Post-Crisis Leadership and Ethical Rebuilding after Corporat…

Post-Crisis Leadership: Rebuilding Trust and Ethical Culture Focus: Center the analysis on the role of the CEO and the senior leadership team following a major ethical scandal or corporate crisis (e.g., fraud, major safety failure, systemic violation). Requirement: The student must analyze a real corporate crisis and propose a Three- Phase Ethical Rebuilding Plan that demonstrates the application of ethical principles to restore trust with the public, regulators, and internal staff. The essay must clearly differentiate required actions for legal compliance from those demonstrating responsible leadership and radical transparency. Unit Objectives Integrated: Ethical Principles, Responsible Leadership, Governance, Transparency during Crises. Assignment Overview: This essay requires students to conduct an in-depth, evidence-based analysis of a chosen topic related to Risk Analysis (selected from the provided list -part 6). The final paper must present a nuanced, academically rigorous argument that addresses all components of the chosen essay question, following the prescribed four-part structure and word count targets. Word Count Target: 4,000 words total (Excluding bibliography and footnotes/endnotes) Essay Structure and Requirements Part 1: Introduction (Target: 400 words) The Introduction must establish the entire analytical framework for your argument and clearly state your research question. 1.1 Context and Scope: Introduce the broad field and the relevance of the debate or assertion you are about to address (e.g., the importance of critical minerals in the current geopolitical risk landscape). Define the necessary boundaries of your evaluation (e.g., geographical focus on the EU/US vs. China, theoretical limits of your risk analysis model). 1.2 Definition of Core Concepts: Clearly and concisely define the central theoretical concepts or variables contained within the essay question (e.g., “Critical Minerals,” “Positive Peace,” “Structural Amplification,” or “Responsible Leadership”). All definitions must reference scholarly literature. 1.3 The Thesis Statement (The Answer): This is the single most important sentence. It must directly answer the essay question and state the primary argument or judgment you will defend throughout the paper. 1.4 Essay Roadmap: Briefly outline the structure of the remaining three sections, showing how each will logically build the case to support the thesis (i.e., Part 2 will provide supporting evidence, and Part 3 will introduce critical limitations). Part 2: The Core Assertion and Supporting Evidence (Target: 1,600 words) This section is dedicated to the ‘Evaluation’ component systematically exploring the evidence, theories, and arguments that support the initial assertion or proposition in the question. 2.1 Theoretical Foundations: Establish the key theories, models, or scholarly frameworks that underpin the assertion (e.g., Realism in Geopolitics, Stakeholder Theory in CSR, or Agenda Setting Theory in media). Explain why the assertion holds merit according to established academic thought. 2.2 Empirical Support (Theme 1): Dedicate a sub-section to the first major theme or category of evidence that supports the assertion (e.g., Theme 1: China’s supply chain dominance for critical minerals, supported by data on processing capacity). Use specific, peer-reviewed examples or data. 2.3 Empirical Support (Theme 2): Dedicate a sub-section to a second, distinct major theme or category of evidence that also supports the assertion (e.g., Theme 2: The escalating economic impact on Western nations due to reliance on these supplies). 2.4 Synthesis of Findings: Summarize how the evidence presented thus far confirms the validity or significance of the core assertion, setting the stage for the critical challenge in the next section. Part 3: Critical Counter-Evaluation and Establishing the ‘Extent’ (Target: 1,600 words) This section introduces complexity and critical thought, challenging the initial assertion and determining the ‘extent’ or limitations of the argument. 3.1 Critical Limitations of the Assertion: Introduce scholarly arguments, contradictory evidence, or specific contextual limitations that weaken the initial assertion (e.g., the economic viability of reshoring, or the ethical risks of increased domestic mining). This is where you demonstrate critical analysis of your sources. 3.2 Factors that Moderate the Argument (Theme A): Introduce the first major moderating factor that limits the validity of the assertion. This might be a contextual factor (e.g., the increasing role of recycling/circular economy) or a structural constraint (e.g., lack of democratic oversight in security decisions). 3.3 Factors that Moderate the Argument (Theme B): Introduce the second major moderating factor. This sub-section should specifically address the ‘extent’ component of the essay question (e.g., the extent to which media should be accountable, or the boundary between transparency and secrecy). 3.4 Refined Argument: Conclude this section by synthesizing the critical points. Use this to refine the initial thesis, arguing that the true picture is more complex and conditional than the simple assertion suggests. Part 4: Conclusion (Target: 400 words) The Conclusion must provide a decisive, evidence-based final statement and discuss the implications of your risk analysis. 4.1 Summary of Argument: Restate the essay’s central thesis in new, compelling language. Briefly summarize the key evidence presented in Part 2 and the key moderating factors presented in Part 3. 4.2 Final Judgment and Scholarly Contribution: Deliver the final, well- justified judgment, directly answering the essay question’s ‘extent’ component. Clearly state the original scholarly contribution or insight your essay has provided to the field of risk analysis. 4.3 Implications and Future Research: Discuss the broader practical or theoretical implications of your findings (e.g., policy implications for supply chain risk mitigation, or ethical implications for TNC conflict navigation). Conclude by suggesting specific, concrete directions for future research that address the remaining unresolved questions. Part 5: References APA 7