Jacob Luttrell posted Apr 6, 2025 10:01 PM ✰Subscribe Currently our organization is starting to fall behind delivery targets. We have an on-time delivery target of 95% every month. This past month despite working overtime we have only achieved an 85% on time delivery rate. To increase capacity, we need to hire more employees. The organization has three options, we can look at the situation optimistically and assume that the high number of orders will keep flowing in and we can hire more staff to accommodate the higher-than-normal orders. We can take a pessimistic approach and assume that this is a temporary condition and that order levels will go back to normal any time and we can choose not to hire additional staff. We can also look at the situation realistically and realize that we do not know if the order numbers will go up or down and we can hire temporary workers that will give us the flexibility to keep them or not depending on the level of future orders. I think the realistic approach is how I would handle this situation. It gives the organization the flexibility to deal with low or high order numbers without making staffing commitments. If we choose to be optimistic or pessimistic we would commit to either hiring someone or not hiring someone and we may have to let someone go that we didn't need, or we may continue to have later and later delivery times until we acknowledge we made the wrong decision and hire someone anyway. Hiring a temporary worker is a more socially responsible way of approaching the situation and eliminates the factor of not knowing the status of future orders. PEER REPLY 1: Choose a classmate's Main Post and review their decision making process. 1. Choose a risk level for each of the states of nature (assign a probability value to each). 2. Explain why each risk level is chosen. 3. Which alternative do you believe would be the best based on the maximum EMV? 4. Do you feel determining the expected value with perfect information (EVWPI) is worthwhile in this situation? Why or why not?