Management Accounting

[Report Title]

[Name]

[Business info]

Executive Summary

Introduction

Explain the purpose of the case study, including a strong emphasis on the context of the case and an overall thesis statement.

Main Text

Summarize the main questions elements with support to help guide the reader to the final recommendations.

Recommendations

Provide a listing of recommendations and brief reasons supporting the rationale.

Table of Contents (complete when report is in final review)

Heading 1 x

Heading 2 x

Heading 3 x

Heading 1 x

Heading 2 x

Heading 3 x

	Table Column Header	Table Column Header	Table Column Header	Table Column Header
Table Row Header	Table text	Table text	Table text	Table text
Table Row Header	Table text	Table text	Table text	Table text
Table Row Header	Table text	Table text	Table text	Table text
Table Row Header	Table text	Table text	Table text	Table text

Note: The table here may be used throughout the recommendation report. Please feel free to adjust based on the findings and recommendations.

Methodology

In this section, discuss the approach taken to complete the case study assignment. This section is where you explain how you defined the case study problem, determined what concept(s) to apply, make note of relevant quantitative/qualitative data, etc. The case study approach is a “learning by doing” activity and requires a process or methodology for assessment and completion. Here is a general list of guidelines that might provide some assistance and overall guidance in the final write-up of this section.

· Read the first few paragraphs, then move through the case asking yourself, “What is the case all about? What types of data (either quantitative and/or qualitative data) is provided in the case?

· Then, read the case slowly and carefully, making sure to note important facts keeping in mind the overall goal of the case.

· Make note of the key problems or issues.

· Perform the appropriate quantitative and/or qualitative analysis required.

· Develop a set of recommendations that are supported by the analysis.

Introduction

In this section, introduce the case study, provide context, describe the case study problem in greater detail, and the overall purpose (e.g., to provide recommendations about…).

Here is a general “Introduction” for the “Over-land Trucking and Freight” case study:

The case is designed to be used to reinforce the concepts of cost behaviour and cost-volume-profit (CVP) analysis and to introduce the concept of capacity.

In this case, you are asked to evaluate a proposal from an existing client to expand the level of services provided. The alternatives relate to the nature of the expansion of capacity

to provide the requested services. There is no need to do discounted cash flow analysis for capital budgeting purposes.

Upon completing this case, you will achieve the following objectives related to the practice of management accounting, including:

1. Apply relevant costing for decision making, including the identification of directly traceable and common costs.

2. Demonstrate an understanding of cost behaviour and use the cost behaviour information to prepare a break-even analysis.

3. Identify a point of indifference between alternatives and provide factors that would influence decisions given that point of indifference.

4. Recognize the limitations and opportunities related to the company’s cost structure and capacity.

Note: Use the information above as a guide to help you begin the case study analysis. Be creative and most importantly be original.

Main Text (Address all 8 questions provided under “The Decision” heading)

Strategic and Risk Factors

· What are the strategic and risk factors specific to this case study surrounding Over-land Trucking and Freight?

Consider the strategic implications (including risks) associated with expanding (or choosing not to expand) operations to meet the demands of FHP. Analyze this question from a conceptual point of view. Calculations are not necessary.

· The case study references J. B. Hunt and Landstar as two publicly traded companies that have two very different cost structures. This is true because the companies practice two different philosophies for using (or not using) owner operators (e.g., independent contractors). Speculate about the company that may produce higher profits in periods of high economic demand. Why? Speculate about the company that may have a less risky cost structure in poor economic times. Why?

· Make sure to summarize any conclusions or assertions made in the “Conclusions” section of the recommendation report.

Cost Factors

· What are the cost factors associated with Over-land Trucking and Freight? Discuss managerial cost concepts.

· Discuss cost structure. Expand on the third bullet point under “Strategic and Risk Factors” section.

