Pearson eText Principles of Operations Management: Sustainability and Supply Chain Management -- Instant Access (Pearson+)
11th Edition
ISBN: 9780135639221
Author: Jay Heizer, Barry Render
Publisher: PEARSON+
expand_more
expand_more
format_list_bulleted
Concept explainers
Question
Chapter 11.S, Problem 13P
Summary Introduction
To determine: The company that has the highest score.
Expert Solution & Answer
Want to see the full answer?
Check out a sample textbook solution
Students have asked these similar questions
Gulf Coast Electronics is ready to award contracts to suppliers for providing reservoir capacitors for use in its electronic devices. For the past several years, Gulf Coast Electronics has relied on two
suppliers for its reservoir capacitors: Able Controls and Lyshenko Industries. A new firm, Boston Components, has inquired into the possibility of providing a portion of the reservoir capacitors needed
by Gulf Coast.
The quality of products provided by Lyshenko Industries has been extremely high; in fact, only 0.5% of the capacitors provided by Lyshenko had to be discarded because of quality problems. Able
Controls has also had a high quality level historically, producing an average of only 1% unacceptable capacitors. Because Gulf Coast Electronics has had no experience with Boston Components, it
estimated Boston Components' defective rate to be 10%.
Gulf Coast would like to determine how many reservoir capacitors should be ordered from each firm to obtain 75,000 acceptable-quality…
Sean Willems has evaluated the vendors in Table S11.3 as well as F ricker V-Tech, the vendor in Problem( Referring to Problem S 11.1 2, Sean Willems, in additionto the two possible vendors evaluated in Table S11.3,has found a third possible vendor. He now wants to evaluate all three vendors using the weights in Table S 11 .3. He scores the third vendor, Fricker V-Tech, Ltd., as: Engineering Competence5, Process Capabili ty 5, Cost I, Quality 5, Performance to Schedule 4, and After-Sales Service I . Which vendor has the highest score? ),but the Quality Control Manager says that new da ta suggest thatSiemsen Systems, Inc.'s quality has deteriorated, a nd Siemsen should now score a 2 in the Quality category. Which of the three vendors now has the highest score?
Eagle Electric Repair wants to select a supplier based on total annual cost, consistent quality, and delivery speed. The following table shows the weights management assigned to each criterion (total of 100 points) and the scores assigned to each supplier 1Excellent = 5, Poor = 12. Which supplier should Eagle select given these criteria and scores?
Chapter 11 Solutions
Pearson eText Principles of Operations Management: Sustainability and Supply Chain Management -- Instant Access (Pearson+)
Ch. 11.S - Prob. 1DQCh. 11.S - Prob. 2DQCh. 11.S - Prob. 3DQCh. 11.S - Prob. 4DQCh. 11.S - Prob. 5DQCh. 11.S - Prob. 6DQCh. 11.S - Prob. 7DQCh. 11.S - Prob. 8DQCh. 11.S - Prob. 9DQCh. 11.S - Prob. 10DQ
Ch. 11.S - Prob. 1PCh. 11.S - Prob. 2PCh. 11.S - Prob. 3PCh. 11.S - Prob. 4PCh. 11.S - Prob. 5PCh. 11.S - Prob. 6PCh. 11.S - Prob. 7PCh. 11.S - Prob. 8PCh. 11.S - Prob. 9PCh. 11.S - Prob. 10PCh. 11.S - Prob. 11PCh. 11.S - Prob. 12PCh. 11.S - Prob. 13PCh. 11.S - Prob. 14PCh. 11.S - Your options for shipping 100,000 of machine parts...Ch. 11.S - If you have a third option for the data in Problem...Ch. 11.S - Prob. 18PCh. 11.S - Prob. 19PCh. 11.S - Prob. 20PCh. 11.S - Prob. 21PCh. 11.S - Prob. 22PCh. 11 - Prob. 1EDCh. 11 - Prob. 1DQCh. 11 - Prob. 2DQCh. 11 - Prob. 3DQCh. 11 - Prob. 4DQCh. 11 - Prob. 5DQCh. 11 - Prob. 6DQCh. 11 - Prob. 7DQCh. 11 - Prob. 8DQCh. 11 - What is CPFR?Ch. 11 - Prob. 10DQCh. 11 - Prob. 11DQCh. 11 - Prob. 12DQCh. 11 - Prob. 13DQCh. 11 - Prob. 14DQCh. 11 - Prob. 15DQCh. 11 - Prob. 16DQCh. 11 - Prob. 17DQCh. 11 - Prob. 1PCh. 11 - Hau Lee Furniture, Inc., described in Example 1 of...Ch. 11 - Prob. 3PCh. 11 - Prob. 4PCh. 11 - Prob. 5PCh. 11 - Prob. 6PCh. 11 - Prob. 7PCh. 11 - Prob. 8PCh. 11 - Prob. 9PCh. 11 - Prob. 10PCh. 11 - Prob. 11PCh. 11 - Prob. 1.1VCCh. 11 - Prob. 1.2VCCh. 11 - Prob. 1.3VCCh. 11 - Prob. 1.4VCCh. 11 - Prob. 2.1VCCh. 11 - Prob. 2.2VCCh. 11 - Prob. 2.3VCCh. 11 - Prob. 3.1VCCh. 11 - Prob. 3.2VCCh. 11 - Prob. 3.3VCCh. 11 - Prob. 3.4VC
Knowledge Booster
Learn more about
Need a deep-dive on the concept behind this application? Look no further. Learn more about this topic, operations-management and related others by exploring similar questions and additional content below.Similar questions
