Gender Disparities in the Workplace Research Paper

Gender Disparities in the Workplace - Research Paper Example Even so, it is recognized that notable disparities still exist. This essay examines these workplace gender disparities through a consideration of overarching elements, culture, education, opportunities, and legislative procedures. A broad array of research has examined gender disparities in the workplace. A great degree of focus has been centered on inequalities, and indeed men are still recognized as making higher annual salaries and more consistently holding upper level management positions than women. Still, an equally strong amount of research has considered the disparities that exist as a result of socialization. In this context of understanding theorists have argued that from an early age men and women experience disparities in social interaction, as men view themselves in a hierarchical social order, while women view themselves in a network of connections where the primary goal is to establish intimacy and avoid isolation (Hahn). One recognizes that such differences come to pr ominently play out in workplace scenarios, as these differing forms of acculturation challenge managerial styles and workplace interactions. To a degree these disparities can be linked to the inequality and largely patriarchal workplace order that has emerged. Such inequality has resulted in significant pressures for change, with government, women’s rights groups and activists promoting measures that would encourage more workplace equality. Another prominent consideration in gender disparity is differences in workplace culture. Within this spectrum of understanding specific differences exist among the types of jobs that men and women traditionally work. For instance, women have traditionally been relegated to careers as childcare providers, secretaries, nurses, librarians, and teachers. In addition to divergences in the types of jobs that are traditionally held by men and women there are differences in dress code expectations. While dress formality remains contingent on the s pecific environment, men are generally expected to dress in shirts with ties; conversely, women are expected to wear blouses, dresses, or skirts. There also exist notable salary differences between men and women. One recent study revealed that women in IT related fields received an average of $25.08 per hour while men received $29.66 for the same job (Vermeulen). Another study revealed that female secretaries earn just 83.4% as much as male ones, and female truck drivers 76.5% as much (Fitzpatrick). Education regarding workplace gender disparity is another major factor. A major concern in recent years has been sexual harassment. The challenge with sexual harassment has been successfully distinguishing the term from accepted modes of social interaction. Legally sexual harassment is prohibited in the workplace, but it is recognized that significant amounts of harassment still occurs. A major difficulty in eliminating sexual harassment is workplace culture wherein individuals are afrai d to report the harassment out of fear of losing their jobs. The first workplace sexual harassment lawsuit was filed in 1974 with Barnes v. Train (Devey). However, in the 1976 case, Williams vs. Saxbe, the term sexual harassment was first used (Devey). While workplace gender inequality must be countered internally, it is also important that changes occur in the political apparatus. In these regards, the 20th century has experienced significant progress. The first woman elected to political office was

The Debate between the Principal-Agent Model and Organisational Essay

The Debate between the Principal-Agent Model and Organisational Culture Theory - Essay Example As the paper outlines  the principal-agent (PA) theory describes linkages entrenched in intricate delegation chains that influence the capacity of the international organisation leader to strive toward their own goals. Theorists mostly view the member states as the ‘principals’ and the international organisation as the ‘agent’. The PA theory can also go deeper the delegation chain to look at the principal-agent ties within international organisations that are specifically helpful in terms of identifying the degree to which IO leaders may understand their tendencies.This study highlights that  organisational culture theorists have persuasively demonstrated that IOs are actors, with ability to expand and behave in line with autonomous goals and principles that cannot be diminished to the goals and principles of their member states. As stated by this model, the capability of IOs towards independent behaviour originates from their specialist, moral, assigned , legal, and rational power, which gives them capacity to wield power. Common arguments of the organisational culture theory recognise the outer limits enforced by states. Nevertheless, in almost all of the empirical studies the possible conflict between the autonomous objectives of the IOs and outside pressures is avoided by selecting case studies wherein IOs behave autonomously but in accordance to the interests of the states, or case studies wherein IOs behave where states are unsympathetic.

Someone to Respect and Admire Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Someone to Respect and Admire - Research Paper Example He earned his electrical engineering degree from Mysore University. He later earned his degree in computer science Indian institute of Technology (IIT), Kanpur. IIT is treated as one of the top engineering colleges in the country. In 1981 Mr. Murthy founded Infosys Technologies alongside six of his friends. Some will even be surprised to know that none of the friends actually ha the capital of start the company. However wife of Mr. Murthy, who also happened to be an engineer by profession had somehow managed to save Rs. 1000 i.e. $250 that was donated by her for the company. Since then it really has been a fairy tale. From the extreme modest beginning the company has become a corporate giant achieving one success after the other. In 2001 the company became was chosen as the best managed company in the Asia. It is also the biggest exporters of software from India. From its humble beginnings the company has expanded its horizon and is present in all over the globe with over 60 offices including the U.S. (Barney, 2010, p.216). Essence of integrity and Ethics in the leadership The best way to focus on the essence of integrity and ethics is probably through an example. With an objective to interview Mr. Murthy an interviewer once visited the office of his. It is said that at that point of time the company had suffered loss in stock value growth. When the topic was asked to Mr. Murthy the answer given by him was amazing, inspirational and ethical to say the least. As per Mr. Murthy the advice given him to the colleagues in not too look at the stock market as it was believed by him that there is so very little to look at the stock. According to him to main objective of the company must be to maintain transparency to the investors, no to violate the law of the land and maintain harmony in the society and deliver quality products to the clients on time (Singhal, 2003, P.45). Insight into the leader Mr. Narayana Murthy is truly an inspirational leader to say the least. I t has already been discussed about the journey of the company from its modest beginning to the pinnacle of success. It was once said by him only that a true leader is the one who leads from front. A true leader leads by example. He sacrifices more than anyone in the quest of excellence. It has always been the belief of his that if confidence is provided to the people tremendous things can be achieved. It has been the belief of the great man that people having entrepreneurial strengths must have ideas which are marketable in nature. Success can’t be achieved alone, the very essence learnt by him at a very young age from his father paid rich evidence in the success as he believed that entrepreneurship is a marathon but a hundred meter dash. In the year 199 the company became the first registered Indian company listed on American stock exchange. As per a poll by Asiaweek Mr. Murthy was chosen as one of the most powerful people in Asia. He was also voted as the best CEO (Murthy, 2010, p.9). The standouts of the person The factors influencing the success of Mr. Murthy are undoubtedly his vision. Once it was said by him that beyond certain point money should only be treated as a power and opportunity to give something back to society. Over the course of time this has always been backed up through his actions. The driving force behind his success is not destination, but the love of the journey. Here another example must be taken. It has become a corporate culture to work for late hours, something which is a

The Almond Tree Essay Example for Free

The Almond Tree Essay In the poem The Almond Tree, the poet manages to effectively deal with the subject of death, or in this poem, the death of the poets hopes, by using different techniques such as imagery and symbolism. In The Almond Tree by Jon Stallworthy, the poet is drives to the hospital to see his new born son, and once arrives there, finds out his son has Downs Syndrome, and in the rest of the poem, the poet deals with the death of his hopes, and eventualy learns to accept his son. The poet manages to create an appropriate mood for the death of his hopes by having the first section of the poem be positive, and build up a positive and excited mood. The poet manages to create this postivite mood by imagery. When the poet is describing the traffic lights, he refers to them being green as peppermints, the reference to confectionery makes the reader associate the image with sweet and pleasant things. The poet is so excited that he feels he can change scenes to suit himself, shown when the poet says as if i were the lucky prince in an enchanted wood, this builds up the positive mood because it shows that the poet is very enthusiastic, and so the reader feels that enthusiasm too. The poet is very conscious of himself in the first section shown when he said he was aware of the blood running down the delta of my wrist, and so this shows how excited he is. The verse structure in the first section of the poem is also used as a technique to build up a feeling of excitement, the verses vary between 4-8 lines, and have a next to no structure, which give an impression of the poet being very excited so that hes not concentrating on the structure, and is just getting out all his thoughts as they come to him. The poet also states the hopes that he has for his child, such as let it be a son, a son, because he wants the family name to be carried on. All these techniques used help to develop a feeling of excitement and positivity in the first section, which is used to make the bad news to come an even bigger contrast. The second section of the poem is when the news is delivered that the poets son has Downs Syndrome, and is delievered effectively by first introducing the feeling of uneasiness by using onomatopoeia in the form of harsh words, such as scissored and slicing, and so makes the reader feel as if something bad is going to happen. The way the news is actually delivered is also meant to shock the reader, and it is said as quickly and to the point as possible, using only 4 one syllable words, and 1 two syllable word your son is a mongol. The way the news is delivered is made shocking not only by the way the news is delievered, but because it is such a big contrast to the first section of the poem. The third section describes how the poet feels once hearing this shocking news, and describes the death of his dreams,the poet uses techniques such as imagery to get these points across. He describes the news he recieved as going in clean as a bullet, and subsequently stopping the heart within it, which tells the reader that that to the poet, this news is fatal, and that the bullet left no mark on the skin so the poet showed no outward sign of despair. This reaction shows that the poet is in a state of shock. The poet then states that this was my first death, and by his first death he means the death of his hopes, which was for his son to carry on the family name and growing up to be just like the poet, he backs this point up again by stating never to come ashore into my kingdom speaking my language. The poet becomes displaced from reality, saying I held four walls in the lens of an eye, and this experience shows that the poet can see his dead self, and cannot feel anything any more, which proves that the poets hopes have died. The central idea of the poem is that love can overcome all obstacles, which in this case is the poet learning to love his son, no matter what. The only way that the poet would have been able to accept his son was by letting go of his hopes for his son growing up to be just like him and carrying on the family name, and this is what happens. The whole process is shown in the poem through symbolism, which in this case is the almond tree blooming, the poet describes this process as painful by using harsh words, such as split and blood-dark, and finds that the tree had to go through a painful process in order to become what it is, and he compares this to his own situation, and realises that he has to go through a painful process, which is the death of his dreams, in order to do what he was really meant to do, which was to accept his son.

