Chapter 12

Cost Allocation and Activity-Based

Costing

LEARNING OBJECTIVES:
When your students have finished studying this chapter, they should be
able to:

1. Explain the major reasons for allocating costs.

2. Allocate the variable and fixed costs of service departments to

other organizational units.

3. Allocate the central costs of an organization.

4. Use the direct and step-down methods to allocate service

department costs to user departments.

5. Describe the traditional approach to allocating costs to products or

services.

6. Use activity-based costing to allocate costs in a modern

manufacturing environment to products or services.

7. Use the physical-units and relative-sales-value methods to allocate

229
 joint costs to products.

8. Understand how cost allocation is used in cost planning and control.

230
CHAPTER 12: OVERVIEW
This chapter looks at cost allocation and activity-based costing.

Section One: Provides a general discussion of cost allocation as the

linking of costs with cost objectives. Also, the four major
purposes and three types of allocation are specified.

Section Two: Focuses on the allocation of service departments.

General guidelines are presented with variable costs and
fixed costs treated separately. Potential troubles with the
use of lump sum allocations for fixed costs are examined
and some solutions mentioned. Also covered are
allocations of central costs and the use of budgeted sales
for allocation purposes. Allocations of reciprocal services
using the direct and step-down methods are illustrated and
discussed. Finally, mention is made of what to do when a
single cost driver is not sufficient to explain the cause of a
department's costs.

Section Three: Covers the allocation of costs to outputs. A general

approach to allocating costs to final products or services is
provided.

Section Four: Looks at activity-based costing (ABC). The principles of

ABC are discussed, an example of its application provided,
and data regarding the effects on product costs of
implementing ABC at one company are given.

Section Five: Examines the allocation of joint costs to joint products

and the accounting for by-products. Both the physical
units and relative sales value methods of allocating joint
costs to joint products are presented and illustrated.

231
CHAPTER 12: ASSIGNMENTS
EXERCISES

23 Fixed- and Variable-Cost Pools

24 Sales-Based Allocations
25 Direct and Step-Down Allocations, Activity-Based
Allocation and Process Map
26 Direct and Step-Down Allocations
27 Joint Costs
28 Joint Costs and Process Map
29 By-Product Costing

PROBLEMS

30 Hospital Allocation Base

31 Cost of Passenger Traffic
32 Allocation of Automobile Costs
33 Allocation of Costs
34 Hospital Equipment
35 Direct Method for Service Department Allocation
36 Step-Down Method for Service Department Allocation
37 Direct and Step-Down Methods of Allocation
38 Activity-Based Allocations
39 Activity-Based Allocations at Dell Computer (Business
First)
40 Joint Costs and Decisions

CASES

41 Allocation, Department Rates, and Direct-Labor Hours

Versus Machine-Hours
42 Multiple Allocation Bases
43 Allocation of Data Processing Costs

COLLABORATIVE LEARNING EXERCISE

44 Library Research on ABC

45 Internet Exercise - http://www.target.com.

232
CHAPTER 12: OUTLINE
I. Cost Allocation in General

Cost allocation is fundamentally a problem of linking (1) some cost

or groups of costs with (2) one or more cost objectives (e.g.,
products, departments, and divisions). Ideally, cost allocation
should assign each cost to the cost objective that caused it.
Linking of costs with cost objectives is accomplished by selecting
cost drivers (i.e., activities that cause costs). Cost-Allocation
Base - a cost driver when it is used for allocating costs. Cost Pool
- a group of individual costs that is allocated to cost objectives
using a single cost driver. Several terms are used to describe the
process of assigning costs to cost objectives. Terms frequently used
include allocate, apply, absorb, reallocate, trace, assign, distribute,
redistribute, load, burden, apportion, and reapportion.

A. Allocation and Cost Management Decisions {L. O.

1}
1. To predict the economic effects of planning
and control decisions. Managers within an
organizational unit should be aware of all the
consequences of their decisions, inside and outside of
their unit.

