MGMT20001

0）先搞清楚：这门课“怎么被考”（你为什么会焦虑 + 怎么稳住）

• 期末考试：2小时，50%（覆盖全套 micro + macro）[1]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdf你已经上完讲座和辅导课。用这 些表格和标注框来自测:说出学 者姓名、列出各组成部分、给出 一个案例。“考试招数”框精确展 示了每个观点是如何被考查的 -- 这是在备战占50% 的试卷 前需要反复操练的一层。 C 3 . APPLY 3 · 应用(APPLY) You're writing the case-study report or sitting the exam. The cases (Theranos, CBA, Uber, Musk) and the define - apply- with-evidence - recommend spine are written to be lifted straight into a case analysis - theory, named source, applied to the organisation. 你正在写案例研究报告或参加考 试。这些案例(Theranos、 CBA、Uber、Musk)以及定义 → 结合证据应用→提出建议这 一主线,都是为了能被直接搬进 案例分析而撰写的 -- 理论、点 名出处、应用于该组织。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual ! Read this first: a 50% exam is the centre of gravity 先读这一段:占50% 的期末考是重心所在 MGMT20001 is assessed four ways: tutorial prep, participation & contribution (10%), an individual assignment (10%, Week 4, 1000 words), a group case-study report (30%, ~1250 words/student of a 5000-word team report), and a 2-hour end-of-semester exam (50%). The exam alone is half the mark and covers the whole canon - the micro ladder (perception - values - motivation - teams - conflict) and the macro block (ethics - change + culture - communication -> power). You cannot bluff that breadth on the night; this book is built to keep the full theory base warm and exam-ready. Treat it as exam revision and confirm exam conditions on your unit outline - the official source does not state whether the paper is open- or closed-book, so this book makes no such claim. MGMT20001 的考核分四部分:辅导课预习、参与及贡献(10%),一篇个人作业(10%,第4周,1000字),一份小 组案例研究报告(30%,5000 字团队报告中每位学生约1250字),以及一场2小时的期末考试(50%)。仅期末考试 就占总分一半,且覆盖整套知识体系 -- 微观主线(知觉→价值观→激励→团队→冲突)和宏观板块(伦理→变 革→文化→沟通→权力)。当晚是蒙混不过这种广度的;本书正是为了让整个理论基础保持温热、随时可考而编写。 把它当作考试复习材料,并在你的课程大纲上确认考试条件 -- 官方来源并未说明该试卷是开卷还是闭卷,因此本书不 作此类断言。 i How this book was built 本书是如何编写的 Every theory, theorist and case here is grounded in this subject's own materials: the genuine UniMelb Canvas modules (MO-M12), the module Overview / Readings pages, the practitioner-video and tutorial-activity pages, the Module 8 Ethics takeaway notes, and the McShane & Von Glinow 10e canon the unit runs on. Standard, published OB theory is stated plainly; the lecturer's specific framing and the case wording (Theranos, CBA, Uber, Musk, the "Fast Fashion" serial) are paraphrased, never copied. Verify all weights and dates against your own LMS - details can shift between cohorts. 这里的每一条理论、每位学者、每个案例都扎根于本课程自身的材料:真实的 UniMelb Canvas 模块 (MO-M12)、各 模块的概览/阅读材料页、从业者视频与辅导课活动页、Module 8 伦理要点笔记,以及本课程所依托的McShane & Von Glinow 第10 版知识体系。标准的、已出版的组织行为学理论按原样陈述;而授课教师的特定框定方式与案例措辞 (Theranos、CBA、Uber、Musk、“Fast Fashion”系列)则经过转述,绝不照抄。请对照你自己的 LMS 核实所有占 比与日期 -- 各届之间细节可能有变动。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual THE BLUEPRINT - THE EXAM BLUEPRINT 50% FINAL . CHECK UNIT OUTLINE Where every mark lives 每一分都从这里来 A 2-hour final worth 50% sits on top of three pieces of continuous work 占 50% 的两小时期末考,建立在三项持续性平时作业之上 TL;DR. Your subject mark is built from four pieces. The single biggest is a 2-hour end-of-semester exam worth 50% - the subject's centre of gravity - covering the full micro+macro canon. The other 50% is continuous: tutorial work, an individual assignment, and a scaffolded group case-study report. 一句话总结。你的单元成绩由四部分构成。其中分量最大的单项是学期末一场 2小时、占50% 的考试 -- 本单元的重心所在 -- 覆盖完整的微观+宏观知识体系。另外50% 是平时持续性评估:辅导课作业、一份个人作业,以及一份有阶段性支架的 小组案例研究报告。 50% FINAL EXAM . 2 HR 期末考试 · 2 小时 30% GROUP CASE REPORT 小组案例报告 10% INDIVIDUAL ASSIGN. 个人作业[3]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdf10% TUTORIAL PREP 辅导课预习 The four assessment pieces 四项考核内容 Component Weight When End-of-semester exam - 2-hour written 50% Exam period Group case-study report - 5000- 30% Wks 9-10 word team report Individual assignment - 1000 words 10% Week 4 Tutorial prep / participation - 0. 4 pt/module 10% Wks 2-6 The group report is scaffolded by a Team Contract (due Sat 18 Apr) and a Structural Plan (due Sat 25 Apr) before the report itself (due Sat 16 May); teams form in the Module 4 tutorial. Tutorial points come from a two-step prep quiz each module - a zero-point Knowledge-Testing gate, then the 0. 4-pt Application- of-Theory quiz. Confirm all weights and dates on your unit outline. 小组报告设有阶段性支架:先有一份团队契约(Team Contract,截止 4 月 18 日周六)和一份结构方案 (Structural Plan,截止4月25日周六),然后才是报告 本身(截止5月16日周六);小组在模块4的辅导课上组 建。辅导课分数来自每个模块的两步式预习测验 -- 先是一 个零分的知识检测(Knowledge-Testing)关卡,随后是占 0. 4 分的理论应用(Application-of-Theory)测验。请以 你的单元大纲核对所有权重和日期。 What each piece rewards 每项考核分别奖励什么 Piece What it rewards Exam (50%) Breadth + recall-and-apply: every theorist, model and flagship case across micro and macro, on demand Group report (30%) Case-method depth: define - apply theory with evidence - recommend, argued as a team Individual (10%) Reflective application of an early micro topic, individually, in academic writing Tutorial (10%)
• 小组案例报告：30%（define → apply-with-evidence → recommend 的深度）[3]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdf10% TUTORIAL PREP 辅导课预习 The four assessment pieces 四项考核内容 Component Weight When End-of-semester exam - 2-hour written 50% Exam period Group case-study report - 5000- 30% Wks 9-10 word team report Individual assignment - 1000 words 10% Week 4 Tutorial prep / participation - 0. 4 pt/module 10% Wks 2-6 The group report is scaffolded by a Team Contract (due Sat 18 Apr) and a Structural Plan (due Sat 25 Apr) before the report itself (due Sat 16 May); teams form in the Module 4 tutorial. Tutorial points come from a two-step prep quiz each module - a zero-point Knowledge-Testing gate, then the 0. 4-pt Application- of-Theory quiz. Confirm all weights and dates on your unit outline. 小组报告设有阶段性支架:先有一份团队契约(Team Contract,截止 4 月 18 日周六)和一份结构方案 (Structural Plan,截止4月25日周六),然后才是报告 本身(截止5月16日周六);小组在模块4的辅导课上组 建。辅导课分数来自每个模块的两步式预习测验 -- 先是一 个零分的知识检测(Knowledge-Testing)关卡,随后是占 0. 4 分的理论应用(Application-of-Theory)测验。请以 你的单元大纲核对所有权重和日期。 What each piece rewards 每项考核分别奖励什么 Piece What it rewards Exam (50%) Breadth + recall-and-apply: every theorist, model and flagship case across micro and macro, on demand Group report (30%) Case-method depth: define - apply theory with evidence - recommend, argued as a team Individual (10%) Reflective application of an early micro topic, individually, in academic writing Tutorial (10%)[5]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfKeeping the theory warm: accurate, on- time prep + reaching your own informed position in discussion AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual ✓ The strategy this dictates 由此确定的学习策略 The exam is the only piece testing the full canon, so it rewards breadth: know what each model is, who proposed it, and which case the unit attaches it to - Taylor/Mayo, Tuckman, Hofstede, Jehn & Mannix, Lewin, Marshak, Lukes/Hardy. The report rewards depth on one case via the define - apply-with- evidence - recommend spine. This book front-loads the recall and teaches that spine for every macro chapter. Master both and nothing in the subject can blindside you. 考试是唯一考查整套知识体系的环节,因此它奖励广 度:要知道每个模型是什么、由谁提出、本课程把它 挂靠到哪个案例上 -- Taylor/Mayo、Tuckman、 Hofstede, Jehn & Mannix, Lewin, Marshak, Lukes/Hardy。报告则通过定义→ 结合证据应用→ 提出建议这一主线奖励对单一案例的深度。本书把记 忆内容前置,并为每一个宏观章节教授这套主线。两 者都掌握,本课程就没有任何东西能让你措手不及。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual CONTENTS CONTENTS The whole subject, in one ordered book 整门课程,浓缩为一本有序之书 Twelve modules - one micro-macro revision map 十二个模块 →一张微观一宏观复习地图 Ch Topic Core idea Micro · individuals, groups & teams (Modules 1-7) 1 What OB is micro vs macro · evidence over "common sense" → 2 Scientific Management vs Human Relations Taylor's efficiency vs Mayo's Hawthorne → 3 Perception, attribution & decisions bias . FAE . Dunning-Kruger . bounded rationality → 4 Teams & leadership Tuckman stages · distributed leadership → 5 Values, attitudes & behaviour Hofstede . dissonance . the satisfaction myth → 6 Motivation content vs process . empowerment → 7 Conflict & negotiation
• 个人作业：10%（约 Week 4，1000词）[3]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdf10% TUTORIAL PREP 辅导课预习 The four assessment pieces 四项考核内容 Component Weight When End-of-semester exam - 2-hour written 50% Exam period Group case-study report - 5000- 30% Wks 9-10 word team report Individual assignment - 1000 words 10% Week 4 Tutorial prep / participation - 0. 4 pt/module 10% Wks 2-6 The group report is scaffolded by a Team Contract (due Sat 18 Apr) and a Structural Plan (due Sat 25 Apr) before the report itself (due Sat 16 May); teams form in the Module 4 tutorial. Tutorial points come from a two-step prep quiz each module - a zero-point Knowledge-Testing gate, then the 0. 4-pt Application- of-Theory quiz. Confirm all weights and dates on your unit outline. 小组报告设有阶段性支架:先有一份团队契约(Team Contract,截止 4 月 18 日周六)和一份结构方案 (Structural Plan,截止4月25日周六),然后才是报告 本身(截止5月16日周六);小组在模块4的辅导课上组 建。辅导课分数来自每个模块的两步式预习测验 -- 先是一 个零分的知识检测(Knowledge-Testing)关卡,随后是占 0. 4 分的理论应用(Application-of-Theory)测验。请以 你的单元大纲核对所有权重和日期。 What each piece rewards 每项考核分别奖励什么 Piece What it rewards Exam (50%) Breadth + recall-and-apply: every theorist, model and flagship case across micro and macro, on demand Group report (30%) Case-method depth: define - apply theory with evidence - recommend, argued as a team Individual (10%) Reflective application of an early micro topic, individually, in academic writing Tutorial (10%)
• Tutorial prep/参与：10%（每模块两步测验：知识关卡 + 0.4分应用测验）[3]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdf10% TUTORIAL PREP 辅导课预习 The four assessment pieces 四项考核内容 Component Weight When End-of-semester exam - 2-hour written 50% Exam period Group case-study report - 5000- 30% Wks 9-10 word team report Individual assignment - 1000 words 10% Week 4 Tutorial prep / participation - 0. 4 pt/module 10% Wks 2-6 The group report is scaffolded by a Team Contract (due Sat 18 Apr) and a Structural Plan (due Sat 25 Apr) before the report itself (due Sat 16 May); teams form in the Module 4 tutorial. Tutorial points come from a two-step prep quiz each module - a zero-point Knowledge-Testing gate, then the 0. 4-pt Application- of-Theory quiz. Confirm all weights and dates on your unit outline. 小组报告设有阶段性支架:先有一份团队契约(Team Contract,截止 4 月 18 日周六)和一份结构方案 (Structural Plan,截止4月25日周六),然后才是报告 本身(截止5月16日周六);小组在模块4的辅导课上组 建。辅导课分数来自每个模块的两步式预习测验 -- 先是一 个零分的知识检测(Knowledge-Testing)关卡,随后是占 0. 4 分的理论应用(Application-of-Theory)测验。请以 你的单元大纲核对所有权重和日期。 What each piece rewards 每项考核分别奖励什么 Piece What it rewards Exam (50%) Breadth + recall-and-apply: every theorist, model and flagship case across micro and macro, on demand Group report (30%) Case-method depth: define - apply theory with evidence - recommend, argued as a team Individual (10%) Reflective application of an early micro topic, individually, in academic writing Tutorial (10%)

1）期末最高分的“万能答题骨架”（你每题都按这个写）

• （1）Define：先点名理论/模型 + 给干净定义
• （2）Apply with evidence：用案例里的具体证据去套理论（不要空讲）
• （3）Recommend：给可执行的建议/修复方案（具体到做什么）
• 这条主线同时也是小组报告评分方式，所以你练熟=一鱼两吃。[1]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdf你已经上完讲座和辅导课。用这 些表格和标注框来自测:说出学 者姓名、列出各组成部分、给出 一个案例。“考试招数”框精确展 示了每个观点是如何被考查的 -- 这是在备战占50% 的试卷 前需要反复操练的一层。 C 3 . APPLY 3 · 应用(APPLY) You're writing the case-study report or sitting the exam. The cases (Theranos, CBA, Uber, Musk) and the define - apply- with-evidence - recommend spine are written to be lifted straight into a case analysis - theory, named source, applied to the organisation. 你正在写案例研究报告或参加考 试。这些案例(Theranos、 CBA、Uber、Musk)以及定义 → 结合证据应用→提出建议这 一主线,都是为了能被直接搬进 案例分析而撰写的 -- 理论、点 名出处、应用于该组织。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual ! Read this first: a 50% exam is the centre of gravity 先读这一段:占50% 的期末考是重心所在 MGMT20001 is assessed four ways: tutorial prep, participation & contribution (10%), an individual assignment (10%, Week 4, 1000 words), a group case-study report (30%, ~1250 words/student of a 5000-word team report), and a 2-hour end-of-semester exam (50%). The exam alone is half the mark and covers the whole canon - the micro ladder (perception - values - motivation - teams - conflict) and the macro block (ethics - change + culture - communication -> power). You cannot bluff that breadth on the night; this book is built to keep the full theory base warm and exam-ready. Treat it as exam revision and confirm exam conditions on your unit outline - the official source does not state whether the paper is open- or closed-book, so this book makes no such claim. MGMT20001 的考核分四部分:辅导课预习、参与及贡献(10%),一篇个人作业(10%,第4周,1000字),一份小 组案例研究报告(30%,5000 字团队报告中每位学生约1250字),以及一场2小时的期末考试(50%)。仅期末考试 就占总分一半,且覆盖整套知识体系 -- 微观主线(知觉→价值观→激励→团队→冲突)和宏观板块(伦理→变 革→文化→沟通→权力)。当晚是蒙混不过这种广度的;本书正是为了让整个理论基础保持温热、随时可考而编写。 把它当作考试复习材料,并在你的课程大纲上确认考试条件 -- 官方来源并未说明该试卷是开卷还是闭卷,因此本书不 作此类断言。 i How this book was built 本书是如何编写的 Every theory, theorist and case here is grounded in this subject's own materials: the genuine UniMelb Canvas modules (MO-M12), the module Overview / Readings pages, the practitioner-video and tutorial-activity pages, the Module 8 Ethics takeaway notes, and the McShane & Von Glinow 10e canon the unit runs on. Standard, published OB theory is stated plainly; the lecturer's specific framing and the case wording (Theranos, CBA, Uber, Musk, the "Fast Fashion" serial) are paraphrased, never copied. Verify all weights and dates against your own LMS - details can shift between cohorts. 这里的每一条理论、每位学者、每个案例都扎根于本课程自身的材料:真实的 UniMelb Canvas 模块 (MO-M12)、各 模块的概览/阅读材料页、从业者视频与辅导课活动页、Module 8 伦理要点笔记,以及本课程所依托的McShane & Von Glinow 第10 版知识体系。标准的、已出版的组织行为学理论按原样陈述;而授课教师的特定框定方式与案例措辞 (Theranos、CBA、Uber、Musk、“Fast Fashion”系列)则经过转述,绝不照抄。请对照你自己的 LMS 核实所有占 比与日期 -- 各届之间细节可能有变动。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual THE BLUEPRINT - THE EXAM BLUEPRINT 50% FINAL . CHECK UNIT OUTLINE Where every mark lives 每一分都从这里来 A 2-hour final worth 50% sits on top of three pieces of continuous work 占 50% 的两小时期末考,建立在三项持续性平时作业之上 TL;DR. Your subject mark is built from four pieces. The single biggest is a 2-hour end-of-semester exam worth 50% - the subject's centre of gravity - covering the full micro+macro canon. The other 50% is continuous: tutorial work, an individual assignment, and a scaffolded group case-study report. 一句话总结。你的单元成绩由四部分构成。其中分量最大的单项是学期末一场 2小时、占50% 的考试 -- 本单元的重心所在 -- 覆盖完整的微观+宏观知识体系。另外50% 是平时持续性评估:辅导课作业、一份个人作业,以及一份有阶段性支架的 小组案例研究报告。 50% FINAL EXAM . 2 HR 期末考试 · 2 小时 30% GROUP CASE REPORT 小组案例报告 10% INDIVIDUAL ASSIGN. 个人作业[5]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfKeeping the theory warm: accurate, on- time prep + reaching your own informed position in discussion AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual ✓ The strategy this dictates 由此确定的学习策略 The exam is the only piece testing the full canon, so it rewards breadth: know what each model is, who proposed it, and which case the unit attaches it to - Taylor/Mayo, Tuckman, Hofstede, Jehn & Mannix, Lewin, Marshak, Lukes/Hardy. The report rewards depth on one case via the define - apply-with- evidence - recommend spine. This book front-loads the recall and teaches that spine for every macro chapter. Master both and nothing in the subject can blindside you. 考试是唯一考查整套知识体系的环节,因此它奖励广 度:要知道每个模型是什么、由谁提出、本课程把它 挂靠到哪个案例上 -- Taylor/Mayo、Tuckman、 Hofstede, Jehn & Mannix, Lewin, Marshak, Lukes/Hardy。报告则通过定义→ 结合证据应用→ 提出建议这一主线奖励对单一案例的深度。本书把记 忆内容前置,并为每一个宏观章节教授这套主线。两 者都掌握,本课程就没有任何东西能让你措手不及。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual CONTENTS CONTENTS The whole subject, in one ordered book 整门课程,浓缩为一本有序之书 Twelve modules - one micro-macro revision map 十二个模块 →一张微观一宏观复习地图 Ch Topic Core idea Micro · individuals, groups & teams (Modules 1-7) 1 What OB is micro vs macro · evidence over "common sense" → 2 Scientific Management vs Human Relations Taylor's efficiency vs Mayo's Hawthorne → 3 Perception, attribution & decisions bias . FAE . Dunning-Kruger . bounded rationality → 4 Teams & leadership Tuckman stages · distributed leadership → 5 Values, attitudes & behaviour Hofstede . dissonance . the satisfaction myth → 6 Motivation content vs process . empowerment → 7 Conflict & negotiation[12]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfM7 Conflict Strong cultures are always more effective Strong culture can be a liability (groupthink, rigidity) M10 Culture Power is always visible Power can be invisible - it shapes preferences unseen M12 Power How the unit teaches - the case method 本课程如何授课 一 案例教学法 Theory never arrives alone: every module pairs it with a practitioner video and a real case (the macro half is explicitly case-method taught - Theranos, Boost Juice, CBA, Uber, Elon Musk). The reusable answer spine the unit rewards is define + link to theory - apply with case evidence - recommend. 理论从不单独出现:每个模块都把它与一段从业者视频和一个真实案例配对(宏观半场被明确以案例法教授 -- Theranos、 Boost Juice、CBA、Uber、Elon Musk)。本单元所奖励的可复用作答主干是:界定+联系理论→ 用案例证据加以应用→ 提出建议。 ! "Common sense" is the wrong-answer trap “常识”是错误答案的陷阱 When an exam stem sounds obviously true ("a bonus will motivate them", "a strong culture must be better"), it is usually testing whether you know the evidence says otherwise. Reach for the systematic finding, not the intuition. 当一道考题的题干听上去显然为真(“奖金会激励他们”“强文化一定更好”)时,它通常是在测试你是否知道证据给出了 相反的结论。要抓住系统性研究的发现,而不是凭直觉。 AskSia Library . MGMT20001 . XXia Bilingual ★ Recall checklist - Module 1 复习清单一 一模块 1 (1) OB defined - systematic study of how people think/feel/act in organisations, to improve effectiveness. (2) Micro vs macro - individuals/groups (M1-7) vs the whole organisation & its environment (M8-12). (3) Three levels - individual / group / organisation. (4) Multidisciplinary roots - psychology, sociology, anthropology, political science, economics. (5) Evidence-based management & Freedman (1992) - systematic study over common sense; contingency ("it depends"). (6) The case-method answer spine: define - apply - recommend. (1)组织行为学的定义 -- 对人们在组织中如何思考/感受/行动的系统性研究,目的是提升效能。(2)微观 vs 宏观-一个 体/群体 (M1-7) vs 整个组织及其环境(M8-12)。(3)三个层次一一个体/群体/组织。(4)多学科根源 -- 心理学、社 会学、人类学、政治学、经济学。(5)循证管理与 Freedman(1992) -- 以系统性研究取代常识;权变(“视情况而 定”)。(6)案例法的作答主线:定义→应用→提出建议。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual MODULE 2 . MICRO MODULE 2 . MICRO HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED Scientific Management vs Human Relations 科学管理 vs 人际关系学派 Two rival accounts of what really drives behaviour at work 关于究竟是什么真正驱动工作中行为的两种对立说法 TL;DR. Module 2 stages a contest between two foundational answers to one question: what shapes how people behave at work, and how should that inform management? Scientific Management (Taylor) says efficiency and the right method; Human Relations (Mayo) says people, attention and the social group. The unit's point: both "have profoundly informed real management practice and continue to do so" - neither alone is the whole story. 一句话总结。模块 2 围绕一个问题上演了两种基础性答案之间的较量:是什么塑造了人们在职场中的行为,这又应如何指导 管理?科学管理(Taylor)认为是效率和正确的方法;人际关系学派(Mayo)认为是人、是关注、是社会群体。本单元的要 点是:两者都“深刻地影响了真实的管理实践,并且至今仍在影响” -- 任何一方单独来看都不是故事的全部。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么[17]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdfasksia. ai/cheatsheet/ unimelb-mgmt20001 . side 2/2 EXAM = 50% . REVISE Compiled by AskSia . mapped to the MGMT20001 syllabus . asksia. ai/cheatsheet/unimelb-mgmt20001 MARSHAK MGMT20001 Organisational Behaviour UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE . MICRO CHEAT SHEET Exam revision . SIDE 1 OF 2 2-hr exam = 50% SIDE 1/2 MICRO . What OB is + micro/macro lens . Scientific mgmt vs human relations . Perception/attribution/bias . Teams & distributed Leadership . Values/attitudes/personality . Motivation 0 · Exam Blueprint READ FIRST * Marks: 2-hr end-of-semester exam = 50% (the centre of gravity) . group case-study report 30% . individual assignment 10% (=1000w, ~Wk4) · tutorial prep/participation 10%. The exam is the single biggest piece - master the full theory base. The unit runs on a micro-> macro split (McShane & Von Glinow 10e). Side 1 = MICRO: OB + lens, SM vs HR, perception/decision, teams, values, motivation. Side 2 = MACRO: conflict, ethics, change, culture, communication, power + the cases. Answer spine for case Qs: define + link to theory -> apply with case evidence > recommend. This is the unit's marking spine - use it on every macro question, and it is the same spine the 30% group report is graded on. SIA > Book status is not stated by the official source - treat as neutral exam revision, no open/closed-book assumption. Check your current unit outline. 1 . What Is OB? MICRO FOUNDATION Organisational behaviour = the systematic study of what people think, feel & do in and around organisations - how individuals, groups & structures affect behaviour, used to improve effectiveness. Three levels of analysis: individual (perception, values, motivation) > group/team (dynamics, conflict, leadership) > organisational (culture, power, change, comms). Multidisciplinary roots - psychology, sociology, anthropology, political science, economics; so "where management knowledge comes from" is itself contested. Evidence-based mgmt = replace intuition/"common sense" with systematic evidence (the Wk-1 myths-vs-evidence quiz is the unit's opening demo of this). 1b . The Micro/Macro Lens THE SPINE[21]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdfAskSia CHEAT SHEET SERIES EXAM = 50% . REVISE Compiled by AskSia . mapped to the MGMT20001 syllabus . asksia. ai/cheatsheet/unimelb-mgmt20001 MGMT20001 Organisational Behaviour UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE . MACRO CHEAT SHEET Exam revision . SIDE 2 OF 2 Conflict -> power + cases SIDE 2/2 MACRO . Conflict & negotiation . Ethics (4 theories + governance) . Change (Lewin/Kotter) . Culture (Schein/3 views/5 ways) . Communication (functional vs meaning) . Power (3 dimensions) . Cases 7 . The MACRO Block CASE METHOD * The macro half zooms out to the organisation as a whole & its environment, taught by the case method (one named org per topic; "there is no right or wrong answer"). Sequence: conflict (the micro->macro hinge) > ethics > change > culture > communication > power. Every macro exam answer should run the define >> apply (case evidence) -> recommend spine. Pair each theory with its case: Theranos (ethics), Boost Juice (change), CBA (culture), Uber (comms), Musk (power). The case method "simulates real problems" & trains you to reach a defensible team consensus. 7b · Conflict THE HINGE TOPIC Conflict = 2+ parties with competing interests ; it can't be eliminated but can be managed, and a moderate level can improve teamwork. JEHN & MANNIX 3 types Task (about the work - can be constructive) . process (about how/who does the work) . relationship (interpersonal - harms the team). High- performing teams keep task conflict mid & relationship conflict low. Constructive (task) vs dysfunctional (relationship) conflict is the unit's central nuance. Sources: incompatible goals, differentiation, scarce resources, ambiguity, interdependence, communication problems - diagnose the source before choosing a style. 7c . Conflict Styles & Negotiation THOMAS- KILMANN

