| Course | MSM-6200 Leading Strategic Change |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 2 |
| Paper type | Module 2 written assignment: diagnosis |
| Length | About 627 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 MSM 6200 Module 2
Before Buying Robots: A Congruence Diagnosis of a Logistics Warehouse
Student Name
Master of Science in Management, Thomas Edison State University
MSM-6200: Leading Strategic Change
Mentor Name
Month Day, Year
Before Buying Robots: A Congruence Diagnosis of a Logistics Warehouse
Why Diagnose First
After our client's ultimatum, the general manager asked for robot quotes within a week. Hayes (2022) warns that managers often jump from recognizing a problem to implementing a favored solution, skipping diagnosis, and that a sound diagnosis compares the present state with the desired one across the whole organization. I proposed two weeks of diagnosis before any purchase. The general manager's instinct was understandable, since the competitor's robots were the most visible difference between our building and theirs. But a visible difference is not necessarily the cause of a gap, and robots for our building would cost about $1.8 million, so a wrong diagnosis would be expensive.
The Diagnostic Model
Nadler and Tushman (1980) proposed the congruence model, which treats an organization as a system turning inputs into outputs through four parts: tasks, individuals, formal arrangements and the informal organization. Performance depends on how well these components fit one another. Burke and Litwin (1992) offered a related model that separates transformational factors like strategy and culture from transactional ones like structure and systems; I used the congruence model because our problems appeared to be ones of fit.
Data Gathered
| Source | What it showed |
|---|---|
| Pick records, six months | Average pick rate flat at 95 lines per hour; 41 percent of a picker's time spent walking |
| Order timing data | Late orders concentrated in the last two hours before the 4 p.m. cutoff |
| Exit interviews, 22 pickers | Main reasons for leaving: pay penalties, feeling rushed, little training |
| Floor observation, three shifts | Fast-moving items stored far from packing; pickers waiting for carts |
The Fit Analysis
The poor fits reinforce each other. A bad layout makes walking long; thin training makes new pickers slow; pay penalties make everyone cautious near the cutoff, exactly when speed matters most.
| Fit | Finding |
|---|---|
| Work and formal organization | The layout stores fast movers at the back; slotting has not been updated in four years |
| Work and people | New pickers receive one shift of training for a complex warehouse management system |
| People and formal organization | Incentive pay penalizes errors heavily, so careful pickers slow down near cutoff |
| Informal organization and work | Experienced pickers keep the best carts and shortcuts to themselves |
The Gap
The desired state is shipping 97 percent of orders before the cutoff with stable staffing. Robots would cut walking time, addressing one misfit. But without reslotting, better training and a pay system that rewards both speed and accuracy, pickers working beside robots would face the same pressures. The diagnosis therefore points to a broader change: reslot fast movers immediately, redesign training and pay, and pilot robots in one zone. Reslotting alone, by our inventory manager's estimate, could cut walking time by a quarter within two months at almost no cost.
Limits of the Diagnosis
This diagnosis is not complete. Exit interviews reach only the people who quit, and pickers who stayed may judge the pay system another way. Two weeks of observation also missed the holiday peak, when the misfits are likely to be worse. Before planning, I will survey current pickers and review last December's data. Hayes treats diagnosis as continuing through a change rather than ending once, and the plan in Module 4 will build in checks that test whether these findings hold. Burke and Litwin (1992) would also direct attention to the site's culture, which our model captured only as the informal organization; the hoarding of shortcuts may reflect a deeper lack of trust that pay changes alone will not repair.
Conclusion
Diagnosis showed that the warehouse's problem was a set of poor fits, not only walking distance. A congruence diagnosis prevented a purchase that would have treated one symptom, and it sets up the planning in Module 4.
References
Burke, W. W., & Litwin, G. H. (1992). A causal model of organizational performance and change. Journal of Management, 18(3), 523-545. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639201800306
Hayes, J. (2022). The theory and practice of change management (6th ed.). Bloomsbury.
