DIU Lvauation. LAATIPICNAKHESPLERPRIMAItemsWeight Scoring Rating Scoring Rating Scoring RatingReference0.15857590Adequacy ofproposed designmethodology0.30909085Qualification ofproposed staff0.55858085Total Technical scoreActivate WindowsGo to Settings to activate WiodfE Chapter7 A-Resou.pdfChapter12- Project..pdfE Chapter8- Project.pdf וש ו23n- ,ןוםירוש ושיeיס elYour co pany a Management consultant firm is awarded acontract to assist a client to procure a design consultantwho will do the design work for shopping complex. Withprequalification three firms NAK consultant, HESPLERconsultant and the PRIMA consultant submitted bids. Usethe following criteria to evaluate the bid. 80% by weight willbe given for quality and 20% by weight will be given toprice. The procurement team preliminary evaluation of theproposals and result is as shown below. Complete theevaluation, rank the proposal according to their total scoreand write your recommendation to the owner.

Find the given details below: Given Details: NAK HESPLER PRIMA Items Weight Scoring…

NAK HESPLER PRIMA Items Weight Scoring Rating Scoring Rating Scoring Rating Reference 0.15 85 75 90 Adequacy of proposed design methodology 0.30 90 90 85 Qualification of proposed staff 0.55 85 80 85 TotalTechnical score

NAK HESPLER PRIMA Items Weight Scoring Rating Scoring Rating Scoring Rating Reference 0.15 85 75 90 Adequacy of proposed design methodology 0.30 90 90 85 Qualification of proposed staff 0.55 85 80 85 TotalTechnical score

Purchasing and Supply Chain Management

6th Edition

ISBN:9781285869681

Author:Robert M. Monczka, Robert B. Handfield, Larry C. Giunipero, James L. Patterson

Publisher:Robert M. Monczka, Robert B. Handfield, Larry C. Giunipero, James L. Patterson

ChapterC: Cases

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 5.3SD: Scenario 4 Sharon Gillespie, a new buyer at Visionex, Inc., was reviewing quotations for a tooling...

