There is no room for miscommunication. This leads to reductions in time to market, for the organization.
In addition, by spelling out the quality demands within a contract, the contract further facilitates the high-degree of collaboration between the organization and the supplier, as needed in JIT (Kristensen, Dahlgaard, Kanji, & Juhl, 1999), by ensuring that both parties understand what is required of the supplier, from the very beginning.
With such detailed quality levels spelled out for their suppliers, suppliers are less likely to try to deliver inferior parts or materials. When unacceptable parts or materials are received, there is significant time lost as the material is sorted through, and communication between the supplier and Infotechnics occurs to rectify the problem. In addition, further time can elapse while replacement parts or materials are redelivered to the company. This can lead to significant production challenges considering the nature of the JITQC system.
The JITQC system is based on two components - JIT and TQC. Implementing JIT and TQC practices have been proven to not only increase productivity but quality as well (Sriparavastu & Gupta, 1997).
With TQC, the organization cannot accept inferior parts or materials from their suppliers, therefore they must reject them and get replacement parts. With the implementation of JIT, Infotechnics has very low levels of materials on hand, typically only that material that they will need in the very near future. For this reason, if a delivery of parts or materials is of unacceptable quality, it may hold up the entire production line, as production waits for replacement materials to be delivered. Infotechnics simply does not have a quantity of stock on hand to use in its stead. The inclusion of these high quality standards in the contract helps avoid the possibility of shipments being returned.
One of the key goals of any JIT system is to improve quality for an organization in addition to improving cost effectiveness (Modarress, Ansari, & Willis, 2000; Garg & Deshmukh, 1999). This is especially true for Infotechnics and their organizational goals included in their JITQC system. Without specifying specific, quantitative and qualitative quality specifications, it would be impossible for Infotechnics to monitor and measure their suppliers' ability to meet these quality needs. With hard data and goals to strive for, Infotechnics can determine which suppliers are of benefit to the organization, which may need more assistance in implementing their own JITQC strategies, and which may need to be replaced. It is this "management philosophy, which involves providing the right items of the right quality and quantity at the right place and at the right time" (Mukhopadhyay, 1995) that is facilitated by a variety of important facets, including the specification of what is acceptable quality from their suppliers.
Chakravarty, A. & Balakrishnan, N. (Summer 2004). Real-time revision of order quantities with capacity constraint: A single period model. Production & Operations Management, 13(2). Retrieved December 7, 2006, from Business Source Complete database.
Clarke, B. & Lockman, M. (1993). JIT manufacturing systems: Use and application in Australia. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 13(7). Retrieved December 7, 2006,...
(Fall 1992). JIT implementation: A growth opportunity for purchasing. International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 28(4). Retrieved December 7, 2006, from InfoTrac database.
Garg, D. & Deshmukh, S. (Apr. 1999). JIT purchasing: Literature review and implications for Indian industry. Production Planning & Control, 10(3). Retrieved December 7, 2006, from Business Source Complete database.
Giunipero, L. (Summer 1990). Motivating and monitoring JIT supplier performance. Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 26(3). Retrieved December 7, 2006, from InfoTrac database.
Kelle, P. & Miller, P. (1998). Transition just-in-time purchasing. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 18(1/2). Retrieved December 7, 2006, from Business Source Complete database.
Kristensen, K., Dahlgaard, J., Kanji, G., & Juhl, H. (Jan. 1999). Some consequences of just-in-time: Results from a comparison between the Nordic countries and East Asia. Total Quality Management, 10(1). Retrieved December 7, 2006, from Business Source Complete database.
Mahmoodi, F. & Martin, G. (Dec 1994). Optimal supplier delivery scheduling to JIT buyers. The Logistics and Transportation Review, 30(4). Retrieved December 7, 2006, from Academic OneFile database.
Modarress, B., Ansari, A., & Willis, G. (20 Mar 2000). Controlled production planning for just-in-time short-run suppliers. International Journal of Production Research, 38(5). Retrieved December 7, 2006, from Business Source Complete database.
Mukhopadyay, S. (1995). Optimal scheduling of just-in-time purchase deliveries. Internationals Journal of Operations & Production Management, 15(9). Retrieved December 7, 2006, from Business Source Complete database.
Noori, H. (2004). Collaborative continuous improvement programs in supply chain. Problems & Perspectives in Management, (2). Retrieved December 7, 2006, from Business Source Complete database.
Pragman, C. (Jul-Aug 1995). JIT II: A purchasing concept for reducing lead times in time-based competition. Business Horizons, 39(4). Retrieved December 7, 2006, from Academic OneFile database.
Richeson, L, Lackey, C., & Starner, J. (Winter 1995). The effect of communication on the linkage between manufacturers. International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 31(1). Retrieved December 7, 2006, from InfoTrac database.
Srinivasan, K. & Kekre, S. (Oct. 1994). Impact of electronic data interchange of technology on JIT shipments. Management Science, 40(10). Retrieved December 7, 2006, from Business Source Complete database.
Sriparavastu, L. & Gupta, T. (1997). An empirical study of just-in-time and total quality management principles implementation in manufacturing firms in the U.S.A. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 17(12). Retrieved December 7, 2006, from Business Source Complete database.
Stamm, C. & Golhar, D. (July 1991). Customer and supplier linkages for small JIT manufacturing firms. Journal of Small Business Management, 29(3). Retrieved December 7, 2006, from Academic OneFile database.
Stuart, F. (May-June 1997). Supplier alliance success and failure: Longitudinal dyadic perspective. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 17(5-6). Retrieved December 7, 2006, from Academic…
Target Corporation Target Organizational Structure Target Corporation operates in three major market segments. It operates the U.S. Retail segment, the U.S. credit card segment, and the Canadian credit card segment. In the U.S. Retail segment, consumers can purchase items either online or by locating them in one of its stores. Target operates in the discount general merchandise retail segment. Its credit card segment offers a Target visa, Target card, and branded Target
Target Annual Report: Target Corporation that normally operates as Target is a retailing company in the United States with its headquarters in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Target mainly operates through its bullseye trademark and was ranked at position 33 in 2010 on the Fortune 500 Company listing. Since its inception, the Target experience has now grown beyond the walls of its stores as it creates a modern shopping experience to customers through personal,
Target Corporation: Facility Planning Target Corporation started working on improvement of operation logistics back in 1991 when it realized that back end of its supply chain was causing problems and had a big room for improvement. They needed better facility location planning especially for returned merchandise which had earlier been a messy process since each retail store had its own back room for returned merchandise and there was no centralization. For
Target Corporation (NYSE: TGT) is a discount store that operate almost entirely in the United States (it has plans to expand into Canada in the next couple of years). The company began life as Dayton's, but by the 1960s the Target name was had been launched and the company had begun to expand beyond its home market (Target.com, 2012). Today, Target operates two business divisions -- retail and credit card
Target Corporation Capital Expenditure Committee In modern corporations, various projects compete for the same source of capital allocated for new investments. In preparing an analysis for a Capital Expenditure Committee, the two most important predictive financial metrics used are Net Present Value (NPV) and Internal Rate of Return (IRR). NPV is the present value of the project's cash inflows minus the present value of the project's cash outflows. It indicates the
discount chain store Target is inseparable from the history of the Dayton Hudson Corporation, a long-standing leader in American mass retail. In 1902, George Dayton opened a modest department store in downtown Minneapolis named Goodfellows, one of the many that appeared on Main streets all over the United States. Over the course of the next few years, while changing the company name several times before settling on The Dayton