作業(yè)成本法的實(shí)施和適應(yīng)性外文翻譯

1、<p>　　1922單詞，3560漢字</p><p>　　Source : Frederick WLindahl . Human Resource Planning, 1997, Vol.20 Issue 2, 62-66.</p><p><b>　　外文文獻(xiàn)翻譯譯文</b></p><p><b>　　原文：</

2、b></p><p>　　Activity-Based Costing Implementation and Adaptation</p><p><b>　　Abstract </b></p><p>　　Activity-based costing (ABC) has been much studied and much writte

3、n about over the last decade. While the topic has received a great deal of coverage from a technical and theoretical standpoint, accounts of actual implementation experiences have received relatively less study. If ABC i

4、s to be an important addition 10 management practice the theory must be translated into successful implementation. This survey reports on the extent of research that applies the theory of organizational change to t</p

5、><p>　　Over the course of the last decade a management tool called “activity-based costing”(ABC) has become one of the more widely embraced of new management methods. While its core lies in cost accounting it h

6、as attracted the attention of business managers in general and has been the subject of articles in the Harvard Business Review, Fortune, and elsewhere in the business press. And not only is it a major theme in business,

7、it has been adopted in parts of government for instance the IRS and the Depar</p><p>　　What began as essentially an “accounting” matter has spread to the point where it affects nearly every aspect of an orga

8、nization from production to marketing. In the early literature about ABC the focus was on the underlying concepts –essentially “theory development”. As the theory began to be implemented farther-reaching consequences wer

9、e developed for instance the need to reshape performance evaluation measures to reflect the new economics revealed by ABC. As these extensions of the basic theo</p><p>　　The focus of the paper is that part o

10、f the “organizational change” literature that has some theoretical foundation. I will not attempt to survey comprehensively a large number of teaching cases nor accounts of ABC installations in the practitioner literatur

11、e - articles along the line of “In a DoD Environment Hughes Aircraft Sets the Standard for ABC”(Haedicke and Feil 1991). These cases and descriptions have had an important influence on the more “academic” papers by provi

12、ding a rich field from </p><p>　　Finally I note that this is quite a new and accordingly rather small, literature. Only in about 1990 did rigorous study of ABC implementation become part of our literature. M

13、oreover there are those (e.g. Hopwood 1983) who believe that the whole area of studying accounting in the contexts in which it operates is underdeveloped. </p><p>　　The next section gives a description of AB

14、C. The third section is the review and the final section concludes. </p><p>　　Discussion </p><p>　　This section outlines the basic ideas of ABC and how the basic ideas have spread to other areas

15、 of management. </p><p>　　An explicit aim of cost accounting has always been to use an accounting system that assigns to products a dollar amount that reasonably reflects the value of resources actually cons

16、umed to create that product - whether a good or a service. Some resources are fairly easy to account for, like the paper in a book. The greater challenge lies in allocating resources where the connection between the reso

17、urce and a unit of the final product is indirect unobservable and imprecise like industrial enginee</p><p>　　In recent years the challenge in allocating indirect resources has increased greatly for several r

18、easons. (1) Indirect cost as a fraction of total cost has increased e.g. automation: the substitution of machines (indirect) for direct laborers (easily traced). (2)Increasing proliferation of product models and types, w

19、here complex production scheduling, parts inventories, etc. add to indirect costs; e.g. automobile models and options. (3) Decreasing reliability of the “base” which has traditionall</p><p>　　In the operatio

20、ns realm, the ABC perspective makes clear that production managers do not manage costs they manage activities (which in turn create costs). This implies that ABC can and should be used for more than passively measuring c

21、osts it can be used actively to manage costs. Among other uses it has been used to improve quality by estimating the costs of “non-value-adding” activities (MacArthur 1992). The extension of ABC to cost management is ter

22、med “activity-based management”.</p><p>　　Activity-based management reaches beyond manufacturing. Returning to the marketing department, it becomes clear that the costs of marketing can be analyzed in terms

23、 of the “activities” that cause them, just as is the manufacturing process (Foster et al.1996). A large Dutch firm Philips NV performed an analysis of one of its business unitsin which administrative departments that sup

24、port production - personnel among others –were examined in terms of the “activities” which drove their costs (Groot</p><p>　　“ABC thinking” calls into question performance measurement. If the new “activity”

25、insights call for different emphasis then performance measurements should direct managers efforts toward that emphasis. Further with ABC thinking traditional budgeting practices become suspect - it makes more sense to st

26、art with the number of times an activity is to be performed as the basis for the budget than to start with last year’s budget and add 5% .ABC thinking also changes the criteria for design: product d</p><p>　

