I need a assignment done for week 10 for my Strategic Partnering w C-Suite

JWI 522: Strategic Partnering with the C-Suite

Assignment 4

© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University confidential and proprietary information and may not be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed, in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University. This document is subject to change based on the needs of the class.

JWI 522 – Assignment 4 (1212) Page 1 of 2

Assignment 4: CEO Meeting Managing Conflicts and Confidences Due: Sunday, Midnight of Week 10 (12% of total grade)

Overview

HR leaders frequently find themselves in situations that require tact and diplomacy. While most business

decisions are made in ways that balance potential conflicts, occasionally, there are serious ethical and

legal challenges that must be navigated. C-Suite leaders must be able to deal with situations that do not

have an obviously “right” solution, that involve power struggles and confidences and that sometimes pit

the interests of individuals against one another, and the interests of the business.

HR leaders must also understand the role they play both as advocates for employees and strategic

partners to the C-Suite. Having a seat at the table frequently requires a delicate and nuanced approach

to conflict management, while still demanding that HR be clear in its message. It also, frequently,

requires that decisions must be made about if, when and how to bring a problem to the CEO and when

the issue should be dealt with at a lower level.

Instructions

• This assignment is based on the attached scenario which presents a complex ethical and

(potentially) legal challenge.

• Information has surfaced that may involve an ethical and/or legal violation, but a fellow employee

has asked that this concern be kept confidential.

• While the discussion was after hours and private, because of the potential seriousness of the

situation you determine you must address this with the CEO. As part of this discussion you must

not just update the CEO, but give a recommendation and rationale for your CEO to consider.

You can’t simply leave CEO with the problem. Your recommendation should address:

o Stakeholders and impact

o Explanation of the legal issues and/or regulations involved

o Risk-reward assessment based on alternatives being considered

o Outline of proposed actions

o How the situation and decision should be communicated to employees and the public

• You may organize your presentation as you wish, but you should imagine yourself walking into

the CEO’s office, closing the door and beginning your conversation with, “Something important

has just come to my attention that I need to discuss with you…”

Submission Requirements

• Video presentation using Zoom of no more than 5 minutes. No visuals are allowed.

JWI 522: Strategic Partnering with the C-Suite

Assignment 4

© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University confidential and proprietary information and may not be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed, in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University. This document is subject to change based on the needs of the class.

JWI 522 – Assignment 4 (1212) Page 2 of 2

RUBRIC: Assignment 4

CRITERIA

Unsatisfactory

Low Pass

Pass

High Pass

Honors

1. Synopsis of Problem Weight: 20%

Unclear or missing explanation of the reason for the meeting and the intended outcome.

Synopsis was vague on how information was obtained and/or took too much (or too little) time to summarize the circumstances.

Good, but basic presentation of the problem. Failed to adequately frame the context and implications.

Very good opening to the meeting; confident, clear and succinct while still providing the right level of detail.

Presented a clear synopsis and was confident and informed about what information would be shared and why, and included confirmation the CHRO will handle it.

2. Explanation of Impact on Stakeholders Weight: 20%

No explanation of impact on stakeholders or only superficial reference to seriousness of problem.

Presented basic explanation of impact on one stakeholder group; lacked insight into repercussions and/or empathy for collateral damage to others.

Good explanation of impact on two or more stakeholder groups; basic insight into repercussions and/or empathy for collateral damage and impact on the business.

Very good explanation of impact on all stakeholder groups; demonstrated empathy for collateral damage while balancing this against corporate responsibility.

Excellent explanation of impact on all stakeholder groups; demonstrated empathy for collateral damage while demonstrating deep understanding of corporate responsibility.

3. Risk-Reward Evaluation Based on Alternatives Being Considered Weight: 20%

No explanation of upside or downside potential of alternatives.

Rudimentary presentation of risk- reward of alternatives, but little more than generalities.

Risk-reward evaluation was adequate, but was not sufficiently focused and/or failed to address key elements of potential impact.

Very good presentation of risk- reward and clear summary of and concise consideration of alternatives and options.

Briefing presented an excellent, well- informed and succinct synopsis of risk and reward and delivered the alternatives in a clear and concise manner that was balanced.

4. Outline of Proposed Actions Weight 20%

No plan presented and/or; CEO was left with a problem and no solution.

Solution was provided, but was basic with little insight into the complexities or was vague in terms of ownership and timelines.

Good proposal for actions; some detail missing on timelines and actions and/or imbalance with some details emphasized too much and others not enough.

Very good plan of action. The right level of detail to demonstrate that it has been well thought out but not too much detail for the CEO.

Plan of action was exemplary. Demonstrated deep understanding of the impact and the actions needed to address each issue.

5. Communication Plan Weight: 20%

No communication plan presented and/or plan was vague lacking details on timelines and specific actions.

Communication plan was basic, but did not address one or more impacted groups.

Communication plan contained basic components and addressed all impacted groups.

Communication plan was well-formed; addressed all key stakeholders and had action items, timelines and ownership.

Communication plan was excellent and very thorough; demonstrated control over the situation; ownership and timelines and consideration of all stakeholders.