Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorRoy E. Welsch and Qi D. Van Eikema Hommes.en_US
dc.contributor.authorJoyce, Michael (Michael Sagar)en_US
dc.contributor.otherLeaders for Global Operations Program.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2013-09-24T19:36:15Z
dc.date.available2013-09-24T19:36:15Z
dc.date.copyright2013en_US
dc.date.issued2013en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/81002
dc.descriptionThesis (M.B.A.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Sloan School of Management; and, (S.M.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Engineering Systems Division; in conjunction with the Leaders for Global Operations Program at MIT, 2013.en_US
dc.descriptionCataloged from PDF version of thesis.en_US
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references (p. 60).en_US
dc.description.abstractWhy do some new initiatives fail while others succeed? This thesis attempts to answer this complex question by investigating the failure of a defect tracking initiative at Amazon and examining how a reintroduction of the process succeeded. Amazon is a very complex and dynamic organization that has both a corporate headquarters as well as a regional fulfillment centers. In distributed organizations like this, successfully implementing network-wide process improvements can be critical to the success of the business. Consequently, Amazon is constantly attempting to roll-out new improvement efforts. Unfortunately, some of these initiatives fail to reach their full potential. Common suggestions for the failure of initiatives include lack of management support, poor technology, limited communication, or lack of vision. This thesis argues that while these suggestions are valid and important when designing a process, these alone cannot by themselves show whether the initiative is destined for success or doomed to failure. To better understand the success rate of the initiative, one must do a deep dive into the incentive structure, motivations, and perceptions of all stakeholders involved in a new process. In 2010, Amazon introduced a defect tracking tool. Adoption grew during the first five months, but declined rapidly during the second half of the year. In 2012, 1 reintroduced the same defect tracking tool but made a number of minor changes to the process. Over the course of 2012, the project resulted in nearly 300,000 defects and nearly one million dollars in vendor chargebacks. More than 50,000 defects were filed in the month of December alone, compared to less than 4,000 in the month January. Approximately 1000 people used the tool at more than 30 different sites. This thesis illustrates how system dynamics modeling of the Amazon defect tracking process can be an effective tool for a more complete understanding of adoption or abandonment rates. At a broader level, this thesis discusses methods for designing new processes or modifying existing ones so they are more likely to succeed.en_US
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityby Michael Joyce.en_US
dc.format.extent60 p.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherMassachusetts Institute of Technologyen_US
dc.rightsM.I.T. theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission.en_US
dc.rights.urihttp://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582en_US
dc.subjectSloan School of Management.en_US
dc.subjectEngineering Systems Division.en_US
dc.subjectLeaders for Global Operations Program.en_US
dc.titleDesign and process solutions for decreasing vendor defectsen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.description.degreeS.M.en_US
dc.description.degreeM.B.A.en_US
dc.contributor.departmentLeaders for Global Operations Program at MITen_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Engineering Systems Division
dc.contributor.departmentSloan School of Management
dc.identifier.oclc857789524en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record