The incentives created by transparency in the costs of justice or the Dissertation

The incentives created by transparency in the costs of justice or the lack thereof - Dissertation Example However, transparency in this regard is superficial as ordinary members of the public rarely spend time in courts observing trials unless they are parties to a case and thus are wholly unaware of the rulings, the contents of the rulings, the rationale, ratio decidendi and how those rulings compare to previous rulings. Moreover, ordinary members of the public are also generally unaware of the court hierarchal structure and will not know whether or not a ruling by one court is binding on another court or whether or not a ruling in one court is invalid because it failed to follow a ruling by a higher court. In this regard, transparency only benefits experts and members of the public must pay for expert advice and knowledge. Complicating matters, the cost of this advice is far from transparent since it varies from one lawyer to another and changes according to the special circumstances and facts of a particular case. It is against this background that this research study applies game the ory’s coordination model and Nash equilibrium model which theoretically at least, helps to shed light on the factors that influence actors in making the decision to litigate. ... a cost-benefit analysis of the â€Å"legislative and the judicial process of lawmaking.†1 Informed by game theory, this paper uses the model created by Mattiacci and Deffains in analysing the incentives created by transparency in the cost of justice. The results of a survey conducted in Europe involving 1080 respondents are used to confirm the author’s contention that potential litigants are concerned with outcomes and the cost of litigation. In other words, transparency in the cost of justice can result in more litigation if the costs of justice in terms of legal fees and related expenses are low but can result in less litigation if the costs of justice are high or disproportionate to the award contemplated by the dispute. It is therefore concluded that transparency and its twin partner certainty/uncertainty informs the potential litigant’s decision, but only via attorneys who can understand the information generated by precedents and this information is availab le at uncertain costs. Based on information relative to outcome, the law, strategies/intentions of other actors, and the socio-economic cost involved in obtaining relevant information and the desired outcome, potential litigants will decide on one of three things: accept the consequences of the legal dispute and do nothing; settle the matter privately; or rely on formal adjudication to resolve the dispute. Table of contents Abstract 2 Introduction 3 Dari-Mattiacci and Deffains’ Model 9 Research Questions 16 Aims and Objectives 17 Statement of the Problem 17 Significance of the Study 18 Research Methodology 19 Organization of the Study 20 A Review of the Literature 21 Transparency 21 Game Theory 30 Transparency and the Incentive to Litigate or not to Litigate 41 Findings and Conclusion 55 Bibliography 64

Discouse the way in which recent work in the area related to Essay

Discouse the way in which recent work in the area related to organisational theory have challenged or contributed to conventional understandings of the subject - Essay Example Similarly, Donaldson (1995) supported the general connotation that organizations are established and preserves in order to achieve specific intentions. This goal-oriented or active perspective regarding organization indicates that organizations are meeting places of individual efforts that are more or less synchronized to accomplish objectives that could not be otherwise achieved through solitary action. Nevertheless, aligning the notion of organization with the framework of goal pursuit is to some extent problematic, and there is a large collection of literature that deals with the model of an organizational goal and whether or not the construct carries great weight. For instance, several organizations have within them members or employees who either is not aware with the organization’s mission statement or if they have substantial knowledge of it, they do not essentially support it. An actual example is the goal of most publicly managed corporations in several developed nations which is profit maximization or the capitalization of shareholder value; this corporate objective is in stark contrast with the concerns of the many employees who are more focused on their job security and their comparative influence or prestige than they are about revenues. One instance is a contract manufacturer or employee who is not familiar with the components of corporate accounting and consume s more labour hours because of the common belief that the more hours of work the more income they will earn. However, the target of maximizing overtime was not an organizationally endorsed or even acknowledged goal. Furthermore, the objective of maximizing shareholder value does not produce much dedication or motivation among most organizational contributors (Pfeffer, 1997). On the other hand, Pfeffer and Salancik emphasized that â€Å"organizations are... a process of organizing support

Jury and Group Think Essay Example for Free

