# Managerial Accounting Course Guide: [Programme, term or section] > A course guide for the managerial (management) accounting core of an MBA: cost behaviour and estimation, > cost-volume-profit analysis, relevant costing for decisions, product and customer costing with activity-based > costing, variable versus absorption costing, budgeting, flexible budgets and variance analysis, responsibility > accounting and transfer pricing, and performance measurement with the balanced scorecard. It is for students in the > core year, admitted students who want to see the course before it starts, and managers who use internal cost and > budget numbers. It gives a 12-session roadmap, a key-concepts table that links every concept card, an original > mini-case with exhibits and a teaching note, a grading rubric, an exam plan and a self-test with an answer key. > Source basis: Hirshleifer (1956), Johnson and Kaplan (1987), Cooper and Kaplan (1988), Kaplan and Norton (1992), > Kaplan and Anderson (2004) and IAS 2 for the inventory-costing rule, written up in original words with fictional > examples. Replace every [bracketed] value and every row marked *Example*. Course designs differ between schools: > check your own syllabus for the session order, weights and rules. ## Document control | Field | Value | |---|---| | Course | [Managerial Accounting / Management Accounting and Control / Accounting for Decision Making] | | Programme and term | [Programme name], [term], YYYY | | Learner | [Your name] | | Learning team | [Team number and members] | | Instructor and office hours | [Name], [day and time] | | Grading weights | *Example:* participation 25%, problem sets 20%, case write-up 15%, final exam 40% | | Exam format | *Example:* open notes, laptop with spreadsheet, 3 hours | | Spreadsheet used | [Excel / Google Sheets / LibreOffice Calc] | | Reviewed by | [Study partner, tutor or coach] | | Version | [0.1] | | Last updated | YYYY-MM-DD | ## Contents - [1. What the course is for](#1-what-the-course-is-for) - [2. Prerequisites](#2-prerequisites) - [3. Session roadmap](#3-session-roadmap) - [4. Key concepts](#4-key-concepts) - [5. How the ideas connect](#5-how-the-ideas-connect) - [6. Mini-case: the Northfield jacket plant review](#6-mini-case-the-northfield-jacket-plant-review) - [7. Typical assignments and how they are graded](#7-typical-assignments-and-how-they-are-graded) - [8. Exam preparation plan](#8-exam-preparation-plan) - [9. Common struggles](#9-common-struggles) - [10. Self-test](#10-self-test) - [My notes and next steps](#my-notes-and-next-steps) - [Teaching note: the Northfield jacket plant review](#teaching-note-the-northfield-jacket-plant-review) - [Sources and further reading](#sources-and-further-reading) - [Answer key](#answer-key) - [Revision history](#revision-history) ## 1. What the course is for Financial accounting reports to outsiders under IFRS or US GAAP. Managerial accounting serves insiders, with no external rulebook: it produces whatever cost, budget and performance information helps managers decide and helps the organisation steer. The course answers three recurring questions. **What does it cost?** (cost behaviour, product and customer costing, activity-based costing). **What should we do?** (break-even, make or buy, special orders, product mix under constraints, pricing floors). **How are we doing, and who is responsible?** (budgets, variances, responsibility centres, transfer prices, scorecards and the incentives they create). Johnson and Kaplan (1987) argued that management accounting had lost its relevance by serving external reporting first; much of what an MBA course teaches today, from ABC to the balanced scorecard, grew out of that critique. The table maps the course to the competency list used across this library. As of October 2026 the AACSB accreditation standards in force are the Global Standards for Business Education adopted in 2026, organised around Strategic Management, Learner Success and Pathways to Impact; each school sets its own learning goals within them, so check your programme's learning goals and the [AACSB standards page](https://www.aacsb.edu/educators/accreditation/business-accreditation/aacsb-business-accreditation-standards) before you rely on this mapping. | Competency | What the course builds | Where you practise it | |---|---|---| | Analytical and quantitative reasoning | Cost estimation, CVP, relevant costing, variance decomposition | Sessions 2 to 6 and 8 to 9, mini-case Q1 and Q2 | | Ethical decision making | Budget slack, earnings management through production, honest cost allocation, transfer-price manipulation | Sessions 7, 10 and 11, mini-case Q3 | | Communication | Explaining a variance or a cost finding to non-accountants in one page | Case write-up, cold calls | | Leadership and teamwork | Designing budgets and targets people accept; responsibility centres | Sessions 8, 10 and 11 | | Global perspective | Transfer pricing across tax jurisdictions and the arm's length principle | Session 10 | | Technology, data and AI | Regression cost estimation, driver data from ERP systems, time-driven ABC, rolling forecasts | Sessions 2, 6, 7 and 12 | **Learning outcomes.