Costs, Prices and Results’ Management: A Study Conducted in Fruit Canning Companies Located in Rio Grande do Sul State, Brazil
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to examine issues related to the management of inventory, working capital, pricing process and costs in companies operating in the fruit canning segment in the Brazilian state of Rio Grande do Sul. The researched management practices have often been addressed in literature as instruments for achieving greater business efficiency and effectiveness. This empirical study was carried out in 2009 with the eight largest fruit canning companies domiciled in Rio Grande do Sul, those having annual revenues of more than R$12 million. Structured interviews were conducted with the financial managers of the studied companies. Data analysis involved the use of descriptive statistical and correlation techniques between variables. The principal results suggest that: (a) most companies form the stocks of inputs for short-term periods, given the limitations of working capital and debt; (b) most of them use cost system or some form of cost structure, employing traditional techniques for measuring and managing production costs; (c) mark-up, applied to total production cost, is the preferred method for calculating sale prices; (d) the most significant and relevant correlations were observed between the costing methods used and the adoption of the marginal contribution concept, as well as between costing methods and the break-even point technique; (e) many conceptual inconsistencies were identified in the responses, suggesting weaknesses in the professional preparation of those interviewed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it