SOALSOAL (PROBLEMS) - SOLUSI

Hansen & Mowen (2006)- E- Kls EA-E: kelaseae2011@yahoo.com

Edisi VI: 318

1. Salaries: Senior accountant fixed Office assistant fixed Internet and software subscriptions mixed Consulting by senior partner variable Depreciation (equipment) fixed Supplies mixed Administration fixed Rent (offices) fixed Utilities mixed

2. Internet and software subscriptions: V = (Y2 Y1)/(X2 X1) = ($850 $700)/(150 120) = $5 per hour F = Y2 VX2 = $850 ($5)(150) = $100 Consulting by senior partner: V = (Y2 Y1)/(X2 X1) = ($1,500 $1,200)/(150 120) = $10 per hour F = Y2 VX2 = $1,500 ($10)(150) = $0 Supplies: V = (Y2 Y1)/(X2 X1) = ($1,100 $905)/(150 120) = $6.50 per hour F = Y2 VX2 = $1,100 ($6.50)(150) = $125 Utilities: V = (Y2 Y1)/(X2 X1) = ($365 $332)/(150 120) = $1.10 per hour F = Y2 VX2 = $365 ($1.10)(150) = $200

318
3.

Concluded
Fixed Unit Variable Cost $ 5.00 10.00 6.50 1.10 $22.60

Salaries: Senior accountant Office assistant Internet and subscriptions Consulting Depreciation (equipment) Supplies Administration Rent (offices) Utilities Total cost

$2,500 1,200 100 2,400 125 500 2,000 200 $9,025

Thus, total clinic cost = $9,025 + $22.60/professional hour For 140 professional hours: Clinic cost = $9,025 + $22.60(140) = $12,189 Charge per hour = $12,189/140 = $87.06 Fixed charge per hour = $9,025/140 = $64.46 Variable charge per hour = $22.60 4. For 170 professional hours: Charge/day = $9,025/170 + $22.60 = $53.09 + $22.60 = $75.69 The charge drops because the fixed costs are spread over more professional hours.

319
1. High (1,700, $21,000); Low (700, $15,000) V = (Y2 Y1)/(X2 X1) = ($21,000 $15,000)/(1,700 700) = $6 per receiving order F = Y2 VX2 = $21,000 ($6)(1,700) = $10,800 Y = $10,800 + $6X 2. Output of spreadsheet regression routine with number of receiving orders as the independent variable: Constant Std. Err. of Y Est. R Squared No. of Observations Degrees of Freedom X Coefficient(s) Std. Err. of Coef. 13.3766233766234 3.59557461331427 4512.98701298698 3456.24317476605 0.633710482694768 10 8

V = $13.38 per receiving order (rounded) F = $4,513 (rounded) Y = $4,513 + $13.38X R2 = 0.634, or 63.4% Receiving orders explain about 63.4 percent of the variability in receiving cost, providing evidence that Tracys choice of a cost driver is reasonable. Howe ver, other drivers may need to be considered because 63.4 percent may not be strong enough to justify the use of only receiving orders (Menerima pesanan menjelaskan tentang 63,4 persen dari variabilitas dalam menerima biaya, memberikan bukti bahwa pilihan Tracy dari cost driver adalah wajar. Namun, driver lain mungkin perlu dipertimbangkan karena 63,4 persen mungkin tidak cukup kuat untuk membenarkan penggunaan hanya menerima pesanan)

319

Continued

3. Regression with pounds of material as the independent variable: Constant Std. Err. of Y Est. R Squared No. of Observations Degrees of Freedom X Coefficient(s) Std. Err. of Coef. 0.0449642991356633 0.0073259640055344 5632.28109733183 2390.10628259277 0.824833789433823 10 8

V = $0.045 per pound of material delivered (rounded) F = $5,632 (rounded) Y = $5,632 + $0.045X R2 = 0.825, or 82.5%
Pounds of material delivered explains about 82.5 percent of the variability in receiving cost. This is a better result than that of the receiving orders and should convince Tracy to try multiple regression (Banyak Pon material yang disampaikan menjelaskan sekitar 82,5 persen dari variabilitas dalam

menerima biaya. Ini adalah hasil yang lebih baik daripada menerima pesanan dan harus meyakinkan Tracy untuk mencoba regresi berganda)

319
4.

Concluded

Regression routine with pounds of material and number of receiving orders as the independent variables (Regresi rutin dengan pon bahan dan jumlah menerima perintah sebagai variabel independen): Constant Std. Err. of Y Est. R Squared No. of Observations Degrees of Freedom X Coefficient(s) Std. Err. of Coef. V1 V2 F Y 0.0333883151096915 0.00495524841198368 752.104072925631 1350.46286973443 0.951068418023306 10 7 7.14702865269395 1.68182916088492

= $0.033 per pound of material delivered (rounded) = $7.147 per receiving order (rounded) = $752 (rounded) = $752 + $0.033a + $7.147b

R2 = 0.95, or 95% Multiple regression with both variables explains 95 percent of the variability in receiving cost. This is the best result (Regresi berganda dengan kedua variabel menjelaskan 95 persen dari variabilitas dalam menerima biaya. Ini adalah hasil terbaik).

320 1. The order should cover the variable costs described in the cost formulas. These variable costs represent flexible resources. Materials ($94 20,000) Labor ($16 20,000) Variable overhead ($80 20,000) Variable selling ($7 20,000) Total additional resource spending Divided by units produced Total unit variable cost $ 1,880,000 320,000 1,600,000 140,000 $ 3,940,000 20,000 $ 197

Garner should accept the order because it would cover total variable costs and increase income by $15 per unit ($212 $197), for a total increase of $300,000.

