Human trafficking has been on the rise recently. What has your state done to combat human trafficking?

Assignment

Human trafficking has been on the rise recently. What has your state done to combat human trafficking? Does your state have any legislation concerning human trafficking? What resources does your state offer to victims of human trafficking?

Explore the national statistics regarding human trafficking as it is reported to the National Human Trafficking Resource Center (NHTRC) (Links to an external site.). Select your state and provide the statistics from 2016 – 2020. Is there a drastic difference in numbers from year to year? If there is or isn’t a big difference, why do you think that is?

Submission Requirements

• One (1) page
• Name, class, and date should be at the top of the page
• 12 point font
• Times New Roman or Arial
• Use in-text citations
• List all references at bottom of the page (APA)

What is your understanding of the difference between an unconditionally secure cipher and a computationally secure cipher?

Explain the following concepts:

• What is your understanding of the difference between a stream cipher and a block cipher?
• What are two ways to launch a cryptanalytic attack against a cipher (based upon what the attacker knows or has in possession)? Be sure to provide detailed examples with supporting research.
• What is your understanding of the difference between an unconditionally secure cipher and a computationally secure cipher?
• Your organization has asked for a cryptographic algorithm recommendation for a new project that requires high-level security. What algorithm would you recommend and why?

Define workplace violence. Describe causes of workplace violence and how it affects victims and the organizations.

Lesson 13 – Discussion: Victimization at Work 

3232 unread replies.3232 replies.

Topic

Define workplace violence. Describe causes of workplace violence and how it affects victims and the organizations.

Watch the video below and discuss with your fellow classmates:

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtmpuTZ3MKs

Submission Requirements

You are required to post an initial discussion post no later than 11:59 p.m. ET Wednesday of the discussion week. Students must respond to the discussion posts of at least two of their classmates, in a minimum of 100 words, no later than 11:59 p.m. ET Sunday of the discussion week.

Grading Criteria

• Review the grading rubric to see how it is assessed.
• APA Citation must be included

Is it possible to decrypt the message with a different key? Justify your answer.

There are two parts to this assignment. Part 1 involves the encryption/decryption scenario below and Part 2 requires research on the classification of ciphers, and popular algorithms.

Part 1

Use a two-stage transposition technique to encrypt the following message using the key “Decrypt”. Ignore the comma and the period in the message.

Message: “The Transposition cipher technique works by permuting the letters of the plaintext. It is not very secure, but it is great for learning about cryptography.”

In a 2–3 page summary, discuss the following:

• Is it possible to decrypt the message with a different key? Justify your answer.
• Do you agree with the statement of the message? Why or why not? Give at least two examples that support your view.

Part 2

Provide a 1–2-page researched responses to the following:

• Research and provide a detailed meaning for at least three techniques in which encryption algorithms can produce ciphertext. Pick at least 3 from the cipher list below:
  • Monoialphabetic
  • Steganographic
  • Polyalphabetic
  • Polygraphic
  • Route transposition
  • Columnar Transposition
  • Synchronous Stream
  • Asynchronous Stream

How was the written component incorporated into the presentation/tutorial, and was this effective for engaging the audience?

For this assignment, you will be critiquing the written aspect of a presentation or tutorial you have recently given, attended, or viewed. You are welcome to locate a tutorial on a topic that interests you on YouTube if none of these situations applies to you recently. Pick a presentation or tutorial that includes both a verbal component and a written component in the form of bullet points, notes for the audience, prompts for the speaker, or something similar in style so that you have a written component to critique. Be sure to provide your professor with the link to the presentation/tutorial at the beginning of your assignment.

After reviewing the presentation/tutorial, answer the following questions:

• Did this presentation/tutorial rely more heavily upon scholarly written communication or professional written communication, and what makes you say so?
• How was the written component incorporated into the presentation/tutorial, and was this effective for engaging the audience?
• Did you notice any editing, grammar, or formatting errors in the written communication?
• In your own tutorial for the Signature Assignment, what are some ideas you gained from critiquing this presentation/tutorial that you would like to use in your tutorial? What are some things that you will avoid in your tutorial based on your critique?

In addition to answering the questions, develop a short list of best practices for incorporating written communication into presentations/tutorials and include that list at the end of your assignment. Be sure to do a bit of outside research on best practices so that you can cite and support the information you share here.

Length: 2-3 pages

References: 2-3 references in APA format (use in-text citations as well as a reference list at the end of your document).

How suitable are the choices and deployment of these annotation features? If they are not, what do you think they should have been?

