Leonard-Griggs Case Study

Leonard-Griggs Case Study

Read the case The Rocky Road to Patient Satisfaction at Leonard-Griggs (PDF) (Links to an external site.).

Based on the information in the case, draw an organizational chart for Leonard-Griggs. Include the drawing either within the body of the paper or as an appendix.

Use one of the five organizational structures presented in Chapter 5 of Management of Healthcare Organizations or a variation of one:

• Functional structure
• Divisional structure
• Matrix structure
• Horizontal structure
• Network structure

In your paper, write about the following and include the organizational chart (described above) as an appendix:

• Explain the rationale for your chart.
• Identify and explain the pros and cons of the organizational structure you selected.
• Consider what you’ve learned about leadership styles, leadership theories, teamwork, organizational theories, and change theories. How would you apply these concepts to the problems this organization faces?
• Elaborate on what elements of the organization you would change and explain why.
• Would you restructure the organization? Why or why not?
•  
• Assignment 4.1 Leonard-Griggs Rubric

Assignment 4.1 Leonard-Griggs Rubric

CriteriaRatingsPts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntroduction

15 pts

Consistent with Doctorate/Master’s Level Performance

An introduction captures reader interest. The paper contains a thesis that clearly identifies the proposed organizational structure. There is consistent focus throughout the paper solely on supporting the thesis, with no irrelevant details. The thesis is clearly developed, both within paragraphs and from paragraph to paragraph, to establish coherence and cohesion.

7.5 pts

Needs Improvement

The introduction, while not entirely engaging, sets the purpose and/or tone of the paper. The paper contains a thesis although it may not solidly establish the proposed organizational structure. Focus is mostly maintained throughout the paper with a few inclusions of irrelevant details. Coherence is mostly maintained within paragraphs and cohesion is evident even though some transitions are unclear or missing.

3.75 pts

Unsatisfactory

An ineffective introduction that either does not engage the reader or sets the paper off on the wrong footing with a confusing purpose. A thesis is either lacking or unclear; the paper is marked by a distinct lack of focus, causing the reader confusion. The paper does not clearly identify the proposed organizational structure. Little coherence within paragraphs or absence of transitions between paragraphs leads to poor development of the thesis. No introduction results in 0 points.

15 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOrganizational Structure Chart Drawing

25 pts

The paper includes a figure or drawing of one of the five organizational structures: Functional, Divisional, Matrix, Horizontal, Network OR The paper contains a hybrid of two or more of these structures. The figure or drawing is either included within the body of the paper or as an appendix. All elements of the figure or drawing are easy to interpret and correctly align with the selected organizational structure.

7.5 pts

The paper includes a figure or drawing of one of the five organizational structures: Functional, Divisional, Matrix, Horizontal, Network OR The paper contains a hybrid of two or more of these structures. The figure or drawing is either included within the body of the paper or as an appendix. Most elements of the figure or drawing are easy to interpret, though some elements may be confusing or unclear; elements of the figure or drawing align with the selected organizational structure with few errors.

6.25 pts

The paper does not include a figure or drawing of one of the five organizational structures: Functional, Divisional, Matrix, Horizontal, Network OR The paper includes an organizational structure not on the listed instructions. Elements of the figure or drawing are difficult to interpret and do not align with the selected organizational structure. The figure or drawing is not included within the body of the paper or as an appendix which would result in 0 points.

25 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRationale for Organizational Structure Selection

25 pts

Topic sentence is stated. Relevant, quality concrete details give the reader important information that explains why the organizational structure was chosen. Paper demonstrates the author’s ability to relate course content to the case study using practical examples and applications. There is a comprehensive analysis of details, facts, and concepts that are conveyed in a logical sequence.

12.5 pts

Topic sentence is stated. Supporting details are relevant but reveal a general, fundamental understanding of the course material. Author explains why the organizational structure was chosen but only meets the minimum requirements in this area. Paper reflects the author’s general and fundamental understanding of the course material with either very few details or examples or superficial linkage between the case study facts and the course material.

6.25 pts

Topic sentence is weak or missing entirely. The author attempts to explain why the organizational structure was chosen but fails to include critical detail. Supporting details and information are typically unclear or not related to the topic or there are no concrete details presented. There is a seemingly random collection of information. The paper presents concepts in isolation and does not demonstrate a logical sequencing of ideas; this would result in 0 points.

