Customer profitability analysiswith time-driven activity-basedcosting: a case study in a hotel

Ilhan DalciEastern Mediterranean University, Famagusta, Turkey

Veyis TanisBusiness Administration, Cukurova University, Adana, Turkey, and

Levent KosanSilifke Vocational Business School, Mersin University, Mersin, Turkey

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to show the implementation of customer profitabilityanalysis (CPA) using time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC), in a Turkish hotel.

Design/methodology/approach A case study was conducted in a four-star hotel with 100-roomcapacity in the Cukurova region of Turkey. Interviews, direct observations, and documentationcollection were used to collect the data.

Findings The results showed that some of the customer segments which were found unprofitableunder the conventional ABC method were determined profitable using TDABC. The case study alsorevealed the cost of idle resources devoted for front office, housekeeping, food preparation, andmarketing activities.

Research limitations/implications Only a single hotel operating in Turkey is examined in thispaper. Further research should focus on implementing CPA using TDABC in other hotels in Turkeyand abroad.

Practical implications Based on the results of the study, the hotel management is better able tounderstand profitability of different customer segments and implement appropriate strategies.Moreover, the time equations of TDABC are considered to provide hotel management with anopportunity to better balance the capacities supplied in departments.

Originality/value There is limited research relating to profitability analysis in service companiesin general and in the hotel industry in particular. Therefore, this paper is unique in the sense that itanalyzes the use of TDABC systems for CPA within a real case hotel.

Keywords Activity based costs, Profit, Customers, Hotels, Turkey

Paper type Case study

1. IntroductionCustomer cost information is essential for managerial decision making. Therefore,understanding true costs of serving specific customers is important in any organization.Companies that understand which customers are more profitable and which ones arenot, are armed with valuable information needed to make successful managerialdecisions to improve overall organizational profitability (Raaij et al., 2003). Cotton (2005)and Cooper and Kaplan (1991), also suggest that understanding how current customerrelationships differ in profitability enables managers to make better managerial

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0959-6119.htm

Customerprofitability

analysis

609

Received 15 April 2009Revised 1 September 2009,

22 October 2009,1 December 2009

Accepted 13 December 2009

International Journal ofContemporary Hospitality

ManagementVol. 22 No. 5, 2010

pp. 609-637q Emerald Group Publishing Limited

0959-6119DOI 10.1108/09596111011053774

decisions. However, obtaining accurate information about customer profitabilitynecessitates the use of an appropriate costing system.

Customer profitability analysis (CPA) entails allocation of revenues and costs tospecific customers in a way that the profitability of individual customers can becalculated. Owing to the increased size and organizational complexity of service firms,Kaplan and Narayanan (2001) state that understanding CPA is especially important forservice companies. Indeed, for service companies, CPA is more important thanproduction companies because the cost of providing a service is generally determinedby customer behavior. According to Zeithaml and Bitner (1996), the cost of finding andgaining a new customer in service companies is five times greater than the cost ofretaining current customers. Therefore, successful implementation of CPA in order toretain profitable relationships with current customers is essential for servicecompanies. Moreover, Cotton (2005) asserts that the effective use of CPA enablesservice companies to increase customer satisfaction and boost profitability.

According to Cooper (1988), the use of activity-based costing (ABC) enhances thetraditional contribution margin approach and the quality of CPA. The ABC systemwas promoted by Cooper and Kaplan in the mid-1980s, as an alternative costingsystem to the traditional one, based on their experiences with some productioncompanies in the USA (Gunasekaran and Sarhadi, 1998). Subsequent studies dealt withthe deficiencies of traditional costing systems in automated production environments(Innes, 1999; Baird et al., 2004). The activity-based approach to overhead costs is anextension of the traditional volume-based costing that treats manufacturing overheadas a complex set of costs with multiple cost-drivers (Drake et al., 2001). Rotch (1990)points out that the conditions necessary for manufacturing firms to successfullyimplement ABC are necessary for service companies as well.

The ABC approach assumes that products or customers generate activities, and theactivities consume resources (Cooper, 1988). ABC is based on a two-stage allocationprocess. First of all, the costs of resources are allocated to the activities using first-stagecost drivers, and then the costs of activities are apportioned to cost objects by means ofvolume and non-volume related drivers (Cooper, 1990). That is, the activity costs areallocated to the cost objects based on the relevant cost drivers (i.e. number of machinehours, number of setups, number of design specifications, and number of customervisits). The cost drivers are linkage between activities and cost objects (Cooper, 1988,1990; Cooper and Kaplan, 1992). The rise of ABC has led to the understanding that notevery customer consumes the same level of activities and resources. Moreover,resources that particular activities consume are measured in terms of cost driver units.This is due to the fact that, while traditional cost systems rely on arbitrary costallocations of overhead costs, ABC classifies cost pools according to the activities (unit,batch, product, and facility levels) performed within the organization (Kaplan andCooper, 1988). Understanding the hierarchical levels of the costs of ABC enablesmanagers to better understand cost causation, and hence make better decisions. Thus,with ABC, managers are better equipped to understand which customers are profitableand which ones are not (Kaplan and Cooper, 1998). Additionally, according to Cooperand Kaplan (1992), the use of ABC by organizations has led to increased profitability.

Despite the fact that the ABC system can be a sufficient costing method, it has somedrawbacks. First, due to complexity of the activities performed within organizations,ABC may take too much time to be implemented (Kaplan and Anderson, 2004). Second,

IJCHM22,5

610

when activities, that contain more than one subtask with different cost drivers, areintensified, ignoring that complexity may result in the misallocation of the costs. Third,since the ABC system needs to be updated regularly, it becomes too costly tore-interview and re-survey people engaged in the activities (Kaplan and Anderson,2004). The downsides of traditional ABC system alerted Kaplan and Anderson tointroduce a new costing method called time-driven ABC (TDABC) system to addressthe above-mentioned limitations. However, using TDABC in order to bring solutions tothe problems of conventional costing systems does not mean that ABC should becompletely abandoned. Proponents of TDABC argue that it removes time-consumingand costly interviews and surveys which have been a major barrier to theimplementation of a traditional ABC system, as well as it allows cost driver rates to becalculated based on the practical capacity of the resources supplied (Kaplan andAnderson, 2007b).

Under a traditional ABC system, the costs of activity-cost pools, are apportionedamongst cost objects using activity drivers (Kaplan and Cooper, 1998). On the otherhand, under a TDABC system, these costs are allocated to the cost objects on the basis oftime units consumed by the activities (Kaplan and Anderson, 2004). The TDABCapproach requires identifying resources needed to perform the activities, as it is doneunder a traditional approach. It also requires time needed to perform the activities andthe practical rather than the theoretical capacity of the resources supplied. Theoreticalcapacity equals the theoretically available working minutes, whereas practical capacityis expressed as the amount of time that employees can work without idle time (Kaplanand Anderson, 2007a). The practical capacity of the resources excludes the time thatemployees spend on activities (such as having a rest and taking a break) which areunrelated to actual work performance. Two important aspects of a TDABC system are:estimating the practical capacity of the resources supplied and the cost of theseresources. Dividing the total cost of resources supplied by the practical capacity yieldsthe cost per time unit. Then, the time needed for performing the activities is multiplied bythe cost per time unit in order to assign the costs to products or customers. With the helpof the time equations of TDABC, the time needed to perform an activity can be estimatedwithout any need to continually re-interview people. These time equations can includemultiple time drivers if an activity is driven by more than one driver. Obviously, theTDABC approach, with its time equations, makes it possible to know how many minutesthat staff members spend on activities in a particular time period. Therefore, the timeequations of TDABC can provide larger transparency than a traditional ABC system.With TDABC, it is also possible to pinpoint which customers consume the largestamount of time and resources (Kaplan and Anderson, 2004).

Research conducted on the analysis of costing systems, in the service industry ingeneral and the tourism industry in particular, is very limited. There has also beenlittle innovation regarding cost accounting practices in the hospitality industry (Potterand Schmidgall, 1999). Fay et al. (1976) demonstrated the use of conventional costingsystems in the hospitality industry. Nordling and Wheeler (1992) implemented CPA inthe Hilton Hotel in Las Vegas. However, analysis of the activities in allocating theoverhead costs was not completed in that study. Although the use of ABC in theapplication of CPA in the hospitality industry has attracted little interest, there hasbeen detailed research about costing practices in tourism enterprises after 1999. In acase study conducted in a hotel by Noone and Griffin (1999), activities were determined

Customerprofitability

analysis

611

at macro and micro level and the cost of these activities were assigned to specificcustomers using ABC. Raab and Mayer (2003), surveyed restaurant controllers in theUSA and they found that the use of ABC was almost non-existent in the restaurants.They also discovered that the use of ABC could be appropriate for the restaurants dueto the characteristics inherent in the restaurant industry. Raab et al. (2005) tested amodel for ABC in a buffet style restaurant in Hong Kong. Raab and Mayer (2007)analyzed how menu engineering (ME) can be integrated with ABC to determinewhether or not the integration of ME with ABC can boost the profitability of a dinnerbuffet in a restaurant in Hong Kong. Ultimately, Raab et al. (2009) appliedactivity-based pricing in a restaurant setting. The findings of that study show thatABC could be used by restaurant managers to better analyze the cost structure of theirrestaurants.

