Kar amaçlı olmayan imalat işletmelerinin maliyet muhasebesi problemi: Bir model

Bu çalışmada kâr amaçlı olmayan imalata yönelik işletmelerin maliyet muhasebesi sorunları incelenmiş ve uygulamaya yönelik iyileştirme güdüsü ile Türk Deniz Kuvvetleri Komutanlığı bağlısı Gölcük Tersanesi için “Faaliyet Tabanlı Maliyetleme” sistematiğine dayalı maliyet analiz ve kontrol modeli geliştirilmesi hedeflenmiş; bu hedefe uygun olarak tersane ürün portföyünde yer alan 1400 tonluk 209 sınıfı denizaltının inşa maliyeti hesaplanmıştır. İşletme literatüründe; değişik kaynaklarda, farklı bakış açılarına göre farklı işletme sınıflandırmalarına rastlanmakta olup, bu sınıflandırmaların büyük çoğunlukla hatalı olduğu ve örneğin askeri tersaneler gibi karmaşık üretim ve servis çıktıları üreten ve kar amacı gütmeyen işletmelerin klasik eserlerde doğru konumlandırılmadığı tartışılmıştır. Safha maliyet, sipariş maliyet sistemi gibi geleneksel maliyetleme sistematiklerinin ortak zayıf noktaları üretim genel giderlerinin ürünlerle ilişkilendirilmesinde üretim kapasitesinin yegâne maliyet sürücüsü olduğu varsayımının esas alınmasıdır. Son dönemde üretim hacmi dışında bazı maliyet sürücülerinin de mevcut olduğu gerçeğinden hareketle “Faaliyet Tabanlı Maliyetleme” (Activity Based Costing, ABC, FTM) sistematiğinin kullanımında yoğunluk göze çarpmaktadır. Ancak; FTM’nin genel kabul gören uygulama konsepti işletme bünyesinde kullanılan safha maliyetleme, sipariş maliyetleme gibi mevcut muhasebe sistemlerinin destekleyicisi olarak kullanımını öngörmektedir. İş kollarının sektörel yapısı baz alındığında tersanelerin; sahip oldukları karmaşık süreçlerin doğal neticesi olarak yüksek genel giderlere sahip işletmeler oldukları görülmektedir. Bu itibarla tersaneler FTM için son derece elverişli uygulama potansiyeline sahip kuruluşlardır.

Cost accounting problem for not-for-profit production based organizations: A model

In this study cost accounting problems faced by not-for-profit production based organizations have been analyzed and being motivated for improvement in practice; it was aimed to construct a cost accounting and analyze procedure for the use of Gölcük Naval Shipyard, Turkish Navy, based on “Activity Based Costing” systematical approach and in accordance with the aim the total production cost of a 1400 tons 209 class submarine which is one of the products of the shipyard has been calculated as well. On the theoretical basis; it was discussed that the accounting literature included a variety of enterprise classifications based on different approaches and it was assessed that majority of those were not suitable for use since they did not imply the not-forprofit state enterprise having complex production and service outputs such as military shipyards. It is a fact that the generally accepted management conceptual steps including planning, organizing, execution and control; additionally performance and productivity measurements are not limited to private enterprise and are valid for not-for-profit organizations as well. Unfortunately; being lack of final benchmarking criteria namely profits; and because of some other related issues the major problematic areas on the context of managerial functions and decision making accumulate on productivity issues and performance measurements. So, necessary performance measurement and cost analyzing techniques applicable to the organizational structure should be set forth for the use of managers in such an environment. The most important input factor needed by management authorities during decision making process is the cost figure of the operations. Managers need to have accurate cost analysis data for both planning the company operations and performance evaluation. As for the private enterprise; classification and analyzing the costs resulting from the operations is also vital for not-for-profit organizations. It is generally accepted that cost accounting in not-for-profit organizations is more important than the private enterprise accounting in the scope of national economy as a whole system. The Turkish Armed Forces and its organic subordinate Turkish Navy pays high attention and priority to cost effectiveness in planning and executing the activities while sustaining national defence and security. Gölcük Naval Shipyard is the major supplier of Turkish Navy in the context of ship construction, repair, maintenance and keeping Turkish Navy operational. The common problematic performance and productivity measurement issues are also valid for Gölcük Naval Shipyard which is a not-for-profit production based organization. That’s why she has a great potential for not-for-profit organization accounting research and applications. The common liable characteristic for traditional costing systems such as process costing or job order costing is the assumption that the production capacity is the unique cost driver for allocating the overheads to the products. Nowadays, it has been observed that “Activity Based Costing” discipline got to be used on a wider scale stemming from the fact that there are some other cost drivers. Considering the typical characteristics of business sectors; shipyards are observed to have high overheads since they possess complex production processes. That’s why activity based costing seems to be a useful technique to be adapted to shipyards. In the application section it is aimed to built a cost analysis and control model based on activity based costing systematical approach for Gölcük Naval Shipyard, one of the not-for-profit production based enterprises and the total production cost of a 1400 tons 209 class submarine which is one of the outputs of the shipyard has been calculated as well. The study includes five steps: a through structural analysis in order to identify major activities creating costs, determining and defining the activity-cost pools, allocation of overheads to relevant cost pools, determining the activity rates and allocation of activity rates to the cost object. The most important outcome is the confirmation of the hypothesis that ABC is the most suitable cost accounting technique for shipyards. ABC puts forth effective solutions for managerial purposes. The final result obtained by the study is that ABC possesses many advantages for not-for-profit organizations as a management concept and has a great potential in order to be adapted to the organizations such as Gölcük Naval Shipyard.