2. To obtain desired motivation. Cost allocations are

sometimes made to influence management behavior
and, thus, promote goal congruence and managerial
effort. If management wants to encourage the use of a
service, it may choose not to allocate the costs of
providing the service. If it wants managers to make
sure that the benefits of using a service exceed its costs,
costs are allocated.

3. To compute income and asset valuations. Costs

are allocated to projects and products to measure
inventory costs and cost of goods sold for financial
reporting purposes, and for use in planning and
performance evaluation.

233
4. To justify costs or obtain reimbursement.
Sometimes prices are based directly on costs (e.g.,
government contracts often specify a price that includes
reimbursement of costs plus some profit margin).

234
 Allocating fixed costs usually causes the greatest problems.
When all four purposes cannot be attained simultaneously,
the manager and the accountant should start attacking a
cost-allocation problem by trying to identify which of the four
purposes should dominate in the particular situation at hand.
Often inventory-costing purposes dominate by default.

B. Three Types of Allocations

See EXHIBIT 12-1 for the three basic types of allocations.

1. Allocation of costs to the appropriate

organizational unit: Direct costs are physically traced
to the unit. However, costs used jointly by more than
one unit are allocated based on cost-driver activity in
the unit.

2. Reallocation of costs from one organizational unit

to another: When one unit provides products or
services to another, the costs are transferred along with
the products or services. Service Departments - exist
only to support other departments (e.g., accounting and
human resources), and their costs are totally
reallocated.

3. Allocation of costs of a particular organizational

unit to products or services: The costs allocated to
products or services include those allocated to the
organizational unit in allocation Types 1 and 2.

II. Allocation of Service Department Costs {L. O. 2}

A. General Guidelines (see EXHIBIT 12-2)

The preferred guidelines for allocating service departments

are:

1. Evaluate performance using budgets for each

service (staff) department, just as they are used for
each production or operating (line) department. The
performance of a service department is evaluated by
comparing actual costs with a budget, regardless of how

235
the costs are later allocated. From the budget, variable-
cost pools and fixed-cost pools can be identified for use
in allocation.

236
 2. Allocate variable- and fixed-cost pools separately
(sometimes called the dual method of allocation). Note
that one service department (e.g., a computer
department) can contain multiple cost pools if more
than one cost driver causes the department's cost. At a
minimum, there should be a variable-cost pool and a
fixed-cost pool.

3. Establish part or all of the details regarding cost

allocation in advance of rendering the service rather
than after the fact. This approach establishes the "rules
of the game" so that all departments can plan
appropriately.

B. Variable-Cost Pool

Variable costs should be allocated as follows:

budgeted unit rate x actual hours of cost driver

The use of budgeted cost rates rather than actual cost rates
for allocating variable costs of service departments protects
the using departments from intervening price fluctuations and
inefficiencies in the service departments. When an
organization allocates actual total service department costs, it
holds user department managers responsible for costs
beyond their control and provides less incentive for service
departments to be efficient.

C. Fixed-Cost Pool

The cost driver for the fixed-cost pool is the amount of

capacity required when the service department was
instituted. Therefore, fixed costs should be allocated as
follows

budgeted percent of capacity available for use

x total budgeted fixed costs

The predetermined lump-sum approach is based on the long-

run capacity available to the user, regardless of actual usage
from month to month. The level of fixed costs is affected by
long-range planning regarding the overall level of service and

237
the relative expected usage, not by short-run fluctuations in
service levels and relative actual usage. A major strength is
that a user department's allocation is not affected by the
actual usage of other user departments.

238
D. Troubles with Using Lump Sums

If fixed costs are allocated on the basis of long-range plans,

there is a natural tendency on the part of consumers to
underestimate their planned usage and thus obtain a smaller
fraction of the cost allocation. Top management can
counteract these tendencies by monitoring predictions, and
by following up and using feedback to keep future predictions
more honest. In addition, rewards may be given for accurate
predictions and penalties set (e.g., through higher charges)
for usage above that predicted.

