See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/348372831

Adoption Discrepancies Of Activity-Based Costing Among The Manufacturing

SMEs In The Developed And Developing Countries: Empirical Literature Review

Article  in  Journal of Accounting · January 2021

CITATIONS READS

0 481

1 author:

Godfrey Molela
Dodoma University
5 PUBLICATIONS   5 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Producer Empowerment and Market Linkage View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Godfrey Molela on 10 January 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Researchjournali’s Journal of Accounting
Vol. 8 | No. 6 December | 2020 1

Adoption Discrepancies
Of Activity-Based
Costing Among The
Manufacturing SMEs In
Godfrey F. Molela
Lecturer, Department of Accounting and Finance, The
University of Dodoma, Dodoma, Tanzania
Ismail J. Ismail
Lecturer, Department of Business Management and

The Developed And Administration, The University of Dodoma, Dodoma,

Tanzania

Developing Countries:
Empirical Literature
Review

www.researchjournali.com
Researchjournali’s Journal of Accounting
Vol. 8 | No. 6 December | 2020 2

ABSTRACT

Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) constitute a very valuable component of economic enhancement
framework that contributes significantly to countries’ GDP in the world. The financial performance of these
enterprises have inarguably become of paramount importance for their survival and growth. Adopting the
activity-based costing (ABC) system is among the strategic moves that SMEs are urged to take, in order to
reduce their operational costs and boosting the profit at the same time. Nevertheless, the rates of adoption were
reported in the previous studies to be low in both the developed and developing countries. This study assessed
the effect of individual factors that caused the adoption discrepancies in the two geographical environments.
The use of two-sample test statistic on analyzing the mean score data from twenty (20) empirical studies
revealed that, there were no significant differences imposed by the system advantage, complexity,
compatibility, knowledge, management support, implementation cost and perception on SMEs’ decisions to
adopt the ABC system, in both the developed and developing countries.

Key words: Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs), Activity-based Costing (ABC), Adoption Discrepancies,
Developed and Developing Countries

1. INTRODUCTION

SMEs play a pivotal role as the catalyst of national development by offering employments and contributing
significantly to the countries’ GDP globally (Fungai, 2018). However, this played role had not been much
effective because of the challenges that impeded the efficient functioning of the SMEs (Chan, 2019). Improper
cost management was among the challenges faced the manufacturing SMEs, which in turn had effects to their
profit margins, sales turnover and competitiveness strategies (Muli, 2019; Amir, Anzair & Amiruddin, 2016).
Drury (2017) identified the activity-based costing (ABC) as the efficient managerial accounting for the
manufacturing SMEs to manage costs in their operations. Despite of its benefits related to costs control and
income enhancement, the adoption rate of ABC by SMEs was lower than that of large companies (Raucci &
Lepore, 2020). Babu and Masum (2019) went further to state that, the adoption rate in the developed countries
was higher than in the developing countries, by citing the competitive advantage as the reason for discrepancy.

It was not clear as to what extent the individual factors caused the ABC adoption discrepancies among the
SMEs in the developed and developing countries, as it was reported by Babu and Masum (2019), among other
studies. This study contributed to the knowledge gap by examining the selected factors behind the discrepancies
in adoption rates among the SMEs in the developed and developing countries. Such factors include the system
advantage, complexity, compatibility, knowledge, management support, implementation cost and perception,
which were selected based on the frequency of their references in the previous studies. The analysis was done
by extracting and synthesizing the findings reviewed from the empirical literatures. Such findings were based

www.researchjournali.com
Researchjournali’s Journal of Accounting
Vol. 8 | No. 6 December | 2020 3

on the reported causal-effect relationships of the above-mentioned independent variables and rates of ABC
adoption, which was treated as the dependent variable. Such studies which were based upon include that of
Tabitha and Ogungbade (2016) which identified the expected system benefits, organizational culture,
technological advancement, firm size and production stage as among the factors that determine SMEs’ rates of
ABC adoption in the developing countries. Kocakulah, Foroughi, Stott and Manyoky (2017) identified the
complexity in practicing the system as the major barrier towards adoption in the developed countries. The study
mentioned such parameters which define the complexity variable, including easiness in the identification of the
activities, cost drivers, assigning the direct and indirect costs using the appropriate drivers to cost object and
accounting for idle capacity.

