Case Portfolio Part B: Atlanta Public Schools Marissa Phoon MGC1010 Workshop 1 29708346 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report will identify and analyse the organisational culture, leading, and controlling problems faced by Atlanta Public Schools (APS) between 1999 and 2013, under the leadership of superintendent Beverly Hall. Several solutions will be proposed to rectify each problem, and recommendations on which solutions to adopt and how to implement them will be put forward. Under the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Hall implemented a strict data- centred reform policy in APS, which centred around rewarding or punishing schools based on progress towards yearly standardised testing targets. The product of this was a pervasive cheating scheme, uncovered by investigations which took place in 2010. Administrators, principals and teachers participated to create fraudulent high scores on the standardised Criterion-Referenced Competency Test, to meet the stringent APS targets. Beverly Hall and several other staff were indicted for this cheating scheme, and the new APS leadership needs to decide the direction that the organisation will take to rectify the mistakes of the previous leaders. The major organisational problems that are identified include an organisational culture of intimidation and cheating, principals’ inappropriate use of power bases, and an over-reliance on standardised testing to control performance. Theories that were considered in analysing these problems include symbols of organisational culture, power distance, bases of power, influence tactics, and control methods. The recommended solutions for APS to address each organisational issue include behavioural substitution training for principals, increasing emotional engagement between principals and teachers, and developing quantitative measures for the learning perspective of the balanced scorecard. The report concludes with implementation plans which outline a suggested time frame and steps to execute the recommendations, including the potential costs and problems that may occur. Marissa Phoon MGC1010 Workshop 1 29708346 2 CONTENTS 1 Executive Summary .......................................................................................................... 2 3 Problem Identification and Analysis .................................................................................. 4 3.1 Organisational Culture ............................................................................................... 4 3.2 Leading ...................................................................................................................... 5 3.3 Controlling ................................................................................................................. 5 4 Statement of Key Problems .............................................................................................. 6 5 Generation and Evaluation of Alternative Solutions ......................................................... 7 5.1 Organisational Culture ............................................................................................... 7 5.1.1 Behavioural substitution to encourage positive culture .... Error! Bookmark not defined. 5.1.2 New ‘balanced scorecard’ .................................................................................. 7 5.1.3 Adopt a flatter organisational structure ............................................................... 8 5.2 Leading ...................................................................................................................... 8 5.2.1 Shift power base from coercive to referent ......... Error! Bookmark not defined. 5.2.2 Shift power base from coercive to informational Error! Bookmark not defined. 5.2.3 Shift from coercion tactics to relational tactics ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 5.3 Controlling ............................................................................................................... 10 5.3.1 Shift from objective to normative control ............ Error! Bookmark not defined. 5.3.2 Implement quantitative measures on the balanced scorecard ......................... 10 5.3.3 Increase frequency of administering standardised tests .................................. 11 6 Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 11 6.1 Organisational Culture ............................................................................................. 11 6.2 Leading .................................................................................................................... 12 6.3 Controlling ............................................................................................................... 13 7 Implementation Plans ..................................................................................................... 14 7.1 Organisational Culture ............................................................................................. 14 7.2 Leading .................................................................................................................... 15 7.3 Controlling ............................................................................................................... 16 8 References ..................................................................................................................... 