Operations & Supply Chain Management for the 21st Century

By Ken Boyer & Rohit Verma

• Home
• About
• RSS

OM Blog: July 7, 2010

By Ken Boyer, Fisher College of Business and Rohit Verma, Cornell University

Authors: Operations and Supply Chain Management for the 21^st Century, 2009, Southwestern Cengage Publishing

The early weeks of July include the famous Tour de France, which Lance Armstrong is trying to win for, what, the millionth time?  There are numerous other cycling events around the world.  In its second year, the Pelotonia is a grassroots bike tour with one goal: to end cancer. Pelotonia raises money for innovative and life saving cancer research at The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center – James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute. Driven by the passion of its cyclists and volunteers, and their family and friends, Pelotonia’s annual cycling experience will be a place of hope, energy and determination. Pelotonia proudly directs 100% of every dollar raised to research. It is a community of people coming together to chase down cancer and defeat it.

    

        A noble purpose and a fun event for the ~3000 participants that ride – but what does this have to do with managing operations?  A lot.  Let’s start with a list of volunteer opportunities from the Pelotonia website:

• Pre-Event Course Preparation
• Expo Area Setup
• Site Logistics
• Food and Beverage Service
• Registration / Information Tables
• Bike Maintenance
• Communications Crew
• Road Crew/Support Vehicles
• Bike Corral & Storage
• Bag Check & Luggage Management
• Merchandise Sales
• Site Beautification

There is another link that describes volunteer opportunities in detail.  There is a mechanical crew that provides mechanical assistance to riders along the route.  There is a luggage management team to organize transportation, delivery and tracking of riders’ baggage during the event.  There is a route signage team that puts up route signs at the beginning of the event and then takes them down on completion.  I hope this team is good with its GPS – imagine hundreds of lost, hot and tired riders!

            Putting together an event like this requires excellent project management, careful inventory management (remember those luggage bags and imagine trying to get all of them to the right place – plus food management, signs, parts etc.), scheduling and numerous other activities.  The Pelotonia is sponsored by Huntington Bank, the Limited Brands foundation and Peggy and Richard Santulli.  This group has committed $8 million in funding over five years so that 100% of funds raised by riders go directly to support cancer research.  The thousands of riders and volunteers raised $4.5 million in 2009 and are hoping to better that amount in 2010.  So, grab your bike, or find a rider to sponsor – it is for a great cause!

 

Sponsor a Pelotonia Rider:

• http://www.pelotonia.org/ride/about.jsp

Ten Most American Cars: Global supply chains are here to stay and expand.

CNNMoney.Com recently published a list of ten most American cars. The list contains ranking of cars based on the percentage of parts they used are built in the United States. The list includes five car models with either “Toyota” or “Honda” brand name. If a similar list were put together (say) 15 or 20 years ago, I am very sure that we would have only seen cars made by the big three US automobile corporations.

Car	Assembly Location	% U.S. Made Parts
Toyota Camry	Georgetown KY and Lafayette, ID	80%
Honda Accord	Maryville, Ohio and Lincoln, Ala.	75%
Ford Escape	Kansas City, Kansas	90%
Ford Focus	Wayne, Michigan	90%
Chevrolet Malibu	Kansas City, Kansas	75%
Honda Odyssey	Lincoln, Ala.	75%
Dodge Ram 1500 Quad and Crew Cab	Warren, Michigan	76%
Toyota Tundra	San Antonio, Texas	80%
Jeep Wrangler	Toledo, Ohio	79%
Toyota Sienna	Princeton, Indiana	85%

Source: http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2010/autos/1006/gallery.american_made/index.html

While these results may not be surprising to some readers, I wonder how the list will change in another ten to fifteen years. Will be see a TATA (India) or a Hyundai (Korea) on this list? And how will a similar list look like for (say) China, India, Russia, Brazil or other emerging markets?

When a guest stays at a hotel, they are, at-the-minimum, promised a clean, safe and comfortable accommodation. In addition, depending on the type of hotel, they may also have the opportunity to relax by the pool, workout in the fitness center, or get some work done at the business center. They may also choose to place a room service order for breakfast or visit the restaurant located within the facility.

