Group Project 2: Presentation on Enterprise System and Enterprise Architecture Considerations Assignment Purpose of this Assignment This assignment gives you the opportunity to demonstrate your ability to research, evaluate, and explain enterprise systems, and to communicate effectively at the executive level. This assignment specifically addresses the following course outcomes: • • • • analyze and examine how enterprise architecture and enterprise systems influence, support, and enable an organization's ability to contribute to strategic decision making and to respond and adapt to the business environment analyze enterprise system solutions to make recommendations based on benefits, limitations, and best fit within the enterprise environment analyze and explain the elements of a successful plan for implementing enterprise solutions, addressing structure, processes, culture, and other considerations analyze considerations for enabling enterprise architecture Assignment Your instructor has assigned each group one of several types of enterprise systems (ERP, SCM, CRM, etc.) to research and prepare an executive-level informational presentation. Your instructor has provided you with instructions on locating case studies. Your group should have completed Group Project 1 and each team member should have completed the individual project memo identifying seven criteria for successful implementation of enterprise systems. As you saw in Group Project 1, the chief information officer (CIO) of your organization has heard about enterprise systems and believes that they could solve many of the problems in your organization. He has asked your team to do some research and prepare an analysis and recommendations about these types of systems. Your team has been assigned one of several types of enterprise systems (ERP, SCM, CRM, or others) to research and prepare an informational presentation for the CIO. The purpose is to help him understand the type of enterprise system (assigned to your team), to understand how other organizations have implemented such systems, and lessons learned from the implementations. Finally, your team is to present the considerations that the CIO should think about—both positive and negative aspects—prior to suggesting that the organization consider implementing one of these systems. For Group Project 1, your team analyzed the case studies and assessed the success of the enterprise system implementations. Then, for your individual project, you researched, identified and explained in a memo to the CIO what makes for a successful implementation of these types of enterprise systems. Your group will use the information gathered and developed for those assignments to prepare the presentation described below. Group Project 2 Develop an executive-level PowerPoint presentation that uses the organizations in your case studies as examples to provide an analysis and recommendation to your CIO. Your presentation should include: 03/15/2019 1. A brief o o o o summary of each organization that includes the following: the business the organization is in the problem the organization was trying to solve whether the enterprise system implementation was a success or not in terms of cost, schedule, performance, and quality lessons learned (Summarized from Group Project 1) 2. An evaluation of what each organization did right and what they did wrong; compare and contrast them. 3. Your own set of considerations—both positive and negative—that the CIO should think about prior to making any suggestions that the organization move forward. Your group should consider and address, at a minimum: o benefits of enterprise systems o limitations of enterprise systems o determining the best fit for the organization o implementation planning and success criteria, including structure, processes, and culture of the organization; the phases of the System Development Life Cycle; and other considerations o potential to enable an enterprise architecture (Some of this information may come from your individual memos on success criteria.) Presentation Formatting and Requirements I. Your presentation should be 14-23 slides that include: • • • • • • • II. A cover slide with a title, your group number/name, and date, as a minimum An introduction or slide outlining the presentation to follow. Make a nice introduce and “thesis statement” to capture the objective of this briefing. 2-4 slides that summarize the case studies (the business they are in; the problem they were trying to solve; whether the enterprise system implementation was a success in terms of cost, schedule, performance, and quality; and lessons learned) 3-6 slides that provide an evaluation of what each organization did right and what it did wrong; and compare and contrast the organizations 6-9 slides that provide considerations for the CIO including: benefits and limitations of enterprise systems, determining the best fit for the organization, implementation planning and success criteria (covering structure, processes, and culture of the organization; the phases of the system development life cycle (SDLC); and other considerations) 1-4 slides on positioning of these case studies for their ability to enable the architecture (i.e. are the “hooks” in place to enable EA?) Very important! A summary/conclusion slide. Don’t forget a nice wrap-up here articulating the key points. Notes: Details of Presentation • 03/15/2019 The bullet