Perception and management support were likewise stated by Rundora and Selesho (2014) as the other factors
that determine the SMEs’ decision to implement the ABC system. Ozyurek and Yilmaz (2015) added to the list
such factors including the relative advantage, compatibility and application knowledge whose impact on
adoption depends on the SMEs’ internal policy of staff development. Moreover, the external factors including
the environmental cost, stakeholders’ intervention and business prospects affect the adoption and efficiency in
the ABC implementation (Neto, Agostinho, Almeida, Garcia & Giannetti, 2018).

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 DESCRIPTIONS OF CONCEPTS

2.1.1 ACTIVITY-BASED COSTING (ABC)
Kim (2017) defined ABC as the two-stage accounting approach used to record, accumulate the relevant costs
and assign the same to product or service. At stage one, the activities tend to consume the resources while at
stage two the product or service consumes the activities (Drury, 2017). According to Mahal and Hossain (2015),
ABC was introduced by Cooper and Kaplan in 1987 as an advanced costing system to traditional costing method
which is the one-stage approach where product or service directly consumes the resources.

Reduction of total cost by properly assigning direct and indirect costs to cost object as well as to accurately
perform the gross margin analysis are among the benefits of ABC in SMEs’ operations (Borad, 2019). Likewise,
ABC is essential for deciding which resources or activities need to be reduced or eliminated as they are the
sources of idle capacity in the manufacturing SMEs (Soekardan, 2016).

2.1.2 MANUFACTURING SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED ENTERPRISES (SMES)

Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are distinctively distinguished from large corporations in both
developed and developing countries based on the number of employees, invested capital and annual turnover
(EU SME Centre [ESC], 2019; United Republic of Tanzania [URT], 2003). According to the reports, the SMEs
classification was defined by the average composition of maximum 250 and 99 employees and invested capital
not exceeding Euro 43 million (TZS. 108,360 million) and TZS. 800 million in the developed and developing

www.researchjournali.com
Researchjournali’s Journal of Accounting
Vol. 8 | No. 6 December | 2020 4

countries respectively. The composition may differ slightly across different countries in a particular category
(ESC, 2019).

Ngibe and Lekhanya (2019) and Kenton (2020) collectively refer to manufacturing SMEs as the small to
medium sized companies, which use man-power, machineries and chemical ingredients to convert raw materials
to finished goods. Depending on the production line, SMEs manufacture different products including clothes,
metal, chemicals, minerals, papers, leathers and building materials to mention the few (Tersoo, 2018). Shah,
Jamuludin, Talib and Yusof (2019) added to the list another production line of SMEs dealing with the food
processing. This study based on the food-processing category to collect secondary data for analysis.

2.2 THEORETICAL LITERATURE

2.2.1 SOCIAL COMPARISON THEORY (SCT)
The study was built on the ground of social comparison theory as promulgated for the first time in 1954 by
Leon Festinger. The theory states that, individuals tend to be driven internally to evaluate their opinions and
abilities against either their own objectives or other people’s achievements in the similar line of production
(Cherry, 2019). Upward social comparison is one of the aspects stipulated in the theory, where individuals’
abilities are stimulated by envy and admiration to achieve higher results as per plan or similar others (Ven,
2015). On the other hand the downward social comparison seeks to explain the individuals’ drive to keep up
after having realized their positions are much more superior as compared with the others (E. Michinov, & N.
Michinov, 2001).

In building the case for analysis, this study based on only first five hypotheses postulated in the theory, despite
the total composition being made of nine hypotheses. Such hypotheses as in accordance to Festinger (1954)
include hypothesis I “every individual has inner drive to self-evaluate one’s opinions and abilities”, hypothesis
II “in the absence of set objectives and non-social attributes, the individual tends to evaluate his opinions and
abilities against similar others”, hypothesis III “the comparison is only relevant for individuals in the same line
of business”, hypothesis IV “the comparison of one’s ability is unidirectional always upward” and hypothesis V
“there are non-social forces that restrain individuals from undergoing changes”.

