作业成本法英文翻译.
- 格式:doc
- 大小:46.50 KB
- 文档页数:14
浅谈作业成本法在制造企业中的运用作业成本法(Job Costing)是一种在制造企业中常用的成本核算方法。
它通过将制造过程划分为各个作业来确定和追踪每一个作业的成本,从而帮助企业管理者更好地控制成本、评估利润和做出决策。
以下是对作业成本法在制造企业中运用的一些浅谈。
首先,作业成本法对于制造企业来说是一种很有效的成本核算方法。
在制造企业中,产品的制造过程通常会经历多个阶段和环节,每个阶段和环节都涉及到不同的资源消耗和成本产生。
作业成本法通过将制造过程划分为各个作业,将成本分配到每个作业上,从而更精确地计算出每个作业的成本,为企业管理者提供了关于各个作业成本的详细信息。
其次,作业成本法有助于企业管理者了解产品成本的组成和结构。
作业成本法将产品的制造过程分解为不同的作业,可以清晰地显示出产品成本的组成和结构。
通过对每个作业的成本进行追踪和分析,企业管理者可以了解到产品制造过程中哪些环节和因素对成本的影响最大,从而指导企业在降低成本和提高效率方面做出相应的调整和决策。
另外,作业成本法可以帮助制造企业准确计算成本和评估利润。
制造企业的产品成本通常包括直接材料成本、直接人工成本和制造间接费用等多个方面,如果没有一个准确的成本核算方法,很难确定产品的实际成本和利润。
作业成本法将成本分配到每个作业上,可以帮助企业准确计算每个作业的成本,并根据销售价格对每个作业进行定价,从而评估出每个作业的利润。
通过对每个作业的成本和利润进行监控和分析,企业可以及时采取措施来降低成本、提高利润。
最后,作业成本法为制造企业提供了基于成本的决策依据。
通过对每个作业的成本进行追踪和分析,企业可以得出每个作业的利润率和贡献率等指标,从而根据不同作业的成本和利润情况来进行决策。
例如,在产品定价方面,企业可以通过对不同作业的成本和利润进行分析,确定合理的销售价格;在资源配置方面,企业可以根据不同作业的成本和利润,合理安排资源的使用和分配;在产品开发方面,企业可以根据不同作业的成本和利润,决定是否继续开发或停产一些产品。
成本会计英文术语成本会计中英文术语非正常毁损Abnormal spoilage生产成本法Absorption costing账户分析法Account analysis method 会计回报率Accounting rate of return 权责发生制下会计回报率Accrual accounting rate of return作业Activity作业基础的预算管理Activity-based budgeting作业成本法Activity-based costing作业管理Activity-based management 实际成本Actual cost实际成本法Actual costing调整分配率途径Adjusted allocation-rate approach允许的成本Allowable cost鉴定成本Appraisal costs拟构成本Artificial costs注意力导向Attention directing自治Autonomy平均成本Average cost平均等候时间Average waiting time 反冲成本法Backflush costing 平衡记分卡Balanced scorecard批次级成本Batch-level costs观念系统Belief systems标杆管理Benchmarking账面价值Book value瓶颈Bottleneck边界系统Boundary systems盈亏平衡点Breakeven point预算Budget预算成本Budgeted cost预算松弛Budgetary slack预算间接成本分配率Budgeted indirect-cost rate捆绑产品Bundled product业务功能成本Business function costs 副产品Byproducts资本预算Capital budgeting储囤成本Carrying costs现金预算Cash budget因果图Cause-and-effect diagram财务管理认证Certified in financial management注册管理会计师Certified management accountant财务总监Chief financial officer决定系数Coefficient of determination 共谋定价Collusive pricing共同成本Common cost完整往复成本Complete reciprocated costs合成单位Composite unit商讨会法Conference method遵循质量Conformance quality常数Constant固定毛利率NRV法Constant gross-margin percentage NRV method约束条件Constraint滚动预算Continuous budget, rolling budget贡献收益表Contribution income statement边际贡献Contribution margin单位边际贡献Contribution margin per unit边际贡献率Contribution margin percentage边际贡献比例Contribution margin ratio 控制Control控制图Control chart可控性Controllability可控成本Controllable cost主计长Controller加工成本Conversion costs成本Cost成本会计Cost accounting成本会计标准委员会Cost accounting standards board成本汇集Cost accumulation成本分配Cost allocation成本分配基础Cost-allocation base成本分配基础Cost-application base成本归集Cost assignment成本-收益权衡Cost-benefit approach 成本中心Cost center成本动因Cost driver成本估计Cost estimation成本函数Cost function成本层级Cost hierarchy成本流入Cost incurrence成本领先Cost leadership成本管理Cost management成本对象Cost object资本成本Cost of capital产品制造成本Cost of goods manufactured成本库Cost pool成本预测Cost predictions成本追溯Cost tracing质量成本Costs of quality, quality costs 本量利分析Cost-volume-profit (CVP) analysis累计平均时间学习模型Cumulative average-time learning model当前成本Current cost客户成本层级Customer cost hierarchy 客户生命周期成本Customer life-cycle costs客户盈利分析Customer-profitability analysis客户回应时间Customer-response time 客户服务Customer service分权Decentralization决策模型Decision model决策表Decision table 经营杠杆水平Degree of operating leverage分母水平Denominator level生产数量差异Denominator-level variance, Output-level overhead variance, Production-volume variance 因变量Dependent variable产品或服务设计Design of products, services, or processes设计质量Design quality设计锁定成本Designed-in costs, locked-in costs诊断控制系统Diagnostic control systems差异成本Differential cost差异收入Differential revenue直接分配法Direct allocation method直接成本法Direct costing成本对象的直接成本Direct costs of a cost object直接生产人工成本Direct manufacturing labor costs直接材料成本Direct material costs直接材料存货Direct material inventory直接材料混合差异Direct material mix variance直接材料产量差异Direct material yield variance直接法Direct method折现率Discount rate现金流量折现法Discounted cash flow (DCF) methods酌量性成本Discretionary costs发送Distribution减少规模Downsizing向下需求旋转Downward demand spiral双重定价Dual pricing双成本分配率法Dual-rate cost-allocation method, dual-rate method倾销Dumping次优化决策制定Dysfunctional decision making, Incongruent decision making, suboptimal decision making经济订单数量Economic order quantity (EOQ)经济增加值Economic value added有效性Effectiveness效率Efficiency效率差异Efficiency variance, usage variance努力Effort 技术成本Engineered costs约当产量Equivalent units事项Event预期货币价值Expected monetary value, expected value经验曲线Experience curve外部失败成本External failure cost设施支持成本Facility-sustaining costs 工厂间接费用Factory overhead costs有利差异Favorable variance反馈Feedback财务主管Finance director财务会计Financial accounting财务预算Financial budget财务计划模型Financial planning models产成品存货Finished goods inventory先进先出分步法First-in, first-out (FIFO) process-costing method固定成本Fixed cost固定间接费用弹性预算差异Fixed overhead flexible-budget variance固定间接费用耗费差异Fixed overhead spending variance弹性预算Flexible budget弹性预算差异Flexible-budget variance 产品全部成本Full costs of the product 目标一致性Goal congruence毛利率Gross margin percentage增长构成Growth component高低法High-low method同质的成本库Homogenous cost pool 基本报酬率Hurdle rate混合成本核算系统Hybrid costing system空置时间Idle time假设成本Imputed costs增量成本Incremental cost增量成本分配法Incremental cost-allocation method增量收入Incremental revenue增量收入分配法Incremental revenue-allocation method增量单位时间学习模型Incremental unit-time learning model自变量Independent variable成本对象的间接成本Indirect costs of a cost object间接成本分配率Indirect-cost rate 间接制造成本Indirect manufacturing costs工业工程法Industrial engineering method, Work-measurement method通货膨胀Inflation价格差异Input-price variance, price variance, rate variance内制Insourcing检验点Inspection point管理会计师协会Institute of Management Accountants交互式控制系统Interactive control systems截距项Intercept中间产品Intermediate product内部失败成本Internal failure costs内含报酬率法Internal rate-of-return (IRR) method产品存货成本Inventoriable costs存货管理Inventory management投资Investment投资中心Investment center批次Job分批成本记录Job-cost record, job-cost sheet分批法Job-costing system联合成本Joint costs联产品Joint products即时制生产Just-in-time (JIT) production, lean production即时制采购Just-in-time (JIT) purchasing改进法预算Kaizen budgeting人工时间记录Labor-time record学习曲线Learning curve生命周期预算Life-cycle budgeting生命周期成本法Life-cycle costing业务管理Line management线形成本函数Linear cost function线性规划Linear programming主产品Main product自产/外购决策Make-or-buy decisions 管理会计Management accounting例外管理Management by exception 管理控制系统Management control system制造单元Manufacturing cells生产周期时间Manufacturing cycle time, Manufacturing lead time 分配的制造费用Manufacturing overhead allocated, Manufacturing overhead applied制造类企业Manufacturing-sector companies安全边际Margin of safety市场营销Marketing市场分额差异Market-share variance 市场规模差异Market-size variance全面预算Master budget全面预算生产能力利用Master-budget capacity utilization材料需求规划Materials requirements planning用料单Materials-requisition record商业类企业Merchandising-sector companies混合成本Mixed cost, semivariable cost 道德风险Moral hazard动机Motivation多重共线性Multicollinearity多变量回归Multiple