Case summary: Major Design Corporation is a 3,500-employee firm with annual revenues of more than $1 billion. The firm offers full services and is divided into five geographically based global sales divisions. MDC was selected by the city of Saratoga to design a new, 10-million-gallon-per-day surface water intake and transmission main. This project is touted as an “alternative” water supply project because the water source is not a historically used source. The project will increase the long-term sustainability of the city because it will diversify the city’s water supply portfolio and recycle water. The project will also minimize the need for additional withdrawals from historic water sources, which have become less productive and more highly regulated in the past 10 years, as the city’s population continues to grow. Other green benefits of the project include reduced environmental impacts on the historic water sources and a reduced carbon footprint, as the irrigation water requires less energy-intensive treatment than the city’s other drinkable water sources.
MR J manages about six engineering projects at any one time, so the project is to be analyzed for ways to complete it in 35 weeks. The results are to be analyzed.
Interpretation: The final recommendation is to be stated.
Want to see the full answer?
Check out a sample textbook solution- 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_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_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_forward
- What do the expressions order winner and order qualifiers mean? What was the order winner for your last major purchase of a product or service?arrow_forwardsubject: Quantitative Analysis For Business Please answer both of them.arrow_forwardWhat is the distinction between quality and effectiveness? Give an example of a target that was efficiently and effectively met.arrow_forward
- A microbiologist is presenting a research project to a hospital staff regarding the major concern of antimicrobial resistance in hospitals. Bacteria have the ability of becoming antibiotic-resistant. These bacteria may infect humans and animals, and the infections they cause are harder to treat than those caused by non-resistant bacteria. This researcher addressed the problem investigated, the results found, the conclusion drawn, the recommendations made, and the ways in which they can be implemented. At the end of the presentation, he noticed that the audience was bored and falling asleep. What is one thing this presenter could have done wrong? * The information wasn’t detailed enough. His dress code was distracting The wrong audience was addressed. He had bad voice modulation.arrow_forwardBriefly outline the study by Fletcher & Nielsen (2012). Comment on what they did, what they found and what they concluded.arrow_forwardCASE SUMMARY: Retailers commonly track customer's shopping patterns and target them with special offers. For example, PTS an Extra care card that, when swiped at checkout applies discounts to purchases and provides rebates called Extra Bucks to be used as cash on future purchases. Behind the scenes, PTS has gathers data on customer’s purchases and using aggregated data to target individuals with special offers. Customers who have not recently shopped may may receive a discount in the mail or an online offer to incentive them to return. Frequent shoppers can scan their Extracare cards to get discounts and offers in the store. Questions Is it right for marketers to track consumer purchases? (Explain.) Should consumers be concerned with what information is being used? What are other examples of marketers using data collection to sell products? Is it ethical?arrow_forward
- Purchasing and Supply Chain ManagementOperations ManagementISBN:9781285869681Author:Robert M. Monczka, Robert B. Handfield, Larry C. Giunipero, James L. PattersonPublisher:Cengage Learning