2.2.2 CLASSICAL ORGANIZATION THEORY (COT)

Social comparison theory was used together with the classical organization theory in the course of formulating
and performing the hypotheses testing. According to Onday (2016), classical organization theory, considers the
organization as the machine and employees as the components. The organization is considered as an individual,
where the employees work to accomplish the organizational mission while serving their individual interests
(Shafritz, Ott, & Jang, 2016). Adam Smith put it clear that, the organizational performance increases when each
individual employee plays his role efficiently through the concept of division of labor (Ciftci, 2010). Based on
this theory, SMEs were considered as individuals when referred to in the social comparison theory whose
performance depends on the individual employees.

www.researchjournali.com
Researchjournali’s Journal of Accounting
Vol. 8 | No. 6 December | 2020 5

2.3 EMPIRICAL LITERATURE

2.3.1 ADVANTAGES OF ADOPTING ABC TO SMES
ABC usage guarantees the survival of SMEs where it is used in cost reduction and performance measurements
(Mohammed, 2019). Activities which do not contribute significantly in the profitability enhancement but
consume resources can easily be traced using the ABC system, hence eliminated if need be (Drury, 2017).
Likewise, the system is essential in the efficient allocation of resources in the entire chain of production as far
as manufacturing SMEs are concerned (Miller-Nobles, Mattison & Matsumura, 2018). Dorde and Vladan
(2013) asserted that, ABC is mostly used by the SMEs to monitor the low-cost production and low-cost
distribution. The study further related the system with the proper mechanism of price determination.

2.3.2 CHALLENGES FACED BY THE SMES TO ADOPT ABC SYSTEM

Despite the benefits associated with the use of ABC in the organization, the rate of adoption had still been lower
among the SMEs as compared to large firms (Manivannan, 2019). The study generally referred to contextual
and organizational factors as the reasons behind the discrepancy not only between the SMEs and large firms
but also among the SMEs themselves.

For the case of developed countries, Rundora and Selesho (2014) mentioned perception by no-users was the
reason for non-adoption of ABC into their accounting operations. Challenges faced by the SMEs to automate
the ABC system was another reason pointed by Zarei, Rad, F. Ghapanchi and A. Ghapanchi (2015). The study
mentioned such factors including the budget constraints, limited managerial and governance support as the
contributing reasons behind the failure to implement the computerized ABC. Nair and Tan (2018) went further
to associate the external environment and cost savings mechanism with the successful implementation of ABC
system. It was reported that, the business competitiveness as the external force and the awareness of ABC as
the best mechanism for cost savings drove most SMEs to implement the system, and the opposite is true.

However, the issue of complexity, cost structure and the perceived advantage to be derived from the system
were among the factors that determined the rate of adoption among the SMEs in the developing countries
(Hamad, Yousif, & Fatehaerrhman, 2020). Likewise, the system compatibility and knowledge of the advantages
that ABC offers and how to implement it, were identified by Rios-Manriquez, Colomina and Pastor (2014) as
the other factors that impose challenges to SMEs from adopting the system. Above all, financial constraint acts
as the major impediment for SMEs to adopt the ABC among other management accounting practices
(Eferakeya, 2017). The operational employees of SMEs particularly those dealing with accounting issues are
supposed to be acquainted with the system operations through formal trainings and exchange visits when need
be. Hence, if the institution suffers the financial scarcity, staff development strategy cannot be implemented
(Samuel, 2016).

www.researchjournali.com
Researchjournali’s Journal of Accounting
Vol. 8 | No. 6 December | 2020 6

3. METHODOLOGY

The study employed the descriptive research design to collect the secondary data from empirical literatures and
subsequently analyzed the same using the two-sample test statistic based on the t-test model. According to Kim
(2015, the model was deemed appropriate because of the impossibilities to obtain the population variances,
hence sample variances were used instead. This inferential statistics test was undertaken using the quantitative
research approach as the supplement to deductive approach, which was based upon to prove the theories of SC
and CO in the context of ABC adoption by the SMEs.

Twenty (20) articles were purposively selected from online academic databases, that would provision the
reliable information on factors behind the adoption of ABC system by the SMEs in both the developed and
developing countries. The section mean scores of the factors for adoption was the area of focus, where studies
with different point and percentage scales were converted to five point likert scale to achieve the data uniformity
as advised by Dokoushkani (2014). For objective analysis, the study extracted data related to developed
countries’ scenario from ten (10) articles so did for developing countries’ scenario.

The ordinal scale of measurement was considered in ranking the effects of independent variables to dependent
variable. According Ahmad, Teng and Zabri (2017), the advantage variable was particularly measured by
considering the ABC’s contributions to cost reduction and enhanced financial performance. The ability to
operate the system and fit its features in the SMEs’ operations were respectively considered as the parameters
to measure complexity, knowledge and compatibility (Dubihlela & Rundora, 2014). Management support and
running cost were likewise measured by assessing the ability and willingness of managers of SMEs to commit
the financial and material support to make the system function efficiently (Nair & Tan, 2018). Moreover, the
perception variable was measured by considering the pre-conceived ideas about the system and the attitude of
the decision makers towards change, by replacing the traditional costing system with the ABC system (Msomi,
Ngibe & Nyide, 2019).

