Hi,
I am currently undertaking an as-is exercise to capture the cost of a number of services with a view to being able to calculate any possible financial savings of introducing a shared service at some point. I am trying to capture the vehicle costs however the vehicles are used by the services for activities that would not fall in the scope of the shared service. I'm unsure how I can capture the as-is cost and what any financial saving would be in relation to the vehicles- I am struggling because….
a). the service would need to have the vehicle even if a shared service was introduced to enable them to undertake the activities that they currently undertake that would be outside of the shared service.
b). I have thought of asking the service to specify a percentage of time that the vehicle is used for all activities that would be in scope for the shared service and then apply this ratio to the total cost of the vehicle and running costs- but if I put this as a saving I’m sure the services would argue that it is not a true saving.
I'd appreciate any comments/views on the above!
Thanks,
R
Kippers,
These questions smack of cost accounting! Now activity based costing (ABC) and user-pay concepts could be of assistance here!
The issue is how iwll you have an asset that is used equitably. The dept who pays 90% of the service is indirectly subsidising the other groups by "maintaining" the bulk of the asset! mmmmh interesting.
warm regards,
K
Kippers
What sort of benefits are you seeking from your centralising of resources (presuming that this is the physical outcome of moving to shared services.)
Examples of benefits may include;
brought to you by enabling practitioners & organizations to achieve their goals using: