| Course | MSHR 6625 Building Human Capital Through Training and Development |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 3 |
| Paper type | Performance gap memo |
| Length | About 600 words, 4 pages |
| Format | Memo, APA 7 citations |
| School | Walden University |
| Program | MS in Human Resource Management |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for MSHR 6625 Week 3
Memorandum
To: Field Operations Manager, Mill Creek Water District
From: HR Training and Development Specialist
Date: February 16, 2026
Re: Late and incomplete work orders: about one third skill, the rest equipment and process
Conclusion
About one third of the gap in work-order completion reflects a genuine skill deficiency; the remaining two thirds belong to equipment and process. Training can close the first part. It cannot close the rest, and if the rest is left in place, the training will look as though it failed. I recommend a narrow training program for about 45 technicians and three non-training fixes, each owned by someone other than HR.
How the Gap Was Divided
Mager and Pipe (1997) suggest a simple test for any performance problem: could the person do it if their job depended on it? If yes, the problem is not a skill gap, and training will not fix it. Gilbert (2007) made a similar point when he argued that most performance problems trace to the work environment rather than to people's knowledge. I applied that test to each part of the gap, using the needs assessment's records, ride-alongs and interviews. Where technicians could complete a field when shown the asset or the reference list, but did not because the tool failed or nothing required it, the cause is not skill. Where technicians could not complete it even when they tried, the cause is skill.
Causes and Owners
Table 1
The Gap by Cause, Share and Owner
| Part of the gap | Share of incomplete or late orders | Cause | Owner | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Asset IDs and pipe materials missing or wrong | About 35 percent | Skill: technicians do not know where IDs are or which material to choose | HR training, with crew leads | |
| Orders closed at the yard, a day or more late | About 30 percent | Equipment: tablets offline across the hilly north and other dead zones | IT, with the mobile vendor | |
| Photos missing | About 20 percent | Equipment: camera app crashes on older tablets | IT and fleet | |
| Orders left open for supervisor review | About 15 percent | Process: supervisors still sign paper and accept late close-outs | Field operations manager | |
Composite utility. Shares are illustrative, based on three months of work-order records.
What Each Owner Would Do
For the skill share, HR would build a brief program on stamped asset numbers and pipe identification for the 45 technicians the assessment singled out, delivered in the field by crew leads. For signal, IT can enable offline mode in the mobile app, which the vendor supports but Mill Creek has not switched on; orders would then be completed on site and sync later. For photos, IT and fleet would replace or reset the eleven older tablets on which the camera app crashes. For the process share, the field operations manager would end the acceptance of paper tickets on a set date and ask supervisors to review orders in the mobile system.
Why the Order Matters
The non-training fixes should start before or with the training. If technicians learn to record asset IDs but still cannot sync in the field, they will complete fields at the yard from memory, and errors will return. Baldwin and Ford (1988) found that the work environment, including supervisor support and the opportunity to use new skills, strongly affects whether training transfers to the job. Two of the fixes, offline mode and the paper-ticket deadline, are inexpensive and could be in place within a month.
Decision Requested
Please approve the narrow training program and ask IT and fleet to complete offline mode and the tablet replacements before the first training session.
References
Baldwin, T. T., & Ford, J. K. (1988). Transfer of training: A review and directions for future research. Personnel Psychology, 41(1), 63-105. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1988.tb00632.x
Gilbert, T. F. (2007). Human competence: Engineering worthy performance (Tribute ed.). Pfeiffer.
Mager, R. F., & Pipe, P. (1997). Analyzing performance problems or you really oughta wanna (3rd ed.). Center for Effective Performance.
MSHR 6625 Week 3 instructions, in plain terms
Week 3 asks you to write a memo dividing a performance gap by cause. State your conclusion and its implication for the training request in the first paragraph. Explain the test you used to separate skill causes from others, citing a recognized approach. Present a table showing each part of the gap, its approximate share, its cause and the owner who can fix it. Describe briefly what each owner would do. Explain why the order of the fixes matters, especially whether non-training fixes must come before training. Close with a decision request that names what you need approved and who must act before any training begins.
Inside the MSHR 6625 Week 3 example
The memo opens with the one-third split and its implication. A section explains Mager and Pipe's test and Gilbert's view of environmental causes. A table divides the gap into four parts, asset-field errors, late yard close-outs, missing photos and orders held for supervisor review, with shares, causes and owners. A section describes what HR, IT, fleet and field operations would each do, including enabling the app's offline mode. A section explains why offline mode and the paper-ticket deadline should come first, citing Baldwin and Ford. A decision request closes the memo. Every part of the gap in the table carries an owner by role, so no part is left for training by default.
Where the marks sit in the MSHR 6625 Week 3 rubric
Gap memos earn credit for clear division and clear ownership. A conclusion in the first paragraph is weighted heavily. A named test for separating skill from other causes shows method. A table with shares, causes and owners makes the analysis usable. Describing what each owner would do shows the writer has thought beyond training. Sequencing fixes, with research on transfer, demonstrates understanding of why training fails in unchanged environments. A decision request that names prerequisites makes the memo actionable. Memos that assign the whole gap to training, leave causes without owners or ignore sequence tend to earn less credit. Short memos that a manager can act on the same day are the standard. A short, plain memo that a manager could forward to IT and fleet the same day is the expected standard here.
Common MSHR 6625 Week 3 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Take the problem you analyzed and divide it into parts, each with one main cause. For each part, ask the key question: would the person manage it if their job hung on it? When the answer is yes, find the real cause in tools, information or incentives, and name who controls that. Estimate each part's share of the problem, even roughly. Then decide what must happen first. Students often divide the problem but then recommend training for all of it. Others forget to name owners, which leaves the non-training causes with no one. Two pages is plenty. If you are unsure how to estimate shares, our writers can help you work from your records.
Get a MSHR 6625 Week 3 example written to your instructions
Include the gap memo prompt, the rubric and your Week 2 findings if you have them. A memo dividing the gap by cause and owner comes back within 24 to 48 hours, and the first request costs nothing. The manager addressed in it is fictional, as is the utility.
More MSHR 6625 papers and MS in Human Resource Management samples
- MSHR 6625 Week 1: Training Need Discussion Post
- MSHR 6625 Week 2: Training Needs Assessment
- MSHR 6625 Week 4: Learning Objectives Set
- MSHR 6625 Week 5: Training Design Brief
- MSHR 6625 Week 6: Training Facilitator Guide
- MSHR 6625 Week 7: Training Alignment Peer Replies
- MSHR 6625 Week 8: Training Evaluation Plan
- MSHR 6625 Week 9: Training Transfer Memo
- MSHR 6625 Week 10: Training Pilot Review
- MSHR 6625 Week 11: Training Program Proposal
- MHRM 6101 Week 3: Peak-Season Shortfall Case Memo
- MSHR 6610 Week 3: Contact Center Demand Analysis
- MHRM 6902 Week 3: Analytical Aptitude Competency Map
- MHRM 6601 Week 3: Salary Market Analysis
MSHR 6625 Week 3 questions, answered
Where can I find a free MSHR 6625 Week 3 sample paper?
The performance gap memo, cause table included, is free to read below.
How much of the gap in the MSHR 6625 Week 3 memo is skill?
About one third; the rest is equipment and process.
What test divides the gap?
Mager and Pipe's question: could the technician do it if the job depended on it?
Who owns the signal problem?
IT, with the mobile vendor, by enabling the app's offline mode.
Why must some fixes come before training?
Without them, the work environment would undo what technicians learn.