First assignment,PowerPoint of 10 slides 

research a recent crisis a well-known organization has experienced. Use the concepts presented in the textbook and course materials to assess how the leaders communicated during the crisis situation.

A successful submission will synthesize with the course textbook and Canvas resources while addressing these aspects of how the leaders handled the crisis:

• Examine how did the leader(s) and organization take responsibility for the crisis. Assess the accountability taken or not taken.
• Explain how the leader builds trust with stakeholders through communication. Assess the leadership’s ability to strengthen or weaken relationships.
• Include how the leader communicates a plan for resolving the crisis. 
• Demonstrate how the leader builds trust and/or uses expertise to persuade the audience.
• Identify at least one communication style used by the leader.
• Include what communication channels were utilized to spread information.
• Explain a specific communication breakdown that occurred during the events and process. If a breakdown did not occur, include how the leader likely offset a breakdown from occurring.
• Include aspects of cross-cultural communication of areas of diverse perspectives that may have played a role in the way the information was communicated, and how it was received by the target audience. If there are particular demographics or cultures or recipients included in the target audience, explain the approach to effective communicate to a diverse population.
• Rubric below Assignment 2- Effective CommunicationCriteriaRatingsPts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome1. Taking responsibilityview longer descriptionthreshold: 5.136.89 ptsMeets all assignment requirements. Addresses if the company took responsibility for the crisis in a well developed with high quality and quantity support. Reveals a high degree of critical thinking.5.81 ptsMeets all assignment requirements. Addresses if the company took responsibility for the crisis in a well developed with high quality and quantity support. Critical thinking is weaved into points.5.13 ptsMeets all assignment requirements. Addresses if the company took responsibility for the crisis are present with limited detail and development. Some critical thinking is evident.4.44 ptsSomewhat meets all assignment requirements.Addresses if the company took responsibility for the crisis lack detailed development. Ideas are vague, with little evidence of critical thinking.0 ptsDoes not address if the company took responsibility for the crisis lack detailed development. Ideas are vague, with no evidence of critical thinking./ 6.89 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome2. Building trust with stakeholdersview longer descriptionthreshold: 5.136.88 ptsMeets all assignment requirements. Addresses if the company built trust with stakeholders in a well developed with high quality and quantity support. Reveals a high degree of critical thinking.5.81 ptsMeets all assignment requirements. Addresses if the company built trust with stakeholders in a well developed with high quality and quantity support. Critical thinking is weaved into points.5.13 ptsMeets all assignment requirements. Addresses if the company built trust with stakeholders is present with limited detail and development. Some critical thinking is evident.4.44 ptsSomewhat meets all assignment requirements. Addresses if the company built trust with stakeholders lack detailed development. Ideas are vague, with little evidence of critical thinking.0 ptsDoes not address if the company built trust with stakeholder. It lacks detailed development. Ideas are vague, with no evidence of critical thinking./ 6.88 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome3. Building trust with expertise & persuasionview longer descriptionthreshold: 5.136.88 ptsMeets all assignment requirements. Addresses if the company leader built trust with stakeholders or used expertise to persuade in a well developed with high quality and quantity support. Reveals a high degree of critical thinking.5.81 ptsMeets all assignment requirements. Addresses if the company leader built trust with stakeholders or used expertise to persuade in a well developed with high quality and quantity support. Critical thinking is weaved into points.5.13 ptsMeets all assignment requirements. Addresses if the company leader built trust with stakeholders or used expertise to persuade is present with limited detail and development. Some critical thinking is evident.4.44 ptsSomewhat meets all assignment requirements. Addresses if the company leader built trust with stakeholders or used expertise to persuade lack detailed development. Ideas are vague, with little evidence of critical thinking.0 ptsDoes not address if the company leader built trust with stakeholder or used expertise to persuade. It lacks detailed development. Ideas are vague, with no evidence of critical thinking./ 6.88 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome4. Communicating crisis planview longer descriptionthreshold: 11.1815 ptsMeets all assignment requirements. Addresses if the company communicate a plan for resolving the crisis in a well developed with high quality and quantity support. Reveals a high degree of critical thinking.12.68 ptsMeets all assignment requirements. Addresses if the company communicate a plan for resolving the crisis in a well developed with high quality and quantity support. Critical thinking is weaved into points.11.18 ptsMeets all assignment requirements. Addresses if the company communicate a plan for resolving the crisis is present with limited detail and development. Some critical thinking is evident.9.68 ptsSomewhat meets all assignment requirements. Addresses if the company communicate a plan for resolving the crisis lack detailed development. Ideas are vague, with little evidence of critical thinking.0 ptsDoes not address if the company communicated a plan for resolving the crisis. It lacks detailed development. Ideas are vague, with no evidence of critical thinking./ 15 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome5. Communication style usedview longer descriptionthreshold: 11.1815 ptsMeets all assignment requirements. Addresses if the company used a particular communication style in a well developed with high quality and quantity support. Reveals a high degree of critical thinking.12.68 ptsMeets all assignment requirements. Addresses if the company used a particular communication style in a well developed with high quality and quantity support. Critical