当前位置：文档库 › 作业成本法和对传统成本会计缺陷的管理解决方案【外文翻译】

作业成本法和对传统成本会计缺陷的管理解决方案【外文翻译】

外文翻译

原文：

Activity-Based Costing and Management Solutions to Traditional Shortcomings of Cost Accounting

METHODOLOGY

Today’s traditional cost accounting system supports enterprise-wide financial reporting and measure the health of the business. However, this conventional approach to cost is somewhat little value to quality practitioners and decision makers in the areas of cost allocation in a value stream; cost of quality or poor quality in the enterprise; and forecasting or budgeting for quality.

This thesis study will prove the activity-based costing and management is the quality tool and solution to quality cost shortcomings of the standard accounting work in the area of total quality management. This includes the introduction to the concept of ABC/M; its significance in horizontal costing approach in the value stream; ABC/M to identify and reduce cost of quality (COQ); and budgeting and forecasting efforts via activity-based model.

This article will introduce the quality professionals and decision makers the different approach to defining true costs in the cross-functional processes. This includes the study and the application of the activity-based costing and management approach within the total quality management framework in today’s global competition. In addition, ABC/M will be proven as the quality solution to conventional cost accounting system via the concepts of lean, cost of quality and forecasting and budgeting. The quality practitioners will gain and be able to expand their perspectives and roles in cost drivers and allocation for process cost control and improvement opportunities.

Activity-Based Costing and Management and Traditional Cost Accounting System

One of the important questions to be explored further in this section is how

traditional accounting system that has been widely used as the internal and external cost system is considered inadequate. In addition, why can the activity-based costing and management be a TQM solution of choice to quality cost shortcomings of the conventional costing accounting system? Few key claims shown below will answer the questions posted in details:

? Existing cost data is not useless; however, it appears incomplete or unprocessed for internal efficiency, profit or quality analysis and decision making process.

? Traditional cost system denies decision makers the visibility of the true costs created along the end-to-end process. And,

? Overheads are allocated inappropriately and frequently based on the labor or material expenses via the conventional costing approach.

Managers have been posted with operational and cost questions one time or the other, if not periodically. With the traditional cost reporting under the general ledger’s chart of accounts, many of decision makers are not able to explain if their specific production or service areas of responsibilities are effective, productivity or profitable. Tables 1 and 2 provide the insight of the problem at hand; that is, the expenses are allocated based on the chart of account established by the company’s accounti ng department for both internal and external reporting. With the cost breakdown by the chart of accounts, the recipients (i.e., managers or quality practitioners) of the information can only tell the costs of labor, material and other.

In addition, the conventional approach to cost is considered a vertical, organizational or "transaction-centric" costing system. To illustrate, all expenses incurred are associated to the costs within the departments or cost centers. This method lacks the ability to report process costs across-functional, limiting managers the visibility of the true end-to-end costs of each process and system. For example, the pre-mixed powder drink packing can be viewed at department levels such as packing, quality control, shipping and handling. On the other hand, the end-to-end packaging process can be looked at via the "work-centric" ABC/M as collective efforts and resources to manufacture a final premixed powder drink pouch .

Overhead assignment is not a simple task. Based on the traditional cost

accounting methodology, overhead or indirect expenses are assigned to each product, service, or process, based on a percent of direct labor or material costs. This is not only misleading as each product, service, or process consumes overheads at different rates, but also misguiding decision makers that certain product or service is profitable or not based on the pre-determined and distributed overheads to all processes equally.

To sum, the conventional approach to cost accounting explains "what was spent, whereas the activity-based view describes, what it was spent for".

Activity-Based Cost Allocation and Lean Value Stream Map

The standard costing approach was developed in the mid-20th century to meet the decision-making requirement in the mass production type organizations. As manufacturing and service industries change from mass to lean production, because of the changes of the demands and the complexity of the consumer goods, the conventional way to approach costing has become unsuited for lean initiatives.

As the result, B.H. Maskell suggested a unique view of allocating expenses via the value-steam-based methodology; that is, the cost of a process will be composed of the labor, materials and assignable overhead expenses for solely activities in the value stream and the optimized flow of the process (See figure 1).