R.V. Keilty :: essays research papers

R. v. Keilty In the case R.v.Keilty the accused, Keilty, was charged and convicted of trafficking in narcotics. He then appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada on the grounds that the trial judge erred in law. The facts in the case were not disputed but the actual definition of possession under section 2 of the Narcotic Control Act was the issue. The appellant never actually did sell the narcotics nor did he at anytime have possession. It is illogical to convict a person of possession when they don't actually have possession as defined in the Criminal Code. Therefore is it logical to convict a person of trafficking if there were no narcotics? Crown arguments The actual possession is irrelevant because section 2 of the Narcotic Control Act states that trafficking means: (a) to manufacture, sell, give, administer, transport, send, deliver, or distribute, or (b) offer to do anything referred to in paragraph (a) otherwise than under the authority of this Act or the regulation The appellant obviously offered to sell the narcotics to the officer and as in R.v.Mancuso he should be found guilty. Also the actual physical possession is not necessarily needed to be proven as was in R.v.Russo where the defendant was convicted of possession and trafficking even though he did not posses at any time the narcotics. In the case R.v.Piscopo it was demonstrated that an accused can be convicted upon circumstantial evidence. The accused can be convicted using all of the aforementioned cases. Another issue is that if this case becomes precedent it would open a "floodgate" or loophole in the law where other criminals may escape through. This would allow for more dangerous dealers of narcotics, who operate their business "long distance" to escape prosecution because they never actually had the narcotics in their possession. Appellant arguments A person should not be stigmatized by conviction for a criminal offense they did not actually commit.. The case R.v.Vallancourt illustrates the use of the "stigma" test. A person who is convicted of possession should not be also branded as a trafficker of narcotics also. Another principle brought to the court from the R.v.Vallancourt case is that a crime requires a minimal state of mental blameworthiness. This means that the person must bear a certain degree of moral fault for what he did. To convict the accused of trafficking in narcotics when everyone acknowledges that there were no narcotics would seem to violate this principle. Using the rational connection established in the R.v.Oakes it would appear as if the government of Canada is trying to reduce trafficking but if a person who did not posses or sell any narcotics is

Compare and Contrast Federal and State Prisons

A penitentiary is an institution established and controlled by the government. The penitentiary system in the United Stated has as its primary goal of detaining, housing and punishing individuals who have been convicted of felony crimes. Up until the 19th century, prison systems were not common. The common jail dates back to ancient times, but was used to detain persons temporarily until he or she was found innocent, fined, or subjected to corporal punishment. Generally, corporal punishment was most often reserved for the lower classes, since those with means were able to most fines levied against them. Those crimes that were not deemed capital crimes were punishable by means of public whippings, maiming, or being shamed. Historically, there have been two types of prisons or penitentiary systems in the United States. The Pennsylvania and the New York penitentiary systems form the basis are penitentiary systems in the United States. Although the two share some of the same principles, they differ in many respects and it is not surprising that supporters of each type believe strongly that his or her preferred system is the most desirable and best represents that which characterizes the penal system. Hattery, 2007) The Pennsylvania system was introduced into American society by the Quakers and is far and away the more conservative of the two penitentiary systems. The religious Quakers sought to replace the existing cruel methods of punishment that had been associated with corporal punishment with mandated yet productive labor intensive methods. Prior to the enlightened Quakers entry int o the penal system, criminals were abused at the hands of both formal and informal governments. Punishment included branding, mutilation, whipping and other harsh punishments. Under the Pennsylvania system, prisoners are housed in individual cells. Prisoners are required to engage in unpaid laborious service for as long as he or she is housed in the government run institution. Working hours are clearly defined and convicts are expected to comply with prison policy. While imprisoned, convicts are not allowable to interact with other prisoners and if they come into contact with others, they are not allowed to engage in conversation. Haslam, 2008) The New York system, which was implemented at Auburn, is similar to the Pennsylvania system but markedly differs in that prisoners are allowed to form bonds with other prisoners. Prisoners were afforded the opportunity to interact with each other while working and they were also allowed to eat meals together. Under this model, socialization and relationships were not seen as an enemy of punishment; instead, relationships and socializatio n were seen as that which was inevitable. Under the New York system, prisoners were assigned separate cells where they slept. Generally, this was the only form of isolation allowed under the New York system. Although there seemed to be less rigidity than that of the Pennsylvania system, rules were strictly enforced. (Haslam, 2008) During World War II, the United States created prisoner of war camps at the request of the British allies who were unable to house large number of captives. During this period, numerous prisoners of war who happened to be of German and Italian nationality were housed on American military bases and were forced to provide prison labor. The POWs were treated in much the same way as modern prisoners are treated. The Prisoners were required to work while being held on the military installation and were expected to adhere to all prison camp policies. Since World War II, the prison system in the United States has grown tremendously. A somewhat foreseeable result of this growth has been the evolution of prison labor. Prisoners throughout the country work in numerous manufacturing and service industries. The growth of prison labor in the United States has come under attack by both Americans and human rights advocates around the world. Many people argue that the United States is hypocritical because it denounces China’s use of prison labor while encouraging the privatization of prisons at home. (Hattery, 2007) Works Cited Haslam, J. (2008). Pits, Pendulums, and Penitentiaries: Reframing the Detained Subject. Texas Studies In Literature and Language, 268-284. Hattery, E. S. (2007). If We Build it They Will Come: Human Rights Violations and the Prison Industrial Complex 1 . Societies Without Borders 2, 273 –288.

Financial Statement Analysis of Ibm

Financial Statement Analysis of IBM Financial Statement Analysis of IBM I. Company Facts IBM – International Business Machines Corporation The home office of IBM is located in Armonk, Town of North Castle, New York, United States. IBM was founded in 1911 as the Computing Tabulating Recording Company (CTR) through a merger of three companies: the Tabulating Machine Company, the International Time Recording Company, and the Computing Scale Company.CTR adopted the name International Business Machines in 1924, using a name previously designated to CTR's subsidiary in Canada and later South America. Standard Industrial Classification Codes are 7379 which are mainly on computer and relative stuff. Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of IBM now is Virginia M. Rometty. Chairman of the Board of IBM now is Samuel J. Palmisano. The end date of recent fiscal year of IBM is Dec. 31st 2011. Main services IBM provides include business consulting, IT related services, outsourcing service and traini ng.Main products IBM provides include mainframe, software, system and storage. IBM’s major operations consist of five business segments: Global Technology Services, Global Business Services, Software, Systems and Technology and Global Financing. In the latest fiscal year, IBM has an amount of 433,362 wholly owned employees all over the world. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC) is the independent auditor retained to audit IBM’s consolidated financial Statements and the effectiveness of the company's internal control over financial reporting.The stock ticker symbol is IBM. IBM common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange, the Chicago Stock Exchange, and outside the United States. And the latest stock price was $188. 