Monday, August 2, 2010

Cost-Volume-Profit Analysis

Cost-Volume-profit(CVP)
in managerial economics is a form of cost accounting. It is a simplified model, useful for elementary instruction and for short-run decisions.
Cost-volume-profit (CVP) analysis expands the use of information provided by breakeven analysis. A critical part of CVP analysis is the point where total revenues equal total costs (both fixed and variable costs). At this breakeven point (BEP), a company will experience no income or loss. This BEP can be an initial examination that precedes more detailed CVP analysis.
Cost-volume-profit analysis employs the same basic assumptions as in breakeven analysis. The assumptions underlying CVP analysis are:
The behavior of both costs and revenues is linear throughout the relevant range of activity. (This assumption precludes the concept of volume discounts on either purchased materials or sales.) Costs can be classified accurately as either fixed or variable. Changes in activity are the only factors that affect costs. All units produced are sold (there is no ending finished goods inventory). When a company sells more than one type of product, the sales mix (the ratio of each product to total sales) will remain constant.
The components of Cost-Volume-Profit Analysis are:
Level or volume of activity Unit Selling Prices Variable cost per unit Total fixed costs Sales mix Contents1 Assumptions 2 Model 2.1 Basic graph 2.2 Break down 3 Applications 4 Limitations 5 Note // AssumptionsCVP assumes the following:
Constant sales price; Constant variable cost per unit; Constant total fixed cost; Constant sales mix; Units sold equal units produced. These are simplifying, largely linearizing assumptions, which are often implicitly assumed in elementary discussions of costs and profits. In more advanced treatments and practice, costs and revenue are nonlinear and the analysis is more complicated, but the intuition afforded by linear CVP remains basic and useful.
One of the main Methods of calculating CVP is Profit volume ratio: which is (contribution /sales)*100 = this gives us profit volume ratio.
contribution stands for Sales minus variable costs. Therefore it gives us the profit added per unit of variable costs.
Model Basic graph [Image] [Image]Basic graph of CVP, demonstrating relation of Total Costs, Sales, and Profit and Loss.The assumptions of the CVP model yield the following linear equations for total costs and total revenue (sales):
[Image][Image]These are linear because of the assumptions of constant costs and prices, and there is no distinction between Units Produced and Units Sold, as these are assumed to be equal. Note that when such a chart is drawn, the linear CVP model is assumed, often implicitly.
In symbols:
[Image][Image]where
TC = Total Costs TFC = Total Fixed Costs V = Unit Variable Cost (Variable Cost per Unit) X = Number of Units TR = S = Total Revenue = Sales P = (Unit) Sales Price Profit is computed as TR-TC; it is a profit if positive, a loss if negative.
 Break downCosts and Sales can be broken down, which provide further insight into operations.
[Image] [Image]Decomposing Total Costs as Fixed Costs plus Variable Costs.One can decompose Total Costs as Fixed Costs plus Variable Costs:
[Image] [Image] [Image]Decomposing Sales as Contribution plus Variable Costs.Following a matching principle of matching a portion of sales against variable costs, one can decompose Sales as Contribution plus Variable Costs, where contribution is "what's left after deducting variable costs". One can think of contribution as "the marginal contribution of a unit to the profit", or "contribution towards offsetting fixed costs".
In symbols:
[Image]where
C = Unit Contribution (Margin) [Image] [Image]Profit and Loss as Contribution minus Fixed Costs.Subtracting Variable Costs from both Costs and Sales yields the simplified diagram and equation for Profit and Loss.
In symbols:
[Image] [Image] [Image]Diagram relating all quantities in CVP.These diagrams can be related by a rather busy diagram, which demonstrates how if one subtracts Variable Costs, the Sales and Total Costs lines shift down to become the Contribution and Fixed Costs lines. Note that the Profit and Loss for any given number of unit sales is the same, and in particular the break-even point is the same, whether one computes by Sales = Total Costs or as Contribution = Fixed Costs. Mathematically, the contribution graph is obtained from the sales graph by a shear, to be precise [Image], where V are Unit Variable Costs.
ApplicationsCVP simplifies the computation of breakeven in break even analysis, and more generally allows simple computation of Target Income Sales. It simplifies analysis of short run trade-offs in operational decisions.
 LimitationsCVP is a short run, marginal analysis: it assumes that unit variable costs and unit revenues are constant, which is appropriate for small deviations from current production and sales, and assumes a neat division between fixed costs and variable costs, though in the long run all costs are variable. For longer-term analysis that considers the entire life-cycle of a product, one therefore often prefers activity-based costing or throughput accounting.
Notes  The Controversy over the contribution margin approach, in MAAW, Chapter 11

Throughput Accounting

Throughput Accounting
(TA) is a dynamic, integrated, principle-based, and comprehensive management accounting approach that provides managers with decision support information for enterprise optimization. TA is a relatively new management accounting approach based largely on the identification of factors that limit an organization from reaching its goal and is proposed by Eliyahu M. Goldratt  as an alternative to cost accounting. As such, Throughput Accountingis neither cost accounting nor costing because it is cash focused and does not allocate all costs (variable and fixed expenses, including overheads) to products and services sold or provided by an enterprise. Considering the laws of variation, only costs that vary totally with units of output (see definition of T below for TVC) e.g. raw materials, are allocated to products and services which are deducted from sales to determine Throughput. Throughput Accounting is a management accounting technique used as the performance measures in the Theory of Constraints (TOC) . It is the business intelligence used for maximizing profits, however, unlike cost accounting that primarily focuses on 'cutting costs' and reducing expenses to make a profit, Throughput Accounting primarily focuses on generating more throughput. Conceptually, Throughput Accounting seeks to increase the velocity or speed at which throughput (see definition of T below) is generated by products and services with respect to an organization's constraint, whether the constraint is internal or external to the organization. Throughput Accounting is the only management accounting methodology that considers constraints as factors limiting the performance of organizations.
