外文翻譯--第三方物流企業(yè)的作業(yè)成本法

1、<p>　　本科畢業(yè)論文（設(shè)計(jì)）</p><p>　　外 文 翻 譯</p><p>　　外文出處 International Advances in Economic Research, 2001,7(1): </p><p>　　133-146. </p><p>　　外文作

2、者 Carles Gríful-Miquela </p><p><b>　　原文：</b></p><p>　　Activity-Based Costing Methodology for Third-Party Logistics Companies</p><p>　　Th

3、is paper will analyze the main costs that third-party logistics companies are facing and develops an activity-based costing methodology useful for this kind of company. It will examine the most important activities carri

4、ed out by third-party distributors in both warehousing and transporting activities. However, the focus is mainly on the activity of distributing the product to the final receiver when this final receiver is not the custo

5、mer of the third-party logistics company. </p><p>　　Introduction </p><p>　　In the last decade, development of third-party logistics companies has been very important. There are several reasons f

6、or such development, the most important being the trend to concentrate in the core business by manufacturing companies and new technological advances, In this context, conventional approaches to costing might generate di

7、storted information, This can result in making wrong decisions. When companies realize this potential danger, the use of activity-based costing (ABC) methodologi</p><p>　　Costing Methodology: Definition of t

8、he Cost Model and Critique of the Conventional Approach </p><p>　　Definition of the Cost Model </p><p>　　It is first necessary to define what a cost model is. This can be done through analysis o

9、f the main functions that any cost model should perform [Kaplan and Cooper, 1998]: </p><p>　　1) valuation of inventory and measurement of the cost of goods and services sold for financial purposes; </p>

10、;<p>　　2) estimation of the cost of activities, products, services, and customers; and </p><p>　　3) provide economic feedback to managers and staff in general about process efficiency. </p><

11、;p>　　From this definition, a cost model might be analyzed as the tool that companies use in order to have a proper understanding about the cost to run their businesses. One of the purposes of a cost model is to gather

12、 and analyze data generated in the company in order to gain useful information for making decisions. Therefore, the usefulness of a cost model may be evaluated depending on its capacity to generate the right information

13、to make the right managerial decisions. </p><p>　　Evolution of Cost Models </p><p>　　The evolution of cost systems has not been a linear and continuous process [Johnson and Kaplan, 1987]. Indeed

14、, by the 1920s, companies had developed almost all the management accounting procedures that have been used up to the present day. Furthermore, between 1925 and 1980, virtually no new ideas have affected the design and u

15、se of cost management systems. The same concepts always appear: break-even analysis, cost-volume-profit analysis, direct costing, and fixed and variable cost estimates. Th</p><p>　　Problems with Conventional

16、 Approaches </p><p>　　As a result of the described evolution of cost models, the situation at the beginning of the 1980s was that the actual management accounting systems provided few benefits to organizatio

17、ns. Normally, the reported information not only inhibited good decision making by managers, but actually encouraged bad decisions [Johnson and Kaplan, 1987]. The main reason was the use of an obsolete tool in an extremel

18、y different and more complex and competitive environment. </p><p>　　The main problem that conventional cost models faced was the allocation of overhead by products on the basis of either direct labor or mach

19、ine hour content in the manufacturing environment. This problem was growing at the same time that direct labor and machine hour contents of many products and services fell, while overhead costs increased. Conventional co

20、sting ignores important differences between products and services, markets and customers, which incur different overhead costs. This was the</p><p>　　Traditional methods of cost accounting showed some other

21、 weaknesses [Bellis-Jones and Develin, 1995]. That is, companies do not know whether their products or services are profitable and they cannot distinguish profitable from unprofitable customers. In addition, traditional

22、methods focus on the short term at the expense of the long term. </p><p>　　A Description of ABC Methodology </p><p>　　The problems that conventional costing methodologies raised were the main re

23、ason for developing a new theoretical approach to this subject. Johnson and Kaplan are considered the inventors of ABC, although they do not use this terminology at the beginning of their studies [Johnson and Kaplan, 198

24、7]. The first time the concept of ABC appears is in a later article [Cooper and Kaplan, 1988]. The analysis of cost and profitability of individual products, services, and customers represents a critical </p><

25、p>　　Definition of ABC </p><p>　　In literature there are several definitions of ABC. The definition here shows the ABC philosophy [Hicks, 1992] briefly and clearly: </p><p>　　"Activity-ba

26、sed costing is a cost accounting concept based on the premise that products (and/or services) require an organization to perform activities and that those activities require an organization to incur costs. In activity-ba

