Samsung Electronics: Company Profile And Market Position

Samsung Electronics Business Units

Samsung is a multinational company dealing with a variety of products and services. Established in 1938 with its headquarters in South Korea, it has become one of the most innovative companies globally (Dudovskiy 2017). It is by far the largest company in South Korea contributing to almost a quarter of the country’s total exports. The company has grown tremendously from cottage industry to a global leader employing over 300,000 workers across the world (Jurevicius 2018).

According to Christopher (2016) Samsung is involved in multiple businesses in the manufacturing and construction, and service sector. These are grouped under four strategic global business units to take full advantage of different business opportunities. The Hansol business unit, the CJ unit, and the Shinsegae unit collectively deal with chemical manufacturing, supply chain, and logistics, manufacturing of paper, advertisement and insurance among other business interests (Nisen 2013).

For the purposes of this report, the focus will be on the Samsung Electronics group which is the most successful of the business units. It deals with the manufacture of mobile phones, tablets, personal computers, televisions, display screens, fridges, headphones, microwaves, freezers among other home appliances (Reuters 2016).

Samsung customers are spread out across the world. The company has different packages for their different customers. To begin with, it supplies other original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) with display screens (Weng, Wei & Fujimura 2012) Secondly, they supply the aviation sector firms with circuits and display equipment. Governments are also part of their customers ordering telecommunication equipment. Other customers include firms in the hospitality industry and individual customers. Samsung has segmented their customers according to their location and social-economic aspects (Wilson 2015). On the smartphones market, for instance, the segments include high-end customers the midrange customers and the feature phone customers.

Due to the array of products that Samsung sells, the company has different sale approaches. It has stores in all major markets in North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Africa, and South America. In parts where stores are unavailable, it has agents, franchises and subsidiaries to sell their electronics (Sai 2018). Lastly, the company has embraced online marketing where customers can order their devices. Damaged or defective devices are replaced if covered by warrants (Peng 2017).

Samsung is now the biggest Smartphone maker in the world after overtaking Nokia Corporation in 2012 (Azmeh 2014). Its sales as of 2017 averaged 175 billion USD. Its net profit was in the same year was in the neighborhood of 20 billion and asset base of a quarter billion US dollars. Its electronics are manufactured mainly in South Korea and shipped to the rest of the world.

Sales Approaches and Customer Segmentation

In this illustration, the assumption is that Samsung needs to develop a gaming console since they do not have this offering in their product line-up. Since the gaming console is mostly used by young people (Morris 2009; Debano 2017). Samsung believes that it can pull up sales by introducing the product into the market.

Table 1: The six hat model

Hat	Detail
White Hat (Information)	1. There is an adequate market. This is from the fact that there are close to 2 billion young people on the planet who enjoy using gaming consoles. 2. Disposable income for young people in Europe and North America ranges between 3000-6000 US dollars. This income encourages youth to spend on luxury products like gaming consoles (Tilley & Rosenblatt 2017). 3. Asian markets present great market potential because the region hosts 59% of the population that is growing an appetite for luxury products (Curtis & Corbhan 2013). 4. The economic growth rate in the Asia-Pacific region has been growing steadily at between 6.4% in the Philippines and 8.1% in the Republic of Myanmar with many other countries recording an average of 7%. This presents a huge market for the gaming consoles (Azmeh 2014). 5. Millennials are spending huge proportions of their time on entertainment and the gaming console offers a good alternative to other forms of entertainment (Kaur 2017).
Green hat (New Idea)	1. Instead of manufacturing the products in South Korea where the cost of production is increasing, new labour markets should be explored in China, India or Africa (Cao 2014). 2. Some features of the smartphones can be merged with the gaming console to appeal to the market already possessing the smartphones. 3. Mass production of the consoles can lower the total cost of production. 4. Recycling of waste electronic products can provide the raw material for the production of consoles
Blue Hat (Processing)	1. The production process should take no longer than 8 months to avoid other players from accessing the markets first. 2. What benefits will accrue from using the existing distribution networks? 3. Additional time (2 months) should be allocated to conduct market research. 4. Using artificial intelligence during production may shorten the lead-time and hence production cost
Red Hat (Emotions)	1. The consoles should be released to the market to coincide with Christmas festivities as people love to play games this period. 2. A red colour variation on the consoles will appeal to the customers 3. Customers may not buy this console since it is the first model that the company is distributing 4. The company has not adequately performed quality audits and risks recalling the consoles from the market
Black Hat (What can go wrong)	1. There are other consoles in the market and this will not sell 2. The company lacks adequate resources for the production of the console 3. Governments may enact new laws to restrict the sale of the consoles 4. Customers will not like the first experience using the consoles
Yellow Hat (The benefits)	1. Our sales and distribution channels are well experienced in the market and will, therefore, increase company sales. 2. Selling the consoles will open new frontiers for company growth 3. The company will diversify on its products, therefore, reduce the risk of total failure if other products stall in future 4. The company will make it harder for other entities to venture the market hence gaining competitive advantage

