本文是会计专业Essay范例，题目是“Throughput Accounting: Theory of Constraints（产量会计:约束理论）”，戈德拉特博士的“吞吐量会计”彻底改变了企业看待成本并将其与利润联系起来的方法。与传统的成本会计方法不同，戈德拉特认为，会计应该寻求在组织中最大化产品的移动，以消除阻碍效率和速度的潜在瓶颈。戈德拉特认为，目前使用的成本计算系统是在大约100年前根据那个特定时代的商业实践和商业设计发展起来的。因此，传统的会计制度可以在一个“成本世界”的背景下理解。这个成本世界把商业价值和决策的所有方面都集中在产品本身的成本上。为了将业务的所有后续环节与成本联系起来，必须将非常精细的费用分配到产品上。这些“成本计划”实际上有许多不同的错误和假设，影响账目的准确性，因此导致管理决策的错误判断。戈德拉特在他的书中提出，会计应该从“吞吐量”的角度来看待。吞吐量取决于三个具体因素:吞吐量、库存和运营费用。吞吐量可以定义为企业从销售其产品中获得的货币收益。投资是使生产能力得以发生的所有固定资产的货币价值。最后，运营费用是所有花费在生产能力上的运营费用。戈德拉特对吞吐量会计必要性的分析背后的原因是，世界不再是基于成本的扁平描述。与上个世纪不同，今天的企业并没有将大部分资源投入到生产要素、工厂和其他大量资本投资的载体上。更重要的是，工人被认为是可变成本，因为他们大多是低技能的，因此很容易随着劳动力需求而变化。在当今世界，资源和劳动力这两种移动的力量正朝着相反的方向移动。由于工作流程的改变，资源变得更加多变，以前固定的成本也变得灵活。与此同时，技术劳动力，特别是在关键的高技能行业，也变得比以前更加固定和必要。因此，对劳动力或特定产品的成本分配不再准确，而是建立在错误的假设之上。Godratt吞吐量会计的基本原则是，决策关注的是组织的目标，而不是其成本。企业所做的所有决策都与他们的最终目标相关。在这种会计系统下，个人被视为资产而不是费用，传统的库存和吞吐量机制被仔细分析和重新配置，以符合组织的目标。Goldratt认为，通过吞吐量核算机制建立了三种基本关系，如下所述。吞吐量核算的核心是“所有单个产品的销售所得的总和”(注释):T= pTp(p=单个产品)
Dr. Goldratt’s ‘Throughput Accounting’ revolutionized the methods by which companies viewed their costs and associated them with profits. Unlike the traditional cost accounting methods, Goldratt argues that accounting should seek to maximize the movement of products through an organization to eliminate potential bottlenecks that prevents efficiency and speed. Goldratt argues that the current costing systems in use were developed almost a hundred years ago based upon the business practices and business designs of that particular era. The traditional accounting system therefore can be understood in the context of a “Cost World”. This cost world focuses all aspects of business value and decision making upon the cost of products themselves. In order to connect all of the subsequent aspects of business to costs, very elaborate allocation of expenses had to flow through to products. These “cost schemes” in effect have many different errors and assumptions that impacts the accuracy of accounts and therefore causes misjudgments within management decision making. Goldratt proposes within his book that accounting should be viewed through a “throughput” perspective. Throughput rests upon three specific elements: throughput, inventory and operating expense. Throughput can be defined as the monetary gain a business makes from selling its products. Investment is the monetary value of all fixed assets which enables throughput to occur. Finally, operating expense is all of the operational expenses spent on producing throughput. The reasoning behind Goldratt’s analysis for the need of throughput accounting is that the world is no longer based upon flat delineations of costs. Businesses today, unlike the last century, do not commit the majority of their resources on factors, plants and other vehicles of heavy capital investment. Even more important, workers were thought of as variable costs because they were mostly low-skilled and thus easily varied through workforce demand. In today’s world, these two moving forces, resources and labor are moving in opposite directions. Resources are becoming much more variable and formerly fixed costs are becoming flexible as a result of changing workflows. At the same time, skilled labor especially in key high skilled industries are becoming much more fixed and necessary than before as well. Thus, allocation of costs to labor or specific products is no longer accurate and rests on faulty assumptions. The foundational principle of Godratt’s throughput accounting is that decisions are focused upon the goals of the organization rather than on its costs. All of the decisions made by the business can be related to their ultimate goal. Under this accounting system, individuals are viewed as assets rather than expenses, and traditional mechanisms of inventory and throughput are carefully analyzed and reconfigured to align with organizational goals. Goldratt argues that there are three fundamental relationships established through throughput accounting mechanisms, these are described below. Throughput accounting at the core is the “summation of all the gain from sales of all the individual products” (NOTATION): T= pTp(p=individual products)
This is the first principle of throughput accounting. At the same time, Operating expense is the summation of the individual subsets of operating expense. This would include all subsets of operating expense including employees and their manager resources, interest levels, energy costs, etc.
