In this project, you will demonstrate your mastery of the following competencies:
Utilize information from industry and scholarly sources to inform problem solving and decision making
Analyze quantitative and qualitative data to solve problems and make decisions that impact organizations and their
Communicate professionally to diverse internal and external audiences
Your presentation to the leadership panel of your company was well received. Now you must create a presentation for a wider audience—stakeholders from inside and outside the company—and include your decisions and recommendations, which were approved by the leadership panel. Remember that your presentation must convey professionalism and be visually appealing as well as informative.
Create a presentation of your research and data findings from Project Two including your decision and rationale.
Construct a professional business presentation for internal and external stakeholders.
Identify your key message to both internal and external stakeholders.
Illustrate your key points using visualizations.
Tell your story.
Specifically include the following in your presentation:
Communicate your decision about diversification based on your analysis of the data and research.
Use visualizations to tell the story of the (quantitative and qualitative) data.
Determine the likelihood of success based on the data and research collected.
Discuss the impact that moving to the new industry will have on the organization and its internal and external stakeholders.
Detail your recommendations for moving forward.
Summarize findings of the research performed.
Include research conclusions and reasoning.
Describe the rationale behind your recommendations.
unjustly. Also, in today’s world, wars are no longer fought only by states but also non-state actors like Al-Queda and ISIS, showing Vittola’s normative claim on authority is outdated. This is further supported by Frowe’s claim that the leader needs to represent the people’s interests, under legitimate authority, which links on to the fourth condition: Public declaration of war. Agreed with many, there must be an official announcement on a declaration of war (Frowe (2011), Page 59-60&63). Finally, the most controversial condition is that wars should have a reasonable chance of success. As Vittola reiterated, the aim of war is to establish peace and security; securing the public good. If this can’t be achieved, Frowe argues it would be better to surrender to the enemy. This can be justified because the costs of war would have been bigger (Frowe (2011), Page 56-7). Consequently, jus ad bellum comprises several conditions but most importantly: just cause and proportionality. This gives people a guide whether it’s lawful to enter a war or not. However, this is only one part of the theory of the just war. Nevertheless, it can be seen above that jus ad bellum can be debated throughout, showing that there is no definitive theory of a just war, as it is normatively theorised. Jus in bello The second section begins deciphering jus in bello or what actions can we classify as permissible in just wars (Begby et al (2006b), Page 323). First, it is never just to intentionally kill innocent people in wars, supported by Vittola’s first proposition. This is widely accepted as ‘all people have a right not to be killed’ and if a soldier does, they have violated that right and lost their right. This is further supported by “non-combatant immunity” (Frowe (2011), Page 151), which leads to the question of combatant qualification mentioned later in the essay. This is corroborated by the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, ending the Second World War, where millions were intently killed, just to secure the aim of war. However, sometimes civilians are accidentally killed through wars to achieve their goal of peace and security. This is supported by Vittola, who implies proportionality again to justify action: ‘care must be taken where evil doesn’t outweigh the possible benefits (Begby et al (2006b), Page 325).’ This is further supported by Frowe who explains it is lawful to unintentionally kill, whenever the combatant has full knowledge of his actions and seeks to complete his aim, but it would>GET ANSWER