- Scenario 3 Ben Gibson, the purchasing manager at Coastal Products, was reviewing purchasing expenditures for packaging materials with Jeff Joyner. Ben was particularly disturbed about the amount spent on corrugated boxes purchased from Southeastern Corrugated. Ben said, I dont like the salesman from that company. He comes around here acting like he owns the place. He loves to tell us about his fancy car, house, and vacations. It seems to me he must be making too much money off of us! Jeff responded that he heard Southeastern Corrugated was going to ask for a price increase to cover the rising costs of raw material paper stock. Jeff further stated that Southeastern would probably ask for more than what was justified simply from rising paper stock costs. After the meeting, Ben decided he had heard enough. After all, he prided himself on being a results-oriented manager. There was no way he was going to allow that salesman to keep taking advantage of Coastal Products. Ben called Jeff and told him it was time to rebid the corrugated contract before Southeastern came in with a price increase request. Who did Jeff know that might be interested in the business? Jeff replied he had several companies in mind to include in the bidding process. These companies would surely come in at a lower price, partly because they used lower-grade boxes that would probably work well enough in Coastal Products process. Jeff also explained that these suppliers were not serious contenders for the business. Their purpose was to create competition with the bids. Ben told Jeff to make sure that Southeastern was well aware that these new suppliers were bidding on the contract. He also said to make sure the suppliers knew that price was going to be the determining factor in this quote, because he considered corrugated boxes to be a standard industry item. Is Ben Gibson acting legally? Is he acting ethically? Why or why not?arrow_forwardScenario 3 Ben Gibson, the purchasing manager at Coastal Products, was reviewing purchasing expenditures for packaging materials with Jeff Joyner. Ben was particularly disturbed about the amount spent on corrugated boxes purchased from Southeastern Corrugated. Ben said, I dont like the salesman from that company. He comes around here acting like he owns the place. He loves to tell us about his fancy car, house, and vacations. It seems to me he must be making too much money off of us! Jeff responded that he heard Southeastern Corrugated was going to ask for a price increase to cover the rising costs of raw material paper stock. Jeff further stated that Southeastern would probably ask for more than what was justified simply from rising paper stock costs. After the meeting, Ben decided he had heard enough. After all, he prided himself on being a results-oriented manager. There was no way he was going to allow that salesman to keep taking advantage of Coastal Products. Ben called Jeff and told him it was time to rebid the corrugated contract before Southeastern came in with a price increase request. Who did Jeff know that might be interested in the business? Jeff replied he had several companies in mind to include in the bidding process. These companies would surely come in at a lower price, partly because they used lower-grade boxes that would probably work well enough in Coastal Products process. Jeff also explained that these suppliers were not serious contenders for the business. Their purpose was to create competition with the bids. Ben told Jeff to make sure that Southeastern was well aware that these new suppliers were bidding on the contract. He also said to make sure the suppliers knew that price was going to be the determining factor in this quote, because he considered corrugated boxes to be a standard industry item. As the Marketing Manager for Southeastern Corrugated, what would you do upon receiving the request for quotation from Coastal Products?arrow_forwardThe Global Sourcing Wire Harness Decision Sheila Austin, a buyer at Autolink, a Detroit-based producer of subassemblies for the automotive market, has sent out requests for quotations for a wiring harness to four prospective suppliers. Only two of the four suppliers indicated an interest in quoting the business: Original Wire (Auburn Hills, MI) and Happy Lucky Assemblies (HLA) of Guangdong Province, China. The estimated demand for the harnesses is 5,000 units a month. Both suppliers will incur some costs to retool for this particular harness. The harnesses will be prepackaged in 24 12 6-inch cartons. Each packaged unit weighs approximately 10 pounds. Quote 1 The first quote received is from Original Wire. Auburn Hills is about 20 miles from Autolinks corporate headquarters, so the quote was delivered in person. When Sheila went down to the lobby, she was greeted by the sales agent and an engineering representative. After the quote was handed over, the sales agent noted that engineering would be happy to work closely with Autolink in developing the unit and would also be interested in future business that might involve finding ways to reduce costs. The sales agent also noted that they were hungry for business, as they were losing a lot of customers to companies from China. The quote included unit price, tooling, and packaging. The quoted unit price does not include shipping costs. Original Wire requires no special warehousing of inventory, and daily deliveries from its manufacturing site directly to Autolinks assembly operations are possible. Original Wire Quote: Unit price = 30 Packing costs = 0.75 per unit Tooling = 6,000 one-time fixed charge Freight cost = 5.20 per hundred pounds Quote 2 The second quote received is from Happy Lucky Assemblies of Guangdong Province, China. The supplier must pack the harnesses