Nevertheless, there are many issues, relating to cost and management accountingpractices in the hospitality industry, that deserve research attention (Pellinen, 2003;Dittman et al., 2008). Several researchers as mentioned above have advocated the use ofABC in the hospitality industry. However, the costs of activities have not beenanalyzed using TDABC in the hospitality industry even though this method has beenapplied in other industries. Pernot et al. (2007) used a case study in a university to showhow to use a TDABC system for inter-library services. They argue that TDABC canimprove the cost management of all library services because it enables librarymanagers to take appropriate actions to reduce the time needed for specific requests oflibrary customers. Everaert et al. (2008) described a case in a distribution company andshowed that ignoring the complexity of activities containing more than one subtaskwith different time drivers, resulted in a misallocation of 54 percent of the costs whenthe traditional ABC system rather than a TDABC approach was used. In a recentstudy, Demeere et al. (2009) showed how to implement a TDABC model for fiveoutpatient clinic departments through a case study. They uncovered that the use of aTDABC system provided the healthcare managers and physicians with valuableinformation which assisted them in operational improvements, making profitabilityanalysis for departments, and deciding on future investments.

The general aim of this paper is to show the implementation of CPA with TDABC ina hotel operating in the Cukurova region in Turkey. The case hotel is located in the cityof Mersin. The city of Mersin is important for the regions economy because tradeamong Turkey, the Middle East, and Europe takes place through the Mersin Port.Therefore, most of the businesspeople conducting business through the Mersin Portprefer to stay in the hotels which are located in the city. Thus, hotels have significantimpact on the economic development of the Cukurova region. In that respect,implementing CPA successfully for accurate and effective managerial decision makingis important for the managers of the hotels located in this region.

2. The case study and research designThis study adopted both convenience and purposive sampling techniques to select theresearch sample (Altinay and Paraskevas, 2008). One of the co-authors of this studypreviously worked for the hotel to have experience during his summer holidays. Thus,he knew the managers and asked for permission to conduct a research of this kind.He met the hotels managers for a preliminary discussion and he realized that thecase hotel was measuring customer profitability by using a traditional ABC system.

IJCHM22,5

612

Then, he explained to the managers the benefits of conducting this case study in theirhotel. The managers of the hotel accepted to give permission for the research with acondition that, due to confidentiality reasons, the hotels name should not be disclosedin the paper. This request was taken into account and the researchers commenced thestudy in the hotel and concluded it within one year.

The physical and environmental information about the hotel is as follows: it is afour-star hotel operating with 100 rooms in the Cukurova region in Turkey. The hoteloperates at an annual occupancy rate of 60 percent. In addition to a banqueting hall,steam bath, meeting room, bar, and business centre facilities, various other serviceswhich are suitable for four-star hotel standards are also offered in the hotel. The casehotel employs 53 personnel (one general manager, one assistant general manager, fourfront office clerks, seven housekeepers, 30 restaurant staff, two marketing personnel,three bartenders, two accounting personnel, and two human resource managers).

Our study in the case hotel started in September 2006 and ended in September 2007.The data presented in this case study represent real figures gathered throughout theone-year period. All the data presented in this study are expressed in US$. The costdata were compiled during a three-month (September, October, and November) periodin 2006. In order to compile consistent data regarding the time spent on the activities,needed for deriving the time equations used in the TDABC model, we observed theactions of the personnel while they were performing the tasks several times duringthe year of 2007. Additionally, we conducted follow-up interviews during the last threemonths of the study in 2007 in order to verify and validate the accuracy of the data. Bycomparing the results we obtained at different times, we computed the average timesfor each of the activities. Moreover, documentation was collected from financial reportsin order to gain a rich description of the hotels costing system and to understand howmanagers implement CPA. All of the above-mentioned case study applications wereconducted with the following theoretical background and literature.

A qualitative research strategy was used as the most appropriate method for a casestudy of this kind because case studies are often associated with qualitative researchdesign even though they can be conducted with both qualitative and quantitativeresearch methods (Yin, 1994). According to Ryan et al. (2007), Lee (1999) and Yin (1994),case studies provide the researchers with an opportunity to understand the nature ofaccounting systems which are currently used in practice. Moreover, case studies couldbe used to explore the application of new procedures. As suggested by Yin (1994), casestudies investigate a contemporary phenomenon in its real-life context and more thanone case can be conducted at a time. Since the main purpose of our study was tounderstand the costing system currently applied and to evaluate the applicability ofTDABC in a hotel setting, the case study method was deemed to be the most appropriatemethod to gain in-depth understanding of the hotel. In the study, a descriptive case studywas first used in order to explicate the accounting system currently used in the casehotel. Then, we used an experimental case study method in order to evaluate theapplicability of the new costing system (TDABC) in the hotel.

We used qualitative research methods for gathering data regarding the costingmethod currently used by the hotels accountants, activities performed in the hotel, unittimes needed for performing the activities, and detailed costs of these activities.Semi-structured interviews that lasted between 45 minutes and one hour with thepersonnel of the hotel (i.e. general manager, general assistant manager, cost accountant,

Customerprofitability

analysis

613

receptionists, housekeepers, marketing personnel, and waiters), direct observations, anddocumentation collection were used as data-collection methods. Semi-structuredinterviews were chosen because they enable the researchers to understand the issues indepth (Bryman and Bell, 2007). The interviews were conducted based on a detailedinterview schedule that was agreed upon with assistant general manager of the hotel.The interviewees were asked closed-ended as well as open-ended questions on issuesrelating to main activities performed in the hotel, the tasks performed by each staffmember, type of costs incurred, and the customers of the hotel. The purpose of thoseinterviews was to clarify how staff members performed their tasks and how muchtime (in terms of minutes) they spend on performing these tasks. Direct observationswere also used to examine the activities while the staff members physically perform thetasks. As suggested by Tharenou et al. (2007), observations are important tools forunderstanding the procedures. In that respect, we conducted observations in order toensure that the data gathered through interviews accurately reflected the real timeexperiences of the employees. After each visit to the relevant department, we wrote upnotes in order to analyze the nature of the activities. We also documented the tasksperformed by the staff members. All the interviews were recorded on tape, and the dataobtained through these interviews were filed. We transcribed all tapes and notes andread the transcripts several times in order to make thorough activity analysis. The costdata were obtained from the cost reports documented by the accounting department. Weused the cost reports to get an insight into the costing system currently employed by thehotels cost accountants (Tables I and II).

We also utilized job descriptions in reviewing the tasks. In addition, we analyzed theannual reports of the hotel in order to analyze revenues generated from accommodationand other revenue generating areas, especially food and beverage spending. Wedeveloped time equations using the data concerning the tasks and unit times needed toperform these tasks. Based on the time equations that we formulated and the cost dataprovided by the accounting department, we allocated the costs to customer segmentsusing TDABC. Ultimately, we computed profitability figures for the customersegments using TDABC and compared TDABC results to the ones found under theconventional ABC, as presented in Tables V and VI.

Customer segments of the case hotelThe implementation process for CPA started with scrutinizing the current customersegments (groups) of the case hotel. The customers of the hotel were determined asfollows:

. Group 1. This group includes managers of local and foreign companies. Thegreatest share (48 percent) in the sales mix belonged to this group of customers.These customers generally utilized accommodation and food and beverageservices.

. Group 2. This customer group constitutes customers brought to the hotel by thetravel agents operating both in internal and external markets. That group hadthe second highest sales mix percentage (19 percent). The customers clustered inthis group utilized accommodation and food and beverage services.

. Group 3. These customers represent people holding managerial positions ingovernment-owned institutions. This customer group used accommodation andfood and beverage services and had a 10 percent share in the total sales mix.