2）全课程“复习主线图”（你要背什么、练什么）

• Micro（M1–M7）：个体/群体过程（知觉→价值观→激励→团队→冲突等）[1]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdf你已经上完讲座和辅导课。用这 些表格和标注框来自测:说出学 者姓名、列出各组成部分、给出 一个案例。“考试招数”框精确展 示了每个观点是如何被考查的 -- 这是在备战占50% 的试卷 前需要反复操练的一层。 C 3 . APPLY 3 · 应用(APPLY) You're writing the case-study report or sitting the exam. The cases (Theranos, CBA, Uber, Musk) and the define - apply- with-evidence - recommend spine are written to be lifted straight into a case analysis - theory, named source, applied to the organisation. 你正在写案例研究报告或参加考 试。这些案例(Theranos、 CBA、Uber、Musk)以及定义 → 结合证据应用→提出建议这 一主线,都是为了能被直接搬进 案例分析而撰写的 -- 理论、点 名出处、应用于该组织。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual ! Read this first: a 50% exam is the centre of gravity 先读这一段:占50% 的期末考是重心所在 MGMT20001 is assessed four ways: tutorial prep, participation & contribution (10%), an individual assignment (10%, Week 4, 1000 words), a group case-study report (30%, ~1250 words/student of a 5000-word team report), and a 2-hour end-of-semester exam (50%). The exam alone is half the mark and covers the whole canon - the micro ladder (perception - values - motivation - teams - conflict) and the macro block (ethics - change + culture - communication -> power). You cannot bluff that breadth on the night; this book is built to keep the full theory base warm and exam-ready. Treat it as exam revision and confirm exam conditions on your unit outline - the official source does not state whether the paper is open- or closed-book, so this book makes no such claim. MGMT20001 的考核分四部分:辅导课预习、参与及贡献(10%),一篇个人作业(10%,第4周,1000字),一份小 组案例研究报告(30%,5000 字团队报告中每位学生约1250字),以及一场2小时的期末考试(50%)。仅期末考试 就占总分一半,且覆盖整套知识体系 -- 微观主线(知觉→价值观→激励→团队→冲突)和宏观板块(伦理→变 革→文化→沟通→权力)。当晚是蒙混不过这种广度的;本书正是为了让整个理论基础保持温热、随时可考而编写。 把它当作考试复习材料,并在你的课程大纲上确认考试条件 -- 官方来源并未说明该试卷是开卷还是闭卷,因此本书不 作此类断言。 i How this book was built 本书是如何编写的 Every theory, theorist and case here is grounded in this subject's own materials: the genuine UniMelb Canvas modules (MO-M12), the module Overview / Readings pages, the practitioner-video and tutorial-activity pages, the Module 8 Ethics takeaway notes, and the McShane & Von Glinow 10e canon the unit runs on. Standard, published OB theory is stated plainly; the lecturer's specific framing and the case wording (Theranos, CBA, Uber, Musk, the "Fast Fashion" serial) are paraphrased, never copied. Verify all weights and dates against your own LMS - details can shift between cohorts. 这里的每一条理论、每位学者、每个案例都扎根于本课程自身的材料:真实的 UniMelb Canvas 模块 (MO-M12)、各 模块的概览/阅读材料页、从业者视频与辅导课活动页、Module 8 伦理要点笔记,以及本课程所依托的McShane & Von Glinow 第10 版知识体系。标准的、已出版的组织行为学理论按原样陈述;而授课教师的特定框定方式与案例措辞 (Theranos、CBA、Uber、Musk、“Fast Fashion”系列)则经过转述,绝不照抄。请对照你自己的 LMS 核实所有占 比与日期 -- 各届之间细节可能有变动。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual THE BLUEPRINT - THE EXAM BLUEPRINT 50% FINAL . CHECK UNIT OUTLINE Where every mark lives 每一分都从这里来 A 2-hour final worth 50% sits on top of three pieces of continuous work 占 50% 的两小时期末考,建立在三项持续性平时作业之上 TL;DR. Your subject mark is built from four pieces. The single biggest is a 2-hour end-of-semester exam worth 50% - the subject's centre of gravity - covering the full micro+macro canon. The other 50% is continuous: tutorial work, an individual assignment, and a scaffolded group case-study report. 一句话总结。你的单元成绩由四部分构成。其中分量最大的单项是学期末一场 2小时、占50% 的考试 -- 本单元的重心所在 -- 覆盖完整的微观+宏观知识体系。另外50% 是平时持续性评估:辅导课作业、一份个人作业,以及一份有阶段性支架的 小组案例研究报告。 50% FINAL EXAM . 2 HR 期末考试 · 2 小时 30% GROUP CASE REPORT 小组案例报告 10% INDIVIDUAL ASSIGN. 个人作业[9]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdftask / process / relationship · Jehn & Mannix → Macro . the organisation as a whole (Modules 8-12, case method) 8 Ethics frameworks . governance . Theranos → 9 Organisational change Lewin . resistance . Boost Juice → 10 Organisational culture integrationist / differentiationist / critical . CBA → 11 Communication functional vs meaning-centred . Uber → 12 Power five bases . three dimensions . Musk → Walk in ready — Glossary every term, every theorist, +X gloss → — Practice bank exam-style drills & answer cues → i Why this order 为何采用这一顺序 The book follows the unit's own spine - the micro half first (Modules 1-7: what OB is, the Scientific- Management/Human-Relations contrast, then the individual and group ladder of perception, teams, values, motivation and conflict), then the macro half (Modules 8-12: the organisation as a whole - ethics, change, culture, communication and power), each taught by the case method on one real organisation. The micro chapters build the individual-and-group vocabulary; the macro chapters zoom out to the whole organisation and its environment. Part three turns it all into marks: a glossary of every term and theorist, and a practice bank of exam-style drills. 本书遵循本课程自身的主线 -- 先是微观半场(Module 1-7:组织行为学是什么、科学管理与人际关系的对比,随后是 知觉、团队、价值观、激励、冲突这一从个体到群体的阶梯),再是宏观半场(Module 8-12:把组织作为整体来看 伦理、变革、文化、沟通与权力),每一部分都以案例法围绕一个真实组织来教学。微观各章构建起个体与群体的词汇; 宏观各章则拉远镜头,审视整个组织及其所处环境。第三部分把这一切转化为分数:一份涵盖每个术语和每位学者的术 语表,以及一个由考试风格演练题组成的题库。 AskSia Library . MGMT20001 . XXia Bilingual MODULE 1 . MICRO[13]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfFunctional vs meaning-centred communication? Functional = transmit a message, find/fix breakdowns (noise, richness); meaning- centred = communication constructs meaning (Marshak's metaphors). The three dimensions of power (Lukes via Hardy)? 1st = overt decision-making; 2nd = agenda-setting (keep issues off the table); 3rd = power over meaning / unobtrusive power. Lewin's model of planned change? Unfreeze - change/move - refreeze; participation is the strongest lever against resistance (Boost Juice). AskSia Library . MGMT20001 . XXia Bilingual ★ Recall checklist - must-knows before the 2-hour exam 复习清单 -- 2 小时考试前的必知要点 Micro ladder: micro/macro split & 3 levels (M1) · Taylor vs Mayo / SM vs HR (M2) · perception, attribution, FAE, Dunning-Kruger, bounded rationality (M3) . Tuckman, task/maintenance, distributed leadership (M4) . values-attitudes-behaviour, Hofstede, cognitive dissonance (M5) · content vs process motivation, expectancy/equity/goal-setting, empowerment (M6) · task/process/relationship conflict, Thomas-Kilmann, negotiation (M7). Macro block (case method): ethical frameworks + governance + whistle-blowing - Theranos (M8) . Lewin/planned change + resistance - Boost Juice (M9) . 5 ways + integration/differentiation/critical - CBA (M10) . functional vs meaning-centred + Marshak metaphors - Uber (M11) . French & Raven bases + three dimensions of power + ethical use - Musk (M12). Always answer with the spine: define - apply with evidence - recommend. 微观主线:微观/宏观之分与三个层次 (M1) · Taylor vs Mayo / 科学管理 vs 人际关系(M2) · 知觉、归因、基本归因 错误、邓宁一克鲁格、有限理性(M3) · Tuckman、任务/维护、分布式领导(M4)· 价值观→态度→行为、Hofstede、 认知失调 (M5)· 内容型 vs 过程型激励、期望/公平/目标设定、赋权(M6)· 任务/过程/关系冲突、Thomas- Kilmann、谈判(M7)。宏观板块(案例法):伦理框架+公司治理+举报 -- Theranos (M8) · Lewin/计划性变革 + 阻力 -- Boost Juice (M9)· 五种方式+ 整合/差异/批判––CBA (M10) · 功能取向 vs 意义中心取向 + Marshak 隐 喻 -- Uber (M11) · French & Raven 权力基础 +权力三维度+伦理运用 -- Musk (M12)。始终用这条主线作答:定 义→结合证据应用→提出建议。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual
• Macro（M8–M12）：组织整体与环境（伦理→变革→文化→沟通→权力），用案例法考。[9]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdftask / process / relationship · Jehn & Mannix → Macro . the organisation as a whole (Modules 8-12, case method) 8 Ethics frameworks . governance . Theranos → 9 Organisational change Lewin . resistance . Boost Juice → 10 Organisational culture integrationist / differentiationist / critical . CBA → 11 Communication functional vs meaning-centred . Uber → 12 Power five bases . three dimensions . Musk → Walk in ready — Glossary every term, every theorist, +X gloss → — Practice bank exam-style drills & answer cues → i Why this order 为何采用这一顺序 The book follows the unit's own spine - the micro half first (Modules 1-7: what OB is, the Scientific- Management/Human-Relations contrast, then the individual and group ladder of perception, teams, values, motivation and conflict), then the macro half (Modules 8-12: the organisation as a whole - ethics, change, culture, communication and power), each taught by the case method on one real organisation. The micro chapters build the individual-and-group vocabulary; the macro chapters zoom out to the whole organisation and its environment. Part three turns it all into marks: a glossary of every term and theorist, and a practice bank of exam-style drills. 本书遵循本课程自身的主线 -- 先是微观半场(Module 1-7:组织行为学是什么、科学管理与人际关系的对比,随后是 知觉、团队、价值观、激励、冲突这一从个体到群体的阶梯),再是宏观半场(Module 8-12:把组织作为整体来看 伦理、变革、文化、沟通与权力),每一部分都以案例法围绕一个真实组织来教学。微观各章构建起个体与群体的词汇; 宏观各章则拉远镜头,审视整个组织及其所处环境。第三部分把这一切转化为分数:一份涵盖每个术语和每位学者的术 语表,以及一个由考试风格演练题组成的题库。 AskSia Library . MGMT20001 . XXia Bilingual MODULE 1 . MICRO[12]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfM7 Conflict Strong cultures are always more effective Strong culture can be a liability (groupthink, rigidity) M10 Culture Power is always visible Power can be invisible - it shapes preferences unseen M12 Power How the unit teaches - the case method 本课程如何授课 一 案例教学法 Theory never arrives alone: every module pairs it with a practitioner video and a real case (the macro half is explicitly case-method taught - Theranos, Boost Juice, CBA, Uber, Elon Musk). The reusable answer spine the unit rewards is define + link to theory - apply with case evidence - recommend. 理论从不单独出现:每个模块都把它与一段从业者视频和一个真实案例配对(宏观半场被明确以案例法教授 -- Theranos、 Boost Juice、CBA、Uber、Elon Musk)。本单元所奖励的可复用作答主干是:界定+联系理论→ 用案例证据加以应用→ 提出建议。 ! "Common sense" is the wrong-answer trap “常识”是错误答案的陷阱 When an exam stem sounds obviously true ("a bonus will motivate them", "a strong culture must be better"), it is usually testing whether you know the evidence says otherwise. Reach for the systematic finding, not the intuition. 当一道考题的题干听上去显然为真(“奖金会激励他们”“强文化一定更好”)时,它通常是在测试你是否知道证据给出了 相反的结论。要抓住系统性研究的发现,而不是凭直觉。 AskSia Library . MGMT20001 . XXia Bilingual ★ Recall checklist - Module 1 复习清单一 一模块 1 (1) OB defined - systematic study of how people think/feel/act in organisations, to improve effectiveness. (2) Micro vs macro - individuals/groups (M1-7) vs the whole organisation & its environment (M8-12). (3) Three levels - individual / group / organisation. (4) Multidisciplinary roots - psychology, sociology, anthropology, political science, economics. (5) Evidence-based management & Freedman (1992) - systematic study over common sense; contingency ("it depends"). (6) The case-method answer spine: define - apply - recommend. (1)组织行为学的定义 -- 对人们在组织中如何思考/感受/行动的系统性研究,目的是提升效能。(2)微观 vs 宏观-一个 体/群体 (M1-7) vs 整个组织及其环境(M8-12)。(3)三个层次一一个体/群体/组织。(4)多学科根源 -- 心理学、社 会学、人类学、政治学、经济学。(5)循证管理与 Freedman(1992) -- 以系统性研究取代常识;权变(“视情况而 定”)。(6)案例法的作答主线:定义→应用→提出建议。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual MODULE 2 . MICRO MODULE 2 . MICRO HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED Scientific Management vs Human Relations 科学管理 vs 人际关系学派 Two rival accounts of what really drives behaviour at work 关于究竟是什么真正驱动工作中行为的两种对立说法 TL;DR. Module 2 stages a contest between two foundational answers to one question: what shapes how people behave at work, and how should that inform management? Scientific Management (Taylor) says efficiency and the right method; Human Relations (Mayo) says people, attention and the social group. The unit's point: both "have profoundly informed real management practice and continue to do so" - neither alone is the whole story. 一句话总结。模块 2 围绕一个问题上演了两种基础性答案之间的较量:是什么塑造了人们在职场中的行为,这又应如何指导 管理?科学管理(Taylor)认为是效率和正确的方法;人际关系学派(Mayo)认为是人、是关注、是社会群体。本单元的要 点是:两者都“深刻地影响了真实的管理实践,并且至今仍在影响” -- 任何一方单独来看都不是故事的全部。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么[21]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdfAskSia CHEAT SHEET SERIES EXAM = 50% . REVISE Compiled by AskSia . mapped to the MGMT20001 syllabus . asksia. ai/cheatsheet/unimelb-mgmt20001 MGMT20001 Organisational Behaviour UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE . MACRO CHEAT SHEET Exam revision . SIDE 2 OF 2 Conflict -> power + cases SIDE 2/2 MACRO . Conflict & negotiation . Ethics (4 theories + governance) . Change (Lewin/Kotter) . Culture (Schein/3 views/5 ways) . Communication (functional vs meaning) . Power (3 dimensions) . Cases 7 . The MACRO Block CASE METHOD * The macro half zooms out to the organisation as a whole & its environment, taught by the case method (one named org per topic; "there is no right or wrong answer"). Sequence: conflict (the micro->macro hinge) > ethics > change > culture > communication > power. Every macro exam answer should run the define >> apply (case evidence) -> recommend spine. Pair each theory with its case: Theranos (ethics), Boost Juice (change), CBA (culture), Uber (comms), Musk (power). The case method "simulates real problems" & trains you to reach a defensible team consensus. 7b · Conflict THE HINGE TOPIC Conflict = 2+ parties with competing interests ; it can't be eliminated but can be managed, and a moderate level can improve teamwork. JEHN & MANNIX 3 types Task (about the work - can be constructive) . process (about how/who does the work) . relationship (interpersonal - harms the team). High- performing teams keep task conflict mid & relationship conflict low. Constructive (task) vs dysfunctional (relationship) conflict is the unit's central nuance. Sources: incompatible goals, differentiation, scarce resources, ambiguity, interdependence, communication problems - diagnose the source before choosing a style. 7c . Conflict Styles & Negotiation THOMAS- KILMANN

