KEENER DOORS AND WINDOWS COMPANY

In September, Larissa Keener was asked to explore new methods of cost accounting for Keener Doors and Windows Company, which is owned by her father. Simon Keener wants to control costs better because his small window and patio door manufacturing company competes with large corporations that dominate the market.

First, Larissa decided to analyze the cost system in the company's patio door division. Half of the company's total volume of sales came from patio doors. The patio door division contained drilling and grinding machines, glass cutting equipment, and assembly space. All the operations for the production of patio doors were completed here.

The division occupied nearly half the total floor space in the two-story plant. The glass cutting department was located on the first floor of the plant and occupied about a third of that floor. The office and the frames department were also located on the first floor. Two other departments (hardware and grinding/machining), as well as the tool room and stock room, were all located on the second floor. Part of the assembly department was located on the first floor and part of it was on the second floor.

As an order came in, several departments began work at the same time. In the glass cutting department, glass was cut and edges were beveled for each order. In the frames department, door frames were cut from metal sheeting. The grinding and machining department smoothed and rounded the edges of the frames. The hardware for each door was assembled or manufactured in the hardware department. Each department sent their completed jobs to the assembly department where the doors for each order were assembled and then shipped out.

Larissa discovered that her fathers accountant used a division-wide allocation pool and used direct labor hours as an allocation base. The hours each batch of product spent in every department were tracked. When the batch was complete, manufacturing overhead and direct labor costs were lumped together and allocated based on the number of hours the product had spent in all of the departments. Exhibit 1 shows the number of direct labor hours and the amount of overhead for the month of March. The overhead application rate for the company is also calculated.

Larissa believed that the costing system was not very accurate. She was concerned that product costs might appear distorted under this method. She thought that collecting data by department and allocating the costs of the department to work done by that department would better reflect the flow of resources. The company already tracked the time each order spent in every department, so that information could be used as the allocation base.

Larissa remembered that she needed to trace as many costs as possible to each department and then assign those costs that couldnt be traced. She dug out her cost accounting textbook from college to review the job costing method. She decided to assign all of the costs of the building and equipment first. She allocated building-related costs such as depreciation, insurance, utilities, and property taxes based on each departments square footage. She traced other costs, such as supervisors salaries and indirect supplies used to each department. Exhibit 2 outlines the costs for each department.

She decided to analyze the cost of several different types of products using this new system and to compare the new costs to the old costs. Standard doors use standard hardware, which is supplied to the assembly department by a vendor. Therefore the orders do not go through the hardware department. The following work is done per batch of standard patio doors.

Department Hours

Glass Cutting 30

Frames 50

Grinding and Machining 20

Assembly 100

Larissa found a big difference for standard doors under the old and proposed systems. She felt that the current method probably misled managers about the profitability of these doors

The company needs to keep spare parts on hand for contractors doing repairs to their windows and doors. Since these parts are needed immediately, spare parts inventory can be large at times. Larissa believed that under the old method, the cost of spare parts inventory may not accurately reflect the resources used in production. The following amounts of time were usually spent on producing spare parts each month:

Department Hours

Glass Cutting 75

Frames 25

Grinding and machining 50

Hardware 375

Larissa decided to present her new system in a managers meeting. She was surprised at the reaction of the various department managers. One concern was the amount of work that Patio Doors did for other divisions in the company. The Hardware Department made most of the hardware for all of the other divisions, and Grinding and Machining did many jobs for other divisions. In March the following hours were spent for other divisions work.

Department Hours

Glass Cutting 200

Grinding and Machining 500

Hardware 800

The other division managers thought that changing these costs would penalize them under their current budgets. They also complained that they had no control over the costs in the Patio Doors Division. The manager of the sales division was particularly concerned about how these new costs would affect pricing. And the head of the Patio Doors Division thought that the increased paper work would not be worth the effort. His division was providing good service to other departments and always timely in delivering product, so he saw no need to change now.

Simon Keener was unsure which method was better. He wondered if the new method would have any effect on profitability.

Exhibit 1

KEENER DOORS AND WINDOWS

Assigning Direct Labor Cost and Manufacturing Overhead to Jobs Current Method

March

Department	Labor Charge per Month	Overhead	Total
Glass Cutting	$15,000
Frames	$15,000
Grinding & Machining	$35,000
Hardware	$23,100
Assembly	$24,000
Total	$112,100	$147,600	$259,700

Total number of hours worked: 9,600/month

Average hourly charge: $259,7009,600 = $27.05 predetermined overhead application rate

Exhibit 2

KEENER DOORS AND WINDOWS

Assigning Direct Labor Cost and Manufacturing Overhead to Jobs Proposed Method

March

Section	Total Hours	Labor Charge Per Hour	Overhead Charge Per Hour	Total Cost Per Hour
Glass Cutting	1,000	$15.00	$14.00	$29.00
Frames	1,500	$10.00	$8.00	$18.00
Grinding & Machining	2,000	$17.50	$33.50	$51.00
Hardware	2,100	$11.00	$16.00	$27.00
Assembly	3,100	$8.00	$7.00	$15.00
Total	9,600

Required:

A. Compare the old and new method allocations for the following products.

1. The cost of standard doors

2. The value of spare parts added to inventory each month

3. The cost of work done for other departments

B. Briefly explain how the differences in cost calculated in Part A arise.

C. Are the differences in cost calculated in Part A significant? Calculate the percent difference for each product by dividing the change in cost by the old cost. Use your judgment and discuss whether the change is significant.

D. Is this new system likely to help with cost control as Mr. Keener desires? Explain.

E. Explain how the new system might be used to help with the following:

1. Product pricing

2. Inventory valuation

3. Efficient allocation of work among departments.

F. Prepare a memo outlining your recommendation to Mr. Keener. In addition, make any other recommendations you have about improving profitability of the company

G. Prepare a memo allaying the fears of the other division managers and promoting the benefits of the proposed system. Use proper memo format.