in a container and ship via inland transportation to the port of Shanghai in China, have the shipment transferred to a container ship, ship material to Seattle, and then have material transported inland to Detroit. The quoted unit price does not include international shipping costs, which the buyer will assume. HLA Quote: Unit price = 19.50 Shipping lead time = Eight weeks Tooling = 3,000 In addition to the suppliers quote, Sheila must consider additional costs and information before preparing a comparison of the Chinese suppliers quotation: Each monthly shipment requires three 40-foot containers. Packing costs for containerization = 2 per unit. Cost of inland transportation to port of export = 200 per container. Freight forwarders fee = 100 per shipment (letter of credit, documentation, etc.). Cost of ocean transport = 4,000 per container. This has risen significantly in recent years due to a shortage of ocean freight capacity. Marine insurance = 0.50 per 100 of shipment. U.S. port handling charges = 1,200 per container. This fee has also risen considerably this year, due to increased security. Ports have also been complaining that the charges may increase in the future. Customs duty = 5% of unit cost. Customs broker fees per shipment = 300. Transportation from Seattle to Detroit = 18.60 per hundred pounds. Need to warehouse at least four weeks of inventory in Detroit at a warehousing cost of 1.00 per cubic foot per month, to compensate for lead time uncertainty. Sheila must also figure the costs associated with committing corporate capital for holding inventory. She has spoken to some accountants, who typically use a corporate cost of capital rate of 15%. Cost of hedging currencybroker fees = 400 per shipment Additional administrative time due to international shipping = 4 hours per shipment 25 per hour (estimated) At least two five-day visits per year to travel to China to meet with supplier and provide updates on performance and shipping = 20,000 per year (estimated) The international sourcing costs must be absorbed by Sheila, as the supplier does not assume any of the additional estimated costs and invoice Sheila later, or build the costs into a revised unit price. Sheila feels that the U.S. supplier is probably less expensive, even though it quoted a higher price. Sheila also knows that this is a standard technology that is unlikely to change during the next three years, but which could be a contract that extends multiple years out. There is also a lot of hall talk amongst the engineers on her floor about next-generation automotive electronics, which will completely eliminate the need for wire harnesses, which will be replaced by electronic components that are smaller, lighter, and more reliable. She is unsure about how to calculate the total costs for each option, and she is even more unsure about how to factor these other variables into the decision. Calculate the total cost per unit of purchasing from Original Wire.arrow_forward
- The Global Sourcing Wire Harness Decision Sheila Austin, a buyer at Autolink, a Detroit-based producer of subassemblies for the automotive market, has sent out requests for quotations for a wiring harness to four prospective suppliers. Only two of the four suppliers indicated an interest in quoting the business: Original Wire (Auburn Hills, MI) and Happy Lucky Assemblies (HLA) of Guangdong Province, China. The estimated demand for the harnesses is 5,000 units a month. Both suppliers will incur some costs to retool for this particular harness. The harnesses will be prepackaged in 24 12 6-inch cartons. Each packaged unit weighs approximately 10 pounds. Quote 1 The first quote received is from Original Wire. Auburn Hills is about 20 miles from Autolinks corporate headquarters, so the quote was delivered in person. When Sheila went down to the lobby, she was greeted by the sales agent and an engineering representative. After the quote was handed over, the sales agent noted that engineering would be happy to work closely with Autolink in developing the unit and would also be interested in future business that might involve finding ways to reduce costs. The sales agent also noted that they were hungry for business, as they were losing a lot of customers to companies from China. The quote included unit price, tooling, and packaging. The quoted unit price does not include shipping costs. Original Wire requires no special warehousing of inventory, and daily deliveries from its manufacturing site directly to Autolinks assembly operations are possible. Original Wire Quote: Unit price = 30 Packing costs = 0.75 per unit Tooling = 6,000 one-time fixed charge Freight cost = 5.20 per hundred pounds Quote 2 The second quote received is from Happy Lucky Assemblies of Guangdong Province, China. The supplier must pack the harnesses in a container and ship via inland transportation to the port of Shanghai in China, have the shipment transferred to a container ship, ship material to Seattle, and then have material transported inland to Detroit. The quoted unit price does not include international shipping costs, which the buyer will assume. HLA