Jury and Group Think Essay A jury is a sworn group of citizens gathered to provide a reasonable and unbiased verdict and a finding of fact on a legal inquiry presented to them officially or set a penalty based on the evidences and the law. This practice is considered to have originated from England where nobles and freeman were accorded the right to be tried by a committee of the same class as they are rather than be subjected to the judgment of the king. The right to jury trial in both state and federal proceedings is guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Seventh Amendment also accords explicitly the right to jury trial for all parties involved in civil cases at the district level. In the United States, only juries can provide a verdict and set a penalty for the accused if found guilty. This is especially true for cases when the penalty decided is capital punishment (Jury, 2006). This power vested in a jury makes it important to analyze how verdicts are formed in the environment of jury deliberations. One way to do this is through jury simulation research. Jury simulation research involves the methods of research used to understand how a jury would react to statements made by parties involved in court cases and how they would arrive at the verdict. Some of the methods used are prospective juror demographic research, mock trials, jury selection, shadow jury and post-trial jury interviews. The usual market research techniques are also used such as phone surveys, focus groups and feedback sessions. The results of these researches are used by parties involved in court proceedings for settlement negotiations and setting up a defense or prosecution strategy that would be compelling to the jury (Jury research, 2007). The main strength of jury research is that it presents interested parties possible combinations of strategies that could possibly influence the jury verdict in their favor. Visual exhibits, witnesses, metaphors, timeline of events and other techniques in the presentation of evidence are tested to understand the viability of each and combinations of these for the benefit of the interested party. Psychological and sociological analysis is used to give parties an edge on jury trials. Research of this type has been successfully utilized in some landmark cases such as the IBM antitrust trial of 1969 and the O. J. Simpson murder case (Jury research, 2007). The main limitation is that it is impossible to predict exactly what needs to be done for a jury to make a decision in favor of the party. In the methods involved in jury research, questions are often general demographic ones that will not accurately predict the outcome of the jury deliberations. Surrogate jurors and not the actual jury members are used to represent the jury pool in the research. Jury research is simply no guarantee for victory in a case (Jury research, 2007). Mock juries are used in jury research to try to analyze in a controlled experiment how a verdict is reached in an actual jury. However, they cannot accurately mimic the behavior of actual juries. The behavior of the jury is based on the personal perspective of the individual jurors and external factors that may affect the behavior and decision making capabilities of the individuals and the whole jury in general. For instance, the pressure provided by the high stakes of a case, the stress from time constraints and routine disruption and other psychological stresses may not be exactly replicated in mock juries. â€Å"Group thinking† is the term used to describe tendencies of groups to base their decision not on their personal judgment but on the collective and single unanimous decision that may not always be the best given the biases and desires of the members of the group to come up with the decision at the soonest possible time. It is defined as â€Å"a way of deliberating that group members use when their desire for unanimity overrides their motivation to assess all available plans of action† (Janis, 1972). This very commonly affects the verdict of a jury. This is because, following the framework prepared by Janis (1983) on Group Thinking, the antecedents such as structural faults (insulation, lack of impartial leadership, lack of norms and procedures) and provocative context (high stress from external threats) are commonly characteristics of a presiding jury. This tendency to seek unanimity over proper assessment leads to bad decision-making. Some of the symptoms that often characterize defective decision making stemming from group thinking include the incomplete analysis and consideration of alternatives and objectives, failure to examine risks from choice and reappraise rejected ones, poor information search and selective information bias and failure to contingency plan. Because of the high stakes involved in jury cases, it is important to ensure sound decision-making by steering away from the tendency to group think. The most effective way to prevent group thinking is promoting vigilance against it. The first step is to recognize when symptoms of group thinking are starting to appear. Group members must strive to retain status equality to prevent a single member from influencing the entire group. New information must always be sought to challenge a reigning agreement to test its strength. Norms must be set to retain vigilance such as having a devil’s advocate, instituting dialectical inquiry and assigning a specific member to remind against bias and group thinking (Meade, 2003). The tendencies of group thinking may be uncovered through jury research. There is a danger that certain parties that rely on jury research may prey upon these tendencies. Therefore, it is important that jury retain its impartiality and sound decision making capability to effectively perform its duty to uphold justice in any court proceeding. Bibliography Janis, I. (1972). Victims of groupthink, Boston: Houghton – Mifflin Janis, I. (1982). Groupthink (2nd edn. ), Boston: Houghton – Mifflin Janis, I. (1983). Groupthink model. Retrieved 19 May 2007 from http://choo. fis. utoronto. ca/FIS/Courses/LIS2149/Groupthink. html.

