DB_MK_Unit_4_ Production and Operations Q) MRP and JI

DB_MK_Unit_4_ Production and Operations
Q:) MRP and JIT each have benefits. Can they work together
successfully, and how would
one go about combining them at one of the Feets vendors? Pick
a vendor type, such as
shoes or apparel and relate you answer to that vendor type. How
does shipping from China
(e.g., shoes) affect your analysis? Can the result be a pull or a
push system?
SCM645 Scenario A
Feets
Introduction
Feets is a chain of retail athletic wear stores. The company
headquarters is located in
Sacramento, California, near the western warehouse. There are
seven geographically dispersed
warehouses to serve the needs of Feets’ 400 stores. Tedra Grav,
supply chain vice president,
had this to say about the Fashion Squared store, a new location
in Sacramento.
“The product mix in the Fashion Squared store is new to Feets.
There are many new products
and many new vendors. Our western distribution center is set up
to serve the set of stores in
California. It was not set up for all these new products and new

vendors. This has caused us
problems because of the small quantities of some of these new
products, which are not used in
any other store. All of this may cause us problems in the
upcoming summer sports season. I have
informed the rest of the management team of the nature of these
problems.”
Third-Party Logistics
Feets uses third-party logistics firms to move the goods from
warehouse to store. With the
exception of the Fashion Squared store’s daily shipments, the
stores receive orders twice weekly.
Feets uses a small package carrier to make transshipments
between stores.
Tedra feels efficiency as opposed to responsiveness in the Feets
supply chain is important. As is
common in retailing, buyers forecast trends, determine how
those trends affect demand at the
stores, and order from vendors accordingly. Efficiency is
important, so vendors ship large
quantities to the Feets warehouse relatively infrequently. The
warehouse has a computer
program to help team members determine where to store these
large quantities of goods as they
are received.
Buyers
A buyer specializes in one or more departments depending upon
volume, allowing the buyer to
be familiar with the products. This allows for better
identification of customer demand and
utilization of supplier’s manufacturing practice knowledge.
Feets’ business is very fashion oriented. Each year, 80% percent

of the product that comes into
the distribution center is new. Even if the product is very
similar to one ordered last year, it is
considered new. Customers demand new colors and styles;
product is normally not replenished.
Instead, a particular item is purchased, distributed to the retail
stores, and sold. As a result,
determining the amount to be purchased can be difficult. The
buyers can look at how a similar
product sold last year. However, that may be misleading due to
changes in taste.
The normal lead time quoted by a supplier is 6 months even
though it only takes 2 to 3 months for
the company to produce the product. The buyer is faced with
anticipating what will be in demand
6 to 12 months into the future. These difficulties are
compounded by the life of a new style being
less than 6 months.
The buyers determine the order quantity from forecasts of
demand done at the store level. The
historical distribution of sizes sold at each store is part of the
calculation and then adjusted by
projections made by each store. The supplier collects orders for
all stores at one time. If too many
items are ordered, then the result is to discount the item at an
outlet store for discontinued styles.
If too few items are ordered, there is no chance to reorder.
When orders arrive from the supplier, the majority of product i s
immediately shipped to the store.
The amount distributed is calculated from the original order

with adjustments made for store
closings and new openings. The remaining order, about 40%, is
stored in the warehouse to be
used for replenishment.
Inventory Replenishment
Feets has an automated replenishment ordering system. The way
this works is that the computer
at the distribution center collects data from each store about
what was sold that day. There are
two systems for collecting the data. Some stores have a high-
speed Internet connection and
transmit sales data in near real time. Other stores have only
dial-up connections and transmit
their data once per day. Once the data have been collected, the
computer calculates the amount
of inventory in each store by SKU. That inventory level is
compared against predetermined
minimums, and any replenishment is placed in an order.
Because the buyers place just one order for any particular style
during the course of a season,
available stock for replenishment is limited. Consequently,
when inventory on that item is
exhausted, no more replacements can be done. At this point,
transshipments between stores
help Feets meet the demands of its customers.
Feets has a few stores that are outlet stores. These stores do not
sell the full Feets line. At the
end of a SKU’s life (where there are very few items left in
inventory), the inventory is sent to these
stores to be sold at substantial discounts.
The Need for Inventory Accuracy
In general, inventory records need to be accurate. In the Feets

