ACCT204 Management Accounting Semester 2 2017
Assessment Task 2- Individual Assignment (Weighting 25% of the unit)
Due date- 18th October 2017, 5pm
Each student is to submit an individual assignment via Turnitin based on the given case below.
The individual assignment should be around 900 words (numerical data is not included in the
word count).
Prairie Wolf (PW) designs and produces car parts. In 2015, actual variable manufacturing
overhead is $400,000. PW’s simple costing system allocates variable manufacturing overhead
to its three customers based on machine-hours and prices its contracts based on full costs.
One of its customers has regularly complained of being charged non-competitive prices, so you
as PW’s management accountant, realizes that it is time to examine the consumption of
overhead resources more closely. You know that there are three main departments that
consume overhead resources: Design, Production and Engineering. Interviews with the
department personnel and examination of time records yield the following detailed information:
Department Cost driver Variable
manufacturing
overhead 2015
Usage of cost drivers by customer contract
United Motors Alpha Motors Beta Motors
Design CAD-design hours $28,000 110 200 80
Production Engineering hours $40,000 60 240 370
Engineering Machine-hours $230,000 140 XXXX 1080
Total $298,000
XXXX is the last four digits of your student ID
Requirements:
Your report must at least cover the following parts:
(1) What is the variable manufacturing overhead allocated to each customer in 2015 using
the simple costing system that has machine-hours as the cost-allocation base?
(2) What is the variable manufacturing overhead allocated to each customer in 2015 using
departmental based variable manufacturing overhead rates?
(3) Which customer do you think was complaining about being overcharged in the simple
system? Which customer do you think will be unhappy in the departmental based rates
being used to price contracts? How would you respond to these concerns?
(4) How else might PW use the information available from its department-by-department
analysis of variable manufacturing overhead costs?
(5) PW’s managers are wondering if they should further refine the department-bydepartment
costing system into an ABC system by identifying different activities within
each department. Under what conditions would it not be worthwhile to refine further the
department costing system into an ABC system?
(6) PW’s variable manufacturing overhead for engineering department has increased by
50% in 2015 with little increase in machine hours. The management believes that there
are significant idle hours in the machine operators in engineering department. Provide
two effective recommendations to PW’s engineering department on how to improve the
productivity of the machine operators.
Please note that marks are awarded based on the marking rubric as shown in Appendix 2 of the
unit outline and is also reproduced on the following pages for the ease of references.
Please note also the relevant ‘ACU POLICIES AND REGULATIONS’ that are applicable to this
assignment are reproduced below:
Word limits
Word limits will be enforced with penalties. The marking penalty for exceeding the word limit will
be calculated as follows: 5% of the total available marks for the piece of work will be deducted
from the student’s mark for each 10% or part thereof by which the number of words in the
student’s piece of work exceeds the relevant word limit.
Late submission
Unless an extension is granted, essays/assignments submitted after the due date will incur a
5% per calendar day penalty based on the maximum marks available for that assessment task.
This penalty will run up to a maximum of 15%. Assessment tasks received more than three
calendar days after the due or extended date will not be allocated a mark. Note: The 5% penalty
will be incurred for each whole or part of a calendar day that the work is overdue.
Extensions
For extension of time for assessments, please click here. Timely submission is critical.
Academic integrity
You have the responsibility to submit only work which is your own, or which properly
acknowledges the thoughts, ideas, findings and/or work of others. See the Framework for
Academic Integrity and the Academic Honesty Policy.
Please read them, and note in particular that plagiarism, collusion and recycling of assignments
are not acceptable. Penalties for academic dishonesty can vary in severity, and can include
being excluded from the course.
Turnitin
The ‘Turnitin’ application (a text-matching tool) will be used in this unit, in order to enable:
x students to improve their academic writing by identifying possible areas of poor citation
and referencing in their written work; and
x teaching staff to identify areas of possible plagiarism in students’ written work.