thinking is weaved into points.11.18 ptsMeets all assignment requirements. Addresses if the company used a particular communication style are present with limited detail and development. Some critical thinking is evident.9.68 ptsSomewhat meets all assignment requirements. Addresses, if the company used a particular communication style, lacks detailed development. Ideas are vague, with little evidence of critical thinking.0 ptsDoes not address if the company used a particular communication style. It lacks detailed development. Ideas are vague, with no evidence of critical thinking./ 15 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome6. Communication channels utilizedview longer descriptionthreshold: 11.1815 ptsMeets all assignment requirements. Addresses what communication channels the company utilized in a well developed with high quality and quantity support. Reveals a high degree of critical thinking.12.68 ptsMeets all assignment requirements. Addresses what communication channels the company utilized in a well developed with high quality and quantity support. Critical thinking is weaved into points.11.18 ptsMeets all assignment requirements. Addresses what communication channels the company utilized are present with limited detail and development. Some critical thinking is evident.9.68 ptsSomewhat meets all assignment requirements. Does not address if the company used a particular communication style, lacks detailed development. Ideas are vague, with little evidence of critical thinking.0 ptsDoes not address if the company used a particular communication style. It lacks detailed development. Ideas are vague, with no evidence of critical thinking./ 15 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome7. Example of communication breakdownview longer descriptionthreshold: 5.136.88 ptsMeets all assignment requirements. Addresses an example of a communication breakdown that can be explained in a well developed with high quality and quantity support. Reveals a high degree of critical thinking.5.81 ptsMeets all assignment requirements. Addresses an example of a communication breakdown that can be explained in a well developed with high quality and quantity support. Critical thinking is weaved into points.5.13 ptsMeets all assignment requirements. Addresses an example of a communication breakdown that can be explained are present with limited detail and development. Some critical thinking is evident.4.44 ptsSomewhat meets all assignment requirements. Does not address an example of a communication breakdown that can be explained, lacks detailed development. Ideas are vague, with little evidence of critical thinking.0 ptsDoes not address an example of a communication breakdown that can be explained. It lacks detailed development. Ideas are vague, with no evidence of critical thinking./ 6.88 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome8. Cross-cultural communication componentview longer descriptionthreshold: 5.136.88 ptsMeets all assignment requirements. Addresses if cross-cultural communication was a component of the crisis in a well developed with high quality and quantity support. Reveals a high degree of critical thinking.5.81 ptsMeets all assignment requirements. Addresses if cross-cultural communication was a component of the crisis in a well developed with high quality and quantity support. Critical thinking is weaved into points.5.13 ptsMeets all assignment requirements. Addresses if cross-cultural communication was a component of the crisis with limited detail and development. Some critical thinking is evident.4.44 ptsSomewhat meets all assignment requirements. Does not address if cross-cultural communication was a component of the crisis, lacks detailed development. Ideas are vague, with little evidence of critical thinking.0 ptsDoes not address if cross-cultural communication was a component of the crisis. It lacks detailed development. Ideas are vague, with no evidence of critical thinking./ 6.88 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome9. Quality of Slideshow Presentation including neatness, accuracy, grammar, spellingview longer descriptionthreshold: 5.136.88 ptsThe slides are presented in a neat, clear, organized fashion that is easy to read. Effective message support provided in the form of facts. The presentation contains no grammar errors; sentences are free of jargon.5.81 ptsSlides are presented in a neat and organized fashion that is usually easy to read. Effective message support provided in the form of facts. The presentation has no serious grammar errors; sentences are mostly jargon-free, complete, and understandable.5.13 ptsThe slides are presented in an organized fashion but may be hard to read at times. Adequate message support provided for key concepts by facts. The presentation may contain some grammar or sentence errors; sentences may contain jargon or are too long or hard to follow.4.44 ptsThe slides are presented in a somewhat organized fashion but are often hard to read. It is hard to know what information goes together. Some message support provided by facts message support provided for key concepts by facts. The presentation contains several major grammar/usage errors; sentences are long, incomplete, or contain excessive jargon.0 ptsThe slides appear sloppy and unorganized. It is hard to know what information goes together. . Little or no message support provided for major ideas. The presentation contains excessive significant grammar/usage errors; sentences are long, incomplete, or contain excessive jargon./ 6.88 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome10. Visuals & attractive layout of slideshowview longer descriptionthreshold: 5.136.88 ptsSlides are exceptionally attractive in terms of design, layout.5.81 ptsSlides are very attractive in terms of design, layout.5.13 ptsSlides are attractive in terms of design, layout.4.44 ptsSlides are somewhat attractive in terms of design, layout.0 ptsSlides are distractingly messy or very poorly designed. It is not attractive./ 6.88 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome11. References Slideview longer descriptionthreshold: 5.16.84 ptsAll information used was properly cited with a correct APA-style References Slide.5.78 ptsMajority of information used was properly cited with a correct APA-style References Slide.5.1 ptsMost information used was properly cited with a correct APA-style References Slide.4.41 ptsMinimal information used was properly cited with an incorrect APA-style References Slide.0 ptsInformation was not cited with APA-style Reference Slide.

