A)
Ventas. 14
Costo de bienes vendidos. (8)
Depreciación. (2)
Intereses (1)
Beneficio neto antes de impuestos=3 millones
Impuesto. 0.35×3 = (1.05)
Ingreso neto= 1.95
Flujo de efectivo= ingreso neto+ depreciación
Flujo de efectivo=1.95+2=3.95
B)
Ingreso neto=1.95-1=0.95
Flujo de efectivo=3.95+1=4.95
Respuesta:
Objetivo de costo = Precio de mercado - Margen de beneficio deseado
= $181 - $19
= $162
Explicación:
El costo objetivo es la diferencia entre el precio de mercado competitivo y el margen de beneficio deseado. En el método de costo objetivo, el precio de mercado está fijado por las fuerzas del mercado. Se resta el margen de beneficio deseado del precio de mercado para obtener el costo objetivo.
Response:
Labor Efficiency Variance: $2,090 Favorable
Clarification:
Based on the information provided, the calculation for labor efficiency variance for July is outlined below:-
Labor efficiency variance = Standard rate × (Standard hours - Actual hours)
= $11 × ((0.7 × 3,000) - 1,910)
= $11 × 190
= $2,090 Favorable
Hence, to compute the labor efficiency variance for July, we adhered to the aforementioned formula.
Answer: disturbance handler; decisional; more through others.
Explanation:
As a newly appointed manager, Candace has faced a steep learning curve, and at times, her role is more demanding than anticipated. As a manager, she must take on multiple responsibilities. Candace organizes employee schedules for front desk shifts, dog play areas, and grooming rooms.
This falls under the disturbance handler function in management, categorized as a decisional aspect. To adjust to her managerial role, Candace has learned to facilitate tasks by coordinating with others.
Answer:
Isn't "corporate entrepreneurship" a contradictory term?
Many people might assume that corporations and entrepreneurs are entirely different, and mostly, they are correct. However, a few companies exemplify an entrepreneurial attitude or attempt to cultivate it. For instance, 3M is renowned for encouraging employees to allocate time for creative endeavors and innovation. Google is another major corporation that fosters such creativity among its workforce.
Do the established organization's traits, like routines and structural systems, enhance productivity while simultaneously stifling entrepreneurial zeal?
Corporate routines and frameworks do not merely stifle, but they effectively eliminate entrepreneurial energy and creativity. A notable illustration of this is found in the film depicting Ford's rivalry at Le Mans, which shows how corporate environments suppress unique thinking and actions.
Is it feasible for a firm to combine the advantages of both approaches?
It might be challenging, but achieving entrepreneurial spirit within a corporation is not out of reach. The hurdle lies in the belief that paying employees to spend time generating ideas is a frivolous expense. Creativity has associated costs, and not every organization is prepared to cover those expenses.