27、sed costing, systems are designed so that any costs that cannot be attributed directly to a product, flow into the activities that make them necessary. The cost of each activity then flows to the product(s) that make the

28、 activity necessary based on their respective co</p><p>　　Main Differences Between Conventional Cost Models and ABC </p><p>　　The most important difference between conventional cost models and A

29、BC is the treatment of non-volume-related overhead costs. The use of direct labor-based overhead allocation methods were appropriate in the past when direct labor was the principal component of manufacturing cost, but no

30、t today. In the ABC approach, many overheads are related to specific activities to avoid distortions in product and service costs. </p><p>　　Another difference is the treatment of unused capacity. ABC descri

31、bes resources that are used by activities, but conventional accounts describe resources that are supplied. The difference between the two is excess capacity. If excess capacity is allocated to products, services, or cust

32、omers, there is risk of a "dead spiral," as defined by Bellis-Jones and Develin [1995]. This means that the company should be aware of which costs their customers really generate and not allocate the excess of

33、capa</p><p>　　Advantages and Benefits of the ABC Approach </p><p>　　Several authors have described the main advantages and benefits of using ABC [Innes and Mitchell, 1990; Bellis-Jones and Devel

34、in, 1995; Malmi, 1997]. The most important are as follows: </p><p>　　1) ABC provides more accurate product and service costing, particularly where non- volume-related overheads are significant. </p>&

35、lt;p>　　2) By using ABC, it is possible to analyze costs by areas of managerial responsibility and customers. ABC helps to recognize the way in which customers directly affect the cost structure of the business and the

36、refore helps to analyze customer profitability. </p><p>　　3) ABC provides a better understanding of cost behavior as well as identifying the costs of complexity, variety, and change inherent in both the kind

37、 of service offered and customer-specific requirements. </p><p>　　4) ABC focuses on the activities that add value, which are those activities that create value from the customer's point of view. On the o

38、ther hand, the company should focus on those non-value-added activities and try to eliminate them, although some of the non-value-added activities are necessary to enable value-adding activities to occur. </p><

39、;p>　　5) ABC is useful in performing capacity analysis. ABC measures the costs of resources used rather than the costs of resources supplied, the difference being excess capacity. It would be wrong to allocate unused c

40、apacity to the customers. To perform this analysis, the use of practical capacity is suggested, which means the capacity reflecting the maximum level at which the organization can operate efficiently. </p><p&g

41、t;　　6) ABC reduces uncertainty and provides a more solid basis for strategic decisions. Therefore, the success of ABC might not depend only on the results of the analysis, but on its ability to provide a correct diagnosi

42、s of the company's situation.</p><p>　　Disadvantages and Problems of the ABC Approach </p><p>　　The disadvantages extracted from a study based on the answers of several companies after one y

43、ear of using ABC [Cobb et al., 1992] regarded the amount of work involved, difficulties in collecting accurate data, and the fact that cost management was difficult because several activities cross department boundaries.

44、 Additionally, implementation is very time consuming, requiring not only gathering and processing of data, but also interpreting the results. Even though all of the former problems have </p><p>　　ABC for Log

45、istics </p><p>　　Even though literature mentions that ABC applies to all types of business organizations in the service industry, including warehousing and distribution providers [Hicks, 1992], the author co

46、uld not specifically find the case of a third-party logistics provider as far as the transport operations are concerned. The main issue is to properly allocate the transport operations costs to the consignors, which are

47、the real customers of the company.4 Furthermore, in the literature about transportation co</p><p>　　In recent years and because of the increasing importance of logistics costs within companies, the first stu

48、dies analyzing the utility of the activity-based approach on logistics were undertaken [Pohlen and LaLonde, 1994; LaLonde and Ginter, 1996; LaLonde and Pohlen, 1996]. The main benefits and difficulties related to the imp

49、lementation of ABC for logistics departments are almost the same as those described earlier. </p><p>　　Analysis of Overheads </p><p>　　The analysis of overheads is the least obvious and the most

50、 complicated to perform. Normally, overheads are related to several activities (or nonactivities), and it is necessary to carry out in-depth studies during long periods of time in order to find out the right links betwee

51、n overheads and products, services, or customers. For this reason, the recommendation is to be as accurate as possible in order to link overheads with consignors, avoiding the traditional approach to link, in the first i

52、n</p><p>　　Conclusion </p><p>　　It is very difficult (and not always recommended) to develop a pure ABC model because the particular characteristics of a single third-party logistics company ent

