C1R

1. DDBA_8006_Week_3_Assignment_Rubric
Faculty Comments: Thank you for Week 3 – Assignment. I have graded your Application to reflect the Rubric assessment: DDBA_8006_Week_3_Assignment_Rubric. Grade: 87.25/100 = 65.625/75
Superior Criteria Excellent Criteria Satisfactory Criteria Marginal Criteria
Unsatisfactory
Criteria
Not Submitted
Element 1: Definition of
Product-Harm Crisis In
Context to Toyota Case
Study
8 (8%)
Student presents a thorough
and detailed evaluation of the
definition of product-harm
crisis within the context of the
Toyota case study. Several
sources and examples
support thinking.
7.6 (7.6%)
Student presents a thorough and detailed
evaluation of the definition of product-harm
crisis within the context of the Toyota case
study. Several sources and examples
support thinking. There are one or two minor
errors in evaluation.
6.8 (6.8%)
Student presents an
evaluation with some details
of the definition of product-
harm crisis within the context
of the Toyota case study.
Some sources and examples
support thinking.
6 (6%)
Student presents a cursory or
incomplete evaluation with vague
or missing details of the definition
of product-harm crisis within the
context of the Toyota case study.
Few sources or examples support
thinking.
4 (4%)
Does not meet
minimal standards.
0 (0%)
Did not submit
element.
Element 2: Problems
Toyota Leaders Must
Solve
8 (8%)
Student presents a thorough
and detailed explanation of
the problems the Toyota
leaders must solve. Several
sources and examples
support thinking.
7.6 (7.6%)
Student presents a thorough and detailed
explanation of the problems the Toyota
leaders must solve. Several sources and
examples support thinking. There are one or
two minor errors in explanation.
6.8 (6.8%)
Student presents an
explanation of some of the
problems the Toyota leaders
must solve. Some sources
and examples support
thinking.
6 (6%)
Student presents a cursory or
incomplete explanation of the
problems the Toyota leaders must
solve. Few sources or examples
support thinking.
4 (4%)
Does not meet
minimal standards.
0 (0%)
Did not submit
element.
Element 3: Successful
and Unsuccessful
Organizational Changes
8 (8%)
Student presents a thorough
and detailed analysis of the
organizational changes that
were successful and
unsuccessful. Several
sources and examples
support thinking.
7.6 (7.6%)
Student presents a thorough and detailed
analysis of the organizational changes that
were successful and unsuccessful. Several
sources and examples support thinking.
There are one or two minor errors in
analysis.
6.8 (6.8%)
Student presents an analysis
of some of the organizational
changes that were
successful and unsuccessful.
Some sources and examples
support thinking.
6 (6%)
Student presents a cursory or
incomplete analysis of the
organizational changes that were
successful and unsuccessful. Few
sources or examples support
thinking.
4 (4%)
Does not meet
minimal standards.
0 (0%)
Did not submit
element.
Element 4:
Recommendations for
Strategies
8 (8%)
Student presents a thorough
and detailed synthesis of
his/her analysis of the
literature to develop one or
more recommendations for
strategies Toyota might use
to manage this product-harm
crisis and recover brand
loyalty in the global market.
Several sources and
examples support thinking.
7.6 (7.6%)
Student presents a thorough and detailed
synthesis of his/her analysis of the literature
to develop one or more recommendations for
strategies Toyota might use to manage this
product-harm crisis and recover brand loyalty
in the global market. Several sources and
examples support thinking. There are one or
two minor errors in assessment.
6.8 (6.8%)
Student presents an
explanation that somewhat
synthesizes his/her analysis
of the literature to develop
one or more
recommendations for
strategies Toyota might use
to manage this product-harm
crisis and recover brand
loyalty in the global market.
Some sources and examples
support thinking.
6 (6%)
Student presents a cursory or
incomplete synthesis of his/her
analysis of the literature to develop
one or more recommendations for
strategies Toyota might use to
manage this product-harm crisis
and recover brand loyalty in the
global market. Few sources or
examples support thinking.
4 (4%)
Does not meet
minimal standards.
0 (0%)
Did not submit
element.
Element 5: Components
of Paper
8 (8%)
Students submits a
comprehensive, well-
organized paper that
includes for each page at
least two to three APA-
formatted scholarly citations.
There are no errors.
7.6 (7.6%)
Students submits a comprehensive, well-
organized paper that includes for each page
at least two to three APA-formatted scholarly
citations. There are one or two minor errors
in formatting.
6.8 (6.8%)
Students submits a paper
that includes for each page
at least two APA-formatted
scholarly citations. There are
issues with selection of
citations and/or consistent
errors in formatting.
6 (6%)
Students submits a paper that
includes some citations, but does
not submit at least two APA-
formatted citations per page.
4 (4%)
Does not meet
minimal standards.
0 (0%)
Did not submit
element.
Element 6: Written
Delivery Style &
GrammarElement 6:
Critical Thinking
30 (30%)
Writing exhibits excellent
evidence of thoughtful critical
analysis and thinking; careful
examination is made of
assumptions and possible
biases, with detailed
supporting rationale. Writing
28.5 (28.5%)
Writing exhibits excellent evidence of
thoughtful critical analysis and thinking;
careful examination is made of assumptions
and possible biases, with detailed supporting
rationale. Writing synthesizes the classroom
experiences and content; analyze patterns or
connections between theory and practice;
25.5 (25.5%)
Writing exhibits some
evidence of thoughtful critical
analysis and thinking. A good
examination is made of
assumptions and possible
biases, with some supporting
rationale. Writing synthesizes
22.5 (22.5%)
Writing exhibits little evidence of
thoughtful critical analysis and
thinking. Examination is not made
of assumptions and possible
biases. Writing does not
synthesize the classroom
experiences and content; nor
15 (15%)
Does not meet
minimal standards.
0 (0%)
Did not submit
element.