Management accounting is an organization's internal set of techniques and methods used to maximize shareholder wealth. Throughput Accounting is thus part of the management accountants' toolkit, ensuring efficiency where it matters as well as the overall effectiveness of the whole organization. It is an internal reporting tool. Outside or external parties to a business depend on accounting reports prepared by financial (public) accountants who apply Generally Accepted Accounting Principles(GAAP) issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) and enforced by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and other local and international regulatory agencies and bodies.
Throughput Accounting improves profit performance with better management decisions by using measurements that more closely reflect the effect of decisions on three critical monetary variables (throughput, investment (AKA inventory), and operating expense — defined below).
Contents1 History 2 The concepts of Throughput Accounting 3 Relevance 4 References 5 Category // HistoryWhen cost accounting was developed in the 1890's, labor was the largest fraction of product cost. Workers often did not know how many hours they would work in a week when they reported on Monday morning because time-keeping systems were rudimentary. Cost accountants, therefore, concentrated on how efficiently managers used labor since it was their most important variable resource. Now, however, workers who come to work on Monday morning almost always work 40 hours or more; their cost is fixed rather than variable. However, today, many managers are still evaluated on their labor efficiencies, and many "downsizing," "rightsizing," and other labor reduction campaigns are based on them.
Goldratt argues that, under current conditions, labor efficiencies lead to decisions that harm rather than help organizations. Throughput Accounting, therefore, removes standard cost accounting's reliance on efficiencies in general, and labor efficiency in particular, from management practice. Many cost and financial accountants agree with Goldratt's critique, but they have not agreed on a replacement of their own and there is enormous inertia in the installed base of people trained to work with existing practices.
Constraints accounting, which is a development in the Throughput Accounting field, emphasizes the role of the constraint, (referred to as the Archemedian constraint) in decision making.
The concepts of Throughput AccountingGoldratt's alternative begins with the idea that each organization has a goal and that better decisions increase its value. The goal for a profit maximizing firm is easily stated, to increase profit now and in the future. Throughput Accounting applies to not-for-profit organizations too, but they have to develop a goal that makes sense in their individual cases.
Throughput Accounting also pays particular attention to the concept of 'bottleneck' (referred to as constraint in the Theory of Constraints) in the manufacturing or servicing processes.
Throughput Accounting uses three measures of income and expense:
[Image] [Image]The chart illustrates a typical throughput structure of income (sales) and expenses (TVC and OE).
T=Sales less TVC and NP=T less OE.Throughput (T) is the rate at which the system produces "goal units." When the goal units are money (in for-profit businesses), throughput is net sales (S) less totally variable cost (TVC), generally the cost of the raw materials (T = S - TVC). Note that T only exists when there is a sale of the product or service. Producing materials that sit in a warehouse does not form part of throughput but rather investment. ("Throughput" is sometimes referred to as "throughput contribution" and has similarities to the concept of "contribution" in marginal costing which is sales revenues less "variable" costs - "variable" being defined according to the marginal costing philosophy.) Investment (I) is the money tied up in the system. This is money associated with inventory, machinery, buildings, and other assets and liabilities. In earlier Theory of Constraints (TOC) documentation, the "I" was interchanged between "inventory" and "investment." The preferred term is now only "investment." Note that TOC recommends inventory be valued strictly on totally variable cost associated with creating the inventory, not with additional cost allocations from overhead. Operating expense (OE) is the money the system spends in generating "goal units." For physical products, OE is all expenses except the cost of the raw materials. OE includes maintenance, utilities, rent, taxes and payroll. Organizations that wish to increase their attainment of The Goal should therefore require managers to test proposed decisions against three questions. Will the proposed change:
Increase throughput? How? Reduce investment (inventory) (money that cannot be used)? How? Reduce operating expense? How? The answers to these questions determine the effect of proposed changes on system wide measurements:
Net profit (NP) = throughput - operating expense = T-OE Return on investment (ROI) = net profit / investment = NP/I TA Productivity = throughput / operating expense = T/OE Investment turns (IT) = throughput / investment = T/I These relationships between financial ratios as illustrated by Goldratt are very similar to a set of relationships defined by DuPont and General Motors financial executive Donaldson Brown about 1920. Brown did not advocate changes in management accounting methods, but instead used the ratios to evaluate traditional financial accounting data.
Throughput Accounting is an important development in modern accounting that allows managers to understand the contribution of constrained resources to the overall profitability of the enterprise. See cost accounting for practical examples and a detailed description of the evolution of Throughput Accounting.
RelevanceOne of the most important aspects of Throughput Accounting is the relevance of the information it produces. Throughput Accounting reports what currently happens in business functions such as operations, distribution and marketing. It does not rely solely on GAAP's financial accounting reports that still need to be verified by external auditors and is thus relevant to current decisions made by management that affect the business now and in the future. Throughput Accounting is used in critical chain project management (CCPM), Drum Buffer Rope (DBR) - in businesses that are internally constrained, Simplified Drum Buffer Rope (S-DBR)  - in businesses that are externally constrained particularly where the lack of customer orders denotes a market constraint, in strategy, planning and tactics, etc.