• 伦理 Ethics → Theranos [8]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfThe defensible answer is no: a celebrated board with little life-sciences expertise, dominated by a charismatic founder who controlled information, with weak independent verification of the central claim. Recommendations write themselves - appoint directors with medical/scientific competence, separate founder control from oversight, require independent validation, and build protected whistleblowing so concerns reach the board, not just the CEO. 站得住脚的答案是否:一个备受推崇却几乎没有生命科学专 业知识的董事会,被一位掌控信息的魅力型创始人所主导, 对核心主张的独立验证十分薄弱。建议自然而然就浮现出来 -- 任命具备医学/科学能力的董事,把创始人的控制权与 监督职能分开,要求进行独立验证,并建立受保护的举报机 制,使关切能够上达董事会,而不仅仅到 CEO 为止。 Bridge - CSR & stakeholders 桥梁 一 CSR 与利益相关者 Ethics widens into corporate social responsibility (CSR): to whom is the firm responsible? The shareholder view (maximise owner returns within the law) contrasts with the stakeholder view (obligations to employees, customers, community and society too). Theranos read as a shareholder/founder-first firm that treated patients - its most safety-critical stakeholder - as an afterthought. CSR and the stakeholder map carry forward into the rest of the macro block. 伦理进一步拓宽为企业社会责任 (corporate social responsibility, CSR):企业该对谁负责?股东视角(在法 律范围内最大化所有者回报)与利益相关者视角(对员工、 客户、社区和社会同样负有义务)形成对照。Theranos 可 被解读为一家股东/创始人优先的公司,它把病人 -- 其最 具安全关键性的利益相关者 -- 当作了事后才考虑的对象。 CSR 和利益相关者地图会延续进宏观半场的其余部分。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual ✓ Exam move - the case-analysis spine 考试技巧 -- 案例分析的主干 Structure every ethics answer the way the unit marks it: (1) define + name the theory/concept - (2) apply it to the case with specific evidence - (3) recommend a concrete fix. For Theranos: define governance - show the board lacked medical expertise and independence - recommend competent directors + independent validation + protected voice. 按本课程的评分方式来组织每一份伦理答案:(1)定义+点名理论/概念 →(2)应用,结合具体证据应用于案例→(3)提 出建议,给出一个具体的修正办法。对 Theranos 而言:定义公司治理→ 表明董事会既缺乏医学专长又缺乏独立性→ 建议引入称职的董事+ 独立验证+受保护的话语渠道。 ★ Recall checklist - Module 8 复习清单 -- 模块 8 (1) Business ethics = right/wrong standards in business; descriptive (what is) vs normative (what ought). (2) Four theories - consequentialist/utilitarian (outcomes), deontological/rights (duties), virtue (character), justice/fairness (distribution); apply ≥2 and show divergence. (3) Why unethical - moral intensity, moral sensitivity, rationalisation, situational pressure. (4) Levers - codes, ethical culture/tone at the top, whistleblowing/voice, governance, moral courage. (5) Theranos - responsibility (Holmes/Balwani/board/enablers), governance gap, Silicon-Valley-meets- medtech. (6) Bridge - CSR & stakeholder vs shareholder. (1) 商业伦理=商业中关于对错的标准;描述性(实然)vs 规范性(应然)。(2)四种理论 -- 后果论/功利主义(看结 果)、义务论/权利论(看义务)、美德论(看品格)、正义/公平论(看分配);应用至少两种并表明其分歧。(3)为何会不 道德 -- 道德强度、道德敏感性、合理化、情境压力。(4)杠杆 -- 行为准则、伦理文化/高层定调、举报/话语权、公司 治理、道德勇气。(5) Theranos -- 责任归属(Holmes/Balwani/董事会/帮凶)、治理缺口、硅谷思维遭遇医疗科技。 (6) 衔接- 企业社会责任(CSR)与利益相关者 vs 股东。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual MOD 9 . FORCES HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED MODULE 9 . MACRO Organisational change 组织变革 Dynamic environments force change - the task is to plan and lead it, not just survive it 动态的环境迫使组织变革 一任务是去规划并领导变革,而不只是熬过去 TL;DR. Organisations sit in a dynamic environment that constantly pushes them to change. Organisational change is the move from a current state to a desired future state; a planned-change model gives a framework for doing it deliberately. The two pillars are Lewin's force-field / unfreeze-change-refreeze model and the management of resistance - where the unit's punchline is that participation is the strongest lever. - 一句话总结。组织身处一个动态环境之中,环境不断推动它们去变革。组织变革(organisational change)是从当前状态向 一个理想的未来状态的转移;一个计划性变革模型为有意识地推动变革提供了框架。两大支柱是 Lewin 的力场分析/解冻一变 革一再冻结模型,以及对变革阻力的管理 -- 本单元的点睛之笔在于:参与(participation)是最强的杠杆。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么 On the 50% final, change is a high-frequency macro topic. Be ready to (a) draw and apply Lewin's force-field - name driving vs restraining forces and the unfreeze-change-refreeze stages; (b) walk a case through Kotter's 8 steps; (c) list sources of resistance and the matched ways to overcome them (participation first); and (d) explain Beer & Eisenstat's 'silent killers' of strategy implementation. Run the define - apply - recommend spine on Boost Juice.[21]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdfAskSia CHEAT SHEET SERIES EXAM = 50% . REVISE Compiled by AskSia . mapped to the MGMT20001 syllabus . asksia. ai/cheatsheet/unimelb-mgmt20001 MGMT20001 Organisational Behaviour UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE . MACRO CHEAT SHEET Exam revision . SIDE 2 OF 2 Conflict -> power + cases SIDE 2/2 MACRO . Conflict & negotiation . Ethics (4 theories + governance) . Change (Lewin/Kotter) . Culture (Schein/3 views/5 ways) . Communication (functional vs meaning) . Power (3 dimensions) . Cases 7 . The MACRO Block CASE METHOD * The macro half zooms out to the organisation as a whole & its environment, taught by the case method (one named org per topic; "there is no right or wrong answer"). Sequence: conflict (the micro->macro hinge) > ethics > change > culture > communication > power. Every macro exam answer should run the define >> apply (case evidence) -> recommend spine. Pair each theory with its case: Theranos (ethics), Boost Juice (change), CBA (culture), Uber (comms), Musk (power). The case method "simulates real problems" & trains you to reach a defensible team consensus. 7b · Conflict THE HINGE TOPIC Conflict = 2+ parties with competing interests ; it can't be eliminated but can be managed, and a moderate level can improve teamwork. JEHN & MANNIX 3 types Task (about the work - can be constructive) . process (about how/who does the work) . relationship (interpersonal - harms the team). High- performing teams keep task conflict mid & relationship conflict low. Constructive (task) vs dysfunctional (relationship) conflict is the unit's central nuance. Sources: incompatible goals, differentiation, scarce resources, ambiguity, interdependence, communication problems - diagnose the source before choosing a style. 7c . Conflict Styles & Negotiation THOMAS- KILMANN
• 变革 Change → Boost Juice [8]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfThe defensible answer is no: a celebrated board with little life-sciences expertise, dominated by a charismatic founder who controlled information, with weak independent verification of the central claim. Recommendations write themselves - appoint directors with medical/scientific competence, separate founder control from oversight, require independent validation, and build protected whistleblowing so concerns reach the board, not just the CEO. 站得住脚的答案是否:一个备受推崇却几乎没有生命科学专 业知识的董事会,被一位掌控信息的魅力型创始人所主导, 对核心主张的独立验证十分薄弱。建议自然而然就浮现出来 -- 任命具备医学/科学能力的董事,把创始人的控制权与 监督职能分开,要求进行独立验证,并建立受保护的举报机 制,使关切能够上达董事会,而不仅仅到 CEO 为止。 Bridge - CSR & stakeholders 桥梁 一 CSR 与利益相关者 Ethics widens into corporate social responsibility (CSR): to whom is the firm responsible? The shareholder view (maximise owner returns within the law) contrasts with the stakeholder view (obligations to employees, customers, community and society too). Theranos read as a shareholder/founder-first firm that treated patients - its most safety-critical stakeholder - as an afterthought. CSR and the stakeholder map carry forward into the rest of the macro block. 伦理进一步拓宽为企业社会责任 (corporate social responsibility, CSR):企业该对谁负责?股东视角(在法 律范围内最大化所有者回报)与利益相关者视角(对员工、 客户、社区和社会同样负有义务)形成对照。Theranos 可 被解读为一家股东/创始人优先的公司,它把病人 -- 其最 具安全关键性的利益相关者 -- 当作了事后才考虑的对象。 CSR 和利益相关者地图会延续进宏观半场的其余部分。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual ✓ Exam move - the case-analysis spine 考试技巧 -- 案例分析的主干 Structure every ethics answer the way the unit marks it: (1) define + name the theory/concept - (2) apply it to the case with specific evidence - (3) recommend a concrete fix. For Theranos: define governance - show the board lacked medical expertise and independence - recommend competent directors + independent validation + protected voice. 按本课程的评分方式来组织每一份伦理答案:(1)定义+点名理论/概念 →(2)应用,结合具体证据应用于案例→(3)提 出建议,给出一个具体的修正办法。对 Theranos 而言:定义公司治理→ 表明董事会既缺乏医学专长又缺乏独立性→ 建议引入称职的董事+ 独立验证+受保护的话语渠道。 ★ Recall checklist - Module 8 复习清单 -- 模块 8 (1) Business ethics = right/wrong standards in business; descriptive (what is) vs normative (what ought). (2) Four theories - consequentialist/utilitarian (outcomes), deontological/rights (duties), virtue (character), justice/fairness (distribution); apply ≥2 and show divergence. (3) Why unethical - moral intensity, moral sensitivity, rationalisation, situational pressure. (4) Levers - codes, ethical culture/tone at the top, whistleblowing/voice, governance, moral courage. (5) Theranos - responsibility (Holmes/Balwani/board/enablers), governance gap, Silicon-Valley-meets- medtech. (6) Bridge - CSR & stakeholder vs shareholder. (1) 商业伦理=商业中关于对错的标准;描述性(实然)vs 规范性(应然)。(2)四种理论 -- 后果论/功利主义(看结 果)、义务论/权利论(看义务)、美德论(看品格)、正义/公平论(看分配);应用至少两种并表明其分歧。(3)为何会不 道德 -- 道德强度、道德敏感性、合理化、情境压力。(4)杠杆 -- 行为准则、伦理文化/高层定调、举报/话语权、公司 治理、道德勇气。(5) Theranos -- 责任归属(Holmes/Balwani/董事会/帮凶)、治理缺口、硅谷思维遭遇医疗科技。 (6) 衔接- 企业社会责任(CSR)与利益相关者 vs 股东。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual MOD 9 . FORCES HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED MODULE 9 . MACRO Organisational change 组织变革 Dynamic environments force change - the task is to plan and lead it, not just survive it 动态的环境迫使组织变革 一任务是去规划并领导变革,而不只是熬过去 TL;DR. Organisations sit in a dynamic environment that constantly pushes them to change. Organisational change is the move from a current state to a desired future state; a planned-change model gives a framework for doing it deliberately. The two pillars are Lewin's force-field / unfreeze-change-refreeze model and the management of resistance - where the unit's punchline is that participation is the strongest lever. - 一句话总结。组织身处一个动态环境之中,环境不断推动它们去变革。组织变革(organisational change)是从当前状态向 一个理想的未来状态的转移;一个计划性变革模型为有意识地推动变革提供了框架。两大支柱是 Lewin 的力场分析/解冻一变 革一再冻结模型,以及对变革阻力的管理 -- 本单元的点睛之笔在于:参与(participation)是最强的杠杆。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么 On the 50% final, change is a high-frequency macro topic. Be ready to (a) draw and apply Lewin's force-field - name driving vs restraining forces and the unfreeze-change-refreeze stages; (b) walk a case through Kotter's 8 steps; (c) list sources of resistance and the matched ways to overcome them (participation first); and (d) explain Beer & Eisenstat's 'silent killers' of strategy implementation. Run the define - apply - recommend spine on Boost Juice.[15]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfWhat quietly defeats the strategy Poor vertical communication Bad news never travels up; reality stays hidden Poor cross-functional coordination Silos fail to cooperate on shared goals Inadequate down-the- line leadership Middle managers lack the skills to lead the change OD 把本单元的教训付诸实践:参与能降低阻力,因为人们 会支持自己参与构建的东西。 ! Resistance is not always irrational 变革阻力并不总是非理性的 A common error is to treat all resistance as stubbornness to be crushed. Often resisters see real risks leaders have missed - their resistance is data. The right response is usually participation and honest communication, not coercion; coercion buys compliance but breeds the next round of resistance. 一个常见错误是把一切阻力都当成需要碾压的固执。阻力者往往看到了领导者忽略的真实风险 -- 他们的阻力是数据。 正确的应对通常是参与和诚实沟通,而非强制;强制能换来服从,却会孕育下一轮阻力。 ★ Recall checklist - Module 9 复习清单 -- 模块 9 (1) Forces for change - competition, technology, customers/demographics, growth. (2) Lewin - force-field (driving vs restraining); unfreeze - change - refreeze; lower restrainers, don't skip refreeze. (3) Kotter's 8 steps (urgency - coalition - vision - communicate - empower -+ wins - consolidate -> anchor) - map onto Lewin. (4) Resistance - sources (fear, distrust, routines, incongruent systems, face) and remedies; participation is the strongest lever. (5) Beer & Eisenstat's six silent killers. (6) OD - action research, appreciative inquiry; episodic vs continuous change. Worked case: Boost Juice. (1)变革的推动力 -- 竞争、技术、顾客/人口结构、增长。(2) Lewin -- 力场分析(驱动力 vs 阻碍力);解冻→变革 →再冻结;削弱阻碍力、不要跳过再冻结。(3) Kotter 八步(紧迫感→联盟→愿景→沟通→赋权→ 短期胜利 → 巩固→锚定) -- 映射到 Lewin 上。(4)阻力 -- 来源(恐惧、不信任、惯例、系统不一致、面子)及对策;参与是最 强的杠杆。(5) Beer & Eisenstat 的六个隐形杀手。(6)组织发展(OD) -- 行动研究、欣赏式探询;阶段性 vs 持续 性变革。范例案例:Boost Juice。 AskSia Library . MGMT20001 . XXia Bilingual M10 . CULTURE HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED MODULE 10 . MACRO Organisational culture 组织文化 "The usual way of thinking and doing things" that every member must learn “每位成员都必须习得的那套惯常思维与行事方式” TL;DR. Organisational culture is the pattern of shared values and basic assumptions that members learn as they figure out "how we do things around here" - so deep it is largely taken for granted, and new members must absorb it to be accepted. This unit does not treat culture as one tidy thing: it teaches three competing approaches (integrationist, differentiationist, fragmentation/critical) and a 5-ways toolkit for observing it - all rehearsed on the Commonwealth Bank (CBA) case. 一句话总结。组织文化(organisational culture)是成员在弄清“我们这里做事的方式”的过程中所习得的共同价值观与基本 假设的模式 -- 它深至大多被视为理所当然,新成员必须吸收它才能被接纳。本单元不把文化当作一个整齐划一的东西来处 理:它教授三种相互竞争的视角(整合、差异、碎片化/批判),以及一套用于观察文化的“五种方式”工具 -- 全部围绕澳大 利亚联邦银行(CBA) 案例加以演练。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么 Define culture; lay out Schein's three levels; and - the high-value move - apply the three approaches (integrationist / differentiationist / critical) and the 5 ways to observe culture to a named organisation, then argue a position with evidence. Expect a culture case in the 2-hour final worth 50%; the marking spine is define - apply- with-evidence - recommend. 定义文化;铺陈 Schein 的三层次;并 -- 这是价值最高的一招 -- 把三种视角(整合/差异/批判)和观察文化的五种 方式应用于一个具名组织,然后结合证据论证一个立场。要预期在占50% 的2 小时期末考试里出现一个文化案例;评 分主线是定义→结合证据应用→提出建议。 Schein's three levels - the standard underpinning Schein 的三层次 一 标准的底层支撑 Edgar Schein arranges culture into three layers from visible to invisible. The trap: the visible artefacts are easiest to see but hardest to interpret, while the invisible basic assumptions are what really drives behaviour. These three levels map directly onto the unit's "5 ways to observe culture" below.[21]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdfAskSia CHEAT SHEET SERIES EXAM = 50% . REVISE Compiled by AskSia . mapped to the MGMT20001 syllabus . asksia. ai/cheatsheet/unimelb-mgmt20001 MGMT20001 Organisational Behaviour UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE . MACRO CHEAT SHEET Exam revision . SIDE 2 OF 2 Conflict -> power + cases SIDE 2/2 MACRO . Conflict & negotiation . Ethics (4 theories + governance) . Change (Lewin/Kotter) . Culture (Schein/3 views/5 ways) . Communication (functional vs meaning) . Power (3 dimensions) . Cases 7 . The MACRO Block CASE METHOD * The macro half zooms out to the organisation as a whole & its environment, taught by the case method (one named org per topic; "there is no right or wrong answer"). Sequence: conflict (the micro->macro hinge) > ethics > change > culture > communication > power. Every macro exam answer should run the define >> apply (case evidence) -> recommend spine. Pair each theory with its case: Theranos (ethics), Boost Juice (change), CBA (culture), Uber (comms), Musk (power). The case method "simulates real problems" & trains you to reach a defensible team consensus. 7b · Conflict THE HINGE TOPIC Conflict = 2+ parties with competing interests ; it can't be eliminated but can be managed, and a moderate level can improve teamwork. JEHN & MANNIX 3 types Task (about the work - can be constructive) . process (about how/who does the work) . relationship (interpersonal - harms the team). High- performing teams keep task conflict mid & relationship conflict low. Constructive (task) vs dysfunctional (relationship) conflict is the unit's central nuance. Sources: incompatible goals, differentiation, scarce resources, ambiguity, interdependence, communication problems - diagnose the source before choosing a style. 7c . Conflict Styles & Negotiation THOMAS- KILMANN
• 文化 Culture → CBA [15]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfWhat quietly defeats the strategy Poor vertical communication Bad news never travels up; reality stays hidden Poor cross-functional coordination Silos fail to cooperate on shared goals Inadequate down-the- line leadership Middle managers lack the skills to lead the change OD 把本单元的教训付诸实践:参与能降低阻力,因为人们 会支持自己参与构建的东西。 ! Resistance is not always irrational 变革阻力并不总是非理性的 A common error is to treat all resistance as stubbornness to be crushed. Often resisters see real risks leaders have missed - their resistance is data. The right response is usually participation and honest communication, not coercion; coercion buys compliance but breeds the next round of resistance. 一个常见错误是把一切阻力都当成需要碾压的固执。阻力者往往看到了领导者忽略的真实风险 -- 他们的阻力是数据。 正确的应对通常是参与和诚实沟通,而非强制;强制能换来服从,却会孕育下一轮阻力。 ★ Recall checklist - Module 9 复习清单 -- 模块 9 (1) Forces for change - competition, technology, customers/demographics, growth. (2) Lewin - force-field (driving vs restraining); unfreeze - change - refreeze; lower restrainers, don't skip refreeze. (3) Kotter's 8 steps (urgency - coalition - vision - communicate - empower -+ wins - consolidate -> anchor) - map onto Lewin. (4) Resistance - sources (fear, distrust, routines, incongruent systems, face) and remedies; participation is the strongest lever. (5) Beer & Eisenstat's six silent killers. (6) OD - action research, appreciative inquiry; episodic vs continuous change. Worked case: Boost Juice. (1)变革的推动力 -- 竞争、技术、顾客/人口结构、增长。(2) Lewin -- 力场分析(驱动力 vs 阻碍力);解冻→变革 →再冻结;削弱阻碍力、不要跳过再冻结。(3) Kotter 八步(紧迫感→联盟→愿景→沟通→赋权→ 短期胜利 → 巩固→锚定) -- 映射到 Lewin 上。(4)阻力 -- 来源(恐惧、不信任、惯例、系统不一致、面子)及对策;参与是最 强的杠杆。(5) Beer & Eisenstat 的六个隐形杀手。(6)组织发展(OD) -- 行动研究、欣赏式探询;阶段性 vs 持续 性变革。范例案例:Boost Juice。 AskSia Library . MGMT20001 . XXia Bilingual M10 . CULTURE HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED MODULE 10 . MACRO Organisational culture 组织文化 "The usual way of thinking and doing things" that every member must learn “每位成员都必须习得的那套惯常思维与行事方式” TL;DR. Organisational culture is the pattern of shared values and basic assumptions that members learn as they figure out "how we do things around here" - so deep it is largely taken for granted, and new members must absorb it to be accepted. This unit does not treat culture as one tidy thing: it teaches three competing approaches (integrationist, differentiationist, fragmentation/critical) and a 5-ways toolkit for observing it - all rehearsed on the Commonwealth Bank (CBA) case. 一句话总结。组织文化(organisational culture)是成员在弄清“我们这里做事的方式”的过程中所习得的共同价值观与基本 假设的模式 -- 它深至大多被视为理所当然,新成员必须吸收它才能被接纳。本单元不把文化当作一个整齐划一的东西来处 理:它教授三种相互竞争的视角(整合、差异、碎片化/批判),以及一套用于观察文化的“五种方式”工具 -- 全部围绕澳大 利亚联邦银行(CBA) 案例加以演练。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么 Define culture; lay out Schein's three levels; and - the high-value move - apply the three approaches (integrationist / differentiationist / critical) and the 5 ways to observe culture to a named organisation, then argue a position with evidence. Expect a culture case in the 2-hour final worth 50%; the marking spine is define - apply- with-evidence - recommend. 定义文化;铺陈 Schein 的三层次;并 -- 这是价值最高的一招 -- 把三种视角(整合/差异/批判)和观察文化的五种 方式应用于一个具名组织,然后结合证据论证一个立场。要预期在占50% 的2 小时期末考试里出现一个文化案例;评 分主线是定义→结合证据应用→提出建议。 Schein's three levels - the standard underpinning Schein 的三层次 一 标准的底层支撑 Edgar Schein arranges culture into three layers from visible to invisible. The trap: the visible artefacts are easiest to see but hardest to interpret, while the invisible basic assumptions are what really drives behaviour. These three levels map directly onto the unit's "5 ways to observe culture" below.[21]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdfAskSia CHEAT SHEET SERIES EXAM = 50% . REVISE Compiled by AskSia . mapped to the MGMT20001 syllabus . asksia. ai/cheatsheet/unimelb-mgmt20001 MGMT20001 Organisational Behaviour UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE . MACRO CHEAT SHEET Exam revision . SIDE 2 OF 2 Conflict -> power + cases SIDE 2/2 MACRO . Conflict & negotiation . Ethics (4 theories + governance) . Change (Lewin/Kotter) . Culture (Schein/3 views/5 ways) . Communication (functional vs meaning) . Power (3 dimensions) . Cases 7 . The MACRO Block CASE METHOD * The macro half zooms out to the organisation as a whole & its environment, taught by the case method (one named org per topic; "there is no right or wrong answer"). Sequence: conflict (the micro->macro hinge) > ethics > change > culture > communication > power. Every macro exam answer should run the define >> apply (case evidence) -> recommend spine. Pair each theory with its case: Theranos (ethics), Boost Juice (change), CBA (culture), Uber (comms), Musk (power). The case method "simulates real problems" & trains you to reach a defensible team consensus. 7b · Conflict THE HINGE TOPIC Conflict = 2+ parties with competing interests ; it can't be eliminated but can be managed, and a moderate level can improve teamwork. JEHN & MANNIX 3 types Task (about the work - can be constructive) . process (about how/who does the work) . relationship (interpersonal - harms the team). High- performing teams keep task conflict mid & relationship conflict low. Constructive (task) vs dysfunctional (relationship) conflict is the unit's central nuance. Sources: incompatible goals, differentiation, scarce resources, ambiguity, interdependence, communication problems - diagnose the source before choosing a style. 7c . Conflict Styles & Negotiation THOMAS- KILMANN
• 沟通 Communication → Uber [10]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfTL;DR. The unit teaches communication through two contrasting approaches. The functional view treats communication as the transmission of information - diagnose where it broke and fix it. The meaning- centred view says communication does far more than transmit: it constitutes the organisation, building the shared meanings and metaphors through which members understand reality. The functional-vs- meaning-centred contrast is the exam hinge - the unit runs it on the Uber case. 一句话总结。本单元通过两种对照的取向来教授沟通。功能取向把沟通看作信息的传递 -- 诊断它在哪里出了问题并加以修 复。意义中心取向则认为沟通远不止于传递:它构成了组织本身,建立起成员借以理解现实的共享意义与隐喻。功能取向 vs 意义中心取向的对照是考试的关键枢纽 -- 本单元围绕 Uber 案例展开这一对照。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么 Lay out the communication-process model and use it to diagnose a breakdown (functional); then switch lenses and read the same situation for its shared meanings and metaphors (meaning-centred). The high-mark answer holds both and explains what each lens reveals that the other hides. Tie it to the 2-hour final (50%): expect a comms case, scored on define - apply-with-evidence - recommend. 铺陈沟通过程模型并用它来诊断一次崩溃(功能取向);然后切换视角,从共享意义和隐喻的角度解读同一情境(意义中 心取向)。高分答案同时持有两者,并解释每种视角揭示了对方所掩盖的什么。把它与占50% 的2 小时期末考试挂钩: 要预期一个沟通案例,按定义→结合证据应用→提出建议评分。 The functional approach - the communication-process model 功能取向 一 沟通过程模型 The functional lens models communication as a pipeline: a sender encodes an idea into a message, sends it down a channel, the receiver decodes it, and feedback closes the loop - with noise (anything that distorts the message) as the enemy at every stage. Its value is diagnostic: find where understanding failed and repair it. 功能取向把沟通建模为一条流水线:发送者把一个想法编码为一条信息,将其沿一条渠道发出,接收者对其解码,再由反馈闭 合这一回路 -- 而噪音(noise)(任何扭曲信息的东西)则是每一环节上的敌人。它的价值在于诊断:找出理解在哪里失败并 加以修补。 Stage What happens Where it can break (noise) Sender Has an idea / intention to convey. Unclear purpose; wrong assumptions about receiver. Encode Turns the idea into words, symbols, tone. Jargon, ambiguity, poor word choice. Message & channel The encoded message travels via a medium (email, meeting, memo). Channel too 'lean' for a rich message; technical disruption. Decode Receiver interprets the symbols. Different frames of reference; misreading tone. Receiver Arrives at their meaning - not necessarily the sender's. Perceptual bias, filtering, information overload. AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual Stage What happens Where it can break (noise)[21]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdfAskSia CHEAT SHEET SERIES EXAM = 50% . REVISE Compiled by AskSia . mapped to the MGMT20001 syllabus . asksia. ai/cheatsheet/unimelb-mgmt20001 MGMT20001 Organisational Behaviour UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE . MACRO CHEAT SHEET Exam revision . SIDE 2 OF 2 Conflict -> power + cases SIDE 2/2 MACRO . Conflict & negotiation . Ethics (4 theories + governance) . Change (Lewin/Kotter) . Culture (Schein/3 views/5 ways) . Communication (functional vs meaning) . Power (3 dimensions) . Cases 7 . The MACRO Block CASE METHOD * The macro half zooms out to the organisation as a whole & its environment, taught by the case method (one named org per topic; "there is no right or wrong answer"). Sequence: conflict (the micro->macro hinge) > ethics > change > culture > communication > power. Every macro exam answer should run the define >> apply (case evidence) -> recommend spine. Pair each theory with its case: Theranos (ethics), Boost Juice (change), CBA (culture), Uber (comms), Musk (power). The case method "simulates real problems" & trains you to reach a defensible team consensus. 7b · Conflict THE HINGE TOPIC Conflict = 2+ parties with competing interests ; it can't be eliminated but can be managed, and a moderate level can improve teamwork. JEHN & MANNIX 3 types Task (about the work - can be constructive) . process (about how/who does the work) . relationship (interpersonal - harms the team). High- performing teams keep task conflict mid & relationship conflict low. Constructive (task) vs dysfunctional (relationship) conflict is the unit's central nuance. Sources: incompatible goals, differentiation, scarce resources, ambiguity, interdependence, communication problems - diagnose the source before choosing a style. 7c . Conflict Styles & Negotiation THOMAS- KILMANN
• 权力 Power → Musk [4]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfWhy Musk is the teaching case 为什么 Musk 是那个教学案例 He visibly stacks the bases - legitimate (founder/CEO), reward (equity), coercive (pace and exits), expert (engineering credibility), referent (a devoted following) and information (controls the narrative). But the sharp lesson is the third dimension: the most powerful thing isn't winning arguments - it's a mission story so compelling that staff want what he wants, so the gruelling demands generate little visible resistance. That is Hardy's unobtrusive power in action. 他明显地堆叠了各种权力基础––合法权(创始人/CEO)、 奖赏权(股权)、强制权(节奏与去留)、专家权(工程方面 的可信度)、参照权(一批忠实的追随者)和信息权(掌控 叙事)。但真正深刻的教训在于第三维度:最有力量的东西 并不是赢得争论 -- 而是一个如此引人入胜的使命叙事,让 员工想要他所想要的东西,于是那些艰苦的要求几乎不会激 起可见的抵抗。这正是 Hardy 隐性权力的实际运作。 i The ethical reading (the unit's imperative) 伦理解读(本单元的伦理要求) Concentrated, partly invisible power raises the ethical stakes. Third-dimension power that manufactures consent can erode the very upward voice (Module 11) that would flag harm - so the "ethical imperative to use power responsibly" bites hardest exactly where power is least visible and least accountable. 集中而部分不可见的权力抬高了伦理风险。制造同意 的第三维度权力,会侵蚀本可揭发危害的那种向上话 语权 (Module 11) -- 因此“负责任地使用权力的伦 理责任”恰恰在权力最不可见、最不受问责的地方咬得 最紧。 AskSia Library . MGMT20001 . XXia Bilingual The deepest power isn't getting people to do what you want - it's getting them to want it themselves. 最深层的权力不是让人们去做你想要他们做的事 而是让他们自己去想要那样做。 - THREE- DIMENSIONS FRAMING . PARAPHRASED ★ Recall checklist - Module 12 复习清单 -- 模块 12 (1) Power = capacity to influence; basis = dependence (valued + scarce + non-substitutable). (2) Bases (Benfari et al. 1986, extending French & Raven): reward, coercive, legitimate (position); expert, referent (personal); + information, affiliation, group. (3) Three dimensions (Lukes / Hardy): 1st = visible decision-making; 2nd = agenda- setting / non-decisions; 3rd = unobtrusive / ideological (Hardy 1985) - shapes preferences, no overt conflict. (4) Absence of conflict can be evidence of power, not its absence. (5) Power vs politics: organisation-serving vs self- serving; influence tactics (hard vs soft); the ethical imperative. (6) Apply to Elon Musk / Tesla & SpaceX across all three dimensions - define -> apply-with-evidence - recommend. (1) 权力=施加影响的能力;其基础是依赖(被重视+稀缺+不可替代)。(2)权力基础(Benfari et al. 1986,扩展自 French & Raven):奖赏、强制、合法(职位);专家、参照(个人);+信息、归属、群体。(3)三维度(Lukes / Hardy):第一=可见的决策;第二=议程设定/不作决策;第三=隐性/意识形态(Hardy 1985) -- 塑造偏好、无公 开冲突。(4)冲突的缺席可以是权力的证据,而非权力的缺席。(5)权力 vs政治:服务于组织 vs 服务于自己;影响策略 (硬性 vs 软性);伦理责任。(6)应用于 Elon Musk / Tesla 与 SpaceX,贯穿全部三个维度 -- 定义→结合证据应 用→提出建议。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual GLOSSARY . 1/3 - GLOSSARY BILINGUAL · 双语词汇表 MGMT20001 in two languages MGMT20001 的双语版本 Every theorist, model & term - with an accurate X gloss and a one-line meaning 每一位理论家、每一个模型与术语一配有准确的中文 gloss 和一句话释义 TL;DR. The 50% exam rewards naming the model, defining it cleanly, then applying it - so this is the recall layer. ~ 95 terms across the whole micro-macro canon, each with a native Chinese gloss and a one-line meaning. Cover the right two columns and define each term cold; then cover the left column and name the term from the meaning - recognition is not recall. 一句话总结。占50% 的考试奖励的是:点名模型、把它界定清楚、然后加以应用 -- 所以这是复述层。本表收录了横跨整个 微观→宏观知识体系的约 95个术语,每个都配有地道的中文释义和一行式的含义说明。盖住右侧两列、当场把每个术语界定 出来;然后盖住左列、根据含义说出术语名 -- 能认得并不等于能复述出来。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么 Definitional and "name-the-theorist" recall sits inside almost every exam answer: you lose easy marks if you can call the case but not name and define the model (Tuckman, Lukes, Jehn & Mannix, Marshak . . . ). Drill EN++++->>> until each is automatic, then spend your study time on application, where the marks really live. 定义性的、以及“说出学者”式的记忆几乎潜伏在每一道考试答案之中:如果你能叫出案例却说不出并定义那个模型 (Tuckman、Lukes、Jehn & Mannix、Marshak . . . . . . ),你就会丢掉本应轻松到手的分。把 EN→中文→定义 反复操练 到每一项都成为本能,然后把学习时间花在应用上 -- 分数真正所在之处。 Term (EN) 中文 One-line meaning[21]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdfAskSia CHEAT SHEET SERIES EXAM = 50% . REVISE Compiled by AskSia . mapped to the MGMT20001 syllabus . asksia. ai/cheatsheet/unimelb-mgmt20001 MGMT20001 Organisational Behaviour UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE . MACRO CHEAT SHEET Exam revision . SIDE 2 OF 2 Conflict -> power + cases SIDE 2/2 MACRO . Conflict & negotiation . Ethics (4 theories + governance) . Change (Lewin/Kotter) . Culture (Schein/3 views/5 ways) . Communication (functional vs meaning) . Power (3 dimensions) . Cases 7 . The MACRO Block CASE METHOD * The macro half zooms out to the organisation as a whole & its environment, taught by the case method (one named org per topic; "there is no right or wrong answer"). Sequence: conflict (the micro->macro hinge) > ethics > change > culture > communication > power. Every macro exam answer should run the define >> apply (case evidence) -> recommend spine. Pair each theory with its case: Theranos (ethics), Boost Juice (change), CBA (culture), Uber (comms), Musk (power). The case method "simulates real problems" & trains you to reach a defensible team consensus. 7b · Conflict THE HINGE TOPIC Conflict = 2+ parties with competing interests ; it can't be eliminated but can be managed, and a moderate level can improve teamwork. JEHN & MANNIX 3 types Task (about the work - can be constructive) . process (about how/who does the work) . relationship (interpersonal - harms the team). High- performing teams keep task conflict mid & relationship conflict low. Constructive (task) vs dysfunctional (relationship) conflict is the unit's central nuance. Sources: incompatible goals, differentiation, scarce resources, ambiguity, interdependence, communication problems - diagnose the source before choosing a style. 7c . Conflict Styles & Negotiation THOMAS- KILMANN

3）“定义/公式/框架”清单（你要背到张口就来）

说明：管理课这里的“公式”主要是模型结构/对比框架，不是数学公式；但有少量“乘积式”结构要死记（比如期望理论）。[11]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfStressors Sources of stress (demands & pressures) Work overload, role conflict/ambiguity, low control, harassment, work-life conflict Strains / The toll on person & org consequences Physiological (fatigue, illness), psychological (burnout), behavioural (absence, lower performance) Management How to reduce stress Remove the stressor; withdraw from it; change perceptions; control consequences (fitness, support); receive social support ★ Recall checklist - Module 5 复习清单 -- 模块 5 (1) Big Five (OCEAN) - conscientiousness predicts performance best; MBTI caveat. (2) Values = normative basis of attitudes; values congruence. (3) Hofstede's dimensions - individualism-collectivism, power distance, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity-femininity, long-short-term orientation. (4) Attitude = cognitive + affective + behavioural (ABC); attitude-behaviour gap & cognitive dissonance. (5) Job satisfaction - weak satisfaction-performance link. (6) EVLN - exit / voice / loyalty / neglect. (7) Emotional labour & emotional dissonance; El. (8) Stress - stressors - strains - management. (1) 大五人格(OCEAN) -- 尽责性最能预测绩效;MBTI 的告诫。(2)价值观=态度的规范性基础;价值观契合度。 (3) Hofstede 的维度 -- 个人主义一集体主义、权力距离、不确定性规避、男性化一女性化、长期一短期取向。(4)态 度=认知+情感+行为(ABC);态度一行为差距与认知失调。(5)工作满意度 -- 满意度与绩效之间的关联薄弱。(6) EVLN -- 退出/呼吁/忠诚/忽视。(7)情绪劳动与情绪失调;情商。(8)压力 -- 压力源→应激→管理。 AskSia Library . MGMT20001 . XXia Bilingual M6 . CONTENT THEORIES HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED MODULE 6 . MICRO Motivation 激励 Content theories ask WHAT motivates; process theories ask HOW the thinking that motivates works 内容型理论问“什么”在激励人;过程型理论问驱动激励的思维“如何”运作 TL;DR. Motivation is the set of forces - direction, intensity and persistence - that energise goal-directed behaviour. The unit's master split: content theories explain what motivates (which needs); process theories explain how the thinking that motivates works. Then job design and empowerment turn the theory into practical levers. We run it against "Fast Fashion" (Part 2). 一句话总结。激励/动机(motivation)是一组力量 -- 方向、强度和持续性 -- 它们为指向目标的行为注入能量。本单元的 核心划分是:内容型理论解释什么在激励(哪些需求);过程型理论解释激励背后的思维过程如何运作。随后,工作设计(job design) 和赋权(empowerment)把理论转化为实用的杠杆。我们将围绕“Fast Fashion”(第二部分)来展开。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么 First, classify a theory as content or process - the favourite framing. Then: order Maslow's levels; tell a Herzberg hygiene factor from a motivator; name McClelland's three needs; recall that expectancy multiplies Ex|xV (any zero kills it); apply equity and organisational justice; build a SMART goal (Locke & Latham); read the job characteristics model; and define psychological empowerment (Quinn & Spreitzer). Bust the reward myths (Christmas-bonus, punishment). 首先,把一个理论归类为内容型还是过程型- 一最受青睐的框定方式。然后:排出 Maslow 的层次;分辨 Herzberg 的 保健因素与激励因素;说出 McClelland 的三种需要;记住期望相乘即 ExlxV(任一项为零即归零);应用公平与组织公 正;构建一个 SMART 目标(Locke & Latham);解读工作特征模型;并定义心理赋权(Quinn & Spreitzer)。破除奖 励迷思(圣诞奖金、惩罚)。 Content theories - "what motivates" 内容型理论 一“什么在激励人” Content theory Theorist[18]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdf· Four-drive (Lawler & Nohria) - drives to acquire, bond, comprehend, defend 6b . Process Theories THE THINKING · Goal-setting (Locke & Latham) - specific, challenging, accepted goals + feedback; SMART; difficult goals beat easy ones · Expectancy (Vroom) - E x | x V (effort-> perf x perf-> outcome x value); any term 0 = no motivation · Equity (Adams) - compare own input:output ratio to a referent; inequity demotivates > organisational justice (distributive, procedural, interactional) · Reinforcement / OB-mod - A-B-C; reinforcement, punishment, extinction (punishment is a weak corrector) 6c . Applied & Empowerment QUINN & SPREITZER Job characteristics model (Hackman & Oldham): skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, feedback -> motivating potential; job enrichment (more depth) / enlargement (more breadth) / rotation. Empowerment (Quinn & Spreitzer's seven questions) = psychological empowerment: meaning, competence, self-determination, impact Reward systems: pay-for-performance, gainsharing, ESOPs - but reward myths matter (a fixed annual bonus does little for ongoing productivity; punishment is a weak corrector). Worked case . Fast Fashion Pt 2: diagnose a flat workforce - is it a content gap (unmet need) or a process gap (broken E->P->O link, perceived inequity)? Prescribe the matching lever (enrich the job, fix the reward line, raise empowerment). ---- SIA > In an exam, sort each theory into content vs process first, then name the theorist + one keyword (Maslow=5 needs; Vroom=ExIxV; Adams=equity ratio; Herzberg=hygiene+motivator). The serial "Fast Fashion" case threads values ++motivation-conflict. asksia. ai/cheatsheet/ unimelb-mgmt20001 . side 1/2 exam = 50% . book status unstated . check your current unit outline . @ 2026 flip + for side 2 . the MACRO block + cases AskSia CHEAT SHEET SERIES EXAM = 50% . REVISE Compiled by AskSia . mapped to the MGMT20001 syllabus . asksia. ai/cheatsheet/unimelb-mgmt20001 MGMT20001

M1：What OB is（组织行为学是什么）— 最基础但很常被当成开头铺垫

• Micro：个体与群体/团队层面的过程（M1–M7）
• Macro：组织整体与环境（M8–M12）[12]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfM7 Conflict Strong cultures are always more effective Strong culture can be a liability (groupthink, rigidity) M10 Culture Power is always visible Power can be invisible - it shapes preferences unseen M12 Power How the unit teaches - the case method 本课程如何授课 一 案例教学法 Theory never arrives alone: every module pairs it with a practitioner video and a real case (the macro half is explicitly case-method taught - Theranos, Boost Juice, CBA, Uber, Elon Musk). The reusable answer spine the unit rewards is define + link to theory - apply with case evidence - recommend. 理论从不单独出现:每个模块都把它与一段从业者视频和一个真实案例配对(宏观半场被明确以案例法教授 -- Theranos、 Boost Juice、CBA、Uber、Elon Musk)。本单元所奖励的可复用作答主干是:界定+联系理论→ 用案例证据加以应用→ 提出建议。 ! "Common sense" is the wrong-answer trap “常识”是错误答案的陷阱 When an exam stem sounds obviously true ("a bonus will motivate them", "a strong culture must be better"), it is usually testing whether you know the evidence says otherwise. Reach for the systematic finding, not the intuition. 当一道考题的题干听上去显然为真(“奖金会激励他们”“强文化一定更好”)时,它通常是在测试你是否知道证据给出了 相反的结论。要抓住系统性研究的发现,而不是凭直觉。 AskSia Library . MGMT20001 . XXia Bilingual ★ Recall checklist - Module 1 复习清单一 一模块 1 (1) OB defined - systematic study of how people think/feel/act in organisations, to improve effectiveness. (2) Micro vs macro - individuals/groups (M1-7) vs the whole organisation & its environment (M8-12). (3) Three levels - individual / group / organisation. (4) Multidisciplinary roots - psychology, sociology, anthropology, political science, economics. (5) Evidence-based management & Freedman (1992) - systematic study over common sense; contingency ("it depends"). (6) The case-method answer spine: define - apply - recommend. (1)组织行为学的定义 -- 对人们在组织中如何思考/感受/行动的系统性研究,目的是提升效能。(2)微观 vs 宏观-一个 体/群体 (M1-7) vs 整个组织及其环境(M8-12)。(3)三个层次一一个体/群体/组织。(4)多学科根源 -- 心理学、社 会学、人类学、政治学、经济学。(5)循证管理与 Freedman(1992) -- 以系统性研究取代常识;权变(“视情况而 定”)。(6)案例法的作答主线:定义→应用→提出建议。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual MODULE 2 . MICRO MODULE 2 . MICRO HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED Scientific Management vs Human Relations 科学管理 vs 人际关系学派 Two rival accounts of what really drives behaviour at work 关于究竟是什么真正驱动工作中行为的两种对立说法 TL;DR. Module 2 stages a contest between two foundational answers to one question: what shapes how people behave at work, and how should that inform management? Scientific Management (Taylor) says efficiency and the right method; Human Relations (Mayo) says people, attention and the social group. The unit's point: both "have profoundly informed real management practice and continue to do so" - neither alone is the whole story. 一句话总结。模块 2 围绕一个问题上演了两种基础性答案之间的较量:是什么塑造了人们在职场中的行为,这又应如何指导 管理?科学管理(Taylor)认为是效率和正确的方法;人际关系学派(Mayo)认为是人、是关注、是社会群体。本单元的要 点是:两者都“深刻地影响了真实的管理实践,并且至今仍在影响” -- 任何一方单独来看都不是故事的全部。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么[27]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdfMICRO MACRO individual & group process org as a whole + environment perception, values, motiv. ethics, change, culture teams, conflict, leadership communication, power (Side 1) (Side 2 · case method) Contingency thinking = "it depends"; rarely one best answer. Open-systems view = the org trades inputs/outputs with its environment (the bridge to macro). How the unit teaches each module (the "educational model"): lecture/readings > practitioner video + reflection -> two-step prep quiz (a zero-point Knowledge-Testing gate, then a 0. 4-pt Application-of-Theory quiz) -> dual-mode tutorial > takeaway notes. Every theory arrives attached to a real case - so revise it the same way. 2 . Scientific Mgmt vs TWO RIVAL Human Relations ACCOUNTS Two rival accounts of what shapes workplace behaviour & how to manage - both still inform real practice. F. W. TAYLOR scientific mgmt One best way per job via time-and-motion study; scientifically select & train; split planning (managers) from doing (workers); incentive/piece-rate pay. Goal = max efficiency. Worker = a "cog" - efficient but de- skilled, low discretion ("Cog or Co-worker?"). THE GILBRETHS Motion study - eliminate wasted movement. HENRY FORD Moving assembly line = SM at scale; standardisation + the "$5 day" high wage to offset monotonous, de- skilled work & cut turnover. 2b · Human Relations

M2：Scientific Management vs Human Relations（Taylor vs Mayo）— 考官最爱“对比题”

• “one best way”、时间动作研究、科学选拔与训练、计划与执行分离、用激励/计件工资追求效率。[12]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfM7 Conflict Strong cultures are always more effective Strong culture can be a liability (groupthink, rigidity) M10 Culture Power is always visible Power can be invisible - it shapes preferences unseen M12 Power How the unit teaches - the case method 本课程如何授课 一 案例教学法 Theory never arrives alone: every module pairs it with a practitioner video and a real case (the macro half is explicitly case-method taught - Theranos, Boost Juice, CBA, Uber, Elon Musk). The reusable answer spine the unit rewards is define + link to theory - apply with case evidence - recommend. 理论从不单独出现:每个模块都把它与一段从业者视频和一个真实案例配对(宏观半场被明确以案例法教授 -- Theranos、 Boost Juice、CBA、Uber、Elon Musk)。本单元所奖励的可复用作答主干是:界定+联系理论→ 用案例证据加以应用→ 提出建议。 ! "Common sense" is the wrong-answer trap “常识”是错误答案的陷阱 When an exam stem sounds obviously true ("a bonus will motivate them", "a strong culture must be better"), it is usually testing whether you know the evidence says otherwise. Reach for the systematic finding, not the intuition. 当一道考题的题干听上去显然为真(“奖金会激励他们”“强文化一定更好”)时,它通常是在测试你是否知道证据给出了 相反的结论。要抓住系统性研究的发现,而不是凭直觉。 AskSia Library . MGMT20001 . XXia Bilingual ★ Recall checklist - Module 1 复习清单一 一模块 1 (1) OB defined - systematic study of how people think/feel/act in organisations, to improve effectiveness. (2) Micro vs macro - individuals/groups (M1-7) vs the whole organisation & its environment (M8-12). (3) Three levels - individual / group / organisation. (4) Multidisciplinary roots - psychology, sociology, anthropology, political science, economics. (5) Evidence-based management & Freedman (1992) - systematic study over common sense; contingency ("it depends"). (6) The case-method answer spine: define - apply - recommend. (1)组织行为学的定义 -- 对人们在组织中如何思考/感受/行动的系统性研究,目的是提升效能。(2)微观 vs 宏观-一个 体/群体 (M1-7) vs 整个组织及其环境(M8-12)。(3)三个层次一一个体/群体/组织。(4)多学科根源 -- 心理学、社 会学、人类学、政治学、经济学。(5)循证管理与 Freedman(1992) -- 以系统性研究取代常识;权变(“视情况而 定”)。(6)案例法的作答主线:定义→应用→提出建议。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual MODULE 2 . MICRO MODULE 2 . MICRO HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED Scientific Management vs Human Relations 科学管理 vs 人际关系学派 Two rival accounts of what really drives behaviour at work 关于究竟是什么真正驱动工作中行为的两种对立说法 TL;DR. Module 2 stages a contest between two foundational answers to one question: what shapes how people behave at work, and how should that inform management? Scientific Management (Taylor) says efficiency and the right method; Human Relations (Mayo) says people, attention and the social group. The unit's point: both "have profoundly informed real management practice and continue to do so" - neither alone is the whole story. 一句话总结。模块 2 围绕一个问题上演了两种基础性答案之间的较量:是什么塑造了人们在职场中的行为,这又应如何指导 管理?科学管理(Taylor)认为是效率和正确的方法;人际关系学派(Mayo)认为是人、是关注、是社会群体。本单元的要 点是:两者都“深刻地影响了真实的管理实践,并且至今仍在影响” -- 任何一方单独来看都不是故事的全部。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么[27]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdfMICRO MACRO individual & group process org as a whole + environment perception, values, motiv. ethics, change, culture teams, conflict, leadership communication, power (Side 1) (Side 2 · case method) Contingency thinking = "it depends"; rarely one best answer. Open-systems view = the org trades inputs/outputs with its environment (the bridge to macro). How the unit teaches each module (the "educational model"): lecture/readings > practitioner video + reflection -> two-step prep quiz (a zero-point Knowledge-Testing gate, then a 0. 4-pt Application-of-Theory quiz) -> dual-mode tutorial > takeaway notes. Every theory arrives attached to a real case - so revise it the same way. 2 . Scientific Mgmt vs TWO RIVAL Human Relations ACCOUNTS Two rival accounts of what shapes workplace behaviour & how to manage - both still inform real practice. F. W. TAYLOR scientific mgmt One best way per job via time-and-motion study; scientifically select & train; split planning (managers) from doing (workers); incentive/piece-rate pay. Goal = max efficiency. Worker = a "cog" - efficient but de- skilled, low discretion ("Cog or Co-worker?"). THE GILBRETHS Motion study - eliminate wasted movement. HENRY FORD Moving assembly line = SM at scale; standardisation + the "$5 day" high wage to offset monotonous, de- skilled work & cut turnover. 2b · Human Relations

• 产出不只由物理条件决定，关注/社会因素/群体规范会影响表现（霍桑效应），强调员工是社会人、满意度与工作生活质量。[12]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfM7 Conflict Strong cultures are always more effective Strong culture can be a liability (groupthink, rigidity) M10 Culture Power is always visible Power can be invisible - it shapes preferences unseen M12 Power How the unit teaches - the case method 本课程如何授课 一 案例教学法 Theory never arrives alone: every module pairs it with a practitioner video and a real case (the macro half is explicitly case-method taught - Theranos, Boost Juice, CBA, Uber, Elon Musk). The reusable answer spine the unit rewards is define + link to theory - apply with case evidence - recommend. 理论从不单独出现:每个模块都把它与一段从业者视频和一个真实案例配对(宏观半场被明确以案例法教授 -- Theranos、 Boost Juice、CBA、Uber、Elon Musk)。本单元所奖励的可复用作答主干是:界定+联系理论→ 用案例证据加以应用→ 提出建议。 ! "Common sense" is the wrong-answer trap “常识”是错误答案的陷阱 When an exam stem sounds obviously true ("a bonus will motivate them", "a strong culture must be better"), it is usually testing whether you know the evidence says otherwise. Reach for the systematic finding, not the intuition. 当一道考题的题干听上去显然为真(“奖金会激励他们”“强文化一定更好”)时,它通常是在测试你是否知道证据给出了 相反的结论。要抓住系统性研究的发现,而不是凭直觉。 AskSia Library . MGMT20001 . XXia Bilingual ★ Recall checklist - Module 1 复习清单一 一模块 1 (1) OB defined - systematic study of how people think/feel/act in organisations, to improve effectiveness. (2) Micro vs macro - individuals/groups (M1-7) vs the whole organisation & its environment (M8-12). (3) Three levels - individual / group / organisation. (4) Multidisciplinary roots - psychology, sociology, anthropology, political science, economics. (5) Evidence-based management & Freedman (1992) - systematic study over common sense; contingency ("it depends"). (6) The case-method answer spine: define - apply - recommend. (1)组织行为学的定义 -- 对人们在组织中如何思考/感受/行动的系统性研究,目的是提升效能。(2)微观 vs 宏观-一个 体/群体 (M1-7) vs 整个组织及其环境(M8-12)。(3)三个层次一一个体/群体/组织。(4)多学科根源 -- 心理学、社 会学、人类学、政治学、经济学。(5)循证管理与 Freedman(1992) -- 以系统性研究取代常识;权变(“视情况而 定”)。(6)案例法的作答主线:定义→应用→提出建议。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual MODULE 2 . MICRO MODULE 2 . MICRO HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED Scientific Management vs Human Relations 科学管理 vs 人际关系学派 Two rival accounts of what really drives behaviour at work 关于究竟是什么真正驱动工作中行为的两种对立说法 TL;DR. Module 2 stages a contest between two foundational answers to one question: what shapes how people behave at work, and how should that inform management? Scientific Management (Taylor) says efficiency and the right method; Human Relations (Mayo) says people, attention and the social group. The unit's point: both "have profoundly informed real management practice and continue to do so" - neither alone is the whole story. 一句话总结。模块 2 围绕一个问题上演了两种基础性答案之间的较量:是什么塑造了人们在职场中的行为,这又应如何指导 管理?科学管理(Taylor)认为是效率和正确的方法;人际关系学派(Mayo)认为是人、是关注、是社会群体。本单元的要 点是:两者都“深刻地影响了真实的管理实践,并且至今仍在影响” -- 任何一方单独来看都不是故事的全部。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么[28]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdfperception, values, motiv. ethics, change, culture teams, conflict, leadership communication, power (Side 1) (Side 2 · case method) Contingency thinking = "it depends"; rarely one best answer. Open-systems view = the org trades inputs/outputs with its environment (the bridge to macro). How the unit teaches each module (the "educational model"): lecture/readings > practitioner video + reflection -> two-step prep quiz (a zero-point Knowledge-Testing gate, then a 0. 4-pt Application-of-Theory quiz) -> dual-mode tutorial > takeaway notes. Every theory arrives attached to a real case - so revise it the same way. 2 . Scientific Mgmt vs TWO RIVAL Human Relations ACCOUNTS Two rival accounts of what shapes workplace behaviour & how to manage - both still inform real practice. F. W. TAYLOR scientific mgmt One best way per job via time-and-motion study; scientifically select & train; split planning (managers) from doing (workers); incentive/piece-rate pay. Goal = max efficiency. Worker = a "cog" - efficient but de- skilled, low discretion ("Cog or Co-worker?"). THE GILBRETHS Motion study - eliminate wasted movement. HENRY FORD Moving assembly line = SM at scale; standardisation + the "$5 day" high wage to offset monotonous, de- skilled work & cut turnover. 2b · Human Relations THE WORKER AS SOCIAL BEING MAYO . HAWTHORNE At Western Electric, output rose with attention, social factors & group norms, not just physical conditions = the "Hawthorne effect. " Births the HR movement: social needs, morale & informal groups drive output. Worker = a co-worker, focus on satisfaction & quality of working life. FOLLETT

