1

FROSTBITEcupcake

FROSTBITE https://www.facebook.com/groups/310259419152

2

FROSTBITE

INTRODUCTION Farida began a cupcake business in 2010. In 2014, Abdullah, her husband, suggested that she should begin recording data to show the costs and revenue of her operations. After having taken a course in Operations Management, Talaat, her father -in-law, suggested that Farida should analyze this data in order to improve the productivity of her business.Facebook address:

FROSTBITE https://www.facebook.com/groups/310259419152/

3

BRAIN STORMING Dr. TALAAT suggested for FARIDA and ABDULLAH

also himself to attend COURSERA: An Introduction to Operations Management

https://www.coursera.org/courses For helping make key decisions and thereby improves the

effectiveness of Problem-Solving Process, then Increase the Profit. The three decided to make a TEAM. When referring to the word "TEAM" or "FAT" then we

mean Farida, Abdullah& Talaat as a team work. Since the alternative name of TEAM is FAT, a decision

has been taken by them to apply LEAN Production to avoid the SEVEN WASTES in FROSTBITE.

4

AREA UNDER STUDY

The TEAM has decided to FOCUS on all the FOUR DIMENTION OPERATIONAL PERFORMANCE.

TIME, VARIETY, QUALITY & PRICE.There for data collection is a must.Revising the available data, FARIDA already have a

table described:Date, Inflow Revenue, Outflow/Cost, Description

of the transaction, and Balance.A new form of data collection will be established to

coop with the PROCESS ANALYSIS requirements.

5

FRAME WORK In order to well understand the existing system, hence

proposed a new efficient system, FROSTBITE, TEAM have decided to follow a Methodology for performing System Study Cycle.

Beginning with the Problem Definition with its three dimension the Subject, the Scope and the Objective,

Passing through Interactions between areas being studied (Inputs, Outputs),

Defining the System Requirement ( SRD ), Designing the New System, Economic Cost Comparisons, Implementation Follow-up & Re-Evaluation.

6

TEAM/FAT ACTION PLAN Farida, Abdullah & Dr. Talaat (FAT) decided to follow

COURSERA , https://accounts.coursera.org/

Introduction to Operations Management in different Approaches- there are four alternative ways. The Coursera Operations Project – An Alternative Way of

Taking the Course: The reason of this selection for both Farida& Abdullah is

to focus understanding theory while working as a TEAM in the aim of solving FROSTBITE problems, increasing efficiency with Dr. Talaat

With Course Project Without Course Project

With HW/Exam With DistinctionDr. Talaat

Ops CertificateFarida& Abdullah

Without HW/Exam Ops Certificate Audit

7

COP introduction

We had over 80,000 participants enrolled in last course

Over 80% were in business; not students, but running real operations

As a professor, I believe that everyone benefits from the academic content of my course

This is supported by our first offering

But: the needs for somebody running an operation and a student new to the area are different- different reason to be here in this course- desire for clean theory vs desire to change a business tomorrow- Student might be better at math / formulas- Some of the formulas might not easily fit the world of business

8

Coursera Operations Challenge

Source: submissions from the Coursera Operations Challenge

9

The Coursera Operations Project – My Vision

Take this to the next levelA project with multiple deliverables that mirror a true operations improvement projectPeer feed-back along the wayCommunity level problem solving on some of the things that emerge as common problemsThe reward: we will rewrite the books of business; almost like a Wikipedia, this will generate a library of operations projects across industries and across the world

So, here is how it works

10

The Coursera Operations Project – Outline

Generic Process – should work across industriesLinked to the course / course materialFor each milestone, I will provide you with detailed instructionsExample calculations for two local businesses here in Philadelphia

Problem Solving step Question to be answered Potential toolsSense the problem broadly What type of operational problems do I have

access to?Where do I sense a performance gap?

Four dimensions of performanceEfficient frontier

Collect data to analyze the status quo

What does the process flow look like? Process flow diagramI, R, T

Define a specific outcome you want to achieve and define the performance gap

What specific outcome measure are you trying to improve? What does success look like?What is the status quo; does this measure vary over time? How far are you from the target?

Three system inhibitors; variability lectureLabor content; Flow time efficiency (% value add time from customers perspective)

Consider opportunities for improvement

What are the inhibitors to improvement?What alternatives are there to the current process flow?

