Planning the Future at Galaxy Assignments, management homework help

Anonymous
timer Asked: Nov 9th, 2016
account_balance_wallet $10

Question Description

Hi,

Please see the attachment for the following question (Assignment) and the Resources that must be used as well as the company profile that must be used to complete Part One .

Please note if it is late I will withdraw. If it does not use the reading I provided I will withdraw. Part one and Part two must be completed or I will withdraw. The question must be answered and not merely restated or talked aroundor I will withdraw.. Their must be a definite answer or I will withdraw. Grammer mistakes that I can find need to be kept at a minimum. It must use all of the provided sources. Feel free to use other materials as long as it valid and relevant. You can only use 2 outside sources or I will withdraw..The paper must be APA. It must contain APA in text Citations if not i will withdraw. All citations need to be APA and any additional citations I need to be able to verify. If it is not APA and searchable i will withdraw. If it does not follow the directions I will withdraw. If it is plagiarized I will withdraw.

Feel free to reach out if you need anything from me.

Thank you kindly

Resources that must be used: https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newTMC_05.htm https://blog.udemy.com/planning-in-management/ http://www.riskope.com/2014/04/03/lets-define-strategic-tactical-and-operational-planning/ https://prezi.com/lqqwbhhmn4bh/evaluate-the-planning-function-of-management/
   Assignment 2: Planning the Future at Galaxy (Week 6) Purpose: In the second assignment, students will create a SWOT analysis and provide a detailed explanation of what considerations led to the determination of the SWOT components. Students will then make recommendations and explain what factors were considered in making the recommendations. Outcome Met by Completing This Assignment: integrate management theories and principles into management practices employ effective planning processes to develop strategies, goals, and objectives in order to enhance performance and sustainability identify the essential characteristics of decision making and indicate the range and types of decisions a manager makes Instructions: Step 1: Create a Word or Rich Text Format (RTF) document. This paper should be presented in a professional manner, double-spaced with indented paragraphs. The final product will be between 6-8 pages in length excluding the title page and reference page. Step 3: Title page with your name, the course name, the date, and the instructor’s name. Step 4: In writing a case study, the writing is in the third person. What this means is that there are no words such as “I, me, my, we, or us” (first person writing), nor is there use of “you or your” (second person writing). If uncertain how to write in the third person, view this link: http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/firstsecond-and-third-person. Do not include personal commentary. Step 5: In writing this assignment, students are expected to support the reasoning using in-text citations and a reference list. If any material is used from a source, it must be cited and referenced. A reference within a reference list cannot exist without an associated in-text citation and vice versa. View the sample APA paper under Week 1 content. Step 6: In writing this assignment, students are expected to paraphrase and not use direct quotes. Learn to paraphrase by reviewing this link: https://writing.wisc.edu/Handbook/QPA_paraphrase2.html Step 6: In writing this assignment, students will use resources from the course material and no more than 2 external source documents. NOTE: The expectation is that students provide a robust use of the course material. This reference is not about just using the company profile. Step 7: In completing the assignment, students are expected to use the facts from the case study and company profile paired with the weekly courses readings to develop the analysis. View the company profile here: ATTACHED Step 8: Read critically and analyze the case study provided under Week 6 content. Notate the key points in the case study. Step 10: Create the introductory paragraph. The introductory paragraph is the first paragraph of the paper but is typically written after writing the body of the paper (Questions students responded to above). View this website to learn how to write an introductory paragraph: http://www.writing.ucsb.edu/faculty/donelan/intro.html Step 11: Respond to the required elements of the assignment. Be clear and concise in the writing and make sure the questions are comprehensively answered.         