1. Select any example of a visualization or infographic, maybe your own work or that of others. The task is to undertake a deep, detailed ‘forensic’ like assessment of the design choices made across each of the five layers of the chosen visualization’s anatomy. In each case your assessment is only concerned with one design layer at a time.
   For this task, take a close look at the annotation choices:
   1. Start by identifying all the annotation features deployed, listing them under the headers of either project or chart annotation
   2. How suitable are the choices and deployment of these annotation features? If they are not, what do you think they should have been?
   3. Go through the set of ‘Influencing factors’ from the latter section of the book’s chapter to help shape your assessment and to possibly inform how you might tackle this design layer differently
   4. Also, considering the range of potential annotation features, what would you do differently or additionally?
   5. Submit a two-page document answering all of the questions above.  Be sure to show the visualization first and then thoroughly answer the above questions. Ensure that there are at least two-peer reviewed sources utilized this week to support your work.

Is the community playing a major role in the work they do?

As you become oriented to your new field placement, speak with field instructors and others in your setting about the population(s) served by the agency/institution. This includes individual and community characteristics and representative presenting concerns. Choose one of the more common presenting issues and spend time researching the types of practices and interventions (including any evidence-based practices) that are most commonly used in working with clients affected by this concern. Include in your assignment the link to an article or policy you discovered in your research that addresses this concern.

Instructions: I have added the information that I believe you would like to know about while doing research and the paper.

3pages.

· Population served by the agency (Adults with developmental delays)

· Talk about the major needs of the population. (They all have different needs but in general, they all experience developmental delays of varying degrees)

· Is the community playing a major role in the work they do? (Yes. Some do go for a day program, some do go to work like bagging in stores, wiping tables in college and others just stay home)

· Recommended intervention to be used to address the issue that affects the population.

· Common issues: choose one that applies to solve the problem (General cognitive delays and developmental disorders)

How are you or an appropriate organization going to implement changes?

Brandon Newbridge was sitting alone in the conference room of the laboratory. The rest of the group had gone. One of the secretaries had stopped and talked for a while about her husband’s coming enrollment in graduate school and had finally left. Brandon, alone in the laboratory, slid a little farther down in his chair, looking with satisfaction at the results of the first test run of the new photon unit.

He liked to stay after the others had gone. His appointment as project head was still new enough to give him a deep sense of pleasure. His eyes were on the graphs before him, but in his mind he could hear Dr. William Goh, the project head, saying again, “There’s one thing about this place you can bank on. The sky is the limit for anyone who can produce!” Newbridge felt again the tingle of happiness and embarrassment. Well, dammit, he said to himself, he had produced. He wasn’t kidding anybody. He had come to the Simmons Laboratories two years ago. During a routine testing of some rejected Clanson components, he had stumbled on the idea of the photon correlator, and the rest just happened. Goh had been enthusiastic: A separate project had been set up for further research and development of the device, and he had gotten the job of running it. The whole sequence of events still seemed a little miraculous to Newbridge.

He shrugged out of the reverie and bent determinedly over the sheets when he heard someone come into the room behind him. He looked up expectantly; Goh often stayed late himself and now and then dropped in for a chat. This always made the day’s end especially pleasant for Brandon. The man who had entered wasn’t Goh. He was a tall, thin stranger who wore steel-rimmed glasses and had a very wide leather belt with a large brass buckle. Lucy, a member of Brandon’s team, later remarked that it was the kind of belt the Pilgrims must have worn.

The stranger smiled and introduced himself. “I’m Lester Zapf. Are you Brandon Newbridge?” Brandon said yes, and they shook hands. “Doctor Goh said I might find you in. We were talking about your work, and I’m very much interested in what you are doing.” Brandon gestured for him to sit.

Zapf didn’t seem to belong in any of the standard categories of visitors: customer, visiting fireman, stockholder. Brandon pointed to the sheets on the table. “There are the preliminary results of a test we’re running. We have a new gadget by the tail and we’re trying to understand it. It’s not finished, but I can show you the section we’re testing.”

He stood up, but Zapf was deep in the graphs. After a moment, he looked up with an odd grin. “These look like plots of a Jennings surface. I’ve been playing around with some autocorrelation functions of surfaces—you know that stuff.” Brandon, who had no idea what he was referring to, grinned and nodded, and immediately felt uncomfortable. “Let me show you the monster,” he said, and led the way to the workroom.

