Electives Part 3

by on November 7th, 2012

A little late out the gate – I was too busy doing a lot of nothing during the break :) I am also fortunate to say that Hurricane Sandy had little-to-no effect on Pittsburgh, other than rain and cold.

Managing Intellectual Capital and Knowledge-Intensive Businesses (Mini 1, 2012. Taught by Robert Kelley)

Background: Given how I want to work in IT/entertainment industries, where the brainwork is the product, this course seemed pretty ideal. Professor Kelley has a reputation for being an excellent teacher also.

Course Deliverables: Class participation 1/3; Individual paper 1/3, Group project & presentation 1/3

Good Stuff: I immensely enjoyed his class. A lot of his class was discussion-based, which meant that it was less sage-on-the-stage format and more hearing the inputs and thoughts of my classmates. This also explains the heavy emphasis on class participation in the grading scheme. This format allowed the very long class (6:30-10.00) to go by rather quickly. It also seemed a lot of people didn’t skip the class either, which meant that they were likewise engaged.
The topics we could choose for our group project were interesting and revolved around IC and organizations. We chose to do the topic on how to structure the organization to best manage IC. I like researching academic papers and reading/learning all this stuff, so I volunteered to do this piece. Thankfully, my teammates all preferred to do the other aspects of the project, which meant this was a perfect fit.
The individual paper was to draw up a business plan, essentially, of one’s own career progression. It was interesting, since I do this type of work already in my head, but putting it down on paper and seeing how much I’m really worth was a great exercise.

Bad Stuff: There was a LOT of reading to do in this class. Again, not that much of an issue for me, but I would spend an entire Saturday doing the readings.

Commercialization & Innovation: Strategy (Mini 1, 2012. Taught by Art Boni)

Background: I was told I had to take this class as part of the Technology Leadership track, even though it wasn’t on the track course listing.

Course Deliverables: I think it was just a final project presentation. Participation was also assessed.

Good Stuff: Similar to another entrepreneurship course I took in Mini 1 2011, this was pretty light on the deliverables. The content was interesting – about identifying a market need before doing anything related to business plans – and the idea we ended up following through with was non-rigid facial tracking technology – the same technology used in Avatar, only we applied it to video games.

Bad Stuff: It had a LOT of overlap with another course in this mini (see below) and thus didn’t grab my attention all to well.

Innovation Ecosystems (Mini 1, 2012. Taught by Jim Herbsleb)

Background: Another Track-requisite course, but it’s new and was added for the academic year.

Course Deliverables: A project proposal, presentation, and final write-up on an ecosystem.

Good Stuff: This ended up being a very engaging and interesting course that opened my mind up to this idea of ecosystems and complements. It had been touched on before in my Technology Strategy course, but this was truly immersive and very interesting. It had a lot of applicability to technology products.

Bad Stuff: This was the class with the unfortunate episode with the teammate that I had discussed a few posts back. It didn’t colour my view of the class itself, since the professor was very understanding of the situation.

Information Security & Privacy (Mini 1, 2012. Taught by Norman Sadeh)

Background: Another Track-requisite course.

Course Deliverables: A mid-term and final exam, an individual homework assignment, and a group project

Good Stuff: Another pretty interesting course, I was more intrigued by the privacy side of things than the security side of things. We had a guest speaker – the CSO of Alcoa – in for one class and he was very interesting. The exams were surprisingly easy. I also liked how the professor released the Homework assignment three weeks before it was due, which gave me plenty of time to pace myself. I’ve learned my lesson with CS-based courses; they can’t be completed at the last minute :) (my other classmates, however, didn’t learn this lesson and was frantically trying to complete this homework, which took a good 12 hours to complete, on the sunday before it was due). The professor also seemed very engaged and interested in our projects and encouraged us to come and see him constantly for guidance and advice.

Bad Stuff: The work requirements were skewed. Let’s take, for example, the mid-term exam. There was one question which was a fill-in-the-word type of question. There were 6 words that needed to be filled in. Each word was worth the same number of points as a short paragraph answer in other questions – which meant that by putting in the wrong word, it was heavily penalised.
Other students complained about the homework and how long it was, but since my expectations had changed to be more aware that the CS-courses are work-intensive, I don’t have anything to complain about.

This little anecdote doesn’t fall into either good or bad, but my group had a member who was in the school of Computer Science. The Friday before the project was due, he sent the group an email explaining how he dropped the class since he would be shuttling between San Francisco and Seattle for job interviews for the next two weeks. Our group took it in our stride – we had all taken upon ourselves to do different sections of the work, and his wasn’t that important to the grand scheme of the project. It just seemed odd that he would wait until this last minute to let us know, when presumably he would’ve already known about the interviews and made the trip plans before that Friday.

Government & Business (Mini 1, 2012. Taught by Jay Apt and Michael Griffin

Background: I added this class after the mini had already started, when I felt that my courseload for the mini was too light. A friend of mine had told me it was being taught by a former NASA astronaut, so curious, I enrolled.

Course Deliverables: 2 Case writeups, 2 Homeworks. Optional: Debate involvement. Class participation was also taken into consideration, I believe.

Good Stuff: This was a fascinating class. I keep making the mistake of thinking government is a dry, boring topic. This really opened my eyes to how businesses encourage regulation by the government to their advantage, of how government isn’t always anti- or pro-business, since a regulation always puts one sort of business against another, and how little lobbying money does – businesses pay for lobbying (which, before this class, was extremely distasteful in my eyes) but they tend to woo only those in the government who are sympathetic to their cause or strong supporters. I took this class for curiosity sake, and I’m really glad I did.

Bad Stuff: There was slight confusion with groups, since we had to change groups to be composed of new people for the second half of the assignments, but that was it. I had a really great time in this class and learned a lot.

Ask a Question or Leave a Reply

The author Julianne Harty gets email notifications for all questions or replies to this post.

Some HTML allowed. Keep your comments above the belt or risk having them deleted. Signup for a Gravatar to have your pictures show up by your comment.