Former CEO Ron Johnson designed and tried to implement a new strategy for JCPenney (JCP). However, the firm’s tar- get “middle market” customers did not respond well to the new strategy and the innovations associated with it. In fact, some say that Johnson’s innovations and strategy alienated what had historically been the firm’s target customers.

Johnson came to JCP after successful stints at Target and Apple. At Apple, he was admired for the major role he played in developing that firm’s wildly successful Apple Stores, which a number of analysts say brought about “a new world order in retailing.” It was Johnson’s ability to establish what some viewed as path-breaking visions and to develop innovations to reach them that appealed to JCP’s board when he was hired.

Comparing JCP to the Titanic, Johnson came to the CEO position believing that innovation was the key to shaking up the firm. Moreover, he reminded analysts, employees, and others that he came to JCP to “transform” the firm, not to marginally improve its performance. Describing what he intended to do at JCP, Johnson said that “in the U.S., the department store has a chance to regain its status as the leader in style, the leader in excitement. It will be a period of true innovation for this company.”

The essence of Johnson’s vision for JCP was twofold. First, he eliminated the firm’s practice of marking up prices on goods and then offering discounts, heavy pro- motions, and coupons to entice its bargain-hunting tar- get customers. Instead, Johnson introduced a three-tiered pricing structure that focused on what were labelled “everyday low prices.” To customers though, the pricing structure was confusing and failed to convince them that the “everyday low prices” were actually “low enough” compared to competitors’ prices.

Innovation was at the core of the second part of the new CEO’s vision, with one objective being to give JCP a more youthful image. The innovations Johnson implemented to create this image included establishing branded boutiques within JCP stores. To do this, JCP set up branded boutiques “along a wide aisle, or ‘street’ dotted with places to sit, grab a cup of coffee, or play with Lego blocks.” With an initial intention of having 100 branded shops within JCP stores by 2015, Johnson asked people “to envision an entire store of shops with a street and square in the middle representing a new way to interface with the customer.” Disney was one of the brands to be included as a shopping destination, as were Caribou Coffee, Dallas- based Paciugo Gelato & Cafe?, and Giggle, a store dedicated to making “it a whole lot easier to become a parent” by offering innovative and stylish “must-have baby items.” In addition, and as noted in Chapter 4’s Opening Case, Levi’s, IZOD, Liz Claiborne, and Martha Stewart branded items were to be included as part of the boutiques.

But, these innovations and the strategy used to exploit them did not work. So what went wrong? Considering the components of the model shown in Figure 13.2 yields a framework to answer this question. While it is true that Johnson had an entrepreneurial mind-set, cross-functional teams were not used to facilitate implementation of the desired innovations such as the boutique stores. In essence, it seems that Johnson himself, with- out the involvement of others throughout the firm, was instrumental in deciding that the boutiques were to be used as well as how they were to be established and operated within selected JCP stores. In addition, the values associated with efforts to change JCP from its historic roots of being a general merchant in the space between department stores and discounters to becoming a firm with a young, hip image were not shared among the firm’s stakeholders. Finally, Johnson’s work as an entrepreneurial leader was, seemingly, not as effective as should have been the case. Because of mistakes such as these, the level of success desired at JCP through internally developed innovations was not attained.

1. The new CEO tried to be innovative. Were the innovations introduced, more incremental or more novel? Please explain.

2. What are the reasons that the innovations implemented by the new CEO failed?

3. What recommendations do you have for turning around the performance of JCP?

NB:

1. Questions: 3.1 - 3.3 are related. Make use of the information provided in 3.1 to answer 3.2 & 3.3.

2. Questions: 4.1 - 4.4 are related. Make use of the information provided in 4.1 to answer 4.2, 4.3 & 4.4.

3. Questions: 5.1 - 5.3 are related. Make use of the information provided in 5.1 to answer 5.2 & 5.3.

3.1 An IQ test was given to five MBA students before and after they completed the MBA degree. Test whether there is any improvement (increase) in the IQ of the same students after completing MBA degree. Note: μ1 = population mean IQ before; μ2 = population mean IQ after. Hint: If the mean IQ has improved, then the mean IQ difference ∂ < 0; otherwise, the mean IQ difference ∂ > 0. Question: Formulate the Null and Alternative Hypothesis for this problem.