points in your presentation will be supported by relevant details in the Notes section of the slides, which contain the actual • • III. • • IV. • • • • • • • • • words you would say to the CIO as you present each slide. Since you cannot actually present the slides in person, the Notes will show what you would actually say. This is an important part of your presentation. If you were writing a paper, the content would be in the notes and the PowerPoint slides would be the outline. [Select the Notes Page under View option in PowerPoint.] Presentations with limited or no “Notes” will receive much lower grades, because the bullets should not tell the whole story. Use a graphic or visual representation of the model to emphasize key points or to add interest. It is useful to add an image or graphic representing the model to help describe it. Resources The use of at least four external scholarly resources (which may include your case studies) is required. (NOTE: More than four resources are required to receive all possible points; see Grading Rubric below.) You should use scholarly journals (rather than Wikipedia and authorless website postings). If you need assistance with determining what a scholarly journal is, the UMUC library is a very good source of information, accessed via the following link: http://www.umuc.edu/library/libhow/articles.cfm. Remember to correctly cite and reference all sources. Any direct quotes should be indicated within the slide text with appropriate quotation marks and an in-text citation (however, direct quotes should be short and used sparingly, if at all). Complete references for sources should be included in the corresponding Notes section. Paraphrased material can just be referenced within the Notes section of the slides without an in-text citation on the slide. This deviates from APA style but keeps the slides more readable. Note: Do not include your resources on a separate slide in the presentation. They need to be included in the notes section of the slide to which they pertain. Additional Instructions Each slide should have a title and a limited amount of text. The presentation should capture key bullet points and not include complete paragraphs and detailed text. Content on your Slides should be double-spaced Use bullet points – 6-8 words per line; 4-7 lines per slide; Font – preferably Arial, Verdana or Calibri (sans serif) size 18 Your presentation format should be professional and use a professional theme to make it interesting in appearance to keep your audience’s attention Stay with the same theme of graphics throughout your presentation. For example use all clip art, all photograph, etc. Proofread and Spellcheck (including what you write in the Notes section)! Read your Notes out loud to yourself to see that the presentation flows well from start to finish and that the words you read correspond to and complement what is shown on the slide without just repeating it Use the Grading Rubric below to be sure you have covered everything. Submit your presentation via the Group Assignment Folder as a Microsoft PowerPoint document (or a presentation format that can be read using PowerPoint) with your group name first in the filename. Individual Assessment of Group Member Participation 03/15/2019 At the conclusion of Group Project 2, each team member will rate the overall group participation of each of the team members, but not himself or herself. These ratings will be based on the person’s participation in the group project, using the instructions provided in the individual assignment, Group Project 2 Participation Assessment. The report will be submitted via the (individual) Assignments Folder as either a Word or Excel file and is due on the date Group Project 2 is due. Grading Rubric for Group Project 2 The group project will be graded based on the rubric below. The instructor will determine whether all members of a group will receive the same grade, or will have their grades influenced by the group members' ratings of their individual participation. Criteria Introduction or Outline Summary of Case Studies Evaluation of Case Studies 90-100% Far Above Standards 80-89% Above Standards 70-79% Meets Standards 60-69% Below Standards < 60% Well Below Standards Possible Points 5 Points 4 Points 3.5 Points 3 Points 0-2 Points 5 A sophisticated introduction or outline sets the stage for the presentation. A well-written introduction or outline sets the stage for the presentation. The introduction or outline adequately sets the stage for the presentation. The introduction or outline does not adequately set the stage for the presentation. No introduction or outline is included. 9-10 Points 8 Points 7 Points 6 Points 0-5 Points The summary of each case study is clearly explained; covers all pertinent facts; is clearly derived from the case; and demonstrates sophisticated understanding of course concepts, analysis, critical thinking, and synthesis. The summary of each case study is clearly explained; covers most pertinent facts; is derived from the case; and demonstrates good understanding of course concepts, analysis, critical thinking, and synthesis. The summary of each case study is provided; each is aligned to the case; and demonstrates adequate understanding of course concepts, analysis, and/or critical thinking. The summary of each case study may not be clearly explained; may not be aligned to the case; and/or may not demonstrate adequate understanding of course concepts, analysis, and/or critical thinking. Minimal or no summary of the case studies is included. Or only 1 case is discussed. 