- Home
- Process
- Order now
- About us
- Guarantees
- Benefits
- Beware
- Free essays
- Blog
- FAQ
- Contact us
Live chat
Table of Contents
What specific areas and activities should the Oceanics group have investigated on its two visits?
The specific areas and activities should the Oceanics group have investigated on its two visits are enlisted below:
Evaluate each supplier on each of the above atoms using information obtained on the field visits.
The evaluation of Atomic Products Company N.Y. and Nuclear Vessels, Inc., Houston, Texas as supplier on each of the above atoms using information obtained on the field visits is tabulated below:
Specifications |
Exhibit 1 Atomic Products Company N.Y. |
Exhibit 2 Nuclear Vessels, Inc., Houston, Texas |
Rigid cleaning specifications |
The firm does not have enclosed environment for cleaning vessel and adhere to the surgical cleaning requirements. |
Adequate space for a cleaning room |
Shop area capacity |
Does not have sufficient shop area inside the building to perform the job. |
|
Condition of manufacturing equipment |
Most of the machines, such as vertical boring mill, horizontal mill planner, radial drill and beam press were comparatively new and well-maintained. |
Machines were of considerable age and not of large capacity but adequate for the job. |
Outsourcing |
No outsourcing |
Some outside subcontracting work for the close machining tolerances would be required. The possibility of getting work from other divisions at Texas exists as well, which is well equipped as far as machinery is concerned. |
Production rates |
Corporately higher |
Higher estimated cost resulted due to more man-hours due to less adequate machines |
Shop facilities |
Best in the region |
|
Previous production experience |
Limited to the vessels of smaller capacities |
Had constructed one vessel considerably larger than the vessel required by the Oceanics |
Capabilities |
Capable of handling the vessels of required size and beyond |
|
On hand order for vessels of larger capacities |
Nil |
|
Work interruptions |
Several strikes in the past few years |
No work interruptions in past years |
Employees and floor area |
2,000 people with 470,000 square feet of floor area. |
|
General appearance |
Excellent lighting and ventilation arrangements, clean aisles. Neat and well ordered arrangement of the overall building |
Heating, lighting and cleanliness conditions were not as adequate as Atomic products |
Laboratories and inspection facilities |
Up to date laboratories and good inspection facilities. Metallurgical and chemical laboratories were well-staffed and could provide Oceanics with adequate test specimens required by the specifications |
Metallurgical and chemical laboratories were very large, but most of their equipment was old. |
The response of manager of production about under progress jobs |
The response was vague due to either lack of on floor activities or due to lack of knowledge about the end use of products |
The equipment available and its intended use was explained to the visitors from Oceanics |
Inspection and quality control |
Both departments were well-staffed and had up to date equipment |
|
Control of incoming material |
No evidence of material control |
Better control of materials. Each piece of material was marked for the project of its intended use |
Contract cost |
Negotiable |
|
Understanding of requirement |
The firm had the complete understanding of the requirements from the Oceanics |
|
Control between the management and the shop |
No infrastructure exists for day to day control of the progress |
Effective control and coordination among people from supply, expediting, quality control and scheduling. Project engineer is kept informed on a day to day basis |
Based on the value of the written proposal, which company appeared to submit the better offer?
Hurry up! Limited time offer
Get
19%OFF
Use discount code
Based on the value of the written proposal, Atomic Products Company N.Y. appeared to submit the better offer (CXO media Inc., 2012).
Based on the proposal plus information obtained from the case history, which company is likely to be better supplier?
Based on the proposal plus information obtained from the case history, Nuclear Vessels, Inc., Houston, Texas is likely to be better supplier.
Based on the overall scenario of both companies it is recommended that the contract should be awarded to Nuclear Vessels, Inc., Houston, Texas. The company has the experience in the fabrication of the large size vessels. The setup of machinery is sufficient to handle the requirement of Oceanics. There is no history of shutdowns and strikes in the company due to non existence of employee union. The company is very likely to follow the schedule of delivery, due to strict control over the on-floor activities and day to day monitoring system available (Robert Handfield, 2011).
We provide excellent custom writing service
Our team will make your paper up to your expectations so that you will come back to buy from us again.
Prime-Writing.com Testimonials