Home

  [Home]

Note that this case is paired with Endoscopes at Victoria Hospital, which is scheduled for November 3rd. You are to submit one or the other, but NOT both.

Accuride manufactures rims for the wheels on heavy trucks. They are considering a procedure that would enable them to install the valve stems on the wheels. This work is currently done by the truck [e.g., Paccar] and trailer [e.g., Fruehauf] manufacturers who buy Accuride's wheels. The Accuride assignment is as follows:

1. What factors are important to Accuride's customers? How would you rank them? Use bullet points and be brief and specific.
2. Will the new process have sufficient capacity to meet customer demand? To answer this question, consider two alternatives:
   1. Assume that there 8 productive hours in each shift.
   2. Assume that during each shift, there are 2, 10-minute breaks and a 30-minute lunch period.
3. Determine the revenue associated with this project.
4. Determine the variable costs associated with this project.
5. Determine the investment associated with the project.
6. Determine the CASH contribution associated with the project.
7. Determine the payback period. How many years [or fractions thereof] will they have to wait to recoup their investment?

Submission follows the pattern we have established: [1] via email no later than 7:45 am on November 5, 2009; email subject line is accuride; filename is yourlastnameaccuride.doc; AND [2] hard copy in class. NOTE: The quantitative analysis required for case this is not extensive. Do your work in Excel and the copy the Excel tables into MS Word. I do reserve the right two request to see your Excel file, however. 

Evaluation:

"A" papers: identification of relevant costs and benefits is complete and accurate. Evaluation of the issues associated with the alternative courses of action is complete, shows insight into the case situation, and an understanding of the context. "A" papers are professional in all respects.

"B" papers: most of the relevant costs and benefits are correctly identified. Evaluation of issues is thorough, but may lack some of the insight and perspective evident in the "A" papers. "B" papers have professional presentation. 

"C" papers: "C" papers exhibit more serious gaps in understanding the relevant costs and benefits associated with the courses of action. Calculations may be incorrect or items may be misclassified [e.g, investments are classified as annual operating costs, or vice versa]. Presentation may be less professional.

"D" and "E" papers exhibit progressively larger gaps in understanding of conceptual material. Organizational problems inhibit reader understanding. Professional presentation may be lacking.

Copyright © 2010 Gerald M. Myers
Last modified: 01/24/2012; 17:00