In order for managers to respond effectively to environmental or organizational pressures that can be disruptive to an organization, they must implement clear intervention strategies. In a 1,000-1250 word paper, propose a change plan to respond to the most significant pressures affecting the organization represented in your Pressures for Change assignment from Topic 2. Include the following: 1.Review the organizational/environmental pressures you presented in your initial paper: Determine which pressure is most important to address at this time in order to maintain a competitive and viable company. Summarize the pressure and how the organization is currently being affected. Project the outcome for the organization if it fails to address the pressure. 2.Develop a change vision to respond to the organizational or environmental pressure: The vision must define the organizational change and resonate with the decision making and strategies proposed in the paper. Additionally, the vison must include a cognitive and affective component in order to help stakeholders understand how to achieve the goals, and to inspire and motivate them to engage in the change. 3.Develop a change model to implement your change vision. Identify the specific steps needed to implement a change and effectively respond to the pressure. Describe a strategy for implementing each step. 4.Evaluate the potential resistance from stakeholders. Discuss the reasons for the resistance, at what point the resistance will likely occur, and some strategies for overcoming the resistance.  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.  You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.
Rubic please use:70.0 %Content       10.0 % Organizational and Environmental Pressures Affecting Organizational Viability   Organizational and environmental pressures are not addressed.   At least one organizational or environmental pressure is presented. The nature of the pressures and the effect the pressures have on the organization are unclear. A projected outcome for organizational viability if the pressures are not addressed is omitted.    Organizational and environmental pressures affecting the organization are summarized. The effect of these pressures on the organization is unclear. A vague prediction for organizational viability if the pressures are not addressed is presented.    Organizational and environmental pressures affecting the organization are discussed. The effect of these pressures on the organization is discussed. A prediction for organizational viability if the pressures are not addressed is presented.   Key organizational and environmental pressures affecting the organization are determined. The effect of these pressures on the organization is thoroughly discussed. A well-developed prediction for organizational viability if the pressures are not addressed is presented. The author demonstrates insight into how organizational and environmental pressures affect organizational outcomes.    70.0 %Content       20.0 % Change Vision Responding to Organizational and Environmental Pressures   A change vision is not developed.   The change vision is incomplete, or the change vision does not correlate with the organizational and environmental pressures presented. The change vision does not define organizational change, or does not support proposed decision-making strategies for change. Attributes that inspire and motivate stakeholders are not utilized in the vision.    The change vision generally correlates with the organizational and environmental pressures presented, but a more in-depth explanation is needed for clarity. The change vision vaguely defines organizational change. It is unclear if the vision supports the proposed decision-making strategies for change. Attributes that inspire and motivate stakeholders are generally utilized in the vision.   The change vision correlates with the organizational and environmental pressures presented. The change vision defines organizational change. The vision supports the proposed decision-making strategies for change. Attributes that inspire and motivate stakeholders are utilized in the vision. Some detail is needed for clarity.   The change vision strongly correlates with the organizational and environmental pressures presented. The change vision clearly defines and embraces organizational change. The vision clearly supports the proposed decision-making strategies for change. Attributes that inspire and motivate stakeholders are utilized in the vision. The attributes of the vision appeal to stakeholders on a cognitive and affective level to encourage stakeholders to engage in the change.    70.0 %Content       20.0 % Change Model and Implementation of Vision   A change model Is not presented.   A change model is referenced. The specific steps needed to implement the change vision are incomplete. No strategies are clearly described.   A change model is presented, and general steps needed to implement the change vision are summarized. One or two key strategies are presented for implementing the change vision. It is unclear if the model and proposed strategies would be effective in implementing the change vision.   A change model is developed. The steps needed to implement the change vision are outlined along with strategies for the implementation of each step. The change model and proposed strategies support the implementation of the change vision.   A well-developed change model is presented. The steps needed to implement the change vision are clearly described. Strong strategies for the implementation of each step are proposed. The change model and proposed strategies are effective and support the implementation of the change vision.    70.0 %Content       10.0 % Prediction of Stakeholder Resistance    Stakeholder resistance is not predicted.   A vague prediction for potential resistance from stakeholders is presented. Reasons for the resistance, and when resistance is likely to occur, are not explored. A clear strategy for overcoming resistance is developed.    A general prediction for potential resistance from stakeholders is presented. General reasons for the resistance, at when resistance is likely to occur, are explored. A vague strategy for overcoming resistance is developed.   A prediction for potential resistance from stakeholders is presented. Key reasons for the resistance, and when resistance is likely to occur, are explored. A strategy for overcoming resistance is developed. Sound reasoning is used in the prediction.    A sound prediction for potential resistance from stakeholders is presented. Motives for the stakeholder resistance, and when resistance is likely to occur, are thoroughly investigated. A well-developed strategy for overcoming resistance is developed. Strong reasoning is used in the prediction. The prediction demonstrates an understanding of stakeholder considerations and needs during change.    70.0 %Content       10.0 % Support and Rationale for Proposed Change Plan    No evidence or rationale is provided to support the proposed change plan.   Significant evidence and rationale is needed to establish support for all aspects of the change plan.    Rationale is offered for some of the major aspects of the change plan. It is unclear if many of the proposed strategies or ideas support the change plan. More evidence is needed to fully establish support for change plan.   Acceptable evidence is provided to establish support the change plan. Some minor detail is needed for clarity.   Strong evidence is provided to establish support for the change plan. The evidence provided demonstrates an understanding of theory and concepts relevant to organizational change.    20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness       7.0 % Thesis Development and Purpose   Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.   Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.   Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.   Thesis is clear and forecasts the 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.    20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness       8.0 % Argument Logic and Construction   Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.   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 logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.   Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.    20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness       5.0 % Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)   Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.   Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.   Some mechanical
errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.   Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.   Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.    10.0 %Format      5.0 % Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)   Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.   Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.   Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.    Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.   All format elements are correct.     5.0 % Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)   Sources are not documented.   Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.   Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.   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.    100 % Total Weightage