320

Concluded

2. The correlation coefficients indicate the reliability of the cost formulas. Of the four formulas, overhead activity may be a problem. A correlation coefficient of 0.75 means that only about 75 percent of the variability on overhead cost is explained by direct labor hours. This should have a bearing on the answer to Requirement 1 because if the percentage is low, there are activity drivers other than direct labor hours that are affecting variability in overhead cost. What these drivers are and how resource spending would change need to be known before a sound decision can be made (Koefisien korelasi

menunjukkan keandalan rumus biaya. Dari empat rumus tersebut, aktivitas overhead yang mungkin menjadi masalah. Sebuah koefisien korelasi 0,75 berarti bahwa hanya sekitar 75 persen dari variabilitas biaya overhead dijelaskan oleh jam tenaga kerja langsung. Ini harus memiliki bantalan pada jawaban Kebutuhan 1 karena jika persentase rendah, ada aktivitas penggerak/driver selain jam tenaga kerja langsung yang mempengaruhi variabilitas dalam biaya overhead. Apa driver ini dan bagaimana pengeluaran sumber daya akan berubah perlu diketahui sebelum keputusan suara dapat dibuat).

3.

Resource spending attributable to order: Material ($94 20,000) Labor ($16 20,000) Variable overhead: ($85 20,000) ($5,000 12) ($300 600) Variable selling ($7 20,000) Total additional resource spending Divided by units produced Total unit variable cost $ 1,880,000 320,000 1,700,000 60,000 180,000 140,000 $ 4,280,000 20,000 $ 214

The order would not be accepted now because it does not cover the variable activity costs. Each unit would lose $2 atau Urutan tidak akan diterima sekarang karena tidak menutupi biaya kegiatan variabel. Setiap unit akan kehilangan $ 2 ($212 $214). It would also be useful to know the step-cost functions for any activities that have resources acquired in advance of usage on a short-term basis. It is possible that there may not be enough unused activity capacity to handle the special order, and resource spending may also be affected by a need (which, in this case, would be unexpected) to expand activity capacity (Ini juga akan berguna untuk mengetahui langkah-fungsi biaya untuk setiap kegiatan yang memiliki sumber daya yang diperoleh di muka penggunaan secara jangka pendek. Ada kemungkinan bahwa ada mungkin tidak cukup aktivitas kapasitas yang tidak terpakai untuk menangani pesanan khusus, dan pengeluaran sumber daya

juga dapat dipengaruhi oleh kebutuhan (yang, dalam hal ini, akan menjadi tak terduga) untuk memperluas kapasitas aktivitas).

Ini solusi Tambahan untuk dipelajari. Dari edisi 6 (Hansen & Mowen, 2006)
321
1. High (2,000; $120,000); Low (1,200; $52,000) V = ($120,000 $52,000)/(2,000 1,200) = $85/nursing hour F = $52,000 ($85 1,200) = $50,000 This problem illustrates how the high-low method can be misleading when cost behavior patterns have changed. Fortunately, in this case, the negative value of fixed cost tells us that something is wrong (Masalah ini menggambarkan bagaimana metode tinggi-rendah dapat menyesatkan saat biaya pola perilaku telah berubah. Untungnya, dalam hal ini, nilai negatif dari biaya tetap memberitahu kita bahwa ada sesuatu yang salah. 2. a. Output of spreadsheet multiple regression routine: Constant Std. Err. of Y Est. R Squared No. of Observations Degrees of Freedom X Coefficient(s) Std. Err. of Coef. 40.8752113255057 2.2207348945557 236.211171346831 1788.59942408259 0.993939842186014 14 11 35307.5122042085 970.201096681915

b. Output of spreadsheet regression routine on 2005 data: Constant Std. Err. of Y Est. R Squared No. of Observations Degrees of Freedom X Coefficient(s) Std. Err. of Coef. 34.9533333333331 0.151087766637518 10081.3333333337 94.8068211329403 0.999887905585866 8 6

321

Concluded

c. Output of spreadsheet regression routine on 2006 data: Constant Std. Err. of Y Est. R Squared No. of Observations Degrees of Freedom X Coefficient(s) Std. Err. of Coef. 50.0216788702923 0.0238700194326353 19964.2403242688 12.0521931978647 0.999999089146329 6 4

While each regression has a high R2, the multiple regression gives unacceptable results. Notice the $35,308 coefficient on the independent variable changes. Yet, the increased fixed cost was only $10,000 per month. Regression (c) gives more reasonable results. The intercept term, $19,964, is roughly $10,000 higher than the intercept term for Regression (b), as expected. So, the hospital should use Regression (c) to budget for the rest of the year (Sementara regresi masingmasing memiliki R2 tinggi, regresi berganda memberikan hasil yang tidak dapat diterima. Perhatikan koefisien $ 35.308 pada variabel independen Namun "perubahan.", Biaya tetap meningkat hanya $ 10.000 per bulan. Regression (c) memberikan hasil yang lebih masuk akal. Istilah mencegat, $ 19.964, kira-kira $ 10.000 lebih tinggi daripada istilah intercept untuk Regresi (b), seperti yang diharapkan. Jadi, rumah sakit harus menggunakan Regresi (c) anggaran untuk sisa tahun ini). --- SELAMAT BELAJAR ---