The principles of Quick Response Manufacturing

The principles of Quick Response Manufacturing Abstract Quick Response Manufacturing (QRM) is a strategy which needs to applied throughout the company and whose primary goal is the reduction of lead-time in each and every operation of the company while simultaneously reducing costs and improving quality.  [1]  QRM can be defined in two contexts: (i) Externally (Customers point of view): QRM means quickly responding to customer needs by designing and producing goods customized to cater those needs. (ii) Internally, QRM stresses on reducing the lead times throughout the organization, leading to lower inventory, better quality, reduced cost, and greater responsiveness. QRM uses Manufacturing Critical-path Time (MCT) as the metric for measuring the success of QRM processes. MCT is an extension of the concept of lead-time, which is the time from the receipt of order from the customer till the product is delivered to the customer. There are 2 ways of implementing QRM: one is using large breakthrough improvements and the other is through continuous improvements. QRM was developed by Rajan Suri, a Professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, who is famous for his works on continuous improvement programs. He not only gave the theory but also the practical ways by which QRM could be successfully applied and integrated in the operations of the company. QRM is basically an extension of Time based Competition (TBC), which was a strategy used by Japanese firms in the 1980s. TBCs philosophy is to use speed to gain competitive advantage. QRM is more particular as it is restricted to manufacturing firms only. QRM finds its first foray in history in 1993 with the foundation of the Center for Quick Response Manufacturing at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.  [2]  In 1995, Rajan Suri published the article Slaying the Beast which put forth some bad policies which were prevalent in manufacturing companies and also offered explanations for the same. This helped QRM gain a lot of recognition and importance.1 The positive response spurred Dr. Suri to continue working on this subject and this further led to his consulting businesses in implementing QRM and successfully applying the same in many companies. Since then, the Center for QRM has helped in applying QRM in nearly 180 companies resulting in reduced lead times and increased market shares.2 QRM Principles Its not necessary to work harder, faster and longer hours to complete job earlier. One can focus on finding new ways to complete a job that takes lower time. Most of the time a job spends in a queue instead of in process and traditional approach only look to reduce processing time (touch time) and in QRM focus is on lead-time (total elapsed time) and not just processing time. Out of total lead-time 34 days only 19.5 hours is a touch time so it makes sense that we should focus on whole 34 days. But generally organizations are not designed to focus on lead-time. Mainly because organizations dont recognize the cost of waiting they mainly focus on processing time like one need to reduce batch sizes to reduce waiting time but it will increase number of setups that will increase their processing time which is mostly opposing to company goals. So, Companies need to change their accounting systems and reward systems so that benefits of reduction in lead-time can be measured and rewarded appropriately. Table 1: Examples of Organizational Waste Due to Long Lead Times Expediting of hot jobs or late orders: Requires Systems, Air Freight, People, even Top Management time à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¢ Production Meetings required to change and update priorities à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¢ Overtime costs for trying to speed up late jobs à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¢ Time spent by Sales, Planning, and other Departments to develop and update forecasts à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¢ WIP and Finished Goods holding costs, including space à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¢ Obsolescence of parts made to forecast but not used à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¢ Quality problems not detected till much later; lots of rework or scrap à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¢ Opportunity for: Order changes or even cancellations Feature and scope creep Loss of sales to competition à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¢ Sales time devoted to expediting and explaining delays to customer à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¢ Complex systems required to manage the dynamic environment There is one major problem with cost based systems that hinders QRM implementation that is functional structure of an organization. Looking the figure one can see how organizations fell into vicious circle by delaying regular jobs because of hot jobs and then again increase in hot jobs due to insertion of safety time due to delay in regular jobs. This is also called response time spiral. And so the spiral grows. QRM focus on reducing system in time like we do in service industry but this will require substantial reorganization of most of the processes. Basically, we will end up with cellular organizations in shop floor and also in offices and each cell will focus on its customers. The POLCA material control system helps coordinate production across multiple cells. Also, new operating methods such as time slicing are described, to help cells share non-cell resources. This principle is hard to digest as we believe that we should utilize capacity to its maximum possible value. Any reduction in the same would mean losing out on productive opportunities, resulting in increasing costs. However, by keeping all the machines busy at tall times does not necessarily transform into higher output or higher productivity. We frequently encounter the problems of growing queues due to the presence of a few bottleneck machines and jobs spending a lot of time waiting for resources due to mismanagement. All this ultimately results in increasing the lead time of the jobs which culminates in the increase of the organizational costs, which have been enlisted in the previous table. In