This paper circulates around the core theme of belief that decisions must be made swiftly together with its essential aspects. It has been reviewed and purchased by the majority of students thus, this paper is rated 4.8 out of 5 points by the students. In addition to this, the price of this paper commences from £ 99. To get this paper written from the scratch, order this assignment now. 100% confidential, 100% plagiarism-free.
As per the module syllabus, the reassessment assignment for Crisis Management is an individual reflection paper of 3,000 words (+/-10%) based on module coursework (100%). Paper should be a word-processed document uploaded to canvas, 12 point font, double-space, spellchecked, grammar checked, with proper citation format. The question to address is the following: One of the challenges inherent in studying crisis is that academics are not in agreement about the basic definitions. For example, Pearson and Clair (1998: 60) define crisis as: A low-probability, high-impact event that threatens the viability of the organization and is characterized by ambiguity of cause, effect, and means of resolution, as well as by a belief that decisions must be made swiftly. However, Coombs (2007: 2-3) states: A crisis is the perception of an unpredictable event that threatens important expectancies of stakeholders and can seriously impact an organization’s performance and generate negative outcomes. Each of these definitions has clear pros and cons for crisis management education. Support your answer with real-world examples. Final Paper-Common Mistakes Final Paper Marking Criteria Three embedded learning activities: Researching and identifying an appropriate crisis to study Not one discussed in class; not too big, too small, too soon, etc. Applying Life Cycle of a Crisis Framework Subheadings and clear discussion: Pre-conditions, trigger, crisis, and post-crisis One trigger must be clearly identified to frame ANALYSIS Do not identify multiple triggers ANALYSING case using at least one theory from class Paper should be ANALYSIS not a report Paper should not be overly fixated with details about what happened ANALYSIS should explain why and how crisis occurred, emphasizing systemic issues; Paper should not blame individuals, ANALYSIS should identify systemic flaws Average papers will adequately accomplish these three tasks. In addition, better papers will also Identify a novel, interesting, or obscure case to study Offer innovative interpretations of causes of this crisis case Creatively discuss influence of Covert factors Apply more than one theory in a thoughtful manner Common mistakes: Not picking an appropriate case Not understanding the case and therefore misrepresenting issues Not selecting ONE clear trigger to frame ANALYSIS Not clearly applying crisis lifecycle Producing a report of what happened, not an ANALYSIS of why and how Blaming individuals for failures, not identifying systemic causes Name dropping in lots of theories without proper application in the ANALYSIS