2. Superior Criteria Excellent Criteria Satisfactory Criteria Marginal Criteria
Unsatisfactory
Criteria
Not Submitted
synthesizes the classroom
experiences and content;
analyze patterns or
connections between theory
and practice; and draws
logical conclusions based on
well-reasoned, superb
arguments.
and draws logical conclusions based on well-
reasoned, superb arguments. There are one
or two minor errors in explanation.
the classroom experiences
and content; analyzes
patterns or connections
between theory and practice;
and draws logical
conclusions based on well-
reasoned arguments
adequately, but not superbly.
analyzes patterns or connections
between theory and practice.
Logical conclusions based on well-
reasoned arguments are not
exhibited.
Element 7: Written
Delivery Style &
Grammar
15 (15%)
Student consistently follows
APA writing style and basic
rules of formal English
grammar and written essay
style. Student communicates
in a cohesive, logical style.
There are no spelling or
grammar errors.
14.25 (14.25%)
Student consistently follows APA writing style
and basic rules of formal English grammar
and written essay style. Student
communicates in a cohesive, logical style.
There are one or two minor errors in spelling
or grammar.
12.75 (12.75%)
Student mostly follows APA
writing style and basic rules
of formal English grammar
and written essay style.
Student mostly
communicates in a cohesive,
logical style. There are some
errors in spelling or grammar.
11.25 (11.25%)
Student does not follow APA
writing style and basic rules of
formal English grammar and
written essay style and does not
communicate in a cohesive, logical
style.
7.5 (7.5%)
Does not meet
minimal standards.
0 (0%)
Did not submit
element.
Element 8: Formal and
Appropriate
Documentation of
Evidence, Attribution of
Ideas (APA Citations)
15 (15%)
Student demonstrates full
adherence to scholarly
reference requirements and
adheres to APA style with
respect to source attribution,
references, heading and
subheading logic, table of
contents and lists of charts,
etc. There are no APA errors.
14.25 (14.25%)
Student demonstrates full adherence to
scholarly reference requirements and
adheres to APA style with respect to source
attribution, references, heading and
subheading logic, table of contents and lists
of charts, etc. There are one or two minor
errors in APA style or format.
12.75 (12.75%)
Student mostly adheres to
scholarly reference
requirements and/or mostly
adheres to APA style with
respect to source attribution,
references, heading and
subheading logic, table of
contents and lists of charts,
etc. Some errors in APA
format and style are evident.
11.25 (11.25%)
Student demonstrates weak or
inconsistent adherence scholarly
reference requirements and/or
weak or inconsistent adherence to
APA style with respect to source
attribution, references, heading
and subheading logic, table of
contents and lists of charts, etc.
Several errors in APA format and
style are evident.
7.5 (7.5%)
Does not meet
minimal standards.
0 (0%)
Does not meet
minimal
standards.

