Ch.04 Kinney 9e SM_Final

CHAPTER 4 ACTIVITY-BASED MANAGEMENT AND ACTIVITY-BASED COSTING QUESTIONS 1. Activity­based management is a management model that associates an organization’s activities   with   the   value   customers   derive   from   the   organization’s   products. Efficiency and effectiveness are achieved by reducing the level of activities that do not create value for the customer and by improving execution of activities that do create customer value. Specific tools used in ABM include activity analysis, cost driver analysis, activity­ based costing, continuous improvement, operational control, performance evaluation, and business process reengineering. 2. Activity analysis  is  used to separate activities  into two groups: those that add value to the product or service and those that do not add value. Once the non­ value­added activities  are identified, managers seek to reduce or eliminate the level of the drivers of those activities. If such efforts are successful, NVA costs will   be   reduced   without   impairing   the   value   of   products   or   services   to   the consumer. The result should be an increase in profits. 3. Value­added activities are defined from the customer’s perspective because it is the customer who is the final evaluator of a product’s or service’s “worth” and, therefore, the activities involved in creating that product or service. The customer is also the person who should, in the final analysis, be the one who determines whether   he   or   she   actually   wants   to   pay   the   price   for   engaging   in   all   of   the activities that are incurred in the production of a product or the performance of a service. 4. In addition to approximately one hour of commercials, the remaining time is spent showing players standing around, network announcers, replays, cheerleaders, head coaches, and referees. In a televised football game, the value­added activities are the actual game plays. Non­value­added activities consist of commercials and the time   between   plays.   Activities   such   as   “moving   the   chains,”   measuring   to determine if a first down was made, and moving the ball from the end of one play to the point where it will be put in play next are all non­value­added activities. People who believe that the commercials are informative and interesting and that the time between plays allows them an opportunity to examine the strategies of the   teams   and   project   what   each   team   is   likely   to   do   may   disagree   with   this assessment.   Advertisers   may   also   disagree   that   commercials   are   NVA: HomeAway estimated that 60 to 70 percent of its first Super Bowl ad cost was recouped in new business and GoDaddy says it obtained five percentage points of market share within the first 48 hours after a Super Bowl ad (R. Nakashima, “At $3   Million   per   30   Seconds,   an   Ad   Often   Is   Still   Worth   the   Gamble,”  Austin American­Statesman, 2/3/11, p. B5). 67 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

Chapter 4

The cycle efficiency of the game would be 11 ÷ 180 = 6%. 5. The   five   people   would   probably   not   calculate   the   same   MCE.   First,   times   of processes will differ and a value chart will typically contain both minimum and maximum times for an activity; thus, the individuals may choose different times within the range to determine total cycle time. Additionally, some people may believe that   certain   activities   (such   as   packaging   and   inspection)   are   value­added,   while others  may believe  the same  activities  to be non­value­added.  However, all five would probably agree that a significant portion of “total” cycle time is NVA time from a customer’s perspective. 6. Service cycle efficiency is generally higher than manufacturing cycle efficiency because services are primarily acquired at the time they are needed, meaning that there   is   little   storage   time.   Additionally,   transfer   time   is   commonly   small   in service   businesses,   with   the   exception   of   having   to   go   from   one   location   to another. 7. Yes,   cost   drivers   exist   in   traditional   accounting   systems,   although   they   are generally called “overhead allocation bases.” In traditional systems, a single cost pool is commonly used for overhead costs and a single cost driver such as direct labor hours or machine hours is used rather than multiple cost drivers. Also in traditional systems, volume­based cost drivers are more the norm than non­volume­based (e.g., square footage or distance moved) cost drivers. Finally, traditional accounting stresses finding an allocation base that demonstrates   strong   statistical   correlation   to   the   cost,   but   ABC   emphasizes searching for multiple cost drivers that bear cause­and­effect relationships to the cost. However,   regardless   of   how   the   drivers   are   titled   or   on   what   bases   they   are calculated, the use of the drivers is the same in both systems. Cost drivers are used to compute a predetermined overhead rate to assign overhead costs to products and services. 8. By using a single cost pool and a single cost driver to allocate overhead, the more traditional   methods   of   overhead   assignment   ignore   the   influence   on   cost   of   the different activities that occur to make a product. In this manner, low­volume specialty products, which cause a disproportionate amount of overhead costs, are only assigned an average charge for overhead, thereby shifting costs to the standard product lines. ABC does a better job of tracing costs to the products that caused the various costs by using multiple cost pools and multiple cost drivers. Additionally, most costs in a traditional costing system are viewed as being either variable on a per­unit­of­activity basis or fixed. Activity­based costing recognizes that the “unit” causing a change in variable costs may also be a batch­level or a process­level “unit.” Thus, rather than spreading costs over all units produced, ABC spreads costs over all units produced within the appropriate level of activity.

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

Chapter 4

9.

As is true with any management or costing system, an ABC system will not “last forever.”   The   system   must   be   updated   periodically   to   reflect   changes   in   the company’s   human   and   physical   resources,   products/services,   and   business environment. Additionally, the original system may not have been the “best” it could   have   been.   For   a   discussion   of   changing   the   ABC   system,   see   B.   E. Waldrup, J. B. MacArthur, and J. E. Michelman, “Does Your Costing System Need a Tune­Up?”   Strategic Finance (June 2009), pp. 47–51.

10. All companies are not likely to benefit equally from adopting ABC. The greatest benefits are likely to be gained by firms with complex production processes; firms that make products that have substantial diversity relative to cost, complexity, and volume; and firms that have a high level of overhead costs that are fixed relative to production volume. 11. Some of the additional costs that will be incurred will relate to purchasing and storage to have the options available as customers make requests. (Interestingly, Chrysler has asked its suppliers to keep more parts on hand rather than incurring many of those costs.) Setup costs will increase when the production line has to change   paint   colors.   Also,   Chrysler   incurred   significant   retooling   costs   for   its plant in Mexico that manufactures the Fiat 500. However, one of the largest costs may occur on production for cars to be sent to dealers: if the company makes configurations not desired by the customers, the cars may not be sold and the customers   will   go   elsewhere.   Many   customers   are   not   willing   to   wait   for   the model they want to be delivered from another location.  Customers may be willing to pay modest price variations for different options, but with a base price of $15,500, customers may likely be price sensitive—especially in urban markets where small cars such as the Fiat 500 may be driven less and garaged more. Many customers simply would not understand why paint color A should cost $X more than paint color B. The Pareto principle is likely to hold true as shown by the following quote. “[C]ar makers have tried hard to bundle features so they can produce a dozen or so versions of a vehicle that will satisfy most buyers. That limits the complexity on the factory floor and dealership lots.” (J. Bennett, “Options Overload for Fiat’s 500,” WSJ, 11/22/10, p. B1.) 12. Implementation of ABC requires a significant commitment of time and resources. Significant time is consumed by preparing process and value charts, identifying cost drivers, and determining how to split production costs into pools that are relatively homogeneous relative to a particular cost driver. Identifying cost drivers typically   requires   internal   surveys   and   interviews   with   company   personnel. Additional   time   is   consumed   evaluating,   selecting,   and   implementing   any software that is used to manage the ABC data collection and cost assignments.

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

70

Chapter 4

EXERCISES 13. Each student will have a different answer. No solution provided. 14. Each student will have a different answer. No solution provided. However, it is likely that students will determine that quality inspection is non­value­added for the clothing manufacturer and value­added for the pharmaceutical company. 15. Each student will have a different answer. No solution provided. 16. a. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14)

BVA (customers might view this as VA) BVA BVA NVA NVA BVA BVA (customers might view this as VA) BVA BVA BVA (customers might view this as VA) VA BVA VA VA

b. Pisana’s might want to have better relationships with suppliers so that they will provide   the   store   with   the   most   up­to­date   merchandise   possible   (given parameters   established   by   Pisana’s)   that   have   both   barcodes   and   customer­ readable tags, and with a no­defect clause.  17. a. None of the items is a value­added activity. Products should be designed so that schedule changes should not be needed. b. c.

Number of factory schedule changes is the driver. Eliminate factory schedule changes except for those asked for by a customer (in which case the customer should be charged for the cost of the change)   or   for   critical   changes   necessary   to   realize   significant   quality improvements and cost reductions.

18. a. Cycle time = 9 + 264 + 3.5 + 6.5 + 3 + 5 = 291 hours  Value­added processing time = 6.5 hours of mixing and cooking + 3 hours of   bottling MCE = (6.5 + 3.0) ÷ 291.0 = 9.5 ÷ 291.0 = 3.3%

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

Chapter 4

19. a. Value­added activities: Remove sod and level site Build forms Mix and pour concrete Level concrete and smooth Remove forms Total   b. Non­value­added activities: Purchase materials Obtain rental equipment Drying time Return rental tools Clean up Total

Time  20  10    5    6    2  43 hours Time    5    2  24    1    4  36 hours

c. Total cycle time = 43 + 36 = 79 hours            MCE = 43 ÷ 79 = 54.4% 20. a. Value­added activities: Measuring and cutting materials Assembling materials Building fireplace Pegging logs Cutting and framing doors/windows Sealing joints Total value­added time b. Non­value­added activities Receiving materials Storing materials Handling materials Setting up and moving scaffolding Waiting for inspectors County inspections Total non­value­added time

Time    9    3  12    8    5    4  41 days Time    2  10    7    6    6    1  32 days

c. Total cycle time = 41 + 32 = 73 days MCE = 41 ÷ 73 = 56.2% d. Value­added   activities   are   those   that   increase   the   worth   of   the   product   or service in the eyes of the customer and for which the customer is willing to pay. Non­value­added activities are those that do not increase a product’s value in the customer’s perspective.