27、　The list goes on. The point is that ABC is a tool that affects behavior throughout an organization. Because it changes established routines and revises performance and compensation standards, it has important behavioral

28、 consequences. It is no surprise then that not every attempt to capture the benefits of better cost measurement has met with success. It is true that there is a selection bias that makes it harder to learn the failures t

29、han the successes, but nevertheless there is abundant evidenc</p><p>　　ABC is not universally accepted. There is a substantial population of organizations that believes that the cost exceeds the benefit. It

30、appears that even among organizations that have adopted it. It is most likely done “off line” with spreadsheets and special studies it has not replaced the traditional accounting system used to create financial statement

31、s. Since many of the uses of ABC - product pricing for example - do not depend on “real time” information, many of the benefits of ABC are avail</p><p><b>　　Survey </b></p><p>　　Brun

32、s (1987) performed an early detailed field study of a firm that changed its accounting system (though it was not an ABC implementation). Though he did not submit the study to a deep theoretical analysis he observed what

33、many others reported later: (1) the importance of a top management sponsor - in this case the absence of one and associated lack of progress;(2) the stimulating role of crisis in developing new information systems: and (

34、3) the difficulty of dislodging an “embedded” cost syste</p><p>　　Anderson (1995) performed a very thorough case study of ABC implementation at General Motors. She used interviews, archives, and direct obser

35、vation to track the implementation over a period of several years. Her approach was to follow the case study methods proposed by Mintzberg(1979) and Eisenhardt(1989) in which she began the study with a “well-defined rese

36、arch focus” using the existing literature on ABC to pick variables. The theoretical framework was based on Kwon and Zmud (1987) and Coopera</p><p>　　The GM story was more “successful” than not. As Anderson l

37、eft the theater, ABC had become corporate policy and had begun to branch out beyond its initial uses in product costing to “activity-based management”, where operational improvements are sought on that basis of the ABC p

38、rinciples. Nevertheless, the system had not yet proceeded beyond the fourth of the six stages, and there were still difficulties that threatened to curb full acceptance and the full scope of possibilities. </p>&l

39、t;p>　　Anderson found that the “stage” model fitted GMs experience quite well. It seems clear that almost any set of events can be fitted to this model that identifies for example the first stage as the “initiation” st

40、age. Thus the study is not so much a test of a theory as a careful account analyzed according to the organizing principle of a “change model”. Similarly, the general category of “factors” in Kwon and Zmud(1987) are broad

41、 enough to encompass almost anything: the categories are individual o</p><p>　　She draws many conclusions; a few seem particularly important. (1) Individual factors - things like sponsorship -are important i

42、n the early stages, but organizational factors - Like “routines to promote efficiency” - become dominant in later stages. Organizational factors are probably even more important at GM, where there were over 100 ABC sites

43、 than in smaller organizations.(2) There were significant technological hurdles to be cleared - the challenges at GM extended far beyond the “resistance</p><p><b>　　二、翻譯文章</b></p><p>

44、;<b>　　譯文：</b></p><p>　　作業(yè)成本法的實(shí)施和適應(yīng)性</p><p><b>　　摘要 </b></p><p>　　在過去十年里作業(yè)成本法進(jìn)行了深入的研究，與此同時(shí)，作業(yè)成本法這個(gè)題材受到了大量技術(shù)和理論角度的關(guān)注，而關(guān)于實(shí)際運(yùn)用經(jīng)驗(yàn)的研究卻很少。如果作業(yè)成本法要成為一個(gè)重要的補(bǔ)充管理實(shí)踐，它的理論

45、必須被轉(zhuǎn)換成成功的實(shí)踐經(jīng)驗(yàn)。這個(gè)調(diào)查報(bào)告研究的范圍理論適用于組織理論對(duì) ABC 實(shí)施的話題的變革。它發(fā)現(xiàn)這個(gè)領(lǐng)域研究的不足之處，并提出新的研究建議。 </p><p><b>　　引言</b></p><p>　　在整個(gè)過程的最后十年里一種被稱為“作業(yè)成本法”(ABC)的管理工具成為一種被更廣泛接受的新管理方法。雖然它的核心在于成本核算，但它吸引了一般的業(yè)務(wù)經(jīng)理的關(guān)注

