| Course | GM543 Strategic Organizational Design and Architecture |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 9 |
| Paper type | Fit assessment memo |
| Length | About 790 words, 5 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | MS in Management |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for GM543 Unit 9
Two Passes, Four Failures, Three Mixed: A Unit 9 Fit Assessment Memo on the Current Design
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
GM543: Strategic Organizational Design and Architecture
Unit 9 Fit Assessment Memo
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
Harrow Contract Furniture, its executives and every figure are composite and illustrative; the frameworks cited are real.
Memo
To: Chief Executive Officer, Harrow Contract Furniture From: Organization Design Analyst Date: November 14 Subject: Does our current structure fit the strategy?
Bottom Line
The current functional design still serves the dealer catalog business well, and it cannot deliver large workplace projects or healthcare seating without change. Of Michael Goold and Andrew Campbell's nine tests of organization design, it passes two, fails four and gives mixed results on three (Goold & Campbell, 2002a). The most serious failure is the market advantage test: no unit owns the two businesses the strategy depends on.
Results of the Nine Tests
Market advantage: fail. The design gives catalog orders a clear path through the plants, but no unit owns large projects or healthcare customers. Large projects shipped late 42 times last year, and healthcare bids were won at about 19 percent against 35 percent for office projects.
Parenting advantage: mixed. The executive team adds value by setting standards and allocating capital across the two plants. It loses value when it is pulled into disputes, as when the engineering vice president spent twenty-three days on one engineer's schedule during the matrix pilot.
People: mixed. The design suits our specialists and develops them well. It does not develop managers who could run a whole business, and we have none ready to lead a market unit.
Feasibility: pass. The design works within our systems, budgets and the skills we have today.
Specialist cultures: pass. Engineering and the plants keep strong professional standards and a single frame standard. Lawrence and Lorsch found that departments doing unlike work come to hold unlike goals and outlooks, and that this differentiation is worth protecting (Lawrence & Lorsch, 1967); our functions have it.
Difficult links: fail. The reciprocal link between sales and engineering at quoting is handled by devices meant for sequential work, and the Tuesday review has grown from six to seventeen people without settling disputes.
Redundant hierarchy: mixed. Sales is lean, with four layers. The plants have seven, including a production manager layer that adds little, and three managers have a single direct report.
Accountability: fail. No one is accountable for a large project from quote to installation, and no one's pay depends on healthcare growth. On 14 of 20 recent orders, sales set the ship date the plant was then held to.
Flexibility: fail. The healthcare line has no home, so every new healthcare product competes with catalog work for engineers and plant time.
The design fails the market advantage test because the two businesses the strategy depends on have no owner anywhere on the chart.
The Four Failures in Order of Consequence
Market advantage first. Goold and Campbell treat this as the most important test, because a design that does not direct attention to the sources of competitive advantage will not deliver the strategy, however well the rest works (Goold & Campbell, 2002b). The board's strategy depends on large projects and healthcare, and neither has an owner. Every other failure follows partly from this one.
Accountability second. Because no one owns a project, no one answers for its delivery, and our reward system pays for booked orders and plant efficiency, not for projects shipped complete and on time.
Difficult links third. The quoting link costs us most of our project delay. A redesign that gave projects an owner would also give that link a decision maker.
Flexibility fourth. Healthcare will keep losing engineering time until it has its own claim on resources, and future markets would meet the same problem.
The Mixed Results
The parenting result depends on whether the executive team can step out of daily disputes; a design with clearer decision rights would help. The people result shows that any new market unit needs a leader we must develop or hire. The hierarchy result points to the production manager layer and the single-report roles, which can be addressed with or without a larger redesign.
What a Redesign Must Achieve
I recommend we judge any proposed design against five criteria rather than choose a structure now. It must give large projects and healthcare customers an owner with profit responsibility. It must keep the plants' efficiency and the shared frame standard. It must put a decision maker at the quoting link. It must tie rewards to project delivery and healthcare growth. And it must remove layers that add no distinct work. The next stage of this work will compare options against these criteria.
References
Goold, M., & Campbell, A. (2002a). Designing effective organizations: How to create structured networks. Jossey-Bass.
Goold, M., & Campbell, A. (2002b). Do you have a well-designed organization? Harvard Business Review, 80(3), 117-124.
Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. (1967). Organization and environment: Managing differentiation and integration. Harvard University Press.
Reading the GM 543 Unit 9 instructions
In GM543 Unit 9 you write a memo assessing how well an organization's design fits its strategy, often using Goold and Campbell's nine tests. Use memo form with to, from, date and subject lines, and open with a bottom-line paragraph that gives the verdict before any analysis. Present each test with a result, pass, fail or mixed, and the evidence behind it, drawing where you can on earlier analyses such as decision rights, coordination and span reviews. Then take the failures in order of consequence, explaining why the most serious one matters most. Give each mixed result a short paragraph saying what would tip it. Close by stating what any redesign must achieve, as criteria rather than a chosen structure, so that later options can be tested fairly. Expect about four pages, citing the framework and any design research in APA 7.