2 points

Students 1 2 3 4 5

IQ test scores before MBA 110 120 123 132 125

IQ test score After MBA 120 118 125 136 121

use above information

a) H0: IQ mean difference ∂≥0 vs H1: IQ mean difference ∂>0

b) H0: IQ mean difference ∂≤0 vs H1: IQ mean difference ∂>0

c) H0: IQ mean difference ∂=0 vs H1: IQ mean difference ∂≠0

d) H0: IQ mean difference ∂≥0 vs H1: IQ mean difference ∂<0

3.2 Make use of the information provided in the previous question calculate the t-statistic using T-test and tick the correct answer below.

10 points

a) t-statistic = -2.319

b) t-statistic = 0.1028

c) t-statistic = -1.028

d) t-statistic = -0.816

3.3 Based on your empirical evidence in the previous question make your statistical conclusion at the 5% level of significance whether there is any improvement in IQ of the same students after completing MBA degree. Tick the correct answer below.

5 points

a) None of these answers is correct.

b) Fail to reject the Null hypothesis, the Null is probably true that IQ remains the same has not improved after completing the MBA degree.

c) Reject the Null hypothesis. The alternative is probably true that IQ has improved after completing the MBA degree.

d) Accept the Null hypothesis because the t-statistic is very close to zero.

4.1 A company that manufacturers wooden products (e.g. garden furniture, ladders, benches) regularly maintains its lathe machines, which are used for cutting and shaping components. The manager would like to know whether the cost of machine maintenance is related to the age of the machines. For a random sample of 8 lathe machines in the company's factory, the annual maintenance cost (in N$100s) and age of each machine was recorded. Question: Identify the independent variable and the dependent variable. Tick the correct answer below.

2 points

Machine 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Age 4 2 3 8 6 7 1 2

Annual Cost 45 20 39 66 58 50 14 18

Table 2. Maintenance costs analysis

a) Machine =Independent variable & Age =Dependent variable

b) Machine & Age =Independent variables, Annual Cost =Dependent variable

c) Annual cost=Dependent variable & Age =Independent variable

d) Age =Independent variable & Machine =Dependent variable

4.2 Use the information given in the previous question and using the method of least squares, which of the equation listed below represent the best fitting regression line between the age of lathe machines and their annual maintenance costs? Tick the correct answer below.

10 points

a) Machine & Age =7.1306 + 9.336Annual costs

b) Annual cost = 7.336 +6.1306Age

c) Annual cost = 9.336 + 7.1306Age

d) Age = 7.1306 + 9.431Annual cost

4.3 Calculate the sample correlation coefficient (r) between the annual maintenance cost and age of each machine. Question: Which of the options below is the correct answer?

5 points

a) r = -0.91

b) r = 0.89

c) r = 0.87

d) r = 0.94

4.4 Question: What is the expected average maintenance cost of a lathe machine that is five years old? Tick the correct answer below.

4 points

a) 45.04

b) 40.67

c) 42.77

d) 41.77

5.1 In May 2010, the Snap poll asked British adults their opinion on whether they are in favour of or opposed to using profiling to identify potential terrorists at airports, a practice used routinely in Israel, but not in the UK. Does opinion depend on age? Or are opinion and age independent? Table below show some numbers from Snap Poll. Question: Formulate the Null and Alternative Hypothesis for this problem.

2 points

Age 18-29 30-49 50-64 65+

Favour 57 66 77 87

Oppose 43 34 23 13

Table 3. Snap Poll Results

a) The null hypothesis is that Opinion and Age are the variables.

b) The null hypothesis is that Opinion and Age are associated vs. The alternative hypothesis is that Opinion and Age are not associated.

c) The null hypothesis is that Opinion and Age are independent vs. The alternative hypothesis is that Opinion and Age are dependent.

d) The alternative hypothesis is that Opinion and Age are independent vs. The null hypothesis is that Opinion and Age are dependent.

5.2 Does opinion depend on age? Or are opinion and age independent? Using the information in the previous question calculate the Chi-square-statistic using Chi-square-test. Tick the correct answer below.