IJCHM22,5

614

Cos

tce

nte

rsT

otal

cost

s($

)C

ost

dri

ver

Cos

tp

ool

rate

Fro

nt

offi

ceH

ouse

kee

pin

gM

ark

etin

gF

ood

pre

par

atio

nB

ever

age

pre

par

atio

nB

anq

uet

ing

Dep

reci

atio

n15

6,66

0D

irec

t$9

,260

$28,

500

$16,

400

$38,

400

$26,

700

$37,

400

Per

son

nel

265,

281

Dir

ect

$34,

404

$68,

945

$26,

288

$90,

291

$22,

848

$22,

505

En

tert

ain

men

t17

7,10

6D

irec

t$1

77,1

06F

ood

and

bev

erag

e40

3,21

3A

ctu

alu

sag

e$1

14,7

47$1

78,4

66$1

10,0

00C

lean

ing

and

lau

nd

ry28

2,07

6L

aun

dry

and

clea

nin

gh

ours

$12.

2428

/h

our

$168

,656

$33,

511

$44,

504

$35,

405

23,0

40h

ours

13,7

76h

ours

2,73

7h

ours

3,63

5h

ours

2,89

2h

ours

Sta

tion

ary

3,84

0A

ctu

alu

sag

e$2

,031

$446

$886

$477

Tel

eph

one

9,41

5D

irec

t$6

,590

$2,8

25M

ark

etin

g54

,977

Dir

ect

$54,

977

En

erg

y,

bu

ild

ing

dep

reci

atio

nan

din

sura

nce

221,

235

Are

a$5

0.74

2/sq

uar

em

eter

$11,

850

$84,

231

$34,

096

$49,

027

$42,

031

4,36

0sq

uar

em

eter

s23

3.5

squ

are

met

ers

1,66

0sq

uar

em

eter

s67

2sq

uar

em

eter

s96

6.2

squ

are

met

ers

828.

3sq

uar

em

eter

sH

um

anre

sou

rces

83,0

00E

stim

ated

$11,

620

$42,

330

$9,9

60$1

0,79

0$4

,980

$3,3

20p

erce

nta

ge

ofti

me

14%

51%

12%

13%

6%4% (c

onti

nued

)

Table I.Costs allocated to

customer groups undertraditional ABC

(allocation of costs toactivity-cost pools)

Customerprofitability

analysis

615

Cos

tce

nte

rsT

otal

cost

s($

)C

ost

dri

ver

Cos

tp

ool

rate

Fro

nt

offi

ceH

ouse

kee

pin

gM

ark

etin

gF

ood

pre

par

atio

nB

ever

age

pre

par

atio

nB

anq

uet

ing

Sto

rin

g79

,609

Sp

ace

occu

pie

d66

3.41

/sq

uar

em

eter

$52,

410

$13,

268

$6,6

34$7

,297

120

squ

are

met

ers

79sq

uar

em

eter

s20

squ

are

met

ers

10sq

uar

em

eter

s11

squ

are

met

ers

Pu

rch

asin

g16

5,60

3O

rder

s$2

50/o

rder

$10,

000

$88,

103

$18,

000

$37,

000

$12,

500

662

ord

ers

40or

der

s35

2or

der

s72

ord

ers

148

ord

ers

50or

der

sG

ener

al(a

dm

inis

trat

ing

and

80,0

00E

stim

ated

$11,

200

$12,

000

$12,

000

$16,

000

$13,

600

$15,

200

acco

un

tin

gan

dfi

nan

ce)

per

cen

tag

eof

tim

e14

%15

%15

%20

%17

%19

%

Rep

air

and

mai

nte

nan

ce11

0,12

0M

ain

ten

ance

tim

e$1

.433

9/m

inu

te$2

8,15

034

,033

2,00

011

,800

29,1

375,

000

76,8

00m

inu

tes

19,6

32m

inu

tes

23,7

35m

inu

tes

1,39

5m

inu

tes

8,23

0m

inu

tes

20,3

21m

inu

tes

3,48

7m

inu

tes

Tot

al($

)2,

092,

135

125,

105

579,

208

124,

450

381,

349

413,

782

468,

241

Table I.

IJCHM22,5

616

Act

ivit

ies

Tot

alG

rou

p1

Gro

up

2G

rou

p3

Gro

up

4G

rou

p5

Gro

up

6G

rou

p7

Gro

up

8

Fro

nt

offi

ceT

otal

cost

($)

125,

105

35,6

1941

,468

8,73

026

,192

10,9

132,

183

No.

ofar

riv

als

17,9

935,

123

5,96

41,

256

3,76

71,

570

314

Cos

td

riv

erra

te($

)6.

9529

Hou

sek

eep

ing

Tot

alco

st($

)57

9,20

827

8,02

084

,934

90,4

1448

,058

68,9

905,

792

No.

ofn

igh

ts31

,390

15,0

674,

603

4,90

02,

767

3,73

931

4C

ost

dri

ver

rate

($)

18.4

5225

Mar

ket

ing

Tot

alco

st($

)12

4,45

093

,863

5,21

415

,042

802

1,20

350

17,

825

No.

ofcu

stom

erv

isit

s2,

482

1,87

210

430

016

2410

150

Cos

td

riv

erra

te($

)50

.140

Foo

dp

rep

arat

ion

Tot

alco

st($

)38

1,34

915

6,27

858

,364

32,4

1240

,969

90,2

363,

090

No.

ofco

ver

s67

,652

27,7

2410

,354

5,75

07,

268

16,0

0854

8C

ost

dri

ver

rate

($)

5.63

692

Bev

erag

ep

rep

arat

ion

Tot

alco

st($

)41

3,78

241

3,78

2B

anq

uet

ing

Tot

alco

st($

)46

8,24

146

8,24

1T

otal

($)

563,

780

189,

980

149,

568

115,

219

170,

941

469,

444

11,5

6642

1,60

7

Table II.Costs allocated to

customer groups undertraditional ABC

(allocation of costs ofactivity-cost pools to

customer groups)

Customerprofitability

analysis

617

. Group 4. These customers are walk-in customers coming to the hotel withoutmaking reservations. This customer group used accommodation and food andbeverage services and had a 12 percent share in the total sales mix.

. Group 5. Professional sport clubs coming to the city of Mersin to play footballmatches constitute this group. Customers in this group stayed in the hotel for oneor two days and had a 10 percent share in the total sales mix.

. Group 6. This customer group comprises people who organize parties andwedding ceremonies in the hotel. Customers in group 6 received catering andentertainment services and did not stay overnight in the hotel.

. Group 7. These customers come to the hotel to participate in wedding ceremoniesand parties and stay in the hotel for just one night. This group had a 1 percentshare in the total sales mix.

. Group 8. Customers who come to the hotel only for bar and entertainmentservices are clustered in this group. These customers do not stay overnight in thehotel.

Activities performed in the case hotelIn the case hotel, we identified six general activities. Each of these activities comprisesseveral subtasks (sub-activities). These activities and the related subtasks are:marketing (making calls to customers in order to arrange visits, giving information viae-mail or fax, making customer visits, advertising, and making promotional campaigns),front office (reservation and information, check-in and check-out, meeting andwelcoming customers, settling customers in the rooms, opening customers accounts,controlling customers spending, accompanying customers when they are leaving, andclosing customers accounts), housekeeping (cleaning the rooms, making beds,vacuuming, and replenishing linens), food preparation and service (taking orders,preparing the kitchen for breakfast, lunch, and dinner, cooking, preparing and servingbreakfast, lunch, and dinner, cleaning the kitchen and the restaurant), beveragepreparation and service (preparing the bar for beverage service, servicing the beverages,carrying out entertainment activities, and cleaning), and banqueting (makingpreparations for catering events such as wedding ceremonies, parties, and meetings).

Allocation of costs to the customer groups under traditional ABCIn the case hotel, costs were initially totaled in cost centers along with their dollar value(Table I). These cost centers were: personnel, stationary, telephone, marketing(advertising, promotion, billboard, and customer visit costs), accounting and finance,human resource, administrating, energy (electricity and heating costs), storing (rent,air conditioning, and insurance costs), cleaning and laundry, purchasing, repair andmaintenance (material and personnel costs), entertainment, food and beverage (costof foods and beverage used for restaurant, bar, and catering events), and depreciation.Then, the costs which were directly associated with particular activities were imputedto relevant activity-cost pools. The direct costs that the accountants of the hotelidentified were: depreciation costs of equipment, furniture, and fixtures that are used inparticular departments, personnel costs, and telephone costs. On the other hand, thecosts not directly related to the activities were allocated to the activity-cost pools bymeans of relevant cost drivers. The activity cost-pools were: front office, housekeeping,marketing, food preparation, beverage preparation, and banqueting.

