Decision imaking: Decision imaking, iprocess iand ilogic ithrough iwhich iindividuals iarrive iat ia idecision. iDifferent imodels iof idecision imaking ilead ito idramatically idifferent ianalyses iand ipredictions. iDecision-making itheories irange ifrom iobjective irational idecision imaking, iwhich iassumes ithat iindividuals iwill imake ithe isame idecisions igiven ithe isame iinformation iand ipreferences, ito ithe imore isubjective ilogic iof iappropriateness, iwhich iassumes ithat ispecific iinstitutional iand iorganizational icontexts imatter iin ithe idecisions ithat iindividuals imake “Decision-making involves the selection of a course of action from among two or more possible alternatives in order to arrive at a solution for a given problem”. As ievidenced iby ithe iforegone idefinitions, idecision imaking iprocess iis ia iconsultative iaffair idone iby ia icomity iof iprofessionals ito idrive ibetter ifunctioning iof iany iorganization. iThereby, iit iis ia icontinuous iand idynamic iactivity ithat ipervades iall iother iactivities ipertaining ito ithe iorganization. iSince iit iis ian iongoing iactivity, idecision imaking iprocess iplays ivital iimportance iin ithe ifunctioning iof ian iorganization. iSince iintellectual iminds iare iinvolved iin ithe iprocess iof idecision imaking, iit irequires isolid iscientific iknowledge icoupled iwith iskills iand iexperience iin iaddition ito imental imaturity. Further, idecision imaking iprocess ican ibe iregarded ias icheck iand ibalance isystem ithat ikeeps ithe iorganisation igrowing iboth iin ivertical iand ilinear idirections. iIt imeans ithat idecision imaking iprocess iseeks ia igoal. iThe igoals iare ipre-set ibusiness iobjectives, icompany imissions iand iits ivision. iTo iachieve ithese igoals, icompany imay iface ilot iof iobstacles iin iadministrative, ioperational, imarketing iwings iand ioperational idomains. iSuch iproblems iare isorted iout ithrough icomprehensive idecision imaking iprocess. iNo idecision icomes ias iend iin iitself, isince iin imay ievolve inew iproblems ito isolve. iWhen ione iproblem iis isolved ianother iarises iand iso ion, isuch ithat idecision imaking iprocess, ias isaid iearlier, iis ia icontinuous iand idynamic. Managers iat iall ilevels iand iin iall iorganization imake idecision. iThey imake ichoices. iIn ifact, idecision imaking iis ithe iessence iof imanagerial iwok,. iIn iaccordance iwith ithe irequirement iof ilevel ithe imanagers iat: 1. Top ilevel imake idecisions iabout iorganizations igoal ietc. 2. 2 iMiddle iand ilower ilevel imake idecisions iabout iproduction ischedules iproduct iquality iproblems ietc. A idecision iis ia ichoice ifrom itwo ior imore ialternatives. iIn ithis ichapter iwe ifocus ion i‘how imanagers imake idecision’. iIn ivery isimple isense idecision imaking iis i‘chossing iamong ialternatives’. iHowever, idecision imaking iis ia iprocess iand iis inot ia isimple iact iof ichoosing iamong ialternatives. Decision imaki.

1. Decision imaking:
Decision imaking, iprocess iand ilogic ithrough iwhich
iindividuals iarrive iat ia idecision. iDifferent imodels iof
idecision imaking ilead ito idramatically idifferent ianalyses
iand ipredictions. iDecision-making itheories irange ifrom
iobjective irational idecision imaking, iwhich iassumes ithat
iindividuals iwill imake ithe isame idecisions igiven ithe isame
iinformation iand ipreferences, ito ithe imore isubjective ilogic
iof iappropriateness, iwhich iassumes ithat ispecific
iinstitutional iand iorganizational icontexts imatter iin ithe
idecisions ithat iindividuals imake “Decision-making involves
the selection of a course of action from among two or more
possible alternatives in order to arrive at a solution for a given
problem”.
As ievidenced iby ithe iforegone idefinitions, idecision imaking
iprocess iis ia iconsultative iaffair idone iby ia icomity iof
iprofessionals ito idrive ibetter ifunctioning iof iany
iorganization. iThereby, iit iis ia icontinuous iand idynamic
iactivity ithat ipervades iall iother iactivities ipertaining ito ithe
iorganization. iSince iit iis ian iongoing iactivity, idecision
imaking iprocess iplays ivital iimportance iin ithe ifunctioning
iof ian iorganization. iSince iintellectual iminds iare iinvolved
iin ithe iprocess iof idecision imaking, iit irequires isolid
iscientific iknowledge icoupled iwith iskills iand iexperience iin
iaddition ito imental imaturity.
Further, idecision imaking iprocess ican ibe iregarded ias icheck
iand ibalance isystem ithat ikeeps ithe iorganisation igrowing
iboth iin ivertical iand ilinear idirections. iIt imeans ithat
idecision imaking iprocess iseeks ia igoal. iThe igoals iare ipre-
set ibusiness iobjectives, icompany imissions iand iits ivision.
iTo iachieve ithese igoals, icompany imay iface ilot iof
iobstacles iin iadministrative, ioperational, imarketing iwings
iand ioperational idomains. iSuch iproblems iare isorted iout
ithrough icomprehensive idecision imaking iprocess. iNo

2. idecision icomes ias iend iin iitself, isince iin imay ievolve
inew iproblems ito isolve. iWhen ione iproblem iis isolved
ianother iarises iand iso ion, isuch ithat idecision imaking
iprocess, ias isaid iearlier, iis ia icontinuous iand idynamic.
Managers iat iall ilevels iand iin iall iorganization imake
idecision. iThey imake ichoices. iIn ifact, idecision imaking iis
ithe iessence iof imanagerial iwok,. iIn iaccordance iwith ithe
irequirement iof ilevel ithe imanagers iat:
1. Top ilevel imake idecisions iabout iorganizations igoal ietc.
2. 2 iMiddle iand ilower ilevel imake idecisions iabout
iproduction ischedules iproduct iquality iproblems ietc.
A idecision iis ia ichoice ifrom itwo ior imore ialternatives. iIn
ithis ichapter iwe ifocus ion i‘how imanagers imake idecision’.
iIn ivery isimple isense idecision imaking iis i‘chossing iamong
ialternatives’. iHowever, idecision imaking iis ia iprocess iand
iis inot ia isimple iact iof ichoosing iamong ialternatives.
Decision imaking iis Ian ieight isteps iprocess. iThe iProcess iis
irelevant ito ipersonal idecisions iand ibusiness idecision. iThe
isteps iin iprocess iare:
1. Identify ia iproblem
2. Identify idecision ito ithe icriteria
3. Allocate ithe iweights ito ithe icriteria
4. Developing ialternatives
5. Analyzing ialternatives
6. Select ian ialternatives
7. Implementing ithe ialternative
8. Evaluating idecision ieffectiveness
Program iDecision iand iNon iProgram idecision:
Program iDecision:
Programmed idecisions iare ithose ithat iare itraditionally imade
iusing istandard ioperating iprocedures ior iother iwell-defined
imethods. iThese iare iroutines ithat ideal iwith ifrequently
ioccurring isituations, isuch ias irequests ifor ileaves iof
iabsence iby iemployees. iProgrammed idecisions ido inot
inecessarily iremain iconfined ito isimple iissues, isuch ias
ivacation ipolicies ior isimilar isuch ithings; ithey iare ialso

3. iused ito ideal iwith ivery icomplex iissues, isuch ias ithe itypes
iof itests ithat ia idoctor ineeds ito iconduct ibefore iperforming
ia imajor isurgery ion ia ipatient iwith idiabetes.
Programmed idecisions iare iroutine iand irepetitive, iand ithe
iorganization itypically idevelops ispecific iways ito ihandle
ithem. iA iprogrammed idecision imight iinvolve idetermining
ihow iproducts iwill ibe iarranged ion ithe ishelves iof ia
isupermarket. iFor ithis ikind iof iroutine, irepetitive iproblem,
istandard iarrangement idecisions iare itypically imade
iaccording ito iestablished imanagement iguidelines.
