Why would these particular testing methods be appropriate for the 'Share a Coke' campaign?

-Pretesting measures: Direct Mail tests and moment-by-moment measures

-Post testing measures: Sales Results Tests and Intend-to-Buy Tests

Use 250 words to discuss the value of certifications exams.

CASE STUDY

The winter was somewhat mild in some parts of the United States in February 2018. Although Spring Practice for football had not officially begun at Mid-Atlantic University, the players were expected to work out on their own informally and stay in top physical condition. An extremely close-knit group of athletes, mutually dedicated to the goal of winning the national championship in the Fall. When upper respiratory infections began circulating among the players, the team physician decided to send specimens to the State Health Department where virologists examined 23 specimens and obtained a positive test for influenza virus for 15 of them. They also confirmed that most of the virus isolates contained the influenza strain A/Victoria, a common type of influenza that occurs every winter. Unfortunately, they could not identify three virus isolates and were uncertain about four others. These seven specimens were forwarded to a federal laboratory where scientists specialize in infectious diseases.

Two months prior to the outbreak at the university, health officials in Vietnam had ordered the destruction of 12 million chickens after evidence surfaced that a "bird flu" strain of virus resulted in 20 confirmed influenza cases, 12 of which proved to be fatal. Health authorities in Hong Kong confirmed that the virus involved human-to-human transmission. Shortly before the campus outbreak at Mid-Atlantic University, local health officials temporarily closed a large meat distribution company in the area that supplied food to the school because its poultry was suspected of being infected with an influenza strain.

While the specimens were on their way to the federal laboratory, more players reported feeling ill and on February 15, an offensive tight-end named Dave Murray died in the university infirmary complaining of flu-like symptoms, his position coach had told him two days beforehand to take a week off and not return to workouts until he felt 100 percent healthy.The same day that he died, an opinion piece in a national daily newspaper by a prominent virologist noted that pandemics occur approximately every 30 years or so. The last one had swept the globe four decades earlier. Over the course of the next few days, State Health Department laboratory experts were unable to identify the strain of two additional influenza-positive specimens, one of which was obtained from the player's corpse. These specimens also were forwarded to federal scientists who discovered that the three previously unidentified isolates, along with the two new ones represented a different virus type. Even more serious was the possibility that the isolates might be closely related to an avian influenza virus believed to have swept the world in a pandemic in 1918, killing an estimated 50 million persons around the world and approximately one-half million victims in the United States. Hong Kong health authorities feared that the virus uncovered there was the same as the strain implicated in that earlier pandemic.

The many deaths that occurred then were due to an accompanying bacterial pneumonia prior to the advent of modern antibiotics.

Human-to-human spread of avian influenza had not been seen in the U.S, in at least 50 years and Dr. Lionel Traister, head of the federal infectious disease agency, contacted officials from other federal agencies and major State health departments around the country and invited them to an emergency meeting at his offices on March 1. Those scientists present who possessed a sense of public health history noted that the 1918 pandemic began relatively mildly in the spring and then returned with a vengeance in the fall, accounting for the vast majority of deaths. As a group, they agreed that the university outbreak could be a harbinger of more lethal and widespread disease on the not-too-distant horizon. No precise estimate of the extent of the risk ever was voiced, however, such as indicating that there might be a 25 percent chance the nation may be headed for a serious outbreak. All that could be stated was that there was a possibility of a pandemic. A question that loomed rather large in their minds was what to do about going public with these concerns. A delicate balance existed between sounding a warning to public health officials around the country and inciting a panic. The media frenzy associated with the outbreak of other influenzas in recent years provided a cautionary lesson. They decided to wait for the results of another round of tests, which in the next three days should confirm whether the virus uncovered at the university was avian influenza. Their worst fears soon were realized. The virus was avian influenza. Another emergency meeting was called on March 7 with the invitation list extended to virologists from private clinics, universities, and pharmaceutical companies. Meanwhile, the search for a further outbreak of the virus among the football team and among the rest of the student body had not yielded any new active cases nor had it spread beyond the campus to the community nearby. Outside the U.S., the World Health Organization had not reported any outbreaks of avian flu nor were any new cases reported in Hong Kong. Had the avian flu returned to its source among poultry or was it spreading in humans sub-clinically, waiting for an explosive eruption during the next flu season?