32 on Nov. 14th 2012 on NYSE. II. Business and Strategy Analysis 1. Industry Description and Competitive Anlysis Since IBM is a highly diversified company, it concentrates on several industries at the same time. So let’s say IBM mainly concentra tes on the computer related hardware and software manufacturing industries. As we all now, these two industries supplement each other and depend on each other while the most competitive companies always work on both industries at the same time. The computer related software and hardware manufacturing industry is characterized by significant research and development activity and rapid technological change. The rapid pace of innovation in this sector creates a constant demand for newer and faster products and applications. While the sector has grown faster than most other industries over the past several decades, it faces challenges from rising costs, global market share, and the rapid pace of innovation.The main competitors for IBM now are Hewlett-Packard, Dell and Microsoft. Here I will use the Porter five forces analysis to give a competitive analysis among these four companies. Threat of new competition: The market of this industry is profitable in some parts like high-level softw are and frames, not too profitable in some other parts like PCs. So we can say the market is still profitable and is attracting the new entrants, which has the possibility to decrease profitability for all firms in this industry.While in this industry, because of the existence of several big companies, the barriers to entry are relatively high which are non-profitable for the new entry firms. The several big companies have held very high brand equity, customer loyalty, efficient distribution methods and scale effect to decrease the costs and increase the profits. There is not too much threat from the new firms to compete with IBM, there are high possibility for other main competitors like HP, Dell and Microsoft to enter the markets where IBM is making high profit, well they have the R&D capabilities.But to make the biggest profits, although IBM's main competitors are Hewlett-Packard, Dell and Microsoft, each of these companies has a different focus area. Dell makes most of its money on PC and server hardware, while Hewlett-Packard is more diversified as the leader in PCs and Imaging ; Printing as well as offering IT services and Microsoft concentrates on the computer software development. So we can conclude that there is threat of new competition, but the level is relatively low.Threat of substitute products or services: The threat of substitute products or services is relatively high compared with the threat of new competition. Also these threats come from the main competitors. For products, such as PC, most customers will compare the price, screen size, life time and other attributes instead of just the brand the same way as services such as IT consulting etc. Bargaining power of customers: The bargaining power of customers is also described as the market of outputs: the ability of customers to put the firm under pressure, which also affects the customer's sensitivity to price changes.In this factor, because customers of these two industries have many channe ls to access the products and services, high information availability, different choices, differentiated advantages of products and customers is also kind of price sensitive. So we can conclude that the bargaining power of customers is strong. Bargaining power of suppliers: The bargaining power of suppliers is also described as the market of inputs. Suppliers of raw materials, components, labor, and services (such as expertise) to the firm can be a source of power over the firm, when there are few substitutes.Because there are plenty of suppliers in most parts, presence of substitute keeps being produced, degree of differentiation of inputs is not high enough and supplier competition is very strong. Then we can conclude that bargaining power of suppliers is also in a lower level. Intensity of competitive rivalry: Intensity of competitive rivalry is the major determinant of the competitiveness of the industry. Sustainable competitive advantages through innovation, all these four big competitive companies have strong R&D team and invest much money on it.And we can always see the advertisements of their products anywhere. Each company has a differentiated competitive strategy to concentrate on their own areas and holds sustainable competitive advantages through innovation. So we can conclude that the intensity of competitive rivalry is very high. Given the Porter five forces analysis above, here we have a general conclusion that computer related hardware and software industries are relatively highly competitive and sustainable based on the current situation and future development trends.There do have some profitable niche market and some areas can be developed further. The big four companies have their own advantages and emphasis and also compete heavily with each other. There is no easy way for each of them to lead in all. 2. Industry’s Future Prospects Assessment When we come to talk about the future prospects of computer related hardware and software in dustries, I’m sure that it will not be that promising like nanotechnology or genetic therapy which is still in research period, since he computer related hardware and software industries have been developed many years, most of products, technologies and services have been mature enough. But it is still profitable and sustainable because the world has been established based on these two industries. Without their support, the world cannot step forward even a little. And the intense competition and fast replacement speed will drive these two industries to be developed faster and faster.There may be some lawsuits and governmental regulations there confronting companies, such as the plagiarization, copyright infringement, anti-monopoly, cutthroat competition, tax issue, local protection and so on. These will be the main legal issues that companies of two these industries are certainly meeting now and will still never end in the future. Plagiarization and copyright infringement wil l be the two main issues that these companies should pay more emphasis on cuz these two are the vital parts for them to keep their competitive advantages and make profits.Incorporating the relative small companies may be judged by the court saying it is buying the potential competitor due to the concern of monopoly of government. Cutthroat competition may not happen, while once it happened, it will certainly be a disaster. Tax issue and the local protection are always come together. Local government may protect the local companies by dealing high tax to the foreign competitors. Furthermore, due to the fast replacement speed, the price of products and services in these two industries will never be high as long as there is no monopoly.So the cost control is one of the key parts to determine these companies’ future. And innovation will never be too much. 3. Summarization and Evaluation of IBM’s Future Goals and Strategies The next decade holds enormous promise for IBM. Th ey are uniquely positioned to deliver the benefits of a vast new natural resource – a gusher of data from both man-made and natural systems that can now be tapped to help businesses and institutions succeed in an increasingly complex and dynamic global economy.IBM has steadily realigned its business to lead in a new era of computing and to enable its clients to benefit from the new capabilities that era is creating. As a consequence, its investors benefit from a business model that is both sustainable over the long term and fueled by some of the world’s most attractive high-growth markets and technologies. It will be on track toward its 2015 Road Map goal of at least $20 in operation earnings per share and $20 billion in revenue growth by 2015. This goal for IBM is quite suitable.There are four high-growth spaces as following, growth markets, business analytics, cloud and smarter planet. These four spaces IBM is working hard on will certainly drive to high profits due to its high emphasis and profession. The world is undergoing disruption, but IBM now stands out among its industry peers and in business at large as distinctively able to keep moving to the future, and to keep generating differentiating value for its clients, its employees and the citizens of the world. III. Accounting AnalysisThe accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements and foot notes of the International Business Machines Corporation (IBM or the company) have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP). 1. Revenue The revenue recognition principle provides guidance on when a company must recognize revenue. To recognize means to record it. If revenue is recognized too early, a company would look more profitable than it is. If revenue is recognized too late, a company would look less profitable than it is. The company recognizes revenue when it is realized or realizable and earned.The company considers revenu e realized or realizable and earned when it has persuasive evidence of an arrangement, delivery has occurred, the sales price is fixed or determinable and collectability is reasonably assured. Delivery does not occur until products have been shipped or services have been provided to the client, risk of loss has transferred to the client, and either client acceptance has been obtained, client acceptance provisions have lapsed, or the company has objective evidence that the criteria specified in the client acceptance provisions have been satisfied.The sales price is not considered to be fixed or determinable until all contingencies related to the sale have been resolved. IBM’s revenue was growing in an increasing speed and its pre-tax income margin grew from 18. 9 percent in 2009 to 19. 7 percent in 2010 to 20. 02 percent in 2011 which is the ninth consecutive increasing year. If only based on this, IBM was doing better and better in last three years. 2. Major Expenses The expe nse recognition (or matching) principle, prescribes that a company record the expenses it incurred to generate the revenue reported.The expense recognition (or matching) principle aims to record expenses in the same accounting period as the revenues that are earned as a result of those expenses. This matching of expenses with the revenue benefits is a major part of the adjusting process. Under the accrual basis of accounting, expenses are recognized when incurred, usually when goods are received or services are consumed. This may not be when the goods or services are actually paid for. The point at which an expense is recognized is dependent on the nature of the transaction or other event that gives rise to the expense.The major expense of IBM includes stock-based compensation, prepared expense, advertising and promotional expense, research expense, development expense, engineering expense, workforce rebalancing charges, retirement-related costs, amortization of acquired intangibles assets, interest expense and other expense. Below tables show the main expenses IBM recognized from 2009 to 2011. Table 3-2-1 Total Expense and Other Income ($ in millions) For the year ended December 31:| 2011| 2010| 2009|Total consolidated expense and other (income)| $29,135| $26,291| $25,647| Total operating (non-GAAP) expense and other (income) | $28,875| $26,202| $25,603| Total consolidated expense-to-revenue ratio| 27. 