| Course | MHRM 6901 Capstone: Strategic Human Resource Management |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 3 |
| Paper type | Gap analysis |
| Length | About 770 words, 5 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Walden University |
| Program | MS in Human Resource Management |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for MHRM 6901 Week 3
What Hartwell Says About Its People and What Its Records Show: A Gap Analysis Setting the Bakery's Stated Strategy Against Its Postings, Turnover Logs and Training Budget, Ranked by Consequence for the Second Contract
Student Name
Walden University
MHRM 6901: Capstone: Strategic Human Resource Management
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
What Hartwell Says About Its People and What Its Records Show: A Gap Analysis Setting the Bakery's Stated Strategy Against Its Postings, Turnover Logs and Training Budget, Ranked by Consequence for the Second Contract
Purpose
Hartwell Baking Company describes its approach to people in three statements: "people are our recipe," a commitment to "grow from within" (F18) and a promise of "real investment in your skills" (F19). This gap analysis sets those statements against three records: job postings, turnover logs and the training budget. Argyris and Schön (1978) distinguished an organization's espoused theory, what it says guides its actions, from its theory-in-use, what its actions reveal. The gaps between them matter here only insofar as they affect the capstone question: whether Hartwell can staff its second restaurant contract with qualified maintenance technicians. Each gap is therefore ranked by its consequence for that question.
The Gaps
Table 1
Stated Strategy Against Records
| Stated | Record | What the record shows | Consequence for the contract | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grow from within (F18) | Postings, three years | 2 of 14 maintenance openings posted internally before external advertising; 70 percent of technician hires external (F12) | High: the contract needs 14 technicians, and outside hiring takes 16 weeks per vacancy (F11) | |
| Investment in skills (F19) | Training budget | About $180 per employee per year (F14); no formal maintenance program; six workers learning informally (F13) | High: no internal source of qualified technicians exists | |
| People are our recipe (F18) | Turnover logs | Technicians leave at 18 percent a year (F8); exit records cite pay in 41 percent and night shifts in 27 percent of departures | High: the new line runs three shifts | |
| Grow from within (F18) | Promotion records | Production supervisors are mostly promoted internally | Low: supervisors are not the binding constraint | |
| People are our recipe (F18) | Safety and benefit records | Benefits and safety record compare well with regional employers | Low: a strength, not a gap | |
Composite organization. F numbers refer to the organizational profile.
Reading the Ranking
The three gaps ranked high all concern maintenance technicians. Hartwell grows production supervisors from within, which is consistent with its words, but buys technicians from outside, which is not. It invests little in skills and has no formal route for production workers to become technicians, even though six are trying informally. And its technicians leave for reasons, pay and nights, that the new three-shift line would make worse.
The two gaps ranked low are reminders that Hartwell is not simply failing to live up to its words. Its benefits and safety record are good, and its supervisors' careers do follow the grow-from-within promise. The gap is specific to one group, and that group is the one the contract depends on.
Why Gaps Like These Persist
Hartwell's reliance on outside hiring for technicians is understandable. Hiring a qualified technician takes four months but costs nothing in training; developing one takes two years and costs more up front. Bidwell (2011) showed, using personnel records from a large US firm, that workers brought in from outside earned more than insiders promoted into comparable roles, received weaker early evaluations and left at higher rates, which suggests the apparent savings from outside hiring are smaller than they look. Becker and Huselid (2006) argue that HR practices create the most value when they fit what the firm needs to compete; a firm that competes on reliable high-speed production needs a reliable supply of technicians.
The Six Informal Learners
The clearest evidence of the gap is the six production workers learning maintenance informally (F13). Interviews with two of them and with the senior technicians teaching them show that the learning happens in spare minutes during changeovers, without a curriculum, a schedule or a promise of a technician job at the end. One of the six applied for a technician opening last year and was told that external candidates had more experience. These workers are exactly the internal pipeline Hartwell's words describe, and its practices neither recognize nor reward them. They are also a ready starting point: a formal program could begin with people who have already shown the interest and some of the skill.
What the Analysis Does Not Establish
The exit records rely on the reasons departing technicians chose to give, which may understate dissatisfaction with supervision. The comparison of benefits with regional employers is based on Hartwell's own summary. Neither limitation affects the ranking of the three high-consequence gaps, which rest on postings, budgets and turnover counts.
Implications for Later Sections
The workforce plan in Week 4 must address the missing internal pipeline. The rewards section in Week 6 must address pay and night-shift differentials. Both must be tested against the contract's schedule.