17 Marissa Phoon MGC1010 Workshop 1 29708346 3 PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS 3.1 ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE The key organisation culture problem that Atlanta Public Schools (APS) faced in implementing the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) was the organisational founder, organisational heroes, and the large power distance between employees, that together created a culture of “fear, intimidation and retaliation” (Simons & Kindred, 2017). The founder of an organisation shapes its culture by imprinting their beliefs, attitudes and values on the company (Williams, McWilliams, & Lawrence, 2017). As the superintendent of APS, Beverly Hall’s slogan “low score, out the door” (Simons & Kindred, 2017) declared the ruthless approach that she would take to achieve favourable results, replacing 90% of APS principals during her tenure. Hall’s slogan was repeated throughout all levels of APS, creating a culture where educators would employ unethical methods to achieve high results, at the fear of losing their jobs. Alongside slogans, Williams et al. (2017) state that another visible symbol of culture is organisational heroes – people celebrated for their qualities and achievements within the organisation. An organisational hero of APS was Principal Christopher Waller of Parks Middle Schools, who pushed teachers to cheat on standardised tests and used intimidation tactics to silence educators who spoke against him. However, Hall praised him as “one of the finest principals in the city” (Simons & Kindred, 2017), indirectly encouraging others to emulate him and fostering the “mafia-like atmosphere” of APS (Simons & Kindred, 2017). These visible symbols of APS’ culture were shadowed by invisible symbols and beliefs – which are more deeply rooted and difficult to change (Williams et al., 2017). A key invisible symbol was the large power distance between teachers and principals – exemplified in remarks by principals like “It’s my school and I will run it how I want,” (Simons & Kindred, 2017). According to Lukasik and Pikula (2014), this is characteristic of a power-oriented organisational culture, where management is uncompromising. Lin, Wang and Chen (2013) assert that power distance orientation is the extent to which an individual accepts this unequal distribution of power; in power- oriented organisational cultures, employees with a lower power distance orientation are more likely to suffer negative effects. This was seen in APS, as honest educators who spoke up were silenced or forced to leave schools. Marissa Phoon MGC1010 Workshop 1 29708346 3.2 LEADING The leading problem in APS was that principals and administrators were abusing their legitimate and coercive power to apply coercion tactics, particularly ultimatums where the negative consequences were being fired or not promoted. Williams et al. (2017) define legitimate power as the formal authority embedded within an organisation, and coercive power as the ability to impose penalties for non- compliance. Ultimatums are real or imagined threats where negative consequences will flow from not complying with the ultimatum (Williams, et al., 2017). Principals in APS frequently threatened low-scoring teachers that failing to meet targets could result in termination. Other examples of ultimatums include when Testing Coordinator Lou Ellen McKim stated that she would “get them at their car” if teachers told investigators of the cheating (Simons & Kindred, 2017). Coercion tactics like these can be classed as a ‘harsh’ power source, which according to Ozaslan (2018), is negatively related to employees’ job satisfaction and performance. This can be seen in APS with teacher Tabitha Hollinson expressing her dissatisfaction, that the cheating scheme was “not going to help the children” (Simons & Kindred, 2017). The negative impact on performance was shown when students’ learning did not improve despite increased Criterion-Referenced Competency Test (CRCT) scores – one student could not read the word “cat” yet still passed the CRCT. According to Kosar, Kilinç, et al. (2014), the use of primarily legitimate and coercive power bases also negatively impacts on teacher professionalism - evidenced by the widespread cheating in APS. These power bases may have also decreased teachers’ trust in school administrators, as discussed by Medina (2018). This is shown when Lena Levison was implicitly cautioned by Principal Dwayne Clemson against reporting the cheating scheme – Levinson was confused and frightened by Clemson’s subtext, showing a level of distrust between teachers and principals (Simons & Kindred, 2017). 3.3 CONTROLLING The controlling problem in APS was the over-reliance on bureaucratic and objective methods to control school performance, using the standardised test of the CRCT. Bureaucratic control is defined by Williams et al. (2017) as the use of hierarchical authority to influence behaviour, by rewarding or punishing employees for Marissa Phoon MGC1010 Workshop 1 29708346 compliance or non-compliance. Objective control is the use of observable measures of worker behaviour or outputs to assess performance and influence behaviour. The CRCT system was the primary mode of objective control in APS. Beverly Hall’s perspective that “the data controls everything” led to schools being required to not only meet, but exceed student improvement targets on the test (Simons & Kindred, 2017). Under the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, repeated