30%| 26. 30%| 26. 80%| Operating (non-GAAP) expense-to-revenue ratio| 27. 00%| 26. 20%| 26. 70%| We can see from this table that the expense is increasing with time goes on. While compared with the increasing speed of revenue and that of expense-to-revenue, we can figure out a little bit progress on expense control of IBM. Table 3-2-2 Selling, General and Administrative ($ in millions) For the year ended December 31:| 2011| 2010| 2009|Selling, general and administrative expense| | | | Selling, general and administrative—other| $20,287| $18,585| $17,872| Advertising and promotional expense| $1,373| $1,337| $1,255| Workforce rebalancing charges| $440| $641| $474| Retirement-related costs| $603| $494| $503| Amortization of acquired intangibles assets| $289| $253| $285| Stock-based compensation| $514| $488| $417| Bad debt expense| $88| $40| $147| Total consolidated selling, general and administrative expense| $23,594| $21,837| $20,952| Non-operating adjustments| | | |Amortization of acquired intangible assets| ($289)| ($253)| ($285)| Acquisition-related charges| ($20)| ($41)| ($8)| Non-operating retirement-related (costs)/income| ($13)| $84| $127| Operating (non-GAAP) selling, general and administrative expense| $23,272| $21,628| $20,787| Table 3-2-3 Research, Development and Engineering ($ in millions) For the year ended December 31:| 2011| 2010| 2009| Total consolidated research, development and engineering| $6,258| $6,026| $5,820| Operating (non-GAAP) research, development and engineering| $6,345| $6,152| $5,943| Table 3-2-4 Interes t Expense ($ in millions)For the year ended December 31:| 2011| 2010| 2009| Interest expense| $411| $368| $402| From all the tables above, we can find that the most important or the highest portion of the expense is the selling, general and administrative expense which includes most of the expense. 3. Investments IBM’s 2009 cash investment was $1. 2 billion for six acquisitions — five of them in key areas of software. And after investing $ 5. 8 billion in R &D and $3. 7 billion in net capital expenditures, IBM was able to return more than $10 billion to you — $7. billion through share repurchase and $2. 9 billion through dividends. Last year’s dividend increase was 10 percent, marking the 14th year in a row in which it has raised its dividend. IBM’s 2010 cash flow has enabled it to invest in the business and to generate substantial returns to investors. Our 2010 cash investment was $6 billion for 17 acquisitions— 13 of them in key areas of s oftware. After investing $6 billion in R&D and $4 billion in net capital expenditures, IBM was able to return more than $18 billion to you— $15. billion through share repurchases and $3. 2 billion through dividends. Last year’s dividend increase was 18 percent, marking the 15th year in a row in which it has raised its dividend. Over the past decade, IBM has returned $107 billion to you in the form of dividends and share repurchases, while investing $70 billion in capital expenditures and acquisitions, and almost $60 billion in R&D. IBM’s 2011 cash flow has enabled IBM to invest in the business and to generate substantial returns to investors, while spending $6. billion on R&D. In 2011 IBM invested $1. 8 billion for five acquisitions in key areas of software and $4. 1 billion in net capital expenditures. IBM was able to return $18. 5 billion to you — $15 billion through share repurchases and $3. 5 billion through dividends. Last year’s dividend incr ease was 15 percent, marking the 16th year in a row in which IBM has raised its dividend, and the 96th consecutive year in which it has paid one. From the table and the description above, the R&D investment was always above 5% of total revenue.IBM put much emphasis on its R&D to keep the sustainable development and competitive advantages. 4. Inventories Raw materials, work in process and finished goods are stated at the lower of average cost or market. Cash flows related to the sale of inventories are reflected in net cash from operating activities in the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows. Table 3-4-1 Inventories ($ in millions) At December 31:| 2011| 2010| 2009| Finished goods| $589| $432| $533| Work in process and raw materials| $2,007| $2,018| $1,960| Total| $2,595| $2,450| $2,494| 5.Property, Plant and Equipment Property, plant and equipment are carried at cost and depreciated over their estimated useful lives using the straight-line method. The estimated useful lives of cert ain depreciable assets are as follows: buildings, 30 to 50 years; building equipment, 10 to 20 years; land improvements, 20 years; plant, laboratory and office equipment, 2 to 20 years; and computer equipment, 1. 5 to 5 years. Leasehold improvements are amortized over the shorter of their estimated useful lives or the related lease term, rarely exceeding 25 years.Below is the table of Property, Plant and Equipment from 2009 to 2011 including the depreciation. Table 3-5-1 Property, Plant and Equipment ($ in millions) At December 31:| 2011| 2010| 2009| Land and land improvements| $786| $777| $737| Buildings and building improvements| $9,531| $9,414| $9,314| Plant, laboratory and office equipment| $26,843| $26,676| $9,314| Plant and other property—gross| $37,160| $36,867| $35,940| Less: Accumulated depreciation| $24,703| $24,435| $23,485| Plant and other property—net| $12,457| $12,432| $12,455| Rental machines| $2,964| $3,422| $3,656|Less: Accumulated depreciation| $1,538 | $1,758| $1,946| Rental machines—net| $1,426| $1,665| $1,710| Total—net| $13,883| $14,096| $14,165| The data from the table show a relatively steadily decreasing status of IBM’s property, plant and equipment in all. This means a good control and a relatively 6. Goodwill and Intangibles Below tables show the intangibles from 2009 to 2011 Table 3-6-1 Intangibles in 2009 ($ in millions) At December 31, 2009:| GrossCarryingAmount| Accumulated Amortization| Net Carrying Amount| Intangible asset class| | | |Capitalized software| $1,765| ($846)| $919| Client relationships| $1,367| ($677)| $690| Completed technology| $1,222| ($452)| $770| Patents/trademarks| $174| ($59)| $115| Other*| $94| ($75)| $19| Total| $4,622| ($2,109)| $2,513| Table 3-6-2 Intangibles in 2010 ($ in millions) At December 31, 2010:| GrossCarryingAmount| Accumulated Amortization| Net Carrying Amount| Intangible asset class| | | | Capitalized software| $1,558| ($726)| $831| Client relationships| $1,7 09| ($647)| $1,062| Completed technology| $2,111| ($688)| $1,422|In-process R&D| $21| $0| $21| Patents/trademarks| $211| ($71)| $140| Other*| $39| ($28)| $11| Total| $5,649| ($2,161)| $3,488| Table 3-6-3 Intangibles in 2011 ($ in millions) At December 31, 2011:| GrossCarryingAmount| AccumulatedAmortization| NetCarryingAmount| Intangible asset class| | | | Capitalized software| $1,478| ($678)| $799| Client relationships| $1,751| ($715)| $1,035| Completed technology| $2,156| ($745)| $1,411| In-process R&D| $22| ($1)| $21| Patents/trademarks| $207| ($88)| $119| Other*| $29| ($22)| $7| | $5,642| ($2,250)| $3,392|The net carrying amount of intangible assets decreased $96 million during the year ended December 31, 2011, primarily due to amortization, partially offset by intangible asset additions. No impairment of intangible assets was recorded in any of the periods presented. Total amortization was $1,226 million, $1,174 million and $1,221 million for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2 010 and 2009 respectively. The aggregate intangible amortization expense for acquired intangibles (excluding capitalized software) was $634 million, $517 million and $489 million for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009 respectively.In addition, in 2011 the company retired $1,133 million of fully amortized intangible assets, impacting both the gross carrying amount and accumulated amortization for this amount. The amortization expense for each of the five succeeding years relating to intangible assets currently recorded in the Consolidated Statement of Financial Position is estimated to be the following at December 31, 2011: Table 3-6-4 Estimated consolidated statement of financial position ($ in millions) | Capitalized Software| Acquired Intangibles| Total| 012| $480| $634| $1,113| 2013| $250| $590 | $840 | 2014| $70| $446 | $516 | 2015| —| $340 | $340 | 2016| —| $303 | $303 | The changes in the goodwill balances by reportable segment, for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2010 and 2011, are as follows: Table 3-6-5 Goodwill Balances in 2009 ($ in millions) Segment| Balance anuary 1, 2009| Goodwill Additions| Purchase Price Adjustments| Divestitures| Foreign Currency Translation and Other Adjustments| Balance December 31, 2009|Global Business Services| $3,870 | —| —| —| $172 | $4,042 | Global Technology Services| $2,616 | $10 | $1 | —| $150 | $2,777 | Software| $10,966 | $994 | ($50)| ($13)| $708 | $12,605 | Systems and Technology| $772 | —| ($7)| —| $1 | $12,605 | Total| $18,226 | $1,004 | ($56)| ($13)| $1,031 | $20,190 | Table 3-6-6 Goodwill Balances in 2010 ($ in millions) Segment| Balance anuary 1, 2010| Goodwill Additions| Purchase Price Adjustments| Divestitures| Foreign Currency Translation and Other Adjustments| Balance December 31, 2010|Global Business Services| $4,042 | $252 | $0 | —| $35 | $4,329 | Global Technology Services| $2,777 | $32 | ($1)| —| ($104)| $2,704 | S oftware| $12,605 | $4,095 | ($52)| —| $315 | $16,963 | Systems and Technology| $766 | $375 | ($1)| —| ($1)| $1,139 | Total| $20,190 | $4,754 | ($54)| —| $245 | $25,136 | Table 3-6-7 Goodwill Balances in 2009 ($ in millions) Segment| Balance anuary 1, 2011| Goodwill Additions| Purchase Price Adjustments| Divestitures| Foreign Currency Translation and Other Adjustments| Balance December 31, 2011|Global Business Services| $4,329 | $14 | $0 | ($10)| ($20)| $4,313 | Global Technology Services| $2,704 | —| ($1)| ($2)| ($55)| $2,646 | Software| $16,963 | $1,277 | $10 | ($2)| ($127)| $18,121 | Systems and Technology| $1,139 | —| ($6)| —| $0 | $1,133 | Total| $25,136 | $1,291 | $2 | ($13)| ($203)| $26,213 | Purchase price adjustments recorded in the 2011, 2010 and 2009 were related to acquisitions that were completed on or prior to December 31, 2010, 2009 or 2008 respectively, and were still subject to the measurement period that ends at the earlier of 12 months from the acquisition date or when information becomes available.There were no goodwill impairment losses recorded in 2011, 2010 or 2009 and the company has no accumulated impairment losses. IV. Financial Analysis 1. Financial Ratio Display and Interpretation 2. 