Supply Chain Management Simulation

Diagnose bottlenecks and develop operational improvement strategy

Your Progress

Introduction 0% Complete

FlexTech Manufacturing

Electronics Component Manufacturer - Operational Crisis

Company Snapshot

Annual Revenue
$185M
Avg Lead Time
45 days
On-Time Delivery
68%
Quality Defect Rate
4.2%
SITUATION: You are a Supply Chain Analyst at FlexTech Manufacturing, a mid-size electronics component manufacturer facing severe operational challenges. Customer complaints about late deliveries have tripled in the past 6 months, major accounts are threatening to switch suppliers, and operational costs are 18% above industry benchmarks. Your task is to diagnose supply chain bottlenecks, quantify improvement opportunities, and build an actionable implementation roadmap.

Company Materials & Operational Data

Review all materials before beginning your analysis

What You Need to Extract from Materials:

Current lead times by supplier region
Capacity utilization and production constraints
Quality defect rates and rework costs
Cost impacts of each bottleneck
Industry benchmarks for comparison
Improvement strategy costs and benefits

FlexTech Operations & Supply Chain Materials

Click to View

Company Background

FlexTech Manufacturing is a mid-size electronics component manufacturer based in Austin, Texas. Founded in 2008, the company produces specialized circuit boards, connectors, and power modules for the automotive, industrial equipment, and consumer electronics industries. The company operates one primary manufacturing facility (120,000 sq ft) and employs 280 people.

Product Mix:

  • Custom circuit boards (45% of revenue)
  • High-precision connectors (30% of revenue)
  • Power management modules (25% of revenue)

Current Financial Performance:

  • Annual Revenue: $185M (LTM)
  • Gross Margin: 32% (below 38% industry benchmark)
  • Operating Margin: 6% (below 12% industry benchmark)
  • Revenue Growth: +8% YoY (decelerating from +22% two years ago)

Supply Chain Structure - Current State

Supplier Base: FlexTech sources components from 47 suppliers across three regions:

Region % of Spend Lead Time Shipping Cost Quality Score
Asia (China, Taiwan) 62% 45 days $12-18/kg 4.2% defect rate
Eastern Europe 23% 28 days $8-11/kg 2.8% defect rate
North America 15% 12 days $3-5/kg 1.5% defect rate

Logistics & Transportation:

  • Ocean freight: 75% of inbound shipments (30-40 day transit)
  • Air freight: 15% of shipments (expedited, 5-7 day transit, 4x cost of ocean)
  • Ground: 10% (North American suppliers only)
  • Annual expedited freight cost: $2.8M (up from $800K two years ago)

Primary Bottlenecks Identified

BOTTLENECK #1: Extended Lead Times from Asian Suppliers

Issue: 62% of component spend sourced from Asia with 45-day average lead times. Recent port congestion has extended this to 52-58 days for 35% of shipments.

Impact:

  • Safety stock requirements increased 40% (tying up $8.2M in working capital)
  • Expedited air freight costs up 250% to $2.8M annually
  • Production delays causing 32% on-time delivery rate to key customers
  • Lost revenue: $12M in orders cancelled due to lead time constraints

Annual Cost Impact: $23M (working capital opportunity cost @ 12% + expedited freight + lost margin on cancelled orders)

BOTTLENECK #2: Production Capacity Constraints

Issue: Surface mount technology (SMT) line operating at 94% capacity utilization. Current facility has limited space for expansion.

Impact:

  • Unable to accept rush orders (turning down $6M in high-margin business annually)
  • Minimal flexibility to absorb production variability
  • Overtime costs elevated: $1.8M annually (18% of direct labor)
  • Equipment downtime causes cascading delays (6.2% unplanned downtime)

Annual Cost Impact: $7.8M (lost revenue opportunity + overtime premium)

BOTTLENECK #3: Quality Issues Causing Rework

Issue: 4.2% defect rate on Asian-sourced components (vs. 1.5% North American benchmark). Incoming inspection catches 60% of defects; remaining 40% discovered in production.

