The document describes 6 practice problems related to location strategies. Problem 1 involves choosing the best location for a new drug store warehouse based on ratings for factors like markets, labor costs, and suppliers. Problem 2 involves choosing the best location for a new plant based on fixed and variable costs. Problem 3 involves determining the optimal location for a new food distribution center based on store locations and delivery needs. Problems 4-6 involve choosing the best country location for a new plant based on ratings for critical success factors and different weighting approaches.

1. Practice Problems: Chapter 8, Location Strategies
Problem 1:
A major drug store chain wishes to build a new warehouse to serve the whole Midwest. At the
moment, it is looking at three possible locations. The factors, weights, and ratings being considered
are given below:
Ratings
Factor
Weights
Peoria
Des Moines
Chicago
Nearness to markets
20
4
7
5
Labor cost
5
8
8
4
Taxes
15
8
9
7
Nearness to suppliers
10
10
6
10
Which city should they choose?
Problem 2:
Balfour’s is considering building a plant in one of three possible locations. They have estimated the
following parameters for each location:
Location
Fixed Cost
Variable Cost
Waco, Texas
$300,000
$5.75
Tijuana, Mexico
$800,000
$2.75
Fayetteville, Arkansas
$100,000
$8.00
For what unit sales volume should they choose each location?
1

2. Problem 3:
Our main distribution center in Phoenix, AZ is due to be replaced with a much larger, more modern
facility that can handle the tremendous needs that have developed with the city’s growth. Fresh
produce travels to the seven store locations several times a day making site selection critical for
efficient distribution. Using the data in the following table, determine the map coordinates for the
proposed new distribution center.
Store Locations
Map Coordinates (x,y)
Truck Round Trips per Day
Mesa
(10,5)
3
Glendale
(3,8)
3
Camelback
(4,7)
2
Scottsdale
(15,10)
6
Apache Junction
(13,3)
5
Sun City
(1,12)
3
Pima
(5,5)
10
2

3. Problem 4:
A company is planning on expanding and building a new plant in one of three countries in Middle
or Eastern Europe. The general manager, Patricia Donegal, has decided to base her decision on six
critical success factors: technology availability and support, availability and quality of public
education, legal and regulatory aspects, social and cultural aspects, economic factors, and political
stability.
Using a rating system of 1 (least desirable) to 5 (most desirable) she has arrived at the following
ratings (you may, of course, have different opinions). In which country should the plant be built?
Critical Success Factor
Turkey
Serbia
Slovakia
Technology availability and support
4
3
4
Availability and quality of public education
4
4
3
Legal and regulatory aspects
2
4
5
Social and cultural aspects
5
3
4
Economic factors
4
3
3
Political stability
4
2
3
Problem 5:
Assume that Patricia decides to use the following weights for the critical success factors:
Technology availability and support
0.3
Availability and quality of public education
0.2
Legal and regulatory aspects
0.1
Social and cultural aspects
0.1
Economic factors
0.1
Political stability
0.2
Would this change her decision?
3

4. Problem 6:
Patricia’s advisors have suggested that Turkey and Slovakia might be better differentiated by either
(a) doubling the number of critical success factors, or (b) breaking down each of the existing
critical success factors into smaller, more narrowly defined items, e.g., Availability and quality of
public education might be broken into primary, secondary, and post-secondary education. How
would you advise Ms. Donegal?
4

5. ANSWERS:
Problem 1:
Ratings
Weighted Ratings
Weights
Peoria
Des
Moines
Chicago
Peoria
Des
Moines
Chicago
Nearness to
markets
20
4
7
5
80
140
100
Labor cost
5
8
8
4
40
40
20
Taxes
15
8
9
7
120
135
105
Nearness to
suppliers
10
10
6
10
100
60
100
Sum of Weighted ratings:
340
375
325
Factor
Therefore, it appears that based upon the weights and rating, Des Moines should be chosen.
5

6. Problem 2:
Transition between Waco and Tijuana:
300, 000 + (5.75 x) = 800, 000 + (2.75 x)
3 x = 500, 000
x = 166, 000
Transition between Waco and Fayetteville:
300, 000 + (5.75 x) = 100, 000 + (8.00 x)
200, 000 = 2.25 x
88,888 = x
6