18-20 Points 16-17 Points 14-15 Points 12-13 Points The evaluation of what was done right and wrong for the enterprise The evaluation of what was done right and wrong for the The evaluation of what was done right and wrong for the The evaluation of what was done right and wrong for the 0-11 Points Minimal or no evaluation is provided. 03/15/2019 10 20 Criteria Considerations 90-100% Far Above Standards 80-89% Above Standards 70-79% Meets Standards 60-69% Below Standards < 60% Well Below Standards system implementation in each case study is convincing, fully explained and is directly related to the case study. The pertinent aspects of the case studies are compared and contrasted, demonstrating sophisticated understanding of course concepts, analysis, critical thinking and synthesis. enterprise system implementation in each case study is clearly explained and is directly related to the case study. The case studies are compared and contrasted, demonstrating thorough understanding of course concepts, analysis, critical thinking and synthesis. enterprise system implementation in each case study is explained and is related to the case study; case studies are adequately compared and contrasted; evaluation demonstrates adequate understanding of course concepts, analysis, critical thinking and/or synthesis. enterprise system implementation in each case study may not be clearly explained or may be only partially related to the case study; case studies may not be adequately compared and contrasted; and/or the evaluation does not demonstrate an adequate understanding of course concepts, analysis, and critical thinking. Or only one case is discussed. 32-35 Points 28-31 Points 24-27 Points 21-23 Points The considerations are fully explained and clearly appropriate, and adequately cover: benefits and limitations of enterprise systems, determining the best fit for the organization, implementation planning and success criteria. Slides presented that thoroughly articulates the greater The considerations are clearly explained and appropriate, and adequately cover: benefits and limitations of enterprise systems, determining the best fit for the organization, implementation planning and success criteria. Slides presented that clearly articulates the The considerations are explained and are appropriate, and cover the following: benefits and limitations of enterprise systems, determining the best fit for the organization, implementation planning and success criteria. Slides presented that touches The considerations are not clearly explained and/or not appropriate, and/or may not adequately cover the following: benefits and limitations of enterprise systems, determining the best fit for the organization, implementation planning and 0-20 Points Considerations are minimally covered or not included. 03/15/2019 Possible Points 35 Criteria Summary/ Conclusion External Research 90-100% Far Above Standards 80-89% Above Standards 70-79% Meets Standards 60-69% Below Standards application to an enterprise architecture. Demonstrates sophisticated understanding of course concepts, analysis, critical thinking and synthesis. greater application to an enterprise architecture. Demonstrates thorough understanding of course concepts, analysis, critical thinking and synthesis. lightly on the application to an enterprise architecture. Demonstrates thorough understanding Demonstrates adequate understanding of course concepts, analysis, critical thinking and/or synthesis.. success criteria; and/or does not demonstrate adequate understanding of course concepts, analysis, and critical thinking. Slides do not address the application to an enterprise architecture nor does it demonstrate a thorough understanding of the concepts. 5 Points 4 Points 3.5 Points Conclusion is convincing, effective and relevant. Demonstrates sophisticated analysis and critical thinking. Conclusion is effective and relevant. Demonstrates analysis and critical thinking. 9-10 Points More than four scholarly sources (which may include the case studies) are incorporated and used effectively, contextualized, appropriately researched and supported, and synthesized with original arguments. Sources used are 03/15/2019 < 60% Well Below Standards Possible Points 3 Points 0-2 Points 5 Conclusion is provided and is relevant. Conclusion is somewhat effective and/or relevant. No conclusion provided, or minimal effort shown. 8 Points 7 Points 6 Points 0-5 Points More than four scholarly sources (which may include the case studies) are incorporated and used effectively, appropriately researched and supported, and support original arguments. Sources used are credible, Four scholarly sources (which may include the case studies) are properly incorporated and used. Uses APA format for references and citations. Two or fewer sources other than the class resources may be used; may not be scholarly sources; may not be properly incorporated or used to support arguments; may rely too heavily on the reporting of No external research is incorporated or reference listed is not cited within text. 10 Criteria Presentation Format 90-100% Far Above Standards 80-89% Above Standards 70-79% Meets Standards 60-69% Below Standards < 60% Well Below Standards credible, relevant, and timely. Correct APA style is used for citations and references. relevant, and timely. Correct APA style is used for citations and references. 