| School/Faculty/Institute | Faculty of Economics, Administrative and Social Sciences | ||||
| Course Code | IR 331 | ||||
| Course Title in English | Strategic Decision Making | ||||
| Course Title in Turkish | Stratejik Karar Verme | ||||
| Language of Instruction | EN | ||||
| Type of Course | Flipped Classroom | ||||
| Level of Course | Intermediate | ||||
| Semester | Spring | ||||
| Contact Hours per Week |
|
||||
| Estimated Student Workload | 133 hours per semester | ||||
| Number of Credits | 5 ECTS | ||||
| Grading Mode | Standard Letter Grade | ||||
| Pre-requisites | None | ||||
| Co-requisites | None | ||||
| Expected Prior Knowledge | None | ||||
| Registration Restrictions | Only Undergraduate Students | ||||
| Overall Educational Objective | Teaching strategic thinking and decision making | ||||
| Course Description | This course aims at introducing undergraduate students from all disciplines to the concepts of strategy, strategic thinking, and strategic decision-making in an interdependent and uncertain international security environment. Students will be first given the theoretical foundations of strategic thinking and decision-making through the assigned book chapters and journal articles. Then, students will enhance their understanding of strategic thinking and planning, strategic decision-making processes, and the significance of leadership in difficult crisis times through the case studies that will be presented by the first-hand observers who have been involved in the crisis in mention. |
Course Learning Outcomes and CompetencesUpon successful completion of the course, the learner is expected to be able to:1) Know the basic concepts of strategy and strategic thinking; 2) Understand the stages of strategic decision-making processes; 3) Analyze real world cases of international crises presented by first-hand observers. |
| Program Learning Outcomes/Course Learning Outcomes | 1 | 2 | 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1) An ability to identify, formulate, and solve complex engineering problems by applying principles of engineering, science, and mathematics | |||
| 2) An ability to apply engineering design to produce solutions that meet specified needs with consideration of public health, safety, and welfare, as well as global, cultural, social, environmental, and economic factors | |||
| 3) An ability to communicate effectively with a range of audiences | |||
| 4) An ability to recognize ethical and professional responsibilities in engineering situations and make informed judgments, which must consider the impact of engineering solutions in global, economic, environmental, and societal contexts | |||
| 5) An ability to function effectively on a team whose members together provide leadership, create a collaborative and inclusive environment, establish goals, plan tasks, and meet objectives | |||
| 6) An ability to develop and conduct appropriate experimentation, analyze and interpret data, and use engineering judgment to draw conclusions | |||
| 7) An ability to acquire and apply new knowledge as needed, using appropriate learning strategies |
| N None | S Supportive | H Highly Related |
| Program Outcomes and Competences | Level | Assessed by | |
| 1) | An ability to identify, formulate, and solve complex engineering problems by applying principles of engineering, science, and mathematics | N | |
| 2) | An ability to apply engineering design to produce solutions that meet specified needs with consideration of public health, safety, and welfare, as well as global, cultural, social, environmental, and economic factors | N | |
| 3) | An ability to communicate effectively with a range of audiences | N | |
| 4) | An ability to recognize ethical and professional responsibilities in engineering situations and make informed judgments, which must consider the impact of engineering solutions in global, economic, environmental, and societal contexts | H | |
| 5) | An ability to function effectively on a team whose members together provide leadership, create a collaborative and inclusive environment, establish goals, plan tasks, and meet objectives | N | |
| 6) | An ability to develop and conduct appropriate experimentation, analyze and interpret data, and use engineering judgment to draw conclusions | N | |
| 7) | An ability to acquire and apply new knowledge as needed, using appropriate learning strategies | N |
| Prepared by and Date | MUSTAFA KİBAROĞLU , January 2024 |
| Course Coordinator | MUSTAFA KİBAROĞLU |
| Semester | Spring |
| Name of Instructor | Asst. Prof. Dr. BARIŞ ÇAĞLAR |
| Week | Subject |
| 1) | Introduction & Ground Rules |
| 2) | What is Strategy? |
| 3) | Evolution of Strategic Thinking and Planning |
| 4) | Evolution of Strategic Thinking and Planning |
| 5) | Strategic Decision-Making Processes |
| 6) | Strategic Decision-Making Processes |
| 7) | Mid-Term Examination |
| 8) | Case Study: US-USSR, Cuban Missile Crisis (1962) |
| 9) | Case Study: Türkiye-Greece: Kardak Crisis (1996) |
| 10) | Case Study: Türkiye-Greece, S-300 Crisis (1998) |
| 11) | Case Study: Türkiye-Greece, S-300 Crisis (1998) |
| 12) | Case Study: Türkiye-Israel, “Mavi Marmara” Crisis (2010) |
| 13) | Case Study: Türkiye-Russia, SU-24 Crisis (2015) |
| 14) | Case Study: Russia-Ukraine Crisis and the War (2022) |
| 15) | Final Exams Week |
| 16) | Final Exams Week |
| Required/Recommended Readings | • Carl Von Clausewitz, On War, Michael Howard and Peter Paret (eds.), Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1993. • Peter Paret, Gordon A. Craig, Felix Gilbert, Makers of Modern Strategy from Machiavelli to the Nuclear Age, Princeton University Press, 2010, • Graham Allison and Philip Zelikow, Essence of Decision, Longman, New York, 1999. • Mustafa Kibaroğlu and Ayşegül Kibaroğlu, Global Security Watch – Turkey: A Reference Handbook, Praeger Security International, Greenwood Publishing Group, Westport, Connecticut, 2009. • Instructor’s personal website: www.mustafakibaroglu.com | |||||||||||||||
| Teaching Methods | Flipped Learning method | |||||||||||||||
| Homework and Projects | There are three requirements that must be fulfilled successfully to get a passing grade: • First requirement is active participation in the group discussions as well as in the debates that will occasionally take place after some of the case study lectures, which will count for 25% of the students’ overall grade; • Second requirement is to take the Quizzes after each of the 7 case study lectures, which will count for 35% of the overall grade; • Third requirement is to take the Mid-Term Exam, tentatively scheduled on ../../.., which will count for 40% of the overall grade. | |||||||||||||||
| Laboratory Work | N/A | |||||||||||||||
| Computer Use | N/A | |||||||||||||||
| Other Activities | N/A | |||||||||||||||
| Assessment Methods |
|
|||||||||||||||
| Course Administration |
mustafa.kibaroglu@mef.edu.tr Rectorate Building Attendance and active participation are required. There would be no make-up exams unless medical report provided. MEF university values academic integrity. Therefore, all students must understand the meaning and consequences of cheating, plagiarism and other academic offences under the code of student conduct and disciplinary procedures. Any improper behavior, academic dishonesty or plagiarism is subject to the YÖK Disciplinary Regulation. |
|||||||||||||||
| Activity | No/Weeks | Hours | Calculation | ||||
| No/Weeks per Semester | Preparing for the Activity | Spent in the Activity Itself | Completing the Activity Requirements | ||||
| Course Hours | 14 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 98 | ||
| Presentations / Seminar | 10 | 1 | 1 | 20 | |||
| Midterm(s) | 1 | 12 | 3 | 15 | |||
| Total Workload | 133 | ||||||
| Total Workload/25 | 5.3 | ||||||
| ECTS | 5 | ||||||