| Course | LDR 310 Applied Leadership Capstone (LDR/310) |
|---|---|
| Week | 3 |
| Paper type | Stakeholder and change communication strategy |
| Length | about 1,000 words, 4 double-spaced pages plus title page and references |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | University of Phoenix |
| Program | BS in Business |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for LDR 310 Week 3
Owners, Leads, Crews and Members: Stakeholder Engagement and a Change Communication Strategy for a Marina's Dock Lead Program
[Student Name]
University of Phoenix
LDR/310: Applied Leadership Capstone
Week 3 Assignment
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
Harbor Point Marinas, its stakeholders and its plan are composites written for a model paper.
The second week traced Harbor Point's summer losses and fuel dock mishaps to how new hires are welcomed, how rosters are built and who stands watch at the pumps. The causes point to dock leads: new workers lack training and connection in their first two weeks, schedules are unpredictable and fuel docks often lack a trained lead at peak hours. Devon's proposed remedy has three strands: leads trained to welcome and coach newcomers, leads trusted to publish rosters a fortnight in advance and a qualified lead stationed at every fuel dock during rush periods. The program will succeed only if stakeholders support it. This paper analyzes stakeholders and plans engagement and communication.
Identifying Stakeholders
Stakeholders include the two owners, siblings who control the budget and pay rates; the general manager, responsible for all three marinas; the nine dock leads; about 120 seasonal workers; the year-round service shop and grill staff; slip members and rental customers; and, indirectly, the lake's water patrol and the state conservation agency, which respond to fuel spills.
A Theory of Salience
Mitchell et al. (1997) suggested that managers pay attention to a group according to three qualities: how much it can force outcomes, how rightful its claim seems and how pressing its demands are at the moment. Stakeholders with all three are definitive and receive the most attention; those with one or two are latent or expectant. Salience changes as attributes change.
Mapping Harbor Point's Stakeholders
The owners hold power and legitimacy, and urgency rises when costs or incidents climb, making them definitive at budget time. The general manager holds power over schedules and legitimacy, and has urgent concerns about weekend coverage. Dock leads hold legitimacy and, collectively, practical power, since the program depends on them. Seasonal workers hold legitimacy and urgency in the moments they decide whether to stay. Members hold legitimacy and some power through renewals. Regulators hold power and legitimacy when incidents occur.
Sharing Information and Seeking Input
Lewis (1999) surveyed people who implemented planned organizational changes about how they communicated. Implementers commonly disseminated information widely but solicited input from a narrower group, often through formal channels, and the choice of targets and channels reflected their goals. She argued that soliciting input from those affected can improve both the change and its acceptance. For Harbor Point, telling dock leads about the program is not enough; they must help design it.
Supervisors and Safety
Zohar (2002) tested an intervention in which supervisors received feedback on how often they discussed safety with workers and were encouraged to raise safety in daily interactions. Supervisors' attention to safety increased, workers' safety behavior improved and minor injuries declined in the intervention groups. The study shows that what supervisors pay attention to shapes crews' behavior, which supports placing trained dock leads on fuel docks and making safety part of their daily conversations.
Engagement Strategy by Group
The owners will be involved through a short business case in March showing the costs of turnover and incidents and the program's modest cost, including a $1.50 hourly differential for dock leads. The general manager will be consulted on scheduling rules and coverage. Dock leads will be involved as co-designers in two planning sessions. Seasonal workers will be informed at hiring and consulted through check-ins during their first two weeks. Members will be informed through the spring newsletter about improved service and safety. Regulators need no special engagement but will benefit from fewer incidents.
The dock leads are not an audience for this program; they are its authors.
Anticipating Resistance
Three groups may resist. The general manager may fear that leads posting schedules will leave gaps; a shared scheduling tool with his approval step addresses this. Some dock leads may see added responsibility without enough pay; the differential and recognition address this, and leads who do not want the role can decline it. The service shop may resent leads pulling mechanics for fuel dock problems; a clear protocol will set when to call the shop.
Engaging the Owners Early
The owners need a clear business case because they will see costs before benefits. The case estimates that each seasonal worker who quits early costs about $900 in recruiting, training time and overtime for others, so last season's 54 early departures cost roughly $48,600, before counting lost rentals on short-staffed days. A single fuel spill can bring cleanup costs and fines in the thousands. Against these figures, the program's cost of under $20,000 looks modest, and the owners can track results at midseason.
Key Messages
To owners: the program protects revenue and reduces risk at low cost. To the general manager: coverage will improve, with his oversight. To dock leads: you will gain skills, authority and pay. To seasonal workers: you will have a trained lead who knows your name and a schedule you can plan around. To members: safer, better-staffed docks.
Communication Calendar
March: business case to owners. April: planning sessions with dock leads and the general manager. May: dock lead training before opening weekend; program explained at seasonal orientation. June through August: weekly lead huddles with Devon, monthly short surveys of seasonal workers and a midseason check-in with owners after the Fourth of July. September: results shared with all groups.
