| Course | MGT 500 Management |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 3 |
| Paper type | MBA decision analysis |
| Length | About 1,065 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Aspen University |
| Program | Master of Business Administration |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for MGT 500 Module 3
Imagine the Move Has Failed: Redesigning How a Symphony Orchestra Decides Whether to Leave Its Hall
Student Name
Master of Business Administration, Aspen University
MGT 500: Management
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Imagine the Move Has Failed: Redesigning How a Symphony Orchestra Decides Whether to Leave Its Hall
The Inland Northwest Symphony, a composite nonprofit orchestra in Spokane, Washington, has performed in the same downtown hall since 1928. The building is beloved but failing: its roof, heating and accessibility need about $6 million in work. A developer building a new performing arts center has offered the orchestra a twenty-year lease as its main tenant, with lower maintenance costs but higher rent and fewer dates in the main hall. The board chair, a retired executive, has spoken in favor of the move at two meetings, and a board vote has been informally scheduled. The executive director has asked whether the board is deciding well.
The Process So Far
The decision began when the developer approached the chair. The chair asked the executive director for a summary of the lease, which was presented at the next meeting alongside a repair estimate. No one stated what the orchestra was trying to achieve with its home. No other options were developed, such as phased repairs, sharing the old hall with other groups or selling it. Musicians and major donors have not been consulted. Several board members privately have doubts but have not raised them, assuming the chair's view will carry.
Why Decisions Fail
Nutt (1999) studied several hundred decisions in organizations and found that about half failed, meaning they were not adopted, were adopted only partly or were abandoned. Failure followed predictable tactics. Leaders often imposed an idea early, searched for few alternatives and pushed implementation through persuasion or edict. Successful decisions more often began by setting objectives, searched widely for options and involved people who would carry out the decision. The orchestra's process so far follows the failure-prone path almost exactly: an idea arrived first, there is one option and those affected have not been asked.
Fast Can Still Be Good
A board might respond by commissioning a year of studies. Eisenhardt (1989) studied top management teams in microcomputer firms, a fast-moving industry, and found that the fastest decision makers were not careless. They used real-time information, considered several alternatives at the same time, sought advice from experienced counselors, resolved conflict with a process of consensus with qualification and connected the decision to other decisions. Considering multiple options at once actually sped decisions, because comparison clarified choices. The developer needs an answer by spring, so the orchestra must be thorough and quick.
Imagining Failure
Klein (2007) proposed the premortem: before a decision is final, a team imagines that it has been carried out and has failed badly, and each member writes down why. Because the failure is treated as certain, people feel free to voice doubts they would otherwise keep to themselves. For the orchestra, a premortem on the move might surface fears that higher rent will consume reserves in a bad year, that fewer main hall dates will reduce ticket revenue or that loyal donors attached to the old hall will give less.
The Four Options in Brief
Developing real alternatives changes the conversation. The lease offers lower maintenance costs and a modern hall but higher rent and only about 40 main hall dates a year instead of the 70 the orchestra now uses. Full renovation of the old hall would cost about $6 million, raised through a capital campaign, and keep every date. Phased repair would fix the roof and heating now and accessibility over five years, spreading cost but leaving risks. Shared use would bring a ballet company and a choral society into the old hall as paying tenants, helping to fund repairs. Each option serves the objectives differently, which only becomes clear when they sit side by side.
Who Should Be in the Room
Nutt's successful decisions involved the people who would live with the result. Musicians know how each hall sounds and how many rehearsals they need on stage. Major donors know what they will support. Staff know what box office revenue each option implies. A small working group drawn from all three, reporting to the board, gives these voices a place before the vote rather than after.
Two Processes Compared
| Step | Current process | Redesigned process |
|---|---|---|
| Framing | Developer's offer defines the question | Board states objectives: financial stability, artistic quality, audience access |
| Options | One: the lease | Four: lease, full renovation, phased repair, shared use of old hall |
| Information | Lease summary and one repair estimate | Twenty-year cost comparison; audience and donor survey |
| Involvement | Board chair and director | Musicians, donors, staff and a facilities adviser |
| Testing | None | Premortem on the two leading options |
| Decision rule | Chair's preference, likely unanimous vote | Vote after comparison against stated objectives |
Timeline
In December, the board will adopt objectives. By the end of January, staff will prepare the four options with twenty-year costs, and a donor and audience survey will be completed. In February, a facilities adviser will review the estimates, and the board will hold a premortem on the two strongest options. The board will vote in March.
What the Premortem Might Change
A premortem on the lease might reveal that the orchestra's reserves could cover only two years of the higher rent if ticket sales fell, suggesting the board negotiate a rent cap or an early exit clause. A premortem on renovation might reveal that the capital campaign depends on three donors, one of whom is elderly, suggesting pledges be secured before construction begins. Either finding would improve the chosen option rather than simply rank the options.
