Summary by Cathy Riemer
Master of Accountancy Program
University of South Florida, Summer 2002
Departmental Activity-Based Management (DABM) is a new approach that improves Activity-Based Management (ABM). One of the main problems with ABM is that it analyzes information differently than traditional accounting systems. ABM ignores departments, which are a main focal point in the tradition system. DABM incorporates the ideas of ABM and displays the information in the common language of departmental information that managers understand.
In stage one, of DABM, costs are assigned to departments instead of activities, as in ABM. Then, in stage 2, DABM uses multiple cost drivers to assign costs to specific products. Traditional accounting systems generally use one overhead base to assign costs. DABM users will generate more accurate information because it is unlikely that one overhead base will cause, or accurately represent all of the department costs.
The following two illustrations provide an example of how the same costs are allocated differently in an ABM and DABM system.
|Table 2 - Departmental Activity-Based Management*|
|Department||Cost||Total # of Moves||Cost/ Move||Number of Moves||Total Cost||Unit Cost|
|Product A||Product B||Product A||Product B||Product A (1,000 U)||Product B (2000 units|
|Table 2 - Departmental Activity-Based Management Continued *|
|Department||Cost|| Total #
|Cost per Insp.||Number of Inspections||Total Cost||Unit Cost|
|Product A||Product B||Product A||Product B||Product A (1,000 U)||Product B (2000 units|
|Total material handling and inspections cost||$314||$118|
|*Adapted from Table 2 p. 29.|
These illustrations show that DABM provides all of the same information as ABM plus four types of addition information. First, DABM establishes the cost of material handling and inspection in each department. This information can help managers in calculating the cost/benefit relationship of each department. Second, DABM calculates the different departmental rates, while ABM only calculates a company-wide average. The cost of a move in each department is calculated to help analyze plant layout, required capital investment, and skill level of employees. Third, DABM provides information on the inspection cost attributed to each department, while ABM only calculates an average cost. This provides managers with more accurate information on where they need to focus their efforts in reducing inspection and move costs. Forth, DABM provides a more detailed and accurate description of the specific product costs.
There are five general advantages of using DABM instead of ABM listed in the article. The five reasons are as follows:
1. DABM is more similar to the tradition accounting approach than ABM. Therefore, DABM is easier for a company to use and understand.
2. DABM costs significantly less to implement than ABM.
3. DABM calculates departmental costs, that can be used to perform cost/benefit analysis of decisions and to help allocate resources to specific departments.
4. DABM provides more specific information, such as, department’s cost drivers and cost rates. ABM only provides information on plant-wide activities.
5. DABM is flexible. For example, companies can work on one department at a time or numerous departments at once. Also, DABM can be broken down further than the department level, such as calculating rates for specific machines in each department.
There are a few problems that have occurred when the DABM system has been implemented. The two main problems mentioned in the article are:
1. Traditional cost system errors are not corrected when transferred into the new system.
2. Managers do not accept DABM numbers over the original numbers calculated by the tradition system.
Overall, switching to the DABM system is met with less resistance than ABM because of its similarities to the traditional approach. DABM provides more accurate and a greater amount of information than ABM, and is easier for a company to implement.
Anderson, S. W., J. W. Hesford and S. M. Young. 2002. Factors influencing the performance of activity based costing teams: A field study of ABC model development time in the automobile industry. Accounting, Organizations and Society 27(3): 195-211. (Summary).
Argyris, C. and R. S. Kaplan. 1994. Implementing new knowledge: The case of activity-based costing. Accounting Horizons (September): 83-105. (Summary).
Baxendale, S. J. and P. S. Raju. 2004. Using ABC to enhance throughput accounting: A strategic perspective. Cost Management (January/February): 31-38. (Summary).
Carter, T. L., A. M. Sedaghat and T. D. Williams. 1998. How ABC changed the post office. Management Accounting (February): 28-32, 35-36. (Summary).
Cokins, G. 1999. Using ABC to become ABM. Journal of Cost Management (January/February): 29-35. (Summary).
Cokins, G. 2002. Integrating target costing and ABC. Journal of Cost Management (July/August): 13-22. (Summary).
Cooper, R. 1990. Implementing an activity-based cost system. Journal of Cost Management (Spring): 33-42. (Summary).
Cooper, R. 1996. Activity-based management and the lean enterprise. Journal of Cost Management (Winter): 6-14. (Summary).
Cooper, R. and R. S. Kaplan. 1992. Activity-based systems: Measuring the costs of resource usage. Accounting Horizons (September): 1-13. (Summary).
