As children are pushed to achieve academic goals at earlier and earlier ages, the incidence of learning disabilities is growing at an alarming (some say epidemic) rate. There may be a host of root causes, from immune response issues to dietary and familial problems, but one factor is susceptible to immediate control by parents who choose to homeschool and that is the age at which traditional academic work is introduced to their children. One hundred years ago, it was common for children to enter school at age 8 or even later. Two hundred years ago, children were not even accepted in most schools until they could read. Today, in contrast, the most arduous efforts of our public schools cannot produce high school graduates who can compare favorably in knowledge and skills with the 8th grade graduates of 1900. What on earth is going on? It is claimed by the education establishment that the fault lies variously with the children (learning disabled), their parents (incompetent and /or uninterested), or the government/tax payers (low funding), or all three. Educators seldom blame their own methods, materials, timetables, etc. Most people would agree that “one size fits all” items actually don’t fit most people very well, but when it comes to education, otherwise intelligent folks are inclined to bow to the “wisdom” of the established educational order in the matter of what a child should learn and when he should learn it. Homeschool parents come to me every day asking for “the list” of what their children should be learning at each grade level. Or, they come in very worried because Jr. is in third grade and doesn’t yet know his multiplication facts or parts of speech or the difference between a parallelogram and a trapezoid! Oh, my! As a former primary teacher, I can attest to the almost total incompetence of the school bureaucracy – from the teacher colleges to the state mandated textbooks. Even though the new emphasis on phonics is a promising sign, it appears that the manic insistence on developmentally inappropriate “academic” goals will insure a large number of educationally handicapped children for years to come, incidentally providing job security for legions of special education teachers. As principal of a large, private homeschool Independent Study Program (umbrella school for homeschoolers), I see children daily who have been battered by this insane and inhumane system. But, that is not the worst of it. The problem is compounded by the tyranny of “experts” who are determined to “help” homeschoolers by “diagnosing” and offering to “treat” all manner of suddenly discovered maladies from ODD (opposition/defiant disorder) to ADHD (attention deficit hyperactive disorder) to my favorite: Auditory Processing Disorder(APD), a wonderful catch-all for the late bloomer who hasn’t yet cracked the phonetic code of English. These “experts” would have us believe that otherwise normal children suddenly become “disordered” when they enter school or begin formal “homeschooling.” This is not to say that there are not children with very real medical and /or psychological problems, but the vast majority of children diagnosed with a “learning disability” are simply normal children with either a low tolerance for boredom (ADD), too much energy to sit still for long doing boring, repetitive work (ADHD), developmentally unready to absorb the material presented (LD, ADD,APD, Dyslexic, Dysgraphic, etc.) or possessed of a learning style which is incompatible with the curriculum in use(ADD, etc., etc.) The labels fly so rapidly and predictably to so many children that they have become virtually meaningless except to the professional “experts” whose livelihood depend on a full IN basket of educationally handicapped kids. Many distraught parents opt to homeschool after receiving one or more of these dred diagnoses for their children. They remove them from school in order to help them overcome their “disability” and “remediate” their “deficiencies.” Although they intuitively know that their children are bright and can learn, they cling to the standards and timelines of the system that condemned their children and in so doing, create unnecessary difficulty for themselves and their offspring. Often, parents come to me in search of a curriculum to help their children “catch up.” I have to ask, ”Catch up to what?” In trusting that the state and the state’s schools know the best way to educate a child, they are in danger of destroying their children’s best opportunity to learn in the home environment. By pushing children too hard too early, resistance, aversion and fear of failure create barriers to learning, only compounding the damage already done by the school system. Teaching and learning are neither difficult nor mysterious. It does not take a trained expert to teach the phonetic code to a child who is ready. READY is the operative word. As a former first grade teacher who learned to read in the first grade, I once thought that all children could and should learn to read at age six. It took a determined homeschooling neighbor, my own “late” reading daughters and the research of pioneering homeschool advocates, Raymond and Dorothy Moore to convince me otherwise. We were very excited about homeschooling and started right in with MCP Plaid Phonics when Tenaya was five years old. She learned the letter sounds quickly but could not put them together to make words. We were both frustrated while the neighbor boys, two years older than my girls, played happily and didn’t even attempt to read. Their mother, Susan, introduced me to the Moores’ books and philosophy. I was unconvinced but I had no choice. My very bright and eager daughter was not reading no matter what we did. Had she been in school, she would have been labeled dyslexic simply because she did not read. Her sister, however, would have earned a whole list of labels: ADHD (she bounced off the walls when she wasn’t climbing them), APD (she made no sound/symbol connections until she was about nine), dyslexic (she couldn’t read), dysgraphic (she couldn’t write) among others. Dr. and Mrs. Moore’s first book, School Can Wait and its twin for laymen, Better Late Than Early, introduced me to the facts about education and child development. The Moores collected early childhood research from medicine, ophthalmology, neurology, and psychology and came to the inescapable conclusion that for most children, the optimum age to begin formal academics is between the ages of