SCM Globe simulation evaluates collaborative supply chains

Running Head: SCM GLOBE SIMULATION 7
SCM Globe Simulation
Collaborative Supply Chains
ASCM 631
University of Maryland University College
Professor Jim Bryant
November 11, 2018
I was given the task to evaluate the SCM globe simulation tool
for a new company the Just Born Candy Company. As the
testing evaluator it is my job to come up with a way to properly
manage two different companies and evaluate how well the
simulation is able to handle the changes the occur during the
simulation. This will be done by figuring out which
combination of different supply chain operations will allow it to
run with the most effective approach. As the evaluator for the
simulation I will have to fix all demand issues, route issues,
supply issues, storage issues and any other possible object that
may present itself while trying to come up with an approach that
will allow both organizations to run smoothly. Then provide
them with a recommendation on how I felt the simulation ran
and its possible benefits. By accomplishing this it will allow the

simulation to meet the objective that has been put into place.
Based on the data and information that will be provided in this
paper you will be able to see what issues were found that
became a problem for both companies and what steps were
taken to fix the problem. It will also show what changes had to
be made during the simulation that either made things worse or
better for the simulation. The main reason for the entire
simulation other than a teaching tool, is to get two companies
that were not able to compete as individuals against the bigger
brand companies so they had to figure out how to come together
so that both companies could still survive. This simulation
proves that they can do that and draw in the necessary revenue
to compete.
The two companies need to run as a unit in order to run
successfully. They must find a way to balance every aspect
associated with running the companies individually and as a
unit. This will mean balancing all known components and the
demands that they produce per day must go with the production
per day as well as the quantity per day. The operation cost and
the storage must also be balanced.
During the first week of the simulation (week 2) the task was to
load the simulation (collaborative supply chains) case study.
Given how SCM globe is designed to function the data will
allow for adjustments in the supply chain to ensure proper
operations. This includes adjustments with truck routs, changing
to different modes of transportation, storage, adding and
removing facilities, inventory and the quantities being produced
and delivery schedules. The first four graphs will show the
results of the changes made to the simulation as a result of
trying to merge the two companies and get them to run together.
Error one occurred when I first downloaded the simulation at
only three days, there was a storage issue at Just Born Candy
Factory. This would be a problem because it would cause an
issue with being meeting demand while still trying to keep up
with production. The first changes that were made was to
change storage from 300 to 500. I also changed the daily

operating cost from 5500 to 500. With these changes the
simulation ran for six days. The second error stated that there
wasn’t enough Crunch 2 – Case at the Parsippany store.
Looking at the simulation we now had enough storage but the
demand continued and wasn’t able to keep up with the storage
that was not available. So Storage at this store was change from
500 to 1000, and product for all wet from 0 to 100. This allowed
the simulation to run for eight days. There was another error
(#4) truck JB DC Truck 1 on route Sburg Hopat – Parip picked
up more product (JB Candy 1 case) than what was in stock at
the Just Born Candy DC factory. This would require that we
either balance stock or carry a safety stock. In order to try and
balance the stock levels and carry a small amount of safety
stock the following changes were made:
Demand per day JB candy 1&2 - 0 to 10 both
Production per day 0 t0 10 both
Qty on hand JB 1 490 to 200; JB 2 800 to 200
Daily operating cost changed from 3000 to 800 and JB candy
factory storage moved 800 to 1500. With all of these changes
the simulation still only rand for 8 days. Due to the information
that I was able to see with the data that is provided through
SCM globe I was able to see what was still being missed in
order to get it to run I made one final attempt in this week
moved the storage in the Parsippany store to 50,000 it ran the
simulation for 12 days.
Week 2 - 9/20/2018 (12 Days)
Week 2 - 9/20/2018 (12 days)
Week 2 - 9/20/2018 (12 Days)