1 Liquidity and Efficiency Ratios a. Current ratio 2011 Current ratio=Current assetsCurrent liabilities=50,92842,123=1. 21:1 2010 Current ratio=Current assetsCurrent liabilities=48,11640,562=1. 19:1 The current ratio is a financial ratio that measures whether or not a firm has enough resources to pay its debts over the next 12 months. It compares a firm's current assets to its current liabilities.Here, we can conclude that IBM is totally able to pay for its debt. b. Quick ratio (Acid-test ratio) 2011 Quick ratio=Cash+Short-term investments+ Current receivablesCurrent liabilities=11,922+4,895+18,38242,123=0. 84:1 2010 Quick ratio=Cash+Short-term investments+ Current receivablesCurrent liabilities=10,661++4,895+17, 39140,562=0. 81:1 Quick assets are cash, short-term investments, and current receivables. These are the most liquid types of current assets. The acid-test ratio, also called quick ratio, reflects on a company’s short-term liquidity.The quick ratio is more conservative than the current ratio, a more well-known liquidity measure, because it excludes inventory from current assets. Inventory is excluded because some companies have difficulty turning their inventory into cash. Here, the quick ratio is pretty good for IBM. c. Accounts receivable turnover 2011 Accounts receivable turnover=Net salesAverage accounts receivable, net=106,91617,886. 5=5. 97 times 2010 Accounts receivable turnover=Net salesAverage accounts receivable, net=99,87016,724=5. 97 timesAn accounting measure used to quantify a firm's effectiveness in extending credit as well as collecting debts. The receivables turnover ratio is an activity ratio, measuring how efficiently a firm uses its assets. d. Inventory tur nover 2011 Inventory turnover=Cost of goods soldAverage inventory=56,7782,522. 5=22. 51 times 2010 Inventory turnover=Cost of goods soldAverage inventory=53,8572,472=21. 89 times The Inventory turnover is a measure of the number of times inventory is sold or used in a time period such as a year. e. Days’ sales uncollected 011 Days’ sales uncollected=Accounts receivable, netNet sales*365=18,382106,916*365=62. 75 days 2010 Days’ sales uncollected=Accounts receivable, netNet sales*365=17,39199,870*365=63. 56 days Accounts receivable turnover provides insight into how frequently a company collects its accounts. Days’ sales uncollected is one measure of this activity. f. Days’ sales in inventory 2011 Days’ sales in inventory=Ending inventoryCost of goods sold*365=2,59556,778*365=16. 68 days 2010 Days’ sales in inventory=Ending inventoryCost of goods sold*365=2,45053,857*365=16. 0 days Days’ sales in inventory is a useful measure in evaluating inventory liquidity. A measure of how quickly a company turns its inventory into sales. Days’ sales in inventory is linked to inventory in a way that days’ sales uncollected is linked to receivables. g. Total assets turnover 2011 Total assets turnover=Net salesAverage total assets=106,916114,942. 5=0. 93 times 2010 Total assets turnover=Net salesAverage total assets=99,870111,237=0. 90 times The total asset turnover ratio measures the ability of a company to use its assets to efficiently generate sales.This ratio considers all assets, current and fixed. Those assets include fixed assets, like plant and equipment, as well as inventory, accounts receivable, as well as any other current assets. 2. 2 Solvency Ratios a. Debt ratio 2011 Debt ratio=Total liabilitiesTotal assets=96,197 116,433 =82. 6% 2010 Debt ratio=Total liabilitiesTotal assets=90,279113,452=79. 6% A ratio that indicates what proportion of debt a company has relative to its assets. The measure giv es an idea to the leverage of the company along with the potential risks the company faces in terms of its debt-load. b. Equity ratio 011 Equity ratio=Total equityTotal assets=20,236116,433=17. 4% 2010 Equity ratio=Total equityTotal assets=23,172113,452=20. 4% A financial ratio indicating the relative proportion of equity used to finance a company's assets. The two components are often taken from the firm's balance sheet or statement of financial position (so-called book value), but the ratio may also be calculated using market values for both, if the company's equities are publicly traded. c. Interest coverage ratio 2011 Interest coverage ratio=Income before interest expense and income taxesInterest expense=22,904411=55. times 2010 Interest coverage ratio=Income before interest expense and income taxesInterest expense=20,923368=56. 9 times A metric used to measure a company's ability to meet its debt obligations. It is calculated by taking a company's earnings before interest and t axes (EBIT) and dividing it by the total interest payable on bonds and other contractual debt. It is usually quoted as a ratio and indicates how many times a company can cover its interest charges on a pretax basis. Failing to meet these obligations could force a company into bankruptcy. 2. Profitability Ratios a. Return on total assets 2011 Return on total assets=Net incomeAverage total assets=15,855114,942. 5=13. 8% 2010 Return on total assets=Net incomeAverage total assets=14,833 111,237=13. 3% A ratio that measures a company's earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT) against its total net assets. The ratio is considered an indicator of how effectively a company is using its assets to generate earnings before contractual obligations must be paid. b. Return on equity 2011 Return on equity=Net income-Preferred dividendsAverage equity=15,855-3,47321704=57. % 2010 Return on equity=Net income-Preferred dividendsAverage equity=14,833- 3,177 22963. 5=50. 8% The amount of net income ret urned as a percentage of shareholders equity. Return on equity measures a corporation's profitability by revealing how much profit a company generates with the money shareholders have invested. c. Net income as a percentage of net sales (Profit margin ratio) 2011 Net income as a percentage of net sales=Net incomeNet sales=15,855106,916=14. 8% 2010 Net income as a percentage of net sales=Net incomeNet sales=14,833 99,870=14. % A ratio of profitability calculated as net income divided by revenues, or net profits divided by sales. It measures how much out of every dollar of sales a company actually keeps in earnings. Profit margin is very useful when comparing companies in similar industries. A higher profit margin indicates a more profitable company that has better control over its costs compared to its competitors. d. Gross profit rate (Gross margin ratio) 2011 Gross profit rate=Net sales-Cost of goods soldNet sales=106,916-56,778106,916=46. 9% 2010 Gross profit rate=Net sales-Cost o f goods soldNet sales=99,870-5385799,870=46. % A company's total sales revenue minus its cost of goods sold, divided by the total sales revenue, expressed as a percentage. The gross margin represents the percent of total sales revenue that the company retains after incurring the direct costs associated with producing the goods and services sold by a company. The higher the percentage, the more the company retains on each dollar of sales to service its other costs and obligations. 2. 4 Market ratios a. Price-Earnings ratio 2011 Price-Earnings ratio=Market price per common shareEarnings per share=183. 8813. 25=13. 9:1 010 Price-Earnings ratio=Market price per common shareEarnings per share=146. 7611. 69=12. 6:1 P/E ratio is an equity valuation measure defined as market price per share divided by annual earnings per share. b. Dividend yield 2011 Dividend yield=Annual cash dividends per shareMarket price per share=2. 90183. 88=1. 6% 2010 Dividend yield=Annual cash dividends per shareMar ket price per share=2. 50146. 76=1. 7% A financial ratio that shows how much a company pays out in dividends each year relative to its share price. In the absence of any capital gains, the dividend yield is the return on investment for a stock. . Comparison and Interpretation of Ratio Values With Main Competitors Microsoft All the comparisons are based on the data of 2011. 3. 5 Liquidity and Efficiency Ratios a. Current ratio 2011 IBM Current ratio=Current assetsCurrent liabilities=50,92842,123=1. 21:1 2011 Microsoft Current ratio=Current assetsCurrent liabilities=74,91828,774=2. 60:1 The lower current ratio means that Microsoft has more resources to pay its debts over the next 12 months. b. Quick ratio (Acid-test ratio) 2011 IBM Quick ratio=Cash+Short-term investments+ Current receivablesCurrent liabilities=11,922+4,895+18,38242,123=0. 84:1 011 Microsoft Quick ratio=Cash+Short-term investments+ Current receivablesCurrent liabilities= 9,610+43,162+14,98728,774=2. 35:1 Microsoft has a higher quick ratio which means that Microsoft’s shot-term liquidity is better than that of IBM. c. Accounts receivable turnover 2011 IBM Accounts receivable turnover=Net salesAverage accounts receivable, net=106,91617,886. 