I would like someone to complete this assignment for me. I already have a lot of components but need help especially with the scorecard and answering the questions with more depth.Learning Objectives
Upon completion of this lesson you will be able to:
1. Discern complexities and uncertainties associated with supplier selection.
2. Apply structured supplier qualification and selection processes.
3. Align supplier selection decisions to the firm’s business objectives.
Introduction
The toy retail industry is characterized by high competition, short lifecycle, and heavy
reliance on key selling seasons. Success in this industry hinges primarily on toymakers’
ability to design and develop new toys to meet constantly changing consumer tastes,
obtain licenses for popular characters and trademarks, secure adequate shelf space in
retail stores to support both existing and new products, and devise effective branding
and marketing strategies. These success factors put enormous pressure on toymakers
to ensure that the desired products are available for the selling season. This is exactly
the scenario of the Spin Master Toys case. The pressure to get to market is quite
evident and is heavily reliant on the procurement function to find and select the right
supplier under a tight timeline, tight quality standards/tolerances, and uncertainty.
Spin Master Toys (A) Case Assignments
Assignment Guidelines and Criteria
•
•
•
•
This assignment is a team assignment. Please see the Team Resources and other
Course Information Module provided under the Module link. This module will provide you
with the student teams list and team collaboration resources. Be sure to reach out to
your team members early to plan your collaborations for this assignment.
Additional guidelines and assignment questions are provided in the assignment’s M2L3:
Spin Master Toys (A) Case Team Assignment dropbox provided under the Module link.
This assignment will be assessed by a rubric located in the dropbox.
Your Team should submit ONE file to the assignment dropbox by the due date provided
on the course schedule.
Assignment Guidelines
•
•
•
Word document, max of two pages, single-spaced (not smaller than 11-point font), plus not
more than two pages of charts, tables, or figures. Citations can be listed on a separate page
and are NOT included in the page count.
This assignment will be assessed by the criteria provided in the rubric provided below.
Have ONE team member submit your team’s completed file to this dropbox.
Assignment Questions
Please answer the following questions:
1. What criteria should be used to select the supplier for the E-Chargers and why?
2. Evaluate (score) each supplier on the selection criteria discussed in number 1. Defend your
scoring scheme.
3. Based on 1 and 2, which supplier would you recommend, and why? What are the risks
associated with your choice and what mechanisms/contingencies would you put in place to
mitigate these risks?
Submitting Your Team Assignment:
•
•
Please have only ONE team member from your team submit your team’s completed
assignment file to this dropbox.
You should include your team name/number in the file name of the assignment document.
Points:100
Rubric
Team Case Rubric
Team Case Rubric
Criteria
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
OutcomeMain
Case Solution:
Responsiveness
to the Questions
Asked
Ratings
Pts
25 pts
20 pts
15 pts
10 pts
EXCELLENT:
Thoroughly
addresses all of the
assignment
questions or
requirements
GOOD: Addresses
most of the
assignment
questions or
requirements
NEEDS IMPROVEMENT:
Does not address most
of the questions or
does so superficially
UNACCEPTABLE:
Non-responsive to
the assignment
25 pt
Team Case Rubric
Criteria
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
OutcomeMain
Case Solution:
Quality of Answer
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
OutcomeMain
Case Solution:
Incorporation of
Course Reading
Material
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
OutcomeWritten
communication:
Organization
Ratings
Pts
40 pts
30 pts
20 pts
10 pts
EXCELLENT: Answer
demonstrates
evaluation,
synthesis, and
anaylsis of readings
and other material
used for the case
solution;
assumptions are
stated and justified
GOOD: Analysis
demonstrates the
previous, but lacks
support for the
conclusions/solutions
NEEDS
IMPROVEMENT:
Analysis is mainly
comprised of
restating what is in
the course readings
UNACCEPTABLE:
Analysis is too
superficial.
40 pt
20 pts
15 pts
10 pts
5 pts
EXCELLENT: Course
reading material is
included and
integrated into the
presentation;
citations are
provided
GOOD: Course
readings included
but not well
integrated into
presentation;
citations are
included
NEEDS IMPROVEMENT:
Course readings
included but not well
integrated into
presentation; citations
are not included
UNACCEPTABLE:
Course readings are
not included in the
presentation
5 pts
3 pts
1 pts
EXCELLENT: Written
work is well organized
and easy to
understand.
COMPETENT: The
organization is generally
good, but some of the parts
seem out of place.
NOT COMPETENT: The
presentation is disorganized to
the extent that it prevents
understanding of content.
20 pt
5 pts
Team Case Rubric
Criteria
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
OutcomeWritten
communication:
Grammar
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
OutcomeWritten
Communication:
Integration of
Writing Styles
Total Points: 100
Ratings
Pts
5 pts
3 pts
1 pts
EXCELLENT: The work
has been thoroughly
spell-checked and
proofread.