The Procedures for Quantitative Data Analysis are as highlighted below:

I: Setting the Null Hypothesis based on the Classical Organizational Theory and Social Comparison Theory
“Hypothesis II”

𝐻0 : The mean population of ABC adoption among the SMEs in the developed countries is not different from
the mean population of adoption among the SMEs in the developing countries.

Symbolically, 𝐻0 : 𝜇1 = 𝜇2 , or 𝐻0 = 𝜇1 − 𝜇2 = 0

II: Computing the Confidence Interval of Mean Difference “𝜇1 − 𝜇2 " of the Two Populations

1 1 1 1
(Ẍ1 − Ẍ2 ) − 𝑡𝑛1 +𝑛2 −2 √𝑆𝑝2 ( + ) ≤ 𝜇1 − 𝜇2 ≤ (Ẍ1 − Ẍ2 ) + 𝑡𝑛1 +𝑛2 −2 √𝑆𝑝2 ( + )
𝑛1 𝑛2 𝑛1 𝑛2

www.researchjournali.com
Researchjournali’s Journal of Accounting
Vol. 8 | No. 6 December | 2020 7

Where;

Ẍ1 and Ẍ2 stand for sample means,

𝜇1 and 𝜇2 stand for population means,

𝑛1 and 𝑛2 stand for sample sizes,

𝑡𝑛1 +𝑛2 −2 stands for t-test value with the degree of freedom 𝑛1 + 𝑛2 − 2 = 18 and

𝑆𝑝2 stands for a pooled variance,

III: Accepting or Rejecting the Null Hypothesis

If the value 𝜇1 − 𝜇2 = 0 falls within the non-rejection region based on II above, then 𝐻0 is accepted, otherwise
it is rejected and the alternative hypothesis is accepted instead.

4. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

The data collected are the summaries of the mean score effects of independent variables to ABC adoption,
where 1 and 2 stand for developed and developing countries respectively.

Data extraction and synthesis were based on the seven core independent variables defined in this study namely
advantages of adopting the ABC to SMEs’ operations, application complexity, system’s compatibility in SMEs’
working environment, operators’ knowledge, management support, installation and system’s maintenance cost
as well as the users’ perceptions. The results of the computed mean differences were compared with the
hypothetical mean differences of the two studied populations in the table below.

Table I: The Findings from the Empirical Literature Review

Management Implementatio
S/ Researche Advantage Complexity Compatibility Knowledge Perception
Support n Cost
N rs
1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2
Rundora &
1 Selesho 3.875 2.875 3.400 3.313 2.875 4.375 4.000
(2014)
Abusalama
2 3.950 3.880 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
(2008)
Botha &
3 3.500 4.000 4.000 3.500 3.500 3.500 0.000
Toit (2017)
Aldukhil
4 3.063 4.336 3.738 3.677 3.798 0.000 0.000
(2012)
Maduekwe
5 3.800 0.000 0.000 3.160 3.319 3.132 3.729
(2015)
Ahmad, et
6 3.220 3.665 3.443 3.342 3.497 3.700 3.360
al. (2017)
Dubihlela,
7 et al. 3.445 0.000 0.000 3.805 2.815 0.000 0.000
(2014)
Rios-
Manriquez,
8 1.000 1.000 1.316 3.300 1.000 1.000 0.000
et al.
(2014)
Nair, et al.
9 1.570 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.060 0.000 1.220
(2018)
Rababah,
10 et al. 4.140 3.000 0.000 3.000 3.500 3.500 0.000
(2012)

