| Course | HR499 Bachelor's Capstone in Human Resource Management |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 2 |
| Paper type | Situation analysis |
| Length | About 1,140 words, 7 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | BS in Business Administration (Human Resources) |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for HR499 Unit 2
Thirty-Four Stores, Three Days' Notice and an Ordinance Seven Months Out: A Unit 2 Situation Analysis
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
HR499: Bachelor's Capstone in Human Resource Management
Unit 2 Situation Analysis
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
Hobbyline Crafts, its stores, its people and every figure are composite and illustrative, and the city ordinance is the case file's own version; the sources cited are real.
Purpose and Method
This analysis records what is true at Hobbyline Crafts, who said what, and what is still unknown. It makes no recommendation. Each fact carries its source, the case file, an HRIS extract, the timekeeping system or an interview, so that a reader who doubts a figure knows where to check it.
Every figure in this analysis can be traced to a document or a person, and none of them yet carries an opinion about what Hobbyline should do. Where two sources disagree, both figures are reported and the one used later is named. The analysis was assembled over three weeks from the case file, two HRIS extracts, a timekeeping sample and interviews with four store managers, the benefits director and the payroll manager. Nobody interviewed was asked for a solution, and the few who offered one are quoted only in the stakeholder section, as positions rather than findings.
The Organization
Hobbyline Crafts sells art supplies, yarn, fabric, seasonal decor and custom framing from 34 stores in two neighboring Midwestern states, and it runs classes in most stores on weekday evenings and Saturday mornings. Stores average 38 employees, for 1,292 store employees in all; another 148 work at the support center and the distribution center, for 1,440 in total. Source: HRIS extract, current quarter.
Of the 1,292 store employees, 956 are part-time and 336 full-time, so 74 percent of store staff work part-time. Source: HRIS extract.
The Workforce
Part-time turnover. Last year 761 part-time associates separated against 956 part-time positions, a rate of 79.6 percent. Source: HRIS separations report.
The hours rule. Since 2015 a corporate rule has required that part-time associates keep their weekly average at or below 29 hours across any rolling quarter. The rule's memo gives its reason as keeping part-time employees below the full-time threshold the Affordable Care Act uses for employer coverage. Source: case file, corporate policy manual.
Starting pay. Part-time associates start at $15.25 an hour and average $16.40. Source: payroll register.
No-shows. Store directors report 1,180 no-call no-shows last year; the timekeeping system records 1,046 unexcused absences. The two counts differ because directors include shifts swapped informally without approval. This analysis uses the timekeeping figure. Source: directors' survey and timekeeping system.
Scheduling as It Runs
The weekly sequence explains where the three days' notice comes from. The sales and class-enrollment forecast is released by the support center on Wednesday. Store managers build the schedule Wednesday afternoon and Thursday morning and post it Thursday for a week that begins Sunday. Any associate with a conflict learns of it after the schedule is set, and the manager fills the gap by text message.
A four-week timekeeping sample at six stores found that 19 percent of part-time associates worked at least one close followed by an open with fewer than ten hours between them. Holiday weeks were excluded from the sample. Source: timekeeping system, sample drawn for this analysis.
Store managers also report that classes add uncertainty: an instructor-led class that fills late needs an extra associate at the register and in the classroom, and a class that is canceled leaves one idle. Source: interviews with four store managers.
The Legal Calendar
A city fair workweek ordinance, summarized in the case file, takes effect in seven months for retail employers above a size threshold. Nine Hobbyline stores sit inside the city's limits, with 342 employees. The ordinance's provisions are listed in the case file and are not interpreted here; interpretation belongs to the legal review in Unit 5. Source: case file, ordinance summary.
No similar law exists in the second state, but its legislature held a hearing on a scheduling bill last session. Source: case file, news clipping.
Research gives context for why such laws have spread. Schneider and Harknett (2019), surveying hourly service workers, found that routine schedule instability was more strongly associated with psychological distress and poor sleep than low wages were, which is part of the argument that cities have relied on.
