MENU
The safety guard on a piece of equipment was broken. The factory manager suspended an operator who refused to operate the equipment until it was repaired.The factory manager paid another operator a bonus for operating the damaged equipment until the safety guard could be repaired.
What does this incident say about the control environment within that factory?
Suggested Answer: B
Get Premium CIMAPRO19-P03-1 Questions
as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF
Real Exam Format
Detailed Explanations
Instant Access
Get Your Practice Test
36 comments · newest first
HY
Hyun
11 months ago
But maybe they just wanted to keep things running smoothly?
DA
Dahlia
11 months ago
I think it shows a lack of proper risk management, for sure.
WI
Winfred
11 months ago
Wait, they actually rewarded someone for using broken equipment? That's wild!
JO
Josphine
12 months ago
Totally agree, this sends a bad message to everyone.
EV
Evangelina
12 months ago
Sounds like management doesn't care about safety at all.
RY
Ryann
1 year ago
I want to say that option D could be a possibility, but it seems more like management is prioritizing productivity over safety, which isn't a good sign.
RO
Rosenda
1 year ago
This reminds me of a practice question where we talked about safety culture. I think option C could be valid since a poor safety record might stem from such incidents.
RA
Ramonita
1 year ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I feel like option B makes sense too. If the manager rewards someone for ignoring safety, it sends a bad message.
AS
Ashlyn
1 year ago
I remember discussing how a broken safety guard could indicate a lack of concern for risks, so I think option A might be right.
VI
Viva
1 year ago
Yikes, this scenario doesn't paint a great picture of the control environment. Suspending one worker for refusing to use the unsafe equipment, but then paying another to use it anyway? That's a clear sign that management is more focused on production than on keeping employees safe. Not good at all.
RO
Rosio
1 year ago
This is a tricky one. On the surface, it seems like the manager is just trying to keep production going. But rewarding an employee for operating unsafe equipment is a major lapse in control. I'd say that points to a pretty dysfunctional control environment overall.
NO
Nobuko
1 year ago
Okay, I think I've got a handle on this. The key is to look at how the manager responded to the safety issue. Suspending one worker but then incentivizing another to ignore the problem suggests management doesn't really prioritize health and safety controls. That's a red flag.
KR
Kristel
1 year ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused by this one. The manager's actions seem to send mixed signals - suspending one worker but rewarding another for the same unsafe behavior. Not sure what that says about the control environment.
SY
Sylvia
1 year ago
This seems like a pretty straightforward question about the control environment. I'd focus on analyzing the actions of the factory manager and what they say about the company's priorities.
LA
Lashunda
1 year ago
I'm pretty sure the answer has something to do with the initiative, since the question mentions creating an item from an initiative. I'll need to think through the different options carefully.
DA
Darnell
1 year ago
Hmm, this is a tricky one. I'm not sure if the classification tree coverage or use case/exception case coverage would be the best approach here. Given the unreliable nature of the system, I think the ability to set up and tear down the test suites and SUT would be crucial, so I'm leaning towards option C.
MO
Mozell
1 year ago
I remember studying operational audits in relation to ongoing security assessments, but I'm not sure if that's the exact term they used.
FA
Farrah
1 year ago
I can't recall if we specifically linked those principles to master data management. It feels like a tricky choice between security and vocabulary.
BU
Bulah
1 year ago
You know, they could've just called in 'Rosie the Riveter' to fix the safety guard. She wouldn't have taken any nonsense from the manager. Safety first, productivity second!
BE
Bette
1 year ago
D) Employees are motivated to maintain productivity.
AN
Annita
1 year ago
B) Employees will perceive that management does not care about health and safety risks.
ME
Melynda
1 year ago
A) Management is not particularly concerned with managing risks.
NA
Nan
1 year ago
D) Employees are motivated to maintain productivity.
WI
Wilda
1 year ago
B) Employees will perceive that management does not care about health and safety risks.
FR
Freeman
1 year ago
A) Management is not particularly concerned with managing risks.
VE
Veda
1 year ago
If I were the factory manager, I'd be looking for a new job. Seriously, who rewards employees for operating dangerous equipment? That's just asking for a lawsuit. Option B is the way to go.
DA
Dana
2 years ago
This is a classic case of 'profits over people.' Management's actions in this scenario scream 'we don't care about your well-being as long as the machines keep running.' Definitely Option B.
YO
Youlanda
2 years ago
I'm going with C on this one. A factory that prioritizes productivity over safety is likely to have a poor safety record. It's a recipe for disaster waiting to happen.
CA
Camellia
1 year ago
E) Management has a proportionate and considered attitude towards risk.
MA
Marge
1 year ago
A) Management is not particularly concerned with managing risks.
VA
Valentin
1 year ago
D) Employees are motivated to maintain productivity.
JO
Johnson
1 year ago
B) Employees will perceive that management does not care about health and safety risks.
MI
Millie
2 years ago
Option B seems to be the most accurate. By rewarding the employee for operating the damaged equipment, the factory manager is essentially showing that they prioritize productivity over employee safety - not a good look for the control environment.
ST
Stevie
2 years ago
D) Employees are motivated to maintain productivity.
CH
Cherrie
2 years ago
C) This factory's safety record is likely to be poor.
BE
Bernadine
2 years ago
B) Employees will perceive that management does not care about health and safety risks.