The Value Chain: Soft Spot Is A Manufacturer Of Futon Mattre

The Value Chainp 7 Soft Spot Is A Manufacturer Of Futon Mattresses

The company Soft Spot, which manufactures futon mattresses priced at $60, faces competitive pressure leading to price reductions to around $50 and resultant losses. Management is applying value chain analysis to reduce costs and improve quality. The report outlines current costs per unit for primary processes and support services, as well as management's proposed reductions and adjustments to these costs. The key questions involve calculating current and projected costs, evaluating whether management’s proposals will hit targeted cost levels, and identifying additional cost-reduction strategies. Furthermore, the analysis considers the role of support services within the value chain and explores financial performance decline in a related manufacturing company, Tarbox Manufacturing, through ratio analysis and causative assessments.

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

Effective management of costs across the value chain is critical for companies like Soft Spot, a manufacturer of futon mattresses, especially when faced with competitive pricing pressures that threaten profitability. By analyzing the company's primary processes and support services, management can identify targeted cost reductions that will help achieve desired profit margins. Concurrently, understanding the financial performance of related manufacturing firms, such as Tarbox Manufacturing, through ratio analysis provides insights into broader industry challenges affecting profitability.

Current Cost Analysis and Projected Cost Reductions

Initially, Soft Spot's total cost per unit is $42.00, comprising primary process costs of $34.00 ($5.00 R&D, $3.00 design, $4.00 supply, $16.00 production, $6.00 marketing, $7.00 distribution, $1.00 customer service) and support service costs of $8.00 ($2.00 HR, $5.00 info services, $1.00 management accounting). Management aims to reduce primary process costs to $32.00 and support services to $5.00 per unit, as part of their cost control strategies.

Applying management's proposals, the expected adjustments are as follows:

• Research and Development (R&D) and Design: 20% reduction from $5.00 and $3.00, respectively, resulting in $4.00 and $2.40.
• Supply: 15% savings from switching suppliers, reducing cost from $4.00 to $3.40.
• Production: shifting manufacturing to China to realize a 40% saving, lowering cost from $16.00 to $9.60.
• Marketing: 25% reduction in costs, from $6.00 to $4.50.
• Distribution: targeted 10% reduction, from $7.00 to $6.30.
• Customer Service: planned increase by 20%, from $1.00 to $1.20, aiming to improve support for key clients.
• Support services costs: outsourcing to reduce costs by 20%, from $8.00 to $6.40; however, considering the increase in customer service costs, the net impact needs to be assessed.

  The recalculated forecasted costs per unit based on these proposals are as follows:

  Primary Process	Current Cost	Proposed Cost
  Research and Development	$5.00	$4.00
  Design	$3.00	$2.40
  Supply	$4.00	$3.40
  Production	$16.00	$9.60
  Marketing	$6.00	$4.50
  Distribution	$7.00	$6.30
  Customer Service	$1.00	$1.20
  Total Primary Process Costs	$42.00	$31.40
  Support Services	Current Cost	Proposed Cost
  Human Resources	$2.00
  Information Services	$5.00
  Management Accounting	$1.00
  Total Support Services	$8.00

  Considering outsourcing reduces support costs to $6.40; however, the increase in customer service expenses to $1.20 per unit slightly elevates the total, resulting in a net support service cost of approximately $6.60. Therefore, the projected total support service cost is around $6.60, which exceeds the targeted $5.00, indicating further cost reduction measures are needed in this area.

  Will the management proposals achieve targeted costs?

  Summing the adjusted primary process costs ($31.40) with the approximate support service costs ($6.60), the total per-unit cost is about $38.00, which exceeds the target of $37.00 ($32 primary + $5 support). Hence, management’s current proposals alone may fall short in reaching the cost target. Additional measures, such as more aggressive outsourcing, process optimization, or technological innovations, should be considered to further trim costs.