E. Allocation of Central Costs {L. O. 3}

Whenever possible, the preferred cost driver for central
services is usage, either actual or estimated. For some
central services (e.g., data processing, advertising, and
operations research), usage appears to be a reasonable basis
to allocate costs. For others (e.g., public relations, top
corporate management overhead, a real estate department,
and a corporate planning department), usage seems an
inappropriate base. For these types of costs, companies
frequently use revenues as the cost driver, which represents
an "ability to bear" philosophy rather than portraying any
cause and effect relationship.

F. Use of Budgeted Sales for Allocation

If the costs of central services are to be allocated based on

sales, even though the costs do not vary in proportion to
sales, the use of budgeted sales is preferable to the use of
actual sales. At least this method means that the short-run
costs of a given consuming department will not be affected by
the fortunes of other consuming departments.

239
G. Reciprocal Services {L. O. 4}
Service departments often support other service departments
in addition to producing departments. See EXHIBIT 12-3 for
relevant data in regard to an example, which is used to
demonstrate two popular methods for allocating service
department costs: the direct method and the step-down
method.

1. Direct Method

Direct Method - ignores other service departments

when any given service department's costs are
allocated to the revenue-producing (operating)
departments. The costs of operating the service
departments are allocated directly to operating
departments with no intermediate allocations for the
services provided to other service departments.

2. Step-Down Method

Step-Down Method - recognizes that some service

departments support the activities in other service
departments as well as those in production
departments. A sequence of allocations is chosen,
usually by starting with the service department that
renders the greatest service (as measured by costs) to
the greatest number of other service departments. The
last service department in the sequence is the one that
renders the least service to the least number of other
service departments. Once a department's costs are
allocated to other departments, no subsequent service
department costs are allocated back to it. See EXHIBIT
12-4 for an illustration of the application of the step-
down allocation method for the text example.

H. Comparison of the Methods

See EXHIBIT 12-5 for a comparison of the costs ultimately

allocated to the producing departments. The method of
allocation can greatly affect the amounts distributed to
different producing departments. If significant differences are

240
not generated, companies typically use the direct method is
usually used due to its simplicity.

241
 A third method, the Reciprocal Method, provides the most
theoretical accuracy because it fully realizes reciprocal
services by service departments to each other. With this
method, simultaneous equations and linear algebra are used
to solve for the impact of mutually interacting services. Due
to the difficulty managers have in understanding the
application of this method, it is rarely used in practice. This
method is not presented in the text. [See the article by
Brown and Killough in the recommended readings for a
treatment of this method using the matrix algebra function in
computer spreadsheet packages.]

I. Costs Not Related to Cost Drivers

The examples used in the text thus far have assumed that the
costs in a given service department were caused by a single
cost driver. The costs were then allocated using this single
cost driver. If some costs in the service department are not
related to a single cost driver, three alternative methods of
cost allocation should be considered.

1. Identify additional cost drivers. Divide the costs in

the service department into two or more cost pools and
use a different cost driver to allocate the costs in each
pool.

2. Divide the service department costs into two cost

pools, one with costs that vary in proportion to the cost
driver (variable costs), and one with costs not affected
by the cost driver (fixed costs). Allocate the former
using the direct or step-down method, but do not
allocate the latter. Costs not allocated are period costs
for the organization and are not regarded as a cost of a
particular production department.

3. Allocate all costs by the direct or step-down

method using a single cost driver. This assumption
implicitly assumes that, in the long run, the cost driver
causes all of the service department's costs, even if a
short-term causal relationship is not easily identifiable.

242
III. Allocation of Costs to Final Cost Objects {L. O. 5}
So far the chapter has discussed allocations of costs to
departments or segments of an organization. Cost allocation is
often carried one step further, to the outputs (e.g., products, parts,
services) of these departments. Cost Application (or cost
attribution) - the allocation of total departmental costs to the
revenue-producing products or services.

A. Traditional Approach

1. Allocate production-related costs to operating

(line), or production or revenue-producing departments.
This includes allocating service department costs to the
production departments following the guidelines
provided earlier.

2. Select one or more cost drivers in each production

department.

3. Allocate (apply) the total costs accumulated in Step 1

to products or services that are the outputs of the
operating departments using the cost drivers specified
in Step 2. If only one cost driver is used, two cost pools
should be maintained: one for variable costs and one for
fixed costs. Variable costs should be allocated on the
basis of actual cost-driver activity. Fixed costs should
either remain unallocated or be allocated on the basis of
budgeted cost-driver activity.

IV. Activity-Based Costing (ABC) Approach {L. O.

6}
TEACHING TIP: Internet site see the following for ABC:
http://www.taxsites.com/managerial.htm/
(Activity-Based Costing)

In the past, companies used direct-labor hours to apply the costs of

departments to units of product. However, direct-labor hours are
not a very good measure of the cause of costs in modern, highly
automated departments. As a result, companies are implementing

243
activity-based costing (ABC) to develop measures that better reflect
the consumption of resources and related costs in their
environment by accumulating costs into key activities.

244
Both direct-labor hours and machine hours are volume measures. If
many costs are caused by non-volume-based cost drivers, ABC
should be considered. As Chapter 4 states, ABC is a system that
first accumulates the costs of each activity of an organization and
then applies the costs of activities to the products, services, or
other cost objects using appropriate cost drivers. The ABC system
takes one large overhead cost pool and breaks it down into several
pools, each associated with a key activity.

The goal of activity-based costing is to trace the costs to products

or services instead of arbitrarily allocating them. While it is
relatively easy to trace direct material and labor to products using
physical measures, advocates of ABC maintain that, by using
appropriate cost drivers, many manufacturing overhead costs can
also be physically traced to products or services.

A. Illustration of Activity-Based Costing Approach in

Manufacturing

The text provides an illustration of an ABC system for a plastic

parts manufacturer using the four-step procedure that was
introduced in Chapter 4 (see EXHIBIT 12-6 for the product
cost based on the former costing system). First the costs
objectives are determined to be the three product lines of the
plastic parts manufacturer. The activity centers, cost drivers,
and resources used in the molding department were identified
and are presented in EXHIBIT 12-7. Next, the
interrelationships between activities and resources were
determined based on interviews with key personnel, and a
process-based map representing the flow of activities,
resources and their interrelationship was developed. See
EXHIBIT 12-8 for the process-based map of the molding
department operations. Using the process map as a guide,
the accountants then collected the required cost and
operational data via further interviews. Finally, EXHIBIT 12-
9 presents the key results of the activity based costing study.
These results indicate that Product Line C is indeed being
under-costed, was more complex, produced in small lots and,
therefore, required significantly more setup costs.

B. Effect of Activity-Based Costing

Data from the Schrader Bellows company are presented in

245
EXHIBIT 12-10, which shows that products with the highest
sales volume and fewer setups per unit showed slight
decreases in costs when comparing the activity-based costs
to those generated under the old system.

246
V. Allocation of Joint Costs and By-Product Costs {L.
O. 7}
A. Joint Costs

Sometimes inputs are added to the production process before

individual products are separately identifiable (i.e., before the
split-off point). The costs of these inputs (e.g., materials,
labor, and overhead costs) are called joint costs. While
allocations of these costs to the products, which emerge from
the joint process, should not affect decisions regarding
whether to process the products further, allocations are
routinely made for inventory valuation and income
determination purposes.

Two conventional ways of allocating joint costs to products are

widely used: physical units and relative sales values. They
allocate the joint costs to the joint products in proportion to
their number of physical units or sales dollars generated by
the joint products. A twist on the relative-sales-value method
is necessary when a joint product cannot be sold at the split-
off point. Therefore, the sales value is approximated using

Sales value at split-off = Final sales value -

Separable costs

B. By-Product Costs

By-Product - a product that, like a joint product, is not

individually identifiable until manufacturing reaches a split-off
point. By-products differ from joint products because they
have relatively insignificant total sales values in comparison
with other products emerging at split-off (e.g., glycerin from
soap making and mill ends of cloth and carpets).

If an item is accounted for as a by-product, only separable

costs are allocated to it. All joint costs are allocated to the
main products. Any revenues from by-products, less their
separable costs, are deducted from the cost of the main
products.

247
CHAPTER 12: TRANSPARENCY MASTERS

The following exhibits are reproduced as transparency masters at the end

of this manual:

Exhibit 12-1 Three Types of Cost Allocations

Exhibit 12-3 Cost Drivers

Exhibit 12-4 Step-Down Allocation

Exhibit 12-5 Direct Versus Step-Down Method

Exhibit 12-7 Activity Centers, Cost Drivers, and Resources

Exhibit 12-9 Key Results of Activity-Based-Costing Study

Exhibit 12-10 Comparison of Costing Systems

248
CHAPTER 12: Quiz/Demonstration Exercises
Learning Objective 1

1. Major purposes for allocating costs are

a. to predict the economic effects of planning and control

decisions.
b. to obtain desired motivation.
c. to compute income and asset valuations.
d. to justify costs or obtain reimbursement.
e. all of these.

2. The following purposes of allocation relate to planning and control:

a. obtain desired motivation and compute income and asset

valuations
b. obtain desired motivation and predict economic
consequences
c. predict economic consequences and justify costs
d. compute income valuations and obtain reimbursement

Learning Objective 2

Use the following information for questions 3 and 4.

The city of Clare leases a photocopy machine, which it uses in its

Copy Services Department for $2,500 per month plus 4 per copy
made. In addition to the lease costs, operating costs for toner,
paper, operator salaries, and so on are variable at 7/copy. All
departments of the city combined estimated that they would make
a total of 70,000 copies per month. The Parks and Recreation
Department estimated that they would make 10,000 copies per
month on average. In June, the Parks and Recreation Department
made 12,000 copies and the total number of copies made by Copy
Services for the month were 58,000.

3. Following the guidelines of allocating variable- and fixed-costs of

service departments separately, the variable costs of the Copy
Services Department that should be allocated to the Parks and
Recreation Department in June are

249
 a. $480 b. $840 c. $1,130 d. $1,320 e. some other
amount.

250
4. Following the guidelines of allocating variable- and fixed-costs of
service departments separately, the fixed costs of the Copy
Services Department that should be allocated to the Parks and
Recreation Department in June are

a. $0 b. $200 c. $357 d. $2,500 e. some other

amount.

Learning Objective 3

5. A method of allocating central costs of an organization to divisions,

which clearly fails to demonstrate a cause-and-effect relationship, is
to

a. allocate on the basis of sales dollars.

b. allocate based on the actual usage of the service.
c. allocate based on the estimated usage of the service.
d. do none of these.

6. Which of the following is an example of a central service?

a. public relations
b. legal services
c. accounting
d. advertising
e. all of the above

251
Learning Objective 4

Use the following information for questions 7 and 8.

The St. Edmond Corporation operates two service and two

producing departments in its production of golf clubs. The
budgeted direct costs and other pertinent data for an upcoming
month follow.

Service Departments Production

Departments
Maintenance Personnel Fabrication
Assembly

Direct costs $144,000 $80,000 $280,000$320,000

Machine hours - - 30,000 20,000
# of employees 20 16 60 100

Personnel costs are allocated based on the number of employees

and maintenance costs are allocated based on machine hours.

7. The amount of maintenance costs allocated to the Assembly

Department using the direct method of cost allocation would be

a. $32,000 b. $48,000 c. $57,600 d. $86,400.

8. The amount of maintenance costs (to the nearest dollar) allocated

to the Fabrication Department using the step-down method would
be

a. $8,888 b. $54,000 c. $86,400 d. $91,733.

Learning Objective 5

9. The traditional approach to allocation of costs to the final cost

objects focuses on:

a. accumulating costs within departments and then allocating

departmental costs to producing departments, and finally to
products, services, or customers.
b. accumulating costs within producing departments and then
allocating producing department costs to departments, and
finally to products, services, or customers.

252
c. accumulating costs by products, services, or customers and
deriving a cost per unit.
d. none of the above.

253
10. The general approach to cost allocation:

a. selects one cost driver for all production departments.

b. allows for the same cost driver for both variable and fixed
costs.
c. promotes fixed costs to remain unallocated or be allocated on
the basis of actual cost-driver activity.
d. does not allow allocation of service department costs to
production departments.
e. none of the above.

