De volta para o futuro: uma análise dos projetos de melhoria nos sistemas produtivos a partir da contabilidade dos ganhos

Abstract

This study aimed to assess to what extent and under which conditions investment decisions in improvement projects—and their respective outcomes—would differ when analyzed through the lens of throughput accounting, in contrast to traditional cost accounting. To achieve this objective, a two-stage methodological approach was adopted: (i) a Systematic Literature Review (SLR), grounded in the Literature Grounded Theory (LGT), which mapped key methods and existing gaps in the selection and prioritization of improvement projects; and (ii) a single-case study with counterfactual analysis, conducted in an auto parts manufacturing company and involving four implemented projects. The analysis applied both absorption costing and throughput accounting retroactively using real project data. Financial indicators such as Net Present Value (NPV), Payback Period, and Decision Adherence Rate (DAR) were employed, along with a counterfactual sensitivity analysis of the project assumptions. Results indicated that throughput accounting demonstrated a higher alignment between pre-investment decisions and post-implementation outcomes (DAR of 60% compared to 40% for absorption costing), lower sensitivity to assumption changes (40% project reclassification versus 60%), and greater suitability for contexts involving intensive internal manufacturing processes. The main contributions of this study are: (i) the contextual delineation of throughput accounting’s superiority, particularly in high-transformation manufacturing environments; and (ii) the introduction of the concept of decisional sensitivity to assumptions, highlighting throughput accounting’s robustness in uncertain scenarios. This research advances theoretical understanding of the application of the Theory of Constraints (TOC) to project portfolio management and offers practical implications for resource allocation decisions in production systems.