eight and twelve! For those of us who are steeped in the culture of early academics, this is a strange pill to swallow. But the Moores didn’t stop with mere laboratory research; they studied homeschool families in the 70’s and 80’s to see what happened when children were free to learn at a more natural pace. The result was several more books, culminating with The Successful Family Homeschool Handbook. This volume elaborates on “The Moore Formula” which Dr. and Mrs. Moore developed over the years as they combined research with practical application. The “Moore Formula” includes three elements in approximately equal portions: study, work and service. They do not recommend formal academic studies before age 8 and in some cases, as late as 12. (My younger daughter fell into this older category.) This does not mean that the child does not learn anything until age 8+. Children are learning voraciously from birth and only the roadblock of clumsy “schooling” can retard or stop a child’s otherwise insatiable thirst for knowledge. Books are useful and important tools, but for a young child, the world is filled with much better learning opportunities than can be found on the printed page alone. When a child is allowed to explore and question and wonder, whole worlds of interest can open that might never be discovered otherwise. In this homeschooling style, a child might learn to read at five, at seven or at twelve, depending on the child. This more relaxed early learning/teaching style will incorporate important developmental areas often neglected or ignored by formal curricula: listening, hand-eye coordination, large motor skills, spatial relationships, personal relationships, knowledge about the physical environment, memory development, imagination, logic and many more. Because of the overwhelming presence of electronic media in our lives, children are often have difficulty using their own imagination or even listening to a story without pictures. They are so bombarded with constant sound from radio, TV, and electronic games that they can hardly think for themselves. Giving children time in the early years (hopefully with a minimum of TV, etc.) to develop physically, neurologically and emotionally allows them to move into formal academics with a maximum of preparedness and energy. Since we are on the topic of physical and academic readiness we should spend a few moments on learning styles. It is important to understand that each child has a unique learning style that might be different from yours or his siblings. Regardless of when you start teaching your children formally it is critically important to teach in a manner that best fits the child’s learning style. The absolute best publication we know of to assist you in determining and understanding your child’s learning style is Mariaemma Willis’ and Victoria Hodson’s book, Discover Your Child’s Learning Style. The blending of this book with the works of the Moore’s will provide you the foundation of a highly successful homeschool experience. Delayed academics does not mandate delayed reading; it encourages parents to wait until their children are ready. Until that time, parents can read to their children, play games with letters and sounds, and watch for signs that their children are beginning to catch on to the code. Once that happens, you cannot stop a child from reading. Some will move quickly and others will make slower progress, but as long as the instruction is phonetic (this is vital), children will make gradual progress until they are reading at an adult level. The catch here is that although you can toss out the LD labels, you may not be able to use a packaged curriculum (Oh shucks!) One of my daughters learned to read (effortlessly) at age 8 and the other at 10 ½. One used Primary Phonics readers and the other preferred Dr. Seuss I Can Read primers. Once past the primers, they simply selected (with my guidance) books they enjoyed. Gradually, they moved to more and more difficult material. Both are college graduates with enjoyable careers. We used the Moore Formula instead of a formal curriculum. The girls worked at many jobs and invented as many businesses including one, Fun Ed, that is still thriving as part of Excellence In Education Resource Center. They were involved in numerous service projects culminating in overseas missions work. Most people would classify us as unschoolers and I would not argue except to qualify that label by saying we did use the Moore Formula to balance our lives. This happy ending would not have been possible without the concept of “delayed academics,” for our daughters would have been labeled early and often had we taken our little non-readers to the “experts.” Thankfully, we went instead to Dr. Raymond Moore and his wonderful wife Dorothy, who told us that as long as they were making progress, we should not worry. They were right! Modern schools were intended to do for education what Henry Ford did for auto manufacturing. In some ways they have succeeded, but remember that children aren’t molten blobs of metal that can be reshaped by any mold to fit in any space for any purpose. Children are unique and delicate human beings with special talents, strengths and weaknesses. Each has his own developmental schedule, which we ignore at our peril. As homeschoolers, we have rejected the “system” for a variety of reasons; we have stepped outside the box. Remember that the box includes much more than just the building. Stepping outside the box and giving our children the very best tailor made education includes questioning the school schedule and curriculum as well. Things that are mass-produced are never of the finest quality and the same goes for a copy of a mass- produced item. The best education for your child is one that is developed for his or her unique learning schedule and learning style. Only the parent can judge the appropriateness of the schedule by watching for things to “click,” but we can get quite a bit of guidance from Raymond and Dorothy Moore’s many books on homeschooling and Willis and Hodson’s Learning Style Profile found in Discover Your Child’s Learning Style. Trying to get a head start by pushing early academics can backfire, causing difficulties for years to come. Instead of worrying about a “learning disability” because your child does not fit the style and sequence of “in the box” schools, spend your energy on developing your child’s natural interests. You will be amazed at the results.

