| Course | MGMT 4400 Organizational Behavior and Management |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 10 |
| Paper type | Change proposal |
| Length | About 1,050 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Walden University |
| Program | BS in Business Administration |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for MGMT 4400 Week 10
Three Kinds of Objection to the Central Prep Kitchen: A Change Proposal That Reads the Bistro Cooks' Resistance Through Piderit's Cognitive, Emotional and Intentional Dimensions
Student Name
Walden University
MGMT 4400: Organizational Behavior and Management
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Three Kinds of Objection to the Central Prep Kitchen: A Change Proposal That Reads the Bistro Cooks' Resistance Through Piderit's Cognitive, Emotional and Intentional Dimensions
The Change on the Table
Next spring the Brennan owners plan to open a central prep kitchen next spring that would supply all four of their restaurants with sauces, stocks, dressings and cut vegetables, prepared each morning and delivered by van. The aim is consistent quality and lower food cost, since buying and prepping in bulk would cut waste. At each restaurant, cooks would no longer make these items from scratch; they would finish and plate dishes using the central kitchen's components. When the plan was presented in September, the line cooks at the Overland Park bistro objected in three different ways at once. This proposal reads those objections as information and proposes how to introduce the change.
Three Sides of a Response
Piderit (2000) argued that resistance to change is not a single attitude. The analysis separated responses into three dimensions: cognitive, covering beliefs about whether the change will work; emotional, covering the feelings it stirs; and intentional, covering what each person means to do in response. These dimensions can point in different directions at once, producing ambivalence: a cook might believe a change is sensible, feel loss about it and intend to go along anyway. Treating every objection as resistance to be overcome misses that mix, and misses the information objections contain. Ford et al. (2008) made a related argument, that resistance often reveals real problems in a change and in how it was introduced.
What the Objections Revealed
The table shows that the objections are not one block. Two are cognitive and raise practical questions the owners should want answered. Two are emotional and concern what the work means to the cooks. One is intentional and signals a retention risk.
Table 1
The Bistro Cooks' Objections by Dimension
| Dimension | Objection, as stated | What it reveals | |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive | "Sauce made at six in the morning won't hold till nine at night." | A genuine quality question about shelf life that the plan has not answered | |
| Cognitive | "If the van's late, we can't open." | A real dependency risk; the bistro would rely on one delivery | |
| Emotional | "Making the stock is the one part of the job that's mine." | A sense of loss of craft and identity | |
| Emotional | "So we're just assemblers now." | Concern about status and skill | |
| Intentional | "I'll go along, but I'm not staying if it's all packets." | Intention to leave if the change empties the work of skill | |
Objections as stated in the September meeting and afterward.
A Response for Each Dimension
Cognitive objections call for evidence. The owners could run a two-week trial at the bistro on one station, measuring how central sauces hold through a full service, and could arrange a backup supply for late deliveries. If the sauces do not hold, the cooks were right and the plan should change, perhaps keeping some sauces made on site.
Emotional objections call for preserving what the cooks value. The central kitchen does not have to take everything. The owners could leave one signature item at each restaurant, such as the bistro's house stock, to be made on site, and could invite cooks to work rotations at the central kitchen, so their craft follows the work rather than disappearing.
The intentional objection calls for a direct conversation. A cook who says they will leave is giving notice of a risk, and the kitchen manager should ask what would make the job worth staying in.
What Pushing Through Would Cost
The owners could instead announce the central kitchen as decided and expect compliance, which is quicker. The bistro's own recent history suggests the cost. When the tip pool was announced by text without consultation, servers who gained money objected as loudly as those who lost it, and the ill feeling lasted for weeks. When the ordering tablets were ordered by memo, nobody used them for a month. A central kitchen pushed through the same way would likely meet slow, grudging adoption, more food waste while cooks quietly work around it and the loss of at least one experienced cook who has already said as much. Replacing a line cook costs a restaurant several thousand dollars in hiring and training, and an experienced one is harder to find. The three-step introduction takes about a month longer but addresses each kind of objection, which makes it the cheaper route in the end.
How the Trial Would Be Judged
A trial only answers the cognitive objections if everyone agrees in advance what counts as success. The proposal suggests four measures, settled with the bistro cooks before the first delivery. The first is holding quality: the head cook tastes each central sauce at the start of service and again at nine in the evening, and records whether it would be served. The second is delivery reliability, counted as the number of mornings the van arrives after the agreed time. The third is waste, measured by weighing what is thrown out from the trial station against the same two weeks last year. The fourth is the cooks' own judgment, gathered in a short conversation at the end of each week rather than a survey. If quality fails on more than two evenings, that sauce stays on site. Agreeing on the measures together also answers part of the emotional objection, because the cooks become judges of the change rather than its subjects, which is the participation Piderit (2000) suggested turns ambivalence into engagement.
Proposal
Introduce the central kitchen in three steps. First, a two-week trial on one station at the bistro, with results shared openly. Second, adjustments based on the trial, including a list of items that stay on site. Third, rollout to all four restaurants, with rotations at the central kitchen offered to interested cooks. The trial also uses the social proof the tablet rollout showed, since a respected cook's experience will carry more weight than an announcement.
