Title: Chapter 14 Cases & Readings
1Chapter 14 Cases Readings
- Presented by Team 4
- Chakraborty, Madhuri
- Nambiar, Jisha
- Rajendrakumar, Jinashree
- Singh, Shalini
- Tyagi, Priyanka
2Case 14-1Berkshire Toy Company
3The Hierarchy
4The milestones ..
- Berkshire Toy Company was founded by Franklin
Berkshire, Janet McKinley's father, in 1974 - By 1986 ,the annual sales exceeded a million
dollar . - In 1991, the company launched an initial public
offering and became a publicly traded co. on
NASDAQ. - In 1993 , Janet McKinley became the CEO of the
company - In 1995 , Berkshire was acquired by Quality
product corporations
5The Product
- Berkshire Bear, a fifteen inch teddy bear
- The co. Advertises its product as the only teddy
bear made in America . - The bears were fully jointed, constructed of
washable acrylic pile fabric and stuffed with
polyester filing. - The toys are dressed in various accessories.
- Berkshire bear is sold with an unconditional
lifetime warranty.
6Production process ..
- Cutting ? Sewing ?Filling ?Assembly
7Marketing ..
- Retail internet sales is a new addition to the
overall marketing effort. - Company also sells to department stores, toy
boutiques and other specialty stores. - The Berkshire bear is sold in designer boxes
,which contributes to the image of the product. - Commission of 3 is paid on retail stores sales
and the sales to the wholesale buyers - No commission is paid on catalog sales
8The Bonus Plan ..
- David Hall , the purchasing manager receives a
bonus equal to 20 of the net material price
variance. - Rita Smith, the marketing manager, will receive
a bonus equal to 10 of the excess of actual net
revenue over the master budget net revenue . - Bill Wilford , the production manager , receives
a bonus equal to 3 of the net of several
variances. - (the efficiency variance for material, labor,
and variable overhead the labor rate variance
and the variable and fixed overhead spending
variance)
9Sales Details
10Table 1
- Berkshire Toy Company A Divisions of Quality
Products Corporation - Schedule
showing flexible budget variance
11Table 1
12Table 1
13Sales Analysis
14Sales Analysis
- Master static budget Flexible Budget
Flexible Budget - MS F1 F2 budgeted
mix actual sales mix
budgeted mix -
-
Sales Mix variance Effect on revenue due to
difference between the actual mix of distribution
and the budgeted mix
Sales Volume Variance Effect on revenue due to
selling more or fewer units than planned
15Direct Materials analysis
Data from Table 2 and Table 3
16DIRECT MATERIAL VARIANCES
17Direct Labor analysis
Data from Table 2 and Table 3
18DIRECT LABOR VARIANCES
19VARIABLE OVERHEAD VARIANCES
201. b) Compute Bonuses earned
21Q2 a) Explain the variance
- Direct material price variance was favorable
- Reasons
- Substandard quality of material
- Price change of the material
- Changes in the freights costs
22Q2 a) Explain the variance contd..
- Direct Material Usage variance was unfavorable
- Reasons
- Variation in the quality of direct materials
- Inadequate training or inexperienced employees
- Excessive spoilage (thunderstorm )
23Q2 a) Explain the variance contd..
- Direct labor price variance was unfavorable
- Reasons
- Some workers had to be replaced at higher than
standard wage rate. - Skill set of the replaced workers could have been
lesser then required leading to higher costs .
24Q2 a) Explain the variance contd..
- Direct labor efficiency/usage variance was
unfavorable - Reasons
- Machine /equipment was not in proper working
condition - The material was of substandard quality
- Deviation from standard production plans
- Plant was operating at near to maximum capacity,
people were tired
25Q2 a) Explain the variance contd..