· Assume Over-land could service the contract with existing equipment. Use Exhibit 1 in the case study to identify the relevant costs concerning the acceptance of FHP’s request to add two additional loads per week. Which costs are not relevant? Why?

· Why might Over-land use an independent operator if the variable cost per mile is higher than if the company had purchased a rig and hired a driver?

· Make sure to summarize any conclusions or assertions made in the “Conclusions” section of the recommendation report.

Capacity Factors

· Calculate the contribution per mile and total annual contribution associated with accepting FHP’s proposal. What do you recommend? (Use 52 weeks per year in your calculations.)

· After a closer examination of capacity, management believes an additional rig is required to service the FHP account. Assume Over-land’s management chooses to invest in one additional truck and trailer that can serve the needs of FHP (at least initially). Assume the annual incremental fixed costs associated with acquiring the additional equipment is$50,000. Further, FHP would agree to pay $2.20 per mile (total including FSC and miscellaneous) if Over-land would sign a five-year contract. What is the annual number of miles required for Over-land to break even, assuming the company adds one truck and trailer? What is the expected annual increase in profitability from the FHP contract? (Use 52 weeks per year in your calculations.)

· Over-land has business relationships with independent contractors, though Alan is reluctant to use them. Another possibility for expanding capacity is to outsource the

miles requested by FHP. One of Over-land’s most reliable independent contractors has quoted a rate of $1.65 per mile. As with question 4, assume FHP would agree to pay$2.20 per mile if Over-land would sign a five-year contract. Further, assume Over-land would incur incremental fixed costs of $20,000 annually. These costs would include insurance, rental trailers, certain permits, salaries and benefits of garage maintenance, and office salaries such as billing. How many annual miles are required for Over-land to break even if the miles are outsourced? What is the expected annual increase in profitability from the FHP contract? What are your conclusions?

· All organizations have the potential to perform work, which is determined by the types of resources and the organization’s capacity. Effective use of resources can be critical to a firm in any competitive market. In their efforts to efficiently use capacity, managers may ask questions such as: What portion of the available capacity is in use? Of the capacity in use, what portion is used productively? How can we increase the productive use of capacity? Why is a portion of available capacity not in use? Can we eliminate unused capacity? Over-land’s management is no different. In fact, management is not exactly clear about how to view capacity. Discuss the challenges that Over-land’s management faces with defining and managing capacity. Consider various definitions of capacity, such as theoretical, practical, normal, and actual capacity. Based on the facts presented in the case, prepare an estimate of capacity for Over-land (assuming one driver per rig without slip seating or team driving).

· Make sure to summarize any conclusions or assertions made in the “Conclusions” section of the recommendation report.

Conclusions

· Summarize conclusions and assertions made in prior sections of the recommendation report.

· At what point would management be indifferent between the scenarios illustrated in questions 4 and 5 in the case study? Based on your analysis, would you recommend adding capacity by purchasing an additional rig or by utilizing the services of an independent contractor? Why?

Recommendations

List recommendations based on the case study analysis of the following three areas:

· Strategic and Risk Factors

· Cost Factors

· Capacity Factors

Make sure the “Recommendations” section links to the “Conclusions” section.

References

Ambady, N., & Rosenthal, R. (1993). Half a minute: Predicting teacher evaluations from thin slices of nonverbal behavior and physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(3), 431–441. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.64.3.431

American Association of University Professors. (n.d.). Background facts on contingent faculty positions. https://www.aaup.org/issues/contingency/background-facts

American Association of University Professors. (2018, October 11). Data snapshot: Contingent faculty in US higher ed. AAUP Updates. https://www.aaup.org/news/data-snapshot-contingent-faculty-us-higher-ed#.Xfpdmy2ZNR4

Anderson, K., & Miller, E. D. (1997). Gender and student evaluations of teaching. PS: Political Science and Politics, 30(2), 216–219. https://doi.org/10.2307/420499

Armstrong, J. S. (1998). Are student ratings of instruction useful? American Psychologist, 53(11), 1223–1224. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.53.11.1223

