Read the case and answer the below questions 1)Summarize the key points of the case. 2) Describe the present purchase structure of the firm. 3)Evaluate Make Vs Buy model for the firm. 4)If you were at Alice's place, what would you opt and why? Case 5–3 Alicia Wong Alicia Wong, Corporate Supply Manager, Thain Foods Limited, wanted to prepare a proposal to manufacture mustardi in-house Mustard, an important ingredient in many of the company’s products, was currently purchased from an outside supplier. She hoped a comprehensive proposal could be prepared in on month’s time for the CEO’s approval.GENERAL COMPANY BACKGROUND ThainFoods Limited (TFL) had been in business for more than30 years. Its products included a wide range of syrups, fudges cone dips, sauces, mayonnaise, and salad dressings. Its customers were major food chains, hotels, and restaurantsin North America and Europe. TFLbelieved in continuous improvement to its operations Over the last two years, it invested more than $2 million in plant facilities, the bulk of it new, state-of- the-art process equipment and process control. All production and process control functions were computerized for maximum efficiency. TFL employed about 120 people. It had a corporate struc- ture of CEO; president; executive vice president, domestic sales; and national account manager and used a network of food brokers who sold and promoted its products. THE SUPPLY AREA Alicia was responsible for supply and reported direct- ly to the CEO. She had an inventory control officer, a buyer, and a receiver under her supervision. Purchas- es could be classified into five different types: labels, packaging, raw materials, commodities, and MRO sup- plies. Mustard was an important raw material used in many of TFL’s products. CURRENT PRACTICE: PURCHASING MUSTARD EXTERNALLY Whenever mustard was required, the buyer e-mailed the supplier and requested that it prepare the ap- propriate amount to be picked up by a truck from TFL. The purchase order would be prepared be- fore the truck left for the supplier, normally the next day. The mustard supplier used mustard seed as its raw material and blended in the other ingredients af- ter the seed had been reduced to mustard flour. Ev- ery month TFL purchased 500 drums, or 100,000 li- ters, of mustard. The cost of the mustard itself was $64 per drum. Freight costs were borne by TFL and amounted to about $8 per drum. TFL operated three eight-hour shifts, five days a week. Each worker was paid about $20 per hour. It took about 10 minutes of a worker’s time to handle each drum. This included pouring the mustard into the processing kettle, making sure other added ingredients mixed well, and rinsing the drums. The drums were bulky and, because they could not be used in the plant for other purposes, had to be rinsed for a contractor who took them away. The costs of disposing of the drums in this manner were negligi- ble. Other costs and overhead of purchasing were $0.02 per liter. SUGGESTED CHANGE: MANUFACTURING MUSTARD IN-HOUSE The mustard to be produced at TFL would be composed of roughly 60 percent solid, 20 percent water, and 20 percent vinegar. The solid portion was a spice blend, consisting essentially of mustard flour, salt, and other spices that could be readily bought. Water was not a problem because the city provided a reliable supply. Vinegar was already a raw material that TFL ordered in bulk regularly from suppliers. Alicia therefore believed that it was a simple matter for TFL to make the mustard for its own use. TFL only needed to buy the spice blend and add water and vinegar in the right proportions. She approached a supplier who indicated that it could make the spice blend at a delivered price of $0.15 per liter for TFL, including freight. However, it needed time for tests to ensure that the blend would be of the right quality for TFL’s use. Vinegar cost TFL $0.1875 per liter delivered in 15,000 liter lots. And TFL was paying $0.025 per liter for water. Alicia also checked whether production had the time and equipment to make the mustard. Production felt that the change would not be too drastic and no ad- ditional workers would be necessary. However, it would use up more of the existing workers’ time. Production calculated that the change would entail a total labor and overhead cost of about $0.105 per liter of mustard using standard cost accounting for labor time and overhead charges. Alicia organized an information gathering and discus- sion session involving supply, production, quality assur- ance, and distribution to discuss the proposed change. The workers were keen on the idea because this meant that they would no longer have to haul and rinse the bulky drums (water and vinegar could be easily channeled to the mix- ing containers using existing pipes). However, quality as- surance expressed concern about the quality of mustard if produced in-house. Because the mustard was an ingredient in many of TLF’s products, such a change might adversely affect the quality and taste of these products.
Read the case and answer the below questions
1)Summarize the key points of the case.
2) Describe the present purchase structure of the firm.
