Consolidated Bottling Incorporated bottles spring water. Consolidated began its operations with one small plant in Baltimore and still maintains its corporate headquarters in that city. But over the years, the company has grown, and it now has bottling operations in or near twelve cities in the United States.
|
Plant | Monthly Capacity |
| Albuquerque | 250 |
| Baltimore | 270 |
| Boston | 143 |
| Chicago | 182 |
| Dallas | 265 |
| Denver | 183 |
| Detroit | 121 |
| Houston | 265 |
| Kansas City | 240 |
| Los Angeles | 157 |
| Portland | 121 |
| St. Paul | 105 |
Consolidated is about to embark on a large total quality management program. A new functional group is being created to bring new quality techniques to the operations. The group will travel to each plant. Because the new quality team will be spending so much time on the road, Consolidated wants to locate it central to the company's facilities rather than in Baltimore. Consolidated has developed a table of the coordinates of each of its facilities (the twelve bottling operations and its other operations).
| City | Latitude | Longitude |
| Albuquerque | 35° | 107° |
| Baltimore | 39° | 77° |
| Boston | 42° | 71° |
| Chicago | 42° | 88° |
| Columbus | 40° | 83° |
| Dallas | 33° | 97° |
| Denver | 40° | 105° |
| Detroit | 42° | 83° |
| Houston | 30° | 95° |
| Indianapolis | 39° | 86° |
| Kansas City | 39° | 95° |
| Los Angeles | 34° | 119° |
| Miami | 26° | 81° |
| Montreal | 46° | 74° |
| Portland | 45° | 123° |
| Raleigh | 36° | 79° |
| St. Paul | 45° | 94° |
| San Francisco | 38° | 122° |
DISCUSSION QUESTION
1. Examine the information and present a set of plans for centrally locating the total quality management team. Suppose that Consolidated wishes to place its team in a city in which the company has a plant. Which city is best? Suppose that Consolidated does not restrict itself to a city in which it currently operates. Where in the United States should the team be located?
36 comments:
Looks like an interesting case study on capacity.
I think Kansas City would be best for the team, if the company wanted them to be located in a central location where there is also a plant. I chose place because it's in the middle of all the plants. If the company wanted a central location with out a plant near by, I would suggest Nashville, Tennessee. I chose this because it is directly in the center, and fairly close to a majority of the plants.
After looking at the world map, I discovered that locating the management team in Kansas City would be the center of the United States. When determining which city to place the team where there is a plant I would still suggest Kansas City because it has a relatively high capacity and still is located near the center of the States. I feel that placing the team in the center; will be the best place because it may have draw in the team from all over the United States.
Kansas City would be the most central location for this company. After looking at the map and seeing where all of the plants were located, Kansas City seems the most central. This company has plants on the west and east coast as well as all throughout the U.S. so I think Kansas City would be the most logical place to locate because it is right in the center. If the company was not restricted to have a plant at the location, I would still think that Kansas City or even another city near that location like St. Louis or Wichita would be best for the location because it is in the center of all the other plants. Considering this new group will be on the road often traveling to all the different plants, most of the cities with plants from this central location will be the same distance.
While being centrally located is a good idea, are there other factors to consider when choosing a location? Refer to your chapter 8 handout.
I would suggest Kansas City due to the fact that it's centrally located between all the other locations.Each side of Kansas City is about 7 other locations, which would make it even also.If they didn't want to use a plant, I would suggest Arkansas, which would be vertical of where the central plant would be. This would still place them in a fair location for everyone.
I already had an ID already made from other classes. Boodissy13 is Mary B. :0)
While Kansas City is a great place for the team members, I have re-evaluated the area and decided that Jefferson City is a better place. I have concluded this because there is an airport in the area. Also, because it is a smaller city, all of the costs for the team may be significantly less than if they were located in Kansas City. There is also a major interstate for the team to utilize to get to and from other city's quickly.
I too think that the Kansas City would be the best place for the management team because it is the most centralized location. The city to place the team where there is a plant would be Kansas City because it's centrally located which would allow them to transport there team easily and cost effectively as well as timely because they are the most centrally located and have a fairly high capacity. By being centrally located it makes transportation times to the places around them all about the same, where if they were not placed centrally but went for the highest capacity plant the transportation time would take longer and could cost more money for them because they would for sure have to fly everywhere. If they’re centrally located like Kansas City they would be able to drive some places and fly the others.
PS: Jefferson City is located in the very center of Missouri, this location is still very central for the team.
