Global Electronics Inc.

1423 Words Dec 29th, 2013 6 Pages
Background information

Global Electronics, Inc. (GEI), headquartered in Sarasota, Florida, designs, manufactures, and markets discrete power semiconductors and analog, digital, mixed-signal, and radiation-hardened integrated circuits for signal processing and power-control applications. The company employs about 2,300 people at its three U.S. fabrication facilities (located in Huntsville, Alabama; Evansville, Indiana; and Reading, Pennsylvania), and has 4,000 employees at its assembly and test facility in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. In 1999, GEI's profitability came down with operating losses reaching $100 million on sales of approximately $650 million, causing management concern about the accuracy of the company's standard cost system. There
…show more content…
The whole price justification process was very confusing to the customers and very frustrating for them. With the new system they could say this is what the flow is, this is what those activities cost, and this is how much your product is going to cost.

Question 2. Was the implementation of ABC at GEI successful? What did GEI do well? What areas of the implementation could have been improved on? What are the key success factors that lead to or impede successful ABC implementation? Be sure to consider behavioural as well as technical factors. Analysis 2: It appeared that GEI's two-phased implementation plan had been partially successful. The first phase succeeded in delivering timely, revised product-cost information for strategic pricing and mix decision making. The second phase struggled to deliver upon its promise of delivering productivity improvement and cost reduction. The ABC implementation was completed in the nine-month time frame, as planned. Based on a total of 88 interview sessions, 674 activities and 254 activity drivers were identified across all five plants and entered into the standard cost subsystem that provided data for the financial reporting system. The project team streamlined the implementation process by only including activities within the cost model that it believed could materially affect strategic product-pricing and mix decisions. This made the