Quote: Unit price = 19.50 Shipping lead time = Eight weeks Tooling = 3,000 In addition to the suppliers quote, Sheila must consider additional costs and information before preparing a comparison of the Chinese suppliers quotation: Each monthly shipment requires three 40-foot containers. Packing costs for containerization = 2 per unit. Cost of inland transportation to port of export = 200 per container. Freight forwarders fee = 100 per shipment (letter of credit, documentation, etc.). Cost of ocean transport = 4,000 per container. This has risen significantly in recent years due to a shortage of ocean freight capacity. Marine insurance = 0.50 per 100 of shipment. U.S. port handling charges = 1,200 per container. This fee has also risen considerably this year, due to increased security. Ports have also been complaining that the charges may increase in the future. Customs duty = 5% of unit cost. Customs broker fees per shipment = 300. Transportation from Seattle to Detroit = 18.60 per hundred pounds. Need to warehouse at least four weeks of inventory in Detroit at a warehousing cost of 1.00 per cubic foot per month, to compensate for lead time uncertainty. Sheila must also figure the costs associated with committing corporate capital for holding inventory. She has spoken to some accountants, who typically use a corporate cost of capital rate of 15%. Cost of hedging currencybroker fees = 400 per shipment Additional administrative time due to international shipping = 4 hours per shipment 25 per hour (estimated) At least two five-day visits per year to travel to China to meet with supplier and provide updates on performance and shipping = 20,000 per year (estimated) The international sourcing costs must be absorbed by Sheila, as the supplier does not assume any of the additional estimated costs and invoice Sheila later, or build the costs into a revised unit price. Sheila feels that the U.S. supplier is probably less expensive, even though it quoted a higher price. Sheila also knows that this is a standard technology that is unlikely to change during the next three years, but which could be a contract that extends multiple years out. There is also a lot of hall talk amongst the engineers on her floor about next-generation automotive electronics, which will completely eliminate the need for wire harnesses, which will be replaced by electronic components that are smaller, lighter, and more reliable. She is unsure about how to calculate the total costs for each option, and she is even more unsure about how to factor these other variables into the decision. Calculate the total cost per unit of purchasing from Happy Lucky Assemblies.arrow_forwardThe Global Sourcing Wire Harness Decision Sheila Austin, a buyer at Autolink, a Detroit-based producer of subassemblies for the automotive market, has sent out requests for quotations for a wiring harness to four prospective suppliers. Only two of the four suppliers indicated an interest in quoting the business: Original Wire (Auburn Hills, MI) and Happy Lucky Assemblies (HLA) of Guangdong Province, China. The estimated demand for the harnesses is 5,000 units a month. Both suppliers will incur some costs to retool for this particular harness. The harnesses will be prepackaged in 24 12 6-inch cartons. Each packaged unit weighs approximately 10 pounds. Quote 1 The first quote received is from Original Wire. Auburn Hills is about 20 miles from Autolinks corporate headquarters, so the quote was delivered in person. When Sheila went down to the lobby, she was greeted by the sales agent and an engineering representative. After the quote was handed over, the sales agent noted that engineering would be happy to work closely with Autolink in developing the unit and would also be interested in future business that might involve finding ways to reduce costs. The sales agent also noted that they were hungry for business, as they were losing a lot of customers to companies from China. The quote included unit price, tooling, and packaging. The quoted unit price does not include shipping costs. Original Wire requires no special warehousing of inventory, and daily deliveries from its manufacturing site directly to Autolinks assembly operations are possible. Original Wire Quote: Unit price = 30 Packing costs = 0.75 per unit Tooling = 6,000 one-time fixed charge Freight cost = 5.20 per hundred pounds Quote 2 The second quote received is from Happy Lucky Assemblies of Guangdong Province, China. The supplier must pack the harnesses in a container and ship via inland transportation to the port of Shanghai in China, have the shipment transferred to a container ship, ship material to Seattle, and then have material transported inland to Detroit. The quoted unit price does not include international shipping costs, which the buyer will assume. HLA Quote: Unit price = 19.50 Shipping lead time = Eight weeks Tooling = 3,000 In addition to the suppliers quote, Sheila must consider additional costs and information before preparing a comparison of the Chinese suppliers quotation: Each monthly shipment requires three 40-foot containers. Packing costs for containerization = 2 per unit. Cost of inland transportation to port of export = 200 per container. Freight forwarders fee = 100 per shipment (letter of credit, documentation, etc.). Cost of ocean transport = 4,000 per container. This has risen significantly in recent years due to a shortage of ocean freight capacity. Marine insurance = 0.50 per 100 of shipment. U.S. port handling charges = 1,200 per container. This fee has also risen considerably this year, due to increased security. Ports have also been complaining that the charges may increase in the future. Customs duty = 5% of unit cost. Customs broker fees per shipment = 300. Transportation from Seattle to Detroit = 18.60 per hundred pounds. Need to warehouse at least four weeks of inventory in Detroit at a warehousing cost of 1.00 per cubic foot per month, to compensate for lead time uncertainty. Sheila must also figure the costs associated with committing corporate capital for holding inventory. She has spoken to some accountants, who typically use a corporate cost of capital rate of 15%. Cost of hedging currencybroker fees = 400 per shipment Additional administrative time due to international shipping = 4 hours per shipment 25 per hour (estimated) At least two five-day visits per year to travel to China to meet with supplier and provide updates on performance and shipping = 20,000 per year (estimated) The international sourcing costs must be absorbed by Sheila, as the supplier does not assume any of the additional estimated costs and invoice Sheila later, or build the costs into a revised unit price. Sheila feels that the U.S. supplier is probably less expensive, even though it quoted a higher price. Sheila also knows that this is a standard technology that is unlikely to change during the next three years, but which could be a contract that extends multiple years out. There is also a lot of hall talk amongst the engineers on her floor about next-generation automotive electronics, which will completely eliminate the need for wire harnesses, which will be replaced by electronic components that are smaller, lighter, and more reliable. She is unsure about how to calculate the total costs for each option, and she is even more unsure about how to factor these other variables into the decision. Based on the total cost per unit, which supplier should Sheila recommend?arrow_forwardThe Global Sourcing Wire Harness Decision Sheila Austin, a buyer at Autolink, a Detroit-based producer of subassemblies for the automotive market, has sent out requests for quotations for a wiring harness to four prospective suppliers. Only two of the four suppliers indicated an interest in quoting the business: Original Wire (Auburn Hills, MI) and Happy Lucky Assemblies (HLA) of Guangdong Province, China. The estimated demand for the harnesses is 5,000 units a month. Both suppliers will incur some costs to retool for this particular harness. The harnesses will be prepackaged in 24 12 6-inch cartons. Each packaged unit weighs approximately 10 pounds. Quote 1 The first quote received is from Original Wire. Auburn Hills is about 20 miles from Autolinks corporate headquarters, so the quote was delivered in person. When Sheila went down to the lobby, she was greeted by the sales agent and an engineering representative. After the quote was handed over, the sales agent noted that engineering would be happy to work closely with Autolink in developing the unit and would also be interested in future business that might involve finding ways to reduce costs. The sales agent also noted that they were hungry for business, as they were losing a lot of customers to companies from China. The quote included unit price, tooling, and packaging. The quoted unit price does not include shipping costs. Original Wire requires no special warehousing of inventory, and daily deliveries from its manufacturing site directly to Autolinks assembly operations are possible. Original Wire Quote: Unit price = 30 Packing costs = 0.75 per unit Tooling = 6,000 one-time fixed charge Freight cost = 5.20 per hundred pounds Quote 2 The second quote received is from Happy Lucky Assemblies of Guangdong Province, China. The supplier must pack the harnesses in a container and ship via inland transportation to the port of Shanghai in China, have the shipment transferred to a container ship, ship material to Seattle, and then have material transported inland to Detroit. The quoted unit price does not include international shipping costs, which the buyer will assume. HLA Quote: Unit price = 19.50 Shipping lead time = Eight weeks Tooling = 3,000 In addition to the suppliers quote, Sheila must consider additional costs and information before preparing a comparison of the Chinese suppliers quotation: Each monthly shipment requires three 40-foot containers. Packing costs for containerization = 2 per unit. Cost of inland transportation to port of export = 200 per container. Freight forwarders fee = 100 per shipment (letter of credit, documentation, etc.). Cost of ocean transport = 4,000 per container. This has risen significantly in recent years due to a shortage of ocean freight capacity. Marine