Quality Chairs Incorporated (QC) manufactures chairs for industrial use. Laura Winters, the Vice President for Marketing at QC, concluded from market analysis that sales were dwindling for QC's standard three-foot chair due to aggressive pricing by competitors. QC's chairs sold for $580 whereas the competition's comparable chair was selling for $525. Winters determined that a price drop to $525 would be necessary to regain market share and reach a targeted annual sales level of 10,000 chairs. Cost data based on sales of 10,000 chairs: Budgeted Quantity Actual Quantity Actual Cost Direct materials (board feet) 90,100 81,300 $ 1,280,000 Direct labor (hours) 73,800 76,300 905,000 Machine hours (hours) 12,800 12,600 280,000 Finishing and packing (hours) 8,100 7,900 155,000 The current cost per unit is: Multiple Choice $262.00. $312.00. $412.00. $462.00. $487.00.

Quality Chairs Incorporated (QC) manufactures chairs for industrial use. Laura Winters, the Vice President for Marketing at QC, concluded from market analysis that sales were dwindling for QC's standard three-foot chair due to aggressive pricing by competitors. QC's chairs sold for $580 whereas the competition's comparable chair was selling for $525. Winters determined that a price drop to $525 would be necessary to regain market share and reach a targeted annual sales level of 10,000 chairs. Cost data based on sales of 10,000 chairs: Budgeted Quantity Actual Quantity Actual Cost Direct materials (board feet) 90,100 81,300 $ 1,280,000 Direct labor (hours) 73,800 76,300 905,000 Machine hours (hours) 12,800 12,600 280,000 Finishing and packing (hours) 8,100 7,900 155,000 The current cost per unit is: Multiple Choice $262.00. $312.00. $412.00. $462.00. $487.00.

Cornerstones of Cost Management (Cornerstones Series)

4th Edition

ISBN:9781305970663

Author:Don R. Hansen, Maryanne M. Mowen

Publisher:Don R. Hansen, Maryanne M. Mowen

Chapter12: Activity-based Management

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 6E: Harvey Company produces two models of blenders: the Super Model (priced at 400) and the Special...

See similar textbooks

	Budgeted Quantity	Actual Quantity	Actual Cost
Direct materials (board feet)	90,100	81,300	$ 1,280,000
Direct labor (hours)	73,800	76,300	905,000
Machine hours (hours)	12,800	12,600	280,000
Finishing and packing (hours)	8,100	7,900	155,000