Structured
Lower ilevels i
Repetitive/ iRoutine
Available i
Specific
Short
Procedures, irules
Policies
Non iprogram iDecision:
Non iprogrammed idecisions iare itypically ione ishot idecisions
ithat iare iusually iless istructured ithan iprogrammed idecision.
A iunique iand inonrecurring idecision ithat irequire ia icustom
imade isolution.
Unstructured
Upper ilevel
Unusual
Ambiguous
Not iwell idefined i
Long
Judgement iand icreativity
Effective iDecision:
Today, ibusiness iworld irevolves iaround imaking idecisions.
iThe idecision iare ioften irisky iand iwith iincomplete
iinformation iunder itime ipressure. iMost imanagers imake ione
idecision iafter ianother iwithout ibreak. i
The ichain iof idecision iis iendless. iBad idecision ican icost

4. imillions. iManagers ineed ito imake ieffective idecision itoday.
iHere iare isome iguidelines ito imake ieffective idecisions:
1. Understand icultural idifferences.
Mangers ialways iand ieverywhere iwant ito imake igood
idecisions. iHowever, ithere iis ino isingle i‘best’ iway
ieverywhere iin ithe iworld. iThe ibest iway iat ia iplace
idepends ion ithe ivalues, ibeliefs, iattitudes iand ibehavioural
ipatterns iof ithe ipeople iinvolved ithere. iTo ibe ian ieffective
idecision imaker, iA imanager imust ikeep iin imind ithe
icultural isystem iof ia iplace.
2. Know ithe itime ito iquits
When iit ibecomes ievident ithat ia idecision iis inot iworking,
ido inot ibe iafraid iquit. iMany idecision imakers iblock
inegative iinformation. iThey ido inot iwant ito ibelieve ithat
itheir idecision iwas ibad. iIn ia idynamic ienvironment ithe
ithinking iwill inot iwork.
3. iAn ieffective idecision imaking iprocess.
a. It ifocuses ion iimportant i
b. It iis ilogical iand iconsistent i
c. It itakes iinto iaccount iboth isubjective iand iobjective
ithinking.
d. It irequires ionly inecessary iinformation ito iresolve ia
iproblem
4. Maintain iability ito ispot ithe iunexpected iand iquickly
iadapt ito ichanged ienvironment.
a) They idefer ito ithe iexperts ion ithe ifrontline
b) iThey ilet iunexpected isituations iprovide ithe isolution.
c) They iembrace icomplexity
Rationality:
1. In imodern iWestern isocieties ithe imost icommon
iunderstanding iof idecision imaking iis ithat iit iis irational—
self-interested, ipurposeful, iand iefficient. iDuring irational
idecision imaking, iindividuals iwill isurvey ialternatives,
ievaluate iconsequences ifrom ieach ialternative, iand ifinally
ido iwhat ithey ibelieve ihas ithe ibest iconsequences ifor
ithemselves. iThe ikeys ito ia idecision iare ithe iquality iof

5. iinformation iabout ialternatives iand iindividual ipreferences.
iModern ieconomics iis ibuilt ion ithis iunderstanding iof ihow
iindividuals imake idecisions.
2. Rational idecision imaking ibecomes iefficient iwhen
iinformation iis imaximized iand ipreferences iare isatisfied
iusing ithe iminimum iof iresources. iIn imodern isocieties,
irational idecision imaking ican ioccur iin imarkets ior ifirms.
iBoth iassume ithat iindividuals iwill iact irationally,
imaximizing iself-interest, ibut ieach iworks imost iefficiently
iunder idifferent iconditions. iMarkets iare imost iefficient
iwhen iboth ibuyers iand isellers iexist, iwhen iproducts ior
iservices iare idiscrete iso ithat ithe iexchange ican ibe ione-
time, iwhen iinformation iabout ia iproduct ior iservice i(such
ias iits itechnology ior imeans iof ievaluation) iis ibroadly
iunderstood, iand iwhen ithere iare ienforced ipenalties ifor
icheating.
