| Course | MAN-3110 Organizational Behavior |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 5 |
| Paper type | Capstone paper: organizational structure, culture and change |
| Length | About 1,031 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Thomas Edison State University |
| Program | B.S.B.A. in Human Resources/Organizational Management |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for MAN 3110 Module 5
Changing the Show Without Losing the Company: Structure, Culture and Change at a Regional Theater
Student Name
B.S.B.A. in Human Resources/Organizational Management, Thomas Edison State University
MAN-3110: Organizational Behavior
Mentor Name
Month Day, Year
Changing the Show Without Losing the Company: Structure, Culture and Change at a Regional Theater
The capstone paper asks students to bring the course together by applying its concepts to one organization. This paper does so for the Raritan Stage Company, the same invented company that has appeared in each of my written activities. The theater is in transition. After a costly season and the arrival of a new artistic director, it plans to shift from a subscription season of established plays to a mixed season with new work developed with local communities, shorter runs and a year-round education program. The paper diagnoses the theater's structure and culture, examines how staff are likely to react to the change, and recommends how to manage it, drawing on concepts from all five modules.
Structure: Who Decides What
Organizational structure is the formal system of task and reporting relationships that coordinates people's work (George & Jones, 2012). Raritan Stage has a dual structure common in nonprofit theaters: an artistic director responsible for programming and artistic staff, and a managing director responsible for marketing, development, finance and operations, both reporting to the board. Within each side, departments are functional, and production work is organized as temporary project teams for each show.
The structure suits the old model, in which a handful of large productions moved through predictable stages. The new model strains it in two ways. Community-developed work requires artistic and education staff to work closely with marketing and development from the start, but the dual structure separates them until a show is announced. And year-round education programs need continuing coordination that temporary production teams do not provide. A modest structural change would help: a standing community programs team that includes the education director, a marketing manager, a development officer and an artistic associate, reporting jointly to both directors. This adds a matrix element at one point of need rather than redesigning the whole organization.
Culture: What People Value
Organizational culture is the shared values, norms and assumptions that shape how members behave (George & Jones, 2012). The theater's culture has strong, positive elements: pride in production quality, loyalty among long-serving staff and a shared belief that the work matters. Interviews with staff for this paper also revealed norms that could hinder change. Success is measured by reviews of mainstage productions, so education and community work carry less status. Decisions have traditionally come from the artistic director with little discussion, a pattern noted in the Module 3 analysis of the season-selection committee. And the company prides itself on polish, which can make experimental work feel risky.
Culture matters because people's fit with it affects whether they stay. O'Reilly et al. (1991) measured the fit between individuals' values and their organizations' cultures and found that better fit predicted job satisfaction and commitment a year later and lower turnover two years later. If the theater's culture shifts toward community engagement and experimentation, some long-serving staff whose values center on polished mainstage work may find the fit weaker. The change plan must therefore address values, not only tasks.
Reactions to Change
Employees' reactions are central to whether change succeeds. Oreg et al. (2011) reviewed 79 quantitative studies of how change recipients react and found that reactions depended on several groups of factors: recipients' own characteristics, the organization's context before the change, such as trust in management, and features of the change itself, including how it was carried out, whether people expected to benefit or be harmed and what the change involved. Reactions in turn affected work outcomes such as satisfaction, commitment and intentions to leave.
Applying that framework to Raritan Stage suggests where resistance will come from. Trust in management is fragile after the losing season and budget cuts. Production staff may expect harm: shorter runs mean more productions to build each year with the same crew. Long-serving artists may see the community focus as a judgment on their past work. On the other hand, education staff and younger employees are likely to welcome a change that raises the status of their work. The process will matter as much as the content.
Recommendations
Five recommendations follow, each drawing on concepts from the course. First, build trust before launching the new season: the new artistic director should hold small-group conversations with every department, explain the financial and audience data behind the change and acknowledge what the old model did well, using the leadership practices discussed in Module 4. Second, involve staff in designing the change, for example by asking production staff to help plan the build schedule for shorter runs, which addresses both expected harm and the decision norms identified above. Third, adjust structures and rewards to match the new values: create the community programs team described earlier and give education and community work visible recognition, such as opening-night style celebrations for community productions.
Fourth, protect the workload of production staff, whose stress during tech weeks was examined in Module 2, by hiring one additional technician and limiting the number of overlapping builds. Fifth, attend to fit honestly: some long-serving staff may decide the new direction is not for them, and the theater should support those transitions respectfully while recruiting new staff whose values match the community mission. Progress should be tracked through the twice-yearly staff survey introduced in Module 1, adding questions about trust, workload and support for the new direction, and through turnover among key staff.