Second assignment here 

Research suggests followers respect any decision over indecision. Particularly in a crisis or time of uncertainty, organizational members seek guidance from decisive leaders. The best leaders quickly process information, measure what matters, and make decisions based on what they know, even if they may not have the benefit of the “full picture.”

Deciding with speed over precision is important in times of uncertainty. Leaders should encourage action and embrace failure. There will be mistakes. Failing to act is much worse than the occasional misstep.

Use a well-known leader. Explain why the decision was made quickly, and describe what was good about the decision, and what was bad about the decision. Two pages are good 

Third Assignment here,

Identify a decision that you view as unethical. Explain why you think this decision is unethical. Include which of the following biases negatively influenced this decision-making process. Refer to the course resources and web sources to support your selection. (These bulleted items below are each addressed in this Canvas Module under Instructor’s Materials by scrolling down through the visual content).

• Confirmation
• Availability
• Representativeness
• Adjustment
• Escalation of commitment
• Framing 
• welcome to use a different bias than those listed above, so long as it is identified & explained in the submission)

Part II:After identifying the bias present in the flawed decision, students are expected to prescribe a better method for the same decision. To do so, students will consider mental models to support more sound decision making. To do so, include the following in the assignment submission:
1. Review the mental models presented inhttps://fs.blog/mental-models/ 

2. Choose one or more of the models that you find appropriate to address/improve the unethical decision you select to write about. Explain how applying the selected mental model could improve the questionable decision detailed in Part 1.