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

72

Chapter 4

21. a. Receiving ingredients Moving ingredients to stockroom Storing ingredients in stockroom Moving ingredients from stockroom Measuring ingredients Mixing ingredients Packaging ingredients Moving packaged seasoning to warehouse Storing packaged seasoning in warehouse Moving packaged seasoning from warehouse to  trucks Total minutes of cycle time

60 80 8,200 8 30 60 50 100 20,000      120 28,708

b. The value added functions are (1) measuring ingredients, (2) mixing ingredients, and (3) packaging ingredients. (30 min. + 60 min. + 50 min. = 140 min.) c. MCE = 140 ÷ 28,780 = 0.5% d. The company could do many things to improve its MCE. The primary areas on which to concentrate are the times spent storing ingredients in the stockroom and storing   packaged   seasoning   in   the   warehouse.   Probably   the   most   significant improvement in MCE would come from adopting JIT (just­in­time) management of all inventories, which would allow the firm to concentrate on reducing total cycle time by not purchasing materials until they are needed and not producing finished goods until they are demanded by customers. 22. Each student will have a different answer because determination of VA and NVA time in this situation depends on Reliance’s perspective of the various activities. An audit is, in fact, a type of quality control and, as such, could be viewed in its entirety as NVA. However, if Reliance views the audit process as value­added to the   organization,   the   following   activities   are   most   likely   to   be   the   ones   the company would most likely “want” to pay for. Audit planning and discussion of audit risk Fieldwork, transaction testing, completing work papers Drafting and issuing audit report; discussion with board of directors   23 Total VA time Drafting engagement letter    4 Internal control review (likely seen as NVA b/c job is recurring and, if no changes have been made, assessment “should” have been performed       previously)  32 Preparing audit program (likely seen as NVA b/c job is recurring and, if no     changes have been made, program “could” be used again)                                 24 Client discussions and rework 16 Audit follow­up discussions Total NVA time    96 © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

Chapter 4

Given these classifications, the SCE is [168 ÷ (168 + 96)] = 168 ÷ 264 = 63.6%.  Other efficiency percentages are equally likely.  23. a. Step Patient arrives at doctor’s office and checks in with receptionist.

VA or NVA NVA

Patient is asked to review previously provided information for changes; there are none.

NVA

Patient returns forms to receptionist.

NVA

Receptionist verifies patient insurance and collects co-pay.

NVA

Patient waits in waiting room.

NVA

Nurse escorts patient to exam room and takes vital signs.

VA

Patient waits in exam room.

NVA

Physician examines and treats patient.

VA

Patient checks out with receptionist, if needed.

NVA

b. Total VA time = 11 minutes Total cycle time = 47 minutes SCE = 11 ÷ 47 = 23.4% 24. a. None of the activities should be perceived as value­added because the product should have been properly designed originally so that no correction process should have been needed. b.

If the problem could not have been foreseen, then development of the solution (30 minutes) should be considered value­added. All reviews may be seen as business value­added, but that still means that those activities are NVA. Thus, cycle efficiency is  Total time = (15 days × 24 hours × 60 minutes) = 21,600 minutes  Cycle efficiency = 30 ÷ 21,600 = 0.0014

c. Cycle efficiency = 30 ÷ [30 + (4 hours × 60 minutes)] = 30 ÷ 270 = 11% d. 21,600 ÷ 10 minutes = 2,160 calls before the solution document is posted;  2,160 × $15 = $32,400 270 ÷ 10 minutes = 27 calls; 27 × $15 = $405 25. a. The production process in McAllen Co. must have a significant amount of non­ value­added time built into the cycle time. The most likely cause of this NVA time is at least one bottleneck process that creates a long wait period when no production is occurring and goods are simply stored or stacked until they can pass through the process. A fairly simple way to determine where the bottlenecks are is to walk through the plant and see where materials or partially completed units are being stacked

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

74

Chapter 4

or being brought back into the production area from a storage location. Another indicator of a bottleneck is where labor is waiting for a machine to complete a process so that additional materials can be input. In addition to bottlenecks, the company could be engaging in rush orders that remove   regularly   scheduled   production   from   processing.   Always   trying   to catch up on backorders will create delays in processing current orders. It is possible that if all backorders were filled, the current orders could be processed at   a   much   more   rapid   pace.   Finally,   defective   units   caused   by   rushing   to complete orders will have to be reworked, thereby causing an even longer delay in processing time. b. A value chart allows a company to analyze all activities that comprise total cycle time. The role of the value chart is to identify those activities that do not add value in the eyes of the consumer. By focusing managerial attention on reducing or eliminating such activities, total cycle time is reduced and total costs are reduced. 26. Each student will have a different answer; the following are illustrative examples. a. b. c.

number   of   print   ads   (volume   measure),   seconds   of   air   time   (cost measure) usage)

number   of   clients   (volume   measure),   number   of   invoices   sent   (for assessed value of factory building (cost measure)

d.

number of transactions processed (volume measure), number of calls (for   usage),   number   of   installations   (for   usage),   number   of   documents processed (for usage)

e.

number   of   employees   (volume   measure),   number   of   payroll   checks processed (volume measure)

f.

hours of operation (time measure)

27. Each student will have a different answer; the following are illustrative examples. a. amount of investment in factory machinery and buildings (total cost basis for depreciation) b. pounds of materials received (volume measure), distance of average shipment received (cost driver for commercial freight carriers) c. number   of   setups   (volume   driver),   total   time   of   setups   (alternative   volume measure) d. number of transactions processed (volume measure), number of service calls (for usage), number of installations (for usage), number of viruses/worms (for usage), pages of documents printed (volume)

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

Chapter 4

e. average   amount   of   material   inventory   (volume   of   material   stored),   square footage of storage area (storage capacity) f. pounds of material processed (volume of work processed), number of different types   of   material   handled   (complexity   of   material   handling),   number   of purchase orders (volume of work processed by staff and number of suppliers used) g. number of engineering changes (volume of engineering changes), number of process changes (volume of changes to the manufacturing processes), number of engineering change orders (number of requests for changes to products and processes)  h. number of print ads (volume measure), seconds of air time (cost measure), number of new ads developed (measure of professional time) i. machine hours (for machine­driven usage), outside air temperature (for weather­ related usage)  j. number of product defects (volume of quality defects), pounds of scrap and waste (volume of quality defects), number of quality inspections (number of batches) k. machine hours (for maintenance related to the volume of usage of machinery), average age of equipment (for obsolescence and age­related maintenance)  28. a. O O   P O U (could be product/process if left on all the time) U O U O U (per order) 29. a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i.

P P U B U B P P O

30. a. Total setup cost = $20,445  6 = $122,670 Total setup cost per unit = $122,670 ÷ (68,500 + 15,200 + 900) © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

76

Chapter 4

 = $122,670 ÷ 84,600  = $1.45 Product #453 ($1.45  68,500) Product #529 ($1.45  15,200) Product #663 ($1.45  900) Total setup cost assigned

$   99,325 22,040        1,305 $ 122,670

b.

Total cost ÷ # of Units = Cost per unit (rounded) Product #453 ($20,445  3) = $61,335 ÷ 68,500 = $0.90 (rounded) Product #529 ($20,445  1) = $20,445 ÷ 15,200 = $1.35 (rounded) Product #663 ($20,445  2) = $40,890 ÷ 900 = $45.43 (rounded)

c.

Total number of setups would have been three; total setup cost =  ($20,445  3) = $61,335 Product #453 = $20,445 ÷ 68,500 = $0.30 (rounded) Product #529 = $20,445 ÷ 15,200 = $1.35 (rounded) Product #663 = $20,445 ÷ 900 = $22.72 (rounded)

31. a. Total cost per call = $20,980 ÷ 17,500 = $1.20 (rounded) $11,040 Client A [$1.20  (7,000 + 2,200)] = $1.20  9,200 5,160 Client B ($1.20  4,300)     4,800 Client C ($1.20  4,000) $21,000 Total setup cost assigned (off due to rounding) b.

Total cost ÷ # of units = Cost per unit Service #359: $5,810 ÷ 7,000 = $0.83 per call Service #360: $7,085 ÷ 6,500 = $1.09 per call Service #361: $3,198 ÷ 1,300 = $2.46 per call Service #362: $4,887 ÷ 2,700 = $1.81 per call

c.

Client A will be billed an additional $8,208 [$5,810 + ($1.09  2,200)] or   ($5,810   +   $2,398)   for   Babineaux’s   equipment   upgrades.   Client   A   could choose to spread that cost over all calls ($8,208 ÷ 30,000 = $0.27) or could assign the cost only to the specific calls benefited by the upgrades. The latter would be a more reasonable allocation process. (For example, assume that the fees were for directory assistance. If you never used directory assistance, would it seem reasonable for you to be charged an additional $0.27 merely because you were a caller of Client A?)

32. a. Total support cost = $312,750 + $125,100 = $437,850 Partner hours = 5  2,100 = 10,500 Staff hours = 12  2,600 = 31,200 Total hours = 10,500 + 31,200 = 41,700 hours Support rate per hour = $437,850 ÷ 41,700 = $10.50

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

Chapter 4

b.

Total hours = 60 + 220 = 280 Total support cost = 280  $10.50 = $2,940

c.

