Electronic Testing Operations (ETO)‚ a division of Seligram‚ Inc.‚ provided centralized electronic components throughout the 1980s. This centralization was estimated to save Seligram over $20 million in testing equipment investment over the next five years. ETO primarily tested for divisions within Seligram; however‚ was allowed to devote up to 10% of its testing capabilities to outside resources. Component testing is important for two main reasons. Firstly‚ if defective components are detected
Premium Cost accounting Costs Cost
1. What caused the existing system at ETO to fail? The existing system does not account for time spent in the testing facility by each set of products. It allocates burden according to ‘direct labor dollar’ incurred instead of ‘machine hours’. 2. DIRECT LABOR MAIN ROOM MECH ROOM TOTAL ICA 917 8.5 10 18.5 Accountants 183.4 680 800 2580.4 Consultants 183.4 538.4 1126.3 2765.1 Current 917 1329.7 2246.7 ICB 2051 14 26 40.0 Accountants 410.2 1120.0 2080.0 5661
Premium Electricity Labour economics
------------------------------------------------- Subject: Managerial Accounting Case 1 Seligram In the Seligram case‚ the existing cost accounting system measured two components of cost: direct labor and burden. All burden cost‚ which is the overhead‚ was grouped into a single cost pool and was calculated only by using a burden rate per direct labor dollar. This may cause problems since direct labor and overhead are not consumed by the products in the same proportion. Simply using the same burden
Premium Cost accounting Cost Costs
Was the existing system adequate in the past? Why or why not? Why is it no longer adequate? The existing system was adequate in the past due to heavy reliance on direct labor hours. The ETO served as a central cost center‚ and transferred the costs to other divisions at direct costs plus allocated burden. Being in the late 1970s and early 1980s‚ technology testing of components required fewer cycles‚ and less complicated structures. Hence‚ such testing on products could be carried out by direct
Premium Depreciation Costs
1) What caused the existing system at ETO to fail? This system was based on the assumption that direct costs and overhead are consumed in the same proportion for all product testing. However‚ this is not the case and therefore the system failed. For example‚ due to the implementation of the vendor certification and the just-in-time delivery‚ some products are already tested and do not need any further tests‚ and ETO faces a decreasing number of the tests performed. On the other hand‚ new components
Premium Depreciation
1- Describe the existing cost system and explain why it failed The current cost system is based on two components: a direct and indirect cost measurement. There are only two types of cost: direct labor and burden. Burden is grouped into a single cost pool and represents the cost of both testing rooms‚ engineering burden costs (software and tooling development)‚ plus the administrative costs of the division. Burden was then calculated for each lot‚ with a burden rate of 145% The lot’s total
Premium Costs Variable cost
ETO Case Study Analysis Seligram Incorporation‚ Electric Testing Operations (ETO) previously measured two components of cost: direct labor and manufacturing overhead. The existing cost system is very simple. Burden was grouped into a single cost pool that was combined with each of the testing rooms as well as the engineering burden costs related to software and tooling development and the administrating costs of the department. The total burden costs was then divided by the sum of testing and
Premium Depreciation Costs Cost
Cost allocation for indirect costs Cost Pool – Set of costs that are added together before being allocated to cost objects on some common basis Cost Driver/ Allocation base Cost Object Cost Driver Rate = Total Costs in Pool/ Total Quantity of Driver Where total quantity of driver = practical capacity of driver Cost of excess capacity = Cost Driver Rate * Excess capacity Predetermined overhead rate - cost per unit of the allocation base used to charge overhead to products. Predetermined
Premium Costs Cost driver Cost
rooms as well as other costs such as admin were grouped into a single cost pool and then divided by the total labor dollars. This resulted to a single burden rate of 145% of direct labor dollars (cost driver). This method is not appropriate for Seligram because the information on the case present that direct labor hours and machine hours vary by product line and activity. In addition‚ the burden cost of the main and test room also significantly vary. Therefore‚ using a single burden rate does
Premium Depreciation Mathematics Costs
and expensed (Income Statement) when goods are sold SG&A (Selling‚ General & Administrative) are periodical costs ( expensed as incurred directly in the Income Statement Economic Value: ROCE – WACC (ROCE = Return on Capital Employed) 2. Seligram Case and Anagene Case - Effective cost systems Classical cost systems: Overhead allocated based on DL$ Products that absorb many machine-hours are undercosted; vice-versa for labor-intensive products If the total overhead is allocated to
Premium Costs Management accounting Cost