| Course | NR 703 Applied Organizational and Leadership Concepts |
|---|---|
| Week | 4 |
| Paper type | Power and politics memo |
| Length | About 820 words, 4 pages |
| Format | Memo with APA 7 citations |
| School | Chamberlain University |
| Program | MSN, Nurse Executive |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NR 703 Week 4
Memorandum
To: Course faculty, NR 703
From: MSN student
Date: 2 October 2026
Re: How a two-year-old request was approved in eleven days
The Outcome
On 9 September 2026, the medical-surgical nursing director approved a 90-day pilot of a fifteen-minute paid overlap at 06:45 on the telemetry unit, so that night-to-day report could happen at the bedside. The same request had sat without a decision since March 2024. The approval came eleven days after a written patient complaint on 29 August.
Sources of Influence, by Role
| Role | Source of influence | What they did |
|---|---|---|
| Patient experience director | Legitimate and informational: owns complaint responses and reports them to the executive team monthly | Forwarded the complaint to the director of nursing with a note that it would appear in the September executive report |
| Clinical nurse specialist | Expert: the unit's audit data and knowledge of the evidence on bedside report | Produced a one-page summary of the 07:00 audits, 11 of 50 at the bedside, within two days |
| Director of nursing | Legitimate: controls the medical-surgical budget line for overtime and can approve pilots | Placed the item on the 9 September nursing leadership agenda |
| Staffing office manager | Informational: the only person with the cost model for paid overlaps | Updated the 2024 cost estimate the same day it was asked for |
| Night charge nurse | Referent: respected by night staff | Told the director the night staff would use the overlap if it was paid |
| Unit manager | Legitimate, but limited by span and budget | Supported the pilot but could not approve it |
The categories come from the classic bases of social power (French & Raven, 1959).
Which Sources Combined
No single source of influence explains the outcome; the combination does. The complaint alone had no power over nursing; the patient experience director's role made it visible to the executive team. The audit data alone had existed for months; the clinical nurse specialist's expertise made it usable in two days. The cost estimate alone had existed since 2024; the staffing office's updated figure made it current. The director's legitimate power to approve was always there, and so was the night charge nurse's standing with night staff, which mattered once the question became whether the overlap would be used. What changed was that information, expertise and a deadline, the September executive report, arrived at the director's desk in the same week.
Why It Had Not Happened Before
The same sources of influence existed in 2024 but were scattered across roles that did not meet. In 2024, the request carried only the night nurse's and charge nurse's support. Neither held power over the budget or the agenda. The unit manager, who had legitimate power over the unit, lacked it over overtime. No one with informational power had attached data, and no external pressure created a deadline.
Where the Structure Helped
The request moved because it reached the director through two routes at once: patient experience, which sits outside nursing's line, and the clinical nurse specialist, whose dotted line runs to the director of nursing practice. In 2024 it had only the line route through the unit manager. The structure did not change between 2024 and 2026; which parts of it the request touched did (Mintzberg, 1979).
What the Memo Does Not Allege
That anyone acted in bad faith in 2024. That the director approved the pilot only to avoid embarrassment; the director's note on the approval cites the audit data first. That the complaint was orchestrated; it came from a patient's family, unsolicited. The memo explains how influence combined, not anyone's motives.
How Long Each Source Had Existed
The audit data had existed since 2023. The cost estimate had existed since 2024. The director's authority had existed throughout. The complaint was new. The executive report deadline recurs monthly but had never before carried a complaint about report. Only the combination was new in August 2026, and the memo's main finding follows from that: power that is spread across roles has little effect until something brings it together. In this case the bringing together was done by a patient's family, through a letter written for their own reasons, which no one in the hospital controlled, and the next request may not be so lucky.
What This Suggests for Future Requests
The lesson for anyone on the unit who wants to change practice is practical. A request that needs budget authority should arrive with data, a cost and a reason the decision cannot wait. The pilot is evidence that the structure can move quickly when those three meet. A future request about another practice, such as how the unit handles telemetry alarm settings, would do well to arrive with the same three elements rather than waiting for a complaint to supply the deadline. Bedside report has been linked with better patient and nurse outcomes in some hospitals (Sand-Jecklin & Sherman, 2014), which was part of the clinical nurse specialist's summary.
References
French, J. R. P., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 150-167). University of Michigan.
Mintzberg, H. (1979). The structuring of organizations: A synthesis of the research. Prentice-Hall.
