CASE ANALYSIS FUYAO GLASS

Document Content and Description Below

Introduction CASE ANALYSIS H&M The case, “Fuyao Glass America: Sourcing Decision” discusses the sourcing options Fuyao Industry Group must consider for a potential bid on an upcoming contract ... . For starters, Fuyao specializes in manufacturing glass for automotive vehicles through a centralized method that allows for consistent production of specific, custom glass to fit the production line of their customers. Considering automotive glass can vary dramatically by shape, size, thickness, etc. the contract and their options prove to be of utmost importance, especially since the contract is expected to be a few years long. The two primary routes Fuyao could consider fall between a facility in Tianjin, China and another in Moraine, Ohio. The difficulty in choosing between the two revolves around which would be the best match in terms of costs, efficiency, risk, etc. while being able to maintain production levels – without increasing risk of stoppage and consequentially high fees that would be enforced by their customers (after all, a disruption in glass production could completely stop the manufacturing of a line of cars). The two options provide different pros and cons, which primarily include the differences in labor costs, shipping costs, and overall production potential (and the possibility of improving such production). While the Tianjin, China facility has considerably lower labor costs and are far more established than the newer facility in Moraine, Ohio, the shipping of glass is significantly more expensive than the transportation fees incurred domestically. The case describes the further difficulty in deciding between these options as the benefits of both choices both have underlying downsides (e.g. labor costs are lower in China but are continually increasing), and therefore require a more thorough consideration. The Issue ALYSISdocx/4 CASE ANALYSIS H&M The issue, as mentioned, comes down to choosing the best facility for this production contract which proves to be difficult due to the wide varying differences (and underlying consequences) between the facilities. The only pieces of this case that remains central among both choices are the repercussions of not meeting production numbers – whether it be due to quality error, breakage on the floor, or poorly executed processes. The Moraine, Ohio facility differs from that in Tianjin not only because of minimal shipping costs but also because of the considerable investments Fuyao already committed to the new factory – roughly $700 million (Shih, 2020). With the factory being new, more floor employees are working per shift which stacks up labor costs, however, this could change in the future once the new facility staff have had time to gain experience. Another primary difference of course is the location, as the Moraine facility is near their customers’ plants of assembly, minimizing transportation costs while reducing the distance in which breakage from accidents could occur. Despite this, there are considerable downsides and concerns, primarily revolving around potential environmental influences and the lack of growth possibility. The Tianjin, China facility differs from that in Moraine in that labor costs are far lower, and the facility is more established and mature, as they have been running for longer. Geographically they also have their own advantage in that there are other glass production factories surrounding the area which could be beneficial in the event of a stop in manufacturing – due to the specific concentration of glass production resources and intelligence available and general greater connectivity throughout the area (Chan, et. al., 2019). Shipping costs and times are a downside compared to the quick movement Moraine can provide, however, the shipping itself is quite fast in respect to the distance being travelled. More of these differences will be further analyzed in the following sections [Show More]

Last updated: 3 years ago

Preview 1 out of 9 pages