I think the answer is A. Sorting and charting data from surveys
Answer:
Contract
Explanation:
From the question we are informed about instance, whereby In order to purchase the parts from the supplier, Torc Tools Corp. had to agree with all of the terms set forth in the document the supplier provided which detailed the rights and obligations of the supplier and Torc Tools Corp. In this case, This document is a type of contract. A contract can be regarded as written agreement that binds. Contracts can be explained as documents which define responsibilities as well as roles, and “Work” which is still under the construction Contract, this document can be seen as one that is legally-binding on involved parties, this could be between Owner and Contractor. It do contains information such as General Conditions as well as Special Conditions and Scope of Work.
Answer:
Fixed Component of the selling, general adn adminsitrative cost 147,000
Explanation:
We calculate the fixed cost using the high low method.
![\left[\begin{array}{ccc}High&7000&294700\\Low&6000&273600\\Difference&1000&21100\\\end{array}\right]](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=%5Cleft%5B%5Cbegin%7Barray%7D%7Bccc%7DHigh%267000%26294700%5C%5CLow%266000%26273600%5C%5CDifference%261000%2621100%5C%5C%5Cend%7Barray%7D%5Cright%5D)
We subtract high from low the difference is that 1,000 units generates 21,100 dollars of cost
variable cost per unit then will be:
21,100 / 1,000 = 21.1
we now calculate fixed cost:
Total cost = variable x Q + fixed cost
When Q = 6,000 total cost: 294700
294,700 = 21.1 (6,000) + Fixed Cost
Fixed Cost = 147,000
The common arguments that are in favor of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) are:
Public image of the company.
Moral Justification.
Public Support for business.
Long run survival of the organization and the public both.
Common arguments that go against CSR are:
Ambiguity in business policies.
Moral Responsibility.
Shareholders' rights
Explanation:
Against
The public should perceive the company as their savior and not their enemy. CSR helps a company stay in the good books of the public. If a cigarette manufacturing company opens a profit free farm or a recreational park for the public, it will ensure the maintenance of a positive image.
Morally, when a company takes something from the public e.g their clean air, or clean environment, then morally the company is bound to give something in return e.g a water filtration plant.
CSR can lead the public to support the company during times of need. A company during tough times might get several volunteers if it is known to have given much to the public.
Co-dependence is essential for the survival of both the organization and the public. Companies excel if the public likes them. If a company has been known to have only take and never give, then the balance is disturbed.
Against:
Not every company has the resources or interest to focus on one problem. Therefore, ambiguous policies of different organizations lead to partial working on one social issue or environmental issue. it leads the problem to be partially solved and not completely eliminated.
Company might morally owe the public in some domain but might not have the resources to fix that particular problem. It may leave the company in a moral debt. In order to compensate, a company may go beyond its capabilities which will not result in mutual benefit. Only one party will be happy.
CSR activities require resources. A company has several stakeholders and all might nit agree to spending/donating their profits for CSR activities. This may sound 'selfish' but public doesn't always know what the stakeholders are going through. CSR in such a case may deprive a stakeholder from a fraction of his share of profit.
