Empirical validity of the claim that overhead costs are driven not by production volume but by transactions resulting from production complexity is examined using data from 32 manufacturing plants from the electronics, machinery, and automobile components industries. Transactions are measured using number of engineering change orders, number of purchasing and production planning personnel, shop-floor area per part, and number of quality control and improvement personnel. Results indicate a strong positive relation between manufacturing overhead costs and both manufacturing transactions and production volume. Most of the variation in overhead costs, however, is explained by measures of manufacturing transactions, not volume.

Using a field study approach, we examine two competing perspectives on direct labor variance reporting: some argue that direct labor variance reporting is costly and cumbersome, and should be eliminated; whereas others contend that without direct labor variance information, managers will not be able to monitor workers effectively, causing workers to shirk and worker productivity to decline. Specifically, we investigate the productivity and quality impacts of eliminating direct labor variance reporting with panel data containing 36 months of data from seven experimental plants that eliminated direct labor variance reporting and 11 control plants that did not. The experimental plants experienced a significant decline in labor productivity compared to the control plants. Also, the experimental plants showed an improvement in product quality, indicating that workers reallocate their efforts to other tasks as a result of the change in the information set available to evaluate them.