Failed controls = Not Effective controls from Question 1 a.

Stage 1:Established TV return processes and ASCs report to TV division: Failures of these controls were due mainly to no existence of a punishment policy. In addition, there was too much trust placed on the employees. The 1985 employees loyalty is long gone . Behavioral constraint is seen here for fraud is no part of the employees culture. There is a lack of direction for there is no report or form of supervision for ASCs. Communication process are not followed maybe they do not like it. There is no motivation at all, one bores when doing the same thing daily. Dull and negative attitudes crept in when there's no incentive so there a lot of pressure for people employees to commit fraud. The ability to do the job is very poor and this questions the selection process no form of training .Thus, Incompetence could be another reason why this control failed. b. Stage 2: Formation of the taskforce team ;Failure was due to no employee empowerment. The taskforce were professionals which need empowerment. Another reason was that the team had no specified role they tackle the problem blindly, some of them just went with the flow not all areas were tapped into. In addition, Trust is questioned for centralization of power and thus their findings are subjective for their roles were not clearly defined. Direction was there but due to lack of motivation, direction was never practiced. The capability of achieving the target is in the teams potential .Performance is measured not only through capability but motivation too and since motivation lacks and so as performance. c. Stage 2: Penalty scheme for ASCs: Failure for it was never enforced for there was no one who can verify any inspection made. Lack of proper measure. A sudden change need time. Negative attitude and pursuing shared value goals of ASCs employees they divert their time to pursue their own interest, fake inspections increased just within two months . Feel of not belonging and no value is another reason. Direction was not known for there has been a change that many don't understand. Lack of motivation for only penalties are given. The ability to do the job was there for the salespeople in going to meet dealers bargaining to buy more TV. The ASCs did not show that they had the ability at all instead they showed more incompetence than ever.

d. Stage 2: Set performance targets: Failure of this was due poor plan by putting unrealistic targets, yielding a poor result. What you measure is what you get. There was no cost and benefit analysis made .This also be the ending result of having a "yes sir taskforce", to achieve so much in just a little time is pathetic! . in addition, There was forecasts made by the taskforce but only known to them, this is gamesmanship due to information asymmetry. Lack of direction here for they have overestimated what they need and the clear desirable outcomes. there is no motivation for motivation should be challenging not discouraging. Lack of to attain their target because it is impossible which lead to a failure.

Imbalance of the controls are due to many shortcomings of the management and the employees from the planning of the management control up to its implementation. Strong balanced controls were practiced in stage 3 for they were good(tight) controls . A cost benefit analysis of the controls reflects that the benefits outweigh the costs in stage 3 due to the good(tight) controls. Cultural control and Personnel control were used the least even though they are thought to be the soft controls but these controls can be seen here as effective since they recognize the employees potential and psychological needs. Most of the controls used where action control and it is no surprise for the firm need to achieve a target. Getting there desired actions has to be followed and the schedule too done to attain the desired outcomes. Moreover result control was also used to reward and keep employees motivated to achieve their required targets. The controls came through three stages to be balanced it reflects that there is no optimal control for large matured firm like PCL , management have to make thorough plans and choose the mix that yield them more benefits rather than costs to be used in the firm. All the three controls have to be used together and I cannot say one is more important than the other or useful for they are all needed to make a management control system become effective. For the short run it is clear that tying reward to performance is the best way of motivating employees. However in the long run trusting employees and valuing their performance can be done in other ways such as a pad on the back and say job well done or acknowledging and thanking them in the monthly newsletter of the firm. Annual Bonus schemes and appraisal performance may be a loss to the firm for

they should focus on profit(instead of downgrading that profit)and existence of the firm and secondly, the money aren't theirs it is the shareholders money. Now employee has developed the norm that they can only perform to get a reward. The author believe that the salary is enough but what needs to be done is to have well defined followed protocols and trainings for it is clear that the ASCs are incompetent for them to feel that they belong and the firm cares about them to execute their task successfully and to achieve the firms long term goals. For both the short run and long run employees has to adapt to change and management has to form controls that are behavioral focus depending on the organization architecture and their cultures with legisitimising to the nation's culture. In the long run there is a need for the firm to set objectives and targets that are realistic to time through rapid growth not a one day transformational change. Managers should lead by example in aiding employees to the acceptable behaviors. Above all, criticism of the control system may lead to downfall. There is no universal control system to be used by a firm and so mix of the controls are prone to errors for their is no one perfect control system. Bureaucratic leading styles should be flexible and give employees the sense that you trust them and their loyalty to the firm will never be stripped away.