Crisis Management Plan: Minimizing the Damage
Evaluating Risk: Understanding what Can Go Wrong
Discuss the challenges that incident handlers face in identifying incidents when resources have been moved to a cloud environment.” 227 https://www.homeworkmarket.com/homework-answers?page=227
“I) Find the research article on the e-learning indie the folder “”Assignment 3″”, topic 3.
II) Find and read at least 2 and maximum 5 other literature sources on the topic of your article that would allow you to evaluate its credibility.
III) Write a report containing approximately the wordcount indicated below (you can write more, but not less than total 1000 – 1500 words,), with a grade weighted per section accordingly:
A) Research topic (5%, 50+ words)
B) Comparison and contrasting of your research findings with current practices in hospitality business that you know from your own experience and/or other 2 literature sources you have read on your research article topic (25%, 250+ words)
C) Assess the research credibility of your research article:
- Describe the selected research strategy by giving its name and definition (10%, 100+ words).
- Discuss how efficient is this research strategy for answering the research question asked in the article? State if you believe the researchers found an answer to the question they wanted to address and not something different. (10%, 100+ words)
- Evaluate credibility of these research findings, using the 4 criteria of credibility and possibly referring to your 2 other literature sources or your own industry experience. Provide an overall conclusion, whether hospitality managers could use the findings of research described in your article to make decisions about business innovation (50%, 500+ words).
Mary only returned 4 of the 8 missed calls from Sibongile after which no other form of communication was established from Mary’s side. While returning these calls Mary had no news of development or any information regarding Sibongiles questions. These serious delays in or lack of proper communication with Sibongile and the unsatisfactory attention to the problem is proof that Mary is not capable of the standard of professional ethics needed to uphold a relationship with her client. Attorneys failing to pass the “fit and proper person” test can be struck from their roles. This test has no defined wording but is in essence commonly accepted as: upholding the law, reliability, honesty and integrity. Mary included in each phone call to Sibongile that she was “busy researching the problem”. We know from the facts that Mary only started her research after the last phone call with Sibongile, which means more or less 6 months after accepting the mandate. With regards to professional ethics the abovementioned would constitute as major misconduct and disregard for the clients interest, time or the client-attorney relationship. It was held in Jasat v Natal Law Society that section 22(1)(d) contemplates a three-stage inquiry: “Secondly, it must consider if the person concerned is in the discretion of the court is not a “fit and proper” person to continue to practise.” The test is therefore very important in the legal profession and if Mary’s actions were investigated one would find that she did act dishonestly towards her client and thereby harming the attorney-client relationship, but did not act dishonestly with regards to court or legal proceedings. Mary’s misconduct in this instance relates to the improper acceptance of Sibongile’s Mandate and unprofessional manner in which she has dealt with Sibongile’s query up to this point. Mary would pass the fit and proper person test if it is established on the basis of being fit and proper to practice law, but with regards to Sibongile and potential future clients this conduct would have to be analysed further in order to determine the intensity of this misconduct. ii. Acceptance of the mandate>GET ANSWER