failure to meet these targets could result in staff dismissals and even school closure. According to Ströbele and Wentges (2018), this objective control would have fostered self-interest and competition between schools and teachers, and emphasised short-term results rather than consistent student improvement. This competitive pressure resulted in principals employing cheating schemes to ensure their schools performed well, often using bureaucratic control to enforce teachers’ compliance. Principal Cameron Wells rewarded a teacher with $1000 because her homeroom had the highest percentage of students pass the CRCT. Conversely, Wells also fired teachers for non-compliance with the cheating scheme (Simons & Kindred, 2017). Ströbele and Wentges (2018) assert that employees perceive this kind of bureaucratic control as too legalistic, signalling a lack of trust - which would have destroyed educators’ intrinsic motivation to perform well. 4 STATEMENT OF KEY PROBLEMS Hall’s data-centred approach to education led to the creation of slogans and organisational heroes which fostered a harmful culture in APS of intimidation and fear. Administrators and principals abused their power bases to apply coercion tactics, placing excessive pressure on teaching staff. The strong focus on the CRCT as a control scheme also meant APS was governed through an overly bureaucratic and objective lens. These three problems all fed into a focus on quantitative results at the cost of ethics, leading to a rift between management and teaching staff, rampant cheating, and ultimately, a lack of positive impact on student learning. Marissa Phoon MGC1010 Workshop 1 29708346 5 GENERATION AND EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS 5.1 ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE 5.1.1 Culture training Train principals to replace behaviours that were central to the old culture with behaviours central to a desired new culture. Instead of principals demeaning teachers whose classes performed poorly, they could use positive reinforcement like verbal praise to encourage teacher improvement. This solution focuses on altering the visible symbols of APS’ culture. These are the easiest symbols to change, as they are less strongly held than invisible cultural symbols (Williams et al., 2017). Additionally, according to Seppala and Cameron (2013) the culture created by this positive reinforcement would be more productive due to teachers’ lower stress levels and higher engagement with work. This is likely to be a long-lasting cultural change, rather than a temporary behavioural change (Sims, 2014). However, substituting undesirable behaviours may not change the previously held beliefs that were central to APS’ old culture. According to Williams et al. (2017), invisible symbols of culture such as beliefs are more difficult to change, because they are strongly held and rarely discussed. Furthermore, Sims (2014) suggests that managers may fall into a one-size-fits-all approach to reinforcement, breeding mediocrity and passivity. 5.1.2 New ‘balanced scorecard’ Introduce a new review system for schools, adding qualitative assessment goals to the existing quantitative factors. These could include student satisfaction, engagement, and innovation, not just test scores. The main benefit of this is that APS’ goals would be realigned towards a more balanced approach on education. Encouraging qualitative improvement in areas such as innovative teaching methods would be beneficial to student engagement and satisfaction, which would hence improve learning (Subramani, 2018). However, this may not change the culture of cheating, as it does not directly alter the visible or invisible symbols of organisational culture discussed above. Gupta Marissa Phoon MGC1010 Workshop 1 29708346 and Salter (2018) suggest that the subjectivity of the balanced scorecard creates an unbalanced system where most of the weight is placed on financial measures. Additionally, teachers may still be able to manipulate the scorecard to achieve favourable results, as it is difficult to accurately measure its qualitative factors. 5.1.3 Adopt a flatter organisational structure Reduce APS’ large power distance by eliminating layers of middle management such as the district supervisors, and increase individual teachers’ involvement in school decision-making. A decentralised decision-making process means that feedback can be communicated between management and employees quicker, and hence APS could respond quicker to environmental changes (Prunty, 2018). Additionally, asking for teachers’ input would increase engagement with their work and hence improve student learning (Seppala & Cameron, 2013). Eliminating middle management roles from the payroll would also save money. However, as APS is a large organisation spanning an entire district, a flatter structure may not be feasible without impacting productivity and requiring significant financial investment. Furthermore, Baker (2015) suggests that in a flatter organisational structure, new harmful power dynamics can emerge even between employees at the same power level, and are harder to address because they are implicit. 