FFLI FIELD INTEGRATION ASSIGNMENT 1

docx

School

Fleming College *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

303

Subject

Industrial Engineering

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

5

Uploaded by EarlSeal6788

Report
FIELD INTEGRATION Assignment 1 Mukul Kainth FC1002060 mukul.kainth2060@myflemingcollegetoronto.ca
mukul.kainth2060@myflemingcollegetoronto.ca FC1002060 PART A Problem Statement: The main issue is that FFLI was started because its founder, Brett Simpson, couldn't find good exercise machines to help him recover from a back injury. The problem they address is the lack of advanced exercise machines for people who want to prevent injuries and recover from them. Company Background: FFLI started small, making exercise machines in Toronto. The founder, Brett Simpson, was a good golfer, and Raj Singh, a physiotherapist, helped with the fitness machines. Over time, they expanded to sell more fitness products and provide training and certifications. The decision of whether to "make" or "buy" in the context of FFLI (Fit for Life Inc.) should be based on a careful analysis of various factors. Considering the information provided in the case, some recommendations are: The rationality behind this decision can be explained as follows: 1. Core Competency: FFLI's core competency and expertise lie in providing high-quality exercise machines and fitness-related services, including coaching and training. They have established themselves as a trusted brand in the fitness industry. Manufacturing fitness machines may not be their core strength, and outsourcing could potentially allow them to focus on their core business areas. 2. Cost Efficiency: Outsourcing manufacturing can often result in cost savings. External suppliers may have specialized equipment, expertise, and economies of scale that can produce fitness machines at a lower cost compared to in-house production. This can help FFLI reduce its operational expenses and increase profitability. 3. Scalability: Outsourcing provides flexibility and scalability. As FFLI's business grows, they may need to adjust production levels accordingly. Outsourcing allows them to easily scale up or down production volumes based on market demand without the burden of maintaining a fixed in-house manufacturing capacity. 4. Risk Mitigation: Manufacturing involves various operational risks, such as equipment maintenance, quality control, and supply chain issues. Outsourcing can help transfer some of these risks to external suppliers who specialize in manufacturing, allowing FFLI to focus on its core business without being overly exposed to manufacturing-related challenges. 5. Quality Assurance: By partnering with reputable external suppliers, FFLI can ensure the quality of their fitness machines. Experienced suppliers may have stringent quality control processes in place, leading to higher product quality and customer satisfaction. 6. Resource Allocation: Outsourcing manufacturing can free up FFLI's internal resources, including personnel, time, and capital, which can be redirected toward marketing, research, and development, or improving their core fitness services. 7. Focus on Value-Added Activities: FFLI's value proposition primarily revolves around fitness coaching, training, and other fitness-related services. By outsourcing manufacturing, they can allocate more resources to enhance these value-added activities and provide a better experience for their customers. Overall, the rationality behind the Make vs. Buy decision for FFLI is to focus on their core competencies, reduce costs, manage risks, and improve the overall quality and scalability of their fitness machine business. This strategic move aligns with their goal of ensuring world-class fitness coaching and steady growth.
mukul.kainth2060@myflemingcollegetoronto.ca FC1002060 PART B (Excel uploaded for Part B) Part C To create a transportation model and calculate the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) for Fit for Life Inc. (FFLI), we need to make several assumptions and gather data. The following is a simplified hypothetical model and TCO calculation: Assumptions: 1. FFLI manufactures fitness machines and accessories in its own facility. 2. FFLI sources raw materials and components from various suppliers. 3. FFLI uses its own transportation for the delivery of raw materials, components, and finished products to its distribution centres and customers. 4. The transportation costs include fuel, vehicle maintenance, and driver salaries. 5. The TCO analysis considers a one-year period. 6. We will focus on a single distribution centre and a single transportation route for simplicity. Data: Annual transportation costs for delivering raw materials to the manufacturing facility: $100,000 Annual transportation costs for delivering components to the manufacturing facility: $50,000 Annual transportation costs for delivering finished products to the distribution centre: $60,000 Annual transportation costs for delivering products to customers $40,000 Fuel cost per mile: $0.40 Vehicle maintenance cost per year: $20,000 Driver salary per year: $50,000 Number of miles travelled per year for each transportation route: 10,000 miles for raw materials 5,000 miles for components 6,000 miles for products to the distribution centre 4,000 miles for customer deliveries Transportation Model
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
mukul.kainth2060@myflemingcollegetoronto.ca FC1002060 We will calculate the transportation costs for each route using the following formula: Transportation Cost = (Fuel Cost per Mile x Number of Miles) + Vehicle Maintenance Cost + Driver Salary 1. Transportation Cost for Raw Materials = ($0.40 x 10,000) + $20,000 + $50,000 = $4,000 + $20,000 + $50,000 = $74,000 2. Transportation Cost for Components = ($0.40 x 5,000) + $20,000 + $50,000 = $2,000 + $20,000 + $50,000 = $72,000 3. Transportation Cost for Finished Products to Distribution Centre = ($0.40 x 6,000) + $20,000 + $50,000 = $2,400 + $20,000 + $50,000 = $72,400 4. Transportation Cost for Customer Deliveries = ($0.40 x 4,000) + $20,000 + $50,000 = $1,600 + $20,000 + $50,000 = $71,600 Total Transportation Cost: Total Transportation Cost = Sum of all individual transportation costs Total Transportation Cost = $74,000 + $72,000 + $72,400 + $71,600 = $290,000 Total Cost of Ownership (TCO): TCO includes all costs associated with transportation over the year. TCO = Total Transportation Cost TCO = $290,000 This is a simplified example of a transportation model and TCO calculation for FFLI. The model and TCO analysis would be more complex, considering multiple distribution centres, routes, suppliers, and various cost components. It's essential for FFLI to conduct a comprehensive analysis with real- world data for more accurate results.
mukul.kainth2060@myflemingcollegetoronto.ca FC1002060 PART D (EXCEL UPLOADED FOR PART D) To evaluate the performance of suppliers for Fit for Life Inc. (FFLI), you can create a Key Performance Indicator (KPI) spreadsheet. Here are some common supplier performance KPIs and their formulas: KPI 1: On-Time Delivery Rate This KPI measures the percentage of on-time deliveries by suppliers. Formula: (Number of On-Time Deliveries / Total Number of Deliveries) * 100 KPI 2: Quality of Delivered Goods This KPI assesses the quality of goods received from suppliers. You may need to establish quality criteria for this. Formula: (Number of Acceptable Deliveries / Total Number of Deliveries) * 100 KPI 3: Lead Time Variability This KPI measures the variability in lead times for deliveries. Formula: Standard Deviation of Lead Times KPI 4: Cost Variance This KPI evaluates cost variances between agreed-upon prices and actual costs. Formula: (Actual Cost - Agreed Cost) / Agreed Cost * 100 KPI 5: Supplier Performance Score This KPI combines multiple factors to provide an overall score for each supplier. Formula: Supplier Performance Score = (Weighted On-Time Delivery Rate + Weighted Quality of Delivered Goods + Weighted Lead Time Variability - Weighted Cost Variance) In this formula, each KPI is given a weight based on its importance, and these weights should add up to 100%. You can adjust the weights to reflect the relative importance of each KPI to FFLI. KPI 6: Supplier Ranking This KPI ranks suppliers based on their performance score.