Although no new cases had been reported, the discussion at the meeting centered around: the logistics of vaccine production and distribution, field testing and licensing vaccines, and how to go about conducting a national immunization campaign. The general consensus was that even if all the vaccine needed could be produced by the beginning of the next flu season, which could occur in September or October, it still might take another 10 weeks to immunize the entire population of the U.S. Even then, it would take an additional two weeks after vaccination for protective immunity to be conferred. Stockpiling vaccine and waiting until an outbreak of flu occurred was not viewed as a workable option since infection produced disease much faster than a needle stick provided immunity. Only one person at this meeting, Dr. Virginia Bell who was director of a State health department on the West Coast, addressed the issue of stockpiling vaccine until clearer signals emerged that would warrant the start of a mass immunization program. Her basic concern was that caution should be exercised when considering the possibility of injecting any foreign substance into the bodies of more than 300 million Americans. She wanted to know at what point do preparations to immunize the entire population stop and the plan is changed to stockpile the vaccine instead. Bell's comments were made dispassionately and seemed to have little or no impact on the group. She did not argue her case any further.

Following the Chain of Command

Lionel Traister was regarded as a tough, highly competent, and occasionally wily career bureaucrat. Not only was he committed to advancing public health measures, he would never be accused of failing to advance himself when opportunity knocked. The appearance of the avian flu virus seemed to be one of those rare occasions when he could be at center stage to demonstrate to a wide audience both his own and his agency's capabilities. Strict caps were imposed on spending for that fiscal year because of a serious budget deficit. Recognizing that a national immunization program would require a supplemental appropriation, coupled with the fact that the federal bureaucracy was so slow moving, he knew that quick, decisive action on his part was imperative. The key was to frame the situation in urgent terms that persons higher-up in the administrative chain would find difficult to ignore. Consequently, he prepared a document that combined a sense of extreme urgency with a set of propositions that would be difficult to counter. On March 11, he contacted his superior, Dr. Myles Borash who was the Assistant Secretary of Health, to let him know that the memorandum was on its way to him. Traister followed procedures by addressing it to Department Secretary Wilma Kester from Assistant Secretary Borash. In the chain of command, Traister was one of six agency heads reporting to Borash. As Assistant Secretary, even though Borash was a highly regarded physician, he was at the low end of the political appointments chain. Essentially, his job was to assume responsibility for official health policy within the Administration. The facts presented in the memorandum were clear and understandable.

The second option proposed a minimal response, with the federal role limited to: advising vaccine manufacturers, providing a stimulus to State/local health departments to take action, and educating the public. Reasons favoring this choice included high visibility, less responsibility for the eventual outcome if it proved to be unfavorable, and reduced federal spending. Arguments against this approach were that drug companies might not produce enough vaccine and significant portions of the population such as the poor and the aged might never be immunized. The third option called for total federal intervention. The main argument favoring this course of action was that widespread availability and distribution of vaccine would be assured. Opposing arguments were the high cost of such a campaign and the fact that the American people would not be favorably disposed to a program that left out the private sector.

The last option involved a combined approach that would have the advantage of using both public and private sectors. The federal government could purchase the vaccine needed, have it tested for safety and efficacy by federal agencies, and distribute it through health departments at all levels of government as well as in hospitals, clinics, and physician offices. This choice would provide a good vehicle for having all facets of the health care system work together cooperatively to assure that every American would have an opportunity to be immunized. The memorandum concluded with a recommendation to pursue the fourth option.

On March 13, the memorandum was discussed at the weekly meeting of the Secretary. Recognizing the likelihood that there might not be a pandemic in the making, there still was a great amount of attention focused on what happened earlier in the 20^th century. Kester indicated that she wanted to meet with Borash and Traister in her office the following morning along with the directors of federal agencies involved in licensing vaccines and overseeing research on viruses. At this session one day later, Traister recommended that the federal government undertake action as recommended in the fourth option. When Kester asked what the probability of a pandemic is, the answer from Traister was "unknown." Nobody at the meeting was willing to assign a probability, but Traister said that it is greater than zero. When asked if it was possible to produce enough vaccine and have it administered, the response was in the affirmative, but with the caveat that time was of the essence and that a decision would have to be made quickly.