** By the end of the course you should be able to: (1) separate fixed and variable cost with the high-low method and regression; (2) compute break-even, target volume, margin of safety and operating leverage for one product and for a mix; (3) identify relevant costs, including opportunity costs, for make or buy, special orders, dropping a segment and constrained resources; (4) build an activity-based or time-driven ABC model and explain the difference from a volume-based system; (5) reconcile variable and absorption costing profit and explain the incentive problem; (6) build a flexible budget and decompose the gap between budget and actual into volume, price, efficiency and spending variances; (7) set a transfer-price range and judge its effect on divisional and company profit; (8) design a balanced scorecard with linked measures and targets. ## 2. Prerequisites You need the basic financial statements (income statement, balance sheet, cash flow statement), the idea of inventory and cost of goods sold, comfortable algebra and solid spreadsheet skills. You do not need prior cost accounting. | Need | Self-check | Where to fix it | |---|---|---| | Statements and inventory flow | Explain why producing more than you sell can raise reported profit | mba/pre-mba-accounting-primer | | Algebra | Solve $OI = (P - V)Q - F$ for $Q$ in under a minute | mba/pre-mba-quant-refresher | | Spreadsheets | Use SUMPRODUCT, Goal Seek and a data table | mba/pre-mba-excel-modeling-drills | | Regression basics | Read a slope, intercept and R squared | academic/stats-linear-regression | | Time value of money | Discount three annual cash flows | mba/pre-mba-finance-primer, mba/mba-npv-irr-card | ## 3. Session roadmap *Example* plan for a 12-session core course. Many programmes order the topics differently or merge managerial accounting with financial accounting or control; adjust the rows, not the logic. | Session | Topic | Card to read | Case or exercise | Deliverable | |---|---|---|---|---| | 1 | Purpose of management accounting; cost terms and objects | Section 4.1 of this guide | Classify 20 cost lines of a retailer by behaviour and traceability | Cost classification table | | 2 | Cost behaviour and estimation | Section 4.1, academic/stats-linear-regression | Mini-case Exhibit 4 (high-low and regression) | Cost function with R squared | | 3 | Cost-volume-profit analysis | mba/mba-cvp-breakeven-card | Break-even and target profit for a product launch | Break-even chart and sensitivity table | | 4 | Multi-product CVP and operating leverage | mba/mba-cvp-breakeven-card | Sales-mix and cost-structure exercise | Indifference point and recommendation | | 5 | Relevant costs: make or buy, special orders, drop decisions | mba/mba-relevant-costs-card | Outsourcing case | Relevant-cost table with qualitative factors | | 6 | Constrained resources and pricing floors | mba/mba-relevant-costs-card, mba/mba-pricing-card | Bottleneck product-mix problem in Solver | Optimal mix and shadow price | | 7 | Product and customer costing; ABC and time-driven ABC | mba/mba-activity-based-costing-card | Two-product costing case; cost-to-serve exercise | ABC model with reconciliation | | 8 | Budgeting: master budget, rolling forecasts, behavioural issues | Section 4.3, finance/annual-budget | Build a quarterly operating budget | Budgeted income statement and cash budget | | 9 | Flexible budgets and variance analysis | Section 4.3, finance/variance-analysis | Mini-case Exhibits 1 and 2 | Variance bridge with explanations | | 10 | Variable versus absorption costing; responsibility centres; transfer pricing | Sections 4.2 and 4.4 | Mini-case Exhibit 3 | Transfer-price range and policy memo | | 11 | Performance measurement and the balanced scorecard | Section 4.5, business/okr | Draft a scorecard for a business unit | Strategy map and 12 measures | | 12 | Integration and review | All cards | Mini-case in section 6 | Case write-up (mba/mba-case-write-up) | ## 4. Key concepts | Concept | One-line definition | Formula or rule | Where to study it | |---|---|---|---| | Cost behaviour | How total cost changes with activity: variable, fixed, mixed, step | $TC = a + bX$ within the relevant range | Section 4.1 | | Contribution margin | Price minus variable cost; what each unit adds to cover fixed cost | $CM = P - V$ | mba/mba-cvp-breakeven-card | | Break-even and target volume | Volume at which profit is zero or reaches a target | $Q = (F + T)/CM$ | mba/mba-cvp-breakeven-card | | Operating leverage | Sensitivity of profit to sales | $DOL = CM \times Q / OI$ | mba/mba-cvp-breakeven-card | | Relevant cost | Future cost that differs between alternatives | Ignore sunk and common costs; add opportunity cost | mba/mba-relevant-costs-card | | Contribution per constrained unit | Ranking rule when a resource is scarce | $CM_i / r_i$; shadow price | mba/mba-relevant-costs-card | | Activity-based costing | Two-stage assignment through activities and causal drivers | $r_a = C_a / D_a$ | mba/mba-activity-based-costing-card | | Time-driven ABC | Capacity cost rate times minutes from time equations | $CCR = C / T_{\text{practical}}$ | mba/mba-activity-based-costing-card | | Absorption versus variable costing | Fixed production