CORTLAND MANUFACTURING, INC.[1]
We constantly seem to be pricing ourselves out of some markets and not charging enough in others. Our pricing policy is pretty simple: we mark up our full manufacturing cost by 50%. That means a computer that costs us $2,000 to manufacture will sell for $3,000. Until now I thought this was a workable approach, but now I'm not so sure.
Steve Works, CEO, Cortland Manufacturing, Inc. (CMI)
Steve's Controller, Sally Nomer, had just told him that she believed the computers might be priced inappropriately. Steve continued:
When I was at Leland [School of Management] I focused most of my attention on operations and marketing, convinced that those were the keys to my successful career. Cost accounting was boring and not relevant. But now my accountant is telling me that I need to think about a new way to assign manufacturing overhead to products, and I don't even know where to start! I never dreamed that some day my career would come to this. I wish I'd paid more attention to those classes so I could understand what is going on here. I'm lost.
BACKGROUND
CMI manufactures several different computer models, distributed to retail outlets throughout the 50 states. The company is proud of the user-friendly computers it produces, in particular their graphics capability. CMI claims the superb graphics are what distinguish its products from competitors.
CMI purchases raw materials in components and subassemblies made to its specifications, from a very small group of highly reliable suppliers. It uses a single facility to house both manufacturing facility and administrative and sales offices. The factory workers operate three kinds of machines. Inspecting machines check the raw materials and test components and subassemblies to assure they are working to specifications. Soldering machines solder various components as necessary. Finally assembly machines put all the components and subassemblies together into finished computers. The processes can vary by computer model.
About 40% of CMI's overhead cost consists of depreciation, maintenance and repairs on the three types of manufacturing machines used in the factory. The remainder of the overhead is made up of labor involved in receiving and handling the raw materials, adjusting and setting up machines for each new batch of computers, and inspecting and packing finished computers for shipping, with some small amount of overhead for miscellaneous factory-related costs. Additional costs include insurance and depreciation on handling equipment, supplies, and utilities. The actual manufacturing effort (soldering, inspecting and assembly) is primarily automated, so CMI uses very little direct labor. The company also operates on a lean production model, so almost no inventories exist at the end of any period.
Most of the computers are sold in large orders to national electronic retail chains. However, the Cortland 2000 is not such a machine. It represents a recent effort by CMI to enter the scientific computing market. The quantity manufactured and sold of this and similar machines is expected to be much lower than other models even when it gains its hoped-for market share. Fewer customers exist for such a sophisticated, powerful, high-priced machines. Nonetheless, Mr. Works has believed from the conception of this product that, when all manufacturing costs were considered, these specialty computers would contribute a reasonable amount to CMI's selling and administrative costs and profit. The name recognition from the elite scientific community should enhance sales of the more generally used computers.
FINANCIAL INFORMATION
CMI budgeted direct labor costs for 2012 at $60,000,000. Based on expected sales, the company estimated that raw material purchased and used would be $300,000,000. Manufacturing overhead was budgeted at $196,000,000. Overhead is currently allocated to production on the basis of machine hours (MH). As mentioned above, computers are priced at full production cost plus a mark-up of 50%.
EXHIBIT 1 shows the expected direct manufacturing costs for two of the company's several computers. The Cortland 1000 is a very popular computer with large production and sales volume. By contrast, the Cortland 2000, described above, is a state-of-the-art scientific computer with several special features. In particular, the Cortland 2000
Uses a new processing chip imported from Sweden.
Has special patented random access memory (RAM) that gives it extremely high input/output speed.
Is manufactured in very small batches to assure uniform quality from one computer to the next, to satisfy the users of the machines who have very high expectations for the performance of the machines they purchase.
Mr. Works' concerns arose when Ms. Nomer told him that she thought the company's traditional overhead allocation system was providing misleading cost information about the different types of products, especially the specialty computers. She developed an analysis of the 2012 manufacturing overhead costs (discussed above), shown in EXHIBIT 2. She classified the overhead costs described above into activities. She also gathered data, shown in EXHIBIT 3, for the 2012 production of the Cortland 1000 and the Cortland 2000, as two representative examples, a large-volume and a specialty computer, of her point. Mr. Works commented on the data:
I don't know quite what to make of all this. Clearly I need some further explanation and analysis. I guess what I really need is some sense of what is the true manufacturing cost of each computer. I thought I knew that, but I guess I really didn't. Even though we cannot at this point change prices for 2012, we at least need to know if we're covering full production cost on the Cortland 2000 and leaving something to contribute to the company's selling, general and administrative expenses. I thought this was so, but now ... well, I'm not so sure. We'd better figure this out before we begin our budget cycle for 2013. Maybe I need to go back to school!
