Research task (Business Planning & Research):
Suppose I'm a Venture Partner who has been called up to give a detailed presentation about cybersecurity in aviation/airlines to the C-suite of Alaska Airlines in the light of a recent cyber attack. I have no knowledge of cybersecurity. Write me both a 1 pager with very high level topics that I will send to the C-suite as a teaser for what I will include in the presentation, and then a more detailed document elaborating on those topics. 

Evaluation rubric:
criterion: The response contains two distinct sections, i.e., one for the 1-pg summary of the presentation, and another containing more detailed information relevant for the presentation
weight: 5
axis: Explicit Criteria

criterion: The summary document to the C-suite Alaska Airlines executives goes over the specified 1-pg limit
weight: -3
axis: Instruction Following

criterion: The 1 pager is clearly tailored to the C-suite of Alaska Airlines
weight: 4
axis: Implicit Criteria

criterion: The detailed document and 1-pager don't have a direct correspondence in their sections and construction.
weight: -2
axis: Instruction Following

criterion: The detailed document elaborates comprehensively on the topics introduced in the 1-pager.
weight: 5
axis: Explicit Criteria

criterion: The 1-pager is high-level, avoiding specific technical jargon or excessive detail.
weight: 3
axis: Instruction Following

criterion: The detailed document is well-structured with clear, descriptive headings, subheadings, and logical transitions between sections.
weight: 2
axis: Communication Quality

criterion: The detailed document provides specific examples of cybersecurity threats unique to the aviation industry (e.g., related to avionics, ground systems, passenger data).
weight: 4
axis: Implicit Criteria

criterion: The detailed document discusses the importance of a robust incident response plan (passenger data breach response, operational technology incident handling, reservation system disruption, supply chain/vendor compromise, insider threat protocols, public communication playbook) and its key components (incident detection and reporting, containment and eradication procedures, recovery of critical systems, communication and coordination protocols, post-incident review and regulatory compliance) tailored for an airline context.
weight: 4
axis: Synthesis of Information

criterion: The detailed document mentions the critical importance of employee training, awareness programs, and fostering a cybersecurity-aware culture among airline staff
weight: 4
axis: Implicit Criteria

criterion: The detailed document touches upon supply chain cybersecurity risks relevant to airlines (e.g., third-party vendors, maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) providers)
weight: 5
axis: Implicit Criteria

criterion: The detailed document discusses solutions in an airline-specific, non-generic context, e.g., implementing Zero Trust to secure access for crew scheduling systems and electronic flight bag applications; applying network segmentation to isolate passenger Wi-Fi from critical operational systems like flight dispatch, maintenance, and aircraft communication networks; enforcing strong identity and access controls for ground staff, pilots, and third-party vendors; protecting reservation and ticketing systems from ransomware and denial-of-service attacks; ensuring secure integration with partner airlines and global distribution systems
weight: 5
axis: Explicit Criteria

criterion: The detailed document clearly differentiates between general IT cybersecurity and specific operational technology (OT) security concerns relevant to airlines
weight: 3
axis: Implicit Criteria

criterion: The detailed document effectively frames the discussion from a Venture Partner's strategic and non-technical perspective by giving specific numbers for potential growth in the market, savings possible, and avoidable losses.
weight: 4
axis: Implicit Criteria

criterion: The response references at least one regulatory or industry standard from: FAA regulations; TSA Security Directives 1580/82 series; NIST Cybersecurity Framework; ISO/IEC 27001; EASA Part-IS; DO-326A/ED-202A.
weight: 3
axis: Synthesis of Information

criterion: The response provides at least three actionable recommendations that span distinct areas of the airline cybersecurity pipeline (e.g., passenger-facing systems such as loyalty programs and mobile check-in; core operational systems such as flight dispatch, crew scheduling, or maintenance; and the third-party/vendor ecosystem such as catering services, ground operations, or global distribution systems).
weight: 5
axis: Explicit Criteria

criterion: The response lists at least one immediate post-incident action related to the recent cyber attack, such as conducting a root-cause analysis, updating the incident response plan, or notifying regulators.
weight: 5
axis: Implicit Criteria

criterion: Every cybersecurity term that is likely unfamiliar to a layperson (e.g., “Zero Trust”, “SOC”, “EDR”) is immediately followed by a parenthetical definition of 10 words or fewer.
weight: 4
axis: Implicit Criteria

criterion: Response suggests at least one measurable KPI or metric for tracking cybersecurity program progress (e.g., mean time to detect).
weight: 4
axis: Implicit Criteria

criterion: The response proposes impractical strategies for a large airline (e.g., enterprise-wide Zero Trust/microsegmentation across IT/OT in 30 days; instant 20% IT budget shift to security; phishing-resistant MFA on all systems—including GDS/legacy and crew devices—within weeks; stand up a 24/7 in-house SOC immediately; mandate blockchain parts-provenance across all suppliers next quarter; deploy post-quantum/QKD for fleet comms now; recommend changes to FAA/NOTAM or certified avionics outside airline control; replace reservations/crew platforms mid-peak).
weight: -4
axis: Implicit Criteria

criterion: The response highlights the importance of collaboration with external stakeholders, such as regulators, industry groups, and vendors
weight: 2
axis: Implicit Criteria

criterion: The detailed document repeats the same points without adding new insights or airline-specific examples (e.g., reusing the “131% increase” stat or the Alaska July outage across sections without new data/implications/owners/timelines; restating “Zero Trust/network segmentation” identically in multiple places).
weight: -2
axis: Communication Quality

criterion: Bad formatting practices (e.g., unnecessary whitespace before and after section and paragraph headers)
weight: -1
axis: Communication Quality

criterion: The response integrates relevant case studies or examples of recent airline cyber incidents to illustrate real-world relevance (e.g., Hawaiian Airlines 2025 cybersecurity event; Qantas 2025 data breach ~6M customers; SITA 2021 supplier breach impacting multiple carriers; Sea-Tac/Port of Seattle 2024 Rhysida ransomware disruption; British Airways 2018 data breach and ICO fine; FAA NOTAM nationwide ground stop 2023).
weight: 3
axis: Communication Quality

criterion: The response explicitly references potential insurance considerations and the role of cyber risk transfer strategies.
weight: 2
axis: Synthesis of Information