This article focuses on an instructional/training problem in the
behavioral sciences, namely, that learners often see the field as a
collection of common sense and often (mistakenly) believe that they
already follow the prescriptions of theories as diverse as Reinforce
ment Theory and Theory Y Management. A method for changing
these perceptions and attitudes called the self-analytic case study is
presented along with preliminary evidence suggesting that the
method works. Since the study was done both with undergraduate
and MBA students, it is suggested that the method is a valuable
training tool in both university classes and management develop
ment workshops.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Argyris, C. (1980). Some limitations of the case method: Experiences in a management development program. Academy of Management Review, 5(2), 291-298.
2.
Asch, S.E. (1955). Opinions and social pressure. Scientific American (November), 31-34.
3.
Dooley, A.R., & Wickham, S. (1977). Casing the case method. Academy of Management Review, 2(2), 277-284.
4.
Frederiksen, L.W. (1982). On the prospects of a behavioral approach to managerial effectiveness. Journal of Organizational Behavioral Management , 3(3), 85-90.
5.
Gadon, H. (1977). Teaching cases experientially. Exchange: The Organization Behavior Teaching Journal, 2(1), 20-24.
6.
Gellerman, S. (1967). Comments on McGregor's Theory X and Theory Y. BNA Film Guide.
7.
Hackman, J.R., & Oldham, G.R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 250-279.
8.
House, R.J. (1979). Experiential learning: A sad passing fad? Exchange, 4(3), 8-12.
9.
Latham, G.P., & Locke, E.A. (1979). Goal setting: A motivational technique that works . Organizational Dynamics, 8(2), 68-80.
10.
Lewin, K. (1952). Group decision and social change. In G. E. Swanson, T. M. Newcomb , & E. L. Hartley (Eds.), Readings in Social Psychology (pp. 459-473). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
11.
McGregor, D. (1960) The Human Side of Enterprise. New York: McGraw-Hill.
12.
McGregor, D. (1967). The Professional Manager. New York: McGraw-Hill.
13.
Milgram, S. (1965). Liberating effects of group pressure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1(2), 127-134.
14.
Miles, R.E. (1965). Human relations or human resources. Harvard Business Review, 43(4), 148-155.
15.
Miles, R.E. (1964). Conflicting elements in managerial ideologies . Industrial Relations, 4(1), 77-91.
16.
Miner, F.C. (1978). An approach to increasing participation in case discussions. Exchange: The Organization Behavior Teaching Journal, 3(3), 41-42.
17.
Rasmussen, R.V. (1983). Teaching Behavior Modification: Approaches to Dealing with the Attitudinal Problems. Working Paper submitted and under review for the 1984 Western Academy of Management Meetings.
18.
Rasmussen, R.V. (1984). Interpersonal feedback: Problems and reconceptualization. 1984 Annual for Group Facilitators. San Diego, CA: University Associates. Also presented at the Western Academy of Management Meetings, April 1983, Santa Barbara, California .
19.
Reynolds, J.I. (1978). There's method in cases. Academy of Management Review, 3(1), 129-133.
20.
Rosenthal, R., & Rosnow, R.L. (1969). The volunteer subject. In R. Rosenthal & R. L. Rosnow (Eds.), Artifact in Social Research. New York: Academic.
21.
Schein, E.H., & Bennis, W.G. (1965). Personal and organizational change through group methods: The laboratory approach. New York: John Wiley.
22.
Schein, E.H. (1967). Introduction to D. McGregor, The Professional Manager. New York: McGraw-Hill.
23.
Walter, G.A., & Marks, S.E. (1981). Experiential learning and change. New York: John Wiley.
24.
Woolfolk, A.E., Woolfolk, R.L., & Wilson, G.T. (1977). A rose by any other name ... : Labelling bias and attitudes toward behavior modification. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 45, 184-191.