13-15 Points 12 Points 10-11 Points 9 Points 0-8 Points Presentation is clear and concise, and supported by complete and appropriate notes. It reflects effective organization and creative design; appropriate focus for the intended audience; correct structure of slides, uses course vocabulary and concepts, correct grammar and spelling; presented in a professional format for an oral presentation; references are appropriately incorporated and cited using APA style as indicated in the instructions. Presentation is complete and clear, and supported by appropriate notes. It reflects effective organization and correct structure of slides, keeps audience in mind, may have few grammar or spelling errors; presented in a professional format; uses course vocabulary and concepts; references are appropriately incorporated and cited using APA style as indicated in the instructions. Presentation is complete and supported by notes. It includes correct structure of slides; may have some grammar and/or spelling errors; references are appropriately incorporated and cited using APA style as indicated in the instructions. Presentation has few notes, and/or is not well organized, and/or is not focused on audience, and/or contains several grammar and/or spelling errors; and/or does not follow APA style for references and citations as indicated in the instructions. Presentation includes very few or no notes; is extremely poorly done and/or does not convey the information or shows little effort. external sources, and/or are not effective or appropriate; and/or are not credible, relevant, or timely. May not use APA format. TOTAL Points Possible 03/15/2019 Possible Points 15 100 Running Head: Project 1: SCM Group 5-Project 1: Analyzing and Summarizing Supply Chain Management (SCM) for McDonald’s and Subaru Corp Project 1: SCM 2 I. Introduction: In today’s business world, the most prosperous companies are those with a vision, plan, and strategy to execute a marketable brand with a continuous flow of supplies to meet consumer demand. However, in saturated and competitive business markets, sometimes finding effective business models with a steady supply-chain can be difficult, resulting in low productivity, revenue loss, or business failures. This document will analyze the case of McDonald’s restaurant franchise and Subaru Corporation to see how these companies implemented strategies to guide stakeholder decisions and business goals with flexible, productive, and competitive enterprise architectures and enterprise systems. McDonald’s is a quick service restaurant (QSR) that operates company-owned and franchise locations around the world with a net worth of 100 billion dollars in 2019 and serving nearly 70 million people in over 100 countries daily (Klein, 2020). The McDonald's restaurant offers a standard and limited menu of breakfast, burgers, chicken tenders/nuggets, fries, salads, desserts, and hot or cold beverages in addition to some items favoring taste and culture of people where McDonald's restaurants are located. The McDonald’s vision is based on the philosophy of Ray Kroc, a founder of McDonald’s who conceptualized a “three-legged stool” model with each leg representing employees, owner/operators, and suppliers (respectfully), who all share vested interests and long-term goals for McDonald's success that is driven by loyalty and trust (Vitasek, 2014), so the McDonald’s ecosystem will only flourish from the cooperation of all stakeholders who form Kroc’s model of a three-legged stool. McDonald's is always thinking of innovative strategies to enhance their menu offerings so they can remain competitive in the QSR sector. Subaru is a Japanese automobile manufacturer founded in 1953 and headquartered in Japan. The company has two manufacturing plants located in Gumna, Japan, and Lafayette, Indiana for cars and SUVs worldwide, including the Impreza, Legacy, Crosstrek, Forester, Outback, BRZ and WRX vehicles (Gresham, n.d.). However, in 2015, in the midst of an increased demand for new vehicle production, press reports surfaced that raised ethical questions and shed light on the low wages paid to Subaru workers in Japan and Indonesia manufacturing plants to help offset the high volume of vehicle production (Wilson et al., 2015), causing many to wonder if the Subaru business model could withstand the production demand for new vehicles within standards of ethical business practices. From a logistical standpoint, Subaru relies heavily on the timely shipments of automobile parts from suppliers to ensure the vehicle assembly line is producing quality vehicles that can be delivered to the parking lots of car dealerships worldwide with minimal warranty defects or service recalls for maximum customer loyalty and satisfaction to ensure return business purchases in the future or referrals to family, friends and associates. Project 1: SCM 3 On the next pages that follow, this document will analyze how these two companies formed a business strategy to guide stakeholder decisions based on the benefits, limitations, and best fit for the organization, as well as lessons learned from the implementation of these systems. II. The problem they were trying to solve: McDonald’s operates about 37,000 fast-food restaurants serving about 70 million customers daily in over 100 