Corbett, T. 2000. Throughput accounting and activity-based costing: The driving factors behind each methodology. Journal of Cost Management (January/February): 37-45. (Summary).
Gosselin, M. 1997. The effect of strategy and organizational structure on the adoption and implementation of activity-based costing. Accounting, Organizations and Society 22(2): 105-122. (Summary).
Hughes, S. B. and K. A. Paulson Gjerde. 2003. Do different cost systems make a difference? Management Accounting Quarterly (Fall): 22-30. (Summary).
Ittner, C. D., D. F. Larcker and T. Randall. 1997. The activity-based cost hierarchy, production policies and firm profitability. Journal of Management Accounting Research (9): 143-162. (Summary).
Jones, T. C. and D. Dugdale. 2002. The ABC bandwagon and the juggernaut of modernity. Accounting, Organizations and Society 27(1-2): 121-163. (Summary).
Kaplan, R. S. 1990. The four stage model of cost systems design. Management Accounting (February): 22-26. (Summary).
Kaplan, R. S. 1998. Innovation action research: Creating new management theory and practice. Journal of Management Accounting Research (10): 89-118. (Summary).
Kaplan, S. E. and J. T. Mackey. 1992. An examination of the association between organizational design factors and the use of accounting information for managerial performance evaluation. Journal of Management Accounting Research (4): 116-130. (Summary).
Kee, R. C. 2001. Implementing cost-volume-profit analysis using an activity-based costing system. Advances in Management Accounting (10): 77-94. (Summary).
Keys, D. E. 1994. Tracing costs in the three stages of activity-based management. Journal of Cost Management (Winter): 30-37. (Summary).
Keys, D. E. and A. van der Merwe. 1999. German vs. U.S. cost management. Management Accounting Quarterly (Fall): 19-26. (Summary)
Keys, D. E. and A. van der Merwe. 2002. Gaining effective organizational control with RCA. Strategic Finance (May): 41-47. (Summary).
Krumwiede, K. R. 1998. ABC: Why it's tried and how it succeeds. Management Accounting (April): 32-34, 36, 38. (Summary).
Landry, S. P., L. M. Wood and T. M. Lindquist. 1997. Can ABC bring mixed results? Management Accounting (March): 28-30, 32-33. (Summary).
Mangan, T. N. 1995. Integrating an activity-based cost system. Journal of Cost Management (Winter): 5-13. (Summary).
Martin, J. R. Not dated. Activity based management models. Management And Accounting Web. http://maaw.info/ABMModels.htm
Martin, J. R. Not dated. The CAM-I conceptual design. Chapters 1-3. Management And Accounting Web. (Summary).
Martin, J. R. Not dated. The CAM-I conceptual design. Chapter 6. Management And Accounting Web. (Summary).
Martin, J. R. Not dated. Chapter 7: Activity Based Product Costing. Management Accounting: Concepts, Techniques & Controversial Issues. Management And Accounting Web. http://maaw.info/Chapter7.htm
Martin, J. R. Not dated. Chapter 8: Just-In-Time, Theory of Constraints, and Activity Based Management Concepts and Techniques. Management Accounting: Concepts, Techniques & Controversial Issues. Management And Accounting Web. http://maaw.info/Chapter8.htm
Mecimore, C. D. and A. T. Bell. 1995. Are we ready for fourth-generation ABC? Management Accounting (January): 22-26. (Summary).
Palmer, R. J. and M. Vied. 1998. Could ABC threaten the survival of your company? Management Accounting (November): 33-36. (Summary).
Ruhl, J. M. and B. P. Hartman. 1998. Activity-based costing in the service sector. Advances in Management Accounting (6): 147-161. (Summary).
Sandison, D., S. C. Hansen and R. G. Torok. 2003. Activity-based planning and budgeting: A new approach. Journal of Cost Management (March/April): 16-22. (Summary).
Troxel, R. and M. Weber. 1990. The evolution of activity-based costing. Journal of Cost Management (Spring):14-22. (Summary).
Turney, P. B. B. 1990. Ten myths about implementing an activity-based costing system. Journal of Cost Management (Spring): 24-32. (Summary).
West, T. D. and D. A. West. 1997. Applying ABC to healthcare. Management Accounting (February): 22, 24-26, 28-30, 32-33. (Summary).
Zeller, T. L. 2000. Measuring and managing e-retailing with activity-based costing. Journal of Cost Management (January/February): 17-30. (Summary).