The controls at the Bellagio Casino Resort case was designed with several purposes in mind. First, it illustrates a control system that is dominated by action and personnel controls, rather than results controls. The analysis of this system leads to insights about some of the factors that limit the feasibility of results controls.

Second, the case can lead into a discussion of what is meant by the term tight control. The case presents an excellent example of the application of tight action controls in the table games areas of the casino.

Finally, the case can lead into a discussion of the meaning of what auditors refer to as internal control, which is a subset of the broader area of management control. The case describes an excellent system of controls over cash and cash-equivalent stocks and movements thereof. These controls, which fall in the category of internal controls, are necessary but not sufficient to guarantee good management control.

Questions

• Focus on three key roles at mainly three levels of authority in the casino blackjack dealers, pit bosses, and the vice president of table games. How would you characterize the control strategy (e.g., tight vs. loose) used over each of these roles?
• Prepare a list of the controls described in the case. What control problems are they designed to address? Are the managers interviewed for the case justified in being proud of their companys control system? Why or why not?
• Are any of the control systems in place at the Bellagio suitable for firms in other industries?

Submit your response in 2-3-pages, Include a cover page and a reference page. When citing sources, please use proper APA citing and reference techniques.