COMPETENT: There
are a few spelling and
grammatical errors.
NOT COMPETENT: There are frequent
misspelled words and serious
grammatical errors, indicating that time
was not taken to spell-check and
proofread.
5 pts
3 pts
1 pts
EXCELLENT: The team developed
a writing style that is uniform
throughout the presentation.
There is no indication that the
report involved multiple
authors.
COMPETENT: There is
some indication of
multiple authors (e.g.,
different fonts,etc.)
NOT COMPETENT: Report is
clearly the work of multiple
authors with different writing
styles, margins, printer fonts,
poor transition between
sections.
5 pts
5 pts
1. What criteria should be used to select the supplier for the E-Chargers and why?
Cost: Spin Master Toys needs to maximize their profit margins due to the short seasonal nature
of the toy industry. The case states that “retail sales for toy airplanes will peak from March to
mid-May, after which water toys will dominate.” (Haywood-Farmer and Mark) The company
has from mid-December to March to maximize profit as much as possible until consumer
interest shift.
Capacity: Spin Master Toys has already ruled out a manufacturer for consideration for the ECharger project due to this criterion. “Because of the tightness of its E-Chargers schedule, Spin
Master Toys decided not to consider Kin Seng as a potential supplier.” (Haywood-Farmer and
Mark) Spin Master Toys must include this criterion in future supplier considerations because
they need a supplier that has the resources available to meet the scheduled deadline and
capacity to expand production volume if necessary.
Reputation/Experience: The E-Chargers is a toy that is made of electronic components and due
to the tight project deadline, Spin Master Toys must select a supplier that has a workforce
knowledgeable in producing toys with electronics. There is not enough time for an
inexperienced supplier to gain the knowledge and experience necessary to meet the
demanding deadlines.
Management & Workforce: Spin Master Toys must evaluate the current state of the supplier’s
workforce and management team. The management team must have effective communication
throughout the stages of the project and the workforce must display a culture of innovation
that is up to meet the rapid innovation required for the E-Chargers project.
Tooling Time: This criterion is critical in this project because developing the customized molds
is the most time-consuming stage of the project. The case states, “This crucial step usually took
four weeks; the time required was usually factored into the design component.” (HaywoodFarmer and Mark)
Quality Levels: According to the article Best Practices in Supplier Qualification and Supply Chain
Protection, “A well-functioning vendor qualification programme can significantly reduce the
amount of testing needed on incoming materials, and it also reduces the risk of a final product
becoming contaminated or adulterated.” With the E-Chargers project success relying on tight
manufacturing tolerances, Spin Master Toys must select quality levels as a criterion.
Attention to Company: With this criterion Spin Master Toys must evaluate the micro level
questions from Module 1 of course SCM 822. “What percentage of their capacity do we
represent?”, “Do we have a technical relationship?”, “Who are the members of their senior
management?” These questions will help determine if the supplier has the self-interest,
relationships and capability to rise to the stringent demands of the project.
Supplier Risks (Financial Stability): A critical component of SMI involves identifying supplier
risk. Spin Master Toys must have 20,000 units ready to ship by December. The last thing the
company can afford to do is go into business with a vendor that is about to go under. Vendor
financial health should be thoroughly scrutinized by analyzing current ratio, revenue, financial
references and their party credit ratings.
2. Evaluate (score) each supplier on the selection criteria discussed in number 1. Defend
your scoring scheme.
Criteria
Company
Weight A
Cost
Capacity
Reputation/Experience
Management & Workforce
Tooling Time
Quality Level
Attention to Company
Supplier Risks (Financial Stability)
Score Total
Company A = Wai Lung Plastics
Company B = Wah Sheng Electronic Co.
Score = 0 or 1
13%
10%
11%
11%
13%
13%
9%
20%
Company
B
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
56%
67%
(**Delete Later**As stated in our Supply Market Intelligence reading, creating and identifying
intelligence is pretty unstructured. For this answer we could create a scoring system here or in
excel. Paste here and simply defend. M.Moore)
3. Based on 1 and 2, which supplier would you recommend, and why? What are the risks
associated with your choice and what mechanisms/contingencies would you put in
place to mitigate these risks?
(**Delete Later**Our answer here should align with the outcome of our scoring system and the
points identified in Q1. M.Moore)
Citations:
Altinoz, Dr. Cuneyt. “Avoid These Five Decision-Making Pitfalls in Supplier Selection.” Supply and
Demand Chain Executive, 24 May 2016, www.sdcexec.com/sourcingprocurement/article/12186091/avoid-these-five-decisionmaking-pitfalls-in-supplier-selection.