这是吞吐量核算的首要原则。同时，营业费用是各营业费用子集的总和。这将包括运营费用的所有子集，包括员工和他们的经理资源、兴趣水平、能源成本等。
OE = cOEc(c=individual categories)
The role of cost accounting within financial analysis was to develop a mechanism to search for a very good estimation in understanding how production lines impact each other and thus impacts the net profitability of companies. Goldratt argues that cost accounting was intended to make “apples and oranges into apples and apples”. This would allow companies to have a true metric for cross-comparison. Throughput accounting solves the problem of allocation simply by dividing a company into product by product classes. It uses the formula:
NP = p (T – OE)p
The reason that Throughput accounting is necessary according to Goldratt is that cost accounting has become too ineffective in forming solutions for modern corporate problems and diversification. Concepts such as cost drivers and activity based costing are both ineffective in their methodology in truly assessing corporate profit and stakeholders. These above principles make up the foundation of Godratt’s Throughput Accounting analysis.By focusing upon the mechanisms for consistent business improvement, Throughput Accounting works to eliminate bottlenecks throughout an organization and focuses upon how to achieve sustainable development through maximizing organizational goals rather than focusing upon costs and expensing. Godratt’s overall theory is meant to provide accurate business decision data that focuses upon tailored organization needs rather than standardized costing.
根据Goldratt，吞吐量会计之所以是必要的，是因为成本会计在形成现代企业问题和多样化的解决方案方面已经变得过于无效。成本动因和作业成本法等概念在真正评估企业利润和利益相关者时都是无效的。以上原则构成了Godratt吞吐量会计分析的基础。通过关注持续业务改进的机制，吞吐量会计工作以消除整个组织的瓶颈，并关注如何通过最大化组织目标实现可持续发展，而不是关注成本和费用。哥德拉特的总体理论旨在提供准确的商业决策数据，这些数据侧重于定制的组织需求，而不是标准化的成本计算。
Despite the widespread acceptance of throughput accounting within the managerial finance community, it is not a perfect solution. Many different developments within the field have strongly impacted its sustainability and usability in the near term. One of these most fundamental changes is the concept developed by Caspari and Caspari called “Constraint Accounting”. While throughput accounting is often described as a transition from variable costing, constraint accounting also derives from the Theory of Constraints but is directed towards a systematic solution for corporate financial analysis. Throughput accounting is not perfect because it attempts to evaluate “global throughput paradigms” with the current local efficiency cost paradigm. Thus, Caspari describes throughput accounting as a “legacy system”, thus something more systematic must be used to judge global criteria. Constraints accounting can be understood as a global throughput accounting paradigm, rather than evaluate transitive states, global throughput decisions are measured through internally consistent metrics. Its goal is to bring the effect of identifiable constraints to the concept of profit and loss statements and effectively overcome the traditional management accounting functions of the firm, moving them to the goal of on-going improvement model. Constraints accounting allows for the recovery of investment in breaking constraints down as operating expenses at the same rate as throughput. The result is that it creates a means of “global congruence” through financial incentives to “bust constraints”. Thus Constraints accounting allows for aligning business perspectives in both the short term and long term through broad principles which is similar to the developments of Kaizen and Continuous Improvement dynamics. Constraints accounting can be defined as “an accounting reporting technique, consistent with a process of ongoing improvement and implementation of the theory of constraints, including:
Explicit consideration of the role of constraints,
Specification of throughput contribution effects
Decoupling of throughput from operational expense
Constraints accounting has dramatically impacted the dynamics of businesses through the understanding of global perspectives on constraints decision making. It impacts accountants because it changes the dynamics within business decision making by extending a systematic methodology for examining business impact and bottlenecks. Constraints accounting focuses on the explicit consideration of the role of constraints and the actual throughout contribution by understanding the separate value of throughput and operating expense. Constraints accounting is widely used as a methodology for understanding future costs and controlling future costs as an effect on constraints. Constraints accounting impacts one specific area, organization wide consulting. While traditional throughput accounting mechanisms had consultants focus their attention on the limitations of business in their bottlenecks, CA focuses instead on the development of continuous mechanisms for optimized business practice. This has transformed how consultants analyze business functions by decoupling throughput and operational expenses. Consultants no longer pursue a specific understanding operational expenses and thus tailor their recommendation on how to decrease OE in order to take away bottlenecking. However, CA focuses instead on the specific effects of throughput upon an organization and how to instill continuous improvement at this level. Deviating from a transitive model towards a greater understanding of the global and systematic viewpoint. New developments and expansions of throughput accounting have helped to answer of many of the criticisms that have been leveled at this TOC (Theory of constraints). There are four main criticisms that have been leveled at the concept of Throughput Accounting. The first is that throughput accounting is just another form of variable costing. Second, that throughput is only valid when there is a tangible production bottleneck. Third, that it regards all operating expenses of a company as fixed, and finally, that it can only be used as a short term decision tool rather than a long term decision making calculus. Although there is some validity to these criticisms, the majority of them rest upon misunderstandings of how throughput accounting works and what its specific methods are. Throughput accounting is not a costing analysis in that its primary concern is with the relevant costs and revenues associated with a decision.
约束会计通过对约束决策的全球视角的理解，极大地影响了企业的动态。它影响会计，因为它通过扩展系统的方法来检查业务影响和瓶颈，改变了业务决策的动态。约束会计通过理解吞吐量和运营费用的单独价值，着重于明确考虑约束的作用和实际的整体贡献。约束会计作为一种理解未来成本和控制未来成本对约束的影响的方法被广泛使用。约束会计影响一个特定的领域，组织范围的咨询。传统的吞吐量核算机制让顾问将注意力集中在瓶颈中的业务局限性上，而CA则将重点放在开发用于优化业务实践的连续机制上。这改变了咨询师通过解耦吞吐量和运营费用来分析业务功能的方式。咨询顾问不再追求对运营费用的具体了解，因此，他们对如何减少OE的建议进行定制，以消除瓶颈。然而，CA关注的是吞吐量对组织的特定影响，以及如何在这个级别上逐步引入持续改进。从传递模型转向对全局和系统观点的更大理解。吞吐量核算的新发展和扩展帮助回答了许多针对TOC(约束理论)的批评。对于吞吐量核算的概念，有四个主要的批评。首先，吞吐量会计只是可变成本的另一种形式。其次，只有当存在切实的生产瓶颈时，这种产量才有效。第三，它认为公司的所有经营费用都是固定的，最后，它只能作为一个短期的决策工具，而不是一个长期的决策演算。尽管这些批评有一定的正确性，但大多数批评都是基于对吞吐量会计的工作方式及其具体方法的误解。吞吐量会计不是成本分析，因为它主要关心的是与决策相关的成本和收入。
The majority of companies in the modern world still use a form of cost accounting as their primary management accounting system. Although this system has been used widely its founding premise is that if a company can reduce the cost of a product, then it will simultaneously increase the company’s overall profitability. However, throughput accounting does not attach cost to production. Rather it attempts to answer three primary questions using throughput accounting measurements.
