Comparison with standards

The governing concept is the close relationship between planning and controlling. Planning establishes objectives, expected results, time limits, and performance standards. Controlling then measures actual results and compares them with those planned standards. If actual performance differs significantly, management investigates the deviation and takes corrective action; the findings may also improve future plans. Thus, planning provides the benchmark and controlling performs the comparison and follow-up. Option A is false because the functions are interdependent, option C reverses their normal sequence, and option D confuses them with staffing. Therefore, option B is correct.

Controlling involves measuring actual performance, comparing it with a predetermined standard, analysing deviations, and taking corrective action. A budget is a financial standard or planned benchmark. When actual expense exceeds that budget, the manager identifies the unfavourable deviation and investigates its causes; these are control activities. Therefore, option A is correct. Planning prepares the budget, but it does not investigate the later difference. Organising arranges work and authority, while staffing concerns human resources. The fact that actual expenditure is being compared with a budget and its causes are being examined makes controlling the unambiguous answer.

The governing concept is balanced performance evaluation through controlling. Actual time alone cannot establish effective performance because speed is useful only when the output also meets the required quality standard. If quality is poor, the decision must include the relevant quality standards, inspection results, rejection rate, and, where appropriate, corrective action. Therefore, option A is correct. The controlling process compares actual performance with predetermined standards and investigates deviations; it should not reward rapid but defective production. Machine colour, bank balance, and a product slogan have no direct role in judging this worker’s production performance. The item therefore tests whether the evaluator considers both quantitative efficiency and qualitative effectiveness rather than relying on one favourable time figure.

Performance evaluation should compare actual results with suitable standards and should not reward speed in isolation. A low actual time may initially appear favourable, but poor quality means that the output may require rework, rejection, or correction. The decision must therefore include the relevant quality standards, inspection findings, rejection rates, and, where appropriate, rework information. Option A is correct because these data show whether the fast performance produced acceptable output. Bank balance, a product slogan, and office colour do not measure the worker’s operating performance or the quality of the result. The governing principle is balanced control: quantity or time and quality must be considered together before judging performance.