| Course | HRM-5700 The Effectiveness of a Market-Connected Culture |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 6 |
| Paper type | Final project report: knowledge management and change |
| Length | About 1,005 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Thomas Edison State University |
| Program | Master of Science in Human Resources Management |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for HRM 5700 Module 6
From Knowing to Sharing: A Knowledge Management Change Plan for Meridian BioLabs
Student Name
Master of Science in Human Resources Management, Thomas Edison State University
HRM-5700: The Effectiveness of a Market-Connected Culture
Mentor Name
Month Day, Year
From Knowing to Sharing: A Knowledge Management Change Plan for Meridian BioLabs
Executive Summary
Meridian BioLabs, a composite contract research organization with 600 employees, depends on the knowledge of its scientists, yet that knowledge stays within teams, its project lessons are lost and its experts retire without passing on what they know. These problems cost the company repeated study designs, delayed studies and lost clients. This report proposes a two-year change program that combines knowledge processes, trust-building leadership and aligned human resources practices. It estimates a first-year cost of about $520,000 and expects to reduce repeated design failures by half, raise cross-team help seeking from 31 to 55 percent and improve on-time study delivery from 78 to 90 percent.
The Knowledge Problem
The course's analysis found four connected problems. The document portal stored reports but not lessons, so knowledge was not transferred or applied (Module 1). The culture assumed that scientific excellence alone would satisfy clients, leaving relational capital weak (Module 2). Projects ended without capturing lessons, and clients' knowledge was not sought (Module 3). Expert retirements created unmanaged knowledge loss, as when a study slipped eight weeks (Module 4). Underlying all four is limited trust across departments, which keeps scientists from seeking or offering help outside their teams (Module 5).
The costs are measurable. A review of last year's studies found 23 in which a team repeated a design approach another team had already found unsuitable, adding an average of three weeks and about $40,000 in staff time to each. Two major clients moved work elsewhere, representing about $3 million in annual revenue. On-time delivery stood at 78 percent.
The Target State
In two years, Meridian should be a lab where scientists routinely consult past lessons and colleagues in other departments before designing a study, where every study ends with recorded lessons, where critical knowledge is transferred before experts leave and where clients' knowledge is part of study planning. Leaders will model sharing, and HR systems will reward it.
Change Strategy
Kotter (1996) laid out an eight-step path for leading change, from creating urgency and building a guiding coalition, through setting and communicating a vision and clearing obstacles to action, to winning early results, building on them and rooting the change in the culture. The plan follows these steps.
| Kotter step | Action at Meridian |
|---|---|
| Establish urgency | Share the cost of repeated designs and lost clients with all staff |
| Guiding coalition | Chief scientific officer, HR director, two department heads and three respected senior scientists |
| Vision and strategy | "Every study starts from what we already know" |
| Communicate the vision | Town halls, department meetings and examples from real studies |
| Empower action | Remove the time barrier by funding thirty minutes for each after-action review |
| Short-term wins | Publicize the first studies shortened by applying past lessons |
| Consolidate gains | Extend reviews to all studies; add the expert directory |
| Anchor in culture | Build sharing into hiring, reviews, promotion and leadership development |
Knowledge Processes
The change program puts in place the processes developed in earlier modules: after-action reviews at three milestones of each study; a searchable lessons database linked to an expert directory; a required pre-study lookup; joint end-of-study reviews with major clients; and a knowledge loss risk register with transfer plans for critical roles.
Aligning Human Resources Practices
Knowledge sharing will not last unless HR systems support it. Cabrera and Cabrera (2005) argued that people management practices, including selection, work design, training, performance appraisal and rewards, shape the social and psychological conditions for sharing. Wang and Noe (2010) reviewed knowledge sharing research and found that organizational context, interpersonal and team characteristics and individual factors all matter, with management support and a culture that values sharing among the most consistent influences.
| HR practice | Change |
|---|---|
| Selection | Assess collaboration and client focus in scientist interviews |
| Onboarding | Introduce new scientists to experts in three other departments |
| Performance management | Include lessons contributed and help given across teams |
| Rewards and recognition | Quarterly recognition for lessons that others apply |
| Succession | Knowledge transfer plans for roles scoring above 12 on the risk register |
| Leadership development | Empowering leadership training with upward feedback for department heads |
Implementation Plan and Budget
The program unfolds in three stages. During its first half-year, the coalition forms, the urgency case is shared, facilitators are trained and after-action reviews begin in two departments. In months seven to twelve, reviews extend to all departments, the lessons database and expert directory launch, and performance reviews change. In the second year, joint client reviews begin, leadership development runs, and results are evaluated.
If the program halves repeated design failures, it saves about $460,000 a year in staff time, before counting retained clients.
| First-year cost | Amount |
|---|---|
| Knowledge program manager | $140,000 |
| Facilitator training and review time | $160,000 |
| Lessons database and expert directory | $90,000 |
| Leadership development | $80,000 |
| Phased retirement and transfer arrangements | $50,000 |
| Total | $520,000 |
Resistance and How to Address It
Three sources of resistance are likely. Scientists may see reviews as extra paperwork; keeping them to thirty minutes and showing early examples of time saved addresses this. Department heads may fear losing control over their staff's time; involving two of them in the guiding coalition and recognizing cross-team help in their own reviews reduces that fear. Some scientists may worry that recorded mistakes will be used against them; a written rule that review content never enters individual ratings, applied consistently, protects them.