countries around the world. The corporation does not own a farm or warehouse, meaning all supplies are outsourced. Thus, McDonalds requires a dependable supply system to match up to their demand. QSR chains have a complex web of direct and indirect suppliers that must be well coordinated to ensure a consistent supply of items needed to create menus for customers (Khandelwal, 2019). McDonald’s operates in an industry where safety and health standards are very high, and products are transported in a specific condition and within specified periods to ensure the quality and safety of the food sold to customers. The firm also faces the challenge of ensuring suppliers maintain high safety standards and consistency across the board while producing and transporting farm produce to restaurants (Gale, 2006). McDonalds was looking to create an All-Day Breakfast (ADB) menu, and there were uncertainties as demand can increase or decrease beyond expectations since the suppliers are located across different regions with different production capacities. Thus, a supply chain management system (SCM) was needed to effectively manage supplies to prevent any excess or shortage at various restaurant locations. The continuous increase in consumer awareness about food safety and food sources requires that supplies are trackable down to its origin to assure consumers of high quality and safety standards (McCorkle, 2017). To solve these problems and surmount these challenges, there is a need to incorporate SCM and continue to improve the system for efficiency in the supply system. The approach will increase customer satisfaction and enhance business growth, which will be beneficial to all stakeholders. In recent years, Subaru has enjoyed impressive growth and a high level of demand for its vehicles in the North American market. The increase in demand for Subaru’s vehicles created the challenge of increasing supply to meet up with the high rate of demand. Subaru uses parts from 164 Tier-1 automotive parts suppliers making it highly reliant on suppliers for production (RPA, n. d.). Before 2016, Subaru had a single production line, which made it challenging for the company to meet the increased demand for its vehicles. There was a need to make more cars within a short duration of time without sacrificing the expected quality. The company continues an attempt to surmount its challenges by adopting a lean SCM process and by partnering with a logistics provider, Venture Global Solutions (Tredway, 2017). Sequel to the partnership with Venture Global Solutions, the firm has been able to increase its production from 850 vehicles per day to 1,000 and projects to reach a daily volume of 1,800 (Hoppe-Spiers, 2017). However, the company is still striving to solve the problem of poor vehicle quality and customer satisfaction while increasing supply. Subaru’s quality ranking has suffered a decrease, and there is a high rate of recall of their vehicles. The company relies on suppliers for its parts, and some suppliers have Project 1: SCM 4 been reported to be operating at quality levels lower than the company’s quality target. Hence, the situation has created challenges for logistics and quality assurance (Posky, 2019). III. Whether the Enterprise System Implementation was a Success or not: When it comes to a fast-food giant like McDonald's, it’s not difficult to understand that they must have done something(s) right in the industry. For many decades they have been the largest fast-food chain in the world compared to others. One of the main reasons for this is that they essentially got “it” right. What is “it”? Their SCM system, which received an overhaul when it was preparing to launch its ADB initiative. They invested in a sophisticated SCM, which included an efficient assured supply system (EAS) that provides suppliers, distributors, and the company with one “shared” view of demand and inventory levels. They also implemented a restaurant order proposal (ROP) system, which reduces the burden on restaurant managers, all while improving the accuracy of replenishing supply/inventory orders (McCorkle, 2017). With these two, they were able to integrate both systems to have an overall SCM system. McDonald's governs itself by a “three-legged stool” approach and a “System First” methodology. They have a belief with their partners (i.e., suppliers, owners, distributors, etc.) that “if we win, everybody wins” philosophy. The ADB implementation was a success in the fact that they were able to gain the trust in and from their suppliers and distributors, which allowed them to realize the true value of the SCM system. Another reason that this was successful is that they effectively coordinated and collaborated with the suppliers and distributors to source, manage, and deploy equipment for 13,700 domestic restaurants in under four months, which represented how the SCM system met complexities and challenges of this project (McCorkle, 2017). Having to deal with a project of this size is very daunting. Clear communication was accomplished through daily contact with suppliers, daily/weekly reports, weekly meetings with senior management, and on-site feedback from suppliers and staff allowed the SCM to be effective at keeping all parties informed, aligned, and working toward the common goal. This was another reason for the success of the ADB through the SCM implementation. Another company that has been