Handling the Chair's Preference
The chair's early support for the lease is not a fault; leaders are entitled to views. But Nutt's findings suggest that his voice should come last, after options are developed and members have recorded their own assessments. The executive director will ask him privately to open the February meeting by inviting dissent, which signals that the decision is still open.
Judging the Decision Later
Two years after the move or renovation, the board will compare results with the objectives: reserves, ticket revenue, donor giving and musician and audience satisfaction.
Conclusion
The orchestra's board has been sliding toward a decision by default. Nutt's research shows why that path often fails, Eisenhardt's shows that a better process need not be slow and Klein's premortem gives the board a way to hear its own doubts. With objectives, real alternatives and wider involvement, the March vote can be a decision rather than a ratification.
References
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Making fast strategic decisions in high-velocity environments. Academy of Management Journal, 32(3), 543-576. https://doi.org/10.2307/256434
Klein, G. (2007). Performing a project premortem. Harvard Business Review, 85(9), 18-19.
Nutt, P. C. (1999). Surprising but true: Half the decisions in organizations fail. Academy of Management Executive, 13(4), 75-90. https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.1999.2570556
Reading the MGT 500 Module 3 assignment instructions
Decision making runs through every function in Aspen's MBA management course. A paper on it usually examines a real decision and the process behind it, then shows how research could improve both. Use your classroom's Module 3 prompt for specifics; one nonprofit's facilities choice is analyzed here. Describe the decision and its stakes, with costs and time horizons. Reconstruct the process so far, including who framed the question. Apply research on how decisions fail and succeed. Consider speed as well as quality, since some decisions have deadlines set by others. Redesign the process with specific steps, roles and dates. Explain how the organization will know afterward whether the decision was sound, and who will check.
Inside the MGT 500 Module 3 example
The paper opens with the Inland Northwest Symphony, whose 1928 hall needs $6 million in repairs. A developer has offered a twenty-year lease in a new arts center, and the board chair has spoken for it at two meetings. Nutt's Academy of Management Executive article on why half the decisions in organizations fail identifies idea imposition and limited search as failure-prone tactics. Eisenhardt's Academy of Management Journal study of microcomputer firms found that fast decision makers considered more alternatives at once, used real-time information and sought advice from experienced counselors. Klein's Harvard Business Review article describes the premortem. A table contrasts the current process with a redesigned one that names objectives first, develops four options including staying and renovating, runs a premortem and involves musicians and donors. The board votes in March after a costed comparison.
Reading the MGT 500 Module 3 grading rubric
Decision papers are assessed on a clear account of the actual process, accurate use of research on decision quality and a redesigned process concrete enough to follow. This example shows the board drifting toward one option, which Nutt's research identifies as a common route to failure. Eisenhardt's findings keep the redesign from becoming slow. Klein's premortem gives the board a practical tool for surfacing risks that members would otherwise keep to themselves. The comparison table makes the changes visible, the four options are developed side by side and the timeline turns the redesign into commitments the board can keep.
MGT 500 Module 3 help: mistakes that cost marks
A frequent mistake is grading a decision by its result instead of by the way it was reached. Examine the process: who framed the problem, which options were considered and what evidence was used. Another weakness is recommending more analysis without limits; research shows good decisions can be fast. Use specific tools, such as a premortem or explicit objectives. Involve the people affected. Set dates. Finally, plan how the decision will be reviewed later, so the organization learns whether its process worked. Show what each option looks like when developed side by side.
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 MGT 500 and Master of Business Administration sample papers
- MGT 500 Module 1: Managers and Management Practices
- MGT 500 Module 2: Planning and Goal Setting
- MGT 500 Module 4: Organizing and Coordination
- MGT 500 Module 5: Managing People and Teams
- MGT 500 Module 6: Leading and Motivating Employees
- MGT 500 Module 7: Controlling and Performance Measurement
- MGT 500 Module 8: Current Issues and an Integrated Management Plan
- MGT 645 Module 6: Project Work and Delivery
- MGT 530 Module 6: Power, Influence and Organizational Politics
- MGT 646 Module 4: Sequencing and Schedule
- MGT 570 Module 4: Business-Level Strategy
MGT 500 Module 3 questions, answered
What does MGT 500 Module 3 usually ask for?
Aspen's MGT 500 covers decision making in this module, so an MBA paper analyzing a real decision process and how to improve it is typical. Read your classroom prompt.
Why do organizational decisions fail?
Nutt found that about half failed, often because leaders imposed an idea, searched for few alternatives and used persuasion or edict instead of involvement.
Can decisions be both fast and good?
Eisenhardt found that fast decision makers in high-velocity firms considered more alternatives at once and used real-time information and experienced advisers.
Where can I find a free MGT 500 Module 3 sample paper?
The example above redesigns a symphony orchestra's process for deciding whether to move to a new hall, using research on decision failure and speed.
What is a premortem?
A technique Klein described in which a team imagines a decision has failed and explains why, surfacing risks people might otherwise keep to themselves.