- Variable overhead spending variance was
unfavorable - Reasons
- Maintenance supplies expenses increased
- Frequent breakdowns
- Overtime premium expenses increased
- Variable overhead efficiency/usage variance was
unfavorable - Reasons
- Maintenance labor increased due to breakdown and
extra maintenance required on machinery - Overtime labor hours increased
26Q2 b) Advantages of incentive compensation plan
- Intended towards promoting participation and
teamwork - Incentive Plan discussed with department heads
- Department heads rewarded based on individual
responsibility center - Rewarded managers fairly for individual
contributions and achievements - Brought groups of employees to work together
toward a common goal (the bottom line of the
company). - In this case the manager and not the department
was getting the incentive !!!! - Motivation for individuals to perform
- Purchasing manager was motivated to look for
discounts
27Disadvantages of the incentive compensation plan
- Marketing myopic focus on revenues.
- Rita increased the sales volume but used less
profitable distribution mix. - Sales mix variance shows that the actual mix of
channels was less profitable than the budgeted
mix of 85( retail and catalog) and 15
(wholesale) - Production
- Penalized for factors beyond his control
- faced overtime situations
- Substandard direct materials
- Purchasing aggressively sought discounts, even
at expense of quality - Narrowly focuses on prices
- Promotes Silo mentality
28What is the appropriate role of budget in
performance evaluation ?
- An appropriate budget should
- Help set attainable and meaningful goals
- Should promote Effectiveness and Efficiency
- Help promote enthusiasm, creativity and
productivity - Help management attain better results
- Budget over runs and variances should be one of
the parameters but not the only parameter for
performance evaluation - Use budget based on standard cost system for
evaluation guidelines - dont look for scapegoats!!!
- Not be not thrust upon the people
29Recommendations and modifications for the
incentive plan
- Distribute profits to all employees on profit
sharing basis instead of just the managers. - Incorporate other variances that look at quality
and inventory situations along with price. - Quality variance (Input)
- Raw Materials Inventory variance
- Quality variance (output)
- Materials price variance is an important concern,
but over emphasis on price may ignore quality - Updating the management responsibility
- Use benchmarking Look to industry standards and
gauge yourself
30Questions?
31Overhead control implications of Activity Costing
32Variable Overhead Variance Analysis
Actual Quantity Actual Quantity
Standard Quantity
Actual OH Rate Standard OH Rate
Standard OH Rate
SpendingVariance
EfficiencyVariance
The total variance is the flexible budget
variance.
33Some interesting facts..
- Surveys of Fortune 500 Companies from about a
decade ago, show that almost all firms use
Standard cost overhead analysis. - Most firms use labor focused costing system of
1900s. - Majority of firms don't breakdown overhead into
its major cost elements. - Problems with an emphasis on overhead spending
and efficiency variances have continued through
1990 in CMA exams. - Standard costing variance analysis included in
top ten of the most important topics covered in
curriculum.
341983 CMA on Overhead Variances
35Implications of the above analysis
- A signal that direct labor, the base is
efficiently used. - Overhead spending is greater than actual.
- Overhead usage is highly favorable.
36Additional Data
37Solution per detail data, Volume Driven Standards
38Comparison of Alternatives
- A large favorable overhead quantity variance
replaced by unfavorable variance. - A modest unfavorable Spending variance replaced
by highly favorable variance. - For Indirect Labor, indication is that untrained
workforce was appropriately used at lesser hourly
rates. - The variance directions and proportions are same
for both Indirect labor and supplies.
39Q1 Limitations of Standard Cost Overhead
Analysis
- Overhead pools are too aggregated, and allocation
of overhead based on a single, probably
irrelevant base leads to wrong results. - Variance formulas are misapplied.
- Reliance on these can mislead into costly,
incorrect decisions. - Efficiency overhead, particularly is a misnomer
as efficiencies are not in the use of overhead
but rather in the use of the base itself. - Traditional computations for overhead spending
and efficiency variances yield meaningless
outcomes but at a cost. - Though it gives us the relationship between
estimated and actual costs, it gives very little
management information. - It may be counter-productive, resulting in
dysfunctional decisions and in a loss of
credibility for other accounting reports.
40Reasons to change from SCS
- Overhead itself is a relatively larger cost.