www.researchjournali.com
Researchjournali’s Journal of Accounting
Vol. 8 | No. 6 December | 2020 8
Quinn, et
11 4.555 1.000 1.800 1.000 4.370 4.580 3.970
al. (2017)
Cardos, et
12 1.138 1.300 0.000 2.000 0.000 1.000 0.000
al. (2012)
Bhandari
13 3.729 4.350 3.470 3.820 3.880 4.190 4.590
(2013)
Askarany,
14 et al. 4.244 3.770 3.468 3.939 0.000 0.000 0.000
(2012)
Msomi, et
15 2.255 2.355 2.255 2.255 1.960 0.000 0.000
al. (2019)
Joseph &
16 Piorce 2.600 2.780 1.510 2.750 2.650 2.750 1.600
(2019)
Ramezani
17 4.615 2.603 4.000 2.153 4.500 3.512 2.202
(2015)
Pietrazak,
18 et al. 1.167 3.300 1.167 3.700 2.900 3.250 1.167
(2020)
Somapa, et
19 4.500 3.500 2.300 4.000 3.600 5.000 0.000
al. (2012)
Anand, et
20 2.681 1.133 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
al. (n.d)
Total 20.02 21.84
32.372 27.994 27.689 17.789 18.078 26.769 25.945 23.668 25.556 21.647 7.339 18.499
scores 5 2
2.002 2.184 0.733
Ẍ1|Ẍ2 3.2372 2.7994 2.7689 1.7789 1.8078 2.6769 2.5945 2.3668 2.5556 2.1647 1.8499
5 2 9
1.5381 0.7637 1.2474 1.713 1.5627 1.7042 1.3578 1.4446 1.8966 1.2209 1.983 1.9191 1.357 1.8882
S1|S2
9 3 7 1 1 1 4 9 1 2 7 8 5 7
2
Sp 1.474653561 2.245450028 2.673190361 1.965427967 2.543893778 3.809174206 2.704207878
t18 2.1009 2.1009 2.1009 2.1009 2.1009 2.1009 2.1009
Lower
Tail: (μ1- -0.703146764 -0.641500866 -1.565056002 -1.234791576 -1.687345264 -1.814231715 -2.661042448
μ2)
Upper
Tail: (μ1- 1.578746764 2.174300866 1.507256002 1.399591576 1.309745264 1.853231715 0.429042448
μ2)

Source: Empirical Literatures and Researcher’s Own Computation

Table II: Two-sample Test Results
Independent Population Mean Differences from Null Hypothesis
S/N
Variable Two-sample Test “𝜇1 − 𝜇2 " “𝜇1 − 𝜇2 = 0" Test
1. System advantage -0.7031 ― 1.5787 Accepted
2. Complexity -0.6415 ― 2.1743 Accepted
3. Compatibility -1.5651 ― 1.5073 Accepted
4. Knowledge -1.2348 ― 1.3996 Accepted
Management
5. -1.6873 ― 1.3097 Accepted
support
6. Implementation Cost -1.8142 ― 1.8532 Accepted
7. Perception -2.6610 ― 0.4290 Accepted

Source: Researcher’s Own Computational Results from Empirical Literatures

5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 CONCLUSION
The hypothesized mean difference “𝜇1 − 𝜇2 = 0", that summarizes the difference in effect of system advantage
to ABC adoption by SMEs, fell within the non-rejection region of the confidence interval of the computed mean
difference “-0.7031 ≤ 𝜇1 − 𝜇2 ≤ +1.5787. Hence, null hypothesis “𝐻0 : 𝜇1 = 𝜇2 " was accepted, signifying that
the perceived system advantage had more or less the same effect to ABC adoption by SMEs operating in both
developed and developing countries. Likewise, the hypothesized mean difference “𝜇1 − 𝜇2 = 0", that

www.researchjournali.com
Researchjournali’s Journal of Accounting
Vol. 8 | No. 6 December | 2020 9

summarizes the difference in effect of system complexity to ABC adoption by SMEs, fell within the non-
rejection region as well of the confidence interval of the computed mean difference “-0.6415 ≤ 𝜇1 − 𝜇2 ≤
+2.1743. Hence, null hypothesis “𝐻0 : 𝜇1 = 𝜇2 " was accepted, signifying that the system complexity had more
or less the same effect to ABC adoption by SMEs operating in both developed and developing countries.

The system compatibility was found to produce the similar effects on adoption by the SMEs operating in both
the developed and developing countries, since the hypothesized mean difference “𝜇1 − 𝜇2 = 0" fell within the
non-rejection region of the confidence interval of the computed mean difference “-1.5651 ≤ 𝜇1 − 𝜇2 ≤ +1.5073.
The same conclusion was drawn to the effect of knowledge on system adoption by the SMEs operating in both
the developed and developing countries, by accepting null hypothesis “𝐻0 : 𝜇1 = 𝜇2 " whose value fell within
the non-rejection region as well of the confidence interval of the computed mean difference “-1.2348 ≤ 𝜇1 − 𝜇2
≤ +1.3996.