Learning Objective 6

Use the following information for questions 11 and 12.

Cruise Industries has four categories of overhead. The four

categories and expected overhead costs for each category for next
year are:

Inspection $ 30,000
Maintenance 60,000
Materials Handling 9,000
Setups 8,000

Currently overhead is applied using a predetermined overhead rate

based upon budgeted direct labor hours, and 20,000 direct labor
hours are budgeted for next year.
The company has been asked to submit a bid for a proposed job.
The company bases its bids on full manufacturing costs. Estimates
for the proposed job are as follows:

Direct materials $ 2,000

Direct labor (400 hours) 4,000

Number of material moves 10 Number of inspections 2

Number of setups 5 Number of machine hours
40

In the past, full manufacturing cost has been calculated by

allocating overhead using a volume-based cost driver, direct labor
hours. Expected activity for the four activity-based cost drivers
that would be used are:

254
 Machine hours 5,000 Material moves
600
Setups 200 Quality inspections
1,000

255
11. If direct labor hours are used as the cost driver, the total cost of the
proposed job would be

a. $5,140 b. $6,000 c. $8,140 d. $10,280.

12. If the activity-based cost drivers are used to assign overhead, the
total cost of the proposed job would be

a. $890 b. $6,890 c. $8,140 d. $10,280.

Learning Objective 7

Use the following for questions 13 and 14.

S&J produces two products through a single manufacturing process.

Each batch of product results in 400 pounds of product S and 600
pounds of product J. The process requires materials, labor, and
manufacturing overhead costing $50,000 per batch. S sells for $30
per pound, while J sells for $20 per pound.

13. Using the physical units method of allocating joint production costs
would result in an allocation to product S of

a. $0 b. $20,000 c. $30,000 d. $50,000.

14. Using the relative sales value approach of allocating joint

production costs would result in an allocation to product S of

a. $10,000 b. $25,000 c. $30,000 d. $40,000.

256
CHAPTER 12: Solutions to
Quiz/Demonstration Exercises

1. [e] 2. [b]

3. [d] The allocation of variable costs: the variable portion of

the lease of 4 per copy and the Copying Services variable
operating costs of 7 per copy. The actual number of copies
made (12,000) is multiplied by the variable cost of 11 per
copy to give $1,320 allocated.

4. [c] For fixed costs, the $1,000 monthly lease cost on the
copier should be allocated in proportion to the expected
usage. 10,000/50,000 gives 20%, times $1,000 to give $200
allocated.

5. [a] 6. [e]

7. [c] The $144,000 of maintenance cost is allocated based on

machine hours. Assembly uses 40% [20,000 of 50,000 total
machine hours] resulting in a $57,600 allocation.

8. [d] With the step-down method, Personnel costs are

allocated first with $8,888.88 [$80,000 x (20/(20 + 60 +
100))] allocated to the Maintenance department. Then, of the
$152,888,88 now in Maintenance, $91,733.33 [$152,888.88 x
(30,000/(30,000 + 20,000))] would be allocated to the
Fabrication Department.

9. [a] 10. [e]

11. [c] The total cost consists of direct material ($2,000), direct labor
($4,000), and applied overhead. The overhead rate is $5.35
per labor hour [($30,000 + $60,000 + $9,000 +

257
$8,000)/20,000 direct labor hours]. Applying the $5.35 rate to
400 direct labor hours for the job gives $2,140 of overhead
applied to this job. Adding this to the $2,000 direct materials
and $4,000 direct labor gives $8,140 total cost.

258
12. [b] Rates are $12/machine hour for maintenance
[$60,000/5,000], $15/move for materials handling
[$9,000/600], $40/setup [$8,000/200], and $30/inspection
[$30,000/1,000]:
Maintenance (40 machine hours @ $12) $480
Materials handling (10 moves @ $15) 150
Setups (5 setups @ $40) 200
Inspections (2 @ $30) 60
Total overhead costs applied $890

Adding this to the $6,000 of materials and labor costs

gives $6,890.

