This is the second of a 2-part
posting on the dangers of using traditional cost accounting to run your
business that Bruce Nelson wrote in the appendix of our book Epiphanized. You will
recall, that my last posting ended with the following…..
"If the
owner could make more pairs of socks in the same amount of time, then his labor
cost per pair of socks would go down.
This was the solution the business owner was looking for—reducing his
costs. If everyone was busy making more
and more socks, and they could make a lot of socks in a day, then his new labor
cost per pair of socks could be reduced! This had to be the
answer— look how cheap he could make socks now!
Or so he thought."
With
these new found levels of high efficiency came another problem. The owner quickly noticed that he had to buy
more and more raw materials just to keep his employees working at such high
efficiency levels. The raw materials
were expensive, but he had to have them.
The owner knew that his past success was directly linked to his ability
to maintain such high efficiency and keep his cost low. More and more raw
materials were brought in. More and more
socks were made. The socks were now
being made much faster than he could sell them.
What he needed now was more warehouse space to store all of those
wonderfully cheap socks! So at great
expense, the owner built another warehouse to store more and more cheap
socks. The owner had lots and lots of
inventory of very cheap socks. According
to his numbers the socks now were costing next to nothing to make. He was saving lots of money! Wasn’t he?
Soon
the creditors started to show up and want their money.
The owner was getting behind on his bills to his raw material suppliers. He had warehouses full of very cheap socks,
but he wasn’t selling his socks at the same rate he was making them. He was
just making more socks. He rationalized
that he had to keep the costs down, and in order to do that he had to have the
efficiency numbers high. The business
owner soon realized that he had to save even more money. He had to cut his costs even more, so he had
to lay people off and reduce his workforce to save even more money. How did he ever get into a situation like
this? His business was highly
efficient. His cost per pair of socks
was very low. He saved the maximum
amount of money he could, and yet he was going out of business—How come?
Reality
had changed and labor costing had changed (labor shifted from a variable cost
to a fixed cost), but the cost accounting rules did not change. The owner was still trying to treat his labor
cost as a variable cost. Even today many
businesses still try to treat their labor cost as a variable cost and allocate
the labor cost to individual products.
When the labor costs are allocated to a product, then companies try and
take the next step—they work hard to improve efficiency and drive down the
labor costs per part, or unit. This
erroneous thought process is ingrained in their mind, and they believe that
this action will somehow reduce labor costs.
And if you can reduce labor costs, they think, then you are making more
profit. But take just a moment and
reflect back on the consequences of the sock maker’s experience with cost
savings and the high efficiency model.
Are these end results anywhere close to what the business owner really
wanted to have happen? Was this the real
outcome business owners really wanted from high efficiency?
In my next series of postings we'll look deeper into the problems faced by the sock maker.
Bob Sproull
No comments:
Post a Comment