Professional support rate per hour = $312,750 ÷ 41,700 = $7.50 Administrative support rate per hour = $125,100 ÷ 10,500 = $11.91

d. Professional support (280 total hours  $7.50)  $2,100.00 Administrative support (60  $11.91)                               714.60 Total support cost  $2,814.60 33. a. Allocation rate = Cost ÷ Allocation base Contracts rate = $270,000 ÷ 500,000 = $0.54 per contract page Regulation rate = $379,500 ÷ 750 = $506 per review request Court rate = $862,500 ÷ 3,750 = $230 per professional hour

b Contracts: 21,000  $0.54 .  Regulation: 27  $506 Court: 315  $230 Total c.

$11,340 13,662   72,450 $97,452

The rates will be used to bill other departments for the costs incurred in the legal department. If the legal department operates efficiently, its billings  should equal or exceed the costs it incurs. The firm can hire an outside law firm to perform the legal work rather than do  the work internally. It is difficult to determine, without more information, how  this action would affect total costs. However, it would tend to make the legal  costs much more variable and less fixed.

34. a. 60 beds  360 days = 21,600 b.

$3,620,400 ÷ 21,600 = $168 (rounded)

c Rooms [$504,000 ÷ (35  360)] = $504,000 ÷ 12,600 . Laundry [$151,200 ÷ (60  180)] = $151,200 ÷ 10,800 Nursing care ($1,314,000 ÷ 43,800) Physical therapy ($960,000 ÷ 8,000) General services ($691,200 ÷ 21,600)

$ 40 14 30 120 32

d.                Traditional: 6  $168 = $1,008 ABC: Room ($40  6) Laundry ($14  3)

$   240 42

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

78

Chapter 4

Nursing care ($30  6) Physical therapy ($120  30) General services ($32  6) Total e.

180 3,600      192 $4,254

Traditional: 6  $168 = $1,008 ABC: Room [($40 ÷ 2)  6)] Laundry ($14  3) Nursing care ($30  6) General services ($32  6) Total

$120 42 180      192 $534

35. a. $375,000 ÷ 75,000 calls = $5 per call $187,500 ÷ 46,875 purchase orders = $4 per purchase order $168,750 ÷ 28,125 receiving reports = $6 per receiving report Cost assignment: $125 25 calls  $5 200 50 purchase orders  $4   210 35 receiving reports  $6 Total cost assigned $535 b. $535 ÷ 100 units = $5.35 per unit c.

$731,250 ÷ 75,000 = $9.75 per call $9.75  25 calls = $243.75

36. a. $2,000,000 ÷ (170,000 + 30,000) = $2,000,000 ÷ 200,000 = $10 per MH Total OH assigned to regular dictionaries = $10  170,000 = $1,700,000 Total OH assigned to hand­sewn dictionaries = $10  30,000 = $300,000 b.

c.

Utilities­related: $800,000 ÷ 200,000 = $4 per MH Inspection­related: $1,200,000 ÷ 60,000 = $20 per inspection hour Total OH to regular dictionaries = ($4  170,000) + ($20  10,000) = $680,000 + $200,000 = $880,000 Total OH to hand­sewn dictionaries = ($4  30,000) + ($20  50,000) = $120,000 + $1,000,000 = $1,120,000 Revenues Direct costs Overhead assigned Profit before tax

Regular $ 6,400,000  (5,000,000)      (880,000) $    520,000

Hand­Sewn     $ 5,600,000     (4,400,000)     (1,120,000)      $      80,000

Management should not stop producing the regular dictionaries as these are generating   a   rate   of   return   on   revenues   of   8   percent,   while   the   hand­sewn © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

Chapter 4

dictionaries are only generating 1.4 percent. 37. a. Overhead rate = $3,960,000 ÷ 330,000 units = $12 per unit Revenue Less: Direct material Direct labor Overhead* Profit (loss) Less: Admin. expense Income before tax Number of units Profit per unit

Mowers  $19,500,000

    Tractors  $17,850,000

Total    $37,350,000

(4,000,000) (2,800,000)   (3,600,000) $  9,100,000

     (2,700,000)      (6,000,000)         (360,000)   $  8,790,000

     (6,700,000)      (8,800,000)      (3,960,000)    $17,890,000        (7,400,000)    $10,490,000

  ÷ 300,000 $         30.33

        ÷ 30,000    $       293.00

*Mowers: $12  300,000 = $3,600,000; Tractors: $12  30,000 = $360,000 b.

Mowers: $2,800,000 ÷ $20 per hour = 140,000 direct labor hours Tractors: $6,000,000 ÷ $20 per hour = 300,000 direct labor hours Overhead rate = $3,960,000 ÷ 440,000 = $9 per DLH

Revenue Less: Direct material Direct labor Overhead* Profit (loss) Less: Admin. expense Income before tax Number of units Profit per unit (rounded)

   Mowers   $19,500,000

  Tractors   $17,850,000

    (4,000,000)     (2,800,000)     (1,260,000)   $11,440,000

   (2,700,000)   (6,000,000)    (2,700,000)  $  6,450,000

       ÷ 300,000    $         38.13

       ÷ 30,000  $       215.00

  Total   $37,350,000   (6,700,000)   (8,800,000)     3,960,000) $17,890,000     (7,400,000)   $10,490,000

*Mowers: $9  140,000 = $1,260,000; Tractors: $9  300,000 = $2,700,000 c.

Rate per DLH: $1,320,000 ÷ 440,000 = $3.00 Rate per MH: $2,640,000 ÷ 150,000 = $17.60 Revenue Less: Direct material Direct labor Overhead*

   Mowers    $19,500,000

Tractors $17,850,000

    (4,000,000)     (2,700,000)     (2,800,000)      (6,000,000)        (860,000)     (3,100,000)

Total $ 37,350,000     (6,700,000)     (8,800,000)     (3,960,000)

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

80

Chapter 4

Profit (loss) Less: Admin. expense Income before tax Number of units Profit per unit (rounded)

   $11,840,000

$  6,050,000

       ÷ 300,000    $          39.47

$ 17,890,000       (7,400,000) $ 10,490,000       ÷ 30,000 $       201.67

*Mowers: ($3  140,000) + ($17.60  25,000) = $420,000 + $440,000 = $860,000 Tractors: ($3  300,000) + ($17.60  125,000) = $900,000 + $2,200,000 = $3,100,000 d.

The profit per unit in (c) provides the best picture. The solution to (a) does not recognize the difference in direct labor time and the solution to (b) does not recognize the difference in machine time. Costs should be attached to products using the most rationale and measurable bases of activity. However, given that the profits per unit are not significantly different, the allocation base in (b) would be acceptable if the additional tracking of machine hours is not easily nor inexpensively handled.

38. a. As variety in products increases, costs will also increase. Thus, the shift to small special orders will increase costs in purchasing (more orders, more calls to get prices, more space required for catalogs, etc.), receiving (more orders and receipts to handle and account for), storage (different products must be grouped together and differentiated from other products for easy accessibility), accounting (more inventory to account for, potentially more suppliers to pay), customer service (new larger catalogs, possible complaints  from customers receiving   wrong   or   slightly   wrong   orders,   more   time   for   sales   calls), production scheduling (variety in setups, increase in movement of materials depending on production run), and laboratory work (research and development tests   incurred   to   make   certain   that   the   products   meet   the   appropriate environmental and technical requirements). b.

Yes, it is very possible that management is correct in its belief because total overhead costs are typically allocated to products based on some single allocation   base   such   as   direct   labor   hours   or   machine   hours.   These   single allocation   bases   do   not   reflect   the   actual   cause­and­effect   relationships between cost drivers and overhead costs.

c.

The   memo   should   suggest   that   management   consider   the   use   of multiple overhead allocation bases and activity­based costing. This method of overhead allocation attempts to more fairly attach costs to the products and/or services that actually caused the costs to be incurred.

39. a. Outlined below are the purpose and several characteristics of the two noted cost systems: (1)

Inventory measurement  Meets   external   reporting   requirements   for   aggregate   balance   sheet valuation and income determination. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

Chapter 4

 (2)

Provides monthly and quarterly reporting.

Activity­based costing  Differentiates   costs   between   value­added   and   non­value­added activities.  Assigns   costs   to   products   according   to   activities   involved   in   the production process that cause these costs. b.

A cost system developed to value inventory may distort product cost information because that system    

c.

was designed to value inventory in the aggregate and not relate to product cost information; uses a common departmental or factory­wide measure of activity, such as direct labor hours or dollars (now a small portion of overall production costs) to distribute manufacturing overhead to products; deemphasizes   long­term   product   analysis   (when   fixed   costs   become variable costs); and causes managers, who are aware of distortions in the traditional system, to make intuitive, imprecise adjustments to the traditional cost information without understanding the complete impact.

The benefits that management can expect from activity­based costing system are that such a system: 

Leads to a more competitive position by evaluating activity costs (that is, costs that are associated with the complexity of the transaction rather than the production volume) and the cost drivers that cause the activities.

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

82

Chapter 4

      d. 

Streamlines production processes by reducing non­value­added activities, thereby creating reduced setup times, optimal plant layout, and improved quality. Provides   management   with   a   more   thorough   understanding   of   product costs and product profitability for strategies and pricing decisions. Highlights interrelationships among activities. Provides feedback for opportunities for improvements in product design and production processes. Encourages use of non­financial measures of activity and performance. Provides a more appropriate means of assigning overhead to products.

The steps that a company, using a traditional cost system, would take to implement activity­based costing include:

Identify activity centers and cost drivers.  Assign costs to activity center cost pools using appropriate first­stage cost drivers.  Assign activity center cost pools to products, services, or other cost objects using   appropriate   second­stage   cost   drivers,   according   to   level   of   cost (unit, batch, products, process, and organizational levels).     (CMA adapted) 40. a. In the modern competitive environment, firms must be willing to relinquish unprofitable customers so that the highest quality of service is provided to the most profitable customers. Small customers are not able to provide the same economy of operations that are available from larger customers. b.

