Strategic Organization Design

Yet there is two reasons for my low rating: 1) lack of a systematic approach and 2) lack of detail going beyond the obvious and sometimes lack of arguments for certain claims.More specficially things that could be improved on would be:* red line is sometimes missing (or at least not very obvious), concepts just seem to pop up semi randomly, which may be similiar to my second critique point:* often the scope of concepts wasnt clear, i.e.

including examples if there is no space in the presentation for this)* discussions dont receive any replys nor any moderation (but that seems more like the usual case on coursera; and the separation into different forums for each course period leads to only a sinlge post per thread per period which doesnt encourage peer discussion); yet as this seems to be a coursera wide applicable critique this didnt factor into my ratingAs it is, this course can be finished rather very quickly, and i think people would be willing to spend more time on the course to gain actual depth knowledge (as is often said but not achieved in the class unfortunately) Great course, however somewhat less interesting and more conceptual content than the previous courses.

I LOVE IT Magnifico curso, he aprendido muchísimo de manera amena y clara.

Very useful to understand the organization design Good course Given that I didnt pay for the course, I have to say that it was successfull in giving me a decent amount of information and an introduction into thought processes underlying strategic design.

Would be very beneficiated from several cases of real structure problems Haven't taken part in a course with so little practical value and so theoretical approach.

It barely scratched the surface of the topic, so calling course takers as experts at the course end is not fair.

does a company buy another random company and makes somehow money?

the heading in the slides suggests its an entirely different subtopic, but there is no other sign of such a transition, neighter in slides nor in the oral presentation; this happens quite alot of times, so please make the relationship between the different parts of the presentation and concepts clearer* often, a real example would help: how does concept A look in a specific company (titles, organization trees and procedures), how does a centralized vs decentralized company strcuture look like, which capabilities are where; maybe use the companies where you film the lectures at as examples, this would make the choice of location also seem less random* not much beyond the slides is explained: refinancing is mentioned as a way of improving performance; what debt is refinanced here, how does this pertain to company everyday workings (i.e.

A nice course that challenges us to face our own ideas regarding organization and companies.