53、ailed the use of slightly different ways to allocate several costs in some instances, which a purely ABC approach would not be able to do. Despite this fact, the final model for both sides of the third-party company oper

54、ations (warehouse and transport operations) has been mainly described by taking ABC analysis into account. Only when A</p><p>　　It is recommended that such a model should be developed by using a spreadsheet

55、because it fulfills the needs of the company, it is a very powerful tool, and it is also very user-friendly. Furthermore, the model developed may be capable of performing what-if analysis in order to simulate actual or p

56、otential situations the third-party company might face. These what-if analyses may be used in different ways such as in the analysis of potential consignors, in the requirement of different service lev</p><p&g

57、t;　　Finally, note that the costs of the model should not exceed its benefits. In other words, it is necessary to cope with the trade-off between a model that is so simple that it fails toprovide enough information to sup

58、port the company's decisions and a model that is excessively costly to design, implement, and operate [Brimson, 1991]. This should always be taken into account, trying to achieve a happy medium between simplicity and

59、 excessive sophistication. </p><p>　　Source: Carles Gríful-Miquela.Activity-based costing methodology for third-party logistics companies[J].International Advances in Economic Research, 2001,7(1): 133-1

60、46.</p><p><b>　　譯文：</b></p><p>　　第三方物流企業(yè)的作業(yè)成本法</p><p>　　本文將分析第三方物流企業(yè)面臨的主要成本問(wèn)題并開發(fā)出適合于這一類企業(yè)的成本計(jì)算方法。在文中將會(huì)探討所進(jìn)行的最重要的第三方分銷商進(jìn)行倉(cāng)儲(chǔ)和運(yùn)輸活動(dòng)過(guò)程中的業(yè)務(wù)處理。不過(guò),重點(diǎn)是主要的產(chǎn)品運(yùn)輸?shù)阶罱K的接收者時(shí),這個(gè)接收者卻不是第三方

61、物流企業(yè)的顧客時(shí)的情況。</p><p><b>　　引言</b></p><p>　　在過(guò)去的十年里,第三方物流企業(yè)的發(fā)展一直很重要。原因有幾個(gè),最重要的是發(fā)展的趨勢(shì)集中在制造企業(yè)的技術(shù)進(jìn)步和新的核心業(yè)務(wù),在此背景下,傳統(tǒng)的成本計(jì)算方法可能產(chǎn)生歪曲的信息,這可能導(dǎo)致做出錯(cuò)誤的決定。當(dāng)公司意識(shí)到這一潛在危險(xiǎn)時(shí),作業(yè)成本方法在第三方物流企業(yè)的應(yīng)用就會(huì)增加。</p&

62、gt;<p>　　成本計(jì)算方法:成本模式的定義和對(duì)傳統(tǒng)方法的批判</p><p><b>　　成本模式的定義</b></p><p>　　首先要定義什么樣的成本模型。這可以通過(guò)分析一些運(yùn)行成本模式的主要功能來(lái)實(shí)現(xiàn)（卡普蘭和庫(kù)珀,1998):</p><p>　　1)存貨的估價(jià)和為金融目的出售商品和服務(wù)的成本計(jì)量；</p>

63、;<p>　　2)業(yè)務(wù)、產(chǎn)品、服務(wù)和顧客的成本估算；</p><p>　　3)提供經(jīng)濟(jì)反饋給在工作中做的好的管理者和員工。</p><p>　　從這個(gè)定義可以看出,成本模型可以作為分析工具,以便能對(duì)企業(yè)經(jīng)營(yíng)成本進(jìn)行更好的管理。成本模型的其中一個(gè)目的是對(duì)公司的數(shù)據(jù)進(jìn)行集中和分析從而為決策者提供有用的信息。因此,成本的有效性評(píng)估模型可以根據(jù)其能產(chǎn)生正確的信息,做出正確的管理決策。

64、</p><p><b>　　成本模型的演變</b></p><p>　　成本系統(tǒng)的演變還沒(méi)有一個(gè)線性和持續(xù)的過(guò)程（約翰遜和卡普蘭，1987年）事實(shí)上,到了二十世紀(jì)二十年代,企業(yè)已開發(fā)出了幾乎所有的管理會(huì)計(jì)程序，并沿用至今。此外,1925到1980年之間，幾乎沒(méi)有新的觀念來(lái)影響成本管理系統(tǒng)的設(shè)計(jì)和使用?？偸浅霈F(xiàn)相同的概念:盈虧平衡分析,本量力分析、直接成本以及固定和可