Attiyeh, R., & Lumsden, K. G. (1972). Some modern myths in teaching economics: The U.K. experience. American Economic Review, 62(1), 429–443. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1821578

Bachen, C. M., McLoughlin, M. M., & Garcia, S. S. (1999). Assessing the role of gender in college students' evaluations of faculty. Communication Education, 48(3), 193–210. http://doi.org/cqcgsr

Basow, S. A. (1995). Student evaluations of college professors: When gender matters. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(4), 656–665. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.87.4.656

Becker, W. (2000). Teaching economics in the 21st century. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 14(1), 109–120. http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/jep.14.1.109

Benton, S., & Young, S. (2018). Best practices in the evaluation of teaching. Idea paper, 69.

Berk, R. A. (2005). Survey of 12 strategies to measure teaching effectiveness. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 17(1), 48–62.

Bloom, B. S., Englehart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Addison-Wesley Longman Ltd.

Brandenburg, D., Slinde, C., & Batista, J. (1977). Student ratings of instruction: Validity and normative interpretations. Research in Higher Education, 7(1), 67–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00991945

Carrell, S., & West, J. (2010). Does professor quality matter? Evidence from random assignment of students to professors. Journal of Political Economy, 118(3), 409–432. https://doi.org/10.1086/653808

Cashin, W. E. (1990). Students do rate different academic fields differently. In M. Theall, & J. L. Franklin (Eds.), Student ratings of instruction: Issues for improving practice. New Directions for Teaching and Learning (pp. 113–121).

Centra, J., & Gaubatz, N. (2000). Is there gender bias in student evaluations of teaching? The Journal of Higher Education, 71(1), 17–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2000.11780814

Davis, B. G. (2009). Tools for teaching (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.

Denton, D. (2013). Responding to edTPA: Transforming practice or applying shortcuts? AILACTE Journal, 10(1), 19–36.

Dizney, H., & Brickell, J. (1984). Effects of administrative scheduling and directions upon student ratings of instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 9(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-476X(84)90001-8

DuCette, J., & Kenney, J. (1982). Do grading standards affect student evaluations of teaching? Some new evidence on an old question. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(3), 308– 314. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.74.3.308

Edwards, J. E., & Waters, L. K. (1984). Halo and leniency control in ratings as influenced by format, training, and rater characteristic differences. Managerial Psychology, 5(1), 1–16.

Fink, L. D. (2013). The current status of faculty development internationally. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2013.070204

Fulcher, G. (2003). Testing second language speaking. Pearson Education.

Fulcher, G., Davidson, F., & Kemp, J. (2011). Effective rating scale development for speaking tests: Performance decision trees. Language Testing, 28(1), 5–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532209359514

Gaff, J. G., & Simpson, R. D. (1994). Faculty development in the United States. Innovative Higher Education, 18(3), 167–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01191111

Hattie, J. (2008). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.

Hoffman, R. A. (1983). Grade inflation and student evaluations of college courses. Educational and Psychological Research, 3(3), 51–160.

https://doi.org/10.1023/A:101557981

Howard, G., Conway, C., & Maxwell, S. (1985). Construct validity of measures of college teaching effectiveness. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(2), 187–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.77.2.187

Kane, M. T. (2013) Validating interpretations and uses of test scores. Journal of Educational Measurement, 50(1), 1–73.

Kelley, T. (1927). Interpretation of educational measurements. World Book Co.

Knoch, U. (2007). Do empirically developed rating scales function differently to conventional rating scales for academic writing? Spaan Fellow Working Papers in Second or Foreign Language Assessment, 5, 1–36. English Language Institute, University of Michigan.

Knoch, U. (2009). Diagnostic assessment of writing: A comparison of two rating scales. Language Testing, 26(2), 275-304.

Appendix (if needed)

Replace placeholder text with your own…

2

[Report Title]