M5：Values / attitudes / behaviour（价值观→态度→行为）— 高频定义题

• “满意=高绩效”关联并不强（常识陷阱）。[11]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfStressors Sources of stress (demands & pressures) Work overload, role conflict/ambiguity, low control, harassment, work-life conflict Strains / The toll on person & org consequences Physiological (fatigue, illness), psychological (burnout), behavioural (absence, lower performance) Management How to reduce stress Remove the stressor; withdraw from it; change perceptions; control consequences (fitness, support); receive social support ★ Recall checklist - Module 5 复习清单 -- 模块 5 (1) Big Five (OCEAN) - conscientiousness predicts performance best; MBTI caveat. (2) Values = normative basis of attitudes; values congruence. (3) Hofstede's dimensions - individualism-collectivism, power distance, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity-femininity, long-short-term orientation. (4) Attitude = cognitive + affective + behavioural (ABC); attitude-behaviour gap & cognitive dissonance. (5) Job satisfaction - weak satisfaction-performance link. (6) EVLN - exit / voice / loyalty / neglect. (7) Emotional labour & emotional dissonance; El. (8) Stress - stressors - strains - management. (1) 大五人格(OCEAN) -- 尽责性最能预测绩效;MBTI 的告诫。(2)价值观=态度的规范性基础;价值观契合度。 (3) Hofstede 的维度 -- 个人主义一集体主义、权力距离、不确定性规避、男性化一女性化、长期一短期取向。(4)态 度=认知+情感+行为(ABC);态度一行为差距与认知失调。(5)工作满意度 -- 满意度与绩效之间的关联薄弱。(6) EVLN -- 退出/呼吁/忠诚/忽视。(7)情绪劳动与情绪失调;情商。(8)压力 -- 压力源→应激→管理。 AskSia Library . MGMT20001 . XXia Bilingual M6 . CONTENT THEORIES HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED MODULE 6 . MICRO Motivation 激励 Content theories ask WHAT motivates; process theories ask HOW the thinking that motivates works 内容型理论问“什么”在激励人;过程型理论问驱动激励的思维“如何”运作 TL;DR. Motivation is the set of forces - direction, intensity and persistence - that energise goal-directed behaviour. The unit's master split: content theories explain what motivates (which needs); process theories explain how the thinking that motivates works. Then job design and empowerment turn the theory into practical levers. We run it against "Fast Fashion" (Part 2). 一句话总结。激励/动机(motivation)是一组力量 -- 方向、强度和持续性 -- 它们为指向目标的行为注入能量。本单元的 核心划分是:内容型理论解释什么在激励(哪些需求);过程型理论解释激励背后的思维过程如何运作。随后,工作设计(job design) 和赋权(empowerment)把理论转化为实用的杠杆。我们将围绕“Fast Fashion”(第二部分)来展开。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么 First, classify a theory as content or process - the favourite framing. Then: order Maslow's levels; tell a Herzberg hygiene factor from a motivator; name McClelland's three needs; recall that expectancy multiplies Ex|xV (any zero kills it); apply equity and organisational justice; build a SMART goal (Locke & Latham); read the job characteristics model; and define psychological empowerment (Quinn & Spreitzer). Bust the reward myths (Christmas-bonus, punishment). 首先,把一个理论归类为内容型还是过程型- 一最受青睐的框定方式。然后:排出 Maslow 的层次;分辨 Herzberg 的 保健因素与激励因素;说出 McClelland 的三种需要;记住期望相乘即 ExlxV(任一项为零即归零);应用公平与组织公 正;构建一个 SMART 目标(Locke & Latham);解读工作特征模型;并定义心理赋权(Quinn & Spreitzer)。破除奖 励迷思(圣诞奖金、惩罚)。 Content theories - "what motivates" 内容型理论 一“什么在激励人” Content theory Theorist[12]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfM7 Conflict Strong cultures are always more effective Strong culture can be a liability (groupthink, rigidity) M10 Culture Power is always visible Power can be invisible - it shapes preferences unseen M12 Power How the unit teaches - the case method 本课程如何授课 一 案例教学法 Theory never arrives alone: every module pairs it with a practitioner video and a real case (the macro half is explicitly case-method taught - Theranos, Boost Juice, CBA, Uber, Elon Musk). The reusable answer spine the unit rewards is define + link to theory - apply with case evidence - recommend. 理论从不单独出现:每个模块都把它与一段从业者视频和一个真实案例配对(宏观半场被明确以案例法教授 -- Theranos、 Boost Juice、CBA、Uber、Elon Musk)。本单元所奖励的可复用作答主干是:界定+联系理论→ 用案例证据加以应用→ 提出建议。 ! "Common sense" is the wrong-answer trap “常识”是错误答案的陷阱 When an exam stem sounds obviously true ("a bonus will motivate them", "a strong culture must be better"), it is usually testing whether you know the evidence says otherwise. Reach for the systematic finding, not the intuition. 当一道考题的题干听上去显然为真(“奖金会激励他们”“强文化一定更好”)时,它通常是在测试你是否知道证据给出了 相反的结论。要抓住系统性研究的发现,而不是凭直觉。 AskSia Library . MGMT20001 . XXia Bilingual ★ Recall checklist - Module 1 复习清单一 一模块 1 (1) OB defined - systematic study of how people think/feel/act in organisations, to improve effectiveness. (2) Micro vs macro - individuals/groups (M1-7) vs the whole organisation & its environment (M8-12). (3) Three levels - individual / group / organisation. (4) Multidisciplinary roots - psychology, sociology, anthropology, political science, economics. (5) Evidence-based management & Freedman (1992) - systematic study over common sense; contingency ("it depends"). (6) The case-method answer spine: define - apply - recommend. (1)组织行为学的定义 -- 对人们在组织中如何思考/感受/行动的系统性研究,目的是提升效能。(2)微观 vs 宏观-一个 体/群体 (M1-7) vs 整个组织及其环境(M8-12)。(3)三个层次一一个体/群体/组织。(4)多学科根源 -- 心理学、社 会学、人类学、政治学、经济学。(5)循证管理与 Freedman(1992) -- 以系统性研究取代常识;权变(“视情况而 定”)。(6)案例法的作答主线:定义→应用→提出建议。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual MODULE 2 . MICRO MODULE 2 . MICRO HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED Scientific Management vs Human Relations 科学管理 vs 人际关系学派 Two rival accounts of what really drives behaviour at work 关于究竟是什么真正驱动工作中行为的两种对立说法 TL;DR. Module 2 stages a contest between two foundational answers to one question: what shapes how people behave at work, and how should that inform management? Scientific Management (Taylor) says efficiency and the right method; Human Relations (Mayo) says people, attention and the social group. The unit's point: both "have profoundly informed real management practice and continue to do so" - neither alone is the whole story. 一句话总结。模块 2 围绕一个问题上演了两种基础性答案之间的较量:是什么塑造了人们在职场中的行为,这又应如何指导 管理?科学管理(Taylor)认为是效率和正确的方法;人际关系学派(Mayo)认为是人、是关注、是社会群体。本单元的要 点是:两者都“深刻地影响了真实的管理实践,并且至今仍在影响” -- 任何一方单独来看都不是故事的全部。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么
• 认知失调（cognitive dissonance） 与 “态度-行为差距”。[11]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfStressors Sources of stress (demands & pressures) Work overload, role conflict/ambiguity, low control, harassment, work-life conflict Strains / The toll on person & org consequences Physiological (fatigue, illness), psychological (burnout), behavioural (absence, lower performance) Management How to reduce stress Remove the stressor; withdraw from it; change perceptions; control consequences (fitness, support); receive social support ★ Recall checklist - Module 5 复习清单 -- 模块 5 (1) Big Five (OCEAN) - conscientiousness predicts performance best; MBTI caveat. (2) Values = normative basis of attitudes; values congruence. (3) Hofstede's dimensions - individualism-collectivism, power distance, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity-femininity, long-short-term orientation. (4) Attitude = cognitive + affective + behavioural (ABC); attitude-behaviour gap & cognitive dissonance. (5) Job satisfaction - weak satisfaction-performance link. (6) EVLN - exit / voice / loyalty / neglect. (7) Emotional labour & emotional dissonance; El. (8) Stress - stressors - strains - management. (1) 大五人格(OCEAN) -- 尽责性最能预测绩效;MBTI 的告诫。(2)价值观=态度的规范性基础;价值观契合度。 (3) Hofstede 的维度 -- 个人主义一集体主义、权力距离、不确定性规避、男性化一女性化、长期一短期取向。(4)态 度=认知+情感+行为(ABC);态度一行为差距与认知失调。(5)工作满意度 -- 满意度与绩效之间的关联薄弱。(6) EVLN -- 退出/呼吁/忠诚/忽视。(7)情绪劳动与情绪失调;情商。(8)压力 -- 压力源→应激→管理。 AskSia Library . MGMT20001 . XXia Bilingual M6 . CONTENT THEORIES HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED MODULE 6 . MICRO Motivation 激励 Content theories ask WHAT motivates; process theories ask HOW the thinking that motivates works 内容型理论问“什么”在激励人;过程型理论问驱动激励的思维“如何”运作 TL;DR. Motivation is the set of forces - direction, intensity and persistence - that energise goal-directed behaviour. The unit's master split: content theories explain what motivates (which needs); process theories explain how the thinking that motivates works. Then job design and empowerment turn the theory into practical levers. We run it against "Fast Fashion" (Part 2). 一句话总结。激励/动机(motivation)是一组力量 -- 方向、强度和持续性 -- 它们为指向目标的行为注入能量。本单元的 核心划分是:内容型理论解释什么在激励(哪些需求);过程型理论解释激励背后的思维过程如何运作。随后,工作设计(job design) 和赋权(empowerment)把理论转化为实用的杠杆。我们将围绕“Fast Fashion”(第二部分)来展开。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么 First, classify a theory as content or process - the favourite framing. Then: order Maslow's levels; tell a Herzberg hygiene factor from a motivator; name McClelland's three needs; recall that expectancy multiplies Ex|xV (any zero kills it); apply equity and organisational justice; build a SMART goal (Locke & Latham); read the job characteristics model; and define psychological empowerment (Quinn & Spreitzer). Bust the reward myths (Christmas-bonus, punishment). 首先,把一个理论归类为内容型还是过程型- 一最受青睐的框定方式。然后:排出 Maslow 的层次;分辨 Herzberg 的 保健因素与激励因素;说出 McClelland 的三种需要;记住期望相乘即 ExlxV(任一项为零即归零);应用公平与组织公 正;构建一个 SMART 目标(Locke & Latham);解读工作特征模型;并定义心理赋权(Quinn & Spreitzer)。破除奖 励迷思(圣诞奖金、惩罚)。 Content theories - "what motivates" 内容型理论 一“什么在激励人” Content theory Theorist

M6：Motivation（激励）— 这章是“最爱考、最能出大题”的微观核心

• 内容型理论 content：问“什么在激励人（需要）”
• 过程型理论 process：问“激励背后的思维过程怎么运作”[7]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfi Fast Fashion, Part 2 - designing the work, not just the bonus Fast Fashion(第二部分) -- 设计工作本身,而不只是奖金 Back in the case (paraphrased): a fast-fashion floor job is high on task significance (customer-facing) but low on autonomy and skill variety - tightly scripted, repetitive. A recommendation that goes beyond "pay more": enrich the role (let staff own merchandising or a section), build competence through training, and give self-determination over how they serve - raising the motivating potential rather than just the bonus. 回到案例(转述):一份快时尚卖场的工作在任务重要性(直接面对顾客)上很高,但在自主性和技能多样性上很低 脚本化严苛、重复。一项超越“多发钱”的建议是:丰富化该岗位(让员工掌管陈列或某一区域)、通过培训培养胜任感、 并赋予对如何服务的自主决定权 -- 从而提升激励潜能,而不只是提高奖金。 ★ Recall checklist - Module 6 复习清单 -- 模块 6 (1) Content vs process - the master split. (2) Content: Maslow hierarchy; Herzberg hygiene vs motivators; McClelland nAch/nAff/nPow; four-drive (acquire/bond/comprehend/defend); ERG; SDT. (3) Process: Vroom expectancy = Ex|×V (a product); Adams equity vs a referent; Locke & Latham goal-setting / SMART; organisational justice (distributive / procedural / interactional). (4) Job design - JCM (Hackman & Oldham): five dimensions - three states; rotation / enlargement / enrichment. (5) Empowerment (Quinn & Spreitzer) - meaning, competence, self-determination, impact. (6) Reward myths - bonus & punishment. (1) 内容型 vs 过程型 -- 这是主分法。(2)内容型:Maslow 需求层次;Herzberg 保健因素 vs 激励因素;McClelland nAch/nAff/nPow;四驱力(获取/联结/理解/防御);ERG;自我决定论(SDT)。(3)过程型:Vroom 期望= ExlxV (一个乘积);Adams 公平 -- 与参照对象比较;Locke & Latham 目标设定/SMART;组织公正(分配/程序/互动)。 (4) 工作设计 -- JCM (Hackman & Oldham):五个维度→三种心理状态;轮岗/扩大化/丰富化。(5)赋权(Quinn & Spreitzer) -- 意义、胜任、自主决定、影响。(6)奖励迷思 -- 奖金与惩罚。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual MOD 7 . CONFLICT TYPES HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED - - MODULE 7 . MICRO Conflict & negotiation 冲突与谈判 Conflict can't be eliminated - it is managed; some of it even helps 冲突无法被消除 一 它只能被管理;其中一部分甚至有益 TL;DR. Conflict is a process that begins when one party perceives that another has frustrated, or is about to frustrate, something it cares about - two or more parties with competing interests. The unit's core nuance: conflict is not simply bad and cannot be wiped out, so the managerial task is to manage it - encouraging the kind that improves decisions while defusing the kind that wrecks teams. The flagship distinction is Jehn & Mannix's (2001) three types. 一句话总结。冲突(conflict)是一个过程,当一方察觉到另一方已经挫败、或即将挫败它所在意的某种东西时,这一过程便 开始 -- 即两个或更多拥有相互竞争利益的各方。本单元的核心微妙之处在于:冲突并非单纯是坏事,也不可能被根除,因此 管理上的任务是去管理它 -- 鼓励那种能改善决策的冲突,同时化解那种会毁掉团队的冲突。最具代表性的区分是 Jehn & Mannix (2001) 提出的三种类型。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么 A 2-hour final (50%) loves this topic because it is built on clean distinctions. Expect to (a) distinguish constructive/task conflict from relationship conflict and state the Jehn & Mannix verdict (moderate task conflict can help early; relationship conflict harms); (b) read a scenario and name the conflict type and source; (c) pick the right Thomas-Kilmann style for a situation; and (d) tell distributive from integrative negotiation and define BATNA. Always run the spine: define - apply with case evidence - recommend. 占 50% 的2 小时期末考试钟爱这个主题,因为它建立在干净利落的区分之上。要预期能够(a)区分建设性/任务冲突与 关系冲突,并陈述 Jehn & Mannix 的结论(适度的任务冲突在早期可能有益;关系冲突有害);(b)解读一个情境并说出 冲突类型和来源;(c)为某情境选择正确的 Thomas-Kilmann 处理风格;并(d)分辨分配式与整合式谈判、定义 BATNA。始终走这条主线:定义→结合案例证据应用→提出建议。 Conflict type What clashes Effect on the team Verdict (Jehn & Mannix) Task conflict Disagreement about the content of the work - goals, ideas, the right course of action Surfaces assumptions, tests options, sharpens decisions A moderate level early on can help - if it stays impersonal Process conflict[11]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfStressors Sources of stress (demands & pressures) Work overload, role conflict/ambiguity, low control, harassment, work-life conflict Strains / The toll on person & org consequences Physiological (fatigue, illness), psychological (burnout), behavioural (absence, lower performance) Management How to reduce stress Remove the stressor; withdraw from it; change perceptions; control consequences (fitness, support); receive social support ★ Recall checklist - Module 5 复习清单 -- 模块 5 (1) Big Five (OCEAN) - conscientiousness predicts performance best; MBTI caveat. (2) Values = normative basis of attitudes; values congruence. (3) Hofstede's dimensions - individualism-collectivism, power distance, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity-femininity, long-short-term orientation. (4) Attitude = cognitive + affective + behavioural (ABC); attitude-behaviour gap & cognitive dissonance. (5) Job satisfaction - weak satisfaction-performance link. (6) EVLN - exit / voice / loyalty / neglect. (7) Emotional labour & emotional dissonance; El. (8) Stress - stressors - strains - management. (1) 大五人格(OCEAN) -- 尽责性最能预测绩效;MBTI 的告诫。(2)价值观=态度的规范性基础;价值观契合度。 (3) Hofstede 的维度 -- 个人主义一集体主义、权力距离、不确定性规避、男性化一女性化、长期一短期取向。(4)态 度=认知+情感+行为(ABC);态度一行为差距与认知失调。(5)工作满意度 -- 满意度与绩效之间的关联薄弱。(6) EVLN -- 退出/呼吁/忠诚/忽视。(7)情绪劳动与情绪失调;情商。(8)压力 -- 压力源→应激→管理。 AskSia Library . MGMT20001 . XXia Bilingual M6 . CONTENT THEORIES HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED MODULE 6 . MICRO Motivation 激励 Content theories ask WHAT motivates; process theories ask HOW the thinking that motivates works 内容型理论问“什么”在激励人;过程型理论问驱动激励的思维“如何”运作 TL;DR. Motivation is the set of forces - direction, intensity and persistence - that energise goal-directed behaviour. The unit's master split: content theories explain what motivates (which needs); process theories explain how the thinking that motivates works. Then job design and empowerment turn the theory into practical levers. We run it against "Fast Fashion" (Part 2). 一句话总结。激励/动机(motivation)是一组力量 -- 方向、强度和持续性 -- 它们为指向目标的行为注入能量。本单元的 核心划分是:内容型理论解释什么在激励(哪些需求);过程型理论解释激励背后的思维过程如何运作。随后,工作设计(job design) 和赋权(empowerment)把理论转化为实用的杠杆。我们将围绕“Fast Fashion”(第二部分)来展开。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么 First, classify a theory as content or process - the favourite framing. Then: order Maslow's levels; tell a Herzberg hygiene factor from a motivator; name McClelland's three needs; recall that expectancy multiplies Ex|xV (any zero kills it); apply equity and organisational justice; build a SMART goal (Locke & Latham); read the job characteristics model; and define psychological empowerment (Quinn & Spreitzer). Bust the reward myths (Christmas-bonus, punishment). 首先,把一个理论归类为内容型还是过程型- 一最受青睐的框定方式。然后:排出 Maslow 的层次;分辨 Herzberg 的 保健因素与激励因素;说出 McClelland 的三种需要;记住期望相乘即 ExlxV(任一项为零即归零);应用公平与组织公 正;构建一个 SMART 目标(Locke & Latham);解读工作特征模型;并定义心理赋权(Quinn & Spreitzer)。破除奖 励迷思(圣诞奖金、惩罚)。 Content theories - "what motivates" 内容型理论 一“什么在激励人” Content theory Theorist[18]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdf· Four-drive (Lawler & Nohria) - drives to acquire, bond, comprehend, defend 6b . Process Theories THE THINKING · Goal-setting (Locke & Latham) - specific, challenging, accepted goals + feedback; SMART; difficult goals beat easy ones · Expectancy (Vroom) - E x | x V (effort-> perf x perf-> outcome x value); any term 0 = no motivation · Equity (Adams) - compare own input:output ratio to a referent; inequity demotivates > organisational justice (distributive, procedural, interactional) · Reinforcement / OB-mod - A-B-C; reinforcement, punishment, extinction (punishment is a weak corrector) 6c . Applied & Empowerment QUINN & SPREITZER Job characteristics model (Hackman & Oldham): skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, feedback -> motivating potential; job enrichment (more depth) / enlargement (more breadth) / rotation. Empowerment (Quinn & Spreitzer's seven questions) = psychological empowerment: meaning, competence, self-determination, impact Reward systems: pay-for-performance, gainsharing, ESOPs - but reward myths matter (a fixed annual bonus does little for ongoing productivity; punishment is a weak corrector). Worked case . Fast Fashion Pt 2: diagnose a flat workforce - is it a content gap (unmet need) or a process gap (broken E->P->O link, perceived inequity)? Prescribe the matching lever (enrich the job, fix the reward line, raise empowerment). ---- SIA > In an exam, sort each theory into content vs process first, then name the theorist + one keyword (Maslow=5 needs; Vroom=ExIxV; Adams=equity ratio; Herzberg=hygiene+motivator). The serial "Fast Fashion" case threads values ++motivation-conflict. asksia. ai/cheatsheet/ unimelb-mgmt20001 . side 1/2 exam = 50% . book status unstated . check your current unit outline . @ 2026 flip + for side 2 . the MACRO block + cases AskSia CHEAT SHEET SERIES EXAM = 50% . REVISE Compiled by AskSia . mapped to the MGMT20001 syllabus . asksia. ai/cheatsheet/unimelb-mgmt20001 MGMT20001