3)Evaluate Make Vs Buy model for the firm.
4)If you were at Alice's place, what would you opt and why?
Case 5–3
Alicia Wong
Alicia Wong, Corporate Supply Manager, Thain Foods Limited, wanted to prepare a proposal to manufacture mustardi in-house Mustard, an important ingredient in many of the company’s products, was currently purchased from an outside supplier. She hoped a comprehensive proposal could be prepared in on month’s time for the CEO’s approval.GENERAL COMPANY BACKGROUND ThainFoods Limited (TFL) had been in business for more than30 years. Its products included a wide range of syrups, fudges cone dips, sauces, mayonnaise, and salad dressings. Its customers were major food chains, hotels, and restaurantsin North America and Europe. TFLbelieved in continuous improvement to its operations Over the last two years, it invested more than $2 million in plant facilities, the bulk of it new, state-of-
the-art process equipment and process control. All production and process control functions were computerized for
maximum efficiency.
TFL employed about 120 people. It had a corporate struc-
ture of CEO; president; executive vice president, domestic
sales; and national account manager and used a network of
food brokers who sold and promoted its products.
THE SUPPLY AREA
Alicia was responsible for supply and reported direct-
ly to the CEO. She had an inventory control officer, a
buyer, and a receiver under her supervision. Purchas-
es could be classified into five different types: labels,
packaging, raw materials, commodities, and MRO sup-
plies. Mustard was an important raw material used in
many of TFL’s products.
CURRENT PRACTICE: PURCHASING
MUSTARD EXTERNALLY
Whenever mustard was required, the buyer e-mailed
the supplier and requested that it prepare the ap-
propriate amount to be picked up by a truck from
TFL. The purchase order would be prepared be-
fore the truck left for the supplier, normally the next
day. The mustard supplier used mustard seed as its
raw material and blended in the other ingredients af-
ter the seed had been reduced to mustard flour. Ev-
ery month TFL purchased 500 drums, or 100,000 li-
ters, of mustard. The cost of the mustard itself was
$64 per drum. Freight costs were borne by TFL and
amounted to about $8 per drum. TFL operated three
eight-hour shifts, five days a week. Each worker was
paid about $20 per hour. It took about 10 minutes of
a worker’s time to handle each drum. This included
pouring the mustard into the processing kettle, making
sure other added ingredients mixed well, and rinsing the
drums. The drums were bulky and, because they could
not be used in the plant for other purposes, had to be
rinsed for a contractor who took them away. The costs
of disposing of the drums in this manner were negligi-
ble. Other costs and overhead of purchasing were $0.02
per liter.
SUGGESTED CHANGE:
MANUFACTURING MUSTARD
IN-HOUSE
The mustard to be produced at TFL would be composed
of roughly 60 percent solid, 20 percent water, and 20
percent vinegar. The solid portion was a spice blend,
consisting essentially of mustard flour, salt, and other
spices that could be readily bought. Water was not a
problem because the city provided a reliable supply.
Vinegar was already a raw material that TFL ordered in
bulk regularly from suppliers. Alicia therefore believed
that it was a simple matter for TFL to make the mustard
for its own use. TFL only needed to buy the spice blend
and add water and vinegar in the right proportions. She
approached a supplier who indicated that it could make
the spice blend at a delivered price of $0.15 per liter for
TFL, including freight. However, it needed time for tests
to ensure that the blend would be of the right quality for
TFL’s use. Vinegar cost TFL $0.1875 per liter delivered
in 15,000 liter lots. And TFL was paying $0.025 per liter
for water. Alicia also checked whether production had
the time and equipment to make the mustard. Production
felt that the change would not be too drastic and no ad-
ditional workers would be necessary. However, it would
use up more of the existing workers’ time. Production
calculated that the change would entail a total labor and
overhead cost of about $0.105 per liter of mustard using
charges.
Alicia organized an information gathering and discus-
sion session involving supply, production, quality assur-
ance, and distribution to discuss the proposed change. The
workers were keen on the idea because this meant that they
would no longer have to haul and rinse the bulky drums
(water and vinegar could be easily channeled to the mix-
ing containers using existing pipes). However, quality as-
surance expressed concern about the quality of mustard if
produced in-house. Because the mustard was an ingredient
in many of TLF’s products, such a change might adversely
affect the quality and taste of these products.
Step by step
Solved in 5 steps