5=5. 97 times 2011 Microsoft Accounts receivable turnover=Net salesAverage accounts receivable, net=69,94314000. 5=5. 00 times The similar accounts receivable turnover means that both the companies have a relatively good ability to use its assets efficiently. . Inventory turnover 2011 IBM Inventory turnover=Cost of goods soldAverage inventory=56,7782,522. 5=22. 51 times 2011 Microsoft Inventory turnover=Cost of goods soldAverage inventory=53,8571,372=39. 25 times Microsoft has a higher inventory turnover which means a better inventory control. e. Days’ sales uncollected 2011 IBM Days’ sales uncollected=Accounts receivable, netNet sales*365=18,382106,916*365=62. 75 days 2011 Microsoft Days’ sales uncollected=Accounts receivable, netNet sales*365=14000. 569,943*365=73. 1 days IBM has a faster pace to collect its accounts. f.Days’ sales in inventory 2011 IBM Days’ sales in inventory=Ending inventoryCost of goods sold*365=2,59556,778*365=16. 68 days 2011 Microsoft Days’ sales in inventory=Ending inventoryCost of goods sold*365=1,37253857*365=9. 30 days Microsoft has a quicker speed to turn its inventory into sales. g. Total assets turnover 2011 IBM Total assets turnover=Net salesAverage total assets=106,916114,942. 5=0. 93 times 2011 Microsoft Total assets turnover=Net salesAverage total assets=69,94397408. 5=0. 72 times IBM has better abilities to use its assets to efficiently generate sales. . 6 Solvency Ratios a. Debt ratio 2011 IBM Debt ratio=Total liabilitiesTotal assets=96,197 116,433 =82. 6% 2011 Microsoft Debt ratio=Total liabilitiesTotal assets=51,621 108,704 =47. 5% IBM has a higher proportion of debe relative to its assets, which means a higher risk. b. Equity ratio 2011 IBM Equity ra tio=Total equityTotal assets=20,236116,433=17. 4% 2011 Microsoft Equity ratio=Total equityTotal assets=57,083108,704=52. 5% c. Interest coverage ratio 2011 IBM Interest coverage ratio=Income before interest expense and income taxesInterest expense=22,904411=55. times 2011 Microsoft Interest coverage ratio=Income before interest expense and income taxesInterest expense=28,071295=95. 2 times Microsoft has better ability to meet its debt obligations. 3. 7 Profitability Ratios a. Return on total assets 2011 IBM Return on total assets=Net incomeAverage total assets=15,855114,942. 5=13. 8% 2011 Microsoft Return on total assets=Net incomeAverage total assets=23,15066213. 5=35. 0% Microsoft is more efficient in generating earnings by using its assets. b. Return on equity 2011 IBM Return on equity=Net income-Preferred dividendsAverage equity=15,855-3,47321704=57. % 2011 Microsoft Return on equity=Net income-Preferred dividendsAverage equity=23,150-5,39451629=34. 4% IBM has a better performan ce in generating profitability by using shareholders’ investment. c. Net income as a percentage of net sales (Profit margin ratio) 2011 IBM Net income as a percentage of net sales=Net incomeNet sales=15,855106,916=14. 8% 2011 Microsoft Net income as a percentage of net sales=Net incomeNet sales=23,15069,943=33. 1% Microsoft is better in keeping earnings in how much out of every dollar of sales. d. Gross profit rate (Gross margin ratio) 011 IBM Gross profit rate=Net sales-Cost of goods soldNet sales=106,916-56,778106,916=46. 9% 2011 Microsoft Gross profit rate=Net sales-Cost of goods soldNet sales=69,943-56,77869,943=18. 8% Higher percentage of IBM means it retains more on each dollar of sales to service its other costs and obligations. 3. 8 Market Ratios a. Price-Earnings ratio 2011 IBM Price-Earnings ratio=Market price per common shareEarnings per share=183. 8813. 25=13. 9:1 2011 Microsoft Price-Earnings ratio=Market price per common shareEarnings per share=26. 872. 73=9. 84 :1 P/E ratio gives a clear comparison, Microsoft is better. b.Dividend yield 2011 IBM Dividend yield=Annual cash dividends per shareMarket price per share=2. 90183. 88=1. 6% 2011 Microsoft Dividend yield=Annual cash dividends per shareMarket price per share=0. 64 26. 87=2. 4% Microsoft give higher percentage of dividend. 3. Comparison and Interpretation of Ratio Values with Key Business Ratios All the comparisons are based on the data of 2011. Only compared with those available online. 4. 9 Liquidity and Efficiency Ratios Table 3-3. 1-1Liquidity and Efficiency Ratios with Key Business Ratios Item| IBM 2011| IBM 2011| Key Business Ratios| Current ratio| 1. 21:1| 1. 19:1| 1. 9:1| Quick ratio| 0. 84:1| 0. 81:1| 0. 68:1| Return on equity| 57. 0%| 50. 8%| 13. 96%| Net income as a percentage of net sales| 14. 8%| 14. 9%| 10. 2%| Price-Earnings ratio| 13. 9:1| 12. 6:1| 13. 2:1| Dividend yield| 1. 6%| 1. 7%| 2. 05%| The lower current ratio means IBM has a more resource to pay its debts over the next 12 month compared to the industry average. IBM has a higher quick ratio which means that IBM’s shot-term liquidity is better than industry average. A higher return on equity ratio means IBM has a better performance than industry average in generating profitability by using shareholders’ investment.A higher Net income as a percentage of net sales means IBM is better in keeping earnings in how much out of every dollar of sales than industry average. IBM’s P/E ratio increased and exceeded the industry average and is a little bit better. Its stock performed well last year. A lower dividend yield ratio means less dividend compared to industry average gave to shareholders. In conclusion, IBM had a quite well performance in last two years. All the ratios shows that IBM had got an obvious growth and improvement. 4. Common-size Comparative Statements Analysis Appendix 1 is IBM Common-Size Comparative Balance Sheets A 0. 4% point increase in cash and equivalents , which is likely balanced with a 0. 87% point decline in Marketable securities, both steady status in inventories and property, plant and equipment, a marked increase 8. 5% in retained earnings and with most of the good increase and good decrease in percentage means a better performance year in 2011 than that in 2010. Appendix 2 is IBM Common-Size Comparative Income Statement A 0. 33% decline in cost of services, a 0. 39% decline in cost of sales, a 0. 11% decline in cost of financing, a 0. 82% decline in total cost contributes a 0. 82% increase in gross profits, and a 0. 2% decline in net income (loss) shows a better performance of IBM in 2011 than that in 2010. Appendix 3 is IBM Common-Size Comparative Cash Flow Statement A 4. 01% increase in net income, a 1. 29% decline in inventories, a 5% decline in other assets/other liabilities, a 0. 09% increase in investment in software, a 0. 61% in non-operating finance receivables – net, a 21. 17% increase in acquisition of busine sses, net of cash acquired, and a 21. 37 increase in net cash flows from investing activities gives a enough evidence to show the better performance of IBM in 2011 than that in 2010.So in conclusion, IBM performed better in 2011 than in 2010. 5. Trend Analysis Appendix 4 is IBM Income Statement Trend Percent The base period is 2009 and the trend percent is computed in each subsequent year by dividing that year’s amount by its 2009 amount. Total revenue in trend percent is 100% in 2009, 104. 29% in 2010, and 111. 65% in 2011; Total cost is 100% in 2009, 103. 62% in 2010, and 109. 25% in 2011; Total expense & other income is 100% in 2009, 102. 51% in 2010, and 113. 60% in 2011. These data shows a good control of cost but a relatively bad expense control.IBM used the relatively same cost generates more revenue but fewer revenue with the same expense. Total revenue falls short of that for total expense & other income in 2011 but exceeded in 2010, IBM fails to show an ability to c ontrol these expenses as it expands in 2011. Appendix 5 is IBM Balance Sheet Trend Percent The base period is 2009 and the trend percent is computed in each subsequent year by dividing that year’s amount by its 2009 amount. Total revenue in trend percent is 100% in 2009, 104. 29% in 2010, and 111. 65% in 2011; Total assets are 100% in 2009, 104. 60% in 2010, and 106. % in 2011; Retained earnings are 100% in 2009, 114. 38% in 2010, and 129. 61% in 2011. With these percent, we can figure out that IBM was more efficient in using its assets in 2011. Management has generated revenues sufficient to compensate for this asset growth. And in retained earnings shows a better in expense control and higher efficiency in generate revenues. So in conclusion, IBM did a quite good job in 2011. V. Prospective Analysis and Summary Here, based on what I have calculated and the interpretation. We can definitely come to a conclusion that IBM is still growing and it did very good in most parts.As the trend analysis listed above, the faster growing total revenue and the slower growing total cost shows a quite good control of the cost. IBM used the relatively same cost generates more revenue. And IBM was becoming more efficient in using its assets to generate revenue. The fairly good current ratio gives an average performance in giving the debts in next 12 months. And with the quite good quick ratio, return on equity, net income as a percentage of net sales, P/E ratio in 2011 which are higher than the average key business ratios and the ratios of IBM in 2010, we can anticipate a good performance in 2012 and far future.Common-size comparative statements analysis also gives a quite good result, such as the increase in cash and equivalents, gross profits, net income, acquisition of businesses, net of cash acquired, net cash flows and retained earnings, the decline in cost of goods and inventories. Although IBM didn't perform as well as Microsoft, and there is still some defects i n its performance in last two years. As a whole, I would like to invest my hard -earned dollars into the stock of IBM. Appendix 1 | | | Common-size Percent| Report Date| 12/31/2011| 12/31/2010| 12/31/2011| 12/31/2010| Cash ; cash equivalents| 11,922,000| 10,661,000| 10. 4%| 9. 40%| Marketable securities| 0| 990,000| 0. 00%| 0. 