The reporting of the "value steam profits" was also addressed in the similar manner. With the efforts to identify both cost and profit via the value stream and associated activities, the value stream managers now can understand, measure and become accountable for the expenses, efficiency and value produced by all value-added or essential, related activities in the process .

Furthermore, unlike the traditional costing methodology, the activity-based and lean production methodology can support continuous improvement efforts by a study of the activity classification and cost of activities residing in the vale stream system. Per Agrawal, Rezaee and Pak, each activity can be classified based on the following dimensions:

Category A: Value-Adding And Essential– This category identifies activities that not only add the value or features that consumers desire in the final products or services, but are also required tasks within the value stream to manufacture products

or deliver services. An example of this category is weighting batch ingredients; this activity both adds the value to the final product and is also a required task to manufacture the pre-mixed powder drink package.

Category B: Value-Adding But Nonessential –This category identifies activities that add the value or features that consumers desire in the final product or service; however, these tasks are not required within the value stream to manufacture products or deliver services. An example of this category is the mixing batch ingredients; this activity adds the value to the final product, but is not a required task to manufacture the pre-mixed powder drink package. The value-adding but nonessential task may be eliminated through re-designing or re-engineering of the products or process.

Category C: Nonvalue-Adding But Essential –This category identifies activities that do not add the value or features that consumers desire in the final product or service; however, these tasks are required within the value stream to manufacture products or deliver services. Examples of this category are product or package labeling and quality control tasks; these activities do not add the value to the final product, but are required tasks to manufacture the pre-mixed powder drink package. The nonvalue-adding but essential task should be controlled and minimized as much as possible through continuous process improvement efforts.

Category D: Nonvalue-Adding And Nonessential –This category identifies activities that do not add the value or features that consumers desire in the final product or service nor are required within the value stream to manufacture products or deliver services. Examples of this category are certain storage or transport activities; these activities do not add the value to the final product nor are they required tasks to manufacture the pre-mixed powder drink package. The nonvalue-adding and nonessential task should be eliminated immediately upon discovery.

Based on the understanding of the activity classification, the organization can improve its efficiency and assign or lower the costs associated to the value stream by mean of the "activity-based model of continuous improvement" (See figure 2). This activity-based approach can focus and facilitate production, quality or continuous

improvement processes in areas that need most attention and provide an optimum return on the investment. To illustrate, the activity-based model recommends that the company must focus its efforts and resources to enhance activities in category A. This includes efforts to increase value-adding and essential activities that will contribute to the bottom-line. In addition, the said approach suggests that efforts should also be to move to or eliminate activities in the category D as much as possible, such as the following:

? Moving Activities From Category A to Category B or C –Activities in category A must be reviewed, analyzed or reduced (if possible) periodically. This can be achieved by mean of product, service or process redesign, so that the desired value or features can be built in, rather than added in, or the redesign eliminates the need for certain necessary activities. With this improvement, the cost of each category A activity can be reduced as the activity is moved or eliminated from the value stream.

? Moving Activities From Category B to Category D– Activities in category B must also be reviewed, analyzed or reduced (if possible) periodically. This can be achieved by mean of product, service or process redesign, so that the desired value or features can be built in, rather than added in. With this improvement, the cost of each category B activity can be reduced as the activity is moved or eliminated from the value stream.

? Moving Activities From Category C to Category D– Activities in category C must also be reviewed, analyzed or reduced (if possible) periodically. This can be achieved by mean of product, service or process redesign as the redesign eliminates the need for certain necessary activities. With this improvement, the cost of each category C activity can be reduced as the activity is moved or eliminated from the value stream.

