Lfield

When our group first started planning our strategy to win the second Littlefield simulation game, it was evident that the goal of the game was to maximize profits. We were competing against 18 other teams, but we knew with correct system capacity management and correct inventory management we could be the number one team. Even though we made correct decisions overall, we ended up in second place again with a cash balance of $2,660,393 and remaining inventory of 52 kits. Although we were a little disappointed again, we were very satisfied with what we have learned and the important operations management concepts we used such as capacity management and lead-time and inventory management throughout both of the Littlefield simulation games.

After evaluating capacity, Team A turned our attention towards an analysis of the throughput time of the Littlefield factory to determine the optimum customer contract to offer. During the first 50 days, Littlefield management elected to accept purchase orders with a quoted lead time of 7 days at a price of $750. Littlefield was able to obtain 100% expected revenue during the first 50 days of operations and averaged a throughput time of 1.64 days (St Dev: 0.91). In order to increase the overall profitability, Littlefield can increase

We recalculated the average arrival rate over the entire simulation to be approximately 11.8 orders per day, which we rounded to 12 for a small buffer. Based on this daily consumption, we found what day the next reorder point would be which was day 222. We wanted to find the demand for the final 46 days with an average of 12 orders per day came up with a figure of 552 units needed to meet demand over the last 46 days. Since we already had 61 units at the time of ordering, we subtracted that figure from the 552 and came up with a final order value of 491. This value should allow us to have a low inventory level at the end of the simulation. To achieve this, we had to change the reorder point to zero. This strategies hinges heavily on the lab not being in existence past day 268, if that were not the case, we would not recommend this plan.

The purpose of this paper is assessing my strategy and decisions in the simulation Biz Café. Then, I will give my results and explain how I got there. However, there were many factors involved creating these results. In this simulation, everything was left up to me to decide how to run my new coffee shop. There were big decisions at the beginning you had to make to create the overall theme of your business. Then, I was to hire employees, buy goods, and act on specials decisions or react to good or bad customer reactions. This, I will explain more in the following paragraphs.

Our team operated and managed the Littlefield Technologies facility over the span of 1268 simulated days. Our team finished the simulation in 3rd place, posting $2,234,639 in cash at the end of the game. We did intuitive analysis initially and came up the strategy at the beginning of the game. And then we applied the knowledge we learned in the class, did process analysis and modified our strategies according to the performance results dynamically. We have reinforced many of the concepts and lessons learned in class and had a better understanding of the operation of the Littlefield Technologies facility and how certain modifications would affect the throughput and lead time.

After both of the steps, pre-game and dirty work are completed, we relaxed until game day. This step was the step that we worked

Given that a machine cost us the same price on day 50 of the simulation as it did on day 217, and the fact that buying each machine represents a tradeoff of gaining higher potential for profits in the future (through the fact that more machines afford us greater utilization at each station) for a lower cash balance in the present, we felt it was best to try to determine how many machines we would need and purchase them at the beginning of day 51.

This week’s key learning areas have been eye opening and worthwhile. Our game simulation has taught me how to manage the human resources (HR), capacity planning, receiving, production, and shipping departments. One key element that caught my attention was bottleneck issues. Although reputation and meeting goals is important, I must pay attention to the machines that are causing bottleneck issues; performing a cost/benefit analysis can fulfill this. It is necessary to manage mistakes made in strategy during the game, which can resolve issues down the road to have a successful business plan. There were three questions posed in our case study: What are the highest three unit profits?; What are the lowest percentage mark-up items?; and How would you use this in determining your business plan? These key areas will be discussed throughout the journal to express my understanding of the experience.

Since quarter one was the first quarter of this simulation, I was unaware of how difficult it was going to be to make all the different decisions. Firstly, I had to choose a Company name. Because I was selling computers, I thought that the name “Dev-Tech” was a perfect fit being that this simulation was about development and technology. Next, I had to choose a target segment. I knew going into this simulation that it would be better to invest in the more expensive goods as it would benefit me in the end. The segment that didn’t care about price was Mercedes, so that is the segment that I made my first priority.

1) Correct the Economic Order Quantity (EOQ) and Reorder point (ROP) quantities for each of the five items mentioned in the case.

Along with capacity, we also made it a focus to limit the amount of overtime and second shift workers. This kept our costs down and our profit margin wider. We paid attention to our inventory on hand and made sure to not schedule more production than was needed. Towards the later rounds, we really seemed to grasp the idea of the game, which can be seen in our large increase in profitability. In the Finance portion, we borrowed money in the first five weeks to pay off our current debt. As the game got into the later rounds we began paying off our current and long term debt because our profits were increasing at a higher rate. Overall, we believe that our group had a decent understanding of the concepts as we finished with high market share and profits.

With the bottleneck occurring so early in the process, it is critical that the early steps become more efficient. Hiring more personnel for this step would help ease the back up here but more staff would also increase expenses at a time when the company is trying to reduce costs. An alternative fix would be schedule regular pick ups and deliveries to reduce the uncertainty and efficiency of the way drop offs are occurring. Additionally, if pickups were scheduled, costs could be reduced as LAA could rely on their six trucks to make 4 scheduled pick up/deliveries and could eliminate the need to outsource to a private company. Another thought to address this step is to completely outsource the pick ups, thereby eliminating the cost of truck fuel, maintenance and other expenses. The major problem with the current delivery system in place is that drop offs can occur at any time during a 16-hour work day.

1) Correct the Economic Order Quantity (EOQ) and Reorder point (ROP) quantities for each of the five items mentioned in the case.

Andrews Corporation’s previous position after the first half of the simulation is expected for the strategies implemented; the company finished in 1st place at the end of Round 4. The company at the end of Round 4 had six products available in five assorted markets. Initial strategy that was implemented was to develop a Broad Differentiator strategy. Continual product development and addition of our product count as a process to dominate the market and perfect our customer buying criteria. Investment in corporate infrastructure to increase capacity and lower unit costs in volume production. The development of the final four rounds were very different as Andrews was not able to keep up with some of the

In this essay, two companies will be identified and described on how they utilize a queuing system. Only two of the four most basic waiting line structures will be discussed: single-server and multiple-server waiting lines. Since waiting is an integral part of many service related operations, it is an important area of analysis. Each queue system has its advantages and disadvantages, but with no doubt each company’s goal is to cut down on the waiting time and that customer returns. In particular, we examine their implementation of both processes and try to find solutions to improve the waiting line process.