10 points

a) Chi-squares-stat = 25.20

b) Chi-squares-stat = 14.76

c) Chi-squares-stat = 23.20

d) Chi-squares-stat = 21.19

5.3 Based on your empirical evidence in the previous question, and using a 5% level of significance, make your statistical conclusion about the association between opinion and age. Tick the correct answer below.

5 points

a) Reject the Null hypothesis and conclude that Age and Opinion about Profiling are not independent. The alternative is probably true.

b) Accept the alternative and conclude that Age and Opinion about Profiling are independent.

c) Fail to reject the Null hypothesis, the alternative is probably false.

d) None of these answers is correct.

Described below are six independent and unrelated situations involving accounting changes. Each change occurs during 2021 before any adjusting entries or closing entries were prepared. Assume the tax rate for each company is 25% in all years. Any tax effects should be adjusted through the deferred tax liability account.

1. Fleming Home Products introduced a new line of commercial awnings in 2020 that carry a one-year warranty against manufacturer’s defects. Based on industry experience, warranty costs were expected to approximate 3% of sales. Sales of the awnings in 2020 were $4,100,000. Accordingly, warranty expense and a warranty liability of $123,000 were recorded in 2020. In late 2021, the company’s claims experience was evaluated, and it was determined that claims were far fewer than expected: 2% of sales rather than 3%. Sales of the awnings in 2021 were $4,600,000, and warranty expenditures in 2021 totaled $104,650.
2. On December 30, 2017, Rival Industries acquired its office building at a cost of $1,120,000. It was depreciated on a straight-line basis assuming a useful life of 40 years and no salvage value. However, plans were finalized in 2021 to relocate the company headquarters at the end of 2025. The vacated office building will have a salvage value at that time of $760,000.
3. Hobbs-Barto Merchandising, Inc., changed inventory cost methods to LIFO from FIFO at the end of 2021 for both financial statement and income tax purposes. Under FIFO, the inventory at January 1, 2021, is $750,000.
4. At the beginning of 2018, the Hoffman Group purchased office equipment at a cost of $396,000. Its useful life was estimated to be 10 years with no salvage value. The equipment was depreciated by the sum-of-the-years’-digits method. On January 1, 2021, the company changed to the straight-line method.
5. In November 2019, the State of Minnesota filed suit against Huggins Manufacturing Company, seeking penalties for violations of clean air laws. When the financial statements were issued in 2020, Huggins had not reached a settlement with state authorities, but legal counsel advised Huggins that it was probable the company would have to pay $260,000 in penalties. Accordingly, the following entry was recorded:

Late in 2021, a settlement was reached with state authorities to pay a total of $416,000 in penalties.

6. At the beginning of 2021, Jantzen Specialties, which uses the sum-of-the-years’-digits method, changed to the straight-line method for newly acquired buildings and equipment. The change increased current year net earnings by $511,000.

Required:
For each situation:
1. Identify the type of change.
2. Prepare any journal entry necessary as a direct result of the change, as well as any adjusting entry for 2021 related to the situation described.

Described below are six independent and unrelated situations involving accounting changes. Each change occurs during 2021 before any adjusting entries or closing entries were prepared. Assume the tax rate for each company is 25% in all years. Any tax effects should be adjusted through the deferred tax liability account.

1. Fleming Home Products introduced a new line of commercial awnings in 2020 that carry a one-year warranty against manufacturer’s defects. Based on industry experience, warranty costs were expected to approximate 2% of sales. Sales of the awnings in 2020 were $2,600,000. Accordingly, warranty expense and a warranty liability of $52,000 were recorded in 2020. In late 2021, the company’s claims experience was evaluated, and it was determined that claims were far fewer than expected: 1% of sales rather than 2%. Sales of the awnings in 2021 were $3,100,000, and warranty expenditures in 2021 totaled $70,525.
2. On December 30, 2017, Rival Industries acquired its office building at a cost of $820,000. It was depreciated on a straight-line basis assuming a useful life of 40 years and no salvage value. However, plans were finalized in 2021 to relocate the company headquarters at the end of 2025. The vacated office building will have a salvage value at that time of $610,000.
3. Hobbs-Barto Merchandising, Inc., changed inventory cost methods to LIFO from FIFO at the end of 2021 for both financial statement and income tax purposes. Under FIFO, the inventory at January 1, 2021, is $600,000.
4. At the beginning of 2018, the Hoffman Group purchased office equipment at a cost of $231,000. Its useful life was estimated to be 10 years with no salvage value. The equipment was depreciated by the sum-of-the-years’-digits method. On January 1, 2021, the company changed to the straight-line method.
5. In November 2019, the State of Minnesota filed suit against Huggins Manufacturing Company, seeking penalties for violations of clean air laws. When the financial statements were issued in 2020, Huggins had not reached a settlement with state authorities, but legal counsel advised Huggins that it was probable the company would have to pay $110,000 in penalties. Accordingly, the following entry was recorded:

Late in 2021, a settlement was reached with state authorities to pay a total of $251,000 in penalties.

6. At the beginning of 2021, Jantzen Specialties, which uses the sum-of-the-years’-digits method, changed to the straight-line method for newly acquired buildings and equipment. The change increased current year net earnings by $346,000.

Required:
For each situation:
1. Identify the type of change.
2. Prepare any journal entry necessary as a direct result of the change, as well as any adjusting entry for 2021 related to the situation described.
  

Described below are six independent and unrelated situations involving accounting changes. Each change occurs during 2021 before any adjusting entries or closing entries were prepared. Assume the tax rate for each company is 25% in all years. Any tax effects should be adjusted through the deferred tax liability account.

a. Fleming Home Products introduced a new line of commercial awnings in 2020 that carry a one-year warranty against manufacturer’s defects. Based on industry experience, warranty costs were expected to approximate 4% of sales. Sales of the awnings in 2020 were $2,500,000. Accordingly, warranty expense and a warranty liability of $100,000 were recorded in 2020. In late 2021, the company’s claims experience was evaluated, and it was determined that claims were far fewer than expected: 3% of sales rather than 4%. Sales of the awnings in 2021 were $3,000,000, and warranty expenditures in 2021 totaled $68,250.

b. On December 30, 2017, Rival Industries acquired its office building at a cost of $800,000. It was depreciated on a straight-line basis assuming a useful life of 40 years and no salvage value. However, plans were finalized in 2021 to relocate the company headquarters at the end of 2025. The vacated office building will have a salvage value at that time of $600,000.

c. Hobbs-Barto Merchandising, Inc., changed inventory cost methods to LIFO from FIFO at the end of 2021 for both financial statement and income tax purposes. Under FIFO, the inventory at January 1, 2021, is $590,000.

d. At the beginning of 2018, the Hoffman Group purchased office equipment at a cost of $220,000. Its useful life was estimated to be 10 years with no salvage value. The equipment was depreciated by the sum-of-the-years’-digits method. On January 1, 2021, the company changed to the straight-line method.

e. In November 2019, the State of Minnesota filed suit against Huggins Manufacturing Company, seeking penalties for violations of clean air laws. When the financial statements were issued in 2020, Huggins had not reached a settlement with state authorities, but legal counsel advised Huggins that it was probable the company would have to pay $100,000 in penalties. Accordingly, the following entry was recorded:

Late in 2021, a settlement was reached with state authorities to pay a total of $240,000 in penalties.

f. At the beginning of 2021, Jantzen Specialties, which uses the sum-of-the-years’-digits method, changed to the straight-line method for newly acquired buildings and equipment. The change increased current year net earnings by $335,000.

Required:
For each situation:
1. Identify the type of change, change in accounting estimates or change in accounting principle
2. Prepare any journal entry necessary as a direct result of the change or any adjusting entry for 2021 related to the situation described

Described below are six independent and unrelated situations involving accounting changes. Each change occurs during 2021 before any adjusting entries or closing entries were prepared. Assume the tax rate for each company is 25% in all years. Any tax effects should be adjusted through the deferred tax liability account.