3. Lacking ithese iconditions, iconsensual iexchange icannot
ioccur, iand irational iindividuals iwill itry ito icheat iothers ito
imaximize itheir igain. iIn ithese icases ia ihierarchical
iorganization iis imore iefficient. iThe iGerman isociologist
iMax iWeber idescribed ihow ifactories iand ibureaucracies
ibecame idramatically imore iefficient ithrough igrowing
itechnical iexpertise iand, imore iimportantly, ia inew idivision
iof ilabour, iwhich idivided iwork, ispecialized iexpertise, iand
icoordinated iindividuals iin ia irule-based ihierarchy.
iBureaucracies idecomposed icomplex itechnologies iinto
imanageable ipieces, ithen iallowed iindividuals ito ispecialize
iand imaster ia idefined iskill iset. iUsing ia iclear ihierarchy
iin iwhich ieach iposition iis icontrolled iand isupervised
iaccording ito ia istable iand inonarbitrary isystem iof irules,
ieach iindividual’s iwork iand iexpertise icould ibe icoordinated
ito iachieve iorganizational igoals, iranging ifrom iwinning
iwars ito imaking idresses.Satisficing iAnd iBounded
iRationality:
In ithe i1940s, iorganization itheorists ibegan ito ichallenge
itwo iassumptions inecessary ifor irational idecision imaking ito

6. ioccur, iboth iof iwhich iwere imade iobvious iin icases iwhere
imarkets ifailed iand ihierarchies iwere inecessary. iFirst,
iinformation iis inever iperfect, iand iindividuals ialways imake
idecisions ibased ion iimperfect iinformation. iSecond,
iindividuals ido inot ievaluate iall ipossible ialternatives ibefore
imaking ia ichoice. iThis ibehaviour iis idirectly irelated ito ithe
icosts iof igathering iinformation, ibecause iinformation
ibecomes iprogressively imore idifficult iand icostly ito igather.
iInstead iof ichoosing ithe ibest ialternative ipossible,
iindividuals iactually ichoose ithe ifirst isatisfactory
ialternative ithey ifind. iThe iAmerican isocial iscientist
iHerbert iSimon ilabeled ithis iprocess i“satisficing” iand
iconcluded ithat ihuman idecision imaking icould iat ibest
iexhibit ibounded irationality. iAlthough iobjective irationality
ileads ito ionly ione ipossible irational iconclusion, isatisficing
ican ilead ito imany irational iconclusions, idepending iupon
ithe iinformation iavailable iand ithe iimagination iof ithe
idecision imaker.
Simon iargued ithat iotherwise iirrational iindividuals ican
ibehave irationally iin ithe iright icontext, iparticularly iwithin
ia iformal iorganization. iOrganizations ican istructure, ior
ibound, iindividuals’ idecisions iby imanipulating ithe ipremises
ion iwhich idecisions iare imade. iOrganizations ican ifilter ior
iemphasize iinformation, ibringing ifacts ito ian iindividual’s
iattention iand iidentifying icertain ifacts ias iimportant iand
ilegitimate. iIndividuals iin ihierarchies ican itake imost iof
iwhat ihappens iaround ithem ifor igranted, iconcentrating ionly
ion ia ifew ikey idecisions. iHierarchies iare iefficient ibecause
ithey iensure ithat ithe icorrect iinformation igets ito ithe
icorrect idecision imakers iand ithat ithe icorrect iperson iis
imaking ithe idecisions. iAt ithe isame itime, ihierarchical
iorganizations ican isocialize iindividuals ito irefrain ifrom
icheating iby icreating ivalue idecision ipremises ithat iunderlie
idecision imakers’ ijudgments ion iwhat iis iright ior igood ito
ido. iThese ivalues, ibeliefs, ior inorms ican icome ifrom
ifamily, ifrom ischool, ior ifrom iwithin ithe iorganization, ibut

7. ithe iorganization ican istructure ienvironments iso ithat ithe
imost idesirable ivalue iwill ibe imost isalient iat ithe itime iof
idecision.