Limits
The proposal rests on what cooks said in one meeting and afterward. Some objections may be shared by cooks at other locations who did not speak. A short conversation with cooks at each restaurant before the trial would show whether the bistro's pattern is typical (Robbins & Judge, 2019).
References
Ford, J. D., Ford, L. W., & D'Amelio, A. (2008). Resistance to change: The rest of the story. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 362-377. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2008.31193235
Piderit, S. K. (2000). Rethinking resistance and recognizing ambivalence: A multidimensional view of attitudes toward an organizational change. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 783-794. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2000.3707722
Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2019). Organizational behavior (18th ed.). Pearson.
MGMT 4400 Week 10 instructions, in plain terms
Week 10 asks you to propose how to introduce a change, using a framework for understanding resistance. State the change precisely before discussing objections. Sort the objections using the framework's dimensions, ideally in a table that records what each reveals. Respond to each dimension differently, since practical doubts, feelings of loss and intentions to leave call for different answers. Weigh the cost of forcing the change through. Propose a sequence of steps the organization can adopt, and note what your evidence cannot show. Quote the objections closely where you can, because paraphrasing them tends to flatten the feelings behind them. Give the reader enough detail about the change itself, such as timing and who is affected, that each objection can be judged against it.
How this MGMT 4400 Week 10 example is built
The paper opens by describing the central kitchen and the cooks' September objections. A section defines Piderit's three dimensions and links them to Ford and colleagues on resistance as information. A table sorts five objections by dimension. A section proposes a response for each dimension. A section compares the cost of pushing the change through with the slower route, drawing on the tip pool and tablet episodes. The proposal sets out a three-step introduction, and a limits section suggests conversations at other locations, citing Robbins and Judge. The table records the source of each objection, its dimension and what it tells management, so a reader can follow the sorting at a glance. The response section then follows the table's order, keeping the link between diagnosis and remedy easy to trace.
MGMT 4400 Week 10 rubric: what earns full marks
Change proposals earn credit for treating resistance as information and responding to it specifically. Stating the change precisely gives the objections something to answer. Sorting objections by the framework's dimensions, with what each reveals, is the analytical core. Distinct responses for each dimension show understanding that resistance is not one attitude. Weighing the cost of forcing change adds realism. The proposal should be a sequence the organization can follow. Limits should be stated. Proposals that treat every objection as an obstacle, or prescribe vague better communication, score lower. Accuracy in using Piderit's dimensions matters, since many papers mislabel a practical doubt as an emotional reaction. Graders also reward proposals that set a timeline and name who would carry out each step, because a plan without owners rarely moves.
MGMT 4400 Week 10 help from the desk
Write down what the change actually is, in a sentence or two. Collect every objection you have heard, in the words people used. For each, ask whether it is a belief about whether the change will work, a feeling about what it takes away or a statement of what the person will do. Sort them. Then ask what would answer each: evidence, preserving something valued or a conversation. Compare that slower path with simply announcing the change. Many proposals lump all objections together as resistance. If you are planning a change and want help sorting objections, list them for us. It can help to ask the people who objected what would change their minds, then record those answers next to each objection. Those answers often reveal whether a trial, a concession or a private talk would do the most good.
Get a MGMT 4400 Week 10 example written to your instructions
Send the Week 10 prompt, the rubric and the change your situation involves, along with any objections you have heard. The change proposal comes back in 24 to 48 hours, first one free, with every objection sorted and every revision traced to one. Anyone who objected is identified by job title, and their words are paraphrased with care.
More MGMT 4400 papers and BS in Business Administration samples
- MGMT 4400 Week 1: Levels of Analysis Discussion Post
- MGMT 4400 Week 2: Attribution Perception Memo
- MGMT 4400 Week 3: Self-Determination Analysis
- MGMT 4400 Week 4: Organizational Justice Case Paper
- MGMT 4400 Week 5: Real Team Analysis Paper
- MGMT 4400 Week 6: Interdependence Conflict Brief
- MGMT 4400 Week 7: Leadership Peer Reply Set
- MGMT 4400 Week 8: Social Proof Influence Memo
- MGMT 4400 Week 9: Organizational Culture Write-Up
- MGMT 4400 Week 11: Organizational Behavior Final Synthesis
- MRKT 3001 Week 10: Target Reach Peer Reply
- HRMG 4203 Week 10: One-Page Recommendation Brief
- HRMG 4202 Week 10: Training Evaluation Plan
- HRMG 4201 Week 10: Strategic HR Discussion Reply
MGMT 4400 Week 10 questions, answered
Where can I find a free MGMT 4400 Week 10 sample paper?
The change resistance proposal and its objection table are posted below at no charge.
What change does the MGMT 4400 Week 10 proposal address?
A central prep kitchen supplying sauces, stocks and cut vegetables to all four restaurants.
How are the objections sorted?
By Piderit's dimensions: cognitive doubts, emotional loss and an intention to leave.
How does the proposal respond to emotional objections?
By keeping a signature item on site at each restaurant and offering cooks rotations at the central kitchen.
What sequence does it propose?
A two-week trial on one station, adjustments based on results and then rollout to all four restaurants.