___

  • Balachandran, B.V. ve Babad, Y.M., (1993). Cost driver optimization in activity-based costing, The Accounting Review, 68, 563-575.
  • Berliner, C. ve Brimson, J. A., (1988). Cost management for today’s advanced manufacturing: The CAM-I Conceptual Design, Harward Business School Pres, Boston.
  • Brookner, L. ve Heilman E., (1960). Technical assistance in accounting in Turkey, The Accounting Review, 35, 33-36.
  • Büyükkılıç, D., (2004). Kar amaci gütmeyen örgütlerde verimlilik, Milli Prodüktivite Merkezi Yayınları No: 888, Eskişehir.
  • Cooper, R., (1988a). The rise of activity-based costing part one: What is an activity-based cost system?, Journal of Cost Management, 2, 2, 45-54.
  • Cooper, R., (1988b). The rise of activity-based costing part two: When do I need an activity-based cost system?, Journal of Cost Management, 2, 3, 41-48.
  • Cooper, R., (1989a). The rise of activity-based costing part three: How many cost drivers do you need and how do you select them?, Journal of Cost Management, 2, 4, 34-46.
  • Cooper, R., (1989b). The rise of activity-based costing part four: What do activity-based cost systems look like?, Journal of Cost Management, 3, 1, 34-46.
  • Demski, J.S. ve Kreps, D.M., (1982). Models in managerial accounting, Journal of Accounting Research, 20, 117-148.
  • Gordon, M.J., (1951). Cost allocations and the design of accounting systems for control, The Accounting Review, 26, 209-220.
  • Gürsoy, C.T., (1999). Yönetim ve maliyet muhasebesi, Beta Basım Yayım Dağıtım A.Ş., İstanbul.
  • Kanodia, C., (1982). Discussion of models in managerial accounting, Journal of Accounting Research, 20, 153-160.
  • Kaplan, R.S., (1983). Measuring manufacturing performance: A new challenge for managerial accounting research, The Accounting Review, 58, 686-705.
  • Kaplan, R.S., (1984). The evolution of management accounting, The Accounting Review, 3, 390-418.
  • Kaplan, R.S. ve Cooper, R., (1998). Cost & effect: using integrated cost systems drive profitability and performance, Harvard Business School Pres, Boston.
  • Miller, H.C., (1942). Cost inspection in the United States Navy, The Accounting Review, 17, 94-99.
  • Pownall, G., (1986). An empirical analysis of the regulation of the defence contracting industry: The cost accounting standarts board, Journal of Accounting Research, 24, 291-315.
  • Report of the Committee on Not-For-Profit Organizations, (1971). The Accounting Review, 46, 81-163.
  • Rogerson, W.P., (1992). Overhead allocation and incentives for cost minimization in defense procurement, The Accounting Review, 67, 671-690.
  • Rotch, W., (1990). Activity based costing in service industries, Journal of Cost Management, 4, 4-14.
  • Sherwood, D., (1985). Helping managers manage, The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 36, 627-631.
  • Stocken, P.C. ve Verrechia, R.E., (2004). Financial reporting system choice and disclosure management, The Accounting Review, 79, 1181-1203.
  • Storch, R.L., Hammon, C.P., Bunch, H.M. ve Moore, R., (1995). Ship production, Cornell Maritime Pres, New Jersey.