Bellagio has tight controls over its dealer, which provide a high degree of certainty that the person being controlled will act as the organization wishes. However the vice presidents of table games are not tightly controlled because there is no good performance measure for them. In terms of cash control, Bellagio assigns employees the responsibility of certain amount of cash, and some procedures are carried out to ensure that the records are reliable, such as standardization of actions at the tables, supervision and surveillance, as well as auditing procedures. These procedures are effective internal control methods and can prevent embezzlement, unless two or more people collude. Amount the internal control methods, standardization of actions at the tables, would be an example of tight action controls and is effective in making the games fair and preventing the dealers from theft. The method of monitoring of result would be an example of result controls.
However whether this method is appropriate is in doubt. The result is measures after the 24-hour procedure is completed, and during that time 3 dealers would have worked on the same table. It would be effective in measuring casino profitability, but not so helpful if they want to measure each dealer’s performance. If the 24-hour procedure can be divided into several sections and each of the 3 dealers are measured individually, and they can receive constant feedback before they finish their shift every day, the result control might be more effective. Another result control problem existing is that pit bosses and casino managers have the right of resolving disputes by deciding in the casino’s favor. Since casino is in service industry, it is more important to keep the customers happy, rather than maintain the discipline inside the casino, so that they will return in the future, thus it is more reasonable to make the decision in favor of the players.