Evaluation
The program will be evaluated on outcomes and on the conditions that produce them. Outcomes include the number of repeated design failures, on-time delivery and client retention. Conditions include the annual trust survey from Module 5, the use of the lessons database and expert directory, and the share of critical roles with active transfer plans. Results will be reviewed with the leadership team every six months.
Conclusion
Meridian's scientists know what the lab needs to compete; the problem is that their knowledge does not move. A change program led through Kotter's steps, supported by knowledge processes and aligned HR practices, would help that knowledge reach every study and every client, making Meridian the market-connected organization this course describes.
References
Cabrera, E. F., & Cabrera, A. (2005). Fostering knowledge sharing through people management practices. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(5), 720-735. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190500083020
Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Harvard Business School Press.
Wang, S., & Noe, R. A. (2010). Knowledge sharing: A review and directions for future research. Human Resource Management Review, 20(2), 115-131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2009.10.001
Reading the HRM 5700 Module 6 assignment instructions
The HRM-5700 final project on knowledge management and change within an organization is worth 31 percent of the grade, in three parts: a progress report due by the end of Module 5 (6 percent), the final report (15 percent) and a PowerPoint presentation (10 percent). Expect the report to define a knowledge problem, describe the change needed, plan how to lead it and explain how human resources practices will support it. The report should reuse your written assignments, add scholarly sources and meet the requirements posted with the project. Write for organizational leaders in APA style. The PowerPoint presentation summarizes the report for leaders, so write the report first and build the slides from its executive summary and tables.
How the HRM 5700 Module 6 example is put together
A summary page names the problem, the program, its price and its targets before anything else. A problem section joins findings from the five earlier modules and puts costs on them. A target state section describes success. A table maps each of Kotter's eight steps to an action. Sections on knowledge processes and HR alignment draw on research about people management and knowledge sharing, with a table of HR changes. Implementation, a budget, resistance and evaluation complete the report. The structure shows how the course's analyses fit into one plan. A budget is compared with the savings from fewer repeated failures, giving leaders a financial reason to approve the change.
HRM 5700 Module 6 rubric: what earns full marks
The report's grade rests on the diagnosis, a change strategy that hangs together, HR practices woven into it, a plan that could really run and good sources. Mentors look for a recognized change model applied specifically, costs and benefits estimated, resistance anticipated and evaluation defined. Reports that build on the progress report and earlier assignments show development over the course. The slide deck earns its own grade and should condense the report for an executive audience. APA style applies. Mentors also value a plan that addresses resistance with specific responses and a timeline that phases the change. Using the course's earlier analyses as the evidence base shows synthesis. Measures that include both outcomes and the conditions that produce them, such as trust, show that the plan can be monitored and adjusted.
HRM 5700 Module 6 help: mistakes that cost marks
Final reports lose points when they describe a knowledge management tool without a change plan, when they name a change model without applying it or when HR practices are missing. Others propose large programs without costs or measures. Start from evidence of the problem and its cost. Apply each step of your change model. Align selection, appraisal and rewards with sharing. Plan for resistance. Attach a number and a date to each goal. A free first sample of your own HRM-5700 progress report or final report is available on request. Show the cost of the problem in numbers. Map every step of your change model to an action. Include a table of HR practices and how each changes. Plan for the people who will resist. Keep the executive summary to one page.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Thomas Edison State University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More HRM 5700 and Master of Science in Human Resources Management sample papers
- HRM 5700 Module 1: Written Assignment: Knowledge Management in Theory and in Practice
- HRM 5700 Module 2: Written Assignment: Culture and Intellectual Capital in a Knowledge Economy
- HRM 5700 Module 3: Written Assignment: Learning From Projects and From Clients
- HRM 5700 Module 4: Written Assignment: Knowledge Loss as a Project Risk
- HRM 5700 Module 5: Written Assignment: Leadership, Trust and Knowledge Sharing
- HRM 5600 Module 3: Written Assignment: Is Garden State Mutual a Learning Organization?
- HRM 5500 Module 5: Discussion: Fit to the Job, the Team or the Company?
- HRM 6100 Module 1: Written Assignment: Costco's Strategy and the Case for Strategic HR
- HRM 5400 Module 2: Written Assignment: Job Analysis and a Point Factor Evaluation
HRM 5700 Module 6 questions, answered
Where can I find a free HRM 5700 Module 6 sample paper?
The complete final report for Meridian BioLabs is above, with the knowledge problem, a Kotter change plan, HR alignment, budget and evaluation.
What is the HRM-5700 final project?
A project on knowledge management and change within an organization, delivered as a progress report, a final report and a PowerPoint presentation.
What are Kotter's eight steps?
Urgency, a guiding coalition, a vision, communication of it, removal of barriers, quick wins, consolidation and, last, embedding the new ways in the culture.
How do HR practices affect knowledge sharing?
Selection, appraisal, rewards, training and leadership development shape whether people see sharing as valued and safe.
How can a knowledge management program be evaluated?
By tracking outcomes such as repeated errors and delivery times alongside conditions such as trust and the use of knowledge tools.