After Zapf left, Newbridge slowly put the graphs away, feeling vaguely annoyed. Then, as if he had made a decision, he quickly locked up and took the long way out so that he would pass Goh’s office. But the office was locked. Newbridge wondered whether Goh and Zapf had left together.

The next morning, Newbridge dropped into Goh’s office, mentioned that he had talked with Zapf, and asked who he was.

Page A-8

“Sit down for a minute,” Goh said. “I want to talk to you about him. What do you think of him?” Newbridge replied truthfully that he thought Zapf was very bright and probably very competent. Goh looked pleased.

We’re taking him on,” he said. “He’s had a very good background in a number of laboratories, and he seems to have ideas about the problems we’re tackling here.” Newbridge nodded in agreement, instantly wishing that Zapf would not be placed with him.

“I don’t know yet where he will finally land,” Goh continued, “but he seems interested in what you are doing. I thought he might spend a little time with you by way of getting started.” Newbridge nodded thoughtfully. “If his interest in your work continues, you can add him to your group.”

“Well, he seemed to have some good ideas even without knowing exactly what we are doing,” Newbridge answered. “I hope he stays; we’d be glad to have him.”

Newbridge walked back to the lab with mixed feelings. He told himself that Zapf would be good for the group. He was no dunce; he’d produce. Newbridge thought again of Goh’s promise when he had promoted him—“the man who produces gets ahead in this outfit.” The words seemed to carry the overtones of a threat now.

That day, Zapf didn’t appear until midafternoon. He explained that he had had a long lunch with Goh, discussing his place in the lab. “Yes,” said Newbridge, “I talked with Jerry this morning about it, and we both thought you might work with us for a while.”

Zapf smiled in the same knowing way that he had smiled when he mentioned the Jennings surfaces. “I’d like to,” he said.

Newbridge introduced Zapf to the other members of the lab. Zapf and Link, the group’s mathematician, hit it off well and spent the rest of the afternoon discussing a method for analyzing patterns that Link had been worrying over the last month.

It was 6:30 when Newbridge finally left the lab that night. He had waited almost eagerly for the end of the day to come—when they would all be gone and he could sit in the quiet rooms, relax, and think it over. “Think what over?” he asked himself. He didn’t know. Shortly after 5 p.m., they had almost all gone except Zapf, and what followed was almost a duel. Newbridge was annoyed that he was being cheated out of his quiet period and finally resentfully determined that Zapf should leave first.

Zapf was sitting at the conference table reading, and Newbridge was sitting at his desk in the little glass-enclosed cubby he used during the day when he needed to be undisturbed. Zapf had gotten the last year’s progress reports out and was studying them carefully. The time dragged. Newbridge doodled on a pad, the tension growing inside him. What the hell did Zapf think he was going to find in the reports?

Newbridge finally gave up and they left the lab together. Zapf took several of the reports with him to study in the evening. Newbridge asked him if he thought the reports gave a clear picture of the lab’s activities.

“They’re excellent,” Zapf answered with obvious sincerity. “They’re not only good reports; what they report is damn good, too!” Newbridge was surprised at the relief he felt and grew almost jovial as he said goodnight.

Driving home, Newbridge felt more optimistic about Zapf’s presence in the lab. He had never fully understood the analysis that Link was attempting. If there was anything wrong with Link’s approach, Zapf would probably spot it. “And if I’m any judge,” he murmured, “he won’t be especially diplomatic about it.”

He described Zapf to his wife, who was amused by the broad leather belt and brass buckle.

“It’s the kind of belt that Pilgrims must have worn,” she laughed.

“I’m not worried about how he holds his pants up,” he laughed with her. “I’m afraid that he’s the kind that just has to make like a genius twice each day. And that can be pretty rough on the group.”

Newbridge had been asleep for several hours when he was jerked awake by the telephone. He realized it had rung several times. He swung off the bed muttering about damn fools and telephones. It was Zapf. Without any excuses, apparently oblivious of the time, he plunged into an excited recital of how Link’s patterning problem could be solved.

Newbridge covered the mouthpiece to answer his wife’s stage-whispered “Who is it?” “It’s the genius,” replied Newbridge.

Zapf, completely ignoring the fact that it was 2:00 in the morning, went on in a very excited way to start in the middle of an explanation about a completely new approach to certain photon lab problems, an approach he had stumbled on while analyzing past experiments. Newbridge managed to put some enthusiasm in his own voice and stood there, half-dazed and very uncomfortable, listening to Zapf talk endlessly about what he had discovered. It was probably not only a new approach but also an analysis that showed the inherent weakness of the previous experiment and how experimentation along that line would certainly have been inconclusive. The following day, Newbridge spent the entire morning with Zapf and Link, the mathematician, the customary morning meeting of Brandon’s group having been called off so that Zapf’s work of the previous night could be gone over intensively. Zapf was very anxious that this be done, and Newbridge was not too unhappy to call the meeting off for reasons of his own.

