W6_Doyin_How best to Procure Christmas Hampers for our
Clients Using the Best Practices
1. Problem
Recognition, Definition and Evaluation:
Christmas is a season which comes
annually at the end of the year to celebrate with the Christians the birth of
Jesus Christ.
For Corporate Organizations, it is usually a time of stock taking,
measures of value additions, rewards and gift giving. This Blog focuses on the
best method to employ in the giving of Hampers (collection of different items
as gift) as corporate gifts to say thank you to our numerous clients for their
patronage over the year.
2. Development
of Feasible Alternatives
·
Off
shelve Procurement : Procuring already
made hampers in departmental stores
·
In house
Procurement: Using our in house resources (Procurement dept) to put the hampers
together.
·
Out
Sourcing. Using Specialist of Hampers to procure them.
3.
Development of the outcomes and cash flows for each alternative:
The Alternatives will be evaluated based on the following
Attributes.
I.
Time.
II.
Cost
III.
Branding
IV.
Quality
V.
Variety
VI.
Packaging
Table 1. Alternatives
Attribute
|
Off
Shelve Procurement
|
In
House Procurement
|
Outsourcing
|
Time Saving
|
Excellent
|
Poor
|
Good
|
Cost Saving
|
Fair
|
Excellent
|
Poor
|
Branding
|
Poor
|
Very Good
|
Excellent
|
Quality
|
Fair
|
Very Good
|
Excellent
|
Variety
|
Fair
|
Very Good
|
Excellent
|
Packaging
|
Fair
|
Good
|
Excellent
|
All these attributes are very important.
5. Analysis and
comparison of the alternatives: This is done by using 2 non-compensatory model
s called Dominance and Satisficing to evaluate each alternative.
Table 2 feasible Ranges
Attribute
|
Minimum
|
Maximum
|
Time Savings
|
10%
|
50%
|
Cost Savings
|
5%
|
40%
|
Quality
|
20%
|
80%0
|
Branding
|
3 items
|
5 items
|
Variety
|
7
|
20
|
Packaging
|
Fair
|
Excellent
|
For Dominance method in Table 1 Outsourcing
is superior to all other alternatives considering the dominance of Excellent.
The Satisficing method of feasible ranges
eliminates off shelve procurement since its attributes fall outside the
acceptable limits. Therefore In-house
procurement and Out sourcing will be
considered
The Non Dimensional Scaling of Compensatory
model is also being used for this analysis in
Table
3 – Non Dimensional Scaling
Attribute
|
Off Shelve Procurement
|
In House Procurement
|
Outsourcing
|
Time Saving
|
0
|
-1.46
|
0.49
|
Cost
Saving
|
0.85
|
0
|
1
|
Branding
|
-1.67
|
0.670
|
0
|
Quality
|
1
|
0.286
|
0
|
Variety
|
1
|
0.386
|
0.077
|
Packaging
|
1
|
0.571
|
1
|
Sum
|
2.180
|
0.452
|
2.490 Best Choice
|
6. Selection
of the preferred alternative
The best
Alternative is Outsourcing since it eliminates Man hour wastage, gives room
for Corporate Image branding, flexibility in variety and the quality will not
be compromised. Though the impact of cost reduction is not tangible.
7. Performance
Monitoring.
Performance will be measured by delivery
time, and terms of reference (Quality, Variety, Branding, and Packaging) in the
bidding/contractual documents.
8. References
1. Sullivan,W.G, Wicks,E.M, & Koelling, C.P (2012).
Engineering Economy (15th edition.)(Chapter 14) New Jersey, NJ. Pearson Higher
Education, Inc.
2. Bratcher D. (Dec 2011) Season of the Church year.
Retrieved from http/www.crivoice.org.....
3. Giammalvo, P.D (2012, October 22). Integrated portfolio
(asset), program (operations) and project management methodology course (Power
Point slides) (An AACE methodology course).
Day 1(pp 15-20) Lagos. Nigeria
Ho ho ho ho ho!!! Good case study, Doyin!!!
ReplyDeleteWell done using multi-attribute decision making!!
You followed our step by step process and on your citation, it would have been better if you listed the actual pages from Engineering Economy and not just the chapter.
Keep up the good work and happy to see you catching up and building yourself a buffer as we head into the holiday season.
BR,
Dr. PDG, Jakarta