1. Fleming Home Products introduced a new line of commercial awnings in 2020 that carry a one-year warranty against manufacturer’s defects. Based on industry experience, warranty costs were expected to approximate 2% of sales. Sales of the awnings in 2020 were $3,600,000. Accordingly, warranty expense and a warranty liability of $72,000 were recorded in 2020. In late 2021, the company’s claims experience was evaluated, and it was determined that claims were far fewer than expected: 1% of sales rather than 2%. Sales of the awnings in 2021 were $4,100,000, and warranty expenditures in 2021 totaled $93,275.
2. On December 30, 2017, Rival Industries acquired its office building at a cost of $1,020,000. It was depreciated on a straight-line basis assuming a useful life of 40 years and no salvage value. However, plans were finalized in 2021 to relocate the company headquarters at the end of 2025. The vacated office building will have a salvage value at that time of $710,000.
3. Hobbs-Barto Merchandising, Inc., changed inventory cost methods to LIFO from FIFO at the end of 2021 for both financial statement and income tax purposes. Under FIFO, the inventory at January 1, 2021, is $700,000.
4. At the beginning of 2018, the Hoffman Group purchased office equipment at a cost of $341,000. Its useful life was estimated to be 10 years with no salvage value. The equipment was depreciated by the sum-of-the-years’-digits method. On January 1, 2021, the company changed to the straight-line method.
5. In November 2019, the State of Minnesota filed suit against Huggins Manufacturing Company, seeking penalties for violations of clean air laws. When the financial statements were issued in 2020, Huggins had not reached a settlement with state authorities, but legal counsel advised Huggins that it was probable the company would have to pay $210,000 in penalties. Accordingly, the following entry was recorded:

Late in 2021, a settlement was reached with state authorities to pay a total of $361,000 in penalties.

6. At the beginning of 2021, Jantzen Specialties, which uses the sum-of-the-years’-digits method, changed to the straight-line method for newly acquired buildings and equipment. The change increased current year net earnings by $456,000.

1. Prepare any journal entry necessary as a direct result of the change, as well as any adjusting entry for 2021 related to the situation described. (If no entry is required for a transaction/event, select "No journal entry required" in the first account field.)

• Record journal entry as a direct result of the change.

Described below are six independent and unrelated situations involving accounting changes. Each change occurs during 2021 before any adjusting entries or closing entries were prepared. Assume the tax rate for each company is 25% in all years. Any tax effects should be adjusted through the deferred tax liability account.

1. Fleming Home Products introduced a new line of commercial awnings in 2020 that carry a one-year warranty against manufacturer’s defects. Based on industry experience, warranty costs were expected to approximate 3% of sales. Sales of the awnings in 2020 were $3,800,000. Accordingly, warranty expense and a warranty liability of $114,000 were recorded in 2020. In late 2021, the company’s claims experience was evaluated, and it was determined that claims were far fewer than expected: 2% of sales rather than 3%. Sales of the awnings in 2021 were $4,300,000, and warranty expenditures in 2021 totaled $97,825.
2. On December 30, 2017, Rival Industries acquired its office building at a cost of $1,060,000. It was depreciated on a straight-line basis assuming a useful life of 40 years and no salvage value. However, plans were finalized in 2021 to relocate the company headquarters at the end of 2025. The vacated office building will have a salvage value at that time of $730,000.
3. Hobbs-Barto Merchandising, Inc., changed inventory cost methods to LIFO from FIFO at the end of 2021 for both financial statement and income tax purposes. Under FIFO, the inventory at January 1, 2021, is $720,000.
4. At the beginning of 2018, the Hoffman Group purchased office equipment at a cost of $363,000. Its useful life was estimated to be 10 years with no salvage value. The equipment was depreciated by the sum-of-the-years’-digits method. On January 1, 2021, the company changed to the straight-line method.
5. In November 2019, the State of Minnesota filed suit against Huggins Manufacturing Company, seeking penalties for violations of clean air laws. When the financial statements were issued in 2020, Huggins had not reached a settlement with state authorities, but legal counsel advised Huggins that it was probable the company would have to pay $230,000 in penalties. Accordingly, the following entry was recorded:

Late in 2021, a settlement was reached with state authorities to pay a total of $383,000 in penalties.

6. At the beginning of 2021, Jantzen Specialties, which uses the sum-of-the-years’-digits method, changed to the straight-line method for newly acquired buildings and equipment. The change increased current year net earnings by $478,000.

Required:
For each situation:
1. Identify the type of change.
2. Prepare any journal entry necessary as a direct result of the change, as well as any adjusting entry for 2021 related to the situation described.

Described below are six independent and unrelated situations involving accounting changes. Each change occurs during 2021 before any adjusting entries or closing entries were prepared. Assume the tax rate for each company is 25% in all years. Any tax effects should be adjusted through the deferred tax liability account.

1. Fleming Home Products introduced a new line of commercial awnings in 2020 that carry a one-year warranty against manufacturer’s defects. Based on industry experience, warranty costs were expected to approximate 2% of sales. Sales of the awnings in 2020 were $2,900,000. Accordingly, warranty expense and a warranty liability of $58,000 were recorded in 2020. In late 2021, the company’s claims experience was evaluated, and it was determined that claims were far fewer than expected: 1% of sales rather than 2%. Sales of the awnings in 2021 were $3,400,000, and warranty expenditures in 2021 totaled $77,350.
2. On December 30, 2017, Rival Industries acquired its office building at a cost of $880,000. It was depreciated on a straight-line basis assuming a useful life of 40 years and no salvage value. However, plans were finalized in 2021 to relocate the company headquarters at the end of 2025. The vacated office building will have a salvage value at that time of $640,000.
3. Hobbs-Barto Merchandising, Inc., changed inventory cost methods to LIFO from FIFO at the end of 2021 for both financial statement and income tax purposes. Under FIFO, the inventory at January 1, 2021, is $630,000.
4. At the beginning of 2018, the Hoffman Group purchased office equipment at a cost of $264,000. Its useful life was estimated to be 10 years with no salvage value. The equipment was depreciated by the sum-of-the-years’-digits method. On January 1, 2021, the company changed to the straight-line method.
5. In November 2019, the State of Minnesota filed suit against Huggins Manufacturing Company, seeking penalties for violations of clean air laws. When the financial statements were issued in 2020, Huggins had not reached a settlement with state authorities, but legal counsel advised Huggins that it was probable the company would have to pay $140,000 in penalties. Accordingly, the following entry was recorded:

Late in 2021, a settlement was reached with state authorities to pay a total of $284,000 in penalties.

6. At the beginning of 2021, Jantzen Specialties, which uses the sum-of-the-years’-digits method, changed to the straight-line method for newly acquired buildings and equipment. The change increased current year net earnings by $379,000.

Required:
For each situation:
1. Identify the type of change.
2. Prepare any journal entry necessary as a direct result of the change, as well as any adjusting entry for 2021 related to the situation described.

On June 15, 2018, Sanderson Construction entered into a long-term construction contract to build a baseball stadium in Washington, D.C., for $260 million. The expected completion date is April 1, 2020, just in time for the 2020 baseball season. Costs incurred and estimated costs to complete at year-end for the life of the contract are as follows ($ in millions):

Required:
1. Compute the revenue and gross profit will Sanderson report in its 2018, 2019, and 2020 income statements related to this contract assuming Sanderson recognizes revenue over time according to percentage of completion.
2. Compute the revenue and gross profit will Sanderson report in its 2018, 2019, and 2020 income statements related to this contract assuming this project does not qualify for revenue recognition over time.
3. Suppose the estimated costs to complete at the end of 2019 are $110 million instead of $60 million. Compute the amount of revenue and gross profit or loss to be recognized in 2019 using the percentage of completion method.

Required 1

Required 2

Required 3

Compute the revenue and gross profit will Sanderson report in its 2018, 2019, and 2020 income statements related to this contract assuming Sanderson recognizes revenue over time according to percentage of completion. (Enter your answers in millions. Loss amounts should be indicated with a minus sign. Use percentages as calculated and rounded in the table below to arrive at your final answer.)

Compute the revenue and gross profit will Sanderson report in its 2018, 2019, and 2020 income statements related to this contract assuming Sanderson recognizes revenue over time according to percentage of completion. (Enter your answers in millions. Loss amounts should be indicated with a minus sign. Use percentages as calculated and rounded in the table below to arrive at your final answer.)

Show less

Compute the revenue and gross profit will Sanderson report in its 2018, 2019, and 2020 income statements related to this contract assuming this project does not qualify for revenue recognition over time. (Enter your answers in millions. Loss amounts should be indicated with a minus sign.)

Suppose the estimated costs to complete at the end of 2019 are $110 million instead of $60 million. Compute the amount of revenue and gross profit or loss to be recognized in 2019 using the percentage of completion method. (Enter your answers in millions. Use percentages as calculated and rounded in the table below to arrive at your final answer.)