46、，而且還成為了《哈佛商業(yè)評(píng)論》中“財(cái)富”和其他商業(yè)出版社中各文章的主題。它不僅是出版社的重大主題業(yè)務(wù)，它還被部分政府部門所采用，例如，國稅局和國防部。</p><p>　　作業(yè)成本法成為“會(huì)計(jì)”領(lǐng)域中的一部分，已經(jīng)影響到從生產(chǎn)到銷售的每一個(gè)組織方面。早期關(guān)于作業(yè)成本法的文學(xué)作品，重點(diǎn)主要集中于內(nèi)在的概念——即埃森的“理論發(fā)展”，它是理論的開始，一提出就產(chǎn)生了深遠(yuǎn)的影響。例如它提出的重塑績(jī)效評(píng)估措施就反映了新制度經(jīng)

47、濟(jì)學(xué)的基礎(chǔ)知識(shí)。而這些基本理論的延伸開始逐漸影響組織，學(xué)術(shù)研究人員開始意識(shí)到作業(yè)成本法的實(shí)施性問題。這又反過來加深了作業(yè)成本文學(xué)對(duì)組織的影響。本文研究的就是這部分加深了的作業(yè)成本對(duì)組織影響的文學(xué)。 </p><p>　　本文的焦點(diǎn)是有一定理論基礎(chǔ)的“組織變革”文學(xué)。我不會(huì)試圖全面大量的研究教學(xué)案例也不會(huì)確認(rèn)作業(yè)成本法在公司中的賬戶裝置是否沿著文學(xué)論文《國防部環(huán)境休斯飛機(jī)公司為ABC設(shè)置的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)》 (Haedicke

48、1991 年 8 月初版 )這條路線。這些案件和描述可以提供更豐富的領(lǐng)域，從而對(duì)更多的“學(xué)術(shù)”論文產(chǎn)生重要的影響，并以此檢查它們的正確性。但這種研究?jī)H僅局限于作業(yè)成本法的理論方面。雖然會(huì)有很多共同的經(jīng)驗(yàn)，并且可能從全面質(zhì)量管理（Jensen和Wruck 1994 或Klein，1989）實(shí)現(xiàn)中得出結(jié)論，但我不打算對(duì)理論研究進(jìn)行展開。</p><p>　　最后，我意識(shí)到對(duì)作業(yè)成本法的研究是非常的新穎的。只有在 19

49、90 年左右實(shí)施的嚴(yán)格的作業(yè)成本法才屬于我們研究的范圍。此外還有一些人 如Hopwood，1983 認(rèn)為在整個(gè)范疇中研究會(huì)計(jì)工作是不會(huì)有成果的。這一段是介紹作業(yè)成本法的理論的，第二部分是回顧最后一部分是得出結(jié)論。</p><p><b>　　討論 </b></p><p>　　這個(gè)部分主要概括了作業(yè)成本法的基本思想，并且論述了這個(gè)基礎(chǔ)思想是如何傳播到其他管理領(lǐng)域中的。

50、成本核算的明確目標(biāo)始終是運(yùn)用會(huì)計(jì)系統(tǒng)分配給產(chǎn)品的每一分錢都能合理地反映在生產(chǎn)產(chǎn)品（不管是產(chǎn)品還是服務(wù)）的實(shí)際損耗價(jià)值。有一些資源的分配是很簡(jiǎn)單的，很容易理解；而也有一些資源很難分配，比如那些相互聯(lián)系，又難以區(qū)分開來的與最終單位產(chǎn)品之間的間接費(fèi)用。 </p><p>　　最近幾年中，分配間接費(fèi)用的難度大大地增強(qiáng)了。因?yàn)椋海?）間接成本在總成本中的比重在上升；例如，自動(dòng)化使得機(jī)器生產(chǎn)的間接人工代替了（比較容易分配的）

51、直接人工；（2）由于生產(chǎn)產(chǎn)品的型號(hào)和類型在不斷的增多，使得企業(yè)要在復(fù)雜的生產(chǎn)調(diào)度中盡量能夠保持零庫存，從而增加了間接成本；（3）分配直接成本、直接人工的傳統(tǒng)基礎(chǔ)方法的運(yùn)用減少，從而導(dǎo)致了制造企業(yè)需要更好的成本分配方法。作業(yè)成本法的關(guān)鍵思想是：作業(yè)消耗成本；產(chǎn)品不消耗成本。作業(yè)成本法是用來說明間接成本和消耗間接成本的作業(yè)之間的聯(lián)系。一旦運(yùn)用了作業(yè)成本法，產(chǎn)品成本不過是各個(gè)作業(yè)耗費(fèi)成本的總和。這樣作業(yè)成本法的實(shí)施就可以解決產(chǎn)品成本計(jì)算的難題

