Periodic reports and management by exception: A periodic managerial report best facilitates “management by exception” when it does which of the following?

Introduction / Context:
Management by exception is a control philosophy: managers focus attention on significant deviations from plan, standard, or budget and avoid micromanaging routine, in-range results. Periodic reports are key instruments for surfacing those exceptions.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Standards, budgets, or control limits are defined in advance.
• Periodic reports aggregate activity for a period (day, week, month).
• The objective is to highlight deviations that warrant action.

Concept / Approach:
To enable exception-based control, a report must explicitly compare actuals against standards and indicate variance size and direction. Pure narrative detail or listing only in-range transactions does not help managers spot problems; summary by itself is useful but insufficient without a standard for comparison.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Control charts, budget variance reports, and KPI dashboards all rely on comparisons to targets or limits to trigger attention and corrective action.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Including complete alphabetic descriptions: adds detail, not exception focus.
• Including only in-limit transactions: hides exceptions; the opposite of what is needed.
• Consolidation into summary form: helpful, but without standards, exceptions remain unclear.
• None of the above: incorrect because comparison to standards is exactly the enabler.

Common Pitfalls:
Setting limits too tight or too loose; failing to provide drill-down for root-cause analysis after an exception is flagged.

Final Answer:
comparing actual performance with acceptable standards