【導(dǎo)讀】367. CHAPTER16. LEANACCOUNTING,TARGETCOSTING,ANDTHE. BALANCEDSCORECARD. product;(2)Identifythe"valuestream"for. fromtheproducer;and(5)Pursue. perfection.product;however,itismoremonto. two-dimensionalmatrix,wherethe. dimension.needed.Demand-pullsystems. manufacturingfirm.movementofpeople;(6)Unnecessary. transportofgoods;(7)Waiting;and,(8)The. resources,people,andequipmentto. valuestream.increasedsales. thent

　　

【正文】 chers of root beer, with a total cost reduction of $10 ? 2 + $3 ? 4 = $32. The average cost per person for Group B is: ($200 ? $32)/20 = $. The threeguest program will require (5 ? 1) + (6 ? 2) = 17 slices of pizza and (2 ? 1)+ (1 ? 2) = 4 glasses of root beer. No additional cost is required (relative to the original arrangement) for pizza and root beer。 however, three extra salads would be needed and would cost an extra $ or $ per guest. In a manufacturing environment, as waste is eliminated from the value streams, extra capacity exists. This extra capacity can be used productively to increase valuestream profitability. For example, a special order may be offered and if there is unused capacity in the value stream, the only extra cost may be the cost of materials. Thus, if the price is above the cost of materials, then accepting the order will increase valuestream profitability (in the short run). 377 1610 1. The operational performance measures that improved for the first six months all have to do with improving timebased performance. Ontime delivery and docktodock days showed dramatic improvements, reflecting the increased ability of the firm to produce on demand. From the capacity measures, we see that the ability to produce on demand has created additional available capacity in the value stream. For the second six months, the focus has been on improving quality. FTT improved from 60% to 90 %, a dramatic increase in quality. For example, eliminating scrap may explain why the materials cost dropped, giving the increase in ROS that did occur. The improvements have eliminated waste and increased the amount of available capacity. The implications are profound. The pany can produce higher quality products much more rapidly. This will enable the pany to produce the kind of products demanded by customers, in the quantities needed, and delivered when they need them. This should begin to translate into increased sales and improved financial performance. The stage is now set. 2. The constant sales per person coupled with constant total sales, suggest that the head count has not been reduced. More resources are available for use by the value stream as reflected by the increase in available capacity. The fact that financial performance has not improved dramatically is likely attributable to the fact the pany is maintaining the same level of resources in the value stream. Eliminating these resources is one way to improve financial performance. However, a more preferable approach is to find ways to use them productively. New products and expanded production (which may occur because of increased quality and improved cycle time) are much better ways of improving financial performance. 3. Accepting the order only promises a contribution of $10,000 or an ROS of 10%, using the traditional standard cost. However, the value stream has 50% available capacity, suggesting that the order could easily be accepted (the value stream is currently producing $800,000 of sales output) without causing any increase in the conversions cost already being incurred. The only incremental cost would be the materials cost of $30,000. Thus, value stream profitability would increase by $70,000 and sales by $100,000. ROS = $330,000/900,000 = %, a hefty increase in ROS from this one order. 378 1611 1. A: $350 + (6 + 20 + 4)/60 ? $2,000 = $350 + 30/60 ? $2,000 = $1,350 B: $350 + (7 + 20 + 5)/60 ? $2,000 = $350 + 32/60 ? $2,000 = $1,467 (rounded) C: $350 + (10 + 15 + 13)/60 ? $2,000 = $350 + 38/60 ? $2,000 = $1,617 (rounded) 2. Production rate: A: 60/20 = 3 B: 60/20 = 3 C: 60/15 = 4 Unit cost: A: $350 + ($2,000/3) = $1,017 B: $350 + ($2,000/3) = $1,017 C: $350 + ($2,000/4) = $850 3. For each individual unit, product C requires the most amount of time in the value stream. Thus, under the traditional costing method, product C should be assigned the most amount of conversion cost. Under the features and characteristics approach, product cost is determined by the rate of flow through the production process. This approach recognizes that the production rate is affected by the features and characteristics of the products. Since product C has the highest rate of flow, it is assigned the least amount of conversion cost. A parison of the unit costs from these two approaches reveals that there is substantial difference in the unit costs of each product. This highlights the notion that features and characteristics costing approach should be used with caution. CYBER RESEARCH CASE 16–12 Answers will vary