? Eliminating Activities in Category D

—Activities in this category must be eliminated immediately; the associated activity-based cost saving can then be recognized. The activity-based model approach is a continuous, never-ending process to keep enhancing only the core activities, contributing to solely the cost of the value-adding and essential activities in the value

企业成本控制外文翻译文献

企业成本控制外文翻译文献(文档含英文原文和中文翻译)

译文：在价值链的成本控制下减少费用和获得更多的利润摘要：根据基于价值链的成本管理理念和基于价值的重要因素是必要的。首先，必须有足够的资源，必须创造了有利的价值投资，同时还需要基于客户价值活动链，以确定他们的成本管理优势的价值链。其次，消耗的资源必须尽量减少，使最小的运营成本价值链和确保成本优势是基于最大商业价值或利润，这是一种成本控制系统内部整个视图的创建和供应的具实践，它也是一种成本控制制度基于价值链，包括足够的控制和必要的资源投资价值的观点，创建和保持消费的资源到合理的水平，具有价值的观点主要对象的第一个因素是构造有利的价值链，从创造顾客价值开始；第二个因素是加强有利的价值链，从供应或生产客户价值开始。因此它是一个新型的理念，去探索成本控制从整个视图的创建和供应的商品更盈利企业获得可持续的竞争优势。关键词：成本控制，价值链，收益，支出，收入，成本会计 1、介绍根据价值链理论，企业的目的是创造最大的顾客价值；和企业的竞争优势在于尽可能提供尽可能多的价值给他们的客户，作为低成本可能的。这要求企业必须首先考虑他们是否能为顾客创造价值，和然后考虑在很长一段时间内如何创造它。然而，竞争一直以“商品”（或“产品”）作为最直接的载体，因此，传统的成本控制方法主要集中在对“产品”和生产流程的过程。很显然，这不能解决企业的问题，企业是否或如何能为客户创造价值。换句话说，这至少不能从根本上解决它。因此，企业必须首先投入足够的资源，以便他们能够创建客户值取向，然后提供它以最少的资源费用。所以在整个视图中对价值创造和提供整体的观点来控制成本，它可以为客户提供完美的动力和操作运行机制运行成本的控制，也可以从根本上彻底克服了传统的成本控制方法的缺点，解决了无法控制的创造和供应不足的真正价值。基于此，本文试图从创作的整体观讨论成本控制提供价值并探讨实现良性循环的策略，也就是说，“创造价值投资成本供应价值创造价值”。 2、成本及其控制的基于价值链理念 2.1基于价值链的成本观念根据价值链理论，如果企业是要被客户接受，它必须创造和提供能满足其客户的价值。因此，成本（价值或资源支付费用）这不离为创造和提供顾客价值的活动，其活动的价值链。因此，我们应该从价值链角度看成本的重要。

企业环境成本会计外文翻译

企业环境成本会计外文翻译 ACCOUNTING IN SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED COMPANIES 1．ENVIRONMENTAL COST ACCOUNTING IN SMES Since its inception some 30 years ago, Environmental Cost Accounting (ECA) has reached a stage of development where individual ECA systems are separated from the core accounting system based an assessment of environmental costs with (see Fichter et al., 1997, Letmathe and Wagner , 2002). As environmental costs are commonly assessed as overhead costs, neither the older concepts of full costs accounting nor the relatively recent one of direct costing appear to represent an appropriate basis for the implementation of ECA. Similar to developments in conventional accounting, the theoretical and conceptual sphere of ECA has focused on process-based accounting since the 1990s (see Hallay and Pfriem, 1992, Fischer and Blasius, 1995, BMU/UBA, 1996, Heller et al., 1995, Letmathe, 1998, Spengler and H.hre, 1998). Taking available concepts of ECA into consideration, process-based concepts seem the best option regarding the establishment of ECA (see Heupel and Wendisch , 2002). These concepts, however, have to be continuously revised to ensure that they work well when applied in small and medium-sized companies. Based on the framework for Environmental Management Accounting presented in Burritt et al. (2002), our concept of ECA focuses on two main groups of environmentally related impacts. These are environmentally induced financial effects and company-related effects on environmental systems (see Burritt and Schaltegger, 2000, p.58). Each of these impacts relate to specific categories of financial and environmental information. The environmentally induced financial effects are represented by monetary environmental information and the effects on environmental systems are represented by physical environmental information. Conventional accounting deals with both – monetary as well as physical units – but does not focus on environmental impact as such. To arrive at a practical solution to the implementation of ECA in a company’s existing accounting system, and to comply with the problem of distinguishing between monetary and physical aspects, an integrated concept is required. As physical information is often the basis for the monetary information (e.g. kilograms of a raw material are the basis for the monetary valuation of raw material consumption), the integration

