من أنا
المقالات
الوظائف
التواصل معي

Calculating the cost of a product

The question that looks simple and is not: what did a single unit cost us? The answer depends on how you allocated the costs that belong to no product in particular.

Chapter 1 · Lesson 3 of 511 min readBeginner level

A wrong cost means a wrong price. And a wrong price means either a silent loss or customers lost to an inflated price — and both start with how overhead was allocated.

1 The elements of product cost

1
Direct materials

The materials that go into the product

2
Direct labour

The wages of those who make it

3
Manufacturing overhead

Rent · depreciation · supervision · electricity

Materials + direct labour = prime cost · labour + overhead = conversion cost

2 The traditional absorption rate

The problem lies in the third element: how do we spread it? The traditional method uses a single rate:

The formula

  • Absorption rate = estimated manufacturing overhead ÷ estimated allocation base
  • The base may be: direct labour hours · machine hours · direct wages
  • A product’s share = absorption rate × its consumption of the base
A worked example

Estimated manufacturing overhead for the year: SAR 1,200,000 · estimated machine hours: 30,000.

Absorption rate = 1,200,000 ÷ 30,000 = SAR 40 per machine hour.

ItemProduct AProduct B
Direct materials per unit12090
Direct labour per unit6045
Machine hours per unit21
Overhead absorbed (40 × hours)8040
Cost per unit260175

3 When does a single rate deceive you?

When products differ in the activities they consume rather than in machine hours alone. A product made in many small batches consumes far more set-ups, inspections and purchase orders than one made in a single large batch — and a single rate cannot see that difference.

The practical effect

The result is a hidden cross-subsidy: the simple high-volume product carries costs that are not its own and looks less profitable than it is, while the complex low-volume product looks profitable while draining resources.

4 Activity-based costing

This method solves the problem in two steps: costs are pooled into activities, then charged to products according to each product’s consumption of each activity’s cost driver.

ActivityCost driverCostDriver quantityRate
Machine set-upNumber of set-ups300,000600500
Quality inspectionNumber of inspections200,0002,000100
Material handlingNumber of move orders250,0001,250200
Machine runningMachine hours450,00030,00015
The difference between the two methods

A batch of Product B of 500 units consumed: 4 set-ups · 50 inspections · 20 move orders · 500 machine hours.

ActivityCalculationCost
Set-up4 × 5002,000
Inspection50 × 1005,000
Handling20 × 2004,000
Running500 × 157,500
Total for the batch—18,500
Per unit18,500 ÷ 50037

Under the traditional method the unit carried SAR 40 (one hour × 40). The gap here is small, but it widens as batches get smaller and set-ups multiply — and it can turn the ranking of product profitability upside down.

When is it worth the effort?

When indirect costs are a large proportion and products vary in complexity and batch size. For a business with one simple product it will add nothing worth its cost.

Lesson summary

  • Product cost = direct materials + direct labour + manufacturing overhead.
  • The traditional rate = estimated overhead ÷ estimated allocation base.
  • A single rate distorts cost when products differ in the activities they consume.
  • Activity-based costing charges by genuine drivers and corrects that distortion.
  • Choosing the method is a cost-benefit decision, not a case of “newer is better”.

5 Test yourself

Three quick questions

Choose the answer you think is correct — the result appears immediately.

1. Estimated overhead is 800,000 and estimated machine hours 20,000. What is the absorption rate?

2. When is a single rate misleading?

3. What is the appropriate cost driver for the “machine set-up” activity?

Sources and review: overhead absorption methods and activity-based costing as settled in the cost accounting literature. The figures are illustrative. Last reviewed: September 2026.