IJCHM22,5

618

According to traditional ABC literature (Cooper, 1990; Kaplan and Cooper, 1998),facility-sustaining costs (i.e. accounting, finance, human resource, training, andadministrating costs) should be attributed to the activity centers rather than be traced toindividual customers. Since facility-sustaining costs cannot be determined as specificcosts for particular customers in the case hotel, these costs were first apportioned to theactivity-cost pools. Then, from the activity-cost pools they were allocated to the customergroups. This approach is also consistent with the ABC literature. Since it is difficultto determine appropriate cost drivers and relevant consumption rates for the costsof these types, they were apportioned to the activity-cost pools according to somerelevant pattern of usage. For allocating the costs of general support activities such asadministrating, accounting and finance, and human resource, the estimated percentageof total personnel time spent for different departments was used as an allocation base.Information about the time that the personnel, who are engaged in the general supportactivities, spent for different departments were not documented in the case hotel.Therefore, allocation of these costs was based on staff estimates of the time they spent oneach department.

For storing the goods, a 120-square meter warehouse was rented next to the hotelbuilding. The costs (rent, air conditioning, and insurance costs) gathered in the storingcost center were allocated to the activity-cost pools based on the amount of floorspace occupied in the warehouse, which was measured in terms of square footage.On the other hand, the costs of the purchasing cost center were allocated using thenumber of purchase orders as an allocation base. The costs gathered in the repairand maintenance cost center were allocated based on the actual maintenance timespent. Information about the maintenance time was documented by the accountingdepartment.

The stationery and food and beverage costs were allocated according to actual usageof stationary materials and food and beverage goods. The actual usage of theseresources was documented and maintained by the accounting department. The laundryand cleaning costs (i.e. costs of personnel, depreciation cost of laundry machine, and costof cleaning materials) were apportioned among activities according to number ofcleaning hours spent. As can be seen in Table I, a major part of the cleaning costs wereallocated to the housekeeping activity because the laundry personnel take the mosttime to wash and clean the linens of the rooms.

On the other hand, depreciation and insurance costs relating to the hotel buildingwere combined with energy costs in the same cost center (because these costs wereallocated using the same cost driver) and they were allocated to the activities based onthe amount of floor space that each department (restaurant, front office, banquetinghall, rooms, bars, and disco) occupies. The entertainment costs were directly imputed tothe beverage preparation activity. Likewise, the costs (advertising, promotion,personnel, and customer visit costs) which were gathered in the marketing cost centerwere directly assigned to the marketing activity (Table I).

In allocating the indirect costs to the activities, cost pool rates were used (somenumbers in Table I were rounded to the nearest dollars therefore the numbers representapproximate figures). For example, the total amount of purchasing costs was dividedby 662 orders (which is the total number of orders made during the study period) in orderto calculate a cost pool rate of $250 ($165,603/662 orders) per order. Then the rate of $250was multiplied by the total number of orders made for each activity or department

Customerprofitability

analysis

619

in order to allocate the purchasing costs to the activities. For example, the cost pool rateof $250 was multiplied by 72 (total number of orders made for the purchase of the goodsto be used in the restaurant) in order to compute $18,000 (Table I).

After the costs were allocated to the activity-cost pools, the amounts were summedup and the total amount of costs for each cost pool was calculated. For example, afterthe amounts in the fifth column in Table I were summed up, the total amount of costsfor the front office cost pool was computed as $125,105. Once the total costs of theactivity-cost pools were computed, the costs of each activity-cost pool were allocated tothe customers via second-stage activity cost drivers which were unique to eachactivity-cost pool (Table II). The activity cost drivers used by the accounting personnelin order to allocate the cost of front office, housekeeping, marketing, and foodpreparation activity-cost pools were: the number of arrivals, number of nights spent bycustomers, number of customer visits, and number of covers, respectively.

The costs allocated to the customer groups were calculated using the activity driverrates which were computed by dividing the total amount of costs gathered in eachactivity-cost pool by the quantity of the relevant activity cost driver. The activitydriver rate computed for each activity-cost pool was multiplied by the quantity ofrelated activity cost driver that each customer group consumes. For example, the totalcost ($125,105) of the front office activity-cost pool was divided by the total numberof arrivals (17,993) in order to calculate the activity driver rate of $6.9529 per arrival.Then, the rate of $6.9529 was multiplied by the number of arrivals (quantity of costdriver) related to a particular customer group in order to compute the amount of frontoffice costs that should be assigned to that group. For example, the activity driver rateof $6.9529 was multiplied by 5,123 (total number of arrivals made by customersclustered in group 1) in order to compute $35,619, which was the amount allocated tothe customer group 1. The rate per activity driver ($6.9529) was used as a single ratefor the front office cost pool because it was assumed that each cost driver activity(arrival) consumes the same amount of resources. In fact, this approach is consistentwith the traditional ABC literature (Cooper and Kaplan, 1992).

One of the customer groups of the case hotel is the bar customers who come to thehotel in order to utilize solely the bar services. As a result of the interviews, it wasrealized that the bar of the case hotel operates to serve the bar customers rather thanthe customers staying in the hotel. It was also realized that customers who stay in thehotel receive food and beverage services in the restaurant rather than in the bar.Therefore, the accountants of the hotel assigned the total cost of the beveragepreparation activity-cost pool ($413,782) only to the customer group 8. Likewise,the total cost of the banqueting activity-cost pool ($468,241) was assigned to thecustomer group 6 and customer group 7.

Allocation of costs under TDABCThe calculations made under the conventional ABC system were based on anassumption that the resources of the hotel were utilized at full capacity. Moreover,tracing the costs of activities such as food and beverage preparation, making customervisits, and front office may become a challenging task for the hotel management.This is due to the fact that, the way each customer consumes these activities differsfrom one another. For instance, some customers take more of the personnels time todecide what to eat and drink when they come to the restaurant of the hotel, while some

IJCHM22,5

620

of them decide quite quickly. Some customers consume all of the available services inthe restaurant, whereas some of them do not. Likewise, some of the customers needmore advice about the services of the hotel at the front office, while some of them leavethe front office quickly. Moreover, when making visits to particular customers, themarketing personnel need to travel and stay longer. Furthermore, the marketing staffmembers spend more time giving information to some customers before makingcustomer visits. However, some customers do not consume that much effort andresources. Thus, diversity in the use of resources by customers is likely to make itdifficult for the hotel management to analyze the costs using a traditional ABC systembecause ABC uses single cost driver rate for each activity. This is because, the use of asingle cost driver does not adequately reflect resource demands associated with theactivities performed in the hotel. In that respect, the TDABC, with its time equations, isconsidered to better reflect the resource demands of the activities in the case hotel.

The time unit (in terms of minutes) used for the calculations made under TDABCwere average times. These averages were calculated by taking the average of the timeswe obtained through interviews and observations. The staff members in the case hotelwork six days a week and daily working hours vary between seven and 12 hoursdepending on the department in which the personnel work. For example, thereceptionists who are employed at front office work eight hours and 15 minutes a day,whereas the administrative personnel such as the accountant and human resourcemanagers work 12 hours per day. However, the above-mentioned working hoursrepresent theoretical capacity of the personnel, while we based our TDABC calculationson the practical capacity.

In implementing the TDABC approach, we did not assign the costs of accounting,finance, human resource, purchasing and administrating departments directly to thecustomer groups because these costs cannot be determined as specific costs forparticular customers in the case hotel. Instead, we considered the ABC cost pools (inwhich the costs of support activities were already included) as activity costs formaking calculations under TDABC.

Under the TDABC approach, as it was done under the traditional ABC approach, weassigned the total cost of the beverage preparation activity-cost pool ($413,782) onlyto customer group 8. Likewise, the total cost of the banqueting activity-cost pool isrelated solely to customer group 6 and customer group 7. Therefore, we assignedthe cost of the banqueting activity ($468,241) only to customer groups 6 and 7.

Allocation of the costs of front office activities under TDABCThe front office activity-cost pool consists of direct and indirect costs such asdepreciation, personnel, energy, stationery, telephone, repair and maintenance, andpurchasing. In addition, it includes the costs which are allocated from human resource,accounting and finance, and administrating cost centers. The costs gathered in the frontoffice cost pool were allocated to the customer segments based on the practical capacityof the receptionists. This approach is also consistent with the TDABC literature (Kaplanand Anderson, 2004). Subtasks related to the main front office activity are: takingreservations, giving information to a customer, welcoming the customer, settling thecustomer in the room, opening the customers account, monitoring the room in orderto control customers spending, closing the customers account, and accompanying thecustomer as he\she leaves the hotel. Indeed, the length of time spent on the front office

Customerprofitability

analysis

621

activities varies depending on the type of customer coming to the hotel. For instance,walk-in-customers (group 4) come to the hotel without making reservations, whilecustomers in group 1, who come to the hotel more frequently than the others, need fourminutes to make a reservation and 2.5 minutes to get information. On the other hand,it takes totally nine minutes for the personnel to make a reservation (six minutes) andgive information (three minutes) for a customer in group 3. When bar customerscome to the hotel, they only ask where the bar is. Therefore, it takes only 30 seconds forthe personnel to give information to these customers.