When a patient is admitted to a hospital for a surgical procedure, then they too need a clean, safe and comfortable accommodation – in addition to appropriate clinical and medical care, of-course. In fact, depending on the nature of the hospital visit, the patient needs include many of the same aspects of a hotel stay such as food & beverage, service, and so on.

So to enhance their effectiveness, should the healthcare facilities focus on what they do best (i.e. clinical and medical care) and partner with hospitality firms to offer the services which are their core competence?

Does the above idea seem far-fetched? Maybe not so — we have witnessed outsourcing and supply-chain partnerships between manufacturing firms located around the world for the last several decades. Similarly, during the last few years, there have been many-many successful examples of service outsourcing and supply chain partnerships across many industries including financial services and other business processes.

Maybe hospitality and healthcare organizations should seriously consider active partnerships and build on each other’s strengths. Whenever possible, this approach will allow them to focus on their own competitive priorities and core competences and leave the rest on their respective supply chain partners. Still not convinced – take a look a this news article which describes how an orthopedic clinic has partnered with Hilton to provide a better care to its patients. A win, win for everyone … and 20% cheaper.

http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/health/92146304.html

By Ken Boyer, Fisher College of Business and Rohit Verma, Cornell University

Authors: Operations and Supply Chain Management for the 21^st Century, 2009, Southwestern Cengage Publishing

Its hard to turn on the TV or access the internet right now without hearing something about the huge oil spill from the Deepwater Horizon oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico.  On April 20, 2010 the rig had a huge blowout, blew up, caught on fire and sank.  The blowout killed 11 workers, will cost several billion dollars to stop and clean up, and is leaking between 10,000 and 250,000 barrels of oil per day into the Gulf, depending on which estimates you believe.  No matter your point of view, this is a disaster of tremendous magnitude.  But what does it have to do with operations management?  Read on to see a few linkages:

Quality Management: One of the central pieces of equipment in the disaster is the Blowout Preventer (BOP).  Essentially a very expensive Poke yoke or mistake proofer, the blowout preventer did not work.  For more information on how blowout preventers are supposed to work, go to the following link:

 

Project Management: A useful rule of thumb for major projects is that “anything that can go wrong, will go wrong” or “expect the unexpected.  According to a 60 Minutes interview with Mike Williams aired on May 16,   the initial estimate to drill the well, 5000 feet underwater and then 13,000 feet below the bottom of the ocean, was 21 days – at 1 $million a day.  But the well took twice that – 42 days.  With the schedule slipping, the BP manager ordered the drilling speed to increase.  Thousands or millions of project managers over the years have “crashed a project” – speeding up the pace or spending more money to finish earlier, yet often this comes with an increase in the risk of quality problems.  In this case, the Williams says “ going faster caused the bottom of the well to split open, swallowing tools and that drilling fluid called “mud.”  The original well had to be abandoned and a new one started.

Supply Chain Conflict: BP was the customer of a company named Transocean, which contracted to drill the well.  When things get outsourced, there is often tension and competing objectives.  According to Mike Williams and CBS:

“In the hours before the disaster, Deepwater Horizon’s work was nearly done. All that was left was to seal the well closed. The oil would be pumped out by another rig later. Williams says, that during a safety meeting, the manager for the rig owner, Transocean, was explaining how they were going to close the well when the manager from BP interrupted.

“I had the BP company man sitting directly beside me. And he literally perked up and said ‘Well my process is different. And I think we’re gonna do it this way.’ And they kind of lined out how he thought it should go that day. So there was short of a chest-bumping kind of deal. The communication seemed to break down as to who was ultimately in charge,” Williams said.”

To see the entire 60 minutes interview, click on the following link.  See how many operational challenges can be seen.  Clearly, in hindsight, there were numerous decisions that should have been made differently.  Unfortunately, hindsight is 20/20 – in oil rig drilling it is hard to determine the proper course of action in the moment.

