Forum Replies Created
- Posts
I think it said you had to prioritise one order over the other but the second order could be part filled. I just did it to see which of the three options was best to comment on the options. If you can part fill either one I’d assume you can part fill both.
I recommended BB be fully filled first though, even though I had excelsior with a higher contribution – mentioned supplier relationship already existed, growth opportunities if successful as trial was 10% of stores, Excelsior was in high end sector and Northland was going through recession so would customers would be downgrading which shops they went to where as BB was a supermarket so unlikely to be as badly affected.I’m sure it said something about which one to prioritise and which one to part fulfill.
Order should have been prioritised on contribution per limiting factor not total contribution so do all a then b then c.
Think I got 94k for excel and 91 for BB and 96k if you did all A all B and split C between both companies2a – was a bit mean I thought, had plenty of points but hardly any space to structure the answer in a bloody tabular format.
3 – I said they covered 4 of the 6 core aims, suggested 2 not mentioned were therefore not addressed properly. Related the comments back to each of the aims but kept mentioning a lack of KPI data to verify.
2b – thought this was quite nice. Used TARA as it asked for you to use a relevant model. Probably not sceptical enough of the directors but recommended fair trade accreditation for large suppliers and Dulce setting their own checklist and monitoring system for smaller suppliers who wouldn’t have resource to get accredited.I BS my way through 3 and said because everyone was salaried it couldnt be efficiency or labour rate variance therefore it was because the new staff hadn’t started yet or featured in payroll lol
I went from a fail of 49 to a fail of 23…how is that even possible?! So broken 🙁