Understanding organizational change into entrepreneurship
Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages Description/Paper Instructions
Understanding organizational change into entrepreneurship
MOD 1
Module One addresses two topics that are foundational to your concept or idea: entrepreneurs or intrapreneurs as change agents and justification for your idea or concept.
Martiarena (2013) and De Clercq and Voronov (2009) describe entrepreneurs as those individuals who typically pursue concepts or ideas for the creation of new enterprises. In contrast, Shin (2013) explains that intrapreneurs are people who generally work within existing organizations to create new concepts or ideas. Thus, regardless of whether you are starting a new business or working within an existing firm, you are operating as a change agent in one arena or the other.
Within the framework of entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs, change agents seek to move things from their current state to some new, presumably better, state. Module One is a reflection of the individuals involved in a concept or idea as those who drive change in a meaningful way. It is also important to understand that change agents operate in a variety of environments. Some change agents work in difficult situations in which change is necessary for organizational survival. Other change agents work in successful environments in which the proposed concept or idea has the potential to improve things even further.
Justification for your concept or idea forms the foundation for business implementation plans, which is where leaders develop the rationale for their concept or idea. This activity follows two important work streams: quantify project and justify project. The first work stream is to quantify a given project. Business leaders involved in this part of a project consider the project in terms of the economic value added that the project brings to the overall organization. The second work stream involves justifying the project. Managers often can select from more than one proposal, so they need information about the justification of each potential project.
In Module Four, you will present a detailed financial analysis of your plan or concept. Module One simply references the concept or ideas of return on investment (ROI) using a standard financial metric for evaluating financial returns, managing for value (MFV) and net present value (NPV, ROI, and so on).
Bardy and Massaro (2013) describe the concept of economic value projects as those projects with a positive economic net benefit that accrues to the sponsoring organization. Of course, it is not enough to simply calculate the ROI, because organizational leaders evaluate projects against each other and often do not have enough capital to engage in all projects that have a positive economic value add.
For this reason, it is necessary for organizational leaders to properly disclose the justification of the project and for this justification to include both financial and nonfinancial considerations. In addition to the financial benefits of concepts or ideas, business leaders also seek to outline the soft benefits of their proposal. These can be more difficult to evaluate because organizational leaders often cannot measure soft benefits. Despite this, Baldwin (2009) argues that these kinds of benefits should be a part of a business implementation plan.
Within the framework of soft return on investment, organizational leaders consider how a concept or idea fits within the business’s core competency. The concept or idea may be a winning one, but it may not fit in with what the organization does well. If this is the case, then the concept or idea may not be a good one for the organization to pursue.
In addition to presenting a concept or idea within that construct of organizational competency, business leaders must also consider strategic fit for the concept or idea. Here, organizational leaders have likely considered where they wish the organization to head over a relatively long time frame. From this perspective, organizational leaders also evaluate concepts or ideas to determine how well the concept or idea supports the long-term perspective of where the organization is headed.
Module One sets the foundation for an implementation plan or concept by outlining the justification, and Module Two will reflect on entrepreneurs or intrapreneurs as change agents. This provides the starting point for the rest of the modules. Module Two will build on the foundation in Module One by addressing plan or concept implementation.
References
Baldwin, G. (2009, June). Measuring ROI. Healthcare Data Management, 17, 24–32.
Bardy, R., & Massaro, M. (2013). Shifting the paradigm of return on investment: Towards a composite index to measure overall corporate performance. Corporate Governance, 13(5), 498–510. doi:10.1108/cg-06- 2013-0081
De Clercq, D., & Voronov, M. (2009, June). The role of cultural and symbolic capital in entrepreneurs’ ability to meet expectations about conformity and innovation. Journal of Small Business Management, 47(3), 398–420. doi:10.1111/j.1540-627x.2009.00276.x
Martiarena, A. (2013). What’s so entrepreneurial about intrapreneurs? Small Business Economics, 40, 27–39. doi:10.1007/s11187-011-9348-1
Shin, S. (2013, Winter). Understanding organizational change into entrepreneurship: A theoretical frameworks and integration. Management Review: An International Journal, 6(2), 29–5
MOD 1
Module One addresses two topics that are foundational to your concept or idea: entrepreneurs or
intrapreneurs as change agents and justification for your idea or concept.
Martiarena (2013) and De Clercq and Voronov (2009) describe entrepreneurs as those i
ndividuals who
typically pursue concepts or ideas for the creation of new enterprises. In contrast, Shin (2013) explains
that intrapreneurs are people who generally work within existing organizations to create new concepts
or ideas. Thus, regardless of whe
ther you are starting a new business or working within an existing firm,
you are operating as a change agent in one arena or the other.
