Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Change Management 101 Model

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. (X! · talk) · @080 · 00:55, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Change Management 101 Model

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested prod. Unnotable business model, only reference is the book that introduced it. Written like an ad for said book. Delete. Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 03:56, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, a non-notable concept for which I can find no significant independent coverage. Glenfarclas (talk) 04:04, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this content-free article. No third-party coverage of this model, as far as I can tell. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 04:17, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete. So confused and meaningless that nobody can reasonably be expected to make sense of it: This model illustrates three primary phases of Change Management project implementation: Plan, Do and Sustain. The model states that implementors Plan the change process, Do the work required to lead the organization through transition and Sustain new structures and behaviors to meet long-term business objectives. The Plan phase includes assessing needs and developing a plan. The Do phase includes launching communication and transitioning work. The Sustain phase includes aligning structures and optimizing results. So, what have we learned? - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:36, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.
Delete I unfortunately have enough experience with the jargon to understand the article. By the standards of the field, though the article is very poorly written, it is not nonsense. But nonetheless it is not a notable business model or a notable book. DGG ( talk ) 20:12, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.