Nadler, D. A., & Tushman, M. L. (1980). A model for diagnosing organizational behavior. Organizational Dynamics, 9(2), 35-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616(80)90039-X
MSM 6200 Module 2 instructions, in plain terms
The written assignments in MSM-6200, three in all and worth 36 percent of the grade, cover topics tied to the modules, and two of them help build the final project. This one covers diagnosis. Expect to choose a diagnostic model, gather or describe data, analyze the organization's present state against a desired state and explain what the diagnosis implies for change. Use the organization you plan to study in the final project. Show the data behind each conclusion, and be willing to let the diagnosis challenge the solution leaders already favor, since that is the purpose of diagnosing. Include a short explanation of the model's parts so a reader who has not seen it can follow the analysis, and state any limits of your data honestly.
How this MSM 6200 Module 2 example is built
The paper opens by explaining why diagnosis must come before a solution. A section introduces the congruence model and a related model, with a reason for the choice. A table lists data sources and findings. A second table analyzes four fits, and the text explains how the misfits reinforce one another. A section defines the gap and explains why the favored solution would not close it alone. The conclusion links the diagnosis to the planning module. A closing section on the diagnosis's own limits names what the data could not show, from pickers who stayed to the missing holiday peak, and how those gaps will be checked before planning begins.
MSM 6200 Module 2 rubric: what earns full marks
Mentors grade this assignment on correct use of a diagnostic model, evidence from data, insight into how the organization's parts fit and clearly written, cited prose. Papers that analyze fits between components, rather than listing problems, show command of systems models. Letting the diagnosis change the proposed solution demonstrates the purpose of diagnosis. Clear tables of data and findings make the analysis easy to follow, and research on diagnostic models supports the choice of framework and its limits. Acknowledging what the data cannot show, and planning to check it, demonstrates the critical judgment the module expects. A cost figure for the favored solution shows why careful diagnosis is worth the time.
Common MSM 6200 Module 2 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Students lose points by describing problems without a model, by skipping data or by diagnosing only the part of the organization they already wanted to change. Others confuse symptoms with causes. Choose a model and explain why. Gather at least two kinds of evidence. Analyze how the parts fit. Define the gap between present and desired states, and say what the diagnosis means for the solution. Trace each finding to its source so a reader can weigh it. Note what your data cannot show and how you would fill the gap. A free first sample on your own MSM-6200 diagnosis assignment 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 MSM 6200 and Master of Science in Management sample papers
- MSM 6200 Module 1: Discussion: Recognizing the Need to Change at a Carteret Warehouse
- MSM 6200 Module 3: Discussion: Pickers, Supervisors and the Politics of the Robot Pilot
- MSM 6200 Module 4: Written Assignment: Planning and Preparing the Robot Pilot
- MSM 6200 Module 5: Discussion: What Leaders Did When the Pilot Stumbled
- MSM 6200 Module 6: Final Project: A Change the Warehouse Should Make, and How to Make It Stick
- ORG 5020 Module 1: Traits, Skills and Behaviors of a New Plant Manager
- MAN 6300 Module 2: Annotated Bibliography Written Assignment
- PJM 5100 Module 1: Defining a Branch Opening as a Project
- IOP 5100 Module 5: Written Assignment: Combining Scores and Setting Cut Scores for Agent Hiring
MSM 6200 Module 2 questions, answered
Where can I find a free MSM 6200 Module 2 sample paper?
A congruence diagnosis of a Carteret logistics warehouse, before choosing robots, is the assignment above.
What is the congruence model?
Nadler and Tushman's model that views an organization as work, people, formal organization and informal organization, whose fit determines performance.
Why diagnose before choosing a solution?
Because a favored solution may treat only one symptom of a problem with several causes.
What is the Burke-Litwin model?
A causal model of organizational performance that sets transformational drivers like mission and culture apart from transactional ones like systems and structure.
What is the gap in change diagnosis?
The difference between the organization's present state and the desired state the change should reach.