Question...

What factors would influence your decision? Were you surprised at the articles that question the value of early childhood education?

The Town of Tyler approved the following general fund budget for the fiscal year July 1, 2011, to June 30, 2012: TOWN OF TYLER GENERAL FUND BUDGET SUMMARY FOR THE YEAR JULY 1, 2011 TO JUNE 30, 2012 Revenue Sources Taxes $250,000 Licenses and permits 20,000 Intergovernmental revenue 40,000 Charges for services 60,000 Fines and forfeits 15,000 Rents and royalties 10,000 Miscellaneous revenues 5,000 Total budgeted revenues $400,000 TOWN OF TYLER GENERAL FUND BUDGET SUMMARY FOR THE YEAR JULY 1, 2011 TO JUNE 30, 2012 Expenditures Current services General government $45,000 Public safety 140,000 Highways and streets 90,000 Sanitation 55,000 Health and welfare 20,000 Recreation 30,000 Capital outlays 15,000 Total appropriations $395,000 Budgeted increase in fund balance $5,000 The after-closing trial balance of the Town of Tyler general fund at June 30, 2011, shows the following ledger account balances: Debits Cash 31,000 Tax receivable—delinquent 15,000 Accounts receivable 3,000 Supplies inventory 6,000 Total debits $ 55,000 Credits Allowances for uncollectible taxes—delinquent 1,000 Vouchers payable 14,000 Note payable (short-term) 15,000 Fund balance—committed 9,000 Fund balance—nonspendable 6,000 Fund balance—unassigned 10,000 Total credits $ 55,000

1. Prepare T account balances for the following transactions: a. The treasurer of Tyler sends out property tax bills of $200,000; 1% is considered uncollectible b. Current property taxes of $176,000 and past-due taxes of $14,000 were collected. c. A specifi c property tax bill ($1,000) is determined to be uncollectible. d. Fees in the amount of $20,000 are collected for hunting licenses. e. Other revenues in the amount of $200,000 are collected. f. The payroll for salaries of $20,000 is vouchered for payment. g. Playground equipment expected to cost $15,000 is ordered. h. The playground equipment is received and has an actual cost of $14,000. i. Tyler received equipment that had been ordered in the previous fiscal year. The actual cost was $9,500 j. Supplies in the amount of $11,000 were ordered. By year-end, only $5,000 worth of these supplies has been received The consumption method is used. k. The note payable that was outstanding at June 30, 2011, becomes due and is paid. l. Various expenditures are paid throughout the year totaling $348,040. m. Supplies in the amount of $3,000 are on hand at year-end. n. Assume that uncollected taxes on June 30, 2011, are past due. o. Closing entries are made.

We want to find the proportion of students at Saint Michael's Middle School who carpool or ride the bus to school.  

a. A quick survey of 30 randomly selected students at Saint Michael's found 7 either rode the bus or carpooled to school. What is the point estimate for the population proportion for students at Saint Michael's who carpool or ride the bus to school?  (a) The point estimate = 7/30 = 0.233

b. Would you say that this would be a good estimate of the proportion of students who carpool or ride the bus to school?  

(b) Yes, because this is a random sample.

c. How large a sample needs to be taken to determine the proportion of students who carpool or ride the bus to school within an error of 2% at a 99% level of confidence? (c) n = (2.576/0.02)^2*0.233*(1 - 0.233) = 2968

d. Assuming the student population at Saint Michael's is 8000 students, what is the largest sample size you could use and still consider the subjects independent?  (d) n = 8000*0.05 = 400

e. Is the sample size found in (c) acceptable according to your answer to (d)?  

f. If we insist on a 99% level of confidence and using your point estimate from (a) what margin of error would we expect if we used the largest possible sample size based on the student population at Saint Michael's?  

g. Using your point estimate from (a), what is the largest level of confidence we could use for a 2% margin of error if we used the largest possible sample size based on the student population at Saint Michael's?

It is December 2016 and you are thinking about whether to start a Master’s program or

begin work come Jan. 1. Either way, you plan to work for 30 years before retiring (so you

will retire at t=30 if you don’t go to school and t=31 if you do go to school).

If you were to start work now you expect your starting salary to be $50,000, with the first

payment arriving exactly one year from today. Due to the poor economy you don’t foresee

a raise for the first 3 years, but after the 3

rd

year (i.e., after t=3) you expect to get a 15%

raise. You expect another 25% raise after the 10

th

year (i.e., after t=10) and constant salary

after that until your last payment at t=30.

The master’s program costs $70,000, paid immediately, and takes exactly 1 year. With a

master’s degree you believe that your starting salary will be $65,000 per year. You also

think that you will learn some skills that will increase your bargaining power in salary

negotiations. Thus, you believe that if you get a Masters your salary will grow steadily at

3% per year for your entire working life.

Assuming the discount rate is 10% and that all wages are paid at the end of the year, what

is the difference in present value between your wages going to school and not going to

school? If all you care about are these wages should you go to school? What is the most

you would be willing to pay for school under the wage assumptions in the problem?

n October 2010, Tom Chong was on his way to his office and thinking about several issues he would have to deal with in the coming weeks. Chong was Jextra Stores (Jextra) country manager for the Neighbourhood Markets Division in Malaysia. One issue involved a conversation with the mayor of Klang, a town near Malaysia’s capital city of Kuala Lumpur. Chong had been seeking to expand to Klang for some time. The mayor surprised Chong with an offer to help with land zoning if Jextra would help finance a new primary school (or at least Chong thought that was what he had been asked for).