Week 2 - 9/20/2018
Week 3 started off with stocking issues in one of the stores.
Vehicle Crunch DC Truck 1 on route New Brunswick route
picked up more product Crunchy 1 case than what was in stock
at the Crunch Candy DC facility has. The following changes
were made to try and go with a just in time delivery method to
try and prevent the shortage of stock and still keep up with
demand. We also want to keep in mind that we are not creating
an access of stock that will create waste causing storage prices
to go up as well as production for materials that aren’t needed.
Crunch Candy DC
Storage 5000 to 15,000
Daily Operating Cost 1,200 to 500
Crunchy 1 Case: Demand per Day 200; Production per Day 400;
Qty per Day 800
Qty per Day 800
This simulation ran for 18 days which is a better cycle than the
first week, but still did run as a unit. As you can see in the
factory out report the distribution centers needed to run as a
unit as well. The levels were all changed gradually over the
course of the 20 days that the final step of that simulation ran
for that week in order for that to take place. You also notice
that there was a more consistent rise in the facility storage of JB
factory that there was for the Crunch Candy factory.
Week 3 – 9/27/2018 (20 Days)
Week 3 – 9/27/2018 (20 Days)

Week 3 – 9/27/2018 (20 Days)
Week 3 – 9/27/2018 (20 Days)
Week 4 – 10/3/2018 (296 Days)
The simulation for week four ran for almost a year (296 DAYS)
so the system would not produce an excel file because the file
was too large. The graphs and charts to try and recreate this
data would also be too large The easiest way for me to show
you the information is through screen shots and to explain what
I did and the outcome that produced the results which are shown
below.
I had to figure out logistically what would be the best course of
action to take in order to get this simulation to run as accurately
and as cost effectively as possibly. The most efficient way was
to separate the two stores. So as the evaluator I had to use the
tools of the simulation and see what would be the best possible
outcome. I chose to delete the two distribution centers and
create one factory that could sustain the entire route and still
allow them to be competitive in the market with low cost and
high revenue. I created Just Crunch Candy DC. I knew I would
have to change the vehicles, the routes the storage capacity,
daily operating cost, which facilities would go on which truck
routes and much more. The best way to do this was to break it
down using the four supply chain objectives: product, vehicles,
facilities and routes. The results of everything are as follows:
Added a large truck (Just crunch truck)
· Operating cost 0.6, carbon 1, carry volume 500, max weight
50,000, speed 90
The route for this truck was Parsippany, Hoboken, and the New
Brunswick stores plus the distribution factory.
Just Crunch Candy Dc
Storage: 200,00 ; Daily operating cost 500 ; rent 2,000 ; carbon
1 ; demand peer day 200 ; production per day 500 ; quantity on

hand 1,000
This is important because you have to make sure that the
amounts in place are able to with stand the demands for all your
stores because it is now your sole distribution center. It had to
balance out production, distribution and demand.
There are two routes now so I had to create another truck route.
I created Crunch Factory Truck Route that stopped at
Allentown, Stroudsburg, Hopatcong stores and the distribution
center.
All of the stores were set up the same so that they had even
distribution to see how it would work with the demands of the
customers as this was a new layout in the delivery of inventory
and routes.
Storage (25, 000); operation cost (200); demand per day (100);
production per day (150); qty on hand (200).
The labor, utilities and insurance were all set to 15, 000 as a
default price and the rent at $2 per simulation suggestion.
This gave amazing results of a 254 day simulation run. Having
two separate trucks run from one distribution center on smaller
routs that were able to hold more inventory and the facilities
given more storage but not so much so as to cause waste create
large amounts as you can see form the data below.
Week 4 – 10/3/2018 (296 Days)
Week 4 – 10/3/2018 (296 Days)
Week 5 10/11/2018 (28 Days from 354 Days)
Although as the evaluator I had found a way to run a successful
supply chain I wanted to see if I could lower the storage
necessary therefore cutting cost and inventory but still
maintaining the revenue that was coming in. I ran the simulation
twice the fist I was able to get 312 days. I ran out of storage at
the Hoboken store so I raise it to 50,000 which was the opposite

of what I was trying to achieve. So I made the following change
also:
Crunchy 1 & 2 Price 350 to 200 (C1) 200 to 150 (C2)
JB Candy 1& 2 250 to 200 (JB1) 300 to 200 (JB 2)
I tried to run this almost like a sale option in order to move
more inventory at a lower cost and clearing out storage. It
dropped the simulation down to 28 days which is still good but
as you can see from the data below there was still great revenue
outcome.
Week 7
I noticed that two of my stores were producing more that my
other stores so I decided to add a third truck and a new route
from my distribution center to see if a could capture more of
that customer demand and create more revenue. The Hopatcong
and Parsippany stores both had great output and were in perfect
alignment with each other to create a third route. So I created
HopaPar Route that ran to both stores and the distribution
center. They would also have their own truck HopaPar Truck
which would be a med size truck given that it’s only two stores
and you don’t want to waste money on resources not needed like
a larger truck.
Carry 60, weight 8,000. Speed 90
There was an error at 32 days more product was picked up than
what was in stock at the distribution center. I didn’t take into

