De Havilland Inc. Case Report
De Havilland Inc. Case Report
Date of submission: February 2, 2010
Executive Summary:
Marton’s suitability as a Vendor for De Havilland must first prove that its proposal is realistic in price and does not lack any important elements to efficiently supply the flap shrouds and equipment bay doors to De Havilland. Once that is clarified, De Havilland must ensure that Marton’s is a viable entity that can perform its duties on a long term basis, provide the necessary warranties and guarantees as well as perform to the service levels De Havilland is receiving from their current supplier. In order to not jeopardize any production levels at De Havilland it is recommended that De Havilland use both, their current supplier Dollard Plastics and Marton enterprise (or any new Supplier), for the procurement of flap shrouders and equipment bay doors for a period of one year. Marton Enterprise can be slowly introduced with orders for a period of 12 months and if KPI’s are met, Marton Enterprise would then be fully accepted as a Supplier for De Havilland.
Statement of Issue:
De Havilland has a very systematic approach with its procurement process, one that prepares the negotiating team with a solid background of the marketplace and information that helps ensure the corporation leaves no stone unturned with its supplier selection process. This particular bid, on flap shrouds and equipment bay doors, received from the nine (9) different suppliers poses the question “Why is there such has a wide range in pricing between Suppliers?”. Was the Supplier’s understanding of the specifications misunderstood or are there missing attributes in producing and delivering the products. It is important to address the reasons as to why the lowest bidder is 211% (CDA currency) less expensive than the current supplier used at De Havilland. When the current supplier, Dollard Plastics was approached by De Havilland to reduce costs, they refused to do so knowingly that such
Date of submission: February 2, 2010
Executive Summary:
Marton’s suitability as a Vendor for De Havilland must first prove that its proposal is realistic in price and does not lack any important elements to efficiently supply the flap shrouds and equipment bay doors to De Havilland. Once that is clarified, De Havilland must ensure that Marton’s is a viable entity that can perform its duties on a long term basis, provide the necessary warranties and guarantees as well as perform to the service levels De Havilland is receiving from their current supplier. In order to not jeopardize any production levels at De Havilland it is recommended that De Havilland use both, their current supplier Dollard Plastics and Marton enterprise (or any new Supplier), for the procurement of flap shrouders and equipment bay doors for a period of one year. Marton Enterprise can be slowly introduced with orders for a period of 12 months and if KPI’s are met, Marton Enterprise would then be fully accepted as a Supplier for De Havilland.
Statement of Issue:
De Havilland has a very systematic approach with its procurement process, one that prepares the negotiating team with a solid background of the marketplace and information that helps ensure the corporation leaves no stone unturned with its supplier selection process. This particular bid, on flap shrouds and equipment bay doors, received from the nine (9) different suppliers poses the question “Why is there such has a wide range in pricing between Suppliers?”. Was the Supplier’s understanding of the specifications misunderstood or are there missing attributes in producing and delivering the products. It is important to address the reasons as to why the lowest bidder is 211% (CDA currency) less expensive than the current supplier used at De Havilland. When the current supplier, Dollard Plastics was approached by De Havilland to reduce costs, they refused to do so knowingly that such