Space Age Furniture Company
Read “Space Age Furniture Company” in Chapter 9 of your text. Respond to the following and include any Materials Requirement Planning (MRP) calculations:
The final case study should demonstrate your understanding of the reading as well as the implications of new knowledge. The paper should integrate readings, scholarly sources, and class discussions into work and life experiences. It may include explanation and examples from previous events as well as implications for future applications.
The purpose of the final case study is for you to culminate the learning achieved in the course by describing your understanding and application of knowledge in the field of operations management.
Writing the Final Paper
The Final Paper:
· Space Age Furniture Company
· The Space Age Furniture Company manufactures tables and cabinets to hold microwave ovens and portable televisions. Theseproducts are made in various sizes and with various features, but all follow basically the same production and assemblyoperations. However, two of these products—the Saturn microwave stand and the Gemini TV stand—have a part (no. 3079) thatrequires machining on a special lathe used only for making that part. At present the machine is run by Ed Szewczak, a machinistwho also operates other machines in Space Age’s shop. Once set up and started, the lathe can run nearly unattended. However,the machinist must be present (even if not actually attending the machine) any time one of the machines, including the lathe, isin operation. At present, Ed works a regular 40-hour week. However, due to the workload for producing part 3079, it has beennecessary to schedule frequent overtime for him in order to finish the necessary parts on time.
· Coral Snodgrass, operations manager for Space Age, has just heard from Ed’s foremen that Ed is becoming unhappy about somuch overtime. As Coral knows, Ed has been with the company a long time and is an excellent, reliable employee. Skilledmachinists with Ed’s experience and employment record are extremely difficult to find. Coral wonders what can be done toalleviate this problem.
· Recently, Space Age began using an MRP system that has helped reduce inventories greatly and improve on-time deliveries. Infact, Space Age carries no finished-goods inventory. Instead, everything in the master schedule is being produced for customerorders, so all products are shipped almost immediately. Previously Space Age had estimated that it cost $1.25 per week to storeeach Gemini and $1.50 per week to store each Saturn that wasn’t shipped immediately. The master schedule for producing thesetwo items for the next six weeks is shown below.
|
Master Schedule |
||||||
|
Week |
||||||
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
|
|
Gemini |
600 |
400 |
700 |
500 |
400 |
600 |
|
Saturn |
300 |
400 |
400 |
600 |
300 |
300 |
· The part in question, 3079, is used in two different subassemblies: no. 435, which is used in the Gemini TV stand, and no. 257,which is used in the Saturn microwave stand. One of part 3079 is used in each subassembly, and one of each subassembly is usedin each of the final products.
· Part 3079 may be produced in any quantity since the lathe that makes it is not used for anything else. However, both of thesubassemblies are produced using the same equipment. To minimize change over time, Space Age has decided that thesesubassemblies should be made in minimum quantities of 1,000 at a time, although there is no problem with capacity on theequipment that makes them. In fact, an order for 1,000 of subassembly 435 is due to be received in week 1, as is an order for1,000 of subassembly 257. Lead time for both these subassemblies is one week, and no inventory is expected to be on hand foreither part at the beginning of week 1. There is not any on-hand inventory of part 3079, and there are no orders in process.
· Ed Szewczak earns $22 per hour and gets a 50% premium for any overtime work. Whenever part 3079 is made, there is no set-uptime, but processing takes 0.03 hour per unit. It costs $0.25 per week to hold any of these parts over from one week to the next.The cost of holding each subassembly in inventory is $0.75 per unit per week.
Grading Rubic
Total Possible Score: 28.00
Total: 2.50
Distinguished – Accurately develops an MRP using the information in the case including the production of sub-assemblies in lot sizes of 1,000.
Proficient – Develops an MRP using the information in the case including the production of sub-assemblies in lot sizes of 1,000. The calculations include minor inaccuracies, or details are missing.