account that adding a new route at two of my largest producing
stores would require more product to come out of the
distribution point. Whenever you have a higher demand for a
product and you decide to move it at a higher rate than what
was normally done before you have to make sure that you
balance your stock levels and carry safety stock. I changed the
production levels and on hand quantities it ran for 254 days.
Week 7 – 10/23/2018 (224 Days)
Week 7 – 10/23/2018 (224 Days)
Conclusion
During the evaluation of the SCM Globe simulation I notice a
few things that could be changed. It proved to be a little
difficult when you tried to change routes according to the
instructions in the manual. It was easier to delete everything
and start over and create a new route. The same applied for new
stores and factories. The simulation doesn’t allow you to enter
the required information to make the changes. It deleted
information and routes but wouldn’t upload the new information
for both routes and facilities. There was also no clear way of
making sure that the simulation saved the data of the last
uploaded simulation. I noticed that on one of the completed
simulations I hit the save tab and went back to the other screen
to reopen the simulation to make changes and it had not saved.
There should be something in place to make sure that your
simulation has actually saved so that you don’t have to redo
them. Another issue is the inability to create an excel file for
large simulations. I have some simulations that ran for 256, 254,
and 354 days and when I tried to create the excel file through
the SCG system it said that the file was too big to create an
excel file. That brings up another issue when the simulation is
in excess of 100 or more days it takes a long time to run the
simulation. There should be something in place that allows you

the jump to the last day so that you can correct the error and
continue with your corrective action plan. On the plus side the
simulation it is a great learning tool to teach and show you how
to run a real-life supply chain. It allows you to see what
challenges you will run into while trying to meet the needs of
your customers and your business. You are put in real life
situations with setting up stores determining what you are
supplying how much you think you need to produce on a daily
bases and what needs to be shipped out. Then it shows you
didn’t options to use for shipping which is great because in a
real life situation you may need something other than just a
truck and this simulation allows you to try plans and trains and
see how it works. It puts real life in your hands and allows you
to completely run a business make mistakes and fix them and
see the outcomes. Over all I think it is a great learning tool to
teach on how to run a supply chain, what to expect and how to
fix it. It would be my recommendation that management should
fund enterprise wide implementation of the tool.
Reference
Hugos, Michael. 2018. https://www.scmglobe.com/
Factory Production report
Series 1
Just Born Candy Factory - JBCandy2 - Case Just Born Candy
Factory - JBCandy1 - Case Crunch Candy Factory -
Crunchy1 - Case Crunch Candy Factory - Crunchy2 - Case70
70 70 70 Series 2

70 70 70 Series 3
70 70 70 Series 4
70 70 70 Series 5
70 70 70 Series 6
70 70 70 Series 7
Crunchy1 - Case Crunch Candy Factory - Crunchy2 - Case
70 70 70 70 Series 8
70 70 70 Series 9

70 70 70 Series 10
70 70 70 Series 11
70 70 70 Series 12
70 70 70
Factory Out Report
Series 1
10 10 10 Series 2
30 30 30 Series 3

50 50 50 Series 4
70 70 70 Series 5
80 80 80 Series 6
100 100 100 100 Series 7
120 120 120 120 Series 8
140 140 140 140 Series 9
160 160 160 160 Series 10
170 170 170 170 Series 11

190 190 190 190 Series 12
210 210 210 210 Series 13
230 230 230 230
Factory Cost Report
DAY 1 Just Born Candy Factory Crunch Candy Factory
Category 3 Category 4 2150 14500 3.5 4.5
Categor y 3 Category 4 4300 29000 1.8 2.8
Category 3 Category 4 6450 43500 3 5
Category 3 Category 4 8600 58000 DAY 5
Just Born Candy Factory Crunch Candy Factory

Category 3 Category 4 19350 130500 DAY
10 Just Born Candy Factory Crunch Candy Factory
Category 3 Category 4 25800 174000 DA Y
Category 3 Category 4 27950 188500
Factory On Hand Report
Series 1
340 270 560 560 Series 2
390 320 610 610 Series 3
440 370 660 660 Series 4
490 420 710 710 Series 5