insurance = 0.50 per 100 of shipment. U.S. port handling charges = 1,200 per container. This fee has also risen considerably this year, due to increased security. Ports have also been complaining that the charges may increase in the future. Customs duty = 5% of unit cost. Customs broker fees per shipment = 300. Transportation from Seattle to Detroit = 18.60 per hundred pounds. Need to warehouse at least four weeks of inventory in Detroit at a warehousing cost of 1.00 per cubic foot per month, to compensate for lead time uncertainty. Sheila must also figure the costs associated with committing corporate capital for holding inventory. She has spoken to some accountants, who typically use a corporate cost of capital rate of 15%. Cost of hedging currencybroker fees = 400 per shipment Additional administrative time due to international shipping = 4 hours per shipment 25 per hour (estimated) At least two five-day visits per year to travel to China to meet with supplier and provide updates on performance and shipping = 20,000 per year (estimated) The international sourcing costs must be absorbed by Sheila, as the supplier does not assume any of the additional estimated costs and invoice Sheila later, or build the costs into a revised unit price. Sheila feels that the U.S. supplier is probably less expensive, even though it quoted a higher price. Sheila also knows that this is a standard technology that is unlikely to change during the next three years, but which could be a contract that extends multiple years out. There is also a lot of hall talk amongst the engineers on her floor about next-generation automotive electronics, which will completely eliminate the need for wire harnesses, which will be replaced by electronic components that are smaller, lighter, and more reliable. She is unsure about how to calculate the total costs for each option, and she is even more unsure about how to factor these other variables into the decision. Are there any other issues besides cost that Sheila should evaluate?arrow_forward
- The Global Sourcing Wire Harness Decision Sheila Austin, a buyer at Autolink, a Detroit-based producer of subassemblies for the automotive market, has sent out requests for quotations for a wiring harness to four prospective suppliers. Only two of the four suppliers indicated an interest in quoting the business: Original Wire (Auburn Hills, MI) and Happy Lucky Assemblies (HLA) of Guangdong Province, China. The estimated demand for the harnesses is 5,000 units a month. Both suppliers will incur some costs to retool for this particular harness. The harnesses will be prepackaged in 24 12 6-inch cartons. Each packaged unit weighs approximately 10 pounds. Quote 1 The first quote received is from Original Wire. Auburn Hills is about 20 miles from Autolinks corporate headquarters, so the quote was delivered in person. When Sheila went down to the lobby, she was greeted by the sales agent and an engineering representative. After the quote was handed over, the sales agent noted that engineering would be happy to work closely with Autolink in developing the unit and would also be interested in future business that might involve finding ways to reduce costs. The sales agent also noted that they were hungry for business, as they were losing a lot of customers to companies from China. The quote included unit price, tooling, and packaging. The quoted unit price does not include shipping costs. Original Wire requires no special warehousing of inventory, and daily deliveries from its manufacturing site directly to Autolinks assembly operations are possible. Original Wire Quote: Unit price = 30 Packing costs = 0.75 per unit Tooling = 6,000 one-time fixed charge Freight cost = 5.20 per hundred pounds Quote 2 The second quote received is from Happy Lucky Assemblies of Guangdong Province, China. The supplier must pack the harnesses in a container and ship via inland transportation to the port of Shanghai in China, have the shipment transferred to a container ship, ship material to Seattle, and then have material transported inland to Detroit. The quoted unit price does not include international shipping costs, which the buyer will assume. HLA Quote: Unit price = 19.50 Shipping lead time = Eight weeks Tooling = 3,000 In addition to the suppliers quote, Sheila must consider additional costs and information before preparing a comparison of the Chinese suppliers quotation: Each monthly shipment requires three 40-foot containers. Packing costs for containerization = 2 per unit. Cost of inland transportation to port of export = 200 per container. Freight forwarders fee = 100 per shipment (letter of credit, documentation, etc.). Cost of ocean transport = 4,000 per container. This has risen significantly in recent years due to a shortage of ocean freight capacity. Marine insurance = 0.50 per 100 of shipment. U.S. port handling charges = 1,200 per container. This fee has also risen considerably this year, due to increased security. Ports have also been complaining that the charges may increase in the future. Customs duty = 5% of unit cost. Customs broker fees per shipment = 300. Transportation