Learning Goal: I’m working on a management writing question and need an explanation and answer to help me learn.
Planning for the Surge: How Do Amazon, UPS, and FedEx Manage Peak Seasons? (adapted from Principles of Management, Rice University, OpenStax) Not always so well. In 2013, both FedEx and UPS underestimated holiday demand, and with bad weather conditions as well, struggled to deliver packages as promised. Since then, both carriers have worked hard to keep adequate resources available to handle the end-of-year upsurge. But in 2014, UPS overcompensated and had too much capacity, once again damaging profitability (Livengood, 2017). In June 2017, UPS announced that it would be adding a surcharge to some peak season rates. According to the UPS website, “During the 2016 holiday season, the company’s average daily volume exceeded 30 million packages on more than half of the available shipping days. In contrast, on an average non¬peak day, the company ships more than 19 million packages” (UPS Establishes New Peak Shipping Charge, 2017). The rate for the 2017 peak season would apply to select services and to oversize shipments, primarily (UPS Establishes New Peak Shipping Charge 2017). Analysts see the surcharge as a signal that UPS is the rate setter in parcel delivery. Such an assessment is not surprising given that the increase in parcel delivery as an outcome of increased e-commerce is seen as a core driver of earnings for UPS (Franck, 2017). Second-ranked FedEx, in contrast, announced that it would not follow suit but instead would “forgo most holiday surcharges on home deliveries this year” (Schlangenstein, 2017). The surcharges levied by UPS are aimed primarily at small shippers, not the larger contract shippers. By not adding a seasonal surcharge, FedEx might hope to capture sales from individuals and small businesses that are deterred by the UPS surcharge (Schlangenstein, 2017). Kevin Sterling, a Seaport Global Holdings analyst, believes that FedEx has the existing capacity to absorb additional ground shipments. “[FedEx is] going to let UPS be Scrooge at Christmas” (Schlangenstein, 2017). UPS already has a contract with Amazon, the de facto behemoth of online shopping, for normal shipping, leaving room for FedEx to pick up the slack during the holiday rush (Schlangenstein, 2017). In contrast, UPS reports that the additional charge is needed to offset the costs of additional resources necessary to achieve expected upsurges in capacity. UPS spokesperson Glenn Zaccara commented, “UPS’s peak season pricing positions the company to be appropriately compensated for the high value we provide at a time when the company must double daily delivery volume for six to seven consecutive weeks to meet customer demands” (Schlangenstein, 2017). With or without surcharges, price structures at both companies strive to discourage shipment of heavy, odd-sized, or oversized packages because such packages won’t flow through either company’s sorting systems and require special handling. All the same, FedEx has seen a 240 percent increase in such shipments over the last 10 years, which make up roughly 10 percent of all packages shipped using its ground services. And although FedEx is not adding a holiday surcharge, per se, it has added charges for packages that require extra handling, particularly shipments between November 20 through December 24 (Schlangenstein, 2017). And the global pandemic of 2020 didn’t help the situation. “Salesforce … says global digital orders continued to grow after Cyber Monday (Nov. 30), peaking to 71% growth year over year on Dec. 5 before slowing down on Dec. 7” (Evans, 2020). One logistics-saving innovation continued expansion during 2020 to help save valuable last-mile transportation resources: curb-side pickup. This ecommerce tool leverages on-line ordering with safe, social-distancing customer pickup. “Retailers with curbside pickup particularly benefitted, Salesforce adds. Digital sales Dec. 1–Dec. 14 grew 52% year over year for U.S. retailers that offered curbside, drive-thru and in-store pickup options” (Evans, 2020). Increased customer demand for holiday shipping created the perfect-storm, with the pandemic drastically hitting transportation supply at the same time. “Nearly 19,000 of the [United States Postal Service’s] 644,000 workers are under quarantine after testing positive for the virus or after a close exposure, according to the American Postal Workers Union” (Bogage & Denham, 2020). It wasn’t unexpected but it was rather unprecedented when “FedEx and UPS enacted restrictions on large-volume retail shippers in early December, according to industry tracking firm ShipMatrix. For the week of Dec. 6, FedEx delivered 93.9 percent of its parcels on time, UPS delivered 96.1 percent, and the Postal Service, 87.5 percent” (Bogage & Denham, 2020). To many, however, the number of lost and delayed packages seemed even greater. It appears that Amazon’s investments for additional in-house personnel, trucks, sorting centers and even cargo aircraft paid off in 2020, as they claimed Prime Members could still shop for most items through Dec 23 or even Dec 24 (Steiner, 2020). When next day just isn’t good enough, many consumers are now willing to pay for two-hour delivery! The year 2021 is even worse. Case Study Questions: (edited from original text)
Guidelines: This assignment is considered a complete Business Case Study. Therefore, your report should be written as a formal business report of your analysis.