regression净利润Net income净现值法Net present value (NPV) method净可实现值法Net realizable value (NPV) method名义回报率Nominal rate of return非线性成本函数Nonlinear cost function非价值增加成本Nonvalue-added cost 正常生产能力利用Normal capacity utilization正常成本法Normal costing正常毁损Normal spoilage目标函数Objective function准时表现On-time performance一次性特殊订单One-time-only special order经营预算Operating budget营业部门Operating department营业利润Operating income经营杠杆Operating leverage经营Operation经营成本核算系统Operation-costing system机会成本Opportunity cost资本机会成本Opportunity cost of capital采购订单成本Ordering costs 组织架构Organization structure结果Outcomes产出单位成本Output unit-level costs外部采购Outsourcing分配过多的间接成本Overabsorbed indirect costs, Overapplied indirect costs, overallocated indirect costs加班奖金Overtime premium帕累托图Pareto Diagram局部生产力Partial productivity回收期法Payback method最大负荷定价Peak-load pricing完全竞争市场Perfectly competitive market期间成本Period costs实物计量法Physical measure method计划Planning现实的生产能力Practical capacity掠夺性定价Predatory pricing预防成本Prevention costs转入成本Previous department costs, transferred-in costs价格折扣Price discount区别定价Price discrimination价格恢复构成Price-recovery component主要成本Prime costs预测报表Pro forma statements概率Probability概率分布Probability distribution问题解决Problem solving分步成本核算系统Process-costing system产品Product产品成本Product cost产品成本互补Product-cost cross-subsidization产品差异化Product differentiation产品生命周期Product life cycle产品组合决策Product mix decisions 成本高计的产品Product overcosting 产品支持成本Product-sustaining costs 成本少计的产品Product undercosting 生产Production生产部门Production department生产量水平Production-denominator level生产力Productivity 生产力构成Productivity component 利润中心Profit center按比例分配Proration采购订单提前量Purchasing-order lead time采购成本Purchasing costsPV图PV graph定性因素Qualitative factors质量Quality定量因素Quantitative factors真实回报率Real rate of return交互分配法Reciprocal allocation method, reciprocal method业务流程再造Reengineering精练化成本系统Refined costing system回归分析Regression analysis相关成本Relevant costs相关范围Relevant range相关收入Relevant revenues再订购点Reorder point要求的回报率Required rate of return 研发Research and development剩余收益Residual income剩余项Residual term责任会计Responsibility accounting 责任中心Responsibility center投资报酬率Return on investment收入分配Revenue allocation收入中心Revenue center收入动因Revenue driver收入对象Revenue object收入Revenues返工Rework合适规模Rightsizing安全库存Safety stock销售组合Sales mix销售组合差异Sales mix variance销售数量差异Sales-quantity variance 分离点销售价值法Sales value at splitoff method销售数额差异Sales-volume variance 业务记录Scorekeeping废料Scrap销售价格差异Selling-price variance 敏感性分析Sensitivity analysis可分离成本Separable costs 阶梯法Sequential allocation method, step-down allocation method, step-down method顺序追溯Sequential tracing服务部门Service department, supporting department服务类企业Service-sector companies 服务支持成本Service-sustaining costs 单变量回归Simple regression单一成本分配率法single-rate cost-allocation method, single-rate method 斜率系数Slope coefficient原始凭证Source document设定分析Specification analysis分离点Splitoff point毁损Spoilage人事管理Staff management单一个体成本分配法Stand-alone cost-allocation method单一个体收入分配法Stand-alone revenue-allocation method标准Standard标准成本Standard cost标准成本法Standard costing估计系数标准差Standard error of the estimation coefficient标准投入Standard input标准价格Standard price静态预算Static budget静态预算差异Static budget variance阶梯式成本函数Step cost function脱销成本Stockout costs战略成本管理Strategic cost management战略Strategy沉没成本Sunk costs超级变动成本法Super-variable costing, throughput costing供应链Supply chain单位目标成本Target cost per unit单位目标营业利润Target operating income per unit目标价格Target price目标投资回报率Target rate of return on investment理论生产能力Theoretical capacity约束理论Theory of constraints物料贡献Throughput contribution时间动因Time driver 货币时间价值Time value of money全要素生产力Total factor productivity (TFP)全部间接费用差异Total-overhead variance转移价格Transfer price触发点Trigger point不确定性Uncertainty分配不足的间接成本underabsorbed indirect costs, underapplied indirect costs, underallocated indirect costs不利差异Unfavorable variance单位成本Unit cost未用生产能力Unused capacity价值增加成本Value-added cost价值链Value chain价值工程Value engineering变动成本Variable cost变动成本法Variable costing变动间接费用效率差异Variable overhead efficiency variance变动间接费用弹性预算差异Variable overhead flexible-budget variance变动间接费用耗费差异Variable overhead spending variance差异Variance加权平均的分步法Weighted-averageprocess-costing method在产品存货Work-in-process inventory 在产品Work-in-process。
1、ABC的发展ABC是Activity-Based Costing的英文缩写,即我们通常所说的作业成本法。
它以作业为中心,通过对作业成本的确认和计量,对所有作业活动追踪地动态反映,为尽可能消除“不增值作业”,改进“可增值作业”及时提供有用信息,促使损失、浪费减少到最低限度,提高决策、计划、控制的科学性和有效性,促进企业管理水平的不断提高。
作业成本法的研究最早可追溯到本世纪四十年代初。
当时最早提出的概念是“作业会计”(Activity-Based Accounting或Activity Accounting)。
而最早从理论和实践上探讨作业会计的是美国会计学家埃里克·科勒(Eric Kohler)教授。
科勒教授曾任教于美国的西北大学、俄亥俄州立大学和明尼苏达大学,并担任《会计评论》主编达15年之久。
1941年,科勒教授在<<会计论坛>>杂志发表论文首次对作业、作业账户设置等问题进行了讨论,并提出“每项作业都设置一个账户”。
科勒教授在文章中指出:“作业就是一个组织单位对一项工程、一个大型建设项目、一项规划以及一项重要经营的各个具体活动所做出的贡献”。
第二位研究“作业会计”的是乔治·斯托布斯(George.J.Staubus)教授。
在他撰写的会计文献中,Activity Accounting 和Activity Costing经常混用。
他坚持认为:会计是一个信息系统,“作业会计”是一种和决策有用性目标相联系的会计。
研究作业会计首先应明确“作业”、“成本”和“会计目标—-决策有用性”三个概念。
1971年乔治·斯托布斯教授在具有重大影响的<<作业成本计算和投入产出会计>>一书中,对“作业”、“成本”、“作业成本计算”等概念作了全面阐述。
80年代初、中期,大批西方会计学者开始对传统的成本会计系统进行全面的反思。
先进制造系统的推广普及,准时制(JIT)由日本而起转而对整个西方公司经营管理思想的冲击,传统管理思想和管理方法技术的巨大变革,促使大批西方会计学者对传统的成本会计系统进行了重新审视,作业成本法成为会计学界研究的热点问题。
英语参考资料一、英语缩写及对应中文ABC: 作业制成本制度(Activity-Based Costing)ABB: 实施作业制预算制度(Activity-Based Budgeting)ABM: 作业制成本管理(Activity-Base Management)APS: 先进规画与排程系统(Advanced Planning and Scheduling)ASP: 应用程序服务供货商(Application Service Provider)ATP: 可承诺量(Available To Promise)BOM: 物料清单(Bill Of Material)BPR: 企业流程再造(Business Process Reengineering)BSC: 平衡记分卡(Balanced ScoreCard)BTF: 计划生产(Build To Forecast)BTO: 订单生产(Build To Order)CPM: 要径法(Critical Path Method)CRM: 客户关系管理(Customer Relationship Management)CRP: 产能需求规划(Capacity Requirements Planning)CTO: 客制化生产(Configuration To Order)DBR: 限制驱导式排程法(Drum-Buffer-Rope)DRP: 运销资源计划(Distribution Resource Planning)DSS: 决策支持系统(Decision Support System)EC: 设计变更/工程变更(Engineer Change)EC: 电子商务(Electronic Commerce)EDI: 电子资料交换(Electronic Data Interchange)EIS: 主管决策系统(Excutive Information System)EOQ: 基本经济订购量(Economic Order Quantity)ERP: 企业资源规划(Enterprise Resource Planning)FMS: 弹性制造系统(Flexible Manufacture System)FQC: 成品品质管制(Finish or Final Quality Control)IPQC: 制程品质管制(In-Process Quality Control)IQC: 进料品质管制(Incoming Quality Control)JIT: 实时管理(Just In Time)KM: 知识管理(Knowledge Management)L4L: 逐批订购法(Lot-for-Lot)LTC: 最小总成本法(Least Total Cost)LUC: 最小单位成本(Least Unit Cost)MES: 制造执行系统(Manufacturing Execution System)MPS: 主生产排程(Master Production Schedule)MRP: 物料需求规划(Material Requirement Planning)MRPⅡ: 制造资源计划(Manufacturing Resource Planning)OEM: 委托代工(Original Equipment Manufacture)ODM: 委托设计与制造(Original Design & Manufacture)OLAP: 线上分析处理(On-Line Analytical Processing)OLTP: 线上交易处理(On-Line Transaction Processing)OPT: 最佳生产技术(Optimized Production Technology)OQC: 出货品质管制(Out-going Quality Control)PDCA: PDCA管理循环(Plan-Do-Check-Action)PDM: 产品数据管理系统(Product Data Management)PERT: 计画评核术(Program Evaluation and Review Technique)POH: 预估在手量(Project on Hand)QCC: 