| Course | LDR 321 Modern Leadership (LDR/321) |
|---|---|
| Week | 3 |
| Paper type | Adaptive leadership analysis |
| Length | about 1,009 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 321 Week 3
Thunderstorms, Ride Closures and a Heat Wave: Adaptive Leadership for Supervisors at a Pennsylvania Amusement Park
[Student Name]
University of Phoenix
LDR/321: Modern Leadership
Week 3 Assignment
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
Pinecrest Park, its supervisors and its events are composites written for a model paper.
The first two weeks at Pinecrest, the invented Pocono park, dealt with who the operators are and how they talk to one another. This week examines another feature of the work: unpredictability. Summer thunderstorms close outdoor rides on short notice, breakdowns idle major attractions and heat waves strain crews and guests. Rides manager Alicia Gomez has noticed that her 14 area supervisors respond to disruption very differently. This paper reviews research on adaptive leadership and analyzes two difficult days.
Why Flexibility Matters
Yukl and Mahsud (2010) argued that flexible and adaptive leadership is essential because leaders face changing situations that require different behaviors. They described flexibility as the capacity to adjust one's behavior to fit the situation and adaptive leadership as changing behavior in appropriate ways as situations change. Effective leaders diagnose situations accurately, have a wide range of behaviors and can balance competing demands, such as efficiency and safety.
Adaptive Leadership as a Process
DeRue (2011) proposed a theory of adaptive leadership in which leading and following are a complex adaptive process. Leadership is not fixed in a formal role; it emerges as people claim and grant leading and following identities in response to the situation. In adaptive teams, leadership shifts among members as conditions change, and teams that allow this exchange respond better to dynamic environments.
Complexity Leadership
Uhl-Bien et al. (2007) argued that leading in complicated settings involves three strands: the official planning and coordinating work of managers, the unplanned problem solving that springs up among people facing a situation and a bridging role that makes room for that problem solving and ties it back to the official plan. Leaders in complex settings must enable adaptation rather than control everything.
Day One: Storm and Breakdown
On a July Saturday with 11,000 guests, a thunderstorm closed all outdoor rides for 90 minutes, sending about 2,000 guests into the arcade, theater and indoor carousel, while the coaster broke down for three hours. Supervisor Marcus Webb, responsible for the indoor area, quickly asked two experienced operators to manage lines, reassigned idle operators from outdoor rides to help and kept a steady stream of radio updates. Another supervisor, responsible for the coaster area, tried to handle the breakdown, guest questions and her idle crew alone, and guests complained of no information for over an hour.
Day Two: The Heat Wave
In August, temperatures reached 97 degrees. Three operators went to first aid with heat exhaustion. One supervisor, Denise Park, noticed early signs in her crew, created a rotation that moved operators into shaded positions every 30 minutes and asked a retiree operator to monitor water breaks. Her area had no heat-related first-aid visits.
Technical and Adaptive Challenges
The coaster breakdown was largely technical: maintenance knew how to repair it. The guest crowding, communication during closures and crew fatigue were adaptive: they required people to change routines, share information and take initiative in ways the standard plan did not cover.
The storm did not need a hero; it needed a supervisor who could hand pieces of the problem to the people around her.
What Helped
Supervisors who adapted well did three things. They diagnosed quickly what had changed. They shifted their behavior, from directing to delegating and from routine to improvised plans, as Yukl and Mahsud (2010) describe. And they let experienced operators lead parts of the response, the shared leading and following DeRue (2011) describes. Marcus and Denise acted as enabling leaders in the sense of Uhl-Bien et al. (2007), creating room for others to solve problems while keeping the formal plan in view.
What Hindered
Supervisors who struggled tried to control everything personally, waited for instructions from the office and did not share information with crews. Their operators, though capable, had no authority to act.
What the Operators Saw
Operators' accounts of the storm day add detail. In Marcus's area, operators said they knew what to do within minutes because he told them plainly what had happened, who would manage which line and when he would update them. In the coaster area, operators stood idle for nearly an hour because they were waiting for their supervisor to tell them what to do, though several had ideas for helping guests. The difference was not in the operators' ability but in whether their supervisor made room for them to act.
Why Some Supervisors Froze
Supervisors who struggled were not careless. Several were new and feared making a mistake without approval from the office. Others had been criticized in earlier seasons for improvising. Their caution made sense given past signals from managers, which means the department must change those signals, not only train individuals.
Recommendation 1: Disruption Playbooks
Each area will have simple playbooks for storms, breakdowns and heat, listing roles, communication steps and guest messages, so routine parts of disruptions are handled quickly.
Recommendation 2: Delegated Authority
Experienced operators will be designated as lead operators with authority to manage lines, reassign idle crew within their area and start heat rotations without waiting for approval.
Recommendation 3: After-Event Debriefs
After each major disruption, supervisors will hold a 10-minute debrief with crews: what happened, what worked, what to change.
Recommendation 4: Develop Adaptive Supervisors
Marcus and Denise will share their approaches at a supervisor meeting, and supervisors will practice scenarios before peak season.