第十三章作业基础成本的法与作业成本管理成本会计习题及答案

第十三章作业基础成本法与作业成本管理一、单项选择题 1. 作业基础成本法适用与具有以下特征的企业（）。 A.间接生产费用比重较小 B.作业环节较少 C.生产准备成本较高 D.产品品种较少 2. 作业基础成本法的缺陷有（）。 A.实施成本较高 B.实施效果较差 C.成本决策相关性较弱 D.间接费用的分配与产出量相关性较弱 3. 作业基础成本法与传统成本法的区别之一是作业基础成本法（）。 A.存在较多的同质成本库 B. 存在较少的同质成本库 C.间接费用分配基础不一定是成本动因 D. 成本决策相关性较弱 4. 按照作业的执行方式，可将作业分为（）。 A.主要作业和次要作业 B.必需性作业和酌量性作业 C.重复作业和不重复作业 D.后勤作业和质量作业 5. 下列项目中，不属于按受益对象分类的作业是（）。 A.单位水平作业 B.协调平衡作业 C.批次水平作业 D.工厂维持作业 6. 销售成本和调运成本不包括（）。 A.执行订单成本 B.装运成本 C.编制商品销售价目表 D.材料采购 7. 作业成本法所采用的成本动因（）。 A. 不考虑辅助作业 B. 只考虑某些生产作业 C. 将作业与产品直接联系在一起 D. 将作业与产品间接联系在一起 8. 华宇公司本期制造费用共计480000元，采用传统成本法核算，它拥有5个为辅助生产部门和5个生产部门，生产25种产品。其制造费用中应有（）分配至产品层次。

A.48000元 B.480000元 C.1920元 D.0元 9. 与数量相关的动因不包括（）。 A.产量 B.直接人工工时 C.机器工时 D.生产工人人数 10. 在作业成本法下通常难以找到合适的成本动因来将（）作业所消耗的资源分配至产品。 A.车间管理 B.直接人工 C.质量检验 D.机器调试二、多项选择题 1. 作业按所完成的职能可以分为（）。 A.后勤作业 B.协调、平衡作业 C.质量作业 D.变化作业 E.产品维持作业 2. 作业基础成本法适用于具有以下特征的企业（）。 A.间接生产费用比重较大 B.企业规模大、产品品种多 C.作业环节多且易辨认 D.生产准备成本较高 E.计算机技术较高 3. 作业的分类方法主要有（）。 A.按作业所完成的职能分 B.按作业的执行方式分 C.按作业的性质分 D.按作业的收益对象分 E.按作业的时间长短分 4. 作业基础成本法的兴起和运用与以下新的制造环境密切相关（）。 A.专业化生产 B.电脑辅助设计 C.弹性制造系统 D.适时制生产方式 E.自动化生产 5. 成本动因的选择应遵循以下原则（）。 A.因果关系 B.受益性 C.合理性

环境会计方面的外文文献汇总

EVOLUTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT PROGRAM J. H. Maday T. L. Kuusinen October 1991 Presented at the Environmental Auditing Conference October 22-23, 1991 Seattle, Washington Work supported by the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract DE-ACO6-76RLO 1830 Pacific Northwest Laboratory Richland, Washington 99352

DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States。Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. Evolution of an Environmental Audit Program Joseph H. Maday, Jr. (ASQC-CQA) Technical Group Leader - Quality Verification Department and Tapio Kuusinen Senior Research Scientist Environmental Policy and Compliance Group Pacific Northwest Laboratory Richland, Washington 99352