Sources: |
|
Due Date | |
Nov 6, 2022 11:59 PM |
Hide Rubrics
Rubric Name: Planning rubric
Print Rubric
Criteria | Outstanding | Commendable | Acceptable | Marginal | Failing | Missing/Unacceptable | Criterion Score | |
Introduction (10%) | 2 points
Clear description of of events. Written as a business problem statement. Ends with an overview of what follows. |
1.7 points
Complete description provided. Clear presentation of the business issue/problem & some details that will be used in the analysis. Overview of the sections that will follow. |
1.5 points
Description is somewhat complete; however, more depth &/or length are needed. Lacking details or overview. |
1.3 points
Brief with some depth, fails to meet some criteria. Lacking details and missing overview |
1 point
Some description provided but lacking major details of the case and including unrelated information. |
0 points | Score of Introduction (10%),
/ 2 |
|
Vision and Mission (15%) | 3 points
In-depth analysis of question. Exceptional integration of the business case and course material. All components of vision and mission included. |
2.55 points
In-depth analysis of question. Good integration of the business case and course material. All components of vision and mission included. |
2.25 points
Overview analysis of question. Limited integration of the business case and course material. Many components of vision and mission included. |
1.95 points
Minimal analysis of question. Limited integration of the business case and course material. Only a few components of vision and mission included. |
1.5 points
Little analysis of question. No integration of the business case and course material. Only some of the components of vision and mission included. |
0 points | Score of Vision and Mission (15%),
/ 3 |
|
SWOT (15%) | 3 points
In-depth analysis of question. Exceptional integration of the business case and course material. SWOT items are clear, appropriate, and insightful to the business case. |
2.55 points
In-depth analysis of question. Good integration of the business case and course material. SWOT items are clear, appropriate, and insightful to the business case. |
2.25 points
Overview analysis of question. Limited integration of the business case and course material. SWOT items are somewhat clear, appropriate, and insightful to the business case. |
1.95 points
Minimal analysis of question. Limited integration of the business case and course material. SWOT items are not very clear, appropriate, nor insightful to the business case. |
1.5 points
Little analysis of question. No integration of the business case and course material. Self-assessment is limited. SWOT items are not directly related to the business case. |
0 points | Score of SWOT (15%),
/ 3 |
|
Planning (25%) | 5 points
In-depth analysis of question. Exceptional integration of the business case and course material. Planning steps are all included and directly relate to the business case. Recommendations are insightful. |
4.25 points
Planning steps are all included and directly relate to the business case. Recommendations are somewhat insightful. |
3.75 points
Planning steps are mostly included and directly relate to the business case. Recommendations are somewhat insightful. |
3.25 points
Planning steps are all included and directly relate to the business case. Planning steps are limited and/or do not directly relate to the business case. Recommendations are not very insightful. |
2.5 points
Planning steps are all included and directly relate to the business case. Planning steps are poorly explained and not very related to the business case. Recommendations are not very insightful. |
0 points | Score of Planning (25%),
/ 5 |
|
Conclusion (5%) | 1 point
Clear summary of key points and recommendations. Ends with strong action statement. |
0.85 points
Summary of all key points and recommendations. Ending isn’t action or big-picture. |
0.75 points
Summary of most key points and recommendations. Ending isn’t action or big-picture. |
0.65 points
Summary of some key points and some recommendations. Ending isn’t action or big-picture. |
0.5 points
Summary of some key points. Missing recommendations. Order is not the same as the report. Ending isn’t action or big-picture. |
0 points | Score of Conclusion (5%),
/ 1 |
|
Critical Thinking and Support (10%) | 2 points
A clear, logical connection is made between the data, analysis & recommendations. Claims are supported by reputable sources, both from class and external to the course material. |
1.7 points
A logical connection is made between the data, analysis & recommendations, but may not be clear at all times. A few class and external sources are used. All are reputable. |
1.5 points
Most of the time a logical connection is made between the data, analysis & recommendations, but may not be clear at all times. Only a few sources are used, or all from the course material. Not all sources are reputable. |
1.3 points
Several logical discrepancies are made, and several points may not be clear. Only a couple of sources are used, or none are reputable. |
1 point
Many discrepancies are note or no connection between data and analysis, or between analysis and recommendations are noted. Only 1 class reference is used, or none are reputable. |
0 points | Score of Critical Thinking and Support (10%),
/ 2 |
|
APA Guidelines and Organization (10%) | 2 points
|
1.7 points
Cover Page, title, headings & page numbers properly formatted. Questions used as main heading, plus Introduction & Conclusion. Correct quoting, paraphrasing, style & formatting followed. |
1.5 points
Missing Cover Page, title or pages numbers. Questions not repeated as headings. Missing some in-text citations &/or quoting/para- phrasing errors. |
1.3 points
Missing Cover Page, or title, page number and headings. Questions are not repeated as headings. APA Style guidelines not followed in many areas. |
1 point
Some structure in formatting is consistent in the document, but not in accordance with APA guidelines. Report does not flow with the questions. |
0 points | Score of APA Guidelines and Organization (10%),
/ 2 |
|
Grammar, Spelling & Mechanics (10%) | 2 points
No errors. Paragraphs and sentences are properly structured to promote understanding by the reader. |
1.7 points
Few minor errors or one major error. Paragraphs and sentences are properly structured to promote understanding by the reader. |
1.5 points
Some minor errors or a couple of major errors. Most paragraphs and most sentences are properly structured to promote understanding by the reader. |
1.3 points
Several errors. Lacking paragraph structure to support flow. Sentence structure in mostly correct. |
1 point
Many errors. Some sentences difficult to understand due to errors. |
0 points | Score of Grammar, Spelling & Mechanics (10%),
/ 2 |
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.
Read moreEach paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.
Read moreThanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.
Read moreYour email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.
Read moreBy sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.
Read more
Recent Comments