LEAD FPX 5220 Assessment 2 Assessing Priorities and Planning for Change
- High Quality FPX Sample Assessment
- Step-by-Step Guide to master FPX Assessment
- References (APA Format) for related Assessments
- Connect with Top professors for specific class
- Detailed (FAQs) related to Assessment.
- Express Delivery with in 24 hours.
Assessment Overview:
LEAD FPX 5220 Assessment 2: Assessing Precedences and Planning for Change asks you to dissect a real organizational change challenge( then XYZ Corporation’s failing IT structure), identify motorists and restrainers, use a readiness/ force- field lens, and give prioritized, practical recommendations and an perpetration plan to restore stability and support unborn growth.
How to Pass LEAD FPX 5220 Assessment 2 Assessing Priorities and Planning for Change
- The “Unfreeze” Stage: Use Lewin’s Change Model. Explain that the server crashes and customer complaints in 2005 were the “Unfreezing” event that forced XYZ Corp to realize the status quo was dead.
- Map the Force Field: You must present two sides.
- Driving Forces: Digital Revolution, Customer Demand, Profit Potential.
- Restraining Forces: Leadership Vision Gap, Initial Cost, Lack of IT Expertise.
- Address the “IT Debt”: Explain that by not upgrading earlier, XYZ Corp accumulated “Technical Debt.” The cost of fixing the system now is higher because of the lost data and 6-month shutdown.
- Prioritize Globalization: Note that XYZ’s focus on North America was a “Restraining Force” that limited their market. A recommendation should include a Global Data Center strategy.
- Identify the “Vision Gap”: Use Staren & Eckes (2013) to argue that the internal resistance wasn’t from the employees, but from a leadership team that treated IT as a “cost” rather than a “strategic asset.”
- Create a “Disaster Recovery” Recommendation: Don’t just recommend “better servers.” Recommend a Redundant Backup System and a Business Continuity Plan (BCP) to prevent another 6-month arrestment.
- Calculate the “Cost of Inaction”: To get a Distinguished grade, highlight that the lack of change cost the company millions in potential profit and customer trust.
- The “Quick Win” Strategy: In your implementation plan, identify a “Quick Win,” such as hiring an IT consultant to stabilize the most critical game server first. This builds momentum for the larger overhaul.
- Stakeholder Readiness: Assess who is ready for change. The finance team and customers are likely “Ready,” while the old-guard leadership may need more “Heightened Awareness” training.
- Define Success Metrics: How do we know the change worked? Use technical KPIs: Server Uptime (99.9%), Mean Time to Recovery (MTTR), and Customer Retention Rates.
Sample Assessment:
Abstract
A robust structure plays a pivotal part in easing communication within an association. By enforcing a strategic structure, associations can minimize inconsistencies and communication walls, enhancing bothcross-functional and interpersonal relations. This paper discusses how XYZ Corporation’s structure was unsustainable from its commencement. Altering IT structure resembles revising a house while still abiding in it — if done inaptly, it can lead to significant challenges. Effective technology is essential for a business to operate efficiently.
An efficiently designed IT structure not only frustrates workers but also diminishes effectiveness and productivity, performing in substantial long- term costs( Lazor, 2020). The argument presented in this paper underscores the critical significance of strategic structure for organizational success. Its absence led to chaos and an arrest lasting several months. The conclusion offers recommendations for necessary changes and their significance for the association’s unborn success and sustainability.
Change Challenge
Change is ineluctable in any association; still, the way an association manages this change can determine its success or failure. For the sake of confidentiality, this company will be appertained to as XYZ Corporation. As the Director of Finance in the gaming sector, I understand that change is particularly frequent due to the nonstop release and development of new games. Preparing an online game involves multitudinous details, and the being structure was shy, set up by workers lacking IT moxie. Although the original outfit supported the many games released, as the company grew, the urgency for upgrades came apparent, yet the leadership platoon failed to fend off this necessity.
At that time, the portfolio included three games and a single data center housing roughly four waiters, routers, firewalls, storehouse systems, and garçon racks, staffed by about five workers. This data center was pivotal for both game operations and organizational functions. During a period of rapid-fire growth in the early 2000s, the game portfolio expanded from three to fifteen, and the pool grew from five to 215. XYZ Corporation delivered quality games, exceptional client service, and a cash shop featuring costumes and customization options that guests appreciated. profit soared from$ 500,000 in 2001 to$ 3.5 million in 2003, reaching$ 7.5 million in 2004. The company continued to exceed prospects until 2005.
