As of now Southwest is a stage in front of their rivals. They can ascribe this to the choices they made to limit their cost, their clients have seen the advantages of these choices. Since flights run assuming regardless of the possibility that they are half full, the organization goes out on a limb of gaining low income for that flight. Since the organization remains in an endless value war with its rivals they are compelled to keeps ticket costs low, this could bring about lost income and a plausibility of cutting overhead and creation cost. This could likewise impact the planning of workers. The dread of expanding oil costs still stays high on the organization's radar.
I would say that if the manager was consulted on the budget then he/she couldn't complain that it was unrealistic and impossible to meet and if they had any problems with it then they should have spoken up when the budget was being formulated.
Answer:
To explain the answer is given as follows,
Explanation:
<span>Diminishing marginal returns - By investing in hiring an additional worker, Michelle does not receive twice the productivity compared to when she had only 1 worker. Productivity only increased by roughly 50%. I would consider the worker to be more of an investment, and thus count as diminishing marginal returns, rather than decreasing returns to scale, which I consider to apply more to assets, such as machines for manufacturing or in the case of the scenario, an additional kiln.</span>