Casestudy1
1. Write a brief report that outlines the reasons (both internal and external) for Burgmaster’s demise, and whether operations management played a significant role in the demise.
a. The demise of Burgmaster was certainly caused by a perfect storm of complications including government policy, internal management complications, and competition. The tax laws and “open economy” policies leveraged the buyouts and reduced the roadblocks for foreign competitors in addition to the government not supporting Burgmaster’s petition for protection when they needed it. Based on my readings, Burgmaster was a company dedicated to top quality machines with a strictly managed assembly process. Their innovative designs helped grow the company into a multimillion dollar company, in their early years. However, though this strict management helped grow the company based on the initial innovative product designs, their complacent views ultimately resulted in the demise. Failure to focus on new innovations that foreign competitors were quickly capitalizing on and combined with acquisitions that were focused on growing revenue, the top quality products the company was built on were thrown out the door in favor of processing more orders. An increase in defective machines was a recipe for disaster for a company built on quality. With so many acquisitions, there were far too many changes for a company in an industry that was quickly changing. With no clear future business strategy, the company was being drug through the mud in an attempt to grab up every last bit of revenue.
2. Do you think that inadequate strategic planning was a factor that resulted in the company’s asking for trade protection?
a. Inadequate strategic planning was a major factor that resulted in the company asking for trade protection. After uniting with Houdaille Industries, and leveraged buyout by Kohlberg Kravis Roberts and Co, the strategic planning was completely dissolved as inventors focused solely on revenue
a. The demise of Burgmaster was certainly caused by a perfect storm of complications including government policy, internal management complications, and competition. The tax laws and “open economy” policies leveraged the buyouts and reduced the roadblocks for foreign competitors in addition to the government not supporting Burgmaster’s petition for protection when they needed it. Based on my readings, Burgmaster was a company dedicated to top quality machines with a strictly managed assembly process. Their innovative designs helped grow the company into a multimillion dollar company, in their early years. However, though this strict management helped grow the company based on the initial innovative product designs, their complacent views ultimately resulted in the demise. Failure to focus on new innovations that foreign competitors were quickly capitalizing on and combined with acquisitions that were focused on growing revenue, the top quality products the company was built on were thrown out the door in favor of processing more orders. An increase in defective machines was a recipe for disaster for a company built on quality. With so many acquisitions, there were far too many changes for a company in an industry that was quickly changing. With no clear future business strategy, the company was being drug through the mud in an attempt to grab up every last bit of revenue.
2. Do you think that inadequate strategic planning was a factor that resulted in the company’s asking for trade protection?
a. Inadequate strategic planning was a major factor that resulted in the company asking for trade protection. After uniting with Houdaille Industries, and leveraged buyout by Kohlberg Kravis Roberts and Co, the strategic planning was completely dissolved as inventors focused solely on revenue
References: Stevenson, W. (2015). Operations management (Twelfth ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.