USC Price SOL PRICE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY
PPD 500: Intersectoral Leadership
Spring 2014
Lead Instructor: Paul Danczyk, PhD
Email: [email protected]
Telephone: 916.637.8988
Office and Course Location: USC State Capital Center, 1800 I Street, Sacramento, CA
Office Hours: Upon request
In-person Class Hours: 9:00 to 5:00 pm on first day; other days/times will be discussed
Course description
PPD 500 is one of the required courses for the Master of Public Administration degree
program. The course focuses on issues that arise when the public, not-for-profit and forprofit sectors collaborate to address societal challenges. Of particular interest are
leadership modalities and the organizational mechanisms in play across the public,
private and not-for-profit sectors. Through analyses and applications, students will
acquire an understanding of leadership and followership in cross-sectoral settings, and
gain skills and insights into organizational and institutional designs, organizational
innovation, problem solving, negotiation, and conflict resolution.
Cross sectoral collaborations are often complex arrangements. Over time, they develop
their own unique cultures and require interpersonal competencies to perform effectively
in a context that normally lacks a hierarchical distribution of authority. Participants in
these arrangements are challenged to think critically about policy and process issues
and lead efforts to create a culture that facilitates building an innovative capacity that is
essential for the inter-sectoral arrangement. This course will address these
competencies and be guided by the objectives specified below.
Learning objectives
Organizational Competencies
 To increase your knowledge of specific, concrete public, not-for-profit and forprofit organizations and the ways they are collaborating in addressing societal
challenges.
 To add to your “tool bag” multiple frameworks for conceiving of inter-sectoral
organizational designs and management practices; namely, structural, human
resource, political, symbolic and systems frameworks. You will be applying
these frames in class exercises and should be able to apply them in
organizations that you analyze and work for in the future.
 To illustrate the merits of “thinking preceptively” in organizational and
institutional contexts. You will be able to distinguish preceptive and receptive
thinking and do both as you work through class exercises addressing issues
which are typical in contemporary organizations.
 To help you sharpen your analytical reasoning skills. You will analyze at least
two case studies during the course that will allow you to use your critical and
preceptive thinking skills.
PPD 500 | Intersectoral Leadership 1
USC Price SOL PRICE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY
Leadership Competencies
 To review some of the classic writings on leadership and acquaint you with
concepts which will help you reflect on leadership and followership. The
importance for leaders of the language they employ including concepts,
theories, models, typologies, analogies and metaphors will be explained and
demonstrated.
 To add to your insights regarding the attributes and behaviors of effective
leaders. You will learn the principal concepts of role theory and be able to
apply these concepts to leadership situations.
 To enable you to practice your own leadership skills.
Interpersonal Competencies
 To promote insights into individual, group and organizational behaviors which
are useful in intersectoral collaborative arrangements.
 To assist you in developing your interpersonal skills in areas such as
negotiation, consensus building, conflict resolution, stakeholder analysis and
problem solving by employing experiential learning approaches.
 To provide specific tools for problem solving and analysis. You will be able to
use these tools in your future work.
Professional Development
 To facilitate the building of MPA students’ networks across sectors, levels of
government and professional fields.
 You will have a working knowledge of literature relevant to the subject matter
covered in this course and will learn how to keep yourself updated as this
subject matter evolves.
Textbooks and Supplemental Reading Materials

Required Books:
o Tyrus Ross Clayton, Leading Collaborative Organizations, (Bloomington,
IN: iUniverse LLC, 2013). ISBN for paperback edition is 978-1-4917-10227.
o Lee G. Bolman and Terrence E. Deal, Reframing Organizations, Artistry,
Choice, and Leadership, Fourth Edition, (New York, N.Y: John Wiley &
Sons, Inc., 2008). ISBN for paperback edition is 978-0-7879-8798-2.

Articles:
o Please refer to learning activities tables at the bottom of this syllabus.
PPD 500 | Intersectoral Leadership 2
USC Price SOL PRICE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY
Grading policy
Course components
Component
1. Individual Proposal (3-4 pgs)
2. Group Outline (no page limit)
3. Group Cross-Sectoral Paper (18-22 pgs)
4. Group Presentation (20 minutes + Q&A)
5. Group Case-Study (2-3 pgs)
6. Case Study Analyses (2 responses)
7. Online Posts and Discussions
8. Participation
Total Percentage
Percentage of Final
Grade
15%
5%
20%
10%
15%
15%
15%
5%
100%
1 – 6. Cross-Sectoral Paper
I. Individual Proposal: Problem Definition (15%)
Research and identify an existing, concrete intersectoral arrangement involving at least
two of the following three sectors: Public, Non-profit, and/or For-profit. The arrangement
you select must demonstrate organizations working together to address a specific public
program or collective action opportunity that you will describe in this proposal.
Explain how you found this arrangement or project. (For purposes of succeeding in this
analysis, it is suggested that you begin looking for a specific cross-sectoral challenge
early as manifest in an actual arrangement since sophisticated arrangements may take
some time to identify and understand – so, again, begin looking for your example as you
initially prepare for this course.)
Record your observations about the arrangement regarding its leadership, effectiveness,
problems, challenges, and achievements. Use concepts from the course readings to
identify these organizational elements in your proposal.
Your topic proposal must discuss an actual, current, cross-sectoral, collaborative
governance arrangement and detailed responses linked to conceptual frameworks to
answer the following:
1. Context: What is the specific policy problem, societal need or opportunity being
addressed by the arrangement?
PPD 500 | Intersectoral Leadership 3
USC Price SOL PRICE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY
2. Structure: What is the arrangement (e.g. public-private partnership, contractual,
market-based, networks) currently being utilized among the participants in this
arrangement?
Faculty will provide feedback to evaluate the appropriateness of your topic proposal
determining if it is suitable for continuing with your analytic paper assignments or
requiring a re-submission if the topic or presentation of information is not adequate.
Faculty will also provide feedback that corrects any misunderstandings or may redirect
the student to further research the true and actual facts of the arrangement. You are
required to obtain a final faculty approval of the student topic proposal based upon this
submission or a revision in order for the two subsequent assignments (outline and final
paper) to be reviewed and scored for course credit.
Format: Submission should be double spaced, 12 point font, with one inch margins of a
length between three (3) and four (4) pages. Citations referencing detailed information,
website locations, facts and data related to your selected intersectoral arrangement must
be included in either a footnote or endnote format within your submission.
A quick guide to Word footnotes and endnotes: http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/wordhelp/create-footnotes-and-endnotes-RZ001098190.aspx
Kate Turabian’s Guide: http://library.georgiasouthern.edu/libref/turabian.pdf
Joseph Gibaldi’s Guide: http://www.aresearchguide.com/7footnot.html
II. Group Outline: Study Subject Facts, Data, Inputs, Options (5%)
After your group is created, review each member’s individual cross-sectoral papers and
select one to further develop into the group assignment and case study. Since you will
be using the same topic for the remainder of the class, choose one that is of the most
interest to your group members.
Utilizing the existing, concrete intersectoral arrangement that you, as a group, identified
(and was approved by faculty) present detailed information about your study subject.
The purpose of collecting copious amounts of information about your intersectoral
arrangement will help you determine relevance; demonstrate collaboration that
addresses a specific public policy program or collective action opportunity, and evaluate
the effectiveness of their endeavor.
Record your original research about the arrangement regarding its leadership, problems,
challenges, efficiencies and achievements by focusing on facts and data. Collect
information that you believe will be useful in applying course concepts from our readings,
instructional materials, lectures and framework exercises to identify effectiveness in your
final paper.
Again, your research must relate to an actual, current, cross-sectoral, collaborative
governance arrangement and their factual and known data, facts, and information.
