Young believes that because his employees were not responsible for the 9/1 1 attacks, they should not have to suffer loss of income as a consequence. Businesses are always subject to economic forces over which they have little or no control. Should the business response to something like the 9/1 1 attacks be any deferent from the response to “normal” fluctuations In the business cycle? If so, why and how? If not, why not? How does the example set by Aaron Bernstein Influence your decision? When normal business cycle going down then the companies can be changed by peeing new lines, new products or new companies.
Unlike the normal business cycle, after 9/1 1 attacks the business Is going down Immediately. The MIT Is a primary spend time on surveys. The MIT also found that mental state of the respondent Influenced the validity of the answers that could be obtained In a research study. Usually, the research also changes in response rate when local place have a big sporting event, national event, sometimes even the weather played an important role. In the short run, the MIT should focus on the relationship with clients and tell the linens the truth that the research results might different after 9/1 1 attacks.
In the long run, the MIT should prepare the backup plan in case that the similar accident happened again. Form the example set by Aaron Bernstein whose spirit matched with Bill Young that they all think have responsibility for employees and they have their religious beliefs which influence how to run the company, then the MIT should focus on the employees emotional status since Bill Young has thought employees were the company’s primary assets and he might start cut the budgets from fixed assets rather than layoff employees.