The total time needed for the main front office activity is obtained by summing upthe times spent on the related subtasks. For example, for a customer clustered ingroup 1, the reservation activity starts with taking reservations (four minutes) andgiving necessary information to the customer (2.5 minutes). After the customer arrivesat the hotel, the receptionist welcomes the customer (1.5 minutes), settles the customerin the room (two minutes), and opens the customers account (1.5 minutes). At the endof the customers stay, the personnel controls the customers spending and closeshis/her account (four minutes) and accompanies the customer as he/she leaves the hotel(two minutes). In this case, the total length of time, spent at the front office for acustomer in group 1, is 17.5 minutes.

Table III reveals the unit times of consumption of the front office activities byeach customer group. For instance, for the customers clustered in group 2, thereceptionists spent 107,352 (5,964 18 minutes) minutes in a year. As Table III shows,the total time actually needed for performing the front office activities during thestudy period was 326,600 minutes. Table III also demonstrates the allocation of thefront office costs using TDABC.

Through the inclusion of the data presented in Table III (total unit time column ofTable III), we developed the following time equation for estimating the time needed forperforming the front office activities:

Total time min for front office activities 17:5*#customresif customer group 1 18*#customersif customer group 2

22*#customersif customer group 3 18*#customersif customer group 4 12*#customersif customer group 5 17*#customersif customer group 6 0:5*#customersif customer group 7 2:5*#customersif customer group 8

The case hotel employs four receptionists to do the front-office work and normalworking hours (theoretical capacity) for each person is around eight hours and15 minutes per day. Each receptionist works six days a week and 26 days in a month.In this case, normal working hours for one receptionist corresponds to 12,8708:25 hour 60 minutes 26 days minutes per month and 154,440 minutes peryear. Thus, the theoretical capacity for four receptionists is 617,760 minutes per year.However, each receptionist spends around 75 minutes for breaks, arrival anddeparture, and resting every day. Therefore, each receptionist actually works onlyseven hours (which is practical capacity of one receptionist) per day. In this respect,each receptionist practically supplies about 10,920 minutes per month or 131,040minutes per year. Therefore, the practical capacity of 4 receptionists is about 524,160minutes per year. Hence, the practical capacity corresponds to around 85 percent(524,160/617,760 minutes) of the theoretical capacity.

IJCHM22,5

622

Cu

stom

erg

rou

ps

Un

itti

me

(min

ute

)sp

ent

onre

serv

atio

nac

tiv

ity

Un

itti

me

(min

ute

)sp

ent

onin

form

atio

nac

tiv

ity

Un

itT

ime

(min

ute

)sp

ent

onw

elco

min

gcu

stom

er(c

hec

k-i

n)

Un

itti

me

(min

ute

)sp

ent

onse

ttli

ng

cust

omer

inth

ero

om(c

hec

k-i

n)

Un

itti

me

(min

ute

)sp

ent

onop

enin

gcu

stom

ers

acco

un

t(c

hec

k-i

n)

Un

itti

me

(min

ute

)sp

ent

onco

ntr

olli

ng

cust

omer

ssp

end

ing

and

clos

ing

the

acco

un

t

Un

itti

me

(min

ute

)sp

ent

onac

com

pan

yin

gcu

stom

er(c

hec

k-o

ut)

Tot

alu

nit

tim

e(m

inu

te)

Act

ivit

yq

uan

tity

Tot

alm

inu

tes

Rat

e($

/min

)A

lloc

ated

cost

Gro

up

14

2.5

1.5

21.

54

217

.55,

123

89,6

530.

2386

821

,397

Gro

up

25

32

2.5

1.5

22

185,

964

107,

352

0.23

868

25,6

23G

rou

p3

63

22.

51.

54

322

1,25

627

,632

0.23

868

6,59

3G

rou

p4

04

32

14

418

3,76

767

,806

0.23

868

16,1

84G

rou

p5

14

0.5

11.

52

212

1,50

418

,049

0.23

868

4,30

8G

rou

p6

43

12

13

317

314

5,33

80.

2386

81,

274

Gro

up

70

0.5

00

00

00.

511

,940

5,97

00.

2386

81,

425

Gro

up

82

0.5

00

00

02.

51,

920

4,80

00.

2386

81,

146

Tot

al22

20.5

1012

819

1610

7.5

31,7

8832

6,60

077

,950

Table III.Costs of front office

activities allocated underTDABC

Customerprofitability

analysis

623

The cost per minute of capacity supplied is calculated by dividing the cost of capacitysupplied by the practical capacity of resources (Kaplan and Anderson, 2004). Thus, wecalculated the cost per minute of supplying capacity for the front office activities as$0.23868 [$125,105 (Table I)/524,160 minutes]. Then, the rate of $0.2368 per minutewas multiplied by the total time (in terms of minutes), needed for each customer group,in order to allocate the costs of the front office cost pool to the customer segments.

As revealed by the calculations, around 62 percent [326,600 minutes(Table III)/524,160 minutes] of the practical capacity of the resources supplied forthe front office activities had actually been used for productive work during thestudy period. Hence, only 62 minutes ($77,950/$125,105) of the total cost of $125,105was assigned to the customer groups using TDABC. In this case, the total cost ofunused resources supplied to perform the front office activities was computed as$47,155 ($125,105 2 $77,950).

Allocation of the costs of housekeeping activities under TDABCThe housekeeping activity-cost pool includes depreciation, personnel, energy,cleaning and laundry, repair and maintenance, storing, and purchasing costs. Thehousekeeping cost pool also comprises the costs allocated from accounting andfinance, administrating, and human resource cost centers. The total cost of thehousekeeping activity-cost pool was allocated to the customer segments based on thepractical capacity of the housekeepers. The housekeeping activities are classified asactivities that take place before a customer comes to the hotel and activities aftercheck-out. These activities constitute several subtasks as follows: cleaning andvacuuming the rooms, making beds, and replenishing linens. The length of time spenton the housekeeping activities is almost the same for all customer segments exceptfor the customers clustered in group 5. The customers in group 5 (football players)come to the hotel after training and football matches and they leave their rooms dirtierthan the other customers. Therefore, it takes more time and effort for the housekeepersto clean these rooms when compared to the rooms of other customers.

The total time for the main housekeeping activity is sum of the times spent on theactivities performed before check-in and after check-out. For example, before acustomer (group 1) checks in, the housekeeper controls (three minutes), as well ascleans and vacuums the reserved room (seven minutes). After the customer settles in,the housekeeper cleans and vacuums the reserved room during customers stay (fourminutes). After the customer leaves the hotel, the housekeeper cleans and vacuums theroom and replenishes the linens (16 minutes). In this case, the total length of time, spenton the housekeeping activity for a customer in group 1, is 30 minutes. Table IVportrays the average unit times of consumption of resources of the mainhousekeeping activities by each of the customer groups. Table IV also shows theamount of costs allocated under TDABC. Based on the figures presented in Table IV,the total time needed for performing the housekeeping activities was calculated as566,154 minutes.

The case hotel employs seven housekeepers and each housekeeper works 6.5 hoursper day (excluding time for breaks, meetings, arrival and departure, and resting hours).In this case, each housekeeper supplies about 10,140 minutes per month and 121,680minutes per year. Thus, the practical capacity of seven housekeepers is 851,760minutes per year. We combined the unit time figures in Table IV (total unit time

IJCHM22,5

624

Cu

stom

erg

rou

ps

Un

itti

me

(min

ute

)sp

ent

onco

ntr

olli

ng

the

rese

rved

room

(bef

ore

chec

k-i

n)

Un

itti

me

(min

ute

)sp

ent

oncl

ean

ing

and

vac

uu

min

gth

ere

serv

edro

om(b

efor

ech

eck

-in

)

Un

itti

me

(min

ute

)sp

ent

oncl

ean

ing

the

room

san

dre

ple

nis

hin

gli

nen

sd

uri

ng

cust

omer

sst

ay

Un

itti

me

(min

ute

)sp

ent

oncl

ean

ing

the

room

san

dre

ple

nis

hin

gli

nen

saf

ter

the

cust

omer

leav

esth

eh

otel

Tot

alu

nit

tim

e(m

inu

te)

Act

ivit

yq

uan

tity

Tot

alm

inu

tes

Rat

e($

/min

)A

lloc

ated

cost

Gro

up

13

74

1630

5,12

315

3,69

00.

