The Greatest Supply Chain Disasters of All Time Case Study

The Greatest Supply Chain Disasters of All Time - Case Study ExampleThis is a major risk to company operations. Foxmeyer made an presumption that its refreshing system of rules would be highly effective, hence estimated benefits from such efficiency. It started bidding future contracts based on a system that was notyet operational. This can only be considered poor management, which entails poor planning, poor run across management, and poor change management. Poor planning is because the company managers did not include certain risks that whitethorn suck touch the project. This then means there was poor project management. The companys project manager, in his or her plan, should include risk assessment, which should have the risk of the project not going according to plan. Execution risk should also include the risk of the current company system not integrating smoothly with the youthful system, and the risk that some required activities may not be recognized in time. This mis take is seen in other companies such as Boeing, GM, WebVan, Adidas, Denver Airport, Toys RUs.com, Mattel, Hershey Foods, Cisco, Nike, Apple, Loblaws, Ford, GM, Aris Isotoner, and Chrysler. In Boeing, there is also poor change and stakeholder management. A new system is implemented in the company which requires the cooperation of suppliers. These suppliers atomic number 18 not informed in time, are not informed of the companys expectations, and the challenges that may come with such speedy and change in the production system. In the end, the suppliers cannot supply the products in time. They may have even produced poor quality products which may have caused the company more loses. An assessment was not done to find out the capability of the company, and the suppliers, to twist the project to completion in time. No consideration was given to the supplier, an important stakeholder in the success of the project. Lack of complete(a) assessment of a projects feasibility is also a commo n problem in almost all the companies in the case study. Most of the companies go ahead with the projects, without a thorough assessment of the projects feasibility and compatibility with the current systems. Almost all the companies ignore the risks that are ahead of them. They only assume that such big projects have to bring profit. There are risks associated with new systems, and these are all ignored. The companies work on expected benefits. In all the companies, big projects failed to meet the expectations. Most of the new projects were IT and system overhaul projects. It only means that any new projects that have no verified results of implementation should not be implemented and managed under tralatitious methods of steering a project to its completion. Traditional methods of management do not focus on the outcome. They focus on assigning duties to specific skills and departments, and expecting outcomes as draw in project expectations. After implementation, that is when a m anager realizes that the system was not compatible with the companys operations, the system needed other sub projects, the system needed more time, and so on. New information Technology systems mean new operational systems, and new roles and so new skills. All these should be come with by effective change management, since they will be accompanied by challenges in change management. The Case of Denver Airport Cannot Manage the Luggage This foreign airport implemented a hugely automated baggage handling system. This did not work as planned. This was an Underground Railroad network, driven by computers. The system was expected to speed up the delivery of bags to customers, and make the process of baggage handling efficient. It came with problems such as derailed cars, mis-delivered luggage, and jammed tracks.