References
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Addison-Wesley.
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
Bidwell, M. (2011). Paying more to get less: The effects of external hiring versus internal mobility. Administrative Science Quarterly, 56(3), 369-407. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839211433562
MHRM 6901 Week 3 instructions, in plain terms
Week 3 asks you to compare what your organization says about its people with what its records show. Quote each stated commitment exactly. Choose records that can test each one, such as postings, turnover data or budgets. Present the comparison in a table and rank each gap by its consequence for your capstone question, not by how embarrassing it is. Include areas where the organization does live up to its words. Explain why the gaps persist, using research. Note what your evidence cannot establish, and say what later sections must address. One comparison table, with a consequence column, usually carries the analysis, followed by sections on the highest-ranked gaps and the reasons they persist.
How the MHRM 6901 Week 3 example is put together
The paper opens by quoting three statements and citing Argyris and Schön. A table compares five statement-record pairs and ranks each consequence high or low. A section shows the three high-ranked gaps all concern technicians, while supervisors' promotion and benefits are strengths. A section explains why outside hiring persists, citing Bidwell and Becker and Huselid. A section describes six production workers learning maintenance informally, one of whom was passed over. A limits section addresses exit records, and a final section assigns issues to the workforce and rewards sections. Each row of the table cites the numbered profile facts it rests on, so the gap analysis and the profile can never drift apart. The table's last two rows record strengths.
MHRM 6901 Week 3 rubric: what earns full marks
Gap analyses are graded on evidence and relevance. Quoting commitments exactly and testing them against records earns credit. Ranking gaps by consequence for the capstone question is weighted heavily, since it keeps the analysis focused. Including strengths shows fairness. Explaining why gaps persist, with research, demonstrates understanding rather than criticism. Concrete evidence, such as specific workers in an informal pipeline, makes the analysis persuasive. Clear handoffs to later sections show capstone planning. Analyses that list every gap equally, or treat stated strategy as hypocrisy without examining causes, receive lower marks. Fair treatment of the organization, including its strengths, is noticed by graders. Precise wording helps too.
Common MHRM 6901 Week 3 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Write down every commitment your organization makes about its people, in its own words. For each, find a record that would show whether it is kept. Compare the two and note the gap, if any. Then ask how much each gap matters for your capstone question, and rank them. Look for at least one commitment the organization keeps. Ask why the gaps exist; there is usually a sensible reason. Many gap analyses read as lists of failures. If you want help finding a record to test a commitment, send it to us. Most gap analyses of this kind fill around three pages. Rank by consequence. Credit strengths too.
Get a MHRM 6901 Week 3 example written to your instructions
Include the gap analysis prompt, rubric and approved profile, since the gaps have to be measured from its facts. The analysis sets stated intent beside recorded practice, ranks the gaps by what they block, and arrives within 24 to 48 hours, a first one free. Its vacancy counts and careers-page promise belong to an employer that exists only here.
More MHRM 6901 papers and MS in Human Resource Management samples
- MHRM 6901 Week 1: Capstone Scope Proposal
- MHRM 6901 Week 2: Capstone Organizational Profile
- MHRM 6901 Week 4: Workforce Planning Section Draft
- MHRM 6901 Week 5: Capstone Peer Workshop
- MHRM 6901 Week 6: Rewards Section Draft
- MHRM 6901 Week 7: Section Reconciliation Memo
- MHRM 6901 Week 8: Capstone Executive Summary
- MHRM 6901 Week 9: Capstone Appendix Set
- MHRM 6901 Week 10: Capstone Revision Pass
- MHRM 6901 Week 11: Strategic HR Capstone Paper
- MHRM 6801 Week 3: Organizational Symptom Review
- MHRM 6751 Week 3: Performance Appraisal Comparison
- MHRM 6701 Week 3: Reentry Hiring Stakeholder Analysis
- MHRM 6101 Week 3: Peak-Season Shortfall Case Memo
MHRM 6901 Week 3 questions, answered
Where can I find a free MHRM 6901 Week 3 sample paper?
Read the gap analysis and its ranking table below for free.
What does the MHRM 6901 Week 3 analysis compare?
The bakery's stated commitments about its people with its postings, turnover logs and training budget.
How are gaps ranked?
By their consequence for staffing the second restaurant contract.
Which gaps rank highest?
Three involving maintenance technicians: outside hiring, minimal training and departures driven by pay and nights.
What strength does the analysis credit?
Production supervisors are promoted from within, consistent with the company's words.