- Statistical tools necessary to implement the
above are much more widely understood by
accountants than a few years ago. - Widespread computer processing has made it
economical to do statistical analyses and
maintain detailed cost data bases.
41An Illustration
- Machine hours have been found to be the
appropriate cost driver through Regression
Analysis for the supplies. - Though all models of the product have same direct
labor hour, the more complex models(20) require
many more machine hours than the basic high
volume model. - With a shift in mix from complex to basic models,
less lubricants are needed(990 to 900 barrels). - If top-management approved 75,000 (6,000 hrs at
12.50) indirect labor budget and activity-based
budget is 60,000 (4,800 at 12.50), then
management is responsible for the sticky cost of
15,000 (Management Decision Variance or
Strategic Quantity Variance).
42Additional data
43Solution per detail data, Activity Driven
Standards
44Total Variance
45Q2 How does the Activity approach improve upon
the Standard Cost Analysis of Overhead?
- With overhead costs rising as a proportion of
manufacturing costs, Activity approach will be
more cost beneficial. - Activity approach may make difference between
profitable or unprofitable operations. - Whenever activity based costing is appropriate
for product cost determination, the same drivers
should be equally relevant for cost control
applications.
46Questions?
47Better information through the marriage of ABC
and traditional standard costing techniques
48A General Model for Variable Overhead Variance
Analysis
- Actual Quantity Actual Quantity
Standard Quantity
Actual OH Rate Standard OH Rate
Standard OH Rate
SpendingVariance
EfficiencyVariance
The total variance is the flexible budget
variance.
49A General Model for Fixed Overhead Variance
Analysis
- Actual Fixed Fixed
Fixed - Overhead Overhead
Overhead
Incurred Budget
Applied
SH FR -
-
Spending Variance
Volume Variance
FR Standard Fixed Overhead RateSH Standard
Hours Allowed
50Q 1. Why traditional standard costing and
variance analyses have severe limitations when
used to analyze overhead costs, but less so when
used to analyze direct materials and direct labor
costs.
51Reasons
- Overhead costs are increasing at a rate faster
than production or sales volume in most
companies. - The traditional cost drivers DM, DL and
Manufacturing Hrs are applied as the activity
measure for OH. - In doing so, overhead rates can reach 500 to
1,000 percent of direct labor costs. - A single activity measure cannot conform to all
the factory O/H - Applying a single overhead rate doesn't
adequately represent all the forces that drive
costs in a modern organization. - Locating overhead costs to products this way
provides managers with poor or incorrect
information on the costs of organizational
resources, especially distribution, engineering,
and sales
52ABC MOLDING COMPANY
- Example of both the limitations of traditional
standard O/H variance information and the
improvements gained by incorporating ABC
techniques. - Consider a single injection molding machine and a
single operator. - Machine operator capable of producing 125 parts
per hr over 20 eight hr shifts at full capacity. - Expected production for the test month 18000
parts with 2 set ups 8 hrs each. - Three components of O/H costs cost of operator,
cost of indirect materials (cleaning solvent) and
cost of utilities (electricity) - Operator sets up machine and then monitors during
production run - Cleaning solvent used as part of set up
- Electricity consumed during production hr
- Actual production in test month was 16000 parts
with 4 set ups 120 prod hrs and 50 set up hrs
53ABC MOLDING COMPANY DATA
ACTUAL INFORMATION
54ABC MOLDING COMPANY DATA
Expected VMOH _at_ actual cost driver level
calculations
Flexible Budget calculations
55Variances Based on Traditional Standard Variable
O/H Cost Analysis
2.22 extra set ups (4 vs. 1.78) more hrs to
perform 4 set ups (50 Vs 32 )
16000 parts in 8 fewer hrs (120 vs. 128)
Incr in price (0.07 Vs 0.06 per KW hr
efficiency 4800 more KW hrs (16800 vs. 12000 kw
hr)
2.22 extra set ups and less solvent (16 g Vs 24)
56Variances Based on Traditional Standard Fixed O/H
Cost Analysis
2 extra set ups, extra hrs (50 vs. 32) incr
operator costs (21 vs. 20)
2 extra set ups,less solvent usage(16 vs. 24)
incr in solvent cost (60 vs. 48)
2000 fewer parts produced.