Utilize the frameworks highlighted in this course as well as conceptual readings to
PPD 500 | Intersectoral Leadership 4
USC Price SOL PRICE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY
identify the categories, criteria, schema, and other data design elements you will need to
collect and list in this outline. Be explicit in your listings, citations, references, and
conceptual framing.
Your outline should address the following aspects of the arrangement, its organizations
and participants:
1. Preceptive: Motivation: What are the drivers, and through which lens or
theories or frames, that led to the formation of this cross-sectoral arrangement?
Be specific as to the drivers for each sector, each organization, and stakeholders.
Detail the cultures of the respective organizations; e.g. are they congruent or
incongruent? If there are cultural differences, what facts demonstrate this
understanding and how do these play out in the ongoing collaborative effort?
2. Receptive: Assessment: Measure the arrangement and its organizations so
that your research presents factual information on the following:
(1) The effectiveness of the mechanisms developed, e.g. contracts; budgets,
etc.
(2) The process for developing the arrangement
(3) Measures of outputs and/or outcomes. Use quantitative metrics if
possible.
(4) What measures are missing? Or should be added?
(5) Is your assessment shared by the participants? By its clients? Why or
why not?
(6) How is leadership provided for the arrangement? For example, is there a
Network Administrative Organization, or a Steering Committee, or a
Project Manager, etc.? Who are the key players, actors and units? What
background information on each is necessary to know, include relevant
and individual facts.
This assignment is titled an “outline” to encourage students to submit formatted briefing
material organized in a useful manner for facilitating understanding. You may wish to
organize your outline by including graphic titles or other sub-headings which serve to
explicitly state your key conclusions from facts collected in order to simplify your
presentation. Additionally, you may relate these conclusions in evaluative
recommendations related to the assignment prompt.
Note: Your final paper will be based SOLELY on facts, data, information presented in
your outline. Please review the upcoming assignment at your earliest convenience and
consider your research efforts in order to satisfy the last assignment in this analytic
paper. Any important details which are NOT included in this submission (e.g.:
information discovered at a later date and salient understandings which are not
PPD 500 | Intersectoral Leadership 5
USC Price SOL PRICE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY
researched and presented in this outline) are deemed “unknowable” for the analyst
working in real time and must not be included in your final paper.
Caution: It is, therefore, VERY IMPORTANT that your research effort be thorough and
targeted at this juncture.
Format: Submission must use 12 point font with one inch margins. Citations may be
single spaced with bibliographic entries formatted according to either MLA or APA
standards and should be double spaced between references. There is no page limit for
this assignment. Be sure to acknowledge useful academic literature readings as well a
substantive research related to your selected arrangement if you are working with a
framework in mind. Only one outline needs to be submitted to the instructor per group.
List all of the group members’ names on the outline.
For more information and sample formatting of bibliographic information, visit these links:
MLA Style Guide: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/01/
APA Style Guide: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/
Chicago Style Guide: http://ataeditingnotes.blogspot.com/2012/03/annotated-guide-topreparing-footnotes.html
III. Group Cross-Sectoral Paper (20%)
Utilizing the intersectoral arrangement you have researched, present an analysis of the
arrangement utilizing one or more frameworks for understanding reviewed in this course.
The purpose of collecting detailed research about your intersectoral arrangement is to
help you, the analyst, select an appropriate lens with which to seek an understanding of
the arrangement and its endeavor’s effectiveness.
Note: Your final paper must be based SOLELY on facts, data and information presented
in your outline. Detailed data, facts and information which were NOT included in the
outline submission (e.g.: information discovered at a later date and salient
understandings which are not researched and presented in this outline) are deemed
“unknowable” for the analyst working in real time on the final paper and may not be
included.
