The purpose of this project is to examine organizational development and identify change formulas/theories and roles. Using a case study, you will be asked to demonstrate how specific roles and change formulas/theories – EssayQuest

Purpose

The purpose of this project is to examine organizational development and identify change formulas/theories and roles. Using a case study, you will be asked to demonstrate how specific roles and change formulas/theories affect organizational effectiveness.

Task

Step 1: Carefully read the case study Danny Meyer Leads His Company Through the Challenges of Eliminating Tips. Note – this case is one page in length.

Step 2: Compose a 4- to 5-page paper (excluding the title page and reference list page) that includes all of the following points:

Research the concepts of change theories, planned change, and organizational change roles, as well as how they individually and collectively relate to the ability for leaders to create effective change that ultimately leads to successful organizational change process.
Apply your research on the concepts identified to the case study.
Develop a forward strategy for leadership and management that focuses on communication and trust that will help the organization implement these new strategies.
Explain the reasoning/conclusions behind your plan elements and support them with your research, class materials, and case study facts.
Analyze how the plan/strategies you develop for management will maximize the success of the change initiative.

Submission

Carefully read the Case Study Written Assignment Rubric for the assignment.
Check the instructions to ensure all elements of the assignment are covered.
Review the How to Solve a Case Study document for guidance on completing a case study written assignment.
Students are expected to use a variety as well as multiple course readings and research to support ideas, reasoning, and conclusions.
This assignment requires the use of, at minimum, four scholarly references/sources that were published within the last five years.
Follow proper style and format guidelines to ensure that your final submission includes a title page, in-text citations, and a reference page (see writing resources).
Paraphrase from relevant sources to show a greater understanding of the topics. Limit quotes, though when used, explain their significance. Provide the page or paragraph number as appropriate for APA format. Note that a reference within a reference list cannot exist without an associated in-text citation and vice versa.
This paper should begin with an introductory paragraph that clearly and succinctly explains what you intend to cover in the body of the paper.
This paper should end with a conclusion/summary paragraph that clearly and succinctly explains what you covered in the body of the paper.
Third-person writing is required. Third person means that there are no words such as “I,” “me,” “my,” “we,” or “us” (first-person writing), nor is there use of “you” or “your” (second-person writing). If uncertain how to write in the third person, view the resource First, Second, and Third Person.
Contractions are not used in business writing, so the expectation is that students do NOT use contractions in the assignment.
The paper must be double-spaced with 1-inch margins and 12-point font.
Submit the final project into the appropriate assignment submission folder by the due date.
NOTE: All submitted work is to be your original work.

This assignment is worth 15% of your final grade and addresses Course Objectives 1 through 6. It gives you an opportunity to apply organizational-level diagnostic processes and organizational development principles to a real-life situation. You will also have the opportunity to assess the appropriateness of the steps taken and propose alternative interventions based on the presenting problems and underlying issues uncovered in the diagnosis. You must complete this assignment individually, without contacting other students, and you may not use a paper or any part of a paper from a previous class or from another person. If you have questions about this assignment, please post them in the Ask the Professor discussion forum so that everyone can benefit from the answers.

Criteria	Excellent	Proficient	Sufficient	Did Not Achieve Level	Criterion Score
Introduction, Analysis, and Evaluation	45 points Student demonstrated complete and thorough outline of the facts surrounding the case, identified all key issues, appropriately identified alternative courses of action, and clearly outlined the reasons for the recommendation. 45 –40 points	39 points Student satisfactorily outlined the facts surrounding the case, identified most key issues, appropriately identified alternative courses of action, and satisfactorily outlined the reasons for the recommendation. 39 – 34 points	33 points Student demonstrated less than satisfactory outline of the facts surrounding the case, identified some key issues, identified some alternative courses of action, and/or less than satisfactorily outlined the reasons for the recommendation. 33 – 27 points	26 points Student unsatisfactorily outlined the facts surrounding the case, key issues, alternative courses of action, and the reasons for the recommendation. 26 – 0 points	Score of Introduction, Analysis, and Evaluation, / 45
Quality of Content	35 points Student demonstrated exceptional knowledge of relevant concepts and theories; all statements and opinions were supported by appropriate citations from relevant literature. 35 – 31 points	30 points Student demonstrated satisfactory knowledge of relevant concepts and theories; most statements and opinions were supported by appropriate citations from relevant literature. 30 – 28 points	27 points Student demonstrated less than satisfactory knowledge of relevant concepts and theories; some statements and opinions were not supported by appropriate citations from the literature. 27 – 23 points	22 points Student demonstrated unsatisfactory knowledge of relevant concepts and theories; many statements and opinions were not supported by appropriate citations from the literature. 22 – 0 points	Score of Quality of Content, / 35
Quality of Research	35 points Student did an exceptional job of integrating course readings with additional research. Student cited more than the required number of references. Sources listed were all scholarly or practitioner journals from the last five years. 35 – 31 points	30 points Student did a satisfactory job of integrating course readings with additional research. Student cited the required number of references. Sources listed were primarily scholarly or practitioner journals from the last five years. 30 – 28 points	27 points Student did a less than satisfactory job of integrating course readings with additional research. Student may not have cited the required number of references. Some sources listed may not have been scholarly or practitioner journals from the last five years. 27 – 23 points	22 points Student did an inadequate job of integrating course readings with additional research. Student did not cite the required number of references. Many of the sources listed were not scholarly or practitioner journals from the last five years. 22 – 0 points	Score of Quality of Research, / 35
Organization, Mechanics	35 points Contributes to discussion with clear, concise comments formatted in an easy-to-read style that is free of grammatical, spelling errors. The page length requirement was met. 35 – 31 points	30 points Contributes valuable information to discussion with minor clarity, mechanics errors. The page length requirement was met or may have been slightly exceeded. 30 – 28 points	27 points Contributes to discussion with errors in clarity, style, vocabulary selection, and/or has some major writing errors. The page length requirement may not have been met. 27 – 23 points	22 points Student did not achieve level. 22 – 0 points

