Principles of Supply Chain Management Essay

Case 3) Dont shoot the messenger1. If you were in Jeffs position, what would you fork out adopte to retain relationships? If I were in Jeffs position, I would first obtain thanked my suppliers and express gratitude to them for being willing to work closely with the company in non completely designing the new product line, provided in accordingly reducing supply prices by the asked for 10 percent. I then would have time-tested to explain the position of the company and how the price decreases were essential to ensuring a successful product launch. Explaining why the additional cost reduction was put across may not make the actual price cuts easier to make, but it should befriend well-nighwhat when it comes to of importtaining the relationships with the suppliers. Hopefully Jeff has treated them honestly up until now and has a level of trust built up with them. 2. Describe the ethical issues involved.It seems to me that the main ethical issue is in the letter that was sen t to suppliers on July 5th. The unvoiced threat that business with suppliers would be cancelled if the cost demands were not met is not consistent with the type of relationship that Jeff had built with his suppliers, based on honestly, integrity, and securely work. In addition, Billing Equipment was asking for previously totald upon contracts to be re- sacrificeed and re-negotiated in order to make the price cuts, essentially leaving back on their own word.3. What is your assessment of the general managers move up to clashing target cost objectives? My assessment of the general managers barbel to meeting target cost objectives is that it is not the right way to under have a bun in the oven the issue. I move intot like the strong-arm tactics, with the thinly-veiled threat of cancellation if they dont comply. The General Manager should have involved the suppliers and been more open with them on the compulsion to reduce oerall costs for the product line. He could have explain ed the long-term benefit of partnering with Billings Equipment, plane if at that place were a financial sacrifice in the short term. As the case pointed out, in essence, the suppliers that complied and tried to work with the company were punished by being asked to cut prices even more.Case 5) caper Deere and mazy move, Inc.1. Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of John Deeres Achieving purity Program. Consider and discuss other criteria to include in the analysis. John Deeres Achieving Excellence Program is designed to get out long- last(a)ing supplier relationships finished an evaluation process that promotes communication, trust, cooperation, and innovation. I prize that overall this is a realistic easily design. It encourages suppliers to work with John Deere and collaborate to improve cost, quality, and timeliness of deli truly. It includes some objective ratings that can directly measure supplier performance, and could be apply to friend identify argonas o f improvement. It helps to form long-lasting relationships with suppliers, which is in John Deeres best interests. Some of its weakness are subjectivity, that it has no anxiety for what is good for supplier, and may have a difficult entry level since you only receive training if you rate noblely in the system. insepar fitting poetic rhythm like the Wavelength and Technical criteria are more difficult to measure accurately. Subjective measures leave things open to interpretation. Personal bias or even be amiss can result in an artificially low or high rating in a subjective measurement. The criteria would need to be real clearly defined. The AEP program is also benefits John Deere primarily, quite an than the suppliers. Suppliers that rate exceedingly do get additional John Deere training, but even that is in the best interests of the John Deere Company. While John Deere is a reputable company, and preferred to do business with, the main reward for performance excellence in t he AEP program is a plaque, maybe a banquet, and more John Deere training. The program almost has a negative incentive for new suppliers.John Deere should have some kind of outreach training for new suppliers that wish to be partners, rather than just supplying additional training for expert suppliers. It could be seen as a program that keeps the elite at elite levels, but does not offer assistance to those newcomers that may need the assistance and expertise of John Deere to improve. While responsiveness is encompassed in the wavelength measurement, I reckon that it is important equal to have its own evaluation criteria (Winsor, Tan, Leong p. 124). The case mentions some of the frustrations that John Deere experient waiting for the return of quotes from interlinking part. An unresponsive supplier can stick supply chain issues very quickly. 2. Do you think Complex Parts has performed adequately over the away year? Why or why not? Which of the Deere supplier assessment cla ssifications should be assigned to Complex Parts?I think that Complex Parts has adequate performance over the past year as a whole, however some areas of concern have arisen, specifically concerning rescue and communication. Their quality rating is very good, and until recently, their pitch shot rating was very good as well. Lately, an increasing number of deliveries had to be expedited, which costs John Deere money. The case stated that it seems as though expediting delivery has become a weekly requirement. Delivery ratings fell from 8,650 to 155,000 over the last quarter. That metric alone is enough to put the supplier in to conditional status.Overall, I would assign a rating of Approved to Complex Parts. Their past performance is worth noting, but recent developments are of great concern. trim downwards their supplier rating should send them a message that performance, specifically deliveries and responsiveness, must(prenominal) improve in order to continue doing business wi th John Deere. 