Sand-Jecklin, K., & Sherman, J. (2014). A quantitative assessment of patient and nurse outcomes of bedside nursing report implementation. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 23(19-20), 2854-2863. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.12575
Reading the NR 703 Week 4 instructions
Use the memo header your course template sets, and keep the whole thing under two pages. Open by naming the outcome being explained, something concrete such as a policy adopted quickly after a long delay. Then build an inventory of influence sources, each attached to a role rather than a person: who controls a schedule, who holds data, who can get an item onto an agenda, who is trusted by staff. Use categories that do work, such as legitimate, expert, informational or referent power. Show which sources combined and why they had not combined before. Close by saying what the memo does not allege, so the analysis does not read as an accusation.
Inside the NR 703 Week 4 example
The sample's outcome is a 90-day overlap pilot approved eleven days after a family's written complaint. Its table lists the patient experience director forwarding the complaint with a note about the executive report, the clinical nurse specialist producing audit data in two days, the director's budget authority and agenda, the staffing office's updated cost, the night charge nurse's standing with night staff and the unit manager's limited authority. Influence combined when information, expertise and a deadline met legitimate power. The 2024 request lacked all three. The memo notes how long each source had existed, does not allege bad faith or staged complaints and draws a lesson for future requests. The memo also explains how the request reached the director through two routes at once.
NR 703 Week 4 rubric: what full points look like
Power memos lose most when they name individuals and their motives, which turns analysis into accusation and raises professional concerns. Next is an inventory of influence that lists people without saying what each controls. Many memos use power categories as labels without showing how they explain the outcome. Few memos ask why the same sources did not produce the outcome earlier, which is often the most revealing question. Memos that run long lose the format. Leaving out what the memo does not allege invites readers to assume the worst about the people involved. Memos that never note how long each source of influence had existed also miss why the outcome happened when it did. Ignoring structure in a power memo also leaves out how the request reached the decision maker.
NR 703 Week 4 help: mistakes that cost points
Writing about power without writing about personalities takes care and practice. A guided draft can help you name the outcome, list influence sources by role and show which combined to produce it. We can also help you explain why those sources had not combined before and state what the memo does not allege. Asking a colleague who saw the decision how it moved often fills in a source you missed. The memo and its analysis are yours. Noting how long each source of influence existed is worth doing too.
Get a NR 703 Week 4 example written to your instructions
Send the Week 4 prompt and any memo template your classroom provides, plus a line about the outcome you want explained. A custom memo written to your rubric returns in 24-48h, and there is no charge for the first. If your site is small, say so and the roles will be described at a level that keeps individuals unrecognizable.
More NR 703 papers and MSN samples
- NR 703 Week 1: Organizational Oddity Post
- NR 703 Week 2: Structure Analysis
- NR 703 Week 3: Culture Assessment
- NR 703 Week 5: Decision-making Analysis
- NR 703 Week 6: Incentive Analysis
- NR 703 Week 7: Diagnostic Case Paper
- NR 703 Week 8: Synthesis Analysis
- NR 670 Week 4: Evidence Portfolio Piece
- NR 632 Week 4: Process Measure Summary
- NR 631 Week 4: Evidence Review
- NR 529 Week 4: Coaching Conversation Plan
NR 703 Week 4 questions, answered
Who is the memo addressed to?
In most classrooms an internal reader with standing to act, often a director or a course-supplied fictional executive. The addressee matters because it fixes what can be assumed. A memo to somebody inside the organization does not need to explain what the unit does; a memo to an outside reader spends a paragraph on it and has less room left for the analysis.
Does writing about politics look unprofessional?
Not when the memo stays descriptive. Politics in this sense means how influence is distributed and used, which every organization has and none can avoid. The unprofessional version is the one that assigns motives, calls somebody manipulative, or implies wrongdoing. Describe what a role can move and what it did, and the same content reads as competence rather than complaint.
What if I have no influence to write about myself?
The memo is not about yours. It explains a site, and a writer with no formal position is often the better observer because nobody performs for them. Some of the sharpest versions come from people who watched a decision happen from outside it, which gives them the routing detail that participants stop noticing.
Where can I find a free NR 703 Week 4 sample paper?
The complete power and politics memo on a report overlap approved in eleven days appears in full here.
Why did the NR 703 Week 4 request succeed in 2026 but not 2024?
In 2026 audit data, a current cost and an executive reporting deadline reached the director together; in 2024 the request had only frontline support.