6810

4,50

9G

rou

p2

26

416

285,

964

166,

992

0.68

113,

555

Gro

up

33

74

1630

1,25

637

,680

0.68

25,6

22G

rou

p4

37

418

323,

767

120,

544

0.68

81,9

70G

rou

p5

411

431

501,

570

78,5

000.

6853

,380

Gro

up

72

64

1628

314

8,79

20.

685,

979

Tot

al17

4424

113

198

17,9

9456

6,19

838

5,01

5

Table IV.Costs of housekeeping

activities allocated underTDABC

Customerprofitability

analysis

625

column) and derived the following time equation for the housekeeping activities(customers clustered in groups 6 and 8 are not included in the equation because thesecustomers do not stay overnight in the hotel):

Total time min for housekeeping activities 30*#customersif customer group 1 28*#customersif customer group 2

30*#customersif customer group 3 32*#customersif customer group 4 50*#customersif customer group 5 28*#customersif customer group 7

As previously presented in Table I, the total cost of the housekeeping activities was$579,208. Dividing this amount by the practical capacity of 851,760 minutes per yearresulted in a cost of $0.68 per minutes as the cost of one time unit of the housekeepingactivities. The rate of $0.68/minute was then multiplied by the total minutes, spent foreach customer group, in order to apportion the costs of the housekeeping activities tothe customers.

The use of TDABC reveals that the cost of unused resources, devoted for thehousekeeping activities, was $194,193 [$579,208 (again Table I) 2 $385,015]. This isdue to the fact that, only 66 percent (which was calculated by dividing 566,198 minutesby the practical capacity of 851,760 minutes) of the practical capacity of the resourcessupplied for the housekeeping activities had been actually utilized during the studyperiod.

Allocation of the costs of food preparation activities under TDABCThe food preparation activity-cost pool basically consists of depreciation, personnel,energy, stationery, repair and maintenance, purchasing, storing, and food andbeverage costs. This cost pool also comprises the costs allocated from the humanresource, accounting and finance, and administrating cost centers. We allocated thetotal cost of the food preparation activity-cost pool to the customer segments basedon the practical capacity of the personnel working in the restaurant. We identified threecommon food preparation activities (preparing and serving breakfast, preparing andserving lunch, and preparing and serving dinner), with each one comprising severalsubtasks. These subtasks are: welcoming customers, taking orders, preparing andcooking foods, serving the foods, waiting while the customers eat, and after-servicecleaning. In calculating the total time spent on the food preparation activities, theunit time a customer spends on eating is also taken into account because the personnelof the restaurant must wait until the customer finishes eating.

The unit and total times spent on the subtasks of the preparing and servingbreakfast activity is presented in Table VI. The total time needed for preparing andserving breakfast activity is sum of the times spent on the subtasks. For example,when a customer (group 1) comes to the restaurant, the staff members of the restaurantwelcome the customer and take the order (one minute), prepare and serve the food(ten minutes), wait until the customer finishes eating (40 minutes), and deal withafter-service cleaning once the customer leaves the restaurant (one minute). In this case,the total length of time, needed to offer breakfast for a customer in group 1, is52 minutes (Table VI in order to see the total unit times needed to serve breakfast forother customer groups).

Based on the data presented in Table VI (total unit time needed for breakfastcolumn of Table VI), we derived the time equation for breakfast as follows (customer

IJCHM22,5

626

groups 6 and 8 are not included in the equation because these customers do not havebreakfast in the hotel):

Total time min for breakfast 52*#customersif customer group 1 50*#customersif customer group 2 52*#customersif customer group 3 52*#customersif customer group 4 37*#customersif customer group 5 38*#customersif customer group 7

As can be seen in Table VI, the time spent on performing the food preparationactivities varies for different customers. For instance, since a set menu is offered to thecustomers in group 5, it takes up less time for the hotel personnel to perform thesubtasks for these customers when compared to others. Based on the data presented inTable VI (total unit time needed for lunch column in Table VI), we developed thefollowing time equation to capture the estimate of the time necessary to implement thepreparing and serving lunch activity (Table VI in order to see the total unit timesneeded to serve lunch to all customer groups):

Total time min for lunch 95*#customersif customer group 1 81*#customersif customer group 2 83*#customersif customer group 3 94*#customersif customer group 4 42*#customersif customer group 5

Customer groups 6-8 are not included in the above equation because these customersdo not have lunch in the case hotel. Similar to breakfast and lunch, the estimated timefor the preparing and serving dinner activity can be calculated using the followingtime equation that we developed based on the data presented in Tables V and VI. In theequation, customer groups 6-8 are not included because these customers do not havedinner in the hotel (total unit time needed for dinner column of Table VI):

Total time min for dinner 145*#customersif customer group 1 106*#customersif customer group 2 108*#customersif customer group 3 129*#customersif customer group 4 57*#customersif customer group 5

Based on the figures presented in Table V, the total time needed for the foodpreparation activities was calculated as 3,978,510 minutes. On the other hand, the casehotel employs 30 employees in the restaurant and each employee works eight hours perday (excluding meeting and resting hours). In this case, each employee supplies 12,480minutes per month and 149,760 minutes per year. In that respect, the practical capacityof 30 employees is about 4,492,800 minutes per year. On the other hand, the total amountof indirect costs of the food preparation activities amounted to $298,434[$381,349(Table I) 2 $82,915 (total direct food costs, see Table V)] during the studyperiod. Dividing this amount by the practical capacity of 4,492,800 minutes per yearproduced $0.07 as the cost of one time unit of the food preparation activities. The rate of

Customerprofitability

analysis

627

Cu

stom

erg

rou

ps

Tot

alm

inu

tes

spen

tfo

rb

reak

fast

(see

Tab

leV

I

colu

mn

g)

Tot

alm

inu

tes

spen

tfo

rlu

nch

(see

Tab

leV

I

colu

mn

n)

Tot

alm

inu

tes

spen

tfo

rdin

ner

(see

Tab

leV

I

colu

mn

u)

Tot

alm

inu

tes

(su

mof

the

tota

lm

inu

tes

spen

tfo

rb

reak

fast

,lu

nch

,an

dd

inn

er)

Rat

e($

/min

)

Tot

alin

dir

ect

cost

sal

loca

ted

Tot

ald

irec

tco

sts

Tot

alco

st

Gro

up

11,

253,

616

68,6

8541

9,48

51,

741,

786

0.07

121,

923

30,4

4615

2,36

9G

rou

p2

477,

150

3,88

880

,878

561,

916

0.07

39,3

339,

013

48,3

46G

rou

p3

261,

144

14,6

0859

,616

335,

368

0.07

23,4

777,

654

31,1

31G

rou

p4

333,

008

27,0

7274

,304

434,

384

0.07

30,4

059,

405

39,8

10G

rou

p5

197,

432

224,

112

331,

512

753,

056

0.07

52,7

1518

,881

71,5

96G

rou

p7

152,

000

152,

000

0.07

10,6

407,

516

18,1

56T

otal

2,67

4,35

033

8,36

596

5,79

53,

978,

510

278,

493

82,9

1536

1,40

8

Table V.Cost of food preparationactivities allocated underTDABC (allocation ofcosts of food preparationactivities under TDABC)

IJCHM22,5

628

Tim

esp

ent

onse

rvin

gb

reak

fast

Cust

omer

grou

ps

(a)

Quanti

ty(n

um

ber

ofcu

stom

ers

havi

ng

brea

kfast

)

(b)

Unit

tim

e(m

inute

)nee

ded

for

wel

com

ing

cust

omer

sand

taki

ng

order

sfo

rbr

eakf

ast

(c)

Unit

tim

e(m

inute

)nee

ded

for

prep

ari

ng

the

order

and

serv

ing

brea

kfast

(d)

Unit

tim

e(m

inute

)sp

ent

duri

ng

havi

ng

brea

kfast

(e)

Unit

tim

e(m

inute

)nee

ded

for

aft

er-s

ervi

cecl

eanin

g

(f)

{b

c

d

e}to

talu

nit

tim

enee

ded

for

brea

kfast

(g)

{a

f}to

tal

min

ute

snee

ded

for

brea

kfast

Gro

up

124

,108

110

401

521,

253,

616

Gro

up

29,

543

18

401

5047

7,15

0G

rou

p3

5,02

21

1040

152

261,

144

Gro

up

46,

404

110

401

5233

3,00

8G

rou

p5

5,33

61

530

137

197,

432

Gro

up

74,

000

16

301

3815

2,00

0T

otal

54,4

126

4922

06

281

2,67

4,35

0T

ime

spen

ton

serv

ing

lun

ch

Cust

omer

grou

ps

(h)