现代世界的大多数公司仍然使用一种形式的成本会计作为其主要的管理会计系统。虽然这个系统已经被广泛使用，但它的基本前提是，如果一个公司可以降低产品的成本，那么它将同时增加公司的整体盈利能力。然而，产量核算并不把成本与生产联系在一起。相反，它试图使用吞吐量会计度量来回答三个主要问题。
How will decisions impact the overall amount of money the company generates?
How will decisions impact the overall operating expenses of the company?
How will decisions impact the overall return captured by the company?
Constraints accounting answers the primary fault of throughput accounting, which is that it is a natural extension of variable costing. There is much truth to this statement because variable costing at a definitional level implies a transitive analysis of controlling costs as they are related to the throughput. The ultimate difference between variable costing and throughput accounting is that local decision making is based on the role of constraints and the contributions due to the constraints themselves. Constraints accounting eliminates the transitive view by taking on a global and systematic viewpoint. It extends the logic that costs are incurred irrespective of the different fixed components of costs and are better management decisions about product cost. Throughput accounting argues that direct labor is no longer considered variable, rather production cost is avoided by instead considering throughput analysis. Constraints accounting is the only methodology that can in reality be considered systematic and global optimum in its approach.
约束会计回答了吞吐量会计的主要缺陷，即它是可变成本的自然延伸。这种说法很有道理，因为可变成本在定义层面上意味着控制成本的传递分析，因为它们与吞吐量有关。可变成本和吞吐量核算之间的最终区别是，局部决策是基于约束的作用和约束本身的贡献。约束会计采用全局和系统的观点，消除了传递性观点。它扩展了成本产生的逻辑，而不考虑不同的固定成本组成部分，是关于产品成本的更好的管理决策。吞吐量会计认为，直接劳动力不再被认为是可变的，而是生产成本被避免，而不是考虑吞吐量分析。约束会计是现实中唯一能够被认为是系统和全局最优的会计方法。
Constraints accounting also changes the perspective of understanding bottlenecks. Bottlenecks within companies are streamlined through the existence of throughput analysis rather than focusing on cost of production. The main criticism that throughput only works when bottlenecks exists is counter-intuitive, bottlenecks will always exist purely because production can never be completely efficient. Using the constraints accounting approach, a process of re-assessing the process of production and the constraints applied to them develops a continuous model for improvement that is comparable with the Kaizen model. This means that there is a response mechanism and systematic approach to understanding constraints fast enough to develop a counteractive means to continuously develop an understanding of constraints. Thus, constraints accounting seeks to continuously improve businesses even when bottlenecks are less noticeable, whereas throughput accounting focuses at the transitive level. One of the chief criticisms of throughput accounting is that it regards all operating expenses as fixed costs. Constraints accounting takes this into consideration by decoupling T and OE. This implies that throughput and thus, understanding of business optimal functions does not entail operating expense considerations at all. Operating expenses are for the most part a fixed cost because of the current state of world capital flow and labor demand. However, constraints accounting focuses on a systematic and global optimum viewpoint which disassociates these two concepts unlike throughput accounting.