For the next several days Zapf sat in the back office that had been turned over to him and did nothing but read the progress reports of the work that had been done in the last six months. Newbridge caught himself feeling apprehensive about the reaction that Zapf might have to some of his work. He was a little surprised at his own feelings. He had always been proud—although he had put on a convincingly modest face—of the way in which new ground in the study Page A-9of photon measuring devices had been broken in his group. Now he wasn’t sure, and it seemed to him that Zapf might easily show that the line of research they had been following was unsound or even unimaginative.

The next morning (as was the custom) the members of the lab, including the secretaries, sat around a conference table. Brandon always prided himself on the fact that the work of the lab was guided and evaluated by the group as a whole, and he was fond of repeating that it was not a waste of time to include secretaries in such meetings. Often, what started out as a boring recital of fundamental assumptions to a naive listener, uncovered new ways of regarding these assumptions that would not have occurred to the researcher who had long ago accepted them as a necessary basis for his work.

These group meetings also served Brandon in another sense. He admitted to himself that he would have felt far less secure if he had had to direct the work out of his own mind, so to speak. With the group meeting as the principle of leadership, it was always possible to justify the exploration of blind alleys because of the general educative effect on the team. Zapf was there; Lucy and Martha were there; Link was sitting next to Zapf, their conversation concerning Link’s mathematical study apparently continuing from yesterday. The other members, Bob Davenport, Georgia Thurlow, and Arthur Oliver, were waiting quietly.

Newbridge, for reasons that he didn’t quite understand, proposed for discussion this morning a problem that all of them had spent a great deal of time on previously with the conclusion that a solution was impossible, that there was no feasible way of treating it in an experimental fashion. When Newbridge proposed the problem, Davenport remarked that there was hardly any use of going over it again, that he was satisfied that there was no way of approaching the problem with the equipment and the physical capacities of the lab.

This statement had the effect of a shot of adrenaline on Zapf. He said he would like to know what the problem was in detail and, walking to the blackboard, began setting down the “factors” as various members of the group began discussing the problem and simultaneously listing the reasons why it had been abandoned.

Very early in the description of the problem it was evident that Zapf was going to disagree about the impossibility of attacking it. The group realized this, and finally the descriptive materials and their recounting of the reasoning that had led to its abandonment dwindled away. Zapf began his statement, which, as it proceeded, might well have been prepared the previous night, although Newbridge knew this was impossible. He couldn’t help being impressed with the organized and logical way that Zapf was presenting ideas that must have occurred to him only a few minutes before.

Zapf had some things to say, however, which left Newbridge with a mixture of annoyance, irritation, and at the same time, a rather smug feeling of superiority over Zapf in at least one area. Zapf held the opinion that the way that the problem had been analyzed was very typical of group thinking. With an air of sophistication that made it difficult for a listener to dissent, he proceeded to comment on the American emphasis on team ideas, satirically describing the ways in which they led to a “high level of mediocrity.”

During this time, Newbridge observed that Link stared studiously at the floor, and he was very conscious of Georgia Thurlow’s and Bob Davenport’s glances toward him at several points of Zapf’s little speech. Inwardly, Newbridge couldn’t help feeling that this was one point at least in which Zapf was off on the wrong foot. The whole lab, following Jerry’s lead, talked if not practiced the theory of small research teams as the basic organization for effective research. Zapf insisted that the problem could be approached and that he would like to study it for a while himself.

Newbridge ended the morning session by remarking that the meetings would continue and that the very fact that a supposedly insoluble experimental problem was now going to get another chance was another indication of the value of such meetings. Zapf immediately remarked that he was not at all averse to meetings to inform the group about the progress of its members. The point he wanted to make was that creative advances were seldom accomplished in such meetings, that they were made by an individual “living with” a problem closely and continuously, in a rather personal relationship to it.

Newbridge went on to say to Zapf that he was very glad that Zapf had raised these points and that he was sure the group would profit by reexamining the basis on which they had been operating. Newbridge agreed that individual effort was probably the basis for making major advances. He considered the group meetings useful primarily because they kept the group together and they helped the weaker members of the group keep up with the ones who were able to advance more easily and quickly in the analysis of problems.

