| Course | LCO-6100 Leading Change in Complex Organizations |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 1 |
| Paper type | Module 1 module paper: succeeding or failing at organizational change |
| Length | About 798 words, 5 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Thomas Edison State University |
| Program | Master of Science in Management |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for LCO 6100 Module 1
Five of Eight Errors: Why Raritan Valley Mutual's First Claims System Rollout Failed
Student Name
Master of Science in Management, Thomas Edison State University
LCO-6100: Leading Change in Complex Organizations
Mentor Name
Month Day, Year
Five of Eight Errors: Why Raritan Valley Mutual's First Claims System Rollout Failed
Introduction
Raritan Valley Mutual is a composite regional insurer with 1,100 employees, writing home and auto policies in New Jersey and Pennsylvania. In 2021 its leaders bought a cloud-based claims platform meant to let adjusters handle simple claims from photos and replace a paper-heavy process built in the 1990s. Eighteen months later, fewer than a third of eligible claims ran through the new system, adjusters kept parallel spreadsheets and the project sponsor had left the company. Kotter (2012) argues that most failed transformations share a small set of predictable errors, and this paper uses his framework to explain what happened. Interviews with adjusters and supervisors after the rollout, summarized in an internal review, provide the evidence used below.
Error 1: Allowing Too Much Complacency
The company's results in 2021 were good. Claims costs were stable and customer complaints low, so most employees saw no reason to change how they worked. Leaders announced the platform as a modernization project but never showed staff the threat behind it: competitors settling simple auto claims in two days while Garden State took nine. Kotter (2012) places complacency first because without a shared sense of urgency, every later step meets passive resistance. At Garden State, adjusters treated the platform as an option rather than a necessity.
Error 2: Failing to Create a Powerful Guiding Coalition
The project was run by the information technology department, with one vice president of claims as a part-time sponsor. No senior claims managers, no respected frontline adjusters and no one from underwriting or customer service sat on the steering group. When adjusters raised problems, the people who heard them could not change claims procedures, and the people who could change procedures were not involved. Battilana and Casciaro (2012) found that change agents who sit at the center of informal networks are more effective at implementing changes that break with existing practice; the first rollout's IT-led group had no such ties to the claims floor.
Error 3: Underestimating the Power of Vision and Undercommunicating It
The only statement of purpose was a slide promising "a modern claims experience." It did not say what would be different for a customer with a dented bumper or for an adjuster on a Monday morning. Communication consisted of a launch email, two town halls and a training schedule. Kotter (2012) argues that leaders undercommunicate their vision by a factor of ten or more, and that a vision that cannot be explained in five minutes is not ready.
Error 4: Permitting Obstacles to Block the New Vision
The largest obstacle was structural. Adjusters were measured on closed files per month, and the new system, with its learning curve, slowed them down at first. Supervisors who saw their teams' numbers fall quietly allowed the old process to continue. The performance system rewarded exactly the behavior the change was meant to end, and no one in the coalition had the authority to change it.
Error 5: Declaring Victory Too Soon
Six months after launch, the IT department reported the project complete because the software was installed and all adjusters had been trained. The steering group disbanded. Adoption then drifted downward as workarounds spread. Kotter (2012) warns that changes sink into a culture only over years, and that celebrating installation as success removes the pressure needed to finish the work.
How Often Does Change Fail?
Garden State's executives, like many, quoted the familiar line that seven in ten changes fail. Hughes (2011) followed that figure back through the literature and found no sound study behind it; it had spread by being repeated. That matters for Garden State. The lesson of its first attempt is not that change usually fails, which would invite fatalism, but that this attempt failed for identifiable reasons that a second attempt can address. Appelbaum et al. (2012) reviewed research on Kotter's model and found broad support for its individual steps, though less evidence for the strict order in which Kotter presents them.
Lessons for the Second Attempt
Three lessons follow. First, urgency must rest on evidence employees find credible, such as customer data, not on executive assertion. Second, the guiding coalition must include claims leaders with authority over procedures and measures, along with respected adjusters. Third, the performance measures must change at the same time as the system, so that using the platform helps adjusters' numbers rather than hurting them. Module 2 develops these first steps into a plan.
Conclusion
Raritan Valley Mutual's first rollout failed because leaders allowed complacency, ran the change through the wrong coalition, never explained the vision, left the old performance measures in place and declared victory at installation. Those errors are specific, and a second attempt that addresses them has a reasonable chance of success.