Preparing Before the Season
Adaptive capacity can be built before the first storm. In May, each area will walk through its playbooks in a 20-minute drill, with lead operators practicing their delegated roles.
Measures
Alicia will track guest complaints during disruptions, time to resume normal operations, heat-related first-aid visits and crew feedback after debriefs.
Conclusion
Research shows that leaders must adjust their behavior to changing situations, that leadership can emerge among team members and that leaders in complex settings should enable others to adapt. At Pinecrest, supervisors who diagnosed, shifted and shared leadership handled storms and heat well. Playbooks, delegated authority, debriefs and shared practice can spread those adaptive skills across the ride team.
References
DeRue, D. S. (2011). Adaptive leadership theory: Leading and following as a complex adaptive process. Research in Organizational Behavior, 31, 125-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2011.09.007
Uhl-Bien, M., Marion, R., & McKelvey, B. (2007). Complexity leadership theory: Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(4), 298-318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.04.002
Yukl, G., & Mahsud, R. (2010). Why flexible and adaptive leadership is essential. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 62(2), 81-93. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019835
What the LDR 321 Week 3 instructions ask
The third LDR 321 assignment commonly asks students to analyze adaptive leadership and how leaders respond to changing conditions. Expect to define adaptive leadership, distinguish technical problems with known solutions from adaptive challenges that require learning, describe how leaders adjust their behavior to situations and explain how they help teams adapt. Some prompts ask students to analyze a specific event or their own adaptability. A strong paper uses research on adaptive and flexible leadership, applies it to real situations with details, shows how leaders shift between directing and enabling others and proposes practices that build a team's capacity to adapt. Cite scholarly sources in APA format.
How this LDR 321 Week 3 example is built
On one July Saturday at Pinecrest, a thunderstorm closed all outdoor rides for 90 minutes, a breakdown stopped the coaster for three hours and 2,000 guests crowded indoor attractions; on another day, a heat wave sent three operators to first aid. Some supervisors managed well, others froze or took over everything. The paper reviews research arguing that leaders must adjust their behaviors to fit changing situations, a theory describing adaptive leadership as an exchange of leading and following that emerges among team members and complexity leadership theory, which distinguishes administrative, adaptive and enabling functions. Analysis of the two days shows which supervisor behaviors helped, and the paper recommends weather playbooks, delegated authority, debriefs and rotating leadership roles.
LDR 321 Week 3 grading rubric: where the points go
Adaptive leadership papers are graded on conceptual clarity and quality of application. High marks go to work that explains adaptive leadership accurately, distinguishes routine problems from adaptive challenges and analyzes real events to show which leader behaviors helped teams adjust. Graders reward recognition that adaptive leadership includes enabling others to lead, not only the formal leader adjusting, and practical recommendations that build team capacity. Reviewers like to see the technical parts of a problem separated from the parts that require people to learn. A paper that compares how different leaders handled the same conditions gives instructors the clearest evidence of analytical skill and earns the strongest marks.
LDR 321 Week 3 help: mistakes to avoid
Students often describe adaptive leadership as being flexible in general, without showing what leaders actually did differently in a specific situation. Use events and behaviors. Another common gap is treating every problem as adaptive; some, like a broken ride, have technical solutions, while others, like a crew losing morale in a heat wave, require learning and new behaviors. Distinguish them. Some papers focus only on the formal leader, missing how team members step into leadership when conditions change. Include them. Others propose only training, when playbooks, authority and debriefs also matter. Include the crew's view of how the day went, not only the supervisor's. Finally, connect adaptability to measurable outcomes, such as guest complaints or injuries, so the recommendations can be evaluated.
Related LDR 321 sample papers
Other LDR 321 week samples
- LDR 321 Week 1: Understanding Individual Attributes
- LDR 321 Week 2: Communication Strategies for Leaders
- LDR 321 Week 4: Teamwork, Inclusion and Performance
- LDR 321 Week 5: Change Management and Empowerment
More BS in Business sample papers
- LDR 309 Week 3: Technology Integration
- LDR 310 Week 3: Stakeholders and Change Strategy
- MGT 312 Week 3: Groups and Teams in Organizations
- MGT 316 Week 3: Operational Processes
LDR 321 Week 3 questions, answered
What does LDR 321 Week 3 usually cover?
It usually covers adaptive leadership, including how leaders adjust to changing conditions, the difference between technical problems and adaptive challenges and how leaders help teams adapt.
Where can I find a free LDR 321 Week 3 sample paper?
The Week 3 adaptive leadership analysis of ride supervisors at a composite Pennsylvania amusement park is free to read above.
What is adaptive leadership?
Adaptive leadership is the practice of adjusting leadership behavior to changing situations and helping people learn and change in response to challenges that have no ready-made solution.
What is the difference between technical and adaptive challenges?
Technical challenges can be solved with existing knowledge and procedures, while adaptive challenges require people to learn, change behaviors or rethink assumptions.
How can leaders build a team's ability to adapt?
By preparing plans for likely disruptions, delegating authority, encouraging team members to take the lead when needed and reviewing events afterward to learn.
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 321 week samples · All courses