Develop Profitable New Products With Target Costing

Develop Profitable New Products with Target Costing
1 of 15
http://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/develop-profitable-new-products-with-...
Hello visitor. You get to see one FREE ARTICLE. To enjoy more articles like this one sign in, or create an account.
Target costing is primarily a technique to strategically manage a

companys future profits. It achieves this objective by determining the
life-cycle cost at which a company must produce a proposed product
with specified functionality and quality if the product is to be profitable
at its anticipated selling price. 3 Target costing makes cost an input to
the product development process, not an outcome of it. By estimating the anticipated selling price of a
proposed product and by subtracting the desired profit margin, a company can establish its target cost. The
key is then to design the product so that it satisfies customers and can be manufactured at its target cost.
In Japan, lean enterprises have learned to view target costing not as a stand-alone program, but as an
integral part of the product development process. To document the Japanese approach to target costing,
we visited seven companies with mature and effective target costing systems and documented their
procedures in depth. The companies we studied were Isuzu Motors Ltd., Komatsu Limited, Nissan Motor
Corporation, Olympus Optical Company Ltd., Toyota Motor Corporation, Sony Corporation, and Topcon
Corporation. 4 While the target costing practices at each company differed, we identified a common
underlying generic approach that we document here to give managers a road map for implementing target
costing systems.
8/23/2016 8:24 PM
2 of 15
Target costing, to be effective, must be a highly disciplined process. The process used at the seven firms
studied can be divided into three sections (see Figure 1 (http://sloanreview.mit.edu/files/2008/12
/4042-ex1-lo7.png)). The discipline starts by forcing alignment with the marketplace and requiring a
new level
of specificity
customers
wantmore
andarticles
what like
price
arein,prepared
toaccount.
pay. Market analysis
Hello visitor.
You get toabout
see onewhat
FREE ARTICLE.
To enjoy
thisthey
one sign
or create an
plays a critical role in shaping the market-driven costing section of target costing by determining so-called
allowable costs. Target costing systems use these allowable costs to transmit the competitive cost pressures
that the company faces to the product designers. Product-level target costing disciplines and focuses the
product designers creativity on achieving the cost aspect of this objective. Once a company establishes
product-level target costs, it decomposes them to the component level, thus transmitting its cost pressures
to its suppliers. Suppliers, in turn, must find ways to design and manufacture the companys externally
sourced components so that they can make adequate returns when they sell their components to the
company. Thus, component-level target costing helps discipline and focus suppliers creativity in ways
beneficial to the buyer.
While market-driven costing is the first step and should be initiated early in the product conceptualization
process, the new products design must be sufficiently advanced so that its functionality and quality can be
defined adequately to the companys customers. Otherwise, the customers will not be able to specify a
meaningful selling price. Even though the product-level target costing process cannot begin in earnest until
the company establishes the allowable cost, the company can start some activities in parallel with the
market-driven costing section. For example, it can determine the current cost and initiate some supplier
feedback. Furthermore, the ability to fine-tune the functionality and quality of products during product
development means that the company has to return to the market occasionally to ensure that design
changes have not invalidated the target selling price. Thus, there is iteration between market-driven costing
and product-level target costing.
Component-level target costing must begin early during the product-level target costing process since the
product-level target cost depends heavily on supplier estimates. However, the formal decomposition
process and the establishment of negotiated supplier selling prices occur fairly late in the overall target
costing process. The two processes are again iterative, with the product-level target costing process
establishing the level of cost reduction that the companys suppliers must achieve, but ameliorated by the
suppliers early feedback.
Thus, while product-level target costing is the linchpin of the whole process, a company can manage the
three sections predominately in isolation of each other. The chief engineer is responsible for resolving the
tensions that are created by the market pressures on the one hand and the suppliers on the other. Effective
target costing allows a company to trade off these pressures against each other so that it manufactures and
sources products with the required level of quality and functionality and it achieves an adequate return on
its investments.