References
Appelbaum, S. H., Habashy, S., Malo, J.-L., & Shafiq, H. (2012). Back to the future: Revisiting Kotter's 1996 change model. Journal of Management Development, 31(8), 764-782. https://doi.org/10.1108/02621711211253231
Battilana, J., & Casciaro, T. (2012). Change agents, networks, and institutions: A contingency theory of organizational change. Academy of Management Journal, 55(2), 381-398. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.0891
Hughes, M. (2011). Do 70 per cent of all organizational change initiatives really fail? Journal of Change Management, 11(4), 451-464. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2011.630506
Kotter, J. P. (2012). Leading change. Harvard Business Review Press.
LCO 6100 Module 1 instructions, in plain terms
LCO-6100 grades its work through discussions, written assignments, reflection exercises, module papers worth 20 percent and a final paper worth 40 percent. The Module 1 paper asks why change succeeds or fails, using Kotter's eight errors and the stories of change in the readings. Most students analyze a change they have seen at work, which gives the paper concrete detail. Choose a change with a clear outcome, explain which errors occurred and how you know, and support the analysis with research beyond Kotter. Avoid listing all eight errors if only some apply; depth on the relevant ones earns more. Name the organization or describe it as a composite if you must protect confidential details, and give enough facts about the change, such as dates, numbers or decisions, for the reader to judge your analysis.
Inside the LCO 6100 Module 1 example
The paper introduces a composite insurer and a failed system rollout with specific numbers on adoption. Five sections each take one of Kotter's errors and show what it looked like inside the company, from the launch slide to the performance measures that rewarded the old process. A section examines the evidence behind the 70 percent failure claim and research on the model's support. Three lessons for a second try follow, and one closing sentence names all five errors. The tone stays analytical rather than blaming: each error is described as a leadership choice with consequences, which models the stance a change leader takes when reviewing a failure.
Reading the LCO 6100 Module 1 grading rubric
Mentors grade module papers on accurate application of course concepts, depth of analysis, use of research and clear APA writing. In this first paper, answers that show how each error appeared in a real organization, with evidence such as adoption figures or meeting structures, show understanding beyond Kotter's list. Questioning the common failure statistic with research demonstrates critical reading. Lessons that follow directly from the analysis, and that set up the next module, show the student is thinking as a change leader, not only as an observer. Clear organization by error, with headings, and correct APA citations make the paper easy to follow and support the grade.
LCO 6100 Module 1 help from the desk
Students lose points by summarizing Kotter's chapter instead of applying it, by blaming failure on resistant employees without examining leadership errors or by repeating the 70 percent figure as fact. Pick the errors that actually occurred and give evidence for each. Look for structural causes, such as performance measures, as well as communication. Cite research that tests Kotter's model. End with lessons a leader could act on. Keep the analysis grounded in what happened rather than what might have happened. A free first sample on your own LCO-6100 Module 1 paper is available on request.
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 LCO 6100 and Master of Science in Management sample papers
- LCO 6100 Module 2: Module Paper: Urgency, a Coalition and a Vision for the Second Attempt
- LCO 6100 Module 3: Module Paper: Communicating, Empowering and Winning Early
- LCO 6100 Module 4: Final Paper: A Full Change Plan for a Contemporary Insurer
- IOP 5100 Module 3: Written Assignment: Validity, Utility and Fairness in Judging a Chat Agent Test
- HRM 5300 Module 6: Final Paper: Delta's People as Advantage
- MSM 6200 Module 2: Written Assignment: Diagnosing the Warehouse Before Choosing a Fix
- PJM 5100 Module 5: Leading the Branch Project Team
LCO 6100 Module 1 questions, answered
Where can I find a free LCO 6100 Module 1 sample paper?
Raritan Valley Mutual's failed claims rollout, traced through Kotter's eight errors, is analyzed above.
What are Kotter's eight errors?
Letting complacency stand, a coalition without power, a vision undervalued and then barely communicated, obstacles left untouched, no early wins, celebrating too early and not embedding change in the culture.
Do 70 percent of change efforts fail?
Research tracing that figure found no valid empirical basis for a single failure rate; it spread through repetition.
Why does complacency come first in Kotter's model?
Without a shared sense of urgency, every later step meets passive resistance.
What textbook does LCO-6100 use?
John Kotter's Leading Change, published by Harvard Business Review Press in 2012.