• Vroom 期望理论：$E \times I \times V$（乘积！任意一项为0就“归零”） [7]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfi Fast Fashion, Part 2 - designing the work, not just the bonus Fast Fashion(第二部分) -- 设计工作本身,而不只是奖金 Back in the case (paraphrased): a fast-fashion floor job is high on task significance (customer-facing) but low on autonomy and skill variety - tightly scripted, repetitive. A recommendation that goes beyond "pay more": enrich the role (let staff own merchandising or a section), build competence through training, and give self-determination over how they serve - raising the motivating potential rather than just the bonus. 回到案例(转述):一份快时尚卖场的工作在任务重要性(直接面对顾客)上很高,但在自主性和技能多样性上很低 脚本化严苛、重复。一项超越“多发钱”的建议是:丰富化该岗位(让员工掌管陈列或某一区域)、通过培训培养胜任感、 并赋予对如何服务的自主决定权 -- 从而提升激励潜能,而不只是提高奖金。 ★ Recall checklist - Module 6 复习清单 -- 模块 6 (1) Content vs process - the master split. (2) Content: Maslow hierarchy; Herzberg hygiene vs motivators; McClelland nAch/nAff/nPow; four-drive (acquire/bond/comprehend/defend); ERG; SDT. (3) Process: Vroom expectancy = Ex|×V (a product); Adams equity vs a referent; Locke & Latham goal-setting / SMART; organisational justice (distributive / procedural / interactional). (4) Job design - JCM (Hackman & Oldham): five dimensions - three states; rotation / enlargement / enrichment. (5) Empowerment (Quinn & Spreitzer) - meaning, competence, self-determination, impact. (6) Reward myths - bonus & punishment. (1) 内容型 vs 过程型 -- 这是主分法。(2)内容型:Maslow 需求层次;Herzberg 保健因素 vs 激励因素;McClelland nAch/nAff/nPow;四驱力(获取/联结/理解/防御);ERG;自我决定论(SDT)。(3)过程型:Vroom 期望= ExlxV (一个乘积);Adams 公平 -- 与参照对象比较;Locke & Latham 目标设定/SMART;组织公正(分配/程序/互动)。 (4) 工作设计 -- JCM (Hackman & Oldham):五个维度→三种心理状态;轮岗/扩大化/丰富化。(5)赋权(Quinn & Spreitzer) -- 意义、胜任、自主决定、影响。(6)奖励迷思 -- 奖金与惩罚。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual MOD 7 . CONFLICT TYPES HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED - - MODULE 7 . MICRO Conflict & negotiation 冲突与谈判 Conflict can't be eliminated - it is managed; some of it even helps 冲突无法被消除 一 它只能被管理;其中一部分甚至有益 TL;DR. Conflict is a process that begins when one party perceives that another has frustrated, or is about to frustrate, something it cares about - two or more parties with competing interests. The unit's core nuance: conflict is not simply bad and cannot be wiped out, so the managerial task is to manage it - encouraging the kind that improves decisions while defusing the kind that wrecks teams. The flagship distinction is Jehn & Mannix's (2001) three types. 一句话总结。冲突(conflict)是一个过程,当一方察觉到另一方已经挫败、或即将挫败它所在意的某种东西时,这一过程便 开始 -- 即两个或更多拥有相互竞争利益的各方。本单元的核心微妙之处在于:冲突并非单纯是坏事,也不可能被根除,因此 管理上的任务是去管理它 -- 鼓励那种能改善决策的冲突,同时化解那种会毁掉团队的冲突。最具代表性的区分是 Jehn & Mannix (2001) 提出的三种类型。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么 A 2-hour final (50%) loves this topic because it is built on clean distinctions. Expect to (a) distinguish constructive/task conflict from relationship conflict and state the Jehn & Mannix verdict (moderate task conflict can help early; relationship conflict harms); (b) read a scenario and name the conflict type and source; (c) pick the right Thomas-Kilmann style for a situation; and (d) tell distributive from integrative negotiation and define BATNA. Always run the spine: define - apply with case evidence - recommend. 占 50% 的2 小时期末考试钟爱这个主题,因为它建立在干净利落的区分之上。要预期能够(a)区分建设性/任务冲突与 关系冲突,并陈述 Jehn & Mannix 的结论(适度的任务冲突在早期可能有益;关系冲突有害);(b)解读一个情境并说出 冲突类型和来源;(c)为某情境选择正确的 Thomas-Kilmann 处理风格;并(d)分辨分配式与整合式谈判、定义 BATNA。始终走这条主线:定义→结合案例证据应用→提出建议。 Conflict type What clashes Effect on the team Verdict (Jehn & Mannix) Task conflict Disagreement about the content of the work - goals, ideas, the right course of action Surfaces assumptions, tests options, sharpens decisions A moderate level early on can help - if it stays impersonal Process conflict[18]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdf· Four-drive (Lawler & Nohria) - drives to acquire, bond, comprehend, defend 6b . Process Theories THE THINKING · Goal-setting (Locke & Latham) - specific, challenging, accepted goals + feedback; SMART; difficult goals beat easy ones · Expectancy (Vroom) - E x | x V (effort-> perf x perf-> outcome x value); any term 0 = no motivation · Equity (Adams) - compare own input:output ratio to a referent; inequity demotivates > organisational justice (distributive, procedural, interactional) · Reinforcement / OB-mod - A-B-C; reinforcement, punishment, extinction (punishment is a weak corrector) 6c . Applied & Empowerment QUINN & SPREITZER Job characteristics model (Hackman & Oldham): skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, feedback -> motivating potential; job enrichment (more depth) / enlargement (more breadth) / rotation. Empowerment (Quinn & Spreitzer's seven questions) = psychological empowerment: meaning, competence, self-determination, impact Reward systems: pay-for-performance, gainsharing, ESOPs - but reward myths matter (a fixed annual bonus does little for ongoing productivity; punishment is a weak corrector). Worked case . Fast Fashion Pt 2: diagnose a flat workforce - is it a content gap (unmet need) or a process gap (broken E->P->O link, perceived inequity)? Prescribe the matching lever (enrich the job, fix the reward line, raise empowerment). ---- SIA > In an exam, sort each theory into content vs process first, then name the theorist + one keyword (Maslow=5 needs; Vroom=ExIxV; Adams=equity ratio; Herzberg=hygiene+motivator). The serial "Fast Fashion" case threads values ++motivation-conflict. asksia. ai/cheatsheet/ unimelb-mgmt20001 . side 1/2 exam = 50% . book status unstated . check your current unit outline . @ 2026 flip + for side 2 . the MACRO block + cases AskSia CHEAT SHEET SERIES EXAM = 50% . REVISE Compiled by AskSia . mapped to the MGMT20001 syllabus . asksia. ai/cheatsheet/unimelb-mgmt20001 MGMT20001
• Adams 公平理论：用“投入:产出”比率与参照对象比较；不公平会去激励，并延伸到组织公正（分配/程序/互动）。[7]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfi Fast Fashion, Part 2 - designing the work, not just the bonus Fast Fashion(第二部分) -- 设计工作本身,而不只是奖金 Back in the case (paraphrased): a fast-fashion floor job is high on task significance (customer-facing) but low on autonomy and skill variety - tightly scripted, repetitive. A recommendation that goes beyond "pay more": enrich the role (let staff own merchandising or a section), build competence through training, and give self-determination over how they serve - raising the motivating potential rather than just the bonus. 回到案例(转述):一份快时尚卖场的工作在任务重要性(直接面对顾客)上很高,但在自主性和技能多样性上很低 脚本化严苛、重复。一项超越“多发钱”的建议是:丰富化该岗位(让员工掌管陈列或某一区域)、通过培训培养胜任感、 并赋予对如何服务的自主决定权 -- 从而提升激励潜能,而不只是提高奖金。 ★ Recall checklist - Module 6 复习清单 -- 模块 6 (1) Content vs process - the master split. (2) Content: Maslow hierarchy; Herzberg hygiene vs motivators; McClelland nAch/nAff/nPow; four-drive (acquire/bond/comprehend/defend); ERG; SDT. (3) Process: Vroom expectancy = Ex|×V (a product); Adams equity vs a referent; Locke & Latham goal-setting / SMART; organisational justice (distributive / procedural / interactional). (4) Job design - JCM (Hackman & Oldham): five dimensions - three states; rotation / enlargement / enrichment. (5) Empowerment (Quinn & Spreitzer) - meaning, competence, self-determination, impact. (6) Reward myths - bonus & punishment. (1) 内容型 vs 过程型 -- 这是主分法。(2)内容型:Maslow 需求层次;Herzberg 保健因素 vs 激励因素;McClelland nAch/nAff/nPow;四驱力(获取/联结/理解/防御);ERG;自我决定论(SDT)。(3)过程型:Vroom 期望= ExlxV (一个乘积);Adams 公平 -- 与参照对象比较;Locke & Latham 目标设定/SMART;组织公正(分配/程序/互动)。 (4) 工作设计 -- JCM (Hackman & Oldham):五个维度→三种心理状态;轮岗/扩大化/丰富化。(5)赋权(Quinn & Spreitzer) -- 意义、胜任、自主决定、影响。(6)奖励迷思 -- 奖金与惩罚。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual MOD 7 . CONFLICT TYPES HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED - - MODULE 7 . MICRO Conflict & negotiation 冲突与谈判 Conflict can't be eliminated - it is managed; some of it even helps 冲突无法被消除 一 它只能被管理;其中一部分甚至有益 TL;DR. Conflict is a process that begins when one party perceives that another has frustrated, or is about to frustrate, something it cares about - two or more parties with competing interests. The unit's core nuance: conflict is not simply bad and cannot be wiped out, so the managerial task is to manage it - encouraging the kind that improves decisions while defusing the kind that wrecks teams. The flagship distinction is Jehn & Mannix's (2001) three types. 一句话总结。冲突(conflict)是一个过程,当一方察觉到另一方已经挫败、或即将挫败它所在意的某种东西时,这一过程便 开始 -- 即两个或更多拥有相互竞争利益的各方。本单元的核心微妙之处在于:冲突并非单纯是坏事,也不可能被根除,因此 管理上的任务是去管理它 -- 鼓励那种能改善决策的冲突,同时化解那种会毁掉团队的冲突。最具代表性的区分是 Jehn & Mannix (2001) 提出的三种类型。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么 A 2-hour final (50%) loves this topic because it is built on clean distinctions. Expect to (a) distinguish constructive/task conflict from relationship conflict and state the Jehn & Mannix verdict (moderate task conflict can help early; relationship conflict harms); (b) read a scenario and name the conflict type and source; (c) pick the right Thomas-Kilmann style for a situation; and (d) tell distributive from integrative negotiation and define BATNA. Always run the spine: define - apply with case evidence - recommend. 占 50% 的2 小时期末考试钟爱这个主题,因为它建立在干净利落的区分之上。要预期能够(a)区分建设性/任务冲突与 关系冲突,并陈述 Jehn & Mannix 的结论(适度的任务冲突在早期可能有益;关系冲突有害);(b)解读一个情境并说出 冲突类型和来源;(c)为某情境选择正确的 Thomas-Kilmann 处理风格;并(d)分辨分配式与整合式谈判、定义 BATNA。始终走这条主线:定义→结合案例证据应用→提出建议。 Conflict type What clashes Effect on the team Verdict (Jehn & Mannix) Task conflict Disagreement about the content of the work - goals, ideas, the right course of action Surfaces assumptions, tests options, sharpens decisions A moderate level early on can help - if it stays impersonal Process conflict[18]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdf· Four-drive (Lawler & Nohria) - drives to acquire, bond, comprehend, defend 6b . Process Theories THE THINKING · Goal-setting (Locke & Latham) - specific, challenging, accepted goals + feedback; SMART; difficult goals beat easy ones · Expectancy (Vroom) - E x | x V (effort-> perf x perf-> outcome x value); any term 0 = no motivation · Equity (Adams) - compare own input:output ratio to a referent; inequity demotivates > organisational justice (distributive, procedural, interactional) · Reinforcement / OB-mod - A-B-C; reinforcement, punishment, extinction (punishment is a weak corrector) 6c . Applied & Empowerment QUINN & SPREITZER Job characteristics model (Hackman & Oldham): skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, feedback -> motivating potential; job enrichment (more depth) / enlargement (more breadth) / rotation. Empowerment (Quinn & Spreitzer's seven questions) = psychological empowerment: meaning, competence, self-determination, impact Reward systems: pay-for-performance, gainsharing, ESOPs - but reward myths matter (a fixed annual bonus does little for ongoing productivity; punishment is a weak corrector). Worked case . Fast Fashion Pt 2: diagnose a flat workforce - is it a content gap (unmet need) or a process gap (broken E->P->O link, perceived inequity)? Prescribe the matching lever (enrich the job, fix the reward line, raise empowerment). ---- SIA > In an exam, sort each theory into content vs process first, then name the theorist + one keyword (Maslow=5 needs; Vroom=ExIxV; Adams=equity ratio; Herzberg=hygiene+motivator). The serial "Fast Fashion" case threads values ++motivation-conflict. asksia. ai/cheatsheet/ unimelb-mgmt20001 . side 1/2 exam = 50% . book status unstated . check your current unit outline . @ 2026 flip + for side 2 . the MACRO block + cases AskSia CHEAT SHEET SERIES EXAM = 50% . REVISE Compiled by AskSia . mapped to the MGMT20001 syllabus . asksia. ai/cheatsheet/unimelb-mgmt20001 MGMT20001
• Locke & Latham 目标设定：SMART；具体、有挑战、被接受 + 反馈。[7]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfi Fast Fashion, Part 2 - designing the work, not just the bonus Fast Fashion(第二部分) -- 设计工作本身,而不只是奖金 Back in the case (paraphrased): a fast-fashion floor job is high on task significance (customer-facing) but low on autonomy and skill variety - tightly scripted, repetitive. A recommendation that goes beyond "pay more": enrich the role (let staff own merchandising or a section), build competence through training, and give self-determination over how they serve - raising the motivating potential rather than just the bonus. 回到案例(转述):一份快时尚卖场的工作在任务重要性(直接面对顾客)上很高,但在自主性和技能多样性上很低 脚本化严苛、重复。一项超越“多发钱”的建议是:丰富化该岗位(让员工掌管陈列或某一区域)、通过培训培养胜任感、 并赋予对如何服务的自主决定权 -- 从而提升激励潜能,而不只是提高奖金。 ★ Recall checklist - Module 6 复习清单 -- 模块 6 (1) Content vs process - the master split. (2) Content: Maslow hierarchy; Herzberg hygiene vs motivators; McClelland nAch/nAff/nPow; four-drive (acquire/bond/comprehend/defend); ERG; SDT. (3) Process: Vroom expectancy = Ex|×V (a product); Adams equity vs a referent; Locke & Latham goal-setting / SMART; organisational justice (distributive / procedural / interactional). (4) Job design - JCM (Hackman & Oldham): five dimensions - three states; rotation / enlargement / enrichment. (5) Empowerment (Quinn & Spreitzer) - meaning, competence, self-determination, impact. (6) Reward myths - bonus & punishment. (1) 内容型 vs 过程型 -- 这是主分法。(2)内容型:Maslow 需求层次;Herzberg 保健因素 vs 激励因素;McClelland nAch/nAff/nPow;四驱力(获取/联结/理解/防御);ERG;自我决定论(SDT)。(3)过程型:Vroom 期望= ExlxV (一个乘积);Adams 公平 -- 与参照对象比较;Locke & Latham 目标设定/SMART;组织公正(分配/程序/互动)。 (4) 工作设计 -- JCM (Hackman & Oldham):五个维度→三种心理状态;轮岗/扩大化/丰富化。(5)赋权(Quinn & Spreitzer) -- 意义、胜任、自主决定、影响。(6)奖励迷思 -- 奖金与惩罚。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual MOD 7 . CONFLICT TYPES HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED - - MODULE 7 . MICRO Conflict & negotiation 冲突与谈判 Conflict can't be eliminated - it is managed; some of it even helps 冲突无法被消除 一 它只能被管理;其中一部分甚至有益 TL;DR. Conflict is a process that begins when one party perceives that another has frustrated, or is about to frustrate, something it cares about - two or more parties with competing interests. The unit's core nuance: conflict is not simply bad and cannot be wiped out, so the managerial task is to manage it - encouraging the kind that improves decisions while defusing the kind that wrecks teams. The flagship distinction is Jehn & Mannix's (2001) three types. 一句话总结。冲突(conflict)是一个过程,当一方察觉到另一方已经挫败、或即将挫败它所在意的某种东西时,这一过程便 开始 -- 即两个或更多拥有相互竞争利益的各方。本单元的核心微妙之处在于:冲突并非单纯是坏事,也不可能被根除,因此 管理上的任务是去管理它 -- 鼓励那种能改善决策的冲突,同时化解那种会毁掉团队的冲突。最具代表性的区分是 Jehn & Mannix (2001) 提出的三种类型。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么 A 2-hour final (50%) loves this topic because it is built on clean distinctions. Expect to (a) distinguish constructive/task conflict from relationship conflict and state the Jehn & Mannix verdict (moderate task conflict can help early; relationship conflict harms); (b) read a scenario and name the conflict type and source; (c) pick the right Thomas-Kilmann style for a situation; and (d) tell distributive from integrative negotiation and define BATNA. Always run the spine: define - apply with case evidence - recommend. 占 50% 的2 小时期末考试钟爱这个主题,因为它建立在干净利落的区分之上。要预期能够(a)区分建设性/任务冲突与 关系冲突,并陈述 Jehn & Mannix 的结论(适度的任务冲突在早期可能有益;关系冲突有害);(b)解读一个情境并说出 冲突类型和来源;(c)为某情境选择正确的 Thomas-Kilmann 处理风格;并(d)分辨分配式与整合式谈判、定义 BATNA。始终走这条主线:定义→结合案例证据应用→提出建议。 Conflict type What clashes Effect on the team Verdict (Jehn & Mannix) Task conflict Disagreement about the content of the work - goals, ideas, the right course of action Surfaces assumptions, tests options, sharpens decisions A moderate level early on can help - if it stays impersonal Process conflict[18]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdf· Four-drive (Lawler & Nohria) - drives to acquire, bond, comprehend, defend 6b . Process Theories THE THINKING · Goal-setting (Locke & Latham) - specific, challenging, accepted goals + feedback; SMART; difficult goals beat easy ones · Expectancy (Vroom) - E x | x V (effort-> perf x perf-> outcome x value); any term 0 = no motivation · Equity (Adams) - compare own input:output ratio to a referent; inequity demotivates > organisational justice (distributive, procedural, interactional) · Reinforcement / OB-mod - A-B-C; reinforcement, punishment, extinction (punishment is a weak corrector) 6c . Applied & Empowerment QUINN & SPREITZER Job characteristics model (Hackman & Oldham): skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, feedback -> motivating potential; job enrichment (more depth) / enlargement (more breadth) / rotation. Empowerment (Quinn & Spreitzer's seven questions) = psychological empowerment: meaning, competence, self-determination, impact Reward systems: pay-for-performance, gainsharing, ESOPs - but reward myths matter (a fixed annual bonus does little for ongoing productivity; punishment is a weak corrector). Worked case . Fast Fashion Pt 2: diagnose a flat workforce - is it a content gap (unmet need) or a process gap (broken E->P->O link, perceived inequity)? Prescribe the matching lever (enrich the job, fix the reward line, raise empowerment). ---- SIA > In an exam, sort each theory into content vs process first, then name the theorist + one keyword (Maslow=5 needs; Vroom=ExIxV; Adams=equity ratio; Herzberg=hygiene+motivator). The serial "Fast Fashion" case threads values ++motivation-conflict. asksia. ai/cheatsheet/ unimelb-mgmt20001 . side 1/2 exam = 50% . book status unstated . check your current unit outline . @ 2026 flip + for side 2 . the MACRO block + cases AskSia CHEAT SHEET SERIES EXAM = 50% . REVISE Compiled by AskSia . mapped to the MGMT20001 syllabus . asksia. ai/cheatsheet/unimelb-mgmt20001 MGMT20001

• 工作特征模型 JCM（Hackman & Oldham）：技能多样性、任务完整性、任务重要性、自主性、反馈 → 激励潜能；配套：轮岗/扩大化/丰富化（enrichment 等）。[7]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfi Fast Fashion, Part 2 - designing the work, not just the bonus Fast Fashion(第二部分) -- 设计工作本身,而不只是奖金 Back in the case (paraphrased): a fast-fashion floor job is high on task significance (customer-facing) but low on autonomy and skill variety - tightly scripted, repetitive. A recommendation that goes beyond "pay more": enrich the role (let staff own merchandising or a section), build competence through training, and give self-determination over how they serve - raising the motivating potential rather than just the bonus. 回到案例(转述):一份快时尚卖场的工作在任务重要性(直接面对顾客)上很高,但在自主性和技能多样性上很低 脚本化严苛、重复。一项超越“多发钱”的建议是:丰富化该岗位(让员工掌管陈列或某一区域)、通过培训培养胜任感、 并赋予对如何服务的自主决定权 -- 从而提升激励潜能,而不只是提高奖金。 ★ Recall checklist - Module 6 复习清单 -- 模块 6 (1) Content vs process - the master split. (2) Content: Maslow hierarchy; Herzberg hygiene vs motivators; McClelland nAch/nAff/nPow; four-drive (acquire/bond/comprehend/defend); ERG; SDT. (3) Process: Vroom expectancy = Ex|×V (a product); Adams equity vs a referent; Locke & Latham goal-setting / SMART; organisational justice (distributive / procedural / interactional). (4) Job design - JCM (Hackman & Oldham): five dimensions - three states; rotation / enlargement / enrichment. (5) Empowerment (Quinn & Spreitzer) - meaning, competence, self-determination, impact. (6) Reward myths - bonus & punishment. (1) 内容型 vs 过程型 -- 这是主分法。(2)内容型:Maslow 需求层次;Herzberg 保健因素 vs 激励因素;McClelland nAch/nAff/nPow;四驱力(获取/联结/理解/防御);ERG;自我决定论(SDT)。(3)过程型:Vroom 期望= ExlxV (一个乘积);Adams 公平 -- 与参照对象比较;Locke & Latham 目标设定/SMART;组织公正(分配/程序/互动)。 (4) 工作设计 -- JCM (Hackman & Oldham):五个维度→三种心理状态;轮岗/扩大化/丰富化。(5)赋权(Quinn & Spreitzer) -- 意义、胜任、自主决定、影响。(6)奖励迷思 -- 奖金与惩罚。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual MOD 7 . CONFLICT TYPES HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED - - MODULE 7 . MICRO Conflict & negotiation 冲突与谈判 Conflict can't be eliminated - it is managed; some of it even helps 冲突无法被消除 一 它只能被管理;其中一部分甚至有益 TL;DR. Conflict is a process that begins when one party perceives that another has frustrated, or is about to frustrate, something it cares about - two or more parties with competing interests. The unit's core nuance: conflict is not simply bad and cannot be wiped out, so the managerial task is to manage it - encouraging the kind that improves decisions while defusing the kind that wrecks teams. The flagship distinction is Jehn & Mannix's (2001) three types. 一句话总结。冲突(conflict)是一个过程,当一方察觉到另一方已经挫败、或即将挫败它所在意的某种东西时,这一过程便 开始 -- 即两个或更多拥有相互竞争利益的各方。本单元的核心微妙之处在于:冲突并非单纯是坏事,也不可能被根除,因此 管理上的任务是去管理它 -- 鼓励那种能改善决策的冲突,同时化解那种会毁掉团队的冲突。最具代表性的区分是 Jehn & Mannix (2001) 提出的三种类型。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么 A 2-hour final (50%) loves this topic because it is built on clean distinctions. Expect to (a) distinguish constructive/task conflict from relationship conflict and state the Jehn & Mannix verdict (moderate task conflict can help early; relationship conflict harms); (b) read a scenario and name the conflict type and source; (c) pick the right Thomas-Kilmann style for a situation; and (d) tell distributive from integrative negotiation and define BATNA. Always run the spine: define - apply with case evidence - recommend. 占 50% 的2 小时期末考试钟爱这个主题,因为它建立在干净利落的区分之上。要预期能够(a)区分建设性/任务冲突与 关系冲突,并陈述 Jehn & Mannix 的结论(适度的任务冲突在早期可能有益;关系冲突有害);(b)解读一个情境并说出 冲突类型和来源;(c)为某情境选择正确的 Thomas-Kilmann 处理风格;并(d)分辨分配式与整合式谈判、定义 BATNA。始终走这条主线:定义→结合案例证据应用→提出建议。 Conflict type What clashes Effect on the team Verdict (Jehn & Mannix) Task conflict Disagreement about the content of the work - goals, ideas, the right course of action Surfaces assumptions, tests options, sharpens decisions A moderate level early on can help - if it stays impersonal Process conflict[18]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdf· Four-drive (Lawler & Nohria) - drives to acquire, bond, comprehend, defend 6b . Process Theories THE THINKING · Goal-setting (Locke & Latham) - specific, challenging, accepted goals + feedback; SMART; difficult goals beat easy ones · Expectancy (Vroom) - E x | x V (effort-> perf x perf-> outcome x value); any term 0 = no motivation · Equity (Adams) - compare own input:output ratio to a referent; inequity demotivates > organisational justice (distributive, procedural, interactional) · Reinforcement / OB-mod - A-B-C; reinforcement, punishment, extinction (punishment is a weak corrector) 6c . Applied & Empowerment QUINN & SPREITZER Job characteristics model (Hackman & Oldham): skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, feedback -> motivating potential; job enrichment (more depth) / enlargement (more breadth) / rotation. Empowerment (Quinn & Spreitzer's seven questions) = psychological empowerment: meaning, competence, self-determination, impact Reward systems: pay-for-performance, gainsharing, ESOPs - but reward myths matter (a fixed annual bonus does little for ongoing productivity; punishment is a weak corrector). Worked case . Fast Fashion Pt 2: diagnose a flat workforce - is it a content gap (unmet need) or a process gap (broken E->P->O link, perceived inequity)? Prescribe the matching lever (enrich the job, fix the reward line, raise empowerment). ---- SIA > In an exam, sort each theory into content vs process first, then name the theorist + one keyword (Maslow=5 needs; Vroom=ExIxV; Adams=equity ratio; Herzberg=hygiene+motivator). The serial "Fast Fashion" case threads values ++motivation-conflict. asksia. ai/cheatsheet/ unimelb-mgmt20001 . side 1/2 exam = 50% . book status unstated . check your current unit outline . @ 2026 flip + for side 2 . the MACRO block + cases AskSia CHEAT SHEET SERIES EXAM = 50% . REVISE Compiled by AskSia . mapped to the MGMT20001 syllabus . asksia. ai/cheatsheet/unimelb-mgmt20001 MGMT20001
• 心理赋权（Quinn & Spreitzer）4要素：意义、胜任、自主决定、影响。[7]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfi Fast Fashion, Part 2 - designing the work, not just the bonus Fast Fashion(第二部分) -- 设计工作本身,而不只是奖金 Back in the case (paraphrased): a fast-fashion floor job is high on task significance (customer-facing) but low on autonomy and skill variety - tightly scripted, repetitive. A recommendation that goes beyond "pay more": enrich the role (let staff own merchandising or a section), build competence through training, and give self-determination over how they serve - raising the motivating potential rather than just the bonus. 回到案例(转述):一份快时尚卖场的工作在任务重要性(直接面对顾客)上很高,但在自主性和技能多样性上很低 脚本化严苛、重复。一项超越“多发钱”的建议是:丰富化该岗位(让员工掌管陈列或某一区域)、通过培训培养胜任感、 并赋予对如何服务的自主决定权 -- 从而提升激励潜能,而不只是提高奖金。 ★ Recall checklist - Module 6 复习清单 -- 模块 6 (1) Content vs process - the master split. (2) Content: Maslow hierarchy; Herzberg hygiene vs motivators; McClelland nAch/nAff/nPow; four-drive (acquire/bond/comprehend/defend); ERG; SDT. (3) Process: Vroom expectancy = Ex|×V (a product); Adams equity vs a referent; Locke & Latham goal-setting / SMART; organisational justice (distributive / procedural / interactional). (4) Job design - JCM (Hackman & Oldham): five dimensions - three states; rotation / enlargement / enrichment. (5) Empowerment (Quinn & Spreitzer) - meaning, competence, self-determination, impact. (6) Reward myths - bonus & punishment. (1) 内容型 vs 过程型 -- 这是主分法。(2)内容型:Maslow 需求层次;Herzberg 保健因素 vs 激励因素;McClelland nAch/nAff/nPow;四驱力(获取/联结/理解/防御);ERG;自我决定论(SDT)。(3)过程型:Vroom 期望= ExlxV (一个乘积);Adams 公平 -- 与参照对象比较;Locke & Latham 目标设定/SMART;组织公正(分配/程序/互动)。 (4) 工作设计 -- JCM (Hackman & Oldham):五个维度→三种心理状态;轮岗/扩大化/丰富化。(5)赋权(Quinn & Spreitzer) -- 意义、胜任、自主决定、影响。(6)奖励迷思 -- 奖金与惩罚。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual MOD 7 . CONFLICT TYPES HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED - - MODULE 7 . MICRO Conflict & negotiation 冲突与谈判 Conflict can't be eliminated - it is managed; some of it even helps 冲突无法被消除 一 它只能被管理;其中一部分甚至有益 TL;DR. Conflict is a process that begins when one party perceives that another has frustrated, or is about to frustrate, something it cares about - two or more parties with competing interests. The unit's core nuance: conflict is not simply bad and cannot be wiped out, so the managerial task is to manage it - encouraging the kind that improves decisions while defusing the kind that wrecks teams. The flagship distinction is Jehn & Mannix's (2001) three types. 一句话总结。冲突(conflict)是一个过程,当一方察觉到另一方已经挫败、或即将挫败它所在意的某种东西时,这一过程便 开始 -- 即两个或更多拥有相互竞争利益的各方。本单元的核心微妙之处在于:冲突并非单纯是坏事,也不可能被根除,因此 管理上的任务是去管理它 -- 鼓励那种能改善决策的冲突,同时化解那种会毁掉团队的冲突。最具代表性的区分是 Jehn & Mannix (2001) 提出的三种类型。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么 A 2-hour final (50%) loves this topic because it is built on clean distinctions. Expect to (a) distinguish constructive/task conflict from relationship conflict and state the Jehn & Mannix verdict (moderate task conflict can help early; relationship conflict harms); (b) read a scenario and name the conflict type and source; (c) pick the right Thomas-Kilmann style for a situation; and (d) tell distributive from integrative negotiation and define BATNA. Always run the spine: define - apply with case evidence - recommend. 占 50% 的2 小时期末考试钟爱这个主题,因为它建立在干净利落的区分之上。要预期能够(a)区分建设性/任务冲突与 关系冲突,并陈述 Jehn & Mannix 的结论(适度的任务冲突在早期可能有益;关系冲突有害);(b)解读一个情境并说出 冲突类型和来源;(c)为某情境选择正确的 Thomas-Kilmann 处理风格;并(d)分辨分配式与整合式谈判、定义 BATNA。始终走这条主线:定义→结合案例证据应用→提出建议。 Conflict type What clashes Effect on the team Verdict (Jehn & Mannix) Task conflict Disagreement about the content of the work - goals, ideas, the right course of action Surfaces assumptions, tests options, sharpens decisions A moderate level early on can help - if it stays impersonal Process conflict[18]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdf· Four-drive (Lawler & Nohria) - drives to acquire, bond, comprehend, defend 6b . Process Theories THE THINKING · Goal-setting (Locke & Latham) - specific, challenging, accepted goals + feedback; SMART; difficult goals beat easy ones · Expectancy (Vroom) - E x | x V (effort-> perf x perf-> outcome x value); any term 0 = no motivation · Equity (Adams) - compare own input:output ratio to a referent; inequity demotivates > organisational justice (distributive, procedural, interactional) · Reinforcement / OB-mod - A-B-C; reinforcement, punishment, extinction (punishment is a weak corrector) 6c . Applied & Empowerment QUINN & SPREITZER Job characteristics model (Hackman & Oldham): skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, feedback -> motivating potential; job enrichment (more depth) / enlargement (more breadth) / rotation. Empowerment (Quinn & Spreitzer's seven questions) = psychological empowerment: meaning, competence, self-determination, impact Reward systems: pay-for-performance, gainsharing, ESOPs - but reward myths matter (a fixed annual bonus does little for ongoing productivity; punishment is a weak corrector). Worked case . Fast Fashion Pt 2: diagnose a flat workforce - is it a content gap (unmet need) or a process gap (broken E->P->O link, perceived inequity)? Prescribe the matching lever (enrich the job, fix the reward line, raise empowerment). ---- SIA > In an exam, sort each theory into content vs process first, then name the theorist + one keyword (Maslow=5 needs; Vroom=ExIxV; Adams=equity ratio; Herzberg=hygiene+motivator). The serial "Fast Fashion" case threads values ++motivation-conflict. asksia. ai/cheatsheet/ unimelb-mgmt20001 . side 1/2 exam = 50% . book status unstated . check your current unit outline . @ 2026 flip + for side 2 . the MACRO block + cases AskSia CHEAT SHEET SERIES EXAM = 50% . REVISE Compiled by AskSia . mapped to the MGMT20001 syllabus . asksia. ai/cheatsheet/unimelb-mgmt20001 MGMT20001

M7：Conflict & negotiation（冲突与谈判）— 期末很爱考“分类+情境判断”