Furthermore, it was concluded that, the effects of management support, implementation cost and perception
were more or less the same in driving the SMEs operating in both the developed and developing countries to
adopting the ABC system in their operations. The conclusion was based on the comparison of the hypothetical
and computed mean differences of the variables. The null hypotheses “𝐻0 : 𝜇1 = 𝜇2 " of the three variables
were accepted, since the hypothesized mean difference “𝜇1 − 𝜇2 = 0" fell within the computed mean
differences “-1.6873 ≤ 𝜇1 − 𝜇2 ≤ +1.3097, “-1.8142 ≤ 𝜇1 − 𝜇2 ≤ +1.8532 and “-2.6610 ≤ 𝜇1 − 𝜇2 ≤ +0.4290
for management support, implementation cost and perception respectively.

5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
It was recommended that, the similar measures could be applied to elevate the rate of ABC adoption by the
SMEs in the developing countries, as it was the case for the contemporary SMEs in the developed countries.
This was basically viable, since the SMEs in both operational areas demonstrated the same level of system
acceptance and implementation when such driving factors like advantage, complexity, compatibility,
knowledge, management support, implementation cost and perception were taken into account.

However, since the studied factors are not the exhaustive list that cause the effect change on the rate of ABC
adoption by the SMEs, it was recommended that, further descriptive researches should be undertaken to study
the comparative effects of other factors. Such other factors that can be considered in the future studies include
but not limited to SMEs’ experience, business culture, product diversification, external influences like
competition imposed by rivalry and stakeholders’ interventions.

6. REFERENCES
Abusalama, F. (2008). Barriers to adopting activity-based Costing System (ABC): An Empirical Investigation Using Cluster analysis.
A PhD Thesis. Dublin Institute of Technology. Doi: 10.21427/D7701R.

www.researchjournali.com
Researchjournali’s Journal of Accounting
Vol. 8 | No. 6 December | 2020 10
Ahmad, K., Zabri, S., & Teng, N. (2017). The Implementation of Activity-Based Costing in Malaysian Small and Medium-Sized
Enterprises. Advanced Science Letters, 23(4), 3170 3173. Doi: 10.1166/asl.2017.7692.
Aldukhil, Y. (2012). Developing and Testing a Model of Successful Adoption of Activity-Based Costing. A PhD Thesis. Victoria
University, Australia.
Amir, A., Anzair, S., & Amiruddin, R. (2016). Cost Management, Entrepreneurship and Competitiveness of Strategic Priorities for
Small and medium Enterprises. Elsevier: Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 219(2016), 84-90.
Anand, M., Sahay, B., & Saha, S. (n.d). Activity-Based Cost Management Practices in India: An Empirical Study. Retrieved from
polfs.semanticscholar.org
Askarany, D., Brierley, J., & Yazdifar, H. (2012). The Effect of Innovation Characteristics on Activity-based Costing Adoption. Int. J.
Managerial and Financial Accounting, 4(3), 291-313.
Babu, A., & Masum, M. (2019). Crucial Factors for the Implementation of Activity-Based Costing System: A Comprehensive Study of
Bangladesh. ABC Research Alert, 7(1), 20-27.
Bhandari, S. (2013). Status of Activity Based Costing System in Selected Dairy Industries of Nepal. Tribhuvan University Journal,
XXVIII(1-2), 291-300.
Borad, S. (2019). Activity Based Costing. Retrieved from efinancemanagement.com/costing-terms.
Botha, G., & Toit, E. (2017). The Adoption of Activity-Based Costing in Private Health Care Facilities in South Africa. Journal of
Economic and Financial Sciences, 10(2), 338-355.
Chan, M. (2019). Challenges for Small-to-Medium Sized Enterprises. Retrieved from unleashedsoftware.com
Cherry, K. (2019). Social Comparison Theory in Psychology. Retrieved from verywellmind.com
Ciftci, I. (2010). Summary of Classical Organization Theory. Retrieved from studylib.net
Cordos , I., Pete, S., & Cardos, V. (2012). An Overview on the Adoption and Implementation of Activity-Based Costing in Practice.
Romanian Journal of Economics, Institute of National Economy, 35(2), 185-200.
Dokoushkani, F. (2014). How Can I Convert Different Point Likert Scales for All Questionnaires in a Survey so that They are the Same?
Research Group of Environment and Human Studies. Retrieved from researchgate.net.
Dorde, K., & Vladan, K. (2013). Activity-based Costing as an Information Basis for an Efficient Strategic Management process.
Economic Annals, 58(197), 95-119. Doi: org/10.2298/EKA1397095K.
Drury, C. (2017). Management and Cost Accounting (10th ed.). Cengage Learning. United Kingdom.
Dubihlela, J., & Rundora, R. (2014). Employee Training, Managerial Commitment and the Implementation of Activity-Based Costing:
Impact on Performance of SMEs. International Business & Economics Research Journal, 13(1).
Eferakeya, I. (2017). Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) and Adoption of Management Accounting in Nigeria. Journal of Social
and Management Sciences, 11(2), 1 - 16.
EU SME Centre (2019). SMEs in China: Policy Environment Report. European Union, Beijing, China.
Festinger, L. (1954). A Theory of Social Comparison Processes. Human Relations: SAGE Journals, 7(2). Doi:
org/10.1177/001872675400700202.
Fungai, K. (2018). An Analysis of the SME Companies in the Manufacturing Sector, Clearly Indicate to What Extent the Microfinance
Institutions have Supported them and What Challenges are Being Faced by Microfinance Institutions in Dealing with these SMEs? Case
of Harare. Doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.12221.97769.
Hamad, F., Yousif, M., & Fatehaerrhman, E. (2020). Availability of the Fundamental Factors for Adoption of Activity-Based
Costing/Manufacturing (ABC/M) at Saudi Universities. International Journal of Accounting Research, 4(4).
Joseph, C., & Piorce, R. (2019). Factors Influencing Non-adoption of Activity Based Costing in Small and Medium Enterprises in the
Technological Era: An Empirical Investigation among Indian Firms. International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering
(IJRTE), 8(1).