成本控制【外文翻译】

外文翻译原文 Cost Control Material Source:Encyclopedia of business,2 and ed. Author:Anthony, Robet N 1 Cost Control Cost control, also known as cost management or cost containment, is a broad set of cost accounting methods and management techniques with the common goal of improving business cost-efficiency by reducing costs, or at least restricting their rate of growth. Businesses use cost control methods to monitor, evaluate, and ultimately enhance the efficiency of specific areas, such as departments, divisions, or product lines, within their operations. During the 1990s cost control initiatives received paramount attention from corporate America. Often taking the form of corporate restructuring, divestment of peripheral activities, mass layoffs, or outsourcing, cost control strategies were seen as necessary to preserve—or boost—corporate profits and to maintain—or gain—a competitive advantage. The objective was often to be the low-cost producer in a given industry, which would typically allow the company to take a greater profit per unit of sales than its competitors at a given price level. Some cost control proponents believe that such strategic cost-cutting must be planned carefully, as not all cost reduction techniques yield the same benefits. In a notable late 1990s example, chief executive Albert J. Dunlap, nicknamed "Chainsaw Al" because of his penchant for deep cost cutting at the companies he headed, failed to restore the ailing small appliance maker Sunbeam Corporation to profitability despite his drastic cost reduction tactics. Dunlap laid off thousands of workers and sold off business units, but made little contribution to Sunbeam's competitive position or share price in his two years as CEO. Consequently, in 1998 Sunbeam's board fired Dunlap, having lost confidence in his "one-trick" approach to management. A complex business requires frequent information about operations in order to plan for the future, to control present activities, and to evaluate the past performance of managers, employees, and related business segments. To be successful,

会计专业外文文献翻译--中小企业环境成本会计的实施

IMPLEMENTING ENVIRONMENTAL COST ACCOUNTING IN SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED COMPANIES 1．ENVIRONMENTAL COST ACCOUNTING IN SMES Since its inception some 30 years ago, Environmental Cost Accounting (ECA) has reached a stage of development where individual ECA systems are separated from the core accounting system based an assessment of environmental costs with (see Fichter et al., 1997, Letmathe and Wagner , 2002). As environmental costs are commonly assessed as overhead costs, neither the older concepts of full costs accounting nor the relatively recent one of direct costing appear to represent an appropriate basis for the implementation of ECA. Similar to developments in conventional accounting, the theoretical and conceptual sphere of ECA has focused on process-based accounting since the 1990s (see Hallay and Pfriem, 1992, Fischer and Blasius, 1995, BMU/UBA, 1996, Heller et al., 1995, Letmathe, 1998, Spengler and H.hre, 1998). Taking available concepts of ECA into consideration, process-based concepts seem the best option regarding the establishment of ECA (see Heupel and Wendisch , 2002). These concepts, however, have to be continuously revised to ensure that they work well when applied in small and medium-sized companies. Based on the framework for Environmental Management Accounting presented in Burritt et al. (2002), our concept of ECA focuses on two main groups of environmentally related impacts. These are environmentally induced financial effects and company-related effects on environmental systems (see Burritt and Schaltegger, 2000, p.58). Each of these impacts relate to specific categories of financial and environmental information. The environmentally induced financial effects are represented by monetary environmental information and the effects on environmental systems are represented by physical environmental information. Conventional accounting deals with both – monetary as well as physical units – but does not focus on environmental impact as such. To arrive at a practical solution to the implementation of ECA in a company’s existing accounting system, and to comply with the problem of distinguishing between monetary and physical aspects, an integrated concept is required. As physical information is often the basis for the monetary information (e.g. kilograms of a raw material are the basis for the monetary valuation of raw material consumption), the integration