the long run, these costs actually prove to be greater than the opportunity costs of not utilizing the spare capacity. Hence, the spare capacity should be considered as a strategic investment that will pay for itself many times over in increased sales, higher quality, and lower total cost s. This is again a measure which is very hard to digest. We always measure the usefulness of any process through its efficiency and utilization. However, the problem with the traditional belief is not that efficiency is not an important measure, but that most measures of efficiency result in increased lead time which ultimately harms the organization. Large batches are used in a lot of companies in a bid to reduce the setup costs. However this very measure results in increasing the lead time which can culminate in the same problems as enlisted in the previous principle. There are numerous examples to show the scope of reduction of lead time in organizations, a prominent one being the case study in Becker (2001) which showed how lead time for a line of spare parts for the oil drilling industry dropped from 40 days to 5 days using reduction of lead time as the main performance measure in a manufacturing cell. QRM says that the quantities as calculated by EOQ are not appropriate and consistent with the goal of reducing lead time as EOQ doesnt consider many costs of large lots like expediting of late orders, overtime cost for trying to speed up late jobs, WIP holding costs including space. Also quality problems are detected much later than with small lots and the amount of rework and scrap generated is also much larger. At the same time, another important point which is missed in EOQ is the lack of responsiveness which occurs when the process is carried out with large lots. Large lots and planning for the same makes it difficult for the organization to respond quickly to change in customer needs. Nor can good lot sizes for QRM be predicted by the MRP system, since it assumes fixed queue times regardless of workload. Hence, in order to reduce the lead times throughout the organization, it is important for everyone in a manufacturing firm, and especially for senior managers, to understand the dynamics of factory operations. The senior managers need to have a broad outlook and decide on the policies of manufacturing and performance measures only after fully understanding the effects of capacity utilization, efficiency measures, and lot sizing policies on lead time. Figure 3. Traditional Versus QRM Views of Capacity and Lot Sizing Source: QRM and POLCA:A Winning Combination forManufacturing Enterprises in the 21st Century Rajan Suri The differences between the traditional and QRM views can be observed from the figure given above. Traditional performance measures of utilization and efficiency encourage managers to exploit their resources to the maximum possible value. Production is considered infeasible only when the capacity utilization exceeds their maximize resource utilization, and only think about their capacity limit as a boundary between feasible and infeasible production targets. Also the perception is that larger lot sizes lead to increase in efficiency. However, QRMs focus is solely on reducing lead time, and hence the impact of utilization and lot size on the same is studied. Higher utilization leads to increase in lead time, whereas lead time first decreases and then increases with increase in lot size. It is essential to consider all such manufacturing dynamics in order to come up with a process that minimizes the lead time and thereby costs. According to QRM on-time performance is an outcome not a performance measure. Because if on time is considered as performance measure departments will quote longer lead-time to match up with on-time delivery. Again this will result in Response time spiral and results in poor performance of organization. But with QRM, organization will focus on shortening lead-time as a performance measure. In QRM its called QRM Number (measure of lead time reduction). This will eliminates Response Time Spiral and performance of organization will improve. For example see Table 2. MRP systems are of great help in managing material supply and ordering but lead-time cannot be reduced using MRP. MRP should be used on high level planning and coordination not on cell level in a cellular structure implemented by QRM, whereas POLCO can be used to manage material between cells and inside cells. POLCO basically a hybrid of push and pull systems using benefits of both. This phenomena can be again seen as entering in Response Time Spiral in which if company buys in large batches this makes supplier to have longer lead time and company to order even larger batches. Internal and external incentives like discounts motivate ordering in large batches. The results this can be verified in John Deere where implementation of QRM with suppliers reduced cost and also improved quality with shorter lead-time and batches. Not only at the supply side, the small lot concept needs to be applied at the distribution end too. Normally it is the tendency of the sales force to get higher orders by offering quantity discounts. This will again lead to the spiral of increasing lot sizes, both during the process as well as on the procurement side, ultimately leading to lowering of delivery performance. By implementing QRM, a company can reduce its costs manifold which can then be passed on to the customers. There is a need to demonstrate to the customer that the company can deliver high quality at low prices even for small lots, which would be more beneficial both to the company as well as the customer. Thus, the idea of small lots percolates throughout the organization, from top to bottom, as well as throughout the supply chain, from supplier to customer. The traditional approach might result in local quality improvements in the respective departments. However, QRM is more concerned with the overall organization than just one department. The requirement is to cut the overall lead time for manufacturing as well as office operations for which Q-ROCs are more appropriate. Such Q-ROCs result in significant reduction of lead times for jobs such as cost estimating, quoting, and order processing. Closed-loop implies that the team would be