Question description

 

Please note: I do not need this assignment COMPLETED per say. I would like a detailed outline in order to get me started on actually writing this. Point form notes on each heading would do.

Another note: This MUST be complete within the 3 hour timeline given - there is a strict deadline. As such, I have increased my budget to $15.

Select two articles about the topic: Ethical Conflict Management and Negotiation written by two different authors. Once you find the articles, please send them to me for me to review. Once I approve you can begin working on the outline.

Below are the requirements for the assignment:

1. Outline for Summary of Articles:

Review conventional and current literature on the subject: Ethical Conflict Manqagement and Negotiation

Write a 3-4 page paper.

Source theTwo Articles

Compare/Contrast the Two Articles

Use either narrative or outline form to compare/contrast the main points, themes, etc. of the two articles.

Draw Conclusions

State and discuss the conclusions drawn from your analysis of the two articles.

Application of Learning

Associate the principles learned to the ethical leadership of an organization and/or application of ethical principles within an organization.

Note 1:

• Use the headings underlined above to separate the sections of your paper
• The Conclusions and Application of Learning sections should constitute 2/3 of the paper.

Note 2: The following will assist you in completing this assignment.

This information is offered to help you think through the assignment.

 

Analysis

1. What are/is the main conclusion(s) (may be stated or unstated; may be recommendations, explanations, and so on, conclusion indicator words and ‘therefore’ test may help.)? ‘Therefore’ – There are certain words and phrases which people characteristically use to indicate that they are arguing a case – that they are presenting reasons for a conclusion. The obvious word people use in this context is ‘therefore’.
2. What are the reasons (data, evidence) and their structure?
3. What is assumed (that is, implicit or taken for granted, perhaps in the context)?
4. Clarify the meaning (by the terms, claims or arguments) which need it?Evaluation
5. Are the reasons acceptable (including explicit reasons and unstated assumptions – this may involve evaluating factual claims, definitions and value judgments and judging the credibility of a source)?
6. (a) Does the reasoning support its conclusion(s) (is the support strong, for example ‘beyond reasonable doubt’, or weak?)(b) Are there other relevant consideration/arguments which strengthen or weaken the case? (You may already know these or may have to construct them.)
7. What is your overall evaluation (in light of 1 through 6)?

Source: Critical Thinking: An Introduction, Alec Fisher, Cambridge University Press, 2007

 

This is a STRICT due date, so PLEASE submit in a timely manner.