overhead in inventory or expensed | Difference = change in inventory units x fixed overhead rate | Section 4.2 | | Flexible budget and variances | Budget restated at actual volume; gaps split by cause | Price (rate) and quantity (efficiency) variances | Section 4.3, finance/variance-analysis | | Transfer price | Internal price between divisions | Minimum = variable cost + opportunity cost; maximum = outside price | Section 4.4 | | Balanced scorecard | Linked financial and non-financial measures of strategy | Four perspectives, cause-and-effect links | Section 4.5 | ### 4.1 Cost behaviour and estimation A cost function $TC = a + bX$ splits a mixed cost into a fixed part $a$ and a variable rate $b$ per unit of a cost driver $X$ (units, machine hours, orders). The **high-low method** uses only the two observations with the highest and lowest driver values: $b = (TC_{\text{high}} - TC_{\text{low}})/(X_{\text{high}} - X_{\text{low}})$. It is quick but uses two points only, and an unusual month distorts it. **Least-squares regression** uses every observation and reports how well the driver explains cost (R squared); in Excel, `=SLOPE(costs, drivers)`, `=INTERCEPT(costs, drivers)` and `=RSQ(costs, drivers)`. Check the scatter plot first: a good cost driver is causal and plausible, not merely correlated. The estimate holds only within the **relevant range** of the data. The mini-case Exhibit 4 gives six months of data to practise both methods. ### 4.2 Variable versus absorption costing Under **absorption (full) costing**, which IFRS and US GAAP require for external inventory reporting, inventory includes fixed production overhead. IAS 2 requires fixed production overhead to be allocated to units on the basis of the normal capacity of the production facilities: unallocated overhead from low production or idle plant is expensed in the period, and in periods of abnormally high production the amount per unit is reduced so that inventory is not measured above cost (IAS 2, paragraph 13; check the current text of IAS 2 on [ifrs.org](https://www.ifrs.org/issued-standards/list-of-standards/ias-2-inventories/)). Under **variable (direct) costing**, used for internal decisions, fixed production overhead is a period cost. When production exceeds sales, absorption costing defers part of the period's fixed overhead in inventory, so absorption profit is higher than variable-costing profit by (units added to inventory) x (fixed overhead rate per unit). When inventory falls, the opposite happens. That creates an **incentive problem**: a manager judged on absorption profit can raise reported profit by producing for stock. Remedies include judging managers on variable costing or contribution, charging a holding cost for inventory, and adding inventory targets to the scorecard. ### 4.3 Budgets, flexible budgets and variance analysis The **master budget** links a sales budget to production, purchases, labour, overhead, selling and administrative budgets, then to a budgeted income statement, cash budget and balance sheet (see finance/annual-budget; for a continuous approach, finance/rolling-forecast). Budgets plan, coordinate, communicate, motivate and evaluate, and these roles conflict: a target that motivates may be too ambitious for planning, and participation invites **budgetary slack**. A **static budget** is set for the planned volume. Comparing it with actual results mixes two effects: selling a different volume and running the business at different prices and efficiency. A **flexible budget** restates the budget at the actual volume using standard prices and quantities. Then: $$ \underbrace{OI_{\text{actual}} - OI_{\text{static}}}_{\text{total}} = \underbrace{(OI_{\text{flex}} - OI_{\text{static}})}_{\text{sales volume variance}} + \underbrace{(OI_{\text{actual}} - OI_{\text{flex}})}_{\text{flexible budget variance}} $$ The flexible budget variance splits further. For each input with standard price $SP$, standard quantity per unit $SQ$, actual price $AP$ and actual quantity $AQ$, at actual output $Q_a$: $$ \text{Price (rate) variance} = (AP - SP)\,AQ, \qquad \text{Quantity (efficiency) variance} = (AQ - SQ \cdot Q_a)\,SP $$ with positive cost variances unfavourable (U). The **selling price variance** is $(P_a - P_b)\,Q_a$. Variable overhead splits into spending and efficiency variances on its allocation base, and fixed costs give a spending variance. A variance is a question, not an answer: the purchasing manager's favourable price variance may be the reason for the production manager's unfavourable quantity variance (cheaper, poorer fabric). finance/variance-analysis gives a reporting template for monthly variance commentary. ### 4.4 Responsibility accounting and transfer pricing Organisations hold managers responsible for what they control: **cost centres** (costs), **revenue centres** (revenue), **profit centres** (revenue and cost) and **investment centres** (profit and the capital used, judged by return on investment, residual income or economic profit). When one division sells to another, the **transfer price** is revenue to the seller and cost to the buyer. It does not change company profit directly, but it changes divisional profit, and through it the decisions divisional managers make. Hirshleifer (1956) gave the first formal economic treatment: with no outside market for the intermediate product, the transfer price that leads divisions to choose the company-optimal output is marginal cost. In practice the general rule is a range: $$ TP_{\min} = \text{variable cost per unit} + \text{opportunity cost per unit (lost external contribution)}, \qquad TP_{\max} = \text{buyer's best outside price} $$ If $TP_{\min} > TP_{\max}$, the internal transfer destroys company value and should not happen. Common methods are market-based, cost-based (variable or full cost, often plus a markup) and negotiated prices. For cross-border transfers, tax authorities require the **arm's length principle**: the price independent parties would agree. As of October 2026 the reference is the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and Tax Administrations (2022 edition, updated in 2024 for Amount B under Pillar One; check the current version on [oecd.org](https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/transfer-pricing.html)). Many groups therefore keep one price for tax and use management adjustments for internal performance, which must be disclosed internally and applied consistently. For the documentation side, see finance/transfer-pricing-local-file. This guide gives the management view only; it is not tax advice. ### 4.5 Performance measurement and the balanced scorecard Kaplan and Norton (1992) proposed the **balanced scorecard**: a limited set of measures that gives senior managers a fast but complete view of the business by complementing financial results with three operational perspectives: customers, internal business processes, and innovation and learning (renamed learning and growth in their later work). The measures should follow the strategy and be linked by cause and effect: skills and systems improve processes, better processes serve customers, satisfied customers produce financial results. A **strategy map** draws those links. Good scorecards mix **lagging** outcome measures (operating income, market share) with **leading** driver measures (on-time delivery, first-pass yield, training hours on a new process), keep to roughly 15 to 25 measures, and give each a target, an owner and an initiative. Simons (1995) places scorecards among the diagnostic controls a company uses next to beliefs, boundaries and interactive controls. For goal-setting systems that overlap with scorecards, see business/okr. ## 5. How the ideas connect ```mermaid flowchart TD A["Cost behaviour and estimation"] --> B["CVP and operating leverage"] A --> C["Relevant costs for decisions"] A --> D["Flexible budgets and variances"] E["Cost assignment: traditional and ABC"] --> F["Product and customer profitability"] F --> C C --> G["Pricing floors and product mix"] D --> H["Responsibility centres"] H --> I["Transfer pricing"] H --> J["Balanced scorecard and incentives"] K["Variable vs absorption costing"] --> J B --> L["Budget targets"] L --> D ``` Two threads run through the whole course. The first is **classification**: every cost is classified by behaviour (fixed or variable), by traceability (direct or indirect to a product, customer or segment) and by relevance (does it differ between alternatives?). Most exam errors are classification errors. The second is **behaviour**: every number the course produces is also a measure someone is judged on. Absorption costing, budgets, variances, transfer prices and scorecards all change what managers do, so the course asks you to anticipate the gaming as well as compute the number. ## 6. Mini-case: the Northfield jacket plant review ### Situation It is the second week of January. Amara Okafor, recently appointed finance director of Northfield Outdoor Co.'s products division, is preparing for a quarterly business review of the division's jacket plant, a small own-brand factory that cuts and sews Northfield's best-selling softshell jacket. The plant supplies Northfield's own stores and website and, when it has spare capacity, sells unbranded jackets to other outdoor brands under private-label contracts. The fourth-quarter report on her desk is not encouraging. The plant had budgeted to sell 10,000 jackets at an average of USD 150 and to earn USD 220,000 of operating income. It sold 9,200 jackets at an average of USD 146, and operating income came in at USD 91,050 (Exhibit 1). The plant manager, Tomasz Wilk, says the shortfall is "all volume: retail ordered less because of a warm autumn". The head of retail, Leila Haddad, says the plant is "inefficient and overpriced" and that she could buy a comparable jacket from an outside supplier for USD 140, below the internal price of USD 146 the plant now charges. Amara knows that a single comparison of budget and actual mixes too many effects. She asks her analyst, Diego Ramírez, to restate the budget at actual volume, using the plant's standard cost card (Exhibit 2), and to explain every dollar of the gap. Diego also notices that the plant changed fabric supplier in October to a cheaper mill and that overtime was used in November to recover lost time. Two further issues are on the agenda. First, the plant's