Where are waste, variability, and inflexibility?Responsiveness module: service blue printStaffing to demand / takt timeMake-to-stockCreate flexibility

Understand the benefits of improvements;Pick one opportunity and create a small experiment

What would be the value of an improvementWhat can you learn about the most promising alternative in 1 day and with $100?

KPI treeProblem solving loop (from problem, to abstraction, now back to reality)

11

The Coursera Operations Project – An Alternative Way of Taking the Course

With Course Project Without Course Project

With HW/Exam With Distinction Ops Certificate

Without HW/Exam Ops Certificate Audit

12

Course Outline / Grading / HomeworkObjective of the course: Understanding and improving business processes

Performance measuresHow-to

Mix of industries: healthcare, restaurants, automotive, computers, call centers, banking, etc

Course OutlineIntroduction (0.5 weeks)1. Process analysis (1.5 weeks)2. Productivity3. Product variety 4. Responsiveness 5. Quality

Requirements / Prerequisites: There are no prerequisites for the course

Some modules require statistical knowledge (standard deviation, normal distribution)

Homework assignmentsOne large assignment after each module (five assignments); 10% each

Final exam with questions from all modules; 50%

13

Text Book

Course book Cachon, Gerard, Christian Terwiesch, Matching Supply with Demand: An Introduction to Operations Management, 3rd edition, Irwin - McGraw Hill, 2012 (ISBN 978-0073525204, 507 pages)

14

Personal IntroductionMBA core course: Operations Management: Quality and Productivity

Taught ~ 60 times ~ 4000 MBA students

McKinsey Ops Practice ~ 500 new associates

Research: Operations Management, focus on Healthcare Management

Innovation tournaments and contests

Christian Terwiesch

terwiesch@wharton.upenn.edu

Andrew M. Heller Professor at the Wharton SchoolSenior Fellow Leonard Davis Institute for Health Economics

573 Jon M. Huntsman Hall Philadelphia, PA 19104.6366

15

COP 4 FROSTBITE

16

Milestone 4 Slide 1: Action Plan for COP 4 Fulfillment

FROSTBITE is a successful cupcake business but it suffer from Waste,

Mismatching between Supply & Demand and Variability of both

Demand& Supply.

Taken into consideration the output of COP 1,2& 3 regarding

FROSTBITE

I have started to analyze the last output of COP 3, inserted it as Slide 3.

After investigating the Process Improving chances regarding Capacity

Increasing, Dealing with Variability in Demand and the Inflexibility Slides

4& 5 represents Some Improvement Ideas classified into three categories

Capacity, Variability and Flexibility.

17

Milestone 4 Slide 2: Action Plan for COP4 Fulfillment(Cont.)

The TOP FOUR IDEAS& EXPECTED CHANGES are presented in

Milestone 4 Slide 6.

Fruitful Discussion have been held with Farida Owner of FROSTBITE

regarding the best IDEAS to be implemented. Summary of Discussions

is presented in Milestone 4 Slide 7.

A Comparison Table between the TOP IDEAS regarding the

Applicability and the Effect of each Idea have been presented in

Milestone 4 Slide 7.

18

SINITIAL S1 S2 S3 S4Arrivals Arrival Orders Ordes/w 4.0000 3.0000 3.0000 6.0000 6.0000 Interarrival time (a) day 1.7500 2.3333 2.3333 1.1667 1.1667 ST-DEV(a) 1.7500 2.3333 2.3333 1.1667 1.1667 CV(a) 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Service m 1.0000 1.0000 2.0000 2.0000 3.0000 Processing Time (p) day 2.0000 2.0000 2.0000 2.0000 2.0000 ST-DEV(p) 2.0000 2.0000 2.0000 2.0000 2.0000 CV(p) day 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 (CV^2+CV^2)/2 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Queue p/m 2.0000 2.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.6667 Utilization U=P/m*a 1.1429 0.8571 0.4286 0.8571 0.5714 1-U -0.1429 0.1429 0.5714 0.1429 0.4286 2*(m+1) 4.0000 4.0000 6.0000 6.0000 8.0000 SRoot 2.0000 2.0000 2.4495 2.4495 2.8284 (Sroot-1)^ 1.0000 1.0000 1.4495 1.4495 1.8284 U^ 1.1429 0.8571 0.2928 0.7998 0.3594 T(q) (16.0000) 12.0000 0.5125 5.5983 0.5591 Total Time (Tq+p) (14.0000) 14.0000 2.5125 7.5983 2.5591 SINITIAL Initial Data yielding Utilization > 1, hence excludedS1 Reduction of Arrivals rate from 4 Orders / week to 3, good utilization with long TqS2 Outsourcing additional server resulting in m=2, with accepted utilization and great

reducution in Tq and TS3 Is the response of S2 to doubled Demand yielding three times increase in TS4 Outsourcing another server on S3 improves total Time to the value of S2