Criteria

Excellent

Proficient

Sufficient

Did Not Achieve Level

Criterion Score

Introduction,
Analysis, and Evaluation

45 points

Student demonstrated complete and thorough outline of the
facts surrounding the case, identified all key issues, appropriately
identified alternative courses of action, and clearly outlined the reasons
for the recommendation.

45
–40 points

39 points

Student satisfactorily outlined the facts surrounding the
case, identified most key issues, appropriately identified alternative
courses of action, and satisfactorily outlined the reasons for the
recommendation.

39
– 34 points

33 points

Student demonstrated less than satisfactory outline of
the facts surrounding the case, identified some key issues, identified some
alternative courses of action, and/or less than satisfactorily outlined the
reasons for the recommendation.

33
– 27 points

26 points

Student unsatisfactorily outlined the facts surrounding
the case, key issues, alternative courses of action, and the reasons for the
recommendation.

26
– 0 points

Score of
Introduction, Analysis, and Evaluation,

/ 45

Quality of
Content

35 points

Student demonstrated exceptional knowledge of relevant
concepts and theories; all statements and opinions were supported by
appropriate citations from relevant literature.

35
– 31 points

30 points

Student demonstrated satisfactory knowledge of relevant
concepts and theories; most statements and opinions were supported by
appropriate citations from relevant literature.

30
– 28 points

27 points

Student demonstrated less than satisfactory knowledge of
relevant concepts and theories; some statements and opinions were not
supported by appropriate citations from the literature.

27
– 23 points

22 points

Student demonstrated unsatisfactory knowledge of relevant
concepts and theories; many statements and opinions were not supported by
appropriate citations from the literature.

22
– 0 points

Score of
Quality of Content,

/ 35

Quality of
Research

35 points

Student did an exceptional job of integrating course
readings with additional research. Student cited more than the required
number of references.

Sources
listed were all scholarly or practitioner journals from the last five years.

35
– 31 points

30 points

Student did a satisfactory job of integrating course
readings with additional research. Student cited the required number of
references. Sources listed were primarily scholarly or practitioner journals
from the last five years.

30
– 28 points

27 points

Student did a less than satisfactory job of integrating
course readings with additional research. Student may not have cited the
required number of references. Some sources listed may not have been
scholarly or practitioner journals from the last five years.

27
– 23 points

22 points

Student did an inadequate job of integrating course
readings with additional research. Student did not cite the required number
of references.

Many
of the sources listed were not scholarly or practitioner journals from the
last five years.

22
– 0 points

Score of
Quality of Research,

/ 35

Organization,
Mechanics

35 points

Contributes to discussion with clear, concise comments
formatted in an easy-to-read style that is free of grammatical, spelling
errors.

The
page length requirement was met.

35
– 31 points

30 points

Contributes valuable information to discussion with minor
clarity, mechanics errors. The page length requirement was met or may have
been slightly exceeded.

30
– 28 points

27 points

Contributes to discussion with errors in clarity, style,
vocabulary selection, and/or has some major writing errors. The page length requirement
may not have been met.

27
– 23 points

22 points

Student did not achieve level.

22
– 0 points

📋 Table of Contents