Comparison with standards

The governing concept is the relationship between standards and controlling. Control involves setting standards, measuring actual performance, comparing it with those standards, identifying deviations, and taking corrective action. If employees do not know the targets, the standard is not communicated and they cannot judge what level of performance is expected. The manager also lacks a fair basis for evaluating results or deciding corrective steps. Therefore option A is correct. Option B contradicts the control process, option C reduces control to compensation alone, and option D is irrelevant because control can concern internal work as well as customer outcomes.

The governing concept is the relationship between standards and controlling. Standards are predetermined targets for quantity, quality, cost, time or other performance measures. The controlling function measures actual performance and compares it with these standards to identify deviations. If no standards are established, the manager may motivate employees, but cannot objectively decide whether performance is satisfactory, below expectation or above target. Thus option A is correct. Directing has already occurred through motivation, while staffing concerns filling and developing positions and organising concerns duties, authority and relationships. The absence of standards does not prevent activity, but it prevents meaningful evaluation and corrective action later. Therefore controlling becomes difficult because it lacks the benchmark required for comparison.

Controlling will face the greatest difficulty, so option A is correct. The control process requires clear standards against which actual performance can be measured. A measurable objective may specify quantity, quality, cost, time, or another observable result. If the objective is vague, the manager cannot reliably decide whether performance is satisfactory, calculate the size of a deviation, identify responsibility, or choose an appropriate corrective action. Staffing may still recruit people, organising may still arrange tasks, and directing may still guide employees, although all functions benefit from clear goals. The decisive problem here is the later comparison between actual performance and standards. Without measurable standards, control becomes subjective and weak.

Option A contains evidence of both staffing and controlling. Selecting employees for available positions is staffing because staffing involves manpower planning, recruitment, selection, placement, training, and development. Later comparing those employees’ performance with predetermined standards is controlling, since control measures actual performance, compares it with standards, analyses deviations, and supports correction. Option B combines planning and organising: setting an objective is planning and dividing work is organising. Option C describes directing through motivation and communication. Option D most directly indicates coordination among departments. The word ‘later’ does not change the classification; it simply shows that two different management functions occur in sequence. Thus A is the only option that includes one clear staffing activity and one clear controlling activity.

The governing concept is control through comparison with expected service standards. A customer who has completed payment expects proof of the transaction, correct delivery or settlement, and a clear route for refund or assistance when something goes wrong. Failure on all three points creates uncertainty about whether the money was received and whether the business will honour its obligation. It therefore threatens both financial security and trust, making Option A the most serious complaint. Options B, C, and D may affect appearance or workplace comfort, but they do not normally endanger a customer’s money or demonstrate a breakdown in transaction control. A responsible firm should record the payment, issue a receipt, investigate exceptions, and communicate the remedy.