 

 

 

Sources:

• http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/16/60minutes/main6490197.shtml?tag=currentVideoInfo;segmentTitle
• Video of Mike Williams discussing the BP oil disaster on CBS 60 Minutes: 
• http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6490348n&tag=related;photovideo

May 16, 2010

By Ken Boyer, Fisher College of Business and Rohit Verma, Cornell University

Authors: Operations and Supply Chain Management for the 21^st Century, 2009, Southwestern Cengage Publishing

 

Virginia Mason Hospital in Seattle has employed aspects of the Toyota Production System to its healthcare procedures.  “At the end of the day, the Toyota production system is all about the customer,” said Dr. Gary Kaplan, the CEO of Virginia Mason Hospital. “For us the patient.”

After a coincidental meeting with Ian Black, the then lean director of Boeing, Gary Kaplan, CEO of Virginia Mason, became convinced that lean production was the solution. In 2002, Kaplan and a team of executives and managers began annual trips to Japan to study at the Shinjijutsu International Center, one of the world leaders in the Toyota production system. On their return, staff immediately put into practice what they had learned and the benefits of implementing this new way of managing hospitals and patient care. Gains in productivity freed up 77 full-time equivalents (the number of full-time employees) with many being reassigned work in the newly developed lean promotion office. Defects in patient care reduced by 47 per cent while kaikaku workshops (see box) saved the hospital over US $12m during the period 2002 to 2004.

One change made in just five days using the kaikaku technique concerned the delay between a doctor’s referral to a specialist and the first consultation. By examining the process closely it was found that the secretaries, whose job it was to arrange these referrals, were not needed. Instead the doctor would page or text the consultant the instant he decided a specialist was required. This specialist then had to respond in ten minutes, even if just to confirm receipt of the text. Delays in referral to treatment dropped by 68 per cent as a consequence.

On another occasion, staff in the radiation oncology department began an exercise looking at and mapping out the value stream with the intention of eliminating all the waste they could find. Due to the removal of these unnecessary non-value adding activities, which only soaked up resources, the time a patient spent in the department fell from three quarters of an hour to just 15 minutes.

Kaplan takes staff to Toyota’s factories in Japan every year and practices what the car maker preaches. Just as the automaker’s executives spend part of each day on the factory floor, Kaplan tours the hospital daily looking for problems and solutions. Everyone is encouraged to look for changes to make work more efficient. Nurses developed ways to spend most of their time with patients instead of at the nursing station.  How?  COWs – short for Computers on Wheels.

At a meeting each week the staff reviews the results of what Toyota calls “Rapid Process Improvement Workshops,” looking for ways to increase efficiency.

In their four day workshop, with the help of a home video camera, the staff of one clinic acted out what happens to a new patient. They came up with 10 things they would start doing differently immediately.

Virginia Mason reached out to area employers like COSTCO and asked them what they needed most from hospital visits.

“I care about quick treatment,” said Katrina Zittnick with Costco. “Immediate appointments, the right treatment at the traumatic, acute time.”

So at Virginia Mason’s back clinic there were dramatic changes, where treatment time was cut from an average of 66 days to 12.

 

The application of lean techniques is expanding in healthcare.  Britain’s National Health Service (NHS) is getting in on the act:

The NHS has been slower to fully embrace lean thinking but is now rapidly making up for lost time. Last January saw the first lean healthcare forum in Birmingham and a second was held in June. Chaired by author and prominent lean thinker Dan Jones, these forums have helped explain and consolidate lean knowledge.

One NHS organisation that has begun the lean journey is Bolton Hospitals NHS Trust. Under the direction of CEO David Fillingham lean has found its way into every department and management decision, reducing waste wherever it occurs and adding value to each step along the patients’ care pathway. Staff too have become more motivated and focused on providing quality care to patients, with each employee responsible for analysing what they do and how they can do it better.

Lean has also been successful in decreasing the length of time inpatients stay in the hospital from an average of 34.6 days to just 23.5. The principal method for bringing about these changes involved looking at the whole supply chain’s value stream as the patient travelled along his or her unique care pathway. Often, in organisations, change happens in a piecemeal fashion with separate departments initiating changes independently.

