In an organization with compensation that has <u>hybrid outcome interdependence</u>, a <u>given </u>portion of the employee's pay depends on the team's output and performance.
Hybrid outcome interdependence refers to the terms of employment in which a team’s output and performance determines a specified portion of the members’ salary. So, if their performance fails to meet given targets or standards, members will end up getting lower pay.
On the other hand, there are incentive structures linked to such arrangements, so that overachieving the targets would lead to members receiving a bonus.
Hybrid outcome interdependence is a key corporate strategy to ensure employees put in their best effort, as incentive and disincentive structures are built into the pay structure.
To learn more about hybrid outcome interdependence: brainly.com/question/28195254
#SPJ4
Answer:
See Below
Explanation:
Expected value is the sum of the products of the probability and payoff of each.
<u>Wager 1:</u>
probability of heads and tails, both is 0.5
Win = 440
Loose = 110
So,
Expected Value = 440(0.5) + (-110)(0.5) = 220 - 55 = $165
<u>Wager 2:</u>
Similar to wager 1
Win = 770
Loose = 220
So,
Expected value = 770(0.5) + (-220)(0.5) = 385 - 110 = $275
2nd wager is better, in this sense.
Answer:
Explanation:
Using the EOQ Formula = EOQ
D = Demand = 773
O = Ordering Cost =28
H = holding Cost = 11*33% =3.63
So we have :
EOQ=
EOQ= 
EOQ=
EOQ= 
EOQ= 109.20196
Previous per unit order cost = 28/773 =0.03622
No of Orders = D/o
No of Orders = 773/109.20196 =7.0786
Cost per order =109.20196*0.03622 =3.9555
Total order cost= 7.0786*3.9555=27.9998
At EOQ holding Cost is equal to Order Cost
New Order cost =27.9998
Holding Cost = 27.9998
New cost As per EOQ = 56
Previous (33+28) = 61
Net Saving = 5
Answer: I will vote in favor of the bill.
Explanation:
Based on the above scenario, I would vote in favor of the bill. The argument here is in the case of bankruptcy, if an individual is willing to pay their dues but because of unavoidable financial circumstances, the individual seeks more time or other assistance which can help so that the person will later pay. I believe it's a good idea which should be supported by the law.
The court should have the right to decide terms of mortgages to help debtors in order for them to pay their debts in future rather than forcing them to leave the house. It will also help the country deal with issue of facilitating housing to maximum number of individuals.
In my opinion, the judge's decision should be given prime importance as the judge must evaluate the intention of the debtor and the capability of the debtor to pay the debts
Answer:
a) attached below
b) P( profit ) = TR(q) - TC(q)
c) attached below
d) -$5000 ( loss )
Explanation:
Given data:
Fixed Cost = $10,000
Material cost per unit = $0.15
Labor cost per unit = $0.10
Revenue per unit = $0.65
<u>a) Influence diagram to calculate profit </u>
attached below
<u>b) derive a mathematical model for calculating profit.</u>
VC = variable cost per unit , LC = per unit labor cost , MC = per unit marginal cost, TC = Total cost of manufacturing , FC = Fixed cost, q = quantity, TR = Total revenue, R = revenue per unit
VC = LC + MC
TC (q) = FC + ( VC * q )
TR (q) = R * q
P( profit ) = TR(q) - TC(q) ------------ ( 1 )
c) attached below
<u>d) If Cox Electrics makes 12,000 units of the new product </u>
The resulting profit = -$5000
q = 12
P = TR ( q ) - TC ( q )
= ( R * q ) - ( Fc + ( Vc * q ) )
= ( 0.65 * 12000 ) - ( 10,000 + ( 0.25 * 12000 )
= -$5200
