a question to this response: In review of the case study, its clear that the budget is off and the income is less than the expected. What's interesting is there is an increase in 'units' and 'sales revenue'. Upon further review of the performance report, there were dramatic increases in the 'overhead expenses', 'indirect labor' and 'administrative expense'. Those respective variances are: $8950, $3400, and $3000. I feel those are clear weaknesses in the budget despite all the other variances that seem to increase in correlation of the units. The behavioral implications of Sara's remarks seem almost unjustified and bashful despite nobody but herself having the chance to review the report. If what is said about Ken's reaction is sincere and he did everything to provide the best work possible, Sara did nothing but bring down a key resource to her operation in Ken. If I were Sara and I had a full understanding of what happened, I would address the issue then demonstrate how it can be approved upon. Until that moment, Ken will be forced waste time and question his thinking, before coming upon a solution. If I were to prepare a more informative performance report, I would want to fully understand the scaled increased in expenses correlated with the increase in revenue, additionally, the supply and distribution costs. Then I'd ensure a full breakdown of the significant increase in administrative expenses and indirect labor that is 'fixed