Report on Course: the Business Simulation Essay

This report provides the Chairman of the board an abstract of the decisions and the results of the Company 1 in Period 2. The focus is given on how our company organized the influence of mean in the Period 2 and I tried to critic all in ally analyze the results compared to our plans. In period 2 our company was take inmed to do recrudesce than the previous period (period 1), but in my opinion period 2 was the beginning of our companys crisis. We didnt ad present to our differentiation strategy and we ignored our objectives. I unbendablely call up that if we consider acted much differently and study the chance to redo the planning of the decision making of period 2 we would perform much better in all next periods.IntroductionThis report is an attempt of informing the chairman of the board of the Companys 1 plans, actions and mistakes during the period 2. It starts with the abstract of the process of planning and continues with the analysis of the results compared to our com panys plans. 2) Body2.1) proviso of the Period 2.To begin with the Price, we planned to prepare the uniform impairment as Period 1 ( 3,090 eur), because we k bracing that customers dis resembling changes in the price and we didnt necessity to have dis pleasant customers especially when we hadnt yet persuaded them that our overlap was the exceed in quality so we couldnt risk losing many another(prenominal) of them. As for our couchment in Advertisement we thought that if we kept investing the same sum up (7.0mEur ) as Period 1 we would own the same or bigger foodstuff share. Then about Sales labour we were sentiment of having 110 in that period because as the Topsim mentions a sales force of 110 could increase sales up to 45000 units. We decided to set the price of 2,640 for the bid that was high than our CGM in the period 1 ( 2,270eur).We were stand foring of purchase 46,000 units of input materials and producing 50,000 units of replica I as we were thinking that we have to be able to respond to the increase of market 1 demand (8%-10%) and to run the bids in case we won that. After that we started thinking of cutting smoothen the cost of the rest investments we had to do. So we thought that investing few or no money to the rest of our say-so investments would be complete. So here are our thoughts of investments1,0mEur in CI, putting 10 people at the written matter I-old technology, 0,50mEur in Ecology of simulate I-old and 0,1mEur in Value Analysis of re-create I-old, 0 people in technology and 0,0 mEur in ecology and 0,0 in think of analysis of Copy I-new, 1,0mEur in Maintenance of our Type A merchandise lines and 0,0mEur in Rationalization of them, no new investment or disinvestment of the cropion lines and no new types of lines, 0,0 mEur process optimization, 0,0 mEur in training overlapion workers, 0,0 mEur in investment in environmental plants, 0 phone number of recruiting or dismissal of growthion workers, non-salary staff c ost 37%, short-term bring 15,0 mEur, long-term loans 0,0 mEur, dividends 40%, purchase of securities 0,0 mEur.2) Body2.2) Critically analyze the results compared to our plans.I have to mention that generally, in the most periods, as we were planning our go we were trying to focus on the companys objectives ( increase our employees productivity decrease the negative bionomical footprint retain the market share17% ) and how we would make those through our actions. However, in period 2 we didnt act like our decisions and results would have a long term effect on the potential achievement of our goals, we tried a different tactic, which was cutting all investments costs extremely and maybe as we pull in from the results of that period and the next that was a fatal mistake for our company. hitherto if it seemed from the improved Net Income (compared to period 1) that we chose a good tactic it wasnt because that move got us behind in comparison to the other companies that had chosen the differentiation strategy as well. They construct a quality product unlike us that we thought lone(prenominal) the temporary survivor of our company. Of course as we were at the beginning we were acrophobic not to get out of the market so we didnt think thoroughly of our long term results. In that point of time our single concern should have been to create a product with a strong quality that would appeal most of the consumers and the price wouldnt be for them an obstacle.Our results werent those we wanted in all periods, and I am sooner certain(p) that this started from the results of period 2. We pretty much failed creating a quality based (eco-friendly and flexible/tend to respond immediately at technological changes) production, our customers werent satisfied generally, our staff was neither and our market share was declining. I can direct find many corrections to our decisions that maybe could en accepted us in a long term view. First of all, I agree with the price, I think that first we had to gain nigh loyal customers who would appreciate our products quality and after that increase the price. So our results wouldnt have changed with another price in a good way.I put one acrosst agree straightway with the amount we invested in the Advertisement. I now mean that we should have put at least 1,o more mEur so that our market share would be wider. The number of sales staff was a good move and I think was enough. As i see it right now Im not sure that we infallible to sell to bids because if we had focused on our differentiation strategy then in all probability we wouldnt need them and maybe we could sell all of our production to the market 1 so that our revenue would be bigger. As for CI we for sure made a severe mistake by reducing the amount of investment because CI expenditures affect Corporate see to it which has an important doubled effect, on Customer Satisfaction (which is one of our companies objectives) and on Production stave Moti vation (which increase our employees productivity).As the crinkle report on the exertion shows our company had in Period 2 the smallest index of Corporate Image of all companies, I for sure believe that we should have put 2,0 or even 3,0mEur. Of course 10 people in technology is a really small number when thinking that a quality product dont invest that much in R&D. They should be at least 30-34 so that we could be flexible to technological changes. By investing in technology we could reduce the overall amount of the environmental damage indicator caused by company which beside avoiding the penalty (we had to pay unless it cancelled 100 or more) it has a direct influence on Sales, Absenteeism of product employees, Corporate Image, Share price and Motivation of staff in production.Also, 0,5mEur in ecology isnt enough for a quality centered Copy machine. Consumers care about the environment and ecology generally. Eco-friendliness affect their satisfaction so if we were more eco-fri endly we would gain consumers appreciation and loyalty. So the more eco-friendly would be our product the merrier market share we would gain. Moreover, I believe we had had to invest in new production lines (Type C for example) because we could improve ecology index of the production lines themselves tardily by replacing certain lines. And for sure 0,0mEur investment in ecological plants is totally unacceptable for the same discernments. I dont have many objections for not investing yet in the technology, ecology and value analysis of the Copy I-new in period 2.At first we should have gained a loyal market share and then when having some good-natured of certainty for our products continuation/progress and of course enough capital to step to the next level to invest in the Copy I-new. I dont agree with the amount of production because we werent well prepaered for selling that. On the other hand I would quite agree with the amount of production we had in period 2 in case we had pla nned more thoroughly our decisions bearing on foreland our differentiation strategy maybe we could sell it.As I see our decisions now I cant understand how we didnt invest in training the production workers. Of course that resulted to the staff generally, shown with the attrition. Training has a positive influence on Production Staff Motivation and that would facilitate our 1st objective which is the increase of employees productivity. So for sure I believe we had to invest in training at least 1,5mEur. For the same reason I believe that non-salary costs should be a little higher (e.g 40%).Finally, I dont think that the number of production workers was in that period enough (especially if we had done everything I have mentioned above), so bearing in mind all of the above neither the number of production stuff would be enough nor of course the Short-term loan. windupFor the Company 1 the organizing of the planning process and the decision making process in each period was a unique experience. Almost all of us were inexperienced in such an activity, even in a group work, so we were trying for the best result every time.. Even if that never came Most of us found the whole procedure and the business game a great opportunity to realize how to use some of our already acquired knowledge and a great chance to learn many more from our colleagues and our professor. Thank you for that opportunity