管理会计成本差异分析

一、成本差异分析的意义成本差异是指是指在生产经营过程中发生的实际成本偏离预定的标准成本而形成的差额，它表示实际成本脱离标准成本的程度，反映成本控制的业绩。标准成本差异产生的原因包括以下五个方面：执行偏差、预测偏差、计量偏差、模型偏差和随机偏差。其中，执行偏差是指由于执行过程中某种措施的不当或失误，或机器接受了错误指令等原因而产生的偏差；预测偏差是指由于标准成本的制定过程中未能准确预测而产生的差异；计量偏差是由于执行过程中计量错误而产生的差异；模型偏差是由于为制定标准成本或编制预算而建立某种模型时，对各因素之间的关系估计错误而产生的差异；随机偏差是指由于执行过程中各种随机因素变过而产生的差异。实际成本低于标准成本的差额为顺差，即有利差异；实际成本高于标准成本的差额为逆差，即不利差异。计算并分析成本差异的主要目的是为了查明差异产生的原因，有针对性地指定调整和消除差异的措施，以进一步加强成本管理，降低产品成本，提高经济效益。在标准成本法中，成本差异的计算与分析是最重要的一环，只有正确地分析成本差异形成的原因，才能提出恰当的成本控制措施。成本差异可以分为两个方面，即数量差异和价格差异。其中数量差异是指由直接材料的用量、直接人工的工时和制造费用的分摊基础等数量性质的因素变化引起的成本差异；价格差异是指由直接材料价格、直接人工工资率和制造费用分摊率等价格性质的因素变化引起的成本差异。成本差异的通用计算公式如下：成本差异= 实际成本—标准成本 = 实际数量×实际价格—标准数量×标准价格 = 实际数量×实际价格—实际数量×标准价格+实际数量×标准价格—标准数量×标准价格 =实际数量×（实际价格—标准价格）+标准价格×（实际数量—标准数量） =价格差异+数量差异标准成本差异可用通用模式来表示，如下图所示。实际数量×实际价格价格差异实际数量×标准价格成本差异数量差异标准数量×标准价格二、直接材料成本差异直接材料成本差异是指直接材料实际成本与标准成本的差异，包括材料用量差异和价格差异两部分。材料用量差异是指实际使用的直接材料和实际产量下按标准应使用的直接材料数量之差乘以标准价格。材料价格差异是指原材料实际价格和标准价格之差乘以实际采购的原材料数量。相关计算公式如下：材料用量差异=（实际数量—标准数量）×标准价格材料价格差异=（实际价格—标准价格）×实际数量直接材料成本总差异= 实际数量×实际价格—标准数量×标准价格如果计算结果为正，表示逆差，是超支，为不利差异，说明企业直接材料实际成本大于标准成本；如果计算结果为负，表示顺差，是节约，为有利差异，说明企业直接材料实际成本小于标准成本。

管理会计第八章标准成本法

第八章标准成本法一、单项选择题 1.下列各项中，经常在制定标准成本时被采用的是（）。 A.理想标准成本 B.稳定标准成本 C.现实标准成本 D.正常标准成本 2.固定制造费用的实际差异与固定制造费用预算金额之间的差异称为（） A．效率差异 B.耗费差异 C．闲置差异 D.能量差异 3.在日常实施成本全面控制的同时，应有选择地分配人力、物力和财力，抓住那些重要的、不正常的、不符合常规的关键性成本差异作为控制重点，该项成本控制原则是指（）。 A.全面控制原则 B.责权利相结合原则 C.讲求效益原则 D.例外管理原则 4.在下列各项中,属于标准成本控制系统前提和关键的是（）。 A.标准成本的制定 B.成本差异的计算 C.成本差异的分析 D.成本差异的账务处理 5.根据一般应该发生的的生产要素消耗量，预计价格和预计生产能力制定出来的标准成本（）。 A.理想标准成本 B.稳定标准成本 C.现实标准成本 D.正常标准成本 6.与预算成本不同，标准成本是一种（）。Ａ.总额的概念Ｂ.单位成本的概念Ｃ.历史成本Ｄ.实际成本 7.无论是哪个成本项目，在制定标准成本时，都需要分别确定两个标准，两者相乘即为每一成本项目的标准成本，这两个标准是（）。 A.价格标准和用量标准 B.价格标准和质量标准 C.历史标准和用量标准 D.历史标准和质量标准 8.成本差异按其性质的不同可划分为（）。 A.数量差异和价格差异 B.纯差异和混合差异 C.有利差异和不利差异 D.可控差异和不可控差异