successful in using SCM is Subaru Corp. Its SCM system allowed for it to be optimized with a lean process flow for the company as a whole from the suppliers to the distributors. The tentative launch of the famed Impreza line, drove the company to look for ways to optimize its supply/transportation system. By optimizing their lean transportation system using the Venture Global Solutions “The Digital Yard” (Hoppe-Spiers, 2017). This system allowed them to obtain real-time, automated data, which eventually led to an increase in sales. Also, they integrated the concept of drone technology with software that integrates with the yard transportation system, and this allows them to see where everything is, pretty much at any given time. Another reason for their success with this system was that they Project 1: SCM 5 were able to standardize the process and get the suppliers and distributors on the same page. In doing this, they set out to build relationships with their suppliers, where they would hold meetings, and have “go and see” type activities where they would visit each other (Hoppe-Spiers, 2017). As with McDonald's, communication played a major role in how they able to accomplish this success. Overall, I think both of these companies in their respective business’ have both utilized SCM systems to build their brands and make a mark in the global market. Furthermore, they both were able to successfully implement these systems due in part to them effectively planning, communicating, and establishing effective relationships with their partners in the supply and distribution chain; they were able to capitalize on these systems for their respective industries. IV. Why it was or was not a Success in Terms of Cost, Schedule, Quality, and Performance: When it comes to why McDonald’s SCM is a success, there are a lot of reasons. McDonald’s is one of the biggest businesses in the world and they were able to outsource all their supply chain’s. They decided to use a vertical Integration system that helps keep costs down. They control everything they need for their company, so they don’t need to have deals with different farms. This allows them to get their beef at a good price as they own the land that they build their stores on. Another good thing is they don’t have to sign a lease or contract with people. One great point about it is that they create and control every aspect of their business. In business things are always changing. For instance, when they changed their food quality and how fast they get their ingredients is due to the fact that they have agreements, where they can get fresher food from their supplier(s). Although the extra can costs up to 60 million more, “Some of these changes cost more, but consumers are more used to seeing premium prices and are more willing to pay that price (Kelso, 2019). Due to the size and scale, we have the benefit of being able to absorb some of that cost pressure” (Kelso, 2019). The performance of McDonald’s SCM speaks for itself as they are at the top of the business when it comes to supply chains. Gartner Inc. moved McDonald’s into its “Masters” category, recognizing its sustained supply chain leadership throughout the past decade, and joined giants like Apple, P&G, and Amazon in that category (Kelso, 2019). Looking at its performance, costs, and the quality of its food, McDonald’s SCM is something a lot of other companies may be looking at in the future. It’s easy to see why Subaru SCM was a success, they were able to streamline their process while also increasing their output. Also, they were able to keep their manufacturing plants in a few places rather than spread out the all over the world. This allowed them to save money by reducing the miles they had to transport their cars. It helped with the vehicles they were selling in that region. They knew that these vehicles sold well and that helped with inventory levels, which also helped to keep the cost down. “Starting in October 2015 and over the course of a year, the company, which has been manufacturing vehicles in Indiana for 30 years, adopted a new Project 1: SCM 6 transport management system (TMS), implemented lean separation centers (cross docks), and achieved a reduction in miles, inventory, and costs (Tredway, 2017). Subaru also made their production more efficient by using warehouses they already had and converting them into assembly space. This way, they had more products readily available without having to go out and spend more money. When it comes to the quality of their inventory, they were able to reuse a lot of it as most of the parts fit all their cars. They didn’t have to use many outside suppliers, and when or if they did, the part would be usable in the models in which they produce. Subaru has made a name for itself, even though they are not one of the big car companies. The company is one of the car manufacturers that are selling enough cars to earn a profit by having a good SCM and keeping its operation relatively small. They are succeeding in this area where a lot of other automotive are not. V. Lessons Learned: McDonald’s distinctive supply chain paradigm is predicated on an outstanding set of working concepts that generate long-term prosperity and competitive edge for the actual structure through cost mitigation, prevention of safety problems, and the production of quality and creative brands that revel clients in a distinctive McDonald’s