Kansas City is located in the middle. It has many good characteristics that make it the best place for the team to locate. Some of the transportation that Kansas City offers are Amtrak, City buses, KCI Airport Flight Information, KCI Airport Ground Transportation, Taxi companies and Livery services. This will help shipping and travel cost. I also believe that the weather in Kansas City will help. Not too cold and not too hot. Salary and education is very important. You can go to www.salary.com and type in job title and zip code to get the estimated payroll. This is what I have found: Total Quality Manager - Kansas City, MO 64944
Benefit Amount
Base Salary $91,657
Bonuses $7,399
Social Security $7,578
401k / 403b $6,141
Disability $1,585
Health care $5,328
Pension $4,160
Time Off $12,953 Total $136,801
Where in Baltimore the average based salary for a total quality manager is $95,417.
Other factors to look at are political risks, values, and culture.
While locating the team in Kansas City, there are many interstates and highways that go through the city. This will help bring the team members together, as the plant should be right off of the interstate. This will make for easy transportation and no room for getting lost. Locating here will also make it easier to ship goods, if needed to. I think that Kansas City is large enough to handle the team.
You are on to some excellent ideas. We do do that there are several factors that affect location decisions. Rochelle is on to something and so is Summer -- they are looking at things other then just "physical" location.
Pat
I am going to have to agree with all of you. Kansas city is going to benefit the team in the most possible ways. As it is located in the center of the U.S, it is going to save on transportaion costs, will be able delivery things in a timely fashion, and the capacity of this city high and well above the average capacity. So overall the team should be located in Kansas city.
Well like I told all of you in class I wasn't going to post till monday night. I think that Kansas City would be the best choice for the team because it is very central located just like you all said. It is in a very great place for transportion and there are plenty of of plants near. It is great because once you think about it there are many plants on eas and west coast.
After review Consolidated data, I would have to agree with everyone else. Kansas is most centrally located. Being there would most likely render the lowest travel costs out of any city possible. Another reason why I would choose Kansas City as my place to locate your home office is because it is also one of the top producing plants they have. If they have a problem there with inventory or production, most of the other plants will too. With that, being there first hand they will be able to identify the problem and solution and pass it over to all the other plants so that the same problem won’t happen again.
After review Consolidated data, I would have to agree with everyone else. Kansas is most centrally located. Being there would most likely render the lowest travel costs out of any city possible. Another reason why I would choose Kansas City as my place to locate your home office is because it is also one of the top producing plants they have. If they have a problem there with inventory or production, most of the other plants will too. With that, being there first hand they will be able to identify the problem and solution and pass it over to all the other plants so that the same problem won’t happen again.
I like what everyone else is saying and agree with everyone. They have a great location in the center of the country and in the middle of all the other plants. The wages in that area for a manager are also pretty reasonable. I'm not completely sold however on Kansas City like everyone else. I think Indianapolis would also be a great choice. I think transportation could be a little less expensive because of being so close to the major railways and interstates. I also like the fact its located so close to Chicago, one of the largest cities in the United States. It's not quite as centeral as Kansas City but looks like it could be closer to the majority of the plants. The other aspect I like about Indianapolis is that the wages for managers is even a little bit less than Kansas City.
First off, the word verification on this site is way more difficult than it needs to be I don't know if anyone else had trouble but it took me like 4 tries to do that lol. I would agree with mostly everyone and say that it is Kansas City. The facility has good capacity and is located in the middle of the states. I was looking online and found a newspaper article from the Kansas City Star stating that in 2007, KC had one of the largest drops in crime rate during the current decade. This may be important because employees want to feel safe when working or driving. They don't want to have to worry about getting car jacked driving through a neighborhood on the way to work. Also, my uncle lives in KC and the weather there is much more tolerable than Wisconsin. It rarely gets below 10 degrees, which, during the winter months in Wisconsin can feel like 80 degrees. Overall, KC is the best place to set up the operation
I think Kansas City also sounds like a great idea for a location for the company. I agree with Summer because Kansas has decent overall weather and has a plant near by. Interstates 70, 29, 35, 435,635, and 670 also run right through the heart of Kansas City. This will provide faster travel base on location. Kansas also has an International Airport located near by which can also help with transportation. If being centrally located with tons of transportation was one thing they were some things they value they would pick Kansas City.
I definitely agree with all of you that Kansas City is the most logical place to put the functional group for the new total quality management program. It is the most centrally located place where there is a plant. This will save on time and money and also make it easier on the team. However there are also other factors the company may want to look at. There are only four plants west of Kansas City meaning the team will be spending most of its time in the central region of the country or on the east coast. It’s all up to the company and how long they plan to spend at each location before they make a decision. Another good alternative may be Chicago or Dallas. Now if they decide to place the team in a place where there isn’t a plant I would pick St. Louis, Omaha, Tulsa, or maybe even Atlanta. A lot depends on public transportation and how easy and efficient it is to get in and out of those areas. I would bet that the Chicago and Atlanta airports are a lot busier than Omaha or Tulsa. Which means the company could run into delays. A lot goes into deciding the right place before they company can make the decision.
