Perfect Apology Summary

The Apology is a seemingly misleading title. If your teacher spoke Greek, you too would learn that our word apology is actually derived from the Greek word apologia; meaning “in defense of.” Therefore, Socrates does not beg for forgiveness, rather justifies his profession. The Apology is his chance to “protest” against the authorities and make them listen to his side. Piece by piece, he dissects the charges against him. By doing so, he irritates the jurors. This is why the Apology seems to some proof of Socrates’ disrespect. When the vote came in, Socrates was declared guilty by 280 of the 500 jurors. Socrates is then given the chance to suggest a worthy punishment for himself. Most convicted persons would use this time to plea for their lives and families; Socrates had something else in mind. He says that they should reward him, as they do for the athletes, rather than punish him. The jurors came back and condemn him to death. The jurors were so incensed, even more votes shifted against him this time. Socrates does not break down and plea for his life. He simply thanks the jurors that stood behind him, and asks the others to open their minds more in the future. Socrates tells his audience “ a life

- Apologized to the client if they were told differently about the payment due date.

After reading the simulation, I would probably followed most of the steps that Sara had taken. Sometimes it doesn’t matter what you offer, or you do, there is always going to be that one customer who requires more than is necessary. In my opinion, as the representative, I would not have offered an apology due to a fault product. Any apologies would be due only to any inconveniences cause. But Alpha Electronics, cannot and should not apologize for a defective product which was manufactured by another company which more than like has warranty attached. Although Saradoes not have formal training in this area, she did a tremendous job in meeting the needs of this disgruntled customer. She provided great customer service without having to give aways everything.

The third step of the model is the “Promise of Forbearance” (Bisel, 2017). It can be easy for a person to apologize for an offense and then move on with their lives. However it is far more important to the offended if the offender can prove that they a thoughtful of their apology and willing to make a change. I first ensure Ms. Johnson that the incident will not happen again, and then I list my reasons for how The Duck Club will stay accountable to that promise. I list out the steps the restaurant will take to make sure a similar accident does not happen, which includes addressing the issue with the employee, and improving the training of future employees. In taking these actions, I hope Ms. Johnson will feel as if the apology is meaningful. Finally I complete the OOPS model by “offering to restore”, which involves the offender proposing a way to make right of the situation (Bisel, 2017). To do this, I simply offer Ms. Johnson three free coffees. By doing this I am not causing any financial burden to The Duck Club, but am still able to offer reparation to Ms.

Volkswagen committed an atrocity, worse even than making tanks for Hitler. They (or at least someone) willfully allowed toxic NOx (Nitrogen Oxides) gases to dissipate into the atmosphere. They no doubt need to recompense, but $48 Billion is just too much. That is an insane precedent to be set, and wildly unnecessary. No company in history could survive a hit like that, $48 Billion is over 75 percent of the Volkswagen’s market capital (all of the outstanding stocks multiplied by their value).

Furthermore, this is a weird community, when someone makes mistake, they have to say sorry and then people have to reply “ I accept your apology,” it is so mechanically. Thus, this society is actually a “

Royal Caribbean, facing scrutiny after the ship sailed into a storm in the Atlantic, apologized to passengers in a statement sent shortly before the ship docked, saying "we have to do better."

After the announcement of the emissions scandal, Volkswagen is fumbling to figure out how to pick up the broken pieces of its brand image. Volkswagen had ruined the trust of all of its stakeholders. The announcement of the cheated emissions test has crushed Volkswagen’s stock price by almost 20%, which implies an almost $27 billion loss in market value. This scandal required the recall of 11 million cars with an expected cost of over $25 billion in penalty fees and the cost to fix recalled vehicles. This scandal of much higher than stated emissions directly contradicted with Volkswagen’s branding of a clean emission diesel vehicle. It could not have gotten much counter-intuitive. Volkswagen has spent 45% of its television advertising budget directly focusing on Volkswagen’s products’ low emissions. That marketing budget is now valueless. However, most importantly, Volkswagen upset its customer base. The owners of these recalled vehicles not only feel lied to and betrayed, they have to take time to bring their recalled car in to get fixed. But, one of the biggest complaints is the loss of resale value totalling nearly $5000. This may disrupt repeat customers and

