MGT481 CSUGlobal Module 3 Capsim Mini-case Review Help The Capsim simulation is designed to offer you a strategic perspective on the interaction between de

MGT481 CSUGlobal Module 3 Capsim Mini-case Review Help The Capsim simulation is designed to offer you a strategic perspective on the interaction between decisions and operational results. When making Capsim decisions, your team must be alert to the potential challenges associated with production capacity. Many businesses fail to recognize the organizational constraints that may limit growth and create a business risk.

Review the Capsim Mini-Case Study entitled “Production.” (Note: Always click the Capsim button in Schoology to access Capsim). To access Capsim case studies, click “eText and Cases” from the left navigation menu, as shown below:

Consider the following questions to ensure you have the necessary production capacity to meet your Capsim team goals:

How can you optimize the limited resources your company has available in order to meet demand?
Should you hire more employees?
Should you utilize forced overtime?
Is there increased investment in automation?
Should you bring in additional production equipment?
What is your strategy to ensure adequate capacity, and what are the possible financial consequences for the company?

Address each of these considerations in your paper.

Your paper should meet the following requirements:

Be 5-6 pages in length, excluding the title and references pages.
Be formatted according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing and APA (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site..
In addition to course resources, use the CSU-Global Library to find three additional resources to support the position you take.

Be sure to check out the CSU-Global Online Research and Writing Lab (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.. Here you can find:

Writing considerations and tips
Writing resources
Sample papers
An APA Template (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. for writing assignments. Mini Case Studies
Production
1
Can Tesla achieve
economies of scale
and keep its promise?
Mini Case Studies
Production: Can Tesla achieve
economies of scale and keep
its promise?
With more than 350,000 pre-orders for its first mass market
car, the Tesla Model 3 Sedan, Tesla Motors will need to boost
production to 500,000 cars by 2018. That’s 10 times the
50,000 cars it produced in 2015.
The pre-sale numbers would seem extraordinary, but Tesla
has been ‘extraordinary’ from the beginning, fueled by the
vision of CEO Elon Musk and a cultural determination to
revolutionize the car industry.
Electric vehicles make a come-back
Electric vehicles were popular in the late 19th and early 20th centuries until Henry Ford began
mass-producing gasoline-fueled cars with internal combustion engines. It took high oil prices,
environmental concerns, and advances in battery technology in the late 20th century to bring
electric cars back into the mainstream.
Now, with these changes in the market, the major car companies including Ford, GM,
BMW, Toyota, Honda, and Nissan have released electric or electric/gasoline hybrid cars to
accommodate for these changes. Yet these new innovations were conservatively tied to
existing models, attempting to retrofit and revise existing models to a newer format. On
the other hand, in 2013, Tesla, a small automotive start-up from California, began not only
winning several design awards, but also proving a profitable model for electric cars that might
challenge the traditional car companies. Tesla opened a new market segment: luxury electric
cars with a longer battery life, longer range, that were designed to excite discerning motorists
and sold through its own stores, not dealerships. It wasn’t offering the battery version of a
gas-powered car with fewer extras, but a new sought-after trend in upscale motoring.
Tesla making good on affordable car promise
When Tesla made its first profit in 2013, Elon Musk said his company’s goal had always been
to mass-produce fully electric cars at a price affordable to the average consumer, and would
do it “within five years.” Musk was standing by his product life-cycle strategy – entering at the
high end where customers will pay more, then driving down costs and building volume.
Improving battery technology leading to increase driving range will lower costs in coming
years. Additionally, suppliers have begun demonstrating that they can revamp their own
production and reduce the cost of parts leading to more efficient manufacturing. Indeed, Tesla
claims it is steadily cutting the number of worker hours necessary to build each car in lieu
2
3
Musk was standing by his product life-cycle
strategy – entering at the high end where
customers will pay more, then driving down costs
and building volume.
of robotic automation and more efficient design processes. Tesla isn’t stopping there either,
as they expand their overall capacity, by pumping money into a Gigafactory and additional
production capacity in order to be ready to fill orders with significantly higher volume than
before. Altogether, these factors strongly tip future balance of the market in Tesla’s favor.
Challenges ahead
The traditional car making giants, however, are not sitting idly by while Tesla muscles into
their space. Improved battery technology itself is replicable, plus they already have experience
in mass-manufacturing. Recognizing the value of experience, Tesla hired a long time Audi
executive to lead its vehicle production team – a departure from the company’s practice of
hiring from the technology and energy industries.
Perhaps Tesla’s biggest advantage is the strong support it enjoys from its investors. By mid2016 Tesla’s market cap was $32 billion with sales of just over 50,000 vehicles in 2015. GM’s
market cap was $50 billion, less than twice Tesla’s, and it sold 9.8 million cars. As 247wallst.
com said, “Something is wrong with this picture.”
Forbes calls Tesla’s share price “a cult-like valuation”, and critics suggest that without
generous U.S. Government loans and subsidies that the company has received, it may not
survive.
Tesla’s performance in the next few years will prove whether the beliefs of the Tesla faithful
are well founded, or whether the challenge of economies of scale for mass market vehicles
was too tough for the new market entrant.
5/5/2019
Module 3: Critical Thinking
MGT481 Mod 3 CT
https://csuglobal.instructure.com/courses/9439/assignments/180857?module_item_id=448436
1/4
5/5/2019
Module 3: Critical Thinking
Criteria
Requirements
Content
Ratings
20.0 to >16.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Includes all of the
required
components, as
specified in the
assignment.
20.0 to >16.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Demonstrates strong
or adequate
knowledge of the
materials, including
the Case Study’s
application to Capsim
and course
experience?
appropriately
addresses each of the
considerations or
elements specified in
the assignment.
16.0 to >12.0 pts
Approaches
Expectation
Includes most of the
required
components, as
specified in the
assignment.
Pts
12.0 to >8.0 pts
Below Expectation
Includes some of the
required
components, as
specified in the
assignment.
16.0 to >12.0 pts
Approaches
Expectation
Some significant, but not
major, errors or omissions
in understanding the
materials, including the
Case Study’s application
to Capsim and course
experience? somewhat
appropriately addresses
each of the
considerations or
elements specified in the
assignment.
https://csuglobal.instructure.com/courses/9439/assignments/180857?module_item_id=448436
12.0 to >8.0 pts
Below
Expectation
Major errors or
omissions in
understanding
the materials,
including the
Case Study’s
application?
partially
addresses the
considerations
or elements
specified in the
assignment.
8.0 to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
Includes few of the
required
components, as
specified in the
assignment.
8.0 to >0 pts
Limited
Evidence
Fails to
demonstrate
knowledge of the
materials,
including the
Case Study’s
application? does
not appropriately
address the
considerations or
elements
specified in the
assignment.
20.0 pts
20.0 pts
2/4
5/5/2019
Module 3: Critical Thinking
Criteria
Analysis
Demonstrates
college­level
proficiency in
organization,
grammar and
style.
Ratings
20.0 to >16.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Provides strong or
adequate critical
thinking, insight, and
evaluation of Case
Study concepts.
Strategically and
thoughtfully addresses
the assignment’s
considerations/elements.
10.0 to >8.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Project is clearly
organized, well
written, and in
proper format as
outlined in the
assignment. Strong
sentence and
paragraph structure?
few errors in
grammar and
spelling.
Pts
16.0 to >12.0 pts
Approaches
Expectation
Some significant, but not
major, errors or
omissions in critical
thinking, insight, and
evaluation of Case
Study concepts.
Somewhat strategically
and thoughtfully
addresses the
assignment’s
considerations/elements.
8.0 to >6.0 pts
Approaches
Expectation
Project is fairly well
organized and written,
and is in proper format
as outlined in the
assignment. Reasonably
good sentence and
paragraph structure?
significant number of
errors in grammar and
spelling.
https://csuglobal.instructure.com/courses/9439/assignments/180857?module_item_id=448436
12.0 to >8.0 pts
Below
Expectation
Major errors or
omissions in
critical thinking,
insight, and
evaluation of
Case Study
concepts. Some
errors in
strategic
thinking, and/or
incomplete
analysis of the
assignment’s
considerations/
6.0 to >4.0 pts
Below Expectation
Project is poorly
organized? does not
follow proper paper
format. Inconsistent
to inadequate
sentence and
paragraph
development?
numerous errors in
grammar and
spelling.
8.0 to >0 pts
Limited
Evidence
Fails to
demonstrate
critical thinking,
insight, and
evaluation of
Case Study
concepts. Major
errors in
strategic
thinking, and/or
incomplete
analysis of the
assignment’s
considerations/
4.0 to >0 pts
Limited
Evidence
Project is not
organized or
well written, and
is not in proper
paper format.
Poor quality
work?
unacceptable in
terms of
grammar and
spelling.
20.0 pts
10.0 pts
3/4
5/5/2019
Module 3: Critical Thinking
Criteria
Demonstrates
proper use of
APA style
Ratings
5.0 to >4.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Project contains
proper APA
formatting, according
to the CSU­Global
Guide to Writing and
APA, with no more
than one significant
error.
4.0 to >3.0 pts
Approaches
Expectation
Few errors in APA
formatting, according
to the CSU­Global
Guide to Writing and
APA, with no more
than two to three
significant errors.
3.0 to >2.0 pts
Below
Expectation
Significant errors in
APA formatting,
according to the
CSU­Global Guide
to Writing and APA,
with four to five
significant errors.
Pts
2.0 to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
Numerous errors in
APA formatting,
according to the
CSU­Global Guide
to Writing and APA,
with more than five
significant errors.
5.0 pts
Total Points: 75.0
https://csuglobal.instructure.com/courses/9439/assignments/180857?module_item_id=448436
4/4

Purchase answer to see full
attachment