Amber Grid: Inspect More, or Fix the Line?

Operations
easy35 min0 submissions
Razorpay
Scenario

Amber Grid manufactures utilities products in Europe, running 732,233 units a year.

Internal quality checks reject 3% of output, at a scrap and rework cost of about €383 a unit. A further 1.4% of shipped units come back under warranty, each costing roughly €8990 once field service, replacement and admin are counted.

Two proposals are on the table. Engineering wants €50 M of one-off capital to re-tool the station where most defects originate. Quality wants €31 M a year of additional inspection headcount to catch more before shipment.

The plant manager is measured on unit cost.

Supporting data

volume

units per year
732233

proposals

process retool one off m
50
additional inspection per year m
31

external failure

cost per claim
8990
warranty claim rate pct
1.4
warranty units per year
10251

internal failure

defect rate pct
3
defective units per year
21967
scrap rework cost per unit
383
Your task

Advise the plant manager. Your answer should provide:

  1. Analysis — the total cost of poor quality today, split by where it is detected, and the return on each proposal.
  2. Risks — what each option does not solve.
  3. Recommendation — which to fund, with a payback period.

State any assumptions you make.

Ready to move forward? Up next: Northwind Energy: This Market Size Looks Too BigNext question
How you'll be graded

80 points, 60% to pass.

  • recommendation20
  • market analysis15
  • risk assessment20
  • financial analysis25
Hint
Reveal suggested structure

Cost of poor quality = internal failure + external failure. Compare prevention against detection on payback, and note that inspection does not reduce the defect rate.