Answer: Satisficing
Explanation:
Satisficing could be described as a decision making method where a manageable result is chosen rather than the optimal solution. The aim of choosing such is just to go with it for the moment before better options are either tested, affordable or reliable. Some managers consider this method of administration, in order to make decisions on time than having backlog of works which might time to get a proper or perfect conclusion.
Satisficing is a decision-making strategy that aims for a satisfactory or adequate result, rather than the optimal solution.
Answer:
d. synergism.
Explanation:
Given that the term synergism is a term that describes the process of interaction between two or more parts or groups to give rise to a combined result that is greater than the sum of its parts or groups.
Hence, in this case, when the managers in a marketing department produce a marketing plan that is "greater than the sum of the parts contributed by individual managers," this is an example of: SYNERGISM
Hello there. ;D
<span>The pure food and drug act was an example of progressive legislation to protect consumer
Answer: True</span>
<span>This action of Elias is based on the expectancy theory. The expectancy theory is based on motivating people through expectations. In order to maximize the effort that an individual is willing to give, you must provide some sort of motivation. Here, Elias has provided motivation in the form of monthly awards. This will give the employees more incentive to perform.</span>
Answer:
The correct answers are:
B. External Benefit.
A. External Benefit.
External Cost.
Explanation:
First, we will define the terms External Benefit and External Cost and compare the definitions with the scenarios above.
External benefit is a situation in which an activity or transaction has a positive impact or benefit on a party that is not part of the activity or transaction. This means that the activity or transaction offers a benefit to a party that has no say in the activity.
External Cost is the direct opposite of External Benefit, in that External Cost has a negative impact or cost on a party that is not part of an activity or transaction.
Comparing the definitions to the scenarios above, we can see that the apartment next door to a garage where local bands practice offers an External Benefit to Allison, if she loves staying late and listening to music. In this case, we can see that she has no part in the activity, but benefits from it.
Also, the apartment next door to a donut shop that opens at 5am will offer an External benefit to Allison, if she wakes up early and loves the smell of donuts. In this case, we see that Allison does not partake in the making of the donuts in the donut shop next door, but she benefits from the activity.
However, if Allison's roommate hates loud music and the smell of donuts makes her sick, she will reject both apartment because of External Cost they both offer to her.