There are  ethical obligations  in ending  all business  relationships. This  is particularly true for firms that are sole suppliers of parts or materials that are critical to their customers. At a minimum, an ethical “firing” of a customer should

involve an explanation as to why service is being discontinued; be announced well in advance of discontinuing services to the customer; be accompanied by suggestions of alternative sources of supply; and  be sensitive to all negative effects that will be suffered by the customer when service is ended. c.

Activity­based costing is a financial management tool. It is not a tool for ethical management of a firm, nor is it a tool that can expressly impound non­ financial, qualitative information. To the extent that factors such as customer goodwill   and   market   reputation   are   involved   in   decisions   driven   by   ABC prescriptions,   those   factors   will   be   ignored   by   activity­based   management. However, it is important to acknowledge that these qualitative factors should not be ignored and, in fact, may be important enough to overturn the activity­ based prescriptions.

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

Chapter 4

PROBLEMS 41. a. Base wages: $63,000,000 ÷ 3,150,000 = $20 per regular hour worked Health care benefits: $10,500,000 ÷ 2,100 = $5,000 per worker Payroll taxes: $5,018,832 ÷ $71,697,600 = $0.07 per $1 of factory wages Overtime: $8,697,600 ÷ 288,000 = $30.20 per overtime hour Training: $1,875,000 ÷ 300 = $6,250 per new hire Retirement benefits: $6,898,500 ÷ 2,100 = $3,285 per worker Workers’ compensation: $1,199,940 ÷ 2,100 = $571.40 per worker b.

Although   more   labor­related   items   are   driven   by   the   number   of   factory workers, the base wages account for most of the labor cost.

c.

It   can   be   inferred   that   the   use   of   overtime   hours   minimizes   some   cost drivers. In this example, use of overtime hours would help contain health care benefits, training costs, retirement benefits, and workers’ compensation.

42. a. Surgery: professional hours (this is an activity base that would drive many costs related to surgery and would be easy to track) Housing patients: days in hospital (this activity base would be easy to follow and would account for use of time and space) Outpatient care: professional hours (this would capture service provision to outpatients); or expected patient volume (this would capture those costs that are more related to capacity to provide service) b. c.

Total costs = $13,125,000 + $6,187,500 + $850,000 = $20,162,500 $20,162,500 ÷ 75,000 = $269 per professional hour (rounded) Professional salaries: $13,125,000 ÷ 75,000 = $175 per hr. Building costs: $6,187,500 ÷ 56,250 = $110 per sq. ft. Risk management: $850,000 ÷ 2,500 = $340 per patient d. Surgery = (3,750  $175) + (12,500  $110) + (500  $340) = $656,250 + $1,375,000 + $170,000 = $2,201,250 Housing = (70,000  $175) + (27,500  $110) + (1,250  $340) = $12,250,000 + $3,025,000 + $425,000 = $15,700,000 Outpatient   care   =   (1,250    $175)   +   (16,250    $110)   +   (750    $340)   = $218,750 + $1,787,500 + $255,000 = $2,261,250

e.

Surgery: $2,201,250 ÷ 3,750 = $587 per professional hour Housing: $15,700,000 ÷ 70,000 = $224 per professional hour (rounded) Outpatient care: $2,261,250 ÷ 1,250 = $1,809 per professional hour The cost per hour for housing patients is significantly lower than for the other two services because the majority of costs is fixed and are spread over a larger number of hours. The other two services create substantial variable costs for professional contact for short periods of time.

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

84

Chapter 4

43. a. The high–low method can be used to determine the variable and fixed cost portions: High 44  POs $ 12,400 Low  20  Pos  (10,000)          24         $   2,400 $2,400 ÷ 24 = $100 variable cost $10,000 – ($100  20) = $10,000  $2,000 = $8,000 fixed cost Variable   purchasing   costs   could   include   supplies,   long­distance   telephone calls,   postage,   and   equipment   maintenance.   Fixed   purchasing   costs   could include purchasing agent’s and assistant’s salaries, depreciation on floor space and equipment, rental charges, or flat monthly fee for telephone and utilities. b. The number of machine setups could have increased by 14 for the following reasons: (1) all parts of the special orders were not run at the same time; (2) desk   sizes   could   have   differed   substantially;   (3)   desks   may   have   needed rework   after   quality   inspections;   or   (4)   special   orders   could   have   been interspersed with production of regular desks. c. The cost of quality control and inspections could have increased because (1) special orders may be inspected more carefully or more often than regular orders or (2) each desk in a special order may be inspected rather than the random selection of desks in regular orders. d. Engineering design and specification costs were not included in the original list of overhead costs because that list pertained only to regular production. It is only when special orders are obtained that new designs and specifications need to be developed. e. Purchasing cost: number of purchase orders Machine setup: number of different types of production; number of setups Utilities: number of machine hours Supervisors: number of supervisors; number of direct labor hours; number of production runs Depreciation: period of time Quality control and inspection: number of desks inspected; hours of quality control time; machine hours Engineering   design   and   specification:   number   of   special   orders   accepted; hours of design time f. OH rate based on MHs = $44,800 ÷ 6,400 = $7 per MH No.   First,   the   method   used   did   not   consider   additional   costs   such   as engineering.   Second,   the   method   used   failed   to   discriminate   in   costing between   the   regular   and   the   special   orders.   Activity­based   costing   would overcome these difficulties. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

Chapter 4

44. a. $2,362,500 ÷ (30,000 + 37,500) = $2,362,500 ÷ 67,500 = $35 Direct material cost = $544,500 ÷ 330,000 = $1.65 per pound Direct material cost Direct labor cost Overhead Total cost Divided by # of units Cost per unit b.

Product B $   314,325 450,000   1,312,500 $2,076,825 ÷ 7,500 $     276.91

$2,362,500 ÷ (52,500 + 22,500) = $2,362,500 ÷ 75,000 = $31.50 Direct material cost Direct labor cost Overhead Total cost Divided by # of units Cost per unit

c.

Product A $   230,175 360,000   1,050,000 $1,640,175 ÷ 15,000 $   109.345

Product A $   230,175 360,000   1,653,750 $2,243,925 ÷ 15,000 $   149.595

Product B $   314,325 450,000      708,750 $1,473,075 ÷ 7,500 $     196.41

Utilities: $750,000 ÷ 75,000 = $10 per MH Setup: $193,500 ÷ 1,290 = $150 per setup Material handling: $1,419,000 ÷ 330,000 = $4.30 per pound Direct material cost Direct labor cost Utilities Setup Material handling Total cost Divided by # of units Cost per unit

Product A $   230,175 360,000 525,000 64,500      599,850 $1,779,525 ÷ 15,000 $   118.635

Product B $   314,325 450,000 225,000 129,000      819,150 $1,937,475 ÷ 7,500 $     258.33

45. a. Umbrella: $24 ÷ $30 = 80% of an hour; 0.80  60 minutes = 48 minutes Gazebo: $180 ÷ $30 = 6 DLHs Chaise lounge: $60 ÷ $30 = 2 DLHs b. Umbrellas ($24  300,000)           $  7,200,000 Gazebos ($180  30,000)  5,400,000 Chaise lounge ($60  90,000)           5,400,000 Total                                              $18,000,000

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

86

Chapter 4

c. Allocation rates: Quality control: $630,000 ÷ 420,000 = $1.50 per unit Setups: $600,000 ÷ 3,000 = $200 per setup Material handling: $1,800,000 ÷ 6,000,000 = $0.30 per pound Equipment operation: $14,970,000 ÷ 3,000,000 = $4.99 per MH

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

Chapter 4

OH Cost Allocation Umbrellas Quality control: $1.50  300,000 $1.50  30,000 $1.50  90,000 Setups: $200  600 $200  1,300 $200  1,100 Material handling: $0.30  1,200,000 $0.30  3,000,000 $0.30  1,800,000 Equipment operation: $4.99  600,000 $4.99  1,100,000 $4.99  1,300,000 Total overhead Number of units Cost per unit *Rounded Total cost per unit: DM DL OH Total d.

Chaise  Lounge

$   450,000   $     45,000   $   135,000 120,000     260,000 220,000 360,000    900,000 540,000

  2,994,000 $3,924,000 ÷ 300,000 $       13.08

$12.00 18.00   13.08 $43.08

  5,489,000   $6,694,000    ÷ 30,000     $     223.13*

    6,487,000   $7,382,000 ÷ 90,000     $       82.02*

 $120.00     135.00     223.13  $478.13

     $  12.00 45.00          82.02     $139.02

If prices are set based on product costs, activity­based costing would  generate lower prices for umbrellas and higher prices for the other two  products.

46. a. Indirect labor Dept. 1 ($682,000  $375,000) Dept. 2 ($462,000  $200,000) Machine ($400,000 + $800,000) Power Building Purchasing Total b.

Gazebos

$   307,000 262,000 1,200,000 400,000 1,000,000      100,000 $3,269,000

Total DLHs = Dept. 1 + Dept. 2 = 25,000 + 10,000 = 35,000 $3,269,000 ÷ 35,000 = $93.40 per DLH

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

88

Chapter 4

c.

DLH for Product A = 20,000 in Dept. 1 + 5,000 in Dept. 2 = 25,000  DLHs

DLH for Product B = 5,000 in Dept. 1 + 5,000 in Dept. 2 = 10,000 DLHs DM: (1/2 to each for X;  all Y to B) DL: Dept. 1 (4/5, 1/5) Dept. 2 (1/2, 1/2) OH  $93.40 per DLH Total cost Number of units Cost per unit d.

