| Course | LDR 310 Applied Leadership Capstone (LDR/310) |
|---|---|
| Week | 5 |
| Paper type | Capstone evaluation and reflection |
| Length | about 1,034 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 5
What One Summer of Dock Leads Changed: Capstone Results, After-Action Review and Leadership Reflection at a Lake of the Ozarks Marina
[Student Name]
University of Phoenix
LDR/310: Applied Leadership Capstone
Week 5 Final Assignment
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
Harbor Point Marinas, its results and its people are composites written for a model paper.
This capstone has tracked one leadership project at Harbor Point, an invented trio of marinas in central Missouri, from proposal to season's end. Assistant operations manager Devon Marsh assessed his own leadership, finding that he often took over problems instead of coaching his dock leads. He diagnosed the company's high seasonal turnover and fuel dock incidents, planned stakeholder engagement and implemented a dock lead development program from Memorial Day to Labor Day. This paper reports the results, analyzes them through an after-action review and reflects on Devon's leadership growth.
Learning From Experience
Ellis and Davidi (2005) studied soldiers who conducted after-event reviews following navigation exercises. Those who reviewed both successful and failed events, analyzing what led to each, improved more than those who reviewed only failures, and reviews of successes were as valuable as reviews of failures. Systematic analysis, not just experience, produced learning.
How Leadership Skill Develops
Lord and Hall (2005) proposed that leadership skill develops from novice to expert levels as people move from relying on surface behaviors and rules to drawing on deeper principles, values and a leadership identity. Early in development, leaders focus on what to do; later, their actions flow from an integrated sense of who they are as leaders and from understanding others.
Results Against Goals
On retention, early departures dropped to 31 percent of seasonal staff, one point short of the 30 percent aim. On safety, the target of no more than five fuel dock incidents was beaten, with four recorded all season. Goal 3, raise dock leads' ratings of Devon's support from 2.6 to 4.0: ratings rose to 3.9, close to the target.
Where Turnover Fell
Turnover in the first two weeks of employment fell from about 40 percent of early leavers to about 15 percent, suggesting the onboarding routine worked. Departures during the July wave fell less, from 35 percent of early leavers to 30 percent.
Outside Factors
A cooler, rainier June reduced crowds, which may have eased pressure, and a new restaurant at a nearby resort offered higher wages in July, drawing several workers. These factors make it harder to attribute all changes to the program.
After-Action Review: What Was Planned
The plan called for trained leads, a two-week onboarding routine, schedules posted two weeks ahead, a lead on each fuel dock at peak hours and weekly huddles.
What Happened
Training and onboarding ran as planned. Fuel dock coverage held on all but two weekends, when illness left one marina short. Schedule posting averaged 11 days ahead rather than 14, because the general manager's approvals were slow during the Fourth of July week.
The program fixed the first two weeks of a new worker's summer better than it fixed the hardest two weeks of everyone's summer.
Why It Happened
Successes trace to leads who embraced coaching and to new workers who felt known; exit interviews from stayers mentioned their lead by name. The July shortfall traces to scheduling slippage, the peak workload and outside wage competition, which the program addressed only partly.
What to Change
Next season, Harbor Point should give leads authority to post schedules without approval for routine weeks, add a midsummer bonus for workers who stay through Labor Day, hire four floaters for the July peak and repeat lead training each spring.
What the Numbers Mean for the Business
The results carry real value. Thirteen fewer early departures than last year saved roughly $11,700 in recruiting and training costs at about $900 each, and fewer short-staffed weekends meant fewer rentals turned away. Seven fewer fuel dock incidents reduced the risk of fines and injuries. Against the program's cost of about $19,400, the first season roughly broke even on measurable savings alone, before counting safety and reputation, and the second season should cost less because training materials and the scheduling app are already in place.
How the Leads Experienced the Program
An end-of-season survey of the nine leads found that eight wanted to return, compared with four the year before. Leads rated the training highly but asked for more practice with difficult customers and for clearer authority over schedules. Their requests match the after-action findings and give the next season's plan its starting point.
Leadership Reflection: Growth
Devon's dock leads now rate him much higher on support. In his journal, he recorded a Saturday in June when a boater argued with a new worker at the fuel dock. Instead of taking over, he stood back while lead Kayla Brooks handled it, then talked with her afterward about what went well. Kayla said later that it was the first time she felt like a lead rather than a senior worker. In Lord and Hall's terms, Devon moved from following a rule, do not take over, toward understanding why coaching builds leaders.
Leadership Reflection: Setbacks
Devon slipped during the Fourth of July week, taking over scheduling himself when approvals lagged, which undercut the leads' authority. Reviewing this as Ellis and Davidi (2005) recommend, he concluded that under pressure he still defaults to control, and that he needs to prepare delegation before busy periods rather than during them.