87%| Notes ; accounts receivable – trade, net| 11,179,000| 10,834,000| 9. 60%| 9. 55%| Short-term financing receivables| 16,901,000| 16,257,000| 14. 52%| 14. 33%| Other accounts receivable| 1,481,000| 1,134,000| 1. 27%| 1. 00%| Finished goods| 589,000| 432,000| 0. 51%| 0. 38%| Work in process ; raw materials| 2,007,000| 2,018,000| 1. 72%| 1. 78%| Inventories| 2,595,000| 2,450,000| 2. 23%| 2. 16%| Deferred taxes| 1,601,000| 1,564,000| 1. 38%| 1. 38%| Prepaid expenses ; other current assets| 5,249,000| 4,226,000| 4. 51%| 3. 2%| Total current assets| 50,928,000| 48,116,000| 43. 74%| 42. 41%| Land ; land improvements| 786,000| 777,000| 0. 68%| 0. 68%| Build ings ; building improvements| 9,531,000| 9,414,000| 8. 19%| 8. 30%| Plant, laboratory ; office equipment| 26,843,000| 26,676,000| 23. 05%| 23. 51%| Plant ; other property, gross| 37,160,000| 36,867,000| 31. 92%| 32. 50%| Less: accumulated depreciation| 24,703,000| 24,435,000| 21. 22%| 21. 54%| Plant ; other property, net| 12,457,000| 12,432,000| 10. 70%| 10. 96%| Rental machines, gross| 2,964,000| 3,422,000| 2. 55%| 3. 02%| Less: Accumulated depreciation| 1,538,000| 1,758,000| 1. 2%| 1. 55%| Rental machines, net| 1,426,000| 1,665,000| 1. 22%| 1. 47%| Plant, rental machines ; oth property, gross| 40,124,000| 40,289,000| 34. 46%| 35. 51%| Less: Accumulated depreciation| 26,241,000| 26,193,000| 22. 54%| 23. 09%| Plant, rental machines ; other property, net| 13,883,000| 14,096,000| 11. 92%| 12. 42%| Long-term financing receivables| 10,776,000| 10,548,000| 9. 26%| 9. 30%| Prepaid pension assets| 2,843,000| 3,068,000| 2. 44%| 2. 70%| Deferred taxes| 3,503,000| 3,220,000| 3. 01%| 2. 84%| G oodwill| 26,213,000| 25,136,000| 22. 51%| 22. 16%| Intangible assets, net| 3,392,000| 3,488,000| 2. 1%| 3. 07%| Deferred taxes| -| -| | | Deferred transition ; set-up costs ; other deferred arrangements| 1,784,000| 1,853,000| 1. 53%| 1. 63%| Derivatives, non-current| 753,000| 588,000| 0. 65%| 0. 52%| Alliance investments – equity method| 131,000| 122,000| 0. 11%| 0. 11%| Alliance investments – non-equity method| 127,000| 531,000| 0. 11%| 0. 47%| Prepaid software| 233,000| 268,000| 0. 20%| 0. 24%| Long-term deposits| 307,000| 350,000| 0. 26%| 0. 31%| Marketable securities| -| -| | | Other receivables| 208,000| 560,000| 0. 18%| 0. 49%| Employee benefit related| 493,000| 409,000| 0. 42%| 0. 6%| Prepaid income taxes| 261,000| 434,000| 0. 22%| 0. 38%| Other assets| 598,000| 663,000| 0. 51%| 0. 58%| Total investments ; sundry assets| 4,895,000| 5,778,000| 4. 20%| 5. 09%| Total assets| 116,433,000| 113,452,000| 100. 00%| 100. 00%| Taxes| 3,313,000| 4,216,000| 2. 85%| 3. 72%| Commercial paper| 2,300,000| 1,144,000| 1. 98%| 1. 01%| Short-term loans| 1,859,000| 1,617,000| 1. 60%| 1. 43%| Long-term debt – current maturities| 4,306,000| 4,017,000| 3. 70%| 3. 54%| Short-term debt| 8,463,000| 6,778,000| 7. 27%| 5. 97%| Accounts payable| 8,517,000| 7,804,000| 7. 31%| 6. 88%| Compensation ; benefits| 5,099,000| 5,028,000| 4. 8%| 4. 43%| Deferred income| 12,197,000| 11,580,000| 10. 48%| 10. 21%| Other accrued expenses ; liabilities| 4,535,000| 5,156,000| 3. 89%| 4. 54%| Total current liabilities| 42,123,000| 40,562,000| 36. 18%| 35. 75%| U. S dollar notes ; debentures| 24,192,000| 21,766,000| 20. 78%| 19. 19%| Other debt in Euros| 1,037,000| 1,897,000| 0. 89%| 1. 67%| Other debt in Japanese yen| 1,123,000| 1,162,000| 0. 96%| 1. 02%| Other debt in Swiss francs| 173,000| 540,000| 0. 15%| 0. 48%| Other currencies debt| 177,000| 240,000| 0. 15%| 0. 21%| Long-term debt| 26,702,000| 25,606,000| 22. 93%| 22. 7%| Less: net unamortized premium (discount)| -533,000| -531,000| -0. 46%| -0. 47%| Add: SFAS No. 133 fair value adjustment| 994,000| 788,000| 0. 85%| 0. 69%| Long-term debt before current maturities| 27,161,000| 25,863,000| 23. 33%| 22. 80%| Less: Current maturities| 4,306,000| 4,017,000| 3. 70%| 3. 54%| Long-term debt| 22,857,000| 21,846,000| 19. 63%| 19. 26%| Retire ; nonpension postretire benef obligs| 18,374,000| 15,978,000| 15. 78%| 14. 08%| Deferred income| 3,847,000| 3,666,000| 3. 30%| 3. 23%| Income tax reserves| 3,989,000| 3,486,000| 3. 43%| 3. 07%| Executive compensation accruals| 1,388,000| 1,302,000| 1. 19%| 1. 5%| Disability benefits| 835,000| 739,000| 0. 72%| 0. 65%| Derivatives liabilities| 166,000| 135,000| 0. 14%| 0. 12%| Restructuring actions| 347,000| 399,000| 0. 30%| 0. 35%| Workforce reductions| 366,000| 406,000| 0. 31%| 0. 36%| Deferred taxes| 549,000| 378,000| 0. 47%| 0. 33%| Enviromental accruals| 249,000| 249,000| 0. 21%| 0. 22%| Non-current warranty accruals| 163,000| 130,000| 0. 14%| 0. 11%| Asset retirement obligations| 166,000| 161,000| 0. 14%| 0. 14%| Other liabilities| 777,000| 841,000| 0. 67%| 0. 74%| Total other liabilities| 8,996,000| 8,226,000| 7. 73%| 7. 25%| Total liabilities| 96,197,000| 90,279,000| 82. 2%| 79. 57%| Common stock| 48,129,000| 45,418,000| 41. 34%| 40. 03%| Retained earnings| 104,857,000| 92,532,000| 90. 06%| 81. 56%| Treasury stock, at cost| 110,963,000| 96,161,000| 95. 30%| 84. 76%| Net unreal gains (losses) on cash flow hedge derivatives| 71,000| -96,000| 0. 06%| -0. 08%| Foreign currency translation adjustments| 1,767,000| 2,478,000| 1. 52%| 2. 18%| Net change retirement-related benefit plans| -23,737,000| -21,289,000| -20. 39%| -18. 76%| Net unrealized gains (losses) on mktble secur| 13,000| 164,000| 0. 01%| 0. 14%| Accum gains ; (losses) not affecting ret earns| -21,885,000| -18,743,000| -18. 0%| -16. 52%| Total stockholders' equity| 20,138,000| 23,046,000| 17. 30%| 20. 31%| Non-controlling interests| 97,000| 126,000| 0. 08%| 0. 11%| Total equity| 20,236,0 00| 23,172,000| 17. 38%| 20. 42%| Appendix 2 | | | Common-size Percent| Report Date| 12/31/2011| 12/31/2010| 12/31/2011| 12/31/2010| Services revenue| 60,721,000| 56,868,000| 56. 79%| 56. 94%| Sales| 44,063,000| 40,736,000| 41. 21%| 40. 79%| Financing revenue| 2,132,000| 2,267,000| 1. 99%| 2. 27%| Total revenue| 106,916,000| 99,870,000| 100. 00%| 100. 00%| Cost of services| 40,740,000| 38,383,000| 38. 10%| 38. 43%| Cost of sales| 14,973,000| 14,374,000| 14. 0%| 14. 39%| Cost of financing| 1,065,000| 1,100,000| 1. 00%| 1. 10%| Total cost| 56,778,000| 53,857,000| 53. 11%| 53. 93%| Gross profit| 50,138,000| 46,014,000| 46. 89%| 46. 07%| Selling, general & administrative – base expense| 20,287,000| 18,585,000| 18. 97%| 18. 61%| Advertising & promotional expense| 1,373,000| 1,337,000| 1. 28%| 1. 34%| Workforce reductions – ongoing expense| 440,000| 641,000| 0. 41%| 0. 64%| Retirement-related expense| 603,000| 494,000| 0. 56%| 0. 49%| Amortization expense-acquired intangible s| 289,000| 253,000| 0. 27%| 0. 25%| Stock-based compensation| 514,000| 488,000| 0. 8%| 0. 49%| Bad debt expense| 88,000| 40,000| 0. 08%| 0. 04%| Total selling, general & administrative exps| 23,594,000| 21,837,000| 22. 07%| 21. 87%| Research, development & engineering expenses| 6,258,000| 6,026,000| 5. 85%| 6. 03%| Intellectual property & custom development income| 1,108,000| 1,154,000| 1. 04%| 1. 16%| Foreign currency transaction gains (losses)| (513,000)| (303,000)| -0. 48%| -0. 30%| Gains (losses) on derivative instruments| 113,000| 239,000| 0. 11%| 0. 24%| Interest income| 136,000| 92,000| 0. 13%| 0. 09%| Net gains from securities & investments assets| 227,000| (31,000)| 0. 1%| -0. 03%| Other income & (expense)| 58,000| 790,000| 0. 05%| 0. 79%| Total other income (expense)| 20,000| 787,000| 0. 02%| 0. 79%| Interest expense| 411,000| 368,000| 0. 38%| 0. 37%| Total expense & other income| 29,135,000| 26,291,000| 27. 25%| 26. 33%| Income (loss) bef income taxes – U. S. oper s| 9,716,000| 9,140,000| 9. 09%| 9. 15%| Income (loss) bef inc taxes – Non-U. S. opers| 11,287,000| 10,583,000| 10. 56%| 10. 60%| Income (loss) from continuing operations before income taxes| 21,003,000| 19,723,000| 19. 64%| 19. 75%| U. S federal income taxes (benefit) – current| 268,000| 190,000| 0. 5%| 0. 19%| U. S. federal income taxes (benef) – deferred| 909,000| 1,015,000| 0. 85%| 1. 02%| Total U. S. federal income taxes (benefit)| 1,177,000| 1,205,000| 1. 10%| 1. 21%| U. S. state & local inc tax (benef) – current| 429,000| 279,000| 0. 40%| 0. 28%| U. S. state & local inc tax (benef) – deferred| 81,000| 210,000| 0. 08%| 0. 21%| Total U. S. state & local income taxes (benef)| 510,000| 489,000| 0. 48%| 0. 49%| Non-U. S. income taxes (benefit) – current| 3,239,000| 3,127,000| 3. 03%| 3. 13%| Non-U. S. income taxes (benefit) – deferred| 222,000| 69,000| 0. 21%| 0. 07%| Total non-U. S. ncome taxes (benefit)| 3,461,000| 3,196,000| 3. 2 4%| 3. 20%| Provision for income taxes| 5,148,000| 4,890,000| 4. 81%| 4. 90%| Net income (loss)| 15,855,000| 14,833,000| 14. 83%| 14. 85%| Weighted average shares outstanding-basic| 1,196,951. 006| 1,268,789. 388| 1. 12%| 1. 27%| Weighted average shares outstanding-diluted| 1,213,767. 985| 1,287,355. 388| 1. 14%| 1. 29%| Year end shares outstanding| 1,163,182. 564| 1,227,993. 544| 1. 09%| 1. 23%| Net earnings (loss) per share-basic| 13. 25| 11. 69| 0. 00%| 0. 00%| Net earnings (loss) per share-diluted| 13. 06| 11. 52| 0. 00%| 0. 00%| Dividends per share of common stock| 2. | 2. 5| 0. 00%| 0. 00%| Total number of employees| 433,362| 426,751| 0. 41%| 0. 43%| Number of common stockholders| 504,093| 523,553| 0. 47%| 0. 52%| Appendix 3 | | | Common-size Percent| Report Date| 12/31/2011| 12/31/2010| 12/31/2011| 12/31/2010| Net income (loss)| 15,855,000| 14,833,000| 79. 89%| 75. 88%| Depreciation| 3,589,000| 3,657,000| 18. 08%| 18. 71%| Amortization of intangibles| 1,226,000| 1,174,000| 6. 18%| 6. 01%| Stock-based compensation| 697,000| 629,000| 3. 51%| 3. 22%| Deferred taxes| 1,212,000| 1,294,000| 6. 11%| 6. 62%| Net loss (gain) on asset sales & other| (342,000)| (801,000)| -1. 2%| -4. 10%| Receivables (including financing receivables)| (1,279,000)| (489,000)| -6. 44%| -2. 50%| Retirement related| (1,371,000)| (1,963,000)| -6. 91%| -10. 04%| Inventories| (163,000)| 92,000| -0. 82%| 0. 47%| Other assets/other liabilities| (28,000)| 949,000| -0. 14%| 4. 85%| Accounts payable| 451,000| 174,000| 2. 