550 480 770 770 Series 6
600 530 820 820 Series 7
650 580 870 870 Series 8
700 630 920 920 Series 9
750 680 970 970 Series 10
810 740 1030 1030 Series 11
860 790 1080 1080 Series 12

910 840 1130 1130 Series 13
960 890 1180 1180 Series 14
1020 950 1230 1230 Series 15
1070 1000 1290 1290 Series 16
1120 1050 1340 1340 Series 17
1170 1100 1390 1390 Series 18
1220 1150 1440 1440 Series 19

1280 1210 1490 1490 Series 20
1330 1260 1550 1550 Series 21
1380 1310 1600 1600
Series 1
70 70 70 Series 2
70 70 70 Series 3
70 70 70 Series 4

70 70 70 Series 5
70 70 70 Series 6
70 70 70 Series 7
70 70 70 Series 8
70 70 70 Series 9
70 70 70 Series 10
70 70 70 Series 11

70 70 70 Series 12
70 70 70 Series 13
Just Born Candy Factory - JBCandy2 - Case Jus t Born
Candy Factory - JBCandy1 - Case Crunch Candy Factory -
70 70 70 Series 14
70 70 70 Series 15
70 70 70 Series 16
70 70 70 Series 17
70 70 70 Series 18
70 70 70 Series 19

70 70 70 Series 20
70 70 70 Series 21
70 70 70
factory out report
Series 1
10 10 10 Series 2
30 30 30 Series 3
50 50 50 Series 4

70 70 70 Series 5
80 80 80 Series 6
100 100 100 100 Series 7
120 120 120 120 Series 8
140 140 140 140 Series 9
160 160 160 160 Series 10
170 170 170 170 Series 11

190 190 190 190 Series 12
210 210 210 210 Series 13
230 230 230 230 Series 14
240 240 250 250 Series 15
260 260 260 260 Series 16
280 280 280 280 Series 17
300 300 300 300 Series 18

320 320 320 320 Series 19
330 330 340 340 Series 20
350 350 350 350 Series 21
370 370 370 370
FACTORY COST REPORT
2150 14500 DAY 1 Just Born Candy Factory Crunch
Candy Factory 2150 14500 DAY 2 Just Born Candy
Factory Crunch Candy Factory 4300 29000 DAY 3
Just Born Candy Factory Crunch Candy Factory 6450
43500 DAY 4 Just Born Candy Factory Crunch

Factory Crunch Candy Factory 23650 159500 DAY
12 Just Born Candy Factory Crunch Candy Factory 25800
304500
FACTORY ON HAND REPORT
DAY 0 Just Crunch Candy DC - Crunchy1 - Case 1300
DAY 1 Just Crunch Candy DC - Crunchy1 - Case
1250 DAY 2 Just Crunch Candy DC - Crunchy1 - Case

300
FACTORY PRODUCTION REPORT
Column3 Just Crunch Candy DC - Crunchy1 - Case 500
Column2 Just Crunch Candy DC - Crunchy1 - Case
500 Column1 Just Crunch Candy DC - Crunchy1 - Case
500 Column12Just Crunch Candy DC - Crunchy1 - Case

FACTORY OUT REPORT
Series 1 Just Crunch Candy DC - Crunchy1 - Case
Category 4 470 Series 2 Just Crunch Candy DC -
Crunchy1 - Case Category 4 2800 Series 3 Just Crunch
Candy DC - Crunchy1 - Case Category 4 5400 Series 4
Just Crunch Candy DC - Crunchy1 - Case Category 4
7850 Series 5 Just Crunch Candy DC - Crunchy1 - Case
Category 4 10450 Series 6 Just Crunch Candy DC
- Crunchy1 - Case Category 4 12900 Series 7 Just
Crunch Candy DC - Crunchy1 - Case Category 4 15230

Category 4 77530
Factory Cost Report

Series 1 Just Crunch Candy DC 401500 Series 2 Just
Crunch Candy DC 401500 Series 3 Just Crunch Candy DC
803000 Series 4 Just Crunch Candy DC 1204500
Series 5 Just Crunch Candy DC 1606000 Series 6
Just Crunch Candy DC 2007500 Series 7 Just Crunch
Candy DC2409000 Series 8 Just Crunch Candy DC
Candy DC9234500 Series 23 Just Crunch Candy DC 963600
Candy DC12848000
Column1
Just Born Candy Factory - JBCandy2 - Case Just B orn
Candy Factory - JBCandy1 - Case Crunch Candy Factory -