(Altinoz)
24-Aug-2015. “Best Practices in Supplier Qualification and Supply Chain Protection.” Nutraceutical
Business Review,
www.nutraceuticalbusinessreview.com/news/article_page/Best_practices_in_supplier_qualification
_and_supply_chain_protection/111375.
Noor, JehanZeb. “The Power of Supplier Collaboration and Rapid Supplier Qualification.” Recently Filed
RSS, 14 Oct. 2014,
www.scmr.com/article/the_power_of_supplier_collaboration_and_rapid_supplier_qualification.
(Noor)
Sáenz, María Jesús, and Luis Herrero. “Do You Have the Right Partners in Innovation?” Supply Chain
Management Review, Peerless Media, Mar. 2014.
(Sáenz and Herrero)
Haywood-Farmer, John S., and Ken Mark. 2001. “Spin Master Toys (A): Finding A Manufacturer For EChargers.” HBR Case. Product #: 901D01-PDF-ENG. PUBLICATION DATE: January 19.
Criteria
Weight Company A Company B
Cost
Capacity
Reputation/Experience
Management & Workforce
Tooling Time
Quality Level
Attention to Company
Supplier Risks (Financial Stability)
Score Total
Company A = Wai Lung Plastics
Company B = Wah Sheng Electronic Co.
Score = 0 or 1
13%
10%
11%
11%
13%
13%
9%
20%
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
0
56%
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
67%
Spin Master Toys Vendor Scorecard
Please assign vendor a score of 1-5 and provide high level reason for sore.
Cost Structure
Example>> Offers best opportunity to maximize profit
Wah Shing – Score
2
2
Wah Shing – Score
Wai Lung Score
3
3
Wai Lung Score
Score
0
Wah Shing – Score
0
Wai Lung Score
Basis For Score:
Score
0
Wah Shing – Score
0
Wai Lung Score
Basis For Score:
Score
0
Wah Shing – Score
0
Wai Lung Score
Basis For Score:
Score
0
Wah Shing – Score
0
Wai Lung Score
Basis For Score:
Score
0
Wah Shing – Score
0
Wai Lung Score
Basis For Score:
Score
0
Wah Shing – Score
0
Wai Lung Score
Basis For Score:
Score
Capacity
Ability to meet schedule deadline and provide access capacity if needed
Reputation/Experience
Industry knowledge and expereince
Management & Workforce
Current state of workforce team and level of effective communication
Tooling Time
Quality Levels
Attention to Company
Supplier Risk (Financial Stability)
Score
Criteria Scores:
Cost Structure
Capacity
Reputation/Experience
Management and Workforce
Tooling Time
Quality Levels
Attention to Company
Supplier Risk (Financial Stability)
Total Score:
0
Weight:
0.25
0.05
0.05
0.15
0.05
0.2
0.10
0.15
1
Basis For Score:
Basis For Score:
0
Wah Shing Weighted Score
0.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.5
Wai Lung Weighted Score
0.75
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.75
1. What criteria should be used to select the supplier for the E-Chargers and why?
Cost: Spin Master Toys needs to maximize their profit margins due to the short seasonal nature
of the toy industry. The case states that “retail sales for toy airplanes will peak from March to
mid-May, after which water toys will dominate.” (Haywood-Farmer and Mark) The company
has from mid-December to March to maximize profit as much as possible until consumer
interest shift.
Capacity: Spin Master Toys has already ruled out a manufacturer for consideration for the ECharger project due to this criterion. “Because of the tightness of its E-Chargers schedule, Spin
Master Toys decided not to consider Kin Seng as a potential supplier.” (Haywood-Farmer and
Mark) Spin Master Toys must include this criterion in future supplier considerations because
they need a supplier that has the resources available to meet the scheduled deadline and
capacity to expand production volume if necessary.
Reputation/Experience: The E-Chargers is a toy that is made of electronic components and due
to the tight project deadline, Spin Master Toys must select a supplier that has a workforce
knowledgeable in producing toys with electronics. There is not enough time for an
inexperienced supplier to gain the knowledge and experience necessary to meet the
demanding deadlines.
Management & Workforce: Spin Master Toys must evaluate the current state of the supplier’s
workforce and management team. The management team must have effective communication
throughout the stages of the project and the workforce must display a culture of innovation
that is up to meet the rapid innovation required for the E-Chargers project.
Tooling Time: This criterion is critical in this project because developing the customized molds
is the most time-consuming stage of the project. The case states, “This crucial step usually took
four weeks; the time required was usually factored into the design component.” (HaywoodFarmer and Mark)
Quality Levels: According to the article Best Practices in Supplier Qualification and Supply Chain
Protection, “A well-functioning vendor qualification programme can significantly reduce the
amount of testing needed on incoming materials, and it also reduces the risk of a final product
becoming contaminated or adulterated.” With the E-Chargers project success relying on tight
manufacturing tolerances, Spin Master Toys must select quality levels as a criterion.