Product A

Product B

$   400,000 $300,000   100,000

400,000   2,335,000 $3,135,000 ÷ 10,000 $     313.50

$   600,000 $ 75,000  100,000

175,000      934,000 $1,709,000 ÷ 10,000 $     170.90

Building occupancy: $1,000,000 ÷ 500,000 = $2 per sq. ft. Purchasing: 10,000  $2 = $20,000 Power: 40,000  $2 = $80,000 Dept. 1: 200,000  $2 = $400,000 Dept. 2: 250,000  $2 = $500,000 Purchasing: $100,000 direct costs + $20,000 allocated building occupancy cost = $120,000; $120,000 ÷ 500 purchase orders = $240 per purchase order Material X: 200  $240 = $48,000 Material Y: 300  $240 = $72,000 Power: $400,000 direct costs + $80,000 allocated building occupancy cost = $480,000; $480,000 ÷ 10,000,000 kWh = $0.048 per kWh Department 1: 1,500,000  $0.048 = $72,000 Department 2: 8,500,000  $0.048 = $408,000

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

Chapter 4

e.

Product A

Product B

Indirect labor Department 1 ($307,000) (Total ILHs for A = 2,500 + 5,000 + 252 = 7,752) (Total ILHs for B = 2,400 + 10,000 + 248 = 12,648) Total indirect labor hours = 20,400 (7,752 ÷ 20,400 = 38%) $116,660 (12,648 ÷ 20,400 = 62%) $   190,340 Department 2 ($262,000) (Total ILHs for A = 2,680 + 1,000 + 250 = 3,930) (Total ILHs for B = 5,000 + 3,860 + 310 = 9,170) Total indirect labor hours = 13,100 (3,930 ÷ 13,100 = 30%) 78,600 (9,170 ÷ 13,100 = 70%) 183,400 Power Total MHs in Dept. 1 = 5,000 + 10,000 = 15,000 Dept. 1 = $72,000 (Product A, 1/3; Product B, 2/3) 24,000 48,000 Total MHs in Dept. 2 = 5,000 + 20,000 = 25,000 Dept. 2 = $408,000 (Product A, 1/5; Product B, 4/5) 81,600 326,400 Machinery­related (same basis as Power) Department 1 (1/3, 2/3) 133,333 266,667 Department 2 (1/5, 4/5) 160,000 640,000 Building occupancy (same basis as Power) Department 1 (1/3, 2/3) 133,333 266,667 Department 2 (1/5, 4/5) 100,000 400,000 Purchasing Total lbs. of X = 50,000 + 50,000 = 100,000 Total lbs. of Y= 100,000 Material X $48,000 (Product A, 1/2; Product B, 1/2) 24,000 24,000 Material Y $72,000 (all Product B)              0        72,000 Total overhead cost $851,526  $2,417,474 f.  Raw material X (1/2, 1/2) Raw material Y (all B) Direct labor––Dept. 1 (4/5, 1/5) Direct labor––Dept. 2 (1/2, 1/2) Overhead (from part e) Total product costs Number of units Cost per unit

Product A Product B $   400,000  $   400,000                 0     200,000      300,000       75,000      100,000     100,000        851,526    2,417,474   $1,651,526  $3,192,474      ÷10,000     ÷10,000  $     165.15* $     319.25*

*Rounded [Adapted from Roth and Borthick, “Getting Closer to Real Product Costs,”  Management Accounting (May 1989), pp. 28–33.]

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

90

Chapter 4

47. a. Allocation rates: Utilities: $1,800,000 ÷ 90,000 = $20 per MH; assigned to products using  45,000, 15,000, and 30,000 MHs, respectively Scheduling & setup: $1,638,000 ÷ 1,170 = $1,400 per setup; assigned to  products using 195, 570, and 405 setups, respectively Material handling: $3,840,000 ÷ 2,400,000 = $1.60 per lb.; assigned to  products using 750,000, 450,000, and 1,200,000 pounds, respectively

Direct costs Utilities Scheduling & setup Material handling Total Units produced Cost per unit

     A $    120,000 900,000 273,000    1,200,000 $ 2,493,000 ÷ 60,000 $        41.55

PRODUCTS          B $   120,000 300,000 798,000      720,000 $1,938,000 ÷ 30,000 $       64.60

   C $   135,000 600,000 567,000   1,920,000 $3,222,000 ÷ 90,000 $       35.80

b. Total overhead = $1,800,000 + $1,638,000 + $3,840,000 = $7,278,000; Total  DLHs = 48,000 + 27,000 + 75,000 = 150,000; Overhead rate = $7,278,000 ÷  150,000 = $48.52; assigned to products using 48,000, 27,000, and 75,000  DLHs, respectively (1)

Direct costs Overhead Total Units produced Cost per unit

    Product A $    120,000    2,328,960 $ 2,448,960 ÷60,000 $        40.82

       Product B $   120,000   1,310,040 $1,430,040 ÷30,000 $       47.67

      Product C $    135,000    3,639,000 $ 3,774,000 ÷90,000 $        41.93

 (2)    Traditional Product A: $40.82  1.25 = $51.03 Product B: $47.67  1.25 = $59.59 Product C: $41.93  1.25 = $52.41      ABC Product A: $41.55  1.25 = $51.94 Product B: $64.60  1.25 = $80.75 Product C: $35.80  1.25 = $44.75 c.

The traditional approach to product costing used only one allocation base, direct labor hours. This allocation base was unable to fully capture the causes   of   overhead   cost   incurrence.   The   ABC   approach   developed   better overhead   allocation   because   of   the   superior   relationship   between   the   cost pools and the cost drivers used to allocate the overhead cost. To the extent that there is error in determining costs, mispricing will also exist when prices are set based on costs, as is evident in this problem. Although

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

Chapter 4

Product A is relatively unaffected by the choice of costing system, Products B and C have substantially different costs and prices under the two systems. The traditional   costing   system   would   result   in   underpricing   Product   B   and overpricing Product C, which would affect both sales volume and company profitability. 48. a. Predetermined rate using MHs: $5,850,000 ÷ 1,000,000 = $5.85 per MH b. Direct material Direct labor Applied overhead (5,000  $5.85) Total cost Divided by number of doors Cost per door c.

Predetermined rate per activity per unit of cost driver: Electric power: $500,000 ÷ 200,000 = $2.50 per kilowatt hour Work cells: $3,000,000 ÷ 300,000 = $10 per square foot Material handling: $1,000,000 ÷ 200,000 = $5 per material move Quality control inspections: $1,000,000 ÷ 50,000 = $20 per inspection Machine setups: $350,000 ÷ 25,000 = $14 per setup Cost per door: Direct material Direct labor Applied overhead Electric power ($2.50  500) Work cells ($10  1,000) Material handling ($5  20) Quality control ($20  15) Setups ($14  6) Total cost Number of doors Cost per door (rounded)

d.

$  50,000 150,000     29,250 $229,250 ÷ 2,500 $    91.70

$  50,000 150,000 $ 1,250 10,000 100 300          84

    11,734 $211,734 ÷ 2,500 $    84.69

The   activity­based   costing   method   allocates   the   cost   pools   of manufacturing overhead to various cost drivers and then to products based on the amount or number or other bases that each product consumes in various cost   drivers.   Assume   that   Strickland’s   policy   is   to   add   40   percent   to manufacturing   costs   as   gross   profit   to   cover   costs   such   as   administrative expenses, selling expenses, financial expenses, and research and development expenses, and the remainder will be a profit. In determining the selling price of the door under both methods, add 40 percent of total manufacturing costs: Unit costs  Plus gross profit at 40% Selling price 

Present System      $  91.70          36.68      $128.38

ABC System      $  84.69          33.88      $118.57

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

92

Chapter 4

It   is   evident   that   a   selling   advantage   results   from   the   ABC   method.   As illustrated in this case, the ABC method should result in a pricing decision that makes the company more competitive in the marketplace. Savings in applying manufacturing overhead costs to products will enable the company to sell its  products at a lower price than competitors while maintaining the same gross margin ratio. e.

If   ABM   were   implemented   first,   Strickland   might   be   able   to significantly reduce or eliminate the material handling and quality inspections costs.   Both   of   these   items   are   NVA   and   create   $2,000,000   of   the   total $5,850,000 (or 34 percent) of manufacturing overhead costs. [Adapted from Nabil Hassa, Herbert E. Brown, and Paul M. Saunders, “Management Accounting Case Study:  Beaver  Window Inc.,”  Management   Accounting Campus Report (Fall 1990). Copyright Institute of Management Accountants, Montvale, NJ.]

49. a. Advantages associated with activity­based costing systems include:  highlighting   non­value­added   activities   so   that   they   can   be   reduced   or eliminated;  improving   the   accuracy   of   product   costing   by   tightening   associations between costs and their causes;  better decision making in setting prices; and  improving   processes   by   highlighting   the   associations   among   production activities. b.

VOH rate = $1,120,000 ÷ 280,000 = $4 per DLH Product #347

Direct material 65,000  $80 40,000  $140 Direct labor 65,000  1.5  $14 40,000  4  $14 Variable overhead 65,000  1.5  $4 40,000  4  $4 Machine charge 65,000  0.5  $10 40,000  1.5  $10 Material handling charge 65,000  $80  0.10 40,000  $140  0.10 Total cost of production

520,000                              $7,800,000

Sales Total costs Contribution

  $9,750,000      (7,800,000)    $1,950,000

Product #658

 $5,200,000 $  5,600,000   1,365,000    2,240,000      390,000       640,000       325,000        600,000

        560,000  $  9,640,000    $12,000,000    (9,640,000)   $  2,360,000

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

Chapter 4

c.

