Making the Connection Integrative Exercise (Chapters 5, 9, and 10)
Discussion of Reported Costs and Variances from the Two Systems:
9. Although answers will vary, most students likely will choose the vital-signs
costing system for numerous reasons, some of which should be included in the
following discussion. First, if the experienced nurses are correct, then the vital-
signs costing system should more accurately allocate costs to service lines
because its cost allocation base (number of times a patient’s vital signs are
one driver and, therefore, should be equally costly to operate, it is likely that
switching from one cost system to another will be costly at first, both in terms
of time, money, and “buy-in” from SHH managers and employees. Third, while
the vital-signs appears to be a more accurate cost system, it is possible that
additional conversations and analyses should be conducted to determine
whether a more advanced version of the vital-signs costing system would
produce even more accurate costs that would prove beneficial to decision
making. Finally, the more accurate vital-signs system should generate a more
accurate estimate of the cost per nursing hour, which affects the budgeting
process, because the portion of costs allocated to each service line, ER and
10. ●The overall current system’s OR flexible budget variance ($47,500) is very
large and unfavorable, suggesting that the subvariances (price variance
and efficiency variance) should be calculated.
●The current system’s OR price variance ($40,000) is very large and
unfavorable, suggesting that the nursing hiring manager negotiated a bad
price and that nursing hour pay cuts might be necessary.
●The current system’s OR efficiency variance ($7,500) is moderate and
unfavorable, suggesting that the operating room manager used too many
OR nursing hours for the actual number of surgeries performed.