While Turnitin can help in identifying problems with plagiarism, avoiding plagiarism is more
important.
Information on avoiding plagiarism is available from the Academic Skills Unit.
For any assignment that has been created to allow submission through Turnitin (check the
Assignment submission details for each assessment task), you should submit your draft well in
advance of the due date (ideally, several days before) to ensure that you have time to work on
any issues identified by Turnitin. On the assignment due date, lecturers will have access to your
final submission, and the Turnitin Originality Report.
APPENDIX 2 – Assessment Task 2
ILOs Criteria/weighting
Standards
Below Expectations Meets Expectations Exceeds Expectations
Level 1 (e.g. NN) Level 2 (e.g. PA) Level 3 (e.g. CR) Level 4 (e.g. DI) Level 5 (e.g. HD)
LO1, LO2 &
LO3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
(10%)
The executive summary not
provided or it does not
presented key issues
covered in the study.
The executive summary does
not provide an overview of the
report; however, it discusses
the results from the analysis
The executive summary
provides some key results
and a justification for the
study.
The executive summary
provides an overview of the
report including key results
and a justification for the
study.
The executive summary
provides an excellent
overview of the study,
including purpose,
method, key results and a
justification for the study.
LO1, LO2 &
LO3
INTRODUCTION
(10%)
Poorly written without proper
explanation of the purpose
and key issues in the study.
A wordy statement of the case
but the purpose and key
issues in the study are
adequately described.
A reasonable introduction of
the case and the purpose
and key issues in the study
are adequately described.
A well written, interesting
introduction of the case with
excellent summary of the
purpose, background and
key issues studies in the
case.
An excellent and
interesting introduction of
the case with excellent
summary of the purpose,
background and key
issues studies in the
case.
LO1, LO2 &
LO3
DISCUSSION
(60%)
Considerable inaccuracies in
knowledge and
understanding with regard to
costing methods in PW and
may not address all six
questions
No discussion on the relevant
management policies on
motivation.
Some inaccuracies in
knowledge and understanding
with regard to activity based
costing applied in PW and may
not address all six questions.
Limited interpretation of impact
of different costing methods on
customers.
Insufficient discussion on the
relevant management policies
on motivation.
Reasonable knowledge and
understanding with regard to
activity based costing and
reasonably address all six
questions.
Reasonable interpretation of
impact of different costing
methods on customers.
Adequate discussion on
relevant management
policies on motivation.
In-depth knowledge and
understanding with regard to
activity based costing and
appropriately address all six
questions.
Correct interpretation of
impact of different costing
methods on customers.
Very good discussion on
relevant management
policies that is effective to
motivate employee.
In-depth, expert
knowledge and
comprehensive
understanding with regard
to activity based costing
and appropriately address
all six questions
sufficiently
Precise interpretation of
impact of different costing
methods on customers.
Excellent discussion on
management policies
attributable to employee’s
motivation
LO1, LO2 &
LO3
CONCLUSION (10%) Poor if any
conclusions/recommendation
has been provided for the
issues on costing method for
the case.
Limited
conclusions/recommendation
has been provided for the
issues on costing method for
the case.
Reasonable
conclusions/recommendatio
n has been provided for the
issues on costing method
for the case.
Comprehensive
conclusions/recommendatio
n has been provided for the
issues on costing method
for the case.
A clear comprehensive
conclusions/recommenda
tion has been provided for
the issues on costing
method for the case.
LO1, LO2 &
LO3
REFERENCES (10%) Inappropriate referencing.
Very limited range of
resources used
Harvard style referencing used
with some errors;
Limited range of references
used
Correct Harvard style
referencing used in text and
reference list;
Reasonable range of
resources used.
Correct Harvard style
referencing used in text and
reference list;
A wide variety of sources
used.
Correct Harvard style
referencing used in text
and reference list;
A wide variety of high
quality sources used.
