Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 1 – uploaded by Khalilur Rahman

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework The indicators for each of these dimensions are outlined below: European Journal of Business and Management ISSN 2222-1905 (Paper) ISSN 2222-2839 (Online) Vol.9, No.36, 2017

Figure 1 Conceptual Framework The indicators for each of these dimensions are outlined below: European Journal of Business and Management ISSN 2222-1905 (Paper) ISSN 2222-2839 (Online) Vol.9, No.36, 2017

Related Figures (6)

Figure 2: Cost accounting methods and techniques Those methods and tools do not match with the manufacturing process and related production cost elements. It is also revealed that the very often used cost accounting methods and tools is process costing (61%), followed by batch costing (56%), marginal costing (52%) and cost of quality (48%). The reason behind the extent use of process costing is that, it is suitable with the manufacturing nature of cement industries. Similar findings also observed by Shields et.al.(1991) where they found the extent use of process costing is 50% for Australian companies. Another study by Lukka and Granlund (1996) revealed a lower use of process costing (40%). Respondents were asked to specify the methods and techniques of cost accounting implemented in cement companies. Results in Figure 2 indicate that among the ten different chosen methods and tools, cement companies are not applying five distinct approaches namely, job costing uniform costing, service costing, contract costing and firm costing.
Figure 2: Cost accounting methods and techniques Those methods and tools do not match with the manufacturing process and related production cost elements. It is also revealed that the very often used cost accounting methods and tools is process costing (61%), followed by batch costing (56%), marginal costing (52%) and cost of quality (48%). The reason behind the extent use of process costing is that, it is suitable with the manufacturing nature of cement industries. Similar findings also observed by Shields et.al.(1991) where they found the extent use of process costing is 50% for Australian companies. Another study by Lukka and Granlund (1996) revealed a lower use of process costing (40%). Respondents were asked to specify the methods and techniques of cost accounting implemented in cement companies. Results in Figure 2 indicate that among the ten different chosen methods and tools, cement companies are not applying five distinct approaches namely, job costing uniform costing, service costing, contract costing and firm costing.
Note: In table, S;= never use, S.= Rare use, S3=Sometimes use, S4=often use and S;= very often use and UI- User Index (relative total percentage of frequency of use computed from S, & Ss) Table 1: Descriptive statistics for costing systems and the ranking of techniques Costing system covers two different aspects in business industry: cost method and specific costing technique: Respondents were asked to indicate how often they are practicing different methods and techniques related tc costing systems to provide more perfect cost information for decision making purpose.
Note: In table, S;= never use, S.= Rare use, S3=Sometimes use, S4=often use and S;= very often use and UI- User Index (relative total percentage of frequency of use computed from S, & Ss) Table 1: Descriptive statistics for costing systems and the ranking of techniques Costing system covers two different aspects in business industry: cost method and specific costing technique: Respondents were asked to indicate how often they are practicing different methods and techniques related tc costing systems to provide more perfect cost information for decision making purpose.
Table 2: Descriptive statistics for budgeting systems and the ranking of techniques
Table 2: Descriptive statistics for budgeting systems and the ranking of techniques
Table 3: Performance evaluation system tools and their ranking of use
Table 3: Performance evaluation system tools and their ranking of use
Note: In table, S;= never use, S.= Rare use, S3=Sometimes use, S4=often use and S;= very often use UI- User Index (relative total percentage of frequency of use computed from S,& Ss) Table 4: Information for decision support systems tools and their ranking of use
Note: In table, S;= never use, S.= Rare use, S3=Sometimes use, S4=often use and S;= very often use UI- User Index (relative total percentage of frequency of use computed from S,& Ss) Table 4: Information for decision support systems tools and their ranking of use
Table 5: Strategic analysis system tools and their ranking of use
Table 5: Strategic analysis system tools and their ranking of use
Related topics:
BusinessCost and Management Accounting
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved