| Course | DPH 805 Organizational and Systems Leadership in Public Health |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 3 |
| Paper type | Organizational behavior analysis |
| Length | About 1,053 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Aspen University |
| Program | Doctor of Public Health |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for DPH 805 Module 3
Inside the Agency: An Organizational Behavior Analysis of a Health Department After the Pandemic
Student Name
Doctor of Public Health Program, Aspen University
DPH 805: Organizational and Systems Leadership in Public Health
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Inside the Agency: An Organizational Behavior Analysis of a Health Department After the Pandemic
Public health programs succeed or fail through the organizations that deliver them. Organizational behavior examines how structure, culture, motivation, communication and relationships shape performance. This paper analyzes a composite county health department of 240 staff after the COVID-19 response and recommends steps its leaders can take.
Data Sources
The analysis draws on an all-staff engagement survey with a 71% response rate, exit interview summaries, focus groups with three divisions, organizational charts and meeting observations. Combining sources reduces reliance on any single perspective.
Structure
The department is organized by program, each funded by separate categorical grants and reporting through division directors to the health officer. The structure creates clear accountability for grant deliverables but weak coordination across programs. Staff described working in silos and duplicating outreach to the same neighborhoods. Grant reporting cycles also differ by program, pulling staff in different directions at the same time.
Culture
The department's culture values expertise and compliance, reflecting years of audits and grant reporting. During the pandemic, a crisis culture of long hours and rapid decisions took hold. Staff reported pride in the response but exhaustion, and some felt their concerns were dismissed in the rush.
Motivation and Strain
Staff are strongly motivated by mission, but engagement scores fell on items about workload, recognition and growth. National data show the same pattern: most public health workers took part in the pandemic response, and many were considering leaving (Hare Bork et al., 2022). In the department, turnover reached 19% in the past year.
Diagnostic Findings
The table summarizes key findings.
| Area | Finding | Implication |
|---|---|---|
| Structure | Program silos; duplicated outreach | Create cross-program teams for shared populations |
| Culture | Compliance focus; crisis habits persist | Reset norms around workload and learning |
| Motivation | High mission, low recognition and growth | Recognition and development pathways |
| Communication | Top-down; decisions not explained | Two-way forums; explain rationale |
| Team dynamics | Staff hesitant to raise concerns | Build psychological safety |
| Decision-making | Centralized in health officer's office | Delegate decisions to divisions |
Communication
Communication flows mainly downward through email. Staff reported learning of decisions without understanding the reasons, which fueled rumors. Division directors said they lacked time for regular team meetings. Two-way channels, such as open forums and structured team huddles, could improve understanding and trust.
Team Dynamics and Psychological Safety
Focus groups revealed that staff often hesitated to question plans or report problems. Teams whose members feel psychologically safe engage more in learning behavior, from asking for feedback to talking through errors and trying new approaches, and they perform better as a result (Edmondson, 1999). Low psychological safety in the department may explain why problems surfaced late.
Leadership Style
Staff described division directors as caring but stretched thin, and senior leadership as distant. Evidence from the nursing workforce links relational and transformational leadership to higher satisfaction and retention (Cummings et al., 2010), suggesting that more visible, supportive leadership could help.
Power and Decision-Making
Decisions, even minor ones, were routed to the health officer's office, slowing work and signaling limited trust in divisions. Delegating decisions with clear boundaries would speed action and build ownership.
Readiness for Change
Staff expressed willingness to change but skepticism that leaders would follow through, given past initiatives that faded. Readiness depends on credible commitment, visible early wins and involving staff in designing changes.
Recommendations
Leaders should form cross-program teams for priority populations, hold monthly open forums with the health officer, train supervisors in giving feedback and building psychological safety, create a recognition program, delegate defined decisions to divisions and set workload norms that end crisis habits. Progress should be tracked through repeat surveys. Each recommendation has an owner and a date so progress can be reviewed at leadership meetings.
Informal Networks
Beyond the formal chart, informal networks shape how work gets done. Focus groups identified long-tenured staff whom others consult for advice and who carry institutional memory. Engaging these informal leaders in change efforts can speed adoption, while ignoring them can create resistance.
Subcultures
Different divisions have distinct subcultures. Environmental health staff, focused on inspections and enforcement, described a rule-driven culture, while health education staff described a relationship-driven one. Leaders should recognize these differences rather than impose a single culture, while building shared values across divisions.
Motivation Theories Applied
Motivation theories help interpret findings. Staff value meaningful work, autonomy and competence, which self-determination theory identifies as core needs. The pandemic reduced autonomy and recognition, lowering motivation. Restoring decision latitude and recognizing contributions address these needs directly.
Measuring Progress
The department will repeat the engagement survey annually, tracking items on workload, recognition, communication and psychological safety, along with turnover and vacancy rates. Division-level results will be shared with teams to guide local improvement.
Leadership Actions for the First 90 Days
In the first 90 days, the health officer and directors would hold listening sessions in each division, announce three immediate changes staff requested, such as fewer after-hours emails and clearer decision rights, and form a cross-program team for one priority neighborhood. Quick, visible actions build credibility for longer-term change.
Limitations of the Analysis
The survey reflects staff willing to respond, and focus groups may not capture quieter voices. Leadership perspectives were gathered mainly through interviews with directors. A follow-up with community partners would add an outside view of the organization.