Design Review Checklist 

Table 2: Design review checklist

Aspect	Question	Answer	Comments
Product packaging	(1) Is the console packaging aesthetic?	Yes	Samsung packaging have done trials with positive results
(2) Is the packaging environmentally friendly?	Yes	The materials used by Samsung are recyclable
(3) Does the packaging bear the console information?	Yes	All information on Samsung products is printed on the package and a manual included
(4) Is the packaging safe?	Yes	The package is made of a safe bio-degradable material
Product Quality	(5) Does the company produce defective products?	No	All products are made from high-quality raw materials
(6) Does the product undergo quality tests at the company?	Yes	The product is well tested before leaving the company.
(7) Does the product bear a quality mark from ISO?	Yes	The console bears the ISO 9001 mark of quality.
(8) Does the product have a warranty	Yes	The product comes with a limited warranty.
Legal /Regulatory Compliance	(9) Does the console comply with government regulations?	Yes	The console has been checked by government agencies for compliance
(10) Does the product meet the international safety SAR?	Yes	The product bears the SAR marking for compliance
(11)  Does the console bear a shelf-life	No	However, some components such as batteries should be replaced  when worn out
(12) Does the console meet the industry standards for electronics?	Yes	The product is tested in all localities to comply with set standards
Promotion	(13) Is there any material to inform consumers of the product?	Yes	There are brochures and banners showing the product
(14) Is the product information understandable?	Yes	The information is written in multiple languages
(15) Is there any online presence of the product?	Yes	The company website and affiliate portals have the product information?
	(16) Is there a discount for early purchasers?	No	The pricing set is standard to all consumers. The company may, however, offer gifts to heavy purchasers.
(17) Does the advertising appeal to the target market	Yes	Images and information contained appeal to the intended market
Pricing	(18) Is there a price list for the different product offering?	Yes	The pricing is determined by the product specifications
(19) Is the pricing similar in all localities?	No	The pricing is influenced by the government tariffs, distribution costs among other factors
(20) Can the customers’ order the product online?	Yes	The consoles can be ordered online using the prevailing currency exchange rates
(21) Will I pay for extra for repairs and upgrades	No	Unless the product damage is outside the scope of the warranty
Product identification/security	(22) Does the product have any security measures	Yes	The product has  geo-location tag and a product key to
	(23) Does the product include warnings to the user?	Yes	The product specifies the correct way to be handled
	(24) Does the product include traceability function in case it is lost or stolen?	Yes	The product contains biometric data that can only be activated by the user
	(25) Does the product contain maintenance information	Yes	Maintenance information is included in the user manual guide.

Design Review outcome

Samsung console is a product that is designed to fill the market gap in the supply of quality and affordable gaming alternatives to the prevailing competition (Porter 2008). It is built using high quality and environmentally friendly materials. In terms of packaging, the console provides the specifications, safety measures while using the device warning and the correct disposal mechanism for the packaging. The console has also met all the legal and regulatory requirements to ensure that the user safety is guaranteed always.