3. 3
Global Crisis Management—A Case Study of Toyota
Gwendolyn Beauford
Program Name or Degree Name
DDBA-806: Contemporary Challenges in Business
Rocky Dwyer
October 16, 2022

4. 4
Global Crisis Management: A Case Study of Toyota (850 words)
Product recalls have increasingly become a commonplace within the contemporary
business world. Product recalls mainly refers to the request to replace, exchange, or return a
given product(s) following the discovery of defects by either a consumer watch group or the
manufacturer that the products can hamper performance, produce legal concerns for producers or
harm consumers (American Society for Quality[ASQ], 2022). Product recalls are considered by
organizations as a strategy when experiencing a product-harm crisis that might potentially cause
tremendous financial or human costs (Rajasekera, 2013). In this context, this paper explores the
case of Toyota to present the meaning of a product-harm crisis, including the challenges faced by
organizational leaders to address the crisis, and recommended strategic actions that an
organization, in this case Toyota, should have utilized to manage the crisis.
Definition of Product-harm Crisis
A product harm-crisis generally refers to a scenario where the products manufactured by
an organization are identified with defects forcing the manufacturer to recall them form clients,
which results in the destruction of the manufacturer’s brand image and reputation, financial
downfall, as well as possible human costs. This definition aligns with Toyota’s case study in
relation to the three aspects of a product harm crisis. The first aspect includes financial costs
associated with a product-harm crisis. In the case of Toyota, the company experienced a major
financial loss following the product-harm crisis that resulted in the recalls of its products. After
the spread of the news through the media concerning Toyota’s recall of 2.9 vehicles on 21st
January 2010, along with the 3.9 million automobiles recalled within a few previous months, the
company’s stoke performance suddenly fell to its to its worst recorded level (below -15%) in its
history. During the same year the CNBC reported that Toyota was being sued by clients seeing

5. 5
compensation for value lost for their trucks and cars in proposed lawsuits of approximately
$3billion in probable damages (Anderson|Ap, 2010). Among the shareholders that sued the
company included, Toyota investors who ultimately caused a further drop of Toyota’s stoke
price fell nearly 16% in early march, 2010 (Anderson|Ap, 2010).
The second aspect of a product harm-crisis includes the human costs such as injuries and
in worst case scenarios, deaths (Liu et al., 2016). According to Rajasekera (2013), aside from the
financial losses, Toyota experienced human costs involving deaths of 52 people as a result of
emotionally charged accidents due to sudden acceleration problems. The other aspect includes
the development and establishment of a negative brand image and reputation amongst the clients.
In the case of Toyota, Rajasekera (2013) reported that the internet, as well as the social media
including Twitter and Facebook reported negative news that spread rapidly through China,
Europe, Japan and across the globe resulting the destruction of its long-cultivated image
worldwide. Therefore, a product-harm crisis is a situation that frequently results in product
recalls that have significant negative consequences on the organization’s reputation, financial
value and the stakeholders, particularly the human costs and associated unprecedented legal
ramifications.
Challenges that Toyota Leaders should Solve based on the case Scenario
A product-harm crisis presents significant challenges for organizational leaders to
resolve. Based on Toyota’s case scenario, the most significant challenge was establishing trust
within the public. Toyota’s reputation was destroyed through the forced recalls by the US
administration due to increased influx of complaints (Rajasekera, 2013). As such Toyota’s client
base lost its trust to the company’s products especially following the destruction of the
company’s image by the news media that sudden acceleration concerns were associated with the

