I was hoping this course would go deeper into psychological managing. This course seems better suited to just learning the architecture of the building departments.

Case studies were good but it was otherwise a very theoretical course and didn't often feel like it could be boiled down to everyday application.

Long story telling with some case studies from real business world. Not so well and clearly structured in my view for long lasting takeaways.

The notes from Mike were not very interactive. ALso the flow of Mike's presentation was not captivating

While information from one teacher was easy to understand, the other was a bit harder to figure out.

Great introduction. A bit more depth and breadth (ie. 8 week course) would be terrific!

Way too easy and general...I wanna learn more from the instructors.

I think more examples would have been better for the class.

Thought provoking albeit at times vague and dragged out.

It started off strong but lost momentum.

Could be a bit more interesting

Content is too anecdotal.

Boring!

5 points out of 5 for professor Peter. 1 point out of 5 for professor Mike. The first 2 weeks were good as professor Peter presented with very brief and sum up the ideas. On another hand, the last 2 weeks were bad, professor Mike didn't do well in term of summary. He spent 70% for introduction of each topic before reaching to the points that he want to make. Most of the time, he didn't make any points. Plus he didn't answer the questions that he asked. I am disappointed. I was expecting to learn more as the course structure was impressive BUT the actual lectures are not covered the topic.

This is a survey course. It uses several simple case studies to explain some basic points, but does not go into detail in any particular area. For example the course does not explain well different organizational models or their strengths and weaknesses (functional, regional, etc). I expected more than a cursory mention of matrix management, which is powerful but complex to implement well. There are no hands-on activities other than quizzes at the end of the week. The subtitles are broken and/or of poor quality in several of the videos.

Taking this course as part of the series of courses offered by Wharton on intro to business. I'm coming from engineering background so not sure if this is true to everyone, but I feel this course does not offer much in-depth on those topics, it's just a slight touch on the surface of those. Among the series of courses I've took so far I fee the accounting course is definitely the No.1 among all others, no doubt at all.

I think the Professors are both great and well-knowledged, but I find that the presentation of the material could have been better. I find that case studies took too much time to present and discuss, and I also think that the quizzes do not highlight the importance of the materials. The quizzes contain too many trivial questions and those that do not have much added value to the learning experience.

great theory and principles but could be a little more tactical and related to real case scenarios of the working environment. such as: how to manage your bosses as well as react to peers when competition exists though team work must prevail. How to handle medium performers. How to handle politics in the offices when bosses use preferences and similarity concepts.

It was a very general overview through human resource management. Hope that more insights could have been offered by providing more concrete strategies. Also, it would be a plus to offer recommended readings for the topic.

I didn't quite feel I left with a sense of practical knowledge on how to manage or build the architecture of an organization.

felt a bit dated. older materials, older case studies and examples. all quizing should be a little tougher i thought.

Explaining many abstractive things with a couple of concrete actual stories and less correct materials.

the course is poorly structured. the videos are lack of well-organization and the slides are poorly written. The lecturer teaches in a way that's so hard to follow with tedious cases. Avoid this one and seek for other alternatives.

Both the professors had a very dull and monotonous teaching style.

very low length to content ratio; basic content