| Course | WMBA 6695 Communication for Leaders and Managers |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 8 |
| Paper type | Presentation deck with speaker notes |
| Length | About 1,260 words across 11 slides with speaker notes |
| Format | Slide deck with speaker notes, APA 7 |
| School | Walden University |
| Program | Master of Business Administration (MBA) |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for WMBA 6695 Week 8
Route Overtime Fell 27 Percent in Thirteen Weeks: A Ten-Slide Ninety-Day Review of Ridgeline's Route Redesign for the President and Leadership Team
Student Name
Walden University
WMBA 6695: Communication for Leaders and Managers
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Slide 1: Route Overtime Fell 27 Percent in Thirteen Weeks, and We Recommend Keeping the Software
Overtime hours: 1,690 from August 4 to November 1, against 2,310 in the same weeks last year
Recommendation: renew the route-planning subscription
Presenter: Service Operations Manager, Ridgeline Uniform Services
Speaker notes: Good morning. The short version is on the slide. In the thirteen weeks since the routes were redrawn, driver overtime fell by 27 percent compared with the same thirteen weeks last year. The stopping rule we agreed in July was a 10 percent drop on the seven longest routes, and we cleared it. So I'm going to recommend that we keep the software. The rest of the deck shows where the savings came from, the one thing that went wrong and what I suggest we do next. Ridgeline is our company, but for the course every figure here is composite.
Slide 2: The Seven Longest Routes Produced Most of the Gain
Seven longest routes: overtime down 34 percent
Other twenty-four routes: down 12 percent
Speaker notes: This is where the change came from. The seven routes that used to average more than ten hours a day cut their overtime by about a third. The other twenty-four routes improved too, but much less, which is what we expected: they were not the problem. That pattern matters, because it tells us the gain came from moving stops off the long routes, not from drivers suddenly working faster everywhere.
Slide 3: No Route Now Averages More Than Ten Hours a Day
Longest route day: Route 22 at 9.6 hours, down from 11.4
Shortest: Route 9 at 8.1 hours, up from 7.1
Spread between longest and shortest: 1.5 hours, down from 4.3
Speaker notes: Here is the balance. Route 22 was our worst at eleven point four hours, and it now runs about nine point six. Route 9 was our shortest and picked up an hour of work. The gap between our longest and shortest route day went from more than four hours to an hour and a half. That gap is the thing we set out to close, and it's mostly closed.
Slide 4: Late Deliveries Fell From 3.8 to 2.1 Percent of Stops
Stops outside the customer's window, August to October: 2.1 percent
Same months last year: 3.8 percent
Speaker notes: This is the number customers notice. Last year almost four in every hundred stops missed the customer's window. Since August it's about two in a hundred. Late deliveries were a reason four restaurants gave for leaving us last year, so this slide is about revenue as much as cost. I can't yet tell you that we've kept a customer because of it; that will take a renewal season.
Slide 5: Miles Fell Less Than Overtime, Because Rebalancing Did Most of the Work
Miles per route day: 133, down 6.3 percent from 142
Overtime: down 27 percent
Speaker notes: Miles fell, but by far less than overtime. That tells us something about where the value came from. Better sequencing within a route saves miles. Moving stops between routes saves hours on the long routes. Most of our gain came from the second. Routing research has produced powerful sequencing methods (Laporte, 2009), and the software does that part well, but for us the bigger lever was the redesign the drivers did with their supervisors in August.
Slide 6: Every Driver Stayed, and Two Asked to Take Back Stops They Had Given Up
No driver left during or after the redesign
Two drivers asked for a former customer back; both requests granted
Speaker notes: The risk we worried about most was losing drivers. We didn't lose any. Two drivers asked to take back a customer they'd given up in the redesign, because they'd built those relationships over years. We said yes to both, since it cost under fifteen minutes a day on each route. The driver on Route 4, who opposed the change in July, has said he'd still rather nobody had touched his route, which is fair, and his day changed by only a few minutes.
