Mintzberg: Feedback to reports

1
Mintzberg Feedback to reports

• Pål Sørgaard, Telenor RD and IfI
• INF 5250
• October 17, 2005

2
Describing with theory

• This is hard
• Generally well done
• Explain the theory you use, but briefly,
  preferably integrated with your description
• Avoid long overviews of Mintzberg
• Be open to more than one interpretation
• A good discussion is more important than a firm
  conclusion
• Several cases are hard to classify
• Some reports have very good discussions

3
Method

• Think about the method you use
• You only see a minor part of the organisation
• You mainly meet official representatives
• You seldom see the real work
• Avoid taking Mintzbergs view for granted
• Risk of circular arguments
• You select an approach given extreme constraints

4
Handling interviews

• Interviewees are normally kept anonymous
• Interviews are normally not a part of the report
• but fine to share with your advisor
• You can quotes from interviews to illustrate
• Refer to interviews if you need to, otherwise
  talk about them
• Be critical, the interviewee is only one person
  among many

5
Handling sources

• Make sure that what you write is what you think
• quote views by interviewees or from official
  brochures
• Be careful with insiders (yourself, your family,
  others that you cannot have a critical distance
  to)
• Try to find alternative sources
• Newspapers and the political agenda are good to
  know
• Be critical

6
Making reports

• Explain to your reader what you do
• Use introductions and meta text
• Present your findings
• Discuss your findings
• Do not hide your doubts
• Conclude
• Dont start with the conclusion
• When talking about an organisation, say it not
  they

7
Understanding Mintzberg

• Stability and complexity
• Delimitation
• Do we see an organisation or a part of one?
• Be prepared for alternative interpretations
• And read chapter 13
• Technostructure different from IT (very!!!)
• Technical system also different from IT
• The middle line consists of all management
  levels, not just level 2
• May also include project leaders

8
Advanced bureaucracies

• Professional independence
• In a hospital, the CEO cannot instruct an MD in
  medical matters, similarly at a university
• In a ministry, in a library, and in a software
  company that is possible (but wise?)
• There are quite strong examples of
  technostructure in these examples
• And also strong external control
• Is pigeonholing a must for a professional
  bureaucracy?
• Bureaucracies with highly skilled workers more
  common than in 1983
• Are these moving towards adhocracy?

9
Technicalities

• Pagination
• Getting references right
• Table of contents
• Title page with complete information
• Proofreading
• Husk regler for orddeling!
• Ikke som på engelsk!!!!!!!!!!
• Se http//folk.uio.no/tfredvik/amo/

10
General impression

• Very good work by most groups
• 21 reports, 15 accepted
• 55 students in total (are you that many?)
• Reports delivered on time
• Successful given constraints in time and
  knowledge
• Good way to learn?

11
To those who failed

• You get one new chance
• In the written feedback you get information about
  why
• Improve or rewrite your report
• New deadline October 31, noon 1200
• Two weeks from now
• Send to Miria
• Final evaluation November 7