5.2 LEADING 5.2.1 Role modelling Have principals and administrators adopt certain desired behaviours which would drive teachers to emulate the owner of those behaviours. An example of such behaviour might be principals displaying their dedication to the job by staying back later at school. According to Medina (2018), referent power is a significant predictor of trust in school administrators, and employing it could reduce the distrust between teachers and principals. Furthermore, referent power is positively related to teacher professionalism (Kosar, Kilinç, et al., 2014), and could thus help to reduce the cheating in APS. Marissa Phoon MGC1010 Workshop 1 29708346 The primary disadvantage here is that shifting the base of power may not directly translate to a change in administrators’ influence tactics. Stowell (2014) asserts that bases of social power merely represent the potential to influence individuals, and the actual behaviours enacted in a specific situation must be formed by influence tactics. Additionally, it may be difficult to implement and monitor the behavioural changes required for administrators – and there would be no guarantee that teachers actually revere administrators enough to comply. 5.2.2 Create an information campaign to change the culture Create an informational campaign in which the desired behaviours (improving teacher performance) are associated with positive outcomes (improved student learning), and shown to teachers. For example, informational videos on the positive impact that a teacher can have on improving a student’s understanding. Stowell (2014) suggests that informational power leads to internalised, lasting changes in the target’s beliefs, attitudes and values, independent of the administrator. In contrast, coercive power only results in temporary compliance while a teacher is under surveillance. With this shift, teachers would be able to self-monitor and their performance would likely improve. A disadvantage of this solution is that time and finances need to be invested into developing an informational campaign. Similarly to the previous solution, this shift in power may not mean a shift in influence tactics (Stowell, 2014). It may not eliminate the use of coercion tactics such as ultimatums. 5.2.3 Use emotional engagement Have administrators replace ultimatums with the relational tactic of emotional engagement. This would involve spending time with teachers to help them understand the overarching goals and vision of APS and creating a dialogue to collaborate on meeting these goals. This relational tactic is likely to produce long-term follower commitment, rather than simple compliance (Williams et al., 2017). Additionally, Dirik and Eryilmaz (2018) assert that compared to legitimate power, which leads to a harmful perception of organisational politics, personal power formed by relational tactics positively correlates with improved job satisfaction and performance. Shifting towards this ‘soft’ tactic would also improve satisfaction and performance (Ozaslan, 2018). Marissa Phoon MGC1010 Workshop 1 29708346 However, authentic emotional engagement requires significant investment of time and effort by principals to meet with teachers and foster the desired dialogue. Furthermore, according to Liu, Huang and Fan (2018), these relational tactics are most effective when a level of trust already exists between the two parties, which is not present in APS staff relationships. 5.3 CONTROLLING 5.3.1 Redevelop the APS’ vision Develop a shared vision, norms, and values which would drive educators’ behaviour, and encourage their self-controlling facilities based on their membership as part of APS. For example, the APS mission ‘to ensure that Atlanta Public Schools students are successful in school and in life’ (Simons & Kindred, 2017) could be promoted on posters which are placed in the staff room. A set of “APS values” could be developed and promoted throughout the organisation. According to Ströbele and Wentges (2018), normative control improves employees’ intrinsic motivation to perform well, as behaviour is driven not by fear and competition, but by loyalty to the group’s shared vision. By shifting educators’ focus from the CRCT to the APS values and mission, the pressure to cheat will be reduced. However, this solution primarily focuses on qualitative goals and vision, which may lead to a lack of clear quantitative standards to track progress against. It may be difficult and time-consuming to develop teachers’ loyalty to the values and mission, and ensure that teachers behave in accordance with them. Furthermore, because this would prescribe a singular set of norms, the scope of decisions may be narrowed, preventing innovation (Liu, Lu & Veenstra, 2014). 5.3.2 Implement quantitative measures on the balanced scorecard Add quantitative measures to the balanced scorecard to broaden the focus of objective control, reducing the importance of the CRCT. Schools should particularly develop the ‘learning’ perspective of the scorecard. Measures could include the number of teachers’ training hours per week, or surveys to gauge percentage of students satisfied with their teachers. This solution would encourage quantitative improvement across the board rather than just in CRCT results. The advantage of developing the learning perspective Marissa Phoon MGC1010 Workshop 1 29708346 is that it would build a culture that encourages innovation and long-term improvement rather than short-term results (Frezatti, Bido, et al., 2014). Fraga, Bernardes, et al. (2018) suggest that the balanced scorecard encourages the involvement of the educational community in decision making, and enables better understanding of the targets for educational objectives. Furthermore, by reducing the importance of the CRCT, the incentive to cheat is removed. However, there is the potential for these quantitative measures to mirror the harmful objective control of the CRCT in a new form. According to Fraga, Bernardes, et al. (2018), these attempts to collect and classify performance data may encourage a narrow view of learning, disregarding its qualitative and unmeasurable facets. Furthermore, practically implementing these measures may subtract time from educators’ day-to-day teaching activities. 