Answer:
reward power
Explanation:
Reward power -
It refers to as the method of using rewards , so that the employee follows a particular instructions , is referred to as reward power .
The reward acts as a bait so that the employee can follow any order of the senior .
As from the given scenario of the question ,
The person works some extra hours in order to get a good increment .
Hence , from the given scenario of the question ,
The correct answer is reward power .
Answer:
B. The denial is justifiable given the level of interbrand competition.
Explanation:
Anti trust law only applicable if you can proof that two or more producers in the same industry work together in order to assert their control over the market. They can do this through price fixing, controlling the amount of supply, etc.
This condition<em> can't be found</em> in the scenario above.
The denial that done by PepsiCo is justifiable because in a really competitive market, a company need to impose a strict requirement on which entities they should form a dealership relation with. If PepsiCo choose the wrong dealers, Its competitors could easily taken over the market and resulted in a huge amount of loss for the company.
Answer:
The businesses paid $24 billion in entrepreneurial ability. This value comes from subtracting the wages, rent and interest from the total amount of businesses' purchase. In this case 170 - 88 - 24 - 34 = 24.
Explanation:
This value can be understood as goodwill that households are recognized for their ideas and can bring a future return to the businesses. The businesses had assessed the future stream of cash the household could bring and, basing our guess on businesses behaving rationally, and they found that 170 was an amount that will recognize these future opportunities
Answer:gfbvcxb
gcdb
Explanation:p;/'l;'
bnmvb nmdtyu6tut56u6jtyiop;ol0
