Solved by verified expert:In today’s fast-paced and global community, most organizations are faced with constant change. Research contemporary organizations that are currently responding to a significant change within the industry, such as disruptive technology; state, government, or industry regulations; environmental constraints; judicial or legislative rulings; etc.Choose one organization from your research that has recently responded to major change, or is currently responding to change. Write a paper (1,250-1,500 words) discussing how well the organization is responding to the change dynamics. Include the following:Describe the organization and the change to which it is responding.Discuss the degree to which the change has been disruptive and how the organization has responded to the dynamics created by this change.Evaluate the strategies the organization used in its change plan and determine the level of success the organization experienced with the strategies.Determine the effect the change had on stakeholders, and to what degree stakeholders have resisted. Assess how well stakeholder resistance was addressed.Evaluate the overall implications the change had on interdepartmental collaboration.In your opinion, how well did the leaders of the organization respond and prepare for the change? What worked and what did not work with the strategies they implemented?What modifications would you suggest the leaders of the organization make in order to better address the change dynamics? What additional strategies would you recommend to assist the organization through this change?Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion. The rubric is attach in the drop files.You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center
apply_rubrics.docx
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Apply Rubrics
Contemporary Organization Evaluation
1
Unsatisfactory
0.00%
70.0 %Content
10.0 %
Contemporary
Organization
(Description of
Organization and
Responding to
Change)
Description of a
contemporary
organization
responding to
change is not
provided.
2
Less than
Satisfactory
74.00%
A partial
description of the
organization is
presented; major
relevant details
are missing. A
description of the
change to which
the organization is
responding is
cursory and
incomplete. The
organization and
change issue are
not contemporary
or current.
3
Satisfactory
79.00%
4
Good
87.00%
5
Excellent
100.00%
A cursory
A description of a A detailed
description of a
contemporary
description of a
contemporary
organization is
contemporary
organization is
presented; all
organization is
presented; most
major details are presented; all
major details are included. A
relevant details
included. A general description of the are included and
description of the change to which
description
change to which
the organization is provides insight
the organization is responding is
into the
responding is
current and
organization. The
presented, but
accurately
description of the
contains some
represented.
current change to
inaccuracies or
which the
lacks some
organization is
relevant details;
responding is well
the change to
developed and
which the
contains relevant
organization is
detail.
responding is not a
current event.
10.0 % Effects of The effects of
An incomplete
A general
A discussion on the A well-rounded
Change
change on the
discussion on the discussion on the effects of change discussion on the
(Discusses Effects organization and effects of change effects of change on the organization effects of change
of Change,
the response of on the organization on the organization and its response to on the organization
Organizational
the organization is presented. The is presented. The the change is
and its response to
Response and
to change are not response of the
response of the
presented. The
the change is
Strategies
discussed.
organization is not organization to the discussion is
presented. The
Utilized)
discussed.
change is
supported by
discussion is
presented, but it relevant and
detailed and
does not include a documented facts. strongly supported
clear evaluation of
by documented
the strategies of
facts.
the organization.
The discussion
lacks relevant
details, facts, and
support.
10.0 %
The effect of
The effect of
The effect of
The effect of
The effect of
Stakeholders
change on the
change on
change on
change on
change on
(Determine
stakeholders is
stakeholders is
stakeholders is
stakeholders is
stakeholders is
Effects of Change not addressed.
briefly considered, discussed, but
discussed.
discussed in detail.
and Response to
but no evidence or little evidence or Stakeholder
Stakeholder
Change)
rationale is
rationale is
response/resistanc response/resistanc
provided for claims provided for claims e to change is
e to change is
made. Stakeholder made. Stakeholder presented.
presented with
response/resistanc response/resistanc Suggestions are
accurate and
e to change is not e to change is
provided in
relevant examples.
presented. No
generally
responding to
Well-developed
suggestions are
presented, but it is stakeholder
recommendations
provided in
responding to
stakeholder
resistance.
lacking in detail. resistance.
are provided in
Cursory suggestions Evidence or
responding to
are provided in
rationale is
stakeholder
responding to
provided for claims resistance. Strong
stakeholder
made. Some
evidence or
resistance, but
evidence is
rationale is
these strategies
provided to
provided for claims
are incomplete and support
made, and
lack support for
statements, and
strategies relevant
validity.
common strategies to the organization
are offered to help and stakeholders
stakeholders
are offered to help
overcome
stakeholders
resistance.
overcome
resistance.
10.0 % Effects of The effects of
General effects of A superficial
An evaluation of
A detailed
Change on
change on
change on
evaluation of the the effects of
evaluation of the
Interdepartmenta interdepartmenta interdepartmental effects of change change on
effects of change
l Collaboration
l collaboration
collaboration are on
interdepartmental on
are not
discussed, but the interdepartmental collaboration for interdepartmental
evaluated.
specific effects for collaboration for the organization is collaboration for
the departments the organization is presented. The
the organization is
within the
presented. The
evaluation is
presented and
organization are
evaluation lacks
supported with
provides insight
not included.
detail, facts,
some detail, facts, into the situation.
support, or
support, or
The evaluation is
rationale.
rationale.
supported with
strong detail,
facts, support, and
rationale.
15.0 % Evaluation Evaluation
A clear evaluation Evaluation of the Evaluation of the Evaluation of the
of the Response response of the of the response of response of the
response of the
response of the
of the Leaders to leaders to change the leaders to
leaders to change leaders to change leaders to change
Change and the is not addressed, change is not
is presented, but it is presented, but it is presented with
Strategies
and strategies
addressed, and
lacks detail or
lacks detail or
sufficient detail
Presented by
presented by
strategies
information vital information vital and supporting
Leaders
leaders are not presented by
to understanding to understanding information vital
referenced.
leaders are
the actual
the involvement of to understanding
referenced, but
involvement of the the leaders.
the involvement of
not formally
leaders. Strategies Strategies
the leaders.
addressed. Overall, presented by
presented by
Strategies
the involvement of leaders in response leaders in response presented by
leadership in
to change are
to change are
leaders in response
response to change generally
generally
to change are
is unclear.
addressed. Overall, addressed. Overall, clearly addressed
it is apparent that it is apparent that and provide insight
the leaders were the leaders were into the outcomes
responsive to
responsive to
the organization
change, but
change, but
experienced in
significant
significant
responding to
information or
information or
change. Overall,
details are missing details are missing leadership
to discern the
to discern the
response to change
actual extent of
actual extent of
is clear and
leadership
leadership
contains significant
involvement or the involvement or the information or
degree to which
degree to which
details that
leadership
leadership
describe the
involvement was involvement was extent of
influential.
influential.
leadership
involvement and
15.0 %
No
Recommendations General
Recommendation recommendations to address change recommendations
s (Suggestions to are made.
dynamics or for
to address change
Better Address
additional
dynamics are
Change
strategies are
presented.
Dynamics,
incomplete.
Additional
Additional
Recommendations strategies are
Strategies)
do not contain
offered, but lack
substantial
detail, rationale,
rationale or
or a clear plan to
support and do not illustrate that the
seem relevant to recommendations
the organization or are relevant and
circumstances.
would support a
better change
option in response
to change.
20.0
%Organization
and Effectiveness
7.0 % Thesis
Paper lacks any
Development and discernible
Purpose
overall purpose
or organizing
claim.
20.0
%Organization
and Effectiveness
8.0 % Argument Statement of
Logic and
purpose is not
Construction
justified by the
conclusion. The
conclusion does
not support the
claim made.
Argument is
incoherent and
uses noncredible
sources.
20.0
%Organization
and Effectiveness
5.0 % Mechanics Surface errors
of Writing
are pervasive
(includes
enough that they
spelling,
impede
the degree to
which leadership
involvement was
influential.
Recommendations Well-supported
to address change recommendations
dynamics are
to address change
presented.
dynamics are
Additional
clearly presented.
strategies are
Additional
offered, with
strategies are
appropriate
offered, with
rationale or a clear strong rationale or
plan to illustrate a clear plan to
that the
illustrate that the
recommendations recommendations
are relevant and are relevant and
would support a
would indeed
better change
support a better
option in response change option in
to change.
response to
change.
Thesis is
insufficiently
developed or
vague. Purpose is
not clear.
Thesis is apparent Thesis is clear and
and appropriate to forecasts the
purpose.
development of
the paper. Thesis
is descriptive and
reflective of the
arguments and
appropriate to the
purpose.
Thesis is
comprehensive and
contains the
essence of the
paper. Thesis
statement makes
the purpose of the
paper clear.
Sufficient
justification of
claims is lacking.
Argument lacks
consistent unity.
There are obvious
flaws in the logic.
Some sources have
questionable
credibility.
Argument is
orderly, but may
have a few
inconsistencies.
The argument
presents minimal
justification of
claims. Argument
logically, but not
thoroughly,
supports the
purpose. Sources
used are credible.
Introduction and
conclusion bracket
the thesis.
Argument shows
Clear and
logical
convincing
progressions.
argument that
Techniques of
presents a
argumentation are persuasive claim in
evident. There is a a distinctive and
smooth progression compelling
of claims from
manner. All
introduction to
sources are
conclusion. Most authoritative.
sources are
authoritative.
Frequent and
repetitive
mechanical errors
distract the
Some mechanical
errors or typos are
present, but they
are not overly
Prose is largely
The writer is
free of mechanical clearly in
errors, although a command of
few may be
punctuation,
grammar, and
language use)
communication
of meaning.
Inappropriate
word choice or
sentence
construction is
employed.
10.0 %Format
5.0 % Paper
Template is not
Format (use of
used
appropriate style appropriately or
for the major and documentation
assignment)
format is rarely
followed
correctly.
5.0 %
Sources are not
Documentation of documented.
Sources
(citations,
footnotes,
references,
bibliography,
etc., as
appropriate to
assignment and
style)
100 % Total
Weightage
reader.
distracting to the
Inconsistencies in reader. Correct
language choice
and varied
(register) or word sentence structure
choice are present. and audienceSentence structure appropriate
is correct but not language are
varied.
employed.
present. The
standard, written,
writer uses a
academic English.
variety of effective
sentence
structures and
figures of speech.
Appropriate
Appropriate
template is used, template is used.
but some elements Formatting is
are missing or
correct, although
mistaken. A lack of some minor errors
control with
may be present.
formatting is
apparent.
Documentation of Sources are
sources is
documented, as
inconsistent or
appropriate to
incorrect, as
assignment and
appropriate to
style, although
assignment and
some formatting
style, with
errors may be
numerous
present.
formatting errors.
Appropriate
All format
template is fully elements are
used. There are
correct.
virtually no errors
in formatting style.
Sources are
documented, as
appropriate to
assignment and
style, and format
is mostly correct.
Sources are
completely and
correctly
documented, as
appropriate to
assignment and
style, and format
is free of error.
…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
