6. Conclusions and directions for further research
Previous studies have shown that TDABC is a model of great applicability in various activities (Demeere et al., 2009; Dalci et al., 2010; Giannetti et al., 2011; Somapa et al., 2012; Everaert et al., 2012; Kaplan et al., 2014; Basuki and Riediansyaf, 2014; Campanale et al., 2014). While the vast majority of studies have analysed TDABC models in service companies, there has been less interest in how this costing model works for manufacturing companies, and the study by Öker and Adigüzel (2010) attributes some complexity to this type of model. To shed some light on these matters, the aim of this research work was to examine the technical suitability and the complexity of TDABC in a manufacturing setting. We adopted an interventionist research that allowed us to investigate these matters with greater richness and depth. The host organisation was GP, a Portuguese company in the frozen food sector, with whom we agreed to help improve their costing practices by building a pilot TDABC model. In this way, we were able to experience every aspect of the process and collect insights, otherwise inaccessible, to respond to our theoretical aims. At the end, our results showed that the TDABC model is feasible and suitable for production environments and able to deal with the variability of the processes. Specifically, the time equations can accommodate the different tasks performed and their specific drivers. Therefore, like Everaert et al. (2008a), who explored logistics processes, this capacity to deal with the variability of the production processes is also true. Nevertheless, our experience compared with the published service examples also lets us conclude that TDABC is less complex for a service company than for manufacturing.