品管圈(Quality Control Circle)RCCP: 粗略产能规划(Rough Cut Capacity Planning)ROP: 再订购点(Re-Order Point)SCM: 供应链管理(Supply Chain Management)SFC: 现场控制(Shop Floor Control)SIS: 策略信息系统(Strategic Information System)SPC: 统计制程管制(Statistic Process Control)TOC: 限制理论(Theory of Constraints)TQC: 全面品质管制(Total Quality Control)TQM: 全面品质管理(Total Quality Management)WIP: 在制品(Work In Process)APQP: 产品质量先期策划和控制计划(Advanced Product Quality Planning and Control Plan )PPAP: 生产件批准程序(Production Part Approval Process)FMEA: 潜在失效模式及后果分析(Potential Failure Mode and Effects Analysis,)SPC : 统计过程控制(Statistical Process Control)OEM: Original Equipment ManufacturerANOVA : 方差分析法(Analysis of Variance)DFMEA : 设计失效模式及后果分析(Design Failure Mode and Effects Analysis)DOE : 试验设计(Design of Experiment)GR&R : 量具的重复性和再现性(Gage Repeatability and Reproducibility)PFMEA : 过程失效模式及后果分析(Process Failure Mode and Effect Analysis)QSR: 质量体系要求(Quality System Requirement)QFD : 质量功能展开(Quality Function Deployment)BOM : 物料清单(Bill of Material)Cpk: 稳定过程的能力指数(Capability for stable process)LCL : 下控制限(Lower Control Limit)UCL : 上控制限(Upper Control Limit)LSL : 工程规范下限(Lower Specification Limit)X(—)--R图: 均值一极差图(Average-Range Chart)Mistake Proofing: 防错ETA : 预计到达(Estimate to be arrive)PO: 定单(Purchase order)M/C : 机器(machine)RFQ : 报价需求(Request for quotation)MFI : 熔融流动指数(Melt flow index)FAI : 全尺寸检测报告(First article inspection)COC : 材质证明(Certificate of compliance)ALT : 加速老化试验(Accelerated life test)CRR : 承认书(Component review report)OT: 加班(Over time)CAP : 矫正计划(Corrective action plan)R&D : 研发(Research and Development)ASAP: 尽快(As soon as possible)ECN: 工程更改通知(Engineering change notice)DCN: 设计更改通知(Design change notice)OTD: 准时交货(On time delivery)二、日常办公英语总经理办公室General manager’s office 模具部Tooling department项目部Project department 品质部Quality department计划部Plan department制造部Manufacture departmentKeypad产品部Keypad departmentIMD 产品部IMD department五金部Metal stamping department设计科Design section冲压车间Stamping workshop电镀车间Plating workshop物控科Production material control section 计划科Plan section仓务科Warehouse section商务科Business section品质规划科quality plan sectionIQC科IQC sectionIPQC科IPQC sectionOQC科OQC section检测中心measurement center项目规划科Project plan section项目XX科Project section XX试模科Mold test section成本科Cost section设备科Facility section采购科Purchase section综合办General affairs office编程科Programming section 模具工程科Tooling engineering section 模具装配车间Mold assembly workshop 文控中心Document control center (DCC) 注塑车间Injection workshop喷涂车间Spray painting workshop装配车间Assembly workshop总经理General manager (GM)经理managerXX部门经理Manager of XX department 原料库Raw material warehouse半成品库Semi-finished product warehouse成品库Finished product warehouse科长section chief主任chief部门主管department head主管, 线长supervisor组长Foreman, forelady秘书secretary文员clerk操作员operator助理assistant职员staff三、专业英语名词超声波焊接ultrasonic welding 塑胶件Plastic parts塑材Raw parts喷涂件Painted parts装配件Assembly parts零件Component原料Raw material油漆Paint稀释剂Thinner油墨Ink 物料编号part number注塑模具injection mold冲压模具Stamping tool模架mold base定模座板Fixed clamp plate A板A plateB板B plate支承板support plate方铁spacer plate回位销Return pin导柱Guide pin动模座板Moving clamp plate 顶针ejector pin单腔模具single cavity mold 多腔模具multi-cavity mold浇口gate合模力clamping force锁模力locking force开裂crack循环时间cycle time老化aging螺杆screw镶件Insert主流道sprue分流道runner浇口gate直浇口direct gate点浇口pin-point gate测浇口edge gate潜伏浇口submarine gate浇口套sprue bush流道板runner plate排气槽vent分型线(面)parting line定模Fixed mold动模movable mold型腔cavity凹模cavity plate,凸模core plate 斜销angle pin滑块slide拉料杆sprue puller定位环locating ring脱模斜度draft滑动型芯slide core螺纹型芯threaded core热流道模具hot-runner mold熔合纹weld line三板式模具three plate mold脱模ejection脱模剂release agent注射能力shot capacity注射速率injection rate注射压力injection pressure保压时间holding time闭模时间closing time电加工设备Electron Discharge Machining 数控加工中心CNC machine center万能铁床Universal milling machine平面磨床Surface grinding machine万能摇臂钻床Universal radial movable driller立式钻床Vertical driller倒角chamfer键Key键槽keyway间距pitch快速成型模Rapid prototype tool (RPT)数控加工numerical control machining原材料raw material主要材料primary material; direct material 辅助材料auxiliary material; indirect material 代用材料substituent 易损材料quick-wear material 废料waste material型材section板材plate棒材bar stock铸件casting锻件forgings焊接件weldment模压件molded parts冲压件stamping合格品accepted product conforming article 不合格品: defective unit non conforming article废品discard返修品rewotking parts样品specimen ; sample工件workpiece配套件(配件)fitting part备品(备件)spare part附件accessory零件part部件subassembly标准件standard part外购件purchased part外协件teamwork part 易损件: quick-wear part试件testing part一般特性general character重要特性important character锻造forging铸造casting钳加工bench work焊接welding铆接riveting热处理heat treatment机械加工machining冷作cold work冲压stamping压力加工mechanical metal processing 塑料成型加工plastic processing电加工electric machining电火花加工electrical discharge machining(EDM)装配assembly包装packaging四、品管专业名词SPC statistic process control品质保证Quality Assurance(QA)品质控制Quality control(QC)来料检验IQC Incoming quality control 巡检IPQC In-process quality control 校对calibration环境试验Environmental test光泽gloss拉伸强度tensile strength盐雾实验salt spray test翘曲warp比重specific gravity 疲劳fatigue撕裂强度tear strength缩痕sink mark耐久性durability抽样sampling样品数量sample sizeAQL Acceptable Quality level 批量lot size抽样计划sampling plan抗张强度Tensile Strength抗折强度Flexural Strength 硬度Rigidity色差Color Difference涂镀层厚度Coating Thickness导电性能Electric Conductivity粘度viscosity附着力adhesion耐磨Abrasion resistance尺寸Dimension(喷涂)外观问题Cosmetic issue不合格品Non-conforming product 限度样板Limit sample质量手册Quality Manual质量计划Quality Plan质量策划Quality Planning质量记录Quality Records原始数据Raw Data 反应计划Reaction Plan返修Repai返工Rework现场Site分承包方Subcontractors产品product质量quality质量要求quality requirement顾客满意customer satisfaction质量管理体系quality management system 质量方针quality policy质量目标quality objective质量管理quality management质量控制quality control质量保证quality assurance五、生产工艺专业名词注塑机injection machine冲床Punch machine嵌件注塑Insert molding双色注塑Double injection molding 薄壁注塑Thin wall molding膜内注塑IMD molding ( In-mold decoration)移印Tampo printing丝印Silk screen printing热熔Heat staking超声熔接Ultrasonic welding (USW)尼龙nylon黄铜brass青铜bronze紫(纯)铜copper料斗hopper麻点pit 配料compounding涂层coating飞边flash缺料Short mold烧焦Burn mark缩水Sink mark气泡Bubbles破裂Crack熔合线Welding line流痕Flow mark银条Silver streak黑条Black streak表面光泽不良Lusterless 表面剥离Pelling翘曲变形Deformation 脏圬Stain mark油污Oil mark蓝黑点Blue-black mark 顶白Pin mark拉伤Scratch限度样品Limit sample 最佳样品Golden sample 预热preheating再生料recycle material 机械手Robot 机器人Servo robot试生产Trial run; Pilot run (PR) 量产mass production切料头Degate产能Capacity能力Capability参数Parameter二次加工Secondary process六、物流控制专业名词保质期shelf lifeABC分类法ABC Classification装配Assembly平均库存Average Inventory批号Batch Number批量生产Mass Production提货单Bill of Lading物料清单Bill of Material采购员Buyer检查点Check Point有效日期Date Available修改日期Date Changed结束日期Date Closed截止日期Date Due生产日期Date in Produced库存调整日期Date Inventory Adjust作废日期D ate Obsolete收到日期Date Received交付日期Date Released需求日期Date Required需求管理Demand Management需求Demand工程变更生效日期Engineering Change Effect