Solution
Two coordinate plots are given, one for 2019 and one for 2023. In each plot the horizontal coordinate of a firm is its employee strength (ES), the vertical coordinate is its profit after tax (PAT, in Rs. crore), and the area of its marker is proportional to PRD, the percentage of PAT spent on R&D. Equal areas represent equal PRD across the two years.
To answer the questions we need, for each firm, its ES, PAT and PRD in both years, plus a few derived quantities:
- the PAT growth ratio , which orders the annual rate of growth (ARG),
- PAT per employee in 2023,
- R&D spend in 2023 , and R&D spend per employee in 2023.
Raw readings (from the two plots):
| Firm | ES '19 | PAT '19 | PRD '19 | ES '23 | PAT '23 | PRD '23 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | ||||||
| B | ||||||
| C | ||||||
| D | ||||||
| E | ||||||
| F |
Derived values (to be computed):
| Firm | PAT/ES '23 | R&D '23 | R&D/ES '23 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | ||||
| B | ||||
| C | ||||
| D | ||||
| E | ||||
| F |
| Firm | ES '19 | PAT '19 | PRD '19 | ES '23 | PAT '23 | PRD '23 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 40 | 20 | 4 | |||
| B | 35 | 25 | 5 | |||
| C | 25 | 30 | 9 | |||
| D | 55 | 35 | 6 | |||
| E | 20 | 10 | 6 | |||
| F | 65 | 55 | 7 |
| Firm | PAT/ES '23 | R&D '23 | R&D/ES '23 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | ||||
| B | ||||
| C | ||||
| D | ||||
| E | ||||
| F |
The 2019 plot is read off (x = ES, y = PAT, marker area = PRD). The values above are the approximate readings; for most questions only the relative positions matter.
Note that E sits lowest on the PAT axis in 2019 (PAT ) and C carries one of the largest markers (PRD ).
| Firm | ES '19 | PAT '19 | PRD '19 | ES '23 | PAT '23 | PRD '23 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 40 | 20 | 4 | 50 | 30 | 5 |
| B | 35 | 25 | 5 | 40 | 45 | 6 |
| C | 25 | 30 | 9 | 20 | 60 | 2 |
| D | 55 | 35 | 6 | 60 | 40 | 3 |
| E | 20 | 10 | 6 | 30 | 50 | 7 |
| F | 65 | 55 | 7 | 70 | 70 | 8 |
| Firm | PAT/ES '23 | R&D '23 | R&D/ES '23 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | ||||
| B | ||||
| C | ||||
| D | ||||
| E | ||||
| F |
The 2023 plot is read off the same way. Note C has climbed to a high PAT () while its marker has shrunk to a small PRD (), and it sits at a low ES ().
| Firm | ES '19 | PAT '19 | PRD '19 | ES '23 | PAT '23 | PRD '23 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 40 | 20 | 4 | 50 | 30 | 5 |
| B | 35 | 25 | 5 | 40 | 45 | 6 |
| C | 25 | 30 | 9 | 20 | 60 | 2 |
| D | 55 | 35 | 6 | 60 | 40 | 3 |
| E | 20 | 10 | 6 | 30 | 50 | 7 |
| F | 65 | 55 | 7 | 70 | 70 | 8 |
| Firm | PAT/ES '23 | R&D '23 | R&D/ES '23 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 1.50 | |||
| B | 1.80 | |||
| C | 2.00 | |||
| D | 1.14 | |||
| E | 5.00 | |||
| F | 1.27 |
The PAT growth ratios are filled in: , , , , , .
Since ARG is constant and the window 2019 to 2023 is the same 4 years for every firm, . A larger ratio therefore means a larger ARG. E stands out with .
| Firm | ES '19 | PAT '19 | PRD '19 | ES '23 | PAT '23 | PRD '23 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 40 | 20 | 4 | 50 | 30 | 5 |
| B | 35 | 25 | 5 | 40 | 45 | 6 |
| C | 25 | 30 | 9 | 20 | 60 | 2 |
| D | 55 | 35 | 6 | 60 | 40 | 3 |
| E | 20 | 10 | 6 | 30 | 50 | 7 |
| F | 65 | 55 | 7 | 70 | 70 | 8 |
| Firm | PAT/ES '23 | R&D '23 | R&D/ES '23 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 1.50 | 0.60 | ||
| B | 1.80 | 1.13 | ||
| C | 2.00 | 3.00 | ||
| D | 1.14 | 0.67 | ||
| E | 5.00 | 1.67 | ||
| F | 1.27 | 1.00 |
PAT per employee in 2023 is filled in as : , , , , , . C is clearly the highest at because of its high PAT on a small workforce.
| Firm | ES '19 | PAT '19 | PRD '19 | ES '23 | PAT '23 | PRD '23 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 40 | 20 | 4 | 50 | 30 | 5 |
| B | 35 | 25 | 5 | 40 | 45 | 6 |
| C | 25 | 30 | 9 | 20 | 60 | 2 |
| D | 55 | 35 | 6 | 60 | 40 | 3 |
| E | 20 | 10 | 6 | 30 | 50 | 7 |
| F | 65 | 55 | 7 | 70 | 70 | 8 |
| Firm | PAT/ES '23 | R&D '23 | R&D/ES '23 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 1.50 | 0.60 | 1.5 | |
| B | 1.80 | 1.13 | 2.7 | |
| C | 2.00 | 3.00 | 1.2 | |
| D | 1.14 | 0.67 | 1.2 | |
| E | 5.00 | 1.67 | 3.5 | |
| F | 1.27 | 1.00 | 5.6 |
R&D spend in 2023 is computed as : e.g. C , D , E , F .
| Firm | ES '19 | PAT '19 | PRD '19 | ES '23 | PAT '23 | PRD '23 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 40 | 20 | 4 | 50 | 30 | 5 |
| B | 35 | 25 | 5 | 40 | 45 | 6 |
| C | 25 | 30 | 9 | 20 | 60 | 2 |
| D | 55 | 35 | 6 | 60 | 40 | 3 |
| E | 20 | 10 | 6 | 30 | 50 | 7 |
| F | 65 | 55 | 7 | 70 | 70 | 8 |
| Firm | PAT/ES '23 | R&D '23 | R&D/ES '23 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 1.50 | 0.60 | 1.5 | 0.030 |
| B | 1.80 | 1.13 | 2.7 | 0.068 |
| C | 2.00 | 3.00 | 1.2 | 0.060 |
| D | 1.14 | 0.67 | 1.2 | 0.020 |
| E | 5.00 | 1.67 | 3.5 | 0.117 |
| F | 1.27 | 1.00 | 5.6 | 0.080 |
R&D per employee in 2023 is R&D '23 divided by ES '23: C , D , E , F . D is the smallest because the same R&D amount as C is spread over a much larger workforce.
| Firm | ES '19 | PAT '19 | PRD '19 | ES '23 | PAT '23 | PRD '23 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 40 | 20 | 4 | 50 | 30 | 5 |
| B | 35 | 25 | 5 | 40 | 45 | 6 |
| C | 25 | 30 | 9 | 20 | 60 | 2 |
| D | 55 | 35 | 6 | 60 | 40 | 3 |
| E | 20 | 10 | 6 | 30 | 50 | 7 |
| F | 65 | 55 | 7 | 70 | 70 | 8 |
| Firm | PAT/ES '23 | R&D '23 | R&D/ES '23 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 1.50 | 0.60 | 1.5 | 0.030 |
| B | 1.80 | 1.13 | 2.7 | 0.068 |
| C | 2.00 | 3.00 | 1.2 | 0.060 |
| D | 1.14 | 0.67 | 1.2 | 0.020 |
| E | 5.00 | 1.67 | 3.5 | 0.117 |
| F | 1.27 | 1.00 | 5.6 | 0.080 |
Last, the 2018 figure needed for C. Using its ARG, , so .
Going one year before 2019: .
The only PRD reading available near 2018 is the 2019 marker, , so .
All raw readings and derived quantities are now populated. The values are graph readings, so small rounding differences are expected; the comparative orderings are robust: ARG ordering led by E, PAT/employee in 2023 led by C, and R&D/employee in 2023 lowest for D.
R&D per employee in 2023 is . For the four firms asked:
- C:
- D:
- E:
- F:
D has the same total R&D as C () but spread over a much larger workforce ( vs ), giving the smallest value, . Hence the least R&D spending per employee is Firm D, option 2.
More from this set:
Question 15