95098598

T6Rendell Company * Divisional controllers report to basic managers via 1985 onwards * 7 Distinct business units with their very own profits, sales * 80 corporate remotes responsible for 1) financial accounting 2) inner auditing 3) analysis of capital spending budget * Reviews went right to top administration from sections * Mr.

Hodgkin wanted to play a far more active role in developing budgets and analyasing functionality (would in person review budgets and analyze divisional efficiency and employed analysts to help) 2. Divisional managers discussed all their budget with top supervision with divisional controller present * Divisional controllers major responsibility was going to divisional managers as opposed to business controllers therefore Bevins thought he had not been getting enough clear information on performance of units 2. Harrigan: Divisional controllers really should not “front business office spies in the event they want to include good doing work relationships with managers that help them with the control functions * Corporate controllers ought not to put divisional controllers in awkward positions regarding even more data/opinions about financials. Inquiries: 1 .

What is the company philosophy of Martex according to controller function? What do you think of this? Should Rendell adopt this kind of philosophy? 5. Divisional controllers report to corporate controllers Accountable for establishing cost and earnings standards and be sure follow through 2. Not designed to take initiative away from DMs * More formal range relationships as controllers job physically independent from division managers 5. Set of formal policies, desired goals, practices that employees (managers) are aware of prior to starting in the orgnization * Accounting system controlled by control division therefore systems aren’t tailored to each BU 5. Divisional managers at Martex like this system because it provides them an unbiased partner with relevant info, controller can easily do better evaluation and there is tiny argument about cost reports I think the[desktop] works for Martex because of the existing tradition that has been created around this version.

People inside the organization will be comfortable with this kind of hierarchy. In Rendell the firm tradition gives good luck to divisional managers and provides them devoted staff doing work under all of them. The feelings towards corporate will be more adversarial thus any enhancements made on the control mechanism function can feel like a corporate spy rather than better communication. This viewpoint will not work together with Rendell’s tradition. It will lead to more reliability on casual organization and poorer connection with business. 2 . Whom should the divisional controllers report to in the Rendell Company? Divisional controllers should report to equally management and corporate controllers although ensuring DM are aware of this responsibility. three or more.

What should the relationship always be between the corporate and business controller and the divisional controllers. DC ought to report to CC to the magnitude that it assures corporate directions are implemented properly damaging DCs and DMs. DCs should connect that business initiatives happen to be being followed/met within their categories. 4. Will you recommend main changes in the simple responsibilities of both the corporate control mechanism or the divisional controller? Divisional controllers ought to play a stronger function as opposed to as being a staff just like assistant to DMs. Nevertheless , having them like a direct report to CCs might conflict together with the existing traditions between DMs and DCs.

Tweet