Market-driven costing focuses on customer requirements and uses the concept of allowable cost to transmit
8/23/2016 8:24 PM
3 of 15
the competitive pressure of the marketplace to the companys product designers and suppliers. We can
break market-driven costing into five steps (the first two of these steps cover all the companys products;
the next three are performed for each new product; see Figure 2 (http://sloanreview.mit.edu/files
/2008/12/4042-ex2-lo7.png)):
Target costing begins with the companys long-term sales and profit objectives. Its primary objective is to
ensure that each product, over its life, contributes its planned share of profits to the companys long-term
profit objectives. The credibility of the long-term plan is paramount in establishing target costing discipline.
Two factors help establish this credibility. First, the company derives long-term sales and profit plans from
careful analysis of all relevant information. To achieve this objective, it spends considerable energy on
customer and competitor analysis. For example, Olympus Optical, a manufacturer of cameras and other
optical-based products, collects and integrates information from six sources: the corporate plan, a
technology review, an analysis of the general business environment, quantitative information about camera
sales, qualitative information about consumer trends, and an analysis of the competitive environment.
Second, the company approves only realistic plans. Wishful thinking is not allowed to enter the planning
process. For example, at Toyota, Japans largest auto manufacturer, the sales division proposes anticipated
production volumes based on past sales levels, market trends, and competitors product offerings. The sales
division typically proposes a figure that is considered achievable. Optimism is thus restrained in favor of
realistic goals.
For product lines to be successful, they must be structured carefully to ensure that they satisfy as many
customers as possible but do not contain so many products that they confuse customers. For that reason,
structuring the product line typically is based on a thorough analysis of how customer preferences change
8/23/2016 8:24 PM
4 of 15
over time. For example, Nissan, Japans second largest auto manufacturer, conceptualizes new models by
identifying so-called consumer mind-sets. Mind-sets capture how consumers view themselves in relation to
their cars. Nissan uses them to identify design attributes that consumers take into account when purchasing
a newHello
car.visitor.
Typical
valueToseeker,
confident
sophisticated,
Youmind-sets
get to see oneinclude
FREE ARTICLE.
enjoy more
articles likeand
this one
sign in, or createaggressive
an account. enthusiast,
and budget/speed star. By detecting clusters of these mind-sets, Nissan can identify niches that contain a
sufficient percentage of the auto-purchasing public to warrant introducing a model tailored specifically for
that niche.
The target costing process requires that a company establish a specific target selling price. 5 At the heart of
the price-setting process is the concept of perceived value. Customers can be expected to pay more for a
product than for its predecessor only if its perceived value is higher. For example, at Toyota, the sales
divisions usually propose retail prices and sales targets. The fundamental guiding principle they use in
setting retail prices is that the vehicle price remains the same unless there is a change in function from the
previous model, and this change alters the perceived value of the vehicle in the customers eyes. Therefore,
increases in retail price are based primarily on the customers perception of additional value from new
functions, such as the introduction of four-wheel steering (for increased maneuverability) and active
suspension, or from better performance, such as higher engine horsepower or better fuel efficiency.
The price increases associated with incremental perceived value are tempered by the availability of
competitive products and their perceived value. A company can raise selling prices only if the perceived
value of the new product exceeds not only that of the products predecessor, but also that of competing
products. For example, at Topcon, a manufacturer of ophthalmic instruments and other advanced optics
and precision equipment, competitive forces determine the allowable range of market prices. Topcon sets
the price of its new products close to its competitors prices. However, if managers believe the Topcon
product has greater functionality than competitive products, then they will raise the price of the Topcon
product. In contrast, if the functionality is perceived to be lower, the price will be correspondingly lower.
Once the new product enters the market, competitors usually react by repricing their own products,
increasing their advertising levels, or introducing a new model at a lower price.