Product #347 Direct material 65,000  $80 40,000  $140 Material overhead Procurement ($0.10 per part) Prod. scheduling ($2 per unit) Pack. & ship. ($4 per unit) Variable overhead Machine setup ($1.60 per setup) Waste disposal ($3 per pound) Quality contr. ($3.50 per insp.) General sup. ($0.60 per unit) Manufacturing: Mach. ins. ($0.40 per part) Manual ins. ($4 per part) Wave solder. ($1.20 per unit) Total costs Sales Total costs Contribution

d.

Product #658

   $5,200,000     $  5,600,000         162,500         130,000         260,000

         220,000            80,000          160,000

        208,000             3,900         227,500           39,000

          192,000             42,000           280,000             24,000

        624,000         260,000             78,000    $7,192,900    $9,750,000  (7,192,900)    $2,557,100

          560,000        3,200,000              48,000   $10,406,000    $12,000,000    (10,406,000)   $  1,594,000

Based on the calculations made in (a), Product #658 appears to be more profitable (in total dollars of gross profit) than Product #347. Under ABC allocations, Product #347 appears to generate a greater dollar contribution toward profits than Product #658; additionally the rate of return for Product #347 (26.2%) is much higher than that for Product #658 (13.3%). The difference is attributable to the fact that the standard cost system does not account for the cost of the complexities associated with the production of Product #658. These effects are most evident with the costs of manual insertions required for Product #658. (CMA adapted)

50. a.  Assignment of overhead costs:     Altamont         Ballard General administration $155,420 $122,700 Project costing 21,600 13,920 A/P/Receiving 62,550 52,820 A/R 24,440 18,330 Payroll 10,200 11,700 Personnel recruiting 15,200 7,600 Employee ins. processing  4,760 5,460 Proposals 54,210 68,110

  Circleville $130,880 12,480 23,630 4,230 8,100 15,200 3,780 16,680

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

.

94

Chapter 4

Sales meetings Shipping Ordering Duplicating costs Blueprinting  Total  Direct overhead  Total overhead

b.

Sales Direct labor Direct material Net contribution c.

Net contribution Overhead Contribution

d.

96,960 74,740 30,300 9,600 12,000 2,400 20,160 16,320 11,520 19,780 17,940 8,280     34,650     27,720     14,630 $529,530 $449,360 $282,110   195,000    286,100    203,500 $724,530 $735,460 $485,610     Altamont     Ballard     Circleville $1,500,000  $1,419,000   $1,067,000       (382,000     (317,000)     (325,000) )       (281,000     (421,000)     (185,000) ) $   837,000   $      $   557,000 681,000 Altamont   $ 837,000       (724,530 )  $ 112,470

    Ballard   $ 681,000   (735,460)

  Circleville     $ 557,000       (485,610)

    $     $    71,390 (54,460)

It is apparent that there are weaknesses in the traditional product costing system that are having a profound effect on profitability measures. Relative to profit measures based on the traditional costing measures, the ABC allocations make   it   apparent   that   the   Ballard   office   is   much   less   profitable   and   the Circleville office is much more profitable. (IMA adapted)

51. a. Send/receive goods: $50,000 ÷ 500,000 = $0.10 per lb. Store goods: $16,000 ÷ 80,000 = $0.20 per cubic foot Move goods: $20,000 ÷ 5,000 = $4.00 per square foot Identify goods: $8,000 ÷ 500 = $16.00 per package Barfield: (40,000  $0.10) + (3,200  $0.20) + (1,100  $4) + (15  $16)  = $4,000 + $640 + $4,400 + $240 = $9,280 Glover: (40,000  $0.10) + (800  $0.20) + (600  $4) + (10  $16) = $4,000  + $160 + $2,400 + $160 = $6,720 Dozier: (40,000  $0.10) + (1,400  $0.20) + (1,900  $4) + (50  $16)  = $4,000 + $280 + $7,600 + $800 = $12,680 Barfield: 40,000  $0.16 = $6,400 Glover: 40,000  $0.16 = $6,400 Dozier: 40,000  $0.16 = $6,400 c.

Barfield: $9,280  1.4 = $12,992 Glover: $6,720  1.4 = $9,408

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

Chapter 4

Dozier: $12,680  1.4 = $17,752 d. The current pricing plan captures only one dimension of cost causality: sending or receiving goods. Accordingly, the prices charged for warehousing services are almost independent of the causes of the costs. As indicated in a comparison of the answers to (b) and (c), the existing pricing plan generates the same price for the three customers whereas an ABC­based price results in very different prices to be charged to the three customers. [Adapted   from   Harold   P.   Roth   and   Linda   T.   Sims,   “Costing   for   Warehousing   and Distribution,” Management Accounting (August 1991), pp. 42–45. Published by Institute of Management Accountants, Montvale, NJ.]

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

96

Chapter 4

52. a. $1,200,000 ÷ 100,000 = $12 per unit b.

Setups: $360,000 ÷ 40 = $9,000 per setup Material handling: $480,000 ÷ $500,000 = $0.96 per $1 of DM cost Quality control: $120,000 ÷ 3,000 hours = $40 per hour Other overhead: $240,000 ÷ 100,000 units = $2.40 per unit  Regular Special $180,000 $180,000 Setups (20  $9,000; 20  $9,000) 307,200 172,800 MH ($320,000  $0.96; $180,000  $0.96)  48,000 72,000 QC* (1,200  $40; 1,800  $40)   192,000     48,000 Other (80,000  $2.40; 20,000  $2.40) Total $727,200 $472,800 Number of units ÷ 80,000 ÷ 20,000 OH cost per unit   $      9.09 $ 23.64

  Total $   360,000 480,000 120,000      240,000 $1,200,000

*X = Regular unit hours; 1.5X = Special unit hours 2.5X = 3,000; X = 1,200 Regular; 1.5X = 1,800 Special c. Traditional system: Direct material Direct labor OH (80,000  $12; 20,000  $12) Total cost Number of units Cost per unit ABC system: Direct material Direct labor OH Total cost Number of units Cost per unit  d. Cost per unit (traditional) Cost per unit (ABC) Increase (decrease) per unit Percentage increase (decrease)

 Regular $   320,000 480,000     960,000 $1,760,000 ÷ 80,000 $       22.00

 Special $180,000 140,000   240,000 $560,000 ÷ 20,000 $    28.00

  Total $   500,000 620,000   1,200,000 $2,320,000

$   320,000 480,000      727,200 $1,527,200 ÷ 80,000 $       19.09

$180,000 140,000   472,800 $792,800 ÷ 20,000 $    39.64

$   500,000 620,000   1,200,000 $2,320,000

      Regular       Special      $22.00 $28.00        19.09   39.64    $ (2.91) $11.64          (13.2)%      41.6%

Under the traditional volume­based system, 80 percent of all overhead cost is assigned   to   the   regular   units.   Under   activity­based   costing,   only   “other overhead” costs appear to be directly correlated to volume. Under ABC, the regular   units   are   assigned   50   percent   of   setup   time,   64   percent   of   material handling  costs,  and  40  percent  of  inspection   costs.  Therefore,   a  total  of  80 percent of the overhead has been allocated in a manner where the regular units are subsidizing the special units to some extent. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

Chapter 4

e.   

A non­value­added (NVA) activity lengthens the production or performance time. increases the cost of product or services without adding product or service value. is one for which the customer would not be willing to pay. Potential non­value­added activities at Power Production include some material handling   costs,   setup   costs,   and   quality   control   inspection.   Given   that   the company   produces   only   two   products,   40   total   setups   of   machinery   seem excessive. Forty percent of overhead cost is related to material handling, and the company currently pays highly trained quality control inspectors to hand inspect every unit. All of these areas are potential areas for elimination of unnecessary costs or improvement of efficiencies in those that are deemed necessary.

f.

Power could reduce costs by considering some or all of the following actions: 



 

Negotiate   with   customers   to   take   larger   quantities   of   units   with   each delivery. It appears that the excessive number of setups is related to a large number   of  small   shipments.  If  customers   are  unwilling  to   increase   their order size, the company should study whether the cost savings of having larger production runs would exceed the cost of storing those units. Management   could   review   the   design   of   the   company’s   products   and processes to standardize them. Both products’ designs should be studied to see if the most efficient processes are being used. The company may be able to reduce the complexity and number of parts, tools, and processes required, especially in the special model. Not only would material­related handling costs be reduced, but cost savings may also result in lower direct material cost for each product. The   company   should   examine   the   factory   layout;   significant   material handling costs  could be resulting from an inefficient layout, resulting in excess movement of materials to work stations. Management should examine the need for hand inspection of each unit. The company  should  work with  suppliers   to  be sure  that  incoming  parts   are defect   free.   Placing   the   burden   of   higher   quality   on   the   suppliers   could potentially result in large savings in the area of quality control.

