Bomba inyectora john deere 310JDescripción completa
Planilla de detalle de mtto de tractores John Deere para concesionariosDescripción completa
Descripción: manual de retroexcavadora
A cocise Engine repair ManualDescripción completa
Planilla de detalle de mtto de tractores John Deere para concesionariosDescripción completa
Full description
John Deere _ Swing DriveFull description
JOHN DEERE MANUALES ELECTRICOSDescrição completa
deere2530Descripción completa
tugas kasus john deer component works B. dalam bahasa
Descripción completa
caso de estudio en el cual se abordan las normativas ambientalesDescripción completa
Descrição completa
JOHN DEERE MANUALES ELECTRICOS
Tratores John Deere Série 6J.Descrição completa
John Deere Component Works It was during the collapse of farmland values and commodity prices in the 1980s that John Deere, like every other farm equipment producer was forced to adjust its level of operation downward, cut costs where possible and restructure manufacturing processes. Additionally, John Deere's effort to push decision making down into more manageable units encouraged divisions to view their product lines as stand-alone businesses that sold to external markets. Its excess capacity and the company's new thrust toward developing stand-alone business motivated the Gear and Special Products Division of JDCW (John Deere Component Works) to bid on 275 of the 635 parts Deere and Company offered. Being awarded only 58 parts of the 275 on the basis of full-cost suggested that the Standard Cost Accounting System was a significant significa nt failure. The cost system was reporting that the division was doing better in lowvolume parts than high-volume parts which was clearly a big anomaly. A subsequent subsequent cost study study undertaken undertaken provided provided the following indications indications of of an in-efficient in-efficient cost system. a> An enormous range of variation among quotes for many parts. b> Large dispersion between JDCW and vendor quotes ranging from 50%-60% on some parts and 200%-300% on others. c> JDCW estimated standard costs exceeded vendor prices by 35% on average. d> JDCW appeared to be most cost-effective on low-volume and low-value parts. The cost study used an Activity Based Costing methodology to more realistically follow the shop process flow. The cost flow diagram for the study is presented below in Exhibit 1. The ABC costing model provided the company with more meaningful data regarding the overheads to help in making more productive decisions. Earlier errors of undercosting expensive parts was eliminated. True cost drivers in the areas of material handling and transportation were discovered and changes in layout could be made to improve efficiency. Looking specifically at the cost of product A103 (Exhibit 2a and 2b), we can see that the ABC costing method increased the costs associated with this product. In this case, overhead was being understated by the standard costing method. Machine operation overhead was one cost driver that actually decreased when going from the standard costing method to the ABC method. Other cost drivers, such as production order and machine setup may have been understated when using the old costing method. This is a product that JDCW would likely not win a bid on given the data shown in Exhibit 2b, but may have won a bid on under the standard costing method.