self-sufficient in dealing with all the problems related to reducing lead time. This implies cutting across functional boundaries and changing the reporting structures to ensure the success of the process. Needless to say, this team needs to be given power in order to make the decisions as reducing lead time is the primary goal of the organization. The best example would be that of Ingersoll Cutting Tool Company, in Rockford, which reduced its engineering and order processing time for customized cutters fro m 10 days to half a day after implementing QRM principles. However, QRM should not be considered as an application of Reengineering as by using principles of system dynamics in the design of Q-ROCs, providing specific engineering and management principles for manufacturing organizations, plus by changing management principles and performance measures and adopting a company-wide approach, QRM goes much deeper than Reengineering. Charging more for speedy response is sustainable only in the short-term. In the long run, it is quality which differentiates a product from its competitors, and the same purpose is served by QRM. Searching for ways of squeezing time out uncovers quality problems and wasted efforts. Changing policies and adopting measures to rectify the same results in higher quality, lower WIP, less overhead, lower operating costs, and greater sales. The QRM Approach yields even better results than Lean Manufacturing as it ignores the wastes caused by long lead times. QRM takes the goal of waste reduction to the next level, creating an even leaner enterprise that will remain a formidable competitor for years to come. As we have seen in many quality improving methodologies like Six Sigma, House of Quality the most important factor in the success of these initiatives is their acceptance by all the members of the organization; and QRM is no different. Realigning of all employees, from the shop floor to the boardroom, from desk workers to senior managers, to the QRM principles is a pre-requisite for the success of QRM, and hence training gains significance. Normally, performance measurement is tied to the cost accounting system which is an impediment to the successful implementation of QRM. Performance measurement must be aligned with the principles of QRM if the company has to benefit from the same. In a nutshell, the following points can be summarized about Quick Response Manufacturing: It requires measurement and efforts to minimize the metric, Manufacturing Critical-path Time (MCT), which is defined as the typical amount of calendar time from when a customer creates an order, through the critical-path, until the first piece of that order is delivered to the customer. This can be measured using the QRM number. Some changes in the structure of the organization are necessary to ensure the success of QRM. It basically requires the strategy of the organization to change from cost-based to entirely time-based with full emphasis on lead time minimization. Functional to Cellular:  Cellular manufacturing is a pre-requisite of QRM as the cells yield greater flexibility in manufacturing Top-down Control to Team Ownership:  QRM requires the formation of closed-loop, cross-functional teams which need to be given complete power for monitoring the processes. Specialized Workers to a Cross-trained Workforce:  Since the success of the process requires reduction in lead times across all the departments, there is a need to provide proper training to the workers so that they can perform multiple tasks and have a broader outlook. Efficiency/Utilization Goals to Lead Time Reduction:  The evaluation parameters, performance measures have to shift from the traditional accounting measures to the goal of lead time reduction. The following steps need to be implemented in the organization so that QRM is a success: 1. Creating a QRM mindset: The most important part is to make people realise the advantages of QRM over the previous measures i.e. the wastes created due to long lead time which are even ignored in Lean Manufacturing. Thereafter, a high-level QRM Steering Committee needs to be formed to oversee the QRM efforts. Also, like Six Sigma,by providing QRM training, some employees can be made QRM champions who can then be entrusted with the responsibility of the projects on a daily basis. 2. Changing of organizational structure Cross-functional planning team are formed to study feasible projects to which QRM can be applied. This would require the management to indulge in a detailed analysis of various consideration like Manufacturing Critical PathTime, product volumes, needs relating to strategy and other factors. Thereafter, QRM cells are formed and training and cross-training is provided to the operators in these cells by an implementation team which consists of members in the new cell as well as planning team members. Measurement of MCT is done to monitor lead time 3. Including of system dynamics QRM requires going through the policies on utilization and efficiency in order to determine the proper loading of the cells. It also calls for making provisions for spare capacities and reduction in the batch sizes in order to reduce the lead time. 4. Enterprisewide expansion of QRM The process would typically begin with a single project. If the project is a success, its results need to be conveyed to all the members of the organization and more projects need to be undertaken based on QRM principles. QRM should not be restricted to the organization alone but should be extended through the entire supply chain. E.g. the suppliers should also be motivated to inculcate and apply the principles of QRM which would have mutual benefits for both parties POLCA: The Material Control System for QRM POLCO is Paired-cell Overlapping Loops of Cards. To implement this system the company need to create cells of the production process focusing on subsets for similar parts and then it processes a given customer order through differing cells depending on the needs of that order. High Level MRP is used to provide high level planning and coordination of materials from external suppliers and across these internal cells. But cells are managed individually. To explain POLCO we can take an example of a shop floor shown in below figure. Assume P1 focuses on color