Similar questions

At the beginning of the last quarter of 20x1, Youngston, Inc., a consumer products firm, hired Maria Carrillo to take over one of its divisions. The division manufactured small home appliances and was struggling to survive in a very competitive market. Maria immediately requested a projected income statement for 20x1. In response, the controller provided the following statement: After some investigation, Maria soon realized that the products being produced had a serious problem with quality. She once again requested a special study by the controllers office to supply a report on the level of quality costs. By the middle of November, Maria received the following report from the controller: Maria was surprised at the level of quality costs. They represented 30 percent of sales, which was certainly excessive. She knew that the division had to produce high-quality products to survive. The number of defective units produced needed to be reduced dramatically. Thus, Maria decided to pursue a quality-driven turnaround strategy. Revenue growth and cost reduction could both be achieved if quality could be improved. By growing revenues and decreasing costs, profitability could be increased. After meeting with the managers of production, marketing, purchasing, and human resources, Maria made the following decisions, effective immediately (end of November 20x1): a. More will be invested in employee training. Workers will be trained to detect quality problems and empowered to make improvements. Workers will be allowed a bonus of 10 percent of any cost savings produced by their suggested improvements. b. Two design engineers will be hired immediately, with expectations of hiring one or two more within a year. These engineers will be in charge of redesigning processes and products with the objective of improving quality. They will also be given the responsibility of working with selected suppliers to help improve the quality of their products and processes. Design engineers were considered a strategic necessity. c. Implement a new process: evaluation and selection of suppliers. This new process has the objective of selecting a group of suppliers that are willing and capable of providing nondefective components. d. Effective immediately, the division will begin inspecting purchased components. According to production, many of the quality problems are caused by defective components purchased from outside suppliers. Incoming inspection is viewed as a transitional activity. Once the division has developed a group of suppliers capable of delivering nondefective components, this activity will be eliminated. e. Within three years, the goal is to produce products with a defect rate less than 0.10 percent. By reducing the defect rate to this level, marketing is confident that market share will increase by at least 50 percent (as a consequence of increased customer satisfaction). Products with better quality will help establish an improved product image and reputation, allowing the division to capture new customers and increase market share. f. Accounting will be given the charge to install a quality information reporting system. Daily reports on operational quality data (e.g., percentage of defective units), weekly updates of trend graphs (posted throughout the division), and quarterly cost reports are the types of information required. g. To help direct the improvements in quality activities, kaizen costing is to be implemented. For example, for the year 20x1, a kaizen standard of 6 percent of the selling price per unit was set for rework costs, a 25 percent reduction from the current actual cost. To ensure that the quality improvements were directed and translated into concrete financial outcomes, Maria also began to implement a Balanced Scorecard for the division. By the end of 20x2, progress was being made. Sales had increased to 26,000,000, and the kaizen improvements were meeting or beating expectations. For example, rework costs had dropped to 1,500,000. At the end of 20x3, two years after the turnaround quality strategy was implemented, Maria received the following quality cost report: Maria also received an income statement for 20x3: Maria was pleased with the outcomes. Revenues had grown, and costs had been reduced by at least as much as she had projected for the two-year period. Growth next year should be even greater as she was beginning to observe a favorable effect from the higher-quality products. Also, further quality cost reductions should materialize as incoming inspections were showing much higher-quality purchased components. Required: 1. Identify the strategic objectives, classified by the Balanced Scorecard perspective. Next, suggest measures for each objective. 2. Using the results from Requirement 1, describe Marias strategy using a series of if-then statements. Next, prepare a strategy map. 3. Explain how you would evaluate the success of the quality-driven turnaround strategy. What additional information would you like to have for this evaluation? 4. Explain why Maria felt that the Balanced Scorecard would increase the likelihood that the turnaround strategy would actually produce good financial outcomes. 5. Advise Maria on how to encourage her employees to align their actions and behavior with the turnaround strategy.