maintenance budget for next year: maintenance cost is mixed, and the plant controller has six months of machine-hour and cost data (Exhibit 4). Amara wants a cost function she can use in a flexible budget instead of last year's single lump sum. Second, the transfer price. Tomasz wants to keep charging retail a market-based price, because private-label customers pay USD 150 for a comparable jacket and the plant avoids USD 6 of selling and freight cost per jacket on internal sales. Leila wants the right to buy outside at USD 140. The plant's capacity situation for next year is uncertain: if private-label demand recovers, the plant will be full; if not, it will have spare capacity (Exhibit 3). Finally, Tomasz has proposed a change to his own bonus plan, which is based on plant operating income measured on an absorption-costing basis, the same basis used for external reporting. For the first quarter, he plans to produce 10,000 jackets even though sales are forecast at 9,200, "to build stock for spring". Amara wonders whether this is good planning or something else, and whether the plant should be judged on a broader set of measures. The group CEO has asked her to propose a balanced scorecard for the plant at the review. Amara has three days. She wants a clear explanation of the fourth quarter, a cost function for maintenance, a transfer-pricing policy that works in both capacity situations, a view on the bonus plan, and a draft scorecard. ### Exhibit 1: Fourth-quarter results versus static budget (USD) | Line | Static budget | Actual | |---|---|---| | Jackets sold | 10,000 | 9,200 | | Revenue | 1,500,000 | 1,343,200 | | Variable costs | 780,000 | 739,150 | | Contribution margin | 720,000 | 604,050 | | Fixed manufacturing costs | 320,000 | 335,000 | | Fixed selling and administrative costs | 180,000 | 178,000 | | Operating income | 220,000 | 91,050 | Actual variable costs: fabric 19,000 metres bought and used at USD 12.40 (USD 235,600); direct labour 13,500 hours at USD 29 (USD 391,500); variable overhead USD 112,050. Production equalled sales in the quarter. ### Exhibit 2: Standard variable cost card per jacket | Input | Standard quantity | Standard price | Standard cost | |---|---|---|---| | Fabric | 2.0 metres | USD 12.00 per metre | USD 24.00 | | Direct labour | 1.5 hours | USD 28.00 per hour | USD 42.00 | | Variable overhead (on labour hours) | 1.5 hours | USD 8.00 per hour | USD 12.00 | | **Total standard variable cost** | | | **USD 78.00** | Budgeted fixed manufacturing overhead is USD 320,000 a quarter at a normal capacity of 10,000 jackets (USD 32 per jacket under absorption costing). ### Exhibit 3: Transfer-pricing data per jacket (next year) | Item | USD | |---|---| | Standard variable manufacturing cost | 78.00 | | Private-label (external) selling price | 150.00 | | Variable selling and freight cost on external sales, avoided on internal sales | 6.00 | | Outside supplier price available to retail for a comparable jacket | 140.00 | | Current internal price charged to retail | 146.00 | ### Exhibit 4: Maintenance cost and machine hours, last six months | Month | Machine hours | Maintenance cost (USD) | |---|---|---| | July | 4,200 | 61,000 | | August | 5,100 | 67,300 | | September | 3,800 | 58,900 | | October | 6,000 | 73,500 | | November | 4,700 | 64,100 | | December | 5,500 | 69,800 | ### Discussion questions 1. Restate the budget at actual volume. How much of the USD 128,950 shortfall is due to volume and how much to price, costs and efficiency? Decompose the flexible budget variance into its components and explain each one. Is Tomasz right that the shortfall is "all volume"? 2. Estimate a maintenance cost function with the high-low method and with regression. Which would you use in next year's flexible budget, and what is the predicted cost at 5,000 machine hours? 3. What range of transfer prices makes sense when the plant has spare capacity, and when it is full? Should Leila be allowed to buy outside? Propose a policy. 4. What happens to Tomasz's reported absorption-costing operating income if he produces 10,000 jackets and sells 9,200? Is this good planning? How would you change the bonus plan? 5. Draft a balanced scorecard for the plant with two or three measures per perspective and the cause-and-effect links. ## 7. Typical assignments and how they are graded Most managerial accounting courses combine **class participation** in case discussions (mba/mba-class-participation-log), **problem sets** (calculation-heavy, often in teams), a **case write-up** or short memo, and a **final exam** with calculation problems and short applied essays. Some add a budgeting or costing project with a real organisation. *Example* rubric for a case write-up or exam essay question: | Criterion | Weight | Excellent | Adequate | Weak | |---|---|---|---|---| | Problem framing | 15% | States the decision, the decision maker and the costing or control issue in two sentences | Decision clear, issue vague | Restates the case facts | | Correct analysis | 35% | Right classification (behaviour, relevance), right numbers, formulas shown, reconciliations close | Minor errors that do not change the conclusion | Wrong approach (full cost in a relevant-cost