Developing the Collective
The project also built leadership capacity beyond Devon. Day et al. (2014) distinguished leader development, growth in one person's ability, from leadership development, growth in a group's shared capacity to lead. Nine dock leads who now onboard, schedule and coach represent the second kind of growth, and three of them have asked to return next summer as senior leads who would help train the new group.
Next Steps for Devon
Devon will ask for 360-degree feedback again next spring, mentor two new leads and work with the general manager on scheduling authority.
Conclusion
The dock lead program met one goal and came close on two, cutting early turnover and fuel dock incidents substantially. An after-action review shows strong onboarding results and remaining work on midsummer retention. Research on learning from success and failure and on how leadership skill deepens frames Devon's reflection: he has begun to lead through others rather than for them, and he knows where he still falls back on control.
References
Day, D. V., Fleenor, J. W., Atwater, L. E., Sturm, R. E., & McKee, R. A. (2014). Advances in leader and leadership development: A review of 25 years of research and theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 63-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.004
Ellis, S., & Davidi, I. (2005). After-event reviews: Drawing lessons from successful and failed experience. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(5), 857-871. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.5.857
Lord, R. G., & Hall, R. J. (2005). Identity, deep structure and the development of leadership skill. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(4), 591-615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.06.003
What the LDR 310 Week 5 instructions ask
The final LDR 310 assignment typically asks students to present the results of their capstone project and reflect on their leadership growth. Expect to compare results with goals using data, analyze what contributed to success and shortfalls, describe lessons learned, recommend next steps for the organization and reflect on how the project changed the student's leadership, often connecting to program concepts and the earlier self-assessment. A strong paper is honest about mixed results, distinguishes causes the project controlled from outside factors, uses research on learning from experience and offers specific, evidence-based reflection rather than general statements of growth. Cite scholarly sources in APA format.
How this LDR 310 Week 5 example is built
By Labor Day, Harbor Point's seasonal turnover had fallen from 44 to 31 percent, fuel dock incidents from 11 to 4 and dock leads' ratings of Devon Marsh's support from 2.6 to 3.9. The paper compares these results with the goals and analyzes why turnover fell most among new workers and least in the July wave. Research on after-event reviews shows that people learn from both successes and failures when they analyze them systematically, and research on leader identity explains how leadership skill grows from surface behaviors to deeper principles and self-concepts. An after-action review covers what was planned, what happened, why and what to change. Devon's reflection traces his move from fixing problems to coaching, the moments he slipped and his development plan.
LDR 310 Week 5 grading rubric: where the points go
Capstone results papers are graded on honest evaluation, analysis of causes and depth of reflection. Graders look for numbers before adjectives. High-scoring work compares results with goals using data, explains why outcomes occurred, separates project effects from outside factors and acknowledges shortfalls. Graders reward structured learning, such as an after-action review, and recommendations for the organization's next steps. Reflection should connect to the earlier self-assessment and to leadership concepts, with specific moments that show growth or difficulty. A clear account of what the student would do differently demonstrates the self-awareness the capstone is designed to build.
LDR 310 Week 5 help: mistakes to avoid
Final capstone papers often claim complete success and offer vague reflection, such as I grew as a leader. Report results honestly, including goals missed, and explain why. Another common weakness is crediting the project for every improvement without considering other factors, such as weather or a new competitor. Note them. Some students reflect only on positives; research suggests learning from failures is especially valuable when analyzed carefully. Others forget to recommend next steps, leaving the organization without a plan to sustain gains. Explain what you would keep and what you would drop if you ran the project again. Finally, tie reflection to evidence, such as feedback from the people you led, so your conclusions about growth rest on more than self-report.
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 3: Stakeholders and Change Strategy
- LDR 310 Week 4: Implementation Plan
More BS in Business sample papers
- LDR 308 Week 5: Inspiring Others
- LDR 309 Week 5: Adaptability and Leading Change
- MGT 312 Week 5: Conflict, Change and a Recommendation to Management
- MGT 316 Week 5: Managing With a Global Mindset
LDR 310 Week 5 questions, answered
What does LDR 310 Week 5 usually cover?
The closing week typically asks for the capstone's outcomes measured against its goals, an honest look at causes, next steps for the organization and a personal reflection on how the writer has grown as a leader.
Where can I find a free LDR 310 Week 5 sample paper?
This page carries a full end-of-capstone paper on one season of dock lead development at an invented Missouri marina, with its results and reflection.
What is an after-action review?
It is a structured discussion after an event or project that asks what was planned, what actually happened, why it happened and what to do differently next time.
Can people learn from success as well as failure?
Research on after-event reviews found that people learn from both when they analyze them systematically, and that reviewing successes can be as useful as reviewing failures.
How do you show leadership growth in a capstone reflection?
Compare current behavior and feedback with the earlier self-assessment, describe specific moments that tested you and explain what you will keep developing.
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