Maxwell Company produces a variety of kitchen appliances, including cooking ranges and dishwashers. Over the past several years, competition has intensified. In order to maintainand perhaps increaseits market share, Maxwells management decided that the overall quality of its products had to be increased. Furthermore, costs needed to be reduced so that the selling prices of its products could be reduced. After some investigation, Maxwell concluded that many of its problems could be traced to the unreliability of the parts that were purchased from outside suppliers. Many of these components failed to work as intended, causing performance problems. Over the years, the company had increased its inspection activity of the final products. If a problem could be detected internally, then it was usually possible to rework the appliance so that the desired performance was achieved. Management also had increased its warranty coverage; warranty work had been increasing over the years. David Haight, president of Maxwell Company, called a meeting with his executive committee. Lee Linsenmeyer, chief engineer; Kit Applegate, controller; and Jeannie Mitchell, purchasing manager, were all in attendance. How to improve the companys competitive position was the meetings topic. The conversation of the meeting was recorded as seen on the following page: DAVID: We need to find a way to improve the quality of our products and at the same time reduce costs. Lee, you said that you have done some research in this area. Would you share your findings? LEE: As you know, a major source of our quality problems relates to the poor quality of the parts we acquire from the outside. We have a lot of different parts, and this adds to the complexity of the problem. What I thought would be helpful would be to redesign our products so that they can use as many interchangeable parts as possible. This will cut down the number of different parts, make it easier to inspect, and cheaper to repair when it comes to warranty work. My engineering staff has already come up with some new designs that will do this for us. JEANNIE: I like this idea. It will simplify the purchasing activity significantly. With fewer parts, I can envision some significant savings for my area. Lee has shown me the designs so I know exactly what parts would be needed. I also have a suggestion. We need to embark on a supplier evaluation program. We have too many suppliers. By reducing the number of different parts, we will need fewer suppliers. And we really dont need to use all the suppliers that produce the parts demanded by the new designs. We should pick suppliers that will work with us and provide the quality of parts that we need. I have done some preliminary research and have identified five suppliers that seem willing to work with us and assure us of the quality we need. Lee may need to send some of his engineers into their plants to make sure that they can do what they are claiming. DAVID: This sounds promising. Kit, can you look over the proposals and their estimates and give us some idea if this approach will save us any money? And if so, how much can we expect to save? KIT: Actually, I am ahead of the game here. Lee and Jeannie have both been in contact with me and have provided me with some estimates on how these actions would affect different activities. I have prepared a handout that includes an activity table revealing what I think are the key activities affected. I have also assembled some tentative information about activity costs. The table gives the current demand and the expected demand after the changes are implemented. With this information, we should be able to assess the expected cost savings. Additionally, the following activity cost data are provided: Purchasing parts: Variable activity cost: 30 per part number; 20 salaried clerks, each earning a 45,000 annual salary. Each clerk is capable of processing orders associated with 100 part numbers. Inspecting parts: Twenty-five inspectors, each earning a salary of 40,000 per year. Each inspector is capable of 2,000 hours of inspection. Reworking products: Variable activity cost: 25 per unit reworked (labor and parts). Warranty: Twenty repair agents, each paid a salary of 35,000 per year. Each repair agent is capable of repairing 500 units per year. Variable activity costs: 15 per product repaired. Required: 1. Compute the total savings possible as reflected by Kits handout. Assume that resource spending is reduced where possible. 2. Explain how redesign and supplier evaluation are linked to the savings computed in Requirement 1. Discuss the importance of recognizing and exploiting internal and external linkages. 3. Identify the organizational and operational activities involved in the strategy being considered by Maxwell Company. What is the relationship between organizational and operational activities?