340 270 560 560 Column2
390 320 610 610 Column3
440 370 660 660 Column4
490 420 710 710 Column5
550 480 770 770 Column6
600 530 820 820 Column7
Crunchy1 - Case Crunc h Candy Factory - Crunchy2 -
Case 650 580 870 870 Column8
700 630 920 920 Column9

750 680 970 970 Column10
810 740 1030 1030 Column11
860 790 1080 1080 Column12
910 840 1130 1130 Column13
960 890 1180 1180
Series 1
70 70 70 Series 2

70 70 70 Series 3
70 70 70 Series 4
70 70 70 Series 5
70 70 70 Series 6
70 70 70 Series 7
70 70 70 70 Series 8
70 70 70 Series 9

70 70 70 Series 10
70 70 70 Series 11
70 70 70 Series 12
70 70 70
Running Head: SCM GLOBE SIMULATION 19
SCM Globe Simulation
Collaborative Supply Chains
ASCM 631
University of Maryland University College
Professor Jim Bryant
November 11, 2018

I was given the task to evaluate the SCM globe simulation tool
for a new company the Just Born Candy Company. As the
testing evaluator it is my job to come up with a way to properly
manage two different companies and evaluate how well the
simulation is able to handle the changes the occur during the
simulation. This will be done by figuring out which
combination of different supply chain operations will allow it to
run with the most effective approach. As the evaluator for the
simulation I will have to fix all demand issues, route issues,
supply issues, storage issues and any other possible object that
may present itself while trying to come up with an approach that
will allow both organizations to run smoothly. Then provide
them with a recommendation on how I felt the simulation ran
and its possible benefits. By accomplishing this it will allow the
simulation to meet the objective that has been put into place.
Based on the data and information that will be provided in this
paper you will be able to see what issues were found that
became a problem for both companies and what steps were
taken to fix the problem. It will also show what changes had to
be made during the simulation that either made things worse or
better for the simulation. The main reason for the entire
simulation other than a teaching tool, is to get two companies
that were not able to compete as individuals against the bigger
brand companies so they had to figure out how to come together
so that both companies could still survive. This simulation
proves that they can do that and draw in the necessary revenue
to compete.
The two companies need to run as a unit in order to run
successfully. They must find a way to balance every aspect
associated with running the companies individually and as a
unit. This will mean balancing all known components and the

demands that they produce per day must go with the production
per day as well as the quantity per day. The operation cost and
the storage must also be balanced.
During the first week of the simulation (week 2) the task was to
load the simulation (collaborative supply chains) case study.
Given how SCM globe is designed to function the data will
allow for adjustments in the supply chain to ensure proper
operations. This includes adjustments with truck routs, changing
to different modes of transportation, storage, adding and
removing facilities, inventory and the quantities being produced
and delivery schedules. The first four graphs will show the
results of the changes made to the simulation as a result of
trying to merge the two companies and get them to run together.
Error one occurred when I first downloaded the simulation at
only three days, there was a storage issue at Just Born Candy
Factory. This would be a problem because it would cause an
issue with being meeting demand while still trying to keep up
with production. The first changes that were made was to
change storage from 300 to 500. I also changed the daily
operating cost from 5500 to 500. With these changes the
simulation ran for six days. The second error stated that there
wasn’t enough Crunch 2 – Case at the Parsippany store.
Looking at the simulation we now had enough storage but the
demand continued and wasn’t able to keep up with the storage
that was not available. So Storage at this store was change from
500 to 1000, and product for all wet from 0 to 100. This allowed
the simulation to run for eight days. There was another error
(#4) truck JB DC Truck 1 on route Sburg Hopat – Parip picked
up more product (JB Candy 1 case) than what was in stock at
the Just Born Candy DC factory. This would require that we
either balance stock or carry a safety stock. In order to try and
balance the stock levels and carry a small amount of safety
stock the following changes were made:
Demand per day JB candy 1&2 - 0 to 10 both
Production per day 0 t0 10 both
Qty on hand JB 1 490 to 200; JB 2 800 to 200