Date 呆滞材料分析Excess Material Analysis 完全跟踪Full Pegging在制品库存In Process Inventory投入/产出控制Input/ Output Control检验标识Inspection ID库存周转率Inventory Carry Rate准时制生产Just-in-time (JIT)看板Kanban人工工时Labor Hour最后运输日期Last Shipment Date提前期Lead Time负荷Loading仓位代码Location Code仓位状况Location Status批量标识Lot ID批量编号Lot Number批量Lot Size机器能力Machine Capacity机器加载Machine Loading制造周期时间Manufacturing Cycle Time 制造资源计划Manufacturing Resource Planning (MRP II)物料成本Material Cost物料发送和接收Material Issues andReceipts物料需求计划Material Requirements Planning (MRP)现有库存量On-hand Balance订单输入Order Entry零件批次Part Lot零件编号Part Number (P/N)零件Part领料单Picking List领料/提货Picking产品控制Product Control产品线Production Line采购订单跟踪Purchase Order Tracking需求量Quantity Demand毛需求量Quantity Gross安全库存量Safety Stock在制品Work in Process零库存Zero Inventories审核Audit能力Capability能力指数Capability Indices控制计划Control Plans纠正措施Corrective Action文件Documentation作业指导书Standard operation procedure (SOP); Work instruction不合格品Nonconformance不合格Nonconformity每百万零件不合格数Defective Parts Per Million, DPPM预防措施Preventive Action程序Procedures过程流程图Process Flow Diagram, Process Flow Chart 组织organization顾客customer供方supplier过程process服务service设计与开发design and development: 特性characteristic可追溯性trace ability合格conformity缺陷defect纠正correction让步concession放行release报废scrap规范specification检验inspection试验test验证verification评审review测量measurement普通原因Common Cause均值Mean极差Range稳定性Stability计量型数据Variables Data变差Variation重复性Repeatability再现性Reproducibility稳定性Stability线性Linearity分辨率Resolution过程更改Process change质量功能展开QFD外观项目Appearance Item初始过程能力Preliminary Process Capability材料清单Bill of Material 设计确认Design Validation 设计验证Design Verification七、通用词语确保ensure构想construct会签con-sign功能Function机构organization外观appearance适用apply to作业流程Operation flow附件attachment商务人员business personnel汇总summarize指定相关人员designated personnel 新产品开发说明会new product development explanation meeting 拟定Prepare委托entrust认证qualify电子档Soft copy3D文件3D database移转Transfer执行ConductXXX申请单XXX Application form 客户要求Customer requirement启动Kick off评估Evaluation作业员Operator批准, 承认Approval合同评审Contract review可靠性Reliability 相关的Relevant程序Procedure制程Process流程图Flow chart产品Product生产Production资材Logistics责任Responsibility跟进Follow-up交付Delivery汇总Summarize外协加工subcontract指定相关人员designated personnel 编号number附件attachment产品名称Description周期循环时间Cycle time模具号Mold No,数量quantity ( Qt’y )备注remarkSAP号SAP No.客户Customer表单Form初步的Preliminary版本Version根本原因Root cause(喷漆)夹具Fixture(设备)小夹具Jig设备Equipment设施Facility送, 提交(样品)Submit责任部门,责任人Responsible by (大的)目标Objective(小的, 具体的)目标Target格式Format 上岗证Qualification card需求Requirement现场On site查检表Checklist试产pilot增值税VAT---value-added tax模具图面常见符号含义M,MC ―― 铣SP ―――― 基准点H ――― 热处理TYP ―――― 典型尺寸ELE ―― 镀铬RP ―――― 圆弧点DYE ―― 染黑CEN,CL ―― 中心线G ――― 磨TAN ―――― 切点PG ――― 光学曲线磨THR ―――― 穿孔JG ――― 坐标磨BOTT ――― 底面W/C,W ――线割TOP ―――― 顶面E,EDM―― 放电SYM ―――― 对称L ―――― 车T ――――― 厚度INT ――― 交点CB ―――― 沉孔C ―――― 倒角CLEAR ――― 间隙11。
本科毕业论文(设计)外文翻译外文出处International Advances in Economic Research,2001,7(1):133-146.外文作者Carles Gríful-Miquela原文:Activity-Based Costing Methodology for Third-Party LogisticsCompaniesThis paper will analyze the main costs that third-party logistics companies are facing and develops an activity-based costing methodology useful for this kind of company. It will examine the most important activities carried out by third-party distributors in both warehousing and transporting activities. However, the focus is mainly on the activity of distributing the product to the final receiver when this final receiver is not the customer of the third-party logistics company.IntroductionIn the last decade, development of third-party logistics companies has been very important. There are several reasons for such development, the most important being the trend to concentrate in the core business by manufacturing companies and new technological advances, In this context, conventional approaches to costing might generate distorted information, This can result in making wrong decisions. When companies realize this potential danger, the use of activity-based costing (ABC) methodologies increases within third-party logistics.Costing Methodology: Definition of the Cost Model and Critique of the Conventional ApproachDefinition of the Cost ModelIt is first necessary to define what a cost model is. This can be done through analysis of the main functions that any cost model should perform [Kaplan and Cooper, 1998]:1) valuation of inventory and measurement of the cost of goods and services sold for financial purposes;2) estimation of the cost of activities, products, services, and customers; and3) provide economic feedback to managers and staff in general about process efficiency.From this definition, a cost model might be analyzed as the tool that companies use in order to have a proper understanding about the cost to run their businesses. One of the purposes of a cost model is to gather and analyze data generated in the company in order to gain useful information for making decisions. Therefore, the usefulness of a cost model may be evaluated depending on its capacity to generate the right information to make the right managerial decisions.Evolution of Cost ModelsThe evolution of cost systems has not been a linear and continuous process [Johnson and Kaplan, 1987]. Indeed, by the 1920s, companies had developed almost all the management accounting procedures that have been used up to the present day. Furthermore, between 1925 and 1980, virtually no new ideas have affected the design and use of cost management systems. The same concepts always appear: break-even analysis, cost-volume-profit analysis, direct costing, and fixed and variable cost estimates. The idea that conventional accounts are only finance oriented and simply describe historical inputs is shared among other authors of costing methodology [Bellis- Jones and Develin, 1995].Problems with Conventional ApproachesAs a result of the described evolution of cost models, the situation at the beginning of the 1980s was that the actual management accounting systems provided few benefits to organizations. Normally, the reported information not only inhibited good decision making by managers, but actually encouraged bad decisions [Johnson and Kaplan, 1987]. The main reason was the use of an obsolete tool in an extremely different and more complex and competitive environment.The main problem that conventional cost models faced was the allocation of overhead by products on the basis of either direct labor or machine hour content in themanufacturing environment. This problem was growing at the same time that direct labor and machine hour contents of many products and services fell, while overhead costs increased. Conventional costing ignores important differences between products and services, markets and customers, which incur different overhead costs. This was the starting point in carefully analyzing