CK Enterprises, Inc.

Supplier Satisfaction Survey

Sample ExecutiveReport

S . S .H i n e s R.A.Sotak J a n u a r y 1 , 19 9 6 3

STRATEGIC ALTERNATTVES INC.

l. Executive Summary
This reportsummarizes findingsof a Supplier the Satisfaction Surveyadministered 199-5 in b1' Explicit Strategies, (CKE). Inc. for CK Enterprises, Inc. Purposes The purposes this surveyare as follows' of I . To determinethe resultsof actionstakenover the pastseveralyears. 2. To discoverwhere future improvements be madein the procurement can process. 3. To frnd out what specificallyCKE could do to reducecostsby 3o/o the next year. in Conclusions The rnajorconclusions corresponding eachof thesepurposes providedbelow. to are l. The responses mostof the questions be translated ratings a one-to-ten to can into on scale, with ten beinghigh. This information summarized TableI and Figure l. CKE resulrs is in fall in the high to very high range(7 to 10) for mosrcategories. One of the key questions askswhat suppliers think is the primaryfactorused CKE in by making a procurement decision. By far, the most frequentlymentioned f'actorwas Quality (46Vc), reflectingthe strongquality message CKE hasbeenattempting sendover the pasr to several years.(SeeFigure2.) 2. One obviousopportunity improvement in the areaof drawings for is and specifications. wherethe rating is7.2. This rating is in the high range,but, comparedto CKE,'sother results, hasplenty of room for improvement.Along theselines,therewere lots of comntents aboutpoor communication regarding drawings/specs unduly complex specs, and among o t h e r s .A l s o , t h i s a r e a r e c e i v e d t h e s e c o n d h i g h e s t p e r c e n t a g e o f r e s p o n s e s ( l 4 c / c ) o n t h e questionabouthow CKE could make it easierfor suppliers do business to with them. "way The top-rated to make it easier"(with 25Vo the responses) to developa closer of was relattonship with the supplier. This would seemto be pointingCKE toward becominga virtual corporation. 3. The top two specificcost-reducing suggestions don't really add much to the analysis.The (with 42Vo)is to buy in volume...hardly new concept. The secondhighest top suggestion a (with l4Vo)is to review and clarify specs, suggestion reinforcingwhat was said earlier.

CKE 1995SupplierSatisfaction Survey

2l2a/9612:32PM

Table l. Summary of Ratings

Question No. Q.12

Description
QualityRequirements

Rating 9.9
J.l

or1
o.16
o.13--

Design Requirements
Natureof Relationship CKE with Comparative Easeof DoingBusiness Delivery Requirements Usageof QualityTraining Concepts Request Quotation CycleTime View of Audit Process AdequateLeadTime for Delivery

o.2i

Buve t_$-o:y! r g_ 99p9-sl99pp-li

b.o
; v.5 9.5 9.4

omQ.19.C

0 ct6^oiBe
Q.09 \,{. | /

e.a
g-s
9.3

Auditedin Last FourYears Q.15 Relative Fairness Treatment of Q.07 RequestDocumentation Quotation Q.02.A Purchasi Performance ng Q.04.A Ease of Communication Purchasing with Q.02.8 E n g r n e e n nH e n o r m a n c e g Q.04.D Ease of Communication Engineering with Q.02.C QualityAssurance Performance O.04:C Ease of Communication QA with o.0E--- .--]@16rmance of Drawing/Spec Understanding Requirements Q.18.A.2

neF!el:l]1P 9[Ei]lerslejs ngere$

e.i e.i
9.0 8.9 8.9 8.1 8,0 ;t .^ o 7.5

iq

o.oi.D

onaB
Q.20

i4 ii i.o
6.9 6.8 3.4

o.iBA:i

S;pplrer ou;ntyAudit cffiucted

No Problems

Ease of Communication Accounts with - Payable

CKE 1995SupplierSatisfaction Survey

3/8/96 1:45 PM

Figure1. Summaryof All Ratings

Q u a l i t yR e q u i r e m e n t s

NoProbrems T l>{"'n"_ . C o o pT1'-":.:*'.R e t a t r o n s h r p S u p p l i e rQ u a l i t yA u d i t C o n d u c t e ! , S ,\ erative

t -

'-

Easeof Communication with eccts eaVaoterl/,r./

,,-+-

\"uy"r.
t \

Knowledge t Supplier o C o r O a r . " t i u e a s e o f D o i n gB u s n e s s E \