Milestone 4 Slide 3: S C E N A R I O S for Impact of a and m on U and Tq

Comment

These Scenarios reflect :

“HOW THE OWNER CAN HANDLE THE THREE ENEMIES :WASTE (Under Utilization, …)

VARIABILITY (Fluctuating Demand, …)

INFLEXIBILITY : (Ignoring Outsourcing, …)

19

Milestone 4 Slide 4: SOME IMPROVEMENT IDEAS

CAPACITY:

Line balancing: The main reason for the process unbalance in FROSTBITE is the severe mismatching between Supply & Demand. Outsourcing will be very suitable in this context. Waste Reduction: Some clear waste reduction action can be

taken specially with the OPE of Farida & the OEE of the Oven (Milestone 3 Slides 4& 5). Reduce rework& scrap: Adding a Quality Control Node to the production line will decrease the rework& scrap Cupcakes.

VARIABILITY:

Pre-produce / make to stock: This can be done partially in order not to loose a wide area of customers that preferred fresh cupcakes. Good Demand Estimation can help.

20

Milestone 4 Slide 5: SOME IMPROVEMENT IDEAS (Cont.)

INFLEXIBILITY:

Outsourcing peak capacity: As mentioned above there is a severe mismatching between Supply & Demand. Sometimes there exist a high demand but Farida prefers to Close for yearly vacation or to stop working to take care of her baby (Adam).

Standardization: Producing a standard PRODUCT LIST that include the main specification of each product as well as the available alternatives will help solving the inflexibility problem. Spreading this LIST with the corresponding PRICE through FROSTBITE Facebook Site and other media will be good.

21

Milestone 4 Slide 6:TOP FOUR IDEAS & EXPECTED CHANGE Idea #1: Outsourcing peak capacity: Pre-contracted people will work as

parallel production line(s). This would help overcoming the severe mismatching between Supply & Demand as well as the supply and demand variability. (40% Improvement)

Idea #2: Offer some pre-made cupcake for “grab-and-go.” Made-to-stock cupcakes would help reduce product variability and thus reduce the waiting time Tq for customers who prefer a custom made-to-order cupcake that still go through the usual process, whereas customers who are in a rush could grab a pre-made cupcake and skip the usual process.

(15% Improvement and Tq will be decreased by ½ day).

Idea #3: Reduce rework& scrap: Adding a Quality Control Node to production line will decrease the rework& scrap Cupcakes(10%Improvement)

Idea #4: Waste Reduction: Some clear waste reduction action can be taken specially with the OPE of Farida & the OEE of the Oven (10% Improvement).

(Milestone 3 Slides 4& 5).

22

Milestone 4 Slide 7: DISCUSSIONS SUMMARY

There exist a seasonal high demand from the facebook site customers of FROSTBITE. There are only ONE production line.

The customers appreciate the quality of cupcakes.

Sometimes there are no demand. But almost the demand is greater than the supply. In the case of regularly satisfying the supply the demand can be 10 time greater.

There are major activities Farida the Owner give them higher priority to the extent that FROSTBITE stop production.

The main customers complaint are rejecting their Orders, then long waiting time for supply.

23

Milestone 4 Slide 8: Comparison table

Ease of implementation

Likely magnitude of impact

Outsourcing peak capacity

Medium: Needs to build& apply a Best Candidate Selection Model then contract.

Too High: overcoming mismatching between Supply & Demand and their variability. 40%

Pre-made cupcake Medium: Needs Quantitative Forecasting Model.

Medium: reduce the waiting time Tq 15%

Quality Control Node

Easy: Can be done immediately by same Operator

Low: decrease rework& scrap cupcakes . 10%

Waste ReductionMedium: Needs good Time Management to satisfy time constraints

Low: (10% Improvement).

