Answer:
Vanessa’s <u>task-oriented</u> leadership behavior is likely to be <u>ineffective</u> because <u>l</u><u>ow position power</u> <u>neutralizes</u> this leadership behavior.
Explanation:
Vanessa is a newcomer to a company, with less time and acting experience than her staff, so her leadership behavior will be offset by her low position power. This occurs when an employee's hierarchical position does not allow certain actions, so Vanessa's actions would be neutralized and ineffective, having no impact on decision making.
Answer:
A. money supply curve will shift right.
Explanation: when the supply of money is increase by the central bank,the money supply curve will shift right. Leading to a lower interest rate,but,the money supply curve shifts left, when the supply of money falls,which leads to higher interest rate.
Answer: B) where resources are exchanged
Explanation:
The factors market is a very important market as this is where producers buy and sell resources needed for the production of goods and services. These resources include land, capital, labor and raw materials.
The market where crude oil is sold for instance is a factor market. Crude oil is a raw material that is converted into gasoline amongst other fuel related products.
Answer with Explanation:
The negligence act would be used here and for a plaintiff to prove to win the suit following four factors must have to be proved which are:
- Duty of care
- Breach
- Cause
- Harm
<u>Part 1. Duty of Care</u>
The railroad company owed a duty of care to every person rail station and the way they had exercised this duty of care was in the form of red light that David Harris saw, which means they exercised reasonable duty of care to avoid the misshapen. This means the duty of care that David Harris owes to himself was not crossing the yellow line.
<u>Part 2. Breach</u>
In fact David Harris was the one to avoid the red light signal and was out of the yellow line. So the breach of duty of care was of David Harris not of the railroad company.
<u>Part 3. Cause</u>
The cause of the breach of duty of care by David Harris was negligence because neither was the railroad signals were allowing him nor he was saving somebody else's life.
<u>Part 4. Harm</u>
Yes, the negligence of David Harris resulted in his death which is the most harm a person can suffer.
<u>Conclusion:</u>
As only harm was satisfactory not the other 3 factors were in the favor of plaintiff, so the widow's argument is incorrect and David Harris was negligent not the railroad company. Hence railroad company owes nothing in compensation to the David Harris's widow.