Answer:
The major challenges with the current information systems budgeting and prioritisation process are:
- The focus was overly on how the budgeted monies will be spent and how much return it will bring to the business. Not much thought was given to how the monies required for the expenses will be generated. Budgeting not only looks at the outflow, it examines existing and potential sources of income/revenue. When this is balanced, the company can integrate such into their marketing strategy armed with what information about the market that they possess.
- The prioritization is all wrong. Budgeting is because there is are organisational objectives to be met with limited resources.
Because those resources are limited, the said objectives have to be prioritized. Income-generating projects must hold more priority over non-revenue generating activities.
If there is a strategic link between the company's Information Systems upgrade and an increase in its bottom line, then it must be given priority.
Cheers!
Answer:
Autocratic leadership.
Explanation:
Autocratic leadership style: These leaders take all decisions by themselves without asking anyone else for suggestion or anything. Such decisions may not be suitable for the employees working under him or his organization's resources aren't capable enough to work as he wishes and in turn hurts his own organization.
- For example, let's assume that, <em>a manager wants to make 20 eggs in an hour, but machine is only able to make 10 in an hour because it needs to cool down before going further. </em>
<em />
Answer:
D
Explanation:
Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining internal control to achieve the objectives of effective and efficient operations, reliable financial reporting, and compliance with applicable laws and regulations.
Answer:
Louise's defense is not valid. She was involved in an Implied-in-fact contracts
Explanation:
Implied-in-fact Contracts
This is a contract that is legally enforceable as a result of an agreement made by conduct and from assumed intentions. These conducts and assumed intentions are derived from the relationship among the involved parties.
When Louise saw Midcity Painters painting her house and made no comments, she became involved a implied-in-fact contract. The conduct of Midcity to paint her house and her conduct to be quiet infact formed a legally enforceable contract.
Louise, therefore, liable. However, due to the lack of contractual terms such as payment for the job done, Louise will be liable for the nominally or typically acceptable rate for such a job done. For instance, if a normal house paint job costs $2000, Louise is liable to pay $2000 for the implied contract.
