Management Capstone 4 power point slides 300 speaker notes per slide References APA format
marnique1032
Presentaion1Allen.pptxDixie
Product Manager: Allen Rebot
High End Segment
1
Research and Development
Decisions in this round targeted
Product Age
0.0 years
Reliability
20,000 – 25,000
Product differentiation
8 Pfmn to 9 Pfmn
Size 12 to Size 11.6
No change to MTBF
Satisfying the needs of technology lovers is Digby’s sensor, Dixie. Dixie is our best combination of high performance melded and a compact size that Digby has to offer. Sales were good this year, but expectations change with each passing year. Customers are expecting an increase in performance, with a decrease in size. Dixie’s performance was at an 8 and brought up to a 9. This surpassed the customers’ expectation of a 0.9 raise. The size went from 12 to 11.6. The expectation of customers’ was a 0.9 decrease in size. This differs from the reliability in that customers do care much for it to be much better or worse than what it currently is at, thus the reliability was left unchanged. The time of release that was wanted by the customers was 0.0 years. The want for a new product to be out as soon as possible brought about a sacrifice. The desired changes, if made, would have brought the product release up to nearly a two years with development. This was reduced at the expense of a slightly larger sensor. The higher processing speed was given to make up for this difference. With these changes made, the Dixie sensor was released after only a year and six months.
2
Marketing
Decisions in this round targeted
Price
$36
Forecasted Demand
426
Product promotion
$900
Product sales
$13,894
Dixie is very much a niche-focused product. Customers were willing to pay between $30 and $40 for a high end sensor. To say competitive, and still bring in a profit, the sensor was sold at $36 a piece. While sales of the item did bring in $13,894, this could have been higher. The price could have been placed at $40 and still sold equally as well. Due to the lowering of the price, we may have actually lost sales due to customers thinking that they would be buying an inferior product compared to our competitors (LaPlante, 2005). The forecasted demand of the item was placed at 426 predicted sales. This prediction was off slightly, as we were left with $121 of inventory remaining. The budget for product promotion was raised from $800 to $900. A larger promotional budget might have yielded more sales and the selling of the entirety of our inventory.
3
Production
Decisions in this round targeted
Production volume
426
Production capacity
400
Capacity utilization
96%
Production automation
3.0
The unit sales forecast for the Dixie sensor was at 426 units. Our facility can currently produce 400 of of the sensors with our first shift capacity untouched. We had a previous inventory of 40 Dixie sensors which reduced the number our facility needed to produce. The number needed to be made by the facility dropped to 386 Dixie sensors. The pull of 386 ordered sensors brought the facility up to a capacity utilization of 96%. No new capacity was needed. What was not taken into consideration was the production of faulty sensors that would simply not leave the factory. Out of the 386 ordered sensors, only 382 were without defect. If we divide the units produced by the units ordered, we find that the facility has a successful production rate of 98.9% (Kenton, 2018). To reach our intended goal of 426 units, the ordered number of Dixie sensors should have been placed at 390 Dixie sensors. Given the success rate of 98.9%, this would have yielded the 386 sensors required to meet the forecasted unit number in combination with our inventory. Automation of the plant was kept the same.
4
References
Kenton, W. (2018) Production Rate. Retrieved from https:// www.investopedia.com/terms/p/production-rate.asp
LaPlante, A. (2005) Asking Consumers to Compare May Have Unintended Results. Retrieved from https:// www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/asking-consumers- compare-may-have-unintended-results