from Seattle to Detroit = 18.60 per hundred pounds. Need to warehouse at least four weeks of inventory in Detroit at a warehousing cost of 1.00 per cubic foot per month, to compensate for lead time uncertainty. Sheila must also figure the costs associated with committing corporate capital for holding inventory. She has spoken to some accountants, who typically use a corporate cost of capital rate of 15%. Cost of hedging currencybroker fees = 400 per shipment Additional administrative time due to international shipping = 4 hours per shipment 25 per hour (estimated) At least two five-day visits per year to travel to China to meet with supplier and provide updates on performance and shipping = 20,000 per year (estimated) The international sourcing costs must be absorbed by Sheila, as the supplier does not assume any of the additional estimated costs and invoice Sheila later, or build the costs into a revised unit price. Sheila feels that the U.S. supplier is probably less expensive, even though it quoted a higher price. Sheila also knows that this is a standard technology that is unlikely to change during the next three years, but which could be a contract that extends multiple years out. There is also a lot of hall talk amongst the engineers on her floor about next-generation automotive electronics, which will completely eliminate the need for wire harnesses, which will be replaced by electronic components that are smaller, lighter, and more reliable. She is unsure about how to calculate the total costs for each option, and she is even more unsure about how to factor these other variables into the decision. Based on this case, do you think international purchasing is more or less complex than domestic purchasing? Why? Is it worth the additional effort?arrow_forwardScenario 4 Sharon Gillespie, a new buyer at Visionex, Inc., was reviewing quotations for a tooling contract submitted by four suppliers. She was evaluating the quotes based on price, target quality levels, and delivery lead time promises. As she was working, her manager, Dave Cox, entered her office. He asked how everything was progressing and if she needed any help. She mentioned she was reviewing quotations from suppliers for a tooling contract. Dave asked who the interested suppliers were and if she had made a decision. Sharon indicated that one supplier, Apex, appeared to fit exactly the requirements Visionex had specified in the proposal. Dave told her to keep up the good work. Later that day Dave again visited Sharons office. He stated that he had done some research on the suppliers and felt that another supplier, Micron, appeared to have the best track record with Visionex. He pointed out that Sharons first choice was a new supplier to Visionex and there was some risk involved with that choice. Dave indicated that it would please him greatly if she selected Micron for the contract. The next day Sharon was having lunch with another buyer, Mark Smith. She mentioned the conversation with Dave and said she honestly felt that Apex was the best choice. When Mark asked Sharon who Dave preferred, she answered, Micron. At that point Mark rolled his eyes and shook his head. Sharon asked what the body language was all about. Mark replied, Look, I know youre new but you should know this. I heard last week that Daves brother-in-law is a new part owner of Micron. I was wondering how soon it would be before he started steering business to that company. He is not the straightest character. Sharon was shocked. After a few moments, she announced that her original choice was still the best selection. At that point Mark reminded Sharon that she was replacing a terminated buyer who did not go along with one of Daves previous preferred suppliers. What does the Institute of Supply Management code of ethics say about financial conflicts of interest?arrow_forwardScenario 4 Sharon Gillespie, a new buyer at Visionex, Inc., was reviewing quotations for a tooling contract submitted by four suppliers. She was evaluating the quotes based on price, target quality levels, and delivery lead time promises. As she was working, her manager, Dave Cox, entered her office. He asked how everything was progressing and if she needed any help. She mentioned she was reviewing quotations from suppliers for a tooling contract. Dave asked who the interested suppliers were and if she had made a decision. Sharon indicated that one supplier, Apex, appeared to fit exactly the requirements Visionex had specified in the proposal. Dave told her to keep up the good work. Later that day Dave again visited Sharons office. He stated that he had done some research on the suppliers and felt that another supplier, Micron, appeared to have the best track record with Visionex. He pointed out that Sharons first choice was a new supplier to Visionex and there was some risk involved with that choice. Dave indicated that it would please him greatly if she selected Micron for the contract. The next day Sharon was having lunch with another buyer, Mark Smith. She mentioned the conversation with Dave and said she honestly felt that Apex was the best choice. When