Critical Factors for Evaluating Part Suppliers－Case of China Motor Company

• Main Authors: Ho-Nien Hsieh, 謝鶴年
• Other Authors: Yi-chung Hu
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2008
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/95875180941674636038

碩士 === 中原大學 === 企業管理研究所 === 96 === Since 2002, when Taiwan was accessed into the WTO, the tariff of import cars decreased annually, which has resulted in the growth in market share of imported cars but negatively declining the sales of locally manufactured cars. In addition, the cost down strategies from Europe, US, and global manufacturers has forced them to source new suppliers from all over the world, whilst changing the nature of supply chain management due to the increasing power of suppliers. Technological enhancement and brand creation has become the only choice of strategy for the Taiwan automotive industry for its sustainability. Therefore, it is imperative to rethink the integration of part suppliers in the throughout the supply chain and building their awareness of car production so they may streamline their strategy together with manufacturers in creating a competitive long term win-win relationship. Established in 1969, China Motors has maintained a strong relationship with part suppliers with its predecessors. After their 2nd generations are taking over the business, a part of them have different operation strategy. China motors is not their main customer any more, instead of is the foreign motors maker. This has resulted in the need for China Motors to re-develop new part suppliers as their medium to long- term strategy. This research aims to analyse selection criterions for part supplier and to establish a methodology for selection standards in support of China Motor’s strategies in formulating new strategic corporate partnerships for sustainable future development. By collecting the related records, documents and expert’s opinions to set up supplier evaluation hierarchical structure, it includes five factors, they are Cost, Delivery, Service, Quality, Technical Capability and 17 of criterions. By collecting the manager and supervisor’s weighting and conformity analysis for the supplier evaluation critial factor’s structure and criterion, we can offer the result as decision maker’s reference. The result shows that the senior management rank “Quality”, “Technical Capability” and “Cost”, whereas departmental directors rank “Quality”, “Cost” and “Technical Capability” in order of importance.Both group members concur the importance of “Quality” factors in the future own brands or current market competitiveness.Senior management value “Technical Capability” higher because senior managers place more emphasis on future sustained development.However, departmental directors believe focus on immediate profitability and price competitiveness as more important, and thus selected “Cost” as their second factor of importance. Overall, both the senior management and departmental directors all value “Quality”, “Technical Capability” and “Cost” as their top three important factors, which shows a consistency in evaluation structure in suppliers selection.