Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ch08pp 140206104530 Phpapp01
ch08pp 140206104530 Phpapp01
Problem 1:
A major drug store chain wishes to build a new warehouse to serve the whole Midwest. At the
moment, it is looking at three possible locations. The factors, weights, and ratings being considered
are given below:
Ratings
Factor
Weights
Peoria
Des Moines
Chicago
Nearness to markets
20
Labor cost
Taxes
15
Nearness to suppliers
10
10
10
Location
Fixed Cost
Variable Cost
Waco, Texas
$300,000
$5.75
Tijuana, Mexico
$800,000
$2.75
Fayetteville, Arkansas
$100,000
$8.00
For what unit sales volume should they choose each location?
Problem 3:
Our main distribution center in Phoenix, AZ is due to be replaced with a much larger, more modern
facility that can handle the tremendous needs that have developed with the citys growth. Fresh
produce travels to the seven store locations several times a day making site selection critical for
efficient distribution. Using the data in the following table, determine the map coordinates for the
proposed new distribution center.
Store Locations
Mesa
(10,5)
Glendale
(3,8)
Camelback
(4,7)
Scottsdale
(15,10)
Apache Junction
(13,3)
Sun City
(1,12)
Pima
(5,5)
10
Problem 4:
A company is planning on expanding and building a new plant in one of three countries in Middle
or Eastern Europe. The general manager, Patricia Donegal, has decided to base her decision on six
critical success factors: technology availability and support, availability and quality of public
education, legal and regulatory aspects, social and cultural aspects, economic factors, and political
stability.
Using a rating system of 1 (least desirable) to 5 (most desirable) she has arrived at the following
ratings (you may, of course, have different opinions). In which country should the plant be built?
Turkey
Serbia
Slovakia
Economic factors
Political stability
Problem 5:
Assume that Patricia decides to use the following weights for the critical success factors:
Technology availability and support
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.1
Economic factors
0.1
Political stability
0.2
Problem 6:
Patricias advisors have suggested that Turkey and Slovakia might be better differentiated by either
(a) doubling the number of critical success factors, or (b) breaking down each of the existing
critical success factors into smaller, more narrowly defined items, e.g., Availability and quality of
public education might be broken into primary, secondary, and post-secondary education. How
would you advise Ms. Donegal?
ANSWERS:
Problem 1:
Ratings
Weighted Ratings
Weights
Peoria
Des
Moines
Chicago
Peoria
Des
Moines
Chicago
Nearness to
markets
20
80
140
100
Labor cost
40
40
20
Taxes
15
120
135
105
Nearness to
suppliers
10
10
10
100
60
100
340
375
325
Factor
Therefore, it appears that based upon the weights and rating, Des Moines should be chosen.
Problem 2:
Transition between Waco and Tijuana:
300, 000 (5.75 x) 800, 000 (2.75 x)
3 x 500, 000
x 166, 000
Transition between Waco and Fayetteville:
300, 000 (5.75 x) 100, 000 (8.00 x)
200, 000 2.25 x
88,888 x
Problem 3:
New Distribution Center should be located at:
Cx
7.97
3 3 2 6 5 3 10
32
Cy
6.69
3 3 2 6 5 3 10
32
Problem 4:
Turkey
Serbia
Slovakia
Economic factors
Political stability
23
19
22
Based upon her ratings of the critical success factors, Patricia should choose Turkey. From a
practical perspective, given the small difference between the scores for Turkey and Slovakia, and
the subjectivity of the ratings themselves, Patricia would be better advised to develop additional
critical success factors, more carefully weigh the individual factors; or, in general, to acquire more
information before making her decisions.
Problem 5:
Wgt
Turkey
Serbia
0.3
1.2
0.9
1.2
0.2
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.1
0.2
0.4
.5
0.1
0.5
0.3
0.4
Economic factors
0.1
0.4
0.3
0.3
Political stability
0.2
0.8
0.4
0.6
= 3.9
Slovakia
3.1
3.6
No, in this case, use of the weighting factors does not change the recommendation. One might
again suggest that additional information be considered in making the decision.
Problem 6:
(a) Doubling the number of critical success factors. There are two issues here. First, from a
practical perspective there are a limited number of truly critical success factors and these
should be the ones presently being considered. Any additional factors should be of secondary
or tertiary importance. Second, given the subjective nature of the rating process, adding
additional factors would also increase the overall margin of error of the final ratings to a degree
that may eliminate any gain in differentiation arising from the use of the additional factors. The
use of a maximum of seven to nine critical success factors is usually appropriate.
(b) Given that ones ability to estimate or rate an aggregate is usually better than ones ability to
estimate or rate the individual components of the aggregate, this approach is unlikely to
provide much help.