distribution chain, inaccurate
inventories would cause stockouts. That is, if the central
computer had an inventory record for a
particular SKU that was too high, it would not order
replenishment.
In the warehouse, a stock picker will pick up an order for a
store, pick the items on the order, put
those items in cartons, and put the cartons on a pallet. Human
error plays a role in what a store
receives for each shipment. Sometimes the wrong items are put
in the carton, sometimes the
wrong cartons are put on a pallet, and sometimes the wrong
pallet is put on the truck. Therefore,
those stocking the store must carefully check orders.
The Feets auditor requires the company to take a complete
physical inventory including the
stores and the distribution center twice a year. A company
specializing in inventory auditing
performs store inventory. The same outside company also
counts the distribution center
quarterly.
Performance Measures
In retail companies, the two most useful metrics are inventory
turns and stockouts. The Feets
inventory turn ratio currently runs at about two. Feets uses its
centralized computer to calculate
stockouts. Tedra feels that the current stockout level of 5% is a
little high but to be expected.
oid:7293:142285812Similarity Report ID:

PAPER NAME
Disciplinary Assignment REVISED.docx
AUTHOR
-
WORD COUNT
873 Words
CHARACTER COUNT
4944 Characters
PAGE COUNT
5 Pages
FILE SIZE
19.0KB
SUBMISSION DATE
Apr 10, 2022 9:43 PM EDT
REPORT DATE
Apr 10, 2022 9:44 PM EDT
48% Overall Similarity
The combined total of all matches, including overlapping
sources, for each database.
33% Internet database 4% Publications database
Crossref database Crossref Posted Content database

26% Submitted Works database
Excluded from Similarity Report
Bibliographic material Quoted material
Summary
DISCIPLINARY ASIGNMENT
1
Disciplinary Assignment: The Criminal Justice System in Its
Environment
Treylesia Alston
Liberty University
CJUS 520
Dr.Pumphrey
April 3, 2022

2
5
9
2
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963)
Officers who have a recorded history of lying-in official matters
are a liability to their
agency, and their records may make them untrustworthy
witnesses. Since 1963, a sequence of
Supreme Court judgments has explained that attorneys in
criminal trials must reveal to the
defence evidence in the defendant`s favour.The primary holding

in Brady v. Maryland, 373
U.S. 83 (1963), was that the refusal of the government to give
relevant particulars that is
pertinent to the decision of a villain defendant's guilt or
punishment breaches the accused's
entitlement to fair trial under the law (Justia v. US Supreme
Court, 2022).
In Anne Arundel County`s state Circuit Court, Charles Boblit
and John Brady were
deemed culpable of premeditated killing by a Maryland jury.
Brady argued that he was a
participant in the previous burglary except the murder. During
conviction, both offenders
were sentenced to death. Following the hearing, Brady realized
that Boblit had before then,
admitted to the homicide, but the prosecuting attorney quashed
Brady's lawsuit evidence. On
retrial, the Maryland Court of Appeals determined that quashing
Brady's admission infringed
his entitlement to fair trial, and the suit was remanded to
address just the question of
retribution (Oyez, 2022).
The Supreme Court decreed that the prosecuting attorney's
motion to suppress proof

contravened the Fourteenth Amendment`s Due Process Clause.
The tribunal equally
determined that, under the laws of Maryland state, Brady's
admission could not vindicate
him; therefore, a detention simply for reconsideration of his
retribution was material (Oyez,
2022).
Giglio v. United States, 405 U. S. 150 (1972)
In Giglio v. United States, 405 U. S. 150 (1972), it was
determined that the Assistant's
absence of power was neither controlling, nor is his refusal to
tell his bosses and companions,
1
1
1
8
3
and the prosecuting authority's responsibility to give out all
significant documentation to the

tribunal was not attained, resulting in a breach of fair trial and
the need for a new trial (Justia
v. US Supreme Court, 2022). It was established that John Giglio
was culpable of forging
money orders. Giglio's counsel uncovered fresh proof whilst his
plea to the Second Circuit
Court of Appeals of the United States was underway Pursuant to
the proof, the prosecuting
authority neglected to reveal that it provided protection in
reciprocation for an affidavit in
opposition to Giglio. The district court rejected Giglio's plea for
a fresh hearing, inferring that
the mistake had no significance on the outcome. The Court of
Appeals confirmed the
judgement (Oyez, 2022).
United States v. Agurs, 427 U. S. 97 (1976)
In United States v. Agurs, 427 U. S. 97 (1976), it was
established that the prosecuting
attorney's negligence to submit Sewell's rap sheet to the defense
did not deny the defendant of
due process as affirmed by the Fifth Amendment`s Due Process
Clause, where it seems that
the defense counsel did not ask for the record and there was no