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Scenario 4 Sharon Gillespie, a new buyer at Visionex, Inc., was reviewing quotations for a tooling contract submitted by four suppliers. She was evaluating the quotes based on price, target quality levels, and delivery lead time promises. As she was working, her manager, Dave Cox, entered her office. He asked how everything was progressing and if she needed any help. She mentioned she was reviewing quotations from suppliers for a tooling contract. Dave asked who the interested suppliers were and if she had made a decision. Sharon indicated that one supplier, Apex, appeared to fit exactly the requirements Visionex had specified in the proposal. Dave told her to keep up the good work. Later that day Dave again visited Sharons office. He stated that he had done some research on the suppliers and felt that another supplier, Micron, appeared to have the best track record with Visionex. He pointed out that Sharons first choice was a new supplier to Visionex and there was some risk involved with that choice. Dave indicated that it would please him greatly if she selected Micron for the contract. The next day Sharon was having lunch with another buyer, Mark Smith. She mentioned the conversation with Dave and said she honestly felt that Apex was the best choice. When Mark asked Sharon who Dave preferred, she answered, Micron. At that point Mark rolled his eyes and shook his head. Sharon asked what the body language was all about. Mark replied, Look, I know youre new but you should know this. I heard last week that Daves brother-in-law is a new part owner of Micron. I was wondering how soon it would be before he started steering business to that company. He is not the straightest character. Sharon was shocked. After a few moments, she announced that her original choice was still the best selection. At that point Mark reminded Sharon that she was replacing a terminated buyer who did not go along with one of Daves previous preferred suppliers. What should Sharon do in this situation?
Scenario 4 Sharon Gillespie, a new buyer at Visionex, Inc., was reviewing quotations for a tooling contract submitted by four suppliers. She was evaluating the quotes based on price, target quality levels, and delivery lead time promises. As she was working, her manager, Dave Cox, entered her office. He asked how everything was progressing and if she needed any help. She mentioned she was reviewing quotations from suppliers for a tooling contract. Dave asked who the interested suppliers were and if she had made a decision. Sharon indicated that one supplier, Apex, appeared to fit exactly the requirements Visionex had specified in the proposal. Dave told her to keep up the good work. Later that day Dave again visited Sharons office. He stated that he had done some research on the suppliers and felt that another supplier, Micron, appeared to have the best track record with Visionex. He pointed out that Sharons first choice was a new supplier to Visionex and there was some risk involved with that choice. Dave indicated that it would please him greatly if she selected Micron for the contract. The next day Sharon was having lunch with another buyer, Mark Smith. She mentioned the conversation with Dave and said she honestly felt that Apex was the best choice. When Mark asked Sharon who Dave preferred, she answered, Micron. At that point Mark rolled his eyes and shook his head. Sharon asked what the body language was all about. Mark replied, Look, I know youre new but you should know this. I heard last week that Daves brother-in-law is a new part owner of Micron. I was wondering how soon it would be before he started steering business to that company. He is not the straightest character. Sharon was shocked. After a few moments, she announced that her original choice was still the best selection. At that point Mark reminded Sharon that she was replacing a terminated buyer who did not go along with one of Daves previous preferred suppliers. Ethical decisions that affect a buyers ethical perspective usually involve the organizational environment, cultural environment, personal environment, and industry environment. Analyze this scenario using these four variables.
Scenario 4 Sharon Gillespie, a new buyer at Visionex, Inc., was reviewing quotations for a tooling contract submitted by four suppliers. She was evaluating the quotes based on price, target quality levels, and delivery lead time promises. As she was working, her manager, Dave Cox, entered her office. He asked how everything was progressing and if she needed any help. She mentioned she was reviewing quotations from suppliers for a tooling contract. Dave asked who the interested suppliers were and if she had made a decision. Sharon indicated that one supplier, Apex, appeared to fit exactly the requirements Visionex had specified in the proposal. Dave told her to keep up the good work. Later that day Dave again visited Sharons office. He stated that he had done some research on the suppliers and felt that another supplier, Micron, appeared to have the best track record with Visionex. He pointed out that Sharons first choice was a new supplier to Visionex and there was some risk involved with that choice. Dave indicated that it would please him greatly if she selected Micron for the contract. The next day Sharon was having lunch with another buyer, Mark Smith. She mentioned the conversation with Dave and said she honestly felt that Apex was the best choice. When Mark asked Sharon who Dave preferred, she answered, Micron. At that point Mark rolled his eyes and shook his head. Sharon asked what the body language was all about. Mark replied, Look, I know youre new but you should know this. I heard last week that Daves brother-in-law is a new part owner of Micron. I was wondering how soon it would be before he started steering business to that company. He is not the straightest character. Sharon was shocked. After a few moments, she announced that her original choice was still the best selection. At that point Mark reminded Sharon that she was replacing a terminated buyer who did not go along with one of Daves previous preferred suppliers. What does the Institute of Supply Management code of ethics say about financial conflicts of interest?
The management of Pearson Institute of Higher Education (PIHE) has decided to run a registrationpromotion to give students some discount on their fees. The promotion is as follows:• Complete Registration at least two weeks before resumption, 5% discount is given• Up to 70% payment and black south African, 5% discount is given• Complete payment onsite, 5% discount given 1.2 Draw a decision table to represent your decision tree 1.3 Represent your decision table in a structure English
The personnel manager ranked all the criteria, except salary, in order of importance and then assigned weights as follows: COMMITMENT100 MANAGEMENT EXP 70 IDEAS 65 CHARITY EXP 55 EDUCATION 10 *Note that, on the basis of the application form, all of the candidates appeared to be equally committed to the charity* Q: Discuss whether the method the personnel manager used to assess these weights is appropriate
5. Business Feasibility Analysis of the demand (include highlights of the findings of the market feasibility study), risk (include business and market risks), environmental impact. 6. Justification of the Business Economic, social and personal benefits.
please provide explaination as to whyy the other options are incorrect. thank you
WebTech Development of Austin, Texas, is considering thepossible introduction of a new product proposed by itsresearch and development staff. The firm’s marketing directorestimates the product can be marketed at a price of $70. Totalfixed cost is $278,000, and average variable cost is calculatedat $48.a. What is the breakeven point in units for the proposedproduct?b. The firm’s CEO has suggested a target profit return of$214,000 for the proposed product. How many units mustbe sold to both breakeven and achieve this target return?
Main Street Cinema invited three firms to bid on its daily janitorial services contract, and then scored those bids (also known as 'tenders') based on quality, reliability/risk and price (using a 100 point scale in each case). The results are listed here: Tender Offer from... Quality Score Reliability/ Risk Price Score Score Dawson Commercial 80 80 90 Cleaning Services Fulton Maintenance 90 70 100 and Facilities Service SteadyBrite Contract 85 85 85 Cleaning Assume that quality and price are equally important to Main Street Cinema. However, the issue of reliability/risk is twice as important to Main Street Cinema then either quality or price. Which janitorial service supplier does linear averaging suggest? O A. Dawson Commercial Cleaning Services and Dawson Commercial Cleaning Services O B. Dawson Commercial Cleaning Services C. Dawson Commercial Cleaning Services O D. SteadyBrite Contract Cleaning E. Fulton Maintenance and Facilities Service and SteadyBrite Contract Cleaning
Please no written by hand solutions QUESTION 10 10. "Enter our competition and you could win your share of R500 online shopping voucher for yourself AND a R10 000 voucher towards a Women's empowerment NGO of your choice!" Mrs Jacobs entered the competition above at Mr Price and won a R500 voucher. With R500, she can either buy a handbag, a pair of shoes, a pair of jeans or jacket. She already has a jacket, and she does not want new shoes. She would like a pair of jeans but decides to buy a handbag. What is her opportunity cost? a)R500 voucher. b) Handbag C)Pair of shoes. d)Pair of jeans.
Please answer 6a and show working out
The Role of Income Taxes For the most recent year, Triad Company had fixed costs of $240,000and variable costs of 75% of total sales revenue, earned $70,000 of net income after taxes, and anincome tax rate of 35%.Required Determine:1. Before-tax income.2. Total contribution margin.3. Total sales.4. Breakeven point in dollar sales