Impact:

  • Rework costs: $3.2M annually (labor + materials)
  • Scrap costs: $1.9M annually
  • Production delays: 8% of manufacturing time spent on rework
  • Customer returns: $2.1M annually (warranty + logistics + reputation damage)

Annual Cost Impact: $7.2M (rework + scrap + customer returns)

Industry Benchmarks - Best-in-Class Performance

Metric FlexTech Current Industry Median Best-in-Class
Average Lead Time 45 days 28 days 18 days
On-Time Delivery % 68% 85% 96%
Defect Rate 4.2% 2.1% 0.8%
Inventory Turns 4.2x 6.8x 9.5x
Fill Rate 88% 94% 98%
Cost-per-Unit (indexed) 118 100 87

Improvement Strategies - Analysis & ROI

STRATEGY A: Supplier Diversification & Near-Shoring

Shift 30% of Asian component spend to North American and Eastern European suppliers over 18 months.

Investment/Cost Amount
Supplier qualification & tooling $1.2M
Higher component unit costs (8% premium) $2.9M/year
Implementation team (18 months) $450K
Total 3-Year Cost $10.35M
Benefit Annual Impact
Reduce lead time from 45 → 28 days Working capital release: $4.8M one-time
Eliminate 70% of expedited freight $1.96M/year savings
Improve on-time delivery to 89% Recapture $7M in lost revenue
Reduce defect rate to 2.5% $2.8M/year (rework + scrap reduction)
Total 3-Year Benefit $41.1M

ROI: 297% over 3 years | Payback Period: 14 months

STRATEGY B: Production Automation & Capacity Expansion

Install second SMT line with automated optical inspection (AOI) and automated guided vehicles (AGVs) for material handling.

Investment/Cost Amount
SMT line & AOI equipment $4.5M
AGV system (4 vehicles) $800K
Facility modifications $600K
Installation & training $350K
Additional operating costs (utilities, maintenance) $420K/year
Total 3-Year Cost $7.51M
Benefit Annual Impact
Capacity increase 85% (handle $95M additional revenue) Capture $6M high-margin rush orders
Reduce overtime by 75% $1.35M/year savings
Automated inspection reduces defects by 40% $2.1M/year (rework + scrap + returns)
Labor efficiency gains (AGVs) $580K/year
Total 3-Year Benefit $30.09M

ROI: 301% over 3 years | Payback Period: 18 months

STRATEGY C: Integrated Supplier Quality Program

Implement supplier quality improvement program with resident quality engineers at top 3 Asian suppliers.

Investment/Cost Amount
3 resident quality engineers (2 years) $720K
Supplier process improvements (co-investment) $400K
Enhanced incoming inspection equipment $280K
Total 3-Year Cost $1.4M
Benefit Annual Impact
Reduce defect rate from 4.2% → 1.8% $4.2M/year (rework + scrap + returns)
Reduce production disruptions $800K/year (throughput improvement)
Total 3-Year Benefit $15M

ROI: 971% over 3 years | Payback Period: 3 months

Implementation Roadmap - Phased Approach

Phase 1 (Months 1-6): Quick Wins

  • Launch supplier quality program with 3 resident engineers
  • Qualify 2 North American alternative suppliers for top 10 components
  • Implement enhanced incoming inspection protocols
  • Expected Impact: $2.1M annualized savings, defect rate → 3.0%

Phase 2 (Months 7-12): Capacity & Procurement

  • Complete SMT line installation and commissioning
  • Shift 15% of Asian spend to qualified North American suppliers
  • Install AGV system for material handling
  • Expected Impact: $5.8M annualized savings, capacity utilization → 68%, defect rate → 2.2%

Phase 3 (Months 13-18): Full Optimization

  • Complete near-shoring transition (30% of spend shifted)
  • Achieve full automation benefits and quality improvements
  • Renegotiate shipping contracts based on reduced expedited freight
  • Expected Impact: $10.6M annualized savings, lead time → 28 days, on-time delivery → 92%, defect rate → 1.5%

Phase 4 (Months 19-24): Continuous Improvement

  • Optimize inventory levels based on reduced lead times (release working capital)
  • Pursue additional automation opportunities
  • Expand capacity to capture incremental revenue opportunities
  • Expected Impact: Achieve best-in-class metrics, $12.5M annualized benefit