53. a. Machine setup: $20,000 ÷ 200 = $100 per setup Inspection: $130,000 ÷ 6,500 = $20 per inspection Material handling: $80,000 ÷ 8,000 = $10 per move Engineering: $50,000 ÷ 1,000 = $50 per hour Job 101: Machine setup (1  $100) Inspection (20  $20) Material handling (30  $10)

$   100 400 300

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

98

Chapter 4

Engineering (10  $50) Total OH

b. Job 102: Machine setup (2  $100) Inspection (10  $20) Material handling (10  $10) Engineering (50  $50) Total OH Cost of Job 102: Direct material Direct labor OH Total cost Number of units Cost per unit c. Job 103: Machine setup (4  $100) Inspection (30  $20) Material handling (50  $10) Engineering (10  $50) Total OH Cost of Job 103: Direct material Direct labor OH Total cost Number of units Cost per unit

     500 $1,300

$     200 200 100     2,500 $  3,000 $12,000 2,000     3,000 $17,000 ÷ 50 $     340 $     400 600 500        500 $  2,000 $  8,000 4,000      2,000 $14,000 ÷ 200 $       70

Selling price = $70  1.4 = $98 per unit d. Total budgeted OH cost Total budgeted DL cost OH per DL $ Cost of Job 103: Direct material Direct labor OH ($2.80  $4,000) Total cost Number of units Cost per unit

$280,000 ÷ $100,000 $ 2.80 $    8,000 4,000     11,200 $  23,200 ÷ 200 $       116

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

Chapter 4

The results show that Job 103 would be significantly overcosted using an OH allocation based on direct labor cost. The cost per unit under activity­based costing was $70; that cost increased by 66 percent to $116 per unit under a traditional costing system. Based on the company’s pricing system, this change would   result   in   a   selling   price   significantly   higher   than   competitors’.   The company would most likely be losing market share because of an excessively high selling price. Other products may have been significantly undercosted. The company might have chosen not to enter the market because it would have felt that it could not compete with the competition on this product. e.

A non­value­added (NVA) activity    

lengthens the production or performance time. increases the cost of product or services without adding product or service value. is one for which the customer would not be willing to pay. potential   non­value­added   activities   at   Jessica   Corp.   include   machine setups,   inspections,   and   material   handling.   Engineering   could   be   value added   but   inefficient.   Company   management   could   reduce   costs   by considering some or all of the following actions: 





Some products seem to require excessive setups. For example, Job 103 required four setups to complete 200 units, while Job 101 required only one setup to complete 100 units. Company management should review the manufacturing procedures that require additional setups. Management could review the design of the company’s products and processes to standardize them. Job 102 required five times as many engineering hours as Jobs 101 and 103. All products’ designs should be studied to see if the most efficient processes are being used. Jessica Corp. may be able to reduce the complexity and number of parts, tools, and processes required, especially in the product produced in Job 102. Jessica Corp. should examine the design of the factory related to the number of material moves required. Job 102 used $12,000 of direct material, yet only required ten material moves, while Job 103 required 50 material moves for $8,000 of materials. Additional moves may be the   result   of   inefficient   plant   design,   where   work   stations   are   not located strategically for the most efficient production process.

f. Jessica Corp. currently has a budgeted cost of $130,000 for inspections. If the inspections   were   outsourced   for   $10   apiece   and   the   total   number   of inspections was the same as budgeted, the cost of inspections would drop to $65,000 (6,500 inspections    $10), a savings of 50 percent. This projection assumes that the company would be able to eliminate $130,000 of inspection labor. If inspection labor personnel perform other duties, this might not be possible. Company management should also consider other qualitative factors: company morale may be affected by job reductions; the outsourced labor may not be as well­trained or reliable as the current workforce; or the company may lose control over the delivery of inspection services. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

100

Chapter 4

(CIA adapted) 54. a. Predetermined OH rate = $1,800,000 ÷ 30,000 = $60 per MH. Each batch produces 5,000 units. Since there are 80 machine hours required for each batch, the MHs per unit are 80 ÷ 5,000 or 0.016. Allocated OH cost per unit = $60  0.016 = $0.96. Alternatively: Each batch has a total machine hours cost of $4,800 (80  $60); the overhead cost per unit is $4,800 ÷ 5,000 units per batch or $0.96 per unit. Per­unit cost under traditional system:

b.

Direct material Direct labor Overhead Total

$4.40 0.75   0.96 $6.11

Material handling: $720,000 ÷ 6,000,000 = $0.12 per part Setups: $315,000 ÷ 750 = $420.00 per setup Machining: $540,000 ÷ 30,000 = $18.00 per MH Quality control: $225,000 ÷ 500 = $450.00 per batch OH per batch: Handling: 5,000 units per batch  5 parts per unit = 25,000 parts per batch  $0.12 per part Setups: 2 per batch  $420 per setup Machining: 80 MHs per batch  $18.00 per MH Quality control: 1 per batch  $450 Total per batch

$3,000.00 840.00 1,440.00      450.00 $5,730.00

Overhead cost per unit = $5,730 ÷ 5,000 = $1.146 per unit Per­unit cost under ABC system: Direct material Direct labor Overhead

$4.400 0.750   1.146       $6.296  or $6.30 (rounded) 

ABC system cost is $0.19 (3.1 percent) more than traditional system per unit. c.

Since the company desires a gross profit of 40 percent, the cost of each unit must be 60 percent of the selling price: Traditional: ABC:

$6.11 ÷ 0.6 = $10.18 $6.30 ÷ 0.6 = $10.50 (CIA adapted)

55. a. 50 guests at $0.90 per guest 1 tier at $34.41 per tier 1 order at $150 per order Purchased decorations Break­even price of cake

$  45.00 34.41 150.00      22.50 $251.91

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

Chapter 4

101

      b. 164 guests at $0.90 per guest 5 tiers at $34.41 per tier 1 order at $150 per order Purchased decorations Cost of cake Selling price of Nussbaum cake Cost of Nussbaum cake Gross margin

$ 147.60 172.05 150.00      58.86 $ 528.51 $ 650.00                   (528.51) $ 121.49

       c. 200 guests at $0.90 per guest 4 tiers at $34.41 per tier 1 order at $150 per order Special flowers (20 × $5) Cost of cake

$180.00 137.64 150.00   100.00 $567.64

If the required gross margin on the O’Brien cake is 35 percent, then the cost of the cake equals 65 percent of the selling price: 0.65X = $567.64; X = $873.29. d.

If the company switched to a traditional system, the cost of cakes for weddings with fewer than average guests would tend to decrease and the cost of cakes with more than the average number of guests would tend to increase. This is contrary to the normal effect of switching to an activity­based costing system, where typically orders in smaller quantities tend to increase in cost per order and larger quantities  tend to decrease. Because the cost per order is fixed at $150, the average per­unit cost based on 125 guests is $150 ÷ 125, or $1.20 per guest. A wedding with fewer than the average number of guests will bear a proportionately lower total cost than a wedding with more guests. If Tillson bases the cost of a cake on the average wedding, the per guest cost would be as follows: 125 guests at $0.90 per guest 3 tiers at $34.41 per tier 1 order at $150 per order Cost of average wedding cake Average number of guests Average per guest cost

$112.50 103.23   150.00 $365.73 ÷ 125 $    2.93

Compare the cost of the Sacks and Nussbaum wedding cake if the cost of cake is based on the number of guests instead of an activity­based cost: Number of guests Cost per guest Total cost ABC cost (without decorations) % increase (decrease) from ABC

            Sacks 50 $    2.93 $146.50 $229.41 (36.1)%

  Nussbaum 164 $    2.93 $480.52 $469.65 2.3%        (CIA adapted)

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

102

Chapter 4

56. a. Engineering: $300,000 ÷ 3,000 = $100 per hour Machine setups: $50,000 ÷ 100 = $500 per setup Material purchase and support: $200,000 ÷ 2,000,000 = $0.10 per pound Machine sanding: $100,000 ÷ 10,000 = $10 per MH Product certification: $270,000 ÷ 6,000 = $45 per order Ravel Nortell $1,000 $200 Engineering hours (10  $100; 2  $100) 2,000 500 Machine setups (4  $500; 1  $500) 100 250 Material support (1,000  $0.10; 2,500  $0.10) 50 N/A Machine sanding (5  $10)        45      45 Product certification (1 order each  $45) Total overhead $3,195 $995 b. Total DLHs = 10 employees  2,000 hours = 20,000 DLHs OH per DLH = $920,000 ÷ 20,000 = $46 per DLH Ravel: 4 hours  $46.00 = $184.00 Nortell: 2 hours  $46.00 = $92.00 c.

Traditional costing: Direct material Direct labor (4  $25; 2  $25) Special packaging (1,000 units ÷ 250 per carton; 4  $5) Overhead (4  $46; 2  $46) Total order cost Number of units (in thousands) Cost per thousand

  Ravel $200   100

 Nortell $   500     50

     20    184 $504 ÷ 1 $504

        92   $   642 ÷ 10 $64.20

Ravel $   200      100

Nortell $     500       50

      20   3,195 $3,515      ÷ 1 $3,515

       995 $  1,545      ÷ 10 $154.50

Activity­based costing: Direct material Direct labor (4  $25; 2  $25) Special packaging (1,000 units ÷ 250 per carton; 4  $5) Overhead Total order cost Number of units (in thousands) Cost per thousand d.

The results show a significant discrepancy in the per order cost using traditional costing. The most likely explanation is that the relative amount of direct labor is immaterial relative to other activities. Using direct labor as the cost driver does not capture the cause and effect of overhead costs, resulting in a significant undercosting of both products. Such undercosting can lead to a significant undercosting of the company’s product in the market, an

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

Chapter 4

inability of management to explain profits, and ultimately an inability of the company to maintain competitiveness in the marketplace. e.