Hearing no dissent and determining that every person in the room was in accord with this recommendation, Secretary Kester decided that it was appropriate to bring this matter to the attention of White House staff. Her reasons were: the government's top scientists favored a course of action, a probability of a pandemic greater than zero had to be assumed, and that there would be no credible way after a pandemic struck of telling the public that the government had not prepared to meet the threat because the probability was low and the costs of an immunization program outweighed the benefits. She also had enough political acumen to realize that even if she rejected the memorandum, it still might be leaked to the media.

Kester wrote a memorandum that same day to the head of the federal budget office, indicating that a request for a supplemental appropriation of $1 billion would be forthcoming. She stated that: "There is evidence that there will be a major flu epidemic this coming fall. The indication is that we will see a return of a virus that killed 500,000 Americans in 1918. The projections are that this virus will kill as many as one-and-one-half million persons in this country. The drug industry must be advised now in order to have enough vaccine produced for a mass immunization program. A decision will have to be made in the next week or so."

Reactions at the State Level

Hiram Waters was only one of two individuals who raised questions about a national immunization program during the widely televised Congressional hearings. His closest friend was one of 60,000 fatalities around the nation during the 1957 Asian flu epidemic. He was a staunch advocate of pediatric immunization programs, but did not believe that there was sufficient evidence to warrant what was being proposed. He indicated that his State would accept the vaccine gladly, but none of it would be distributed to local health departments, private physician offices, and hospitals until new cases of the flu began to emerge.  

Bayside was the largest city in his State. It possessed three academic health centers and because of changes in the health care delivery system occasioned by the growth of managed care, these entities were in fierce competition with one another. In medical circles, an oft-repeated question was whether all three could survive. The State already had a huge surplus of physicians, more per capita than any other State in the Union, and a large oversupply of hospital beds.

Coastal Health Center was the most aggressive of the three health centers. Not only had its executives negotiated a contract with the largest managed care company in the State, they were raiding the Atlantic Health Center, the smallest of the three entities as measured by the size of medical staff and the number of inpatient beds. Atlantic, despite its smaller size was more of a boutique operation with a worldwide reputation for providing care of the highest quality.  

Richard Medvecky, CEO of Coastal, viewed Atlantic as a potential acquisition through merger.

He knew that if he ever made such a move, his chief competitor, Bayside Health Center, would counter it immediately. Administrators at Coastal and Bayside knew that an initial move by either side would trigger a bidding war, one in which both could end up being losers. Medvecky conceived of another way of achieving dominance in this highly charged health care environment. He began making offers to Atlantic physicians who were the chiefs of Neurology, Radiology, and Surgery to switch to Coastal. The offer consisted of: doubling their salaries, providing ten-year contracts with guaranteed hefty annual pay raises, and furnishing perquisites such as additional compensation to cover the costs of their children's college education. These offers were accepted.

Based on a case study on the outbreak of a disease along lines of avian influenza that cuts across national boundaries. Adopt the perspective of one of the actors in the situation (e.g., legislators, governmental agency directors, professional association director, vaccine manufacturers) regarding that person’s role in the episode as it unfolds and provide a critique of the performance of the other actors in dealing with the problem adequately.