way. The effect is enhanced consumer loyalty, improved product safety, and improved results in the market. Secondly, another important lesson from McDonald’s SCM methods is the fact that it is imperative to focus on the outcome of the strategies rather than focusing on transactions. Additionally, the firm also revises the prices for various items in a conservative spiteful cycle of the bid and contract renegotiation, which may be a negative idealistic approach for the final seller in their pricing strategy (Vitasek, Manrodt, & Kling, 2018). Also, the peer-to-peer alignment in the management process allows the firm to make prompt decisions rather than waiting to act based on apparent problems. The Subaru supply chain management strategies also provide insightful lessons concerning the best and bad practices. First, the main component of the Subaru supply chain management strategies is cost-efficiency. The firm selected a location with tax inducement provided by Florence, which forms an essential component in giving significant reserves on real estate duties throughout Subaru’s tenancy. Secondly, unlike many corporations’ supply chain management philosophies, the Subaru selection of the dealership offers an opportunity for sustainability and social accountability (NFI Real Estate, 2020). The site for the dealership, however, has a negative cost effect meaning that the facility is very expensive in the short-run. VI. Conclusion: These companies implementing an enterprise architecture for their SCM systems, have done so in a way which has been for their benefit. Throughout this analysis, we have answered five questions as they relate to the SCM systems that have set these two companies apart from their competitors in these respective industries. In summarizing these cases, a few things were Project 1: SCM 7 realized which were; they solved a problem, their implementations were successful, and they were successful when it came to costs, scheduling, quality, and performance. It is evident that these companies have effectively and efficiently implemented successful SCM systems to increase their competitive advantage in the global market. References Gale, S. (2006). FoodSafety Magazine. McDonald’s USA: A Golden Arch of Supply Chain Food Safety.Retrieved from https://www.foodsafetymagazine.com/magazinearchive1/februarymarch-2006/mcdonalds-usa-a-golden-arch-of-supply-chain-food-safety/ Gareth Tredway (2017). Supply Chain Conference: Subaru transforms to lean at Indiana plant https://www.automotivelogistics.media/supply-chain-conference-subaru-transforms-to-lean-atindiana-plant/18244.article Gresham, T. (n.d.). Where Are Subarus Manufactured? It Still Runs. Retrieved February 1, 2020, from https://itstillruns.com/subarus-manufactured-7164803.html Hoppe-Spiers, J. (2017). Supply Chain Best Practices. Subaru of Indiana Automotive Inc. Retrieved from https://www.bestsupplychainpractices.com/2017/08/subaru-of-indiana-automotive-inc/ Kelso, A (2019). Customers Are Noticing' McDonald's Significant Supply Chain Changes https://www.forbes.com/sites/aliciakelso/2019/07/09/customers-are-noticing-mcdonaldssignificant-supply-chain-changes/#442702e15962 Khandelwal, R. (2019). MARKET REALIST. McDonald’s Supply Chain: A Must-Know for Investors. Retrieved from https://marketrealist.com/2019/11/must-know-mcdonalds-supply-chain-2/ Klein, D. (2020). McDonald’s Becomes a $100 Billion Company [Text]. QSR Magazine. https://www.qsrmagazine.com/fast-food/mcdonalds-becomes-100-billion-company McCorkle, K. C. (2017). Purdue University Food and Agribusiness Executive Summit. McDonald’s All-Day Breakfast (ADB) Launch: The Strategic Value of McDonald’s Supply Chain. Retrieved from https://agribusiness.purdue.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/1-mcdonald-s-case-study-cs62.pdf NFI Real Estate. (2020, January 18). Subaru of America Selects NFI Park at Florence Crossings for New Parts Distribution and Training Center. Retrieved from https://www.nfiindustries.com/aboutnfi/news-events/subaru-america-selects-nfi-parts-distribution/ Posky, M (2019). TTAC. Report Outlines How Subaru is coping with Quality control Issues. Retrieved from https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2019/06/report-outlines-how-subaruis-coping-with-quality-control-issues/ Project 1: SCM RPA (n. d.) Case Study - Subaru of Indiana Automotive, Inc. Reaching New Cost and Environmental Goals with Reusables. Retrieved from https://reusables.org/wp- content/ uploads/ 2016/ 06/ Subaru-of-Indiana-case-study.pdf Tredway, G. (2017). Automotive LOGISTICS. Supply Chain Conference: Subaru transforms to lean at Indiana plant. Retrieved from https://www.automotivelogistics.media/supply-chainconference-subaru-transforms-to-lean-at-indiana-plant/18244.article Vitasek, K. (2014). Trust and Collaboration: McDonald’s Supply Chain Strategy. Global Sourcing Council. https://www.gscouncil.org/trust-and-collaboration-mcdonalds-supply-chain-strategy/ Vitasek, K., Manrodt, K., & Kling, J. (2018, March 8). McDonald’s Secret Sauce for Supply Chain Success. Retrieved from https://www.vestedway.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/McDonalds-CaseStudy.pdf Wilson, T., Saito, M., & Slodkowski, A. (2015). Subaru’s secret: Low-paid foreign workers power an export boom. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-japan-subaru-specialreportidUSKCN0Q21GS20150729 8
Purchase answer to see full attachment