|
|
Building
|
Implementation
|
Operation
Save Time On Research and Writing
Hire a Pro to Write You a 100% Plagiarism-Free Paper.
Get My Paper
|
Retirement
|
|
Fact Sheet Item
|
Best Case
|
Worst Case
|
Best Case
|
Worst Case
|
Best Case
|
Worst Case
|
Best Case
|
Worst Case
|
|
Technical Capability
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outcomes
|
Available infrastructure is capable of building the proposed changes
|
Infrastructure is not capable, building the proposed changes will lead to breakdowns
|
Enough capacity at Micromax to implement Lean Six Sigma to their processes
|
The capacity is not enough to implement the lean six sigma production process
|
Reliable infrastructure to operate a Lean Six Sigma as proposed
|
Unreliable infrastructure, cannot sustained the proposed changes as Micromax
|
Successful project, that is, successful implementation of Lean Six Sigma
|
Project failed, the proposal was not implemented at all
|
|
Alignment
|
Micromax uses available infrastructure to build the new proposal
|
Micromax needs new infrastructure to build the new proposal
|
Available infrastructure useful at Micromax are useful at implementing LSS
|
Available infrastructure not used to implement the LSS as they are not in line with the proposals
|
Output is increased after the proposal is implemented by about 20%
|
Output does not increase after implementation
|
No additional infrastructure needed, it uses the available ones
|
Infrastructure was needed, the available did not match the needs of the proposal
|
|
Financial benefits
|
Cost of acquiringIT needs for LSS is relatively low, saving Micromax huge amounts
|
Cost of acquiring is high and affects the company’s financial position
|
Additional costs are needed for the new IT investment are at the very minimum for the company
|
Additional costs for the new IT investment are high for the company to cover the costs
|
The new investment to improve the production process at Micromax brings more profit of about 12%
|
There are only lossesafter the new investment is implemented, Micromax is in a bad financial situation
|
The investment can be applied across other aspects of Micromax apart from the production lines
|
Systems are obsolete and cannot be applied by Micromax to other business lines
|
|
Non-financial benefits
|
Staff atMicromax are motivated and are willing to build the investment
|
Staffs are demotivated at Micromax and are not willing to work on the new investment
|
Improvement of company culture at Micromax towards excellence
|
Corporate culture deteriorates from the current or remains at the initial level
|
Improved company image in the market from the commitment to excellence
|
Company image destroyed since the project failed and could not deliver to the customer what they promised
|
Micromax’s credibility is built and strengthened because of the commitment to quality and excellence
|
Credibility destroyed because they failed to commit to quality and excellence
|
|
|
|
Resources
|
Company uses available resources to implement the new IT investment
|
Company needs to acquire more resources to successfully go ahead with the new investment
|
Resources are not strained when Micromax rolls out the new IT investment
|
Resources are strained and cannot support the successful implementation of LSS
|
The use of LSS is resource conscious, hardly impacting the resource balance at the company
|
Operation of LSS proves to be resource intensive, affecting the resource balance at the company
|
The resources needed for maintenance is low, it does not use more than it brings in
|
Maintenance is high, LSS proves to be unsustainable to the company
|
|
Expenditure
|
Manageable budget needed for building LSS IT requirements and infrastructure
|
Huge budget needed to implement LSS, the company spends more instead
|
Micromax spends what was planned initially for the new investment
|
Micromax spends beyond the planned amount for the implementation of LSS
|
Micromax spends reasonable amount to maintain the LSS investment
|
Micromax needs a lot of funds to maintain LSS, raising the spending by over 10% of the planned amount
|
Revenue from implementing the IT investment is higher than spending
|
Spending on LSS is evidently higher than revenue from the same investment
|
|
|
|
Risk drivers
|
Micromax has enough capacity for LSS
|
Capacity is not enough to build and implement LSS
|
Skillset is available necessary for LSS implementation at Micromax
|
Skillset is not available within Micromax for effective implementation of LSS
|
Micromax makes money after implementing LSS
|
Micromax incurs losses after the implementation of LSS
|
Performance is enhanced after Micromax implemented LSS, with efficiency rates of about 6%
|
Performance does not change after implementation, the efficiency rates are negative
|
|
Assumptions and constraints
|
Technology needed for LSS to be implemented at Micromaxis not costly
|
Technology needed is costly for Micromax to implement the new technology
|
The employees currently working at Micromaxare capable of successfully implementing the new LSS
|
Employees do not understand or have the capacity to implement LSS
|
Micromax supports the operations after the implementation of LSS
|
Operations are not supported because the company is skeptical about the success of the investment
|
Micromax’s performance is improved after successful implementation of LSS
|
Micromax’s performance stagnates after all the investment in new technology
|
|
|
|
Operational capability
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outcomes
|
Available skills at Micromax are fully utilized
|
Skills are not fully utilized, Micromax does not benefit from the internal capacity
|