Your analysis must address the arrangement, its organizations and participants and
summarize a framework for analysis in providing a response to the following:
Framework Application: What analytic framework is most suitable to apply to this
arrangement that allows analysis of information and creates actionable intelligence
regarding expected outcomes? Apply the framework to the specifics of your
arrangement to uncover actionable intelligence. Describe the process most useful to
creating intelligence. What actions could be or should be undertaken by participants and
organizations to further the leadership goals of or collaboration within the arrangement?
PPD 500 | Intersectoral Leadership 6
USC Price SOL PRICE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY
Effectiveness: Are the expected outcomes aligned with the goals and missions of the
organizations and participants of this arrangement? What is the likelihood that the
arrangement will be ultimately successful in addressing the policy problem or collective
action opportunity you identified in the topic proposal?
Lessons: What have you learned that enhances your understanding of the effectiveness
of cross-sectoral arrangements in solving collective problems and/or accomplishing
constructive goals? What information did you learn subsequent to your initial research
effort (outline submission) and what other information did you hope to obtain or wish to
have had access?
This paper will be evaluated based upon the extent to which the paper is well organized,
has clarity of purpose, demonstrates your understanding of the inter-sectoral effort you
have elected to study and describe utilizing an appropriate framework or analytic lens,
contains a good quality of insights, and demonstrates your ability to integrate materials
covered in this course with your description and analysis of the collaborative effort.
Format: The final paper should include an executive summary and relevant
organizational sections including a brief background and key analytic diagrams or
schema reflective of the framework presentation. A narrative section of findings to
include responses to the assignment prompt for effectiveness and lessons learned
should be followed by a general statement of conclusion.
Submission should be double spaced, 12 point font, with one inch margins of a length
between eighteen (18) and twenty-two (22) pages. Citations must be included in either a
footnote or endnote format.
IV. Group Presentations (10%)
Your group will make a 20-minute in-class presentation plus 10-minute question and
answer period during Module 2. The instructor will set the presentation schedule and the
day/time, with your input.
The presentation illustrates the analysis of the group cross-sectoral arrangement. It will
be graded through two major components: technical and content.
Technical:
Content:
-
Clarity of speaker/stage presence/attire
If using visual aids—clarity, simplicity, appropriateness, design
Presentation coherence
Preparedness
Time requirements
Introduction
o The opener
o Thesis (in this case, author’s key components, insights, and/or arguments)
o Elevator pitch
PPD 500 | Intersectoral Leadership 7
USC Price SOL PRICE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY
-
o Preview
Body
o Structure, argument, transitions
o Linkage back to class discussions/materials
Conclusion
o Summary/key points
o Thesis confirmation
o Learning check/answering questions
V. Group Case Study (15%)
Case studies are important learning tools. They are complex puzzles that need to be
solved. Typically, it is used as reflective exercises to explore possible solutions to
certain set of circumstances and vetting plausible courses of actions. In many ways, it
allows individuals to consider how they might react if they were under the same
conditions.
You, with your members, are to write a case study from the group’s cross-sectoral paper.
Derive a case study that identifies a leadership challenge and illustrate it through one of
the frameworks discussed in class. The leadership challenge could revolve around a
variety of different tensions, including organizational or personal values, customer
service approaches, ethics, personalities, power v. influence, strategy, empowerment,
vision, engagement, to name a few. You will likely consider others not on this list.
Focus your case study on only one.
The previous course readings and lectures could be helpful in thinking about what the
problem might be. The problem may be a real one that you uncovered through your
research, or it could be a plausible, yet fictional, problem.
The case study should be written to provide the reader with enough information about
the cross-sectoral arrangement. You should change names (organizations and persons)
and any sensitive information, like budget numbers, to protect the identity and sensitivity
to the case. While changed, it should still provide enough information to the reader that
they would have a sense as to case’s context.
