Comment on your findings to help explain what has happened to the yield variance.
【参考答案及解析】
Adverse yield variance An analysis of the materials mix variance (see (a)(3)) shows that 3,029 kg of F and 208 kg of H (the more expensive materials) were replaced by 3,237 kg of G (the cheapest material). This substitution of cheaper material could have led to the adverse yield variance. It is also possible that the yield variance was because the material G that was used was of a lower than standard quality since it was purchased at a price below its standard price. Adverse efficiency variance The adverse labour efficiency variance may have been due to Material G taking longer to process than normal because it was of a poor quality. Alternatively, the fact that in Department Q the actual rate was less than the standard rate could mean that less skilled labour was used than provided for in the standard, and that this then lowered productivity with the result that the yield was lower than expected.
Adverse yield variance An analysis of the materials mix variance (see (a)(3)) shows that 3,029 kg of F and 208 kg of H (the more expensive materials) were replaced by 3,237 kg of G (the cheapest material). This substitution of cheaper material could have led to the adverse yield variance. It is also possible that the yield variance was because the material G that was used was of a lower than standard quality since it was purchased at a price below its standard price. Adverse efficiency variance The adverse labour efficiency variance may have been due to Material G taking longer to process than normal because it was of a poor quality. Alternatively, the fact that in Department Q the actual rate was less than the standard rate could mean that less skilled labour was used than provided for in the standard, and that this then lowered productivity with the result that the yield was lower than expected.