Read Each Of Your Classmates' Posts And Post One Follow-Up M

Read Each Of Your Classmates Posts Andpost One Follow Up Messageto

Read each of your classmates’ posts and post one follow-up message to TWO classmates’ posts in each weekly thread (with at least 150 words each). Your follow-up posts must contain substance and should add additional insight to your classmates’ opinions or challenge their opinions. It is never sufficient to simply say, “I agree with what you wrote” or “I really liked your post.” You must use your follow-up posts to continue the discussion at a high level of discourse. Be sure to read the follow-up posts to your own posts and reply to any questions or requests for clarification, including questions posted by your instructor.

Paper For Above instruction

In this discussion, students are required to engage deeply with their classmates’ posts on the topic of corporate governance models and communication strategies related to organizational change. Specifically, students must read two peer posts, analyze the arguments and insights presented, and craft substantive follow-up responses that add meaningful perspectives, challenge ideas, or incorporate relevant scholarly references. The goal is to foster an engaging, high-level academic discourse that demonstrates critical thinking and application of organizational and communication theories.

The assignment emphasizes that responses should go beyond superficial agreement or praise. Instead, students are expected to critically evaluate the points raised, perhaps by comparing theoretical frameworks, providing empirical evidence, or integrating scholarly literature to support or refute the ideas. Lengths of responses should be around 150 words each to ensure depth and articulation of insights.

Furthermore, the discussion requires students to consider different communication strategies during organizational change, including structured planning, emotional intelligence, transparency, and leadership engagement. The insights shared in the peer posts—ranging from the pros and cons of shareholder vs. director primacy models to communication tactics during layoffs or restructuring—must be addressed with thoughtful commentary supported by academic references.

This exercise aims to develop critical analysis skills, foster scholarly debate, and enhance understanding of corporate governance and change management practices within organizations. Effective participation demonstrates the ability to synthesize peer perspectives with established research, thereby enriching the collective learning experience.

Responses to Peer Posts

Kimberly’s post offers a comprehensive comparison of shareholder primacy and director primacy models. She highlights that shareholder primacy emphasizes maximizing shareholder value, often at the expense of other stakeholders, while director primacy centers on professional management by the board. Kimberly favors shareholder primacy for its influence on decision-making and stakeholder engagement. To deepen this discussion, it is important to consider the growing emphasis on stakeholder theory, which advocates for balancing the interests of all stakeholders—not just shareholders—recognizing the long-term benefits of sustainable and ethical corporate practices (Freeman, 1984). Recent corporate scandals and sustainability initiatives suggest that stakeholder-oriented governance can enhance reputation and stakeholder trust, leading to sustainable profit (Harrison & Wicks, 2013). By integrating this perspective, students can evaluate whether the shareholder-primacy model remains viable in today’s environment or if a hybrid approach might better serve long-term organizational success while addressing social responsibilities.

Jeffrion’s analysis emphasizes the core tension between shareholder primacy and director primacy models. He notes that while shareholder primacy entails direct influence on corporate decisions, director primacy involves board-centric control with potential principal-agent problems. To extend this discussion, it is beneficial to explore the role of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate governance reforms that aim to mitigate agency issues. According to Mallin (2019), institutions like the Board of Directors can serve as governance mechanisms to align managerial actions with stakeholder interests, thus reducing agency costs. Moreover, the rise of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) criteria reflects a shift toward incorporating stakeholder concerns into corporate decision-making, emphasizing the importance of responsible governance models. Considering these frameworks helps contextualize the debate within contemporary governance reforms aimed at enhancing accountability, transparency, and sustainable performance (Solomon, 2020). The integration of CSR and ESG factors suggests a move toward more balanced governance structures that serve broader societal interests, alongside shareholder value.

References

• Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Pitman Publishing.
• Harrison, J. S., & Wicks, A. C. (2013). Managing for Stakeholders: Survival, Reputation, and Success. Journal of Business Ethics, 112(2), 243–259.
• Mallin, C. (2019). Corporate Governance. Oxford University Press.
• Palmer, I., Dunford, R., & Buchanan, D. (2022). Managing organizational change: A multiple perspectives approach (4th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
• Solomon, J. (2020). Corporate Governance and Accountability. John Wiley & Sons.