What the Turnover Figure Includes
The 79.6 percent rate counts every part-time separation, voluntary and involuntary, including seasonal associates hired for the October to December peak whose employment ended in January. Seasonal hires account for 214 of the 761 separations. Without them the rate is about 57 percent, which is still high for the role. Source: HRIS separations report, seasonal flag.
Choper et al. (2022) found, in panel data on hourly retail and food service workers, that exposure to unstable schedules strongly predicted later turnover for the third of workers with the least stable schedules. Hobbyline does not track how stable each associate's schedule is, so whether its own turnover follows that pattern remains open. The figure is recorded here with its composition so later units can use whichever version suits their question.
Stakeholders
Store directors control staffing and scheduling at each store and have asked for a stricter attendance policy, a twelve-point system with termination at twelve, and a $250 hiring bonus. Source: directors' memo.
The benefits team controls plan eligibility and the hours rule and has stated that removing the cap would add coverage costs not in the budget. Source: benefits director interview.
Payroll would configure any premium pay the ordinance requires. Source: case file.
The general counsel has asked HR for a list of legal questions before the ordinance takes effect. Source: case file.
Part-time associates have not been asked. An exit survey reaches about one leaver in four, and its most common free-text comment concerns schedule changes. Source: exit survey summary.
Kesavan et al. (2022) randomly assigned Gap stores to a package of steadier, more predictable scheduling practices, and productivity in those stores rose by roughly 5 percent, which suggests the stakeholders' interests may overlap more than their positions do. That possibility is noted here and tested in later units.
What Is Still Unknown
How many part-time associates want more hours. No one has asked them.
What share of no-shows follow a short-notice change. The timekeeping system records schedule edits but has never been matched to absences.
Whether the second state will act. The bill's prospects are unclear.
What the cap costs in turnover. Separations are not yet linked to hours worked.
How classes affect staffing. Class enrollment is forecast with sales, but no one has measured how often a late-filling class forces a schedule change.
Each of these unknowns affects which options are worth considering, and the issue identification memo in Unit 3 should not treat any of them as settled.
References
Choper, J., Schneider, D., & Harknett, K. (2022). Uncertain time: Precarious schedules and job turnover in the US service sector. ILR Review, 75(5), 1099-1132. https://doi.org/10.1177/00197939211048484
Kesavan, S., Lambert, S. J., Williams, J. C., & Pendem, P. K. (2022). Doing well by doing good: Improving retail store performance with responsible scheduling practices at the Gap, Inc. Management Science, 68(11), 7818-7836. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2021.4291
Schneider, D., & Harknett, K. (2019). Consequences of routine work-schedule instability for worker health and well-being. American Sociological Review, 84(1), 82-114. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122418823184
The Purdue Global HR499 Unit 2 instructions
Unit 2 asks for a factual account of the capstone case before any recommendation. Record what is true, who said what and what is still unknown, and attach a source to every fact, whether the case file, an HRIS report, a timekeeping sample or an interview. Organize the facts from the stable to the urgent: the organization, its workforce, how the work actually runs and the legal calendar. Where sources disagree, report both figures and say which one later units will use. Legal facts belong here as dates and populations, not as interpretations, because the legal review comes later. A stakeholder section should list each function, what it controls and what it has said, quoting positions without judging them. The prompt closes with unknowns, the questions that would change the analysis if answered, and those deserve as much care as the facts. Keep recommendations out entirely, even where the answer seems obvious.
How this HR499 Unit 2 example is built
The analysis opens with its method, describing three weeks of work from the case file, HRIS extracts, a timekeeping sample and interviews. The organization section gives 34 stores averaging 38 employees and the 74 percent part-time share. The workforce section reports turnover, the 2015 hours rule, starting pay and two no-show counts, 1,180 from directors and 1,046 from timekeeping, with the second one used. A margin note explains why both are kept. A separate section breaks seasonal hires out of the turnover rate, citing Choper and colleagues. Scheduling is described through the week's sequence, from the Wednesday forecast to the Thursday posting, with a sample showing close-then-open pairs for nearly a fifth of part-time associates. The legal calendar dates the ordinance, with Schneider and Harknett for context. Stakeholders follow, with Kesavan and colleagues on overlapping interests, and five unknowns close the analysis.