the conventional cost models and in criticizing them because of their uselessness in accurately explaining the cost of products. Lately, the fact that the same issues apply to the service sector has been noticed.Traditional methods of cost accounting showed some other weaknesses [Bellis-Jones and Develin, 1995]. That is, companies do not know whether their products or services are profitable and they cannot distinguish profitable from unprofitable customers. In addition, traditional methods focus on the short term at the expense of the long term.A Description of ABC MethodologyThe problems that conventional costing methodologies raised were the main reason for developing a new theoretical approach to this subject. Johnson and Kaplan are considered the inventors of ABC, although they do not use this terminology at the beginning of their studies [Johnson and Kaplan, 1987]. The first time the concept of ABC appears is in a later article [Cooper and Kaplan, 1988]. The analysis of cost and profitability of individual products, services, and customers represents a critical issue that companies were concerned with and one where ABC tries to help. The primary focus was to ask what is important for the organization, and what information is needed for management planning and control functions. Finally, useful information for managerial purposes should not be extracted only from a system designed primarily to satisfy external reporting and auditing requirements (financial information). It is necessary to design systems consistent with the technology of the organization, its product strategy, and its organizational structure.Definition of ABCIn literature there are several definitions of ABC. The definition here shows the ABC philosophy [Hicks, 1992] briefly and clearly:"Activity-based costing is a cost accounting concept based on the premise that products (and/or services) require an organization to perform activities and that those activities require an organization to incur costs. In activity-based costing, systems are designed so that any costs that cannot be attributed directly to a product, flow into the activities that make them necessary. The cost of each activity then flows to the product(s) that make the activity necessary based on their respective consumption of that activity."Main Differences Between Conventional Cost Models and ABCThe most important difference between conventional cost models and ABC is the treatment of non-volume-related overhead costs. The use of direct labor-based overhead allocation methods were appropriate in the past when direct labor was the principal component of manufacturing cost, but not today. In the ABC approach, many overheads are related to specific activities to avoid distortions in product and service costs.Another difference is the treatment of unused capacity. ABC describes resources that are used by activities, but conventional accounts describe resources that are supplied. The difference between the two is excess capacity. If excess capacity is allocated to products, services, or customers, there is risk of a "dead spiral," as defined by Bellis-Jones and Develin [1995]. This means that the company should be aware of which costs their customers really generate and not allocate the excess of capacity to avoid the risk of overpricing its products or services.Advantages and Benefits of the ABC ApproachSeveral authors have described the main advantages and benefits of using ABC [Innes and Mitchell, 1990; Bellis-Jones and Develin, 1995; Malmi, 1997]. The most important are as follows:1) ABC provides more accurate product and service costing, particularly where non- volume-related overheads are significant.2) By using ABC, it is possible to analyze costs by areas of managerial responsibility and customers. ABC helps to recognize the way in which customers directly affect the cost structure of the business and therefore helps to analyzecustomer profitability.3) ABC provides a better understanding of cost behavior as well as identifying the costs of complexity, variety, and change inherent in both the kind of service offered and customer-specific requirements.4) ABC focuses on the activities that add value, which are those activities that create value from the customer's point of view. On the other hand, the company should focus on those non-value-added activities and try to eliminate them, although some of the non-value-added activities are necessary to enable value-adding activities to occur.5) ABC is useful in performing capacity analysis. ABC measures the costs of resources used rather than the costs of resources supplied, the difference being excess capacity. It would be wrong to allocate unused capacity to the customers. To perform this analysis, the use of practical capacity is suggested, which means the capacity reflecting the maximum level at which the organization can operate efficiently.6) ABC reduces uncertainty and provides a more solid basis for strategic decisions. Therefore, the success of ABC might not depend only on the results of the analysis, but on its ability to provide a correct diagnosis of the company's situation. Disadvantages and Problems of the ABC ApproachThe disadvantages extracted from a study based on the answers of several companies after one year of using ABC [Cobb et al., 1992] regarded the amount of work involved, difficulties in collecting accurate data, and the fact that cost management was difficult because several activities cross department boundaries. Additionally, implementation is very time consuming, requiring not only gathering and processing of data, but also interpreting the results. Even though all of the former problems have been overcome with the development of ABC methodology and the increase in using ABC models by companies in different manufacturing and service industries, it is always necessary to be aware of these problems when developing such a model.ABC for LogisticsEven though literature mentions that ABC applies to all types of businessorganizations in the service industry, including warehousing and distribution providers [Hicks, 1992], the author could not specifically find the case of a third-party logistics provider as far as the transport operations are concerned. The main issue is to properly allocate the transport operations costs to the consignors, which are the real customers of the company.4 Furthermore, in the literature about transportation costs [Sussams, 1992], the customer is always the final consignee, and the costs are always an external variable.In recent years and because of the increasing importance of logistics costs within companies, the first studies analyzing the utility of the activity-based approach on logistics were undertaken [Pohlen and LaLonde, 1994; LaLonde and