Round 3

[Brecht Debusschere]

I'll make a small overview of what we discussed this evening:

• Round 3 is already this Sunday (March 31th)
• Every role needs to work on the spreadsheet, so we can see and understand the decisions of the other roles, Communication on the decisions is very important!
• Can someone post the last version of the spreadsheet?

My notes of what the assistent told are (feel free to add or modify, if I understood something wrong):

• A goal for Sales is: try to have 0 penalties and 0 bonus
• Sales: Shelf Life around 70% is the best
• Safety Stock: Lead time/2 x daily demand (+ always add 1 day!)
• Supply Chain: reduce Lot Size so stock is never higher than 3 weeks
• Purchasing: keep contract index just above 1
• Purchasing: lower the order quantity, of possible
• Operations: low changeover (big batches)
• Supply Chain: keep Production Interval around 1,5 weeks
• Purchasing: if you choose a 2nd Supplier => 1st = cheapest and outside Europe, 2nd = more expensive and in Europe
• Sales: in a Low Cost strategy, we can choose not to sell all our products to all our customers (differentiate in products to customers)

Our goal should be to end positive next round.

 

One more remark: I'm on holiday from March 30th to April 10th. Agung will manage Supply Chain on his own, during my absence ;-)

 

Have a good night!

Grtz,

Brecht

 

[Agung Darmawan]

Dank je Brecht voor de informatie. I understand more now. The production interval tools is very2 helpful. Anyway,if you guys don't mind I have some request to all of the roles.

Purchasing : You did a great job for the last round. For this round, I just need a bit more reliability from the suppliers,and as usual,we prefer more efficient decision. Bedankt.

Operation : Please set both the inbound and outbound warehouse to 950 (also set the efficient employee usage). And please set the shift become 2 shifts. I don't think we need the SMED and "increase speed" yet (I'm not sure yet, I will let you know after I get the number). Again keep the cost efficient. Merci.

Sales : I do apologise for my bad suggestion about Shelf Life, I think it will be better around 70-75%. I still don't know how is the influence of the "Service Level Type" to the Contract Index, but if we can change it to "units", we can increase the service level up to 95%. But if by "order lines" is more efficient, the maximum Service Level will be only up to 93%. Terima kasih.

I still don't understand the usage of the KPI stuff. I'm still finding out. So, will we meet to discuss it? Thank you.

[Anete Freimane]

The spreadsheet is ALWAYS available and it is online here
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AhkDTDuh62eKdHhubGF4YVdlWGdhUDBNVnYzRkI1VGc&usp=sharing

[Agung Darmawan]

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AhkDTDuh62eKdHhubGF4YVdlWGdhUDBNVnYzRkI1VGc#gid=0

this is my decision. i don't know how to explain how i calculated it on the spread sheet. but i can explain, if it's needed.

[Agung Darmawan]

I'm leaving tomorrow morning (Saturday) on holiday. I leave Supply Chain in the good hands of Agung. Let's hope we get a positive result Sunday!

I'm back in Belgium on April 10th.

 

Have a nice Spring vacation!

Grtz,

2013/3/28 Agung Darmawan <agu...@gmail.com>

[Annelies Wouters]

Dear Patricia and Agung,

 

Please find in attachments my final thoughts about purchasing.

Personnally, I believe it would be interesting to know the minimum reliability in order the availability of the components doesn't come under pression.

I question it's opportune to contract a second supplier for the component pack. There is an other cheaper supplier (Smurfat) than our current supplier (Brit) but we don't have any experience with this supplier. Because of our low cost strategy and pack is a component purchased in big amounts, it could maybe an option to learn about this supplier?

 

For the other components, I don't see any opportunity to contract a second supplier.

 

What do you think?

 

Tomorrow in the morning, I'll finalise the input of the data before 12h00.

 

Happy Easter!

 

Annelies

Op 30 maart 2013 18:20 schreef Annelies Wouters <annelies...@gmail.com> het volgende:

Dag Patricia,

 

Bedankt :-). Ik ben volop bezig met The Fresh Connection.

Ga nu nog even naar de winkel en stuur nadien alles door.