A lean approach, on the other hand, requires departments to consider from the start their positions in the supply chain and any impact their changes will make on the whole. By ensuring that all the necessary supporting services, such as health records, pathology and secretarial services, work together and come into play at just the right time, the patient, after entering the hospital and beginning the journey, does not need to be kept waiting between processes.

The patient moves or, rather, flows through the system. As one set of processes or treatment finishes another clicks into place immediately.

The Bolton Hospitals and NHS trust has also enjoyed some dramatic changes which have been made to its accident and emergency department and pathology lab, which now operates in half the space it used previously.

As with the Virginia Mason hospital, Bolton has used the kaikaku technique for implementing rapid change. These multi-disciplinary workshops aim to fix a problem in just five days with the new system up and running by the following Monday.

The way it works is quite simple. On the first Monday, a team made up of the department under review, for example radiology, and members from various departments immediately before and after in the supply chain, get together and map the current processes.

The next day, the ideal future state map is drawn up with all wastes identified and removed leaving the following days free for implementation strategies. The idea is that by Friday all the problems will have been solved and a new method of working will have been discovered and implemented ready to begin the following week.

When redesigning the blood science laboratory at Bolton, the team even invaded the hospital’s car park and used cardboard cut-outs of the equipment to map their ideal positions in the lab. They have managed to decrease the number of physical steps it now takes a technician to process a patient’s blood sample. Fewer steps equal less walking time, which means a speedier service. Consequently, blood sample turnaround times have dropped by 90 per cent.

Discussion questions:

• Which techniques/tools of lean can you identify in the stories of Virginia Mason and Bolton Hospitals?
• What are the potential benefits of lean within healthcare?  Dangers?

Sources:

•  “A Carmaker As A Model For A Hospital?”, John Blackstone, CBS Evening News, June 9, 2009, (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/06/06/eveningnews/main5068218.shtml)
• http://www.nqic.org/publication/c4-1-125.shtml

Those days are long gone when an economy class passenger could check-in two pieces of luggage for free when flying a commercial airline in the United States. Almost all major airlines now charge $25 or more for each check-in piece of baggage (for example — see baggage rules for United Airlines here: http://www.united.com/page/article/0,6867,52481,00.html). By the way, one notable exception to this policy is Southwest Airlines – they love baggage (see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pl16hPa1qkQ)!

So why have all major airlines started charging for checked-in baggage? Clearly one motivation behind the new baggage policy is cost reduction due to reduced handing of luggage by the ground staff. Furthermore, if passengers start carrying less baggage then the net weight of an airplane will be reduced leading to lower fuel costs. On the other hand, if passengers continue to carry the same amount of baggage as before then the airline gets additional revenue due to checked-in baggage charges (see: http://blogs.wsj.com/middleseat/2010/05/06/ticket-change-fees-surpass-baggage-charges-at-some-airlines/) for additional details. Win, win both ways for the airlines – or maybe not.

Well, no action goes without reaction, and sometimes they cause many unintended consequences. So let’s discuss some consequences of checked-in baggage fee policy:

Marketplace Effects:

By charging a specific price for every component of a service, the airlines may be converting their market offerings from a “service” to more like a “commodity” and less like an “experience” (see Figure 3.9, page 81 from the textbook inserted below). Past research suggests that such a move will make it harder for airlines to differentiate themselves from each other ultimately leading them to charge only market prices and not premium prices.

Operational Effects:

Since checked-in baggage is not free, passengers are more likely to carry the maximum-size permitted baggage with them as a carry-on luggage. However the storage space in a passenger cabin typically does not have enough capacity to store high volume of luggage carried by majority of passengers. Therefore, during the busy periods and in nearly full-flights, this shortage of capacity requires that the airline check-in the excess baggage (for free!) during the last phase of the passenger boarding process. Such last-min onboard baggage checking means a lot of manual handing of luggage by airline personal in a short amount of time. It is quite possible that during the busy period such last-min loading of luggage may lead to flight delays. Furthermore, some of the last minute luggage may not get loaded on the airplane on time — leading to additional headaches for the passenger and additional costs for the airlines (see http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704423504575211960765813420.html?KEYWORDS=airline+baggage+#articleTabs%3Darticle) for a related discussion.