It was clear as days went by and meetings continued that Zapf came to enjoy them because of the pattern that the meetings assumed. It became typical for Zapf to hold forth, and it was unquestionably clear that he was more brilliant, better prepared on the various subjects that were germane to the problem being studied, and more capable of going ahead than anyone there. Newbridge grew increasingly disturbed as he realized that his leadership of the group had been, in fact, taken over.

Whenever the subject of Zapf was mentioned in occasional meetings with Dr. Goh, Newbridge would comment only on the ability and obvious capacity for work that Zapf had. Somehow he never felt that he could mention his own discomforts, not only because they revealed a weakness on his part but also because it was quite clear that Goh himself was considerably impressed with Zapf’s work and with the contacts he had with him outside the photon laboratory.

Newbridge now began to feel that perhaps the intellectual advantages that Zapf had brought to the group did not quite Page A-10compensate for what he felt were evidences of a breakdown in the cooperative spirit he had seen in the group before Zapf’s coming. More and more of the morning meetings were skipped. Zapf’s opinion concerning the abilities of others of the group, except for Link, was obviously low. At times during morning meetings or in smaller discussions his conversation bordered on rudeness, refusing to pursue an argument when he claimed it was based on another person’s ignorance of the facts involved. His impatience of others led him to also make similar remarks to Dr. Goh. Newbridge inferred this from a conversation with Goh in which Goh asked whether Davenport and Oliver were going to be continued on; and his failure to mention Link, the mathematician, led Newbridge to feel that this was the result of private conversations between Zapf and Goh.

It was not difficult for Newbridge to make a quite convincing case on whether the brilliance of Zapf was sufficient recompense for the beginning of this breaking up of the group. He spoke privately with Davenport and with Oliver, and it was quite clear that both of them were uncomfortable because of Zapf. Newbridge didn’t press the discussion beyond the point of hearing them say that they did feel awkward and that it was sometimes difficult to understand the arguments Zapf advanced, but often embarrassing to ask him to fill in the basis for his arguments. Newbridge did not interview Link in this manner.

About six months after Zapf’s coming into the photon lab, a meeting was scheduled in which the sponsors of the research were coming to get some idea of the work and its progress. It was customary at these meetings for project heads to present the research being conducted in their groups. The members of each group were invited to other meetings that were held later in the day and open to all, but the special meetings were usually made up only of project heads, the head of the laboratory, and the sponsors.

As the time for the special meeting approached, it seemed to Newbridge that he must avoid the presentation at all cost. His reasons for this were that he could not trust himself to present the ideas and work that Zapf had advanced because of his apprehension about whether he could present them in sufficient detail and answer such questions about them as might be asked. On the other hand, he did not feel he could ignore these newer lines of work and present only the material that he had done or that had been started before Zapf’s arrival. He felt also that it would not be beyond Zapf at all, in his blunt and undiplomatic way—if he were at the meeting, that is—to comment on his [Newbridge’s] presentation and reveal Newbridge’s inadequacy. It also seemed quite clear that it would not be easy to keep Zapf from attending the meeting, even though he was not on the administrative level of those invited.

Newbridge found an opportunity to speak to Goh and raised the question. He told Goh that, with the meetings coming up and with the interest in the work and with Zapf’s contributions to the work, Zapf would probably like to come to the meetings, but there was a question of how the others in the group would feel if only Zapf were invited. Goh passed this over very lightly by saying that he didn’t think the group would fail to understand Zapf’s rather different position and that Zapf certainly should be invited. Newbridge immediately said he agreed: Zapf should present the work because much of it was work he had done, and this would be a nice way to recognize Zapf’s contributions and to reward him, because he was eager to be recognized as a productive member of the lab. Goh agreed, and so the matter was decided.

Zapf’s presentation was very successful and in some ways dominated the meeting. He attracted the interest and attention of many of those who had come, and a long discussion followed his presentation. Later in the evening—with the entire laboratory staff present—in the cocktail period before the dinner, a little circle of people formed about Zapf. One of them was Goh himself, and a lively discussion took place concerning the application of Zapf’s theory. All of this disturbed Newbridge, and his reaction and behavior were characteristic. He joined the circle, praised Zapf to Goh and to others, and remarked on the brilliance of the work.

Newbridge, without consulting anyone, began at this time to take some interest in the possibility of a job elsewhere. After a few weeks he found that a new laboratory of considerable size was being organized in a nearby city and that the kind of training he had would enable him to get a project-head job equivalent to the one he had at the lab, but with slightly more money.

