Skip to main content

Activity Based Management - Dispelling the myths - Part II

This is a Guest Post by Rajendra Patil, Pune, India

Profile: View Rajendra Patil's profile on LinkedIn A technocrat with 17 years of proven success in ERP Implementation, Business Analysis, Consultancy Assignments in Strategic Cost Management, Profitability Analytics, Performance Management and Business Process Management in conjunction with the enterprise wide BI solutions. Currently working as an independent consultant in the area of Performance Management and Profitability.

This is the concluding part of earlier post Activity Based Management - Dispelling the Myths - Part I

Myth: Cost systems play a limited role

Fact:

Traditionally this has been true and it has its own reasons. The calculations were not accurate. As it was based on putting overheads as ‘peanut butter’, it did not reflect the changes in the business scenario into the costs.

ABM benefits the organization in various ways like

  • Information for effective decision-making

  • Information to continuously improve processes and reduce costs

  • A focus on significant costs

  • A relationship between organizational cost and organizational value

  • Methods to measure performance with accountability

  • ABM can be used strategically to understand and improve profitability of the organization, operational performance and resource planning.

Myth: We cannot do anything about fixed costs;

Fact:

We can look at fixed costs in couple of ways

  • Fixed costs are fixed eternally. If we take into consideration a longer time horizon, then we can see the fixed costs are also changing. In that case we have to understand the reasons that are changing the ‘Fixed’ costs.

  • Fixed costs are generally attached with corresponding capacities. The investment should match with the required capacity. Alternatively the organization should look for the business that uses maximum if the installed capacity.

  • These fixed costs have to be taken to the products, customers or channels according to the ‘Cause-and-Effect’ relationship.

Myth: Only manufacturing costs are product costs; and Product costs are not useful for managing overhead activities.

Fact:

ABC is based on the ‘Cause-and-Effect’ relationship. The costs can be caused by product, customer, vendor, channel etc. We have to trace the expenses to the proper origin. This helps us to understand the relationship of the costs with the business scenario. With the help of this information we can take current business decisions as well as plan our costs in the future.

The companies that have implemented SAS Activity Based Management Solution

  • Lakshmi Machine Works
  • ING Vysya Life Insurance

On MS Excel

  • Kirlosakar Brothers
  • Thermax
  • Suzlon Energy
  • NCDEX
  • Wockhardt Hospitals
  • Kores
  • Syngenta
  • Merck
  • Crompton Greeves

If you have any questions on Activity Based Management and its implementation, you may post your comments on this blog post or write to Rajendra Patil on rajendra@appsconsulting.in on specific issues or concerns.

Do you like to be updated in Accountancy ?

Subscribe to Management Accountant by Email
Or
Subscribe in a reader

SAP Store, UK

Visit MA Stores ? You will find something you are looking for ....

Management Accountant Store, US - Powered by Amazon
Management Accountant Store, UK Stores - Powered by Amazon, UK

You may also like to read

  1. Activity Based Management - Dispelling the myths Par I - 13-June-08
  2. Activity Based Management - How to collect info 10-June-08
  3. 10 myths about ABC by SSRK 26-Nov-06
  4. Transfer Pricing 29-Dec-06
  5. Throughput Accounting 17-Dec-06
  6. SSRK's Knowledge Repository 03-Dec-06
  7. Stakeholder Analysis 19-May-08
  8. Resistance to Change 26-Apr-08
  9. Strategy Development 05-Apr-08
  10. Strategic Drift 12-Apr-08
  11. How to Share Blog posts with friends 25-May-08
  12. Management Accountant Blog Home

Subscribe to RSS Feeds and be up-to-date

  1. Management Accountant
  2. Accountancy News
  3. My Favorite Blogs that I track
  4. SAP Jobs & Opportunities
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Throughput Accounting

Throughput accounting (TA) is an alternative to cost accounting proposed by Eliyahu M. Goldratt. It is not based on Standard Costing or Activity Based Costing (ABC). Throughput Accounting is not costing and it does not allocate costs to products and services. It can be viewed as business intelligence for profit maximization. Conceptually throughput accounting seeks to increase the velocity at which products move through an organization by eliminiating bottlenecks within the organization.


Cost (or Management) accounting is an organization's internal method used to measure efficiency. Since no one outside the organization uses such internal accounts for investment or other decisions, any methods that an organization finds helpful can be used.


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, inventory, and operating expense — defin…

Learning Curve Theory

Learning Curve Theory is concerned with the idea that when a new job, process or activity commences for the first time it is likely that the workforce involved will not achieve maximum efficiency immediately. Repetition of the task is likely to make the people more confident and knowledgeable and will eventually result in a more efficient and rapid operation. Eventually the learning process will stop after continually repeating the job. As a consequence the time to complete a task will initially decline and then stabilise once efficient working is achieved. The cumulative average time per unit is assumed to decrease by a constant percentage every time that output doubles. Cumulative average time refers to the average time per unit for all units produced so far, from and including the first one made.

Major areas within management accounting where learning curve theory is likely to have consequences and suggest potential limitations of this theory.


Areas of consequence:
A Standard Costing

Resistence to Change - Approaches of Kotter and Schlesinger

The Six (6) Change Approaches of Kotter and Schlesinger is a model to prevent, decrease or minimize resistance to change in organizations.
According to Kotter and Schlesinger (1979), there are four reasons that certain people are resisting change: Parochial self-interest (some people are concerned with the implication of the change for themselves ad how it may effect their own interests, rather than considering the effects for the success of the business)Misunderstanding(communication problems; inadequate information)Low tolerance to change (certain people are very keen on security and stability in their work)Different assessments of the situation (some employees may disagree on the reasons for the change and on the advantages and disadvantages of the change process) Kotter and Schlesinger set out the following six (6) change approaches to deal with this resistance to change: Education and Communication - Where there is a lack…