Slide 7: One Problem: Route 15 Missed a Hospital Dock Window Six Times, Fixed in Week Three
Hospital receiving dock open 5:30 to 7:00 a.m. only
Window missing from the software's customer record
Fixed August 22; no misses since
Speaker notes: One thing went wrong, and I want you to hear it from me. The hospital on Route 15 only accepts deliveries before seven, and that window wasn't in the customer record we loaded. For the first two and a half weeks the software put that stop too late in the day, and we missed it six times. The driver flagged it, we fixed the record on August 22, and there have been no misses since. We've since checked every customer window against the drivers' ride-along notes.
Slide 8: At This Pace, Year One Nets About $35,000 After the Full $86,000 Cost
Overtime saving, annualized: about $92,000
Fuel saving, annualized: about $29,000
First-year cost: $86,000
Speaker notes: Here's the money. If the first thirteen weeks hold for the year, we save about ninety-two thousand dollars in overtime and twenty-nine thousand in fuel. Against the full first-year cost of eighty-six thousand, that leaves about thirty-five thousand. That's inside the range in the July proposal, toward the lower half. From year two the cost is only the subscription, thirty-eight thousand, so the net improves.
Slide 9: The Stopping Rule Was Met, So We Ask to Renew the Subscription
Rule: at least 10 percent less overtime on the seven longest routes
Result: 34 percent less
Decision requested: renew at the twelve-month date
Speaker notes: In July we agreed I'd recommend stopping if the long routes didn't improve by ten percent. They improved by thirty-four. So the decision I'm asking for is to renew the subscription when it comes up. Nothing has to be decided today about anything else.
Slide 10: Next, Rebalance Again in March Before Spring Accounts Are Added
New accounts expected by April: about 40 stops
Without a March review, they would go to the nearest driver again
Speaker notes: The last slide is about keeping the gain. The routes went out of balance over ten years because each new account went to whoever was closest. Sales expects about forty new stops by spring. I'd like to review the routes with the supervisors in March, before those accounts are placed, so we don't rebuild the problem one customer at a time.
Design Note (for the course, not presented)
Slide titles carry full-sentence claims
Bullets hold only figures the claim needs
Speaker notes carry the spoken argument
Speaker notes: Each title states a claim rather than a topic, so the titles read in order make the argument: overtime fell, the long routes drove it, balance improved, customers were served on time, the redesign mattered more than sequencing, drivers stayed, one problem was fixed, the money works and the rule was met. Alley and Neeley (2005) argued for sentence headlines supported by visual evidence instead of topic phrases and bullet lists, and Garner and Alley (2013) found that audiences comprehended engineering content better from slides built on that assertion-evidence design. The bullets are kept to the figures each claim needs, and the spoken explanation sits in the notes. Mayer and Moreno (2003) proposed a set of techniques that lighten the load on an audience's limited processing capacity, including removing material that does not serve the point, and the deck applies that by leaving out the fuel price, the software features and the route maps.
References
Alley, M., & Neeley, K. A. (2005). Rethinking the design of presentation slides: A case for sentence headlines and visual evidence. Technical Communication, 52(4), 417-426.
Garner, J. K., & Alley, M. (2013). How the design of presentation slides affects audience comprehension: A case for the assertion-evidence approach. International Journal of Engineering Education, 29(6), 1564-1579.
Laporte, G. (2009). Fifty years of vehicle routing. Transportation Science, 43(4), 408-416. https://doi.org/10.1287/trsc.1090.0301
Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 43-52. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_6
WMBA 6695 Week 8 instructions, in plain terms
Week 8 asks for a presentation deck of about eight to twelve slides with speaker notes, built around one idea per slide. Slide titles should state claims rather than labels, so that someone reading only the titles in sequence follows the argument. The body of each slide holds the minimum evidence for its claim, often a figure or a simple chart chosen after the claim is written. Speaker notes carry what would be said aloud, in prose, rather than repeating the bullets. Many sections also want a brief explanation of the design choices with support from research on slides or multimedia learning. The usual audience is a decision maker who may read the deck without attending, so the first slide should state the main finding and the recommendation together.