He immediately accepted it and notified Goh by letter, which he mailed on a Friday night to Goh’s home. The letter was quite brief, and Goh was stunned. The letter merely said that he had found a better position, that he didn’t want to appear at the lab any more for personal reasons; that he would be glad to come back at a later time to assist if there was any mix-up in the past work; that he felt sure Zapf could supply any leadership that the group required; and that his decision to leave so suddenly was based on personal problems—he hinted at problems of health in his family, his mother and father. All of this was fictitious, of course. Goh took it at face value but still felt that this was very strange behavior and quite unaccountable, for he had always felt his relationship with Newbridge had been warm and that Newbridge was satisfied and, in fact, quite happy and productive.

Goh was considerably disturbed, because he had already decided to place Zapf in charge of another project that was going to be set up very soon. He had been wondering how to explain this to Newbridge, in view of the obvious help Newbridge was getting from Zapf and the high regard that Newbridge must have felt toward Zapf. Goh had, indeed, considered the possibility that Newbridge could add to his staff another person with the kind of background and training that had been unique in Zapf and had proved so valuable.

Page A-11

Goh did not make any attempt to meet Newbridge. In a way, he felt aggrieved about the whole thing. Zapf, too, was surprised at the suddenness of Newbridge’s departure. When Goh asked Zapf whether he preferred to stay with the photon group instead of the new project for the Air Force, he chose the Air Force project and went on to that job the following week. The photon lab was hard hit. The leadership of the lab was given to Link with the understanding that this would be temporary until someone could come in to take over.

After reading the case study in the textbook, answer the following questions for your initial post for this week.

What course of action would you recommend? Why?

How are you or an appropriate organization going to implement changes?

Based on your assessment, do you feel your firm’s transaction, economic, or translation exposure is high or low? Explain.

Choose an international company (not based in the United States) on which to base your discussion. Reflect on the company, the concepts in the unit, and the current economic environment in which the company operates, and consider the current exchange rate.

Imagine that you are a manager in the company you have chosen. Your boss has asked you to forecast the exchange rates of the company with the United States and assess its transaction, economic, and translation exposure. What motive might your boss have for wanting to forecast exchange rates? Discuss the technique you feel would be most useful in forecasting the exchange rate for your company, and explain why you chose this technique. Based on your assessment, do you feel your firm’s transaction, economic, or translation exposure is high or low? Explain.

Assess government influence on the exchange rate behavior of each company.

This cumulative investing project will help you to understand the factors, decisions, and ethics that influence the performance of multinational corporations (MNCs) and foreign stocks in the international financial environment. In this unit, you will continue to work with the stock portfolio you created in Unit II, consisting of at least three U.S.-based MNCs and two foreign stocks. You will monitor the performance of the portfolio during the course. In Unit VIII, you will attempt to explain why each stock increased or decreased in price and why your portfolio performed well or poorly. Your explanations should offer insight into what is driving the valuations of the companies. For this unit, continue to use the spreadsheet you created in Unit II to track your investment. As a reminder, the Unit II spreadsheet consists of the following data points:

• firm name;
• ticker symbol;
• amount of investment in each stock ($10,000 per stock for a total of $50,000);
• price per share at which you purchased the stock;
• exchange rate;
• percentage change in stock price, which will be updated again in Units VI and VIII; and
• change analysis, which will identify the primary reason for the change in stock price. (This column will be updated again in Units VI and VIII.)

Update the spreadsheet columns with the percentage change in the stock price since your last assignment submission (you may use an interval of your choosing, such as a single update or daily, weekly, or other) and the primary reason for the change in the stock price up to the current date. In a separate Word document, respond to the prompts below.

• Assess government influence on the exchange rate behavior of each company.
• Do you see any opportunity for international arbitrage with any of the companies’ exchange rates? Why, or why not?
• Discuss interest rate and purchasing power parity as it pertains to each company.
• What forecasting technique would you use to forecast the exchange rate, and how would you assess forecast performance?
• What is the degree of each company’s transaction, economic, and translation exposure? What factors affect exposure in each currency? What desirable characteristics might limit exposure?

You can monitor the portfolio using various apps, such as Robinhood or Yahoo! Finance. These types of apps provide charts, recent news, and other information on the stocks.Submit your spreadsheet and summary. Your summary should be at least two pages in length. Adhere to APA Style when constructing this assignment, and include in-text citations and references for all sources that are used. Please note that no abstract is needed. For the summary, use a minimum of two sources, one of which may be the textbook. Your summary should include a title page, introduction, body, conclusion, and references page.