Given the importance of the target selling price to the whole process, it is not surprising that companies are
very careful to ensure the most realistic possible target selling prices. They set the prices by taking into
account the market conditions expected when launching the product. For example, Nissan determines the
target selling price of a new model by considering a number of internal and external factors. The internal
factors include the position of the model in the product matrix and the strategic and profitability objectives
of top management for that model. The external factors include the corporations image and level of
customer loyalty in the models niche, the models expected quality level and functionality compared to
competitive offerings, its expected market share, and the expected prices of competitive models.
8/23/2016 8:24 PM
5 of 15
The objective in establishing target profit margins is to ensure achievement of the companys long-term
profit plan. Usually, the division in charge of the product line is responsible for achieving the overall profit
target. For example, Sony, Japans leading manufacturer of consumer electronics, uses an iterative process
to setHello
the visitor.
targetYou
profit
margin
for each
product.
The
starting
the
group
profitanmargin
get to
see one FREE
ARTICLE.
To enjoy
more
articles point
like thisisone
sign
in, or create
account.identified by
each groups profit plan. Once the annual group profit target is set, each group is responsible for its own
profitability. Two important considerations in setting target profit margins are to ensure that the margins
are realistic and that they are sufficient to offset the life-cycle costs of the products.
A company can set target profit margins in two ways. In the first method, it starts with the actual profit
margin of the predecessor product and then adjusts for changes in market conditions. Nissan adopts this
approach when it uses computer simulations to identify the relationship between selling price and profits.
From this historical relationship, it identifies the target profit margins of new products, based
predominantly on their target selling prices. The aim of this careful analysis is to set realistic profit margins
that will enable it to achieve its long-term profit plans.
In the second method, the company starts with the target profit margin of the entire profit line (or other
grouping of products) and raises or lowers the target profit margin for individual products, depending on
the realities of the marketplace. Sony calculates the first-cut target cost for a new product by subtracting the
group target profit margin from the products target selling price. It compares the resulting target cost to
the estimated cost of the new product. When it considers the target cost too low, it allows the target profit
margin to decrease, but only if it can increase another products target profit margin sufficiently to offset
the loss. The outcome for the product with the decreased target margin is an increased target cost; the
outcome for the product with the increased profit margin is a decreased target cost. The objective is to
maintain the groups profit target. When all the individual product decisions are complete, Sony runs a
simulation of overall group profitability to make sure the groups profit target will indeed be met.
If product launch or discontinuance requires high investments or if a products selling prices or costs are
expected to change significantly during its life, the company has to adjust the target profit margin
accordingly. The purpose of such adjustments is to ensure that the company accounts for all costs and
savings when determining the target profit margin so that the expected profitability of the product across
its life is adequate.
Without such adjustments, the company risks either launching products that do not earn an adequate
return or not launching products that will earn an adequate return over their lives.
Companies with products that require large up-front investments typically analyze their life-cycle
profitability. These analyses include a determination of the investment, both capital and marketing related,
required to bring the new product to market. The objective of the analyses is to ensure that target profit
margins are set large enough so that products will earn an adequate profit margin over their lives (assuming
8/23/2016 8:24 PM
6 of 15
all goes according to plan). For example, when the conceptual design reaches the stage where Nissan can
make rough estimates of how many vehicles it is likely to sell and the costs associated with the development
of the new products, it undertakes a life-cycle contribution study to estimate the overall profitability of the
proposed
model.
The
compares
the estimated
revenues
generated
byin,the
new model
to the expected
Hello visitor.
You
get study
to see one
FREE ARTICLE.
To enjoy more
articles like
this one sign
or create
an account.
cost of the product across its life.
Companies that can reduce product costs substantially during the manufacturing stage of the products life
cycle undertake a different life-cycle analysis that reflects any savings in production costs expected during
the manufacturing phase in the target costing profitability analysis. For example, the joint impact of
increased functionality and reduced prices places severe pressure on Olympus Optical to reduce costs.
