| Course | MGT 362 Change Management and Implementation (MGT/362) |
|---|---|
| Week | 5 |
| Paper type | Change measurement and sustainment plan |
| Length | about 1,082 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 MGT 362 Week 5
Empty Miles Down to 14.5 Percent but Overrides Rising: Measuring and Sustaining the Dispatch Change at Cardinal Freight Lines
[Student Name]
University of Phoenix
MGT/362: Change Management and Implementation
Week 5 Assignment
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
Cardinal Freight Lines and all results are composites written for a model paper.
Three months ago, the composite carrier Cardinal finished rolling out its routing and tracking system to all 14 terminals, a year after the pilot began. Leaders are pleased with the headline numbers, but the change lead has noticed a trend: dispatchers are overriding the system's route plans more often each month at several terminals. The months after a change goes live are when organizations most often declare victory and stop watching, and that is exactly when old habits begin to return. This paper measures the results and plans how to sustain them.
Results Against Targets
Empty miles fell from 19 to 14.5 percent, close to the 14 percent target. On-time delivery rose from 91 to 94.2 percent company-wide, short of the 95 percent target at every terminal. Status calls to dispatchers fell by 58 percent, beating the target. Customer complaints about delivery windows fell by a third.
The Value of the Results
Each point of empty miles was worth about $850,000 a year, so the 4.5-point reduction is worth about $3.8 million annually, well above the project's annual costs. Fewer status calls freed dispatchers for planning. These results justify the investment.
Adoption Measures
Adoption measures show whether people use the system. Ninety-six percent of routes are now planned in the system, and 98 percent of drivers use the app daily. These figures look strong. But adoption also includes how the system is used, and overrides, in which dispatchers change the system's suggested routes, tell a more complicated story.
The Override Trend
Company-wide, dispatchers override about 11 percent of route plans, up from 7 percent in the first month after go-live. At three terminals, Toledo, Dayton and Peoria, overrides reached 25 to 30 percent. These terminals also show the smallest gains in empty miles and on-time delivery.
Investigating the Overrides
Interviews with dispatchers at the three terminals found consistent reasons. The system does not know about low bridges on certain rural roads, customers who accept deliveries only through a back gate or a factory that closes its dock for lunch. Veteran dispatchers override routes that would fail and then rebuild them by hand. Their overrides are often correct.
Resistance or Design Flaw?
It would be easy to treat overrides as resistance. The evidence suggests otherwise: overrides at the three terminals produce better on-time results than the system's original plans. The problem is that dispatchers' knowledge is not being fed back into the system, so the same corrections are made every day.
Fixing the Feedback Loop
Cardinal will create a simple process for dispatchers to flag recurring problems, such as a low bridge or dock restriction, and have the IT team add them to the routing rules within a week. Dispatchers who submit fixes will be recognized. The goal is to reduce overrides at the three terminals to below 12 percent by improving the system rather than discouraging overrides.
Commitment, Not Just Compliance
Herscovitch and Meyer (2002) distinguished three forms of commitment to change: affective, based on belief in the change's value; continuance, based on the costs of not supporting it; and normative, based on a sense of obligation. They found affective and normative commitment were associated with more supportive behavior, including championing the change, than continuance commitment. Dispatchers who follow the system only because they must would not improve it; those who believe in it will.
Building Affective Commitment
Involving dispatchers in improving the system turns them from users into owners. Sharing results with each terminal, including how their fixes improved on-time delivery, links their effort to outcomes they care about.
Anchoring in Structures
Kotter (2012) emphasized that change lasts only when it is anchored in the culture, through visible connections between new behaviors and success and through leadership succession that continues the approach. Cardinal will update dispatcher job descriptions to include maintaining route rules, add system-related measures to performance reviews, include the system in new dispatcher training and require terminal managers to review override reports monthly.
Anchoring in Culture
Culture changes when people see that the new way works and that leaders value it. Leaders will share stories of dispatchers whose fixes improved service, include results in company meetings and avoid any return to old metrics, such as rewarding dispatchers for call volume.
Who Owns the Change Now
The project team will disband at the end of the stabilization period, and responsibility must pass to the line. Terminal managers will own local results and override reviews, a dispatch standards manager in operations will own the routing rules and the feedback process and the operations vice president will review the quarterly dashboard with the executive team. With named owners, nobody can assume the gains are someone else's to protect.
Drivers' Experience One Year Later
Drivers' views matter for sustaining the change. A pulse survey found that 71 percent said the app made their days more predictable and 64 percent said dock waits had fallen. Concerns about monitoring eased after a year in which no driver was disciplined using tracking data outside safety cases, showing that keeping the promise made in Week 4 built trust. Continued adherence to that policy is part of sustaining the change.
Ongoing Measurement
A quarterly dashboard will track empty miles, on-time delivery by terminal, overrides by terminal, rule fixes submitted and completed, status calls and a pulse survey on dispatchers' and drivers' views of the system. Breaking data down by terminal prevents averages from hiding problems.
