Dakota Office Products

913 Words4 Pages
Dakota Office Products Introduction Despite increases in sales from the previous year, Dakota Office Products (DOP) had suffered their first yearly financial loss in company history. The loss spurred an internal managerial investigation by Melissa Dunhill and Tim Cunningham related to increasing DOP’s pricing model and distribution costs. The team of two was able to discover inefficient processes related to the company’s desktop delivery and data entry systems and the pricing structure related to those activities. Existing Pricing System The existing pricing system was not designed to account appropriately for the complex variables of DOP’s diversified distribution and order process offerings. The current markup of 15% to COGS is insufficient to cover warehouse, ordering and distribution actual costs. Even customers like customer A, whose order strategy minimized costs with few large orders, using the EDI and shipping commercial freight, were not profitable when re-evaluated using activity based costing. COGS is roughly 82% of Sales in the examples given. Even if DOP could get OH costs to 15%, margins would be under 3%. DOP should develop a strategy that evaluates and minimizes both activity based costs in overhead as well as COGS, where possible. Activity-based Costing System (Please see EXHIBITS 1 & 2) According to Dakota Office Products warehouse expenses were associated to each carton order. With 80,000 carton orders being processed in 2000 and the expense of $2 million $25 were assigned to each carton. Distribution and desktop personal were also split with 90% of carton orders going to distribution personal costs and 10% going to desktop delivery. General selling expenses were also distributed evenly across the 80,000 carton orders. Shipping costs are also a huge factor for DOP so commercial expenses were distributed amongst the

More about Dakota Office Products

Open Document