decision, static budget comparison) | | Use of evidence | 15% | Uses exhibit data, checks consistency, notes data limits (six months, one supplier change) | Uses data without checking | Ignores exhibits | | Behavioural judgement | 15% | Anticipates how measures and prices change managers' behaviour, proposes safeguards | Mentions incentives without detail | Treats numbers as neutral | | Recommendation and communication | 20% | Key number first, clear recommendation, what would change it, next steps | Recommendation present but hedged | No recommendation | ## 8. Exam preparation plan | Week before exam | Focus | Activity | Evidence of progress | |---|---|---|---| | T-3 weeks | Concepts | One-page formula sheet from section 4 and the three cards; redo every Worked example A from a blank sheet | Formula sheet complete, examples match | | T-3 weeks | Retrieval | Answer every card's self-test from memory; log misses in mba/mba-error-log | Error log with causes | | T-2 weeks | Problem types | One timed problem each: cost estimation, single and multi-product CVP, make or buy, special order, constrained mix, ABC, absorption reconciliation, variance bridge, transfer price | Each type in under 15 minutes | | T-2 weeks | Cases | Write the costing or control mechanism of each class case in one sentence | One line per case | | T-1 week | Mixed practice | One practice exam under exam conditions, topics interleaved | Score and list of weak types | | T-1 week | Fix weaknesses | Two more problems per weak type; flashcards (mba/mba-concept-flashcards) | No repeat errors | | T-2 days | Light review | Formula sheet, error log, the mini-case | Calm, no new material | Spacing and retrieval practice have the strongest evidence among study methods (Dunlosky et al. 2013); see mba/mba-exam-prep for the routine. ## 9. Common struggles 1. **Classifying by function instead of behaviour.** Cost of goods sold is not "variable" by definition. 2. **Using a full unit cost as if it were variable.** Unit costs that include fixed overhead change with volume. 3. **Comparing actual with the static budget.** Always flex the budget to actual volume first. 4. **Getting variance signs wrong.** Decide the sign by asking whether profit is higher (F) or lower (U) than the flexible budget, not by the arithmetic order. 5. **Using actual output instead of standard quantity allowed.** Quantity variances compare actual input with the standard input allowed for actual output. 6. **Treating ABC cost as avoidable.** It shows long-run resource use; savings need capacity to be removed. 7. **Ignoring opportunity cost in transfer prices and special orders.** It changes the answer when capacity is full. 8. **Forgetting the absorption-costing incentive.** Producing for stock raises reported profit without creating value. 9. **Building a scorecard of unlinked measures.** A list of KPIs is not a strategy map. 10. **Reading a variance as a verdict.** A variance starts an investigation; the cause may sit in another department. ## 10. Self-test 1. Give one example each of a variable, fixed, mixed and step cost in a retail chain. 2. Why is a flexible budget a better benchmark than a static budget for judging a plant manager's cost control? 3. State the formulas for a material price variance and a material quantity variance, and the sign convention. 4. In the mini-case, what would the labour efficiency variance have been if the plant had used 14,100 hours? 5. Inventory falls by 500 units during a period and the fixed overhead rate is USD 32 per unit. Which costing method reports higher profit, and by how much? 6. State the general rule for the minimum transfer price, and explain when it equals variable cost. 7. Name the four perspectives in Kaplan and Norton (1992) and give one leading measure for each. 8. What is budgetary slack, and name two ways to reduce it. 9. Why does high-low estimation often differ from regression, and which do you trust more? 10. Name four types of responsibility centre and the main measure for each. ## My notes and next steps | Session | What I understood | Still unclear | Next step | |---|---|---|---| | [1] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | | [2] | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | | *Example:* 9 | Flexing the budget isolates the volume effect | Variable overhead efficiency variance | Redo mini-case Q1 without notes | ## Teaching note: the Northfield jacket plant review **Q1. Flexible budget and variances.