Vendor Evaluation
Vendor Evaluation
Vendor Evaluation
Triburg///
TRIBURG///
COMPANY OVERVIEW
Established in 1980
Providing technical and sourcing services for textile apparel, leather apparel, leather outerwear, accessories and home products Vendor base of 85 factories 2012 - Sourced 42.5 million garments and 5 million units of accessories, leather and home products Shipping turnover USD 440 Million
OPERATIONS
BRANDS
WOMENS WEAR: Ann Taylor Izod Ladies J Crew Nordstrom American Eagle New York & Company DKNY
MENS WEAR
American Eagle
J Crew
AEO 77 Kids American Living Chaps
TJ MAXX GROUP
The largest international apparel and home fashions off-price
To issue instructions and procedures for the evaluation, approval and auditing of incoming-material from Vendor or manufacturers
The vendor can be better informed about what the actual preferences of the ultimate customer are
Buyer
Buying Office
Vendor
Triburg is a mediator - ensures there is no weak link in the supply chain By auditing their vendor through year around continual process which includes Appraisals of various aspects of business including capacity Financials Quality assurance Organizational structure Processes and performance of all vendors. After Auditing vendor is either approved or not approved as one from whom to procure materials or services. The process of auditing performance can motivate vendors to improve their performance.
Approved Vendors
Triburg ensures that approved vendor is: Technically sound Managerially competent Adequately resourced Financially stable Competitive (often in terms of price and availability Reliable Provides goods of suitable quality Environmentally/Ethically sound
RESEARCH GRID
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES RESEARCH DESIGN DATA COLLECION METHODS SAMPLE SIZE SAMPLE FRAME SAMPLING UNIT
Triburg
Theme Gupta Exim To evaluate the performance of different Vendor using Vendors Rating methods. Primary (Inspection Report & Questionnaire) 5 RR Trends Shri Laxmi Dassan Secondary (Internet, Articles, Journals) Delhi & Gurgaon
Descriptive
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
RO1# To understand the process of auditing the Vendors in Triburg
TRIBURG AUDIT
Process Inspection
Requirement
Factory Observation
Triburg Observation
Comments
TRIBURG AUDIT
Process Inspection
Pre-production
Preparation Pattern Marker Fabric inspection Spreading Cutting
Sewing
Finishing/Final Trimming Re-Screen/Repair Measurement Visual/ construction Final Audit
SCORING BY TRIBURG
Overal lAssessment Summay Production Process Max. Scoring Metric Applicable Individua Points l Score 1. Fabric and Trims 70 Outstanding 93% - 100% Control 27.5 2. Sample / Marker Room 50 21 Excellent 82% - 92% 3. Pre-production Meeting 50 15 Satisfactory 70% - 81% 4. Cutting Control 50 9 Fair 60% - 69% 5. Fusing Control 10 0 Poor 0% - 59% 6. Sewing Control 60 15 7. In-Process Inspection 20 Overall meet AT Rate - 10 pts 6 expectation 8. Washed Gmt Control 20 Satisfactory, but need Rate - 7 pts 0 improvement 9. Pressing Control 20 Not acceptable, Rate - 3 pts 6 improvement needed 10. Finishing Control 50 No such concept Rate - 0 pt 15 implementation 11. House-Keeping 50 Not Applicable N/A Condition 3 Total Score 450 117.5 Score Percent
Triburg Inspection
26%
RESEARCH OBJECTIVE
RO2#
To evaluate the performance of different Vendors using
TJX- GROUP-VENDORS
5 Different Vendors are named as:
V1Theme (Okhla)
V5- RR Trends (Gurgaon) V2Dassan (Gurgaon)
For evaluating the 5 vendors on the below selected parameters of a specific buyer (TK &TJ MAXX) These vendors are ranked on following parameters Facilities Quality Control Systems Incoming Material Inspection In Process Quality Control Baby wear product Specific Communication, Document Control and Work Movement
WEIGHTING
Communication, Document Control and Work Movement Baby wear product Specific
1
Weighting
2
Facilities
(Sahay, 1999)
)Weighting
10
Average score
Vendors
Facilities
Score
Score/Weighing
V1