24

COP 5 FROSTBITE

25

Milestone 5 Slide 1: Summary

FROSTBITE is a successful cupcake business. Pride themselves on their use of high-quality and all-natural ingredients. All of whom look to FROSTBITE not only for delicious cupcakes but also for both Performance & Conformance Quality, committed and speedy service. FROSTBITE suffers from Waste, Mismatching between Supply &

Demand and Variability of both Demand& Supply. Although Farida - the Owner and the unique professional – has a high demand she prefers to close for yearly vacation or to stop working to take care of family especially her baby Adam.

A severe mismatching between Supply & Demand becomes a fact.

Investigating the Process Improving chances, some Improvement Ideas classified into three categories: Capacity, Variability and Flexibility were introduced within COP 4.

TOP four Ideas with the expected changes & Comparison table were the output of COP 4 (next two Slides).

26

Milestone 5 Slide 2:TOP FOUR IDEAS & EXPECTED CHANGE Idea #1: Outsourcing peak capacity: Pre-contracted people will work as

parallel production line(s). This would help overcoming the severe mismatching between Supply & Demand as well as the supply and demand variability. (40% Improvement).

Idea #2: Offer some pre-made cupcake for “grab-and-go.” Made-to-stock cupcakes would help reduce product variability and thus reduce the waiting time Tq for customers who prefer a custom made-to-order cupcake that still go through the usual process, whereas customers who are in a rush could grab a pre-made cupcake and skip the usual process.

(15% Improvement and Tq will be decreased by ½ day).

Idea #3: Reduce rework& scrap: Adding a Quality Control Node to production line will decrease the rework& scrap Cupcakes(10%Improvement)

Idea #4: Waste Reduction: Some clear waste reduction action can be taken specially with the OPE of Farida & the OEE of the Oven (10% Improvement).

(Milestone 3 Slides 4& 5).

27

Milestone 5 Slide 3: Comparison table

Ease of implementation

Likely magnitude of impact

Outsourcing peak capacity

Medium: Needs to build& apply a Best Candidate Selection Model then contract.

Too High: overcoming mismatching between Supply & Demand and their variability. 40%

Pre-made cupcake Medium: Needs Quantitative Forecasting Model.

Medium: reduce the waiting time Tq 15%

Quality Control Node

Easy: Can be done immediately by same Operator

Low: decrease rework& scrap cupcakes . 10%

Waste ReductionMedium: Needs good Time Management to satisfy time constraints

Low: (10% Improvement).

28

Milestone 5 Slide 4: ACTION PLAN Idea #1: “Outsourcing peak capacity” was the winner to be implemented

within COP 5. This idea will help overcoming the severe Mismatching between Supply & Demand as well as the supply and demand Variability. Also will give Farida a Flexibility in taking care of her family, especially Adam and her successful business FROSTBITE.

Action Plan consists of Seven main steps: (1) Building The Best Candidates Selection Model to identify to whom will

be the Outsourcing. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) technique was adopted.

(2) Performing an experiment to produce a specific order concurrently at m Outsource Stations. (3) Distributing the order to n favorite customers with an appreciation letter

as well as an evaluation sheet to be collected. (4) Evaluating phase ended with a list of The Best Candidates. (5) Applying the results of the experiment to Business Process Model. (6) Sensitivity Analysis. (7) Contracting : Contracts have been held with the winners. Refer to: Thomas L. Saaty “Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process” ; Int. J. Services Sciences, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2008

29

Milestone 5 Slide 5: Building The Best Candidates Selection Model

The main objective of this model is to allocate candidates that have the capability to simulate at least Farida’s performance with her favorite customers, therefore not to loose any of them. Then to expand the business with the same performance.

Selection Criteria are: Residence, Availability, Commitment, Performance & Conformance Quality.

Analytic Hierarchy Process AHP technique developed by Thomas L. Saaty was adopted. Simply AHP:

Provide judgments about relative importance of each criterion, then Specify a preference on each criterion for each decision alternative. The output is a prioritized ranking indicating the overall preference for each

of the decision Alternative.

Next Slides shows the results the Model : The priority vector showing the priority of Alt(j), j=1,m against each

Criteria (Residence, Availability, Commitment& Quality). Pairwise Comparison for the Four Criteria. The four criteria in terms of overall goals.