The console has been advertised in the news and print media. For any additional information, the product specifications can be accessed online at the company’s portal and affiliated distributors’ links. The pricing has been well specified and varies with the features of the product.

In terms of security and traceability in the event the device is lost or stolen, Samsung has invested in biometric technology to ensure that the device is traceable. In addition, the console is packed with various warning and maintenance directions to ensure maximum utility and comfort (Cudney 2011).

Table 3: The waste forms from the operation activities

Type of waste	Example	Root-cause	Recommendation
Waste from transportation activities	· Spillage of raw  materials when offloading from suppliers · Damage to consoles when shipping to customers · Breakage of consoles during transport	· Defective motor vehicles · The accidental falling of consoles during transportation	· Move the production facility near the customers · Secure raw materials and finished products during transportation
Manufacturing defects	· Damaged circuit boards · Overheating consoles	· Poor quality control during manufacturing · Substandard raw materials	· Automate production process using artificial intelligence · Quality control checks during the delivery of raw materials
Storage/warehousing  waste	· Falling of consoles from pallets · Damage by natural elements such as storm	· Faulty shelves and pallets at the warehouses · Ravaged warehouse	· Repair the shelves and pallets · Repair of damaged warehouses
Excessive production of consoles	· Manufacturing beyond customer orders	· Disregard for Enterprise Resource planning system(ERP)	· Employ Just-In-Time Production · Efficient Use  of ERP
Time wastage	· Occasioned by standby times lost while waiting for suppliers, storage and shipment · Shipment delays	· The production facility is very far from the raw materials · The company does not have its own shipping arrangements	· Move the plant closer to the raw materials · Forward integration into shipping transport

The JIT method of inventory control was introduced by Toyota Motor Company after suffering many instances of resource wastage coupled with poor space management. The system is based on the premise that Re-order levels for inventory are dictated by customer orders (Hirano 2009; Adamu 2017). As depicted in the diagram, there is no production of consoles unless customer orders trigger the process. This implies that the company only keeps inventory and finished products commensurate with the orders placed by the customers (Stevenson 2012).

For this reason, there is never an instance where there are excessive or shortage of raw materials in the storage. On the same breath, a there is never a case of overproduction of finished products waiting in the warehouse for distribution (Hamrol 2017).

In the case of Samsung manufacturing Consoles, once a customer places an order, the company system picks the order immediately and produces finished consoles from the optimal raw materials kept in the storage. This, in turn, minimizes material wastage, space wastage and in the long run, helps to keep the cost of production low. Other companies such as Amazon and eBay have borrowed a leaf from Toyota’s JIT system and are reporting innumerable success (Crouch 2008)

Gaming Consoles: The Proposal

In order for Samsung to manage their operations, there are concerted efforts at ensuring optimal management of customer orders while at the same time ensuring smooth flow of raw materials from their suppliers. This is made possible through managing supply chain functions such as supply chain integration, planning of operations, managing their purchasing, demand and supply planning and lastly through ensuring effective distribution networks (Khurum & Gorschek 2014).

During the production of gaming consoles, Samsung has to ensure that the communication lines between the suppliers, the production team are well managed. The integration of all the parties involved from demand forecasting, inventory control, the production team, and the budgeting team has to be in sync (Giri & Sharma 2015).

To ensure that gaming consoles are produced on the time specified and that the products are of high quality, Samsung has adopted demand forecasting as one avenue to be able to predict future needs of the customers. In addition, the company has a very robust research and development department that keeps adding value to its products which in turn keeps customers interested in their products. This helps the company to maintain a sustainable competitive advantage (Porter 2008).

