins: A Tale of Diversity and Discovery. 2nd Edition. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler. Hateley, Barbara, and Schmidt, Warren H. (2000). Pigeonholed in the Land of Penguins: A Tale of Seeing Beyond Stereotypes. New York, NY: AMACOM. Jones, Roger S. (1982). Physics as Metaphor. New York, NY: New American Library. Lakoff, George, and Johnson, Mark. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Light, Paul C. (1997). The Tides of Reform: Making Government Work, 1945-1995. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. MacKenzie, Gordon. (1998). Orbiting the Giant Hairball: A Corporate Fool’s Guide to Surviving with Grace. New York, NY: Penguin Putnam. Maynard, Herman B., Jr., and Mehrtens, Susan E. (1993). The Fourth Wave: Business in the 21st Century. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler. Montague, Susan P., and Morris, Robert. (1975). “Football games and rock concerts: the ritual enactment of American success models,” in W. Ahrens (Ed.), The American Dimension: Cultural Myths and Realities. Port Washington, NY: Alfred Publishing, 32- 52. Morgan, Gareth. (1980). “Paradigms, metaphors, and puzzle solving in organizational theory,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 25, 605-622. Morgan, Gareth. (1986). Images of Organization, Sage, Newbury Park, CA. Morgan, Gareth. (1993). Imaginization: The Art of Creative Management. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Ortony, Andrew. (1975). “Why metaphors are necessary and not just nice,” Educational Theory, 25, 1, 45-63. Putnam, Robert D. (1995). “Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital,” Journal of Democracy, 6, 1, 65-78. Smith, Ozzie. (2002). Speech prepared for his July 28, 2002, induction to the National Baseball Hall of Fame, Cooperstown, NY. Terry, Larry. (1997). “Public administration and the theater metaphor: the public administrator as villain, hero, and innocent victim,” Public Administration Review, 57, 1 (January/February), 53-61. Toffler, Alvin. (1980). The Third Wave. New York, NY: William Morrow. Appendix 1 METAPHORICAL ANALYSIS OF ORGANIZATIONS Term Paper Undoubtedly, you have had recent experiences with numerous organizations. This exercise will assist you in identifying differences in organizations from a multiplicity of metaphorical orientations. In effect, for this assignment you are being asked to think specifically about organizations you have been associated with recently, develop your own conceptual metaphorical model for looking at their characteristics, and think more specifically about the managerial functions in each of these organizations. You probably already know a great deal more about organizations and their management that you think. This exercise should be useful in getting your thoughts together. Step 1: Select an organization in which you have been involved or with which you have had recent contact. Step 2: Analyze this organization (a) using any of the metaphors described by Gannon (1997; 2001) or (b) develop a metaphorical analysis of your own using the principles described by Morgan (1980; 1986; 1993). Morgan, Gareth. (1980). Paradigms, metaphors, and puzzle solving in organization theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25, 605-622. Morgan, Gareth, 1986: Images of Organization. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Morgan, Gareth (1993). Imaginization: The Art of Creative Management. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Step 3: Write your term paper based on your reasoned response to Step 2. This term paper is to consist of twelve to sixteen typed, double-spaced pages (3000-4000 words). Figure 1 Network of Basic Assumptions Characterizing The Subjective-Objective Debate within Social Science Subjectivist Objectivist Approaches to Approaches to Social Science Social Science 6 5 4 3 2 1 Core reality as a reality as reality as a reality as a reality as a reality as a Ontological projection of social
Recommended publications
  • Tourism and Sacred Ground: the Space of Ground Zero