Bienestar, Inc., has two plants that manufacture a line of wheelchairs. One is located in Kansas City, and the other in Tulsa. Each plant is set up as a profit center. During the past year, both plants sold their tilt wheelchair model for 1,620. Sales volume averages 20,000 units per year in each plant. Recently, the Kansas City plant reduced the price of the tilt model to 1,440. Discussion with the Kansas City manager revealed that the price reduction was possible because the plant had reduced its manufacturing and selling costs by reducing what was called non-value-added costs. The Kansas City manufacturing and selling costs for the tilt model were 1,260 per unit. The Kansas City manager offered to loan the Tulsa plant his cost accounting manager to help it achieve similar results. The Tulsa plant manager readily agreed, knowing that his plant must keep pacenot only with the Kansas City plant but also with competitors. A local competitor had also reduced its price on a similar model, and Tulsas marketing manager had indicated that the price must be matched or sales would drop dramatically. In fact, the marketing manager suggested that if the price were dropped to 1,404 by the end of the year, the plant could expand its share of the market by 20 percent. The plant manager agreed but insisted that the current profit per unit must be maintained. He also wants to know if the plant can at least match the 1,260 per-unit cost of the Kansas City plant and if the plant can achieve the cost reduction using the approach of the Kansas City plant. The plant controller and the Kansas City cost accounting manager have assembled the following data for the most recent year. The actual cost of inputs, their value-added (ideal) quantity levels, and the actual quantity levels are provided (for production of 20,000 units). Assume there is no difference between actual prices of activity units and standard prices. Required: 1. Calculate the target cost for expanding the Tulsa plants market share by 20 percent, assuming that the per-unit profitability is maintained as requested by the plant manager. 2. Calculate the non-value-added cost per unit. Assuming that non-value-added costs can be reduced to zero, can the Tulsa plant match the Kansas City per-unit cost? Can the target cost for expanding market share be achieved? What actions would you take if you were the plant manager? 3. Describe the role that benchmarking played in the effort of the Tulsa plant to protect and improve its competitive position.
Quality Chairs Inc. (QC) manufactures chairs for industrial use. Laura Winters, the Vice President for Marketing at QC, concluded from market analysis that sales were dwindling for QC's standard three-foot chair due to aggressive pricing by competitors. QC's chairs sold for $890 whereas the competition's comparable chair was selling for $750. Winters determined that a price drop to $750 would be necessary to regain market share and reach a targeted annual sales level of 10,000 chairs. Cost data based on sales of 10,000 chairs: Budgeted Quantity Actual Quantity Actual Cost Direct materials (board feet) 89,700 81,200 $ 1,258,500 Direct labor (hours) 72,200 74,625 876,700 Machine hours (hours) 12,250 12,100 251,700 Finishing and packing (hours) 7,350 7,250 126,700 The current profit per unit is: Multiple Choice $588. $638. $813. $788. $738.
Quality Chairs Inc. (QC) manufactures chairs for industrial use. Laura Winters, the Vice President for Marketing at QC, concluded from market analysis that sales were dwindling for QC's standard three-foot chair due to aggressive pricing by competitors. QC's chairs sold for $550 whereas the competition's comparable chair was selling for $495. Winters determined that a price drop to $495 would be necessary to regain market share and reach a targeted annual sales level of 10,000 chairs.Cost data based on sales of 10,000 chairs: Budgeted Quantity Actual Quantity Actual Cost Direct materials (board feet) 88,000 79,500 $ 1,250,000 Direct labor (hours) 71,350 73,775 875,000 Machine hours (hours) 11,400 11,250 250,000 Finishing and packing (hours) 6,500 6,400 125,000 In order to reduce costs so as to reach the desired target cost, Quality Chairs should also focus on reducing the cost of: Multiple Choice Mechanical…
Quality Chairs Inc. (QC) manufactures chairs for industrial use. Laura Winters, the Vice President for Marketing at QC, concluded from market analysis that sales were dwindling for QC's standard three-foot chair due to aggressive pricing by competitors. QC's chairs sold for $550 whereas the competition's comparable chair was selling for $495. Winters determined that a price drop to $495 would be necessary to regain market share and reach a targeted annual sales level of 10,000 chairs.Cost data based on sales of 10,000 chairs: Budgeted Quantity Actual Quantity Actual Cost Direct materials (board feet) 88,000 79,500 $ 1,250,000 Direct labor (hours) 71,350 73,775 875,000 Machine hours (hours) 11,400 11,250 250,000 Finishing and packing (hours) 6,500 6,400 125,000 In order to reduce costs so as to reach the desired target cost, Quality Chairs should also focus on reducing the cost of:
Quality Chairs Incorporated (QC) manufactures chairs for industrial use. Laura Winters, the Vice President for Marketing at QC, concluded from market analysis that sales were dwindling for QC's standard three-foot chair due to aggressive pricing by competitors. QC's chairs sold for $550 whereas the competition's comparable chair was selling for $495. Winters determined that a price drop to $495 would be necessary to regain market share and reach a targeted annual sales level of 10,000 chairs.Cost data based on sales of 10,000 chairs: Budgeted Quantity Actual Quantity Actual Cost Direct materials (board feet) 88,000 79,500 $ 1,250,000 Direct labor (hours) 71,350 73,775 875,000 Machine hours (hours) 11,400 11,250 250,000 Finishing and packing (hours) 6,500 6,400 125,000 The current cost per unit is: Multiple Choice $250. $300. $400. $450. $475.
Quality Chairs Incorporated (QC) manufactures chairs for industrial use. Laura Winters, the Vice President for Marketing at QC, concluded from market analysis that sales were dwindling for QC's standard three-foot chair due to aggressive pricing by competitors. QC's chairs sold for $550 whereas the competition's comparable chair was selling for $495. Winters determined that a price drop to $495 would be necessary to regain market share and reach a targeted annual sales level of 10,000 chairs.Cost data based on sales of 10,000 chairs: Budgeted Quantity Actual Quantity Actual Cost Direct materials (board feet) 88,000 79,500 $ 1,250,000 Direct labor (hours) 71,350 73,775 875,000 Machine hours (hours) 11,400 11,250 250,000 Finishing and packing (hours) 6,500 6,400 125,000 The current profit per unit is: Multiple Choice $250. $300. $400. $450. $475.
Tool Industries manufactures large workbenches for industrial use. Sam Hartnet, the Vice President for marketing at Tool Industries, concluded from market analysis that sales were dwindling for Tool's workbenches due to aggressive pricing by competitors. Tool's workbench sells for $1,140 whereas the competition's comparable workbench sells for $1,060. Sam determined that a price drop to $1,060 would be necessary to protect its market share and maintain an annual sales level of 13,000 workbenches.Cost data based on sales of 13,000 workbenches: Budgeted Quantity Actual Quantity Actual Cost Direct materials (pounds) 175,000 168,000 $ 3,450,000 Direct labor (hours) 72,800 71,500 825,000 Machine setups (number of setups) 900 880 250,000 Mechanical assembly (machine hours) 273,000 281,250 3,750,000 If the profit per unit is maintained, the target cost per unit is (rounded to the nearest whole dollar): Multiple Choice $489. $557. $516. $424.…
Tool Industries manufactures large workbenches for industrial use. Sam Hartnet, the Vice President for marketing at Tool Industries, concluded from market analysis that sales were dwindling for Tool's workbenches due to aggressive pricing by competitors. Tool's workbench sells for $1,440 whereas the competition's comparable workbench sells for $1,300. Sam determined that a price drop to $1,300 would be necessary to protect its market share and maintain an annual sales level of 13,600 workbenches. Cost data based on sales of 13,600 workbenches: Budgeted Quantity Actual Quantity Actual Cost Direct materials (pounds) 178,000 171,000 $ 3,453,000 Direct labor (hours) 74,000 73,000 826,500 Machine setups (number of setups) 1,200 1,000 253,000 Mechanical assembly (machine hours) 29,400 282,750 3,756,000 The current cost per unit is (rounded to the nearest whole dollar): Multiple Choice $560. $495. $437. $609. $417.
Quality Industries manufactures large workbenches for industrial use. Yewell Hartnet, the Vice President for marketing at Quality Industries, concluded from market analysis that sales were dwindling for Quality's workbenches due to aggressive pricing by competitors. Quality's workbench sells for $1,690 whereas the competition's comparable workbench sells for $1,500. Yewell determined that a price drop to $1,500 would be necessary to protect its market share and maintain an annual sales level of 14,100 workbenches. Cost data based on sales of 14,100 workbenches: Budgeted Quantity Actual Quantity Actual Cost Direct materials (pounds) 180,500 173,500 $ 3,455,500 Direct labor (hours) 75,000 74,250 827,750 Machine setups (no. of setups) 1,450 1,100 255,500 Mechanical assembly (machine hours) 31,150 284,000 3,761,000 If the profit per unit is maintained, the target cost per unit is (rounded to the nearest whole dollar):
Benchmark Industries manufactures large workbenches for industrial use. Wally Garcia, the vice president for marketing at Benchmark, has concluded from his market analysis that sales are dwindling for Benchmark's standard table because of aggressive pricing by competitors. Benchmark's table sells for P875 whereas the competition's comparable table is selling in the P800 range. Garcia has determined that dropping price to P800 is necessary to regain the firm's annual market share of 10,000 tables. Cost data based on sales of 10,000 tables are: Budgeted Amount 400,000 sq. ft. 85,000 hrs. 30,000 hrš: 320,000 hrs. Actual Amount Actual Cost 425,000 sq. ft. 100,000 hrs. 30,000 hrs. - 320,000 hrs. Direct materials Direct labor Machine setups Mechanical assembly P2,700,000 1,000,000 300,000 4,000,000