Ginter, 1996; LaLonde and Pohlen, 1996]. The main benefits and difficulties related to the implementation of ABC for logistics departments are almost the same as those described earlier.Analysis of OverheadsThe analysis of overheads is the least obvious and the most complicated to perform. Normally, overheads are related to several activities (or nonactivities), and it is necessary to carry out in-depth studies during long periods of time in order to find out the right links between overheads and products, services, or customers. For this reason, the recommendation is to be as accurate as possible in order to link overheads with consignors, avoiding the traditional approach to link, in the first instance, overheads with activities. This is very important when there is an important lack of time for developing such a costing methodology, despite the fact that this is not a pure ABC approach. The need to cope with overheads appears on both the warehouse and transport side of the model.ConclusionIt is very difficult (and not always recommended) to develop a pure ABC model because the particular characteristics of a single third-party logistics company entailed the use of slightly different ways to allocate several costs in some instances, which a purely ABC approach would not be able to do. Despite this fact, the final model for both sides of the third-party company operations (warehouse and transport operations)has been mainly described by taking ABC analysis into account. Only when ABC does not present an answer to a specific problem should another way be considered to allocate the costs.It is recommended that such a model should be developed by using a spreadsheet because it fulfills the needs of the company, it is a very powerful tool, and it is also very user-friendly. Furthermore, the model developed may be capable of performing what-if analysis in order to simulate actual or potential situations the third-party company might face. These what-if analyses may be used in different ways such as in the analysis of potential consignors, in the requirement of different service levels by the current consignors, and to perform the analysis of structural changes in the third-party logistics company.Finally, note that the costs of the model should not exceed its benefits. In other words, it is necessary to cope with the trade-off between a model that is so simple that it fails toprovide enough information to support the company's decisions and a model that is excessively costly to design, implement, and operate [Brimson, 1991]. This should always be taken into account, trying to achieve a happy medium between simplicity and excessive sophistication.Source: Carles Gríful-Miquela.Activity-based costing methodology for third-party logistics companies[J].International Advances in EconomicResearch,2001,7(1): 133-146.译文:第三方物流企业的作业成本法本文将分析第三方物流企业面临的主要成本问题并开发出适合于这一类企业的成本计算方法。
重庆理工大学文献翻译二级学院应用技术学院班级 112216101 学生姓名陈语宣学号 11221610117译文要求1、译文内容必须与课题(或专业内容相关,并需注明详细出处。
2、外文翻译译文不少于2000字;外文参考资料阅读量至少3篇(相当于10万外文字符以上。
3、译文原文(或复印件应附在译文后备查。
译文评阅导师评语(应根据学校“译文要求”,对学生外文翻译的准确性、翻译数量以及译文的文字表述情况等作具体的评价指导教师:年月日外文翻译译文作业成本法:仍然有用吗?资料来源:管理会计季刊,2011年春季作者:William Stratton, Denis Desroches, Raef Lawson, Toby Hatch在过去的几年里,顾问、从业者和学术研究者已经注意到,作业成本法(ABC已经发展到提高决策支持以及成本与利润核算系统的精度,但是预期结果往往不是很理想。
Robert S. Kaplan 和Steven R. Anderson 指出,许多公司丢弃了作业成本法,因为它没有抓住公司经营的复杂性,花费了很长时间去实施,建立和维护又太昂贵。
作业成本法在其他地方出现进一步的批评:在理论上作业成本法简单易懂,但是在实践中运用却是非常困难的。
它涉及“作业”定义,并试图判断每年需要使用多少费用,而且它必须定期进行检查。
很多公司有些厌倦了,所以放弃运用作业成本法。
在2001年的年度调查报告中,作业成本法在最广泛使用的管理工具中排行第11位,而到2008年已经下跌至22位。
作业成本法的应用研究反映了技术的不完善。
在Bain公司2005年和2007年度的调查报告中显示,作业成本管理(ABM的使用率为50%和52%,其使用效果满意度低于其他方法。
类似的研究结果刊登在SUNY-Albany大学, Hyperion和Pepperdine Study的研究(SHAPS调查指出:在同一时期,他们发现作业成本法的使用价值与其使用率一样处于下降趋势。
尽管这些研究得出很多负面结果,但是也有很多案例研究和报告中可以发现许多公司已经采用作业成本法,并报告了对其使用价值的满意度。
这些公司将运用作业成本法视为一种投资,他们认为值得花时间和资源。
进行这项研究的一个动机是为了寻求一个问题的答案:“成功实施作业成本法与没有实施这种方法的结果有什么区别?”贯穿整个价值链的成本与利润的测量方法成本分配到产品、客户或其他成本对象一直是一个棘手的问题。
在利润表的对外报告中,生产成本必须被分配到产品。
但是对于运营成本控制、战略决策和绩效评估的目的来说,许多公司在内部价值链还分配的其他功能费用。
用什么方法来衡量成本和整个价值链的利润,以及不同方法的使用功能有何区别?目前已确定的方法中最常用的类型为:(1实际成本核算(2定额成本核算(3标准成本核算(4作业成本核算成本核算方法的类型与操作系统一样多种多样,但是大多数公司都是从上面四种方法中选择核算方法的。
事实上,那些公司中大部分是使用以上这些方法中的一种。
通过调查,各种成本核算方法在整个价值链中的使用情况,我们可以得出以下结论:(1除了与生产有直接关系的费用外,很大一部分的成本是没有被分配到成本对象中的。
(2对于产品成本,标准成本核算方法仍然占有“最高使用率”,占42%。
(3与一般观点相反,作业成本法是贯穿整个价值链的,与标准成本法具有几乎相同的使用率。
作业成本法并不是核算产品生产成本的特殊方法。
至于作业成本法的整体满意度,我们的调查结果驳斥了作业成本法正越来越多地被遗弃的说法。
我们调研了141个公司使用或未使用作业成本法的情况。
其中,只有4个公司(占总数2.8%先前使用过后来不再使用;22个公司(15.6%考虑过运用作业成本法但没有执行。
为了探索更详细的情况,我们看看效益和对成本与利润核算系统的关注度。
效益和对成本与利润核算系统的关注度判断作业成本法的使用价值,有助于确定成本与利润的核算系统,同时利于作业成本法在企业运用的普及。
最常见的正面作用包括:(1有利于产品决策,例如价格的制定,产品设计和包装决策。
(2有助于对产品/服务盈利能力的分析。
(3有利于企业进行经营决策。
(4有利于执行预算、规划和绩效评估。
调查还显示,经理人都认为作业成本法为公司的成本与利润核算系统提供了各种各样的好处。
最起码的两个有利之处是:作业成本信息的及时获取和间接费用(间接成本的准确分配。
更多的争论是设计作业成本法能否准确地跟踪作业的成本,并分配到最终的成本对象,还有是否能够准确地跟踪管理费用,并将其分配到最终成本对象。
总成本分配和作业成本计量显然是经理们最关心的。
通过对作业成本法能否解决这两个问题的调查研究发现,只有四分之一的人认为作业成本法不能准确地追踪到产品或服务,而几乎70%使用作业成本法的企业同意作业成本法实现了这样的好处。
类似的结果适用于间接成本跟踪。
最后,近40%的企业认为作业成本法能够准确地跟踪管理费用,同样超过70%的用户从作业成本法思想中获益。
在成本核算系统中采用作业成本法,经理人最担心的是什么?运用作业成本法是否有助于缓解这些问题?下面是主要的情况,包括:(1是否还有更好的方式来分配成本。
(2这种方法不能反映资源是如何被消耗的(不能反映动因成本。
(3信息流通不及时。
(4系统更新困难。
企业运用作业成本法能够分担这些问题,它的使用方法也在某种程度上有助于缓解他们的成本核算系统管理人员的担忧。
作业成本法和成本分配:间接费用是如何被分配到成本对象的?作业成本法不仅仅是一种分配方法,与其他方法的主要区别在于如何积累和分配资源成本。
对受访者的调查发现,他们大多认为这种方法是用于分配间接费用的方法。
以下是目前使用的三种主要成本分配方法:(1平均分配:资源成本平均分配给所有消耗对象。
(2基于产出的分配:资源成本依据相关产出进行分配。
(3作业成本分配:首先确认耗用企业辅助资源的所有作业,资源成本累计形成作业成本库,这些成本被依据作业成本对象耗用的多少进行分配。
在受访者中,最流行的方法是基于产出的分配,其中60%的企业将这种方法作为他们企业成本分配的一部分。
第二个最常用的方法是作业成本法,使用率约为50%。
作业成本法被视为具有的价值的成本核算方法,当被问到什么样的组合分配方式是企业理想的分配制度时,受访的管理人员明显青睐于作业成本法,理想的成本核算系统需要运用作业成本思想。
目前,50%的受访企业认为作业成本法是理想的成本分配系统的组成部分。
在未来,这种比例还会增加。
决策支持与作业成本法决策支持系统主要是财务、运营和战略的成本与利润核算系统,。
如何运用作业成本法支持这三方面的决策?在比较了作业成本法和非作业成本法对决策支持的有用性之后发现,特定类型的成本计算方法支持特定类型的决策系统。
在一般情况下,作业成本法比非作业成本法提供了更高的决策支持水平。
这种支持水平涉及整个财务、运营和战略领域的决策范围。
此外,作业成本法能够更好地整合预算编制和规划过程。
这一切都表明,公司运用作业成本法能够更好地提供管理决策支持(作业成本管理。
产品与客户盈利能力的度量标准从战略角度看,任何一个决策支持系统的基本标准是产品与客户盈利能力的精确测量。
比如产品价格的制定,产品和客户结构,产品和客户合理化的战略决策是最至关重要的市场竞争力。
虽然多年来,产品的盈利能力一直是管理层主要的关注焦点。
无论采用哪种成本核算方法(作业成本法与非作业成本法,几乎所有公司都认为,应对产品与客户盈利情况同时加以衡量。
尽管大多数使用作业成本法的公司(近60%认为作业成本法支持产品和客户的盈利能力决策,而大部分非作业成本法的使用公司(约60%认为作业成本法不支持产品和客户的盈利能力决策。
ABC的支持在最近,作业成本法这种成本计算方法的价值及使用率已经成为从业人员和学者争论的主题。
在此之前的调查表明,作业成本法的使用率比过去几年已经提高了,并趋于稳定。
主要探讨的问题是,作业成本法的使用所创造的价值与其实施成本。
通过对作业成本法的使用率和作为成本与利润核算系统的相关问题的研究之后,得出的结果归纳如下:(1作业成本法运用于整个内部价值链,绝大多数的公司将继续使用这种方法。
(2接受调查的管理人员认为,在非作业成本法中缺乏准确的成本费用分配和作业成本信息流通不及时。
(3作业成本法可以减轻管理人员对成本分摊准确性,在分配和资源消耗之间的因果关系,获取成本/利润信息的及时性,以及更新系统的能力等方面的忧虑。
(4目前作业成本法的使用率和在理想制度下的使用优势预示着越来越多的公司将使用这种成本核算方法。
(5作业成本法能提供更大的财务、运营和战略决策支持。
(6作业成本法可以被更好地纳入预算和规划过程中。
(7作业成本法提供比非作业成本法更好的战略性产品/客户决策支持。
作业成本法在理论上几乎适用于任何行业,因为它能适应不同的管理水平。
然而,作业成本法在管理相对复杂的非服务性公司运用最有效。
管理复杂的公司容易发现到底哪种类型的成本核算方法更有利,因为在信息完全开放的时候,成本很难被用来理解和评价最大利益。
服务行业可能不适用作业成本法,因为这些行业的成本很难分配,没有一个可以识别的因果关系。
公司可以将作业成本法视为一种管理工具。
作业成本法的运用可能要付出昂贵的代价,它并不总是符合公认的会计原则,所以如果使用作业成本管理,公司不得不保留一个独立的系统进行跟踪成本是否符合一般公认会计原则。
