1 Chaff Co 
(a) When assessing variances it is important to consider the whole picture and the interrelationships that exist. In Chaff there 
appears to be doubt about the wisdom of some of the decisions that have been made. Favourable variances have been 
applauded and adverse variances criticised and the managers in charge dispute the challenge to their actions. 
Purchasing manager. The purchasing manager has clearly bought a cheaper product, saving $48,000. The cause of this is 
not specified and it could be due to good buying or negotiation, reductions in quality or changes in overall market conditions. 
We are told the market for buying seeds is stable, so there is more likely to be an internal reason for the problem. The material 
usage variance is significantly adverse, indicating much more waste than is normal has occurred in month 1. This suggests 
that the quality of the seed bought was poor and as a result a $52,000 excess loss has occurred. It is possible that the waste 
was caused by the labour force working poorly or too quickly and this has to be considered. 
The sales price achieved is also well down on standard with the sales price variance showing an $85,000 loss of revenue 
and (therefore) profit. We are told that the market for sales of brown rice is stable and so it is reasonable to presume that the 
fall in sales price achieved is as a result of internal quality issues rather than general price falls. The purchasing manager of 
the only ingredient may well be responsible for this fall in quality. This may have also led to a fall in the volume of sales, 
another $21,000 of adverse variance. 
In conclusion the purchasing manager appears mainly responsible for a loss of $110,000* taking the four variances above 
together. 
* ($85,000 + $52,000 + $21,000 – $48,000) 
Production director. The production director has increased wage rates and this has cost an extra $15,000 in month 1. 
However one could argue that this wage increase has had a motivational effect on the labour force. The labour efficiency 
variance is $18,000 favourable; and so it is possible that a wage rise has encouraged the labour force to work harder. 
Academic evidence suggests that this effect might only be temporary as workers get used to the new level of wages. 
Equally the amount of idle time has reduced considerably, with a favourable variance of $12,000 resulting. Again it is possible 
that the better motivated labour force has been more willing to work than before. Idle time can have many causes, including, 
material shortages or machine breakdowns. However, we are told the machines are running well and the buyer has bought 
enough rice seeds. 
In conclusion the increase in the wage rate did cost more money but it may have improved morale and enhanced productivity. 
The total of the three variances above is $15,000* Fav. *($18,000 + $12,000 – $15,000) 
Maintenance manager. The maintenance manager has decided to delay the annual maintenance of the machines and this 
has saved $8,000. This will increase profits in the short term but could have disastrous consequences later. In this case only 
time will tell. If the machines breakdown before the next maintenance then lost production and sales could result. 
The maintenance manager has only delayed the spend and not prevented it altogether. A saving of $8,000 as suggested by 
the variance has not been made. It is also possible that the adverse variable overhead expenditure variance has been at least 
partly caused by poor machine maintenance. 
The variance calculated is not the saving made as it represents a timing difference only. The calculation also ignores the risks 
involved. 
(b) The standard contribution is given, but could be calculated as follows (not required by the question but shown as a proof): 
$ $ 
Sales price 240 
Less: 
Rice seed (1·4 Tonnes x $60/tonne) 84 
Labour (2 hours x $20/hr) 40 
Variable overhead (2 hours x $30/hr) 60 
–––– 
Marginal costs of production 184 
–––– 
Standard contribution 56 
–––– 
The standard labour charge needs to be adjusted to reflect the cost to the business of the idle time. It is possible to adjust 
the time spent per unit or the rate per hour. In both cases the adjustment would be to multiply by 10/9 – a 10% adjustment. 
In the case above the rate per hour has been adjusted to $18 x 10/9 = $20/hr. (Both approaches would gain full marks.) 
In order to reconcile the budget profit to the actual profit, both these profits need to be calculated and an operating statement 
prepared. 
13 
Budget profit statement for month 2 
$ $ 
Sales (8400u x $240/u) 2,016,000 
Less: 
Rice seed (1·4 tonnes x $60/tonne x 8,400 tonnes) 705,600 
Labour (2 hours x $20/hr x 8,400 tonnes) 336,000 
Variable overhead (2 hours x $30/hr x 8,400 tonnes) 504,000 
–––––––– 
Marginal costs of production 1,545,600 
–––––––––– 
Contribution 470,400 
Less Fixed costs 210,000 
–––––––––– 
Budget profit 260,400 
–––––––––– 
Actual profit for month 2. 
$ $ 
Sales 1,800,000 
Less: 
Rice seed 660,000 
Labour 303,360 
Variable overhead 480,000 
–––––––– 
Marginal costs of production 1,443,360 
–––––––––– 
Contribution 356,640 
Less Fixed costs 200,000 
–––––––––– 
Actual profit 156,640 
–––––––––– 
Operating statement for month 2 
$ $ $ 
Budget contribution 470,400 
Variances: Adverse Favourable 
Sales price 120,000 
Sales volume 22,400 
–––––––– 
142,400 
–––––––– 
328,000 
Material price 60,000 
Material usage 48,000 
Labour rate 18,960 
Labour efficiency 20,000 
Idle time 15,600 
Variable overhead efficiency 30,000 
Variable overhead expenditure 30,000 
–––––––– –––––––– 
96,960 125,600 28,640 
–––––––– 
Actual contribution 356,640 
Budget fixed cost 210,000 
Less: Fixed cost expenditure variance 10,000 
–––––––– 
Actual fixed cost 200,000 
–––––––– 
Actual profit 156,640 
–––––––– 
Workings for the variances in month 2 
1. Sales price: (225 – 240)8,000 = 120,000 Adv 
2. Sales volume: (8,000 – 8,400)56 = 22,400 Adv 
3. Material price: 
4. Material usage: (12,000 – 11,200*)60 = 48,000 Adv 
*(8,000 x 1·4 = 11,200) 
5. Labour rate: (19·20 – 18)15,800 = 18,960 Adv 
6. Labour efficiency: (15,000 – 16,000)20 = 20,000 Fav 
7. Idle time: (800 – 1,580*)20 = 15,600 Fav 
*10% of 15,800 
14 
660 000 
12 000 
60 12 , 000 60 000 
, 

= Fav 
8. Variable overhead expenditure: 
9. Variable overhead efficiency variance: (15,000 – 16,000)30 = 30,000 Fav 
Alternative calculations if standard hours adjusted for expected idle time and not the rate. 
Standard cost (2 hours x 10/9) x $18 = $40 per tonne 
Or 2·222 hours x $18 = $40 per tonne 
Rate variance as above = 18,960 Adv 
Idle time: (800 – 1,580)18 = 14,040 Fav 
Efficiency variance: (15,000 – 16,197·77777*)18 = 21,560 Fav 
* (standard time allowed less standard idle time) 
Standard time is 8,000 tonnes x 2·222 hours = 17,777·777 hours 
Standard idle time is 10% of 15,800 = 1,580 hours 
Therefore expected working hours is 17,777·777 – 1,580 = 16,197·777 hours 
(Note – there are many alternative methods of dealing with this issue, any reasonable attempt was accepted.) 
展开全文