3. If you were a member of the supplier evaluation team, what alternative course of action would you get by for Complex Parts? What barrackations should the team make to the project manager?As a member of the evaluation team, I would recommend that a very close eye be kept on the Delivery metric, as that is where the supplier seems to be slipping the most, and would communicate that intention to Complex Parts. They need to understand that musical composition they have been a good supplier in the past, current performance issues cannot be ignored. Delivery clock and response times to quotes and other communications must be improved. I would suggest a meeting between the project manager and key team members at Complex Parts to discuss expectations and feasible consequences of non-compliance with John Deere policies.The team should recommend a rating of Approved to the project manager, with specific follow-up items expand surrounding delivery and responsiveness . 4. What are the short-term and long-term deductive reasonings of your recommendation? defraud term, I would expect immediate improvements in the delivery rating of Complex parts. The reduction in rating is very much a corrective action, and intended to be an eye-opener to the supplier. It sends a message that while they are close up valued as a supplier, certain aspects of their performance have slipped in to the unacceptable range.Long term, I believe that an action such as this should help strengthen the relationship. Disciplinary action usually comes off negatively, but if the right meetings and discussions take place and concerns are addressed openly and honestly, Complex Parts should be able to see that John Deere does have a vested interest in helping them improve and re-attain a raking of Partner. The fact that as a member of the evaluation team I am not just recommending dropping them or recommending a raking of Conditional shows that there is shut away hope in rebuildi ng the business relationship to a healthy, plenteous level. Case 7) Supplier Development at Deere, & Company1. Is Deeres tactic an appropriate one?I do not think Deeres tactic is the appropriate way to approach the situation. I agree from the details of the case that some improvements need to be made the help reduce they cycle time at wood shavings, but I dont think a mandatory cost reduction is going to get the job done. I think it will create disadvantageously blood and irreparably damage the supplier relationship.2. What are the implications of the tactic and the possible consequences, positive or negative?The implications of the tactic are that wood shavings unavoidably to fall in line with Deeres demands or lose their business. The added implication is that wood shavings will essentially be out of business if this happens because 95% of their income is from Deeres orders. Both of these outcomes are negative, and I am having difficulty comprehend a positive consequ ence come out of this situation. I think that Excelsior is justified in their concerns, and while they may be force their feet, I feel like it is an appropriate reaction to the concept of restructuring their stallion process.3. If it is not an appropriate tactic, what are some alternatives?I think that a valid alternative would be to emphasize the value that Excelsior has to Deere as a primary supplier of the connector that they manufacture for Deere, and to reinforce the want to maintain a long-term, profitable relationship with them.Additionally, Deere may have been able to supply examples of other suppliers that they have worked with to improve their efficiency. Rather than case studies and meetings, real world examples of success could be used to help persuade Excelsiors top decision makers that this was the correct course of action.4. Is this an ethical approach?I do not think that this is an ethical approach. Deere is effectively utilise their position of power in the relat ionship to force Excelsior to take action that they are not convinced is the correct course of action. I think that they should act in an advisory role, not force them in to action. Ultimately, the decision is Excelsiors as to whether to re-tool and comply with Deeres wishes, and while there are big consequences to that decision, it should not be forced upon them.5. What are some of the implications as far as human resource anxiety is concerned? How can the group members better manage the consensus building to enclose an undivided front to Excelsior?If Deeres plan does not succeed, there is a large risk that they will have to put away a massive human resource effort to replace Excelsior as a supplier. Deere would have to expend large amounts of time and resources to identify, secure, and develop a new supplier.The group members could better manage consensus building by involving more people from Excelsiors production teams. Deere should work towards a win-win scenario with Ex celsior (p. 119). Perhaps they would be able to show the benefits of the proposed system to those that are closer to the actual work. Those individuals could then weigh in and lend plump for to the plan, possibly over approach path the resistance that Excelsiors Frank and Sanderson felt. Deeres associates could re-commit to Excelsior that they are a valued long-term supplier, but that these changes needed to be enacted to ensure long-term viability. Deere could explain that there are customers further down the supply chain requesting faster turnaround, and that these requests are not solely coming from Deere.ReferencesJoel D. Wisner, K.-C. T. (2012). Principles of Supply Chain Management. Mason, OH South-Western Cengage Learning.