    Tourism and Sacred Ground: the Space of Ground Zero

    4 Tourism and “Sacred Ground” The Space of Ground Zero n October 14, 2001, weeks after it had become clear that Othere were no survivors left to be pulled from the rub­ ble at Ground Zero in New York, and with the recognition that the bodies of many of those who had died would never be recovered, the City of New York decided to distribute the dust. Mayor Giuliani set up a procedure through which the families of the dead received an urn of the dust from the site for a memorial ceremony. The dust (which was oth­ erwise being hauled from the site to the Fresh Kills landfi ll on Staten Island) was gathered into fi fty-fi ve-gallon drums, covered by American fl ags, blessed by a chaplain at Ground Zero, and given a police escort to One Police Plaza.1 Offi ­ cials wearing white gloves scooped the dust into four thou­ sand small urns, each engraved with 9–11–01 and wrapped in a blue velvet bag.2 By this ritual, the dust was transformed into a substance that was understood to be sacramental and ceremonial (handled with white gloves), moved from drums (indicating refuse) to urns (indicating individuals, ashes, the remains of life), yet that was also offi cial (accompanied by police escort) and national (covered by fl ags). This attempt to make the dust sacred, to turn it into a relic, reveals many aspects of the construction of meaning at Ground Zero in the years since 9/11. While analyses of From Tourists of History by Sturken, Marita.
  • Addressing the Health Impacts of 9/11 Report

    Addressing the Health Impacts of 9/11 Report

    ADDRESSING THE HEALTH IMPACTS OF 9-11 Report and Recommendations to Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg Panel Co-Chairs Linda I. Gibbs, Deputy Mayor for Health and Human Services Edward Skyler, Deputy Mayor for Administration Panel Participants Alan D. Aviles, President & Chief Executive, Health and Hospitals Corporation Dr. Ramanathan Raju, Executive Vice President Medical & Professional Affairs Dr. Joan Reibman, Associate Director of Medicine and Environmental Medicine, NYU Medical Center, and Director, WTC Environmental Health Center at Bellevue Joseph F. Bruno, Commissioner, Office of Emergency Management David J. Burney, Commissioner, Department of Design and Construction Michael Cardozo, Corporation Counsel Anthony Crowell, Counselor to the Mayor John J. Doherty, Commissioner, Department of Sanitation Thomas R. Frieden, M.D., M.P.H., Commissioner, Department of Health and Mental Hygiene Dr. Lorna Thorpe, Ph.D., Deputy Commissioner, Division of Epidemiology James F. Hanley, Commissioner, Office of Labor Relations Charles S. Hirsch, M.D., Chief Medical Examiner Martin F. Horn, Commissioner, Department of Correction Raymond W. Kelly, Commissioner, New York City Police Department Dr. Eli J. Kleinman, Supervising Chief Surgeon Mark Page, Director, Office of Management and Budget Bud Larson, Associate Director Nicholas Scoppetta, Commissioner, New York City Fire Department Dr. Kerry Kelly, Chief Medical Officer Dr. David Prezant, Deputy Chief Medical Officer Iris Weinshall, Commissioner, Department of Transportation Executive Directors Cas Holloway
  • Coordinated Determination of National Register Eligibility—World Trade Center Site New York City, New York, March 31, 2004 I. Introduction

    Coordinated Determination of National Register Eligibility—World Trade Center Site New York City, New York, March 31, 2004 I. Introduction

    COORDINATED DETERMINATION OF NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBILITY—WORLD TRADE CENTER SITE NEW YORK CITY, NEW YORK, MARCH 31, 2004 I. INTRODUCTION This document has been prepared pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act in association with proposed reconstruction and redevelopment in the area of the approximately 16-acre World Trade Center superblock (WTC Site), bounded generally by Vesey Street on the north, Liberty Street on the south, Route 9A/West Street on the west and Church Street on the east. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and Lower Manhattan Development Corporation (LMDC), as a recipient of funds from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), are coordinating the Section 106 processes for several proposed undertakings on or adjacent to the WTC Site: Permanent World Trade Center PATH Terminal (FTA with the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey [Port Authority]), World Trade Center Memorial and Redevelopment Plan (LMDC with HUD funding), and Route 9A Reconstruction (FHWA with New York State Department of Transportation [NYSDOT]). The substance of this document will be incorporated by each of the agencies into their respective environmental review documents. Section 106 requires federal agencies to identify historic properties (e.g. buildings, structures, sites, objects and districts listed in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places) that may be affected by a proposed undertaking. This document focuses on the WTC Site. Each of these undertakings is subject to environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and to review under Section 106. Environmental impact statements are being prepared for each of these independent undertakings.