PROC. 5000
02 June 2014
Week 2 Case Analysis

•A summary of the major facts surrounding the case The major factors in this case are that Ted was going through a hard time in his career due to managing his recently supply department at his job with multiple sub-departments within. Because he was getting a good salary, returns expected from upper management was high. In order to maintain and improve satisfactory numbers, Ted needed to maintain a staff that is skilled, experienced and satisfied in their jobs. Unfortunately, so much was required of each employee it didn’t seem worth it as salaries were low.
As a result, people were leaving to other companies that could pay more for their hard labor. The budget cuts on the supply department made it difficult for standards and quality to be maintained, yet higher management was coming down on Ted’s because his department was not improving with production and its quality.

•A narrative discussion pointing out the major problem Once the corporation began to cut funding from the supply department, quality went down which was to be expected as ted now had to purchase supplies of lower quality. Also, paying his staff less led to people resigning which forced others to have cover down on the labor for those empty positions. Ted budget was cut by 20 percent and he was still expected to maintain and keep improving numbers; In order for that to happen he needed to figure out ways to keep improving supply productivity.
Additional issues involved miscommunication with the cost to purchase machinery for more efficient productivity in the maintenance department. For example, quotes were being made for new machinery cost estimate of 5.5 million dollars and the actual starting cost was 7.2 million dollars. Lastly, upper management was coming down on him for results and other departments were complaining about the supplies