Daily operating cost changed from 3000 to 800 and JB candy
factory storage moved 800 to 1500. With all of these changes
the simulation still only rand for 8 days. Due to the information
that I was able to see with the data that is provided through
SCM globe I was able to see what was still being missed in
order to get it to run I made one final attempt in this week
moved the storage in the Parsippany store to 50,000 it ran the
simulation for 12 days.
Week 2 - 9/20/2018 (12 Days)
Week 2 - 9/20/2018 (12 days)
Week 2 - 9/20/2018 (12 Days)
Week 2 - 9/20/2018
Week 3 started off with stocking issues in one of the stores.
Vehicle Crunch DC Truck 1 on route New Brunswick route
picked up more product Crunchy 1 case than what was in stock
at the Crunch Candy DC facility has. The following changes
were made to try and go with a just in time delivery method to
try and prevent the shortage of stock and still keep up with
demand. We also want to keep in mind that we are not creating
an access of stock that will create waste causing storage prices
to go up as well as production for materials that aren’t needed.
Crunch Candy DC
Storage 5000 to 15,000
Daily Operating Cost 1,200 to 500
Qty per Day 800

Qty per Day 800
This simulation ran for 18 days which is a better cycle than the
first week, but still did run as a unit. As you can see in the
factory out report the distribution centers needed to run as a
unit as well. The levels were all changed gradually over the
course of the 20 days that the final step of that simulation ran
for that week in order for that to take place. You also notice
that there was a more consistent rise in the facility storage of JB
factory that there was for the Crunch Candy factory.
Week 3 – 9/27/2018 (20 Days)
Week 3 – 9/27/2018 (20 Days)
Week 3 – 9/27/2018 (20 Days)
Week 3 – 9/27/2018 (20 Days)
Week 4 – 10/3/2018 (296 Days)
The simulation for week four ran for almost a year (296 DAYS)
so the system would not produce an excel file because the file
was too large. The graphs and charts to try and recreate this
data would also be too large The easiest way for me to show
you the information is through screen shots and to explain what
I did and the outcome that produced the results which are shown
below.
I had to figure out logistically what would be the best course of
action to take in order to get this simulation to run as accurately
and as cost effectively as possibly. The most efficient way was

to separate the two stores. So as the evaluator I had to use the
tools of the simulation and see what would be the best possible
outcome. I chose to delete the two distribution centers and
create one factory that could sustain the entire route and still
allow them to be competitive in the market with low cost and
high revenue. I created Just Crunch Candy DC. I knew I would
have to change the vehicles, the routes the storage capacity,
daily operating cost, which facilities would go on which truck
routes and much more. The best way to do this was to break it
down using the four supply chain objectives: product, vehicles,
facilities and routes. The results of everything are as follows:
Added a large truck (Just crunch truck)
· Operating cost 0.6, carbon 1, carry volume 500, max weight
50,000, speed 90
The route for this truck was Parsippany, Hoboken, and the New
Brunswick stores plus the distribution factory.
Just Crunch Candy Dc
Storage: 200,00 ; Daily operating cost 500 ; rent 2,000 ; carbon
1 ; demand peer day 200 ; production per day 500 ; quantity on
hand 1,000
This is important because you have to make sure that the
amounts in place are able to with stand the demands for all your
stores because it is now your sole distribution center. It had to
balance out production, distribution and demand.
There are two routes now so I had to create another truck route.
I created Crunch Factory Truck Route that stopped at
Allentown, Stroudsburg, Hopatcong stores and the distribution
center.
All of the stores were set up the same so that they had even
distribution to see how it would work with the demands of the
customers as this was a new layout in the delivery of inventory
and routes.
Storage (25, 000); operation cost (200); demand per day (100);
production per day (150); qty on hand (200).
The labor, utilities and insurance were all set to 15, 000 as a
default price and the rent at $2 per simulation suggestion.

