| Course | MHRM 6902 Capstone: Meeting SHRM Competencies |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 9 |
| Paper type | Development plan |
| Length | About 890 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Walden University |
| Program | MS in Human Resource Management |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for MHRM 6902 Week 9
Six Dated Actions a Colleague Could Witness: A Development Plan Built From Two Stated Gaps, With the Artifact Each Action Should Leave Behind and the Person Who Can Confirm It
Student Name
Walden University
MHRM 6902: Capstone: Meeting SHRM Competencies
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Six Dated Actions a Colleague Could Witness: A Development Plan Built From Two Stated Gaps, With the Artifact Each Action Should Leave Behind and the Person Who Can Confirm It
What the Plan Is For
A development plan that nothing could expose as unfinished does no work. This plan is built so that a miss would show. It takes the two gaps my portfolio draft states, Global Mindset on its global side and budgeting under Business Acumen, together with two categories the draft rates partly shown, and turns each into actions with a month, an expected artifact and a person other than me who can confirm the action happened. Locke and Latham (2002) summarized a long research program showing that hard, precise targets outperform an instruction to simply try one's hardest, as long as progress is reported back. Each row below is written to be specific enough to fail.
The Plan
Table 1
Development Actions, in Date Order
| Gap addressed | Action | Month | Expected artifact | Confirmed by | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Global Mindset, global part (gap statement, Week 6) | Draft the onboarding brief for the offshore leasing support vendor's staff, covering fair housing conversations and our communities | April | Vendor onboarding brief and the vendor trainer's written questions | Vice president of operations | |
| Global Mindset, global part | Run two live onboarding calls with the vendor's first team leads and revise the brief from their questions | May | Revised brief with change notes | Vendor account manager | |
| Consultation, partly shown (Week 5 discussion) | Advise a second regional manager on a staffing decision, keeping notes of each conversation | June | Memo, conversation notes and the manager's decision email | Phoenix regional manager | |
| Business Acumen, budgets (gap statement in portfolio draft) | Shadow the controller through the annual budget cycle, attending each HR-related review | August to October | Meeting notes and a summary of how HR costs were challenged | Controller | |
| Business Acumen, budgets | Build the HR department's budget line for next year and defend it in the director's review | November | Draft HR budget with assumptions and the review notes | Controller and HR director | |
| Global Mindset, global part | Complete a short course in international HR practice with a graded assignment | September | Course certificate and the graded assignment | Course instructor | |
Composite generalist and organization. Months refer to the year after this course ends.
Why This Order
Rows follow dates rather than importance. The vendor brief comes first because that opportunity has a fixed window: the vendor's staff begin taking our calls in May, and the onboarding work happens before then or not at all. Gollwitzer (1999) showed that plans which specify when and where an action will occur are carried out far more reliably than goals alone, and a fixed external date is the strongest version of that. The short course comes later because it can be taken at any time and is the weakest evidence of the three Global Mindset actions; a certificate shows study, not practice. I included it because the vendor work alone covers one country and one kind of arrangement.
The budget actions take the longest because the company's budget cycle runs from August to November, and I cannot compress it. Shadowing comes before building, so that when I draft the HR line I have seen how the controller challenges other departments' assumptions. DeRue and Wellman (2009) found that developmental challenge builds leadership skills most when feedback is available, and that very high challenge without feedback yields diminishing returns. Building a budget for the first time without having watched one built would be high challenge with little feedback, so the sequence lowers the challenge first.
The Consultation action is not a gap in the strict sense, since the draft rates it partly shown. It appears because the Week 5 discussion made clear that one memo is thin evidence for a competency about influence. Keeping notes of the advisory conversations this time is the point: the notes are what my first artifact lacks.
Who Confirms
Every confirming person is named by role and is someone other than me or a classmate. The vice president of operations asked HR to support the vendor project and will see the brief. The vendor's account manager will see whether the brief changed after the calls. The controller and the HR director together are the only people who can say whether an HR budget line was built and defended. I chose confirmers who would notice if an action did not happen, because a plan confirmed by friendly readers tests nothing.
What Each Action Should Leave Behind
Each action is meant to produce something I can later map against the standard in the same way as A1 to A8. The vendor brief, for instance, will be tested against the global part of Global Mindset behavior by behavior, as A2 was tested against Analytical Aptitude in Week 3. If an action happens but leaves nothing a reader could inspect, it will count as done for my development and not done for the portfolio.
Review Date
Six months after this course ends, I will rerun the Week 1 self-assessment table with the same three evidence ratings, shown, partly shown and claimed only (Society for Human Resource Management [SHRM], 2022). The plan succeeds if Global Mindset and Business Acumen can move to shown on the strength of artifacts produced by these actions, and fails visibly if they cannot.