Basic – Partially develops an MRP using the information in the case including the production of sub-assemblies in lot sizes of 1,000. The calculations include inaccuracies, or details are missing.
Below Expectations – Attempts to develop an MRP using the information in the case including the production of sub-assemblies in lot sizes of 1,000; however, the calculations include major inaccuracies or significant details are missing.
Non-Performance – The MRP, using sub-assemblies in lot sizes of 1,000, is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.
Total: 3.00
Distinguished – Suggests many feasible ways for improvements over using sub-assemblies in lot sizes of 1,000.
Proficient – Suggests several feasible ways for improvements over using sub-assemblies in lot sizes of 1,000. Minor details are missing.
Basic – Suggests limited ways for improvements over using sub-assemblies in lot sizes of 1,000. Relevant details are missing.
Below Expectations – Attempts to suggest ways for improvements over using sub-assemblies in lot sizes of 1,000; however, significant details are missing.
Non-Performance – The suggestions of ways for improvements over using sub-assemblies in lot sizes of 1,000 are either nonexistent or lack the components described in the assignment instructions.
Total: 3.00
Distinguished – Thoroughly analyzes the trade-offs between overtime and inventory costs.
Proficient – Analyzes the trade-offs between overtime and inventory costs. The analysis is slightly underdeveloped.
Basic – Partially analyzes the trade-offs between overtime and inventory costs. The analysis is underdeveloped.
Below Expectations – Attempts to analyze the trade-offs between overtime and inventory costs; however, the analysis is significantly underdeveloped.
Non-Performance – The analysis of trade-offs between overtime and inventory costs is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.
Total: 2.50
Distinguished – Accurately calculates the new MRP that improves the base MRP.
Proficient – Calculates the new MRP that improves the base MRP. Minor inaccuracies are present.
Basic – Calculates the new MRP that improves the base MRP. Inaccuracies are present.
Below Expectations – Attempts to calculate the new MRP that improves the base MRP; however significant inaccuracies are present.
Non-Performance – The calculation of a new MRP that improves the base MRP is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.
Total: 3.00
Distinguished – Thoroughly compares and contrasts the different types of product processing. Expertly applies concepts and vocabulary from the text and additional scholarly sources.
Proficient – Compares and contrasts the different types of product processing. Sufficiently applies concepts and vocabulary from the text and additional scholarly sources.
Basic – Briefly compares and contrasts the different types of product processing. Minimally applies concepts and vocabulary from the text and additional scholarly sources.
Below Expectations – Attempts to compare and contrast the different types of product processing; however, concepts and vocabulary from the text and additional scholarly sources are not applied.
Non-Performance – The comparisons of the different types of product processing are either nonexistent or lack the components described in the assignment instructions.
Total: 2.50
Distinguished – Comprehensively describes ways that management can track job status and product location during production. Utilizes strong, relevant examples to support the description.
Proficient – Describes ways that management can track job status and product location during production. Utilizes relevant examples to support the description.
Basic – Partially describes ways that management can track job status and product location during production. Utilizes limited examples to support the description.
Below Expectations – Attempts to describe ways that management can track job status and product location during production example; however, examples are not utilized to support the description.
Non-Performance – The description of ways that management can track job status and product location during production is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.
Total: 3.50
Distinguished – Expertly recommends many reasonable and appropriate changes that are beneficial and/or add value to the customer.
Proficient – Recommends several appropriate changes that are beneficial and/or add value to the customer. The recommendations are slightly underdeveloped.
Basic – Recommends limited changes that are beneficial and/or add value to the customer. The recommendations are underdeveloped.
Below Expectations – Attempts to recommend changes that are beneficial and/or add value to the customer; however, the recommendations are significantly underdeveloped.
Non-Performance – The recommendation of changes is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.
Total: 2.00
Distinguished – The paper is logically organized with a well-written introduction, thesis statement, and conclusion.
Proficient – The paper is logically organized with an introduction, thesis statement, and conclusion. One of these requires improvement.