52、，而且經(jīng)過改進(jìn)后計(jì)算的產(chǎn)品成本可以直接影響產(chǎn)品在市場(chǎng)上的銷售：當(dāng)一個(gè)更加可靠的成本系統(tǒng)計(jì)算出來的成本遠(yuǎn)小于它的收益時(shí)，該產(chǎn)品的銷售方式就應(yīng)該改變了，就可以重新定價(jià)或改變產(chǎn)品促銷策略等。 </p><p>　　在操作領(lǐng)域里，作業(yè)成本法的基本思想表明產(chǎn)品管理者不能控制成本，但他們可以控制產(chǎn)生成本的作業(yè)。這意味著作業(yè)成本法可以而且應(yīng)該更多地用于衡量成本；作業(yè)成本法可以被積極地用于控制成本。在其他方面的使用中，作業(yè)成本法

53、已經(jīng)被用于估計(jì)沒有價(jià)值增加的作業(yè)成本來改善質(zhì)量（Mac Arther1992）。這個(gè)對(duì)成本管理延伸的作業(yè)成本法被叫做“作業(yè)成本管理”。 作業(yè)成本管理在銷售方面的影響超過了在制造業(yè)中的影響?；氐戒N售產(chǎn)品的市場(chǎng)上，依據(jù)“作業(yè)消耗成本”的基本思想來分析銷售成本，就會(huì)使成本分配變得很清晰，就像制造過程一樣具有一定的順序性（Foster1996）。荷蘭飛利浦 NV 公司在它的商業(yè)部門中的管理部中實(shí)施對(duì)個(gè)人產(chǎn)品的分析，尤其是檢查控制成本的作業(yè)（Gr

54、oot1997）。這個(gè)方案實(shí)施后，使得公司改進(jìn)了以往的成本分配方法，從而減少了生產(chǎn)部門和管理部門人事成本。 </p><p>　　作業(yè)成本的“思維”質(zhì)疑傳統(tǒng)的績(jī)效衡量。如果新的“作業(yè)”分析需要與以往傳統(tǒng)方法有不同的側(cè)重點(diǎn)，那么管理者應(yīng)該朝著新的側(cè)重點(diǎn)去進(jìn)行績(jī)效衡量。此外，隨著作業(yè)成本法新的“思維”的運(yùn)用，傳統(tǒng)的成本預(yù)算變得令人懷疑——因?yàn)閭鹘y(tǒng)的預(yù)算使得以往被用作年初預(yù)算基礎(chǔ)的作業(yè)，比上一年年初預(yù)算成本增加了5%。

55、同時(shí)作業(yè)成本思想的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)也影響了設(shè)計(jì)的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)：產(chǎn)品設(shè)計(jì)師只要擁有關(guān)于作業(yè)制造成本信息就可以設(shè)計(jì)一個(gè)制造成本最少的產(chǎn)品（Berlant，1990）。</p><p>　　這樣的列子舉不勝舉。但從中可以看到一個(gè)共同點(diǎn)：作業(yè)成本法是通過組織影響行為的一個(gè)工具。它改變了原來分配成本的套路，修改了性能和補(bǔ)償標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，它具有重要的行為后果。但是這并不令人意外，不是每一個(gè)想享受更好成本計(jì)算好處的企業(yè)都可以心想事成。因?yàn)榇嬖谝粋€(gè)選擇性偏

56、好，使得學(xué)會(huì)失敗比學(xué)會(huì)成功更難，但是雖然如此，仍有充分的證據(jù)表明其實(shí)那些緩慢的、停滯不前的作業(yè)成本法和具有重要進(jìn)展的作業(yè)成本法是一樣的。這是在研究實(shí)施過程中得到的，作業(yè)成本法范圍中存在的現(xiàn)象。</p><p>　　作業(yè)成本法沒有完全得到認(rèn)同。有一個(gè)權(quán)威性的人口組織相信分析成本可以為企業(yè)帶來效益。看來連組織都采用了作業(yè)成本法。它很可能是一種新型的研究財(cái)務(wù)分析的工具。但它并沒有取代創(chuàng)建財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告的傳統(tǒng)會(huì)計(jì)系統(tǒng)。作業(yè)成本

57、法使用了很多產(chǎn)品定價(jià)方法，并且它不依賴于信息的及時(shí)性，所以它可以被充分地利用，甚至連沒有進(jìn)行過整理的成本核算體系也可以使用作業(yè)成本法。盡管作業(yè)成本法系統(tǒng)缺少了一個(gè)轉(zhuǎn)換的功能，但它的思想依然產(chǎn)生了深遠(yuǎn)的影響，而且在組織運(yùn)用過程中影響著政策的制定。</p><p><b>　　調(diào)查</b></p><p>　　Bruns(1987)在一家公司中實(shí)施了一個(gè)早期的，詳細(xì)的實(shí)驗(yàn)