Hierarchical iorganizations ican istructure ifactual iand ivalue
idecision ipremises iso ithat ithe irange iof iaction ibecomes iso
inarrow ithat ionly ione ialternative iremains: ithe irational
ichoice. iStructuring idecision ipremises ican ibe idone iby
idirectly imanaging iinformation, iselectively irecruiting
imembers, itraining imembers, iand icreating iclosed ipromotion
ipatterns.
Organizations ibecome irational iin ipursuing itheir imissions
ithrough iwhat iSimon icalled iends-means ichains. iLeaders
iset ithe iorganizational imission, ifind ia iset iof imeans ifor
iachieving ithe imission, itake ieach iof ithose imeans ias ia
isubgoal, iand ithen ifind imeans ifor ithe isubgoals iand iso
ion, iuntil igoals iexist ifor ievery imember iof ithe
iorganization. iLeaders ithus icreate ia ihierarchy iof igoals, iin
iwhich ieach iorganizational ilevel’s igoals iare ian iend
irelative ito ithe ilevels ibelow iit iand ia imeans irelative ito
ithe ilevels iabove iit. iEach iindividual’s iwork ithus ibecomes
ia ismall ipart iof iaccomplishing ithe iorganization’s imission.
Escalation iof iCommitment:
Self-Justification iTheory. iSelf-justification itheory iprovides
ione iexplanation ifor iwhy ipeople iescalate icommitment ito
itheir ipast iinvestments. iFeeling ipersonally iresponsible ifor
ian iinvestment ithat iturns isour iintensifies ithe ithreat
iassociated iwith ifailure iand iincreases ia idecision imaker’s
imotivation ito ijustify ithe ioriginal ichoice ito iherself.
iNegative ifeedback ion ia ipast iinvestment idecision icalls ithe
ivalidity iof ithe ioriginal idecision iinto iquestion iand iis
idissonant iwith ia idecision imaker’s inatural idesire ito isee
iherself ias icompetent. iMany idecision imakers iattempt ito
ieliminate ithis iconflict iby iconvincing ithemselves ithat itheir
ifailing iventures iwill iturn iaround iif ithey isimply iinvest
imore iresources. iTo ido iso iand isucceed iwould iprove ithat

8. ithe ioriginal ichoice iwas ivalid iand ieliminate ithe i“cognitive
idissonance” icreated iby ithe iinitial inegative ifeedback.
When ia idecision imaker idiscovers ithat ia ipreviously
iselected icourse iof iaction iis ifailing, ishe iis ifaced iwith ia
idilemma: iShould ishe ipull iout iher iremaining iresources
iand iinvest iin ia imore ipromising ialternative, ior ishould ishe
istick iwith iher iinitial idecision iand ihope ithat ipersistence
iwill ieventually ipay ioff? iManagement ischolars ihave
idocumented ia itendency iof idecision imakers ito iescalate
icommitment ito ipreviously iselected icourses iof iaction iwhen
iobjective ievidence isuggests ithat istaying ithe icourse iis
iunwise. iIn ithese isituations, idecision imakers ioften ifeel
ithey ihave iinvested itoo imuch ito iquit iand imake ithe ierrant
idecision ito i“stick ito itheir iguns”. iThis iencyclopedia ientry
idescribes ithe inature iof i“escalation iof icommitment”, iits
imost ilikely icauses, idecision icharacteristics ithat iexacerbate
iits iseverity, ihow iit ican ibe iprevented, iand iwhy iit iis
iimportant. i
CONCLUSION:
iDecision imaking ias ione iof ithe imost icharacteristic ihuman
imental iactivity iis ishown ito ius i– ior ibetter istudies iand
ithinking iabout iit iare ishowing ithis i– ias ia ivery icomplex
iphenomenon. iThe iimage iof ithe ihuman idecision imaker iis
icircling ibetween iirrationality iand ibounded irationality. iIf
iclassical imodels iof irational i(economic) ihuman itook ihim
ifrom itime iand ispace, iand iput ihim iwith ihis idecision
imaking, ithat ishould ibe irational, ibut iwas inot, iinto icertain
iabstract ifrozen ispace, iwith ithe idevelopment iof iknowledge
ihe iis igradually icoming iback, ito ifind ihimself iin ithe
itheories iof inaturalistic idecision imaking. Rational decision
making is a multi-step process for making choices between
alternatives. The process of rational decision making favours
logic, objectivity, and analysis over subjectivity and insight.