printing and P2 on black white printing after which we have three Formatting Cells, F1, F2 and F3, which convert the printed sheets into reports with the desired pages. After formatting comes binding operation, which include punching holes and notches, cutting the sheets, and bending, A1 to A4. Finally, all orders go to the Shipping Cell S1, where the packaged plates are placed in shipping containers and then loaded onto carts. The material control system used is POLCA where High Level MRP and a cellular organization is a prerequisite. In this case all Release times are created with the help of High Level MRP. But even after authorization of POLCO work will not begin until all conditions are met. POLCO cards are used to communicate and control the material movement between cells. As Figure shows the POLCA card flows for a particular order at any organization based on initial design. This orders routing takes it from P1 to F2, then to A4 for binding, and finally to S1 to be shipped. This order will therefore proceed through the POLCA card loops with the pairs P1/F2, F2/A4 and A4/S1, as shown in the figure. If cell P1 has a job authorized that is going to F3 next, then a P1/F3 card must be available at P1 in order for it to begin that job. If a P1/F3 card is not available, that means that there is a bottleneck at F3 and working on that job will only add to the work-in-process at F3. Instead, it would be better for P1 to put its resources into a job that is needed by another cell that is not backlogged. So the cell team at P1 skips the P1/F3 job for now, and looks at the next authorized job to see if a card is available for that job, and so on. Differences from KANBAN POLCO cards only control flow between cells not within POLCA cards are not product specific but they are specific to particular pair of cells. POLCO cards are used as capacity signal whereas Kanban is used as inventory signal. As return of POLCA card from a downstream cell signals that the cell has available capacity. Benefits yielded by POLCA: POLCA helps in managing short-term fluctuations in capacity and also assists in reducing congestion on the shop floor. If a POLCA card from a downstream cell is not available, it means that that cell or some other cell further downstream is backlogged with work. Hence it does not make sense allocating further work to that particular job, without replanning of resources, as this will only increase inventory in the system since somewhere downstream there is a lack of capacity to work on this job. A better alternative would be to use this cell for some other job during the time being. POLCA cards flow in longer loops which allows the production to respond to changes in demand or differences in the complexities of jobs. The additional jobs in the loop can act as a buffer to absorb variations in demand and product mix which makes it highly suitable to meet the needs of responsiveness. On the contrary, the pull system stresses on achieving constant takt times throughout the organization, ignoring the fact that a variety of products will require different manufacturing times. Benefits of Quick Response Manufacturing Product Leadership: The main objective of QRM is to minimize lead times. By implementing QRM, a company attains many beneficial and competitive advantages. Benefits of Quick Response Manufacturing Product Leadership: QRM enables a firm to have shorter time to market. Thus a firm can reach out to customers with the latest technology while competitors play catch-up. There are two ways of looking at it. The first is that a given point of time a firms product would be superior to that of its competitor. Another point of view is that since a firm has shorter lead time it can deliver technology that is openly available to the market much earlier. Thus, the firm can skim the market due to its superior product. This can be depicted on a time line as shown below. FIRM USING QRM FIRM NOT USING QRM 2007 2009 2010 FIRM USING QRM FIRM NOT USING QRM 2007 2009 2010 Lower working capital: Lower lead times permit companies to have lower raw material and finished goods inventory. As a result the working capital requirement is decreased. This places the firm in a better strategic position to utilise their resources and capital. Better position to increase market share: The lower lead times increase the firms responsiveness to opportunities in the environment. This increased responsiveness helps the firm attract customers and increase its market share. Increased inventory turns: Since the production system is triggered by demand, smaller batches are produced, inventory decreases, and the number of inventory turns increases. Many inefficient producers have substantial amounts of capital tied up in inventory; therefore, their inventory turns are low. Reducing the cost of quality by minimising rework Cellular manufacturing places more responsibility and accountability on specific production teams. This results in specialization which inherently increases the quality of the product. It is much easier to pinpoint defects since the problems are directly traceable to certain teams or members. This has a positive impact on the quality of products. Cost Reduction: QRM aims at finding opportunities to improve the existing process. This results in lower operating costs. Using QRM, companies are able to save, in some cases, up to 25% of total operating costs by solving problems before they happen. Increasing Long Term competitiveness QRM ultimately aims at enhancing the long term competitiveness of the team. The above mentioned benefits are only the stepping stones in the right direction. The enhanced competitiveness of the firm ensures that is objective of enhancing shareholder value is fulfilled. Issues of Quick Response Manufacturing Increased reliance on suppliers QRM requires a strong relationship with ones raw material suppliers and partners. To react to demand, a manufacturing firm must closely partner with suppliers that will quickly accommodate the firms production schedule. However, if the supplier cannot provide raw materials due to problems such as quality assurance/control, equipment repair or union labour, the manufacturing firm may not be able to meet customer requirements. This could result in stock outs and backorders. Change