What Next?

Some recent news reports had suggested that now airlines will start charging for carry-on luggage too! Well, this new policy will solve some of the operational problems associated with passengers carrying too much carry-on luggage! At the same time, it will make airlines even more-so like a commodity product. Thankfully, many airlines have decided not to implement such policy (see — http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/19/business/19bags.html?src=busln).

OM Blog: April 24, 2010

By Ken Boyer, Fisher College of Business and Rohit Verma, Cornell University

Authors: Operations and Supply Chain Management for the 21^st Century, 2009, Southwestern Cengage Publishing

 

What percentage of the world had ever heard of the Eyjafjallajokull volcano in Iceland on April 13?  One percent?  I am guessing much less than that number.  But we have all heard of it now.

On April 14, this Icelandinc volcano with an extremely hard to pronounce name began erupting and spewing ash up to 9,000 meters in the air.  By April 15, the enormous clods of ash over Europe led to the cancellation of between 5,000 and 6,000 flights.  By April 17, air traffic in 21 European countries remains paralysed.   Almost 17,000 out of 22,000 scheduled flights are cancelled in Europe, an unprecedented situation.

Fast forward to April 24, airlines and travelers around the world are trying to “get back to normal”, but struggling with the aftermath of the worst disruption of air traffic since the September 11 terrorist attacks in the United States in 2001.  At its peak, the crisis affected 1.2 million passengers a day and 29 percent of all global aviation, according to the International Air Transport Association.  The International Air Transport Association estimated earlier this week that the Icelandic volcano crisis cost airlines more than $1.7 billion in lost revenue through Tuesday.

But air travel and stranded passengers are not the only victims of the Iceland volcano.  Over 1,000 tons of produce and flowers are sent daily from Kenya to Europe.  The continent accounts for 82% of Kenya’s exports in this perishable industry, but with air travel clogged by ash, farmers were faced with piles of wilted flowers and rotten produce.  The eruption was estimated to have cost Kenyan farmers up to $3 million a day.

 

Taverna Banfi’s is an upscale restaurant located in Ithaca, New York. Here is how the restaurant’s website describes its service offerings (see http://www.tavernabanfi.com/):

“Delightful and idyllic, Taverna Banfi is an enchanting Italian trattoria specializing in tantalizing Tuscan cuisine. Situated on the second floor of The Statler Hotel, with captivating views of the Cornell University campus, this warm, welcoming gathering place is renowned among the best Ithaca restaurants by hotel guests and locals alike. Savor an enticing menu featuring the freshest ingredients from nearby Finger Lakes region farms. Enjoy friendly, enthusiastic service, provided by our Hotel School students. Fun and flavorful, with a dash of sophistication, our signature Ithaca restaurant welcomes you for breakfast, lunch, and dinner — as well as the city’s best Sunday brunch.”

When visiting the restaurant for lunch, the guests are escorted by the welcoming staff to their table. On the way to the table, the host stops in front of a spectacular display of buffet items which includs salads, warm entrées, soup and desserts. After being comfortably seated, a server appears, takes beverage orders and then asks if the guests would like to help themselves to the buffet or would like to order from the menu (see lunch menu here: http://www.tavernabanfi.com/food/documents/7.08.09LunchMenu.pdf).

The full buffet is served for $17, soup and salad buffet (excluding hot entrées) costs $13. Both buffet options also include the guests’ choice of beverages. The prices for individual items of menu vary quite a bit: soups and salads cost $5 – $14; sandwiches cost $11 – $14; and Luncheon entrées cost $9 – $16. The guests also have to order beverages and any desserts separately.

Taverna Banfi’s is not unique in offering both buffet and menu ordering options to its guests. Many sit-down restaurants offer similar alternatives to its customers. From the customers’ point of view, buffet may offer much better value compared to similar items ordered from the menu individually. However the customers do have to self-serve, be willing to spend a higher amount for lunch, and be very hungry! At the same time, the customers do not have to wait to get their food as it has already been prepared in advance. Ordering from menu, on the other hand, allows guests to customize their order according to their individual needs, tastes and budget. However, the customers do have to wait for their food to be prepared.