The second issue involved the job performance of Arif Alam, Jextra’s top-performing buyer. Alam, a buyer of fresh fruit and vegetables, consistently negotiated better contracts than Jextra’s fifteen other buyers and, Chong believed, better than Jextra’s competitors. The contracts negotiated by Alam certainly contributed to the excellent financial performance of Jextra Malaysia. Nevertheless, Chong could not help wondering if there was more to the picture than he was aware of. The retail industry in Malaysia was notorious for buyers accepting money and gifts from suppliers. A few days ago, Chong had accidentally overheard two of his accounting employees speculating that Alam must be accepting gifts, or even taking bribes—how else could he get such good contracts?

Chong was not sure what to do. Should he con- front Alam? Or, to use one of his English colleague’s

favorite expressions, should he let sleeping dogs lie? Chong knew that his boss expected him to aggres- sively grow the business, so perhaps it would be best to accept the mayor’s offer and deal with Alam later.

Jextra Malaysia

Jextra Stores, a large Asian retailer, was based in Hong Kong and was owned by Sim Lim Holdings, a large publicly traded industrial group. Sim Lim Hold- ings was traded on the Hong Kong and London stock exchanges. Jextra operated retail stores in Hong Kong, China, Philippines, Viet Nam, Malaysia, Thailand, and Singapore. The company operated supermarkets, hypermarkets, and convenience stores.

Jextra entered Malaysia, a stable and prosperous nation of 28 million multi-ethnic people, in 2005 and was very successful. The company operated super- markets in Malaysia using the name Neighbourhood Markets. There were now ten Neighbourhood Mar- kets, and breakeven had been reached quickly. Jextra was planning to enter the Malaysian convenience store sector in a few years. Although other Asian and European retailers were entering Malaysia, Tom Chong saw plenty of growth opportunities for super- markets, and his boss in Hong Kong had approved an aggressive five-year investment strategy.

Tom Chong

Tom Chong, a Hong Kong native, had been in his posi- tion for eight months, and expected to remain there for another two to three years. Malaysia was Chong’s first assignment as country manager. Prior to moving to Malaysia, Chong held various positions in corporate headquarters in Hong Kong, and then moved to Malay- sia as finance director. After two years in finance, he moved into his current role as country manager for Neighbourhood Markets. His new assignment in Malay- sia was his first experience with real operational issues and proft and loss responsibilities.

Chong reported to a Regional Operating Officer responsible for Singapore, Malaysia, and Thailand, and was in constant contact with the CEO and the CFO of the Supermarket and Hypermarket Divisions of Jextra in Hong Kong. Chong was evaluated based on various financial measures, including Economic Value Added. As a country manager in a young market, the number of new stores opened was an important element in his overall evaluation, and a factor in deter- mining his career prospects. In a fast-growing market like Malaysia, a failure to open new stores would be viewed negatively at corporate headquarters. The number of new stores opened would also be a factor in determining his discretionary bonus. In recent years, Chong’s performance had been among the best for Jextra managers of his age and experience.

A New Store in Klang

Jextra was doing well in Malaysia and actively seeking to expand. Chong and his team had identified a poten- tial site in Klang for a new Neighbourhood Market. Klang, a town located about 30 km west of Malaysia’s capital, Kuala Lumpur, was growing and was viewed as an attractive location for a new store. Although the potential site was not zoned for retail and commercial purposes, it had good road access and plenty of space for parking. Chong knew that several other retailers were also interested in expansion in Klang, especially with the opening of a new highway connect- ing Klang to the southeastern edge of Kuala Lumpur.

At a recent meeting between Chong and the mayor of Klang:

Chong: As you know, we have identified Klang as one of the most attractive cities in Malaysia for Jextra investment. We are interested in opening a Jextra Neighbourhood Market there.

Mayor: We are pleased that you are considering our city for your next investment. Klang is a growing community, and the new highway makes our city much more attractive as a place for families to live and commute to the capital. Where does your investment analysis stand?

Chong: We have done some preliminary work. We have identified some potential sites. There is one site of interest near the new sports arena, and we have had some conversations with your offcials since the land is currently not zoned for commer- cial use. Unfortunately, our previous investments in Malaysia have all encountered diffculty with land development. Our newest store was delayed by more than eight months because of zoning issues. We hope that will not be a problem in Klang.

Mayor: We have a unique community in Klang, and want to protect our cultural heritage. We scrutinize

all proposed real estate developments very carefully. With your store, perhaps we can help each other.

Chong: Can you be more specific?

Mayor: Our community is growing quite rapidly, and we have a lot of young families moving in. We des- perately need a new primary school. Without it, families may choose to live elsewhere. People do not want to live in a city with inadequate school facilities. Unfortunately, our school budget is quite tight, and we may not be able to build the school for at least two years. If Jextra were willing to consider supporting a primary school development fund, I am sure I could speed up the land zoning process.

Chong: Interesting....Can you tell me a bit more about the primary school project? Do you have any preliminary estimates of the cost?

