SOLUCION DE CASOS

. An analysis of adjusted results reduces the negative impact on

the capital allocation but there is still a negative growth in multi-factor productivity. After adjustment for inflation, the material costs are still higher in 2009. Yet, one must be aware of the extra

volatility of the cost of petroleum-based products. Did the manag-er have control over his price increases? One should look at the

changes in a petroleum-based price index, including the cost of oil,

over the last two years in order to gain a better understanding of the degree to which the manager had control over these costs. The

increase in wages was beyond the manager’s control and a con-stant rate should be used for comparing both years’ results. Yet a

negative result still remains. Even when material costs in 2009 are

converted to the original cost of $320, a negative 5% growth in productivity remains. The increase in the capital base is responsi-

ble yet should not persist in future years if the increase was the result of an adoption of new technology.

3. The manager did not reach the goal. An analysis of the chang-es in capital costs is warranted. Even after adjusting for in-

flation, multifactor productivity was not positive. However, labor and materials productivity was favorable. The capital investment cost (as figured by the accounting department) was so large as to make his multifactor productivity negative. Multifactor productiv-

ity has fallen by 11.61% before adjustment and by 7.88% after the

adjustment for inflation.

...