This study introduces the methods to apply and develop the integrated Cost of Quality (COQ) and Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing (TDABC) model for seeking not only quality improvement but also reduction of overhead cost. Inefficient and uneconomical COQ activities can be identified by using time driver which also maximizes the quality improvement for Prevention-Appraisal- Failure (PAF) quality costs. In contrast, reduction of the indirect cost of unused capacity resource using Quality Cost Capacity Ratio (QCCR) of TDABC minimizes overhead cost for COQ activities. In addition, linkage between Overall Equipment Effective (OEE) and Time Driver develops the integrated system of Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) and TDABC model. Lean OEE maximizes when an Unused Time (UT) of TDABC that are TPM losses and lean wastes reduces whereas the TPM Cost Capacity Ratio (TCCR) of TDABC minimizes indirect cost for non-value added TPM activities. Numerical examples are derived to better understand the proposed COQ/TDABC model and TPM/TDABC model from this paper. From the proposed model, process mapping and time driver of TDABC are known to lessen indirect cost from general ledger of comprehensive income statement with a better quality innovation and improvement of equipment.

The purpose of this study is to implement and develop the integrated Economic Value Added (EVA) and Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing (TDABC) model to seek both improvement of Net Operating Profit Less Adjusted Tax (NOPLAT) and reduction of Capital Charge (CC). Net Operating Profit Less Adjusted Tax (NOPLAT) can be maximized by reducing the indirect cost of an unused resource capacity increased by Cost Capacity Ratio (CCR) of TDABC. On the other hand, Capital Charge (CC) can be minimized by improving the efficiency of Invested Capital (IC) considered by Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC) of EVA. In addition, the integrated system of TDABC using Balance Scorecard (BSC) and EVA is developed by linking between the lagging indicators and the three leading indicators. The three leading indicators include customer, internal process and growth and learning perspectives whereas the lagging indicator includes NOPLAT and CC in terms of financial perspective. When the Critical Success Factor (CSF) of BSC is cascading as a cause and an effect relationship, time driver of TDABC and capital driver of EVA can be used efficiently as Key Performance Indicator (KPI) of BSC. For a better understanding of the proposed EVA/TDABC model and BSC/EVA/TDABC model, numerical examples are derived from this paper. From the proposed model, the time driver of TDABC and the capital driver of EVA are known to lessen indirect cost from comprehensive income statement when increasing the efficiency of operating IC from the statement of financial position with unified KPI cascading of aligned BSC CSFs.