57Q 2.How can the marriage of ABC and traditional
standard costing techniques improve usefulness of
information?
58Standard costing Vs. ABC
- As manufacturing becomes overhead intensive the
information limitations produced by traditional
analysis become severe. - The traditional cost drivers DM, DL and
Manufacturing Hrs do not adequately represent all
the forces that drive costs in a modern
organization. - Traditional standard costing systems lack two
necessary managerial functions - -an accurate cost estimate for activities,
products, services, and customers - -economic feedback to managers and operators
about process efficiency - ABC System based on cost drivers that link
activities performed to products and allocate
activity costs directly to products using these
cost drivers. - ABC produces more accurate costs by using
multiple drivers (basic and second level cost
drivers) and multiple variable overhead rates
59Standard costing Vs. ABC
- ABC accurately measure costs but ignores the
benefits of a multi-product production strategy. - Updating the accounting system and maintaining an
ABC system requires - additional time and money compared to standard
costing. - ABC is useful for decision making but not
decision control. - Standard costing is the classic control tool. It
sets out standard or expected costs for each
category and then after the fact, one compares
actual to budgets to identify variances - The marriage of the ABC and traditional standard
costing system represents the building block of
a system capable of producing more relevant
information
60Calculations- Unit level O/H costs
- Expected OH _at_ actual SDC level calculation
- 16800Kw hrs _at_ 0.06 per KW hr 1008
- Expected OH _at_ actual BCD level calculation
- 120 production hrs _at_ 20 per hr 2400
- 120 production hrs _at_ 100 Kw hrs per production
hr _at_ 0.06 per kw hr 720 - Flexible Budget calculations
- 16000 parts _at_125 parts per production hr _at_ 20
per hour 2560 - 16000 parts _at_ 125parts per production hr _at_ 100kw
hrs per production hr _at_ 0.06 per Kw hour 768
61Variances Based on ABC Standard O/H Cost Analysis
Unit level O/H costs
Incr electricity consumption for 120 prod hrs
Decr in cost 16000 parts in fewer hrs than
expected.
Incr in KW hr price than expected.
62Calculations- Batch level O/H costs
- Expected OH _at_ actual BCD level calculation
- 50 hrs _at_ 20 per hr 1000
- 16 gallons _at_ 48 per gallon 768
- Batch level flexible budget calculation
- 4 set ups _at_8 hrs per set up _at_ 20per hr 640
- 4 set ups _at_ 6 gallons per set up _at_ 48 per
gallon 1152 - Unit level Flexible Budget calculations
- 16000 parts _at_ 1 set up per 9000 parts_at_ 8 hrs per
set up _at_ 20 per hr 284 - 16000 parts _at_ 1 set up per 9000 parts_at_ 6 gallons
per set up _at_ 48 per gallon 512
63Variances Based on ABC Standard O/H Cost Analysis
Batch level O/H costs
18 more hrs used for 4 set ups (50 Vs 32)
8 less gallons used for 4 set ups (16 vs. 24)
Set up cost per part incr when produced in small
batches (4000 vs. 9000)
64Requirements
- Continually update the standard quantities and
prices of inputs. Variations due to continual
improvement, learning curves and business
environment changes. - Need additional information hence improve
existing information systems. Information like
monitoring utility consumption for each - Calculate both basic and second level cost
drivers for batch level O/H costs.
65Benefits
- It is a system building block to gain more
relevant information. - Focus on correcting the inefficiency
- Management can focus on potential areas for
significant cost reduction. - Low cost monitoring and low cost means for
identifying potential improvements
66Conclusion
- The cost accountant must understand the
strengths and weaknesses of each tool and be able
to help managers decide when and for what purpose
which tool is the best. There are no perfect
answers in management accounting, all one can
hope for is to address the ever-changing
information needs of control and coordination
activities that managers must perform.
67Questions?