58、研究，但它并不算是一個(gè)作業(yè)成本法的實(shí)施按列。因?yàn)樗麤]有提交深入的理論研究分析，他只是在研究了其他人的報(bào)告后得出了結(jié)論：(1)高層管理贊助者所體現(xiàn)的重要性——在這種情況下，某一個(gè)贊助者的退出都會(huì)影響到相關(guān)工作的進(jìn)展；(2)危機(jī)的出現(xiàn)對(duì)新的成本系統(tǒng)的發(fā)展起到了促進(jìn)作用；(3)擯棄一個(gè)傳統(tǒng)的成本系統(tǒng)的困難性(即在變革中存在巨大地阻力)。這些結(jié)論，并不讓人覺得有什么特別的地方，但他們卻是以后的研究作業(yè)成本法實(shí)施的基礎(chǔ)。這些研究相對(duì)于以后研究的成

59、果來說是一個(gè)“失敗”的例子。</p><p>　　Anderson(1995)在通用汽車公司實(shí)施了一個(gè)非常周密的作業(yè)成本法實(shí)施的案例研究。她用訪談，檔案分析和直接觀察等方法來分析數(shù)年間作業(yè)成本法的實(shí)施情況。她運(yùn)用的方法就是按照Mintzberg(1979)和Eisenhardt(1989)提出的案例研究方法，她使用了目前的作業(yè)成本法來選擇變量，以明確研究的重點(diǎn)。她使用的理論框架是以Kwon和Zmud(1987)以

60、及Cooper和Zmud(1990)的研究為基礎(chǔ)的。在這種理論觀點(diǎn)下，想要成功的實(shí)施作業(yè)成本法就必須確定實(shí)施階段以及明確影響每個(gè)階段的因素；想要成功地建立作業(yè)成本法的模型就必須依賴于研究組織變更方面的信息技術(shù)項(xiàng)目。</p><p>　　通用汽車的實(shí)例所獲得成功的經(jīng)驗(yàn)有很多。當(dāng)Anderson離開通用汽車公司后，作業(yè)成本法已經(jīng)成為了公司的政策，并開始運(yùn)用到各個(gè)方面。作業(yè)成本法在企業(yè)中的運(yùn)用超過了傳統(tǒng)用于“作業(yè)成本管

61、理”的產(chǎn)品成本計(jì)算方法。不過，這個(gè)成本系統(tǒng)的運(yùn)用還沒有超出整個(gè)階段的四分之一，并且仍然存在著許多困難，不能是作業(yè)成本法被完全接受，因而它也得不到充分的運(yùn)用。</p><p>　　Anderson發(fā)現(xiàn)在美國通用汽車公司運(yùn)用的“階段”模型很好。他認(rèn)為幾乎所有的事件集合都可以并且適合做這個(gè)識(shí)別模型，而且它的第一階段就為“開始”階段。所以，在通用汽車公司的研究不僅僅是一個(gè)適用于“改變模式”的組織系統(tǒng)的成本理論分析。它里面

62、關(guān)于Kwon和Zwud(1987)提出的“因素”范圍就已經(jīng)很廣泛了，足以涵蓋幾乎所有的東西：包括個(gè)人，組織，技術(shù)，任務(wù)特點(diǎn)和外部環(huán)境等等。</p><p>　　她得出了很多結(jié)論，有幾個(gè)顯得尤為重要。（1）個(gè)人因素——比如說贊助的事情，在早期階段就非常的重要，而組織因素——像促進(jìn)效率的程序，在以后階段就成為了主導(dǎo)。在通用汽車公司組織因素在大的組織機(jī)構(gòu)中顯得更為重要，因?yàn)槟抢镉谐^了100個(gè)作業(yè)成本網(wǎng)站。(2)解決的

63、重大的技術(shù)障礙在通用汽車的難度遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超過了預(yù)期的“變革的阻力”，例如說，獎(jiǎng)金的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)就有兩個(gè)。在通用汽車公司成立的早期，該系統(tǒng)可以被廣泛地運(yùn)用到很多不同的流程，并得到了很好的功效，有利于管理者進(jìn)行決策。所以她覺得作業(yè)成本系統(tǒng)應(yīng)該被保留下來，不僅僅在會(huì)計(jì)領(lǐng)域，還可以在生產(chǎn)方面，而且生產(chǎn)過程中的運(yùn)用更能得到好的效益。在運(yùn)用過程中還要講究的是團(tuán)隊(duì)成員的配合，有一些國家將會(huì)計(jì)師排除在團(tuán)隊(duì)之外，因?yàn)樗麄冋J(rèn)為會(huì)計(jì)師自身存在“避嫌”的問題。</p&