Boeing Memo | Draft due Wednesday, Sept 21, 11:45pm Read "Boeing 737 Max 8-A Stalled Communication Take-off?" It is late October 2019. The Boeing Board has just stripped Muilenburg of his role as Chairman of The Boeing Company, although he remains as CEO. On Muilenburg's watch, the FAA grounded the Boeing 737 Max 8, pilots publicly complained about inadequate training, the media criticized Boeing's slow response, and Boeing's stock price suffered. In your role as the Vice President of Communications for the Boeing Commercial Airplane division, you have been tapped to help manage the scandal. You and your boss, the President and CEO of Boeing's Commercial Airplane division, agree that Boeing must address stakeholder concerns and work to rebuild a positive perception of the brand. As a first step, your boss wants to understand best practices for restoring public trust after a scandal, as well as how Boeing performed against these best practices. The boss wants concrete examples that these best practices work, with instances of companies that have successfully weathered scandals by applying them. For this assignment, write a 750-word memo (+/- 10%) to your boss that explains the 3-5 most effective actions for rebuilding public trust after a crisis. Support each action with 3-5 examples of companies that have successfully applied these practices and/or meaningful statistics that show their effectiveness. Explain how well (or poorly) Boeing followed these best practices. Use a clear, easy to follow inductive argument. The word count excludes headers and citations. Specifically, you must: Research how companies have responded to loss of public trust after a scandal and/or studies that demonstrate the effectiveness of specific actions in restoring public trust Extract the key success factors for regaining trust that are common across companies and/or are supported by rigorous studies Assess how well Boeing performed against each of these best practices Structure your response inductively, using evidence from your research to support your argument. Consider the criteria that follow, on both inductive reasoning and writing style, to ensure a high-impact argument Criteria for Effective Inductive Reasoning Could Improve Subject line incomplete, missing, or too wordy Headlines are incomplete or too wordy Subject Line and Headlines Introduction, Conclusion and Main idea Inductive structure Research based evidence UNIVERSITY Main idea is incomplete, missing, or lacks impact Introduction has too much or too little context to orient audience Conclusion is too brief, with abrupt ending Conclusion is too long, blunting the impact of the argument Too few categories are supplied (i.e.: only 1 or 2) Too many categories are supplied (i.e.: over 5) Categories overlap, meaning they are not fully independent from each other Categories are at different levels of abstraction (e.g.: a mix of reasons and actions are supplied) Overall impact is weak persuasion Evidence for each category does not support the corresponding headline Evidence supplied is not directly relevant to the attempted argument Evidence derives from low quality, unreliable sources Evidence is weak (e.g.: only 1 piece of evidence in a category, evidence in a category is supported by only 1 source) Citations are missing Good Complete, content-rich subject line Complete headlines for each category/paragraph Memo contains an introduction and conclusion that effectively frames the argument Introduction has appropriate level of background context Main idea is provided in the first paragraph 3-5 independent, non-overlapping categories that are at the same level of abstraction: (e.g.: all actions, or all reasons, or all findings) Has 2-3 pieces of supporting evidence for each category Evidence supplied is relevant to the attempted argument Evidence is derived from reasonable sources Evidence is persuasive Sources are cited on each page 2 Excellent Subject line is complete and content-rich, and is concise but conveys meaning Headlines for each category are well-written, significant, and complete Fully formed, significant, and clear main idea or recommendation provided in the first paragraph Introductory context is appropriate, well-written, professional and concise Introduction provides a clear, concise roadmap for the rest of the memo Conclusion briefly synthesizes the main idea, recaps key points, and invites further dialogue. 3-5 independent, non-overlapping categories that are at the same level of abstraction (e.g.: all actions, or all reasons, or all findings) Each category significantly advances the argument Each category provides distinct support for the main idea established in the introduction Overall impact is powerful persuasion At least 3 pieces of high impact, supporting evidence for each category Evidence supplied is relevant to the argument in a manner that drives the argument forward All evidence is derived from high-quality sources Evidence is highly persuasive and compelling Sources are cited using appropriate CMS format on each page Boston University Questrom School of Business Criteria for Effective Writing Could Improve Fails to anticipate and address specific needs of the audience Audience Needs and Success of persuasion Writing Style and Tone Formatting BOSTON UNIVERSITY Argument and evidence are not aligned Persuasion is not effective overall Many sentences are wordy, unclear or written in the passive voice Significant, distracting grammar errors Tone is not appropriate for the relationship between reader and writer, e.g., too formal or too informal Tone is not objective Overpromises benefits Distracting formatting, e.g., extra blank lines and spaces and sentence structure issues Dense paragraphs (>= 8 lines) Good Anticipates and addresses the audience's needs in response to the main message Argument and evidence are aligned Sentences are mostly clear, concise and compelling Most sentences are written in the active voice Correct grammar Tone is appropriate for the relationship between reader and writer Tone is largely objective and measured Meets most Questrom standards for a memo Minimal typos 3 Excellent Clearly anticipates the audience's needs and addresses them in a sophisticated way that advances the argument Effectively addresses potential concerns Argument and evidence are aligned for powerful, effective persuasion Persuasion successfully overcomes potential objections Excellent sentence structure, with language that is consistently clear, concise and compelling Powerful use of vocabulary to convey meaning clearly and concisely Executive, professional tone throughout Tone is appropriate for the relationship between reader and writer Tone is consistently objective and measured Flawless grammar and mechanics Flawless formatting that enhances reader's ability to process the message; Correct word count Has well-written topic sentences for each paragraph or category Boston University Questrom School of Business

Boeing Memo | Draft due Wednesday, Sept 21, 11:45pm Read "Boeing 737 Max 8-A Stalled Communication Take-off?" It is late October 2019. The Boeing Board has just stripped Muilenburg of his role as Chairman of The Boeing Company, although he remains as CEO. On Muilenburg's watch, the FAA grounded the Boeing 737 Max 8, pilots publicly complained about inadequate training, the media criticized Boeing's slow response, and Boeing's stock price suffered. In your role as the Vice President of Communications for the Boeing Commercial Airplane division, you have been tapped to help manage the scandal. You and your boss, the President and CEO of Boeing's Commercial Airplane division, agree that Boeing must address stakeholder concerns and work to rebuild a positive perception of the brand. As a first step, your boss wants to understand best practices for restoring public trust after a scandal, as well as how Boeing performed against these best practices. The boss wants concrete examples that these best practices work, with instances of companies that have successfully weathered scandals by applying them. For this assignment, write a 750-word memo (+/- 10%) to your boss that explains the 3-5 most effective actions for rebuilding public trust after a crisis. Support each action with 3-5 examples of companies that have successfully applied these practices and/or meaningful statistics that show their effectiveness. Explain how well (or poorly) Boeing followed these best practices. Use a clear, easy to follow inductive argument. The word count excludes headers and citations. Specifically, you must: Research how companies have responded to loss of public trust after a scandal and/or studies that demonstrate the effectiveness of specific actions in restoring public trust Extract the key success factors for regaining trust that are common across companies and/or are supported by rigorous studies Assess how well Boeing performed against each of these best practices Structure your response inductively, using evidence from your research to support your argument. Consider the criteria that follow, on both inductive reasoning and writing style, to ensure a high-impact argument