Feedback Channels
Every channel will have a named person responsible for reading and answering it. Seasonal workers will have a quick text survey after their first two weeks and a suggestion box at each dock house. Dock leads will report weekly. Devon will share what he hears and what changes as a result.
Conclusion
Stakeholder salience, research on soliciting input during change and evidence that supervisors' attention shapes safety guide Harbor Point's engagement plan. Owners receive a business case, the general manager is consulted, dock leads design the program, seasonal workers get clarity and a voice and members learn of better service. A calendar and feedback channels keep communication alive through the busy season.
References
Lewis, L. K. (1999). Disseminating information and soliciting input during planned organizational change: Implementers' targets, sources, and channels for communicating. Management Communication Quarterly, 13(1), 43-75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318999131002
Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853-886. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1997.9711022105
Zohar, D. (2002). Modifying supervisory practices to improve subunit safety: A leadership-based intervention model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(1), 156-163. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.1.156
What the LDR 310 Week 3 instructions ask
In Week 3 of LDR 310, students typically work out who has a stake in their capstone and how to talk and listen to each group. Expect to identify stakeholders, analyze their interests, influence and likely reactions, choose engagement strategies such as informing, consulting or involving and develop a communication plan with messages, channels, timing and feedback. Many prompts ask students to anticipate resistance and explain how to address it. A strong paper uses research on stakeholders and change communication, tailors approaches to each group, explains the reasoning for each choice and builds in ways to hear concerns. Cite scholarly sources in APA format.
How this LDR 310 Week 3 example is built
Devon Marsh's dock lead program needs support from people with very different stakes: two owners who control the budget, a general manager worried about weekend coverage, nine dock leads asked to take on more responsibility, 120 seasonal workers, the service shop and members who notice when docks are understaffed. The paper uses a stakeholder salience model based on power, legitimacy and urgency to rank groups and choose engagement levels. Research on change communication shows that implementers often share information widely but seek input narrowly, which undermines support. A study of supervisory safety practices shows that changing what supervisors pay attention to can change crews' safety behavior. A map, an engagement plan and a calendar from March through Labor Day follow.
LDR 310 Week 3 grading rubric: where the points go
Papers on stakeholders and change communication earn credit for sharp analysis of each group and for a plan that fits what that group cares about. Instructors notice when the less visible groups, such as owners or regulators, are not forgotten. High marks go to work that identifies all relevant stakeholders, analyzes their interests and influence with a recognized framework and chooses engagement strategies suited to each. Graders look for communication plans with specific messages, channels, timing and responsible people, and for genuine two-way communication that gathers input. Anticipating resistance and explaining how it will be addressed shows maturity. Connection to the capstone's goals and the diagnosis from Week 2 keeps the plan focused and believable.
LDR 310 Week 3 help: mistakes to avoid
Students often list stakeholders without analyzing them, giving every group the same newsletter. Analyze each group's interests and influence and tailor engagement. Another frequent mistake is planning only to inform, when research shows that soliciting input builds support and improves the plan. Decide where to consult or involve. Some papers ignore powerful but less visible stakeholders, such as owners who control budgets. Include them early. Others anticipate no resistance at all. Every change creates winners and losers; name them and plan for concerns. Write the actual message for at least one group. Finally, set a calendar, since communication that is not scheduled tends not to happen during a busy season.
Related LDR 310 sample papers
Other LDR 310 week samples
- LDR 310 Week 1: Self-Assessment and Capstone Proposal
- LDR 310 Week 2: Analyzing the Leadership Problem
- LDR 310 Week 4: Implementation Plan
- LDR 310 Week 5: Capstone Results and Reflection
More BS in Business sample papers
- LDR 308 Week 3: Negotiation
- LDR 309 Week 3: Technology Integration
- MGT 312 Week 3: Groups and Teams in Organizations
- MGT 316 Week 3: Operational Processes
LDR 310 Week 3 questions, answered
What does LDR 310 Week 3 usually cover?
It usually covers stakeholder analysis and engagement and the communication plan for the capstone project, including messages, channels, timing, feedback and handling resistance.
Where can I find a free LDR 310 Week 3 sample paper?
The stakeholder map and change communication plan for a composite marina company's dock lead program is posted above as a free Week 3 sample.
What is stakeholder salience?
It describes how high a group sits on a manager's list, which rises when the group can force results, has a rightful claim and needs attention quickly.
Why should change communication seek input?
Research suggests that asking for input, not only sharing information, builds support, surfaces problems early and makes people more committed to the change.
How do you handle stakeholders who resist a change?
Understand what they stand to lose, involve them in shaping parts of the change, address concerns honestly and show how the change serves their interests where possible.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official University of Phoenix document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
Request this one custom, free · All LDR 310 week samples · All courses