Swot analysis for Galaxy Toys
Part One: Long Term Planning Goals and Decisions
The toy industry is very fickle and innovation is critical. Sales for January 2016 showed only a 3% rise over January 2015 leaving the company managers concerned about meeting projected sales targets for 2016. In a 30-month plan, George Jepson, Jr., as CEO, together with Edward Mercury, CFO, set long-term goals for the company to include the following:
increase sales unrelated to NASA toys by 22 percent;
reduce company-wide costs by 5 percent within 15 months and 11.2 percent by the end of the plan;
create new technology based action toys;
use innovative technology in production to increase efficiency;
reduce carbon footprint by 5 percent.In November 2015, the long term planning team began to select the newest Galaxy product line. The choice of the right product design will hopefully stop the slump in sales and jump start growth. Tomorrow, February 4, 2016 is the final meeting of the planning team. The team will choose between three options:
produce 1 million Payload Nine toys or MMTJE1 for Christmas 2016;
produce 1 million Payload Nine toys for Christmas 2016 and 1 million MMTJE1 for Christmas 2017;
produce 1.5 million MMTJE1 toys for Christmas 2017.The products have different production requirements. Payload Nine is designed to complement the International NASA Space Station series. Payload Nine is geared to the 7-10 age group and contains building blocks to make the space shuttle with emphasis on the cargo hold and its loading arm.
Focus group results suggest that Payload Nine will sell well but it is not a wow product in the eyes of the group. It is not a trendsetting toy. The introduction of Payload Nine is estimated to jump NASA sales by 6.8%. Payload Nine requires little change on the production floor and supplies are easily obtainable. Production could begin May 1, 2016 and completed in time for the Christmas toy market. No additional personnel would be needed and existing production would not be delayed. Production costs would fit within the current years budget.(1.512 1.68)
1.428 points
Demonstrates an excellent ability to clearly explain reasoning for the selection of individual goals and objectives and the abandonment of others by making appropriate connections between identified goals and objectives and the concepts studied in the course readings and the case study fact pattern.
(1.344 1.511)
1.26 points
Demonstrates satisfactory ability to explain reasoning for the selection of individual goals and objectives and the abandonment of others by making somewhat vague connections between identified goals and objectives and limited use of the concepts studied in the course readings and the case study fact pattern.
(1.176 1.343)
1.092 points
Demonstrates limited ability to explain reasoning for the selection of individual goals and objectives and the abandonment of others making inappropriate, incomplete or little connection between issues identified and the concepts studied in the readings and the case study fact pattern.
(0.01 1.175)
0 points
Fails to explain reasoning for the selection of individual goals and objectives and the abandonment of others.
(0)
Critical Thinking/Reasoning 4.2 points
Comments reflect a highly accomplished level of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and reasoning of the case material and case study facts resulting in accurate, thorough, and soundly reasoned conclusions.
(3.78 4.2)
3.57 points
Comments reflect an excellent level of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and reasoning of the case material and case study facts resulting in accurately reasoned conclusions.
(3.36 3.77 )
3.15 points
Comments reflect a satisfactory level of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and reasoning of the case material and case study facts resulting in partially correct conclusions that lack development or detail that demonstrates insight into reasoning.