Management It can be very difficult to implement QRM in a manufacturing environment. QRM is a business enabling philosophy that works top-down and therefore, changes the roles and responsibilities of the employees. Traditional roles, from lower levels through upper management, are drastically modified and the corporate infrastructure is typically altered. Employees can be extremely apathetic to these changes, which is a barrier that could significantly hinder the implementation process and the success of QRM. To implement QRM, companies must have representation from all functions i.e line and support functions (production, planning, purchasing, engineering, manufacturing, quality, finance and human resources) to facilitate the implementation. All functional areas need to buy-in to QRM philosophy to successfully implement such a major change in the way the firm does business. What Differentiates QRM from Lean? First and foremost is the QRM mindset: the driver for all the principles and strategies in QRM is reduction of lead time. This time-based mindset results in many operating policies that are different from traditional ones. In contrast the driver in JIT/Lean is waste reduction. Although the business press has been talking about the importance of lead time reduction, or speed, for over a decade, we find that most companies still lack the knowledge and the tools to effectively reduce their lead times. Worse still, policies are in place that are lengthening, rather than shortening, lead times. QRM devotes a substantial amount of effort in educating management and workers on why these traditional policies result in long lead times, and in showing them the QRM principles that must be put in place instead. QRM is a companywide strategy. While the original implementation of JIT/Lean at Toyota may well have encompassed the whole company, most Western implementations of JIT/Lean have focused on manufacturing and materials management. In many cases, JIT/Lean has been interpreted even more narrowly as merely implementing a pull system with kanban cards. In contrast, QRM clarifies at the outset that it is a companywide strategy with implications far beyond the shop floor, and principles for other company areas, such as, office operations, are clearly presented as part of the QRM philosophy. QRM provides rational principles and tools for lead time reduction. QRM uses an understanding of system dynamics, and exploits this understanding to define the best structures and policies that will reduce lead times. QRM begins by educating employees and giving them insight into these system dynamics. This then helps justify, to management and workers, the need for changes in policies. State-of-the-art analysis tools such as the MPX software package incorporate this analysis of system dynamics and help to derive the specific changes needed and to quantify the benefits that would be achieved. For companies making a large variety of products with variable demand, as well as for companies making highly engineered products, the JIT/Lean strategy of pull is either wasteful or breaks down altogether. For such companies, QRM provides an alternative strategy called POLCA which combines the best features of push and pull without their drawbacks. While the JIT/Lean approach tries to eliminate variability, QRM recognizes that in certain markets responding to this variability may provide competitive advantage. Instead of eliminating variability, QRM creates an effective organization structure to cope with it and serve the market. QRM does this by exploiting its understanding of system dynamics. A specific example of the difference between JIT/Lean and QRM is the issue of delivery of material or components. On-time delivery is a cornerstone of JIT/Lean is implementation. And yet QRM understands of organizational dynamics shows that promoting on-time delivery results in dysfunctional dynamics with longer lead times and higher costs. QRM provides alternative metrics based on lead time reduction that promise greater improvement in the long run. The QRM approach extends to supply management as well, and is called time-based supply management (Ericksen, 2000). Companies such as John Deere are finding that, particularly for smaller suppliers, the time based mindset and QRM principles offer an effective approach to target improvements at the suppliers operation. In addition, rapid results can be achieved, with significant improvements in supplier deliveries and quality, and reduction in supplier cost and lead time (Golden, 1999; Ericksen, 2000; Nelson, 2000). To summarize, QRM pursues the relentless reduction of lead time all QRM principles stem from this singular driving concern. Instead of management announcing dozens of programs and acronyms, QRM enables management to present one unified message to the organization, and all policies follow from this one driving strategy. Examples of implementation of Quick Response Manufacturing: Trans-Coil Inc. The Milwaukee Company is a manufacturer of equipment that supports variable-speed electric drives. Problem: Trans-Coil Inc.s process sometimes dragged longer than couple of weeks they promised to the customers. Improving its record for production time and meeting deadlines was the only way not to risk losing business. Had Trans-Coil built large numbers of components in advance, ready for shipping, it would mean spending loads of money on raw materials, production and handling, without assurances of turnover of the warehoused products. The company would be stuck then with unused, obsolete components in situations when customers made even minor changes to their specifications. Solution: Having quick-response manufacturing, companies can minimize the time it takes for products to flow via their operations. It makes companies nimble, responsive, and lower costs. For changing operations, Trans-Coil commenced with its factory. Production workers were cross-trained to learn all jobs in the plant. That was a huge change from days when employees occasionally stepped out of their work areas. Trans-Coil employees are now separated into work cells which focus on smaller order sizes which includes custom work, with teams responsible for getting products out o

MacBeth :: essays research papers

