It’s Time to Change your P&L Analysis

Money

Performance management is a term often used in discussions around improving an organization’s results. It includes activities that ensure goals are being met consistently, effectively and efficiently. It can focus on the performance of an organization, a department, employee, or even the processes to build a product or service, as well as many other areas. One of the key performance management tools businesses traditionally use is the profit and loss review, which compares actual results to budget projections. But the analytical approach that this tool presents is now well out of date.

Why?

In many cases, if not all, the largest percentage of a profit and loss review uses a fixed budget approach. This approach can be effective in a manufacturing operation, where production in relation to top-line revenues is more controllable but,for service-related businesses, it falls short.

The goal of a manufacturer is to maximize throughput of a factory operation; in essence, making sure that if a machine or a production line can produce 1,000 widgets an hour, the performance of that line meets this “standard.” There are no outside forces; staffing levels for the machine or line are established based on work stations and other internal requirements to meet the 1,000 widgets-per-hour rate, and those widgets are then placed in inventory. With inventory as a buffer to help optimize production, a fixed budget approach works pretty well. And its dominance was understandable when the U.S. economy was heavily slanted towards manufacturing.

But that has changed

Three out of four jobs today are coming from service industries, where measurable external forces impact day-to-day production. Look at a restaurant, hotel, casino, retail or other dynamic operating environment—the budget projections that lead to cost expectations are highly variable from a production standpoint. And with this variability of production volumes comes a demand for better performance management techniques.

The alternative that I believe service-related businesses should fully embrace is variable, or flex, budgeting and performance analysis. This approach is not new; in fact, it has existed far longer that I have been in business. But for organizations that have limited control over how much they produce on a particular day (consumer demand varies, after all) a variable/flex budget approach enables a more thoughtful application of cost parameters when assessing performance.

Let’s compare two examples: a car production plant and a restaurant

For the car producer, once a design has been developed, a cost is calculated based on all the aspects of the car, from chassis to electronics to seats, and so forth. The nice thing about this cost standard is that once the determination is made to build Model A, the cost of producing that model is clearly known and can be measured easily during the P&L review. And the production is to inventory, without the variability of day-to-day changes in requirements.

The restaurant, by contrast, involves setting parameters that define the cost of serving a customer, from labor to food to other related operating costs. Some of these costs are, in essence, fixed and some vary significantly based on the volume of guests served. The challenge arises in getting an accurate forecast of that volume. Customer demand can vary widely from period to period and rarely is the budgeted top line accurate. And not only are customer counts difficult to predict months in advance, but the revenue per customer also varies.

Despite this, in my experience most organizations still ascribe to the fixed budget review approach, comparing actual costs to budgeted costs even as it produces inaccurate results. And they’re losing out.

Replacing fixed budget with a flex/variable budget approach would enable service businesses to factor the following into their P&L review: original budget, updated plan (if applicable), actual and flex. The flex is developed by taking the actual volumes serviced and applying the cost model that was used to develop the original budget. If, for example, the labor cost per customer is $2.25 in the original budget and the number of customers budgeted was 5,000, the budget labor would be $11,250. Assume the actual labor is $13,000. A fixed budget approach would show the business went over budget by $1,750, or 16%–a poor result. But a flex/variable perspective would factor in the actual volume of customers, in this case 5,800. At that volume, the cost of labor should be $13,050. Now the cost is under .5% variance—a much healthier result, and one that won’t trigger an unnecessary performance discussion.

If organizations in the service space would embrace flex/variable budgeting and P&L analysis, performance management would be far more accurate and the issues that truly need addressing would be easier to discern.

Add Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Careers CEOs Companies Education Entertainment Legal Politics Science Sports Technology
Cargo
20 Things You Didn’t Know about PayCargo
10 Things You Didn’t Know about Tao Ling
Avicii
The 10 Best Selling Swedish Music Artists of All-Time
Collectibles Credit Cards Investing Real Estate Stocks
Credit Card
10 Reasons Why Your Credit Card is Being Declined
Social Security
How Working Longer Affects Your Social Security Benefits
Stock Market
Is CPNG Stock a Solid Long Term Investment?
Aviation Boats Food & Drink Hotels Restaurants Yachts
Colorado Lakes
The Five Clearest Lakes to Visit in Colorado
Brooklyn
Where To Find the Best Indian Food in Brooklyn
International Fishing Pier
The 20 Best Things to do in Deerfield Beach, FL
BMW Bugatti Cadillac Ferrari Lamborghini Mercedes Porsche Rolls Royce
Pagani Huayra Codalunga
A Closer Look at the Pagani Huayra Codalunga
Subaru Outback
20 Cars Similar to the Subaru Outback
BMW Z8
10 Discontinued Cars We Wish Were Still Around
BMW Motorcycles Buell Ducati Harley Davidson Honda Motorcycles Husqvarna Kawasaki KTM Triumph Motorcycles Yamaha
2002 Ducati 998
Remembering The 2002 Ducati 998
1980 Harley-Davidson FXB 1340 Sturgis
Remembering The 1980 Harley-Davidson FXB 1340 Sturgis
1977 Harley-Davidson XLH 1000 Sportster
Remembering The 1977 Harley-Davidson XLH 1000 Sportster
Electronics Fashion Health Home Jewelry Pens Sneakers Watches
Chanel No 5
The 10 Best-Selling Perfumes in the World
Nonfiction
The 10 Best Selling Non-Fiction Books of All-Time
Vacheron Constantin Overseas Perpetual Calendar Ultra-Thin Skeleton 18k Watch
A Closer Look at the Vacheron Constantin Overseas Perpetual Calendar Ultra-Thin Skeleton 18k Watch
David Arquette
How David Arquette Achieved a Net Worth of $30 Million
How Ashley Flowers Achieved a Net Worth of $5 Million
Selma Blair
How Selma Blair Achieved a Net Worth of $6 Million
Hideki Matsuyama
How Hideki Matsuyama Achieved a Net Worth of $35 Million