,
Accounts Pavable Performance

unoerstandinsorDws/specaeosf ,""",;:,:,;.::;. f / /'/,1'>4

-]-fl_/)1\\

Der'veryRequrrements \ ;_;:,:","",,'Busness

EaseofCommunicationWth"^///i@\\\\\Usageofoua|rtyTrarnrngConceplS

Qua|ityASsurancePerformance\\\t\(ffi}])])IQUotat|onFeqUeStCyc|eTme

'W

Easeorcommun,caton with."n'"*.,"\Xff '"n""":'::::'':::":

Ease ot Communicationwtth Purchasing' -'-r

process VieworAudir ', ,

\_*-,{

"X''o'*'1:-':"'rimerorDe'|very

PurchasrngPerformance OuotationRequestDocumentation

u--vRetationship CKE Attempts to lmplement "Rrdit"d in Last Four years \ FairTreatment

F i g u r e 2 . M o s t l m p o r t a n t F a c t o r i n S e l e c t i n ga Supplier
Quality Price DBE Status Influence Technical Ability Service M u l l i p l eR e a s o n s 1 0.k

20%

3 0./"

40"

50%

CKE 1995 Supplier Satisfaction Survey

3/8/96 1:45PM

Tablell. Response Counts

Numberof Suppliers ResponseStatus
75 4 21 108 Responded fax. via Responded telephone via interview. Declined respond. to Did not complete interview. the Totalsuppliers CKE-supplied in database.

F i g u re3 . D i stri bution Respondents Pr oduct Code of by

El e c t r o n i c s M a c h i n eP a r t s Hydraulics Hardware lnsulating tls M Seating MotorParts Gear Parts Pl a s t i c / M o l d Wire& Harness GlassParts 10 Number of Suppliers 15 20

CKE 1995 Supplier Satisfaction Survey

3/8/96 1:45PM

ll. Methodology
Interviews Supplier & Cateqorization Interviewswere conducted from late November 1995to early January1996. Where possible. the surveywas administered over the phone. However,the greatmajority of suppliers optedto respond fax (seeTable II). The overall response via ratewas 807o. were identified CKE as providingproducts one of elevenindustries product Suppliers by (or in codes) shownin Figure3. as DataCompilation& ReportOrqanization The resultsof this surveyhavebeencompiledin severaldifferentways: for all suppliersin the (including aggregate thoseresponding with Don't Know), for just thosewho had an opinion,and by industry/product code. These resultsare presented two versions the final report,eachcontairring stated in of the information: . ExecutiveReport ExecutiveSummary,Methodology, and Summaryof Findingsfor eachquestion.(Note: Only selected questionsappear in this sample report.) ExecutiveSummary,Methodology,detailedfindings for eachquestion, of study respondents, surveyfbrnt. list and

' DetailedReport

The detailed frndings includethese tables eachquestion: for Table l. Table2. Table 3. Table 4. Summaryof Findings Response Detailwith and withoutDon't Knows Response Detail by SupplierCategory Verbatim Responses

The Summaryof Findingstableseachcontaina chart showingthe distributionof responses calculated without the inclusionof thoseresponding Don't Know. (I.e., if 20a/c the of respondents Don't Know, the chartshowsthe distribution responses said of amongthe retnaining 80Vc.)The Response Detail table(Table2) showsthe chartdataplus the distributionwith Don't Know's included. (In ourexample,the Don't Know response would show as 2Oo/c andthe remainingresponses would sum to 8OVo.) Table 3 also includesDon't Know's in the distribution, in the latterexample. Table 4 showsall open-ended as responses exactly as recorded the interviewer, by exceptthat suppliernameshavebeenomittedto maintain confidentiality.

CKE 1995 Supplier Satisfaction Survey

2128196 12:32 PM

Summary Findings of

performance the areasof Purchasing in Question2. How would you rateCK Enterprises' Support,AccountsPayable. and Quality Assurance, Engineering?