在当今复杂的商业世界,作业成本法作为一种成本核算系统,可更精确地将成本分配到产品和部门。
我们的研究结果提供了充足的结论支持:作业成本法的确给管理者提供了更有意义的价值。
我们相信,使用作业成本法为公司提供了更优越的成本和盈利能力核算系统,现在是时候让更多的公司采用作业成本核算方法了。
原文Activity-based costing: is it still relevant?Material source: Management Accounting Quarterly, spring, 2011Author: William Stratton, Denis Desroches, Raef Lawson, Toby HatchOver the past several years, consultants, practitioners, and academic investigators have noticed that activity-based costing (ABC methods, developed to improve decision support and the accuracy of cost- and profit-measurement systems, too often have yielded less than the desired results. Robert S. Kaplan and Steven R. Anderson state, "Many companies abandoned activity-based costing because it did not capture the complexity of their operations, took too long to implement, and was too expensive to build and maintain.”Furthe r criticism of ABC appeared elsewhere. "Straightforward in theory,ABC proved notoriously difficult in practice. It involved defining 'activities' and trying to judge (often subjectively how much overhead each used. And it had to be done regularly. Companies got fed up, and many abandoned it. From 11th position in the 2001 annual survey of the most widely used management tools (Bain, it fell to 22nd place (in 2008."Studies of ABC use have reflected this dissatisfaction with the technique. The Bain & Company annual surveys in 2005 and 2007 reported use of activity-based management (ABM at 50% and 52%, respectively, with associated satisfaction scores below the average for all tools used. Similar results were reported in the SUNY-Albany, Hyperion, and Pepperdine Study (SHAPS surveys: During the same period, they found a decline in the perceived value of ABC compared to its usage.Despite the negative results of these studies, there are many case studies and anecdotal reports of organizations that have adopted ABC methods and reported satisfaction with the value they provide. These companies consider their ABC methods an investment worth the time and resources committed to them. One motive for conducting this research was to seek an answer to the question: "What distinguishes successful implementations of ABC methods from those that have not succeeded?"In order to study the use of ABC methods (and other issues related to the design and use of costing and profitability methods, we formed the Business Research and Analysis Group and conducted a survey sponsored by the Institute of Management Accountants (IMA and other professional associations.Cost and Profit Measurement Methods Across the Value ChainThe assignment of costs to products, customers, or other cost objects has always been a thorny issue. For external reporting, production costs must be assigned to products for both income and asset reporting purposes. For operational cost control, strategic decision-making, and performance measurement purposes, however, many organizations also assign costs from the other functions in the internal value chain.What methods are used to measure costs and profits across the value chain, and does their usage vary by function? We identified the most frequently used types of methods as:(1 Actual costing(2Normal costing(3Standard costing(4Activity-based costing.While the set of costing method types is as diverse as the kinds of operating systems, most organizations in the survey chose from this short list. In fact, most companies used more than one of these methods. A survey shows the use of these method types across the value chain. We can reach the following conclusions:(1With the exception of production-related costs, a significant proportion of costs is not assigned to cost objects.(2 For production costs, standard costing is still "king of the hill" with a usage rate of 42%.(3Contrary to common belief, ABC methods are used across the entire value chain at approximately the same rate. ABC is not a production-specific method.As to the overall satisfaction with the ABC method, our survey results refute many of the assertions that ABC increasingly is being abandoned. We asked 141 organizations to indicate their use or nonuse of ABC. Of these, only four (2.8% previously used ABC but no longer use it, and 22 (15.6% considered ABC but chose not to implement it. To explore the specifics in more detail, we looked at the benefits and concerns that respondents related about cost and profit measurement systems.Benefits and Concerns about Cost-profit-measurement SystemsIn order to judge the value of ABC, it is helpful to identify commonly reported benefits of cost-profit-measurement systems and their prevalence. The most frequently reported benefits include:(1Useful for product decisions, such as pricing, design, and outsourcing.(2 Helpful for product/service profitability analysis.(3 Helpful for making operational improvements.(4 Useful for performing budgeting, planning, and performance evaluation.Survey also shows that managers agree that ABC provide a wide variety of benefits for their cost-profit-measurement systems. The three lowest-scoring benefits relate to commonly claimed benefits of the ABC method: activity-cost information and accurate allocation of overhead (indirect costs. More disagreed than agreed that their system was able to accurately trace activity costs to final cost objects. In a similar way, more disagreed than agreed with the statement that their system could accurately trace overhead costs to final cost objects. Overhead allocation and activity-cost measurement are clearly of concern to managers. To investigate whether ABC methods address these issues, we recast the responses into two groups: ABC users and ABC nonusers. Survey makes it abundantly clear that ABC methods address these issues and constitutes strong evidence of the value of ABC methods. Only one in four nonusers agrees that the costs of activities are traced accurately to products or services, whereas almost 70% of ABC method users agree that this benefit is realized. Similar results apply to overhead cost tracing. Finally, less than 40% of ABC nonusers receive accurate costs of activities, while more than 70% of ABC users benefit from such cost knowledge.It is not surprising that the two benefits directly related to activities,the focus of ABC are realized to a greater extent in such systems, but overhead allocation to cost objects is important in non-ABC methods as well. The substantial difference in benefitsrealized from ABC makes it clear that ABC methods warrant serious consideration, especially in organizations with significant overhead costs.What are the main concerns of managers regarding their cost-measurement systems, and do ABC methods help alleviate these concerns? Survey identifies a variety of possible concerns and tells how users of ABC methods and non-ABC methods view each. The major concerns for both groups include:(1Need to find a better way to allocate costs.