Attention to Company: With this criterion Spin Master Toys must evaluate the micro level
questions from Module 1 of course SCM 822. “What percentage of their capacity do we
represent?”, “Do we have a technical relationship?”, “Who are the members of their senior
management?” These questions will help determine if the supplier has the self-interest,
relationships and capability to rise to the stringent demands of the project.
Supplier Risks (Financial Stability): A critical component of SMI involves identifying supplier
risk. Spin Master Toys must have 20,000 units ready to ship by December. The last thing the
company can afford to do is go into business with a vendor that is about to go under. Vendor
financial health should be thoroughly scrutinized by analyzing current ratio, revenue, financial
references and their party credit ratings.
2. Evaluate (score) each supplier on the selection criteria discussed in number 1. Defend
your scoring scheme.
Criteria
Company
Weight A
Cost
Capacity
Reputation/Experience
Management & Workforce
Tooling Time
Quality Level
Attention to Company
Supplier Risks (Financial Stability)
Score Total
Company A = Wai Lung Plastics
Company B = Wah Sheng Electronic Co.
Score = 0 or 1
13%
10%
11%
11%
13%
13%
9%
20%
Company
B
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
56%
67%
The selection criteria discussed previously was designed with Spin Master Toys strategic goals in
mind. That goal for Spin Master Toys is to find a manufacturing vendor that will be able to hit all
of the due dates that they set in order to be able to meet their December 7, 1999 delivery date.
The criteria being scored above are all key indicators as to whether or not Spin Master has
made the right decision when it comes to choosing a vendor for this project. Each criteria has a
specific weight which might be higher or lower based on the importance of that particular
criteria as it relates to selecting a vendor for this particular project. The score for each criteria is
very simple, the number 1 indicates that the company has displayed to Alex and Ronnen that
they do possess that capability while a 0 indicated that they don’t or that this criteria is not one
of their strong suits. That percentage is then added up accordingly in order to determine from a
quantitative perspective, which vendor can get the job done in the most timely and cost
effective timeframe.
(**Delete Later**As stated in our Supply Market Intelligence reading, creating and identifying
intelligence is pretty unstructured. For this answer we could create a scoring system here or in
excel. Paste here and simply defend. M.Moore)
3. Based on 1 and 2, which supplier would you recommend, and why? What are the risks
associated with your choice and what mechanisms/contingencies would you put in
place to mitigate these risks?
(**Delete Later**Our answer here should align with the outcome of our scoring system and the
points identified in Q1. M.Moore)
Citations:
Altinoz, Dr. Cuneyt. “Avoid These Five Decision-Making Pitfalls in Supplier Selection.” Supply and
Demand Chain Executive, 24 May 2016, www.sdcexec.com/sourcingprocurement/article/12186091/avoid-these-five-decisionmaking-pitfalls-in-supplier-selection.
(Altinoz)
24-Aug-2015. “Best Practices in Supplier Qualification and Supply Chain Protection.” Nutraceutical
Business Review,
www.nutraceuticalbusinessreview.com/news/article_page/Best_practices_in_supplier_qualification
_and_supply_chain_protection/111375.
Noor, JehanZeb. “The Power of Supplier Collaboration and Rapid Supplier Qualification.” Recently Filed
RSS, 14 Oct. 2014,
www.scmr.com/article/the_power_of_supplier_collaboration_and_rapid_supplier_qualification.
(Noor)
Sáenz, María Jesús, and Luis Herrero. “Do You Have the Right Partners in Innovation?” Supply Chain
Management Review, Peerless Media, Mar. 2014.
(Sáenz and Herrero)
Haywood-Farmer, John S., and Ken Mark. 2001. “Spin Master Toys (A): Finding A Manufacturer For EChargers.” HBR Case. Product #: 901D01-PDF-ENG. PUBLICATION DATE: January 19.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
Why Choose Us
- 100% non-plagiarized Papers
- 24/7 /365 Service Available
- Affordable Prices
- Any Paper, Urgency, and Subject
- Will complete your papers in 6 hours
- On-time Delivery
- Money-back and Privacy guarantees
- Unlimited Amendments upon request
- Satisfaction guarantee
How it Works
- Click on the “Place Order” tab at the top menu or “Order Now” icon at the bottom and a new page will appear with an order form to be filled.
- Fill in your paper’s requirements in the "PAPER DETAILS" section.
- Fill in your paper’s academic level, deadline, and the required number of pages from the drop-down menus.
- Click “CREATE ACCOUNT & SIGN IN” to enter your registration details and get an account with us for record-keeping and then, click on “PROCEED TO CHECKOUT” at the bottom of the page.
- From there, the payment sections will show, follow the guided payment process and your order will be available for our writing team to work on it.