** The flexible budget at 9,200 jackets uses the budgeted price of USD 150 and the standard variable cost of USD 78. | USD | Static budget (10,000) | Flexible budget (9,200) | Actual (9,200) | Excel formula (flexible) | |---|---|---|---|---| | Revenue | 1,500,000 | 1,380,000 | 1,343,200 | `=9200*150` | | Variable costs | 780,000 | 717,600 | 739,150 | `=9200*78` | | Contribution margin | 720,000 | 662,400 | 604,050 | `=9200*(150-78)` | | Fixed costs | 500,000 | 500,000 | 513,000 | `=320000+180000` | | Operating income | 220,000 | 162,400 | 91,050 | `=9200*(150-78)-500000` | Sales volume variance = 162,400 - 220,000 = USD 57,600 U (`=(9200-10000)*(150-78)`). Flexible budget variance = 91,050 - 162,400 = USD 71,350 U. Total = USD 128,950 U. The detailed flexible budget variance: | Variance | Calculation | Excel formula | USD | |---|---|---|---| | Selling price | (146 - 150) x 9,200 | `=(146-150)*9200` | 36,800 U | | Fabric price | (12.40 - 12.00) x 19,000 | `=(12.4-12)*19000` | 7,600 U | | Fabric quantity | (19,000 - 18,400) x 12.00 | `=(19000-9200*2)*12` | 7,200 U | | Labour rate | (29 - 28) x 13,500 | `=(29-28)*13500` | 13,500 U | | Labour efficiency | (13,500 - 13,800) x 28 | `=(13500-9200*1.5)*28` | 8,400 F | | Variable overhead spending | 112,050 - 13,500 x 8 | `=112050-13500*8` | 4,050 U | | Variable overhead efficiency | (13,500 - 13,800) x 8 | `=(13500-9200*1.5)*8` | 2,400 F | | Fixed cost spending | 513,000 - 500,000 (manufacturing 15,000 U, selling and admin 2,000 F) | `=513000-500000` | 13,000 U | | **Flexible budget variance** | | `=SUM(...)` with signs | **71,350 U** | Tomasz is wrong: volume explains USD 57,600 (45%) of the gap; USD 71,350 (55%) is price, cost and efficiency. The largest single item is the USD 4 average price cut. The cheaper fabric mill did not deliver savings: the fabric price was 3.3% **above** standard and usage was 600 metres over standard, which suggests a quality or cutting-yield problem worth investigating with the mill. Labour used 300 fewer hours than standard (F) but at USD 1 an hour more, consistent with November overtime premiums; net labour variance is USD 5,100 U. Fixed manufacturing overspent by USD 15,000. **Q2. Maintenance cost function.** High-low uses October (6,000 hours, USD 73,500) and September (3,800 hours, USD 58,900): $b = 14{,}600 / 2{,}200 = 6.6364$ per machine hour, $a = 73{,}500 - 6.6364 \times 6{,}000 = 33{,}682$. Regression on all six months gives $b = 6.7068$ (`=SLOPE(C2:C7,B2:B7)`), $a = 33{,}015$ (`=INTERCEPT(C2:C7,B2:B7)`) and $R^2 = 0.997$ (`=RSQ(C2:C7,B2:B7)`). Predicted cost at 5,000 machine hours: USD 66,864 (high-low) and USD 66,549 (regression, `=INTERCEPT(C2:C7,B2:B7)+SLOPE(C2:C7,B2:B7)*5000`). Use regression: it uses all six points; but six months is a short history and covers only 3,800 to 6,000 hours, so do not extrapolate outside that range, and recheck after a full year (seasonality). **Q3. Transfer pricing.** With **spare capacity**, internal sales displace nothing: $TP_{\min}$ = USD 78 and $TP_{\max}$ = USD 140, so any price in that range makes both divisions willing to trade, and the company saves USD 62 per jacket (`=140-78`) compared with buying outside. With the plant **full**, each internal jacket displaces a private-label sale worth USD 150 - 6 - 78 = USD 66 of contribution, so $TP_{\min}$ = 78 + 66 = USD 144 (`=78+(150-6-78)`). That exceeds the outside price of USD 140, so the company is USD 4 per jacket better off if retail buys outside and the plant sells to private-label customers. A sound policy: a market-based price adjusted for avoided costs (USD 144 = 150 - 6) when the plant is full, with retail free to buy outside; when the plant has spare capacity, a negotiated price between USD 78 and USD 140 (or a two-part tariff: variable cost per jacket plus a fixed fee for reserved capacity), with retail buying internally unless an outside quote falls below the price the plant is willing to match (never below USD 78). The current USD 146 exceeds both the avoided-cost market price and the outside price; it gives the plant a profit the market would not pay. Any cross-border transfer would also have to satisfy the arm's length principle for tax. **Q4. Absorption costing incentive.** At USD 32 of fixed overhead per jacket, producing 10,000 and selling 9,200 puts 800 jackets into inventory and defers USD 25,600 of fixed overhead (`=(10000-9200)*32`). Absorption-costing operating income is USD 25,600 higher than variable-costing income for the same sales; with fourth-quarter figures that would be USD 116,650 instead of USD 91,050. No value is created: the company pays for 800 extra jackets it may have to discount later. Remedies: base the bonus on contribution or variable-costing income, charge a capital or holding cost on inventory, set an inventory-days target, and approve production above forecast centrally. **Q5. Balanced scorecard (one possible answer).** | Perspective | Objective | Measures (lagging, leading) | Target *(Example)* | |---|---|---|---| | Financial | Profitable, efficient plant | Contribution per jacket; flexible budget variance as % of flexible budget cost | USD 72; within 2% | | Customer (retail and private-label) | Reliable, competitive supply | On-time-in-full deliveries; landed cost versus outside quote | 97%; at or below quote | | Internal process | Right first time, low waste | Fabric yield (metres per jacket); first-pass quality; inventory days | 2.0 m; 98%; under 20 days | | Learning and growth | Skilled, flexible teams | Cross-trained operators; supplier quality audits completed | 60%; all new mills audited | Causal chain: cross-training and supplier audits improve yield and first-pass quality, which lower cost and raise on-time delivery, which keeps retail sourcing internally and raises contribution. Note the trade-off with Q4: an inventory-days measure blocks producing for stock. ## Sources and further reading - Hirshleifer, J. (1956). On the