References  Eliyahu M. Goldratt and Jeff Cox - The Goal - ISBN 0-620-33597-1. Thomas Corbett - Throughput Accounting - ISBN 0-88427-158-7.  Eric Noreen - Theory of Constraints and its Implications for Management Accounting - ISBN 978-0884271161.  John A. Caspari and Pamela Caspari - Management Dynamics - ISBN 0-471-67231-9.  Eliyahu M. Goldratt - The Haystack Syndrome (pp 19) - ISBN 0-88427-089-0.  Steven Bragg - Throughput Accounting - ISBN 978-0-471-25109-5.  Eliyahu M. Goldratt - Critical Chain - ISBN 0-620-21256-X.  Eli Schragenheim and H William Dettmer - Manufacturing at Warp Speed - ISBN 1-57444-293-7  

Resource Consumption Accounting

Resource Consumption Accounting (RCA) 
is formally defined as a dynamic, fully integrated, principle-based, and comprehensive management accounting approach that provides managers with decision support information for enterprise optimization. RCA is a relatively new, flexible, comprehensive management accounting approach based largely on the German management accounting approach Grenzplankostenrechnung (GPK) and also allows for the use of activity-based drivers. Contents1 Background 2 Concepts of Resource Consumption Accounting 3 The Core Elements of RCA 4 Additional information 5 References
5.1 Footnotes 5.2 Additional Sources 5.3 External links //
BackgroundInitially, RCA had emerged as a management accounting approach beginning around 2000, and was subsequently developed at CAM-I (The Consortium of Advanced Management, International) in a Cost Management Section RCA interest groupcommencing in December 2001. Over the next seven years RCA was refined and validated through practical case studies, industry journal publications, and other research papers.In 2008, a group of interested academics and practitioners established the RCA Institute to introduce Resource Consumption Accounting to the marketplace and raise the standard of management accounting knowledge by encouraging disciplined practices.By July 2009, Professional Accountants in Business (PAIB) Committee of International Federation of Accountants (IFAC), recognized Resource Consumption Accounting in the International Good Practice Guidance (IGPG) publication called Evaluating and Improving Costing in Organizations and its companion document, [Image] [Image]Costing Continuum // Levels of Maturity Copyright 2008 Gary Cokins All rights reserved. Used with permission of the author,courtesy of International Federation of Accountants-Professional Accountants in Business, International Good Practice Guidance p.23Evaluating the Costing Journey: A Costing Levels Continuum Maturity Model. The guide focuses on universal costing principles and with the Costing Levels Maturity Model[2] acknowledges RCA attains a higher level of accuracy and visibility compared to activity based costing for managerial accounting information when the incremental benefits of RCA's better information exceed the incremental administrative effort and cost to collect, calculate and report its information. As stated in the IGPG, “A sophisticated approach at the upper levels of the continuum of costing techniques provides the ability to derive costs directly from operational resource data, or to isolate and measure unused capacity costs. For example, in the resource consumption accounting approach, resources and their costs are considered as foundational to robust cost modeling and managerial decision support, because an organization’s costs and revenues are all a function of the resources and the individual capacities that produce them.Resource Consumption Accounting was also recognized in a Sustainability Framework Report issued by the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC), for having the capability of helping organizations “improve their understanding of environmental (and social) costs through their costing systems and models”.This Sustainability Framework highlights RCA under the sub-heading Improving Information Flows to Support Decision and informs readers that proper cost allocation can be built ‘directly into the cost accounting system’, thereby enhancing an organization's performance for “identifying, defining and classifying costs in a useful way”. Concepts of Resource Consumption AccountingRCA concepts that distinguish it from other management accounting approaches include the following:
Germany’s GPK method of quantity-based operational modeling using fixed and proportional costs established at the resource level in a company (i.e., cost center/resource pools or value streams"); Gordon Shillinglaw’s concept of attributable cost; Flexible use of activity-based drivers (only where needed) based on specific, and restrictive rules; Value chain integration of management accounting into operational systems; Use of fundamental operations transactions as the primary source for financial and quantitative data (rather than the general ledger); Replacing the principle of variability with the principle of responsiveness for operational modeling; Support for a multi-level, contribution margin-based profit & loss statement that supports managerial decision making without the cost distortions and complexity of inappropriate (not based on the principle of causality) allocations of cost. The Core Elements of RCAThere are three core elements that enable RCA to lay a very different foundation for its cost model The view of resources – resources and their costs are considered foundational to proper cost modeling and decision support. An organization’s cost and revenues are all a function of the resources that produce them. Quantity-based modeling – the entire model is constructed using operational quantities. Operational data is the foundation of value creation and the leading indicator of economic outcomes. Cost behavior – value is added as a veneer to the quantity-based model and costs/dollars behavior is determined by the behavior of resource quantities as they are applied to value creating operations within an organization. Additional informationThe goals of the RCA Institute, in promoting the acquisition of knowledge and skills to apply RCA, include the following: Improve management accounting knowledge and practice by clarifying and embracing sound principles that will enhance enterprise decision making and the public welfare through optimum resource usage. Advance the knowledge and practice of Resource Consumption Accounting (RCA) through:
A community of active, high quality practitioners and academics. Consistent and disciplined practice centered on a core body of RCA knowledge that is not diluted by wide variations in use or form. Education of adopters, practitioners and vendors and the certification of vendors’ products and services. Increased adoption of RCA, over the long-term, as the dominant management accounting approach in business, government, and non-profit organizations. The RCA Institute library contains an annotated bibliography that is currently divided into four sections:RCA theory, management accounting landscape and management accounting philosophy, RCA related research and other materials. This annotated bibliography provides more information for recommended reading and some guidance on how to get the most out of the information that is there.References Footnotes"Cost Management Section - RCA Interest Group". http://www.cam-i.org/displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=30. Retrieved 2008-09-05.   "Evaluating the Costing Journey: A Costing Levels Continuum Maturity Model". Information Paper (Professional Accountants in Business Committee,International Federation of Accountants): 19. July 2009. http://www.ifac.org/Members/DownLoads/evaluating-the-costing-jour.pdf. Retrieved 2009-08-21.   "Evaluating and Improving Costing in Organizations". International Good Practice Guidance (Professional Accountants in Business Committee,International Federation of Accountants): 24. July 2009. http://www.ifac.org/Members/DownLoads/evaluating-and-improving-co.pdf. Retrieved 2009-08-21.  "Sustainability Framework - Internal Management". http://web.ifac.org/sustainability-framework/imp-improvement-of-information. Retrieved 2009-06-05.   Friedl, Gunther; Hans-Ulrich Kupper and Burkhard Pedell (2005). "Relevance Added: Combining ABC with German cost accounting". Strategic Finance (June): 56–61.   Shillinglaw, Gordon (1963). "The Concept of Attributable Costs". Journal of Accounting Research (Spring): 73–85.   Value chain integration (i.e., a quantitative model in the operational systems) eliminates dependency on the General Ledger for managerial decision-making. General Ledgers are primarily a tool for financial reporting in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. (GAAP reporting is specifically designed for external stakeholders – creditors and investors, not internal managers – and external comparisons associated with investing activities.)"RCA Institute - FAQ's". http://www.rcainstitute.org. Retrieved 2008-09-05.   Van der Merwe, Anton (2007). "Management Accounting Philosophy Series II: Cornerstones of Restoration". Journal of Cost Management 21 (Sept/Oct): 26–33. ISSN 1092-8057.   "RCA Institute - About RCA". http://www.rcainstitute.org. Retrieved 2008-09-05.  Additional SourcesClinton, B.D.; and Anton van der Merwe (2006). "Management Accounting - Approaches, Techniques, and Management Processes". Cost Management 20 (May/June): 14–22. ISSN 1092-8057.  Clinton, B. D.; and Anton van der Merwe (2008). "Understanding Resource Consumption and Cost Behavior Part I: The Blended Cost Concept Error". Cost Management 22 (May/June): 33–39. ISSN 1092-8057.  Clinton, B. D.; and Anton van der Merwe (2008). "Understanding Resource Consumption and Cost Behavior Part II: Operational Modeling and the Principle of Responsiveness". Cost Management 22 (Jul/August): 14–20. ISSN 1092-8057.  Clinton, B. D.; and Sally Webber (2004). "RCA at Clopay". Strategic Finance (October): 21–26. ISSN 1524-833X.  Krumwiede, Kip R. (2005). "Rewards and Realities of German Cost Accounting". Strategic Finance (April): 27–34. ISSN 1524-833X.  Van der Merwe, Anton (2007). "Management Accounting Philosophy Series I: Gaping Holes in Our Foundation". Cost Management 21 (May/June): 5–11. ISSN 1092-8057.  Van der Merwe, Anton (2007). "Management Accounting Philosophy Series II: Cornerstones for Restoration". Cost Management 21 (Sept/Oct): 26–33. ISSN 1092-8057.  Van der Merwe, Anton (2007). "Management Accounting Philosophy Series III: An Evaluation Framework". Cost Management 21 (Nov/Dec): 20–29. ISSN 1092-8057.  External links"RCA Institute Official Web Site". http://www.rcainstitute.org.  "Institute of Management Accounting (IMA) - Publisher of Strategic Finance". http://www.imanet.org.  "Thomson Reuters - Publisher of Cost Management". http://ria.thomson.com/eStore/detail.aspx?ID=ZMCMP&productInfo=Details&SITE=.  "International Federation of Accountants (IFAC)". http://www.ifac.org/.  "The Consortium of Advanced Management, International (CAM-I)". http://www.cam-i.org/.

Activity-based costing

Activity-based costing (ABC)
is a costing model that identifies activities in an organization and assigns the cost of each activity resource to all products and services according to the actual consumption by each: it assigns more indirect costs (overhead) into direct costs.
In this way an organization can precisely estimate the cost of its individual products and services for the purposes of identifying and eliminating those which are unprofitable and lowering the prices of those which are overpriced.
In a business organization, the ABC methodology assigns an organization's resource costs through activities to the products and services provided to its customers. It is generally used as a tool for understanding product and customer cost and profitability. As such, ABC has predominantly been used to support strategic decisions such as pricing, outsourcing, identification and measurement of process improvement initiatives.
Contents[hide]1 Historical development 2 Methodology 3 Uses 4 Limitations 4.1 Cost 
Prevalence 5.1 Public sector use 6 References 7 External links // [edit] Historical developmentTraditionally cost accountants had arbitrarily added a broad percentage of expenses into the indirect cost

However as the percentages of indirect or overhead costs had risen, this technique became increasingly inaccurate because the indirect costs were not caused equally by all the products. For example, one product might take more time in one expensive machine than another product, but since the amount of direct labor and materials might be the same, the additional cost for the use of the machine would not be recognised when the same broad 'on-cost' percentage is added to all products. Consequently, when multiple products share common costs, there is a danger of one product subsidizing another.
The seminal work on which ABC is based is George Staubus' Activity Costing and Input-Output Accounting. The concepts of ABC were developed in the manufacturing sector of the United States during the 1970s and 1980s. During this time, the Consortium for Advanced Management-International, now known simply as CAM-I, provided a formative role for studying and formalizing the principles that have become more formally known as Activity-Based Costing.
Robin Cooper and Robert S. Kaplan, proponents of the Balanced Scorecard, brought notice to these concepts in a number of articles published in Harvard Business Review beginning in 1988. Cooper and Kaplan described ABC as an approach to solve the problems of traditional cost management systems. These traditional costing systems are often unable to determine accurately the actual costs of production and of the costs of related services. Consequently managers were making decisions based on inaccurate data especially where there are multiple products.
Instead of using broad arbitrary percentages to allocate costs, ABC seeks to identify cause and effect relationships to objectively assign costs. Once costs of the activities have been identified, the cost of each activity is attributed to each product to the extent that the product uses the activity. In this way ABC often identifies areas of high overhead costs per unit and so directs attention to finding ways to reduce the costs or to charge more for costly products.
Activity-based costing was first clearly defined in 1987 by Robert S. Kaplan and W. Bruns as a chapter in their book Accounting and Management: A Field Study Perspective. They initially focused on manufacturing industry where increasing technology and productivity improvements have reduced the relative proportion of the direct costs of labor and materials, but have increased relative proportion of indirect costs. For example, increased automation has reduced labor, which is a direct cost, but has increased depreciation, which is an indirect cost.
Like manufacturing industries, financial institutions also have diverse products and customers which can cause cross-product cross-customer subsidies. Since personnel expenses represent the largest single component of non-interest expense in financial institutions, these costs must also be attributed more accurately to products and customers. Activity based costing, even though originally developed for manufacturing, may even be a more useful tool for doing this.
