Bridgeton Industries Case Study - Designing Cost Systems

  • Upload
    dgrgich

  • View
    2.138

  • Download
    3

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Looking at the Bridgeton Industries Case Study

Citation preview

  • Assignment One

    Design of Cost Systems Bridgeton Industries

    Question Would you outsource manifolds from the ACF in 1991? Why, or why not? What other

    information would you want before reaching a decision?

    Answering this question requires knowing what differential costs would be avoided if the

    decision was made to outsource manifold production. In the case, Bridgeton made the decision to

    outsource two divisions in 1989. These divisions produced muffler/exhausts and oil pans. Looking at the

    model year budgets provided in the case, we can examine the impact that outsourcing these divisions

    had on costs. We can also compare the cost allocation of overhead to use in our decision making

    process.

    First, here are calculations for overhead allocation based on the case model year budget. This

    shows how overhead changes in these situations when using a single overhead pool.

    1987 1988 1989 1990

    Direct Labor 24682 25294 13537 14102

    Overhead 107954 109890 78157 79393

    Overhead Allocation 437% 434% 577% 563%

    The overhead allocation increases significantly from 1988 to 1989. This corresponds with the

    decision to outsource the production of muffler/exhausts and oil pans. This means that there are costs

    that could not be removed by outsourcing these production lines. Remaining production lines are thus

    left to bear the overhead left behind.

    To illustrate this, here is the overhead each year and the factory profits from that year.

    1987 1988 1989 1990

    Overhead each year 107954 109890 78157 79393

    Profit each year 75153 88524 57688 63501

    This chart shows the change in profits versus the change in overhead each year.

    % Change from year to year 1987 1988 1989 1990

    Overhead 1 2% -29% 2%

    Profits 1 18% -35% 10%

    This means that in 1989, the year two different product lines were dropped, overhead decreased by 29%

    but profits decreased by 35%. This is another sign that there are overhead costs that will not be dropped

  • when manifolds are dropped. It seems likely that dropping manifold production, which accounts for 41%

    of Bridgetons sales, would indeed reduce costs but simultaneously drastically reduce profits. If the

    same criteria for evaluating product line performance is used, it is inevitable that other product lines will

    be in line for the chopping block as well until nothing is left!

    CONCLUSION

    In 1991, it is likely that outsourcing manifolds will result in costs savings based on direct labor

    and direct material costs. However, the drop in profits is likely to be larger on a percentage basis. This

    means we would be killing profits at a faster rate than we would be saving money. Additionally, the case

    mentions that increased emissions standards could result in new requirements for the types of

    manifolds produced by Bridgeton. This would increase demand for these parts and could also increase

    the sales price of the manifolds.

    In order to make an intelligent decision about outsourcing the manifold production process, all

    costs and the resultant savings from dropping these costs must be accounted for. A differential analysis

    of the manifold production process would give this sort of information and allow for the best decision. It

    would be wise not to base decisions on a single overhead pool but to more granularly determine the

    costs for each product line. This would give management the right information to make the correct

    decision.