Consider writing the case study using these phases:
1. Research—already completed through your group paper.
2. Analysis—already completed through your group paper.
3. Organization—new
a. Describe: What is the situation that needs to be addressed?
b. Organize:
i. Introduction to the problem
ii. Background needed
iii. Setting the stage for the problem
iv. Relevant structural, human resource, political, symbolic, or system
contexts
PPD 500 | Intersectoral Leadership 8
USC Price SOL PRICE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY
v. Facts and data that the reader needs to make informed
assessment
vi. Other environmental considerations?
c. Conclusion:
i. Summarize key points
ii. End with 3-4 questions to pose to the reader to engage in critical
thinking
Format: The case study should include a brief background, key analytic diagrams or
schema (if appropriate), and a narrative section setting the stage for the situation and
prompting the reader to think about and respond to possible courses of action. Post it on
the discussion board, or another location identified by the instructor.
Submission will be posted at a location designated by the instructor. One copy should
be submitted via email to the instructor--double spaced, 12 point font, with one inch
margins of a length between three (3) and four (4) pages. No citations are used. The
other version should be posted on a previously designated location.
VI. Case Study Analyses (15%)
The case study analyses have three parts.
Part 1. During the appropriate week, with your group members, select one on the class
case studies posted on the discussion board. Discuss the posed questions as a group.
This can be done in person, online, over the phone, via email… After all of the group
members had the opportunity to share their perspectives, write a short summary of your
reactions and recommendations. This does not need to be more than 2 or 3
paragraphs. Post this to the discussion board. Specify to which case study you
responded in the first line.
Part 2. During the following week, respond to another group’s case study analysis. You
may need to read the original case study before responding. Again, as a group, discuss
how the other group responded. Is this how you would have responded given the same
circumstances? What areas should they give more consideration before taking action?
How might have had the other parties in the case responded? After all of the group
members had the opportunity to share their perspectives, write a short summary (2 or 3
paragraphs) of your reactions and recommendations. Post this to the discussion board.
Part 3. If another group responded to your initial case analysis, read it and reflect as to
whether their reaction was appropriate. Nothing formal needs to be written.
Example of the exercise (there could be other, appropriate variations):
Week A: Group “Trojan” posts their case study.
Week B: Group “Cardinal and Gold” responds to Group “Trojan’s” case study.
This is the case study analysis.
PPD 500 | Intersectoral Leadership 9
USC Price SOL PRICE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY
Week C: Group “Trojan” responds to Group “Cardinal and Gold” or analyzes
Group “1881” case study analysis.
If not previously completed, Group “Trojan” reflects upon Group
“Cardinal and Gold’s” response.
V. Discussions (10%)
Students are expected to write thoughtful responses that directly apply to the course
texts and discussion activities, demonstrate knowledge of the concepts and ideas
pertaining to the topic, and use rational argument or evidence to support all claims.
Students will post their initial responses to the discussion board prompts by Day 4 of the
identified week.
Students will pose follow-up questions to two of their classmates’ initial posts by Day 5.
Note: in the interest of ensuring an equitable distribution of follow up questions, try not to
post questions on a classmates’ response if two or more students have already posed
follow-up questions to that post.
Finally, by Day 7 students will post responses to at least 2 follow-up questions they
received.
Criteria for Discussion
Initial Posting
1.
2.
3.
4.
Relevance to the topic or problem – Does the posting address the
question directly?
Application of Course Concepts – Does the posting attempt to add a
unique perspective or ideas from beyond the reading? Does the
posting attempt to take ideas from the text and put them into play?
Depth of insight, observation, or analysis – Does the posting offer a
concept, idea, new example or something worthwhile to think about?
Use of Evidence and Support – Does the posting seek to make a
rational argument instead of merely offering personal opinion (or does
the posting examine personal opinion by way of making a rational
argument)?
Questions and Responses
For questions and responses, you should offer something significant to the
conversation by either extending or adding to the argument, analysis, or position
of the original post or offering an alternative point of view, analysis, or position.
Responses will be evaluated for:
1.
Number of responses – Did the responses fulfill the minimal
requirement for the discussion?
2.