Mayor: My Director of Schools has told me that we need about 350,000 ringgit to make up a budget shortfall for a new primary school. Jextra’s support would greatly help the community. Also, if you were to build your store on the proposed site, road and electricity developments would be necessary. A fly- over at the intersection of Jalan Mantin and Jalan Subang on the east side of the site would be nec- essary to ensure smooth traffic flow. We would, of course, expect Jextra to help pay for the flyover. I understand one of your competitors in Shah Alam [a community close to Klang] helped pay for a new fire truck when they entered the market. This is quite normal for new investment in Malaysia.

Chong: Well, Mr. Mayor, thank you for your time. We will continue with our analysis, and certainly hope that we can do something that is good for Klang and good for Jextra.

With that, Chong left the meeting. The conversa- tion with the mayor had caught him by surprise. The mayor’s zoning proposal was unexpected, but could certainly speed up development. However, Chong was not sure what he asked for. Was he being asked to pay the entire 5 million ringgit or just a part of the cost? Would he pay for it before the pri- mary school was built, or after? Would he pay the city or a contractor? If he said no, would that mean a denial of the zoning change?

Chong made a few calls, and learned that the mayor’s sister was on the school board and was one of the major supporters of a new primary school. Chong also learned that planning for the flyover had started several months before Jextra had ever expressed an interest in the nearby site. In addition, Jextra had already determined that traffic to and from the store parking lot would be routed through the west side of the lot, using a lightly used commercial street and not on either of the roads close to the planned flyover. Chong wondered about the mayor’s motives in asking Jextra to pay for the flyover.

Jextra Business Conduct Code

Jextra’s Business Conduct Code was very clear: employees could not offer benefits to third parties in connection with business matters (see the Appendix for excerpts from the Code). If Jextra were to contrib- ute to a primary school, the benefit would be a contri- bution to a school development fund, and the benefit would go to the school and the community, not indi- viduals. Chong had discussed a hypothetical situation with a Malaysian friend who was also a lawyer (he did not reveal the specifics of the mayor’s request). He was told that Malaysian law was unclear in the area of business payments for social purposes made spe- cifically for regulatory approval. He was also told that although not widespread in Malaysia, the practice of businesses contributing to city projects was common in Klang and other areas around Kuala Lumpur, and the local mayor prided himself on being able to obtain these payments for schools and roads in particular.

Jextra’s corporate office in Hong Kong had a small group of employees that managed the Jextra Social Fund. The Jextra Social Fund provided funding for various social and educational programs, mainly in Hong Kong. One of the fund’s specific initiatives was providing university scholarships in Hong Kong for children of lower-income families. As Jextra expanded in Asia, the fund was slowly looking at ways to contribute to more local programs.

However, Chong knew that recently there had been some concerns in the Philippines involving the Jextra Social Fund and some funds for a community center in a city in which Jextra planned to build a store. Chong did not know the details, but the rumors were that much of the money went to local politicians instead of the community center. Not long after the incident, Jextra’s country manager in the Philippines was transferred back to Hong Kong to a position that looked like a demotion.

Legal in Malaysia?

Chong thought that the primary school contribution could be illegal in Hong Kong if it circumvented the

Jextra Social Fund. But, perhaps this was normal practice in Malaysia. Chong’s friend said that some local lawyers would probably advise him to make the payments, but to keep the school and flyover pay- ments independent, which would blur the line as to whether the behavior was indeed illegal. Complicating the issue was the question of the expected outcome from the primary school payment. If the school pay- ment speeded up the development process, it could be legal; if it was necessary to make the payment solely as a prerequisite to obtaining the permit, it could be considered a bribe. If the payment was made after the store was built and went directly to a school board budget for future operating expenses, would that be illegal? Chong did not know the answer to these questions.

Various scandals involving alleged bribes and cor- porate contributions had contributed to the recent“retirement” of various elected officials in Malaysia. Both state and federal politicians were using “clean government” as part of their political platforms. The State Investment, Trade and Industry Committee Chairman said that his government would separate itself from the historically tight ties between business, government, and political campaign contributions. At the federal level, the government had promised that foreign direct investment in Malaysia would become transparent, and that giveaways to foreign investors would stop (exactly what giveaways he meant were never specifically identified).

Chong knew that, in the last year, there had been several foreign investors who were rumored to have helped fund different government programs in exchange for favorable treatment. So far, there was no evidence that any of these efforts were illegal or even of much interest to voters and legislators. When a European electronics company opened a new plant in Malaysia, there were many rumors that the company paid a substantial amount of money to a government“education fund.” Chong’s teammate from his football club told him confdentially that the company had paid 2.5 million ringgit to the fund, and that the fund was controlled personally by the Industry and Development Minister, a well-known businessman turned politician, whose wife was dean of the Communications School at the Malaysian Institute of Technology.

Jextra’s Competitors and the

Mayor’s Offer

Chong was aware that Super-Value, one of Jextra’s competitors, was also actively looking at Klang for a new store. Would the mayor make the same offer to Super-Value as he had made to Jextra? If so, when would the offer be made, and would Super-Value be willing to accept it? Perhaps Super-Value was inter- ested in the same site as Jextra. Before Chong could even consider agreeing to the mayor’s primary school request, he needed to think through the details. How would he get the money for the school? Would he identify it in the investment proposal, or try to hide it with other items? Should he get legal advice on his possible criminal liability in Hong Kong? What if he went ahead with the payment, and the money ended up not going to the school? If the press found out, Jextra and Chong could be in big trouble.