25 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDiscussion of Pros and Cons of Selected Organizational Structure

50 pts

The information is broken into whole-to-whole, similarities-to-differences, or point-by-point structure. Paper follows a consistent order when discussing the pros and cons of the selected organizational structure. Paper points to specific examples to illustrate the pros and cons. Includes the information relevant to the pros and cons of the selected organizational structure. Information clearly relates to the main topic and includes several supporting details and examples.

25 pts

The paper breaks the information into whole-to-whole, similarities-to-differences, or point-by-point structure but does not follow a consistent order when discussing the pros and cons of the selected organizational structure. Includes information relevant to only the pros or only the cons but not both. Information clearly relates to the main topic but provides only one or two supporting details and/or examples.

12.5 pts

Some details are not in a logical or expected order, which distracts the reader, or many details lack any logical or expected order. There is little sense that the paper is organized. Paper may include information that is not relevant to the pros or cons of the selected organizational structure. The information has little to do with the main topic and/or no details or examples are given; this would result in 0 points.

50 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeApplication of Course Concepts to the Case Study

50 pts

Paper identifies 4–5 course concepts pertaining to (but not limited to): Leadership styles, Leadership theories, Teamwork Organizational theories, Organizational structures, Change theories. Generates an opinion that critically engages with multiple perspectives on the given case study. Identifies 3–4 specific elements of the organization that would be changed. The rationale for these changes is expressed in a clear, logical sequence that incorporates complexities and tensions and/or underlying values and assumptions.

25 pts

Paper identifies 2–3 course concepts pertaining to (but not limited to): Leadership styles, Leadership theories, Teamwork, Organizational theories, Organizational structures, Change theories. Offers an opinion that responds to multiple perspectives on the given issue within the case study. The paper identifies at least two specific elements of the organization that would be changed. The rationale for these changes is expressed with some clarity in thought and purpose. Paper establishes a limited or tangential context for analysis of the various issues and perspectives. The analysis is simplistic or somewhat unclear.

12.5 pts

Paper identifies only 1 course concept pertaining to (but not limited to): Leadership styles, Leadership theories, Teamwork, Organizational theories, Organizational structures, Change theories. Paper only identifies one element of the organization that would be changed or fails to identify any elements that would be changed. The rationale, if evident, reflects little clarity in thought and purpose. Attempts at analysis are incomplete or largely irrelevant or consist primarily of restatement of the details and issues within the case study. The author’s intentions are difficult to discern or the paper fails to respond intelligibly to the prompts within the instructions. Fails to apply any course concepts to the issues given within the case study; this would result in 0 points.

50 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeConclusions

10 pts

The conclusion subtly returns to the thesis from the introduction paragraph. The paper has a sense of completeness. The student connects the paper to the external world.

5 pts

The conclusion is a summary that repeats previously stated information or introduces new information that does not fit.

2.5 pts

The paper ends without any effort made to add any new insight or connect the content of the paper to the external world. No conclusion would result in 0 points.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting

25 pts

Paper is coherently organized and the logic is easy to follow. There are few to no spelling or grammatical errors. Technical terms are clearly defined. The language is clear and concise. Paper does not exceed five pages in length (not including the cover page or reference page). Two or more sources are cited within the paper. Follows APA formatting.

12.5 pts

Paper is generally well organized and mostly easy to follow. There are a few minor spelling or grammatical errors. Technical terms are not clearly defined. The language is mostly clear but not entirely concise. Paper exceeds 5 pages in length but is fewer than eight pages in length (not including the cover page or reference page). One or two sources are cited within the paper. Mostly observes APA formatting.

6.5 pts

Paper is poorly organized and difficult to read. It does not flow logically from one part to another. There are several spelling and/or grammatical errors. Technical terms are not defined or are poorly defined. The language is not clear or concise. Paper is either insufficient in length to address the required components, or the paper exceeds nine pages in length (not including the cover page or reference page). No sources are cited within the paper. Multiple APA formatting errors exist. Egregious writing mechanic and/or APA errors may result in 0 points.

25 pts

Total Points: 200

PreviousNext