Charles Limited: Changes to the Reporting System - Essay Example

Charles Ltd. Changes to the Reporting System The reporting system that is introduced in Charles Ltd is though at the initial stages and the employees of the company are providing a mixed response to this system. The reports provided should be much detailed and explained so as to better explain and elaborate the results along with the expectations. The preparation of the reports should be appropriate and viable with the true performance of the company and its departments reflected in it. The authenticity of the report is dependent upon the accuracy of the information and data collected and provided so as to prepare the report. The reporting system in the company is new and shall be changing the norms and the culture of the company. With the introduction of new processes to the company operations then it is usually faced with resistant from the employees. The change in the processes of the company and the introduction of new process or norm is resisted whether it comes from inside or from outside of the company (Leanne, 2009). The reporting system in the company is resisted as well and employees consider it as the means of under estimating their performances in the company and shall not be able to truly evaluate their performances. The reporting system shall be considered as in just for the employees as the manager shall be taken the advantage of the performance and the employees and/or workers shall not be recognized for their performance (Debra & Bradley, 1999). Thus in order to get a better response and acceptability from the employees the report should be the true reflection of the performance of the employees. Budget is the most important part of reporting as the actual performance of the department is compared with the budget and thus the evaluation is done. The involvement of the employees shall be playing an important role in the reports as when the budget is prepared with the input from the employees considered along with the management perceptions then the budget prepared shall be much more realistic and achievable and the reports shall be getting a positive and accepted response by the employees (David, 2003). Budget is an integral part of the report and is utilized throughout the process, which involve planning, implementing and control (Mukdad, 2011), as the company enhances its internal controls and thus progress towards a more effective and controlled procedures. The budget in the report shall be much realistic, which involves the employees and the managers of all the departments of the company can attain and thus prepare a realistic and achievable budget. The reporting system shall involve the inputs from the all the employees so as to gather the interest of the employees towards their performance. With the input from the employees the budget then prepared shall be much more realistic and acceptable. The variances in the report shall be minimized and thus a better insight of the employees’ performance can be attained. With the availability of the management techniques (Olivia & Andrea, 2013) the budgetary system shall be enhanced along with the reporting system. With the budgetary system enhanced the collection of information for the actual performance of the company shall be considered. It is absolutely vital to gather the information that is vital and reliable as to represent as the actual performance of the departments (Paul, 2003). The actual performance of the department shall be real and reliable and should be from the most authentic source. The collection of the information regarding the actual performance shall be from the most reliable source (Fran, 2014). The gathering of the information is much crucial as per the sources and the resources and should represent viability and authenticity. The reports should be much more detailed and should provide information regarding the measures that should be taken in order to get the variance to minimum. The variances shown in the report are reflecting the difference between the actual and the budgeted performance. When the budgetary system is enhanced along with the data collection the variances shall be representing a more reliable performance of the department. The variances should represent reliability and should elaborate adverse or favorable variance. The variances elaborated in the report shall be more explaining and should provide detailed information regarding what type of acceptance level that the variance represents (Jami, et al., 2009). With the variance properly explained it shall be much easy and convenient for the managers of the departments to elaborate and evaluate the performance and shall be much easy to implement the changes and/or enhancement that should be incorporated so as to get to the favorable outcome in terms of performance. The performance of the department when properly and reliably measured and presented then the next step becomes much easy and convenient as it will provide the basis for the targets of improvements. With mere improvement suggestion shall not be able to provide enough information for the department to incorporate performance enhancements in it. The variances in the reports should be more detailed and should provide suggestions to as to overcome the adversity in the variance. Revised Report The following is the revised report for Charles Ltd performance of department D. Particulars Actual Budgeted Variance Variance Tolerance Level Amount % Age Units produced 90,000 95,000 5,000 5.26% Adverse 4% Machine hours 27,200 28,500 1,300 4.56% Favorable 5% £ £ £ Sales 922,500 950,000 27,500 2.89% Adverse 2% Raw materials 130,500 133,000 2,500 1.88% Favorable 3% Direct labor 153,000 152,000 1,000 0.66% Adverse 1% Variable production overheads 96,300 100,700 4,400 4.37% Favorable 4% Fixed production overheads 115,300 125,400 10,100 8.05% Favorable 6% The report is much detailed and provided information that should be considered for the evaluation of the department. The variance in the report is calculated by taking the difference between the actual and the budgeted performance. It is assumed that the budget prepared in the previous report was accurate and realistic and the information regarding the actual performance was much reliable and thus no change in the information is done. With the variance calculated the report provides the percentage of the variances as well. This shows that how much change has occurred from the budget and how much change in the performance of the department has occurred. The percentage change in the actual performance and the budgeted performance elaborates that how much change that the department has gone through. With the percentage change elaborated in the report explains the improvement level, which shall be attained in order to get the desired results. The explanation of the variance as favorable and adverse explains that whether the variance is positive or negative for the company and for the department. The favorableness of variance shown in the report explains the positivity of the performance of the department and thus provides an evaluation of the department. The favorable variance shall be appraising the department and providing feedback upon the progressive performance of the department and thus enhances the morale of the employees of department D. The tolerance level of the variance shown in the report elaborates that what percentage change from the actual and the budgeted performance shall be tolerable. Though the negative and adverse variance is unacceptable and there should not be any adverse variance but the tolerable level elaborated explains that the acceptability of the variance that should be because of the reliability and forecast of the future conditions that were ascertained during the budget making. The tolerance level in the variance reflects the level of acceptance in the variance, which account for the accuracy in the predictions and assumptions. With much elaborative report which includes details regarding the performance of the department provides a deeper insight of the performance of the department D of Charles Ltd. References David, C., 2003. Fixing the language of change? A response. ournal of Organizational Change Management, 16(5), pp. 584-590. Debra, L. S. & Bradley, L. K., 1999. Employees’ reaction to the change to work teams: The influence of “anticipatory” injustice. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 12(1), pp. 51-67. Fran, A., 2014. Devising a framework for assessing the subjectivity and objectivity of information taxonomy projects. Journal of Documentation, 70(1), pp. 4-24. Jami, K., Byung, R. C. & Jiju, A., 2009. Development of a variance prioritized multiresponse robust design framework for quality improvement. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 26(4), pp. 380-396. Leanne, C., 2009. Resisting change from within and without the organization. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 22(3), pp. 275-289. Mukdad, I., 2011. The rules of federal budget and final accounts in United Arab Emirates. International Journal of Law and Management, 53(3), pp. 199-206. Olivia, M. H. & Andrea, C., 2013. Collection management and the budget crunch: are we adequately preparing library students for current practices?. Collection Building, 32(4), pp. 128-132. Paul, L., 2003. The quality of information. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 20(6), pp. 691-703. Read More