Connecting to Leadership Theory
The findings suggest that transformational and servant leadership behaviors, such as explaining purpose, listening and removing obstacles, could address many problems identified. Adaptive leadership would help staff and leaders work through the harder question of what the department's role should be after the pandemic.
Role of Middle Managers
Division directors and supervisors connect senior leaders to front-line staff. They need time and training to hold team meetings, give feedback and translate decisions. Investing in middle managers is one of the most effective ways to improve communication and morale.
Culture Change Takes Time
Culture shifts slowly. Leaders should expect several years of consistent action before new norms feel natural, and should celebrate small signs of change, such as staff raising concerns in meetings.
Conclusion
The composite health department has a committed workforce strained by the pandemic and constrained by silos, top-down communication, centralized decisions and low psychological safety. An organizational behavior lens reveals these patterns and points to practical changes in structure, communication, leadership and culture that could restore engagement and improve performance.
References
Cummings, G. G., MacGregor, T., Davey, M., Lee, H., Wong, C. A., Lo, E., Muise, M., & Stafford, E. (2010). Leadership styles and outcome patterns for the nursing workforce and work environment: A systematic review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 47(3), 363-385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2009.08.006
Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999
Hare Bork, R., Robins, M., Schaffer, K., Leider, J. P., & Castrucci, B. C. (2022). Workplace perceptions and experiences related to COVID-19 response efforts among public health workers: Public Health Workforce Interests and Needs Survey, United States, September 2021-January 2022. MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 71(29), 920-924. https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm7129a3
DPH 805 Module 3 instructions, in plain terms
DPH 805's catalog entry includes organizational behavior, and because the third module's instructions stay private to enrolled students, this example analyzes how a public health agency works from the inside. Organizational behavior assignments generally ask you to diagnose an organization using concepts such as structure, culture, motivation and communication, supported by evidence, then recommend changes. Name your data sources. Examine several dimensions rather than one. Separate findings from implications. Use research to explain patterns you see. Recommend changes with owners and timelines. Note the limits of your data. Protect confidentiality when you quote staff, and present findings about systems rather than individuals. Explain how you gathered and protected staff input.
How the DPH 805 Module 3 example is put together
Seventeen headings divide this analysis of roughly 1,050 words, and its three-column table sets each diagnostic finding beside its implication. It describes data sources and examines structure, culture and motivation before the table, then communication, psychological safety, leadership style, decision-making, readiness and recommendations. Informal networks, subcultures, motivation theories, measuring progress, a 90-day plan, limitations, links to leadership theory, middle managers and the time culture change takes follow. A margin comment explains that naming data sources shows the diagnosis is evidence-based. The conclusion restates the main patterns and practical changes. Findings in the table are matched to specific implications so each points toward action. Data sources are listed first so readers can judge the evidence.
Where the marks sit in the DPH 805 Module 3 rubric
Organizational analyses are graded on the quality of evidence, breadth of dimensions examined, use of research to interpret findings and practical recommendations. This paper cites research on psychological safety, a review of leadership styles and national workforce survey data in APA format. The findings table keeps observations apart from their interpretation. Subcultures and informal networks show nuance. The 90-day plan shows leadership thinking. Graders reward diagnoses that lead to specific, owned actions. Distinguishing formal structure from informal networks and subcultures shows sophistication. A realistic timeline acknowledging that culture change takes years shows maturity. Measuring progress with repeat surveys keeps the analysis accountable. Clear, respectful writing about colleagues matters too.
Common DPH 805 Module 3 mistakes, and how to avoid them
A frequent weakness is describing an organization from one viewpoint, often the author's own, without data. Another is recommending generic fixes like better communication. Gather at least two kinds of evidence. Name specific practices to change. Assign owners. Consider how different divisions experience the same organization. If you are analyzing your own workplace, a tutor can help you frame findings tactfully. Close with the change you expect to matter most. Use quotes sparingly and anonymously. Check that recommendations address the root causes you identified. Include a short plan for the first three months, since leaders are judged on early actions. Mention how you would involve staff in shaping changes.
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 Aspen University 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.
More DPH 805 and Doctor of Public Health sample papers
- DPH 805 Module 1: Leadership Theories for Public Health
- DPH 805 Module 2: Leadership Assessment and Plan
- DPH 805 Module 4: Systems Thinking and a Systems Map
- DPH 805 Module 5: Quality Improvement Proposal
- DPH 805 Module 6: Financing and the Economics of Change
- DPH 805 Module 7: Writing a Grant Proposal
- DPH 805 Module 8: Leading Culturally Sensitive Change
- DPH 850 Module 6: Evaluating an Information System
- DPH 820 Module 7: Testimony to a City Council
- DPH 801 Module 4: Community Models and Diffusion
- DPH 870 Module 3: Matching Designs to the Problem
DPH 805 Module 3 questions, answered
What does DPH 805 Module 3 usually ask for?
Aspen's DPH 805 covers organizational behavior, so an analysis of a public health organization is a typical assignment. Confirm with your classroom prompt.
What does an organizational behavior analysis examine?
Structure, culture, motivation, communication, team dynamics, leadership, decision-making and readiness for change.
Why does psychological safety matter in health departments?
It encourages staff to raise concerns and share errors, which helps teams learn and catch problems early.
Where can I find a free DPH 805 Module 3 sample paper?
The organizational behavior analysis appears here, with a table of findings and implications for a health department.
What does an organizational behavior analysis cover in DPH 805 Module 3?
Structure, culture, motivation, communication, team dynamics, leadership, decision-making and readiness for change, with evidence and recommendations.