Perhaps the best approach would be to decline the mayor’s offer and work through regular channels to get the zoning approval. If that was successful, he would worry about the fyover request later. On the other hand, he did not want to lose access to a prime retail site, and his boss, who was aware of the Klang site, wanted an update on the project next week.

Category Management

A very simplified view of Jextra’s category manage- ment and buying process is as follows. Category managers (CMs) were responsible for driving cate- gory direction and leading an operationally efficient category team to deliver the budget within the frame- work of the corporate goals. A key area of responsi- bility for category managers was working with suppliers to determine the products to order, together with their negotiating prices. For a new supplier, establishing a relationship with a category manager was crucial in getting its products listed by Neigh- bourhood Markets. Category managers negotiated contracts, rebates, equipment, placement, incentives, and other financial and logistical arrangement for their category. Neighbourhood Markets in Malaysia had category managers for product lines such as fruits and vegetables, meat, frozen foods, and beverages. Product buyers managed the bundling of orders and actual buying from suppliers at the negotiated prices. Over and above this organizational setup, there were few defined processes, leaving a fair amount of lee- way to the category managers because they decided what to order and what not to order.

Arif Alam

Arif Alam was 32 years old, and had been with Jextra in Malaysia since the company entered the market. He had worked his way up from a sales apprentice position to category manager for fruits and vegeta- bles. His responsibilities included building and man- aging contacts with suppliers, listing suppliers and products, negotiating prices, and working closely with buyers to ensure that the supplier relationship was smoothly managed.

As Alam’s boss, Chong had a reasonable under- standing of how the Malaysian buying process worked, but he did not know all the details, and cer- tainly was not involved in day-to-day activities. What Chong had learned over the past few months was that there were ample opportunities for CMs to exploit the system for personal gain. One typical scheme involved company samples and rewards. Most suppli- ers provided CMs with a large supply of product sam- ples that could be sold on the grey market. CMs and their spouses often traveled extensively to product presentations of certain suppliers. These events usu- ally took place at luxury hotels, and often in resort set- tings. Since Alam was a CM for fruits and vegetables, he might be provided with other products, such as small appliances like toasters or coffeemakers. Another typical scheme was for suppliers to provide rewards tied to performance and sales. These could range from household appliances to expensive jewelry and watches. These rewards could be kept or sold. There were even cases where companies owned by relatives of CMs had to be paid by suppliers in order for the suppliers to get their products sold by Jextra.

Besides his suspicions that Alam was accepting gifts, or even taking bribes, Chong had heard rumors about a scheme between Alam and his father-in-law. Alam referred suppliers willing to be listed for a new product to his father-in-law who, as a side job, ran a trading agency that “established contact to Jextra Stores.” The agency received a commission of 0.5 percent for all goods covered by the agency agree- ment. It was rumored that Alam rarely listed suppliers and products not covered by the agency.

Bribery

The bribery issue was particularly troubling. Bribery of retail buyers was as old as the retail industry itself. The bribery process works as shown in the following exam- ple. A buyer who paid 50 ringgit for a pair of blue jeans the previous year negotiates a 45 ringgit price based on a larger order. Another clothesmaker offers the same pants for 42 ringgit each. In order to retain the big order, the first vendor matches the 42 ringgit price and gives the buyer 2 ringgit for each pair of blue jeans. The bribe is undetectable, because the buyer sets up a phony company that serves as a middleman in the transaction. The vendor bills the retailer for 42 ringgit a pair and funnels the 2 ringgit to the buyer through the dummy corporation, calling it “an agency commission.” After the deal is done, the vendor keeps the order and the retailer pays less for the pants than a year ago. The buyer looks good because the price paid was lower than a year ago. The buyer believes,“I deserve the money because I am helping the com- pany.” For a few years, the retailer may benefit by hav- ing lower costs. Longer term, the retailer’s costs may increase because the buyer has an obligation to the vendor and may end up paying less-competitive prices. The retailer may also end up with merchandise that is inferior in quality and difficult to sell because it was purchased by a corrupt buyer.

Chong’s Decision

Chong had a dilemma. Although he suspected that Alam was involved in “dirty” buying, how could he find out? His colleagues might know, but they could be involved in the same activities. Jextra was doing well and, as far as Chong knew, except for bribery, most of the behaviors were not criminal in Malaysia. What if he set up an investigation? If he found noth- ing, he could alienate his people and lose personal credibility. He might find that large parts of his prod- uct category management were engaged in similar actions. What should he do then? The whole busi- ness might be at risk if he were to shut it down. He could lose his top CMs and disrupt supplier relation- ships. Plus, how would he actually investigate the CMs—hire an outside investigator? Talk with suppli- ers? Find a disgruntled employee? Spy on his employees? This was all new to him.