This gave amazing results of a 254 day simulation run. Having
two separate trucks run from one distribution center on smaller
routs that were able to hold more inventory and the facilities
given more storage but not so much so as to cause waste create
large amounts as you can see form the data below.
Week 4 – 10/3/2018 (296 Days)
Week 4 – 10/3/2018 (296 Days)
Although as the evaluator I had found a way to run a successful
supply chain I wanted to see if I could lower the storage
necessary therefore cutting cost and inventory but still
maintaining the revenue that was coming in. I ran the simulation
twice the fist I was able to get 312 days. I ran out of storage at
the Hoboken store so I raise it to 50,000 which was the opposite
of what I was trying to achieve. So I made the following change
also:
Crunchy 1 & 2 Price 350 to 200 (C1) 200 to 150 (C2)
JB Candy 1& 2 250 to 200 (JB1) 300 to 200 (JB 2)
I tried to run this almost like a sale option in order to move
more inventory at a lower cost and clearing out storage. It
dropped the simulation down to 28 days which is still good but
as you can see from the data below there was still great revenue
outcome.

Week 7
I noticed that two of my stores were producing more that my
other stores so I decided to add a third truck and a new route
from my distribution center to see if a could capture more of
that customer demand and create more revenue. The Hopatcong
and Parsippany stores both had great output and were in perfect
alignment with each other to create a third route. So I created
HopaPar Route that ran to both stores and the distribution
center. They would also have their own truck HopaPar Truck
which would be a med size truck given that it’s only two stores
and you don’t want to waste money on resources not needed like
a larger truck.
Carry 60, weight 8,000. Speed 90
There was an error at 32 days more product was picked up than
what was in stock at the distribution center. I didn’t take into
account that adding a new route at two of my largest producing
stores would require more product to come out of the
distribution point. Whenever you have a higher demand for a
product and you decide to move it at a higher rate than what
was normally done before you have to make sure that you
balance your stock levels and carry safety stock. I changed the
production levels and on hand quantities it ran for 254 days.
Week 7 – 10/23/2018 (224 Days)
Week 7 – 10/23/2018 (224 Days)
Conclusion
During the evaluation of the SCM Globe simulation I notice a
few things that could be changed. It proved to be a little
difficult when you tried to change routes according to the

instructions in the manual. It was easier to delete everything
and start over and create a new route. The same applied for new
stores and factories. The simulation doesn’t allow you to enter
the required information to make the changes. It deleted
information and routes but wouldn’t upload the new information
for both routes and facilities. There was also no clear way of
making sure that the simulation saved the data of the last
uploaded simulation. I noticed that on one of the completed
simulations I hit the save tab and went back to the other screen
to reopen the simulation to make changes and it had not saved.
There should be something in place to make sure that your
simulation has actually saved so that you don’t have to redo
them. Another issue is the inability to create an excel file for
large simulations. I have some simulations that ran for 256, 254,
and 354 days and when I tried to create the excel file through
the SCG system it said that the file was too big to create an
excel file. That brings up another issue when the simulation is
in excess of 100 or more days it takes a long time to run the
simulation. There should be something in place that allows you
the jump to the last day so that you can correct the error and
continue with your corrective action plan. On the plus side the
simulation it is a great learning tool to teach and show you how
to run a real-life supply chain. It allows you to see what
challenges you will run into while trying to meet the needs of
your customers and your business. You are put in real life
situations with setting up stores determining what you are
supplying how much you think you need to produce on a daily
bases and what needs to be shipped out. Then it shows you
didn’t options to use for shipping which is great because in a
real life situation you may need something other than just a
truck and this simulation allows you to try plans and trains and
see how it works. It puts real life in your hands and allows you
to completely run a business make mistakes and fix them and
see the outcomes. Over all I think it is a great learning tool to
teach on how to run a supply chain, what to expect and how to
fix it. It would be my recommendation that management should

fund enterprise wide implementation of the tool.
Reference
Hugos, Michael. 2018. https://www.scmglobe.com/
Series 1
70 70 70 Series 2
70 70 70 Series 3
70 70 70 Series 4
70 70 70 Series 5

70 70 70 Series 6
70 70 70 Series 7
70 70 70 Series 8
70 70 70 Series 9
70 70 70 Series 10
70 70 70 Series 11
70 70 70 Series 12
70 70 70

Factory Out Report
Series 1
10 10 10 Series 2
30 30 30 Series 3
50 50 50 Series 4
70 70 70 Series 5
80 80 80 Series 6
100 100 100 100 Series 7

120 120 120 120 Series 8
140 140 140 140 Series 9
160 160 160 160 Series 10
170 170 170 170 Series 11
190 190 190 190 Series 12
210 210 210 210 Series 13
230 230 230 230