42 x 2 84
44 x 2 88
64 x 2 128
54 x 2 108
51 x 1 51
46 x 1 46 505
505/10 50.5
V2
32 x 2
64
45 x 2
90 42 x 2 84 39 x 2 78 40 x 2
66 x 2
132 63 x 2 126 56 x 2 112 58 x 2
47 x 2
94 51 x 2 102 51 x 2 102 49 x 2
55 x 1
55 54 x 1 54 47 x 1 47 51 x 1
39 x 1
39 43 x 1 43 40 x 1 40 40 x 1 441 487 474
474/10
47.4 487/10 48.7 441/10 44.1 457/10 457
V3
39 x 2 78
V4
31 x 2 62
V5
36 x 2
72
80
116
98
51
40
45.7
Triburg inspection
(Sahay, 1999)
Factory Inspection
44.1
V1 Vendor (v) Theme (V1) Dassan (V2) Shri Laxmi (V3) Gupta Exim (V4) RR Trends (V5)
V2
V3
V4
V5
Weighted average Rank score 50.5 1 47.4 3 48.7 2 44.1 5 45.7 4 Triburg Vendor Inspection observati
Shipment Status
On TIME LATE
Shipment Status
20%
30%
50%
80%
70%
Dassan
Shri Laxmi
Parameters (Weighting 1)
Theme
Dassan
Shri laxmi
Gupta Exim
RR Trends
Infrastructure
(0.1)
23 x 0.1 2.3
20 x 0.1 2 21x 0.05 1.05 19x 0.05 0.95 22x 0.2 4.4
19 x 0.1 1.9 23x 0.05 1.15 21x 0.05 1.05 22x 0.2 4.4
22 x 0.1 2.2 22x 0.05 1.1 21x 0.05 1.05 19x 0.2 3.8
20 x 0.05 1
Expertise of staff
(0.05)
Price
(0.2)
23 x 0.2 4.6
Quality
(0.3)
22 x 0.3
6.6
21x 0.3
6.3 22x 0.3 6.6 21 x 0.1 2.1 23.4
20x 0.3
6 23x 0.3 6.9 24 x 0.1 2.4 23.6
20x 0.3
6 22x 0.3 6.6 21 x 0.1 2.1 23.2
19x 0.3
5.7 21x 0.3 6.3 20 x 0.1 2 22.15
On-Time Delivery
(0.3)
24 x 0.3 7.2
(0.1)
22 x 0.1 2.2
25
(Sahay, 1999)
Questionnaire
23.4
Dassan
Shri laxmi
Gupta Exim
RR Trends Rating 1 3 2 4 5
FINAL SCORES:
Vendor (v)
Theme (V1) Shri Laxmi (V3) Dassan (V2) RR Trends (V5) Gupta Exim (V4)
Rank
1 2 3 4 5
Vendors
Theme Shri Laxmi Gupta Exim Dassan RR Trends
On-time shipment
90% 80% 70% 60% 50%
Late
10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Rank
1 2 3 4 5
Vendors
Theme Shri Laxmi Dassan Gupta Exim RR Trends
Rating
1 2 3 4 5
THEME
Factory Inspection
CONCLUSION
GUPTA EXIM
THEME
Shipment Status
RR Trends
Questionnaire
QA & Sr. Merchandiser
THEME
RR Trends
RECOMMENDATION
Vendor evaluation is important as it can reduce supply chain costs and improve the quality and timeliness of the delivery of items to the company Vendor performance has to be measured occasionally for the following reasons To increase performance visibility To uncover and remove hidden waste and cost drivers in the supply chain To leverage the supply base To align customer and supplier business practices To mitigate risk To improve supplier performance
BENEFITS
Reducing the size of vendor matrix for better and long term business relations Provides more transparency in supply chain, from customer to supplier or vice versa. Reduce workload for Merchant/ QA/ Vendor/ management Efficient working, less manpower required in Triburg More business more profits with less no of hands. Less Rejections/Wastage, more Margins for factory More Margins , gives an hand to Vendor to offer better price to customer( in-turn more business)
BENEFITS
Depending on the facility capability, styles can be allocated to vendor. No unnecessary costing/TNA with each and every Vendor Depending on facility capacity , no of units can be allocated to a vendor per product category
REFERENCES
Ainamo, D. a. (1999). The Coevolution of New Organizational forms in
evaluation of suppliers co-design effort', International Journal of Production Economics, 72, 169-180
An Investigation on the relationship for supplier performance metrics
and supply chain strategies". Singapore Institute of Manufacturing Technology. Retrieved 2011-03-21.
Bohlinger, M. S. (2001). Merchandise Buying. Fairchild Publication, inc. Debra L. Stubbings. (1999). Supplier Evaluation Matrix. Retrieved April
Fast Fashion .
Enrick, N. L. (1992). Quality Control For Profit. Marcel Dekker
Incorporated.
Ross Publishing.
kothari, c. (1985). research methodology, method & techniques (second
Giunipero (2008). Purchasing and Supply Chain Management. Cengage Learning. p. 810. ISBN 978-0-324-38134-4.
Sahay, B. S. (1999). Supply Chain Management. New Delhi: Rajiv Beri
http://www.triburg.com/
Weber. (1966). The Impact of selected Cultural Dimensions on