SupportAreaPerformance
Purchasing

E n g i n e e ri n g

Assurance Quality

Accounts Payable
5 6

1 = Low; 10 = High

Observations: Consistent with findingsfrom othercompanies, Purchasing the highestrating has fbr supportareaperformance.(If relationships generalare good, more opportunityfbr in interaction usually leadsto higherratings.) Thoseofferingthe highestratingsmadecomments aboutneverhaving a problem,and described employees generallycooperative, as helpful. responsive, professional.Purchasing and had only two low ratings(for supplierselection proccss and failureto returncalls).

CKE 1995SupplierSatisfaction Survey

2128196 12:32 PM1

Q.02-Table1

Summaryof Findings

Question3. ln which areado you believeit would be most importantto improve pertbrrnane to e make it easierfor you to do business with CKE?

AreaMost lmportant lmprove to

E n g i n e e ri n g

P u rch a si n g

Assurance Quality

AccountsPayable

O"/"

1O"/"

20'/"

30%

4O"/"

50%

Observations: Although Engineering received second the highestrating in for perfbrmancc. is ir seenas the areamost in needof improvement, doubt reflectingthe high-technology no natureof CKE'sbusiness. Similarly. althoughAccountsPayable hasthe lowestperformance rating,suppliers nor rhar are concerned, relativelyspeaking, aboutimprovingthis area.

'l 995 Supplier Satisfaction Survey

2/2819612:32 PM

Q.05-Table

.l

Summaryof Findings

qualityrequirements compare thoseol to Question12. How would you sayCK Enterprises' you othermanufacturers supply?

QualityRequirements

A s de ma n d i n g

L e s sd e m a n d i n g

M o r ede ma n d i n g

Observations: One-thirdof the suppliers feelCKE's quality requirements more demanding are than thoseof othercustomers, and99Vofeel they are at leastas demanding.This translates a to 9.9 rating,the highestof any of the measures this survey,reflectingCK Enterprises' in on-going commitment quality. to

1995SupplierSatisfaction Survey
2128196 12:32 PM

Q . 1 2 - T a b l1 e

Summaryof Findings

your view of the business relationshrp CK Entc.rprist-'s that Questionl7 What bestdescribes to attempts rrnplement'/

Relationship CKE Attemptsto lmplement

Longterm

Shortterm

1O'/"

30%

60"/"

go"k

Observations: Over three-quarters the respondents of view their relationship with CK E,nterprises long term with mutual benefit. Justas significantly, number viewing it as short as the term with maximum benefitto CK Enterprises only 9Vo,giving an overall rating of 9.I . is

CKE 1995Supplier Satisfaction Survey

2128196 12.32PM

Q . 1 7 - T a b l1 e

Summaryof Findings

20. What is the biggest problemyou experience doingbusiness in with CK Question Enterprises ?

BiggestProblemwith CKE
Drawings/specs

Communications

Shortterm delivery

QualityAssurance

Pricing

Forecasting

Other

15"/"

30"/"

Observations: The numberof respondents sayingtherewere no problems(or giving no answer o n t h e f - a x s u r v e y ) i s a v e r y h i g h 3 4 TD . a w i n g s / s p e c s i s t h e b i g g e s t p r o b l e m f b r 2 3 t h eo f ar %, suppliers, consistent with otherfindingsin this survey.Among othercompanies have we surveyed, Communications the most-frequently is cited top problem. Problemsin the Other categorytendedto be supplier-specific concerns that could not be lumped into any ol the primarycategories.

CKE 1995SupplierSatisfaction Survey

2128196 12:32PM

1 Q.20-Table

Summaryof Findings

-Icll 14. me specifically what CK Enterprises do to help you reducethe cost of can Question your productto them by 3o/a over the next year.

Suggestions ReduceCost to CKE to

B u yi n v o l u m e

Review specs

Forecastorders

product Standardize

Blanket orders

Redesign drawings

Observations: As is true fbr most of thesesurveys, volume buying was cited as the top way to reducecosts,by a considerable margin. Review of specifications took secondplace. The percentage respondents of with no suggestions 20Vo.lncludedin the Don't Know/No was Answer category(not shownon the abovechart)were severalsuppliers who indicatedthat problemswere currentlybeing worked on.

C K E 1 9 9 5S u p p l i e S a t i s f a c t i oS u r v e y r n
2t28tS612.32PM

Q.24-Table 1