In April 2005, client complaints began to crop regarding garçon issues, similar as connectivity problems and dispositions during gameplay, along with enterprises about missing incorporations and unfulfilled purchases from the cash shop. Internal complaints also surfaced about office garçon malfunctions; dispatch services failed, network storehouses reached capacity, and critical data was lost due to lack of a backup garçon.
Factor Driving Change
Successfully navigating the constant cycle of change is essential for any association’s success. Change affects everyone — businesses, diligence, and individualities daily. The two primary motorists of change are external and internal factors.
External Factor
Technology serves as a significant force shaping change. In digital geography, associations must continually upgrade their technologies to maintain competitiveness. “ An important prerequisite for a long- term and successful operation of any association is the capability to prognosticate events and acclimatize to request conditions ”( Jan & Veronika, 2017, p. 5). Unfortunately, XYZ Corporation demanded an educated IT professional who understood the necessity of technological advancements. Accordingly, the company faced a six- month arrestment to hire IT advisers for structure analysis and enhancement.
Internal Factors
operation’s lack of vision significantly hampers associations from achieving their pretensions and charge. Frequent changes in leadership can disrupt durability and introduce new strategies that may not align with being pretensions. The absence of effective leadership negatively impacted XYZ Corporation, performing in a failure to develop strategies for enhancement or change.
Identify the Change
XYZ Corporation must invest in new technology and a professed labor force to progress. The being technological inefficiencies peril the company’s instigation in the North American gaming assiduity. Poor strategic guidance from leadership has brought millions in implicit profit. To overcome these challenges, the association must rethink its IT structure and strategic approaches. “ People repel change as a defense medium since change of any type elicits some position of anxiety ”( Staren & Eckes, 2013).
Readiness for Change and Heightened Awareness
Force Field Analysis Approach
Developed by Lewin, force field analysis( FFA) offers a methodical system for managing change effectively. The FFA comprises five ways( 1) identify planned change,( 2) identify driving forces,( 3) identify restraining forces,( 4) formulate strategies to enhance driving forces, and( 5) concoct strategies to alleviate resisting forces.
Driving Force #1: The Digital Revolution
A lack of outfit has propelled the digital revolution as a critical driving force. Guests demand continued gameplay, nippy garçon performance, and dependable fulfillment of cash shop purchases. Still, the costs associated with new outfit and the unrehearsed staff pose significant walls. The digitalization trend has impacted XYZ Corporation more oppressively than anticipated, challenging functional waiters beyond original prospects.
Driving Force #2: Globalization
A lack of administrative accreditation and trust in operation has made globalization another driving force. Yet, shy understanding of company pretensions and inadequate impulses hamper the transition to a global mindset. Understanding globalization’s impact is vital for associations aiming to subsidize on worldwide trends and expand their request reach( Morris, 2013). As an attachment of a transnational establishment, XYZ’s leadership overlooked implicit requests in Asia, fastening solely on North America, which proved mischievous in 2005.
Driving Force #3: Acceleration
client prospects for immediate changes serve as a driving force. Again, the expanding portfolio presents a restraining force. As Morris( 2013) countries, “ the driving forces are mutually interdependent, and they feed off one another ”( p. 11). The acceleration of change within XYZ, marked by the increase from three to fifteen games and five to 215 workers in just four times, demands a reevaluation of functional strategies.
Recommendation
I recommend upgrading current technology with further robust outfit, including establishing fresh data centers to support global expansion. According to Dallas( 2015), “ once you’ve gathered your data you’ll be ready to make a recommendation ”( p. 27). XYZ Corporation has demonstrated implicit in the gaming assiduity and can enhance its position by broadening its strategic outlook. Investing in a professed labor force is pivotal for achieving long- term objectives, icing the right people in the right places to profit XYZ both now and in the future.
