Writer’s choice: SAME WRITER. PLEASE FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS & RUBRICS. ADD 2 MORE SOURCES

-Peter Senge (2010. p. 170)

Consider the interpersonal and group dynamics of an organization at which you have previously worked. Can you recall a situation where your beliefs were proven inaccurate? How would you explain the disparity between your beliefs and the actual conditions within the organization? What caused this disparity?

How employees relate to one another in any position is based on their own perception of reality. This perception is partly created by the organization and partly created by both conscious and unconscious beliefs of the employees. For example, if employees believe the organization does not want workers who discuss organizational problems, they are less likely to report any issues they are experiencing. While the leadership of an organization may want to avoid having employees focus on complaints or demand unrealistic changes, opportunities for cost savings and improvement of products and services are lost if an organizational culture prevents the sharing of constructive and innovative ideas by everyone. In order to encourage constructive dialogue, organizations must find ways to ensure that employees understand the changing dynamics that affect their work and truly embrace the vision of the organization./p>

This week, you will use a metaphor to analyze interpersonal and group dynamics in an organization with which you are familiar.

Learning Objectives
This week, you will:

Analyze the psychic prison metaphor in organizations
Analyze employee dynamics
Skills
You will develop the following skills:

Analyze interpersonal and group dynamics in organizations
Apply theoretical concepts to practical cases
Resources
Readings
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2017). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership (6th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Chapter 8, “Interpersonal and Group Dynamics” (pp. 160–178)
Case Study, “Anne Baretta” (pp. 160–161)
Morgan, G. (2006). Images of organization. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Chapter 7, “Exploring Plato’s Cave: Organizations as Psychic Prisons” (pp. 207–240) (Note: This chapter is a review from last week’s readings.)

Discussion: Interpersonal Dynamics in the Workplace

Consider the metaphor of the “psychic prison” described in Morgan (2006) and look for an example in your own working experience that illustrates this concept. Describe what happened, and analyze your example to explain the effect of organizational culture on interpersonal and group dynamics. What may have caused this situation and how could it have been prevented? What steps, if any, were taken to address the issue?

Day 3: Initial Post
By Day 3, post an analysis of the psychic prison metaphor in an organization of your choice.

Be sure to review the Objectives listed for this week and refer to the Discussion Rubric as guidance for the criteria that will be used to assess your participation in this Discussion. Refer to the Hints for additional details.

Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.

Name: MGMT_8005M_Week5_Discussion_Rubric
Grid View
List View
Superior Criteria Excellent Criteria Satisfactory Criteria Marginal Criteria Unacceptable Criteria
Element 1a: Initial Post – Psychic Prison Example
6 (20%)
Student presents a thorough and detailed analysis of the physic prison metaphor in an organization by accurately defining psychic prison and explaining with descriptive details his/her example of a psychic prison. Several resources and examples support thinking.
5.7 (19%)
Student presents a detailed analysis of the physic prison metaphor in an organization by accurately defining psychic prison and explaining with descriptive details his/her example of a psychic prison. Several resources or examples support thinking. There are one or two minor errors or details missing.
5.1 (17%)
Student presents an analysis with some details of the physic prison metaphor in an organization by accurately defining psychic prison and explaining with descriptive details his/her example of a psychic prison. Some resources or examples support thinking. Some details are missing and/or not fully developed.
4.5 (15%)
Student presents a cursory or incomplete analysis with vague or missing details of the physic prison metaphor in an organization by vaguely defining psychic prison and/or explaining with few details his/her example of a psychic prison. Few resources or examples support thinking. Most details are missing or lack clarity.
0 (0%)
Does not meet minimal standards.

Element 1b: Initial Post – Understanding Behavior
6 (20%)
Student presents a thorough and detailed analysis of how the concept of psychic prison could be useful in understanding his/her own behavior and that of his/her employees and includes examples of conscious and unconscious behaviors in how he/she relates, manages, develops policies, and leads. Several resources and examples support thinking.
5.7 (19%)
Student presents a detailed analysis of how the concept of psychic prison could be useful in understanding his/her own behavior and that of his/her employees and includes examples of conscious and unconscious behaviors in how he/she relates, manages, develops policies, and leads. Several resources or examples support thinking. There are one or two minor errors or details missing.
5.1 (17%)
Student presents an analysis with some details of how the concept of psychic prison could be useful in understanding his/her own behavior and that of his/her employees and includes examples of conscious and unconscious behaviors in how he/she relates, manages, develops policies, and leads. Some resources or examples support thinking. Some details are missing and/or not fully developed.
4.5 (15%)
Student presents a cursory or incomplete analysis of how the concept of psychic prison could be useful in understanding his/her own behavior and that of his/her employees and includes few if any examples of conscious and unconscious behaviors in how he/she relates, manages, develops policies, and leads. Few resources or examples support thinking. Most details are missing or lack clarity.
0 (0%)
Does not meet minimal standards.

