Individual-Location-Case-study

1 Individual Exercise: Location Mini Case Study Supply Chain Management August 26, 2021 Contents Problem and Causes……………………………………………………………………………..3-4 Causes……………………………………………………………………………………………..4

2 Analysis/Alternatives……………………………………………………………………………5-7 Solution………………………………………………………………………………………….7-8 Recommendation/Conclusion……………………………………………………………………..8 Reading Source/References……………………………………………………………………….9 Problem

4 4. Market Expansion: The company’s decision to expand its market presence in North America has triggered the need for an efficient distribution center in the Prairies. 5. Customer Satisfaction: The company’s commitment to providing excellent customer service requires a well-placed distribution center to meet customer demands promptly. 6. Transportation Efficiency: The company aims to ensure timely and cost-effective transportation of its products to customers, which requires careful consideration of the distribution center’s proximity to transportation corridors like TransCanada #1. 7. Infrastructure Utilization: The company’s decision needs to factor in the existing transportation infrastructure in each potential location to maximize its use for efficient distribution. 8. Operational Costs: Balancing the need for an optimal location with associated operating cost, including real estate prices, labor expenses, and potential taxes, is a key challenge. Identifying these underlying causes can help the company address the root issues ad make an informed decision that aligns with its goals and objectives. Analysis Three potential locations are being considered: Calgary, Regina, and Winnipeg. Additionally, the company needs to decide whether to locate within an inland port, such as CentrePort in Winnipeg or the Global Transportation Hub in Regina. To further arrive at a decision, I have made comparisons with the three alternatives or options for the company’s DC. Calgary, Alberta: Pros:

5  Strategic Transportation Hub: Calgary is strategically located near TransCanada #1, a major transportation corridor, facilitating distribution across the Prairies.  Access to Multiple Transport Modes: The city has a well-developed transportation network, including highways, railways (CP and CN), and an international airport.  Market Access: Calgary offers access to major markets in Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba, enhancing customer operations.  Labor Availability: Being a major city, Calgary provides a diverse labor pool for various distribution center operations. Cons:  Operating Costs: Operating costs, including real estate prices and labor, might be relatively higher compared to other locations.  Competition for Space: The availability of suitable real estate for a distribution center might be limited de to urban development.  Cost of living: The higher cost of living in Calgary could impact labor costs and employee retention. Regina, Saskatchewan: Pros:  Global Transportation Hub: Regina’s Global Transportation Hub offers intermodal connectivity and streamlined customs processes.  TransCanada #1 Access: Proximity to TransCanada #1 provides good transportation access.

7 Evaluation Table 1 Criteri a Weigh t Criteria Description Alternativ e 1 Alternativ e 2 Alternativ e 3 Calgary Regina Winnipeg 1 0.3 Proximity to TransCanada #1 1.2 1 0.9 2 0.2 Transportation Infrastructure 1 0.5 0.8 3 0.2 Geographical Coverage 1.1 0.9 1 4 0.1 Costs 0.9 1 1 5 0.1 Inland Port Evaluation 1 0.8 0.7 6 0.1 Market Access 1 0.4 0.4 Totals 1 6.2 4.6 4.8 Solution Considering the analysis above, the recommended solution is to establish the DC in Calgary, Alberta, without locating within an inland port. Below are my justifications: 1. Proximity to TransCanada #1: Calgary is strategically positioned near TransCanada #1, providing easy access to major transportation corridor. 2. Geographical Coverage: Calgary’s central location within the Prairies enables efficient coverage across Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba. 3. Transportation Infrastructure: Calgary boasts a well-developed transportation network, including highways, railways (CP and CN), and an international airport.

8 4. Inland Port Evaluation: While CentrePort in Winnipeg and the Global Transportation Hub in Regina offer advantage, Calgary’s existing infrastructure minimizes the need for an inland port. 5. Costs: While Calgary’s operating costs might be higher than some other locations, the benefits of its infrastructure and connectivity outweigh the potential cost difference. 6. Market Access: Calgary provides excellent access to major markets in the Prairies, contributing to efficient distribution. Recommendation and Conclusion The recommendation is to to select Calgary for the DC location. Calgary’s strategic position near TransCanada #1, strong transportation infrastructure, and access to major markets align with the company’s goals. The decision doesn’t necessitate an inland port due to Calgary’s established infrastructure. In conclusion, by strategically positioning the DC in Calgary, the company can efficiently serve customers in the Prairies and create a foundation for successful expansion in North America.