Substance of the response – Did the response offer something new or
an alternative point of view?
PPD 500 | Intersectoral Leadership 10
USC Price SOL PRICE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY
3.
Insightfulness – Did the responder offer something to extend or
develop a point of view worth thinking about from real world examples
or situations?
Participation (5%)
Your participation grade will be based on your engagement in the in-person sessions,
faculty interaction, and group exercises that accompany the weekly instructional
materials.
Participation in written and oral discussions and group engagements is a key part of our
learning process. Communications that enable students to think over what you have
read, apply the material and concepts addressed in the course, and compare your ideas
with others must be practiced in a professional setting. Contributing to the course
learning opportunities in both a respectful and appropriate manner will help confirm
student inputs adhere to academic standards.
Paper and Submission guidelines
Each submission should be professionally well written. Proofread and write for clarity. It
should be organized in helpful ways and should begin with a brief overview, focus on
your analysis not a recitation of research and conclude with a summary of the
paper/presentation and its claims. Use an appropriate academic citation format in a
consistent manner to document your sources; citation expectations are very high so
make sure to include both footnotes or endnotes and an inclusive bibliography. These
criteria will all be considered in determining your grade.
All papers should be double-spaced in 12 point font with one inch margins and submitted
in a Word document format and not as a .pdf file format to allow for feedback and faculty
annotations unless otherwise noted.
Late Policy
NO assignments are accepted after their due dates. If an assignment is not completed,
the student receives zero points for it. There are no exceptions to this policy except with
written permission granted by faculty prior to the original due date. Please make sure to
allocate sufficient time to complete all of your assignments in your schedule.
Office Hours
Office Hours: Upon request
Group work
You will work within a group on specific weeks throughout the course to complete the
course assignments. Faculty will assign group member for each of these assignments
at the first in-person session.
PPD 500 | Intersectoral Leadership 11
USC Price SOL PRICE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY
Additional Subject Matter Readings suggested for more information:
o Warren Bennis. The Essential Bennis (San Francisco, CA, Jossey-Bass,
2009).
 SEE ESPECIALLY:
 Learning Some Basic Truisms about Leadership. pp. 195-203
 Understanding the Basics. pp. 204-214.
 Leadership as a Performing Art. pp. 333-341.
 The Coming Death of Bureaucracy. pp. 123-138
o Ross Clayton, Kim Nelson, Cristy Jensen, and Chester Newland, Eds.,
Futures of the Past: Bloomington, ID: iUniverse, 2010. Chapter 33 in
particular
o Jim Collins, Good to Great: New York, NY, HarperCollins Publishing
Company, 2001.
o *Roger Fisher and Bill Ury. Getting to Yes. Boston: Houghton Mifflin,
1981; Penguin Books, 1991.
o *John Gardner, On Leadership: New York, N.Y., The Free Press, 1990.
o *John Gardner, Self Renewal: New York, N.Y., Harper-Colophon Books,
1965.
o Stephen Goldsmith, The Power of Social Innovation: San Francisco CA
Jossey-Bass, 2010.
o N. Gross, Mason, W.S. and McEachern, A.W. Explorations in Role
Analysis: New York, John Wiley and Sons, Inc. 1958.
o John P. Kotter and Paul R. Lawrence, Mayors in Action: (New York, NY,
John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1974.
o *Machiavelli. The Prince: Italy, 1505. (Multiple contemporary
translations are available.)
o Richard Neustadt and Ernest R. May, Thinking In Time: New York, Free
Press, 1986.
o Richard Neustadt, Presidential Power: New York, John Wiley and Sons,
Inc., 1960.
o John M. Pfiffner, and Frank P. Sherwood. Administrative Organization:
Prentice-Hall, 1960.
o Donald K. Price, The Scientific Estate: Cambridge, Mass., Harvard
University Press, 1965, ISBN9780674794856
o Steven B. Sample, The Contrarian’s Guide to Leadership: San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass, 2002. Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America,
1996. ISBN 0-7618-0165-0
o *Donald Schon, Beyond the Stable State: New York, NY: WW Norton,
1971.
o Gilbert B. Siegel and Ross Clayton, Mass Interviewing and the
Marshalling of Ideas to Improve Performance: The Crawford Slip Method.