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) - Target State

KPI Current 6-Month Target 12-Month Target 24-Month Target
Average Lead Time 45 days 40 days 32 days 28 days
On-Time Delivery 68% 78% 87% 92%
Defect Rate 4.2% 3.0% 2.2% 1.5%
Fill Rate 88% 91% 94% 96%
Capacity Utilization 94% 88% 68% 72%
Expedited Freight Cost $2.8M/yr $2.0M/yr $1.2M/yr $0.8M/yr

Risk Factors

  • Supplier Transition Risk: New suppliers may have initial quality or delivery issues during ramp-up (Mitigation: Dual-sourcing during transition, maintain 4-week safety stock)
  • Capital Investment Timing: SMT line installation could face delays (Mitigation: Include 15% schedule buffer, pre-order long-lead equipment)
  • Customer Patience: Major accounts threatening to leave may not wait for improvements (Mitigation: Provide detailed improvement timeline to top 5 accounts, offer short-term discounts)
  • Execution Capacity: Small team may struggle with multiple concurrent initiatives (Mitigation: Hire external implementation support for Phase 2)

Financial Summary - 3-Year Impact

Total Investment Required: $19.26M
Total 3-Year Benefits: $86.19M
Net Present Value (NPV @ 12% discount): $52.8M
Overall ROI: 347%
Blended Payback Period: 11 months

Section 1: Bottleneck Diagnosis

Identify and quantify the primary supply chain bottlenecks

Diagnostic Framework

Effective bottleneck analysis requires identifying constraints that limit overall system throughput. Use the materials to:

  • Identify which processes have the longest cycle times or highest resource utilization
  • Quantify the impact of each bottleneck on delivery performance and costs
  • Prioritize bottlenecks based on severity and solvability
Choose the bottleneck with the greatest impact on customer delivery performance
Must include working capital opportunity cost, expedited freight, and lost orders
Minimum 100 words. Must include specific numbers from materials showing how lead time affects inventory, shipping costs, and customer satisfaction.

Strong Response Example

Click to View

FlexTech's 45-day average lead time from Asian suppliers (62% of component spend) creates a cascading operational crisis. First, it forces FlexTech to maintain 40% higher safety stock levels, tying up $8.2M in working capital that could otherwise be invested in growth. Second, when customer orders come in, the long lead time means FlexTech frequently resorts to expedited air freight at 4x the cost of ocean shipping, driving expedited freight costs to $2.8M annually (up 250% from two years ago). Third, even with these measures, on-time delivery has plummeted to just 32% for key customers, causing $12M in cancelled orders as customers switch to more reliable suppliers. The combination of higher inventory carrying costs, premium freight, and lost revenue creates a $23M annual impact that is directly eroding FlexTech's competitive position.

Weak Response Example

Click to View

Extended lead times are bad for FlexTech because they cause delays. When suppliers take too long to deliver parts, it creates problems in production. This leads to higher costs and unhappy customers. The company needs to find ways to reduce lead times to improve efficiency.

Why this fails: No specific metrics, no quantification of impact, generic statements that could apply to any company.

Section 2: Root Cause Analysis

Analyze why these bottlenecks exist and their interconnected impacts

Root Cause Framework

Moving beyond symptoms to underlying causes:

  • Why did FlexTech become dependent on distant Asian suppliers?
  • What structural factors limit production capacity?
  • How do quality issues compound with other bottlenecks?
Both answers must match materials exactly
Add: rework costs + scrap costs + customer returns from materials
Minimum 120 words. Must explain the interaction effect and reference specific data points (94% utilization, $1.8M overtime, 6.2% downtime, turning down $6M in orders).

Strong Response Example

Click to View

FlexTech's 94% capacity utilization creates a brittle system with no buffer to absorb variability. When quality defects occur (4.2% rate), production must stop to rework faulty units, consuming 8% of manufacturing time. With virtually no spare capacity, this rework forces costly overtime ($1.8M annually, 18% of direct labor) and delays other orders. The situation is compounded by 45-day lead times from Asian suppliers—when a batch arrives with defects, there's no time to reorder without disrupting the entire production schedule, forcing expensive expedited air freight. Additionally, equipment downtime (6.2% unplanned) in an overutilized facility cascades into missed customer commitments. The lack of capacity buffer means FlexTech must turn down $6M in high-margin rush orders annually, even as they struggle to fulfill existing commitments. This creates a vicious cycle: capacity constraints prevent accepting new business, which limits revenue growth needed to invest in additional capacity, while quality issues consume the limited capacity that exists.

