Answer:
Henry has a decision to make. The disgruntled customer in front of him has a valid point. There has been a mix up on the part of Henry’s service team and things have not gone smoothly. It wasn’t the end of the world but the customer has already been inconvenienced and now the ‘fix’ is going to inconvenience him again. Henry feels that the considerations the customer is asking for are not unreasonable, but how can this be handled? How would your company handle it: using a centralized leadership model or a distributed leadership model?
Explanation:
<h3> Centralized Leadership Resolution
</h3>
To make a decision, Henry has to contact his manager. The manager has to stop what she is doing, come to where the customer is, listen to the story, hear the customer’s request, determine if it’s reasonable and make a decision. Meanwhile Henry is standing there listening, waiting, and being unproductive. Only after his manager makes her decision can Henry resume his activity. Much time has passed and the customer is losing his patience and thinking about his time being wasted. If the customer is still not satisfied, he might ask to escalate his request to yet another higher level manager. His blood pressure is rising and if he’s not taken care of you can be certain that his friends and colleagues will hear about how they should stay away from Henry’s company.
Answer:
A polis is Greek city state. There not all people were free. Only certain males who were born there. Like Athens. No one was always equal. But each had the same amount of power when voting. That is one of the basic ideals about democracy.
Explanation:
Hope I understood the question and that this is the answer
Generally speaking, it is the "delegation of authority" that determines the number of levels and managers in an organization, although this can vary slightly depending on the organization in question.
It lessens the actual worth of the money because there was so much
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
Although the question is incomplete and does not refer to any specific war, we can assume that it refers to the end of the Civil War, when the Confederate General Robert E. Lee surrenders at the Appomattox, Virginia, after the victory of the Union Army led by General Ulysses Grant. The date: April 9, 1865. The two generals had great respect for each other and Grant showed his respect to Lee and had a conversation before signing the terms of the surrender. With the authorization of President Abraham Lincoln, the terms of the surrender were generous because Lincoln really wanted a long term peace and the unity of the nation. The Confederate troops had to turn in their weapons and were allowed to return to their homes.
I think the terms were correct because what was most important at the time was not punishment but unity. The war had killed many soldiers and caused so much damage and pain in the United States. So, Lincoln wanted unity and peace, and that is how he thought about these terms.