65、變成本的預(yù)算。在其他作者的成本理念中普遍認(rèn)為傳統(tǒng)會(huì)計(jì)只是財(cái)務(wù)帳目和簡(jiǎn)單描述歷史數(shù)據(jù)輸入（Bellis- Jones and Develin, 1995)。</p><p><b>　　傳統(tǒng)方法存在的問(wèn)題</b></p><p>　　由于成本模型描述演化的結(jié)果, 在20世紀(jì)80年代初的實(shí)際情況是，管理會(huì)計(jì)系統(tǒng)為企業(yè)提供了很少的利益。通常情況下,報(bào)告的信息不僅抑制了管理者

66、制定好的決策,而且還支持錯(cuò)誤的決定（約翰遜和卡普蘭1987年）。主要的原因是在一個(gè)完全不同的、更復(fù)雜和激烈的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)環(huán)境中使用過(guò)時(shí)的工具。</p><p>　　傳統(tǒng)成本模式面臨的主要問(wèn)題是在制造環(huán)境中，產(chǎn)品開銷的分配是基于直接勞動(dòng)還是工時(shí)計(jì)量。同時(shí)還增加了這樣的問(wèn)題,許多產(chǎn)品和服務(wù)的直接勞動(dòng)力和機(jī)器工時(shí)減少,而管理費(fèi)用卻增加了。傳統(tǒng)的成本忽略了在產(chǎn)品與服務(wù)、市場(chǎng)與客戶之間的重要區(qū)別,而這些都會(huì)產(chǎn)生不同的管理費(fèi)用。這是

67、仔細(xì)分析和批評(píng)傳統(tǒng)成本模型的起點(diǎn),因?yàn)樗麄儾荒軠?zhǔn)確解釋產(chǎn)品的成本。最近,同樣的問(wèn)題也出現(xiàn)在了服務(wù)部門并已引起重視。</p><p>　　傳統(tǒng)的成本會(huì)計(jì)方法也顯示出了一些其他方面的不足（Bellis-Jones Develin,1995)。那就是,公司不知道它們的產(chǎn)品或服務(wù)是否是盈利的,而且他們不能分辨出哪些顧客是有利可圖的。此外,傳統(tǒng)方法是把注意力集中在短期項(xiàng)目和長(zhǎng)期項(xiàng)目的費(fèi)用上。</p><

68、p><b>　　ABC法的描述</b></p><p>　　傳統(tǒng)成本方法增加的問(wèn)題是發(fā)展一種全新的理論方法的主要原因。約翰遜和卡普蘭被認(rèn)為是ABC法的發(fā)明家,雖然他們?cè)谠缙诘难芯恐袥](méi)有使用到這個(gè)術(shù)語(yǔ) （約翰遜，卡普蘭，1987）。第一次ABC的概念出現(xiàn)是在后來(lái)的文章里（庫(kù)珀，卡普蘭，1988）。個(gè)人產(chǎn)品、服務(wù)和顧客的成本和收益的分析代表著一個(gè)關(guān)鍵問(wèn)題，公司所看重的部分及ABC最能起作用

69、的地方。主要的焦點(diǎn)是詢問(wèn)對(duì)于公司來(lái)說(shuō)什么是重要的, 管理計(jì)劃和控制功能需要什么樣的信息。最后, 管理目的的有用信息不應(yīng)該只從一個(gè)主要是旨在滿足對(duì)外報(bào)告和審計(jì)要求(金融信息)的系統(tǒng)中提取，而應(yīng)該設(shè)計(jì)一個(gè)符合企業(yè)的技術(shù)、產(chǎn)品戰(zhàn)略以及組織結(jié)構(gòu)的系統(tǒng)。</p><p><b>　　ABC法的定義</b></p><p>　　在文獻(xiàn)中有幾種ABC的定義。在這里簡(jiǎn)要清楚地闡述了A

70、BC法的定義(Hicks,1992):</p><p>　　“作業(yè)成本法是一種以作業(yè)為基礎(chǔ)的成本會(huì)計(jì)理念，是以產(chǎn)品(或服務(wù))在活動(dòng)中會(huì)消耗作業(yè),而這些作業(yè)又會(huì)產(chǎn)生成本為前提的。在作業(yè)成本法下,系統(tǒng)的設(shè)計(jì)是為了不讓任何成本直接導(dǎo)向產(chǎn)品，而是流入必要的活動(dòng)，每一項(xiàng)活動(dòng)的成本再流入到產(chǎn)品,這使得活動(dòng)需要根據(jù)其各自的消費(fèi)來(lái)進(jìn)行計(jì)算?！?lt;/p><p>　　傳統(tǒng)的成本模型與ABC法的差異</p