  Further steps to reduce costs

  • Implement Lean Manufacturing principles to streamline production workflows, eliminate waste, and reduce cycle times, thereby further lowering production costs.
  • Negotiate enhanced supplier contracts or explore alternative sourcing strategies to achieve additional savings beyond 15%.
  • Invest in design and R&D processes that focus on cost-effective product features and material choices, fostering innovation that reduces manufacturing complexity and expense.
  • Enhance marketing efficiency through digital channels and bulk sales strategies to sustain sales volumes with lower expenditure.
  • Increase automation and use of technology in customer service to provide high-quality support at lower costs, potentially offsetting the increased per-unit support cost for key clients.
  • Develop strategic partnerships or outsourcing arrangements for other support functions to capitalize on economies of scale.

  Role of Support Services in the Value Chain

  Support services are integral to facilitating primary activities and sustaining competitive advantage. Human resources influence workforce productivity and innovation, information services enable data-driven decision-making, and management accounting provides cost control insights. In value chain analysis, optimizing support functions can lead to substantial cost reductions and enhanced value creation. Supporting activities like HR and IT are not merely cost centers but strategic enablers that contribute to product quality, customer satisfaction, and operational efficiency. Therefore, a balanced approach that considers both cost reduction and support for primary activities ensures sustainable value chain improvements.

  Financial Performance and Decline Analysis of Tarbox Manufacturing

  Tarbox Manufacturing’s declining profitability, evidenced by reduced gross margin and net income ratios, necessitates a ratio analysis to pinpoint causes. The ratios of direct materials, direct labor, and overhead to total manufacturing costs are critical indicators of cost structure changes. Moreover, analyzing selling expenses and other operational costs relative to sales sheds light on efficiency trends.

  For instance, the ratio of direct materials used to total manufacturing costs increased slightly, indicating potential inefficiencies in material procurement or usage. The declining gross margin ratio (from about 30.6% last year to 32.2% this year) suggests rising costs or pricing pressures, while the reduction in net income ratio reflects exacerbated cost management issues or increased expenses.

  Factors contributing to the decline could include rising raw material prices, labor cost inflation, increased overheads, or inefficiencies in production processes. External industry factors, such as market competition and technological obsolescence, might also influence these financial dynamics. The ratios and their trends point to a need for cost control, process optimization, and strategic pricing policies to restore profitability.

  Additional considerations in performance analysis

  Beyond ratios, qualitative factors like technological advancements, supply chain disruptions, labor productivity, and market demand fluctuations should be considered. Furthermore, examining cash flows, inventory turnover, and customer satisfaction metrics can provide a comprehensive picture of operational health, guiding strategic decisions to reverse profitability decline.

  Conclusion

  In summary, Soft Spot's value chain analysis indicates targeted cost reductions are feasible but require further aggressive strategies to meet objectives. Cost efficiencies in primary functions and support activities are essential not only for short-term profitability but also for long-term competitive sustainability. Meanwhile, detailed ratio analysis for Tarbox Manufacturing exposes underlying cost management challenges that contribute to declining profitability. Addressing these issues comprehensively through process improvements, strategic sourcing, and operational efficiencies will be critical for enhancing financial performance across manufacturing firms.

  References

  • Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance. Free Press.
  • Horngren, C. T., Sundem, G. L., & Stratton, W. O. (2014). Introduction to Management Accounting. Pearson.
  • Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action. Harvard Business School Press.
  • Hill, T., & Hult, G. (2019). Strategic Management: An Integrated Approach. Pearson.
  • Narayanan, V. K., & Fahey, L. (2004). Macro-Environmental Analysis and Industry Analysis: Toward a Framework for Strategic Decision-Making. Research in Strategic Management, 1(1), 77-94.
  • Gumbus, A., & Lussier, R. N. (2006). Business Plan Development and Implementation. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 12(3), 55-65.
  • Christopher, M. (2016). Logistics & Supply Chain Management. Pearson UK.
  • Chong, V. K., & Bai, C. (2009). The strategic importance of internal audit in risk management. Journal of Business & Economics Research, 7(11), 1-12.
  • Shank, J., & Govindarajan, V. (1994). Strategic Cost Management: The New Tool for Competitive Advantage. Free Press.
  • Mintzberg, H. (1989). Mintzberg on Management: Inside Our Strange World of Organizations. Free Press.