Harley Davidson Motor Company - Case Study Example

Harley Davidson Motor Company Harley Davidson Motor Company (HDMC) is a well known American motorcycle company has competed against numerous Asian companies for decades. It has effectively has asserted its brand name in the industry through uncompromising dedication to quality and loyalty in upholding traditions in the motorcycling business. But as time goes by, it has learned that to survive an ever demanding market it should not only continuously improve on its systems, one should be able to transform into something more suitable to the need and wants of the producers and consumers alike. And as changes go there are always internal considerations when trying to improve or transform systems into something that better serves its needs and purpose. This is explicitly pointed out in the case presented by Austin et al. (2003) in his paper on Harley Davidson’s Enterprise Software Selection. This paper will look on the In 1996, under Garry Berryman’s supervision, the purchasing organization of the Harley Davidson Motor Company (HDMC) have began development of Supply Management Strategy (SMS), a system which ensures that the company’s productivity increases by having the correct quality supplies on time by treating suppliers as an extension of the company itself. () In this effect the HDCM, through long and rigorous evaluations of proposals and standoffs with the approving committee, have opted to form a team to select the appropriate software provider to enable SMS within the company. Austin et al. () provided two sets of data in his account of the selection process. One set of data consisted of the self-assessed rating of functionality of the software of the top 3 providers being taken into consideration for partnership. The other consisted of a qualitative data, factors highlighting the provider’s latent understanding of HDMC’s values and needs, evaluated by the selection team. The self assessed rating of the providers showed very competitive scores between the three top software providers being taken into consideration. Based on their ratings, Provider 2 had the greatest potential for selection as a partner by Harley Davidson. Provider 2 has about 98.69%, Provider 3 with 96.83% while Provider 1 falls short with only 93.44% rating. Simply looking into this data one would be inclined to the idea of selecting Provider 2 because of its high self assessed rating. However this presents a highly complicated dilemma concerning the viability information gathered. Although it may seem that all three providers are competent and capable to impart above 90% functionality of their respective software, it should be noted that the data provided in this ratings were self assessed. Given the non-discreet motive of being selected as the partner software provider of Harley Davidson will affect the presentation of these self assessment as all these providers are motivated to close the deal. False claims of compatibility or last minute modifications to the software’s functionality might have been done just to “fit” the requirements of Harley Davidson’s systems at the moment. This could jeopardize the company and the partnership in the long run for these short notice alterations to the software could prove to be ineffective in maintaining the system itself because it hasn’t been stress tested by the end users. This could mean more down time which requires a highly competent technical support system which will not be so much of a problem if the provider that would be selected had one. This situation will also be true in case of false claims during self assessment still there will be “trust issues” if and when these false claims come to light, and this issue is one thing that you do not want in any partnership. It should also be noted that the level of this rating data would only measure the provider’s software compatibility and functionality to the Harley Davidson system of Supply Management Strategy. It does not fully disclose the software’s efficiency in the long run, neither does it present the provider’s potential for a true partnership. Based on the modified, quantized matrix of the qualitative data provided in the paper (), Provider 1 had the highest score among the three. This is based on the weight of the 16 factors taken into consideration in assessing the quality of the provider. I have assigned the weight of each factor based on the needs and values of Harley Davidson Motor Company as stated in the exhibit 8. The Harley Davidson Motor Company values the truth, fairness in business, integrity and reliability through keeping promises and intellectual curiosity; on the other hand it needs to keep an eye on the quality of its products, participation of its partners, productivity of its employees, being flexible to the market and its cash flow efficiency. The assigned weight of each factor are as follows: Out of the box Fit and Cost – 1; Platform Portability – 2; Research and Development, Financial Availability, Number of Partner Providers included in Solution, and Manufacturing Experience – 3; Training Approach, Implementation/ Education/ Change Management Methodology, Technical Support Offerings, and Web Functionality "to go" – 4; and Long Term Relationship Potential, Understanding Harley's Requirements, Enabling the SMS, Overall Functionality, and Architecture Compatibility – 5. Taking the assigned weight into calculating the value of the qualitative data, Provider 1 scored the highest with 262 points (91.93% rating), Provider 2 came in second with 256 (89.82% rating), while Provider 3 came in last with a total of 202 points, (70.88% rating). A more obvious analysis can also be done directly without assigning weight into the factors. Based on the instructions provided, with the respective qualitative rating set at: L - 1, ML - 2, M - 3, MH - 4, H – 5, the calculated value for Provider 1 will be 73 points, Provider 2 with 69 points and Provider 3 with 57 points. Calculated perfect rating would be at 80 points which translated the scores of Providers 1, 2 and 3 into 91.25%, 86.25%, 71.25% ratings respectively. Through these calculations it has become clear that Provider 1 have the highest rating even without assigning weights to the factors. In my opinion, at the level of data provided in the article and the quantified assessment of qualitative data provided, the provider with the highest score under the qualitative matrix should be chosen as a partner software provider for this data substantiates the claim of the software company that they are able to support the system of Harley Davidson according to their needs and direction. The qualitative evaluation of the provider gives insight to the would-be relationship between the two companies. A company being able to provide what is needed and overtime learn to tailor its product to the needs of its partner is exactly what HDMC is going for. Harley Davidson Motor Company should not compromise the quality of its software partner just because the software of Provider 2 had a 98.69% self-assessed rating. It should look forward to a supportive companion that will be able to cope up with the challenges and learn from its short comings. The selection process of for the Harley Davidson Motor Company Enterprise Software appeared to be solid enough to effectively pick out the best provider among its short list of prospective partners. Despite its very detailed description of each provider’s advantage and disadvantages that the data provided in my point of view, a third set of data should be included in the decision making. I propose a data based on the trial run focusing on the end user preferences and feedback. This third data set might take longer to acquire compared to the two sets initially provided but it will be a crucial deciding factor with regards to selecting the most suitable software partnership. It can be considered as a “tie-breaker” for Providers that fall short in the other criteria and step up on the other. By supplying a third data set, it will also enable the selection group to evaluate the provider’s performance across several sets and levels of scrutiny. The process of building and transforming Supply Management Strategy into reality within the HDCM took significantly long time and had gone through numerous evaluations to establish its validity as a system. This should also be reflected upon the relationship that will be founded between the HDMC and the partner software provider. Works Cited Austin, Robert D., Deborah Sole and Mark J. Cotteleer. “Harley Davidson Motor Company: Enterprise Software Selection.” Harvard Business School. (2003): 600-606. Print. Read More