|
MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTING WEB |
|
Van der Merwe, A. and D. E. Keys. 2002. The case for resource consumption accounting. Strategic Finance (April): 31-36. Summary by Jennifer Beck |
The purpose of this article is to discuss the benefits of resource consumption accounting (RCA) and provide an example of its use. According to Van der Merwe and Keys, RCA is an approach to cost management that combines the best of the German methods and activity-based costing. The authors list the three pillars of RCA in the introduction. (See the Clinton & Keys summary for those concepts).
RCA Example
The example described in this article relates to the three pillars described by Clinton and Keys. It involves an airline that has two types of aircraft. There are 60 cabin crew members for the first type, the A7X7, and 10,000 flight hours. Eight crew members are needed for each flight. The second, larger airline, the A7Y7, has 90 crew members and a total of 5,000 flight hours. Twenty-four crew members are needed for each flight. The total expense for the period was $10.6 million. Figure 1 (See below) shows how these costs would be allocated between the two aircraft and how next year’s budget would be determined using ABB if both aircraft are expected to have 7,500 flight hours next year.
The authors point out three problems with
the activity-based budgeting approach illustrated above:
1. ABB assumes that all costs
are variable, but few activities actually have zero fixed costs,
2. ABB does not take planned excess or
idle capacity into consideration, and
3. ABB doesn’t deal with
non-monetary resources.
Activity-based resource planning (ABRP) is a more reliable method for calculating the resources needed and the dollar value of those resources used to support a business plan. There are four steps used to develop an ABRP system as follows:
The first step, establishing resource-pool-level unit standards, is performed by relating the output of the pool with practical capacity, and thereby determining the costs of idle capacity. The table below (based on Table 3, p. 34) shows how this is accomplished for the crew cabin example when the actual utilization is 200,000 hours.
|
Primary
Costs |
|
|
|
Fixed
$$ |
Prop $$ |
|
Cabin crew-productive |
|
|
|
0 |
$6,000,000 |
|
Cabin crew-rest days |
|
|
|
0 |
1,500,000 |
|
Cabin crew-excess capacity |
|
|
|
$1,500,000 |
0 |
|
Flight Allowance |
|
|
|
1,000,000 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
$2,500,000 |
$7,500,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Secondary
Costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Activity |
Driver |
Fixed Qty |
Prop Qty |
|
|
|
HR Benefits |
# Adjustments |
150 |
0 |
15,000 |
0 |
|
Facilities |
Sq footage |
15,000 |
0 |
585,000 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
$600,000 |
0 |
|
Total resource pool costs |
|
|
|
$3,100,000 |
$7,500,000 |
|
Unit cost rates |
|
|
|
$15.50 |
$37.50 |

The final step is to convert the planned demand into monetary equivalents. This is demonstrated in the table below adapted from Table 4 on p. 34.
|
Primary
Costs |
|
|
|
Fixed
$$ |
Prop $$ |
|
Cabin crew-productive |
|
|
|
0 |
$7,200,000 |
|
Cabin crew-rest days |
|
|
|
0 |
1,800,000 |
|
Cabin crew-excess capacity |
|
|
|
0 |
0 |
|
Flight Allowance |
|
|
|
$1,000,000 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
$1,000,000 |
$9,000,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Secondary
Costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Activity |
Driver |
Fixed Qty |
Prop Qty |
|
|
|
HR Benefits |
# Adjustments |
150 |
0 |
15,000 |
0 |
|
Facilities |
Sq footage |
10,000 |
0 |
585,000 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
$600,000 |
0 |
|
Total resource pool costs |
|
|
|
$1,600,000 |
$9,000,000 |
|
Unit cost rates |
|
|
|
$6.67 |
$37.50 |
Using ABRP, the total expected crew costs are $10,600,000 instead of $12,720,000 under activity-based budgeting. This difference occurs because RCA accounts for excess capacity and for fixed costs.
ABRP combines RCA principles with activity-based budgeting and provides more accurate projections of resource demand and costs. The advantages of RCA include:
1. Accurate projections
of monetary equivalents for planning activities and outputs.
2. The ability to reconcile the demand for and supply of
resources proactively.
3. Provide superior decision support for investment decisions
related to resource demands.
4. Predict resource related impacts from various planning
decisions such as training programs.
5. Derive comprehensive monetary plans with a quantity-based
backflush approach.
For example, the last graphic illustration in the article (Figure 3, not provided here) shows that after sales quantities and sales mix are planned, production quantities and mix can be determined, followed by the determination of primary activities and resources, secondary activities and resources, and finally specific resource requirements.
| ABM Main Page | RCA Main Page |