Element 1c: Scholarly Sources
4.5 (15%)
Student supports his/her statements with a minimum of two specific citations from this week’s recommended readings as well as two additional sources from relevant peer-reviewed publications. Citations are relevant, current, and appropriately formatted.
4.28 (14.25%)
Student supports his/her statements with a minimum of two specific citations from this week’s recommended readings as well as two additional sources from relevant peer-reviewed publications. Citations are relevant, current, and appropriately formatted; however one or two statements are missing a citation.
3.83 (12.75%)
Student supports his/her statements with at least two specific citations from this week’s recommended readings as well as two additional sources from relevant peer-reviewed publications.
3.38 (11.25%)
Student somewhat supports his/her statements with at least two specific citations from this week’s recommended readings; but may be missing one or two additional sources from relevant peer-reviewed publications and/or there are several statements missing citations and/or citations are not relevant or current.
0 (0%)
Does not meet minimal standards.

Element 2: Follow-up Responses to Colleagues and Interaction
4.5 (15%)
Student engages with several peers bringing the discussion to a higher level of inquiry and investigation. Responses are thorough and fully contribute to the quality of interaction by offering constructive critique, suggestions, in-depth questions, additional resources, and stimulating thoughts and/or probes.
4.28 (14.25%)
Student engages with several peers bringing the discussion to a higher level of inquiry and investigation. Responses fully contribute to the quality of interaction by offering constructive critique, suggestions, in-depth questions, additional resources, and stimulating thoughts and/or probes. However, there are one or two minor errors in content of responses.
3.83 (12.75%)
Student engages with at least two peers and helps extend the discussion. Responses somewhat contribute to the quality of interaction by offering constructive critique, suggestions, in-depth questions, additional resources, and stimulating thoughts and/or probes.
3.38 (11.25%)
Student engages with at least two peers. Responses are minimal and do not fully contribute to the quality of interaction by offering constructive critique, suggestions, in-depth questions, additional resources, and stimulating thoughts and/or probes. Responses may lack relevant examples and/or details to support reasoning.
0 (0%)
Does not meet minimal standards.

Element 3: Written Delivery Style & Grammar
4.5 (15%)
Student consistently follows APA writing style and basic rules of formal English grammar and written essay style. Student communicates in a cohesive, logical style. There are no spelling or grammar errors.
4.28 (14.25%)
Student consistently follows APA writing style and basic rules of formal English grammar and written essay style. Student communicates in a cohesive, logical style. There are one or two minor errors in spelling or grammar.
3.83 (12.75%)
Student mostly follows APA writing style and basic rules of formal English grammar and written essay style. Student mostly communicates in a cohesive, logical style. There are some errors in spelling or grammar.
3.38 (11.25%)
Student does not follow APA writing style and basic rules of formal English grammar and written essay style and/or does not communicate in a cohesive, logical style.
0 (0%)
Does not meet minimal standards.

Element 4: Formal and Appropriate Documentation of Evidence, Attribution of Ideas (APA Citations)
4.5 (15%)
Student demonstrates full adherence to APA style with respect to source attribution, references, heading and subheading logic, table of contents and lists of charts, etc. There are no APA errors. Citations and references support position.
4.28 (14.25%)
Student demonstrates full adherence to APA style with respect to source attribution, references, heading and subheading logic, table of contents and lists of charts, etc. Citations and references support position. There are one or two minor errors in APA style or format.
3.83 (12.75%)
Student mostly adheres to APA style with respect to source attribution, references, heading and subheading logic, table of contents and lists of charts, etc. At least one citation and reference supports position. Some errors in APA format and style are evident.
3.38 (11.25%)
Student demonstrates weak and/or inconsistent adherence to APA style with respect to source attribution, references, heading and subheading logic, table of contents and lists of charts, etc. No citations or references support opinion and/or several errors in APA format and style are evident.
0 (0%)
Does not meet minimal standards.
Name: MGMT_8005M_Week5_Discussion_Rubric

More information about this Discussion.
MGMT 8005M: Week 5 Discussion Additional Information
• Define “psychic prison.” Describe an example of a “psychic prison” you or a colleague have experienced in your organization or one with which you are familiar.
• Think of yourself in the role of a manager. Analyze and explain how the concept of the psychic prison could be useful in understanding your own behavior and that of your employees, particularly in terms of improving the workplace dynamics in the environment.
• Reading the entire chapter will provide insights on conscious and unconscious behaviors in how we relate, manage, develop policies, and lead.

In your readings this week, you read about Plato’s cave and its relationship to the metaphor of the “psychic prison.” You reflected on how this metaphor can apply to organizations in terms of interpersonal and group dynamics in the workplace. You also reviewed other metaphors of Morgan’s (2006) that can be used in a similar way to make sense of individual and organizational behavior. At this point, you should understand metaphors well enough to create your own and use it to describe a situation.

The following anecdote is an example of creating one’s own metaphor to assist in a strategic direction. A consultant was assisting his client, a large residential care facility, in an overall cultural transformation. During this transformation, a side need arose to help the client facility improve the dining experience for residents using the metaphor “meals as a fine dining experience.” He held a brainstorming session asking residents and employees to share their definition and examples of a fine dining experience. Some of the examples included not eating on trays but nice plates, linen tablecloths and napkins, music, buffets, a dining partner. The dietary staff created an entire dining experience that had two options: One was providing the resident meals in their room as they always had done, the other was going to a dining hall with tables with centerpieces, music playing softly, and some of the dietary staff joining them to interact. The dining room option included dishes instead of trays and soft, pastel-colored paper napkins. Once a week they had a theme-based buffet. More residents came out of their rooms to eat and share in the experience, and overall satisfactory ratings increased. Additional socialization occurred for many residents, which was a side benefit.

Next week, we explore the political frame.