economics of transfer pricing. *Journal of Business*, 29(3), 172–184. - Johnson, H. T., and Kaplan, R. S. (1987). *Relevance Lost: The Rise and Fall of Management Accounting*. Harvard Business School Press. - Cooper, R., and Kaplan, R. S. (1988). Measure costs right: make the right decisions. *Harvard Business Review*, 66(5). - Kaplan, R. S., and Norton, D. P. (1992). The balanced scorecard: measures that drive performance. *Harvard Business Review*, 70(1), 71–79. - Kaplan, R. S., and Norton, D. P. (1996). *The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action*. Harvard Business School Press. - Kaplan, R. S., and Anderson, S. R. (2004). Time-driven activity-based costing. *Harvard Business Review*, 82(11), 131–138. - Simons, R. (1995). *Levers of Control: How Managers Use Innovative Control Systems to Drive Strategic Renewal*. Harvard Business School Press. - Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., and Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving students' learning with effective learning techniques. *Psychological Science in the Public Interest*, 14(1), 4–58. - IFRS Foundation. IAS 2 *Inventories*, https://www.ifrs.org/issued-standards/list-of-standards/ias-2-inventories/ (checked 2026-10-28). - OECD. *Transfer Pricing Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and Tax Administrations 2022*, https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/oecd-transfer-pricing-guidelines-for-multinational-enterprises-and-tax-administrations-2022_0e655865-en.html (checked 2026-10-28). - Textbooks, by name only: Datar, S. M., and Rajan, M. V., *Horngren's Cost Accounting: A Managerial Emphasis* (Pearson); Garrison, R. H., Noreen, E. W., and Brewer, P. C., *Managerial Accounting* (McGraw Hill); Zimmerman, J. L., *Accounting for Decision Making and Control* (McGraw Hill); Merchant, K. A., and Van der Stede, W. A., *Management Control Systems* (Pearson). - Open resource: OpenStax, *Principles of Accounting, Volume 2: Managerial Accounting* (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0), https://openstax.org/details/books/principles-managerial-accounting. ## Answer key 1. Variable: card fees on sales; fixed: store lease; mixed: electricity (standing charge plus usage); step: store staff, one extra employee per band of weekly sales. 2. It removes the effect of volume, which the plant manager may not control, and compares actual costs with what costs should have been at the volume actually achieved. 3. Price variance = (AP - SP) x AQ; quantity variance = (AQ - SQ x actual output) x SP. A positive cost variance is unfavourable (U), a negative one favourable (F). 4. (14,100 - 13,800) x 28 = USD 8,400 U (`=(14100-9200*1.5)*28`). 5. Variable costing reports USD 16,000 more profit (`=500*32`), because absorption costing releases USD 16,000 of fixed overhead deferred in earlier periods into cost of goods sold. 6. Minimum TP = variable cost per unit + opportunity cost per unit (contribution lost on external sales). It equals variable cost when the seller has spare capacity, so nothing is displaced. 7. Financial (contribution margin trend), customer (on-time-in-full delivery), internal business process (first-pass yield), innovation and learning, later learning and growth (cross-trained staff share). Leading measures are drivers that move before results. 8. Deliberately easy targets or padded cost budgets set by those who will be judged on them. Reduce it with benchmarking against outside data, rolling forecasts separated from targets, and rewards that do not depend only on beating the budget. 9. High-low uses only two points, which may be unusual months; regression uses every observation and reports fit. Trust regression when the scatter is plausible and there are enough observations, and check for outliers either way. 10. Cost centre (cost against flexible budget), revenue centre (revenue or sales against target), profit centre (operating income or contribution), investment centre (ROI, residual income or economic profit). ## Revision history | Version | Date | Author | Change summary | |---|---|---|---| | 0.1 | YYYY-MM-DD | [Your name] | First draft from the template | | 0.2 | YYYY-MM-DD | [Your name] | *Example:* Session plan replaced with syllabus; mini-case solved with the learning team | ## Standard and licence note Based on the management accounting literature listed above (Hirshleifer 1956; Johnson and Kaplan 1987; Cooper and Kaplan 1988; Kaplan and Norton 1992 and 1996; Kaplan and Anderson 2004; Simons 1995), on IAS 2 for the inventory-costing rule and on the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines for the arm's length principle, as checked in October 2026. The text, the mini-case, the exhibits and the questions are original; no textbook text or published case is copied or paraphrased, and Northfield Outdoor Co. and every person named are fictional. This guide is independent and not affiliated with or endorsed by any business school, publisher, standard setter or professional body; it is a learning aid, not tax or accounting advice. Check the current official versions of IAS 2, the OECD Guidelines and your course syllabus before you rely on them. Template licence: MIT.