A.)   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Title: Macbeth   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Author: William Shakespeare   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Publisher: The Bobbs-Merrill Company Inc.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Date: 1968   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Pages: 156 B.)  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Macbeth begins with three witches setting the tone of the play. The three witches throughout the play will make predictions and keep the readers continually wondering.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The king of Scotland, Duncan, receives a message saying that his army has defeated a Norwegian invader. Macbeth, an army general in his army, received most of the credit for the victory. Because of this victory and Macbeth’s part in it he is given the title, Thane Cawdor. Macbeth’s wife, Lady Macbeth, begins to get greedy and wants as much power as she can get and will stop and nothing to obtain it.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Macbeth and Banquo, another general in the army are returning from the battle when they encounter the three witches. They announce that Malcolm will one day be heir to the throne. This prediction makes Macbeth happy because he had dreams of one day being king.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The announcement that upsets Macbeth is that King Duncan announces that his son Malcolm will take over the throne after his death. After the king’s announcement he plans to visit and dine with Macbeth at his home.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The idea of power again enters the minds of Macbeth and his wife after this announcement and they start thinking how to gain control of the throne themselves.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  When Duncan arrives at Macbeth’s home Lady Macbeth plans to kill Duncan. She plans to do this while he’s sleeping, but in his sleep he resembles her father and she is unable to go through with it. So Macbeth carries out the plan. The two also made sure that they covered their tracks by making it look like the servants killed the king. After hearing the news about their father, Malcolm and Donalbain, Duncan’s sons flee fearing for their lives.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Macbeth immediately takes control of the throne assuming he is the new

Japanese Aristocrat :: essays research papers

In the play, “Julius Caesar';, by William Shakespeare, Brutus was portrayed as a man of high principles and virtue. He joins the conspirators with their plan to kill Caesar for the good of Rome. On the other hand Cassius is moved by jealousy. He wants to Caesar dead out of revenge of a man who does not like him. He is jealous of Caesar’s glory and power. Therefore Brutus is portrayed as the noblest Roman.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Brutus believes in his morals and ideals and they run his life to an extent. He is perhaps the only man in the story who is not moved by personal gain. “For let the gods so speed me, as I love the name of honor more than I fear death.'; Brutus acts with the conspirators only for what he considers the best interests of Rome. Brutus weighs every decision he makes according to his morals and standards. He believes that reason and logic rule the world in which people can be affected by sound reasoning. He is very honorable but he still is not prepared for the corruption in the world. He can’t believe that anyone would take action without reasoning the effects that could take place. Brutus can’t see motives that are less noble then is own, “Well, Brutus, though art noble; yet I see thy honorable mettle may be wrought from that it is disposed; therefore it is meet tat noble minds keep ever with their likes; for who so from that cannot be seduced? '; Brutus makes two very grave mistakes because of his high principles, he lets Antony live and worse yet he lets him speak at the funeral of Caesar. He doesn’t stir up the emotion that the people were looking for when Antony did. But even though Brutus joined the conspirators he felt so much remorse for what he had done that he had dreams of Caesar’s ghost coming to him. In the end he falls on his sword, which goes against most of his standards which says that men should take whatever fate is handed to them. However, in his last moments he had the satisfaction of knowing that he stood by his principles to the end and he died by them. However, completely opposite the nobleness of Brutus’ character is Cassius. He hates Caesar and is part of the conspiracy out of jealousy. Cassius was friends with Caesar as a child and now Caesar was powerful and popular, Cassius was jealous of this.

Irony Literary Analysis Essay

Tragedy is a dramatic form that was first developed in ancient Greece. A  tragedy usually has these characteristics: The main character is involved in a struggle that ends in disaster. This character, often called the tragic hero, is a person of high rank who has the respect of the community.  The tragic hero’s downfall is usually the result of some combination of fate, an error in judgment, and a personality weakness often called a tragic flaw. Once the tragedy is in motion, the downfall is usually inevitable. The tragic hero gains wisdom or insight by the play’s end. Tragedy arouses feelings of pity and fear in the audience. Spectators pity the plight of the main character and fear that a similar fate might befall them. A tragic drama may also suggest that the human spirit is capable of remarkable nobility even in the midst of great suffering. An allegory is a story with more than one layer of meaning: a literal meaning and one or more symbolic meanings. The characters, settings, and themes in an allegory are symbols of ideas and qualities that exist outside the story. The Crucible is an allegory, because Miller uses one his ­ torical period and setting (seventeenth-century New England) to comment on another (1950s America). The tragedy that occurs in Salem is an allego ­ ry for the anti-Communist hysteria that gripped the United States during the 1950s. As you read, notice how the events in Salem echo the events surrounding the McCarthy hearings to tragic effect.