MHB What formulas to use to work out the following questions

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimBobBrown
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formulas Work
AI Thread Summary
To determine the number of employees in 2010, divide the total revenue of $63.31 billion by the revenue per employee of $175,300, resulting in approximately 158,275 employees. For the number of full-time employees in 2008, use the total revenue of $58.43 billion and divide it by the revenue per full-time employee of $197,100, yielding about 296,000 full-time employees. The calculations emphasize the importance of using the correct revenue per employee figures for each year. The discussion clarifies the formulas needed to derive employee numbers from revenue data. Accurate application of these formulas is essential for obtaining the correct results.
JimBobBrown
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
[table="width: 500, class: grid"]
[tr]
[td][/td]
[td]2007[/td]
[td]2008[/td]
[td]2009[/td]
[td]2010[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Total revenue
($1,000 million)[/td]
[td]60.05[/td]
[td]58.43[/td]
[td]61.24[/td]
[td]63.31[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Revenue per employee
($1,000)[/td]
[td]168.8[/td]
[td]163.5[/td]
[td]170.6[/td]
[td]175.3[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Revenue per full-time employee
($1,000)[/td]
[td]198.6[/td]
[td]197.1[/td]
[td]210.6[/td]
[td]224.7[/td]
[/tr]
[/table]

1. What was the number of employees in 2010?

2. What was the number of full-time employees in 2008?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
JimBobBrown said:
[TABLE="class: grid, width: 500"]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]2007[/TD]
[TD]2008[/TD]
[TD]2009[/TD]
[TD]2010[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Total revenue
($1,000 million)[/TD]
[TD]60.05[/TD]
[TD]58.43[/TD]
[TD]61.24[/TD]
[TD]63.31[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Revenue per employee
($1,000)[/TD]
[TD]168.8[/TD]
[TD]163.5[/TD]
[TD]170.6[/TD]
[TD]175.3[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Revenue per full-time employee
($1,000)[/TD]
[TD]198.6[/TD]
[TD]197.1[/TD]
[TD]210.6[/TD]
[TD]224.7[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

1. What was the number of employees in 2010?

2. What was the number of full-time employees in 2008?
Hi JimBobBrown,

Here you are given the revenue per employee and the revenue per full time employee. If we we take the first one; the revenue per employee it means that you take the total revenue and divide by the number of employees. In equation form we can write this as,

\[\mbox{Revenue per Employee}=\frac{\mbox{Total Revenue}}{\mbox{Number of Employees}}\]

So you are given the Revenue per employee as well as the total revenue for 2010. Plugging those values in the above equation you can find the number of employees for 2010. Can you try to do part 2 yourself? It's basically the same thing but instead of the number of total employees you have number of full time employees. :)
 
Thanks for that, still can't get my head around it for some reason. So for question 1. I would add up both revenues per employee then divide total revenue by that figure?

175300 + 224700 = 400000
63,310,000,000 / 400,000 = 158275
Employees = 158,275
 
JimBobBrown said:
Thanks for that, still can't get my head around it for some reason. So for question 1. I would add up both revenues per employee then divide total revenue by that figure?

175300 + 224700 = 400000
63,310,000,000 / 400,000 = 158275
Employees = 158,275

You don't have to add up both revenues since the "Revenue Per Employee" includes the "Revenue per Full Time Employee". So you just got to use the Revenue per Employee amount. :)
 
WoW I thought something was not making sense. but it does now many thanks Sudharaka. So follow that question 2. would be just

total / full-time =

63,310,000,000 / 224700 = 281753.4
 
JimBobBrown said:
WoW I thought something was not making sense. but it does now many thanks Sudharaka. So follow that question 2. would be just

total / full-time =

63,310,000,000 / 224700 = 281753.4

The method is correct but note that in question 2 you have to find the number of full time employees in 2008.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'

Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'

Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
View full post »

Thread 'What Exactly is Dirac’s Delta Function? - Insight'

Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
View full post »
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'

Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'

Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
View full post »

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top