Conclusion
Raritan Stage's planned change is ultimately about culture: what the company values and how it decides. Its structure can be adjusted at one point of need, and its strengths, pride and loyalty, can be carried into the new model if staff help shape it. Research on how people react to change and on person-organization fit points to the same conclusion as this course: lasting change depends on attending to individuals, groups and the organization together.
The plan also has a sequence. Trust-building conversations come first, in the two months before the new season is announced; the community programs team forms next; and staffing changes follow once the build schedule is clear. Rushing the announcement before staff have been heard would repeat the closed decision process that produced last season's losses.
References
George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and managing organizational behavior (6th ed.). Pearson Prentice Hall.
Oreg, S., Vakola, M., & Armenakis, A. (2011). Change recipients' reactions to organizational change: A 60-year review of quantitative studies. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 47(4), 461-524. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886310396550
O'Reilly, C. A., Chatman, J., & Caldwell, D. F. (1991). People and organizational culture: A profile comparison approach to assessing person-organization fit. Academy of Management Journal, 34(3), 487-516. https://doi.org/10.2307/256404
Reading the MAN 3110 Module 5 assignment instructions
The MAN-3110 capstone paper closes the course, and the syllabus lists it alongside the discussions, quizzes and written activities; the course site gives its full directions. Expect to apply concepts from several modules to one organization, with particular attention to Module 5's topics of structure, culture and change. Choose an organization you know well enough to describe its structure, culture and current challenges, and draw on your earlier written activities where they fit. Support your analysis with the George and Jones text and research, follow the length and format your mentor specifies, and write a clear diagnosis before recommendations. Outline the paper before writing so diagnosis and recommendations stay distinct.
How the MAN 3110 Module 5 example is put together
The paper begins by stating the capstone's purpose and the organization's change. It then diagnoses three things in order: structure, using the textbook definition and a targeted recommendation; culture, naming both strengths and hindering norms and using research on person-organization fit; and likely reactions to change, using a large review to predict where support and resistance will come from. Recommendations draw on concepts from every module, including leadership, stress and group decision making, and include measures. The conclusion ties the analysis back to the individual, group and organizational levels introduced in Module 1. Each recommendation names the module whose concept it uses, which shows integration.
MAN 3110 Module 5 rubric: what earns full marks
Mentors evaluate the capstone on integration, depth and application. Strong papers apply concepts from across the course rather than one module, diagnose before recommending, and support claims with research. For structure, culture and change, they look for accurate concepts applied to specific features of the organization and recommendations that follow from the diagnosis. Acknowledging likely resistance and planning for it shows mature understanding of change. Clear organization, professional writing, correct citations and the identifying information the syllabus requires complete the evaluation of this final paper. Recommendations that include a way to measure progress strengthen the paper. Showing how the recommendations fit together into a sequence earns additional credit.
MAN 3110 Module 5 help: mistakes that cost marks
Capstone papers sometimes become a list of concepts with a sentence of application each. Choose a central issue in the organization and show how several concepts explain it. Another frequent weakness is recommending a change without considering how people will react; use research on reactions to change. Students also describe culture by quoting the mission statement; describe the norms people actually follow. Draw on your earlier written activities rather than starting over. Our writers can prepare a MAN 3110 capstone paper built on an organization you know and the concepts your mentor wants emphasized. Leave time to revise; the capstone rewards clear structure as much as content. Make sure each recommendation answers a problem named in your diagnosis.
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 MAN 3110 and B.S.B.A. in Human Resources/Organizational Management sample papers
- MAN 3110 Module 1: Organizational Behavior Written Exercise
- MAN 3110 Module 2: Self-Awareness Exercise
- MAN 3110 Module 3: Group Processes Application Activity
- MAN 3110 Module 4: Leadership Written Exercise
- MAN 3310 Module 2: Fair Hiring Discussion
- PSY 3630 Module 2: Selection Methods Paper: Weighing Validity and Adverse Impact
- MAN 4250 Module 1: Written Assignment: Three Levels of Culture at an Engineering Firm
MAN 3110 Module 5 questions, answered
Where can I find a free MAN 3110 Module 5 sample paper?
The Organizational Behavior capstone paper is complete above: a diagnosis of structure, culture and reactions to change at a composite theater, five recommendations drawing on all modules, sources and margin notes.
What should the MAN-3110 capstone paper cover?
It should apply organizational behavior concepts from across the course to an organization, with attention to structure, culture and change; the course site gives the full directions.
Why does person-organization fit matter during change?
Research found that fit between individuals' values and organizational culture predicted satisfaction, commitment and turnover, so changing culture can change who stays.
What shapes employees' reactions to change?
A large review found reactions depend on recipients' characteristics, the pre-change context such as trust, and the change itself, including how it is carried out.
Can I use my earlier written activities in the capstone?
Yes, where they fit. Building on earlier analyses of the same organization shows integration across the course.