71、><p>　　傳統(tǒng)成本模型與ABC法最大的不同在于非批量相關(guān)的間接費(fèi)用處理方法上。以直接勞動(dòng)力為基礎(chǔ)的分配開銷方法的使用在過(guò)去是合適的，那時(shí)直接勞動(dòng)是生產(chǎn)成本的組成部分，但現(xiàn)在不是了。在ABC法下,許多費(fèi)用涉及具體活動(dòng)，以避免產(chǎn)品和服務(wù)成本的扭曲。</p><p>　　另一個(gè)區(qū)別是閑置能力的處理。ABC描述的是在活動(dòng)中使用過(guò)的資源,而傳統(tǒng)會(huì)計(jì)描述的是已經(jīng)供應(yīng)的資源。兩者的區(qū)別是產(chǎn)能過(guò)剩。根據(jù)B

72、ellis-Jones和Develin的說(shuō)法（1995）,如果產(chǎn)能過(guò)剩是分配給產(chǎn)品、服務(wù)、或客戶,這就存在“死亡螺旋” 的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。這意味著該公司應(yīng)當(dāng)意識(shí)到其中客戶真正產(chǎn)生費(fèi)用的分配，而不是能力過(guò)剩，以避免過(guò)高的產(chǎn)品或服務(wù)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。</p><p>　　ABC法的優(yōu)勢(shì)與效益</p><p>　　一些作者已經(jīng)描述了使用ABC法的主要的優(yōu)勢(shì)和效益（Innes and Mitchell, 1990；

73、Bellis-Jones and Develin, 1995；Malmi, 1997)。最重要的方面如下:</p><p>　　1)ABC法提供了更精確的產(chǎn)品和服務(wù)成本,特別是在非批量相關(guān)費(fèi)用巨大的方面。</p><p>　　2)通過(guò)使用ABC法,使分析管理責(zé)任和客戶區(qū)域成本成為可能。ABC法有助于識(shí)別哪些客戶能直接影響到企業(yè)的成本結(jié)構(gòu)，從而有助于分析客戶的盈利能力。</p>

74、<p>　　3)ABC法提供了一個(gè)更好的成本習(xí)性的理解，同時(shí)也能在提供服務(wù)和客戶具體要求這兩個(gè)方面區(qū)分出復(fù)雜、多樣及改變固有模式的成本。</p><p>　　4)ABC法專注于增值的活動(dòng),正是這些活動(dòng)從客戶的角度創(chuàng)造出了價(jià)值。另一方面,公司應(yīng)集中于那些非增值活動(dòng)并努力消除,雖然有些非增值活動(dòng)是必要的，能使增值活動(dòng)發(fā)生。</p><p>　　5)ABC法有利于進(jìn)行產(chǎn)能分析。ABC

75、法計(jì)量的是使用過(guò)的資源的成本而不是供應(yīng)資源的成本，區(qū)別在于產(chǎn)能過(guò)剩。這將會(huì)錯(cuò)誤的分配未使用的資源給客戶。進(jìn)行這種分析,建議使用實(shí)際消耗,也就是說(shuō)在組織有效運(yùn)作方面實(shí)際消耗可以反映出最大的能力。</p><p>　　6)ABC法能減少不確定性, 為戰(zhàn)略決策提供了更堅(jiān)實(shí)的基礎(chǔ)。因此,ABC法的成功不可能僅僅依靠分析結(jié)果,但以它的能力能為公司的處境提供一個(gè)正確的解決方案。</p><p>　　A

76、BC法的劣勢(shì)和存在的問(wèn)題</p><p>　　從調(diào)查使用ABC法一年后涉及到工作量的幾個(gè)公司的問(wèn)卷中提取了一些缺點(diǎn)（Cobb et al, 1992），收集準(zhǔn)確數(shù)據(jù)的困難，事實(shí)上，成本管理也是困難的，因?yàn)橐恍┗顒?dòng)超出了部門的界限。此外,實(shí)施起來(lái)很費(fèi)時(shí),不僅需要收集和處理數(shù)據(jù),而且還需要解釋結(jié)果。盡管前者的所有問(wèn)題在發(fā)展與運(yùn)用ABC法在不同的制造和服務(wù)行業(yè)的公司下都已得到解決，但是也必須意識(shí)到在開發(fā)這個(gè)模式時(shí)可能出

