物流模拟测试题3

现代物流测试题（三）

I. Comprehensive understanding

1.The production of large quantity of product for each line change results in a lower per-unit

cost on a full cost basis, as well as more units for a given plant capacity.

2.Inventory planning is critical to successful manufacturing operations.

3.To adopt TPL will be helpful to reduce the firm’s cost.

4.Customer service is a measure of the effectiveness of the logistics system in creating time and

place utility for a product.

5.Firms’ competitive position depends on supply chain management.

II. Decide whether the following statements are true or false by writing “T” for true and “F” for false.

1.The responsibility for managing the disposal of surplus materials belongs to the materials

manager.

2.Air carriers generally transport products of low value and high density or weight.

3.The savings realized from forward buying must exceed the additional inventory carrying

cost.

4.Short production runs minimize the amount of inventory held throughout the logistics system

by producing quantities near to current demand. But there are increased costs of setups and line change associated with short production runs.

5.Quality control is the key to successfully managing the purchasing function.

6.Speculative stock is inventory held for satisfying current demand.

7.Logistics’ responsibility ends when the product is delivered to the customer.

8.Raw materials inventory in excess of that required to support production can result from

speculative purchased made because management expects a future price increase or future supply is in doubt.

9.The firm should pay higher prices to obtain materials with higher quality levels than those

specified by manufacturing.

10.Warehousing has three basic functions: movement, storage, and information transfer.

III. Calculation

Using the format shown in the table, determine the optimal forward buying( in month) given the following information.

a. Monthly usage is $2000

b. Expected price increase is 10%

c. Inventory carrying cost is 30%

d. The ordering cost is $20per order

e. the vendor pays the freight

IV. Case Study

Please read the following case and answer questions.

Handy Andy, Inc.

Handy Andy, Inc, produced garbage/trash compactors at a factory in St. Louis, Missouri, and sold them throughout the United States. Nearly all sales were in large urban area where trash-collection costs were high.

The basic unit was about 3 feet high, 2 feet deep, and 11/2 feet wide. A deluxe model had the same dimensions but contained more features. Because most of the sales represented units to be placed in existing kitchens, a wide variety of colors and trims were manufactured, providing an exterior that would match almost any kitchen décor. The standard model came in eight colors and four different trims for a total of 32 different combinations. Retail prices were set by the dealer, with prices for the standard model between $390 and $450. Sales in an area were usually slow until trash collectors, faced with rising landfill costs, raised their rates per can of refuse picked up.

Because of the sporadic sales patterns and the wide number of colors and trims available, retails usually stocked only a display unit or two. They had available an expensively printed brochure that included paint chips so buyers could select the color and finish they wanted. When the retailer completed the sale, he or she would tale the order and promise delivery and installation within a given number of days. In each major city, there was one major Handy Andy dealer (factory distributor). Each dealer maintained a complete stock of all styles and trims of the Handy Andy compactors. (Handy Andy, Inc, insisted that these factory distributors stock at least five units each of the 47 different styles available.) The general agreement between the factory

distributors and Handy Andy was that the factory distributor would deliver and install the compactor within 5 days after the distributor. For the delivery and installation, the factory distributor received 9 percent of the unit’s wholesale price, half paid by distributor who had made the sale and half paid by Handy Andy as a credit against future orders.

Jose Ortega worked in Handy Andy’s distribution department in the St. Louis headquarters. He currently was working on a project to determine whether the compactor’s warranty should be extended from 1 year to 2 years. The units were well built, and there had been almost no warranty work requested in the first year of each model’s life. Because Handy Andy would have no records of work performed after the 1-year period had expired, Ortega was randomly contacting buyers, using long-distance phones. Their names and phone numbers came from postcards they had mailed in to register the warranty at time of purchase. The phrase at the bottom of the card referring to Handy Andy’s records was to keep the buyer from waiting for a problem to occur and then mailing in the card. Whether this statement was necessary was unknown because so few defects had been reported. Ortega was in the process of contacting 500 purchasers who had owned the compactors for between 1 year and 4 years (when they had first been introduced) to determine whether the compactors had required repairs and, if so, the extent and cost of the repairs. In talking to purchasers, Ortega was impressed by the fact that there were remarkably few complaints involving the durability of the compactors.

Another type of complaint did arise, however, one that Ortega had difficulty understanding until he heard many buyers, usually from the same few cities, well an almost identical story. It appeared that in these cities the factory distributor would contact individuals who had purchased Handy Andy compactors from them cancel the original order. The factory distributor told the buyer that the model originally requested was out of stock but that a better model could be supplied for the same price. The factory distributors also indicated that the buyers would receive better service if they bought from them because, they claimed, they provided service for all Handy Andy models sold in thrie area. In addition, the factory distributors in these few cities indicated that they, not Handy Andy, lnc., stock behind the 1-year warranty.

Ortega realized that he was uncovering a larger problem that he had been assigned to explore. He chatted briefly with his supervisor, who told him to revise the format of his interview to include a few more questions concerning the installation. She also told him to begin calling individuals who had owned compactors for less than a year. Ortega did this, and the only new information he uncovered was that the factory distributors in almost all cities did a better job of installing compactors that they had sold than they did those sold by smaller dealers. The delivery was faster (in terms of elapsed time since sale), more time was spent explaining to the customer how the compactor worked, and phone calls were made to the customer 3 days and 10 days after installation to make certain that the customer had no additional questions concerning the compactor’s operation. When a compactor that had been sold by a smaller dealer was delivered, it was frequently left in the middle of the kitchen with scarcely a word exchanged between the customer and the installation personnel.

Ortega had another meeting scheduled with his supervisor. As he entered her office, he was surprised to see Handy Andy’s vice president of marketing also sitting in the office. Ortega’s supervisor asked him to tell the vice president the results of his interviews.

The marketing vice president asked Ortega, “Do you think this pattern exists in all markets?”

“NO,” was Ortega’s reply. “I’d say it was a problem in Jacksonville, Baltimore, Cleveland,

Louisville, Denver, and San Diego. It may be a problem in Dallas and New Orleans. My sample wasn’t very well structured in a metropolitan market sense; you will recall that it was a nationwide sample that was trying to look at repairs.”

Question

1.Is this a customer service problem? Why or why not?

2.Marketing channels are the arrangement of intermediaries (wholesalers, retailers, and

the like) that the firm uses to achieve its marketing objectives. Is the problem discussed

in Handy Andy’s marketing channels? Why or why not?

3.Logistics channels handle the physical flow of goods or services. Is the problem

discussed in Handy Andy’s logistics channel? Why or why not?

4.It appears that the factory distributors are exploiting the smaller dealers. Yet from what

we can tell, Handy Andy in St. Louis has heard no complaints from the smaller dealers.

Why wouldn’t they complain?

5.What should Handy Andy’s marketing vice president do? Why?

6.Redesign the warranty postcard, staying within the same dimensions, and include

questions or statements that will make it easier for Handy Andy headquarters to detect

whether installation practices of the typ0e discussed in this case occur.

7.In the case is the statement “The factory distributors in these few cities indicated that

they, not Handy Andy, lnc., stood behind the 1-year warranty.” Is this a problem for

Handy Andy? Why or why not?

8.Assume that the situation described in question 7 is a problem. How should the firm deal

with it?