Review the main case study located under week 6 content. Part One: Long Term Planning Goals and Decisions The toy industry is very fickle and innovation is critical. Sales for January 2016 showed only a 3% rise over January 2015 leaving the company managers concerned about meeting projected sales targets for 2016. In a 30-month plan, George Jepson, Jr., as CEO, together with Edward Mercury, CFO, set long-term goals for the company to include the following: increase sales unrelated to NASA toys by 22 percent; reduce company-wide costs by 5 percent within 15 months and 11.2 percent by the end of the plan; create new technology based action toys; use innovative technology in production to increase efficiency; reduce carbon footprint by 5 percent. In November 2015, the long term planning team began to select the newest Galaxy product line. The choice of the right product design will hopefully stop the slump in sales and jump start growth. Tomorrow, February 4, 2016 is the final meeting of the planning team. The team will choose between three options: produce 1 million Payload Nine toys or MMTJE1 for Christmas 2016; produce 1 million Payload Nine toys for Christmas 2016 and 1 million MMTJE1 for Christmas 2017; produce 1.5 million MMTJE1 toys for Christmas 2017. The products have different production requirements. Payload Nine is designed to complement the International NASA Space Station series. Payload Nine is geared to the 7-10 age group and contains building blocks to make the space shuttle with emphasis on the cargo hold and its loading arm. Focus group results suggest that Payload Nine will sell well but it is not a “wow” product in the eyes of the group. It is not a trendsetting toy. The introduction of Payload Nine is estimated to jump NASA sales by 6.8%. Payload Nine requires little change on the production floor and supplies are easily obtainable. Production could begin May 1, 2016 and completed in time for the Christmas toy market. No additional personnel would be needed and existing production would not be delayed. Production costs would fit within the current year’s budget. The other project “Moon Mission to Jupiter’s Europa” (MMTJE1) is a 3D engineered of the Curiosity vehicle used to. explore Mars. The toy is operated remotely allowing a child and parent to launch the capsule “Juno 1” craft, 500 ft. in the air, unload the rover called Galileo and move it along all terrain surfaces. Galileo takes pictures remotely and sends them to a cell phone. The toy is geared for the age 11-15 market but can be used with younger children as long as there is adult supervision. The toy is made from a 3D printer and consists of a plastic capsule and rover base with electronics added separately in production. [Not sure what 3D printing is, view http://3dprinting.com/whatis-3d-printing/] Focus group results suggest that it is a “wow” product and would also encourage sales of related toys and books as Jupiter’s Moon Europa has been deemed by scientists as the most accessible and likely place to support habitable life as we know it to be.    Children can view pictures and imagine a Moon currently covered in ice as a new space frontier adventure. An interactive video game is also envisioned. It will also be the first intergalactic action toy that Galaxy Toys has ever produced. MMTJE1 is estimated to bring a 15% increase in unrelated NASA sales if rolled out in 2016 and 21.6% increase if rolled out in 2017. However, MMTJE1 is not production-friendly at this point. The new production equipment, electronics, computer programming and trained personnel would not see production beginning before November of 2016. Anticipated budget costs of $450,000 necessitating a budget increase of $300,000 over all five plants would be needed. In order to meet the October deadline for Christmas 2016 sales additional manpower would be needed with a cost increase of 20% over the projected $450,000 budget costs. In addition, the push would necessitate significant rescheduling of current production and likely require factory workers to put in overtime. Finally, the rush would be predicated on the assumption that production problems would not occur. Part One: Long Term Planning Goals and Decisions Keith Wisternick, VP of Production, has the job of aligning all the production teams for Galaxy Toys, and more specifically, he is the person that ensures that each of the plants are capable of producing toys that meet the quality standards of Galaxy Toys in an efficient and cost-effective manner. Also, part of Keith’s job is to provide valuable input into the long-term planning process of the company. Every two years, Keith and his counterparts in the other departments meet to determine the new product line for the upcoming two years. They are presented with new ideas that have been developed by the Design and Engineering Department. After soliciting input for recommendations on the toys that would most likely meet the company’s future objectives, the Board of Directors narrowed the choices to Payload Nine and Moon Mission to Jupiter’s Europa 1 (MMTJE1). As VP of Production, Keith is very aware that his recommendation and vote lends great influence to the outcome. Lucky for Keith, he is not expected to provide