Only by continuously taking costs out of products can the company hope to remain profitable. This intense
cost reduction across the manufacturing life of the product often reflects the fact that the target selling price
already incorporates the anticipated cost savings.
Once it has established the target selling price and target profit margin, the company can calculate the
allowable cost by simply subtracting the target profit margin from the target selling price:
(http://sloanreview.mit.edu/files/2008/12/4042-in2-lo7.png)
Given the way in which target profit margins are set, there are two critical issues that a company must
understand. First, the allowable cost reflects the companys relative competitive position because it is based
on its realistic, long-term profit objectives. Consequently, the allowable cost is not a benchmark against
which the company can measure itself compared to its competitors. To make allowable costs act as
benchmarks in this way, target profit margins that reflect the capabilities of the most efficient competitor
would have to be set. Second, the allowable cost does not take into account the cost-reduction capabilities of
the companys product designers or suppliers. Therefore, there is no guarantee that the company can
achieve the allowable cost. When a products allowable cost is considered unachievable, the company must
establish a higher cost in the product-level target costing process.
In the second part of the target costing process, product designers focus on finding ways to develop
products that satisfy the companys customers at the allowable cost. In practice, however, it is not always
possible for the product designers to find ways to do that. Therefore, the process of product-level target
costing increases the products allowable cost to a target cost that the company can reasonably expect to
achieve, given its capabilities and its suppliers (see Figure 3 (http://sloanreview.mit.edu/files
/2008/12/4042-ex3-lo7.png)).
Product-level target costing can be broken into three steps:
8/23/2016 8:24 PM
7 of 15
In highly competitive markets, customers expect each new generation of products to improve, in terms of
higher quality and functionality or reduced prices. Any of these improvements, or a combination, requires
that the company reduce the costs of new products to maintain its profitability. The degree of cost reduction
required to achieve the allowable cost is the target cost-reduction objective, derived by subtracting the
allowable cost from the current product cost:
The current cost of the new product is determined by adding up the current manufacturing costs of each
major function of the new model, assuming no cost-reduction activities are undertaken. For the current cost
to be meaningful, the major functions that the company uses in product construction have to be very
similar to those that it will eventually use in the new product. For example, if the existing model uses a 1.8
liter engine and the new model uses a 2.0 liter one, the appropriate current cost is for the most similar 2.0
liter engine that the company produces or purchases.
Since the allowable cost is derived from external conditions and does not take into account the companys
design and production capabilities and its suppliers, the risk is that the allowable cost will not be
achievable. In this case, to maintain the discipline of target costing, the company has to identify achievable
and unachievable parts of the cost-reduction objective. The achievable or target cost-reduction objective is
derived by analyzing the ability of the product designers and suppliers to remove costs from the proposed
product. The purpose of the interactive relationships with the companys suppliers is to allow them to
provide early estimates of their products selling prices and, when possible, insights into alternative design
possibilities that would enable the company to deliver the desired level of functionality and quality at
reduced cost. The product-level target cost is then determined by subtracting the new products target
cost-reduction objective from its current cost:
Negotiations with the chief engineer and the product designers and major suppliers establish the
product-level target cost. All concerned should consider the target cost-reduction objective achievable. It is
the number to which the designers will be held accountable for the rest of the project.
8/23/2016 8:24 PM
8 of 15
The unachievable part of the cost-reduction objective is called the strategic cost-reduction challenge, which
is the difference between the allowable cost and the target cost:
It identifies the profit shortfall that will occur when the product designers are unable to achieve the
allowable cost, and signals that the company is not as efficient as demanded by competitive conditions. To
maintain the discipline of target costing, the company must manage the size of the strategic cost-reduction
challenge carefully. The challenge should reflect the companys true inability to match its competitors
efficiency. To ensure that this requirement is met, the company must set the target cost-reduction objective
so that it is achievable only if the entire organization makes a significant effort to achieve it. If it sets the
target cost-reduction objective consistently too high, it will not only subject the workforce to excessive
cost-reduction objectives, risking burn-out, but also lose the discipline of target costing as it frequently
exceeds its target costs. On the other hand, if it sets the target cost-reduction objective too low, the
company will lose competitiveness because new products will have excessively high target costs. Typically,
in a company with a well-established target costing system, the strategic cost-reduction challenge will be
small or nonexistent, and intense pressure will be brought on the design team to reduce it to zero.