Questions:

1. What are the labor and material costs associated with the two (buffet vs. ordering from menu) options?

2. What are the operational tradeoffs associated with Buffet (or made-to-stock production) and order-from-menu (made to order)? (Chapter 4: Process Design and Analysis)

3. While the items on the menu are decided a-priori but prepared on demand, the restaurant needs to decide what items to offer on its menu? How do they make this decision? (Chapter 3: New Product Development)

4. Is one option always more profitable for the restaurant? Or are there situations when one option will be better than the other? Why?

5. What are the capacity planning and labor scheduling implications associated with each of the two options? (Chapter 10)

6. Do you know of any all buffet restaurants? How about restaurants where the buffet is actually cheaper than ordering off the menu? How does this alter the scheduling of workers, production etc.

A sports fan in 2010 is able to follow their team in a number of ways – on television, on the internet, in a newspaper or on the radio.  What most sports fans don’t realize is that there is a huge amount of behind the scenes action in putting together a televised broadcase – an operations plays a key role.  Take a Columbus Bluejackets hockey game for the NHL.  A typical local (i.e. not national) Fox Sports Ohio broad cast of a game requires:

• Producer Travis Williams, director Christian Roberts and a crew of 25 people.
• 40 videoscreens
• 12 cameramen – and cameras

Director Roberts choreographs an intricate dance – telling cameramen what to shoot and when, choosing from multiple screen shots, deciding when to air commercials – after all someone does need to pay for the broadcast – and choosing when to air replays.  Consider the following descriptions of the scene behind the scenes from a recent Columbus Dispatch article:

      “Just ahead of the scheduled 7 PM start, Ed Milliken, sits in front of the 40 video screens and puts on headphones.  “Hello darlings” he says to announcers Davidge and Jeff Rimer.  As captain of the ship, Milliken spends the evening telling commentators how long to talk and giving them game-related insights to repeat.  He decides simultaneously what viewers will see – a wide look at the ice, a scan of fans, a close-up of a player.  Next to Milliken, director Christian Roberts makes the captain’s requests happen – guiding the 12 cameramen stationed throughout the arena.  Seven people in the truck – parked in the loading dock since 10 AM – handle the sound and graphics and track player statistics.

During the first period, Riner calls Jackets defenseman Anton Stralman by the wrong name – Thrashers defensemen Ron Hainsey – and the crew notices.”

This activity continues for nearly three hours.  Crew members look forward to breaks in the game so that they can air commercials and take a very short break.  Yet, they don’t get any for nearly 20 minutes – at one point joking “Can you throw some nickels out on the ice”.  Think about how hockey differs from basketball, football and baseball in terms of breaks in play and timeouts – this makes a smooth broadcast more challenging.  Late in the game, Roberts has to keep a careful eye on both the action, and where he expects the action to be:

“With five minutes left in the game and the Jackets up 2-0, Milliken starts talking about the stars of the game.  The clock reaches 2:30 and Roberts tells a cameraman to “sit on the white goalie”, referring to Johan Hedberg of the Thrashers.  Atlanta pulls Hedberg and fans at home see him skate off the ice”

In short, televising a sporting event requires a lot of work, many people and some good operations management.

 

Discussion questions:

• How do television stations/networks handle unexpected events or long delays in a game?  What is the equivalent of inventory for if something goes wrong?
• What elements of project management contribute to a smooth/good broadcast? (Chapter 8: Project Management)

Sources:

• “Ice, Camera, Action!” March 13, 2010 by Suzanne Hoholik, Columbus Dispatch.

In Chapter 12 of the textbook we provide detailed description of Toyota’s production system and their various innovative operations management practices.  Over the last three decades Toyota has received many awards for their excellent quality and performance. The marketplace has rewarded them with higher sales and market-share, ultimately making them the world’s largest producer of automobiles.  