5.3.3 Increase frequency of administering standardised tests Instead of administering the CRCT annually, integrate standardised testing into classroom curriculum to assess students’ understanding at regular intervals throughout the year. Use the regular results of these tests to control school performance, rather than the annual CRCT results. Shapiro (2014) suggests that by modularising standardised tests, teachers could more easily adapt the pace of instruction and assessment to suit the needs of students, gauged through the test results. Feedback based on results could also become timelier and more useful. Furthermore, the dispersal of standardised tests throughout the year would reduce pressure on students and teachers to perform highly on the CRCT, as the CRCT would not be the only measure of performance. However, due to the decentralised nature of this new testing system, Shapiro (2014) states that test validity and integrity may be compromised. If measures are not put in place to prevent cheating, schools may revert to the same cheating schemes employed for the CRCT. 6 RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE The recommendation being put forth is to introduce cultural training for principals, where they use positive rather than negative reinforcement to encourage high performance. The research suggests that this is the ideal solution as it would Marissa Phoon MGC1010 Workshop 1 29708346 create a more positive work culture, improving teachers’ productivity due to lower stress levels and more engagement with their work (Seppala & Cameron, 2013). Additionally, positive reinforcement would help create a lasting change in teachers’ attitudes as well as their behaviours, rendering this new positive culture more permanent (Sims, 2013). This solution is recommended primarily because it can be implemented relatively easily and quickly, compared to the alternatives. Although in the future a flattened organisational structure or a revised balanced scorecard might yield greater long-term teacher engagement and productivity, they do not directly address the root problem of the toxic culture created by the organisational slogan and heroes. In contrast, behavioural substitution focuses on directly changing the visible symbols of APS’ culture – replacing the intimidation tactics central to the old culture with positive reinforcement. Therefore, the recommendation of this report is that behavioural substitution training be introduced for principals, to signal a shift away from APS’ old culture of fear towards a more inclusive culture. 6.2 LEADING The recommendation being put forth is to have school administrators replace the coercion tactic of ultimatums with the relational tactic of emotional engagement. This may involve spending time with teachers in small groups to foster a dialogue about the goals of APS. Administrators would share their personal reasons for belief in the goals, and invite followers to share their thoughts on the goals. The research supports that this solution would improve teachers’ job satisfaction and performance: because of the shift towards a personal power base (Dirik & Eryilmaz, 2018), and replacing the ‘harsh’ tactic of ultimatums with the ‘soft’ tactic of emotional engagement (Ozaslan, 2018). This solution is recommended above the alternatives because it is focused on overt behavioural changes, as compared to merely shifting the base of power – which would only represent an abstract influencing potential (Stowell, 2014). It would be easier to develop a system for tangibly monitoring the change to administrators’ tactics. This solution also substitutes a main cause of the problem, ultimatums, whereas the other solutions did not directly address this component of the problem. Over time, this shift in influencing tactics is likely to incite a shift away from the coercive Marissa Phoon MGC1010 Workshop 1 29708346 power base, thereby incorporating elements of the alternative solutions. Hence, eventually the problems of mistrust and unprofessionalism would also be addressed by this solution. Therefore, this report recommends that APS principals foster emotional engagement and an open dialogue with teachers, to shift away from ultimatums and coercive power towards personal power. 