The company establishes the strategic cost-reduction challenge through negotiations between the chief
engineer and senior managers. Senior managers push for the smallest number possible, while the chief
engineer pushes for a number high enough to ensure that the product-level target cost is achievable. Since
the target cost-reduction objective and the strategic cost-reduction challenge add up to the gap between the
current cost and the allowable cost, these negotiations maintain the pressure on the product designers to
reduce costs. The chief engineer must ensure that the pressure does not become excessive. Thus, when a
strategic cost-reduction challenge emerges, the process of setting product-level target costs becomes
iterative, with the chief engineer in the middle and senior management and the product designers at the
ends.
The emergence of a strategic cost-reduction challenge is a sign for all involved in the new product
development to create additional pressure on the product designers and the companys suppliers to reduce
the challenge to zero for the products next generation. Thus, the primary purpose of the strategic
cost-reduction challenge is to give the company breathing room, while maintaining the overall
cost-reduction pressure. If the company cannot reduce the challenge to zero for the next-generation
product, it may no longer be fully competitive.
The value of differentiating between the allowable cost and the target cost lies in the discipline that it
creates. Target costing systems derive their strength from the application of the cardinal rule: The target
cost must never be exceeded. If a company continuously sets overaggressive target costs, it would
commonly violate the cardinal rule and lose the discipline of the whole process. Even worse, if a company
knows the target cost is unachievable, the design team might give up even trying to achieve it and never
effectively reduce costs. To avoid this, companies frequently set target costs higher than the allowable costs
that are achievable only with considerable effort.
8/23/2016 8:24 PM
9 of 15
Theoretically, the cardinal rule should relate to the allowable cost. However, companies often have to
launch products for strategic reasons, such as to maintain a complete product line. If, early in the target
costing process, the company determines that the allowable cost is unachievable, setting a lower target cost
allows
thevisitor.
product
launched
maintaining
intense
pressure
reduce
costs.
degree to which
Hello
You to
get be
to see
one FREEwhile
ARTICLE.
To enjoy more
articles like
this oneto
sign
in, or create
an The
account.
the allowable cost is relaxed to produce an achievable target cost is the strategic cost-reduction challenge.
Once the company has established the target cost-reduction objective, it can begin the process of designing
the product so that it can be manufactured at its target cost. The chief engineer and his or her superiors
must continuously monitor the design engineers progress toward this objective. This monitoring ensures
that the company can take corrective actions as early as possible and that it doesnt violate the cardinal rule.
The cardinal rule of target costing The target cost must never be exceeded is critical to ensuring that
the discipline of target costing is maintained throughout the design process. The cardinal rule is enforced in
three ways. First, whenever improvements in the design result in increased costs, the company must find
alternative, offsetting savings elsewhere in the design. Second, the company does not launch products
whose costs exceed the target. Finally, the company carefully manages transition to manufacturing to
ensure that it achieves the target cost.
The cardinal rule ensures that all involved realize that failure to achieve the product-level target cost will
typically lead to cancellation of the project. In a well-disciplined target costing program, few projects will be
canceled for failure to achieve the target cost. However, as new product development by its very nature
must push technologies and manufacturing processes to their limits, occasional failures occur. These
failures are very different from those encountered in non-targetcosting environments, where the product
is designed to have excessive functionality for its sustainable selling price and, hence, is withdrawn before
(or, even worse, after) launch.