Section 3: Improvement Strategy Selection

Evaluate improvement options and select optimal strategy

Strategy Evaluation Framework

Three improvement strategies are detailed in materials. Evaluate each based on:

  • Total investment required vs. expected 3-year benefits
  • ROI percentage and payback period
  • Impact on primary bottleneck (lead time reduction)
  • Implementation risk and complexity
Select the strategy with the highest 3-year ROI percentage from materials
Find in Financial Summary section - blended payback for all strategies combined
Minimum 150 words. Must reference specific ROI, payback period, investment cost, and quantified benefits from materials. Explain why this strategy should come first despite other strategies potentially having higher ROI.

Strong Response Example

Click to View

FlexTech should prioritize the Integrated Supplier Quality Program first, despite Supplier Diversification addressing the primary bottleneck more directly. The quality program delivers exceptional ROI of 971% with only $1.4M investment and an extraordinarily fast 3-month payback period. This low-risk, high-return initiative immediately reduces the defect rate from 4.2% to 1.8%, generating $4.2M in annual savings from eliminated rework, scrap, and customer returns, plus an additional $800K from reduced production disruptions. Critically, this strategy can be implemented quickly without major capital expenditure or operational disruption—FlexTech can deploy 3 resident quality engineers to top Asian suppliers within 60 days. The rapid payback means FlexTech will generate $5M in savings within the first year to help fund the more capital-intensive strategies. Furthermore, improving supplier quality creates a more stable foundation for the subsequent near-shoring strategy (which requires $10.35M investment), since FlexTech will be negotiating with new suppliers from a position of better quality management capability. While the quality program alone won't solve the 45-day lead time issue, it represents a quick win that builds momentum, generates cash, and de-risks larger initiatives.

Section 4: Implementation Roadmap & KPI Tracking

Build phased implementation plan with measurable milestones

Implementation Planning Framework

The materials provide a 4-phase, 24-month implementation roadmap. Your task:

  • Sequence initiatives to balance quick wins with long-term transformation
  • Define measurable KPIs for each phase
  • Identify risks and mitigation strategies
Extract from 24-month target in KPI table
Find in 12-month target column of KPI table
Minimum 200 words. Must include specific phase timelines, initiative names, quantified savings/improvements, and KPI targets from materials.

Strong Response Example

Click to View

FlexTech's first 12 months should follow a carefully sequenced two-phase approach. Phase 1 (Months 1-6) focuses on quick wins with minimal capital: launch the supplier quality program by deploying 3 resident quality engineers to top Asian suppliers, qualify 2 North American alternative suppliers for the top 10 component categories, and implement enhanced incoming inspection protocols with upgraded equipment. This phase requires minimal investment ($700K) but delivers immediate impact—reducing the defect rate from 4.2% to 3.0%, generating $2.1M in annualized savings from reduced rework and scrap, and beginning the supplier diversification process. The 3-month payback on the quality program generates cash flow to fund subsequent phases. Phase 2 (Months 7-12) deploys the capital-intensive initiatives: complete installation and commissioning of the second SMT line with automated optical inspection ($4.5M investment), shift 15% of Asian component spend to the newly qualified North American suppliers (reducing average lead time from 45 to 38 days), and install the AGV material handling system ($800K). This phase delivers $5.8M in annualized savings through multiple mechanisms: capacity utilization drops from 94% to 68% (eliminating the need to turn down $3M in rush orders), overtime costs decrease by 50% ($900K savings), and the combination of better quality (2.2% defect rate) and shorter lead times enables a reduction in expedited freight usage ($1.2M savings). By month 12, FlexTech achieves 87% on-time delivery (up from 68%), positioning the company to pursue Phase 3's full near-shoring transition.

Analysis Complete

Review your supply chain diagnostic results

Your Total Score

--

Calculating...

Section 1: Bottleneck Diagnosis --/25
Section 2: Root Cause Analysis --/20
Section 3: Strategy Selection --/25
Section 4: Implementation Planning --/30