6.3 CONTROLLING The recommendation being put forth is to introduce quantitative standards to track APS’ progress on the balanced scorecard objectives. This would require investment of time and finances into developing new measures such as the number of teachers’ training hours. To build sustainability, APS should focus on the learning perspective. The research suggests that this would encourage a move away from the short-term focus on schools’ CRCT performance, towards long-term indicators of improvement and innovation (Frezatti, Bido, et al., 2014). Furthermore, it would encourage active involvement of educators in developing and implementing the measures, and ensure that they understand the targets which APS is working towards. This solution is recommended over the alternatives because of its quantitative focus, meaning that APS’ objective control method does not need to be completely eliminated (which might spark resistance to change). The alternative solutions would require significant changes to APS’ educational model, and their decentralised or qualitative nature would leave schools vulnerable to repetitions of the cheating schemes. In contrast, expanding on APS’ existing balanced scorecard would realign the focus for the entire organisation. However, guidelines for its implementation must be put into place to ensure that this new objective control method does not increase the pressure on teaching staff. Therefore, this report recommends that APS further develop the learning perspective of the balanced scorecard, introducing quantitative standards to track progress towards more holistic, sustainable educational objectives. Marissa Phoon MGC1010 Workshop 1 29708346 7 IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 7.1 ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE Introduce cultural training for principals Who School principals, APS administrators What Train principals to replace negative reinforcement with positive reinforcement in their interactions with teachers When/Where Training system should be rolled out within 6 months How • Conduct research in different schools to identify areas of interaction where negative reinforcement is dominant • Identify the nature of the training series (videos, online modules, or in-person), frequency, and what content should be covered • Engage APS administrators to develop the training, which at the least should explain the reason behind the training and give examples of behaviours which should be substituted • Test the training series in 3 schools and evaluate after 3 months of testing • Make adjustments based on the evaluation and roll out to entirety of APS • Check in monthly with schools to monitor the impact of the training and make continual adjustments as necessary Costs • System costs – research, development, testing, implementation and evaluation • Training costs • Cost of monitoring and evolving the training system Potential problems • Principals may be resistant to change • Training may not result in principals changing behaviours • May not result in changes to underlying beliefs central to APS’ old culture of fear • Desire to receive positive reinforcement may lead to cheating Marissa Phoon MGC1010 Workshop 1 29708346 7.2 LEADING Use emotional engagement Who School principals, APS administrators, teaching staff What Train principals to implement an emotional engagement strategy with teachers, meeting regularly with teachers to help them understand the overarching vision and goals of APS When/Where Training should be implemented within 6 months, but principals and teachers should continue to meet regularly How • Conduct research in schools and identify nature that the meetings should take, and frequency of meetings • Clarify the content that will be discussed in meetings (e.g. the vision/goals and teachers’ progress towards them) • Engage APS administrators to develop strategy and training for principals to implement the meetings • Test the strategy in 3 schools and evaluate after 3 months of testing • Make adjustments based on the evaluation and roll out to entirety of APS • Check in monthly with schools to monitor the impact of the strategy and make continual adjustments as necessary Costs • System costs – research, development, testing, implementation and evaluation • Training costs • Cost of monitoring and evolving the training system • Time costs – time taken away from teaching duties to meet Potential problems • Principals may be resistant to the new strategy • May be difficult and time consuming to cultivate trust between teachers and principals • A single strategy may not be effective for every school, and the meetings may need to be more flexible to adapt to different teachers’ needs Marissa Phoon MGC1010 Workshop 1 29708346 7.3 CONTROLLING Develop quantitative measures for the balanced scorecard learning perspective Who School principals, APS administrators, teaching staff What Develop APS’ existing balanced scorecard and introduce quantitative measures to track progress on the objectives When/Where New balanced scorecard should be rolled out within 6 months How • Conduct research in different schools to identify areas where development and learning is required • Develop new objectives and new measures to complement them • Test the new balanced scorecard system and measures in 3 schools over 3 months, and evaluate their effectiveness and relevance based on the data collected • Make adjustments based on the evaluation and roll out to entirety of APS • Check in monthly with schools to monitor the impact of the measures and make continual adjustments as necessary Costs • System costs – research, development, testing, implementation and evaluation • Cost of data collection • Cost of monitoring and evolving the scorecard Potential problems • May be difficult to decide which objectives and measures to focus on • May place pressure on teaching staff to meet targets for the measures • Risk of making the focus of improvement too broad, and losing sight of the reason for the new measures Marissa Phoon MGC1010 Workshop 1 29708346 8 REFERENCES Baker, S. J. (2015). Exploration of equality