Boston: University Press of America, Inc. 1996.
o Herbert Simon and James G. March, Organizations: New York: John
Wiley and Sons Inc. 1958.
o James Thompson, Organizations in Action: New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967.
PPD 500 | Intersectoral Leadership 12
USC Price SOL PRICE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY
o

Michael L. Tushman and Charles A. O’Reilly III, Winning through
Innovation: Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1997.
More Readings suggested for additional information:
o Robert Agranoff, Managing within Networks (Washington, DC:
Georgetown University Press, 2007).
o Philip J. Cooper, Governing by Contract (Washington, DC: CQ Press,
2003).
o John D. Donahue & Joseph S. Nye Jr., Market-Based Governance
(Washington: Brookings Institution, 2002).
o Stephen Goldsmith and William D. Eggers, Governing by Network: The
New Shape of the Public Sector. (Washington: Brookings Institution
Press, 2004).
o John M. Kamensky and Thomas J. Burlin, Collaboration, Using Networks
and Partnerships (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2004).
o Elinor Ostrom, Understanding Institutional Diversity (Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press, 2005).
** Courtesy of Emeritus Professor Chester Newland
Library access
As a USC student, you have access to all the USC library resources. Please find out
more at the link below:
http://www.usc.edu/libraries/services/remote_user_services/
PPD 500 | Intersectoral Leadership 13
USC Price SOL PRICE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY
Instructor biography
Paul Danczyk, PhD, is the Director of Executive Education in
Sacramento for the University of Southern California Sol Price School of
Public Policy. Since 1997, his professional contributions concentrate on
transforming governance practices in rural and urban settings.
In his current capacity, Paul designs, directs, and presents in leadership
and management programs--impacting national, state and local
governmental and nonprofit organizations--and teaches master-level
classes, both in-person and online, on strategic management, leadership
and public administration in California and Mexico. His presentations impact over 200
senior and mid-career public administrators a year.
With his organizational partners, he is the director of and presenter in these annual, tenyear programs: the National Conference of State Legislatures’ Legislative Staff Management
Institute, and the California Institute for Mental Health’s Leadership Institute.
His featured presentations focus on designing flexible organizations, strategic management,
customer service, leadership frameworks, role of reflection, and cross-sectoral
relationships.
Paul is a National Council representative for the American Society for Public Administration
and represents the eight-state District 5 membership (Arizona, California, Hawaii, New
Mexico, Nevada, Oklahoma, Texas and Utah); a past president and current board member of
ASPA Sacramento Chapter; and a past president of the USC Alumni Club of Sacramento. He
actively serves on the Asian Pacific State Employees Association “Navigating Leadership”
Steering Committee as Co-Chairman, and the World Affairs Council/Sacramento Chapter
executive board.
In his local community, he serves on the Amador County Behavioral Health Advisory Board,
which advises the Board of Supervisors, County Administration and local agencies on
mental health and substance use disorders policy, programs, and services; and the Amador
Community College Foundation board, which advocates, facilitates, and supports
sustainable higher education in the County.
He was a Peace Corps Volunteer in Namibia, where he was the acting national director of a
teacher-training program at the National Institute for Educational Development.
Paul earned his PhD from the University of Pittsburgh, focusing on Public and International
Affairs; Master of Public Administration from the University of Southern California; and BS
in education from the Pennsylvania State University. [email protected]
PPD 500 | Intersectoral Leadership 14
USC Price SOL PRICE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY
Anticipated Course Outline. In the event changes occur, the instructor will send a
revised syllabus.
