Political Frame – Walt Disney

The Political Frame Assignment Overview In the Module 3 Case, you will write Chapter 3 of your thesis-style paper relating to the Political Frame. Using specific examples of politics (i.e., the jungle) as defined by Bolman and Deal, you will use the Political Frame as a lens through which you will analyze the downfall of Walt Disney Company CEO Michael Eisner. Begin the Module 3 Case by visiting the Walt Disney Company website: The Walt Disney Company. (2014). Retrieved on May 8, 2014 from https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/ The following articles provide a good starting point concerning former CEO Eisners tenure with the Walt Disney Company: White, D. (2005, Oct 01). When Mickey finally turned on his master. Michael Eisner’s reign at Disney is over. Dominic White reports. The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved from Proquest. Consider Michael Karpeles article relating to politics in the Disney boardroom: Karpeles, M. D. (2005). Boardroom lessons from the Disney/Ovitz case. Corporate Board, 26(155), 6-10. Retrieved on June 10, 2014 from EBSCO Business Source Complete. Finally, read the following case study: Forbes, W., & Watson, R. (.). Destructive corporate leadership and board loyalty bias: A case study of Michael Eisners long tenure at Disney Corporation. City University London. Retrieved on June 10, 2014 from Case Assignment After you have reviewed the contents of the Walt Disney Company website, completed the above readings and those provided at the Background page of Module 3, and performed additional research from the library and the internet, write a 6- to 7-page paper in which you do the following: Using the following five assumptions of the Political Frame, complete an in-depth assessment of the Walt Disney Company: Organizations are coalitions of diverse individuals and interest groups. There are enduring differences among coalition members in values, beliefs, information, interests, and perceptions of reality. Most important decisions involve allocating scarce resourceswho gets what. Scarce resources and enduring differences make conflict central to organizational dynamics and underline power as the most important asset. Goals and decisions emerge from bargaining, negotiation, and jockeying for position among competing stakeholders. Keys to the Assignment The key aspects of this assignment that are to be covered in your 6- to 7-page paper include the following: Using Bolman and Deals Political Frame, analyze the political behaviors surrounding the departure of Disney CEO Michael Eisner. Specifically, address the following: Briefly identify and discuss the key political forces that led to Eisners downfall. How does the Jungle metaphor apply to the Eisner case? Describe the coalitions that formed at Disney. Then, identify those salient interests that caused the division between coalitions, and how these differences were ultimately resolved. Discuss the Eisner case study in the context of two or three of Bolman and Deals Political Frame assumptions included above. How do the assumptions youve chosen inform what happened in the Michael Eisner case? Briefly comment on the significance of the Toxic Triangle (see Figure 1 of Forbes & Watsons case study about Eisners departure), and discuss how this model informs the Eisner case study. The background readings will not give you all the answers to the Case. Therefore, you are required to perform some research in the library, and use a minimum of 3-4 scholarly sources from the library to support and justify your understanding of the case. Your paper must demonstrate evidence of critical thinking (if you need tips on critical thinking, is an excellent resource). Dont simply restate facts instead, be sure to interpret the facts you have accumulated from your research. Remember that the Module 4 Case will also serve as Chapter 4 of your session-long thesis-style paper. Assignment Expectations Your paper will be evaluated using the following five (5) criteria: Assignment-Driven Criteria: Does the paper fully address all Keys to the Assignment? Are the concepts behind the Keys to the Assignment addressed accurately and precisely using sound logic? Does the paper meet minimum length requirements? Critical thinking: Does the paper demonstrate graduate-level analysis, in which information derived from multiple sources, expert opinions, and assumptions has been critically evaluated and synthesized in the formulation of a logical set of conclusions? Does the paper address the topic with sufficient depth of discussion and analysis? Business Writing: Is the paper well-written (clear, developed logically, and well-organized)? Are the grammar, spelling, and vocabulary appropriate for graduate-level work? Are section headings included in all papers? Are paraphrasing and synthesis of concepts the primary means of responding to the Keys to the Assignment, or is justification/support instead conveyed through excessive use of direct quotations? Effective Use of Information (Information Literacy): Does the paper demonstrate effective research, as evidenced by students use of relevant and quality sources? Do additional sources used in paper provide strong support for conclusions drawn, and do they help in shaping the overall paper? Citing Sources: Does the student demonstrate understanding of APA Style of referencing, by inclusion of proper end references and in-text citations (for paraphrased text and direct quotations) as appropriate? Have all sources (., references used from the Background page, the assignment readings, and outside research) been included, and are these properly cited? Have all end references been included within the body of the paper as in-text citations? Lets begin here with an excerpt from Bolman, L. G. & Deal, T. E. (2003). Reframing organizations: artistry, choice, and leadership (3rd ed.). San Francisco: John Wiley. Note the assumptions of the Political Frame, as you will use these to guide the writing of your Case: Assumptions of the Political Frame The political frame views organizations as living, screaming political arenas that host a complex web of individual and group interests. Five propositions summarize the perspective: Organizations are coalitions of diverse individuals and interest groups. There are enduring differences among coalition members in values, beliefs, information, interests, and perceptions of reality. Most important decisions involve allocating scarce