For Kim Woods

The Question To Be Answered:

Choose two of the four organisational theory perspectives and discuss how and why they provide us with alternative ways of understanding and analysing Coca-Cola and its relationship with its organisational environment. Draw upon the required textbook and Coca-Cola readings, and your own research to answer the question.

Total Words: 2000 words

Harvard Referencing Style

Answering the Question:

You must focus explicitly on the key issues identified in the question.

You must substantiate your research with references to scholarly sources, i.e. peer reviewed journals.

You must consider at least two of the four perspectives (Modernist, Symbolic Interpretivist, Critical Theory, Post-Modernist).

1. You must make use of the required readings(below). They have been selected because they provide the essential material required to answer the question. You will lose marks if you fail to use them.

Required readings for the Coca-Cola Case Study:

1. Gopinath and Prasad, “Toward a critical framework for understanding MNE operations: Revisiting Coca Cola’s exit from India, Organization 20(2), pp.212-232

2. Ciafone, A., 2012 “If ‘Thanda Matlab Coca Cola’ Then ‘Cold Drink Means Toilet Cleaner’: Environmentalism of the Dispossessed in Liberalizing India” International Labour and Working-Class History, v.81, pp.114-135

3. Moses, C.T., Vest, D., 2010 “Coca Cola and PepsiCo in South Aftrica: A Landmark Case in Corporate Social Responsibility, Ethical Dilemmas and the Challenges of International Business” Journal of African Business v.11, pp.235-251.

4. Gill, L. “‘Right There with You’ Coca Cola, Labor Restructuring and Political Violence in Colombia” Critique of Anthropology Vol 27(3), pp. 235-260.

5. Barkay, T., “When Business and Community Meet: A Case Study of Coca Cola” Critical Sociology 39(2), pp.277-293.

6. Ravi Raman, K., 2007, “Community – Coca Cola Interface; Political-Anthropological Concerns on CSR” Social Analysis 51(3) pp. 103-120

7. Regassa, H., & Corradino, L. (2011). Determining the value of the Coca Cola–A Case Analysis. Journal of the International Academy for Case Studies, 17(7).

(Please use the above readings as references that are to be included into the essay)

(Other references from other sources are to be included as well aside from these)

Presentation/Structure of your answer/essay:

Introduction:

In this section you must provide an overview of your answer to the question; provide answers to the key what and why questions of your argument/answer. These should take the form of direct responses to the key issues raised by the question. Your argument should be informed by a critical analysis/engagement with the content of the essential readings.

Please keep in mind that in all sections of your response you must move past description to analysis, this means providing answers to the why questions that emerge from your key statements.

Exploration of your argument:

In this section of the essay you need to accomplish two tasks.

First, you must explore the key perspectives showing how each perspective’s theoretical and metatheoretical approaches lead them to provide different insights into organisations and their relationship to their environment.

Second, having demonstrated an understanding of the perspectives and their theoretical approaches to understanding the relationship between an organisation and its environment you then need to discuss how these understandings lead to different understandings about Coca-Cola and its organisational environment. You should draw upon the required Coca-Cola readings and additional readings on Coca-Cola you find. As you will discover by the required readings, each is influenced by a different perspective. For each of the required readings you should be able to identify and discuss which perspective is being applied to analyse Coca-Cola and its relationship to its environment. You will want to choose the readings most relevant to the perspectives you have chosen to focus on in your essay.

You can address the above, two tasks sequentially; beginning with an exploration of the how and why of each of the chosen perspectives (ontology and epistemology), and second: an exploration of the positions advanced by two of the perspectives (modernist, symbolic interpretivist, critical theory and postmodernism) in relation to how organisations and the environment is conceived, identified and written about in relation to the Coca-Cola case study.

The two alternatives outlined above will enable you to present a clear direct and disciplined response to the question.

The whole response must be informed by an engagement with essential readings. You must draw upon and evaluate academic debates and arguments. This is not to be viewed as an exercise in which you simply discuss Coca-Cola or make up a response off-the-top-of-your-head nor is it one in which you focus on description and ignore analysis. While you should draw upon examples from your readings of Coca-Cola this should be done to illustrate differences in perspectives both theoretically and practically as they relate to understanding organisations and their relationship to their environment.

Conclusion:

You must conclude with your general answer to the question. It should reiterate the key argument/answer to the question provided in the introduction and indicate to what extent it has been supported or challenged by your analysis of the debates and arguments of other authors.

Please note !

A key point to remember in answering the questions is not to be overly descriptive. In answering the question you will need to develop an argument. An argument requires ‘expressing a point of view on a subject and supporting it with evidence’ (see http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/argument.html ) The basic components of an argument include:

· Making a claim (informed by relevant organisational perspectives and/or theories)

· Supporting your claim with evidence

· Recognising and engaging with counterclaims