| Course | MBAX 6007 Complexity and Systems Thinking Dynamics |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 7 |
| Paper type | Boundary memo |
| Length | About 610 words, 4 pages |
| Format | Memo, APA 7 citations |
| School | Walden University |
| Program | Master of Business Administration (MBA) |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for MBAX 6007 Week 7
Memorandum
To: Director of Operations, Hearthside Home Care
From: Scheduling Coordinator
Date: October 6, 2026
Re: Boundary of the caregiver staffing model
The Claim
The roster's yearly overshoot and collapse is produced inside Hearthside, by how we hire, train, schedule and lose people, rather than by anything outside the agency. This memo sets out which variables the model generates itself, which it takes as given and which it leaves out, so you can judge that claim and the recommendations that will follow from it.
The Boundary Chart
Every variable considered since the first diagram is placed in one of three columns. Endogenous variables are produced by the model's own feedback. Exogenous variables are inputs the model uses but cannot change. Excluded variables are left out entirely.
Table 1
Boundary of the Hearthside Staffing Model
| Endogenous (generated inside) | Exogenous (taken as given) | Excluded | |
|---|---|---|
| Active caregivers | State Medicaid home-care reimbursement rate | Individual aides' personal circumstances | |
| Caregivers in the pipeline | Local wages for competing jobs | Client clinical acuity | |
| Quits | Population over 75 in the service area | Weather and travel time | |
| Overtime hours and fatigue | Hospital discharge volumes | Office staff turnover | |
| Hours per caregiver | Screening and training rules set by the state | Marketing spend | |
| Referral memory and referrals received | | | |
Composite organization. One sentence in the memo justifies each placement.
Referral Memory Comes Inside
In last week's class discussion I asked whether discharge planners' memory of refused referrals belongs inside the model. Classmates who work with referral sources agreed that it does, and our own records support them: in the three months after last spring's shortage, referrals from our two largest hospital partners fell by about a fifth while their total discharges did not. Referrals therefore respond to Hearthside's own record, which makes them endogenous. The model now includes a stock of referral memory that rises when we decline referrals and fades slowly afterward, reducing referrals while it is high.
The Swing With the World Held Still
The key test of the claim is to hold every exogenous variable flat, reimbursement, local wages, population and discharge volumes, and run the model. If the swing came from outside, it would disappear. It does not. With demand fixed at 120 aides and no outside change at all, the roster still overshoots to about 137 and falls back below need about eight months later. Forrester (1961) argued that the most important behaviors of an organization often arise from its own policies, and this run supports that view for Hearthside. Sterman (2000) recommends exactly this test: if a model's behavior survives with the outside world held constant, the behavior is endogenous.
Outside Is Not Unimportant
Placing reimbursement and competing wages outside the boundary does not mean they are minor. A cut in the state rate or a new warehouse paying more per hour could hurt Hearthside badly. But the agency cannot set them, and they do not explain the yearly swing, which occurs even when they are flat. They belong in the model as inputs to test in scenarios, which the next analysis will do.
What Is Excluded and Why
Aides' personal circumstances, client acuity, weather and office turnover are excluded because none of them follows the yearly pattern or responds to staffing decisions in a way that could produce it. Excluding them keeps the model small enough to explain (Richardson, 2011). If a later test shows that one of them does follow the cycle, for example if travel time lengthens visits in winter shortages, it can be brought inside then.
What I Am Asking
Please confirm that the referral data I cited match your understanding, since the referral loop is the newest and least tested part of the model.
References
Forrester, J. W. (1961). Industrial dynamics. MIT Press.
Richardson, G. P. (2011). Reflections on the foundations of system dynamics. System Dynamics Review, 27(3), 219-243. https://doi.org/10.1002/sdr.462
Sterman, J. D. (2000). Business dynamics: Systems thinking and modeling for a complex world. Irwin/McGraw-Hill.