9.由于特定成本项目的实际用量消耗与标准用量消耗不一致而导致的成本差异称为（）。 A.价格差异 B.价格差 C.数量差异 D.用量差 10.在标准成本控制系统中，成本差异是指在一定时期内生产一定数量的产品所发生的（）。 A.实际成本与标准成本之差 B.实际成本与计划成本之差 C.预算成本与标准成本之差 D.预算成本与实际成本之差 11.标准成本法下，采用直接处理法进行成本差异的期末结转时，本月发生的各成本差异，应转入（）。 A.生产成本科目 B.产成品科目 C.产品销售成本科目 D.管理费用科目 12.某企业甲产品消耗直接材料，其中A材料价格标准为3元/千克，数量标准为5元/件，B 材料价格标准为4元/千克，数量标准为10元/件，则甲产品消耗直接材料的标准成本为（）。 A.15元 B.40元 C.55元 D.65元 13.下列变动成本差异，无法从生产过程中找到原因的是（） A.变动制造费用耗费差异 B.直接材料价格差异 C.变动制造费用效率差异 D.直接人工耗费差异 14.固定制造费用的的能量差异应（）。 A．质量控制部门 B.相关管理部门 C.生产部门 D.销售部门 15.材料价格差异一般由（）负责。 A．生产部门 B.采购部门 C．财务部门 D.工程技术部门二、多项选择题 1.原材料质量低劣，会造成（）向不利方向转化。 A.直接材料数量差异 B.直接材料价格差异 C.直接人工效率差异 D.变动制造费用效率差异 E.固定制造费用能量差异 2.下列各项中，能够造成变动制造费用差异的是（）。

成本控制和成本管理战略【外文翻译】

外文翻译原文 Cost-Containment and Cost-Management Strategies Material Source: Author: Alan f. Goldberg ,William P. Fleming The leadership and boards of trustees of all healthcare organizations are the ultimate stewards of the limited resources available to best meet community needs. The strategic planning process leads the organization down a clear path of setting priorities, making choices, and taking action. The day a new cancer center opens or the latest technology arrives is an exciting one for the community. After the ribbon cutting, these new programs become the responsibility of the hospital's service line directors or clinical managers. Their staffing is based on projections and other assumptions that may or may not be on point but have a direct impact on the operations and finances of the organization. As part of normal decision making for a hospital's new initiatives, a payer mix and revenue stream were predicted. Now two significant environmental events have made projections more uncertain and put aggressive cost management on center stage: the economic downturn and payment reform. The economic downturn affecting hospitals began in the fall of 2008. Its broad impact on the organization was described by Goldberg and Petasnick (2010): With credit markets drying up, unemployment rising, consumer confidence eroding, and employee morale shaken, healthcare system executives had their hands full. The combined result of the turmoil made the old adage "cash is king" truer than ever. As consumers pulled back and individuals lost health insurance, hospitals experienced losses in volume for elective, nonemergent healthcare. Financial operating results suffered. Meanwhile, losses in investment values eliminated the safety net reserves created by nonoperating income. Many hospitals and healthcare systems were forced to consider or enact layoffs and postpone or cancel capital-intensive projects. All were required to rethink their strategic plans. Because of the economic downturn and high unemployment, which led to income declines and individuals losing job-based healthcare coverage, Medicaid enrollment is projected to increase 10.5 percent in fiscal 2010.

管理会计白玉芳第五章作业成本法课后习题参考答案

第五章作业成本法思考与练习题答案一、思考题 1、什么是作业、作业的类型有哪些? 答：作业是指企业为了达到其生产经营目标所发生的各项活动，是汇集资源耗费的第一对象，是连接资源耗费和产品成本的中介。作业的类型包括：（1）投入作业，即为生产产品做准备的有关作业。包括产品研发和市场调研；招聘和培训员工；购买原材料、零部件和设备等。（2）生产作业，即与生产产品有关的作业。包括操作机器或使用工具生产产品；生产过程中搬运产品；储存产品；检查完工产品等。（3）产出作业，即与顾客相关的作业。包括销售活动；收账活动；售后服务；送货等。（4）管理作业，即支持前三项作业的作业。包括人事、工薪、数据处理、法律服务、会计和其他管理。 2、作业成本计算法下分配间接费用遵循的原则是什么？答：作业成本计算法下分配间接费用遵循的原则是：“作业消耗资源，产品消耗作业”。 3、什么是作业成本法？作业成本计算与传统成本计算的区别是什么？