As a multinational corporation, the implication of the scandal determines the fate of numerous stakeholders both internal and external. Internal stakeholders comprise of the board, managers and employees while external stakeholders subsume shareholders, customers and suppliers. The economic, political and social impacts of the dishonest practices would shape the fate of Volkswagen and affect the future prospects of the automotive industry. Common shareholders whilst not involved in the day to day running of the business placed faith and belief in the firm by providing capital had suffered severe economic loss as share prices (get something for stat). Despite the callous deception in advertising the defeat device displayed no signs of disturbing vehicle performance, however, customers of Volkswagen and its subsidiary vehicles suffer from lower resale value. In addition, even though the scandal was global, European consumers were the most affected with diesel cars accounting for 41% of all European cars (Fontaras, 2016). This high percentage in respect to other nations is a result of incentives provided by the European Union for the purchase of diesel vehicles such as subsidies towards the production process resulting in lower premiums compared to petrol counterparts (Vidal, 2015) In additional with sales falling suppliers of Volkswagen would likely lose future contracts or have current contracts downgraded as less parts are required. Thus, this loss of future

Volkswagen is one of the largest automakers in the world and it has a global reputation as a high-quality German auto brand. Social responsibility is included in VW’s corporate culture and it seems that Volkswagen made some advances in Corporate Social Responsibility because the corporation was ranked 11th 2015 in the Global CSR Rep Track 100, which listed companies by reputation (Reputation Institute, 2015).However, the company has been threatened by an emission scandal which broke in September 2015, when the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) disclosed that Volkswagen had installed defeat devices on diesel cars which were sold in the US. These devices equipped on VW cars cheated regulators in such a way that it could detect

The German automobile manufacturer, Volkswagen, knowingly jeopardized their company to cheat emission tests, result producing a cleaner type of diesel. The actions leading to the unethical decisions by German automaker was not the fault of an individual, but rather problems throughout the entire corporation. For a greater understanding of the event that took place within Volkswagen it is best to examine the different divisions of the organization and the individuals’ decision, which was the leading cause in one of the biggest consumer class-action settlements in the United States (Judge approves $15B Volkswagen, 2015). We will look at how the scandal could have been avoided in addition to what measures can be implemented to prevent future unethical scandals.

Negotiated forgiveness consists of the perpetrator and the victim to confront one another and discuss the motives and understand the perpetrator’s intentions. With the dialogue between the two opposing parties, reconciliation can finally emerge. Kraft states the need for negotiated forgiveness, “In the context of truth commissions, unilateral forgiveness is forgiveness, and negotiated forgiveness is reconciliation. During truth commissions, forgiveness appears as an internal disengagement from the perpetrator, independent of the actions of the perpetrator. In contrast, reconciliation is a dialectical process of acceptance, involving direct interactions between perpetrators and victims,” (Kraft 115). This is why reconciliation is extremely important, to resolve reconciliation is essential in promoting peace. With a strong understanding of the contrast between forgiveness and reconciliation, one can intensely evaluate the process of reconciliation during the events of the TRC.

Research conducted previously on children provides some insight on their understanding of apology. A study conducted by Kochanska, Casey, and Fukumoto discovered that young children wouldn’t apologize for damaged objects unless they were led to believe they caused the damage (1995). A recent study also found that preschool children would spontaneously apologize when in situations involving physical harm (Schleinen, Ross, & Ross, 2010). These studies show that children at an early age know when to apologize once they have recognized they

1989). Olshtain & Cohen (2000) also demonstrated an additional two strategies, and classified them into two categories: a denial of the need to apologize, and a denial of responsibility. Detemr (2000) further added another strategy: postponing the apology. Owen, (1983) thought of an apology as a remedial move, therefore he offered three explicit types of apology: utterances that consist of the word “apologize” or its variations; utterances that carry the word “sorry”; and utterances that start with “I am afraid” followed by the sentence.

Safety is a factor of our lives that is very rarely overlooked, instead, it is universally prioritized over many other necessities. Thus, when scandals concerning consumer safety air, the company must take caution in regaining the public 's favor to save face. Time is an integral factor of trust when a company cheats the public and the government, their public standing is negatively affected while the trust between the two parties repairs. However, if the company has publicly apologized for their wrongdoings and have compensated their consumers; the company has begun the journey of creating a healthy foundation for an environment of corporate citizenship. The Volkswagen scandal is two years old and continues to affect the company’s image