Reflecting on the Whole Change
Looking back, the data in Week 1 created urgency; the combined models in Week 2 guided action; the integrated plan in Week 3 tied people to the schedule; and communication in Week 4 limited rumors. In hindsight, the team should have built a feedback loop for local knowledge before go-live, since veterans' interviews in Week 3 identified some of the same problems.
What Research Says About Sustaining Change
Stouten et al. (2018) found that research supports continuing to evaluate and adjust after implementation and institutionalizing change through systems and structures, steps that popular models sometimes treat briefly. Cardinal's quarterly review and feedback loop follow that advice.
Conclusion
Cardinal's dispatch change has delivered most of its goals, worth about $3.8 million a year. Rising overrides at three terminals revealed a design gap rather than simple resistance. Fixing the feedback loop, building commitment, anchoring the change in roles, measures and culture and continuing to measure by terminal will sustain the gains.
References
Herscovitch, L., & Meyer, J. P. (2002). Commitment to organizational change: Extension of a three-component model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 474-487. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.3.474
Kotter, J. P. (2012). Leading change. Harvard Business Review Press.
Stouten, J., Rousseau, D. M., & De Cremer, D. (2018). Successful organizational change: Integrating the management practice and scholarly literatures. Academy of Management Annals, 12(2), 752-788. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2016.0095
What the MGT 362 Week 5 instructions ask
The final MGT 362 assignment typically asks students to explain how an organization will measure the success of a change and sustain it. Typical requirements include defining measures of adoption and results, comparing results with baselines and targets, identifying signs that change is slipping, explaining what sustains change, such as reinforcement, commitment and culture, and recommending specific actions to anchor it. Many prompts ask students to reflect on the whole change process. Use data, separate adoption from results, explain why some measures may mislead and support recommendations with change research in APA format. Say who will own measurement once the project ends.
How this MGT 362 Week 5 example is built
A year after launch, a trucking company's empty miles are down and on-time delivery is up, but dispatchers at some terminals override the routing system more each month, and the paper asks what that means. It compares results with Week 1 baselines. It separates adoption measures, such as system use and overrides, from results. It finds that overrides cluster at three terminals where veteran dispatchers do not trust the system's handling of local constraints. Research on commitment explains why compliance alone does not sustain change. The paper recommends fixing the routing rules, recognizing dispatchers who improve the system, updating roles and measures, naming owners once the project team disbands and reviewing results quarterly by terminal.
MGT 362 Week 5 grading rubric: where the points go
Strong final papers measure both adoption and results, compare them with baselines and interpret warning signs rather than simply reporting success. Instructors credit clear tables, honest discussion of what is not working, use of research on commitment and reinforcement and specific steps to build change into structures, measures and culture. Reflection on the change process as a whole, linking back to earlier weeks, shows integration. Plain writing and APA citations complete the work. Strong submissions also recognize when a warning sign may reveal a flaw in the change itself, rather than resistance, show mature judgment, and they explain how measurement will continue after the project team disbands, since sustaining change becomes the job of line managers.
MGT 362 Week 5 help: mistakes to avoid
Students often declare a change successful because the system is live. Measure use and results. Another gap is reporting averages that hide problems at specific sites or groups. Break data down. Students also treat every deviation as resistance; sometimes users are right and the design needs fixing. Investigate before judging. Avoid ending with general advice to reinforce change; name the systems, roles and measures that will change. Use research on commitment to explain why compliance is not enough. Finally, reflect on the whole process from Week 1, noting what you would do differently. Honest lessons learned are more useful to readers than a claim that everything worked.
Related MGT 362 sample papers
Other MGT 362 week samples
- MGT 362 Week 1: Change and the Role of Analytics
- MGT 362 Week 2: Applying Change Management Models
- MGT 362 Week 3: Change and Project Management
- MGT 362 Week 4: Stakeholders and Change Communication
More BS in Business sample papers
- MGT 312 Week 5: Conflict, Change and a Recommendation to Management
- MGT 316 Week 5: Managing With a Global Mindset
- MGT 401 Week 5: Funding Options
- MGT 418 Week 5: Go or No-Go Recommendation
MGT 362 Week 5 questions, answered
What does MGT 362 Week 5 usually cover?
It usually covers measuring and sustaining change: adoption and results measures, comparison with baselines, warning signs, commitment and reinforcement and steps to anchor change in systems and culture.
Where can I find a free MGT 362 Week 5 sample paper?
This page presents a full measurement and sustainment plan for a trucking company's dispatch change, with results tables and notes. A free draft of your own final MGT 362 paper can be requested.
What is the difference between adoption and results measures?
Adoption measures show whether people are using the change, such as system logins or process compliance. Results measures show whether the change achieves its goals, such as lower costs or better service.
What are the three types of commitment to change?
Affective commitment is wanting to support the change because one believes in it, continuance commitment is supporting it because of the cost of not doing so and normative commitment is supporting it from a sense of obligation.
How do organizations sustain change?
By building the change into job descriptions, measures, rewards, training and routines, continuing to measure and improve and developing commitment rather than relying only on compliance.
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 MGT 362 week samples · All courses