Evaluating the Perspective of a Practitioner/ Data Sufficiency

Evaluating the Perspective of a Practitioner Practitioners may work within an organization or a team (for example as a leader, internal consultant, or other type of change agent) or from outside an organization or team (for example as a consultant, coach, advisor, or subject matter expert). Following completion of your degree, from what perspective are you likely to work? How will your relationship with the organization, team, or individuals with whom you are working influence your professional judgment and decision making? Examine the relative advantages and disadvantages of working from a position within an organization or a team and from a position external to an organization or a team. What impact does a practitioner’s position have on his or her objectivity? On his or her access to information? On his or her ability to develop and maintain effective working relationships? Briefly describe the three research models reviewed by Brannick and Coghlan (2007). Discuss the perspective from which you are likely to work and explain which research model is most applicable to the work you are likely to do as a practitioner. Explain how you will address the challenges you may face in being either an insider or an outsider. Practitioners may work within an organization or a team (for example as a leader, internal consultant, or other type of change agent) or from outside an organization or team (for example as a consultant, coach, advisor, or subject matter expert). Following completion of your degree, from what perspective are you likely to work? How will your relationship with the organization, team, or individuals with whom you are working influence your professional judgment and decision making? Examine the relative advantages and disadvantages of working from a position within an organization or a team and from a position external to an organization or a team. What impact does a practitioner’s position have on his or her objectivity? On his or her access to information? On his or her ability to develop and maintain effective working relationships? Briefly describe the three research models reviewed by Brannick and Coghlan (2007). Discuss the perspective from which you are likely to work and explain which research model is most applicable to the work you are likely to do as a practitioner. Explain how you will address the challenges you may face in being either an insider or an outsider. Should be minimum 500 words. Discussion 2: Data Sufficiency Practitioners must ensure that information used to assess an organization, team, or individual is factual and objective. What are the parameters for evaluating the sufficiency of different types of data? How can a practitioner be certain that he or she has thoughtfully and thoroughly evaluated a situation prior to making decisions or recommendations? What specific approaches are recommended to reduce bias and increase accuracy of diagnosis or assessment? Evaluate the use of multiple types of data in an assessment of an organization, team or individual, and explain how you as a practitioner would ensure that the information you collect and use is factual and objective. Discuss the role of the practitioner as both observer and diagnostician. What are the potential ethical challenges of using yourself as an instrument of assessment? Minimum of 500 words. Please keep discussion 1 and 2 separate on one page each. Module One Required Readings American Psychological Association. (2010). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx Brannick, T., & Coghlan, D. (2007). In defense of being “native”: The case for insider academic research. Organizational Research Methods, 10(1), 59-74. (ProQuest Document ID: 1188969481) Burke, W. W., & Litwin, G. H. (1992). A causal model of organizational performance and change. Journal of Management, 18(3), 523-545. (ProQuest Document ID: 586940). Coghlan, D. (2003). Practitioner research for organizational knowledge: Mechanistic- and organistic-oriented approaches to insider action research. Management Learning, 34(4), 451-463. (ProQuest Document ID: 522508901) Di Pofi, J. A. (2002). Organizational diagnostics: Integrating qualitative and quantitative methodology. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 15(2), 156-168. (ProQuest Document ID: 250892111) Editor. (2007). Privacy in organizational research. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 2(1), 69. (ProQuest Document ID: 2008971611) McCormick, D. W., & White, J. (2000). Using one’s self as an instrument for organizational diagnosis. Organization Development Journal, 18(3), 49-62. (ProQuest Document ID: 60820048) Paul, J. (1996). Between-method triangulation in organizational diagnosis. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 4(2), 135-153. (ProQuest Document ID: 11349752) Purdue Online Writing Lab. (n.d.). Argument papers. Retrieved from http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/724/01/ Resnik, D. B. (2011). What is ethics in research & why is it important? Retrieved from http://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/resources/bioethics/whatis/ Smith, D. (2003). Five principles for research ethics. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/monitor/jan03/principles.aspx Vassallo, P. (2002). Persuading powerfully: Tips for writing persuasive documents. et Cetera, 59(1), 65-70. (ProQuest Document ID: 118709821) Module One Required Readings American Psychological Association. (2010). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx Brannick, T., & Coghlan, D. (2007). In defense of being “native”: The case for insider academic research. Organizational Research Methods, 10(1), 59-74. (ProQuest Document ID: 1188969481) Burke, W. W., & Litwin, G. H. (1992). A causal model of organizational performance and change. Journal of Management, 18(3), 523-545. (ProQuest Document ID: 586940). Coghlan, D. (2003). Practitioner research for organizational knowledge: Mechanistic- and organistic-oriented approaches to insider action research. Management Learning, 34(4), 451-463. (ProQuest Document ID: 522508901) Di Pofi, J. A. (2002). Organizational diagnostics: Integrating qualitative and quantitative methodology. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 15(2), 156-168. (ProQuest Document ID: 250892111) Editor. (2007). Privacy in organizational research. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 2(1), 69. (ProQuest Document ID: 2008971611) McCormick, D. W., & White, J. (2000). Using one’s self as an instrument for organizational diagnosis. Organization Development Journal, 18(3), 49-62. (ProQuest Document ID: 60820048) Paul, J. (1996). Between-method triangulation in organizational diagnosis. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 4(2), 135-153. (ProQuest Document ID: 11349752) Purdue Online Writing Lab. (n.d.). Argument papers. Retrieved from http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/724/01/ Resnik, D. B. (2011). What is ethics in research & why is it important? Retrieved from http://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/resources/bioethics/whatis/ Smith, D. (2003). Five principles for research ethics. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/monitor/jan03/principles.aspx Vassallo, P. (2002). Persuading powerfully: Tips for writing persuasive documents. et Cetera, 59(1), 65-70. (ProQuest Document ID: 118709821)