Do You Want Fries With That Shake?

578159

In today’s growing world, it seems as if every one wants exactly what they want exactly when they want it. To accommodate this growing trend among needy and picky consumers, many businesses have delved into the world of mass customization. Mass customization is a “rapid, low-cost production that caters to constantly changing unique customer desires” (Heizer and Render 274). This process deals with high volume and high variety, with many parts and component inputs that result in many different and unique output versions. Mass customization dominates almost every economic and industrial sector – shoes, clothing, phones, computers, and now…food!

Due to the increasing trend of mass customization and consumer preference, fast food chains such as McDonald’s and White Castle have implemented kiosks into a few of their stores in the United States that allow customers to create their own customized order at their convenience. If you think about it, it really is ingenious. How many times have you gone to McDonald’s or any other fast-food restaurant, ordered a meal with certain specifications, and the cashier did not relay that information to the kitchen, and your order was messed up? As a picky eater, this happens to me all the time, and it is frustrating. Through the implementation of self-serve kiosks, customers can order their weird or picky combinations in their own privacy without having to repeat that same order back to the cashier multiple times to make sure they have it down correctly.

There are many advantages to using kiosks in fast food restaurants: reduced labor costs, enhanced customization, speed, convenience, and standardized menu information and marketing messages (Blank). Much like how Chipotle utilizes its more well-trained employees during peak rush hour times, these kiosks help alleviate pressure from the employees in restaurants by assisting with customer service (Kiosk Europe). However, there are also some disadvantages to using kiosks when ordering food. These include initial cost for purchase, training, and installation, customer support for when the customer does not understand how to use the machine or when the machine does not work, and maintenance. When looking at the disadvantages, I cannot help but draw comparisons to self-checkouts that many grocery and convenience stores utilize, which we briefly touched on in class. While these kiosks and self-checkouts might save time in theory, if a customer is unfamiliar with the technology, the process takes much more time than ordering or checking out from someone who is trained for that specific task.

From personal experience, I think that kiosks are good in theory, but not so much in practice. This summer, I travelled to Berlin and Prague with DePaul for a business seminar/study aboard. In Berlin, a few of us decided to check out a European McDonald’s to see the differences between an European McDonald’s and an American McDonald’s. Besides the change in general atmosphere, we noticed four kiosks, where people were placing their orders. We decided to try…and we failed. Not only was the kiosk in German, but we could not figure out how to change the language settings, and we were not familiar with the European menu!

Have you ever used a kiosk or tablet to order at a fast food restaurant? If so, how was your experience?

Will fast food kiosks go down the same path as self-checkouts at convenience stores, or will they have more success?

Sources:

Blank, Christine. “Burgers By Design.” QSR Magazine. January 2014. http://www.qsrmagazine.com/exclusives/burgers-design

Heizer, Jay and Barry Render. “Process Strategy.” Principles of Operations Management. 272-294.

Kiosk Europe. http://www.kioskeurope.com/ke/why-self-service/markets/fast-food

Meehan, Sarah and Jayne O’Donnell. “Self-lane checkouts boost convenience, theft risk.” USA Today. 9 April 2012. http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/industries/retail/story/2012-04-06/self-scanning-checkout/54117384/1

Photo: http://www.qsrweb.com/articles/mcdonalds-aggressive-change-includes-localization-digitization/

Nike’s Holly Grail

As we have learned in class, there are many aspects that affect the making of a product. Companies are always working on improving their products, while at the same time trying to reduce their production costs. Nike is one out of many companies that is trying to achieve both with their newest invention, a shoe called the “Flyknit”.