The word “rational” in this context does not mean sane or clear-
headed as it does in the colloquial sense .The iimage iof ithe
ialive iconcrete ihuman, iadapted ito ihis ienvironment, iis

9. iexchanging iits iartificial iabstract iimage.
Bibliography
james. (n.d.). programme. In d. making, www.iednote.com.
https://iedunote.com/programmed-decision-non-programmed-
decision.
krame. (n.d.). britinia. Retrieved from www.brittannica.com:
https://www.britannica.com/topic/decision-making#ref307641
kramer. (2015). management. In m. s. guide.
file:///C:/Users/Hp/Downloads/indecs2009_pp78_89.pdfhttps://
www.managementstudyguide.com/what-is-decision-making.htm.
saesd. (1992). sciencedirect. In kramers.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/00305073849
00175.
Sheet1Minden CompanyBalance sheetAs at March
31AssetsCash9,000Account Receivables54,000Inventory-
0Buildings and Equipments207,000Total
Assets270,000Liabilities & EquityAccount Payable63,000Note
Payable14,500Common Stock180,000Retained
Earning12,500Total Liabilities & Equity270,000- 0
Part IParticularsUOMAmountSelling Price per BoxBhd120Cost
Bhd50Fixed ExpensesBhd10,000Break Even PointBoxes143
Part IISchedule 1: (Projected Sales
Budget)MarchAprilMayJuneJuly50%20%20%Sales
(Boxes)143214257309Sales
(Bhd)17,14325,71430,85737,029July37,029Analysis :As the
company is expecting increase in sales to be 50% in May and
20% (of the previous month sales )in every next month.this
table indicates the increase in both Bhd and boxex as well
Schedule 2: (Collection
Schedule)AprilMayJune17,14325,71430,857AprilMay

10. JuneMayJuneJulyJuneJulyAugust50%30%20%50%30%20%50%
30%20%8,5715,1433,42912,8577,7145,14315,4299,2576,171(In
Bhd)MarchAprilMayJuneCollection62,57118,00026,571Analysi
sAs describe in the problem given 50% of the sales amount will
be recovered in the same month 30% will be received in the
next month and the remaining 20% will be recovered in the 2nd
month of salesSchedule 3: (Purchase
Schedule)April10%TotalMay10%TotalJune10%Total17,1431,71
418,85724,0002,40026,40028,4572,84631,303MarchAprilMayJu
nePurchase (Bhd)18,85726,40031,303Purchase
(Boxes)157220261AnalysisAs mentioned 10% of the sales will
be taken as safety stock so we have to purchase that stock so
that it will be available before the month start.as above we are
taking 10% stock and substracting it from the next month
purchase of stock as we already have purchased it.Schedule 4:
(Payment Schedule)AprilMayJune18,85726,40031,303AprilMay
MayJuneJuneJuly40%60%40%60%40%60%7,54311,31410,5601
5,84012,52118,782(In
Bhd)MarchAprilMayJunePayment70,54321,87428,361Analysisa
s above 40% of the price of good purchased will be given in the
same month and remaining will be paid in the next
month.Schedule 5: (Cash Budget Schedule)(In
Bhd)MarchAprilMayJuneOpening Cash-
0900030,92920,554Received During the
Month62,57118,00026,571Total71,57148,92947,126Borrowing3
0,000- 020,000Total101,57148,92967,126Paid During the
Month70,54321,87428,361Interest100- 0- 0Purchase
Equipment- 06,500- 0Closing
Cash9,00030,92920,55438,765AnalysisAs given opening cash in
hand is 9000 Bhd and the amount received from the sale of the
chocolate will be added.payment maid for the purchase of
chocolate, Interest and equipment cost will be deducted.