www.researchjournali.com
Researchjournali’s Journal of Accounting
Vol. 8 | No. 6 December | 2020 11
Kenton, W. (2020). Manufacturing: Fundamental Analysis. Retrieved from www.investopedia.com/terms/m/m.
Kim, T. (2015). T Test as a Parametric Statistic. Korean Journal of Anesthesiology, 60(6), 540-546.
Kim, Y. (2017). Activity Based Costing for Construction Companies (1st ed.). John Wiley & Sons Ltd, West Sussex, United Kingdom.
Kocakulah, M., Foroughi, A., Stott, A., & Manyoky, L. (2017). Activity-Based Costing: Helpning Small and Medium-Sized Firms
Achieve a Competitive Edge in the Global Marketplace. Journal of Accounting & Marketing, 6(3). Doi: 10.4172/2168-9601.1000245.
Maduekwe, C. (2015). The Usage of Management Accounting Tools by Small and Medium Enterprises in Cape Metropole, South
Africa. Degree Dissertation, Cape Peninsula, South Africa.
Mahal, I., & Hossain, A. (2015). Activity-Based Costing (ABC) – An Effective Tool for Better Management. Research Journal of
Finance and Accounting, 6(4), 66-73.
Manivannan, S. (2019). The Success and Failure of Activity-Based Costing Systems. Multimedia University, Malaysia.
Michinov, E., & Michinov, N. (2001). The Similarity Hypothesis: A Test of the Moderating Role of Social Comparison Orientation.
European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 549-555. Doi: 10.1002/ejsp.78
Miller-Nobles, I., Mattison, B., & Matsumura, E. (2018). Horngren’s Financial & Managerial Accounting (6 th ed.). Pearson, London,
United Kingdom.
Mohammed, S. (2019). Usage and Impact of activity Based Costing (ABC) Technique on the Performance of Selected SMEs in Lagos
State, Nigeria. International Journal of Operational Research in Management, Social Sciences & Education, 5(1).
Msomi, M., Ngibe, M., & Nyide, C. (2019). Factors Influencing the Adoption of Management Accounting Practices (MAPs) by
Manufacturing Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) in Durban, Kwazulu – Natal. International Journal of Entrepreneurship, 23(4).
Muli, D. (2019). Determinants of Financial Performance of Processing Small and Medium Enterprises in Kitui County. Masters
Dissertation, South Eastern Kenya University. Retrieved from http://repository,seku.ac.ke/handle/123456789/4467.
Nair, S., & Tan, X. (2018). Factors Influencing the Implementation of activity-Based Costing: A Study on Malaysian SMEs.
International Business research, 11(8).
Neto, H., Agostinho, F., Almeida, C., Garcia, R., & Giannetti, B. (2018). Activity-Based Costing Using Multicriteria Drivers: An
Accounting Proposal to Boost Companies Toward Sustainability. Frontiers in Energy Research, 6(36). Doi: 10.3389/fenrg.2018.00036.
Ngibe, M., & Lekhanya, L. (2019). Critical Factors Influencing Innovative Leadership in Attaining Business Innovation: A Case of
Manufacturing SMEs in Kwazulu-Natal. International Journal of Entrepreneurship, 23(2).
Onday, O. (2016). Classical Organization Theory: From Generic Management of Socrates to Bureaucracy of Weber. International
Journal of Business and management Review, 4(1), 87-105.
Ozyurek, H., & Yilmaz, M. (2015). Application of Costing System in the Small and Medium Sized Enterprises (SME) in Turkey.
International Journal of economics and management Engineering, 9(1), 389-397. Doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1099848.
Pietrzak, Z., Wnuk-Pel, T., & Christaustkas, C. (2020). Problems with Activity-Based Costing Implementation in Polish and Lithuanian
Companies. Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics, 31(1), 26 – 38.
Quinn, M., Elafi, O., & Selesho, J. (2017). Determinants of and Barriers to the Adoption of Activity-Based Costing for Manufacturing
SMEs in South Africa’s Emfuleni Municipality. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5(3), 30 – 35.
Rababah, A., & Fadzil, F. (2012). Adoption and Implementation of Activity-based Costing System in Jordanian Manufacturing
Companies. Journal of accounting and Auditing: research & Practice, 2012(349927). Doi: 10.51.5171/2012.349927.
Ramezani, A. (2015). Barriers to Implementing Activity-Based Costing in Listed Companies on Tehran Stock Exchange. ICT Business,
Economic and Finance, 2(2015), 27-34.
Raucci, D., & Lepore, D. (2020). A Simplified Activity-Based Costing Approach for SMEs: The Case of an Italian Small Road
Company. European Research Studies Journal, XXIII(I), 198-214.
Rios-Manriquez, M., Colomina, C., & Pastor, M. (2014). Is the Activity-based Costing System a Viable Instrument for Small and
Medium Enterprises? The Case of Mexico. Elsevier: Estudios Gerenciales, 30(132), 220-232.

