SawStop Case Study
Case Study #1
SAWSTOP
Case Synopsis
Sawstop is a saw company owned by Steve Gass, a woodworker. Gass dedicates to provide the best saws to their customers, such as benchmark. The mission is to provide premium products to meet consumers' standards. Their designs were made in the United States and production source in Taichung, Taiwan.
Problem Identification
Why was Sawstop's petition with the CPSC opposed by the saw industry?
Findings
In early 2003
1)The power Tool Institute (PTI) wanted to develop a blade injury avoidance technology.
2)Unawared of the situation, SawStop asked the agency (CPSC) to make a blade avoidance system mandatory.
3)SawStop's petition was considered a monopoly and their technology would make the saws more inefficient and dangerous.
Evaluation of Alternatives
One of SawStop objectives is to provide products that are premium and safe for their customers. They also intended to license their technology to other saw firms and expand their safety mechanism. One of the main obstacles for SawStop is their lack of knowledge about the updates in technology that the power tool industry are trying to develop to avoid blade injuries. A mutually exclusive alternative would be to let SawStop license their safety mechanism and consider it as a technology that has been developed not only by the company, but the entire power tool industry. Consequently, key industry members are opposed and against SawStop's new technology. In addition, the growth in technology is affecting the industry.
Conclusion
Because the technology grows increasingly fast, customers are demanding more top quality products with the safety required. The Power Tool Institute along with SawStop should work together to develop a new safety mechanism system.
Action Plan
Action Plan:
Work together with the PTI to develop more advanced safety regulations and testing
Advance the close working relationships with the United States
SAWSTOP
Case Synopsis
Sawstop is a saw company owned by Steve Gass, a woodworker. Gass dedicates to provide the best saws to their customers, such as benchmark. The mission is to provide premium products to meet consumers' standards. Their designs were made in the United States and production source in Taichung, Taiwan.
Problem Identification
Why was Sawstop's petition with the CPSC opposed by the saw industry?
Findings
In early 2003
1)The power Tool Institute (PTI) wanted to develop a blade injury avoidance technology.
2)Unawared of the situation, SawStop asked the agency (CPSC) to make a blade avoidance system mandatory.
3)SawStop's petition was considered a monopoly and their technology would make the saws more inefficient and dangerous.
Evaluation of Alternatives
One of SawStop objectives is to provide products that are premium and safe for their customers. They also intended to license their technology to other saw firms and expand their safety mechanism. One of the main obstacles for SawStop is their lack of knowledge about the updates in technology that the power tool industry are trying to develop to avoid blade injuries. A mutually exclusive alternative would be to let SawStop license their safety mechanism and consider it as a technology that has been developed not only by the company, but the entire power tool industry. Consequently, key industry members are opposed and against SawStop's new technology. In addition, the growth in technology is affecting the industry.
Conclusion
Because the technology grows increasingly fast, customers are demanding more top quality products with the safety required. The Power Tool Institute along with SawStop should work together to develop a new safety mechanism system.
Action Plan
Action Plan:
Work together with the PTI to develop more advanced safety regulations and testing
Advance the close working relationships with the United States