Posted on: Tuesday, February 7, 2012
You will not be surprised to see that we will be looking at the software selection process for Harley Davidson.
On page 22 of the case you'll see a quantitative analysis of the software selection process as applied to the three possible providers. We'll incorporate this data into our analysis a little later. Our primary focus at first will be the lower diagram of Exhibit 10 on p. 22. HD describes this as a *qualitative* scoring of the three providers. We'll make it a bit more quantitative by converting each factor into a pair of numbers. The first value for each factor is simple- we'll just assign numeric values to the relative scores provided. The relative values from the exhibit will have the following numeric equivalents: L - 1, ML - 2, M - 3, MH - 4, H - 5
The second value for each factor comes from you. As you consider each factor, assign it a "weight" from 1 to 5 based on your assessment of its relative importance to the selection process.
Weight all the factors provided then:
1. Develop your own matrix that displays your scores and weights for the 16 selection criteria. Consider this partial example using weighting values picked at random:
Factor| Weight| Provider 1| Provider 2| Provider 3|
| | | | |
Relationship potential| 5| (H) 5 * 5 = 25| (H) 5 * 5 = 25| (MH) 4 * 5 = 20| Cost| 2| (H) 5 * 2 = 10| (L) 1 * 2 = 2| (M) 3 * 2 = 6| Etc…| | | | |
Total Score| | 35| 27| 26|
Let's be clear here- each of the 16 factors listed in the exhibit will ultimately have 2 "scores" for each provider- a numeric equivalent of the qualitative ranking provided in the case (e.g. MH = 3) and a score from 1-5 that represents your ranking of the relative importance of that particular factor. The product of those two numbers represents a total score for each factor. A sum of the 16 factor scores for, say, Provider 1, gives you a total score for that...