his recommendation without first delegating some researching responsibilities to others. One person that he relies upon for research and analysis is Itza Yu who is a Production Manager. Yu has been tasked with creating a SWOT analysis for Keith’s review. However, Yu has not had any prior experience with creating this type of information. Keith has provided the following source to help him: https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newTMC_05.htm Required Elements for Part One: Using the facts that have been provided, the course content and your own research on the toy industry, students should assume the role of Itza Yu and create the SWOT analysis for Keith. To further assist Keith, Itza Yu must also provide a detailed explanation as to what considerations led to the determination that certain facts should be classified as “strengths” while others were classified as “weaknesses.” In other words, it’s not enough to simply list various strengths and weakness, but instead, Itza Yu must explain “why” these facts were included in the analysis. Lastly, Itza Yu must select the best long term planning decision for Keith's approval. In this report, Itza Yu must explain the analysis and factors used in evaluating the vision, mission, long-term goals and SWOT analysis of the company that led to the conclusions that formed the basis of the decision that Keith would recommend to the Long-term Planning Committee.                             Part Two: Short Term Production Goals and Objectives The Board of Directors has decided to accept the recommendation to roll out the “Moon Mission to Jupiter’s Europa 1” for the holiday season of 2017. In a virtual meeting, led by Itza Yu, the production managers have had a “brainstorming” session and have created a list of short-term goals and objectives. In reviewing the list, Itza Yu noted that some of the items on the list are sound shortterm goals and objectives while others are not and therefore, should be removed. He also noted that some of the items do not fit well with the company’s vision and mission and will need to be eliminated. Assuming the role of Itza Yu, students must determine whether the items on the list are “goals” or “objectives” and whether they should be adopted or abandoned. The list is as follows: Short Term Goals and Objectives List Production of quality MMTJE1 toys must start February 20th, 2017. Production of quality MMTJE1 toys must start by July 1, 2017. Dates for starting production set. Completion dates for new personnel hire set. MMTJE1 quality toys production. Additional personnel must be hired by February 20th 2017. Materials must be state of the art. Completion dates for material purchase and delivery set. 3D printers must be purchased by February 20th, 2017. 3D printers must be purchased and installed by November 1, 2016 The first MMTJE1 toys should be produced by December 1, 2016. QC should evaluate first toys by December 31, 2016. Completion dates for QC standards will be determined by QC. Safety standards should be determined by QC by May 1, 2016. Materials must be purchased by and delivered by July 1, 2016. New packages should be palletized by May 1, 2017. Personnel for all production functions must be organized by March 31, 2016. Shipping should begin immediately upon the nod from Quality Control. Shipping should begin July 1, 2017. Shipping start dates should be determined. IT must confirm programming for 3D printers is complete by June 1, 2016. 3D machine operators must be trained by October 31, 2016. Completion dates for 3D programming, training and installation set. Maintenance for 3D printers must be done daily. Personnel must be cross trained on the 3D printers. Training on new equipment must be done by October 31, 2016. Marketing will determine shipping start date. Dates for personnel hire set. Required Elements for Part Two:       From the list above, students should generate three lists. The first list should be a selection of “appropriate” short-term goals. The second list should be a selection of “appropriate” objectives. The third list should be those other goals and objectives that have been abandoned. In completing this task, students are expected to demonstrate their understanding of the difference between “goals” and “objectives” and their choices should reflect this understanding. Moreover, students are required to clearly explain their reasoning for the selection (of certain goals and objectives) and the abandonment of others. This analysis will be very helpful to Keith Wisternick and the Board of Directors of Galaxy Toys, Inc. Step 13: Proofread the paper for spelling and grammatical issues, and third person writing. Use the spell and grammar check in Word as a first measure; Have someone who has excellent English skills to proof the paper; Consider submitting the paper to the Effective Writing Center (EWC). The EWC will provide 4-6 areas that may need improvement. Step 15: Submit the paper in the Assignment Folder.