7. Problem 3:
New Distribution Center should be located at:
Cx =
(10*3) + (3*3) + (4* 2) + (15*6) + (13*5) + (1*3) + (5*10) 255
=
= 7.97
3 + 3 + 2 + 6 + 5 + 3 + 10
32
Cy =
(5*3) + (8*3) + (7 * 2) + (10*6) + (3*5) + (12*3) + (5*10) 214
=
= 6.69
3 + 3 + 2 + 6 + 5 + 3 + 10
32
7

8. Problem 4:
Critical Success Factor
Turkey
Serbia
Slovakia
Technology availability and support
4
3
4
Availability and quality of public education
4
4
3
Legal and regulatory aspects
2
4
5
Social and cultural aspects
5
3
4
Economic factors
4
3
3
Political stability
4
2
3
23
19
22
Σ =
Based upon her ratings of the critical success factors, Patricia should choose Turkey. From a
practical perspective, given the small difference between the scores for Turkey and Slovakia, and
the subjectivity of the ratings themselves, Patricia would be better advised to develop additional
critical success factors, more carefully weigh the individual factors; or, in general, to acquire more
information before making her decisions.
8

9. Problem 5:
Critical Success Factor
Wgt
Turkey
Serbia
Technology availability and support
0.3
4
1.2
3
0.9
4
1.2
Availability and quality of public
education
0.2
4
0.8
4
0.8
3
0.6
Legal and regulatory aspects
0.1
2
0.2
4
0.4
5
.5
Social and cultural aspects
0.1
5
0.5
3
0.3
4
0.4
Economic factors
0.1
4
0.4
3
0.3
3
0.3
Political stability
0.2
4
0.8
2
0.4
3
0.6
Σ = 3.9
Slovakia
3.1
3.6
No, in this case, use of the weighting factors does not change the recommendation. One might
again suggest that additional information be considered in making the decision.
Problem 6:
(a) Doubling the number of critical success factors. There are two issues here. First, from a
practical perspective there are a limited number of truly “critical” success factors – and these
should be the ones presently being considered. Any additional factors should be of secondary
or tertiary importance. Second, given the subjective nature of the rating process, adding
additional factors would also increase the overall margin of error of the final ratings to a degree
that may eliminate any gain in differentiation arising from the use of the additional factors. The
use of a maximum of seven to nine critical success factors is usually appropriate.
(b) Given that one’s ability to estimate or rate an aggregate is usually better than one’s ability to
estimate or rate the individual components of the aggregate, this approach is unlikely to
provide much help.
9

10. Problem 5:
Critical Success Factor
Wgt
Turkey
Serbia
Technology availability and support
0.3
4
1.2
3
0.9
4
1.2
Availability and quality of public
education
0.2
4
0.8
4
0.8
3
0.6
Legal and regulatory aspects
0.1
2
0.2
4
0.4
5
.5
Social and cultural aspects
0.1
5
0.5
3
0.3
4
0.4
Economic factors
0.1
4
0.4
3
0.3
3
0.3
Political stability
0.2
4
0.8
2
0.4
3
0.6
Σ = 3.9
Slovakia
3.1
3.6
No, in this case, use of the weighting factors does not change the recommendation. One might
again suggest that additional information be considered in making the decision.
Problem 6:
(a) Doubling the number of critical success factors. There are two issues here. First, from a
practical perspective there are a limited number of truly “critical” success factors – and these
should be the ones presently being considered. Any additional factors should be of secondary
or tertiary importance. Second, given the subjective nature of the rating process, adding
additional factors would also increase the overall margin of error of the final ratings to a degree
that may eliminate any gain in differentiation arising from the use of the additional factors. The
use of a maximum of seven to nine critical success factors is usually appropriate.
(b) Given that one’s ability to estimate or rate an aggregate is usually better than one’s ability to
estimate or rate the individual components of the aggregate, this approach is unlikely to
provide much help.
9