Essay about Lego, Consolidating Distribution

3. How can supply chain design and integration help John Wolf reduce investment and space requirements while maintaining adequate service levels?

The use of LEGOs is an extraordinary thing, but it is shocking to see exactly how controversial a small toy can become. People of all ages have been found to enjoy this toy. Companies and organizations such as MIT and NASA have even found a use for them. The toy has become known as a child’s imagination tool and has not been exclusively used for adults. The documentary shows that adults come together to compete in competitions on who can create the greatest LEGO sculpture. Many people may not know just how big this toy is used around the world.

There was the change in the business strategy in the company that was brought up by the new CEO. The strategy was to survive, cut costs, sell businesses, generate cash and ignore the dash for the growth in the immediate future. Lego was known for the traditional blocks and components that will allow children to build anything with their imagination. The business strategy was to broaden the Lego products for the other customer segments. They created the

Team 2 has researched and completed a comparative analysis of Mattel’s supply chain design and related costs with that of its major competitor Hasbro and the toy industry. What follows, is a brief background of Mattel’s traditional (non-electronic game) sector, its key competitors and Mattel’s use of supply chain management concepts in addressing the competitive landscape to gain a competitive advantage. The global toy and game market grew by 7.2% in 2007 with a value of $106.1 billion and by 2012, is forecasted to have a value of $126.2 billion, an increase of 18.9% over 2007. The toy market is divided into three primary sectors, namely game consoles, game software and traditional toys and games. Traditional toys and

The Lego Group tried to catch up the market trends during the period, but they ignored that the industry total profit pool decreased by 50% Between 1999 and 2003. It's naturally for players to reduce mass production and focus on core competency. However, the Lego Group invested significantly in expansion not only in brick-based product lines, but also beyond the brick. The expansion was not focusing on its core competency.

At that time, the performance winners for LEGO were speed (of delivery), and flexibility (wide range of products, volume and delivery adjustments at short notice). Cost, dependability and quality were not as vital. To achieve these objectives, LEGO had made several operational decisions: Speed: • Maintain multiple distribution centres, close to key markets: 5 in Europe, 1 in USA • Maintain high stock levels, of finished product, and components so products could be assembled quickly. Flexibility: • Supply retailers both large and small, from relatively close distribution centres • Frequent, small, orders accepted • Introduce new products to the range, and discontinue old

Lego Corp was established in 1932 by founder Ole Kirk Kristiansen. With just 10 employees, they start crafting wooden construction toys. The most famous of these were the wooden duck. As the popularity of plastic toys rose in the mid-1950s, the company did away with wooden toys and started focusing on manufacturing plastic automatic binding blocks. As early as the beginning of the company, their motto was “Only the best is good enough.” High quality and safe products have been the focal point of LEGO Group for decades. Over the years LEGO Group has kept its word on that motto and has supplied millions of families with creative toys that last.

Through studying the entire retail toy industry, we have been able to understand the complexity of the industry in which Toys "R" Us operates. Upon completion of the analysis, we realized that the industry is growing stably,

There are many barriers to new organizations in the toy industry, making the threat of new entrants low. Lego and other big toy companies like Mattel benefit from economies of scale. An economy of scale is achieved by lower costs through large volume production (Textbook glossary). Economies of scale can occur in many departments within the organization including production, marketing, research and development, and finance. Some manufacturing of Lego products was shifted to Central Europe and Mexico in order to benefit from lower wages and to shorten product supply chains (p. 13 of case). The management of Lego additionally holds expertise on production, distribution and customer needs; which are absent in a new organization. To enter the toy sector a potential entrant needs to calculate the start of production at a level that will give a competitive position and production costs lower than the market.

Based on the case study Lego appears to be using the Focus strategy. Michael Porter proposed three generic strategies Cost Leadership, Differentiation and Focus. Focus is a strategy where organization focuses on specific niche markets; this may include a particular geographic region or particular segment of customers. Organizations which use this strategy develop their products after having a study of dynamics of the segment and unique needs of customer. Lego before the appointment of the new CEO appear to use the focus strategy as their top priority was always to focus on innovation and creativity with taking profits into consideration. Add to that the case study also mention that Lego used to create products that primarily targeted boys. After the appointment of new CEO Jorgen Vig Knudstorp the company appears to have changed its policy form Focus to Cost-Leadership. Cost-Leadership is a strategy where organizations focus on gaining competitive advantage by offering products and services at the lowest possible price. They achieve this by increasing profits by reducing production cost and other way is to increase market share by reducing the prices of products compared to the competitors. Knudstorp after taking charge of Lego changed their focus on reducing the production

Ever since LEGO started experiencing double digit annual sales growth, (by launching new toy games, branded theme parks, entering the video game sector, introducing mobile applications, introducing toys for girls, etc.) they realized they needed a model that was standardized, modular and scalable. Hence, allowing them to expand to new markets in a less amount of time. They already had a decently established market in USA and UK; they were looking for an expansion in other countries as well. This model had to tackle major issues like scalability challenges, employee

In 2002 and beginning of 2003 LEGO struggle with low sales and an increase in their inventory levels due to an intensification of their competitors, adapting their process as LEGO did in the beginning

Knudstorp's slow-it-down approach of careful cash management, focusing on core products, and reducing product complexity certainly contributed to that success. Re-engaging with customers was also taken to another level. One of the insights Jorgen had when he became CEO was that he needed to reconnect with the community of loyal LEGO fans which according to him was one of the most powerful assets the company had. It was one of the big reasons for the comeback.(Most effective)

As their name and ideal, Lego has been beloved by the children as well as the parents for decades. Not only as plastic toy bricks, but also effective educational tools, the LEGO Company enjoyed continuous growth and broaden the global brand value. The LEGO brand moved to third place in 2002/2003 with only Coca-cola and Kellogg having greater respect among families with children. Even though as the overall toy market faces challenges, LEGO’s revenue and profits are increasing rapidly, especially since 2005. This profitability didn’t change even in the current recession in the global market. The LEGO Group achieved record-breaking profits in

The company LEGO (Appendix 1), was far from the reality when in the year 2000 the famous Bricks were named as ‘the toy of the century’ by Fortune Magazine. the numbers were reflecting a different reality when in 2003 and 2004 the losses were of more than $400m on annual sales of over $1b (Lego case of study 2014).