www.researchjournali.com
 Researchjournali’s Journal of Accounting
Vol. 8 | No. 6 December | 2020 12
Rundora, R., & Selesho, J. (2014). Determinants of and Barriers to the Adoption of Activity-Based Costing for Manufacturing SMEs in
South Africa’s Emfuleni Municipality. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5(3).
Samwel, V. (2016). Challenges Facing Employees’ Career Development: The Case of Medical Stores Department Staff. Masters
Dissertation, The Open University of Tanzania. Retrieved from repository.out.ac.tz.
Shafritz, J., Ott, J., & Jang, Y. (2016). Classics of Organization Theory (8 th ed.). Cengage Learning, United States.
Shah, S., Jamuludin, K., Talib, H., & Yusof, S. (2019). Integrated Quality Enviornmental Management Implementation in Food
Processing SMEs: A Case Study of a Developing Country. The TQM Journal, 31(5), 740-757. Doi: org/10.1108/TQM-11-2018-0166.
Soekardan, D. (2016). An Analysis of activity Based Costing: Between Benefit and Cost for its Implementation. International Journal
of Scientific & Technology Research, 5(6).
Somapa, S., Cools, M., & Dullaert, W. (2012). Unlocking the Potential of Time-Driven Activity Based Costing for Small Logistic
Companies. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 15(5).
Tabitha, N., & Ogungbade, O. (2016). Cost Accounting Techniques Adopted by Manufacturing and Service Industry within the Last
Decade. International Journal of Advances in Management Economics, 5(1), 48-61.
Tersoo, A. (2018). Types of Manufacturing Industries in Nigeria. Retrieved from legit.ng/1150344.
Ven, N. (2015). Envy and Admiration: Emotion and Motivation following Upward Social Comparison. Journal of Cognition and
Emotion, 31(1), 193-200. Doi: org/10.1080/02699931.2015.1087972.
Zarei, B., Rad, R., Ghapanchi, F., & Ghapanchi, A. (2015). A Heuristic Approach to the Adoption and Implementation of Activity Based
Costing Information Systems. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation, 18(1), 59-76.

www.researchjournali.com
View publication stats