Answer: Future Value FV = 169,500
Explanation:
The information given to us are;
Present value PV = 113000
Interest R = 10% = 0.01
number of years T = 5
Future value FV = ?
So using the formula
FV = PV * [1 + (R * T)],
We input our value
FV = 113000 * [ 1 + ( 0.1 * 5) ]
FV = 113000 * [ 1 + 0.5]
FV = 113000 * 1.5
FV = 169500
Answer:
$16,100
Explanation:
Add the total manufacturing costs for the year to determine the cost of goods manufactured during the current year. Also remember to account for change in work in process inventory.
Answer:
1. A statement of company policy regarding refunds
Explanation:
A statement of company policy regarding refunds would give clarity to the customer on the reason why the request for refund was denied.
Answer:
$ 13.167 / unit
Explanation:
Data provided:
Beginning material cost = $ 126,000
Number of units in work in progress = 12,000 units
Material cost assigned = $ 32,000
thus,
the total material cost involved = $ 126,000 + $ 32,000 = $ 158,000
Now,
the material cost per equivalent unit = Total material cost involved / number of units
on substituting the values, we have
the material cost per equivalent unit = $ 158,000 / 12,000
or
= $ 13.167 / unit
Explanation:
The long-running debate between the ‘rational design’ and ‘emergent process’ schools of strategy formation has involved caricatures of firms' strategic planning processes, but little empirical evidence of whether and how companies plan. Despite the presumption that environmental turbulence renders conventional strategic planning all but impossible, the evidence from the corporate sector suggests that reports of the demise of strategic planning are greatly exaggerated. The goal of this paper is to fill this empirical gap by describing the characteristics of the strategic planning systems of multinational, multibusiness companies faced with volatile, unpredictable business environments. In-depth case studies of the planning systems of eight of the world's largest oil companies identified fundamental changes in the nature and role of strategic planning since the end of the 1970s. The findings point to a possible reconciliation of ‘design’ and ‘process’ approaches to strategy formulation. The study pointed to a process of planned emergence in which strategic planning systems provided a mechanism for coordinating decentralized strategy formulation within a structure of demanding performance targets and clear corporate guidelines. The study shows that these planning systems fostered adaptation and responsiveness, but showed limited innovation and analytical sophistication