EXHIBIT 1
Direct Manufacturing Costs for ONE Computer
|
Cortland 1000
|
Cortland 2000
|
|
Direct Material
|
$1,000
|
$2,500
|
|
Direct Labor
|
$200
|
$400
|
EXHIBIT 2
Analysis of 2012 Budgeted Manufacturing Overhead Costs
|
Activity
|
Cost driver
|
Budgeted activity (for entire company)
|
Budgeted cost
|
|
Receive/handle raw material
|
Orders received
|
200 orders
|
$90,000,000
|
|
Adjust/set up machines
|
Number of setups
|
2,000 setups
|
$12,000,000
|
|
Inspect, pack, ship computers
|
Batches
|
500 batches
|
$60,000,000
|
|
Inspect raw materials
|
Inspection hours
|
200,000 insp. hr.
|
$10,000,000
|
|
Solder parts
|
Soldering hours
|
200,000 sdr. hr.
|
$12,000,000
|
|
Assemble computers
|
Assembly hours
|
100,000 assm. hr.
|
$12,000,000
|
|
Total overhead
|
|
|
$196,000,000
|
EXHIBIT 3
Production Data for Cortland 1000 and Cortland 2000
|
Item
|
Measure
|
Cortland 1000
|
Cortland 2000
|
|
Budgeted production
|
Number of computers
|
20,000
|
5,000
|
|
Received order size*
|
Size of order
|
10,000
|
500
|
|
Batch size
|
Number of computers
|
5,000
|
100
|
|
Machine setups
|
Number of s/u per batch
|
5
|
6
|
|
Inspecting time (Raw mat.)
|
Hours / computer
|
1
|
2
|
|
Soldering time
|
Hours / computer
|
3
|
1
|
|
Assembly time
|
Hours / computer
|
1
|
1
|
* "Received order size" is the number of computers one order of raw materials will build. Example: (Refer to above.) The company receives 2 orders of raw materials for the Cortland 1000 per year. Calculation: 20,000 computers produced per year, divided by 10,000 computers' worth of raw materials in each order = 2 orders per year.
REQUIRED:
Don't try to begin answering questions until you have studied the case information carefully. Careless reading will result in careless errors! Just take a few extra minutes to understand it all.
How many machine hours is the company budgeted to use in 2012?
Calculate the predetermined overhead rate the company is currently using.
Using the information from the exhibits, and Q1 & Q2, calculate the manufacturing cost of ONE Cortland 1000 and ONE Cortland 2000 under the current system.
Calculate the selling price, under the current system, of ONE Cortland 1000 and ONE Cortland 2000.
Now you are going to begin to construct and evaluate the ABC system. In order to do this, however, your study of Exhibits 2 and 3 should have told you that you are going to have to convert the information the company currently measures into the information you need for the ABC analysis. First, how many raw material orders did the company receive for each model? Remember that you aren't seeing ALL of the company's products, only two.
How many batches of each model did the company pack and ship?
How many machine setups does Cortland do for each model?
Calculate a rate for each activity in Exhibit 2. (Activity rate = overhead rate.)
Use the rates calculated in Q8 to apply overhead to each product line: Cortland 1000 and Cortland 2000.
Calculate the overhead per computer (one unit) for a Cortland 1000 and a Cortland 2000.
Calculate the total manufacturing cost of ONE Cortland 1000 and ONE Cortland 2000 using ABC overhead allocation.
Show how the company would determine a selling price for each model under the ABC system, and assuming they'd continue their current mark-up policy.
Should Mr. Works adopt an ABC system for internal analysis? Your answer should address the question very specifically to this case - no generalities about ABC from the book. It should contain two points in favor of ABC, and two drawbacks that he should be aware of. Note that "It's more accurate" is not a complete answer in favor. You can do better than that, explaining what makes it more accurate. Be aware, also, that pricing isn't an exact science: the company isn't bound by law or accounting principles to charge a certain price.
Mr. Works is also concerned about future product development. They have several new models being researched at this time. If an ABC system is used, list two characteristics of a new model that will make it more costly (or less costly) to manufacture. Note that answers related to direct materials and direct labor, though they will certainly make it more or less costly, aren't what we're looking for here. Those are direct costs, easy to trace, and Cortland doesn't need an ABC analysis to recognize them. What information does your ABC analysis provide to help answer this question?