(2Allocations do not reflect how resources are used (lack of cause-effect.(3Information is not timely.(4Updating the system is difficult.While organizations that apply ABC methods share these concerns, the level of concern about these issues, is uniformly less than expressed by those that use non-ABC methods. This finding indicates that use of ABC methods at least somewhathelps alleviate managers' concerns with their cost-measurement systems. ABC and Cost Allocation: How Are Indirect Costs Being Assigned to Cost Objects? Although ABC is more than an allocation method, the primary attribute differentiating it from other methodologies is how it accumulates and allocates resource costs. Our survey asked respondents to identify the methods used to allocate indirect costs. We presented three major methods of allocation along with the option to specify other methodologies in use. These three methods are: (1Equal allocation: Resource cost is allocated equally to all objects that consume the resources. (2Output-based allocation: Resource cost is allocated according to an output-related allocation base. (3 ABC allocation: Resource costs are accumulated into activity cost pools. These cost pools are allocated to objects based on how much of the activity is consumed by the objects. Among those surveyed, the most popular method is output-based allocation, with 60% of organizations using this methodfor part of their allocations. The second most popular method is ABC, with a usage rate of just under 50%. ABC is viewed as having value, even among firms that do not currently use that methodology. When asked to specify what the mix of allocation methods would be in the organization's ideal allocation system, managers surveyed had a significant bias in favor of ABC: More than 87% of organizations' ideal costing systems would include some form of ABC. Given that such a high number of respondents envision including ABC as part of their ideal cost allocation system than currently do so (about 50%, adoption of ABC may increase in the future. Decision Support and ABC The major types of decisions that are supported by cost-profit-measurement systems are financial, operational, and strategic. How do ABC methods support these decisions compared to others? Survey compares the perceived usefulness of ABC and non-ABC methods to support these decisions. It contains the mean response, on a scale of 0 to 6, to the statement that a given type of costing method supports a given type of decision making. In general, ABC methods provide greater levels of decision support than do non-ABC methods. This improved level of support spans the spectrum of decisionmaking across financial, operational, and strategic areas. Furthermore, ABC methods are better integrated with budgeting and planning processes. All this indicates that companies using ABC feel better equipped to apply their results to management decision support (activity-based management. Product and Customer Profitability Metrics From a strategic perspective, an essential criterion for any decision support system is the accurate measurement of product and customer profitability. Strategic decisions such as pricing, product and customer mix, and product and customer rationalization are among the most vital to organizational competitiveness. Although product profitability has been the primary focus of management attention for many years, the identification of profitable customers has gained prominence recently. Regardless of the type of costing method used (ABC versus non-ABC, almost all companies agree that both product and customer profitability should be measured. Whereas most (nearly 60% ABC methods support both product and customer profitability decisions, most (approximately 60% non-ABC methods do not. Support for ABC The value and usage rate of activity-based costing methods have recently been the subjects of debate among practitioners and academics. Prior surveys indicate that the usage rate of ABC has leveled over the past several years and that questions are being raised as to its value relative to its cost of implementation. In this study we examined the usage rate and relevance of ABC as a cost-profit-measurement system. Our results are summarized as follows: (1ABC methods are deployed across the internal value chain, and the vast majority of organizations continue to use them. (2Managers surveyed believe that accurate overhead allocation and activity cost information is lacking in non-ABC methods, while ABC methods address these needs. (3ABC methods alleviate managers' concerns regarding the accuracy of cost allocations, the cause-effect relationship between allocations and resources consumed, the timeliness of cost/profit information, and the capability to update systems. (4The substantial gap between current usage rates of ABC methods and their desirability in ideal systems may portend increased use. (5ABC methods provide greater support for financial, operational, and strategic decisions. (6ABC methods are better integrated into budget and planning processes.(7ABC methods support strategic product/customer emphasis decisions better than non-ABC methods. When Is Activity-Based Costing Appropriate? Activity-based costing can theoretically be used in almost any industry, because it can be adapted to determine costs at so many different levels. However, ABC is used most effectively in complex companies that are not entirely service-based. Complex companies may see the most benefit from this type of costing because it is most helpful when the costing information is difficult to understand or evaluate. Service industries may not benefit as much from activity-based costing as other industries because their costs can be difficult to assign as they may not have an identifiable cause and effect relationship. Companies considering using ABC should also keep in mind that while it can be a very powerful management tool, it can be very expensive to start and it does not always conform to generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP so if using an ABC system a company may haveto keep a separate system to track costs in a manner that does conform to GAAP. Activity-based costing is a type of costing system that can be used to assign costs more accurately to products and departments in today's complex business world. Our results provide ample support for the conclusion that ABC methods do indeed provide significant value to managers. We believe the use of ABC provides companies with superior cost-profitability-measurement systems. Perhaps it is time for more organizations to take another look at adopting activity-based costing methods.。