How the GM 543 Unit 9 example is put together
The memo opens with to, from, date and subject lines and a bottom line: the functional design suits the dealer catalog business but cannot deliver large projects or healthcare. Each of the nine tests then gets a result and evidence, from 42 late projects and a 19 percent healthcare win rate to the twenty-three day matrix dispute, fourteen of twenty dates set by sales and seven plant layers, with Lawrence and Lorsch supporting the specialist cultures pass. The highlighted sentence explains the market advantage failure. Failures follow in order: market advantage, accountability, difficult links and flexibility. Mixed results on parenting, people and hierarchy get a paragraph that names what would change each. The memo ends with five criteria: owners with profit responsibility, preserved plant efficiency, a decision maker at quoting, rewards tied to strategy and no layers without distinct work.
GM543 Unit 9 rubric: what earns full points
GM543 instructors look for a memo that leads with its verdict and supports every test result with evidence. A bottom-line paragraph that a busy executive could act on earns more than one that saves its conclusion for the last page. Each of the nine tests should be applied accurately and receive a result with specific evidence, ideally drawn from earlier analyses. Ordering the failures by consequence, with a reason for the order, shows judgment. Mixed results deserve explanation rather than a label. Ending with design criteria instead of a structure shows the writer understands the memo's purpose and gives the next stage a standard. Memo form and plain language matter for this audience. Goold and Campbell's Designing Effective Organizations and their Harvard Business Review article, with Lawrence and Lorsch, form the references in APA 7.
GM543 Unit 9 help from the desk
Many GM543 Unit 9 memos bury the verdict at the end or present the nine tests without evidence. Others fail every test, which reads as less credible than a mixed result supported by data. A common gap is order: a memo that treats every failure equally gives the executive no sense of what to fix first. Some writers jump to a new structure, which makes the assessment look written to justify a chosen answer. Open with the verdict, give each test a result and evidence, rank the failures by consequence, explain the mixed results, and close with the criteria any redesign must meet, written in plain language for a chief executive.
Get a GM543 Unit 9 example written to your instructions
Tell us which strategy your organization claims to pursue, or the one the Unit 9 case describes, and sketch its current design in a paragraph. Send the prompt and rubric too. A first fit memo comes back free within 24-48h, verdict on top, built on Goold and Campbell's tests or whichever framework your section assigns. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More GM543 papers and MS in Management samples
- GM543 Unit 1: Functional Structure Discussion Post
- GM543 Unit 2: Star Model Organization Profile
- GM543 Unit 3: Functional vs Divisional Comparison
- GM543 Unit 4: Coordination Mechanism Analysis
- GM543 Unit 5: RAPID Decision Rights Map
- GM543 Unit 6: Reorganization Swings Reflection
- GM543 Unit 7: Matrix Dispute Case Analysis
- GM543 Unit 8: Span of Control and Layers Review
- GM543 Unit 10: Organization Design Recommendation
- GM541 Unit 9: Zone Rollout Sequencing Plan
- GM506 Unit 9: Second Plant Executive Recommendation
- GM505 Unit 9: Dean Feedback Report on Live Answers
- GM504 Unit 9: Scanning Gain Sustainment Plan
GM543 Unit 9 questions, answered
What are Goold and Campbell's nine tests?
Nine questions from their 2002 Harvard Business Review article on well-designed organizations. Four test fit: market advantage, parenting advantage, people and feasibility. Five test design quality: specialist cultures, difficult links, redundant hierarchy, accountability and flexibility. Some sections assign them by name; others assign a congruence model or the Star Model, and the memo's structure adapts to whichever framework the reading supplies.
Can a fit assessment conclude the design is fine?
Yes, if the evidence says so. A design that suits its strategy is a legitimate finding, and a memo reporting it with evidence reads as more credible than one that fails everything. Most real assessments land in between: the design suits one part of the business and not another, which is what the sample finds for its dealer and project businesses.
Should the memo recommend a new structure?
Usually not, unless the prompt asks. The assessment's job is to establish what is wrong and what any redesign must achieve. Criteria such as one accountable owner per project, or no layer without its own decisions, give a later recommendation a standard to test options against. Naming a structure early tends to make the assessment look reverse-engineered from a preferred answer.
Where can I find a free GM543 Unit 9 sample paper?
This page carries a full GM543 Unit 9 fit assessment memo applying Goold and Campbell's nine tests to a furniture maker's functional design, with evidence for each result and APA 7 references.
Why does the memo end with criteria instead of a structure?
The memo's job is to show what is wrong and what a redesign must achieve. Criteria such as an owner for large projects and a decision maker at quoting let the next stage compare options fairly instead of defending a structure chosen too early.