Quanti

ty(n

um

ber

ofcu

stom

ers

havi

ng

lunch

)

(i)

Unit

tim

e(m

inute

)nee

ded

for

wel

com

ing

cust

omer

sand

taki

ng

order

sfo

rlu

nch

(j)

Unit

tim

e(m

inute

)nee

ded

for

prep

ari

ng

the

order

and

serv

ing

lunch

(k)

Unit

tim

e(m

inute

)sp

ent

duri

ng

havi

ng

lunch

(l)U

nit

tim

e(m

inute

)nee

ded

for

aft

erse

rvic

ecl

eanin

g

(m)

{i

j

k

l}to

talu

nit

tim

enee

ded

for

lunch

(n)

{h

m}

tota

lm

inute

snee

ded

orlu

nch

Gro

up

172

37

3550

395

68,6

85G

rou

p2

485

3440

281

3,88

8G

rou

p3

176

734

402

8314

,608

Gro

up

428

88

3450

294

27,0

72G

rou

p5

5,33

63

830

142

224,

112

Gro

up

7T

otal

6,57

130

125

210

1039

533

8,36

5T

ime

spen

ton

serv

ing

din

ner

Cust

omer

grou

ps

(o)

Quanti

ty(n

um

ber

ofcu

stom

ers

havi

ng

din

ner

)

(p)

Unit

tim

e(m

inute

)nee

ded

for

wel

com

ing

cust

omer

sand

taki

ng

order

sfo

rdin

ner

(q)

Unit

tim

e(m

inute

)nee

ded

for

prep

ari

ng

the

order

and

serv

ing

din

ner

(r)

Unit

tim

e(m

inute

)sp

ent

duri

ng

havi

ng

din

ner

(s)

Unit

tim

e(m

inute

)nee

ded

for

aft

erse

rvic

ecl

eanin

g

(t)

{p

q

r

s}to

talu

nit

tim

enee

ded

for

din

ner

(u)

{o

t}to

tal

min

ute

snee

ded

for

din

ner

Gro

up

12,

893

745

903

145

419,

485

Gro

up

276

35

3960

210

680

,878

Gro

up

355

27

3960

210

859

,616

Gro

up

457

68

4475

212

974

,304

Gro

up

55,

816

38

451

5733

1,51

2G

rou

p7

Tot

al10

,120

3017

533

010

545

965,

795

Table VI.Cost of food preparation

activities allocated underTDABC (time spent on

subtasks of the main foodpreparation activities)

Customerprofitability

analysis

629

$0.07/minute was then multiplied by the total minutes, spent for each customer group, inorder to allocate the costs of the food preparation activities to the customers.

As can be found in Table V, the total amount of the food preparation costs, whichwere assigned to all of the customer groups, was $361,408 (including the direct foodcosts). This means that, only around 94 percent ($361,408/$381,349) of the total cost of$381,349 was assigned to the customers using TDABC. In this case, the total cost ofunused resources, supplied for performing the food preparation activities, wascomputed as $19,941 ($381,349 2 361,408). This is due to the fact that, only 3,978,510minutes (Table V) of the practical capacity of 4,492,800 minutes had actually been usedfor productive work during the study period.

Allocation of the costs of marketing activities under TDABCThe marketing activity-cost pool consists of depreciation, personnel, repair andmaintenance, advertising, promotion, customer visit, telephone, fax, e-mail, accountingand finance, human resource, and administrating costs. Advertising costs include costsof radio and television advertising, as well as the cost of billboards displayed in severalplaces throughout the city of Mersin. On the other hand, promotion costs include thecost of gifts (pens, watches, and calendars) presented to the customers. Each gift setcosts around $7.6 per customer. These gifts, however, are not given to all of thecustomers staying in the hotel. Since advertising and promotion costs are directlyrelated to particular customers, we directly assigned these costs to the relevantcustomer segments. On the other hand, we allocated indirect marketing costs to thecustomer segments based on the practical capacity of the marketing personnel.

The case hotel employs two marketing personnel to make customer visits and relatedphone calls. Each person works seven hours per day and six days per week (excludingmeeting, vacation, and resting hours). Thus, each person supplies 10,920 minutes permonth and 131,040 minutes per year. In this case, the practical capacity of two employeesis 262,080 minutes per year. The total cost of customer visits and relevant fax,telephone, and e-mail costs amounted to $60,112 cost of customer visits $50; 269 cost of fax; telephone; and email$9; 843 during the study period. Dividing thisamount by the practical capacity of 262,080 minutes per year resulted in a cost of$0.23 per minute as the cost of one time unit. Then, the rate of $0.23/minute was multipliedby the total minutes, that the marketing personnel spent visiting each customer group, inorder to apportion the costs of the marketing activities to the customer segments.Table VII demonstrates the allocation of the costs of customer visits under TDABC.

The time spent to make customer visits and perform related subtasks changesdepending on the type of the customer. For example, before making a visit to a customerin group 1, the marketing staff members phone the customer in order to arrange anappointment (two minutes). After the appointment is arranged, the staff members giveinformation about the hotel to the customer via e-mail or fax (two minutes). Then, thecustomer is visited (30 minutes). In this case, the total time needed for making a visit to acustomer in group 1 is 34 minutes. On the other hand, it is 52 minutes for a customer ingroup 2.

Based on the figures presented in the total unit time column of Table VII,we derived a time equation to estimate the total time needed for making customer visitsand performing related subtasks (customers in group 4 are not included in the equationbecause they are walk-in customers):

IJCHM22,5

630

Cu

stom

erg

rou

ps

Un

itti

me

(min

ute

)sp

ent

onar

ran

gin

gap

poi

ntm

ent

Un

itti

me

(min

ute

)sp

ent

ong

ivin

gin

form

atio

nto

cust

omer

Un

itti

me

(min

ute

)sp

ent

onv

isit

ing

cust

omer

Tot

alu

nit

tim

e(m

inu

te)

Tot

aln

um

ber

ofv

isit

s(a

ctiv

ity

qu

anti

ty)

Tot

alm

inu

tes

Rat

e($

/min

.)

Cos

tof

cust

omer

vis

its

allo

cate

dto

cust

omer

s

Ad

ver

tisi

ng

cost

s(d

irec

t)

Pro

mot

ion

cost

s(d

irec

t)T

otal

cost

Gro

up

12

230

341,

652

56,1

680.

2312

,918

10,6

143,

200

26,7

32G

rou

p2

43

4552

100

5,20

00.

231,

196

3,18

536

94,

750

Gro

up

32

345

5024

012

,000

0.23

2,76

02,

123

500

5,38

3G

rou

p4

00

00

00

0.23

01,

062

311,

093

Gro

up

53

240

4516

720

0.23

166

2,12

311

52,

404

Gro

up

6an

d7

43

4350

402,

000

0.23

460

2,12

392

2,67

5G

rou

p8

22

2125

150

3,75

00.

2386

338

,769

3139

,663

Tot

al17

1522

425

62,

198

79,8

3818

,363

59,9

994,

338

82,7

00

Table VII.Cost of marketing

activities allocated underTDABC

Customerprofitability

analysis

631

Total time min needed for making customer visits 34*#customersif customer group 1 52*#customersif customer group 2

50*#customersif customer group 3 45*#customersif customer group 5 50*#customersif customer groups 6 & 7 25*#customersif customer group 8

Table VII summarizes the dollar amount of the costs of advertising, promotion, andcustomer visits which were assigned to each customer group using TDABC. Since79,838 minutes of the practical capacity of 262,080 minutes had actually been used formaking customer visits, around 30 percent (79,838 of 262,080 minutes) of themarketing resources had been used for productive work during the study period. Inthis case, the total cost of unused resources devoted for the marketing activities wascomputed as $41,750 ($124,450 2 $82,700).

3. Interpretation of the resultsIn this case study, we have developed a TDABC model for the case hotel in order toimplement CPA. Table VIII compares the profitability figures computed by means ofthe traditional and TDABC systems. The figures in the total cost column in thetraditional ABC section of Table VIII are taken directly from the total column ofTable II. The figures calculated for customer groups 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 in the total costcolumn in the TDABC section of Table VIII are obtained by summing up the figures inthe total cost columns in Tables III-VII. The total cost figure for customer group 6and customer group 7 is obtained by adding up the relevant figures in the total costcolumns in Tables III-VII and the total cost of banqueting activity-cost pool ($468,241).On the other hand, the total cost figure for customer group 8 is found by adding upthe relevant figures in the total cost columns in Tables III and VII to the total cost ofbeverage preparation activity-cost pool ($413,782).

