Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 254 views

    L4M6 Case Study FINAL

    Uploaded by

    Abdallah
    The cross-functional team was tasked with renewing the catering contract for a staff restaurant at a large utilities organization. When initially meeting, team members expressed varying opinions on the options for the contract. After discussions, the consensus was reached to renew the existing contract. The team identified stakeholders, including employees who had high interest but low power. Multiple suppliers met the criteria, giving the organization more bargaining power during the tender process. Early supplier engagement allowed input on potential efficiencies before bids were submitted.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    L4M6 Case Study FINAL

    Uploaded by

    Abdallah
    254 views4 pages
    The cross-functional team was tasked with renewing the catering contract for a staff restaurant at a large utilities organization. When initially meeting, team members expressed varying opinions on the options for the contract. After discussions, the consensus was reached to renew the existing contract. The team identified stakeholders, including employees who had high interest but low power. Multiple suppliers met the criteria, giving the organization more bargaining power during the tender process. Early supplier engagement allowed input on potential efficiencies before bids were submitted.

    Original Title

    L4M6-case-study-FINAL

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The cross-functional team was tasked with renewing the catering contract for a staff restaurant at a large utilities organization. When initially meeting, team members expressed varying opinions on the options for the contract. After discussions, the consensus was reached to renew the existing contract. The team identified stakeholders, including employees who had high interest but low power. Multiple suppliers met the criteria, giving the organization more bargaining power during the tender process. Early supplier engagement allowed input on potential efficiencies before bids were submitted.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    254 views4 pages

    L4M6 Case Study FINAL

    Uploaded by

    Abdallah
    The cross-functional team was tasked with renewing the catering contract for a staff restaurant at a large utilities organization. When initially meeting, team members expressed varying opinions on the options for the contract. After discussions, the consensus was reached to renew the existing contract. The team identified stakeholders, including employees who had high interest but low power. Multiple suppliers met the criteria, giving the organization more bargaining power during the tender process. Early supplier engagement allowed input on potential efficiencies before bids were submitted.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 4

    L4M6 Supplier Relationships

    Case Study
    Jean-Luc works at a large utilities organisation. He is representing the procurement department
    in a cross-functional team that was set up to discuss a catering contract. To date, the
    organisation has provided a staff restaurant in the site. The contract is up for renewal and the
    organisation wanted to engage with the employees to determine what to do next.

    When the team initially met, there were introductions, and a period where they were finding out
    about each other. Once the team had settled somewhat, people began putting forward their
    opinions, which varied from having a subsidised canteen, to suggestions that there was no need
    for a canteen and people could bring their own lunch. It got quite heated at times. Jean-Luc
    observed his team members – some were very vocal, and seemed determined to have their
    opinion be the outcome, others gave their views when asked directly, but sat back and
    disengaged from the process. Eventually a consensus was reached that the contract should be
    renewed.

    Early on, the team identified the stakeholders, and categorised them according to their level of
    power and interest. One group they identified was the employees who worked in the building.
    The team categorised them as having a high level of interest, but a low level of power.

    The team worked together to identify appropriate suppliers who had the capacity and capability
    to provide the services. There were several suppliers who met the criteria; many more than had
    been available last time the contract was put out to tender to find one supplier for the contract.
    This was an advantage for the utilities organisation.

    They invited the suppliers to come in and consider the layout and facilities of the existing staff
    restaurant.

    At this stage, the team also considered the relative spend of the contract compared to the size
    of the supplying organisations, and used the supplier preferencing model and market
    management matrix to identify which suppliers would view the contract most favourably.

    The contract was put out to tender. Everyone had a clearly defined role and they executed their
    own tasks. When bids were received, the team worked together to evaluate them – each taking
    responsibility for assessing a specific section in order to achieve the goal of identifying one
    supplier that was best placed to provide the service.

    Leading global excellence in procurement and supply


    Use the information provided in the case study to answer these questions.

    1. What was the reason for the termination of the incumbent contract?
    a) Poor performance
    b) The end of the contract
    c) Supply base rationalisation

    2. Where does ‘single sourced’ sit on the relationship spectrum?


    a) At the competitive end
    b) At the collaborative end
    c) In the middle

    3. There are four options for how a supplier might view a buyer. Which quadrant is best for the
    buying organisation to be in?
    a) Exploitable
    b) Core
    c) Development

    4. Why was it advantageous for the utilities organisation that there were more potential
    suppliers this time around?
    a) Increased competition among suppliers means suppliers have higher bargaining power.
    b) Increased competition among suppliers means buyers have higher bargaining power.
    c) Increased competition among suppliers means buyers have lower bargaining power.

    5. What method of communication should the team have adopted with the employees, based
    on their stakeholder categorisation?
    a) Minimal effort
    b) Keep informed
    c) Keep satisfied

    6. When the team was working together to identify appropriate suppliers, what stage of team
    development would this have been?
    a) Forming
    b) Storming
    c) Performing

    7. When the team members were giving suggestions about how to proceed, what types of
    behaviour did Jean-Luc observe?
    a) Competitive and avoidant
    b) Competitive and accommodating
    c) Compromising and accommodating

    8. What benefit did early supplier engagement bring to the utilities organisation?

    1
    a) Allowed the suppliers to see where they would be working
    b) Allowed the suppliers to see what facilities were available
    c) Allowed the suppliers to suggest improvements and efficiencies

    2
    Answers
    1. b) The end of the contract
    2. c) In the middle
    3. b) Core
    4. b) Increased competition among suppliers means buyers have higher bargaining power.
    5. b) Keep informed
    6. c) Performing
    7. a) Competitive and avoidant
    8. c) Allowed the suppliers to suggest improvements and efficiencies

    You might also like