Efficient use of Micromax resources to implement the new project (Lean Six Sigma)
|
The resources are not utilized efficiently, affecting the smooth implementation of LSS at Micromax
|
Micromax’s brand position improves after the implementation of LSS
|
Brand position stagnant as compared to the previous times, LSS brings no value to Micromax
|
Micromax’s brand perception improves as it implements the new strategy
|
Brand perception declines or stagnates even after all the resources invested on the new IT investment
|
|
Alignment
|
Number of staff needed available within the company, Micromax has sufficient and relevant roles
|
Need to hire extra staffs because the available ones do not understand the new IT investment
|
Matches the available skillset, that is, Micromax’s new investment falls in the line of the available staff and matches their skills
|
Does not match the available skillset, Micromax’s new investment does not align with existing skillset
|
The new investment aids achieving Micromax’s vision and goals
|
The new investment does not help in achieving Micromax’s goals and visions
|
After investing,the company strategy is boosted because it is in line with existing strategy
|
Company strategy receives no boost because the two do not match at all
|
|
Financial benefits
|
Acquiring staff to match the investment is affordable for the company
|
High cost of acquiring staff for the new investment, affecting the company’s financial performance
|
Implementation costs for the LSS process improvement are low for Micromax
|
Implementation costs are high for Micromax and affects the financial position of the company
|
LSS operation costs are low for Micromax, it leads to huge savings for the company
|
Operation costs are high after the LSS is implemented, no much savings
|
Increased revenues of about 8% for Micromax because LSS reduces wastes, improves quality, and reduces lead time
|
Reduced or plateaued revenues for the company because the implementation of the new project was not successful
|
|
Non-financial benefits
|
Good reception by Micromaxemployees because they own the investment
|
Employees do not appreciate or own the project, which can affect its implementation
|
Micromax employee are motivate to work their best because the new IT investment makes work easier
|
Demotivated employees because they do not understand the changes and do not own the project
|
Micromax’s corporate image is improved because it is implementing industry standard technology
|
Micromax’s corporate image does not change, it risks to deteriorate
|
Corporate culture changes because of the new operation standards
|
Corporate culture does not change because the investment does not change the operation standards
|
|
|
|
Resources
|
No training is needed for the implementation of LSS, saving resource needed
|
Training is necessary, which means the company will spend more on new resource
|
Micromax does not need extra systems to implement LSS, which means less resource will be used
|
Micromax has to develop or acquire extra systems meaning that they will spend more
|
Micromax has enough internal capacity to run LSS successfully, saving the company resource to be used to acquire capacity
|
Micromax has to outsource services hence more resource to acquire outside capacity
|
Micromax has developed in-house capacity which is a positive asset to the company and an addition to available resources
|
In-house capacity is not strong and the company is deficient in resources like that
|
|
Expenditure
|
Micromax saves on costs related to previous production techniques by about 13%
|
Micromax spends more than it planned leading to extra expense to the company
|
Additional costs are on the minimum, the planned amount is sufficient to build capacity, implement, and run the LSS
|
Additional costs are high and exorbitant, increasing the company’s spending
|
Wages are manageable, the company will reduce the workforce, saving a lot in wages paid to duplicated jobs
|
Wages are crippling the company because the workforce is ballooning
|
Marginal spending is low because the new investment reduces wastes by about 80%
|
Marginal spending is high as the waste in the production process remains high
|
|
|
|
Risk drivers
|
Enough resources for the company to build the infrastructure and systems for Lean Six Sigma
|
Inadequate resources for Micromax to invest in the new production strategy
|
Micromax has enough capacity to implement LSS without outside help
|
Micromax lacks required capacity, which necessitates outsourcing of services
|
Resources are enough to sustain the implementation and operation of LSS
|
Resources are not enough to sustain the implementation and consequently operations of LSS
|
Micromax sees value in investing on LSS for improved production process
|
Micromax does not see any value in implementing LSS as it appears as a loss to the company
|
|
Assumptions and constraints
|
There is a need within Micromax to improve the production process and reduce wastes
|
There is no need within the company, the current production techniques meet the company strategy plans and goals
|
Micromax has the will to implement LSS and sees value in implementing
|
Micromax does not see the need to implement as it does not see any value to their strategic goals
|
Micromax dedicates resources to the implementation of LSS
|
Micromax has no resources set aside for the new investment
|
The company assigns some staff to manage the changes in the company streamlining operations
|
The company does not assign any staff to manage change, which maintain the confusion it existed before
|
|
Business capability
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outcomes
|
Less production times and reduced waste by about 80%
|
