Case Study - How Chinese Toymakers Respond to Recalls

An elementary toy that is due to be shipped at the end of the week has failed quality control testing. A metal whistle has been shown to exceed the federal regulation guidelines for lead. The testing process showed the lead level for this particular toy tested at 103 parts per million. The federal guidelines dictate that toys cannot contain lead with more than 100 parts per million (OSHA, 2013). The projected cost to conform to federal guidelines and replace the whistle are

In 2007, Mattel a California based toy company shockingly recalled 19 million toys that had been manufactured in China. Mattel was founded in 1944, and has produced iconic toys such as Barbie and Hot Wheels. The company had a long established trust with their consumers that had been forged from decades of reliability. However, when the company recalled 19 million toys due to health and safety violations, consumer confusion and outrage soared. The public wanted to know how such an established company’s safety regulations could fail, how Mattel was addressing the issue, and whether consumers could trust Mattel to produce reliable toys in the future.

The problem surrounding Mattel Inc. is their mismanagement of international subcontractors and vendors and the production of certain toys (the manufacturing process), as well as their inability to adapt their marketing strategy or product to the constantly changing “demographic and socioeconomic trends.” This is supported by Mattel’s legal battle with Carter Bryant and MGA, their forced recall of certain toys that were manufactured overseas, and the increasing rate at which traditional toys are becoming less appealing to today’s young audience. Essentially, Mattel’s mismanagement and oversight lead to violations in terms of ethical and social responsibilities and safety standards.

The biggest environment force affected Mattel recently has been legal and regulatory with the high levels of lead paint found in their die-cast toys in 2007. This issue created a voluntary recall from Mattel for over 2 million toys and created doubt in customers to the quality of their Mattel toys. Mattel responded by immediately implementing a check system to accept paint only from certified suppliers, tightened controls throughout the production process and testing every production run to ensure compliance. Mattel said that it is working in cooperation with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission and other regulatory agencies worldwide. Mattel is also working with retailers worldwide to identify and remove affected products from retail shelves.

Mattel is starting to take a step in the right direction, according to Renae Merle from The Washington Post, “Mattel said it was strengthening its process for preventing the use of lead based paint, it will only permit paint from certified suppliers and require every batch to be tested, company officials said” (Merle 1). 80% of toys in the United States are imported from China, according to Renae Merle, and 65% of those toys are created by Mattel. Although that is a step in the right direction, that still leaves 15% of the toys in the United States at a higher risk of having high traces of lead on them, going undetected. Stores like Toys ‘R’ Us that sell toys sold by companies other than Mattel, should be required to post the percentage of how much lead is in each toy directly next to or near the toy so that parents can be aware of this problem. If parents are not made aware of this problem, it is going to cause more concerns health wise. Michelle Albert, a stay at home mom of two children states that “I feel our country should be more careful about the things we import” (Albert 1). She fears that her children may have been exposed to these toys and has no way of knowing until it may be too late.

All toys and equipment must relevant to the child’s age and stage of development and comply with BSEN benchmarks for safety.

We have a large shipment of our elementary toy collection scheduled ship at the end of this week but have encountered a problem with the production. One of the products in this collection has failed the quality control testing exceeding the legal limits of lead set by the federal government. This shipment will be delivered to South American schools. As of August 14, 2011 the total legal lead content must not exceed 100 parts per million for a product (CPSC 2013). Our levels tested above these limits and require us to take action. To reproduce this product it will cost the company

At Mattel, Barbie is child-tested to be sure the doll cannot be broken apart and accidentally choke a child.  This type of

This lead poisoning problem finally received the attention it deserved in 1971 when the Lead-Based Paint Poisoning Prevention Act was put into effect. This act provided Federal assistance to help communities carry out screening and treatment programs (Chisholm, 1982).

In 2007, the international toy manufacturer, Mattel, Inc. issued several recalls for millions of their products. These recalls were for safety reasons in that testing at the manufacturing sites and special test laboratories showed that millions of their toys were coated with dangerous amounts of lead in the paint. This lead based paint contains a potent neurotoxin that if ingested can cause serious harm to children. Mattel assured the public that the problem would be solved, the recalled products would be collected and replaced, and that the company would never let this type of incident happen again.

As we can see Mattel does a pretty good job of of managing risk within its own business. However, it is some of these large multi national companies that often overlook managing corporate integrity risk in there supply networks. Companies have inserted clauses into their standard contracts with suppliers requiring them to comply with the rules and regulations applicable and materials used must exactly that which has been stated in the contract.

This report is about the situational analysis of the Toy R US Company. This company is currently facing some drop in sales, possible reasons and potential solutions are provided in this report. All the detailed analysis are given here. Report has suggested that company lost its main perspective which it famous at the first point. This is main outcome of the report. There are many other reasons as well which are causing the decline of the company. There is a lot of room for improvement which can be tackled, implementation plan is also given in this report along with the possible and potential full recommendations. So lets’ start with the report.

Mattel was the world’s largest toy manufacturer with revenue over $5 billion. It had been doing business in China for 25 years. China was Mattel’s most important manufacturing country. 65% of Mattel’s toys were manufactured in China. It owned 5 factories in China and had a network of contract manufacturers for the remainder of production. In August and September, 2007, Mattel recalled for three times globally 21 million problematic toys that were made in China for the reason of containing excess level of lead. The toys recall issue in addition to the publicity of media drew public attention to the global toys inspection system and the products quality of ‘Made in China’, resulting in a trust

Because of the company’s product and designs primary for children, it must be sensitive to social concern about children’s right: By assuring parents that their children’s privacy will be respected, Mattel demonstrated that it takes its responsibility of marketing to children seriously. In 2007, Mattel conduct entitled Global Manufacturing principles. In this principle, Mattel’s business partners must ensure high standard for product safety and quality, adhering to practices that meet Mattel’s safety and quality standards, make sure that the entire product will not be harmful to the children. Partners must also comply with all import and export regulation and they must strictly adhere to local and international customs

The causes and consequences of BMW’s quality problems with newly launched products were plentiful and apparent all throughout the case study. For instance, BMW does not use pre-production tools during prototyping. This significantly lowers their opportunity to discover and fix quality problems earlier in the production process. Secondly, they let suppliers have a say in development after “cubing” has occurred. Unfortunately, if suppliers come across problems during the first production, they often don’t have enough time to fix it before new model introduction. Finally,