Responsibility Accounting
Responsibility accounting is a label using in accounting literature to group together decisions about how to subdivide a firm into work units. At the heart of this concept is agency theory. At the introductory level, the generic types of responsibility are: cost centers, revenue centers, profit centers, and investment centers. The selection process is meant to align reporting details with the responsibilities of managers. An ideal situation arises when accounting reports for managers only include those items over which a manager has authority. In this way responsibility accounting promotes accountability and facilitates good governance for each and every internal agency relationship the organizational structure has created. Implementation of the simple, yet radical approach of service science will require realignment of the types of responsibility accounting divisions that currently exist. Division into units represents a large administrative investment. The procedures and policies required to organize information into existing units are deeply imbedded into organizational life and information systems. They also become a form of psychic contract between all the players. Implementation of service science as it is understood today will necessitate more than a change in managerial attitudes. It will require firms to continuously reorganize to co-create value as conditions change. Consider the organization of a law firm to illustrate this problem. A typical firm can be organized into practice departments such as civil litigation, taxation, and family law. A leadership structure will exist for each area. Accounting procedures and reports are designed to create stability around those divisions. A new view of creating value for a client will require reorganization of those procedures and reports to give it validity. Without such a change the accounting mechanism will draw attention away from the service science approach. A related problem is that accounting practices will not record or capture data about some of the most significant contributions of service science. Consider the exploration of Hay and Hill (1999) into service failures. The key analytical information is missing in accounting systems. An accounting system does not reveal the costs of customer dissatisfaction from a service science perspective. A cut in cost by reducing service personnel is immediately reported as a cost saving. The sale that is lost because a potential client could not wait is never recorded. This establishes a bias regarding what is good in responsibility accounting cycle. Some slack resources might be 本文来自辣.文,论^文·网原文请找腾讯752018766 mutual value. Traditional approaches to effectiveness will not support this paradigm in quarterly financial reports. It will be a challenge to create responsibility accounting structures that reset the psychic contract in ways that affirm the service science approach.
Service Costing
VB+SQLServer2000物流管理系统 Cost information is a crucial input when special and regular pricing decisions are being made. The process involves many arbitrary and potentially capricious cost allocations by accountants. Accountants develop procedures, such as time sheets, to accumulate direct costs of a customer. Indirect costs such a technology support, training, and research capacities can be critical to providing service but extremely difficult to attribute to a specific situation. When Katzan (2008) shows how the service science approach will change the classification of services the value is easily understood. Traditional and newer models of cost allocation can address these information needs. However the sticky nature of systems and procedures has to be kept in mind to guard against assuming reports will easily or automatically change in support of the new paradigm. Accountants have a long tradition of struggling with how to provide cost information about services. In the context of losing relevance, Dearden (1978) stressed the impact of cost accounting on service industries in the Harvard Business Review. Since that time almost all advance management accounting books have devoted separate chapters to the costing issues associated with a service organization. Service science expands the definition and scope of firms that should be considered in this classification. Accountants can use normal costing in a manufacturing situation to handle short term fluctuations in unitization. An equivalent for service firms has been illusive due to the lack of inventories. As a result, the costs of service tend to fluctuate more than costs of manufacturing. These costing vicissitudes are not consistent with the idea of co-producing value with a client.Addressing this difficulty could lead to a costing error by service science practioners. It will be easier to create alternative cost analysis within the units delivering a service or in direct relationship with clients. Anecdotal research found that same dynamic when quality departments independently pursued ISO registration (Larson and Kerr, 2002). The work started by Katzan needs to be extended to relate to the necessary costing support as an example of a way to overcome the obstacle of information in forms that do not support new ideas about how value is created. Until this research happens, advocates of service science could inadvertently increase their costs through duplication of information systems. Of course, the improvement in value creation might be so great that the cost duplication can be considered a necessary investment.
上一页 [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] 下一页
服务科学与会计英文文献和翻译+外文参考文献 第5页下载如图片无法显示或论文不完整，请联系qq752018766