13. [b] Based on physical units, S would be allocated 40% [400

pounds/(400 pounds + 600 pounds)] of the $50,000 of joint
processing costs, or $20,000.

14. [b] Each product can be sold for $12,000. Product S has 400
pounds at $30 per pound, and product J has 600 pounds at
$20 per pound. Thus, the total sales value of the two
products is $12,000, and each product would be allocated
$25,000 [50% x $50,000 joint production costs].

259
CHAPTER 12: SUGGESTED READINGS

Abrahams, M. and M. N. Reavely. "Activity-Based Costing: Illustrations

from the State of Iowa", Government Finance Review, April 1998,
v.14 i.2, p.15.

Acton, D. D. and W. D. J. Cotton. Activity-Based Costing in a University

Setting, Journal of Cost Management, March/April 1997, 32-38.

Adams, S. J. Quality Dairy Case, Issues in Accounting Education, Fall

1997, 385-398.

Albright, T. L. and T. Smith. Software for Activity-Based Costing, Journal

of Cost Management, Summer 1996, 47-58.

Anderson, S. W. A Framework for Assessing Cost Management System

Changes: The Case of Activity-Based Costing Implementation at
General Motors, 1986-1993, The Journal of Management
Accounting Research, Vol. 7, Fall 1995, 1-51.

Baxendale, S. J. "Activity-Based Costing for a Claims Processing

Operation", CPCU Journal, Summer 1999, v.52 i.2, p.84.

Biddle, G. C. and R. Steinberg. "Allocations of Joint and Common

Costs," Journal of Accounting Literature, Spring 1984, 1-46.

Borden, J. P. "Review Of The Literature On Activity-Based Costing,"

Journal of Cost Management, Spring 1990, 5-12.

Brandt, M., Levine, S. and J. Gourdoux. "Application of Activity-Based

Cost Management", Professional Safety, January 1999, v.44 i.1,
p.22.

Brewer, P., Campbell, R. and R. McClure. "Wilson Electronics (A) and (B):
An ABC Capstone Experience", Issues in Accounting Education,
August 2000, v.15 i.3, p.413.

Brimson, J. A. Feature Costing: Beyond ABC, Journal of Cost

Management, January/February 1998, 6-12.

Carter, T. L., A. M. Sedaghat and T. D. Williams. How ABC Changed the

Post Office, Management Accounting, February 1998, 28-37.

260
Cheatham, C. and M. Green. "Teaching Accounting for Byproducts,"
Management Accounting, Spring 1988, 14-15.

261
Cooper, R. "The Rise Of Activity-Based Costing: How Many Cost Drivers
Do You Need And How Do You Select Them?" Journal of Cost
Management, Winter 1988, 34-45.

Dilley, S. C., F. H. Jacobs and R. M. Marshall. The Tax Benefits of ABC,

Journal of Accountancy, March 1997, 34-38.

Eiler, R. G. and J. P. Campi. "Implementing Activity-Based Costing at a

Process Company," Journal of Cost Management, Spring 1991, 43-
50.

Ellis-Newman, J. and P. Robinson. "The Cost of Library Services: Activity-

Based Costing in an Australian Academic Library", Journal of
Academic Librarianship, September 1998, v.24 i.5, p.373.

Gearhart, J. "Activity Based Management and Performance

Measurement Systems", Government Finance Review, February
1999, v.15 i.1, p.13.

Gosselin, M. The Effect of Strategy and Organizational Structure on

the Adoption and Implementation of Activity-Based Costing,
Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 22 No. 2, 1997, 105-
122.

Hicks, D. T. "Activity-Based Costing: Making it Work for Small

and Mid-Sized Companies", (New York, NY: Wiley & Sons, Inc.),
1999, Second Edition, pp.357.

Hyde, A. C. and H. U. Yi. "Everything You ever Really Needed to Know

about ABC Is on the Web", Public Manager, Spring 1998, v.27
i.1, p.60.

Ingram, R. W., W. C. Parsons and W. A. Robbins. Instructional Case:

Oak Citys Cost Allocation and Determination, Issues in
Accounting Education, February 1998, 157-171.