Proving any of his suspicions would be difficult. Alam was a respected member of the team. Aside from rumors and hearsay, Chong had no real evi- dence of bribery or kickbacks. Alam’s lifestyle did not seem out of the ordinary. Chong would need clear evidence, and an outside investigator would mean added cost. The investigation could take months, or even years, and Chong might be gone from Malaysia by the time the process was com- pleted. In addition, this would take a lot of his time, and he was already working almost 60 hours a week.

Chong needed to keep growing the business and meet his financial targets. It was critical for him to deal with the mayor’s proposal appropriately and ensure that Jextra’s chosen site did not end up with one of his competitors. Maybe he should wait before doing anything about Alam.

Appendix: Excerpts from Jextra’s Business Conduct Code

Summary

Jextra is an international company with a strong rep- utation for providing quality products. We continually seek to deliver the best results for the Company the highest return to our shareholders, and the most beneficial service to our customers.

Ethical conduct is defined as conduct that is mor- ally correct and honourable. To maintain our valuable reputation and to build on our success, we must conduct our business in a manner that is ethical as well as legal. This Business Conduct Code estab- lishes Jextra’s commitment to following ethical busi- ness practices. It details the fundamental principles of ethical business behaviour, and defines the responsibilities of all directors, officers, associates, and Company representatives.

Jextra is committed to conducting business lawfully and ethically. Every associate is obligated to act at all times with honesty and integrity. We expect you to bring good judgment and a sense of integrity to all your business decisions. While it is not possible to list all policies and laws to be observed, or all conflicts of interest or prohibited business practices to be avoided, this Business Conduct Code details the company’s expectations for associate conduct, and helps associ- ates make the right decisions. Associates are expected to know the company’s policies and comply with them.

Applicability

Associates who supervise others have an important responsibility to lead by example and maintain the high- est standards of behaviour. If you supervise others, you should create an environment where employees under- stand their responsibilities and feel comfortable raising issues and concerns without fear of retaliation. If an issue is raised, you must take prompt action to address the concerns and correct problems that arise.

You must also make sure that each associate under your supervision understands our Code and the policies, laws, and regulations that affect our workplace. Most importantly, you must ensure that employees understand that business performance is never more important than ethical business conduct.

As a Jextra employee, you are expected to comply with both the letter and the spirit of our Code. This means you must understand and comply with all of the company policies, laws, and regulations that apply to your job, even if you feel pressured to do otherwise. Our Code also requires you to seek guidance if you have questions or concerns, and to cooperate fully in any investigation of suspected violations of the Code that may arise in the course of your employment.

Bribery

It is illegal to pay or receive a bribe intended to influ- ence business conduct or behaviour. Our guideline goes beyond the standard set by the law, and prohi- bits any activity that creates the appearance of any- thing improper, anything that may embarrass the company or anything that may harm our corporate reputation. No assets of the company or other funds may be used to bribe or influence any decision by an officer, director, employee, or agent of another company, or any governmental employee or official.

It may be acceptable to entertain or provide minor gifts to guests or suppliers, as long as the expenses are reasonable, consistent with good business prac- tices, and do not appear improper. Any gift, enter- tainment, or benefit provided must be modest in scope and value. You should consult with your super- visor if you have any questions about whether any gift-giving activity is appropriate. Never provide a gift, entertainment, or benefit that contravenes any applicable law or contract term or that is large enough to influence, or appear to influence, the reci- pient’s business decisions.

Associates should not accept money, gifts, or excessive entertainment from any guest, contractor, or supplier at any time. For more information on gifts, entertainment, and related issues, see the Conflicts of Interest guidelines.

International laws strictly prohibit giving, promis- ing, or offering money, or anything else of value, directly or indirectly, to officials of foreign govern- ments or foreign political candidates in order to obtain or retain business or any improper business advantage. Never give, promise, offer or authorize, directly or indirectly, any payments to government officials of any country.

Conflicts of Interest

Associates must avoid any situation in which their personal interests conflict with the interests of Jextra. If a circumstance arises in which your interests could potentially conflict with the interests of Jextra, it must be disclosed immediately to both your supervisor and Human Resources for review. Associates should be vigilant about recognizing potential conflicts. You must always consider whether your activities and associations with other individuals could negatively affect your ability to make business decisions in the best interest of the company or result in disclosing

nonpublic company information. If so, you may have a real or perceived conflict of interest. Below is a list of potential conflicts of interest.

l Owning a substantial amount of stock in any com- peting business or in any organization that does business with us.

l Serving as a director, manager, consultant, employee, or independent contractor for any organisation that does business with us, or is a competitor—except with our company’s specific prior knowledge and consent.

l Accepting or receiving gifts of any value or favours, compensation, loans, excessive entertain- ment, or similar activities from any individual or organization that does business or wants to do business with us, or is a competitor.

l Taking personal advantage of a business opportunity that is within the scope of Jextra’s business—such as by purchasing property that Jextra is interested in acquiring.

Related Party Transactions

Employees and immediate family or household mem- bers may not serve as a supplier or customer of the Company, or otherwise engage in business dealings with the Company, without the written consent of a member of the Executive Management Team. You or a member of your immediate family or household may not accept business opportunities, commissions, or advantageous financial arrangements from a cus- tomer, supplier, or business partner of the Company. You may not purchase for personal use the goods or services of the Company’s suppliers on terms other than those available to the general public or estab- lished by Company policy. You may not take advan- tage of any business opportunity that you learn about in the course of your employment.