Factory Cost Report
Category 3 Category 4 6450 43500 3 5
Category 3 Category 4 27950 188500
Series 1

340 270 560 560 Series 2
390 320 610 610 Series 3
440 370 660 660 Series 4
490 420 710 710 Series 5
550 480 770 770 Series 6
600 530 820 820 Series 7
650 580 870 870 Series 8

700 630 920 920 Series 9
750 680 970 970 Series 10
810 740 1030 1030 Series 11
860 790 1080 1080 Series 12
910 840 1130 1130 Series 13
960 890 1180 1180 Series 14
1020 950 1230 1230 Series 15

1070 1000 1290 1290 Series 16
1120 1050 1340 1340 Series 17
1170 1100 1390 1390 Series 18
1220 1150 1440 1440 Series 19
1280 1210 1490 1490 Series 20
1330 1260 1550 1550 Series 21
1380 1310 1600 1600

Series 1
70 70 70 Series 2
70 70 70 Series 3
70 70 70 Series 4
70 70 70 Series 5
70 70 70 Series 6
70 70 70 Series 7
70 70 70 Series 8

70 70 70 Series 9
70 70 70 Series 10
70 70 70 Series 11
70 70 70 Series 12
70 70 70 Series 13
70 70 70 Series 14
70 70 70 Series 15

70 70 70 Series 16
70 70 70 Series 17
70 70 70 Series 18
70 70 70 Series 19
70 70 70 Series 20
70 70 70 Series 21
70 70 70

factory out report
Series 1
10 10 10 Series 2
30 30 30 Series 3
50 50 50 Series 4
70 70 70 Series 5
80 80 80 Series 6
100 100 100 100 Series 7

120 120 120 120 Series 8
140 140 140 140 Series 9
160 160 160 160 Series 10
170 170 170 170 Series 11
190 190 190 190 Series 12
210 210 210 210 Series 13
230 230 230 230 Series 14

240 240 250 250 Series 15
260 260 260 260 Series 16
280 280 280 280 Series 17
300 300 300 300 Series 18
320 320 320 320 Series 19
330 330 340 340 Series 20
350 350 350 350 Series 21
370 370 370 370

FACTORY COST REPORT
2150 14500 DAY 1 Just Born Candy Factory Crunch
304500

FACTORY ON HAND REPORT
DAY 0 Just Crunch Candy DC - Crunchy1 - Case 1300
DAY 1 Just Crunch Candy DC - Crunchy1 - Case

300
FACTORY PRODUCTION REPORT
Column3 Just Crunch Candy DC - Crunchy1 - Case 500
Column2 Just Crunch Candy DC - Crunchy1 - Case

FACTORY OUT REPORT
Category 4 470 Series 2 Just Crunch Candy DC -
Crunchy1 - Case Category 4 2800 Series 3 Just Crunch
Candy DC - Crunchy1 - Case Category 4 5400 Series 4
Just Crunch Candy DC - Crunchy1 - Case Category 4
7850 Series 5 Just Crunch Candy DC - Crunchy1 - Case

Category 4 77530
Factory Cost Report
Series 1 Just Crunch Candy DC 401500 Series 2 Just
Crunch Candy DC 401500 Series 3 Just Crunch Candy DC

Candy DC9234500 Series 23 Just Crunch Candy DC 963600
Candy DC12848000
Column1
340 270 560 560 Column2
390 320 610 610 Column3
440 370 660 660 Column4
490 420 710 710 Column5

550 480 770 770 Column6
600 530 820 820 Column7
650 580 870 870 Column8
700 630 920 920 Column9
750 680 970 970 Column10
810 740 1030 1030 Column11
860 790 1080 1080 Column12

910 840 1130 1130 Column13
960 890 1180 1180
Series 1
70 70 70 Series 2
70 70 70 Series 3
70 70 70 Series 4
70 70 70 Series 5

70 70 70 Series 6
70 70 70 Series 7
70 70 70 Series 8
70 70 70 Series 9
70 70 70 Series 10
70 70 70 Series 11
70 70 70 Series 12

SCM Globe simulation evaluates collaborative supply chains

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to SCM Globe simulation evaluates collaborative supply chains

Similar to SCM Globe simulation evaluates collaborative supply chains (19)

More from jeanettehully

More from jeanettehully (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

SCM Globe simulation evaluates collaborative supply chains