and processes of non-hierarchical groups. Journal of Organisational Transformation & Social Change, 12(2), 138-158. doi:10.1179/1477963315Z.00000000039 Calciolari, S., Prenestini, A., & Lega, F. (2018). An organizational culture for all seasons? How cultural type dominance and strength influence different performance goals. Public Management Review, 20(9), 1400-1422. doi:10.1080/14719037.2017.1383784 Dirik, D., & Eryılmaz, İ. (2018). Leader power bases and organizational outcomes: The role of perceived organizational politics. Journal for East European Management Studies, 23(4), 532-558. doi:10.5771/0949-6181-2018-4-532 Frezatti, F., Bido, D. D. S., Da Cruz, A. P. C., & Machado, M. J. D. C. (2014). The role of the balanced scorecard in innovation management, RAE, 54(4), 381. doi:10.1590/S0034-759020140404 Gupta, G., & Salter, S. B. (2018). The Balanced Scorecard beyond Adoption. Journal of International Accounting Research, 17(3), 115-134. doi:10.2308/jiar-52093 Kosar, S., Kilinç, A. Ç., Er, E., Ögdem, Z., & Savas, G. (2014). Examining the relationships between primary school principals' power styles and teachers' professional behaviors. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 60(2), 322- 338. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1697492249?accountid=12528 Lin, W., Wang, L., & Chen, S. (2013). Abusive supervision and employee well-being: The moderating effect of power distance orientation. Applied Psychology, 62(2), 308-329. doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.2012.00520.x Liu, Y., Huang, Y., & Fan, H. (2018). Influence tactics, relational conditions, and key account managers' performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 73(2018), 220-231. doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2018.02.013 Liu, Y., Lu, H., & Veenstra, K. (2014). Is sin always a sin? The interaction effect of social norms and financial incentives on market participants’ behavior. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 39(4), 289-307. doi:10.1016/j.aos.2014.04.001 Lukasik, J. M., & Pikula, N. G. (2014). Organisational culture and qualitative development of schools. International Forum for Education, 115+. Retrieved Marissa Phoon MGC1010 Workshop 1 29708346 from https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A563682945/AONE?u=monash&sid=AONE&xi d=52fb3bb8 Medina, M. R. (2018). Authentic leadership: A study of the relationship between authentic leadership and organizational citizenship behavior among research administrators at research universities. (Ph.D.). Our Lady of the Lake University, Ann Arbor. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/2091369250?accountid=12528 Özaslan, G. (2018). Principals’ conceptions of their current power basis revealed through phenomenography. Journal of Educational Administration, 56(2). doi:10.1108/JEA-10-2016-0120 Prunty, R. (2018). Flattening organizations. In A. Farazmand (Ed.), Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance (pp. 2239-2243). Cham: Springer International Publishing. Radici Fraga, P.G., Bernardes, M.M.E.S., Vieira, D.R., & Chain, M.C. (2018). Implementation issues of a design management indicator system. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 67(5), 890-915. doi:10.1108/IJPPM-01-2017-0009 Seppala, E., & Cameron, K. (2015). Proof that positive work cultures are more productive. Harvard Business Review Digital Articles, 2-5. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login. aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=118667628&site=ehost-live&scope=site Shapiro, S. (2014). Reimagining standardized testing: how a hybrid assessment system can benefit students, teachers, and administrators, AEI Paper & Studies, F1. Retrieved from Washington, DC: https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A436889742/AONE?u=monash&sid=AONE&xi d=e572dfe9 Simons, R., & Kindred, N. (2017). Atlanta Schools: Measures to improve performance. Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing. Sims, B. (2014). Using positive-reinforcement programs to effect culture change. Employment Relations Today, 41(2), 43-47. doi:10.1002/ert.21452 Stowell, F. (2014). Organisational power and the metaphor commodity. International Journal of Systems and Society,1(1), 12-20. doi:10.4018/ijss.2014010102 Marissa Phoon MGC1010 Workshop 1 29708346 Ströbele, A., & Wentges, P. (2018). The role of organizational social capital in the design of management control systems. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 30(2), 187-205. doi:10.2308/jmar-52071 Subramani, P. C. N., & Iyappan, V. (2018). Innovative methods of teaching and learning. Journal of Applied and Advanced Research, 3(2018), 20. doi:10.21839/jaar.2018.v3iS1.161 Williams, C., McWilliams, A., & Lawrence, R. (2016). MGMT3. Melbourne, Australia: Cengage Learning Australia. Filename: Student B.docx Directory: /Users/jessco/Library/Group Containers/UBF8T346G9.Office/User Content.localized/Templates.localized Template: /Users/jessco/Library/Group Containers/UBF8T346G9.Office/User Content.localized/Templates.localized/Normal.dotm Title: Subject: Author: Marissa Phoon Keywords: Comments: Creation Date: 22/05/2020 22:08:00 Change Number: 2 Last Saved On: 22/05/2020 22:08:00 Last Saved By: Jess Co Total Editing Time: 1 Minute Last Printed On: 22/05/2020 22:08:00 As of Last Complete Printing Number of Pages: 19 Number of Words: 6,179 (approx.) Number of Characters: 35,226 (approx.)