Production times do not change, remains as it was before
|
Micromax produces quality products after implementing LSS
|
The products do not show much quality improvement after the investment
|
Market for company products increased because of improved production techniques and outstanding quality products
|
Market does not record any significant changes, quality of products is mediocre
|
Increased revenues for Micromaxfrom waste, cost, and lead time reduction
|
Revenues do not increase significantly, no increase directly connected to new investment by the company
|
|
Alignment
|
The LSS investment falls under existing business units
|
New investment does not fall under existing business units, needs establishing a new business unit
|
Uses available labor, reducing the needed labor and keeping it at the optimum level
|
Needs extra labor for the company to efficiently implement the IT investment
|
Strengthens available business units within Micromax as it streamlines the production process and reduces wastes
|
Disrupts available business units, increases costs, and wastes remain as they were
|
Business strategy strengthened by the investment, it improves on quality, waste management, and process improvement
|
Business strategy does not improve, no notable changes in business processes
|
|
Financial benefits
|
Huge cost savings of almost 15% from implementing LSS in the company
|
Costs are high, Micromax spends more that the planned amount to implement the project
|
Expanded income streams as Micromax cuts on waste and improves the production process, enabling the company to focus on other revenue streams
|
Income streams remain the same, no additional revenue streams or notable cost savings
|
Profits increase from business units, the new investment reduces costs and wastes while improving the manufacturing process in the company
|
Profits do not increase or Micromax runs into losses, the investment needs more money than the revenue it brings
|
Business units earn more income because operations are streamlined
|
Business units run into losses because the investment brings little change or no change at all
|
|
Non-financial benefits
|
Improve employees skillset because they are trained on new skills for the implementation of LSS
|
Employees’ skillset does not change because the LSS investment does not add value to the company
|
Morale within the company boosted because the investment encourages them towards quality delivery and better production processes
|
Morale deteriorates because the new investment does not motivate the employee in the company
|
Streamlines operations between units, LSS ensures that the operations are free of waste and quality production is the focus
|
Operations have problems coordinating because of too much waste and unclear production processes
|
Strong business units producing quality products at Micromax, which improves customer satisfaction
|
Business units are not stable, customer satisfaction is non-existent
|
|
|
|
Resources
|
Business units not affected, the new investment does not affect normal operations in the company
|
Cripples business units because it disrupts normal operations in the company
|
Micromax sources from within, it does not need to procure extra resource for the implementation of LSS
|
Micromax needs to outsource and procure extra resource, which can be costly to the company
|
Existing structures at Micromaxenough to run LSS successfully, and if necessary the structures can be reduced
|
Existing structures are not enough, more are needed which is an additional cost to the company
|
Resources sufficient for successful implementation, Micromax’sperformance remains steady
|
Strained resources which eventually affect the company performance
|
|
Expenditure
|
Micromax spends on necessary items only for LSS
|
Micromax is out of capacity and needs to spend more to have LSS on its legs
|
Implementing LSS does not dent company budget, the spending is kept on the minimum
|
Implementing LSS destabilizes company budget, which can be a disaster to the company
|
Additional spending manageable with the existing company resource
|
Additional spending very high which the company cannot afford at its current situation
|
Maintenance costs are very low, the investment operates smoothly with less hiccups
|
Maintenance is high, needs a lot of money to have it continue past its useful life
|
|
|
|
Risk drivers
|
Business units flexible to allow easy integration of the new IT investment
|
Business units rigid, cannot allow integration of new investment at Micromax
|
Micromax supports operations of the new investment
|
Micromax does not support operations because it does not have the financial muscle to sustain it
|
Adds competitive advantage to the company products and processes, increasing revenue
|
Does not add any competitive advantage, the company revenue is affected
|
There is a continuity plan for the LSS, which ensures that the investment does not go to waste
|
No continuity plan for the investment
|
|
Assumptions and constraints
|
Micromax has extra resources to invest in a new IT investment/program
|
Micromax is working on strict budget and do not have any additional funds to implement the proposed investment
|
Available business units accommodate change in the company, allowing the company to implement LSS
|
Business units are rigid and does not allow new investments to be introduced
|
Funds are available for new investments within the company as long as they are justified investments
|
Funds are limited, no room for new investments as far as funds are concerned
|
Micromax has a continuity plan for the new investment and will ensure that it is operational
|
Micromax does not have a continuity plan for the new investment at all
|