77、現(xiàn)的問(wèn)題。</p><p>　　ABC法對(duì)于物流企業(yè)</p><p>　　盡管文獻(xiàn)中提到ABC法適用于所有類型的服務(wù)行業(yè)中的商業(yè)組織,包括倉(cāng)儲(chǔ)和分銷商(Hicks,1992),筆者無(wú)法找到具體的在運(yùn)輸業(yè)務(wù)方面的第三方物流供應(yīng)商的情況。主要的問(wèn)題就是要妥善分配貨物運(yùn)輸成本給貨主,他們是公司真正的客戶。此外,在關(guān)于運(yùn)輸成本的文獻(xiàn)中（Sussams,1992）談到，客戶永遠(yuǎn)是最后的收貨人,而費(fèi)用

78、總是一個(gè)外部變量。</p><p>　　近年來(lái),又因在企業(yè)內(nèi)部物流成本的重要性不斷增加,以物流活動(dòng)為基礎(chǔ)的效用性的第一個(gè)研究分析也展開了 （Pohlen，LaLonde,1994；LaLonde, Ginter，1996; LaLonde,Pohlen,1996)。有關(guān)ABC法在物流部門的實(shí)施的主要效益和困難幾乎是跟之前描述的一樣。</p><p><b>　　制造費(fèi)用的分析&l

79、t;/b></p><p>　　對(duì)制造費(fèi)用的分析是最明顯也是最復(fù)雜的業(yè)務(wù)。通常,制造費(fèi)用涉及到多個(gè)活動(dòng)(或非活動(dòng)),必須要進(jìn)行長(zhǎng)時(shí)間的深入研究,以便找出在制作費(fèi)用和產(chǎn)品、服務(wù)、或客戶之間的正確的聯(lián)系。因?yàn)檫@個(gè)原因,建議要盡可能精確的計(jì)算與貨主相關(guān)的制作費(fèi)用、避免傳統(tǒng)方法的鏈接,如在第一個(gè)例子中活動(dòng)的制作費(fèi)用。當(dāng)要發(fā)展一個(gè)重要的成本計(jì)算方法卻缺乏時(shí)間時(shí)是非常重要的,盡管事實(shí)上這不是一個(gè)純粹的ABC法。應(yīng)付費(fèi)用

80、出現(xiàn)在倉(cāng)儲(chǔ)和運(yùn)輸方的模式兩個(gè)方面。</p><p><b>　　總結(jié)</b></p><p>　　要開發(fā)一種純粹的ABC模型是很困難的（而且也不是一味地推薦）,因?yàn)橐粋€(gè)第三方物流企業(yè)的獨(dú)特的特征涉及到在某些情況下分配幾種成本使用稍微不同的方法，而純粹的ABC法是做不到的。除了這項(xiàng)事實(shí), 對(duì)于該第三方企業(yè)業(yè)務(wù)（倉(cāng)儲(chǔ)和運(yùn)輸業(yè)務(wù)）的最終模型通過(guò)考慮ABC分析主要介紹了這兩個(gè)

81、方面。只有當(dāng)ABC法并沒(méi)有針對(duì)特定的問(wèn)題給出答案時(shí)就應(yīng)該以另一種方式來(lái)考慮分配成本。</p><p>　　我們建議這種模式應(yīng)制定使用電子表格, 因?yàn)樗鼭M足公司的需要，這是一個(gè)非常有力的工具,并且也很容易操作。此外,該開發(fā)模型能夠執(zhí)行假設(shè)分析,用以模擬第三方公司可能面臨的實(shí)際或潛在的情況。這些假設(shè)分析可以用于不同的情況，例如潛在的貨主分析、目前貨主要求的不同服務(wù)水平以及對(duì)第三方物流公司的結(jié)構(gòu)變化進(jìn)行分析。</

82、p><p>　　最后我們注意到,該模型的成本不應(yīng)該超過(guò)它所帶來(lái)的收益。換句話說(shuō),模型的權(quán)衡配合是很重要的,一個(gè)過(guò)于簡(jiǎn)單的模型是不能提供足夠的信息來(lái)支持企業(yè)決策的，而一個(gè)過(guò)于昂貴的模型也不能用來(lái)設(shè)計(jì)、實(shí)施及操作（Brimson,1991)。我們始終應(yīng)該考慮的是努力建立一個(gè)簡(jiǎn)單和過(guò)分復(fù)雜之間的折中。</p><p>　　出處：Carles Gríful-Miquela.第三方物流企業(yè)的作