In Table VIII, the revenue figures for customer groups 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 are obtained bysumming up the restaurant and accommodation revenues. For example, the total amountof revenue ($948,385) generated from customer group 1 is obtained by summing upaccommodation ($807,602) and restaurant revenues ($140,783). The total amount of therestaurant revenue ($140,783) is calculated by totaling breakfast, lunch, and dinnerrevenues. Since the banqueting activities are organized for only customer group 6

Traditional ABC TDABCCustomergroups Revenue Costs Profit

Relativeprofitability Costs Profit

Relativeprofitability

Group 1 948,385 563,780 384,605 0.32 305,007 643,378 0.42Group 2 216,433 189,980 26,453 0.03 192,274 24,159 0.02Group 3 146,887 149,598 22,711 20.02 68,729 78,158 0.05Group 4 315,117 115,219 199,898 0.15 139,057 176,060 0.12Group 5 160,087 170,941 210,854 20.01 131,688 28,399 0.02Group 6and 7 942,892 481,010 461,882 0.40 497,750 445,142 0.29Group 8 576,000 421,607 154,393 0.13 454,591 121,409 0.07Total 3,305,801 2,092,135 1,213,666 1.00 1,789,096 1,516,705 1.00

Table VIII.Comparison ofprofitability figurescalculated undertraditional and TDABC

IJCHM22,5

632

and customer group 7, the total amount of the banqueting revenues ($942,892) is relatedsolely to these customer groups. The amount of the bar revenues generated fromcustomer group 8, on the other hand, amounts to $576,000.

As Table VIII reveals, customer group 3 and customer group 5 who aredetermined unprofitable customer segments using a traditional ABC method are foundprofitable using a TDABC method. For example, the use of a traditional ABC methoddemonstrates that customer group 5 (sports clubs) shows $10,854 of loss. On the otherhand, the calculations made with the TDABC method reveal that customer group 5generates $28,399 of net profit. Moreover, in Table VIII we can observe that, profitabilityfigures computed using a TDABC approach are higher for all the customer groups whenthey are compared to the ones calculated using a traditional ABC system.

This case study also highlights the difference between the capacity supplied and thecapacity used in the case hotel. In this case study, we found that $303,039 ($2,092,1352$1,789,096) cost of unused capacity exists in the case hotel. Of the total dollar amount ofthe cost of unused capacity, $41,750 represents the cost of unused resources kept for themarketing activities. Likewise, the cost of unused resources, which are related to theactivities in the restaurant, is $19,941. On the other hand, $194,193 and $47,155 representthe costs of unused resources devoted for the housekeeping and front officeactivities, respectively.

The TDABC analysis in the case hotel reveals that only 66 percent of the resourcessupplied for the housekeeping activities (566,198 of 851,760 minutes), 62 percent of theresources supplied for the front office activities (326,600 of 524,160 minutes), 89 percent(3,978,510 of 4,492,800 minutes) of the resources supplied for the food preparationactivities, and 30 percent (79,838 of 262,080 minutes) of the resources supplied for themarketing activities had been actually utilized during the period of the study.

4. Conclusions and managerial implicationsWhat does this all mean for the hospitality industry? First, there is support for theTDABC model which incorporates activities, cost of resources supplied for theactivities, practical capacity of the resources devoted for performing the activities, andthe unit times spent on these activities. In that respect, the study produced valuableinformation which will support various managerial decision makings. First, thesefindings will allow the managers of the hotel to tailor the cost system strategies moreeffectively. Each of the activities and unit times are adaptable for a TDABC model,allowing the managers of the hotel to determine where they need to improve theirproductivity and see how these improvements will affect the external value and overallprofitability of the organization. It seems that ABC is a necessary, efficient, but notsufficient measurement tool for profitability analysis. More importantly, it ignores theimportance of the cost of unused resources assigned to different customer segments.Moreover, the managers of the hotel should remember that tracing the cost of someactivities to customers using a traditional ABC approach may not be feasible due to thediversity in the use of resources by various customers. If the managers of the hotelwant to install and implement a TDABC method for CPA in the subsequent periods inorder to overcome the limitations of a traditional ABC system, all they need is obtainestimates for the costs of the activities that are performed in the hotel, as well asaverage times needed to perform these activities. The estimates of the times, which areneeded for performing the activities, can be obtained via the time equations we

Customerprofitability

analysis

633

developed in this case study. In that respect, based on the practical capacity of theresources supplied, the costs of the activities, and the time estimates for the activities,the hotel management will be able to execute CPA via a TDABC model.In implementing a TDABC model, the cost of activities should be divided by thepractical capacity of the resources, which is expressed as the amount of time thatemployees (i.e. receptionists and housekeepers) can work, in order to compute the costper time unit for each activity. Costs then can be assigned to customers by multiplyingthe cost per time unit by the time needed to perform the activity for each customer. Thetime equations will also provide the management with a chance to update the TDABCsystem quickly without any need for repetitive interviews. In this regard, not only willthe use of a TDABC system provide the managers with an insight into more accurateCPA information, it will also make the unused capacity visible.

Second, there is a clear evidence indicating that the front office, housekeeping, foodpreparation, and marketing departments have idle capacity. It is a well-known fact thatthe hospitality industry is labor intensive and that personnel have a major impact onthe profitability of the hotel. In this case, the managers of the hotel should concentrateon uncovering appropriate strategies for maximizing capacity utilization. For instance,one starategy they can utilize might be to provide the personnel with necessarytraining and motivation to follow and answer the needs and expectations of thecustomers in order to attract more customers and to eliminate the idle capacities in thefuture. Depending on the expected chages in the customer mix in the subsequentperiods, the use of a TDABC system with its time equations will provide managerswith an opportunity to estimate the capacity requirements of different departments.Thus, the time equations of TDABC will assist the managers in understandingwhether it will be necessary to switch the personnel from one department to the next, inorder to balance capacities among departments. Obviously, with a TDABC approach,the managers of the hotel will be better equipped to understand whether capacity isenough to face forthcoming demands. This will allow better manpower planning,which will in turn foster effective utilization of human resources. With bettermanpower planning, the managers will be in a better position to recruit the right typeof employees who can be a good match with the needs of the hotel, as well as they willbe able to estimate training needs of the personnel more effectively. This will in turnenable appropriate training programs to be implemented accordingly. Arrangingappropriate training programs will assure that the training budget is used efficiently.At the same time, better manpower planning may also allow the hotel management tobe in a better position to provide long-term contracts to the employees, hence reducepersonnel turnover. This in turn can lead to increased job satisfaction andorganizational commitment among employees. Furthermore, the use of time equationswill provide the hotel management with an opportunity to see the time demands of theactivities. This will aid the managers in identfying which activities consume muchtime, taking necessary actions in order to reduce the amount of time required by theseactivities, and ultimately reducing the costs of serving customers.

Third, the managers, using customer profitability information gained throughTDABC, will be in a better position to determine which strategy (such as focus,differentiation, and cost leadership) is useful for maximizing the overall profitability of thehotel. With the help of the results of this case study analysis, the managers of the hotel cannow better distinguish profitable customers from unprofitable ones. Obviously, this will

IJCHM22,5

634

result in better-informed managerial decisions. In that respect, the hotel managementshould tailor appropriate programs for managing customer relationships. For instance,the managers of the hotel should implement different promotional programs or campaignsin order to attract more profitable customers during different seasons. The hotel canattract low-profit customer groups during low seasons and may provide services to highincome groups at peak times. Additionally, by using a customer relationship marketingsystem, the hotel personnel can keep track of customers demands and what action hasbeen taken on these demands by other hotels. The calculations made under theconventional ABC system reveal that some customer groups (customer groups 3 and 5) areunprofitable. This is due to the fact that, these customers are burdened with the cost ofunused capacity. In this case, based on the ABC analysis, the managers of the hotel may betempted to consider raising prices or cutting costs by changing service concepts in order toturn unprofitable customers into profitable ones. However, raising prices and changingservice concepts, which may in turn result in changes in the customers quality perceptionsof the hotel, and possibly lead to a loss of customers to competitors. On the other hand,contrary to the traditional ABC, the TDABC cost analysis shows that prices set forthese customer groups truly cover the costs of serving them, despite the fact that thesecustomers are low-profit contributors. Based on this finding, the managers of the hotelshould be alerted to revisit the managerial strategies concerning these customers andtailor new strategies accordingly. According to TDABC CPA outcomes, customer groups1, 6, and 7 are high profit contributors for the case hotel. Thus, the hotel managementshould develop necessary marketing strategies in order to increase guest loyalty fromthese customer groups. This will subsequently enable the hotel to subsidize low profitcontributors (i.e. customer g