This case study examines the challenges of determining how to measure supplier performance. Answer these questions below rather than the ones in the case itself.

/content/enforced/165068-co_SCM-535-MBOL1-2024SU2/FarmCo.pdf

Questions:

1. Using the guidelines presented by Ingrid, identify the top 20% of suppliers.

2. How would you improve the guidelines presented by Ingrid to calculate SR, SM, SI, and SD?

3. Why is it difficult to use data to determine supplier performance?

4. Using the improvements you developed in question 2, assign a weight to the importance of the four items (SR, SM, SI, and SD) and explain your reasoning for the weights. The weights need to add up to 1.0. How are the results different using the weights you assigned? Which method (Ingrid’s or your own) do you think is better, why?

Homework 4: 2 pages with at least 2 references

This case study provides a look at two mid-west companies, their transportation similarities and differences, and their challenges during growth. Read through the questions below then read through the case study. Do not answer the questions listed at the end of the case.

/content/enforced/165068-co_SCM-535-MBOL1-2024SU2/Manly Terminal.pdf

Questions:

1. Would a solution such as Manly Terminal utilizes help MAP with its transportation problems?

2. Many factors influence location decisions. If MAP were to relocate a facility today, what factors would seem most important? Do MAP’s past location decisions limit or enable their future opportunities? Would your answer change if MAP was a large multi-national corporation?

3. Manly Terminal LLC successfully enables modal shifts from truck to rail transportation, and specifically to unit-train pricing, for ethanol shippers producing single carload shipment sizes. What prevents MAP from realizing these same rate advantages? How might these challenges be overcome?