约束会计也改变了理解瓶颈的角度。通过对产量的分析，而不是关注生产成本，企业内部的瓶颈得以简化。关于吞吐量只在瓶颈存在时才有效的主要批评是反直觉的，瓶颈总是存在，因为生产永远不可能完全高效。使用约束会计方法，一个重新评估生产过程和应用于它们的约束的过程开发了一个可与改善模型相比较的持续改进模型。这意味着有一种反应机制和系统的方法来快速理解约束，从而开发出一种反作用的方法来不断地理解约束。因此，约束会计寻求不断改善业务，即使瓶颈不太明显，而吞吐量会计关注的是过渡水平。吞吐量会计的主要批评之一是，它把所有的运营费用视为固定成本。约束会计通过将T和OE解耦考虑到这一点。这意味着吞吐量和对业务最优功能的理解根本不需要考虑运营费用。由于目前世界资本流动和劳动力需求的状况，经营费用大部分是固定成本。然而，约束会计侧重于系统的和全局的最优的观点，这分离了这两个概念不同于吞吐量会计。
Finally, the concept that throughput accounting can only be used as a short term decision making tool is also changed through constraints accounting. While it is true that throughput accounting deals only with bottlenecks in business at the microscopic level, and it is a transitive analysis that can be closely related to variable costing, constraints accounting is very much a global and systematic understanding. Since constraints accounting specifies the role of throughput, it takes a global optimum view of constraints and their function on specific organizational components. The implication is simple, this takes away the fundamental derivative of demand at a cost level. Which means that continuous improvement is possible using constraints accounting, taking away the primary complaint of the Throughput accounting model? The development of constraint accounting goes one step further than throughput accounting. It uses an explicit consideration of the theory of constraints to understand the role of constraints as bottlenecks on a global/systematic view rather than the transitive view. This new development within the understanding of constraints theory is a derivative of throughput accounting. It answers many of the primary concerns of throughput, and thus changes the differing leverage points of TA analysis. Goldratt’s original assumptions of throughput are very valuable in creating an optimal understanding of modern business practice and function, however it still contained many errors. From the above discussion it is evident that cost accounting is no longer the strongest and most credible method of managerial accounting. Changes must be made to this model to accommodate the growth of organizations from focusing on individual products towards integration of product lines that deviates from cost. Throughput accounting focuses on improving businesses through focusing on goals rather than on costs, this was a revolution within managerial accounting. However, many problems still existed with TA that prevented it from systematic adoption. However, the development of constraints accounting has dramatically changed the nature of the theory of constraints and its direct application. It has allowed for the use of continuous improvement models within managerial finance. An understanding of throughput and the theory of constraints have inevitably changed managerial finance and changed its direction from costing to focus on end business goals.
最后，通过约束会计，吞吐量会计只能作为短期决策工具的概念也发生了改变。虽然吞吐量会计确实只处理微观层面上的商业瓶颈，而且它是一个与可变成本密切相关的传递性分析，但约束会计是一个非常全局和系统的理解。由于约束计算指定了吞吐量的角色，因此它采用约束及其在特定组织组件上的功能的全局最佳视图。含义很简单，这去掉了成本水平上需求的基本衍生品。这意味着使用约束核算，消除吞吐量核算模型的主要问题，可以实现持续改进吗?约束会计的发展比吞吐量会计更进一步。它使用了对约束理论的明确考虑，以全局/系统的观点而不是过渡的观点来理解约束作为瓶颈的作用。这种对约束理论理解的新发展是吞吐量核算的衍生物。它解决了吞吐量的许多主要问题，因此改变了TA分析的不同杠杆点。Goldratt最初的吞吐量假设对于建立对现代商业实践和功能的最佳理解非常有价值，但它仍然包含许多错误。从上面的讨论，很明显，成本会计不再是最强大和最可信的管理会计方法。必须对该模型进行更改，以适应组织从关注单个产品向关注偏离成本的产品线整合的增长。吞吐量会计通过关注目标而不是成本来改善业务，这是管理会计中的一场革命。然而，由于TA存在许多问题，使其无法得到系统的采用。然而，约束会计的发展极大地改变了约束理论的性质及其直接应用。它允许在管理财务中使用持续改进模型。对产量和约束理论的理解不可避免地改变了管理财务，并改变了其方向，从成本计算到关注最终的商业目标。
留学生论文相关专业范文素材资料，尽在本网，可以随时查阅参考。本站也提供多国留学生课程作业写作指导服务，如有需要可咨询本平台。