So what went wrong in January 2010? Are the safety recalls due to faulty gas pedals an example of an isolated, one-time problem or are they symptoms of bigger long-term problems with Toyota and also the automobile industry?

Exhibit 1 shows some of the major recalls associated with the automobile industry during the past few years (source: The Wall Street Journal). The problems range from faulty seat belts, air bags, cruise control switches, ignition modules, sudden acceleration and sticky gas pedals. It is also interesting to note that many of the same problems are associated with multiple brands produced by different companies.

The above trends make us wonder about the root causes of quality problems.  Clearly the final responsibility for producing and delivery high-quality products resides with Toyota. So perhaps because of their exponential and sudden growth Toyota has relaxed their quality standards and is not paying the requisite attention to quality of incoming parts and raw-materials? Or perhaps it has changed its competitive priorities from quality to something else which has lead to these problems?

One could also argue that the root cause of these quality problems lie with the extreme and expanding practice of outsourcing common in the automobile industry. For example, were the gas pedals associated with safety recalls produced by Toyota or were they manufactured by a supplier company? Who was responsible for designing these components? Some recent reports published in various newspapers suggest that the safety recalls illustrate the problems associated with the entire production system – such as supplier involvement in product development (e.g. concurrent engineering), outsourcing, extreme modularity in design, lean production concepts, and also pressure to reduce costs of commodity components.

Questions

Q1. How has operations strategy and competitive priorities evolved in the automobile industry during the last 100 years (Hint – about a hundred years ago, one could buy any care from Ford as long as it was black!)? (Chapter 1)

 Q2. What are the positive and negative tradeoffs associated with outsourcing production functions to supplier organizations? (Chapters 12 and 14)

 Q3. What quality systems and procedures and systems should Toyota have followed to ensure that faulty automobiles are not delivered to the customers? (Chapters 2 and 11).

Exhibit 1

Next Page »

Search

• Categories

  • Capacity Planning
  • Forecasting
  • Improvement Methods
  • Inventory Management
  • Lean Enterprise
  • New Product Development
  • Operations Management
  • Process Design & Analysis
  • Quality Management
  • Strategy
  • Supply Chain
  • Supply Chain Management
  • Technology & Integrated Supply Management
  • Uncategorized

• Tags

• Recent Entries

  • Powering Pelotonia
  • Ten Most American Cars: Global supply chains are here to stay and expand.
  • Healthcare and Hospitality: emergence of a new “service” supply chain
  • The (Mis)Operations of the BP Oil Disaster
  • Lean cuts Healthcare Costs at Virginia Mason Hospital in Seattle
  • Unintended Consequences … of Airline Baggage Charges
  • A Volcano Melts World Operations
  • Buffet Restaurants: It’s not Always About Feeding You More – Sometimes it’s About Reducing Labor Costs and Challenges
  • Bluejackets Hockey: The Operations Behind Televising Live Hockey
  • Toyota’s safety recalls – Are they indicators of problems associated with quality management, outsourcing or simply indicators of setting inconsistent competitive priorities in operations strategy?

• The 21st Century Supply Chain

  • Who are the Kinaxis Bloggers? Part 2 - Monique Rupert
  • Black Swan???…what the heck is a Black Swan?
  • Why S&OP? Why now?
  • Behind the name: Who are the Kinaxis bloggers?
  • Pull vs. push manufacturing: Have you been stuck with an umbrella on a sunny day?
  • S&OP: Do you adapt the technology to the process, or the process to the technology?
  • 'Postponing' is not always a bad thing
  • The supply chain is strategic - are we drinking our own kool aid?
  • Planning and response: The two sides of the same coin
  • A new mindset for the S&OP team

• Archives

  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • November 2009
  • October 2009

• Blogroll

  • @ Supply Chain Management
  • Boyerverma.com
  • Global Supply Chain Solution
  • Logistics & Supply Chain Intelligence
  • Operational Risk
  • Simply Supply Chain
  • Supply Chain Matters
  • Supply Chain Network
  • Supply Excellence
  • The 21st Century Supply Chain
•