30

Milestone 5 Slide 6: Estimating the Consistency Ratio "CR"

The most powerful feature of the Analytic Hierarchy Process AHP that have been adopted is Estimating the Consistency Ratio "CR“

Dividing the elements of the vector of weighted sums obtained by corresponding priority value, Compute the average of the values found

(λmax). Compute Consistency Index: CI= ((λmax)-n)/n-1. Then Compute Consistency Ratio CR=CI/RI, RI is Random Index. In our Model we have succeeded to obtain:

All CR Values are Less than or =0.11 (our Accepted Consistency level).

CRITERIA Residence Availability Commitment Quality Criteria's Weight

CR 0.04255 0.00384 0.00154 0.1021 0.01759

31

Milestone 5 Slide 7: Priority Vectors for Alternatives

Overall Goal

Best Candidates Selection Model

Criteria Residence Availability Commitment QualityFinal Result

Criteria's Weight 0.112 0.166 0.139 0.583

Decision

Alternatives

Nouran 0.6590.074

0.4960.083

0.3680.051

0.4230.247 0.454

Rehab 0.1860.021

0.2670.044

0.0710.010

0.2270.132 0.208

Shimaa 0.0770.009

0.0830.014

0.3680.051

0.2270.132 0.206

Mariam 0.0770.009

0.1540.026

0.1930.027

0.1230.071 0.133

1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000

32

To assess the quality, each of the four outsourcing candidates was asked to bake samples of 3 different cupcake flavors: Chocolate, Vanilla, and Red Velvet. These samples were distributed to 3 'special' FROSTBITE customers in order to assess their similarity in taste to the original FROSTBITE cupcake.

Each candidate baked 6 Chocolate, 6 Vanilla, and 6 Red Velvet Cupcakes. This totaled 72 cupcakes. The total cost of the sample was 150LE.

Milestone 5 Slide 8: Experiment, Distribution& Evaluation

33

Milestone 5 Slide 9:

Experiment, Distribution& Evaluation

Each customer received 24 cupcakes of sample. This included 2 of each flavor by each of the four candidates. The cupcake samples were color coded with the cupcake wrapper.

They then had to give each sample through a pairwise comparison a score from 1 to 9 based on the following criteria:

Nouran: White wrapper

Rehab: Brown wrapper

Shimaa: Pink wrapper

Mariam: Blue Wrapper

Refer to: Thomas L. Saaty “Decision making with the analytic hierarchy

process” ; Int. J. Services Sciences, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2008

Intensity Definition

1 Equal Importance

2 Weak or slight

3 Moderate importance

4 Moderate plus

5 Strong importance

6 Strong plus

7 Very strong

8 Very, very strong

9 Extreme importance

34

SINITIAL S1 S2 S3 S4Arrivals Arrival Orders Ordes/w 4.0000 3.0000 3.0000 6.0000 6.0000 Interarrival time (a) day 1.7500 2.3333 2.3333 1.1667 1.1667 ST-DEV(a) 1.7500 2.3333 2.3333 1.1667 1.1667 CV(a) 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Service m 1.0000 1.0000 2.0000 2.0000 3.0000 Processing Time (p) day 2.0000 2.0000 2.0000 2.0000 2.0000 ST-DEV(p) 2.0000 2.0000 2.0000 2.0000 2.0000 CV(p) day 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 (CV^2+CV^2)/2 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Queue p/m 2.0000 2.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.6667 Utilization U=P/m*a 1.1429 0.8571 0.4286 0.8571 0.5714 1-U -0.1429 0.1429 0.5714 0.1429 0.4286 2*(m+1) 4.0000 4.0000 6.0000 6.0000 8.0000 SRoot 2.0000 2.0000 2.4495 2.4495 2.8284 (Sroot-1)^ 1.0000 1.0000 1.4495 1.4495 1.8284 U^ 1.1429 0.8571 0.2928 0.7998 0.3594 T(q) (16.0000) 12.0000 0.5125 5.5983 0.5591 Total Time (Tq+p) (14.0000) 14.0000 2.5125 7.5983 2.5591 SINITIAL Initial Data yielding Utilization > 1, hence excludedS1 Reduction of Arrivals rate from 4 Orders / week to 3, good utilization with long TqS2 Outsourcing additional server resulting in m=2, with accepted utilization and great

reduction in Tq and TS3 Is the response of S2 to doubled Demand yielding three times increase in TS4 Outsourcing another server on S3 improves total Time to the value of S2

