Changes in Costing in Italy

The issue of cost calculation has been largely debated in the last years under the pressure of the perceived lost of relevance of the "traditional cost accounting approaches". The enthusiasm for new management accounting techniques has often driven the attention to the technical theoretical aspects of the proposed cost models. The paper presents the comparison of two survey results developed in a ten years distance on the similar sample of companies located in Italy (the first survey is reported in Cinquini et al., 1999). The comparison is based on costing system characteristics such as cost objects, costing purposes, cost configuration, allocation bases and innovative trends in costing (behavior respect to Activitybased costing and Target costing). These two long-distance surveys provide the opportunity to assess the changes occurred in the costing systems reducing the effects of physical and cultural barriers. The latter constitute the main issue in comparing results of surveys conducted in different countries. Moreover, the time elapsed could allow the perception about adopters’ behavior, along different stages of the diffusion process of advanced costing techniques. This outcome could open to further studies to assess whether or not adopters are moving from a “fad and fashion” behavior of the early stages, to a more rational approach in which the matching between management needs and tools potentiality is improved.

[1]  H. Okano,et al.  Target Costing: Uncharted Research Territory , 2006 .

[2]  L. Vogel,et al.  Strategy and Structure , 1986 .

[3]  H. Thomas Johnson,et al.  Relevance Regained: From Top-down Control to Bottom-up Empowerment , 1992 .

[4]  Tom Kennedy,et al.  The Impact of Activity‐Based Costing Techniques on Firm Performance , 2001 .

[5]  Falconer Mitchell,et al.  A survey of activity-based costing in the U.K.'s largest companies , 1995 .

[6]  Paul Carter,et al.  Product diversity and costing system design choice: field study evidence , 2001 .

[7]  Ashraf M. Ahmed,et al.  Virtual integrated performance measurement , 2002 .

[8]  Robin Cooper,et al.  Target costing and value engineering , 1997 .

[9]  Robert W. Scapens,et al.  Issues in Management Accounting , 2007 .

[10]  G. Beekman,et al.  Activity Based Costing , 2020, Management Accounting.

[11]  M. Shubik,et al.  A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. , 1964 .

[12]  Shahid Ansari,et al.  Target Costing: The Next Frontier in Strategic Cost Management , 1997 .

[13]  K. Langfield-Smith,et al.  The relationship between strategic priorities, management techniques and management accounting: an empirical investigation using a systems approach , 1998 .

[14]  Davood Askarany,et al.  Attributes of Innovation and the Implementation of Managerial Tools: An Activity-Based Management Technique , 2007 .

[15]  David Dugdale,et al.  THE CONCEPT OF AN ACCOUNTING REGIME , 2001 .

[16]  Falconer Mitchell,et al.  The process of change in management accounting: some field study evidence , 1990 .

[17]  Peter Booth,et al.  Technological and Organizational Influences on the Adoption of Activity-Based Costing in Australia , 2004 .

[18]  Falconer Mitchell,et al.  Activity-based costing in the U.K.’s largest companies: a comparison of 1994 and 1999 survey results , 2000 .

[19]  S. Mark Young,et al.  Factors influencing the performance of activity based costing teams: a field study of ABC model development time in the automobile industry☆ , 2002 .

[20]  Falconer Mitchell.  A commentary on the applications of activity-based costing , 1994 .

[21]  Marinus J. Bouwman,et al.  The Association between Activity-Based Costing and Improvement in Financial Performance , 2002 .

[22]  Thomas L. Albright,et al.  The Competitive Environment and Strategy of Target Costing Implementers: Evidence from the Field , 2003 .

[23]  Kip R. Krumwiede.  The Implementation Steps of Activity-Based Costing and the Impact of Contextual and Organizational Factors , 1998 .

[24]  R. Chenhall.  Management control systems design within its organizational context: findings from contingency-based research and directions for the future , 2003 .

[25]  Robert S. Kaplan,et al.  One Cost System Isn't Enough , 1988 .

[26]  Thomas H. Johnson,et al.  Relevance Lost: The Rise and Fall of Management Accounting , 1987 .

[27]  Maurice Gosselin.  A Review of Activity-Based Costing: Technique, Implementation, and Consequences , 2006 .

[28]  Teemu Malmi,et al.  Activity-based costing diffusion across organizations: an exploratory empirical analysis of Finnish firms , 1999 .

[29]  Albie Brooks,et al.  An Empirical Investigation of Adoption Issues Relating to Activity‐Based Costing , 1997 .

[30]  Mike Tayles,et al.  Product costing in UK manufacturing organizations , 1994 .

[31]  N. Nahar,et al.  Do top- and mid-level managers view Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems success measures differently? , 2006 .

[32]  Eric Abrahamson.  Managerial Fads and Fashions: The Diffusion and Rejection of Innovations , 1991 .

[34]  Colin Drury,et al.  Research into product costing practice: a European perspective , 2001 .

[35]  Markus Granlund,et al.  Cost accounting in Finland: current practice and trends of development , 1996 .

[36]  Universite’LavaE.  THE EFFECT OF STRATEGY AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE ON THE ADOPTION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF ACTIVITY-BASED COSTING * , 2003 .

[37]  Trond Bjørnenak.  Diffusion and accounting: the case of ABC in Norway , 1997 .

[38]  Kevin T. Stevens,et al.  ACTIVITY-BASED COSTING IN IRELAND: BARRIERS TO, AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR, CHANGE , 1999 .