For a long time now Nike has been working on achieving the request to “make shoes as comfortable as socks”. While they have been unsuccessful in the past, their new discovery is considered by Nike “the Holy Grail —a 5.6-ounce running shoe called the Flyknit, made from synthetic yarn ingeniously woven together by a knitting machine”.  While the new product could possible be their biggest seller, the executives of Nike are more exited about the manufacturing of the product.  The new computer controlled weaving technology “promises to cut labor costs and production time while also increasing profit margins and opportunities for personalization”.  The new process eliminates the part that is most labor intensive, and knits the upper part of the shoe in one piece. It also provides some customization options that can alter a shoe’s stability and aesthetics.  Due to the new and improved process, the “Flyknit” has fewer pieces to assemble and also fits in with Nike’s sustainability push, because it uses a lot less waste in comparison to the popular Air Pegasus+ 28.  It is so efficient that eventually these shoes could be made all around the world and maybe even bring back some of the work to US. At this point, 96 percent of Nike’s shoes are being made outside the US in countries that have lower labor costs. I think now, since Nike has figured out a new and more efficient way of making shoes, they should work on where to manufacture. While the company is saving money on the production by outsourcing, at the same time they are facing time issues of getting the product out in the market. If they would be able to reduce the amount of time that it takes for a product to get to the store, they would be more successful at filling their demand faster.

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-03-15/is-nikes-flyknit-the-swoosh-of-the-future#p2

 

What do you think about Nike’s new and improved manufacturing process?

What are some other ways that the new technology could be beneficial?

What’s In Your Bag?

 

Golf, one of the greatest games ever invented; enjoyed by millions of people across the world. With advancements in technology and designs, golf clubs have evolved into complex equipment that was completely unimaginable in just a few decades ago. Twenty years ago golfers would go to the store and purchase a set of clubs that feels good to them. These clubs were put together on an assembly line through the use of a product focus strategy that yielded high volume and low variety. As the game evolves over the past couple of decades so have the taste of golfers and the production process of golf clubs manufacturers.

 

Got Ping!

Founded in 1959, Ping Golf has become a powerhouse in the golf industry. They are well recognized by their innovation in custom club making. When Ping introduced their fitting system 10 years ago, they offered golfers with custom made clubs based on their physique and swing type. This was made possible by utilizing a repetitive focus strategy in their production process. Ping would make different clubheads with various lie angle and offset, shaft with different length and flexibility, and grips of different diameters. By measuring a golfer’s physique and analysis his swing, Ping is able to use the data to create a unique set of clubs by combining various components already manufactured. Ping’s production process is similar to that of Harley Davidson, where modules are combined to form many output options. Although Ping’s production process costs more than the traditional continuous flow process, it gives them a competitive advantage that is well worth.

Click here for more information on Ping’s fitting system: http://www.ping.com/fitting/5steps.aspx

 

Is not your daddy’s old club!

As other manufacturers try to gain competitive advantage in customization, a new evolution in club making has begun. TaylorMade just launched their new R-series driver, which embodies full customization while maintaining a low cost continuous flow production process. The R11S Driver offers loft, clubface, and center of gravity adjustments by having tuning devices build within the clubhead. This innovated design allows golfers to adjust the club to a specification suitable for them, and changes to previously set specification can be made again at any time. In terms of production process, TaylorMade only has to manufacture one type of clubhead, which greatly reduce production cost. Of course, the production of such elaborate clubhead requires additional research and development, and the cost of each clubhead is more than the traditional non-adjustable clubhead. But in the long-run, utilizing a continuous flow process will be less expensive in meeting market demand of customization.

Click here for more information on TaylorMade R11 Series Driver: http://taylormadegolf.com/taylormade/R11S-Driver/DW-JN721,default,pd.html?start=1&cgid=taylormade-drivers-r11s

 

The R11 series by TaylorMade is a great example of achieving customization while maintaining a low cost continuous flow production process. Do you know any products that can also do that?

 

 

Works Cited

Ping. (2012, 07 09). Custom Fitting. Retrieved from Ping Golf: http://www.ping.com/fitting/default.aspx

TaylorMade. (2012, 07 09). R11S Driver. Retrieved from TaylorMade Golf: http://taylormadegolf.com/taylormade/R11S-Driver/DW-JN721,default,pd.html?start=1&cgid=taylormade-drivers-r11s