resourceswho gets what. Scarce resources and enduring differences make conflict central to organizational dynamics and underline power as the most important asset. Goals and decisions emerge from bargaining, negotiation, and jockeying for position among competing stakeholders. All five propositions of the political frame came to the fore in the Challenger incident: Organizations are coalitions. NASA did not run the space shuttle program in isolation. The agency was part of a complex coalition including contractors, Congress, the White House, the military, the mediaeven the American public. Consider, for example, why Christa McAuliffewas aboard. Her expertise as a social science teacher was not critical to the mission. But the American public was bored with white male pilots in space. Human interest was good for both NASA and Congress; it built public support for the space program. McAuliffe’s participation was a magnet for the media because it made for a great human interest story. Three years earlier, Sally Ride generated excitement as the first female astronaut. Now the idea of putting an ordinary citizen in spaceespecially a teachercaught the public’s imagination. Symbolically, Christa McAuliffe represented all Americans. Everyone flew with her. There are enduring differences among coalition members. NASA’s hunger for funding competed with the public’s interest in lower taxes. Astronauts’ concerns about safety were at odds with pressures on NASA and its contractors to maintain an ambitious flight schedule. Important decisions involve allocating scarce resources. On the eve of the Challenger launch, key parties struggled to balance conflicting pressures. Everyone from Pres. Ronald Reagan to the average citizen was waiting for the first teacher to fly in space. Higher safety carried a high pricenot just money, but further erosion of support from key constituents for both Morton Thiokol and NASA. Survivor, a pioneer of “reality” television, guaranteed political infighting because the rules allowed for only one winner. Scarce resources and enduring differences make conflict central and power the most important asset. The teleconference on the eve of the launch began as a debate between the contractor and NASA. As a sole customer, NASA was in the driver’s seat. When managers at Morton Thiokol sensed NASA’s level of disappointment and frustration, they asked for time to caucus. The scene shifted to a tense standoff between engineers and managers. Engineers were unable leverage their expertise, their primary source of power, into a sufficiently persuasive case. Managers used their authority to recommend the launch despite the opposition. Goals and decisions emerge from bargaining, negotiation, and jockeying for position among competing stakeholders. Political bargaining with the help of powerful allies got Morton Thiokol into the rocket motor business. Thiokol’s engineers had been attempting to increase management’s attention to the booster joint problem for many months. But acknowledging a problem, in addition to costing substantial time and money, risked eroding Morton Thiokol’s credibility. A large and profitable contract was hanging in the balance. The assumptions of the political frame outline sources of power dynamics. A coalition forms because of interdependence among its members; they need one another, even though their interests may only partly overlap. The assumption of enduring difference implies that political activity is more visible and dominant under conditions of diversity than of homogeneity. Agreement and harmony are easier to achieve when everyone shares similar values, beliefs, and culture. The concept of scarce resources suggests that politics will be more salient and intense in difficult times. Schools and colleges, for example, have lived through alternating times of feast and famine in response to peaks and valleys in economic and demographic trends. When money and students are plentiful (as they were in the 1960s and again in the 1990s), administrators spend time determining which buildings to erect and programs to initiate. Conversely, when resources dry up, conflict mushrooms and administrators often succumb to political forces they neither understand nor control. Another key political issue is powerits distribution and exercise. Power in organizations is basically the capacity to get things done. Pfeffer (1992, p. 30) defines power as “the potential ability to influence behavior, to change the course of events, to overcome resistance, and to get people to do things they would not otherwise do.” Russ (1994, p. 38) puts it more strongly as the ability to “make one’s will prevail and to attain one’s goal.” Social scientists have often emphasized tight linkage between power and dependency: if A has something B wants, A has leverage. In much of organizational life, individuals and groups are interdependent; they need things from one another, and power relationships are multidirectional. From the view of the political frame, power is a “daily mechanism of our social existence” (Crozier and Friedberg, 1977, p. 32). The final proposition of the political frame emphasizes that goals are set not by fiat at the top but through an ongoing process of negotiation and interaction among key players. To illustrate, consider another example: a commitment China made in December 2001 to promote its accession to the World Trade Organization. The Chinese government promised to get serious about protecting intellectual property, ensuring that products carrying labels such as Coca-Cola, Microsoft, Sony, and Rolex were authentic. The central government passed laws, threw the book at the occasional unlucky offender, blustered in the media, and put pressure on local governments. Yet six months later, name-brand knockoffs and pirated software were still on sale all over China, even a few blocks from Tiananmen Square (Bolman & Deal, 2003, pp. 186-9). Lets continue our discussion with this interesting presentation on the Political Frame: Jacobs, . (.). Theories of practice: The political frame. Villanova University. Retrieved on May 1, 2014 from Finally, be sure to review the following presentation relating to power, politics, and conflict: Hogan, . (). Chapter 9: Power, conflict, and coalitions. Eastern Illinois University. Retrieved on May 12, 2014 from Optional resources Holson, . (2005, September 26). A quiet departure for Eisner at Disney. The New York Times. Retrieved on June 10, 2014 from:
Show more