Q.HG Air Conditioner Pvt. Ltd. is lagging behind its scheduled production target by a month. Despite a high demand, the company is struggling to meet its production target. Even after taking measures like training of employees and assigning additional workers and equipment to the project, the targets could not be met. The Production Manager, now, decided to revise the standards. Identify the step of the controlling process under which the Production Manager decided to revise the standards. (A) Setting performance standards (B) Measurement of actual performance (C) Analysing deviations (D) Taking corrective action
You're viewing a preview — the full solution, concept, methods & PYQ mapping are locked.
Start your 14-day free trial to unlock the full solution →The Production Manager's decision to revise standards after exhausting all corrective measures falls under Taking corrective action, the final step where fundamental changes to the control system itself are made.
The controlling process in management is a systematic cycle that helps organizations stay on track toward their goals. It begins with setting performance standards, moves through measurement and comparison, and culminates in action. Understanding where standard revision fits requires seeing the full arc of what happened at HG Air Conditioner.
The company started with a production schedule — a standard against which performance would be judged. When actual output fell short by a month, management didn't simply accept the gap. They measured the deviation, analyzed why it existed, and then took what seemed like logical corrective steps: training employees to improve skills, adding workers to increase capacity, assigning more equipment to boost throughput. These are classic corrective actions aimed at bringing performance back in line with the original standard.
But here's the critical insight: those measures failed. The targets still could not be met despite genuine effort and resource allocation. At this point, the Production Manager faced a fundamental question — was the problem with execution, or with the standard itself?
When corrective actions aimed at performance don't work, management must consider whether the standard was realistic in the first place. Perhaps market conditions changed, supply chain constraints emerged, or the original target was set without full information about production capacity. Revising the standard isn't about lowering expectations arbitrarily; it's about aligning the control system with reality so that future cycles of planning and control rest on achievable benchmarks.
Taking corrective action has two dimensions: routine corrections that adjust performance to meet standards, and fundamental corrections that adjust the standards themselves when they prove unworkable. Standard revision is the latter. …
Unlock everything free for 14 days
- Full step-by-step solutions
- Concept-first explanations
- Methods, shortcuts & mistakes
- PYQ mapping + timed mock tests
Full access for 14 days. No credit card required.