27%| 0. 89%| Net cash flows from operating activities| 19,846,000| 19,549,000| 100. 00%| 100. 00%| Payments for plant, rental machines & other property| (4,108,000)| (4,185,000)| -20. 70%| -21. 41%| Proc from disp of plant, rental machines & oth prop| 608,000| 770,000| 3. 06%| 3. 4%| Investment in software| (559,000)| (569,000)| -2. 82%| -2. 91%| Purchases of marketable securities & other investments| (1,594,000)| (6,129,000)| -8. 03%| -31. 35%| Proceeds from disposition of m arketable securities & other investments| 3,345,000| 7,877,000| 16. 85%| 40. 29%| Non-operating finance receivables – net| (291,000)| (405,000)| -1. 47%| -2. 07%| Acquisition of businesses, net of cash acquired| (1,811,000)| (5,922,000)| -9. 13%| -30. 29%| Divestiture of businesses, net of cash transferred| 14,000| 55,000| 0. 07%| 0. 28%| Net cash flows from investing activities| (4,396,000)| (8,507,000)| -22. 5%| -43. 52%| Proceeds from new debt| 9,996,000| 8,055,000| 50. 37%| 41. 20%| Payments to settle debt| (8,947,000)| (6,522,000)| -45. 08%| -33. 36%| Sht-tm borrows (repays)-less than 90 days-net| 1,321,000| 817,000| 6. 66%| 4. 18%| Common stock repurchases| (15,046,000)| (15,375,000)| -75. 81%| -78. 65%| Common stock transactions, other| 2,453,000| 3,774,000| 12. 36%| 19. 31%| Cash dividends paid| (3,473,000)| (3,177,000)| -17. 50%| -16. 25%| Net cash flows from financing activities| (13,696,000)| (12,429,000)| -69. 01%| -63. 58%| Eff of exch rate chngs on cash & cash e quivs| (493,000)| (135,000)| -2. 8%| -0. 69%| Net change in cash & cash equivalents| 1,262,000| (1,522,000)| 6. 36%| -7. 79%| Cash & cash equivalents, beginning of year| 10,661,000| 12,183,000| 53. 72%| 62. 32%| Cash & cash equivalents, end of year| 11,922,000| 10,661,000| 60. 07%| 54. 53%| Cash paid during the year for income taxes| 4,168,000| 3,238,000| 21. 00%| 16. 56%| Cash paid during the year for interest| 956,000| 951,000| 4. 82%| 4. 86%| Appendix 4 | Trend Percent| Report Date| 12/31/2011| 12/31/2010| 12/31/2009| Services revenue| 110. 15%| 103. 16%| 100. 00%| Sales| 115. 05%| 106. 36%| 100. 00%| Financing revenue| 91. 46%| 97. 5%| 100. 00%| Total revenue| 111. 65%| 104. 29%| 100. 00%| Cost of services| 109. 68%| 103. 33%| 100. 00%| Cost of sales| 110. 05%| 105. 64%| 100. 00%| Cost of financing| 87. 30%| 90. 16%| 100. 00%| Total cost| 109. 25%| 103. 62%| 100. 00%| Gross profit| 114. 51%| 105. 09%| 100. 00%| Selling, general & administrative – base expense| 112. 36%| 1 02. 93%| 100. 00%| Advertising & promotional expense| 109. 66%| 106. 79%| 100. 00%| Workforce reductions – ongoing expense| 92. 83%| 135. 23%| 100. 00%| Retirement-related expense| 187. 27%| 153. 42%| 100. 00%| Amortization expense-acquired intangibles| 101. 40%| 88. 7%| 100. 00%| Stock-based compensation| 123. 26%| 117. 03%| 100. 00%| Bad debt expense| 59. 86%| 27. 21%| 100. 00%| Total selling, general & administrative exps| 112. 61%| 104. 22%| 100. 00%| Research, development & engineering expenses| 107. 53%| 103. 54%| 100. 00%| Intellectual property & custom development income| 94. 14%| 98. 05%| 100. 00%| Foreign currency transaction gains (losses)| -51300. 00%| -30300. 00%| 100. 00%| Gains (losses) on derivative instruments| 941. 67%| 1991. 67%| 100. 00%| Interest income| 144. 68%| 97. 87%| 100. 00%| Net gains from securities & investments assets| -202. 8%| 27. 68%| 100. 00%| Net real gains (losses) from real est activs| -| -| 100. 00%| Other income & (expense)| 16. 48%| 2 24. 43%| 100. 00%| Total other income (expense)| 5. 70%| 224. 22%| 100. 00%| Interest expense| 102. 24%| 91. 54%| 100. 00%| Total expense & other income| 113. 60%| 102. 51%| 100. 00%| Income (loss) bef income taxes – U. S. opers| 102. 02%| 95. 97%| 100. 00%| Income (loss) bef inc taxes – Non-U. S. opers| 131. 03%| 122. 86%| 100. 00%| Income (loss) from continuing operations before income taxes| 115. 80%| 108. 74%| 100. 00%| U. S federal income taxes (benefit) – current| 56. 6%| 40. 17%| 100. 00%| U. S. federal income taxes (benef) – deferred| 67. 79%| 75. 69%| 100. 00%| Total U. S. federal income taxes (benefit)| 64. 88%| 66. 43%| 100. 00%| U. S. state & local inc tax (benef) – current| 357. 50%| 232. 50%| 100. 00%| U. S. state & local inc tax (benef) – deferred| 43. 78%| 113. 51%| 100. 00%| Total U. S. state & local income taxes (benef)| 167. 21%| 160. 33%| 100. 00%| Non-U. S. income taxes (benefit) – current| 138. 01%| 133. 23%| 100 . 00%| Non-U. S. income taxes (benefit) – deferred| 89. 88%| 27. 94%| 100. 00%| Total non-U. S. income taxes (benefit)| 133. 2%| 123. 21%| 100. 00%| Provision for income taxes| 109. 23%| 103. 76%| 100. 00%| Income (loss) from continuing operations| -| -| 100. 00%| Net income (loss)| 118. 10%| 110. 49%| 100. 00%| Weighted average shares outstanding-basic| 90. 19%| 95. 60%| 100. 00%| Weighted average shares outstanding-diluted| 90. 49%| 95. 97%| 100. 00%| Year end shares outstanding| 89. 11%| 94. 07%| 100. 00%| Earnings (loss) per share from continuing operations-basic| -| -| 100. 00%| Net earnings (loss) per share-basic| 130. 93%| 115. 51%| 100. 00%| Earnings (loss) per share from continuing operations-diluted| -| -| 100. 0%| Net earnings (loss) per share-diluted| 130. 47%| 115. 08%| 100. 00%| Dividends per share of common stock| 134. 88%| 116. 28%| 100. 00%| Total number of employees| 98. 99%| 97. 48%| 100. 00%| Number of common stockholders| 92. 70%| 96. 28%| 100. 00%| Appen dix 5 | Trend percent| Report Date| 12/31/2011| 12/31/2010| 12/31/2009| Cash & cash equivalents| 97. 86%| 87. 51%| 100. 00%| Marketable securities| 0. 00%| 55. 28%| 100. 00%| Notes & accounts receivable – trade, net| 104. 13%| 100. 91%| 100. 00%| Short-term financing receivables| 113. 32%| 109. 00%| 100. 00%| Other accounts receivable| 129. 7%| 99. 21%| 100. 00%| Finished goods| 110. 51%| 81. 05%| 100. 00%| Work in process & raw materials| 102. 40%| 102. 96%| 100. 00%| Inventories| 104. 05%| 98. 24%| 100. 00%| Deferred taxes| 92. 54%| 90. 40%| 100. 00%| Prepaid expenses & other current assets| 133. 02%| 107. 10%| 100. 00%| Total current assets| 104. 07%| 98. 33%| 100. 00%| Land & land improvements| 106. 65%| 105. 43%| 100. 00%| Buildings & building improvements| 102. 33%| 101. 07%| 100. 00%| Plant, laboratory & office equipment| 103. 69%| 103. 04%| 100. 00%| Plant & other property, gross| 103. 39%| 102. 58%| 100. 0%| Less: accumulated depreciation| 105. 19%| 104. 05%| 100. 00 %| Plant & other property, net| 100. 02%| 99. 82%| 100. 00%| Rental machines, gross| 81. 07%| 93. 60%| 100. 00%| Less: Accumulated depreciation| 79. 03%| 90. 34%| 100. 00%| Rental machines, net| 83. 39%| 97. 37%| 100. 00%| Plant, rental machines & oth property, gross| 101. 33%| 101. 75%| 100. 00%| Less: Accumulated depreciation| 103. 19%| 103. 00%| 100. 00%| Plant, rental machines & other property, net| 98. 01%| 99. 51%| 100. 00%| Long-term financing receivables| 101. 24%| 99. 10%| 100. 00%| Prepaid pension assets| 94. 4%| 102. 23%| 100. 00%| Deferred taxes| 83. 50%| 76. 76%| 100. 00%| Goodwill| 129. 83%| 124. 50%| 100. 00%| Intangible assets, net| 134. 98%| 138. 80%| 100. 00%| Deferred transition & set-up costs & other deferred arrangements| 100. 68%| 104. 57%| 100. 00%| Derivatives, non-current| 133. 27%| 104. 07%| 100. 00%| Alliance investments – equity method| 113. 91%| 106. 09%| 100. 00%| Alliance investments – non-equity method| 26. 62%| 111. 32%| 100. 00%| Prepa id software| 74. 68%| 85. 90%| 100. 00%| Long-term deposits| 99. 03%| 112. 90%| 100. 00%| Other receivables| 33. 71%| 90. 76%| 100. 00%|Employee benefit related| 115. 46%| 95. 78%| 100. 00%| Prepaid income taxes| -| -| -| Other assets| 76. 37%| 84. 67%| 100. 00%| Total investments & sundry assets| 91. 00%| 107. 42%| 100. 00%| Total assets| 106. 80%| 104. 06%| 100. 00%| Taxes| 86. 59%| 110. 19%| 100. 00%| Commercial paper| 978. 72%| 486. 81%| 100. 00%| Short-term loans| 108. 65%| 94. 51%| 100. 00%| Long-term debt – current maturities| 193. 79%| 180. 78%| 100. 00%| Short-term debt| 203. 05%| 162. 62%| 100. 00%| Accounts payable| 114. 54%| 104. 95%| 100. 00%| Compensation & benefits| 113. 19%| 111. 61%| 100. 00%| Deferred income| 112. 7%| 106. 78%| 100. 00%| Other accrued expenses & liabilities| 86. 83%| 98. 72%| 100. 00%| Total current liabilities| 117. 00%| 112. 67%| 100. 00%| U. S dollar notes & debentures| 132. 58%| 119. 29%| 100. 00%| Other debt in Euros| 30. 26%| 55. 35%| 100. 00%| Other debt in Japanese yen| 71. 76%| 74. 25%| 100. 00%| Other debt in Swiss francs| 35. 74%| 111. 57%| 100. 00%| Other currencies debt| 62. 11%| 84. 21%| 100. 00%| Long-term debt| 111. 22%| 106. 66%| 100. 00%| Less: net unamortized premium (discount)| 101. 14%| 100. 76%| 100. 00%| Add: SFAS No. 133 fair value adjustment| 147. 70%| 117. 9%| 100. 00%| Long-term debt before current maturities| 112. 45%| 107. 08%| 100. 00%| Less: Current maturities| 193. 79%| 180. 78%| 100. 00%| Long-term debt| 104. 22%| 99. 61%| 100. 00%| Retire & nonpension postretire benef obligs| 115. 18%| 100. 16%| 100. 00%| Deferred income| 108. 00%| 102. 92%| 100. 00%| Income tax reserves| 109. 98%| 96. 11%| 100. 00%| Executive compensation accruals| 119. 66%| 112. 24%| 100. 00%| Disability benefits| 105. 03%| 92. 96%| 100. 00%| Derivatives liabilities| 25. 58%| 20. 80%| 100. 00%| Restructuring actions| 78. 68%| 90. 48%| 100. 00%| Workforce reductions| 89. 9%| 99. 27%| 100. 00%| Deferred taxes| 116. 81% | 80. 43%| 100. 00%| Enviromental accruals| 101. 63%| 101. 63%| 100. 00%| Non-current warranty accruals| 129. 37%| 103. 17%| 100. 00%| Asset retirement obligations| 143. 10%| 138. 79%| 100. 00%| Other liabilities| 99. 49%| 107. 68%| 100. 00%| Total other liabilities| 102. 01%| 93. 28%| 100. 00%| Total liabilities| 111. 51%| 104. 65%| 100. 00%| Common stock| 115. 11%| 108. 63%| 100. 00%| Retained earnings| 129. 61%| 114. 38%| 100. 00%| Treasury stock, at cost| 136. 58%| 118. 36%| 100. 00%| Net unreal gains (losses) on cash flow hedge derivatives| -14. 6%| 19. 96%| 100. 00%| Foreign currency translation adjustments| 96. 24%| 134. 97%| 100. 00%| Net change retirement-related