In 2008, facing a serious shortage of leadership-ready employees at the store management level, Walmart decided to recruit from the U.S. military. The company sent recruiters to military job fairs and hired 150 junior military officers, pairing them with store mentors to learn on the job. The result: Walmart claims that it’s been able to bring in world-class leaders who were ready to take over once they had learned the retail business that Walmart could easily teach them. Other organizations that have heavily recruited from the military in recent years include GE, Home Depot, Lowe’s, State Farm Insurance, Merck, and Bank of America. It’s not really surprising to see companies turn to the military for leadership potential. A long tradition of books and seminars advises leaders to think like military leaders ranging from Sun Tzu to Norman Schwarzkopf. And military veterans do have a variety of valuable skills learned through experience. General David Petraeus notes, “Tell me anywhere in the business world where a 22 or 23-year-old is responsible for 35 or 40 other individuals on missions that involve life and death . . . They’re under enormous scrutiny, on top of everything else. These are pretty formative experiences. It’s a bit of a crucible-like experience that they go through.” Military leaders are also used to having to make due in less than optimal conditions, negotiate across cultures, and operate under extreme stress. However, they do have to relearn some lessons from the service. Some may not be used to leading someone like an eccentric computer programmer who works strange hours and dresses like a slob, but who brings more to the company’s bottom line than a conventional employee would. Indeed, in some companies like Google, there is nothing like the chain of command military leaders are used to. Still, most forecasts suggest there will be an ample supply of battle-tested military leaders ready to report for corporate duty in the near future, and many companies are eager to have them.

note; After reading this case what will be this case summary of leadership theories and behavioral theories?

Make a Constitutional-legal Argument as to whether or not President Obama had the constitutional authority to create the DACA program

find two articles describing firms’ use of a cooperative strategy: one where trust is being used as a strategic asset and another where contracts and monitoring are being emphasized. What are the differences between the managerial approaches being used in the two companies? Which of the cooperative strategies has the highest probability of being successful? Why?

what are the four main enablers of good purchasing what are the main inhibitors

1. An esteemed teacher of Rhetoric at The University of Iowa, D.C. Bryant, wrote that rhetoric was the art of adjusting ideas to people, and also of adjusting people to ideas. Please explain your understanding of these ideas.

2. Please explain what it means to organize your remarks.

3. Please explain what is most important in a speech: content, or delivery? Tell why you think so.

4. What is the best type of supporting material to convince your audience?

5. Please explain your idea of credibility.   

(For speech class) we are currently reading the book The Natural Speaker so if you have read the book please answer based on that.

What types of news stories lend themselves well to mobile reporting? What format should a liveblog follow? When planning to live tweet an event, how should you prepare? While live tweeting, what kinds of information belongs in the first few tweets? How and why should hashtags be used? What are other tips and best practices for live tweeting?

Provide examples. Cite all sources.

Think of an environmental problem (e.g., climate change, acid rain, agricultural chemical run-offs, water pollution, air pollution, etc.) that seems interesting or urgent to you.

a. Briefly describe this problem. What causes it? What are the potential short-term and long-term impacts?

b. Suppose that you are a policy maker and you are in charge of implementing a policy dealing with this problem.

i. Suppose that you propose a standard. Briefly explain how this policy would work and how it would deal with the environmental issue. What would be the positive attributes of this policy? What would be negative attributes, or drawbacks?

ii. Suppose that you propose an emission tax. Briefly explain how this policy would work and how it would deal with the environmental issue. What would be the positive attributes of this policy? What would be negative attributes, or drawbacks?

iii. Suppose that you propose a Cap-and-Trade system. Briefly explain how this policy would work and how it would deal with the environmental issue. What would be the positive attributes of this policy? What would be negative attributes, or drawbacks?

how to make a graphical representation (image) of the basic network for 100 users.

Often, planned tasks and their duration may change during project execution. It is important to analyze the effect of these changes on your project to ensure that the project still executes as expected. In this assignment, you will learn how to monitor your project for any effect of changes to planned tasks.

Revisit Chapter 6, "Project Time Management" in your textbook. Assume that there are six tasks to be completed in a project. Their duration and predecessors are specified in the following table:

Perform the following tasks:

1. Create a network diagram for this project.

2. Calculate the critical path and slack times for all tasks.

3. Assume that during project execution, you need to change the duration for Task 3 to 5 days, and Task 2 is finished 1 day early. How would these changes affect your project? What problems would have arisen if you were not monitoring the project?

4. Submit the network diagram as an embedded image in a 3- to 4-page document that also contains the calculations for the critical path and slack times and responses to the questions.

Submit your answers in the online classroom by Day 6.

Submit your answers by Day 6.

write an essay talking about politics and the problems facing lebanon.

how to make a graphical representation (image) of the network using MS Visio for 100 users.