Sometimes a company has to apply the cardinal rule in a more sophisticated way than the conventional,
single-product perspective. When a given product leads to increased sales of other products, a company
must adopt a multiproduct perspective; when it is expected to lead to sales of future generations of
products, the company must adopt a multigenera-tional perspective. Only when getting the product to
market on time is so critical that cost is of secondary consideration should the cardinal rule be violated. For
example, the Walkman market is so competitive that failure to release a timely new model typically will
result in considerable lost sales. Sony believes it is imperative to release products on a timely basis and does
not allow product redesign to extend product launch dates, even if profitability is below minimum. When
such a product is launched, it undergoes two analyses: a thorough review of the design process to identify
why the target cost was not achieved and an intense cost-reduction effort immediately after its launch so
that the violation of the cardinal rule is as short-lived as possible. The two analyses maintain the discipline
of target costing despite the temporary violation.
8/23/2016 8:24 PM
10 of 15
Once a company has established the target cost-reduction objective, it must find ways to achieve it. Several
Hello visitor.
You get to see
FREE
ARTICLE.
To enjoy more
articles
like this costs,
one signincluding
in, or createvalue
an account.
engineering
techniques
canone
help
product
designers
reduce
product
engineering (VE),
design for manufacture and assembly (DFMA), and quality function deployment (QFD). VE is a
multidisciplinary approach to product design that maximizes customer value; it increases functionality and
quality while reducing cost. In contrast, DFMA focuses on reducing costs by making products easier to
assemble or manufacture, while holding functionality at specified levels. QFD provides a structured
approach to ensure that customer requirements are not compromised during the design process.
Once a company has established a products target cost, it develops target costs for the products
components. This component-level target costing process enables the company to achieve the second
objective of target costing: transmitting the competitive cost pressure it faces to its suppliers (see Figure 4
(http://sloanreview.mit.edu/files/2008/12/4042-ex4-lo7.png)). This objective is critical in lean
enterprises, which are horizontally rather than vertically integrated. Such companies purchase a significant
portion of their materials and parts from external instead of internal suppliers. For example, at Toyota,
third-party suppliers are responsible for approximately 70 percent of the parts and materials required to
produce the companys cars. This high level of dependency on externally supplied items makes supplier
relations extremely important to Toyotas success. In particular, the cost and quality of third-party-supplied
parts is considered critical.
Component-level target costing consists of three steps:
Identifying major functions allows the design process to be broken into multiple, somewhat independent
tasks. Typically, the design of each major function is the responsibility of a dedicated team. Design teams
usually include representatives from a number of disciplines, such as product design, engineering,
purchasing, production engineering, manufacturing, and parts supply. The overall responsibility for
coordinating the design of a new product typically rests with the chief engineer or product manager, who
selects the distinctive theme of the new product and sets its functionality. At Toyota, more than 100
8/23/2016 8:24 PM
11 of 15
engineers from various divisions work with a chief engineer on a typical project, but since they belong to
different divisions, not all team members are under his direct supervision. In this sense, the chief engineer
is more a project leader than a supervisor of product development.
The chief engineer is responsible for setting the target cost of each major function, usually through an
extended negotiation process with the design teams. The target costs typically are based on historical costreduction rates. Some companies use relatively simple heuristics to establish the cost-reduction objectives;
for example, if the cost of a major function historically has been decreasing by 5 percent a year, then this
rate will usually be used. Other companies, including Komatsu, have more sophisticated approaches, such
as functional analysis and productivity analysis.
However, not all companies rely solely on historical cost-reduction rates. Some use market analyses to help
set the target costs of new products. These market-based approaches are particularly applicable when new
forms of product functionality are being introduced. For example, Isuzu uses monetary values or ratios to
help set the target costs of major functions and asks customers to estimate how much they are willing to pay
for a given function. These market-based estimates, tempered by other factors, such as technical, safety,
and legal considerations, often lead to adjustments to the prorated target costs. For example, if the prorated
target cost for a component is too low to allow a safe version to be produced, the components target cost is
increased, and the target cost of the other components is decreased to compensate.