How this WMBA 6695 Week 8 example is built
The first slide states the 27 percent overtime drop and the recommendation to renew. Slides 2 and 3 show that the seven longest routes cut overtime by about a third and that the gap between the longest and shortest route day shrank from 4.3 hours to 1.5. Slide 4 reports late stops falling from 3.8 to 2.1 percent, and slide 5 explains that miles fell less than overtime because rebalancing did most of the work, citing Laporte. Slide 6 covers driver retention, and slide 7 admits six missed hospital deliveries caused by a missing dock window. Slides 8 to 10 give the year-one net, the stopping rule result and a proposed March rebalance. A design note explains the claim titles and lean bullets, citing Alley and Neeley, Garner and Alley and Mayer and Moreno.
Reading the WMBA 6695 Week 8 rubric
The deck's title sequence is assessed first. If the titles read as topics, such as results, drivers or next steps, the deck loses the marks this week emphasizes, because a reader cannot follow the argument without the speaker. Each slide should carry one idea, with its supporting evidence chosen to prove that idea. Speaker notes are graded on whether they add the spoken explanation instead of restating bullets. Honest reporting of a problem, with the fix, adds credibility and is noticed. Figures must be consistent across slides and with any earlier proposal. Research on slide design or multimedia learning should justify a specific choice. A first slide that gives both the finding and the decision requested shows the writer has planned for a reader in a hurry.
WMBA 6695 Week 8 help from the desk
Write the slide titles first as a plain list of full sentences and check that they make an argument when read in order. Only then decide what each slide needs to prove its title, and move everything you would say into the notes. Build any chart after the claim, so it shows exactly the comparison the title states. Decks often lose marks for titles like "Background" or "Data," for slides with two claims and for notes that duplicate the bullets. Another problem is hiding bad news on a late slide. Check every number against your source. If you would like a model deck for a review or proposal you need to present, share your findings and the decision you want from the audience.
Get a WMBA 6695 Week 8 example written to your instructions
Send the Week 8 prompt, the rubric, the audience and any deck template the section circulated, and a built file with speaker notes comes back inside 24 to 48 hours, and the first sample is free. Where a recorded delivery is required, the notes are written to be read aloud at a stated length.
More WMBA 6695 papers and MBA samples
- WMBA 6695 Week 1: Misfired Message Discussion Post
- WMBA 6695 Week 2: Single-Reader Audience Analysis
- WMBA 6695 Week 3: Routine Change Informative Memo
- WMBA 6695 Week 4: Bad News Letter to a Customer
- WMBA 6695 Week 5: Rewritten Opening Peer Replies
- WMBA 6695 Week 6: Persuasive Proposal for Approval
- WMBA 6695 Week 7: Talking Points for a Leader
- WMBA 6695 Week 9: Crisis Statement and Matrix
- WMBA 6695 Week 10: Failed Notice Case Analysis
- WMBA 6695 Week 11: Change Communication Plan
- WMBA 6633 Week 8: Coaching Boundary Memo
- WMBA 6627 Week 8: Stakeholder Influence Strategy
- WMBA 6623 Week 8: Risk Contingency Reserve Brief
- WMBA 6620 Week 8: Project Quality Plan
WMBA 6695 Week 8 questions, answered
Where can I find a free WMBA 6695 Week 8 sample paper?
All ten slides, their speaker notes and the design note are laid out in full further down, at no cost.
What does the WMBA 6695 Week 8 deck report?
A 27 percent fall in route overtime in the thirteen weeks after a route redesign, with a recommendation to renew the routing software.
Why are the slide titles full sentences?
Because a title that states a claim lets a reader follow the argument by reading titles alone, which a topic label cannot do.
What problem does the deck admit?
A hospital stop was delivered too late six times because its dock window was missing from the customer record; it was fixed in week three.
What happens to the bullets and the spoken explanation?
Bullets keep only the figures each claim needs, and the explanation lives in the speaker notes as prose.