prepare and submit a paper on the kansas city hyatt regency walkways collapse.

/in /by

Your assignment is to prepare and submit a paper on the kansas city hyatt regency walkways collapse. The design was changed from one rod to a two-rod classification to shorten the assembly process, which doubled the load on the connector. This flaw was the ultimate course of structural failure (Stagers, Baumann, and Hakim, 2008). The evidence used at the Hearings had a number of implications for the principles involved. a number of engineers lost their licenses, and some firms went bankrupt due to the expensive legal suits. The incident thus served as a perfect example of the significance of meeting professional obligations, and the penalty for the professionals who underscores it.

After a year of operation, about 1,600 people gathered in the atrium to watch or participate in a dance competition. The walkways were an ideal spot for great viewing angles, so about 40 people were collected on the one on the second floor, and another 20 on the one on the fourth floor. Apparently, the bearing load (the dead weight of the people on these floors) had exceeded the bearing capacity of the walkways. the fourth floor collapsed on the second one, making both fall on the ground floor (Ratay, 2009). About 111 people died instantly, and another three later during medication.

The proceedings and uncertain communications between G.C.E engineers and Havens led to a change in design from a single to a double hanger rod box beam linkage for the fourth-floor walkways. This change was requested by the fabricator to prevent threading the complete rod. The change was effected, and the contract’s Shop Drawing 30 and Erection E-3 were also changed.

A few days later, 42 new shop drawings were sent to G.C.E., which included the revised drawings. Ten days later, the pictures were returned to Havens, complete with the stamp of Gillum’s Engineering review seal that further authorized the construction. The fabricator had used the guidelines from the American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) standards, for the original&nbsp.design of the steel-to-steel links by steel manufacturers.

writing homework on Leadership Theories and Practice. Write a 1250 word paper answering; There could however be a general idea in the minds of every other person who tries to define leadership.

/in /by

Need help with my writing homework on Leadership Theories and Practice. Write a 1250 word paper answering; There could however be a general idea in the minds of every other person who tries to define leadership. At least every one may be thinking of the practice of heading a group of people. With this basic knowledge, McCrimmon (2010) defines a leader as “a larger-than-life individual in charge of some group – team, company or country.” Quite related to what McCrimmon (2010) states, the Team Technology (2011) posit that “leadership is setting a new direction or vision for a group that they follow, that is: a leader is the spearhead for that new direction.” One factor that continues to make the acquisition of a single definition to leadership and who a leader is impossible is the fact that different leaders lead their people and run leadership with different styles and theories. This is to say that there seem not to be a single way in which all leaders go about leadership. Leading on, this unevenness and differences in leadership styles and theories bring out a realization that it is extremely difficult to point out to who a good leader is. This paper therefore attempts to show: by the use of examples of past and present leaders that the most effective leaders are those who are able to apply the most appropriate leadership styles and theories at the right time to get a leadership decision successfully implemented. This stand is taken against the position that effective and good leaders must be judged or identified by virtue of the possession of certain qualities and technical skills. In a book by Daniel Goleman (1995), it was put forth that the traditional qualities associated with leadership- such as intelligence, toughness and possessing certain skills – are required for success, but are insufficient in accurately conveying the abilities of a true leader. There are complex components that have been found to be more crucially associated with effective leadership that go beyond intellectual abilities and technical skills and these components are exactly what this paper seeks to reveal. Different Theories, Different Leaders Theories of leadership have evolved over the years to describe the different ways in which different leaders have ruled and led their people. The diversities associated with these theories point to one fact and that is, there are different leaders. Two of these leadership theories are discussed in this section to proof that effective leadership cannot be generalized but must be based on the kind of leadership theory at use. Trait Theory Debate in literature on whether or not leaders are born continues unabated. In trait theory, Cherry (2011) points out that the trait theory functions on the assumption “that people inherit certain qualities and traits that make them better suited to leadership.” For this reason, trait theory sees leadership and for that matter effective leadership from a viewpoint, where leaders are supposed to possess certain behavioral and personality characteristics in order to be judged as effective or good. Trait theorists would there look for people with certain skills and attributes to take up leadership positions rather than training ordinary persons to take up leadership positions.

Write 5 pages with APA style on The Theory of the Fraud Triangle. Others may promise themselves that they will return the money in the future. Cressey (1973) asserted that the weak internal control in many organizations provide an opportunity for people to commit fraud. These may include the lack of review and oversight of all the activities taking place within an institution.

/in /by

Write 5 pages with APA style on The Theory of the Fraud Triangle. Others may promise themselves that they will return the money in the future. Cressey (1973) asserted that the weak internal control in many organizations provide an opportunity for people to commit fraud. These may include the lack of review and oversight of all the activities taking place within an institution.

While Cressey contributed immensely to understanding why fraudulent behavior is perpetuated in many institutions, there is a question of whether potential offenders can effectively manage drives and motives to prevent crimes from happening. His theory also seems to generalize fraudulent crimes in institutions. In their contribution to the fraud triangle theory, Schuchter & Levi (2013) echoed most of Cressey’s assertions. They cite opportunity, motivation, and rationalization as the main reasons offenders commit crimes. The opportunity for crimes comes because of a lack of punishment for those who are guilty. To protect the reputation of their companies, managers fail to disclose fraudulent behavior, hence creating an opportunity for the perpetuation of crime. The book has similar weaknesses as that of Cressey because it does not state why some people are more prone to crimes than others are.

Boulter and Bhattacharya (2013) indicated that institutions were to blame for the increased fraudulent crimes. The authors were referring to the increased opportunity for criminal acts in many institutions. They defined fraud as the use of one’s occupational position to enrich oneself by using an organization’s assets. Managers have been blamed for not being keen on ensuring that employees do not access their assets. This is attributed to the lack of a strong internal control system in an organization. While Boulter and Bhattacharya (2013) also mentioned rationalization and motivation as determining factors to crimes, they concentrated&nbsp.more on the opportunity factor.

The assessment task aim is to develop a Cybersecurity Roadmap/Plan for Board members targeted for a specific company.

/in /by

The assessment task aim is to develop a Cybersecurity Roadmap/Plan for Board members targeted for a specific company.

Instructions

1. Download and Read the Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity Version 1.1 National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)

2. Find a recent (2019/2020) case study relating to a data breach . Investigate the breach (including finding other sources) and explain why you selected the case study, who was responsible for the breach, the consequences and actions taken.

3. Develop a cybersecurity roadmap/plan for the case study organisation you selected to present to the Board. Use the relevant components of the Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity Version 1.1 National Institute of Standards and Technology to structure your report (justify your selection of components).

4. Using the roadmap/plan critically evaluate how your case study organisation could have avoided the breach.

Report Requirements

1. Write a report that addresses the areas outlined above. The report should not exceed 3,000 words (between 6 and 8 pages depending on the Font style selected). The word count excludes the reference list, title page, table of contents and appendices – if applicable. The report should be in 12-point font, single-spaced in word processing software such as Microsoft Word. The report should have appropriate headings and subheadings (including a cover page, an introduction and conclusion).

2. This report must use scholarly articles to support any claims you make. You must use the Harvard referencing style

3. Review the marking rubric so that you understand how you will receive feedback.