• Task conflict：对工作内容/目标/方案的分歧（可建设性）
• Process conflict：对“怎么做/谁做”的分歧
• Relationship conflict：人际/情绪/关系冲突（伤害团队）
• 判词：早期适度任务冲突可能有益；关系冲突有害。[7]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfi Fast Fashion, Part 2 - designing the work, not just the bonus Fast Fashion(第二部分) -- 设计工作本身,而不只是奖金 Back in the case (paraphrased): a fast-fashion floor job is high on task significance (customer-facing) but low on autonomy and skill variety - tightly scripted, repetitive. A recommendation that goes beyond "pay more": enrich the role (let staff own merchandising or a section), build competence through training, and give self-determination over how they serve - raising the motivating potential rather than just the bonus. 回到案例(转述):一份快时尚卖场的工作在任务重要性(直接面对顾客)上很高,但在自主性和技能多样性上很低 脚本化严苛、重复。一项超越“多发钱”的建议是:丰富化该岗位(让员工掌管陈列或某一区域)、通过培训培养胜任感、 并赋予对如何服务的自主决定权 -- 从而提升激励潜能,而不只是提高奖金。 ★ Recall checklist - Module 6 复习清单 -- 模块 6 (1) Content vs process - the master split. (2) Content: Maslow hierarchy; Herzberg hygiene vs motivators; McClelland nAch/nAff/nPow; four-drive (acquire/bond/comprehend/defend); ERG; SDT. (3) Process: Vroom expectancy = Ex|×V (a product); Adams equity vs a referent; Locke & Latham goal-setting / SMART; organisational justice (distributive / procedural / interactional). (4) Job design - JCM (Hackman & Oldham): five dimensions - three states; rotation / enlargement / enrichment. (5) Empowerment (Quinn & Spreitzer) - meaning, competence, self-determination, impact. (6) Reward myths - bonus & punishment. (1) 内容型 vs 过程型 -- 这是主分法。(2)内容型:Maslow 需求层次;Herzberg 保健因素 vs 激励因素;McClelland nAch/nAff/nPow;四驱力(获取/联结/理解/防御);ERG;自我决定论(SDT)。(3)过程型:Vroom 期望= ExlxV (一个乘积);Adams 公平 -- 与参照对象比较;Locke & Latham 目标设定/SMART;组织公正(分配/程序/互动)。 (4) 工作设计 -- JCM (Hackman & Oldham):五个维度→三种心理状态;轮岗/扩大化/丰富化。(5)赋权(Quinn & Spreitzer) -- 意义、胜任、自主决定、影响。(6)奖励迷思 -- 奖金与惩罚。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual MOD 7 . CONFLICT TYPES HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED - - MODULE 7 . MICRO Conflict & negotiation 冲突与谈判 Conflict can't be eliminated - it is managed; some of it even helps 冲突无法被消除 一 它只能被管理;其中一部分甚至有益 TL;DR. Conflict is a process that begins when one party perceives that another has frustrated, or is about to frustrate, something it cares about - two or more parties with competing interests. The unit's core nuance: conflict is not simply bad and cannot be wiped out, so the managerial task is to manage it - encouraging the kind that improves decisions while defusing the kind that wrecks teams. The flagship distinction is Jehn & Mannix's (2001) three types. 一句话总结。冲突(conflict)是一个过程,当一方察觉到另一方已经挫败、或即将挫败它所在意的某种东西时,这一过程便 开始 -- 即两个或更多拥有相互竞争利益的各方。本单元的核心微妙之处在于:冲突并非单纯是坏事,也不可能被根除,因此 管理上的任务是去管理它 -- 鼓励那种能改善决策的冲突,同时化解那种会毁掉团队的冲突。最具代表性的区分是 Jehn & Mannix (2001) 提出的三种类型。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么 A 2-hour final (50%) loves this topic because it is built on clean distinctions. Expect to (a) distinguish constructive/task conflict from relationship conflict and state the Jehn & Mannix verdict (moderate task conflict can help early; relationship conflict harms); (b) read a scenario and name the conflict type and source; (c) pick the right Thomas-Kilmann style for a situation; and (d) tell distributive from integrative negotiation and define BATNA. Always run the spine: define - apply with case evidence - recommend. 占 50% 的2 小时期末考试钟爱这个主题,因为它建立在干净利落的区分之上。要预期能够(a)区分建设性/任务冲突与 关系冲突,并陈述 Jehn & Mannix 的结论(适度的任务冲突在早期可能有益;关系冲突有害);(b)解读一个情境并说出 冲突类型和来源;(c)为某情境选择正确的 Thomas-Kilmann 处理风格;并(d)分辨分配式与整合式谈判、定义 BATNA。始终走这条主线:定义→结合案例证据应用→提出建议。 Conflict type What clashes Effect on the team Verdict (Jehn & Mannix) Task conflict Disagreement about the content of the work - goals, ideas, the right course of action Surfaces assumptions, tests options, sharpens decisions A moderate level early on can help - if it stays impersonal Process conflict[21]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdfAskSia CHEAT SHEET SERIES EXAM = 50% . REVISE Compiled by AskSia . mapped to the MGMT20001 syllabus . asksia. ai/cheatsheet/unimelb-mgmt20001 MGMT20001 Organisational Behaviour UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE . MACRO CHEAT SHEET Exam revision . SIDE 2 OF 2 Conflict -> power + cases SIDE 2/2 MACRO . Conflict & negotiation . Ethics (4 theories + governance) . Change (Lewin/Kotter) . Culture (Schein/3 views/5 ways) . Communication (functional vs meaning) . Power (3 dimensions) . Cases 7 . The MACRO Block CASE METHOD * The macro half zooms out to the organisation as a whole & its environment, taught by the case method (one named org per topic; "there is no right or wrong answer"). Sequence: conflict (the micro->macro hinge) > ethics > change > culture > communication > power. Every macro exam answer should run the define >> apply (case evidence) -> recommend spine. Pair each theory with its case: Theranos (ethics), Boost Juice (change), CBA (culture), Uber (comms), Musk (power). The case method "simulates real problems" & trains you to reach a defensible team consensus. 7b · Conflict THE HINGE TOPIC Conflict = 2+ parties with competing interests ; it can't be eliminated but can be managed, and a moderate level can improve teamwork. JEHN & MANNIX 3 types Task (about the work - can be constructive) . process (about how/who does the work) . relationship (interpersonal - harms the team). High- performing teams keep task conflict mid & relationship conflict low. Constructive (task) vs dysfunctional (relationship) conflict is the unit's central nuance. Sources: incompatible goals, differentiation, scarce resources, ambiguity, interdependence, communication problems - diagnose the source before choosing a style. 7c . Conflict Styles & Negotiation THOMAS- KILMANN

• 分配式 distributive：争夺价值（win-lose）
• 整合式 integrative：创造价值（win-win）
• BATNA：最佳替代方案（底牌）[7]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfi Fast Fashion, Part 2 - designing the work, not just the bonus Fast Fashion(第二部分) -- 设计工作本身,而不只是奖金 Back in the case (paraphrased): a fast-fashion floor job is high on task significance (customer-facing) but low on autonomy and skill variety - tightly scripted, repetitive. A recommendation that goes beyond "pay more": enrich the role (let staff own merchandising or a section), build competence through training, and give self-determination over how they serve - raising the motivating potential rather than just the bonus. 回到案例(转述):一份快时尚卖场的工作在任务重要性(直接面对顾客)上很高,但在自主性和技能多样性上很低 脚本化严苛、重复。一项超越“多发钱”的建议是:丰富化该岗位(让员工掌管陈列或某一区域)、通过培训培养胜任感、 并赋予对如何服务的自主决定权 -- 从而提升激励潜能,而不只是提高奖金。 ★ Recall checklist - Module 6 复习清单 -- 模块 6 (1) Content vs process - the master split. (2) Content: Maslow hierarchy; Herzberg hygiene vs motivators; McClelland nAch/nAff/nPow; four-drive (acquire/bond/comprehend/defend); ERG; SDT. (3) Process: Vroom expectancy = Ex|×V (a product); Adams equity vs a referent; Locke & Latham goal-setting / SMART; organisational justice (distributive / procedural / interactional). (4) Job design - JCM (Hackman & Oldham): five dimensions - three states; rotation / enlargement / enrichment. (5) Empowerment (Quinn & Spreitzer) - meaning, competence, self-determination, impact. (6) Reward myths - bonus & punishment. (1) 内容型 vs 过程型 -- 这是主分法。(2)内容型:Maslow 需求层次;Herzberg 保健因素 vs 激励因素;McClelland nAch/nAff/nPow;四驱力(获取/联结/理解/防御);ERG;自我决定论(SDT)。(3)过程型:Vroom 期望= ExlxV (一个乘积);Adams 公平 -- 与参照对象比较;Locke & Latham 目标设定/SMART;组织公正(分配/程序/互动)。 (4) 工作设计 -- JCM (Hackman & Oldham):五个维度→三种心理状态;轮岗/扩大化/丰富化。(5)赋权(Quinn & Spreitzer) -- 意义、胜任、自主决定、影响。(6)奖励迷思 -- 奖金与惩罚。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual MOD 7 . CONFLICT TYPES HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED - - MODULE 7 . MICRO Conflict & negotiation 冲突与谈判 Conflict can't be eliminated - it is managed; some of it even helps 冲突无法被消除 一 它只能被管理;其中一部分甚至有益 TL;DR. Conflict is a process that begins when one party perceives that another has frustrated, or is about to frustrate, something it cares about - two or more parties with competing interests. The unit's core nuance: conflict is not simply bad and cannot be wiped out, so the managerial task is to manage it - encouraging the kind that improves decisions while defusing the kind that wrecks teams. The flagship distinction is Jehn & Mannix's (2001) three types. 一句话总结。冲突(conflict)是一个过程,当一方察觉到另一方已经挫败、或即将挫败它所在意的某种东西时,这一过程便 开始 -- 即两个或更多拥有相互竞争利益的各方。本单元的核心微妙之处在于:冲突并非单纯是坏事,也不可能被根除,因此 管理上的任务是去管理它 -- 鼓励那种能改善决策的冲突,同时化解那种会毁掉团队的冲突。最具代表性的区分是 Jehn & Mannix (2001) 提出的三种类型。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么 A 2-hour final (50%) loves this topic because it is built on clean distinctions. Expect to (a) distinguish constructive/task conflict from relationship conflict and state the Jehn & Mannix verdict (moderate task conflict can help early; relationship conflict harms); (b) read a scenario and name the conflict type and source; (c) pick the right Thomas-Kilmann style for a situation; and (d) tell distributive from integrative negotiation and define BATNA. Always run the spine: define - apply with case evidence - recommend. 占 50% 的2 小时期末考试钟爱这个主题,因为它建立在干净利落的区分之上。要预期能够(a)区分建设性/任务冲突与 关系冲突,并陈述 Jehn & Mannix 的结论(适度的任务冲突在早期可能有益;关系冲突有害);(b)解读一个情境并说出 冲突类型和来源;(c)为某情境选择正确的 Thomas-Kilmann 处理风格;并(d)分辨分配式与整合式谈判、定义 BATNA。始终走这条主线:定义→结合案例证据应用→提出建议。 Conflict type What clashes Effect on the team Verdict (Jehn & Mannix) Task conflict Disagreement about the content of the work - goals, ideas, the right course of action Surfaces assumptions, tests options, sharpens decisions A moderate level early on can help - if it stays impersonal Process conflict[24]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdfOrganisational Behaviour UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE . MACRO CHEAT SHEET Exam revision . SIDE 2 OF 2 Conflict -> power + cases SIDE 2/2 MACRO . Conflict & negotiation . Ethics (4 theories + governance) . Change (Lewin/Kotter) . Culture (Schein/3 views/5 ways) . Communication (functional vs meaning) . Power (3 dimensions) . Cases 7 . The MACRO Block CASE METHOD * The macro half zooms out to the organisation as a whole & its environment, taught by the case method (one named org per topic; "there is no right or wrong answer"). Sequence: conflict (the micro->macro hinge) > ethics > change > culture > communication > power. Every macro exam answer should run the define >> apply (case evidence) -> recommend spine. Pair each theory with its case: Theranos (ethics), Boost Juice (change), CBA (culture), Uber (comms), Musk (power). The case method "simulates real problems" & trains you to reach a defensible team consensus. 7b · Conflict THE HINGE TOPIC Conflict = 2+ parties with competing interests ; it can't be eliminated but can be managed, and a moderate level can improve teamwork. JEHN & MANNIX 3 types Task (about the work - can be constructive) . process (about how/who does the work) . relationship (interpersonal - harms the team). High- performing teams keep task conflict mid & relationship conflict low. Constructive (task) vs dysfunctional (relationship) conflict is the unit's central nuance. Sources: incompatible goals, differentiation, scarce resources, ambiguity, interdependence, communication problems - diagnose the source before choosing a style. 7c . Conflict Styles & Negotiation THOMAS- KILMANN Thomas-Kilmann - five handling styles on assertiveness x cooperativeness: · Compromising (mid/mid) · Avoiding (low/low) · Accommodating/yielding (low assert, high coop) Negotiation: distributive (claim value, win-lose) vs integrative (create value, win-win). Know BATNA (best alternative), ZOPA (bargaining zone), target/resistance points. Third-party: arbitration · mediation . conciliation.

4）Macro（M8–M12）五大“高分大题区”（每个都按案例法写）

M8 Ethics（Theranos）

• 后果论/功利主义（看结果）
• 义务论/权利论（看义务与权利）
• 美德论（看品格）
• 正义/公平论（看分配）[8]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfThe defensible answer is no: a celebrated board with little life-sciences expertise, dominated by a charismatic founder who controlled information, with weak independent verification of the central claim. Recommendations write themselves - appoint directors with medical/scientific competence, separate founder control from oversight, require independent validation, and build protected whistleblowing so concerns reach the board, not just the CEO. 站得住脚的答案是否:一个备受推崇却几乎没有生命科学专 业知识的董事会,被一位掌控信息的魅力型创始人所主导, 对核心主张的独立验证十分薄弱。建议自然而然就浮现出来 -- 任命具备医学/科学能力的董事,把创始人的控制权与 监督职能分开,要求进行独立验证,并建立受保护的举报机 制,使关切能够上达董事会,而不仅仅到 CEO 为止。 Bridge - CSR & stakeholders 桥梁 一 CSR 与利益相关者 Ethics widens into corporate social responsibility (CSR): to whom is the firm responsible? The shareholder view (maximise owner returns within the law) contrasts with the stakeholder view (obligations to employees, customers, community and society too). Theranos read as a shareholder/founder-first firm that treated patients - its most safety-critical stakeholder - as an afterthought. CSR and the stakeholder map carry forward into the rest of the macro block. 伦理进一步拓宽为企业社会责任 (corporate social responsibility, CSR):企业该对谁负责?股东视角(在法 律范围内最大化所有者回报)与利益相关者视角(对员工、 客户、社区和社会同样负有义务)形成对照。Theranos 可 被解读为一家股东/创始人优先的公司,它把病人 -- 其最 具安全关键性的利益相关者 -- 当作了事后才考虑的对象。 CSR 和利益相关者地图会延续进宏观半场的其余部分。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual ✓ Exam move - the case-analysis spine 考试技巧 -- 案例分析的主干 Structure every ethics answer the way the unit marks it: (1) define + name the theory/concept - (2) apply it to the case with specific evidence - (3) recommend a concrete fix. For Theranos: define governance - show the board lacked medical expertise and independence - recommend competent directors + independent validation + protected voice. 按本课程的评分方式来组织每一份伦理答案:(1)定义+点名理论/概念 →(2)应用,结合具体证据应用于案例→(3)提 出建议,给出一个具体的修正办法。对 Theranos 而言:定义公司治理→ 表明董事会既缺乏医学专长又缺乏独立性→ 建议引入称职的董事+ 独立验证+受保护的话语渠道。 ★ Recall checklist - Module 8 复习清单 -- 模块 8 (1) Business ethics = right/wrong standards in business; descriptive (what is) vs normative (what ought). (2) Four theories - consequentialist/utilitarian (outcomes), deontological/rights (duties), virtue (character), justice/fairness (distribution); apply ≥2 and show divergence. (3) Why unethical - moral intensity, moral sensitivity, rationalisation, situational pressure. (4) Levers - codes, ethical culture/tone at the top, whistleblowing/voice, governance, moral courage. (5) Theranos - responsibility (Holmes/Balwani/board/enablers), governance gap, Silicon-Valley-meets- medtech. (6) Bridge - CSR & stakeholder vs shareholder. (1) 商业伦理=商业中关于对错的标准;描述性(实然)vs 规范性(应然)。(2)四种理论 -- 后果论/功利主义(看结 果)、义务论/权利论(看义务)、美德论(看品格)、正义/公平论(看分配);应用至少两种并表明其分歧。(3)为何会不 道德 -- 道德强度、道德敏感性、合理化、情境压力。(4)杠杆 -- 行为准则、伦理文化/高层定调、举报/话语权、公司 治理、道德勇气。(5) Theranos -- 责任归属(Holmes/Balwani/董事会/帮凶)、治理缺口、硅谷思维遭遇医疗科技。 (6) 衔接- 企业社会责任(CSR)与利益相关者 vs 股东。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual MOD 9 . FORCES HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED MODULE 9 . MACRO Organisational change 组织变革 Dynamic environments force change - the task is to plan and lead it, not just survive it 动态的环境迫使组织变革 一任务是去规划并领导变革,而不只是熬过去 TL;DR. Organisations sit in a dynamic environment that constantly pushes them to change. Organisational change is the move from a current state to a desired future state; a planned-change model gives a framework for doing it deliberately. The two pillars are Lewin's force-field / unfreeze-change-refreeze model and the management of resistance - where the unit's punchline is that participation is the strongest lever. - 一句话总结。组织身处一个动态环境之中,环境不断推动它们去变革。组织变革(organisational change)是从当前状态向 一个理想的未来状态的转移;一个计划性变革模型为有意识地推动变革提供了框架。两大支柱是 Lewin 的力场分析/解冻一变 革一再冻结模型,以及对变革阻力的管理 -- 本单元的点睛之笔在于:参与(participation)是最强的杠杆。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么 On the 50% final, change is a high-frequency macro topic. Be ready to (a) draw and apply Lewin's force-field - name driving vs restraining forces and the unfreeze-change-refreeze stages; (b) walk a case through Kotter's 8 steps; (c) list sources of resistance and the matched ways to overcome them (participation first); and (d) explain Beer & Eisenstat's 'silent killers' of strategy implementation. Run the define - apply - recommend spine on Boost Juice.

M9 Change（Boost Juice）

• 力场分析：驱动力 vs 阻碍力
• 三阶段：解冻 unfreeze → 变革 move/change → 再冻结 refreeze
• 关键提醒：削弱阻碍力、不要跳过再冻结。[8]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfThe defensible answer is no: a celebrated board with little life-sciences expertise, dominated by a charismatic founder who controlled information, with weak independent verification of the central claim. Recommendations write themselves - appoint directors with medical/scientific competence, separate founder control from oversight, require independent validation, and build protected whistleblowing so concerns reach the board, not just the CEO. 站得住脚的答案是否:一个备受推崇却几乎没有生命科学专 业知识的董事会,被一位掌控信息的魅力型创始人所主导, 对核心主张的独立验证十分薄弱。建议自然而然就浮现出来 -- 任命具备医学/科学能力的董事,把创始人的控制权与 监督职能分开,要求进行独立验证,并建立受保护的举报机 制,使关切能够上达董事会,而不仅仅到 CEO 为止。 Bridge - CSR & stakeholders 桥梁 一 CSR 与利益相关者 Ethics widens into corporate social responsibility (CSR): to whom is the firm responsible? The shareholder view (maximise owner returns within the law) contrasts with the stakeholder view (obligations to employees, customers, community and society too). Theranos read as a shareholder/founder-first firm that treated patients - its most safety-critical stakeholder - as an afterthought. CSR and the stakeholder map carry forward into the rest of the macro block. 伦理进一步拓宽为企业社会责任 (corporate social responsibility, CSR):企业该对谁负责?股东视角(在法 律范围内最大化所有者回报)与利益相关者视角(对员工、 客户、社区和社会同样负有义务)形成对照。Theranos 可 被解读为一家股东/创始人优先的公司,它把病人 -- 其最 具安全关键性的利益相关者 -- 当作了事后才考虑的对象。 CSR 和利益相关者地图会延续进宏观半场的其余部分。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual ✓ Exam move - the case-analysis spine 考试技巧 -- 案例分析的主干 Structure every ethics answer the way the unit marks it: (1) define + name the theory/concept - (2) apply it to the case with specific evidence - (3) recommend a concrete fix. For Theranos: define governance - show the board lacked medical expertise and independence - recommend competent directors + independent validation + protected voice. 按本课程的评分方式来组织每一份伦理答案:(1)定义+点名理论/概念 →(2)应用,结合具体证据应用于案例→(3)提 出建议,给出一个具体的修正办法。对 Theranos 而言:定义公司治理→ 表明董事会既缺乏医学专长又缺乏独立性→ 建议引入称职的董事+ 独立验证+受保护的话语渠道。 ★ Recall checklist - Module 8 复习清单 -- 模块 8 (1) Business ethics = right/wrong standards in business; descriptive (what is) vs normative (what ought). (2) Four theories - consequentialist/utilitarian (outcomes), deontological/rights (duties), virtue (character), justice/fairness (distribution); apply ≥2 and show divergence. (3) Why unethical - moral intensity, moral sensitivity, rationalisation, situational pressure. (4) Levers - codes, ethical culture/tone at the top, whistleblowing/voice, governance, moral courage. (5) Theranos - responsibility (Holmes/Balwani/board/enablers), governance gap, Silicon-Valley-meets- medtech. (6) Bridge - CSR & stakeholder vs shareholder. (1) 商业伦理=商业中关于对错的标准;描述性(实然)vs 规范性(应然)。(2)四种理论 -- 后果论/功利主义(看结 果)、义务论/权利论(看义务)、美德论(看品格)、正义/公平论(看分配);应用至少两种并表明其分歧。(3)为何会不 道德 -- 道德强度、道德敏感性、合理化、情境压力。(4)杠杆 -- 行为准则、伦理文化/高层定调、举报/话语权、公司 治理、道德勇气。(5) Theranos -- 责任归属(Holmes/Balwani/董事会/帮凶)、治理缺口、硅谷思维遭遇医疗科技。 (6) 衔接- 企业社会责任(CSR)与利益相关者 vs 股东。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual MOD 9 . FORCES HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED MODULE 9 . MACRO Organisational change 组织变革 Dynamic environments force change - the task is to plan and lead it, not just survive it 动态的环境迫使组织变革 一任务是去规划并领导变革,而不只是熬过去 TL;DR. Organisations sit in a dynamic environment that constantly pushes them to change. Organisational change is the move from a current state to a desired future state; a planned-change model gives a framework for doing it deliberately. The two pillars are Lewin's force-field / unfreeze-change-refreeze model and the management of resistance - where the unit's punchline is that participation is the strongest lever. - 一句话总结。组织身处一个动态环境之中,环境不断推动它们去变革。组织变革(organisational change)是从当前状态向 一个理想的未来状态的转移;一个计划性变革模型为有意识地推动变革提供了框架。两大支柱是 Lewin 的力场分析/解冻一变 革一再冻结模型,以及对变革阻力的管理 -- 本单元的点睛之笔在于:参与(participation)是最强的杠杆。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么 On the 50% final, change is a high-frequency macro topic. Be ready to (a) draw and apply Lewin's force-field - name driving vs restraining forces and the unfreeze-change-refreeze stages; (b) walk a case through Kotter's 8 steps; (c) list sources of resistance and the matched ways to overcome them (participation first); and (d) explain Beer & Eisenstat's 'silent killers' of strategy implementation. Run the define - apply - recommend spine on Boost Juice.[15]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfWhat quietly defeats the strategy Poor vertical communication Bad news never travels up; reality stays hidden Poor cross-functional coordination Silos fail to cooperate on shared goals Inadequate down-the- line leadership Middle managers lack the skills to lead the change OD 把本单元的教训付诸实践:参与能降低阻力,因为人们 会支持自己参与构建的东西。 ! Resistance is not always irrational 变革阻力并不总是非理性的 A common error is to treat all resistance as stubbornness to be crushed. Often resisters see real risks leaders have missed - their resistance is data. The right response is usually participation and honest communication, not coercion; coercion buys compliance but breeds the next round of resistance. 一个常见错误是把一切阻力都当成需要碾压的固执。阻力者往往看到了领导者忽略的真实风险 -- 他们的阻力是数据。 正确的应对通常是参与和诚实沟通,而非强制;强制能换来服从,却会孕育下一轮阻力。 ★ Recall checklist - Module 9 复习清单 -- 模块 9 (1) Forces for change - competition, technology, customers/demographics, growth. (2) Lewin - force-field (driving vs restraining); unfreeze - change - refreeze; lower restrainers, don't skip refreeze. (3) Kotter's 8 steps (urgency - coalition - vision - communicate - empower -+ wins - consolidate -> anchor) - map onto Lewin. (4) Resistance - sources (fear, distrust, routines, incongruent systems, face) and remedies; participation is the strongest lever. (5) Beer & Eisenstat's six silent killers. (6) OD - action research, appreciative inquiry; episodic vs continuous change. Worked case: Boost Juice. (1)变革的推动力 -- 竞争、技术、顾客/人口结构、增长。(2) Lewin -- 力场分析(驱动力 vs 阻碍力);解冻→变革 →再冻结;削弱阻碍力、不要跳过再冻结。(3) Kotter 八步(紧迫感→联盟→愿景→沟通→赋权→ 短期胜利 → 巩固→锚定) -- 映射到 Lewin 上。(4)阻力 -- 来源(恐惧、不信任、惯例、系统不一致、面子)及对策;参与是最 强的杠杆。(5) Beer & Eisenstat 的六个隐形杀手。(6)组织发展(OD) -- 行动研究、欣赏式探询;阶段性 vs 持续 性变革。范例案例:Boost Juice。 AskSia Library . MGMT20001 . XXia Bilingual M10 . CULTURE HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED MODULE 10 . MACRO Organisational culture 组织文化 "The usual way of thinking and doing things" that every member must learn “每位成员都必须习得的那套惯常思维与行事方式” TL;DR. Organisational culture is the pattern of shared values and basic assumptions that members learn as they figure out "how we do things around here" - so deep it is largely taken for granted, and new members must absorb it to be accepted. This unit does not treat culture as one tidy thing: it teaches three competing approaches (integrationist, differentiationist, fragmentation/critical) and a 5-ways toolkit for observing it - all rehearsed on the Commonwealth Bank (CBA) case. 一句话总结。组织文化(organisational culture)是成员在弄清“我们这里做事的方式”的过程中所习得的共同价值观与基本 假设的模式 -- 它深至大多被视为理所当然,新成员必须吸收它才能被接纳。本单元不把文化当作一个整齐划一的东西来处 理:它教授三种相互竞争的视角(整合、差异、碎片化/批判),以及一套用于观察文化的“五种方式”工具 -- 全部围绕澳大 利亚联邦银行(CBA) 案例加以演练。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么 Define culture; lay out Schein's three levels; and - the high-value move - apply the three approaches (integrationist / differentiationist / critical) and the 5 ways to observe culture to a named organisation, then argue a position with evidence. Expect a culture case in the 2-hour final worth 50%; the marking spine is define - apply- with-evidence - recommend. 定义文化;铺陈 Schein 的三层次;并 -- 这是价值最高的一招 -- 把三种视角(整合/差异/批判)和观察文化的五种 方式应用于一个具名组织,然后结合证据论证一个立场。要预期在占50% 的2 小时期末考试里出现一个文化案例;评 分主线是定义→结合证据应用→提出建议。 Schein's three levels - the standard underpinning Schein 的三层次 一 标准的底层支撑 Edgar Schein arranges culture into three layers from visible to invisible. The trap: the visible artefacts are easiest to see but hardest to interpret, while the invisible basic assumptions are what really drives behaviour. These three levels map directly onto the unit's "5 ways to observe culture" below.

