Answer:
Job sharing
Explanation:
Job sharing here is a technique whereby the two people share a full-time job responsibilities into a part-time roster to finish off the job one person has been doing in a single full-time job. This redesign technique usually occurs where the workers are looking for a way to reduce their workload without quitting the job entirely or done to give more attention to a loved one at home.
Answer:
Small
Explanation:
Fixed costs are the costs that do not change when output level changes, while variable costs are costs that change as output quantity changes.
When a production process is capacity constrained, it implies that there is a factor that does not allow it to produce more output. Examples of such factors are minor bottlenecks, constrained designs and resources, and others.
A process is said to be efficient when it can avoid waste of resources in producing desired output.
Efficiency improvement therefore occurs when more output can be produced with less resources.
In the question, given that the process is currently capacity-constrained, efficiency improvement will result in producing more output at higher costs because of high variable costs despite that the process has low fixed costs.
As a result, the impact of an efficiency improvement will be small because producing more output will result in incurring higher cost due to high variable costs that change as quantity of output changes. That is, the impact of efficiency improvement will be small because high variable costs with low fixed cost will result in higher production cost.
The answer is D The students conclusion shows experimental bias
Answer:
AFS 2004 market price decline exceeded 2005 market price recovery
No No
The security cannot be classified as available-for-sale because the unrealized gains and losses are recognized in the Income Statement. Unrealized gains and losses on available-for-sale securities are recognized in owners' equity, not earnings.
The second part of the question is somewhat ambiguous. The 2004 price decline could exceed or be exceeded by the 2005 price recovery. The loss in the first year is not related in amount and does not constrain the realized gain in the second year.
The way to answer the question is to read the right column heading as implying that the earlier price decline must exceed the later price recovery. With that interpretation, the correct answer is no.
For example, assume a cost of $10 and a market value of $4 at the end of the first year. An unrealized loss of $6 is recognized in earnings. During the second year, the security is sold for $12. A realized gain of $8 is recognized-the increase in the market value from the end of the first year to the sale in the second year. Thus, the market decline in the first year did not exceed the recovery in year two. (It could have exceeded the recovery in year two but there is no requirement that it must.)
Explanation:
