Search results

The purpose of this paper is to develop a new systematic method for a multi-unit organization to cope with the cost allocation problem, which is an extension of the reciprocal method. As uncertainty is the inherent characteristic of business environments, assuming changes in engaged parameters is almost necessary. The outputs of the model determine the total value of each unit/business lines or product.

In the proposed method, contrary to existing models, business units are able to transfer their costs to other units, and also, not necessarily transfer the total costs of support units completely. The DEMATEL approach, which finds all relationships between different parts of a system, is also applied for computing effects of the units’ expense paid to each other. Moreover, a fuzzification approach is used to capture linguistic experts’ judgments about related data.

Being closer to the real-world problem in comparison to the previous approach, the proposed systematic approach encompasses the other cost allocation models.

Applying the proposed model for a system like a multi-unit organization, the total price of each unit/business line can be obtained. Moreover, this cost allocation process guides the related decision-makers to better manage the expenses that each unit pays the others.

In the existing studies, business units cannot pay expense support units. However, in the proposed method, the business units are able to pay expenses for other units, and also, not necessarily pay total expenses for support unit completely. Moreover, considering engaged parameters as fuzzy numbers makes the proposed model closer to real-world problems.

Tooling is a common component of an industrial product’s manufacture. Specific tooling is devised to serve the fabrication of a particular product, while generic tooling can be used in the manufacture of multiple products. In the latter case, companies are confronted with the problem of fairly allocating the indirect costs of the tooling. This article studies how to allocate costs of generic tooling to single production orders.

Ten allocation methods (AMs) are described that are in principle suited to the distribution of generic tooling costs to production orders. Since the presented methods have for the most part been discussed in differing contexts, we apply them to a specified generic tooling problem for comparison. Evaluation of the various methods is based on 16 criteria. Reasoning is supported by a computational Monte Carlo simulation. Furthermore, we suggest using the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) to elaborate one final proposition concerning the most preferable allocation scheme.

The article reports the single allocation rules’ performances for different allocation scenarios. The described characteristics refer to fairness, efficiency, and simplicity as well as to empty-core performance. Using AHP analysis allows for the aggregation of the rules’ criteria ratings. Thus, especially suitable allocation schemes for the problem at hand are identified.

An allocation is required for budgeting reasons and also for the definition of projects’ bottom-up sales prices. Selecting the “right” AM is important, as a suboptimal AM can result in unfair allocation vectors, which will act as incentives to stop using the common resource, potentially leading to higher total costs.

Research on the comparison of AMs is typically performed for certain purposes, such as enterprise networks, horizontal cooperative purchasing scenarios, or municipal service units. This article will augment the research evaluating AMs by introducing a novel set of evaluation criteria and by providing an in-depth comparison of AMs suited for the allocation of generic tooling costs.

Regardless of the approach taken to allocating common costs, is cost allocation really necessary? Argues that such an exercise may not make any difference to the final outcome ‐ the company’s final profit or loss figure. Takes as an example the University of Clemson, USA’s system of costing and reporting, and describes the university’s Finance Committee’s challenge to that system.

The paper analyses the differential effect of alternative fixed‐cost allocations on managerial effort and risk sharing. In doing so, two alternative schemes are considered: (1) the lump‐sum allocation; and (2) the proportional allocation. Analyses are conducted in the context of a principal‐agent relationship where the principal retains the prerogative of fixed input decisions but delegates all other productive actions to the agent. The paper limits its focus to a simple class of linear sharing rules that guarantee the agent a fractional share of payoff and a fixed salary. The following summarises the major results of the paper. First, the lump‐sum allocation is neutral in that it has no impact on the agents' choice of effort and the allocation of risk between the principal and the agent. Second, the proportional allocation is distortionary in that it induces the agent to exert less effort given a sharing rule and causes a shift in risk from the principal to the agent.

Prior work has focused on the impact of using alternative bases for allocating costs to products but there has been little work that evaluates the use of alternative allocation bases for allocating costs to departments. In particular, if different departments of a multi‐national firm are located in settings with different reporting requirements, exchange rate risks, and costs of capital, then the choice of cost allocation base can be important. This paper examines the economic impact of alternative service department allocation bases in a decentralised setting. A non‐linear programming (NLP) approach is used to model the problem. A review of prior literature identifies a method, based on the NLP approach, for determining the economic impact of alternative allocation bases in a multi‐product setting. The method is adapted in this paper for the multi‐divisional context. The study finds that centralised production volume decision‐making is superior to decentralised decision‐making using either revenue or volume‐based cost allocation bases. Under certain conditions, revenue‐based allocation bases are also found to be superior to volume bases. Under the assumptions of the model no distinction can be made between the centralised solution and a profit‐based allocation regime. A practical implication of this study is that designers of cost allocation systems need to consider not only the direct income‐shifting effect of different cost allocation bases but also the indirect economic effect of consequential changes in the operating decisions of the firm.

Hospitals procure high volumes of medical supplies through large distributors in order to leverage economies of scale. However, when shortages hit, hospitals incur high penalty costs by purchasing from secondary markets. In this paper, the authors counter the hospital's typical purchasing strategy that a collaborative relationship with a large, Tier I medical supply distributor is beneficial under all conditions. The paper finds that during shortages the more beneficial strategy is for the hospital to add a medium-sized, Tier II distributor who offers a transactional relationship and is willing to provide a “preferred allocation” in return for a pre-committed annual purchase contract. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

The authors assume availability of order volume to be a stochastic process and formulate the problem as a two-stage stochastic programming model, with optimal allocation in the second stage. The authors analyze the first-stage objective function using full-factorial numerical experimentation and perform a complete search for optimal volume mix. In addition, the model accounts for purchasing relationship, shortage cost, and varying price discount schedules.

Under no shortage situation, hospitals purchase its entire order volume from Tier I distributor. However, during shortages, for any increase in preferred allocation from the Tier II distributor, hospitals purchase high volumes from the Tier II distributor except when preferred allocation and availability is high. The paper finds that the average cost savings for the use of preferred allocation is 16.14 percent.

Existing purchasing literature focusses on the benefit of using single/multiple homogenous distributors under all conditions. In this paper, the authors examine the benefit of using non-homogenous distributors under conditions of shortage when one of them is willing to provide preferred allocation under varying price discount schedules.

Supplier selection problem is the key process in decision making of supply chain management. An effective selection of vendors is heavily responsible for the success of any organization. Vendor selection problem (VSP) reflects a more practical view when the decision makers involved in the problem are present on different levels. Moreover, vendor selection consists of various random parameters to be dealt with in real life. The purpose of this paper is to present a decentralized bi-level VSP where demand and supply are normal random variables and objectives are fuzzy in nature. Decision makers are present at two levels and are called as leader and follower. As the next purpose, this paper extends and presents a solution approach for fuzzy bi-level multi-objective decision-making model with stochastic constraints. Different scenarios have been developed within a real-life case study based on different sets of controlling factors under the control of leader.

This study uses chance-constrained programming and fuzzy set theory to generate the results. Stochastic constraints are converted into deterministic constraints using chance-constrained programming. Decision variables in the bi-level VSP are partitioned between the two levels and considered as controlling factors. Membership functions based on fuzzy set theory are created for the goals and controlling factors and are used to obtain the overall satisfactory solutions. The model is tested on a real-life case study of a textile industry and different scenarios are constructed based on the choice of leader’s controlling factors.

Results showed that the approach is quite helpful as it generates efficient results producing a good level of satisfaction for the decision makers of both the levels. Results showed that on choosing the vendors that are associated with worst values in terms of associated costs, vendor ratings and quota flexibilities as controlling factors by the leaders, the level of satisfaction achieved is highest. The level of satisfaction of solution is lowest for the scenario when the leader chooses to control the decision variables associated with vendors that are profiled with minimum vendor ratings. Results also showed that higher availability of materials and budget with vendors proved helpful in obtaining quota allocations. Different scenarios generate different results along with different values of satisfaction degrees and objective values which shows the flexible feature of the approach based on leader’s choice of controlling factors. Numerical results showed that the leader’s control can be effectively incorporated maintaining satisfaction levels of the followers under various scenarios or conditions.

The paper makes a certain contribution toward the study of vendor selection existing in a hierarchical manner under uncertain environment. A wide set of data of different factors is needed which can be seen as a limitation when the available time is short for the supplier selection process.

VSP which is generally adopted by most of the large organizations is characterized with hierarchical decision making. Moreover, dealing with the real-life concern, the data available for some of the parameters are not complete, representing an uncertainty of parameters. This study is quite helpful for decentralized VSP under uncertain environment to reduce the costs, improve profit margins and to create long-term relationships with selected vendors. The proposed model also provides an avenue to explore the decision making when the leader has control over some of the decision variables.

Reviewing the literature available, this is the first attempt to present a multi-objective VSP where the decision makers are at hierarchical levels considering uncertain parameters such as demand and supply as per the best knowledge of authors. This research further provides an approach to construct scenarios or different cases based on the choice of leader’s choice of controlling factors.

Better managerial control in terms of decision making and understanding the total costs of a system or service result from allocating indirect costs. Allocation requires a three‐step process of selecting cost objectives, pooling related overhead costs, and selecting costs bases to connect the objectives to the pooled costs. Allocation may be simple, relying on a single base, or activity‐based costing (ABC), relying on multiple bases. Contrasts the methods of allocation, and argues that ABC may be more useful for costing electronic services.

Much managerial and behavioural accounting research assumes that people are rational, self‐interested, expected‐utility maximisers. Often, this reduces to the central expectation that individuals are concerned only with their own material self‐interest and are unconcerned with the welfare of others. Here, we consider a preference for achieving fair outcomes in the context of an interdivisional cost and benefit allocation scenario. Consistent with prior research, we reject a simple wealth maximisation hypothesis and find that subjects actively attempt to achieve fair allocations. Interestingly, subjects were willing to adversely affect the outcome of one party to the transaction when they considered themselves to have been treated unfairly by a third party against whom they had no redress. Also, where subjects expected to have their wealth reduced by another party, who freely chose not to do so, these subjects appeared willing to give a lower share of a future windfall gain to them.

This study aims to analytically explore the economic role of transfer pricing in a vertically integrated supply chain with a direct channel, specifically when it uses cost-based transfer prices, as is frequently observed in management practices. We compare two representative transfer pricing methods: full-cost and variable-cost pricing. Although many firms open a direct channel, which affects the optimal decision on transfer prices, prior literature has not considered this case.

We demonstrate the results using a non-cooperative game theoretical approach.

The results show that full-cost pricing is more profitable than variable-cost pricing when the fixed cost allocation to the marketing division is low, contrary to the established position in prior studies, from which I select their benchmark case. Moreover, we obtain a counterintuitive result, whereby, the firm-wide profit of a vertically integrated supply chain increases with fixed cost allocation.

This study considers the direct channel and internal transfer pricing in a vertically integrated supply chain, while prior research only considers one or the other. This model suggests an optimal choice of cost-based transfer pricing in managerial decisions. In addition, the authors demonstrate the positive effect of increasing fixed cost allocation, which prior management studies do not show. The findings of this study have implications for managerial practice by providing insights into supply chain design and showing that firms should consider the competition between channels when making decisions about transfer pricing methods.