6. 6
deaths of 52 persons. Trust is very crucial in establishing brand loyalty in any manufacturing
organization (Martínez & Del Bosque, 2013).
The other challenge for Toyota’s leadership included its sluggish response to justify the
concerns associated with the production system through a public relations approach. Specifically,
the “Toyota Way” along with quality circles and the total quality control mantras reflect the
failures associated with on-job training due to the increased turnover experienced at the time.
While Toyota was rapidly expanding, the number of factories increased and it became difficult
for leaders to monitor quality concerns of the such as offering workers authority to stop
production defects once noted. Such practices result in bureaucracy that impedes proper
decision-making process within organization (Hirst et al., 2011).
Analysis of Successful and Unsuccessful Organizational Changes in the Case of Toyota
The successful organizational changes included the restructuring of the organization to
include a social media strategy team and an online newsroom for coordinating media releases
from distinct departs like customer service and dealers, and public relations (Rajasekera, 2013).
This strategy is important in determining ethical concerns and false claims from different
organizations and refuting those claims to de-escalate the crisis (Song et al., 2019). One of the
unsuccessful strategies that Toyota emphasized based on the case scenario included the SNS
strategy. According to, Rajasekera (2013), Toyota introduced the “Toyota Fan Club” on
Facebook that did not reflect both sides of the client’s opinions concerning its products and the
recalls since most people who joined the club only had a positive opinion concerning the
company or brand. Moreover, the SNS strategy did only focused on the then recall problem and
failed to clearly indicate reasons for the recall.

7. 7
Another failed strategy included the creation of a defect-reporting database for
monitoring of timely automobile-related complaints from clients. However, according to the case
scenario, Toyota failed to monitor progress of the complaints within the database (Rajasekera,
2013). Moreover, the employees were not empowered to realize the mission and vision of the
company concerning the newly created communication channels. Therefore, there was no much
effort put in regards to closely following the complaints launched by clients within the already
set-up database.
Recommendations
The findings inn the analysis section indicate that Toyota’s leadership had significant
challenges in addressing the crisis effectively. Specifically, even though Toyota’s President
offered a public apology for the recalls, he failed to emphasize a leadership strategy tailored to
establishing loyalty among the clients. In this context, The President ought to have been a
proactive in quicky responding to any issues raised by clients. Instead, he was passive in solving
the problem and waited until being summoned by the US authorities, when he decided to make a
public apology. The president should have proactively inspired his social media strategy and an
online newsroom team to actively engage the affected clients and provide them with real-time
information concerning the sudden acceleration problem to avoid the deaths that the crisis. Ding,
L. and Jiang (2021) noted that proactive communication strategies often improve product loyalty
because they lead the clients into believing that companies bear product responsibility, and that
the products are of good quality.
The other recommendation involves the organizational structure of Toyota. In this
context, the findings from the analysis of the case scenario suggest that Toyota failed to put in
place effective strategies for preventing a product-harm crisis within its quality control

8. 8
department. Indeed, Toyota only focused on the firm’s growth and revenue generation and failed
to emphasize quality of products. To address this concern, Toyota and other companies alike
should empower lower-level workers to report problems at the production stage to the executives
directly in a timely fashion. By doing so, the bureaucracy processes that prevent decision making
during crisis would be prevented and consequently preventing the product-harm crisis altogether
(Kim & Fernandez, 2017).

9. 9
References
American Society for Quality (ASQ). (2022). What is a product recall? Excellence Through
Quality | ASQ. Retrieved October 16, 2022, from https://asq.org/quality-resources/recalls
Anderson|Ap, C. (2010, March 21). Toyota shareholders sue over fallen stock price. Stock
Markets, Business News, Financials, Earnings - CNBC. Retrieved October 16, 2022,
from https://www.cnbc.com/id/35971026
Ding, L., & Jiang, C. (2021). Restaurant proactive philanthropic activities and customer loyalty:
a scenario-based study during the COVID-19 pandemic period. International Hospitality
Review.
Hirst, G., Van Knippenberg, D., Chen, C. H., & Sacramento, C. A. (2011). How does
bureaucracy impact individual creativity? A cross-level investigation of team contextual
influences on goal orientation–creativity relationships. Academy of management
journal, 54(3), 624-641.
Kim, S. Y., & Fernandez, S. (2017). Employee empowerment and turnover intention in the US
federal bureaucracy. The American review of public administration, 47(1), 4-22.
Martínez, P., & Del Bosque, I. R. (2013). CSR and customer loyalty: The roles of trust, customer
identification with the company and satisfaction. International Journal of Hospitality
Management, 35, 89-99.
Rajasekera, J. (2013). Challenges to Toyota caused by recall problems, social networks and
digitisation. Asian Academy of Management Journal, 18(1), 1.