M10 Culture（CBA）

• Artefacts（可见）→ Espoused values（宣称价值）→ Basic assumptions（深层假设，真正驱动行为）[15]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfWhat quietly defeats the strategy Poor vertical communication Bad news never travels up; reality stays hidden Poor cross-functional coordination Silos fail to cooperate on shared goals Inadequate down-the- line leadership Middle managers lack the skills to lead the change OD 把本单元的教训付诸实践:参与能降低阻力,因为人们 会支持自己参与构建的东西。 ! Resistance is not always irrational 变革阻力并不总是非理性的 A common error is to treat all resistance as stubbornness to be crushed. Often resisters see real risks leaders have missed - their resistance is data. The right response is usually participation and honest communication, not coercion; coercion buys compliance but breeds the next round of resistance. 一个常见错误是把一切阻力都当成需要碾压的固执。阻力者往往看到了领导者忽略的真实风险 -- 他们的阻力是数据。 正确的应对通常是参与和诚实沟通,而非强制;强制能换来服从,却会孕育下一轮阻力。 ★ Recall checklist - Module 9 复习清单 -- 模块 9 (1) Forces for change - competition, technology, customers/demographics, growth. (2) Lewin - force-field (driving vs restraining); unfreeze - change - refreeze; lower restrainers, don't skip refreeze. (3) Kotter's 8 steps (urgency - coalition - vision - communicate - empower -+ wins - consolidate -> anchor) - map onto Lewin. (4) Resistance - sources (fear, distrust, routines, incongruent systems, face) and remedies; participation is the strongest lever. (5) Beer & Eisenstat's six silent killers. (6) OD - action research, appreciative inquiry; episodic vs continuous change. Worked case: Boost Juice. (1)变革的推动力 -- 竞争、技术、顾客/人口结构、增长。(2) Lewin -- 力场分析(驱动力 vs 阻碍力);解冻→变革 →再冻结;削弱阻碍力、不要跳过再冻结。(3) Kotter 八步(紧迫感→联盟→愿景→沟通→赋权→ 短期胜利 → 巩固→锚定) -- 映射到 Lewin 上。(4)阻力 -- 来源(恐惧、不信任、惯例、系统不一致、面子)及对策;参与是最 强的杠杆。(5) Beer & Eisenstat 的六个隐形杀手。(6)组织发展(OD) -- 行动研究、欣赏式探询;阶段性 vs 持续 性变革。范例案例:Boost Juice。 AskSia Library . MGMT20001 . XXia Bilingual M10 . CULTURE HEAVILY EXAM-TESTED MODULE 10 . MACRO Organisational culture 组织文化 "The usual way of thinking and doing things" that every member must learn “每位成员都必须习得的那套惯常思维与行事方式” TL;DR. Organisational culture is the pattern of shared values and basic assumptions that members learn as they figure out "how we do things around here" - so deep it is largely taken for granted, and new members must absorb it to be accepted. This unit does not treat culture as one tidy thing: it teaches three competing approaches (integrationist, differentiationist, fragmentation/critical) and a 5-ways toolkit for observing it - all rehearsed on the Commonwealth Bank (CBA) case. 一句话总结。组织文化(organisational culture)是成员在弄清“我们这里做事的方式”的过程中所习得的共同价值观与基本 假设的模式 -- 它深至大多被视为理所当然,新成员必须吸收它才能被接纳。本单元不把文化当作一个整齐划一的东西来处 理:它教授三种相互竞争的视角(整合、差异、碎片化/批判),以及一套用于观察文化的“五种方式”工具 -- 全部围绕澳大 利亚联邦银行(CBA) 案例加以演练。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么 Define culture; lay out Schein's three levels; and - the high-value move - apply the three approaches (integrationist / differentiationist / critical) and the 5 ways to observe culture to a named organisation, then argue a position with evidence. Expect a culture case in the 2-hour final worth 50%; the marking spine is define - apply- with-evidence - recommend. 定义文化;铺陈 Schein 的三层次;并 -- 这是价值最高的一招 -- 把三种视角(整合/差异/批判)和观察文化的五种 方式应用于一个具名组织,然后结合证据论证一个立场。要预期在占50% 的2 小时期末考试里出现一个文化案例;评 分主线是定义→结合证据应用→提出建议。 Schein's three levels - the standard underpinning Schein 的三层次 一 标准的底层支撑 Edgar Schein arranges culture into three layers from visible to invisible. The trap: the visible artefacts are easiest to see but hardest to interpret, while the invisible basic assumptions are what really drives behaviour. These three levels map directly onto the unit's "5 ways to observe culture" below.

M11 Communication（Uber）

• 功能取向 functional：沟通=信息传递；用“沟通过程模型”诊断哪里坏了（噪音/noise）。[10]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfTL;DR. The unit teaches communication through two contrasting approaches. The functional view treats communication as the transmission of information - diagnose where it broke and fix it. The meaning- centred view says communication does far more than transmit: it constitutes the organisation, building the shared meanings and metaphors through which members understand reality. The functional-vs- meaning-centred contrast is the exam hinge - the unit runs it on the Uber case. 一句话总结。本单元通过两种对照的取向来教授沟通。功能取向把沟通看作信息的传递 -- 诊断它在哪里出了问题并加以修 复。意义中心取向则认为沟通远不止于传递:它构成了组织本身,建立起成员借以理解现实的共享意义与隐喻。功能取向 vs 意义中心取向的对照是考试的关键枢纽 -- 本单元围绕 Uber 案例展开这一对照。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么 Lay out the communication-process model and use it to diagnose a breakdown (functional); then switch lenses and read the same situation for its shared meanings and metaphors (meaning-centred). The high-mark answer holds both and explains what each lens reveals that the other hides. Tie it to the 2-hour final (50%): expect a comms case, scored on define - apply-with-evidence - recommend. 铺陈沟通过程模型并用它来诊断一次崩溃(功能取向);然后切换视角,从共享意义和隐喻的角度解读同一情境(意义中 心取向)。高分答案同时持有两者,并解释每种视角揭示了对方所掩盖的什么。把它与占50% 的2 小时期末考试挂钩: 要预期一个沟通案例,按定义→结合证据应用→提出建议评分。 The functional approach - the communication-process model 功能取向 一 沟通过程模型 The functional lens models communication as a pipeline: a sender encodes an idea into a message, sends it down a channel, the receiver decodes it, and feedback closes the loop - with noise (anything that distorts the message) as the enemy at every stage. Its value is diagnostic: find where understanding failed and repair it. 功能取向把沟通建模为一条流水线:发送者把一个想法编码为一条信息,将其沿一条渠道发出,接收者对其解码,再由反馈闭 合这一回路 -- 而噪音(noise)(任何扭曲信息的东西)则是每一环节上的敌人。它的价值在于诊断:找出理解在哪里失败并 加以修补。 Stage What happens Where it can break (noise) Sender Has an idea / intention to convey. Unclear purpose; wrong assumptions about receiver. Encode Turns the idea into words, symbols, tone. Jargon, ambiguity, poor word choice. Message & channel The encoded message travels via a medium (email, meeting, memo). Channel too 'lean' for a rich message; technical disruption. Decode Receiver interprets the symbols. Different frames of reference; misreading tone. Receiver Arrives at their meaning - not necessarily the sender's. Perceptual bias, filtering, information overload. AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual Stage What happens Where it can break (noise)
• 意义中心 meaning-centred：沟通不只是传递信息，而是构成组织、建构共享意义与隐喻；Marshak 的隐喻很关键。[10]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfTL;DR. The unit teaches communication through two contrasting approaches. The functional view treats communication as the transmission of information - diagnose where it broke and fix it. The meaning- centred view says communication does far more than transmit: it constitutes the organisation, building the shared meanings and metaphors through which members understand reality. The functional-vs- meaning-centred contrast is the exam hinge - the unit runs it on the Uber case. 一句话总结。本单元通过两种对照的取向来教授沟通。功能取向把沟通看作信息的传递 -- 诊断它在哪里出了问题并加以修 复。意义中心取向则认为沟通远不止于传递:它构成了组织本身,建立起成员借以理解现实的共享意义与隐喻。功能取向 vs 意义中心取向的对照是考试的关键枢纽 -- 本单元围绕 Uber 案例展开这一对照。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么 Lay out the communication-process model and use it to diagnose a breakdown (functional); then switch lenses and read the same situation for its shared meanings and metaphors (meaning-centred). The high-mark answer holds both and explains what each lens reveals that the other hides. Tie it to the 2-hour final (50%): expect a comms case, scored on define - apply-with-evidence - recommend. 铺陈沟通过程模型并用它来诊断一次崩溃(功能取向);然后切换视角,从共享意义和隐喻的角度解读同一情境(意义中 心取向)。高分答案同时持有两者,并解释每种视角揭示了对方所掩盖的什么。把它与占50% 的2 小时期末考试挂钩: 要预期一个沟通案例,按定义→结合证据应用→提出建议评分。 The functional approach - the communication-process model 功能取向 一 沟通过程模型 The functional lens models communication as a pipeline: a sender encodes an idea into a message, sends it down a channel, the receiver decodes it, and feedback closes the loop - with noise (anything that distorts the message) as the enemy at every stage. Its value is diagnostic: find where understanding failed and repair it. 功能取向把沟通建模为一条流水线:发送者把一个想法编码为一条信息,将其沿一条渠道发出,接收者对其解码,再由反馈闭 合这一回路 -- 而噪音(noise)(任何扭曲信息的东西)则是每一环节上的敌人。它的价值在于诊断:找出理解在哪里失败并 加以修补。 Stage What happens Where it can break (noise) Sender Has an idea / intention to convey. Unclear purpose; wrong assumptions about receiver. Encode Turns the idea into words, symbols, tone. Jargon, ambiguity, poor word choice. Message & channel The encoded message travels via a medium (email, meeting, memo). Channel too 'lean' for a rich message; technical disruption. Decode Receiver interprets the symbols. Different frames of reference; misreading tone. Receiver Arrives at their meaning - not necessarily the sender's. Perceptual bias, filtering, information overload. AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual Stage What happens Where it can break (noise)[29]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdfThe transmission lens - diagnose where things break down & tighten message clarity. THE PROCESS MODEL sender - encode - message - channel → decode - receiver - feedback ( noise = interference at any point ) Media richness - face-to-face is richest (instant feedback, multiple cues), email/memo leanest; match channel to message complexity (oral is not universally best). Barriers/noise: filtering, information overload, jargon, cross-cultural & non-verbal differences. The two views answer different questions: functional = "how do we fix the breakdown?"; meaning-centred = "what reality is this language building?" 11b . Meaning-Centred View MARSHAK metaphors of change Language & metaphors (machine, organism, journey, family . . . ) frame how members understand the org & shape what action seems possible. Communication doesn't just transmit information - it constructs meaning, so the chosen metaphor is itself a lever. Uber = the worked case (Kalanick -> Khosrowshahi): apply functional theory to critique the apology, meaning-centred theory to read shared meanings/metaphors, then draft a change speech for the incoming CEO. Also: persuasion, active listening, assertive communication. Networks & direction: downward/upward/horizontal flows + the informal grapevine (fast, distorted); digital/remote comms add filtering & cue-loss, raising the noise. SIA > Trap: don't pick a "best channel" in the abstract - match media richness to message complexity; the two lenses give different insights, so use both. For Uber: functional = "was the apology clear?"; meaning-centred = "what metaphor did it project?" 12 . Power MACRO . ELON MUSK Power = the capacity to influence; its basis is dependence . There is an ethical imperative to use power responsibly. Bases of power (Benfari / French & Raven): legitimate · reward · coercive (positional) + expert . referent (personal). Contingencies: substitutability, centrality, discretion, visibility - what turns a base into actual influence. Dependence is the engine: I have power over you to the extent you depend on a resource I control & can't easily get elsewhere (low substitutability). The three dimensions -> Side col 5. 12b . The Three Dimensions of Power LUKES VIA HARDY . The unit's central power framework - the different ways power can be used; each face is harder to see than the last: DIMENSION

M12 Power（Musk）

• 第一维：可见的决策
• 第二维：议程设定/不作决策
• 第三维：隐性/意识形态权力（塑造偏好、看不到公开冲突）
• 关键句：冲突的缺席可能是权力存在的证据，不是权力不存在。[4]Source: asksia-bible-mgmt20001-bilingual.pdfWhy Musk is the teaching case 为什么 Musk 是那个教学案例 He visibly stacks the bases - legitimate (founder/CEO), reward (equity), coercive (pace and exits), expert (engineering credibility), referent (a devoted following) and information (controls the narrative). But the sharp lesson is the third dimension: the most powerful thing isn't winning arguments - it's a mission story so compelling that staff want what he wants, so the gruelling demands generate little visible resistance. That is Hardy's unobtrusive power in action. 他明显地堆叠了各种权力基础––合法权(创始人/CEO)、 奖赏权(股权)、强制权(节奏与去留)、专家权(工程方面 的可信度)、参照权(一批忠实的追随者)和信息权(掌控 叙事)。但真正深刻的教训在于第三维度:最有力量的东西 并不是赢得争论 -- 而是一个如此引人入胜的使命叙事,让 员工想要他所想要的东西,于是那些艰苦的要求几乎不会激 起可见的抵抗。这正是 Hardy 隐性权力的实际运作。 i The ethical reading (the unit's imperative) 伦理解读(本单元的伦理要求) Concentrated, partly invisible power raises the ethical stakes. Third-dimension power that manufactures consent can erode the very upward voice (Module 11) that would flag harm - so the "ethical imperative to use power responsibly" bites hardest exactly where power is least visible and least accountable. 集中而部分不可见的权力抬高了伦理风险。制造同意 的第三维度权力,会侵蚀本可揭发危害的那种向上话 语权 (Module 11) -- 因此“负责任地使用权力的伦 理责任”恰恰在权力最不可见、最不受问责的地方咬得 最紧。 AskSia Library . MGMT20001 . XXia Bilingual The deepest power isn't getting people to do what you want - it's getting them to want it themselves. 最深层的权力不是让人们去做你想要他们做的事 而是让他们自己去想要那样做。 - THREE- DIMENSIONS FRAMING . PARAPHRASED ★ Recall checklist - Module 12 复习清单 -- 模块 12 (1) Power = capacity to influence; basis = dependence (valued + scarce + non-substitutable). (2) Bases (Benfari et al. 1986, extending French & Raven): reward, coercive, legitimate (position); expert, referent (personal); + information, affiliation, group. (3) Three dimensions (Lukes / Hardy): 1st = visible decision-making; 2nd = agenda- setting / non-decisions; 3rd = unobtrusive / ideological (Hardy 1985) - shapes preferences, no overt conflict. (4) Absence of conflict can be evidence of power, not its absence. (5) Power vs politics: organisation-serving vs self- serving; influence tactics (hard vs soft); the ethical imperative. (6) Apply to Elon Musk / Tesla & SpaceX across all three dimensions - define -> apply-with-evidence - recommend. (1) 权力=施加影响的能力;其基础是依赖(被重视+稀缺+不可替代)。(2)权力基础(Benfari et al. 1986,扩展自 French & Raven):奖赏、强制、合法(职位);专家、参照(个人);+信息、归属、群体。(3)三维度(Lukes / Hardy):第一=可见的决策;第二=议程设定/不作决策;第三=隐性/意识形态(Hardy 1985) -- 塑造偏好、无公 开冲突。(4)冲突的缺席可以是权力的证据,而非权力的缺席。(5)权力 vs政治:服务于组织 vs 服务于自己;影响策略 (硬性 vs 软性);伦理责任。(6)应用于 Elon Musk / Tesla 与 SpaceX,贯穿全部三个维度 -- 定义→结合证据应 用→提出建议。 AskSia Library · MGMT20001 · 双语 Bilingual GLOSSARY . 1/3 - GLOSSARY BILINGUAL · 双语词汇表 MGMT20001 in two languages MGMT20001 的双语版本 Every theorist, model & term - with an accurate X gloss and a one-line meaning 每一位理论家、每一个模型与术语一配有准确的中文 gloss 和一句话释义 TL;DR. The 50% exam rewards naming the model, defining it cleanly, then applying it - so this is the recall layer. ~ 95 terms across the whole micro-macro canon, each with a native Chinese gloss and a one-line meaning. Cover the right two columns and define each term cold; then cover the left column and name the term from the meaning - recognition is not recall. 一句话总结。占50% 的考试奖励的是:点名模型、把它界定清楚、然后加以应用 -- 所以这是复述层。本表收录了横跨整个 微观→宏观知识体系的约 95个术语,每个都配有地道的中文释义和一行式的含义说明。盖住右侧两列、当场把每个术语界定 出来;然后盖住左列、根据含义说出术语名 -- 能认得并不等于能复述出来。 ★ What the exam asks here 考试在这里考什么 Definitional and "name-the-theorist" recall sits inside almost every exam answer: you lose easy marks if you can call the case but not name and define the model (Tuckman, Lukes, Jehn & Mannix, Marshak . . . ). Drill EN++++->>> until each is automatic, then spend your study time on application, where the marks really live. 定义性的、以及“说出学者”式的记忆几乎潜伏在每一道考试答案之中:如果你能叫出案例却说不出并定义那个模型 (Tuckman、Lukes、Jehn & Mannix、Marshak . . . . . . ),你就会丢掉本应轻松到手的分。把 EN→中文→定义 反复操练 到每一项都成为本能,然后把学习时间花在应用上 -- 分数真正所在之处。 Term (EN) 中文 One-line meaning

5）考前最省命的“怎么练”（把书变成分数）

• 每个模型都背成：模型名 + 学者 + 1个关键词（例如 Vroom=$E\times I\times V$；Lewin=unfreeze-change-refreeze；Jehn&Mannix=三类冲突；Lukes/Hardy=三维权力）。[16]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdfQuinn & Spreitzer psychological empowerment Maslow / Herzberg needs · hygiene vs motivators 15 . Compare- Pairs EXAMINER FAVOURITES · SM vs HR - efficiency/control vs satisfaction/people · Task vs relationship conflict - constructive vs harmful · Distributive vs integrative - claim vs create value Integration vs differentiation vs critical culture · Functional vs meaning-centred communication · 1st / 2nd / 3rd dimensions of power · Hygiene vs motivators (Herzberg) - and why a pay rise rarely "motivates" 16 . Exam Discipline WIN THE MARKS . For every model: store name + theorist + one keyword · Macro answers = define -> apply (case evidence) > recommend · Sort each theory: micro/macro, content/process, conflict-type, power-dimension · Watch the myths the Wk-1 quiz overturns (happy#productive; punishment is weak; strong culture isn't always good; oral isn't always best) · Acknowledge a counter-view, then rebut it - defensible > "correct" SIA > Book status is not stated by the official source - no open/closed-book assumption; revise as if recall-based & check your current unit outline. The exam rewards application: name the theory, then defend a reasoned position with evidence. AskSia CHEAT SHEET SERIES exam = 50% . book status unstated . check your current unit outline . @ 2026 good luck. name the theory, defend the position.[25]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdfpower: the 3 dimensions; ethical use of power Cases are qualitative - there are no figures to memorise; reason from the named facts & public record. Always: define > apply with evidence > recommend. Micro cases too: Women-in-Engineering (perception/bias) + the serial Fast Fashion Pts 1-3 (values -> motivation -> conflict) - the case method is not macro-only; McDonald's anchors SM vs HR. - - SIA > The macro mantra is "there is no right or wrong answer" - marks come from a reasoned, evidence-backed position, not the "correct" verdict. State your stance, then defend it with case facts + theory; a counter- argument acknowledged & rebutted scores higher. 14 . Theorist Quick- Index DRILL THESE NAME ONE-LINE IDEA Taylor scientific mgmt · one best way Mayo Hawthorne . social factors Simon bounded rationality · satisfice Tuckman forming-> . . . >performing Barry distributed leadership Hofstede national-culture dimensions Vroom expectancy (Ex|×V)

• SM vs HR；任务冲突 vs 关系冲突；分配式 vs 整合式；功能沟通 vs 意义中心；文化三视角；权力三维度；Herzberg hygiene vs motivators。[16]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdfQuinn & Spreitzer psychological empowerment Maslow / Herzberg needs · hygiene vs motivators 15 . Compare- Pairs EXAMINER FAVOURITES · SM vs HR - efficiency/control vs satisfaction/people · Task vs relationship conflict - constructive vs harmful · Distributive vs integrative - claim vs create value Integration vs differentiation vs critical culture · Functional vs meaning-centred communication · 1st / 2nd / 3rd dimensions of power · Hygiene vs motivators (Herzberg) - and why a pay rise rarely "motivates" 16 . Exam Discipline WIN THE MARKS . For every model: store name + theorist + one keyword · Macro answers = define -> apply (case evidence) > recommend · Sort each theory: micro/macro, content/process, conflict-type, power-dimension · Watch the myths the Wk-1 quiz overturns (happy#productive; punishment is weak; strong culture isn't always good; oral isn't always best) · Acknowledge a counter-view, then rebut it - defensible > "correct" SIA > Book status is not stated by the official source - no open/closed-book assumption; revise as if recall-based & check your current unit outline. The exam rewards application: name the theory, then defend a reasoned position with evidence. AskSia CHEAT SHEET SERIES exam = 50% . book status unstated . check your current unit outline . @ 2026 good luck. name the theory, defend the position.

• 每个 macro 题至少写1次完整答案：define → evidence → recommend，并练“承认反方→反驳”的写法（defensible > correct）。[16]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdfQuinn & Spreitzer psychological empowerment Maslow / Herzberg needs · hygiene vs motivators 15 . Compare- Pairs EXAMINER FAVOURITES · SM vs HR - efficiency/control vs satisfaction/people · Task vs relationship conflict - constructive vs harmful · Distributive vs integrative - claim vs create value Integration vs differentiation vs critical culture · Functional vs meaning-centred communication · 1st / 2nd / 3rd dimensions of power · Hygiene vs motivators (Herzberg) - and why a pay rise rarely "motivates" 16 . Exam Discipline WIN THE MARKS . For every model: store name + theorist + one keyword · Macro answers = define -> apply (case evidence) > recommend · Sort each theory: micro/macro, content/process, conflict-type, power-dimension · Watch the myths the Wk-1 quiz overturns (happy#productive; punishment is weak; strong culture isn't always good; oral isn't always best) · Acknowledge a counter-view, then rebut it - defensible > "correct" SIA > Book status is not stated by the official source - no open/closed-book assumption; revise as if recall-based & check your current unit outline. The exam rewards application: name the theory, then defend a reasoned position with evidence. AskSia CHEAT SHEET SERIES exam = 50% . book status unstated . check your current unit outline . @ 2026 good luck. name the theory, defend the position.[25]Source: asksia-cheatsheet-mgmt20001.pdfpower: the 3 dimensions; ethical use of power Cases are qualitative - there are no figures to memorise; reason from the named facts & public record. Always: define > apply with evidence > recommend. Micro cases too: Women-in-Engineering (perception/bias) + the serial Fast Fashion Pts 1-3 (values -> motivation -> conflict) - the case method is not macro-only; McDonald's anchors SM vs HR. - - SIA > The macro mantra is "there is no right or wrong answer" - marks come from a reasoned, evidence-backed position, not the "correct" verdict. State your stance, then defend it with case facts + theory; a counter- argument acknowledged & rebutted scores higher. 14 . Theorist Quick- Index DRILL THESE NAME ONE-LINE IDEA Taylor scientific mgmt · one best way Mayo Hawthorne . social factors Simon bounded rationality · satisfice Tuckman forming-> . . . >performing Barry distributed leadership Hofstede national-culture dimensions Vroom expectancy (Ex|×V)

6）你给我3个信息，我就能把你“个人冲刺计划”排出来

• A 激励（M6：$E\times I\times V$ / 公平 / JCM / 赋权）
• B 冲突与谈判（M7：三类冲突 + Thomas-Kilmann + BATNA）
• C 伦理（M8：四框架 + 治理 + whistleblowing/CSR）
• D 变革（M9：Lewin/Kotter/阻力/ silent killers）
• E 文化（M10：Schein三层 + 三视角）
• F 沟通（M11：过程模型 + 意义中心/隐喻 + 渠道丰富度）
• G 权力（M12：权力基础 + 三维权力 + 伦理）

• “给你背诵卡片（定义+关键词）”
• 还是“给你出题，你写两段，我按评分点帮你改到高分答案”？