Course Outline
Week
Assignments
1. Jan. 13
Reading(s)
Clayton, T.R. Leading Collaborative
Organizations. Bloomington, IN: iUniverse
LLC. 2013. Chapters 1-4.
Instructional
format
Video
(asynchronous)
Due date/time
(method)
January 15,
16, 18
midnight
(online)
In-person on
Jan 25 and 26
Due on:
January 25
9:00 am
(in person)
Warren Bennis’ Chapter on “The Coming
Death of Bureaucracy,” in The Essential
Bennis. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
2009. Originally published in Think
Magazine Nov./Dec. 1966.
On-Line Class Activities
Watch introduction video and respond to
questions posed
Cross-sectoral relationship shared
2. Jan 20
Reading(s)
Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (2008). Reframing
organizations: Artistry, choice, and
leadership (4th ed). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass Inc Publisher. Chapters 1-2.
Milward, H., Brinton, & Provan, K.G.
(2000). Governing the hollow state. Journal
of Public Administration Research and
Practice, 10(2), 359-379.
Ellis, C.A. (2000). An evaluation framework
for collaborative systems. Boulder:
Colorado University Technical Report CUCS-901-00.
In-Person Class Activities
Human Characteristics of Change
Effective vs. Ineffective Leadership
Case Study Exercise(s)—on coalignment
theory
Power versus Influence
Negotiation and Influence Exercises
Assignment
PPD 500 | Intersectoral Leadership 15
USC Price SOL PRICE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY
Individual Cross-Sectoral Paper Due
3. Jan 27
Reading(s)
Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (2008). Reframing
organizations: Artistry, choice, and
leadership (4th ed). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass Inc Publisher. Familiarize
yourself with chapters 3-14.
Online
discussion
Due on:
January 29,
30, and
February 1
midnight
(email)
Online
discussion
February 5, 6,
8
midnight
(online)
In-person on
Feb 14 and 15
Paper due:
February 14
9:00 am
On-Line Class Activities
Watch leadership video and respond to
questions posed
Assignment(s)
Group Outline Due
4. Feb 3
Reading(s)
Clayton, T.R. Leading Collaborative
Organizations. Bloomington, IN: iUniverse
LLC. 2013. Chapters 5-9.
Heimovics, R., Herman, R.D., and
Jurkiewicz, D.L. (Spring 1995). The political
dimension of effective nonprofit leadership.
Nonprofit Management and Leadership: A
Quarterly Journal, (5)3, 233-248.
On-Line Class Activities
Watch leadership video and respond to
questions posed
5. Feb 10
Assignment(s)
Group Cross-Sectoral Paper Due
Reading(s)
Margerum, R. D. (2002). Collaborative
planning: Building consensus and building
a distinct model for practice. Journal of
Planning Education and Research, (21)3,
227-253.
Presentations
on:
February 15
morning
Davis, A. M. (July 1989). In theory: An
interview with Mary Parker Follett.
Negotiation Journal, (5)3, 223-235.
In-Person Class Activities
Collaboration approaches
Role Theory
PPD 500 | Intersectoral Leadership 16
USC Price SOL PRICE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY
Guest Lecturers: John Shirey, Sacramento
City Manager; Ross Clayton, Price Dean
Emeritus
Group Presentations
6. Feb 17
Reading(s)
Laslo, A.& Krippner, S. (1998): J.S. Jordan
(ed) Systems theories and A Priori aspects
of perception, (Chapter 3, pp. 47-74).
Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
Online
discussion
February 19,
20, 22
midnight
(email &
online)
Online
discussion
March 1
midnight
(online)
Online
discussion
March 8
midnight
(online)
On-Line Class Activities
Watch leadership video and respond to
questions posed
Assignment
Case study: Email to instructor and post
on-line
7. Feb 24
Reading(s)
Assignment
Case study: Response 1
8. Mar 3
Reading(s)
Assignment
Case study: Response 2
PPD 500 | Intersectoral Leadership 17