Ittner, C. The Activity-Based Cost Hierarchy: Production Possibilities,

Policies and Firm Profitability, The Journal of Management
Accounting Research, Vol. 9 1997, 143-162.

Kaplan, R. S. "Innovation Action Research: Creating New Management

Theory and Practice", Journal of Management Accounting
Research, 1998, v.10, p.89.

262
Kee, R. Integrating Activity-Based Costing with the Theory of
Constraints to Enhance Production-Related Decision-Making,
Accounting Horizons, December 1995, 48-61.

Krumwiede, K. R. ABC: Why Its Tried and How It Works, Management

Accounting, April 1998, 32-38.

Krupnicki, M. and T. Tyson. Using ABC to Determine the Cost of

Servicing Customers, Management Accounting, December 1997,
40-46.

Landry, S. P., L. M. Wood and T. M. Lindquist. Can ABC Bring Mixed

Results? Management Accounting, March 1997, 28-33.

Lee, J. Y., R. Jacob and M. Ulinski. "Activity-Based Costing and Japanese

Cost Management Techniques: A Comparison," Advances in
Management Accounting, 1994, v3(1), 179-196.

McGuire, B. L., M. C. Kocakulah and J. W. Dague. Using ABC to Identify

Cost Drivers in a Manufacturing Environment, Journal of Cost
Management, September/October 1997, 22-28.

Norris, G. "User Perceptions of an Application of Activity-Based

Costing," Advances in Management Accounting, 1994, v3(1),
139-178.

Palmer, R. and L. Green. "ITT Automotive North America: A Case Study

Requiring Use of Benchmarking, Activity/Process Analysis", Issues
in Accounting Education, August 1999, v.14 i.3, p.465.

Platt, D. and K. Towry. "Pecos Products: A Project Introducing Complexity

into the Study of Activity-Based Costing", Issues in Accounting
Education, February 2001, v.16 i.1, p.99.

Player, R. S. and D. E. Keys. Lessons from the ABM Battlefield: Getting

Off to the Right Start, Journal of Cost Management, Spring 1995,
26-38.

Player, R. S. and D. E. Keys. Lessons from the ABM Battlefield:

Developing the Pilot, Journal of Cost Management, Summer
1995, 20-35.

263
Player, R. S. and D. E. Keys. Lessons from the ABM Battlefield: Moving
from Pilot to Mainstream, Journal of Cost Management, Fall 1995,
31-41.

Radhakrishnan, S. and B. Srinidhi. Avoiding the Death Spiral: A Case

for Activity-Based Costing, Journal of Cost Management, Winter
1997, 19-24.

Roberts, M. W. and K. J. Silvester. Why ABC Failed and How It May Yet
Succeed, Journal of Cost Management, Winter 1996, 23-35.

Salafatinos, C. Integrating the Theory of Constraints and Activity-

Based Costing, Journal of Cost Management, Fall 1995, 58-67.

Shields, M. D. An Empirical Analysis of Firms Implementation

Experiences with Activity-Based Costing, The Journal of
Management Accounting Research, Vol. 7, Fall 1995, 148-166.

Shields, M. D. and M. A. McEwen. Implementing Activity-Based Costing

Systems Successfully, Journal of Cost Management, Winter 1996,
15-22.

Stout, D. and D. Wygal. "Making Byproducts A Main Product Of

Discussion: A Challenge To Accounting Educators," Journal of
Accounting Education, 1989, 219-233.

Thorne, H. and B. Gurd. Some Human Aspects of Implementing

Activity-Based Management, Journal of Cost Management, Fall
1995, 50-57.

Trenchard, P. M. and R. Dixon. "Total Quality Management in Non-Profit

Secondary Health Care", Total Quality Management, September
1999, v.10 i.7, p.979.

Vieceli, J. "Technology for Activity-Based Costing", Government Finance

Review, April 2000, v.16 i.2, p.49.

West, T. D. and D. A. West, Applying ABC to Healthcare, Management

Accounting, February 1997, 22-33.

Yennie, H. "ABC: The New Cost-Cutting Tool", Behavioral Health

Management, September/October 1999, v.19 i.5, p.26.

264