Questions:

1.What cross-cultural differences may be at play in the Jextra case? What factors are motivating the key players in this case?

2. Regarding the requests for roads and schools, does Chong understand exactly what the Mayor has asked of him? Is he correct to assume that this may be a request for a bribe? What are Chong’s options as to how to proceed? What are your concerns for Chong going ahead with a contribution to the school? What are your concerns for Chong refusing to contribute?

3. Considering the need to be a manager with a global mindset, what should Chong do with his suspicions regarding Alam?

Quintiles Transnational: Dennis Gillings founded Quntiles Transnational in 1982 when he realized that drug companies were great at inventing new medicines but not particularly good at analyzing the vast amounts of data that came out of clinical trials. He thought drug testing should be broken down into a series of standardized steps and he signed up a network of doctors interesting in enrolling patients in clinical trials. In the ten years leading up to 2010, Quintiles had conducted 4,700 trials on 2.7 million patients.

Quintiles also established a large contract sales organization (CSO) to support its pharmaceutical company clients. Large pharmaceutical companies, faced with cost pressures as well as the costs of maintaining their own sales forces, have increasingly turned to CSOs like the Innovex division of Quintiles, PDI Inc., or inVentive Health to provide variable cost “flex reps” as an alternative to adding the fixed cost they would incur if they added to their own sales forces. CSOs are widely used in therapeutic areas that require somewhat less scientific knowledge, like respiratory, dermatology, and lifestyle. The growth rate in contract sales and marketing was projected at 35% to 2015.

Question:  What are the risks of using or not using the CSO arm of Quintiles. 150 words or more.

Split the Number

IN JAVASCRIPT

Programming challenge description:

You are given a number N and a pattern. The pattern consists of lowercase latin letters and one operation "+" or "-". The challenge is to split the number and evaluate it according to this pattern e.g.
1232 ab+cd -> a:1, b:2, c:3, d:2 -> 12+32 -> 44

Input:

Your program should read lines from standard input. Each line contains the number and the pattern separated by a single whitespace. The number will be in range [100, 1000000000]. All test cases contain valid expressions (no leading zeros).

Output:

Print out the result of the pattern evaluation.

Test 1

Test InputDownload Test 1 Input

3413289830 a-bcdefghij

Expected OutputDownload Test 1 Input

-413289827

Test 2

Test InputDownload Test 2 Input

776 a+bc

Expected OutputDownload Test 2 Input

83

Debra Dillinger, Inc. was incorporated in Connecticut in 1992. Debra Dillinger owns 82% of the stock of Debra Dillinger, Inc. Unrelated individuals hold the remaining stock. In 1993 Debra formed Connecticut Motors and in 1995 Debra formed Long Island Sound Motors. Debra owned 85% of the stock of Connecticut Motors and 85% of the stock of Long Island Sound Motors. Unrelated individuals own the remaining stock of these two corporations. All three corporations are involved in the business of buying, selling and repairing foreign-made sports cars. Each corporation owns a different franchise for selling and servicing different makes of foreign-made cars. In 2018, Connecticut Motors sold all of its shop equipment and vacated its business address. It did not purchase any new automobiles. Long Island Sound Motors had two locations in Connecticut. It closed one location in early 2018 and then closed the other location in mid-2018. All previously sold cars for Connecticut Motors and Long Island Sound Motors were serviced through Debra Dillinger, Inc. On November 1, 2018, Connecticut Motors and Long Island Sound Motors merged into Debra Dillinger, Inc. Connecticut Motors and Long Island Sound Motors were both insolvent at the time of the merger. Debra Dillinger, Inc. issued its stock to the shareholders of Connecticut Motors and Long Island Sound Motors. On the date of the merger Connecticut Motors was indebted to Debra Dillinger, Inc. in the amount of $32,450 and Long Island Sound Motors was indebted to Debra Dillinger, Inc. for $14,300. Both corporations were insolvent. What issues may the IRS raise concerning this merger? Assume that the merger meets all Connecticut statutes.

Suppose Tokyo is planning to construct a new public park. Based on some market research, they have determined that the town’s 50 residents can be divided into two types with respect to their benefit from this public good. 20 of the town’s residents are of Type 1 and the other 30 residents are of Type 2. Each resident's individual demand for acres of park space is given by:

Type 1: Q_D = 20 – P

Type 2: Q_D = 40 – 2P

a. Solve for the aggregate demand of Tokyo’s 50 residents as a function of the number of acres. Be sure to write down equations for each section of the aggregate demand curve, as well as the interval of quantities each section spans.

b. Graph the aggregate demand curve calculated in part a. Make sure to label both intercepts, slopes, and the intersection of the two sections.

c. Suppose each acre of public park has a marginal cost of MC = 200 + Q . Solve for the socially efficient number of acres for the town to construct.

d. Calculate the total surplus the 50 residents of Tokyo's gain from constructing this public park.