Florence Industries, Inc. is a company which provides three entirely different types of products and services through three divisions of the company: consumer products division, industrial products division and professional services. Each division is treated as an entirely different company and the performance evaluation criteria is return on assets in recent years after major shift. Although, the divisions used to be treated as profit centres, this decision meant they are treated more as investment centres. The Company in 2008 & 2009:
From the income statement for 2008 and 2009, it is noticed that there is an increase in revenue by 4% and 11% increase in net profit in 2009. From balance sheet for 2008 and 2009 it is noticed that Florence has issued shared and borrowed long term loan in order to invest in project required high asset cost as the company asset has increased by $ 50,460,000 during 2009. The Company has also declared a dividend to equity of $ 12,570,000 during 2009 and keep $ $11,736,000 to meet future expansion and expense of business Issues and Analysis:
Rejecting Proposals Just Based On Gross Margin Requirement: CFO Ben Johnson has recently rejected the new product proposal of product development manager of consumer products division Calvin Marone as its estimated return of 13.67%(exhibit 1) per year was less than the 15% minimum gross return % requirement any new investment proposal should generate in order to get approve. The company’s 2007 gross return was 9.3 % and Ben estimated that it should go up easily to 12% and set target for each division to bring new product proposal of more than 15% gross return generating capabilities. Then again, gross return of Company in 2009 after rejecting the Marone’s proposal was 9.4%. Suppose if Marone’s proposal would have been accepted, then the Company 2009 gross return would have been approximately 9.6% (Exhibit 2) which would have been even higher than 2008 gross return of 9.5%. So, rejecting proposals that would have actually been beneficial just based on gross margin estimations seems redundant. Return on Investment Comparatively Low In Terms of Free Cash Flow: As per the balance sheet of Florence, it is noticed that there has been an increase in cash balance of $ 390,000 during the year 2009 as compared to 2008 balance. During 2009, the Company has generated cash of $ 42,756,000 from operating activities and $ 13,950,000 from finance activities. Further the Company has used cash of $ 56,316,000(Exhibit 3) in investing activities. Company has used its majority of cash flow generated from operational and financing activities in investing activities. However in case of Florence, the free cash flow is less than the amount of investment made by the company in 2009 which indicate that the company is highly dependent on third party finance for expansion. However, the company has taken initiatives to counter this. They have broken down divisions into investment centres as compared to cost centres which will help enhance the performance of the divisions and influence them to get more out of investments made. By converting the divisions in investment units, it become the overall responsibility of division managers to generate the profit to the company not only on the basis of revenue and expense but also on the basis of total asset employed in order to run the division. Same Performance Evaluation Standard for Each Division: There are some negatives that came out of the Investment Center approach. First, it may not be appropriate to use one Gross return performance standard for all divisions of Florence, considering differences in type of service provided, products, operations, risks, and differences in measurement because of asset age. These divisions cannot be compared with the same yardstick. For example, Professional services division does not use much asset so it will be inappropriate to measure its performance on the basis of gross return % (exhibit 4)....
Please join StudyMode to read the full document