References
DeRue, D. S., & Wellman, N. (2009). Developing leaders via experience: The role of developmental challenge, learning orientation, and feedback availability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(4), 859-875. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015317
Gollwitzer, P. M. (1999). Implementation intentions: Strong effects of simple plans. American Psychologist, 54(7), 493-503. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.54.7.493
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57(9), 705-717. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.57.9.705
Society for Human Resource Management. (2022). SHRM body of applied skills and knowledge (SHRM BASK). https://www.shrm.org/credentials/certification/shrm-bask
What the MHRM 6902 Week 9 instructions ask for
Week 9 asks you to write a development plan that addresses the gaps your portfolio identifies. Build each row from a stated gap and cite where the portfolio states it. Phrase each action as something another person could see you do, small enough to finish by its date. Name the artifact each action should produce, so completed actions add evidence to the portfolio. Name a confirming person for each row who is not you or a classmate. Order the rows by date and explain that order in a short rationale, using research on goals and development where it helps. Finish by dating the review and naming what you would accept as proof the plan worked.
How this MHRM 6902 Week 9 example is built
The plan opens by explaining that a useful plan must be able to fail, citing Locke and Latham. A table lists six actions in date order, from the vendor onboarding brief in April to building the HR budget line in November, each with its gap, month, expected artifact and confirmer. A rationale section explains why the vendor work comes first, citing Gollwitzer, and why shadowing precedes budget building, citing DeRue and Wellman. A section explains the choice of confirmers. A section ties each expected artifact back to the mapping method used earlier. The plan closes with a review date and a test of success. The six rows run from spring to late autumn, so the plan doubles as a calendar.
Where the marks sit in the MHRM 6902 Week 9 rubric
Development plans earn credit for being specific and checkable. Rows drawn directly from stated gaps show the plan answers the portfolio. Actions observable by others, with months attached, are weighted heavily. Expected artifacts that could later be mapped against the standard connect development to evidence. Confirming persons who are not the writer make progress verifiable. A rationale for the sequence, supported by research, shows deliberate planning rather than a list. A review date with a stated test of success completes the plan. Plans built from general aspirations, such as improving leadership skills, or confirmed only by the writer, typically receive lower marks. A plan in which each row could plainly be missed reads as a commitment rather than a hope.
MHRM 6902 Week 9 help: mistakes that cost marks
Begin by copying each gap from your portfolio into the first column of a table, word for word. For each, ask what you would need to do at work for a document showing that competence to exist. Write that action so a colleague could see it happen, then add a month and the name of someone who would know. Order the rows by date and check that nothing depends on something scheduled later. A frequent problem is a plan made entirely of courses and reading, which produce certificates rather than evidence of practice. Another is leaving out confirmers because asking feels awkward. If your workplace offers few obvious projects, our writers can suggest actions suited to your role and sector.
Get a MHRM 6902 Week 9 example written to your instructions
Include the development plan prompt and rubric with your gap statements, and mention any opportunity at work that has a fixed window. Dated actions tied to each gap, the artifact each should yield and the person who could confirm it arrive in 24 to 48 hours; a first plan is free. The generalist and the offshore vendor pilot are fictional composites.
More MHRM 6902 papers and MS in Human Resource Management samples
- MHRM 6902 Week 1: SHRM BASK Self-Assessment
- MHRM 6902 Week 2: Portfolio Evidence Plan
- MHRM 6902 Week 3: Analytical Aptitude Competency Map
- MHRM 6902 Week 4: Artifact Narrative
- MHRM 6902 Week 5: Competency Claim Discussion Post
- MHRM 6902 Week 6: Global Mindset Gap Statement
- MHRM 6902 Week 7: Six-Category Mapping Pass
- MHRM 6902 Week 8: Competency Portfolio Draft
- MHRM 6902 Week 10: Portfolio Revision Ledger
- MHRM 6902 Week 11: Final Competency Portfolio
- MHRM 6901 Week 9: Capstone Appendix Set
- MHRM 6801 Week 9: Organizational Diagnostic Report
- MHRM 6101 Week 9: Reporting Line Peer Reply
- MHRM 6751 Week 9: Virtual Team Norms Memo
MHRM 6902 Week 9 questions, answered
Where can I find a free MHRM 6902 Week 9 sample paper?
The development plan and its rationale are published below for anyone to read freely.
How many actions does the MHRM 6902 Week 9 plan contain?
Six, in date order, each with a gap, a month, an expected artifact and a confirmer.
Why does the vendor brief come first?
The overseas vendor's staff start in May, so the onboarding work has a fixed window.
Why does shadowing come before budget building?
Watching the controller first lowers the challenge and adds feedback before the generalist builds a line herself.
When will the plan be reviewed?
Six months after the course, by rerunning the Week 1 self-assessment table.