Basic – The paper is organized with an introduction, thesis statement, and conclusion. One or more of the introduction, thesis statement, and/or conclusion require improvement.
Below Expectations – The paper is loosely organized with an introduction, thesis statement, and conclusion. The introduction, thesis statement, and/or conclusion require much improvement.
Non-Performance – The introduction, thesis statement, and conclusion are either nonexistent or lack the components described in the assignment instructions.
Total: 0.75
Distinguished – Clearly and comprehensively explains in detail the issue to be considered, delivering all relevant information necessary for a full understanding.
Proficient – Clearly explains in detail the issue to be considered, delivering enough relevant information for an adequate understanding.
Basic – Briefly recognizes the issue to be considered, delivering minimal information for a basic understanding.
Below Expectations – Briefly recognizes the issue to be considered, but may not deliver additional information necessary for a basic understanding.
Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Total: 0.75
Distinguished – Develops a logical, consistent plan to solve a problem, identifies consequences of the solution, and can clearly communicate the reason for choosing the solution.
Proficient – Carefully chooses among alternatives, and develops a logical, consistent approach to problem solving.
Basic – Takes into account and eliminates less acceptable approaches to problem solving.
Below Expectations – Takes into account a single approach and uses the approach to problem solving.
Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Total: 0.75
Distinguished – Autonomously synthesizes or draws conclusions by combining examples, facts, or theories from multiple disciplines.
Proficient – Autonomously correlates examples, facts, or theories from multiple disciplines.
Basic – Attempts to correlate examples, facts, or theories from multiple disciplines.
Below Expectations – When prompted, displays inconsistent examples, facts, or theories from multiple disciplines.
Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Total: 0.75
Distinguished – Uses appropriate, pertinent, and persuasive content to discover and develop sophisticated ideas within the context of the discipline, shaping the work as a whole.
Proficient – Uses appropriate and pertinent content to discover ideas within the context of the discipline, shaping the work as a whole.
Basic – Uses appropriate and pertinent content, but does not apply it toward discovering or developing ideas. Overall, content assists in shaping the written work.
Below Expectations – Uses content, though it may be unrelated or inappropriate to the topic. Content does not contribute toward the development of the written work, and may distract the reader from its purpose.
Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Total: 0.50
Distinguished – Displays meticulous comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains no errors, and is very easy to understand.
Proficient – Displays comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains only a few minor errors, and is mostly easy to understand.
Basic – Displays basic comprehension of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains a few errors, which may slightly distract the reader.
Below Expectations – Fails to display basic comprehension of syntax or mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains major errors, which distract the reader.
Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Total: 0.50
Distinguished – Accurately uses APA formatting consistently throughout the paper, title page, and reference page.
Proficient – Exhibits APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout contains a few minor errors.
Basic – Exhibits basic knowledge of APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout does not meet all APA requirements.
Below Expectations – Fails to exhibit basic knowledge of APA formatting. There are frequent errors, making the layout difficult to distinguish as APA.
Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Total: 0.50
Distinguished – The length of the paper is equivalent to the required number of correctly formatted pages.
Proficient – The length of the paper is nearly equivalent to the required number of correctly formatted pages.
Basic – The length of the paper is equivalent to at least three quarters of the required number of correctly formatted pages.
Below Expectations – The length of the paper is equivalent to at least one half of the required number of correctly formatted pages.
Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Total: 1.50
Distinguished – Uses more than the required number of scholarly sources, providing compelling evidence to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.
Proficient – Uses required number of scholarly sources to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.
Basic – Uses less than the required number of sources to support ideas. Some sources may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are used within the body of the assignment. Citations may not be formatted correctly.
Below Expectations – Uses inadequate number of sources that provide little or no support for ideas. Sources used may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are not used within the body of the assignment. Citations are not formatted correctly.
Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.
Read moreEach paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.
Read moreThanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.
Read moreYour email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.
Read moreBy sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.
Read more