Activity-based costing and central overhead cost allocation in universities: A case study

Public Money and Management

Volumn 18, Issue 3, 1998, Pages 31-38

  Goddard, Andrew ^a   Ooi, Kean ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

^b Temasek Polytechnic   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0032371468     PISSN: 09540962     EISSN: 14679302     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1467-9302.00124     Document Type: Article

References (10)

1. Berry, R. H. (1994), Management Accounting in Universities (CIMA, London).
2. Bourn, M. (1994), Meeting the indirect costs of support services in universities: Top slicing, charging out, taxes, trading and devolution. Financial Accountability and Management, 10, 4, pp. 323-338.
3. Committee of Vice Chancellors and Principals (1985), Report of the Steering Committee for Efficiency Studies in Universities (The Jarrett Report).
4. Cooper and Kaplan (1988), Measure costs right: Make the right decisions. Harvard Business Review (September/October).
5. Innes, J. and Mitchell, F. (1990), Activity Based Costing: A Review With Case Studies (CIMA, London).
6. Jarratt (1985), Report of the Steering Committee for Efficiency Studies in Universities (The Jarrett Report), (, London).
7. Mitchell, M. (1996), Activity based costing in UK universities. Public Money & Management, 16, 1, pp. 51-57.
8. Smith, A. (1776), The Wealth of Nations, 2, Book V, Chapter 2.
9. Thomas, A. L. (1978), Arbitrary and incorrigible allocations: A comment. The Accounting Review (January), pp. 263-269.
10. Zimmerman, J. L. (1979), The costs and benefits of cost allocations. The Accounting Review (July), pp. 504-521.