inference of lying under oath
and that the trial judge stood persuaded of defendant's
culpability without a shadow of
uncertainty after taking into consideration the Brady v.
Maryland, 373 U. S. 83 and Mooney
v. Holohan, 294 U. S. 103 (Justia, US Supreme Court, 2022).
Defendant was deemed culpable of second-degree homicide for
stabbing with a blade
one Sewell to death in the course of a brawl. Proof at the
hearing revealed, in addition to
other things, that Sewell had on him two knives soon prior to
the death, as well as the one
which the defendant attacked him with, that he had been stabbed
repeatedly, but that
defendant was unharmed. Defendant's attorney then made an
application for a fresh hearing,
claiming that he found out Sewell had a previous history of
crime (inclusive of pleading
guilty to battery and being in possession of a dangerous
weapon, evidently a knife) that
3
4
4

6
7
10
11
12
13
14
4
would have supported the reasoning that defendant reacted in
self-protection and that the
prosecuting attorney did not reveal to the defense these details.
The District Court rebutted the submission, stating that the
proof of Sewell's history
of crime was not relevant and significant since it disclosed not a
thing about his personality
that was not hitherto obvious from the uncontradicted
affirmation, especially the reality that
he had on him two knives, emphasizing the disparity linking the
self-protection assertion and

the certainty that Sewell was again and again knifed whilst
defendant got away unharmed.
The Court of Appeals overturned the verdict that the proof of
Sewell's delinquent past was of
great significance. The failure to make it known warranted a
fresh hearing as the jury might
have arrived at a contrasting judgment if the proof was
presented.
2
2
3

5
Reference
Justia; US Supreme Court, (2022). Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S.
83 (1963).
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/373/83/#:~:text=Mar
yland%2C%20373%20U.S.
%2083%20(1963)&text=The%20government's%20withholding%
20of%20evidence,consti
tutional%20right%20to%20due%20process.
Justia; U.S. Supreme Court, (2022). Giglio v. United States, 405
U. S. 150 (1972).
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/405/150/
Justia; U.S. Supreme Court, (2022). United States v. Agurs, 427
U. S. 97 (1976).
Oyez; Legal Information Institute. Brady v. Maryland.
Brady v. Maryland. (n.d.). Oyez. Retrieved April 10, 2022, from
https://www.oyez.org/cases/1962/490 Oyez; Legal Information
Institute. Giglio v. United
States.

Giglio v. United States. (n.d.). Oyez. Retrieved April 10, 2022,
from
https://www.oyez.org/cases/1971/70-29
yland%2C%20373%20U.S.%2083%20( 1963)&text=The%20gove
rnment's%20withholding%20of%20evidence,constitutional%20r
ight%20to%20due%20process
yland%2C%20373%20U.S.%2083%20(1963)&text=The%20gove
rnment's%20withholding%20of%20evidence ,constitutional%20r
yland%2C%20373%20U.S.%2083%20(1963)&text=The%20gove
rnment's%20withholding%20of%20evidence,constitutional%20r
48% Overall Similarity
Top sources found in the following databases:
33% Internet database 4% Publications database
Crossref database Crossref Posted Content database
26% Submitted Works database
TOP SOURCES

The sources with the highest number of matches within the
submission. Overlapping sources will not be
displayed.
1
coursehero.com
26%
Internet
2
Liberty University on 2021-08-22
4%
Submitted works
3
Southern New Hampshire University - Continuing Education on
2022-0...
3%
Submitted works
4
3%
Submitted works
5
2%
Submitted works

6
caselaw.findlaw.com
2%
Internet
7
jm919846758.files.wordpress.com
1%
Internet
8
1%
Submitted works
Sources overview
https://www.coursehero.com/file/138039305/order-167531-
466256docx/
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/374/107.html
https://jm919846758.files.wordpress.com/2019/10/the-power-
of-habeas-corpus-in-america_-from-the-kings-prerogative-to-
the-war-on-terror.pdf
9
1%
Submitted works

10
colorado-technical-university on 2019-08-16
1%
Submitted works
11
<1%
Submitted works
12
Colorado Technical University on 2021-11-03
<1%
Submitted works
13
<1%
Submitted works
14
Colorado Technical University on 2021-12-14
<1%
Submitted works
Sources overview

DB_MK_Unit_4_ Production and Operations Q) MRP and JI

DB_MK_Unit_4_ Production and Operations Q) MRP and JI

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to DB_MK_Unit_4_ Production and Operations Q) MRP and JI

Similar to DB_MK_Unit_4_ Production and Operations Q) MRP and JI (20)

More from MargaritoWhitt221

More from MargaritoWhitt221 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

DB_MK_Unit_4_ Production and Operations Q) MRP and JI