Reading the HR499 Unit 2 grading rubric
A capstone situation analysis is graded on accuracy, sourcing and restraint. Every fact should carry its source, and figures that appear in later units must match exactly. Credit goes to reporting disagreements between sources openly and choosing one with a reason. Describing how work actually runs, such as the weekly scheduling sequence, earns more than a summary of policy, because it shows where problems originate. The legal section should state dates and coverage without interpreting obligations. Stakeholder descriptions are marked for fairness: positions quoted as positions, without evaluation. The unknowns list is where many students lose points by leaving it out; naming what is not known shows analytical maturity. Recommendations in this unit usually cost marks even when they are sensible. Research cited for context should be brief and in APA 7, and the paper should stay within the page count the prompt sets.
Common HR499 Unit 2 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Situation analyses often slide into recommendations, especially in the stakeholder section, where it is tempting to say who is right. Others drop the source notes, which leaves case figures and assumptions looking identical. A common error is using a headline figure, such as total turnover, without checking what it includes; seasonal hires can change a rate dramatically. Some students interpret the law in this unit, which pre-empts the later legal review. Another weakness is skipping the people affected but not consulted, such as part-time associates. Check that your figures add up, store counts times averages, part-time shares and separations, and that the same numbers will carry into later units. Keep the unknowns specific enough that someone could go and find the answer. If your case file is long and you are unsure what belongs in the analysis, send it and we can help you sort facts from positions.
Get an HR499 Unit 2 example written to your instructions
Send your HR499 case file or the organization your section uses, plus the Unit 2 instructions and rubric. Within 24-48h, free as a first sample, the situation analysis comes back with every fact sourced, each function's position reported without comment and the case's open questions set out at the end. 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 HR499 papers and BS in Business Administration (Human Resources) samples
- HR499 Unit 1: Discussion Board Post
- HR499 Unit 3: Issue Identification Memo
- HR499 Unit 4: Alternatives Comparison
- HR499 Unit 5: Legal Exposure Review
- HR499 Unit 6: Cost and Resource Estimate
- HR499 Unit 7: Implementation Roadmap
- HR499 Unit 8: Seminar Reflection
- HR499 Unit 9: Professional Portfolio Piece
- HR499 Unit 10: Executive Case Presentation
- HR400 Unit 2: Job Analysis
- HR485 Unit 2: Metric Definition Brief
- HR410 Unit 2: Needs Assessment
- HR435 Unit 2: Job Evaluation Exercise
HR499 Unit 2 questions, answered
How is a situation analysis different from a SWOT?
A SWOT sorts facts into categories that already imply judgments, strengths and weaknesses. A situation analysis reports what is true, who said what and what is still unknown, and leaves judgment for later. Some sections accept a SWOT as one exhibit inside it; if yours does, keep the narrative descriptive and let the SWOT carry the evaluation.
What if the case file contradicts itself?
Record both figures and their sources, and say which one the analysis will use and why. Capstone cases are sometimes built with inconsistencies on purpose. The sample notes that the store directors' no-show count and the timekeeping system's count differ, and it carries the timekeeping figure forward because the system records it automatically.
Should the analysis mention the law?
It should record legal facts, an ordinance, its effective date and which locations it reaches, without interpreting them. Interpretation is the job of a later unit, and doing it here tends to produce a conclusion before the alternatives exist. Stating that a legal deadline exists, and when it falls, is enough to shape the analysis that follows.
Where can I find a free HR499 Unit 2 sample paper?
You can read a complete HR499 Unit 2 situation analysis here, setting out the sourced facts of a composite 34-store craft chain's scheduling case, with stakeholders, unknowns and margin notes.
Why report the turnover rate with and without seasonal hires?
Because 214 of the 761 part-time separations were seasonal associates whose jobs ended in January. Including them gives 79.6 percent; excluding them gives about 57 percent, and later units can use whichever fits their question.