Activity-based costing was later explained in 1999 by Peter F. Drucker in the book Management Challenges of the 21st Century He states that traditional cost accounting focuses on what it costs to do something, for example, to cut a screw thread; activity-based costing also records the cost of not doing, such as the cost of waiting for a needed part. Activity-based costing records the costs that traditional cost accounting does not do.
[edit] MethodologyCost allocation Fixed cost Variable cost Cost driver Cost driver rate Direct labor and materials are relatively easy to trace directly to products, but it is more difficult to directly allocate indirect costs to products. Where products use common resources differently, some sort of weighting is needed in the cost allocation process. The measure of the use of a shared activity by each of the products is known as the cost driver. For example, the cost of the activity of bank tellers can be ascribed to each product by measuring how long each product's transactions takes at the counter and then by measuring the number of each type of transaction.
[edit] UsesIt helps to identify inefficient products, departments and activities It helps to allocate more resources on profitable products, departments and activities It helps to control the costs at an individual level and on a departmental level It helps to find unnecessary costs It helps fixing price of product or service scientifically [edit] LimitationsEven in activity-based costing, some overhead costs are difficult to assign to products and customers, such as the chief executive's salary. These costs are termed 'business sustaining' and are not assigned to products and customers because there is no meaningful method. This lump of unallocated overhead costs must nevertheless be met by contributions from each of the products, but it is not as large as the overhead costs before ABC is employed.
Although some may argue that costs untraceable to activities should be "arbitrarily allocated" to products, it is important to realize that the only purpose of ABC is to provide information to management. Therefore, there is no reason to assign any cost in an arbitrary manner.
[edit] CostABC is considered a relatively costly accounting methodology Lean accounting methods have been developed in recent years to provide relevant and thorough accounting, control, and measurement systems without the complex and costly methods of ABC. Lean Accounting takes an opposite direction from ABC by working to eliminate cost allocations rather than find complicated methods of allocation.
While lean accounting is primarily used within lean manufacturing, the approach has proven useful in many other areas including healthcare, construction, financial services, governments, and other industries.
[edit] PrevalenceFollowing initial enthusiasm, ABC lost ground in the 1990s, to alternative metrics, such as Kaplan's balanced scorecard and economic value added
ABC has stagnated over the last five to seven years,
– Kaplan, 1998[edit] Public sector useABC is widely used in the public sector[citation needed], including by the United States Marine Corps.
Its use by the UK Police has been mandated since the 2003-04 UK tax year as part of England and Wales’ National Policing Plan, specifically the Policing Performance Assessment Framework. An independent 2008 report concluded that ABC was an inefficient use of resources: it was expensive and difficult to implement for small gains, and a poor value, and that alternative methods should be used.
Furthermore, the South African government, specifically the National Treasury has tasked specialists to craft a master guideline for local government in South Africa, for purposes of cost optimisation, tariff setting, balanced budget setting and equitable fund allocations
[edit] References  Staubus, George J. Activity Costing and Input-Output Accounting (Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1971). onsortium for Advanced Manufacturing-International  Kaplan, Robert S. and Bruns, W. Accounting and Management: A Field Study Perspective (Harvard Business School Press, 1987) ISBN 0-87584-186-4 
Sapp, Richard, David Crawford and Steven Rebishcke "Article title?" Journal of Bank Cost and Management Accounting (Volume 3, Number 2), 1990.  
 Author(s)? "Article title?" Journal of Bank Cost and Management Accounting (Volume 4, Number 1), 1991.
  Drucker Peter F.Management Challenges of the 21st Century. New York:Harper Business, 1999. ^
Activity-Based Costing (ABC): In recent years, ABC has lost ground in the metric wars. But it may be set for a resurgence, by David M. Katz 
Police Service National ABC Model Manual of Guidance Version 2.3 June 2007 
The Review of Policing Final Report by Sir Ronnie Flanagan February 2008 Drucker, Peter F.. Management Challenges of the 21st Century. New York:Harper Busines

Lean accounting

The purpose of Lean Accounting is to support the lean enterprise as a business strategy. It seeks to move from traditional accounting methods to a system that measures and motivates excellent business practices in the lean enterprise
IntroductionWhat we now call lean manufacturing was developed by Toyota and other Japanese companies. Toyota executives claim that the famed Toyota Production System was inspired by what they learned during visits to the Ford Motor Company in the 1920's and developed by Toyota leaders such as Taiichi Ohno and consultant Shigeo Shingo after World War II. As pioneer American and European companies embraced lean manufacturing methods in the late 1980's they discovered that lean thinking must be applied to every aspect of the company including the financial and management accounting processes. See also, William Demming.
There are two main thrusts for Lean Accounting. The first is the application of lean methods to the company's accounting, control, and measurement processes. This is no different than applying lean methods to any other processes. The objective is to eliminate waste, free up capacity, speed up the process, eliminate errors & defects, and make the process clear and understandable.
The second (and more important) thrust of Lean Accounting is to fundamentally change the accounting, control, and measurement processes so they motivate lean change & improvement, provide information that is suitable for control and decision-making, provide an understanding of customer value, correctly assess the financial impact of lean improvement, and are themselves simple, visual, and low-waste. Lean Accounting does not require the traditional management accounting methods like standard costing, activity-based costing, variance reporting, cost-plus pricing, complex transactional control systems, and untimely & confusing financial reports. These are replaced by
lean-focused performance measurements simple summary direct costing of the value streams decision-making and reporting using a box score financial reports that are timely and presented in "plain English" that everyone can understand radical simplification and elimination of transactional control systems by eliminating the need for them driving lean changes from a deep understanding of the value created for the customers eliminating traditional budgeting through monthly sales, operations, and financial planning processes (SOFP) value-based pricing correct understanding of the financial impact of lean change As an organization becomes more mature with lean thinking and methods, they recognize that the combined methods of Lean Accounting in fact creates a Lean Management System (LMS) designed to provide the planning, the operational and financial reporting, and the motivation for change required to prosper the company's on-going lean transformation.
Up until 2006 the methods of Lean Accounting were not clearly defined because they had been developed by different people in different companies. A meeting was held at the 2005 Lean Accounting Summit (Lean Accounting Summit) conference including a number of leaders in the field, and a decision was made to develop a document called "The Principles, Practices, and Tools of Lean Accounting" (PPT) (Lean Accounting PPT). While the methods of lean accounting are continually evolving, the PPT lays out the primary methods of Lean Accounting and shows how they fit together into a Lean Management System. The PPT emphasizes not only the tools and methods of Lean Accounting, but also the need for focusing on customer value and the empowerment (or respect) for people. The PPT was published in Target, the Journal of the Association of Manufacturing Excellence (AME) in 2006. (Lean Accounting PPT article)
Why is lean accounting needed?Everybody working seriously on the lean transformation of their company eventually bumps up against their accounting systems. Traditional accounting systems (particularly those using standard costing, activity-based costing, or other full absorption methods) are designed to support traditional management methods. As a company moves to lean thinking, many of the fundamentals of its management system change and traditional accounting, control, and measurement methods become unsuitable. Some examples of this are:
Traditional accounting systems are large, complex processes requiring a great deal of non-value work. Lean companies are anxious to eliminate this kind of non-value work. They provide measurements and reports like labor efficiency and overhead absorption that motivate large batch production and high inventory levels. These measurements are suitable for mass production-style organizations but actively harmful to companies with lean aspirations. The traditional accounting systems have no good way to identify the financial impact of the lean improvements taking place throughout the company. On the contrary, the financial reports will often show that bad things are happening when very good lean change is being made. One example of this is that traditional reporting shows a reduction in profitability when inventory is reduced. Lean companies always make significant inventory reductions and the accounting reports show negative results . Traditional accounting reports use technical words and methods like "overhead absorption", "gross margin", and many others. These reports are not widely understood within most organizations. This may be acceptable when the financial reports are restricted to senior managers, but a lean company will seek to empower the entire workforce. Clear and understandable reporting is required so that people can readily use the reports for improvement and decision-making Traditional companies use standard product (or service) costs which can be misleading when making decisions related to quoting, profitability, make/buy, sourcing, product rationalization, and so forth. Lean companies seek to have a clearer understanding of the true costs associated with their processes and value streams. There are of course traditional methods for overcoming some of these issues and problems. Indeed, few of the methods of Lean Accounting are new ideas. They are mostly adaptations of methods that have been used for many years, and have been codified into a Lean Management System designed to support the needs of lean thinking organizations.
The Vision for Lean AccountingProvide accurate, timely, & understandable information to motivate the lean transformation throughout the organization, and for decision-making leading to increased customer value, growth, profitability, and cash flow. Use lean tools to eliminate waste from the accounting processes while maintaining thorough financial control. Fully comply with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), external reporting regulations, and internal reporting requirements. Support the lean culture by motivating investment in people, providing information that is relevant and actionable, and empowers continuous improvement at every level of the organization.
A lean accounting assessment tool is available from Lean Accounting Assessment Tool
Where does Lean Accounting apply?As with most lean methods Lean Accounting was developed to support manufacturing companies, and most of the implementation of Lean Accounting has been within manufacturing organizations. Now that lean methods are moving into other industries like financial services, healthcare, government, and education there are some initial examples of the application of Lean Accounting in these industries. There are as yet no published cases of the use of lean accounting outside of manufacturing.
Getting Started Application to accounting processesIn the early stages of lean it is important to apply lean improvement throughout the organization; and there is nowhere more suitable than the accounting processes. These include the month-end close, accounts payable, accounts receivable, payroll, cost accounting, expense reporting, and so forth. There are three reasons for applying lean improvement methods to the accounting processes:
The processes will be improved and the company's operations made better. The finance people will learn a lot about lean methods. Lean is not learned from books but by actual hands-on experience. The removal of waste will free up time for the finance people to work on the introduction of Lean Accounting. Some people object to making changes to the accounting processes because they ask why we would want to spend time making processes better when in fact we will be eliminating them in the future. The answer to this is that with lean we are always interested in making many small improvements. We are not looking for the "silver bullet" that will solve all problems. On the contrary, we are looking to engage the entire work force in many smaller changes that lead to massive improvement over time. It is, of course, our objective over time to largely eliminate most of these wasteful accounting processes, but at the earlier stages of lean change we are content to improve the processes, provide learning to the finance people, and free up their time for the more significant lean changes in the future  .
Lean performance measurementsThe control of the production (and other) processes is achieved by visual performance measurements at the shop-floor and value stream level. These measurements eliminate the need for the shop-floor tracking and variance reporting favored by traditional cost accounting systems. There are (at least) three levels of operational performance measurements.

PURPOSE PLAN DO CHECK ACT IMPROVEMENT TYPICAL FREQUENCY Company or Plant Measurements Enable the senior managers of the company monitor
the achievement of the company's strategy. Strategy Deployment Monthly Value Stream Measurements Track the performance of the value stream and provide
information to drive continuous improvement (CI). Continuous Improvement Weekly Cell and Process Measurements Enable the cell team to monitor
and control their own activities. Identify defects and eliminate them Hourly or by shift Continuous improvement (CI) is motivated and tracked using value stream performance boards. Typically these visual boards are updated weekly and used by the value stream CI team to identify improvement areas, initiate PDCA projects, and monitor their progress. These boards show the value stream performance measurements, pareto charts (or other root cause analysis), and information about the CI projects. The boards also show the current and future state maps together with the project plan to move from current to future state. The Value Stream Performance Boards become “mission control” for both break-through improvement and continuous improvement of the value stream.
