A report on the Implementation of Standard Costing

A report on the Implementation of Standard Costing In current years, various tools such as activity-based costing, the balanced scorecard and target costing have been used in the business community. However, traditional management accounting systems continue to be widely applied. One example is standard costing, which has been used on a wide front during the last century. The purpose of this paper is to examine the widely use of standard costing system. Despite it is less relevant than newer accounting methods, standard costing is far from obsolete. Because of its simplicity, flexibility and affordability, standard costing remains a favorite cost accounting method among accounting and finance professionals. Introduction: In today’s time of rapid technologic change, tough global and domestic competition, total cost management is central to sustained corporate profitability and competitiveness. The management focus today is to minimize cost. The cost leadership strategy does not mean compromise on either quality or technology o r product differentiation. Low costs are no advantage, if the customers are not willing to buy the product of low cost firm. Cost management has to be driven with customer as the focus. The survival way for any company is how to manage its product/service cost, quality and performance. The customers are continuously demanding high quality and better performance products/services and at the same time, they want the prices to fall. The shareholders are also demanding a required rate of return on their investment with the company. Thus, cost has become a residual. The challenge is being able to manufacture or provide service with the stipulated cost framework. Thus, cost management has to be an ongoing continuous improvement program. Standard Costing In recent years, various tools such as activity-based costing, the balanced scorecard and target costing have been used in the business community (Kaplan Kaplan Ansari et al†¦1997). However, traditional management accounting systems continue to be widely applied (Brewer, 2000). One example of traditional management accounting is standard costing. Standards can be used with either job order or process costing system to provide important information for managerial planning, controlling, and decision making. Standard costing assists in setting budgets and evaluating managerial performance. The major motive to use standard costing is because it facilitates product costing estimation (Ask & Ax, 1997). Ask and Ax’s study is supported by a study conducted by Puxty and Lyall (1989), which reported that 76 percent of the UK commercial and industrial companies operate a standard costing system. Although it is used widely, people recently criticize it could not provide the information needed in today’s competitive environment. Despite the criticism, there are few signs that the use of standard costing tends to decrease. The survey from Ask and AX (1997) showed that 12.6 % of the companies investigated state d that they would abandon standards but on the other hand, 9.9 % stated that they would like to convert to standard costing system. The History of Standard Costing The standard costing system was developed in the early 1900s. According to Drury (1992), it was the scientific management principles recommended by F.W. Taylor and other engineers. Scientific engineers built up information about standards to set up â€Å"the best way† to use labour and material resources within manufacturing. Engineers used the standards to provide information for planning the flow of work so that the waste of materials and labour was minimized. Interestingly, engineers did not consider standards as a tool to control financial costs at that time (Drury, 1992)

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Essay

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act - Essay Example The phrase "free and appropriate" would come to be one of the first ideas school administrators and special education teachers would consider when planning and serving those students. The first component declared that all students, no matter what their disability, were entitled to a public education that had to be free of expense and suitable to each student's needs - or "free and appropriate." The second component created safeguards to prevent improper identification of children who were culturally or linguistically different from the student norm. Evaluations had to be administered in the child's native language by a skilled professional. They had to address specific areas (e.g., speech, language, math, behavioral), be made up of more than one procedures, fair to the students, and given by a multidisciplinary team with members representing all components of the students' education ("The Education For All Handicapped Children Act (PL 94-142) 1975"; "Public Law 94-142 (S.6); Nov. 29, 1975 Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975"). The third component involves the creation of an Individualized Education Plan (IEP) to meet their individual educational needs. An IEP team must meet annually and examine the plan for possible updates. The principle of Least Restrictive Environment forms the fourth component. It states that disabled children must be educated with non-disabled students to the greatest possible extent education ("The Education For All Handicapped Children Act (PL 94-142) 1975"; "Public Law 94-142 (S.6); Nov. 29, 1975 Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975"). The fifth component states that a system of due process and checks and balances will be used for disabled students and their families. Parents must give permission for testing and placement, may examine student records at any time, have an independent evaluation performed by an outside party, have a hearing, make appeals, and expect confidentiality ("The Education For All Handicapped Children Act (PL 94-142) 1975"; "Public Law 94-142 (S.6); Nov. 29, 1975 Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975"). The last component declares that parents have a right to be included in all phases of the placement, including assessment, placement, and IED development education ("The Education For All Handicapped Children Act (PL 94-142) 1975"; "Public Law 94-142 (S.6); Nov. 29, 1975 Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975"). Over the years, the law was reauthorized several times and experienced many important changes. PL 99-457, in 1986, expanded the scope of IDEA by adding provisions for the education of infants and toddlers (essentially from birth) with special learning needs. Its goals were to improve the development of infants and toddlers with disabilities, and to reduce the potential for developmental delay. It also wanted to reduce the chances of such a child being institutionalized. It sought to help families meet the special needs of those children, and tried to keep them out of special education, when possible. (Apling and Jones, 2002). In 1990, PL 101-476 gave the law its current IDEA moniker and ordered states to extend all the provisions of PL 94-142 to preschool-age children; public funding would facilitate these early intervention services. The expansion was based on the idea that falling cognitively behind

Marketing Products and Services in a Dynamic Environment Assignment

Marketing Products and Services in a Dynamic Environment - Assignment Example The author makes special references to the claims advanced by Adam Smith and other prominent economic thinkers as understood within the domain of goods-dominant logic with the intention of exposing its fundamental strengths and weaknesses as compared with the service-dominant logic. The theoretical foundation of the article marks a determined departure from the conventional systems of through that privilege the goods-dominant logic as a key determinant of economic exchange. The author affirms that all kinds of exchange are based on service (Vargo, Maglio, & Akaka, 2008, p. 145). This marked departure from the conventions of goods-based logic promotes a sense of disharmony between traditional accounting practices and the modern economic assumptions that emphasize more on the need to develop value-based systems. In essence, the author makes the claim that all forms of transactions are ultimately reducible to service for the benefit of the end users. The author explores the dimensions of service science from the multiple dimensions that include the relationship between production and utilization of the value. Other relationships explored include the product and process in light of their relationship with the generation of value. The study trains some significant focus on the connection between transaction and relationship between the transacting parties. The difference between the goods-dominant logic and the service-dominant logic as understood within the framework of this study involves a range of options that significantly connect within the element of productivity (Vargo, Maglio, & Akaka, 2008, p. 147). The goods-dominant logic operates under a system that offers unique advantages to the end user. Theoretically, this concept is built on the assumption that the roles of the producer and that of the end user are clearly distinct. In line with this ideal, the consumer primarily plays the role of utilizing the value. The value o f a good