To earn a 40 percent gross profit, the order cost must be 60  percent of the selling price.  Ravel: $3,515 = 0.6X; X = $5,858 Nortell: $1,545 = 0.6X; X = $2,575

f. It is clear that the increased number of setups is a significant cost of the orders from Ravel. It is also unlikely that the company can set a selling price that allows it to recover this cost. Mahoney should meet with the buyer from Ravel and encourage orders in larger quantities. He might impose a setup charge of $500   on   orders   less   than   10,000   units.   Alternatively,   the   company   could manufacture in larger quantities and store the units. The cost of storage may be less than the prohibitive cost of multiple setups. 57. a. Although difficult to quantify, some costs are associated with just carrying a part number in the database. Each part number must be originally set up in the system, built into the structure of a bill of materials, and maintained until it is no longer used. Moreover, each part must be planned, scheduled, negotiated with vendors, purchased, received, stored, moved, and paid for. Having two parts  similar  enough  that  one  could  be  used  for both  applications   requires unnecessary duplication of these activities and, therefore, unnecessary costs. Standardizing   parts   results   in   several   indirect   benefits.   Fewer   unique   part numbers usually means fewer vendors and greater quality of delivered parts. It also means smoother JIT production, fewer shutdowns of manufacturing lines, and greater field reliability. b. To   appropriately   influence   the   behavior   of   design   and   cost­reduction engineers, the MOH allocation method should assign little cost to products for each high­usage common part and more cost for each low­usage unique part, in proportion to the total usage of the parts. Annual cost to carry each part # = Budgeted MOH cost ÷ # of active part #s MOH rate for each part # = Annual cost to carry each part # ÷ Annual usage of each part # Annual cost to carry = $5,500,000 ÷ 8,000 = $687.50 MOH rate for high­usage part = $687.50 ÷ 35,000 = $0.02 (rounded) MOH rate for low­usage part = $687.50 ÷ 200 = $3.44 (rounded) The MOH cost for each product is based on the part numbers in its bill of materials. The rate for each part number is multiplied by the number of times the part is used in the product. The resulting amounts are then aggregated for all part numbers in the bill of materials. The greater the number of parts in a product and the higher the percentage of unique parts, the greater the amount of allocated cost. © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

103

104

Chapter 4

c. Students will discuss the appropriateness of the allocation bases they selected, the ways in which their methods would communicate accurate information to design   and   cost­reduction   engineers   concerning   the   indirect   costs   of engineering   products   with   unique   versus   common   parts,   and   the   need   to provide those engineers with incentives to use the information in their part selection decisions. Regarding the latter point, engineers at Strategic Supply are in fact evaluated on the costs of the products they design. Although they are driven by emerging technologies and other considerations such as quality and customer needs, the evaluation process motivates them to seek minimum cost designs consistent with these considerations. With the part number­based MOH allocation method, engineers will tend to design products  differently. The product costing system will tell them that engineering low­volume, unique parts into products causes overhead. Having the material overhead cost associated with each individual part number will help   engineers   to   evaluate   the   use   of   a   new   part   versus   an   existing   part. Knowing   the   previously   hidden   costs   of   components,   the   engineers   can properly assess  not only the trade­offs between parts proliferation and direct labor reduction but   also   the   cost   of   selecting   a   unique   component   to   satisfy   a   specific functional requirement of a customer. d. A MOH allocation method should provide accurate estimates of the long­run variable   costs   of   all   of   the   demands   made   on   the   organization’s   material­ related overhead resources by each product in the product line. To approach 100 percent accuracy, the MOH cost pool would have to be decomposed into smaller homogeneous cost pools in which cost variations could be explained by  a  single  cost driver.  The  resulting  costing  system  would  be  marginally more  accurate but  substantially more  complex, difficult  to understand, and more costly to maintain than the single­cost­pool method that was decided on in this situation. Also, adding more cost drivers to the system would probably have initially created confusion and definitely would have been resisted by manufacturing, engineering, and marketing personnel. Manufacturing   costs   are   a   crucial   element   of   profitability   in   highly competitive markets of complex products. It is therefore very important that the benefits of more accurate tracing of costs to products exceed the cost of achieving the incremental accuracy (for example, the costs of determining and measuring   additional   cost   drivers).   It   would   be   counterproductive   to implement an elaborate overhead allocation system to cost products with very high   accuracy   if   the   system   would   cost   so   much   to   maintain   that   the companies   would become  less, not  more,  competitive.  A  single­cost­driver method may be a compromise that reflects the costs and benefits of achieving additional accuracy. A   final   consideration   related   to   accuracy   is   the   proper   interpretation   of computed rates. The $687.50 annual cost to carry each part number is not a © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

Chapter 4

short­term variable cost. Most of the costs in the MOH cost pool are fixed in the short term on a unit volume basis. Elimination of one part number in the database   therefore   will   not   immediately   reduce   the   total   material­related overhead cost by this amount. Nor in the case of the low­usage part will using one  less  save  $3.44 in out­of­pocket costs. These  rates  reflect a  long­term perspective;   the   company   believes   that,   by   supporting   the   manufacturing strategy, the allocation method will lead to real cost savings over time as the next generation of products is designed with fewer different part numbers. e. The   costs   of   all   demands   made   by   products   on   both   manufacturing   and nonmanufacturing   resources   are   proper   elements   of   product   costs   used   for management decisions, whereas inventory values for external reporting consist of manufacturing costs only. The MOH cost pool includes some or all of the costs of three types of cost areas. Because all such cost areas are manufacturing related, their   costs   are   appropriately   assigned   to   inventory,   and   the   accurate   MOH allocation method is an appropriate technique for making the assignments. The company, however, decided to use the MOH rates as “management costs” only and to continue to use the old allocation method to compute “financial costs.” One factor that led to this decision was the company’s desire to value inventory   consistently.   If   the   new   method   were   used   to   compute   financial costs, the reported inventory valuations would change because, among other reasons, more manufacturing support costs would be allocated to products. A more compelling reason for the “two sets of costs” approach is the need to maintain   flexibility   in   product   costing.   The   part   number­based   MOH allocation method was developed to modify behavior to enact the strategy of parts  standardization. It will cease to be an effective behavioral tool when design and cost­reduction engineers fully understand the costs of part number proliferation and naturally design products with common parts to the extent each situation allows. After parts standardization becomes second nature to engineers, management will change its strategy, and the accounting staff will develop a new product costing method to support the new strategy. In this way,   product   costs   can   continue   to   be   effective   management   tools   for influencing   behavior   without   affecting   the   accountant’s   ability   to   value inventory on a consistent basis. [Michael   A.   Robinson,   ed.,  Cases   from  Management   Accounting   Practice   No.   5 Instructor’s Manual (Montvale, NJ: National Association of Accountants, 1989), pp. 7– 11, adapted.]

58. a. In   particular,   the   other   initiatives   would   include   management   methods   to improve quality. For example, an adoption of the TQM philosophy would be one   of   the   initiatives;   others   could   include   adoption   of   ABC,   employee empowerment,   formation   of   quality   circles,   JIT   inventory   management, decentralization of decision making, and use of kaizen costing techniques. b.

These tools help orient the firm to managing based on a customer’s   perspective   of   value.   World­class   competition   is   based   on satisfying the customer. If a firm concentrates on accentuating those activities

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

105

106

Chapter 4

that are highly valued by customers and diminishing those activities that are not perceived as value­adding by customers, it should be successful in both managing costs and maintaining market share. c.

Yes. Activity­based costing is most useful if managers are willing to act based on the information provided by the ABC system. For example,   activity­based   costing   could   lead   to   changes   in   product   mix   and product pricing. Top management must support the ABC prescriptions for the costing system to lead to operational improvements.

d.

Preferably,   both  would   be   adopted.   Without   adopting ABC,   the   ABM   prescriptions   may   not   be   understood   by   managers.   But, without ABM, there may be reduced opportunity to identify and eliminate NVA   activities.   The   ABC   approach   would   require   a   separate   information system to generate activity­based information. This would not necessarily be the system that managers would attend to; rather, they would continue to use the   firm’s   traditional   and   formal   information   systems.   The   two   sources   of information   would   inevitably   give   some   conflicting   signals   and   confuse managers.   By   using   both   an   ABC   system   and   ABM,   actions   taken   by managers   will   be   consistent   with   the   information   provided   by   the   firms’ formal information systems.

59. a. This   problem   indicates   that   ABC  and  ABM  can   cause  conflict   among  the various stakeholders in a business. The equipment installation would likely be viewed with favor by the stockholders. Analysis indicating that the equipment would   be   value­adding   obviously   underlies   the   decision   to   make   the installation. Employees would be strongly against any move that would result in   displacement   of   60   percent   of   the   workforce.   Such   an   action   would demoralize both those workers who were fired and those who remained. The customers would likely have both short­term and long­term concerns. Short­ term customers would be very concerned about the impact on quality of laying off 60 percent of the workers. However, customers may have a favorable long­ term view of the move because of the potential to improve the quality and reduce the costs of products. b.

No   matter   how   articulate   the   explanation   given,   it   is   difficult   to visualize acceptance of the explanation by workers who may have dedicated much of their lives to learning skills required for their current positions. One approach, however, would be to discuss what customers value in the products currently produced by the business; then, explain how each internal area in the business   contributes   (or   fails   to   contribute)   to   customer   value.   This explanation would need to clearly show that the function performed by the displaced workers is no longer value­adding in the eyes of the customer. Also, it would be important to explain to the employees that this conclusion holds no matter how well the employees perform the functions.

c. Cycle   time   is   reduced   or   eliminated   largely   by   reducing   non­value­added activities.   When   non­value­added   activities   are   reduced,   work   is   no   longer required   of   the   employees   who   performed   those   activities.   Only   if   the © 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

Chapter 4

employees can be redeployed to other operational areas that are value­adding can employee layoffs be totally avoided. However, to the extent possible, the company could aggressively implement training programs to qualify displaced workers   for   other   positions.  Second,   the   company   could   seek   market opportunities to expand the business so that growth would create an internal demand for those workers’ services in other areas of the business. Third, the company could  provide employee  counseling  services  to workers  and help retrain them for work in other businesses.

© 2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied, duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

107