Milestone 5 Slide 10: Performance Improvement

Comment

These Scenarios reflect :

“HOW THE OWNER CAN HANDLE THE THREE ENEMIES :WASTE (Under Utilization, …)

VARIABILITY (Fluctuating Demand, …)

INFLEXIBILITY : (Ignoring Outsourcing, …)

This Slide was introduced within COP 3

35

Milestone 5 Slide 11:

Financial Gain of Experiment

m=1 m=2 m=3 m=4 m-5 Units

Avr Revenue/order 644.76 644.76 644.76 644.76 644.76 $/order

Avr Cost/Order 296.48 296.48 296.48 296.48 296.48 $/cust

Wage 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 $/hr

Fixed cost/Server 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 $/hr

Number of Active Servers m 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00

Activity time at Bottleneck 16.00 16.00 16.00 16.00 16.00 hr/order

Process Capacity 0.06 0.13 0.19 0.25 0.31 order/hr

Demand Rate 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 order/hr

Flow Rate Min(Demand,Cap) 0.06 0.13 0.19 0.25 0.25 order/hr

Revenue =FR*Avr Rev/order 40.30 80.60 120.89 161.19 161.19 $/hr

Wages 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 $/hr

Fixed cost 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 $/hr

COGS food cost= FR*cost/order 18.53 37.06 55.59 74.12 74.12

$/hr

Total Cost 28.53 57.06 85.59 114.12 124.12 $/hr

Profit 11.77 23.54 35.30 47.07 37.07 $/hr

Profit Increase Ratio 50.0% 66.7% 75.0% 68.3%

Comments: Four servers m=4

is the matching point of demand and capacity, where we can fulfill all the customer’s orders.

Increasing servers improved profit by 50.0% ,66.7% ,75.0%.

So that the yearly profit can be increased by 75% BUT These high percentages are under the condition that the demand reaches 0.25 order/hour and having enough servers to fulfill all orders.

36

Milestone 5 Slide 12: Conclusion As stated the main problem is severe Mismatch between Supply &

Demand as well as the supply and demand Variability and Flexibility. The experiment of how to outsource the peak capacity such that

FROSTBITE can fulfill maxim number of orders without loosing customer loyalty.

After the experiment we have achieved a drastic change in both: Performance Improvement: Minimizing the waiting time, maximizing

flexibility (Slide 10). Financial Gain: Increasing servers improved profit by

50.0% ,66.7% ,75.0% (Slide 11).So that the yearly profit can be increased by 75% BUT These high percentages are under the condition that the demand reaches 0.25 order/hour and having enough servers to fulfill all orders.

The mentioned improvements were achieved though an experiment characterized by: CHEAPNESS (Only 150 L.E), FAST (1 Week), FOCUSED (On the best

candidate selection), and INFORMATIVE (Determining the best optimal operation setup).

37

The Change: Introducing four standby servers that can work with at

least the same efficiency as the main server FROSTBITE. When the demand becomes greater than the main

server’s capacity the orders will be directed to the other servers that match the new requirement and so on.

Determining the matching point of demand and capacity, where we can fulfill all the customer’s orders.

Milestone 5 Slide 13: Conclusion(Cont.)

38

39

40

APPRECIATION

To Prof. Christian Terwiesch:

“ My impression as a professional in the field that the six weeks course: An Introduction to Operations Management, taught by Prof. Christian Terwiesch through Coursera is the best course I have ever seen.”Dr. Talaat RefaatA Systems, DSS, Operations Management, Lean& IT Professional https://www.linkedin.com/in/talaatrefaat

41

42

CONCLUSION We are proud to publish our success story of a family

TEAM / FAT. We finished our story within only 2-3 months achieving our target via two aspects:

Theoretically and Academically by obtaining maximum grades as well as Statements of Accomplishment.

Performance Improvement as well as Financial Gain: Increasing servers improved profit by 50.0% ,66.7% ,75.0% according to the outsourcing Model.

If you are interested or have questions, you can link via:

http://www.slideshare.net/DrTalaatRefaat/edit_my_uploads

https://www.linkedin.com/in/talaatrefaat

Other links you can find at:

https://about.me/talaatrefaat