The chief engineer may modify the target costs derived from either historical rates or market analysis for
three major reasons. First, if the sum of all the historical rates does not give the desired cost-reduction
objective, the chief engineer will negotiate with the head of the design teams of the major functions for
higher rates of cost reduction. These negotiations continue until the sum of the target costs of the major
functions equals the target cost of the product. Second, if the relative importance of a given major function
changes from one generation to the next, the chief engineer will modify the target costs accordingly. For
example, if the chief engineer wants the new vehicle to be sportier, he or she might increase the target cost
of the corresponding major functions to make it easier for the design teams to achieve both their
functionality objective and target cost. However, under the cardinal rule of target costing, these cost
increases would have to be offset elsewhere in the design. Third, when the technology on which a major
function relies changes, the historical cost-reduction rate of the old technology ceases to be meaningful.
Instead, the company should figure in the historical rate for the new technology, if it is available. When
entirely new technologies are used, the cost-estimation problem becomes more difficult because no
historical data on cost-reduction trends have been developed.
At some Japanese firms, a safety factor, often called the reserve for the production manager, is built into
the development of major function-level target costs. The purpose of this reserve is to allow for any (minor)
cost overruns due to design-related problems that may occur during the production process. Experience has
shown that minor overruns are common in practice and cannot easily be avoided. By establishing an
adequate reserve, a company can significantly reduce the number of minor cardinal rule violations without
reducing the overall discipline of target costing. It creates the reserve by setting the component target costs
and assembly and indirect manufacturing target costs so that they add up to an amount below the
8/23/2016 8:24 PM
12 of 15
product-level target cost. The chief engineer is responsible for creating a reserve that is sufficient to offset
the anticipated overruns, but does not introduce slack into the production process. The magnitude of the
reserve is based on experience from similar product development projects; it is typically quite small,
ranging
from
5 percent
of theTo
product-level
target
Hello
visitor.
You get to to
see10
onepercent
FREE ARTICLE.
enjoy more articles
like cost.
this one sign in, or create an account.
Once a company has established the target costs of the major functions, it decomposes them to the group
component and parts level as appropriate. The objective is to set a purchase price for every externally
acquired component.
Typically, the major function design teams decompose the target cost of the major function to the
component level. At Toyota, each design division is responsible for attaining its respective cost-reduction
goal. The specifics of parts, materials, and machining processes are left to their discretion. The chief
engineer will sometimes specify cost-reduction targets for specific parts to the related divisions, especially
for large, costly parts. These part-specific targets are set at the same time as the divisional targets.
Supplier management has two primary aspects that are particularly important in the component-level
target costing process:
A critical decision to be made during the component-level costing process is the sourcing of components.
The target costs for externally acquired components are typically set through negotiation. This process
starts with suppliers, both internal and external, providing estimates of their selling prices to the company.
At Nissan, the first step in the product development stage is to prepare a detailed order sheet for the new
model, which lists all the components required. Nissan analyzes it to see which components are likely to be
sourced internally and which externally and gives both internal and external suppliers a description of each
component and its potential production volumes. Suppliers then provide price and delivery-timing
estimates.
The comparison of the target cost of each major function and the sum of the expected costs of the
components in that function after cost reduction indicates whether each major function can be produced at
its target cost. When the sum of the component costs is too high, additional cost reductions are identified
until the total target cost of the representative variation, the one expected to sell the highest volume, is
8/23/2016 8:24 PM
13 of 15
achieved. The target costs for all components are compared to the suppliers quoted prices. If satisfactory,
the company accepts the quote. If the initial quote is too high, the company undertakes further negotiations
until reaching an agreement.
To maintain discipline, a company can relax target costs of components only under very special
circumstances and typically for a short period of time. The objective of this relaxation is to allow the
supplier to make a reasonable return, while finding ways to reduce costs to the target levels.
