| Course | MGMT 4400 Organizational Behavior and Management |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 7 |
| Paper type | Peer reply set |
| Length | About 440 words, 3 pages |
| Format | Discussion reply, APA 7 citations |
| School | Walden University |
| Program | BS in Business Administration |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for MGMT 4400 Week 7
Week 7 Discussion: Replies to Classmates on Leadership Behavior
Three Replies on How a Manager Changed What a Group Produced: A Dental Front Desk, a Campus Dining Hall and a Warehouse Shift, Read Through Consideration and Initiating Structure
Before replying, a note on the two dimensions I am using. The Ohio State studies, including the questionnaire work of Fleishman (1953), described leader behavior along two dimensions: consideration, which is concern for people, trust and relationships, and initiating structure, which is organizing tasks, roles and schedules. Judge et al. (2004) found in a meta-analysis that both are related to group performance and satisfaction, with consideration more strongly linked to followers' satisfaction and initiating structure somewhat more to performance.
Response to Renee
Renee, your post said the new office manager "turned the front desk around in a month" by "being so much nicer than the last one." That is consideration, and your examples of her learning everyone's names fit it. But you also mentioned, almost in passing, that she created a shared checklist for insurance verification and assigned one person each morning to confirm the next day's appointments. Those are initiating structure, the kind of role clarity Robbins and Judge (2019) describe as the task side of leadership. The drop in missed appointments you described may owe more to the checklist and the morning assignment than to the warmth. Would the front desk have improved as quickly with the new routines and the old manager's manner?
Reply to Andre
Andre, you described the dining hall supervisor who "ran it like a military operation" and said output went up but staff turnover spiked. That is a clear case of high initiating structure with low consideration, and your account fits the meta-analytic pattern: structure lifted performance while satisfaction fell. One detail you did not develop is that the supervisor posted the new station assignments without asking anyone's preferences, and the students who quit were mostly those moved off stations they had chosen. Was turnover concentrated among people whose assignments changed? If so, a small dose of consideration, asking preferences before posting assignments, might have kept the output gains without the losses.
Reply to Keith
Keith, your warehouse shift lead "stopped yelling and started explaining," and you credited the improvement to consideration. I agree that explaining is part of it, but explaining the reasons for a schedule change is also a way of clarifying tasks and expectations, so it sits on both dimensions at once. Your case suggests the two are not opposites; a leader can raise both, which Judge et al. (2004) treat as independent dimensions rather than ends of one scale. What happened to errors on your shift after the change, as opposed to morale?
References
Fleishman, E. A. (1953). The description of supervisory behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 37(1), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0056314
Judge, T. A., Piccolo, R. F., & Ilies, R. (2004). The forgotten ones? The validity of consideration and initiating structure in leadership research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(1), 36-51. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.1.36
Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2019). Organizational behavior (18th ed.). Pearson.
The Walden MGMT 4400 Week 7 instructions
Week 7 asks for replies that add something to classmates' arguments about leadership. Define the leadership concept you are using once, briefly, so each reply can apply it precisely. Begin each reply by quoting a phrase the classmate wrote, which shows you engaged with their claim. Place the manager's behavior on the concept's dimensions, then add a detail from the classmate's own account that they did not develop. End each reply with a question the classmate can answer. Keep the structure consistent but vary the wording, so the set does not read like a form. Each reply should run about 120 to 150 words. Use the classmate's name and quote them accurately.
How the MGMT 4400 Week 7 example is put together
An opening paragraph defines consideration and initiating structure, citing Fleishman and Judge and colleagues. The reply to Renee quotes her praise of a friendlier manager, then points to a checklist and morning assignment as initiating structure, citing Robbins and Judge. The reply to Andre links the dining hall's turnover to station assignments posted without asking preferences. The reply to Keith argues that explaining schedule changes sits on both dimensions and asks about errors rather than morale. No two replies open with the same sentence, though all follow the same order. Each reply's margin note explains what it adds to the classmate's account. The opening definitions take two sentences, leaving the rest of the space for the classmates' cases.
Where the marks sit in the MGMT 4400 Week 7 rubric
Peer replies earn credit for adding substance to a classmate's argument. Quoting the classmate's words anchors each reply in what was actually said. Applying the concept precisely, placing behavior on its dimensions, shows understanding. The most valuable part is a detail the classmate mentioned but did not develop, connected to the concept. Ask things the classmate can answer from what they saw. The set should vary its wording while keeping a consistent structure. Agreement alone, or a definition never tied to the classmate's case, scores lower. A respectful tone, even when disagreeing, is part of the grade. Graders reward replies a classmate could act on.
Common MGMT 4400 Week 7 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Read each classmate's post twice, the second time looking for details they mentioned in passing. Copy a phrase that captures their main claim. Ask where the manager's actions fall on the concept's dimensions. Then find something in their own account that complicates or adds to their explanation, such as a routine they introduced alongside the friendlier manner. Ask a question about that detail. Write each reply fresh rather than copying a template. Many replies praise the classmate's example without engaging with it. If you want help finding the detail a classmate skipped, share their post with us. Quote before you comment. End each reply with a question the classmate can answer.
Get a MGMT 4400 Week 7 example written to your instructions
Paste the classmates' posts you need to answer, plus the Week 7 thread instructions and participation rubric. A reply set comes back in 24 to 48 hours, first one free, each reply adding a concept or a detail the post lacked. Replies use only what your classmates wrote; nothing is put in their mouths.
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 8: Social Proof Influence Memo
- MGMT 4400 Week 9: Organizational Culture Write-Up
- MGMT 4400 Week 10: Change Resistance Proposal
- MGMT 4400 Week 11: Organizational Behavior Final Synthesis
- MRKT 3001 Week 7: Distribution Channel Note
- HRMG 4203 Week 7: Cause Elimination Memo
- HRMG 4202 Week 7: Training Delivery Plan
- HRMG 4201 Week 7: Comeback Metric Memo
MGMT 4400 Week 7 questions, answered
Where can I find a free MGMT 4400 Week 7 sample paper?
The three leadership replies are posted below free to read.
Which concept do the MGMT 4400 Week 7 replies use?
Consideration and initiating structure, the two Ohio State leadership dimensions.
What does the reply to Renee add?
That a new checklist and morning assignment, forms of initiating structure, may explain the front desk's improvement.
What does the reply to Andre suggest?
That turnover may have come from station assignments made without asking students' preferences.
What does the reply to Keith argue?
That explaining schedule changes counts as both consideration and initiating structure.