In that situation, I could get a much better idea of when I could expect the backlog to clear and why the supplier was unable to meet my order requirements. I could also have used that information to convey to my customer my expectations of when I would be able to fulfill their orders. Having this ability to extract information would be very helpful. "While one strategy may work for a majority of companies, it may not be the best strategy for your organization" (Neal, 2010). It seems impossible to develop strategy without having strong forward and backward communication. After this simulation, I was left with mixed feelings about computer simulations. It did help me understand the numbers, but the lack of ability to engage in meaningful communication left me extremely frustrated. I was also frustrated by some of the simulations limitations. Is there another source for root beer? Is there a replacement product in my area? How is the lack of supply impacting the costs that retailers can charge? In fact, would there be any financial incentives to keep the supply low? All of these questions occurred during the simulation, and it seems...

However, as far as teaching about the bullwhip effect, the simulation seemed like it would be a very useful tool. Having read about the risk of the bullwhip effect, I was careful to over-order from the supplier, and tried to carefully eliminate my backlog, so that I did not actually experience that effect in my simulation. However, just knowing how careful I was being led to me think about the possible impact of the bullship effect on my orders from my customers and from the supplier.