Typical measurements include:
Productivity (sales/person) Process control (on-time shipment to customer requirement) Flow (dock-to-dock days or hours) Quality & Standardized Work (first time through without scrap or rework) Linearity and overall improvement (average cost) People participating in CI Safety (Safety cross showing lost time, accidents, near-misses, etc.) Cell and process measurements are reported frequently - of ten hourly - by the people working in the cell or the process. The measurements are used to control the process and identify defects. When defects are identified they are "fixed" in the short term to serve the customers today and solved over the longer term so that they never occur again.
Typical measurements include:
Day-by-the-Hour production quantities First Time Thru without scrap or rework WIP to SWIP (work-in-process inventory within the cell or process compared to the standard work-in-process required within the process) Operational equipment effectiveness - OEE (for machine driven operations and particularly for bottleneck or constraint machines.) "Just-Do-It" suggestions per person. For a "starter set" of lean performance measurements: Lean Performance Measurements Starter Set
Financial Reports for Lean Operations Value stream costingCost and profitability reporting is achieved using Value Stream Costing, a simple summary direct costing of the value streams. The value stream costs are typically collected weekly and there is little or no allocation of ‘overheads”. This provides financial information that can be clearly understood by everybody in the value stream which in turn leads to good decisions, motivation to lean improvement across the entire value stream, and clear accountability for cost and profitability. Weekly reporting also provides excellent control and management of costs because they can be reviewed by the value stream manager while the information is still current
Plain English financial statementsLean accounting provides financial reports that are readily understandable to anyone in the company. The income statements are in “plain English” and the information is presented in a way that is no more complicated than a household budget. Plain English income statements are easy to use because they do not include misleading and confusing data relating to standard costs and hosts of incomprehensible variance figures. When used in meetings, plain English financial statements change the question from “What does this mean?” to “What should we do?”.
Box Score reporting[Image]Box Scores are used widely within lean accounting. The standard format of the box score shows a 3-dimensional view of value stream performance; operational performance measurements, financial performance, and how the value stream capacity is being used. The capacity information shows how much of the capacity within the value stream is used productively, how much is used to do non-productive activities, and how much value stream capacity is available for use. The box score shows the value stream performance on a single sheet of paper and using a simple and accessible format.
The box score shown on the right shows weekly value stream performance. Other box scores are used for decision-making, for assessing the financial impact of lean improvement, for selecting or prioritizing such issues as capital acquisitions using the 3P approach, and other reporting and decision-making requirements. Companies using lean accounting often have a standard box score format and require that all decisions relating to a value stream be presented using the standard box scores. This leads to operational and financial information being consistent and well understood when it is used

Making Decisions without the Use of Product or Process Decision-Making using Box Scores and Value Stream Cost Information[Image]Routine decision-making - including quotes, profitability, make/buy, sourcing, product rationalization, and so forth - is achieved using simple yet powerful information that is readily available from the box score. There is no need to use a standard cost again for these important decisions. The Box Score shows an example of this method for decision-making related to sourcing of a new product.
Most companies using lean accounting create standard templates for the various kinds of daily routine decisions. These will include assessing the profitability of a sales order or request for quote, make-buy decisions for products or components, the impact of improvement projects, and so forth. These templates often access box score information from the lean accounting information within the company's systems. The availability of capacity is often a crucial issue when making these kinds of short-term decisions.
The box score show in this example demonstrates a short term decision and assume that the company's capacity and costs are largely fixed. There are two other kinds of decisions used regularly in lean companies; medium term decisions and strategic decisions. Box Scores are also used for medium term decisions but there is no assumption of fixed capacity and costs. The template shows how the capacity and resources need to be changed to fulfill the decision. These decisions are linked in the SOFP (Sales, Operations, and Financial Planning) process that typically looks out 12–18 months. The Box Score is also used for strategic decisions such as the introduction of new products, and the templates feed into the company's Strategy Deployment (Hoshin Kanri) and Target Costing processes.
The Box Score method is flexible to meet the needs of different kinds of decisions, yet using the same underlying approach that we do not try to calculate a fully absorbed product cost. Instead the impact of these decisions on the value stream as a whole is used to assess the suitability of each of our choices. This leads to better understanding and better decisions, when used with standard decision-making processes
Product or service costingUnder most circumstances it is not necessary to calculate product or service costs[. Traditional manufacturing companies usually calculate a fully absorbed product cost using complex methods for the allocation of overhead costs, and they use these product costs for decision-making, inventory valuation, and performance measurements in the form of variance analysis and such metrics as individual efficiency. SImilar methods are used in service organizations to estimate the cost of each service they provide. Companies employing lean accounting methods recognize that standard costs and other methods for fully absorbed product or service costing lead to poor decisions and motivate anti-lean behavior. These companies also find that there is no need to calculate a product cost because all the uses of product costs within traditional companies can be addressed in lean accounting using simpler and better methods. Decision-making, inventory valuation, performance measurements, and other uses of fully absorbed product costs are all achieved using other lean accounting methods. If a product cost is required - for reporting international transfer pricing, for example - then these can be calculated using simpler and more lean-focused methods like Features & Characteristics costing
External Reporting Closing the books[Image]The primary collection of revenue and costs is done using Value Stream Costing, and (typically) weekly value stream income statements are used by the value stream managers to control costs and work to reduce costs. A typical lean organization will have several revenue earning or order fulfillment value streams, one or two new product development value streams, and then a small group of people and departments that support the value streams but are not in the value streams. These external support people include, for example, a plant or division manager, HR, Information systems, and so forth. The costs of these support people is relatively small in comparison to the value streams.
External reporting is achieved by taking the monthly value stream income statements and the financial statement for the support people and adding them together to provide the consolidated financial report for the company or division as a whole. This month-end close provides financial reports for the company that can be used for all external reporting. There is usually a requirement for some "below the line" adjustments to bring the income state in line with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). These adjustments include any change of inventory value between now and last month, group and corporate overhead allocations, and other miscellaneous adjustments like exchange rate gains and losses. The "bottom line" of the adjusted statement will of course be the same as the traditional statements. There is no formal change of accounting method and the bottom line will therefore be the same.