答：作业成本法是以作业为核算对象，通过作业成本动因来确认和计量作业量，进而以作业成本动因分配率来对多种产品合理分配间接费用的成本计算方法。对于直接费用的处理作业成本法与传统成本会计是一致的，两种计算方法最根本的区别在于对间接费用的分配不同。传统成本计算对间接费用分配方法假设间接费用的发生完全与生产数量相联系，并且间接费用的变动与这些数量标准是一一对应的。因而它把直接人工小时、直接人工成本、机器小时、原材料成本或主要成本作为间接费用的分配标准。可以说，传统的间接费用分配方法，满足的只是与生产数量有关的制造费用的分配。，作业成本计算通常对传统成本计算中间接费用的分配标准进行改进，采用作业成本动因为标准，将间接的制造费用分配于各种产品，这也是作业成本法最主要的创新。作业成本法下分配间接费用遵循的原则是：“作业消耗资源，产品消耗作业”。 4、生产作业有哪四种类型？答：生产作业，即与生产产品有关的作业。包括操作机器或使用工具生产产品；生产过程中搬运产品；储存产品；检查完工产品等。生产作业分为四种类型，即单位水平作业、批量水平作业、产品水平作业、能力水平作业。（1）单位水平作业反映对每单位产品或服务所进行的工作。（2）批量水平作业由生产批别次数直接引起，与生产数量无关。

管理会计标准成本习题

例1：某企业计划期的生产量标准为1000直接人工小时，直接人工工资总额为7000元，制造费用预算总额为13000元，其中变动费用预算总额为5000元。制造每件A产品的直接人工的定额工时为80小时，直接材料的消耗定额为30千克，每千克材料的标准单价为60元，计算A产品的标准成本. 例2:某企业购进甲种材料1000千克,每千克的实际价格为2.1元,标准价格2元;购进乙种材料500千克,每千克的实际价格为6.8元,标准价格为7元;甲种材料的实际耗用量1000千克,标准用量950千克,乙种材料的实际耗用量500千克,标准用量480千克.求两种材料的价格差异和数量差异. 甲材料价格差异=1000*（2.10-2.00）=100（元）（U）乙材料价格差异=500*（6.8-7）=-100（元）（F）甲材料数量差异=2*（1000-950）=100（元）（U）乙材料数量差异=7*（500-480）=140（元）（U）例3:某企业采用标准成本控制系统,甲产品的标准成本卡: 甲产品本期的实际产量为1200件,变动性制造费用的预算总额为5000元，固定性制造费用

A材料的用量差异=2*（11400-1200*9.6）=-240（元）（F） B材料的用量差异=3.6*（3840-1200*3.0）=864（元）（U）直接材料的用量差异=-240+864=624（元）（U） A材料的价格差异=11400*（1.9-2.0）=-1140（元）（F） B材料的价格差异=3840*（3.8-3.6）=768（元）（U）直接材料的价格差异=-1140+768=-372（元）（F）直接材料成本差异=直接材料用量差异+直接材料价格差异 =624+（-372）=252（元）（U）直接人工工时差异=4.0*（5760-1200*5）=-960（元）（F）直接人工工资率差异=5760*（4.1-4.0）=576（元）（U）直接人工成本差异=直接人工工时差异+直接人工工资率差异 =-960+576=-384（元）（F）变动性制造费用工时差异=1.0*（5760-6000）=-240（元）（F）变动性制造费用分配率差异=5760*（1.1-1.0）=576（元）（U）变动性制造费用成本差异=变动性制造费用工时差异+变动性制造费用分配率差异 =-240+576=336 （元）（U）固定性制造费用预算差异=3168-3000=168（元）（U）固定性制造费用能量差异=3000-1200*3.0=0.6*（5000-6000）=-600（元）（F）固定性制造费用成本差异=固定性制造费用预算差异+固定性制造费用能量差异 =168+（-600）=-432（元）（F）成本差异=实际成本-标准成本 =实际用量*实际价格-标准用量*标准价格 =实际用量*实际价格-实际用量*标准价格 +实际用量*标准价格-标准用量*标准价格 =实际用量*（实际价格-标准价格） +标准价格*（实际用量-标准用量） =价格差异+用量差异用量差异=纯用量差异 =标准价格*（实际用量-标准用量）价格差异=纯价格差异+混合差异