Reading the MBAX 6007 Week 7 instructions
Week 7 asks you to draw and defend your model's boundary in a short memo to a decision-maker. Sort every variable you have considered into what the model generates itself, what it takes as given and what it leaves out, with a reason for each placement. If an earlier discussion raised a boundary question, settle it explicitly with evidence. State the main claim the boundary supports, such as whether the problem is generated inside the organization, and test it, for example by holding all outside inputs constant. Explain why variables placed outside can still matter. Close by asking the reader for the one thing you need. Three pages with one boundary chart fits most courses.
How this MBAX 6007 Week 7 example is built
The first paragraph carries the claim. A three-column chart sorts six endogenous, five exogenous and four excluded variables. A section explains why referral memory moves inside, citing the fall in referrals from two hospital partners. The test section reports the run with all outside inputs held flat and cites Forrester and Sterman on endogenous behavior. A section explains that reimbursement and wages, though outside, will be tested as scenario inputs. A section justifies the exclusions, citing Richardson on keeping models small, and the memo closes by asking the director to confirm the referral figures. The referral figures are presented as the agency's own records, so the director can check them.
Reading the MBAX 6007 Week 7 rubric
Boundary memos are graded on completeness, justification and the strength of the test. Every variable considered earlier should appear in one column with a reason. Settling an open boundary question with evidence earns credit. The memo's central claim should be tested, not asserted; holding outside inputs constant is the standard test, and reporting its result is weighted heavily. Distinguishing between unimportant and outside the boundary shows maturity. Memo format, a clear claim and a specific request complete the expectations. Memos that draw a boundary without reasons, or claim a problem is internal without testing it, lose most of the credit. A claim stated in the first paragraph, then tested, reads as confident without overreaching.
Common MBAX 6007 Week 7 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Make a list of every variable that has appeared in your diagrams, maps and discussions. For each, ask two questions: does my model's own behavior change it, and can my organization control it? Variables changed by the model go inside; those the model uses but cannot change go in the middle; anything that neither follows the pattern nor responds to decisions can be left out. Then run your model with every outside input held steady. If the problem persists, it is homegrown. Write one sentence for each placement. Students often confuse outside the boundary with unimportant. If you are unsure where a variable belongs, send it to us and we can talk through the placement.
Get a MBAX 6007 Week 7 example written to your instructions
Send your current model, the variables you are unsure about and the Week 7 prompt and rubric. A custom boundary memo reaches you within 24-48h, the first free, with every variable placed in one of three columns and each exclusion priced by the question your model will stop being able to answer.
More MBAX 6007 papers and MBA samples
- MBAX 6007 Week 1: Systems Orientation Post
- MBAX 6007 Week 2: Causal Loop Diagram Paper
- MBAX 6007 Week 3: Stock and Flow Map Paper
- MBAX 6007 Week 4: System Delay Analysis
- MBAX 6007 Week 5: Spreadsheet Modeling Exercise
- MBAX 6007 Week 6: Model Critique Discussion Post
- MBAX 6007 Week 8: Two-Scenario Write-Up
- MBAX 6007 Week 9: Leverage Point Analysis
- MBAX 6007 Week 10: Draft Workshop Submission
- MBAX 6007 Week 11: Final System Dynamics Paper
- MBAX 6005 Week 7: Two-Frame Applied Assignment
- WMBA 6882 Week 7: Timed Change Announcement Sequence
- WMBA 6695 Week 7: Talking Points for a Leader
- WMBA 6633 Week 7: Written Feedback Draft
MBAX 6007 Week 7 questions, answered
Where can I find a free MBAX 6007 Week 7 sample paper?
The boundary memo and its three-column chart are available on this page, free to read.
What claim does the MBAX 6007 Week 7 memo make?
That the agency's yearly caregiver swing is generated inside the agency rather than by outside conditions.
Why does referral memory move inside the boundary?
Referrals from two large hospital partners fell by about a fifth after a shortage while their discharges did not.
How is the claim tested?
By holding reimbursement, wages, population and discharges flat, after which the roster still overshoots to about 137.
Are outside variables unimportant?
No. Reimbursement and wages matter but cannot be set by the agency, so they become scenario inputs.