 

Annelies

Op 30 maart 2013 16:58 schreef Patricia Coppens <patricia...@gmail.com> het volgende:

Op 30 maart 2013 16:58 schreef Patricia Coppens <patricia...@gmail.com> het volgende:

Dag Annelies, je vindt in bijlage de excelfile =ik heb tot nu toe enkel gekeken naar de 2 suppliers die het minder goed gedaan hebben: all vitamins en miami oranges. Ik heb hierbij 2vragen:

1) denk jij dat een payment term van 4 weken voldoende is voor all vitamins? Aangezien we toch niet veel meer moeten bestellen?

2) zou je bij een tank blijven voor oranges?

 

Groetjes en alvast prettig Paasweekend!!!

[Annelies Wouters]

Dear Agung,

 

Still a question. I was in the understanding we have enough stock for vitamins and this for the upcoming rounds because of the order size of a tank (30.000l in the 1st round).

If I look at the analysis, extracted from the program The Fresh Connectin, I have the impression that in round 2, we ordered vitamins as well.

 

Is it correct? Because it's important then to take into account for the upcoming rounds.

 

Annelies

2013/3/30 Annelies Wouters <annelies...@gmail.com>

[Agung Darmawan]

Dear Annelies,

yes, you're right. the stock from last round is not counted. this is a problem. we can not forecast anything from the last stock.

and for the pack,we already have good component availability, but if the second supplier is cheap, I think we can make a deal with them.

We just have serious problem with reliability from the Vitamin. But I don't think our decision on round 1 is considerable,because it caused a lot of problem like overloading warehouse and obsoletes.

advice :

1. Pack : increasing reliability as long as the contract index still < 1.01 is still reasonable. the second supplier also can be chosen, if it's not too costly.

2. PET : so,that's the point,when the quality is higher,the reliability can be lower than its promise. So, the options are just increasing the reliability or choosing the middle quality again and increasing the reliability. I don't think I will have problem with the delivery window 2 days.

3. Orange : I think we can negotiate it at least 95%, or even 97%, because it's still < 1.

4. Mango : I think the only possible improvement is only change the payment term become 7 weeks.

5. Vitamin : Increasing the reliability to 94% will be good.

Regards,

Agung

[Annelies Wouters]

Dear Agung,

 

Thank you very much for your feedback.

 

Please find in attachment higlighted in blue the data as I actually entered in the system.

 

1. Pack : increasing reliability as long as the contract index still < 1.01 is still reasonable. the second supplier also can be chosen, if it's not too costly.

=> Choice of a reliability of 92% which gives a contract index of 1.0058. In case the reliability would be less than agreed (in contrast to the previous rounds) I expect the reliability will be around 90%.

In the meanwhile, I found out that a second supplier is only possible for oranges, mango and vitamins (so not for packaging like packs and PET...).

2. PET : so,that's the point,when the quality is higher,the reliability can be lower than its promise. So, the options are just increasing the reliability or choosing the middle quality again and increasing the reliability. I don't think I will have problem with the delivery window 2 days.

=> The difference in price for high and middle quality seems to low in my opinion. So, my suggestion should be to continue with the high quality. Taken into account it concerns an important component, the low free capacity of the supplier, the quite high rejection %, the lower delivery reliability than agreed,... => Compromis of a reliability of 97% (higher than in previous rounds) and a delivery window of 2 days => Contract index is still lower than 1.000.

3. Orange : I think we can negotiate it at least 95%, or even 97%, because it's still < 1.

=> OK, reliability of 97%.

4. Mango : I think the only possible improvement is only change the payment term become 7 weeks.

=> OK, payment term of 7 weeks

5. Vitamin : Increasing the reliability to 94% will be good.

=> Ok, reliability of 94%

 

I believe it all sounds well :-).

 

Kind regards,

 

Annelies

2013/3/31 Agung Darmawan <agu...@gmail.com>

[Patricia Coppens]

Dear All,

 

You can find our decisions on the google spreadsheet. If somebody has another suggestion, please let us know.

 

Happy Eastern and enjoy the holiday!!!

 

Kind regards,

 

Your purchasing team ;)

2013/3/30 Annelies Wouters <annelies...@gmail.com>

[Agung Darmawan]

Thank's to Annelies and Patricia. Vrolijk Passen. :D

For Operation :
Sorry. I just recalculated the usage of outbound warehouse,I think we
need at lease 1000 for outbound warehouse. Thank you.

[Anete Freimane]

Just a reminder-each pallet place is expensive! And I can't change cause I'm already out. Pls check with aline. But anyway, my personal opinion, I think we shouldn't maybe increase it that much.

But ok, it's up to you now then