The Application Applies Course Learning To A Real-Life Situa ✓ Solved

The application applies course learning to a real-life situa

The application applies course learning to a real-life situation by developing (and where practicable implementing) an intervention to produce a positive change. If proposed, include enough detail to show it is implementable and likely to produce the intended outcome. If implemented, describe what was implemented, the implementation context, results, and reactions. The application normally has two parts: (1) a slide show presentation to the cohort (face-to-face or WebEx), and (2) a commentary or narrative. The presentation may use slides, video, or other media; slides must not exceed 10 content slides (title and references excluded), oral presentation must not exceed 20 minutes, and slide font size must be at least 30 points. Use PowerPoint notes pages or a separate Word document to provide the presentation script; ensure a reader can match text to slides (for example, include slide numbers). Submit slides with the presentation script. Obtain facilitator approval before proceeding.

Paper For Above Instructions

Overview and Purpose

This application translates course learning into a pragmatic intervention aimed at improving employee psychological safety and team performance within a mid-sized professional services firm. The proposed intervention, Team Psychological Safety Action Plan (TPSAP), is designed to be implementable within 12 weeks and is justified by implementation science and organizational change literature. It includes clear components, timeline, roles, evaluation measures, and an accompanying slide presentation and script that meet the format and delivery requirements.

Problem Definition and Context

The target organization experiences recurring project delays, low upward reporting of concerns, and uneven team collaboration. Historical patterns show limited upward feedback and a risk-averse culture. Stakeholders include senior leadership, middle managers, project teams, HR, and clients. The core problem: insufficient psychological safety impeding learning and performance (Edmondson, 1999; Duhigg, 2016). The goal is to increase psychological safety and measurable team performance within three months of implementation.

Intervention Design (TPSAP)

TPSAP is a six-component intervention: 1) Leadership alignment workshop, 2) Manager coaching sessions, 3) Team norms co-creation, 4) Structured reflection rituals, 5) Safe reporting channels, and 6) Rapid feedback loops with metrics. Each component contains practical steps, responsible roles, resources, and acceptance criteria. For example, the leadership workshop is a half-day session facilitated by HR and an external coach; acceptance criteria include an action charter and public leader commitments.

Implementation Steps and Timeline

Week 0: Facilitator approval and stakeholder kickoff. Weeks 1–2: Leadership workshop and commitments. Weeks 3–6: Manager coaching (three biweekly sessions). Weeks 4–8: Team workshops to co-create norms and reflection rituals. Week 6 onward: Launch safe reporting channels and weekly rapid feedback summaries. Week 12: Summative assessment and stakeholder review.

Feasibility and Likelihood of Success

The design draws on implementation frameworks and evidence (Fixsen et al., 2005; Durlak & DuPre, 2008; Craig et al., 2008). Critical success factors include leader buy-in, dedicated time for coaching, integration into regular team routines, and measurement clarity. Risk mitigation includes contingency coaching sessions, incentives for participation, and executive-level escalation protocols.

Evaluation and Measurement

Evaluation uses mixed methods: validated surveys (psychological safety scale; Edmondson, 1999) administered baseline, midline (week 6), and endline (week 12); objective team performance metrics (on-time delivery rates, client satisfaction) drawn from project management systems; and qualitative interviews with stakeholders to capture reactions and context (Patton, 2014). A simple logic model maps inputs to short-term (increased reporting, improved team interactions), intermediate (faster issue resolution), and long-term outcomes (improved project delivery and client satisfaction). The RE-AIM framework guides reach and maintenance assessment (Glasgow et al., 1999).

Alternative Options and Innovation

Two rival approaches were considered: a technology-focused anonymous reporting platform, and a remote asynchronous learning module for managers. TPSAP combines human-centered practices with a lightweight reporting channel to balance relational change and procedural safety. The plan embeds scanning and learning through weekly feedback loops and a post-implementation reflection to inform future iterations (Kotter, 1996; Patton, 2014).

Presentation Plan and Submission Details

The presentation will be a 20-minute oral delivery with no more than 10 content slides plus title and references. Slide design will follow best practices (large type ≥30 pt, minimal text, clear visuals) to enhance clarity and audience engagement (Duarte, 2010; Reynolds, 2008). The slide set will include: title, problem and context, intervention overview, timeline, roles & resources, measurement plan, risks & mitigation, expected outcomes, next steps, and references. A detailed script will be provided in PowerPoint notes and as a separate Word document; each script page will include the slide number at the top for easy matching. The materials will be uploaded to the learning platform per instructions.

Organization, Scholarly Rigor, and Ethics

The narrative synthesizes course material and external literature to support the intervention logic (Craig et al., 2008; Fixsen et al., 2005). All stakeholder engagement will follow ethical norms for consent and confidentiality; qualitative data will be de-identified. The approach ensures transparency about assumptions, such as the need for supervisory support and the potential for variable engagement across teams.

Conclusions and Next Steps

TPSAP is a concrete, implementable intervention with strong grounding in implementation science and organizational change. It includes clear timelines, measurable indicators, and contingency measures. Facilitator approval will precede rollout, followed by staged implementation and documented evaluation. The slide presentation and matched script will be prepared to meet the 10-slide, 20-minute, and notes/submission requirements.

References

• Craig, P., Dieppe, P., Macintyre, S., Michie, S., Nazareth, I., & Petticrew, M. (2008). Developing and evaluating complex interventions: The new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ, 337, a1655.
• Durlak, J. A., & DuPre, E. P. (2008). Implementation matters: A review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(3-4), 327–350.
• Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blase, K. A., Friedman, R. M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature. University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network.
• Glasgow, R. E., Vogt, T. M., & Boles, S. M. (1999). Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: The RE-AIM framework. American Journal of Public Health, 89(9), 1322–1327.
• Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Harvard Business School Press.
• Patton, M. Q. (2014). Developmental evaluation: Applying complexity concepts to enhance innovation and use. Guilford Publications.
• Edmondson, A. C. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383.
• Duarte, N. (2010). Slide:ology: The art and science of creating great presentations. O'Reilly Media.
• Reynolds, G. (2008). Presentation Zen: Simple ideas on presentation design and delivery. New Riders.
• American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.). APA.