Part IIINote 1: Account Receivable(In
Bhd)MarchAprilMayJuneOpening
Receivable54,00017,14330,000Sales25,71430,85737,029Total
Receivable79,71448,00067,029Received during the

11. year62,57118,00026,571Closing
receivables54,00017,14330,00040,457Note 2:
InventoryJuneClosing Inventory917(In
Bhd)MarchAprilMayJuneOpening Inventory-
011,71427,400Purchases during the
Month18,85726,40031,303Total18,85738,11458,703Sales7,1431
0,71412,857Closing Inventory- 011,71427,40045,846Note 3:
Building and Equipment(In Bhd)MarchAprilMayJuneOpening
Building & Equipment207,000206,000211,500Purchases during
the Month- 06,500-
0Total207,000212,500211,500Depreciation1,0001,0001,000Clos
ing Building & Equipment207,000206,000211,500210,500Note
4: Account Payable(In Bhd)MarchAprilMayJuneOpening
Payables63,00011,31415,840Purchases18,85726,40031,303Total
Payables81,85737,71447,143Paid during the
year70,54321,87428,361Closing
Payables63,00011,31415,84018,782Note 5: Notes Payable(In
Bhd)MarchAprilMayJuneOpening Notes
Payables14,50030,00040,560Borrowings30,00010,56020,000Tot
al Notes Payables44,50040,56060,560Paid during the
year14,500- 0- 0Closing Notes
Payables14,50030,00040,56060,560
Part IVMinden CompanyBudgeted Income Statement(In
Bhd)AprilMayJuneSales17,14325,71430,857Cost of
SalesOpening Inventory-
011,71427,400Purchases18,85726,40031,303Closing
Inventory11,71427,40045,8467,14310,71412,857Gross
Profit10,00015,00018,000Selling & Adminstration
Expenses857.141,2861,543Depreciation1,0001,0001,0001,8572,
2862,543Net Profit8,14312,71415,457Minden
CompanyProjected Retained Earning(In
Bhd)AprilMayJuneOpening Retained
Earning12,50020,64333,357Profit for the
month8,14312,71415,457Total20,64333,35748,814Divident
Paid- 0- 0- 0Closing Retained
Earning20,64333,35748,814Minden CompanyProjected Balance

12. SheetAs at June 30Assets(In Bhd)Cash38,765Account
Receivables40,457Inventory45,846Buildings and
Equipments210,500Total Assets335,567Liabilities &
EquityAccount Payable18,782Note Payable60,560Common
Stock180,000Retained Earning48,814Total Liabilities &
Equity335,567
Part Va. Quantity Sold VarianceBudgeted Sales Quantity -
Actual Sales
QuantityBudgeted614Actual850Variance236AnalysisAs actual
sales is 850 and budgeted is 614.the variance 236 shows that
236 more units are sold .b. Celling Price VarianceBudgeted
Selling Price - Actual Selling
PriceActual110Budgeted120(10)AnalysisAs actual selling price
less than budgeted than 10 is variant.c. Sales VarianceBudgeted
Sales - Actual SalesActualBudgetedd. ???e. Quantity Purchase
VarianceBudgeted Purchase Quantity - Actual Purchase
QuantityActual820Budgeted638182Analysis:as actual is greater
than budgetedf. Purchase Price VarianceBudgeted Purchase
Price - Actual Purchase PriceActual55Budgeted50-5g. Purchase
VarianceBudgeted Purchases - Actual
PurchasesActual55Budgeted505
Sheet2a).PV= FV / (1+ r)^nPV=A/r * [1- 1
/(1+r)^nPV?PV?FV1600000FV80000Rate 12%Rate
12%Years20Years20(1+r)^n1- 1/(1+r)^n1.12 ^ 201 - 1/ 1.12 ^
209.650.89PV165803.10880829PV593333.333333333b).Yes, It
can say that Mr. Ormsby is the millionaire because, their
present value is less than their future value. When they invest
their money their value is less and after the winning price the
amount value is less today and if they received it on every year
it will be most valuable for him.