Management Notes

Reference Notes for Management

Which of the following nets the largest productivity improvement? 

Which of the following nets the largest productivity improvement?


A. increase output 15%
B. decrease input 15%
C. increase both output and input by 5%
D. increase output 10%, decrease input 3%
E. decrease input 10%, increase output 3%

The Correct Answer Is:

B. decrease input 15%

Correct Answer Explanation: B. decrease input 15%

Option B, decreasing input by 15%, is the most effective strategy for achieving the largest productivity improvement. This option hones in on the fundamental principle of resource optimization, a critical factor in enhancing overall productivity.

By diminishing the quantity of input required to yield a specific level of output, a company can streamline its operations, curtail costs, and ultimately elevate its efficiency and competitiveness in the market.

Decreasing input by 15% entails identifying methods to maintain the same level of output while utilizing significantly fewer resources. This can be achieved through a variety of means, such as refining processes, adopting more efficient technologies, and implementing improved resource management practices.

For instance, a manufacturing facility might invest in advanced machinery that requires fewer raw materials to produce the same number of finished products. Similarly, a service-oriented business could institute streamlined workflows and automation to curtail the time and materials needed to deliver its services.

One of the primary advantages of decreasing input lies in its immediate impact on a company’s profitability. With reduced resource consumption, expenses related to procurement, storage, and utilization of inputs are substantially diminished.

This leads to improved profit margins, which can be reinvested in the business or passed on to customers, rendering the company more competitive in the market.

Furthermore, decreasing input aligns seamlessly with sustainability goals. By using fewer resources to achieve the same output, a company diminishes its environmental footprint.

This not only resonates with environmentally conscious consumers but also aids the company in adhering to increasingly stringent environmental regulations. It also fosters a positive corporate image, a powerful differentiator in a crowded marketplace.

Now, let’s examine why the other options fall short:

Option A – Increase output by 15%:

While increasing output can be a positive move for a business, it may come at a cost. To achieve this increase, a company might need to invest in additional resources, such as raw materials, labor, or equipment.

This can lead to higher expenses and potentially offset any gains in productivity. Additionally, ramping up production can sometimes lead to inefficiencies and quality control issues if not managed carefully.

Option C – Increase both output and input by 5%:

This option essentially maintains the status quo in terms of productivity. While both output and input are increased by the same percentage, the net productivity gain is zero.

The additional input required to achieve the higher output negates any potential improvement in productivity.

Option D – Increase output by 10% and decrease input by 3%:

This option combines efforts to boost output with a slight reduction in input. While reducing input is a positive step, the 10% increase in output may still demand additional resources.

The net effect on productivity may not be as significant as anticipated, as the efficiency gains from reduced input could potentially be offset by the increased output.

Option E – Decrease input by 10% and increase output by 3%:

Similar to Option D, this choice combines input reduction with output increase. While a 10% reduction in input is substantial and beneficial for productivity, the 3% increase in output might not fully compensate for the reduced input. This could potentially result in lower overall productivity.

It’s important to note that each of these options has its merits and may be suitable for specific situations or industries. However, when it comes to achieving the largest productivity improvement, Option B, which involves decreasing input by 15%, stands out as the most effective.

This is because it directly targets resource optimization, leading to lower costs, improved profit margins, and enhanced environmental sustainability. The other options either do not address resource optimization effectively or introduce potential trade-offs that can impede productivity improvements.

Therefore, a strategic focus on reducing input emerges as the most impactful route to boost productivity in this scenario.

Related Posts


Leave a Comment