| Course | MHRM 6101 Foundations of Human Resource Management |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 9 |
| Paper type | Peer reply |
| Length | About 380 words, 3 pages |
| Format | Discussion reply, APA 7 citations |
| School | Walden University |
| Program | MS in Human Resource Management |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for MHRM 6101 Week 9
Week 9 Discussion: Response to Jordan
Re: Moving HR Under the Chief Executive: Agreed on the Direction, but Which Decision Would the New Reporting Line Change?
Jordan, you wrote that moving HR's reporting line from the finance chief to the chief executive "would finally give HR a voice." I agree with the direction, and your example of requisitions sitting for three weeks in finance's approval queue was the strongest part of the post, because it showed a real cost of the current line rather than a matter of status.
What I want to push on is what that voice would be used for. If HR reported to the chief executive at a firm like the logistics company in our course case, which decision would go differently the following year? At that firm, the shortfall last peak season came from a volume commitment made without HR. A new reporting line might put HR in that planning meeting, but it might not; reporting lines decide who reviews HR's budget, not automatically who attends which meeting. Huselid (1995) linked HR practices to lower turnover and better financial performance, but the effect came from practices such as selective hiring and training, not from where HR sat on the chart. So I would ask you to name one decision, perhaps your requisition approvals, and one measure that would show the change worked, such as days from request to approved posting.
There is also a cost worth naming. Under finance, HR's spending is reviewed closely, and that discipline has some value; at our case firm, the finance chief caught an overlapping benefits contract worth several thousand dollars a year. Under the chief executive, HR might win attention but lose that scrutiny. You could keep both by moving the reporting line while asking finance to keep reviewing HR's budget each quarter. Would that compromise satisfy the people in your organization who argued for the change?
Becker and Huselid (2006) argue that HR adds value when it is aligned with how a particular firm competes, which supports your argument if the new line brings HR closer to those choices. Ulrich (1997) makes a similar case from the practitioner side. I think your proposal is stronger with that link spelled out, and I would be curious which decision you would pick.
References
Becker, B. E., & Huselid, M. A. (2006). Strategic human resources management: Where do we go from here? Journal of Management, 32(6), 898-925. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206306293668
Huselid, M. A. (1995). The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, productivity, and corporate financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 38(3), 635-672. https://doi.org/10.2307/256741
Ulrich, D. (1997). Human resource champions: The next agenda for adding value and delivering results. Harvard Business School Press.
Reading the MHRM 6101 Week 9 instructions
Week 9 asks you to respond to a classmate's argument in a way that strengthens it. Quote the classmate so your reply stays tied to what was written. Credit a specific strength before raising a challenge. Ask one pressing question in concrete terms, ideally one your classmate could answer from experience at work. Bring in research that sharpens the question. Consider a cost or risk the classmate did not mention, and offer a way to address it. Close by offering a source as help and inviting a response. Keep the reply to four short paragraphs, each doing one job: credit, question, cost and offer.
How this MHRM 6101 Week 9 example is built
The reply opens with the classmate's quoted claim and credits the requisition example. The second paragraph asks which decision a new reporting line would change, using the course's logistics case and Huselid's finding that practices drive results. It proposes a measure, days from request to approved posting. The third paragraph names the risk of losing finance's scrutiny, with an example from the case, and suggests quarterly budget reviews as a compromise. The final paragraph cites Becker and Huselid and Ulrich in support of the classmate's direction and asks which decision the classmate would choose. The classmate is addressed by name throughout, and every challenge is phrased as a question rather than a correction, which keeps the exchange open.
MHRM 6101 Week 9 rubric: what earns full marks
Peer replies are graded on substance and tone. Quoting the classmate shows close reading. Specific credit is valued over general praise. A concrete question that pushes the classmate's argument forward is the core of a strong reply. Research should sharpen the question rather than display reading. Raising a cost the classmate missed, with a practical way to handle it, adds depth. The tone should be collegial, offering sources as help. Replies that simply agree, restate their own post or correct the classmate without engaging the argument earn less credit. Graders notice when a reply gives the classmate something they can actually use in a follow-up post.
MHRM 6101 Week 9 help from the desk
Read your classmate's post and find the sentence that carries the argument. Quote it. Then find the strongest example in the post and say why it works. Ask what the classmate's proposal would change in practice, and phrase it so they could answer from experience. Look for one source that helps them answer. Think about what the proposal might cost and whether there is a way to keep that cost low. End with a real question. Many replies stop at agreement. If you want a second opinion on a reply draft, send us the classmate's post and your response. Three hundred fifty to five hundred words is usually enough for a reply like this, and shorter is fine if each paragraph earns its place.
Get a MHRM 6101 Week 9 example written to your instructions
Paste the classmate's post you are answering, the discussion prompt and the rubric, and a reply that presses on that post's argument is written. Free on your first custom request, ready within 24 to 48 hours. The classmate quoted in the sample is imaginary, as is the logistics case the thread discusses.
More MHRM 6101 papers and MS in Human Resource Management samples
- MHRM 6101 Week 1: HR Belief Discussion Post
- MHRM 6101 Week 2: HR Function Role Brief
- MHRM 6101 Week 3: Peak-Season Shortfall Case Memo
- MHRM 6101 Week 4: Freight Dispatcher Job Analysis
- MHRM 6101 Week 5: Supervisor Staffing Memo
- MHRM 6101 Week 6: Internal Posting Policy Draft
- MHRM 6101 Week 7: HRIS Question Inventory Brief
- MHRM 6101 Week 8: Selection Ethics Memo
- MHRM 6101 Week 10: HR Structure Memo
- MHRM 6101 Week 11: HR Position Paper
MHRM 6101 Week 9 questions, answered
Where can I find a free MHRM 6101 Week 9 sample paper?
The reply to Jordan is published on this page free of charge.
What did the classmate argue in the MHRM 6101 Week 9 post?
That moving HR to report to the chief executive would give the function a voice.
What question does the reply ask?
Which decision would go differently the next year if HR reported to the chief executive.
What cost does the reply name?
Losing the finance office's close review of HR spending.
Which sources does the reply offer?
Huselid, Becker and Huselid, and Ulrich, offered as support for the classmate's direction.