This study provides the Chairman of the board an analysis of the determinations and the consequences of the Company 1 in Period 2. The focal point is given on how our company organized the procedure of planning in the Period 2 and I tried to critically analyse the consequences compared to our programs. In period 2 our company was seemed to make better than the old period ( period 1 ). But in my sentiment period 2 was the beginning of our company’s crisis. We didn’t adhere to our distinction scheme and we ignored our aims. I strongly believe that if we have acted much otherwise and have the opportunity to remake the planning of the determination devising of period 2 we would execute much better in all following periods.
This study is an effort of informing the president of the board of the Company’s 1 programs. actions and errors during the period 2. It starts with the analysis of the procedure of planning and continues with the analysis of the consequences compared to our company’s programs. 2 ) Body
2. 1 ) Planning of the Period 2.
To get down with the Price. we planned to hold the same monetary value as Period 1 ( 3. 090 eur ) . because we knew that clients dislike alterations in the monetary value and we didn’t want to hold dissatisfied clients particularly when we hadn’t yet persuaded them that our merchandise was the best in quality so we couldn’t hazard losing many of them. As for our investing in Advertisement we thought that if we kept puting the same sum ( 7. 0mEur ) as Period 1 we would have the same or bigger market portion. Then about Gross saless force we were believing of holding 110 in that period because as the “Topsim” references a gross revenues force of 110 could increase gross revenues up to 45000 units. We decided to put the monetary value of 2. 640 for the command that was higher than our CGM in the period 1 ( ; 2. 270eur ).
We were believing of buying 46. 000 units of input stuffs and bring forthing 50. 000 units of Copy I as we were believing that we have to be able to react to the addition of market 1 demand ( 8 % -10 % ) and to function the commands in instance we won that. After that we started believing of cutting down the cost of the remainder investings we had to make. So we thought that puting few or no money to the remainder of our possible investings would be plenty. So here are our ideas of investings:
1. 0mEur in CI. seting 10 people at the Copy I-old engineering. 0. 50mEur in Ecology of Copy I-old and 0. 1mEur in Value Analysis of Copy I-old. 0 people in engineering and 0. 0 mEur in ecology and 0. 0 in value analysis of Copy I-new. 1. 0mEur in Care of our Type A production lines and 0. 0mEur in Rationalization of them. no new investing or disinvestment of the production lines and no new types of lines. 0. 0 mEur procedure optimisation. 0. 0 mEur in developing production workers. 0. 0 mEur in investing in environmental workss. 0 figure of enrolling or dismissal of production workers. non-salary staff costs 37 % . short-run loan 15. 0 mEur. long-run loans 0. 0 mEur. dividends 40 % . purchase of securities 0. 0 mEur.
2 ) Body
2. 2 ) Critically analyze the consequences compared to our programs.
I have to advert that by and large. in the most periods. as we were be aftering our stairss we were seeking to concentrate on the company’s aims ( ; increase our employees productiveness ; decrease the negative ecological footmark ; retain the market portion & gt ; 17 % ) and how we would accomplish those through our actions. However. in period 2 we didn’t act like our determinations and consequences would hold a long term consequence on the possible accomplishment of our ends. we tried a different maneuver. which was cutting all investings costs highly and possibly as we see from the consequences of that period and the following that was a fatal error for our company.
Even if it seemed from the improved Net Income ( compared to period 1 ) that we chose a good maneuver it wasn’t because that move got us behind in comparing to the other companies that had chosen the distinction scheme every bit good. They built a quality merchandise unlike us that we thought merely the impermanent subsister of our company. Of class as we were at the beginning we were afraid non to acquire out of the market so we didn’t think exhaustively of our long term consequences. In that point of clip our lone concern should hold been to make a merchandise with a strong quality that would appeal most of the consumers and the monetary value wouldn’t be for them an obstruction.
Our consequences weren’t those we wanted in all periods. and I am rather certain that this started from the consequences of period 2. We reasonably much failed making a quality based ( eco-friendly and flexible/tend to react instantly at technological alterations ) production. our clients weren’t satisfied by and large. our staff was neither and our market portion was worsening. I can now happen many corrections to our determinations that possibly could guarantee us in a long term position. First of all. I agree with the monetary value. I think that first we had to derive some loyal clients who would appreciate our product’s quality and after that addition the monetary value. So our consequences wouldn’t have changed with another monetary value in a good manner.
I don’t agree now with the sum we invested in the Advertisement. I now believe that we should hold put at least 1. o more mEur so that our market portion would be wider. The figure of gross revenues staff was a good move and I think was plenty. As one see it right now I’m non certain that we needed to sell to commands because if we had focused on our distinction scheme so likely we wouldn’t necessitate them and possibly we could sell all of our production to the market 1 so that our gross would be bigger. As for CI we for certain made a terrible error by cut downing the sum of investing because CI expenditures affect Corporate Image which has an of import dual consequence. on Customer Satisfaction ( which is one of our companies objectives ) and on Production Staff Motivation ( which increase our employees productiveness ).
As the concern study on the industry shows our company had in Period 2 the smallest index of Corporate Image of all companies. I for certain believe that we should hold put 2. 0 or even 3. 0mEur. Of class 10 people in engineering is a truly little figure when believing that a quality merchandise don’t invest that much in R & A ; D. They should be at least 30-34 so that we could be flexible to technological alterations. By puting in engineering we could cut down the overall sum of the environmental harm index caused by company which beside avoiding the punishment ( we had to pay unless it turned 100 or more ) it has a direct influence on Gross saless. Absenteeism of merchandise employees. Corporate Image. Share monetary value and Motivation of staff in production.
Besides. 0. 5mEur in ecology isn’t plenty for a quality centered Copy machine. Consumers attention about the environment and ecology by and large. Eco-friendliness affect their satisfaction so if we were more eco-friendly we would derive consumers grasp and trueness. So the more eco-friendly would be our merchandise the merrier market portion we would derive. Furthermore. I believe we had had to put in new production lines ( Type C for illustration ) because we could better ecology index of the production lines themselves easy by replacing certain lines. And for certain 0. 0mEur investing in ecological workss is wholly unacceptable for the same grounds. I don’t have many expostulations for non puting yet in the engineering. ecology and value analysis of the Copy I-new in period 2.
At first we should hold gained a loyal market portion and so when holding some sort of certainty for our product’s continuation/progress and of class adequate capital to step to the following degree to put in the Copy I-new. I don’t agree with the sum of production because we weren’t good prepaered for selling that. On the other manus I would rather hold with the sum of production we had in period 2 in instance we had planned more exhaustively our determinations bearing on head our distinction scheme possibly we could sell it.
As I see our determinations now I can’t understand how we didn’t invest in developing the production workers. Of class that resulted to the staff by and large. shown with the abrasion. Training has a positive influence on Production Staff Motivation and that would ease our 1st aim which is the addition of employees’ productiveness. So for certain I believe we had to put in preparation at least 1. 5mEur. For the same ground I believe that non-salary costs should be a small higher ( e. g 40 % ).
Finally. I don’t think that the figure of production workers was in that period plenty ( particularly if we had done everything I have mentioned above ) . so bearing in head all of the above neither the figure of production material would be adequate nor of class the Short-run loan.
For the Company 1 the organizing of the planning procedure and the determination doing procedure in each period was a alone experience. Almost all of us were inexperienced in such an activity. even in a group work. so we were seeking for the best consequence every clip. . Even if that ne’er came! Most of us found the whole process and the concern game a great chance to recognize how to utilize some of our already acquired cognition and a great opportunity to larn many more from our co-workers and our professor. Thank you for that chance!