12.3 Short-Term Operational Decisions: Make-or-Buy, Shutdowns, Special Orders

Management accountants apply relevant costing to evaluate tactical operational choices that arise in the normal course of business. These short-term decisions typically fall into three major categories:

1. Make-or-Buy Decisions: Whether to manufacture a component internally or outsource its procurement to an external supplier.
2. Special Order Pricing: Determining the minimum acceptable price for a non-standard, one-off order when surplus plant capacity exists.
3. Discontinuance / Shutdown Decisions: Evaluating whether to terminate an apparently unprofitable product line, division, or operating branch.

---

1. Make-or-Buy Decisions (Outsourcing)

A make-or-buy decision arises when a company produces a component in-house but receives an offer from an external subcontractor or supplier to provide the component at a specified unit price.

The Financial Decision Rule

To determine the financially optimal choice, management must isolate the internal incremental cost to make and compare it directly to the external purchase cost to buy:

• If Internal Incremental Cost < External Purchase Price: Make internally.
• If External Purchase Price < Internal Incremental Cost: Buy externally.

The Role of Opportunity Costs in Make-or-Buy Decisions

If outsourcing a component vacates factory floor space or frees machine hours, that released capacity may have economic value:

1. Rental Income: The vacated floor space could be leased out to an external third party for cash.
2. Alternative Production: The released machine capacity could be used to manufacture another profitable product line that earns additional contribution.
3. Decision Impact: The cash benefit generated by deploying the freed capacity represents an opportunity benefit of buying (or an opportunity cost of continuing to make). It is subtracted from the external purchase price or added to the internal make cost.

Strategic and Qualitative Factors

A make-or-buy decision must never be made on financial figures alone. Management must weigh vital non-financial considerations:

• Reliability of Delivery: A subcontractor who fails to deliver components on time can shut down the company's entire assembly line, incurring severe stockout and delay penalties.
• Quality Assurance: Subcontractor defects can damage the company's brand reputation and customer goodwill. Controlling quality internally is often easier than auditing external suppliers.
• Proprietary Technology and IP Theft: Sharing engineering blueprints or patented designs with external suppliers risks technological leakage and future competitive threats.
• Vendor Pricing Power (Lock-In): Once a company dismantles its internal manufacturing tooling and lets skilled workers go, it becomes completely dependent on the supplier. The supplier may opportunistically raise prices in future contract cycles.
• Workforce Morale and Redundancy: Outsourcing frequently leads to redundancies, causing severance costs, union disputes, and declining morale among the remaining staff.

---

2. Special Order Pricing Under Spare Capacity

A special order is a one-off request from a customer—often an overseas buyer, institutional client, or private-label distributor—who seeks a non-standard volume of goods at a discounted price below the normal commercial selling price.

The Minimum Floor Price Rule

If the company operates below full capacity (i.e., spare or idle capacity exists), fixed factory overheads are already being absorbed by normal commercial sales. Undertaking the special order will not increase total general fixed overhead spending.

Therefore, the absolute theoretical minimum selling price is the incremental cash cost of fulfilling the order:

$$\text{Minimum Floor Price} = \text{Incremental Variable Cost per Unit} + \frac{\text{Directly Attributable Fixed Costs}}{\text{Special Order Units}}$$

Any price charged above this floor price yields a positive contribution that flows directly to increasing total company operating profits:

$$\text{Incremental Profit} = (\text{Special Selling Price} - \text{Incremental Cost}) \times \text{Order Units}$$

Commercial Dangers and Qualitative Risks

While accepting a special order above incremental cost is mathematically profitable in the short run, it carries significant commercial risks:

1. Cannibalization of Regular Sales: If the special customer resells the discounted units in the company's domestic market, existing customers will buy the cheap units instead of paying full price, severely reducing regular high-margin sales.
2. Market Price Erosion: Discounted sales establish an expectation of lower prices. Once a lower benchmark is set, returning to normal pricing becomes difficult.
3. Customer Alienation: Existing loyal customers who pay full commercial prices will feel aggrieved if they discover that another client received identical goods at a steep discount, potentially damaging commercial relationships.
4. Capacity Bottlenecks and Lock-In: Committing machine capacity to a low-margin special order locks up the plant. If regular, full-price customer demand unexpectedly surges, the company may be forced to turn down lucrative normal business.

---

3. Discontinuance / Shutdown of Product Lines or Segments

When standard absorption costing operating statements are prepared, they frequently report that a specific product line, operating branch, or division is generating a "net loss." Senior executives are often tempted to shut down the loss-making segment to improve overall profitability.

The Fatal Pitfall of Apportioned Overheads

In standard financial reporting, general corporate fixed overheads (executive administration, building leases, central computing) are apportioned across all departments. If a department is eliminated, the apportioned general overhead does NOT disappear. It merely gets reallocated across the surviving departments, increasing their cost burdens.

The Avoidable vs. Unavoidable Decision Rule

To determine whether a segment should be closed, management must isolate avoidable revenues and avoidable costs:

• Avoidable Revenue: The sales revenue that will be lost if the segment is terminated.
• Avoidable Costs: The variable costs saved plus any directly attributable specific fixed costs that will cease upon closure (e.g., dedicated equipment lease, branch manager salary).
• Unavoidable Costs: Common corporate fixed overheads that will persist regardless of the closure.

$$\text{Net Financial Impact of Closure} = \text{Avoidable Cost Savings} - \text{Lost Sales Revenues}$$

Alternatively expressed:

$$\text{Segment Net Contribution} = \text{Segment Sales} - \text{Segment Variable Costs} - \text{Directly Avoidable Fixed Costs}$$

• If Segment Net Contribution > 0: Keep the segment operating. It generates positive cash flow toward covering common corporate fixed overheads. Closing it will reduce overall company profit.
• If Segment Net Contribution < 0: Discontinue the segment. Its revenues do not even cover its direct avoidable expenses.

---

Numerical Demonstration: The Three-Division Case

Olympus Retail Group operates three regional retail branches: North, South, and Central. The summarized absorption costing operating statement for the year is shown below:

The Decision Dilemma

The executive board notes that Central Branch reports a net loss of $15,000 and proposes closing it immediately to eliminate the loss.

Relevant Costing Analysis:

1. If Central Branch is closed:
   • Lost sales revenue: -$200,000
   • Saved variable costs: +$140,000
   • Saved direct fixed costs: +$25,000
   • Net change in cash flow: $-\text{\textdollar}200,000 + \text{\textdollar}140,000 + \text{\textdollar}25,000 = -\text{\textdollar}35,000$.
2. The $50,000 of apportioned corporate overhead does not disappear. It must now be reallocated to North and South Branches.
3. Revised Total Company Operating Profit:

$$\text{New Total Profit} = \text{Original Profit (\text{\textdollar}105,000)} - \text{Lost Central Segment Margin (\text{\textdollar}35,000)} = \text{\textdollar}70,000$$

1. Conclusion: Closing Central Branch would cause total company operating profit to collapse from $105,000 to $70,000—a devastating $35,000 profit destruction!

---

4. Summary Decision Framework Matrix