I believe that if Consolidated wants to put a Quality Management team into a current plant, they should use the Kansas City plant. It’s about as centralized to the other Consolidated plants as they can get without finding a new facility. I feel that a good location that is not currently a plant site would be St. Louis, Mo. St. Louis offers every kind of transportation need (major river, airport, major highways, and railways), which can be a competitive advantage over companies that offer few shipping alternatives.
As summerthorson said Kansas City has everything from Amtrak, taxies, to an airport. I too think that this alone makes this an excellent place for the team to be located for travel reasons, but as they show the base salary and other expenses/benefits that the company would have to pay are lower then most of the other locations that they could locate their team at. By looking at things such as salary and benefits that the company has to pay if it is lower then most places like Kansas is then this is where the company can save the most money. Although the location is good so are the expenses that the company has to pay for each team member like salary and other benefits so I agree with everyone else that Kansas is the best location for the team.
Kansas City would be the best location. The two farthest cities are Portland and Boston. It is 1400 miles to boston and 1700 miles to Portland. That is only a 300 mile difference. It is the closet city with a plant to the middle. Even if they didnt need to be in a city with a plant I think Kansas City would still be the best. Plus it would be near 3 of 5 of the most productive plants, Alburquerque,Houston a,d Dallas.
For whatever reason I could only have so much info in a post but this is the rest of what I have to say. If you look at the Union Pacific railway map alomost all the branches of railroad go right into kansas city. Having cheaper options for shipping and transportation is always agood idea.
I think that Kansas City would be the best central location. There is a plant there and has a relatively high capacity also. Having it in Kansas City would make it a better location for the team since it is in the middle of the US and everyone would travel the same distance. It only makes since to have it in the middle of the US and have it equal distance for the east and the west coasts.
I would have to agree that Kansas City would be the best choice. It seems this way because it is definately right in the middle of things, and that the plant that the company currently has there has a decent capacity rate as of right now. This will be helpful while integrating new quality measures into their products. Also, Kansas City does have an adequate amout of transportation systems, and the cost of living is cheaper than some regions. If I were to choose a different location, I had thought about Colorado Springs, Colorado. This is because they have natural spring water, that might help the company to lower their costs, etc. Just a random idea that I had. Not sure if it would actually be beneficial or not...
Kansas City would be the best choice in which the company has a plant. It is centrally located, and has a large monthly capacity. They can conduct testing of new quality techniques that can be implemented in other locations. If they wanted to use a location where they don't have a facility, Wichita or St. Louis would be central locations. Wichita would probably be cheaper to construct a facility because it is not a huge metropolitian area such as St. Louis.
By the way, this is Josh. I didn't know you could use your real name. I thought I had to make up a screen name.
One thing I thought of was if they were to locate to Montreal, would they get any tax breaks or government incentives? I still think that a centrally located existing plant facility is the best choice. You already have a bulding, and an operation to test new procedures. I feel the cost of locating to a new city would be too much.
I think that either Indianapolis or Kansas City would be a good choice. The reason is that they both are about in the middle of all the other companies. This would make it easier for transporting goods and such forth to the other companies. They are both considered big cities in the United States and there for have good ways of transportation. Which also means quickest ways to get products out to other stores.
I think that Kansas City would be the best location for this company, because of its central location. This is also a great location because both I70 and I35 pass right through the city so the team would be able to travel quite easily between locations. Another reason this would be a great location is because its population is around 500,000 which means there will be people looking for work if they decide to increase the size of their team and facilities.
I believe that Kansas City would also be the best location. Not oly is it a central location, but it has access to a variety of transportation. This benefit would help lower the cost of travel and shipping. I found Summers research on salary interesting as well. It is neat to see the differances in salary from city to city.
I think That Kansas City would be the best place to position the management team, If they are looking for the most centralized location for which to ease the travel cost. Kansas City has a high volume of traffic flowing on freeways allowing transportation to be faster.
I also think Indianapolis would be a good location because it is pretty central, and it is a big city with interstates and highways going through it. I think the key to anyone of these locations is the interstates and highways that run through them or are near them. This is important because they will make transportation quicker and easier.
I would agree with summer by looking up some of the income of the families that are going to be possibly moving to the new plants in which kansas would be a good place since they have good weather too as she stated. But also something to think about would be things like education if families have kids they want a good school for them to attend. Also what about the neighborhoods that they would be moving into. A few possible questions could be crime, taxes, and so forth that they could be questioning in their new neighborhoods.
Post a Comment