do a 400-700 word paper on Gap analysis.. Define Gaps analyis and expand behind the three question : where are we now? where do we want to get to? how can we get there?

600 – 800 word paper on Gap Analysis .

Define Gap analysis in the intro. (I’m donig a gap analysis on Customer Service, Environment Sustainabitly and Techonology. somehow introuduce this in the intro as a lay out what the rest of my project will be).

Gap analysis is a very basic tool for reviewing an organization’s position. It is basedon three questions:1. Where are we now?2. Where do we want to get to?3. How can we get there

Expand or analize the three stated questions above. state The purpose of the question and the benefits in a business environment. (body of the paper to focust on the three questons)

and in the conclusion to state Gap analysis on technology, environment sustainbility and Technology .

I’ll send you the info off the book I’m using so you can cite some out of my text.

I need at least three references and citation

thanks

Lurays

Utilize something out of this and cite please. Whatever you quote off here put next to (TEXTbook) I’ll plug the reference

Gap Analysis

Gap analysis is a very basic tool for reviewing an organization’s position. It is based

on three questions:22

1. Where are we now?

2. Where do we want to get to?

3. How can we get there?

Although basic, these questions can be useful on a number of levels. First, their very

generality means that most managers should be able to venture an opinion of some

sort—at least in regard to the first two questions—which is likely to serve as a good

basis for subsequent discussion.

Second, regardless of whether the responses indicate low or high degree of consensus,

this can be put to good use. High consensus can generate two different courses of action. One option is to act immediately to close the gap, either by revising the objective

or by taking the necessary action to meet the set objective. A second option is to suspend

taking action until a direct challenge to the high consensus view can be arranged. The

rationale for the second option is that—as long as immediate action to close the gap is

not required—such a challenge can lead to either reinforcement of the wisdom of the

preferred position or a timely revision of certain “taken-for-granted” positions.

Low consensus provides the perfect platform for further attention to the objectives

and strategies of the organization on the grounds that commitment to specific courses

of action should be based on a reasonably high degree of consensus on the answers to

at least the first two questions. Agreement on the answer to the third question may be

desirable, but it is not necessary as long as there is commitment to support the formal