Within the framework of entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs, change agents seek to move things from
their current state to
some new, presumably better, state. Module One is a reflection of the individuals
involved in a concept or idea as those who drive change in a meaningful way. It is also important to
understand that change agents operate in a variety of environments. Some
change agents work in
difficult situations in which change is necessary for organizational survival. Other change agents work in
successful environments in which the proposed concept or idea has the potential to improve things even
further.
Justification
for your concept or idea forms the foundation for business implementation plans, which is
where leaders develop the rationale for their concept or idea. This activity follows two important work
streams: quantify project and justify project. The first work
stream is to quantify a given project.
Business leaders involved in this part of a project consider the project in terms of the economic value
added that the project brings to the overall organization. The second work stream involves justifying the
project
. Managers often can select from more than one proposal, so they need information about the
justification of each potential project.
In Module Four, you will present a detailed financial analysis of your plan or concept. Module One
simply references the c
oncept or ideas of return on investment (ROI) using a standard financial metric
for evaluating financial returns, managing for value (MFV) and net present value (NPV, ROI, and so on).
Bardy and Massaro (2013) describe the concept of economic value project
s as those projects with a
positive economic net benefit that accrues to the sponsoring organization. Of course, it is not enough to
simply calculate the ROI, because organizational leaders evaluate projects against each other and often
do not have enough
capital to engage in all projects that have a positive economic value add.
For this reason, it is necessary for organizational leaders to properly disclose the justification of the
project and for this justification to include both financial and nonfinanc
ial considerations. In addition to
the financial benefits of concepts or ideas, business leaders also seek to outline the soft benefits of their
proposal. These can be more difficult to evaluate because organizational leaders often cannot measure
soft bene
fits. Despite this, Baldwin (2009) argues that these kinds of benefits should be a part of a
business implementation plan.
Within the framework of soft return on investment, organizational leaders consider how a concept or
idea fits within the business’s
core competency. The concept or idea may be a winning one, but it may
not fit in with what the organization does well. If this is the case, then the concept or idea may not be a
good one for the organization to pursue.
MOD 1
Module One addresses two topics that are foundational to your concept or idea: entrepreneurs or
intrapreneurs as change agents and justification for your idea or concept.
Martiarena (2013) and De Clercq and Voronov (2009) describe entrepreneurs as those individuals who
typically pursue concepts or ideas for the creation of new enterprises. In contrast, Shin (2013) explains
that intrapreneurs are people who generally work within existing organizations to create new concepts
or ideas. Thus, regardless of whether you are starting a new business or working within an existing firm,
you are operating as a change agent in one arena or the other.
Within the framework of entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs, change agents seek to move things from
their current state to some new, presumably better, state. Module One is a reflection of the individuals
involved in a concept or idea as those who drive change in a meaningful way. It is also important to
understand that change agents operate in a variety of environments. Some change agents work in
difficult situations in which change is necessary for organizational survival. Other change agents work in
successful environments in which the proposed concept or idea has the potential to improve things even
further.
Justification for your concept or idea forms the foundation for business implementation plans, which is
where leaders develop the rationale for their concept or idea. This activity follows two important work
streams: quantify project and justify project. The first work stream is to quantify a given project.
Business leaders involved in this part of a project consider the project in terms of the economic value
added that the project brings to the overall organization. The second work stream involves justifying the
project. Managers often can select from more than one proposal, so they need information about the
justification of each potential project.
In Module Four, you will present a detailed financial analysis of your plan or concept. Module One
simply references the concept or ideas of return on investment (ROI) using a standard financial metric
for evaluating financial returns, managing for value (MFV) and net present value (NPV, ROI, and so on).
Bardy and Massaro (2013) describe the concept of economic value projects as those projects with a
positive economic net benefit that accrues to the sponsoring organization. Of course, it is not enough to
simply calculate the ROI, because organizational leaders evaluate projects against each other and often
do not have enough capital to engage in all projects that have a positive economic value add.
For this reason, it is necessary for organizational leaders to properly disclose the justification of the
project and for this justification to include both financial and nonfinancial considerations. In addition to
the financial benefits of concepts or ideas, business leaders also seek to outline the soft benefits of their
proposal. These can be more difficult to evaluate because organizational leaders often cannot measure
soft benefits. Despite this, Baldwin (2009) argues that these kinds of benefits should be a part of a
business implementation plan.
Within the framework of soft return on investment, organizational leaders consider how a concept or
idea fits within the business’s core competency. The concept or idea may be a winning one, but it may
not fit in with what the organization does well. If this is the case, then the concept or idea may not be a
good one for the organization to pursue.
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
CLICK ON THE LINK HERE: https://www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow
Also, you can place the order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow / www.phdwriters.us/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME]and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!