BMGT 364 Galaxy Toys, Inc. Company Profile Welcome to Galaxy Toys, Inc.! The assessment projects for this course will examine different facets of the management of Galaxy Toys and students will be exploring various scenarios and providing analysis and recommendations from the perspective of a management consultant. Each project has been carefully designed to provide students with opportunities to demonstrate mastery of various management concepts that students have been developing through various learning activities presented in the classroom (both in the face-to-face discussions and online discussions). ● In Project 1, students will demonstrate their understanding of the broad role of managers within an organization and how various organizational theories (historical and current) affect these roles. ● In Project 2, students are expected to apply course concepts and materials to provide real-world recommendations for managers that relate to the planning process ● In Project 3, students will present their analysis and recommendations that demonstrate their ability to organize, lead, and control employees in ways that ultimately support the organization’s vision and strategy for business success. COMPANY PROFILE History Galaxy was founded in 1956 by George Jepson and his wife, Nan after their son Rusty became consumed with the idea of traveling to the moon. Jepson who had worked previously in manufacturing, selling, and advertising of games for a company in Toledo, Ohio, crafted a new spacecraft that delighted his son and his friends. Nan, who had worked in retail toy sales in the local Toledo department store, suggested the idea of producing and selling the toys as a side business. At that time, Nan persuaded her boss, Jack Mercury, to allow her to produce and sell the toys. After approval was given it did not take long before the orders exceeded the Jepson’s ability to produce the product. Seeing the success of the product, Mercury approached the Jepson’s and proposed a partnership to manufacture the spacecraft and other related toy ideas. Galaxy’s fundamental toy-making principles were centered on strong construction, ingenuity, intrinsic playability and action. Early adopted toys were made of heavy steel parts and ponderosa pine, which resisted splintering and held up well to heavy use. The details and charm were added with colorful lithograph labels. Nan Jepson, who had attended art school, was the Art Director and designed push-pull space toys for the opening line of toys for very young children. In 1956, the founders took 8 of their toys to the American International Toy Fair in New York City, and they quickly became a success. The first Galaxy toy ever sold nationally was "Space-IX." in 1957 (The same toy, in excellent condition, would be worth a considerable amount of money in today's collectibles market.) In the early 1960s, Galaxy identified plastic as a material that could help the company incorporate longerlasting decorations and brighter colors into its toys. By the end of the 1960s, Galaxy manufactured 39 toys incorporating plastics. During the 1960s, with America’s entering the Space Race the “Space Rocket” product line was introduced and soon overtook popularity of the earlier toys. The Jepson and Mercury children took over the running of the company in 1970, when George, Nan and Jack retired. The children hold the company shares equally and now occupy both Board and functional positions, making Galaxy Toys the largest privately owned toy company in the USA. The headquarters for the company is still located in Toledo, Ohio with factories in Daytona, Florida, Huntsville, Alabama and White Plains, and Juarez, Mexico. Company vision: To create toys that inspire children all over the globe to dream of space exploration and provide a yearning to achieve that dream Mission: We create both classic and contemporary space-related toys for all ages. All products will be safe. We are committed to using sustainable processes and materials in making our products. Galaxy’s fundamental toy-making principles center on strong and durable construction, ingenuity, intrinsic playability, and action while providing toys that are affordable for all. Products: Galaxy Toys has created approximately 2500 different toys since the early 1950s. One of the best-known product lines is the Apollo Space Rocket line that includes launchable rockets of various sizes and NASA vehicles that are replicas of the earlier ones used at Cape Canaveral. In addition to the Apollo product line, some of the toys and toy brands that have remained popular for many years include the Canaveral building set, Create a Moon Surface Kit, Astronaut Training Center, and the Curious George in Space book and character set. In 2000 Galaxy Toys joined forces with NASA to sponsor the First Annual International Rocket Launch Meet to encourage children’s interests in space exploration. In 2009, Galaxy landed the exclusive right