Answer:
a)
To my view, the MD viewpoint is better. In companies the existing process is usually analyzed and the pain points identified whenever there is a need for change. The new system is simply a change to the existing system. The stakeholders' specific needs are not completely addressed. The MD calls for a collection of and analysis of demands from scratch to share its needs , requirements and inhibitions between the principal stakeholders. The CIO and their staff would be able to assess in the requirements review process what worked and what did not work well for the organization.
In assessing the current process, the CIO and his team will align their thinking process with the pain points and correct the existing system. They are not going to build the system in a fresh light. A new system that meets the needs of stakeholders can be developed. For everybody, this is a win-win situation. The point of view of MD is therefore more logical and related.
b)
In the particular case, the most logical and comprehensive system analysis method is:
Primary stakeholder requirements collection: Primary stakeholders using the system must be consulted on their specific requirements and needs. It is also necessary to consider the limitations identified by stakeholders.
Comprehension of existing system and pain points: the current system can be analysed based on requirements collection and pain points can be emphasized in the current system.
A new system that will win for everyone: the new system must primarily comply with the needs of the stakeholders.
Presentation and approval of the system blueprint to stakeholders
Development and implementation of the system: system development can be carried out by the agile method of sprinting.
Monitoring and control of the system: to check for performance deviations, the system implemented should be observed. In order to monitor deviations, specific intervention can be implemented.
Given:
<span>stockton company adjusted trial balance december 31
cash 7,530
accounts receivable 2,100
prepaid expenses 700
equipment 13,700
accumulated depreciation 1,100
accounts payable 1,900
notes payable 4,300
common stock 1,000
retained earnings 12,940
dividends 790
fees earned 9,250
wages expense 2,500
rent expense 1,960
utilities expense 775
depreciation expense 250
miscellaneous expense 185
To determine the total assets, we only have to consider the following:
</span>cash 7,530
accounts receivable 2,100
prepaid expenses 700
equipment 13,700
<span>accumulated depreciation <u> (1,100) </u>
</span>Total assets: 22,930 CHOICE D.
NET INCOME:
fees earned 9,250
<span>wages expense (2,500) </span>
<span>rent expense (1,960) </span>
<span>utilities expense (775) </span>
<span>depreciation expense (250) </span>
<span>miscellaneous expense <u> (185)</u>
</span><span>Net Income 3,580
LIABILITIES AND S.H.E
</span>accounts payable 1,900
<span>notes payable 4,300 </span>
<span>common stock 1,000 </span>
<span>retained earnings 12,940 </span>
<span>dividends (790)
</span>Net Income <u> 3,580</u>
TOTAL LIABILITIES & SHE 22,930
Answer:
The summary of the accident, calculate the total dollar value of the property damage Stephanie caused is explained below in detail.
Explanation:
The term 100/300/100 coverage indicates that a character has coverage of $100,000 physical damage mortgage coverage per person, $300,000 total physical damage mortgage insurance per accident, and $100,000 property loss accountability per accident.
So, in case Stephanie prompted a property and accident destruction, then $1,00000 will be sustained by the insurance corporation and above this value, it will be paid by Stephanie.
Answer:
b. Organizational justice.
Explanation:
In reacting to the allegations that Google engages in "systematic compensation disparities against women" and the request of payroll records by the U.S. Department of Labor in 2017.
Google annually reviews pay levels and denies any disparities against women. In reviewing pay levels, Google's management is focused on organizational justice. The concept of organizational justice was first introduced by Greenberg in the year 1987.
Organizational justice is an organizational concept that describes an employee's perception of decisions, fairness, behaviors and actions with respect to how these employees are affected or influenced both psychologically and other wise at work.
Organisational justice deals with all workplace related activities, ranging from salary to relationships between superiors and their subordinates, equal rights, gender equality and even access to training and promotion.
For the purpose of trust, loyalty and progressive work attitudes, it is very important that organizations prioritize organizational justice.
Hence, if Google focuses on organizational justice, it will help to build trust and address the issue of pay level disparities among its employees.