Many companies use incentive plans to encourage their suppliers, both to reward innovation and to signal
where additional cost reduction should occur. These plans reward the supplier with all or part of the order
for a given component. For example, under its incentive plan, if Nissan accepts a cost-reduction idea, it
awards the supplier that suggested it a significant percentage of the contract for that component for a
specified time, say 50 percent for twelve months. This incentive scheme is particularly important because
even if a cost-reduction objective cannot be achieved for this model, it signals to the suppliers that when the
next model is developed, this component will be subject to cost-reduction pressures.
Even with the discipline of target costing, the lowest-cost or highest-value supplier does not always win the
bid. Companies actively manage their suppliers to ensure that they remain both efficient and innovative.
Isuzu, although it generally gives the order to the supplier rated as having the highest value, often awards
companies with a reputation for being good suppliers at least part of the order, even if their products do not
have the highest value. Isuzu awards partial contracts to maintain relationships with these companies.
Given a highly competitive environment, companies must manage costs aggressively if they are to survive.
Cost management must start at the earliest stages of a products life because the ability to change the
product significantly increases the degree to which costs can be reduced. Three target-costing processes
together discipline the product development process to help ensure that only profitable products are
launched (see Figure 5 (http://sloanreview.mit.edu/files/2008/12/4042-ex5-lo7.png)).
Leading Japanese manufacturers have used target costing systems to their advantage, and western
companies are introducing this proactive cost management technique to discipline their product
development processes. Target costing and value engineering provide considerable payoffs to early
adopters. The company that can most rapidly reduce costs of new products without having to compromise
on quality and functionality will gain market share and experience economic success.
8/23/2016 8:24 PM
14 of 15
8/23/2016 8:24 PM
15 of 15
1.
R. Cooper, When Lean Enterprises Collide: Competing Through Confrontation (Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1995), p. 7.
2.
R. Cooper and R. Slagmulder, Target Costing and Value Engineering (Portland, Oregon: Productivity Press, 1997).
3.
Target costs should include any costs that are driven by the number of units sold. For example, if the company accepts responsibility for disposing of a
product at the end of its useful life, these costs are included in the target cost. See:
R. Cooper and B. Chew, Control Tomorrows Costs through Todays Designs, Harvard Business Review,volume 74, JanuaryFebruary 1996, pp. 8897.
4.
R. Cooper and T. Yoshikawa, Isuzu Motors, Ltd.: Cost Creation Program (Boston: Harvard Business School, case study 9-195-054);
R. Cooper, Komatsu, Ltd. (A): Target Costing System (Boston: Harvard Business School, case study 9-194-037);
R. Cooper, Nissan Motor Company, Ltd. (Boston: Harvard Business School, case study 9-194-040);
R. Cooper, Olympus Optical Company, Ltd. (A): Cost Management for Short Life-Cycle Products (Boston: Harvard Business School, case study 9-195-072);
R. Cooper, Toyota Motor Corporation (Boston: Harvard Business School, case study 9-197-031);
R. Cooper, Sony Corporation: The Walkman Line(Boston: Harvard Business School, case study 9-195-076); and
R. Cooper, Topcon Corporation: Production Control System (Boston: Harvard Business School, case study 9-195-082).
5.
When firms sell the same product at different prices, for example, in different countries or through different channels, an average selling price is used.
Robin Cooper is professor of management, Peter F. Drucker Graduate School of Management, Claremont Graduate University, and visiting professor, Goizueta
Business School, Emory University.Regine Slagmulder is associate professor, Department of Business Administration, Tilburg University, and visiting professor,
University of Ghent.
Copyright Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1977-2016. All rights reserved.

Permission is required to copy or distribute MIT Sloan Management Review articles.
Buy permissions here:
http://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/develop-profitable-new-products-with-target-costing/
8/23/2016 8:24 PM

Develop Profitable New Products With Target Costing

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Develop Profitable New Products With Target Costing

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Develop Profitable New Products with Target Costing

Target costing is primarily a technique to strategically manage a