to manufacture and sell all NASA toys sold in the United States and in 2012, this exclusive right extended to all NASA toys manufactured and sold overseas. Current Business Status Current Business Philosophy: In desiring to remain on the cutting edge of space exploration and toy design, the owners of Galaxy Toys have decided that “long term” planning is limited to the span of a two-year timeframe, which will allow for them to remain agile in the current business environment. The needs for innovation and implementation of cutting-edge ideas are the main focus for the next two years. The owners acknowledge that incorporating state-of-the-art technology in both toy design and production is crucial in meeting its two-year goals. The use of 3D printing as a means of production, reducing material and labor costs while shortening production time is the innovative competitive-edge technique. Sustainability is also a concern because current sales are slowing. Technology “action” in the toys must augment the current proprietary toy designs to increase sales and surpass the NASA sales making the company less dependent on that sector for sales. Growth is achieved through innovation. The use of “greenfriendly” shipping materials and toy recycling programs are under consideration. Integration of these two ideas, sustainability and innovation, in new product line development is the current business driver. Since the change, Galaxy Toys treats its employees like family. Employees are valued for their input in the business and measures are taken to assure their success. The result is the current small business clan culture atmosphere. The expansion of the business to Mexico and the possibility for more global expansion has caused the company to adapt a new hybrid flat functional structure. This change has pushed the clan culture to a mixture with a collaborative culture. This new structure and culture is bringing the company’s decision making closer to those who have to implement the decisions, thus empowering more workers and motivating others. Galaxy Toys, Inc. 2015 Sales Figures: ● Gross Toy Sales Per Branch: ➢ Toledo- $400 million ➢ Daytona- $225 million ➢ Huntsville- $200 million ➢ White Plains- $175 million ➢ Juarez- $125 million ● Anticipated Sales for 2016 are estimated at 15% over 2015 sales due to a new product line roll out. Organizational Structure Board of Directors CEO and President George Jepson, Jr. CFO Edward Mercury Chris Leibowitz Manager Finance Vice President Shared Services Rusty Jepson Marilyn Moos Manager Human Resources Vice President Sales Jose Fuentes Martin Martinelli Manager Huntsville Vice President Marketing Nan Jepson Samuel Studebaker Manager Huntsville Sheldon Cooper Manager IT Henrick Huber Manager White Plains Maris Baker Manager White Plains Leroy Jethro Disney Manager Design & Engineering Jessica Hare Manager Toledo Alex Beaumont Manager Toledo Carol Gallay Manager Administration Kelly McConnell Manager Dayton Atsushi Hashmi Manager Dayton Juan Valdez Manager Juarez Mark Willis Manager Juarez Vice President Production and Shipping Keith Wisternick Jordan Miles Production Manager Huntsville Jordan Yaffe Production Manager White Plains Itza Yu Production Manager Toledo Justin Winter Production Manager Dayton Julio Rodriquez, Production Manager Juarez Bart Aldrin Shipping Manager Daytona Millicent Marsden Shipping Manager White Plains Ann Southern Shipping Manager Huntsville Ursula Andress Shipping Manager Toledo Hernando Gonzalez Shipping Manager Juarez Vice President Quality Control Terry Mercury Randy Eberhart Manager Huntsville George Washington, Jr. Manager White Plains Jillian Michaels Manager Toledo Allison McKinsey Manager Dayton Alonso Quijano Manager Juarez

Tutor Answer

TutorRight
School: University of Virginia

flag Report DMCA
Review

Anonymous
Tutor went the extra mile to help me with this essay. Citations were a bit shaky but I appreciated how well he handled APA styles and how ok he was to change them even though I didnt specify. Got a B+ which is believable and acceptable.

Similar Questions
Hot Questions
Related Tags
Study Guides

Brown University





1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology




2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University




982 Tutors

Columbia University





1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University





2113 Tutors

Emory University





2279 Tutors

Harvard University





599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology



2319 Tutors

New York University





1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University





1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University





2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University





932 Tutors

Princeton University





1211 Tutors

Stanford University





983 Tutors

University of California





1282 Tutors

Oxford University





123 Tutors

Yale University





2325 Tutors