Mark asked Sharon who Dave preferred, she answered, Micron. At that point Mark rolled his eyes and shook his head. Sharon asked what the body language was all about. Mark replied, Look, I know youre new but you should know this. I heard last week that Daves brother-in-law is a new part owner of Micron. I was wondering how soon it would be before he started steering business to that company. He is not the straightest character. Sharon was shocked. After a few moments, she announced that her original choice was still the best selection. At that point Mark reminded Sharon that she was replacing a terminated buyer who did not go along with one of Daves previous preferred suppliers. Ethical decisions that affect a buyers ethical perspective usually involve the organizational environment, cultural environment, personal environment, and industry environment. Analyze this scenario using these four variables.arrow_forward
- Scenario 4 Sharon Gillespie, a new buyer at Visionex, Inc., was reviewing quotations for a tooling contract submitted by four suppliers. She was evaluating the quotes based on price, target quality levels, and delivery lead time promises. As she was working, her manager, Dave Cox, entered her office. He asked how everything was progressing and if she needed any help. She mentioned she was reviewing quotations from suppliers for a tooling contract. Dave asked who the interested suppliers were and if she had made a decision. Sharon indicated that one supplier, Apex, appeared to fit exactly the requirements Visionex had specified in the proposal. Dave told her to keep up the good work. Later that day Dave again visited Sharons office. He stated that he had done some research on the suppliers and felt that another supplier, Micron, appeared to have the best track record with Visionex. He pointed out that Sharons first choice was a new supplier to Visionex and there was some risk involved with that choice. Dave indicated that it would please him greatly if she selected Micron for the contract. The next day Sharon was having lunch with another buyer, Mark Smith. She mentioned the conversation with Dave and said she honestly felt that Apex was the best choice. When Mark asked Sharon who Dave preferred, she answered, Micron. At that point Mark rolled his eyes and shook his head. Sharon asked what the body language was all about. Mark replied, Look, I know youre new but you should know this. I heard last week that Daves brother-in-law is a new part owner of Micron. I was wondering how soon it would be before he started steering business to that company. He is not the straightest character. Sharon was shocked. After a few moments, she announced that her original choice was still the best selection. At that point Mark reminded Sharon that she was replacing a terminated buyer who did not go along with one of Daves previous preferred suppliers. What should Sharon do in this situation?arrow_forwardYou have been asked to bid for the potential outsourcing of the Facilities Management operations of Kings Avenue Mall, in Paphos. Draft an outline of what you consider to be the THREE most significant. components of a service level agreement to cover the main facilities management operations to be outsourced. Ensure that you include specific service level deliverables that can be measured and the consequences of non-performance.arrow_forwardBloom's Jeans is searching for new suppliers, and DebbieBloom, the owner, has narrowed her choices to two sets. Debbie isvery concerned about supply disruptions, so she has chosen to usethree suppliers no matter what. For option l, the suppliers are wellestablished and located in the same country. Debbie calculates the" unique-event" risk for each of them to be 4%. She estimates theprobability of a nationwide event that would knock out all three suppliersto be 2.5%. For option 2, the suppliers are newer but located inthree different countries. Debbie calculates the " unique-event" riskfor each of them to be 20%. She estimates the "super-event" probabilitythat would knock out all three of these suppliers to be 0.4%.Purchasing and transportation costs would be $1 ,000,000 per yearusing option 1 and $1,0 I 0,000 per year using option 2. A total disruptionwould create an annualized loss of$500,000.a) What is the probability that all three suppliers will be disru pled using option 1?b) What…arrow_forward
arrow_back_ios
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
arrow_forward_ios
Recommended textbooks for you
Purchasing and Supply Chain ManagementOperations ManagementISBN:9781285869681Author:Robert M. Monczka, Robert B. Handfield, Larry C. Giunipero, James L. PattersonPublisher:Cengage Learning
Practical Management ScienceOperations ManagementISBN:9781337406659Author:WINSTON, Wayne L.Publisher:Cengage,
Purchasing and Supply Chain Management
Operations Management
ISBN:9781285869681
Author:Robert M. Monczka, Robert B. Handfield, Larry C. Giunipero, James L. Patterson
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Practical Management Science
Operations Management
ISBN:9781337406659
Author:WINSTON, Wayne L.
Publisher:Cengage,