Inventory valuationAn important aspect of financial control is the evaluation of inventory. Lean manufacturing always leads to substantial inventory reductions. When inventories are low and under good control (using pull systems, single-piece flow, supplier partnerships, etc.), the valuation of inventory becomes much less complex. Lean Accounting contains a number of methods for valuing inventory that are simple, accurate, and often visual. Several of these methods do not require any computer-based inventory tracking at all.
Compliance to regulatory requirementsA question that always comes up when discussing lean accounting is whether these methods comply with regulatory accounting requirements and GAAP (generally accepted accounting principles). Lean accounting fully complies with all statutory and generally accepted accounting requirements in the United States and Europe, including the unique requirements of German, Swiss, and Italian regulation. Lean accounting also complies with the increasingly popular International Accounting Standards (IAS) that is seeking to create a single world-wide approach. When moving from traditional accounting methods to lean accounting there is no "change of accounting" because the external reporting outcome of lean accounting uses the same accrual based actual costing required by GAAP and statutory regulations. There is an argument that lean accounting lends itself better to statutory regulations because they require reporting at actual cost. Lean accounting uses actual costs throughout, whereas traditional accounting uses standard costs that must then be adjusted to actual costing for external reporting.
 Further Simplifying the Accounting Processes Transaction eliminationTraditional companies use complex, transaction-based information systems like MRPII or Enterprise Systems (ERP) to maintain financial and operational control of their processes. Lean organization bring their process under good control using lean methods, visual control, low inventories, short lead times, and - most importantly - identifying and resolve the root causes of the problems that create the lack of control. Once these root causes have been addressed and the process brought under control, it is no longer necessary to use these complex and wasteful transactional systems, and they can be gradually eliminated.
In manufacturing companies the transaction-heavy documents tend to be production work orders and inventory tracking on the computer. Over time, as lean methods eliminate the need for these document in favor of visual management, these documents can be eliminated and the 1,000's of wasteful transaction can be eliminated. One large North American aircraft manufacturer eliminated 3 trillion transactions in one year using this approach. The "ideal" for a manufacturing company is to have only two types of transactions within the production processes; the receipt of raw materials and the shipment of finished product. These two transaction are legally required owing to change of ownership. Everything else within the production process can be addressed better, quicker, easier, and less wastefully using visual, lean methods.
Other kinds of service companies like banks, healthcare, insurance and others, have similarly transaction-heavy processes that can be radically simplified through the use of lean methods of control. Almost every company can largely eliminate their purchasing and accounts payable processes together with the wasteful and complicated three-way matching through using lean methods.
Accounting controls have always been important, and it is essential that Lean Accounting enhance these controls, and does not weaken them. It is important to bring the company’s auditors into the Lean Accounting process at the earliest stages. A primary tool to ensure that Lean Accounting changes are made prudently is the Transaction Elimination Matrix. Using the transaction elimination matrix we can determine what lean methods must be in place to enable us to eliminate traditional, transaction-based processes without jeopardizing financial (or operational) control. These decisions are made ahead of time and become a part of the overall lean transformation; in some cases driving the lean changes and improvements.
Focusing on Customer Value Target costingTarget Costing is the tool for understanding how the company creates value for the customer and what must be done to create more value. Target Costing is used when new products are being designed and/or when the value stream team needs to understand the changes required to increase the value for the customers. The outcome of this highly cross-functional and cooperative process is a series of initiatives to create more value for the customer and to bring the product costs into line with the company’s need for short and long term financial stability. These improvement initiatives encompass sales and marketing, product design, operations, logistics, and administrative processes within the company.
Value-based pricingThe first of the five principles of lean thinking is value to the customer. The prices of products and services are set according to the value created for the customers. Lean accounting includes methods for calculating the amount of value created by a company's products and services, and from that knowledge to establish prices. This approach is in stark contrast to many traditional companies that calculate their prices using the cost-plus method. The cost-plus method establishes prices by calculating a fully absorbed product cost and then adding on an acceptable profit margin. This cost-plus methods leads to serious errors in pricing because it creates a false linkage between price and cost. The price of a product is unrelated to the cost of manufacturing and supplying that product. The price of a product or services is entirely determined by the amount of value created by the product in the eyes of the customers. Lean accounting methods enable value-based pricing.
References References  Emiliani, Bob (March 23, 2007). "Better Thinking Better Results". CLBM; 2 edition, Wethersfield, CT, USA.   Maskell, Brian & BMA Inc Team (September 1, 2007). "Lean Business Management System". BMA Publishing, Cherry Hill, NJ, USA.   Cooper, Robin & Maskell, Brian (Summer 2008, Vol. 49, No. 4, pp. 58-65). "How to Manage Through Worse-Before-Better". MIT Sloan Management Review, Cambridge, MA, USA.  Fiume & Cunningham (March 25, 2003). "Real Numbers: Management Accounting in a Lean Organization". Managing Times Press; 2 edition, Durham, NC, USA.   Maskell & Baggaley (December 19, 2003). "Practical Lean Accounting". Productivity Press, New York, NY.   Maskell & Baggaley (December 19, 2003). "Practical Lean Accounting". Productivity Press, New York, NY.   Ed. Stenzel, Joe (April 6, 2007). "Lean Accounting: Best Practices for Sustainable Integration". Wiley, New York NY , USA.   Maskell & Baggaley (December 19, 2003). "Practical Lean Accounting". Productivity Press, New York, NY.   Solomon, Jerrold M (April 1, 2003). "Who's Counting? A Lean Accounting Business Novel". WCM Associates, Durham, NC, USA.   Maskell & Baggaley (December 19, 2003). "Practical Lean Accounting". Productivity Press, New York, NY.   Cooper & Slagmulder (1997). "Target Costing and Value Engineering". Productivity Press, New York, NY, USA.