LEAD FPX 5220 Assessment 2 Assessing Priorities and Planning for Change
Morris, L. (2013, July 18). Innovation Management. Retrieved from Innovation Management
Staren, E., & Eckes, C. (2013). Optimizing organizational change. Physician Executive, 39(3), 58-60. Retrieved from ProQuest
References (APA 7 Format)
- Dallas, H. J. (2015). Mastering the challenges of leading change: Inspire the people and succeed where others fail. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons. Retrieved from ProQuest
- Jan, D., & Veronika, T. (2017). https://www.forbes.com/sites/jacquelynsmith/2014/01/17/12-tips-for-overcoming-your-fear-of-change-at-work-2/?sh=2ae9368f2735.
- Examination of factors affecting the implementation of organizational changes. Journal of Competitiveness, 9(4), 5-17. doi:http://dx.doi.org.library.capella.edu/10.7441/joc.2017.04.01
- Lazor, D. (2020, September 21). Lazor Point. Retrieved from Lazor Point
- Mak, A. H., & Chang, R. C. (2019). The driving and restraining forces for environmental strategy adoption in the hotel industry: A force field analysis approach. Tourism Management, 73, 48-60. Retrieved from ScienceDirecthttps://www.liquidplanner.com/blog/why-is-organizational-change-so-hard/#:~:text=People%20resist%20change%20because%20they,implementation%20of%20a%20new%20process.
Rubric Breakdown
| Criteria | Distinguished | Proficient | Basic | Non-Performance |
| Analyze Change Challenge | Critically evaluates the systemic failure of XYZ Corp, linking the IT collapse to specific leadership and financial outcomes. | Describes the change challenge, including the infrastructure gap and its impact. | Mentions that “change is needed” but fails to detail the specific organizational stressors. | No analysis provided. |
| Force Field Analysis | Synthesizes complex driving and restraining forces into a prioritized strategy for change. | Uses Force Field Analysis (FFA) to identify forces driving and resisting change. | Lists forces but does not use the FFA framework to categorize them. | No FFA provided. |
| Driving & Internal Factors | Analyzes the interplay between external technology shifts and internal leadership “vision gaps.” | Identifies external and internal factors driving the need for change. | Lists factors but does not explain how they specifically impact the organization. | No factors identified. |
| Recommendations | Proposes 3+ high-impact, evidence-based recommendations with a focus on long-term sustainability. | Provides prioritized recommendations for resolving the change challenge. | Suggests generic solutions (e.g., “buy better computers”) without a strategic plan. | No recommendations. |
| Implementation Plan | Outlines a clear, measurable timeline with success metrics (uptime, recovery time) and stakeholder roles. | Presents an implementation plan with priorities and evaluation methods. | Lists steps for change but lacks a timeline or clear ownership. | No plan presented. |
Step-by-Step Guide
- Title & Abstract Title, name, course, prof, date 2 – 3 judgment abstract recapitulating the IT structure problem and its impact.
- Describe the change challenge Compactly explain XYZ’s situation( growth, failing waiters, lost data, client complaints, arrestment).
- Identify motorists & restrainers List external motorists( technology, globalization, client prospects) and internal restraints( poor leadership, lack of IT moxie, cost).
- Force Field Analysis State the planned change, list driving forces vs. restraining forces, also prioritize which to strengthen or reduce.
- Recommendations Give 3 – 4 concrete fixes( upgrade waiters, add data centers, hire professed IT staff, apply backups disaster recovery).
- Perpetration precedences & plan Short timeline/ way with who’s responsible, budget considerations, and quick triumphs vs. long- term conduct.
- Readiness & evaluation Note stakeholder readiness, communication way, criteria to track( uptime, client complaints, recovery time), and review meter.
- Conclusion & references epitomize crucial benefits and cite sources.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q How long should the Force Field Analysis be?
One clear table or two short lists( motorists vs. restrainers) with 3 – 5 particulars each.
Q What counts as a “ quick palm ”?
Conduct that restores introductory service presto — e.g., temporary pall failover, critical backups, or hiring an adviser to stabilize systems.
Q How to prioritize recommendations?
Rank by impact × feasibility( high- impact, quick- doable particulars first).
Q What criteria show success?
Garçon uptime, mean time to recovery( MTTR), number of client complaints, and profit stabilization.
Q How detailed should the perpetration timeline be?
High- position 3 – 6 month roadmap with mileposts and responsible possessors is sufficient.
Integrity Note
Note: Only use this assessment example for learning and structure purpose. Do not submit as your own work.
We are an independent resource and are not affiliated with Capella University.