Samsung has to effectively manage their processes to ensure that there is minimal wastage hence leading to low cost of production of their gaming consoles. Moreover, the company conducts regular market forecasting to be able to predict future demands hence maintaining optimal inventory. Lastly, Samsung has leveraged their broad marketing networks to ensure that new demands in the market are pursued by having handy supplies of raw materials when needed (Daft 2015).

The market is always demanding consoles of high quality without compromising on pricing. To maintain this balance the Samsung purchasing department is well trained in managing cost-effective supplies while at the same time making sure that the materials supplied adhere to the quality standards set by the company(Antony 2011).

Customers always look out for companies that keep their word in delivering ordered products. To this end, Samsung has established many networks including partnerships with other businesses, maintaining an online market for their products and establishing franchises to make sure their console products and other electronics reach as many customers as possible within the delivery timelines specified(Lewis 2008).

Samsung has enrolled its staff on intensive training on quality management programs such as lean sigma. This ensures that the employees are able to maintain demand from the customers by providing high-quality devices (Mrugalska & Tytyk 2015).

Design Review Checklist for the Gaming Console

This part of the report analysis specific inventory management controls to ensure smooth operations of a company by computing a desirable outcome given a set of constraints like is the case in the real business environment (Mercado 2008). The calculations desired include Inventory reordering point which is basically the stock a company should have at the very least to order inventory given certain market demand (Sharma 2010). The computation will also cover safety stock and Economic order quantity.

Inventory Reorder point, safety stock, and economic order quantity

The parameters given are:

Demand (D) per week = (500,000 to 1,000,000 per week)

Lead Time during replenishment (L/T) = a number between 1 and 2 weeks

Standard Deviation of demand during replenishment (SD) = 15%.

Carrying cost (H) per week = a number between $1and $5

The fixed cost of the order (S) = a number between $100 and $200

Service Level = a number between 80% and 95%

Chosen service level = 90%

Z score = 1.30 for 90% service level

Request Variation σ = D*SD = 500,000*1.5= 75,000

Demand variation during replenishment = σ L/T= σ* LT =75,000*    = 106,066 for a lead time of 2 weeks

Since

Then ROP= 500,000*2 + 1.3*106,066

ROP= 1000, 000+ 137885 =1,137,885 Items

σ LT =106,066

Safety Stock = Z σ L/T

Hence Safety stock = 1.3*106,066

Safety Stock= 137, 885 Items

Annual Demand= 500,000 * 52.1429 = 26,071,450

Annual Carrying cost H= 5* 52.1429 = 260.71

Since the Fixed cost S per order= a number between $100 and $200

200 is chosen as the fixed cost

EOQ = √2D*S/H

Therefore EOQ = √2 *500,000* 260.71/200= 1141.73 units

From the calculations, it is evident that the demand that must be met by Samsung at any given week is at the very least 500,000 units. However, since the EOQ has been found to be  1141 units it shows that Samsung is running on a shortfall supply to be able to meet the market demands. For this reason, it is advised that the company should make better purchasing decisions to ensure that market demand is met to keep customers satisfied.

From the computed safety stock of 137, 885 items, it is evident that Samsung can run well on the current inventory of 500,000 per week up until the inventory reaches 362,115 items. At this point, Samsung can replenish their stock to keep the operations optimal.

The reliability of a given machine is the ability to continue working up to such a point when the manufacturer predicts, based on tests, that without servicing, the machine will continue working. Reliability of the console gaming equipment produced by Samsung to fail may also be computed from the average time that the machine will continue working after it has been serviced after failing (Meudt Metten ich & Abele Uzulans 2016).

If for instance, Samsung stated that their console units will work for 5 years without any failure for 12 hours every day, then the calculations based on this assumption would be as follows.

As per the console machine specifications, it can work 12 hours straight continuously for 5 years.
Assuming that the console is working every day of the week, it will endure 365 days for five years providing unbridled utility to the owner.
Time (T) when the machine is expected to be in use= 8000 hours

MTBF = 12* 365* 5= 26280 Hours
From this figure Failure rate= 1/MTBF
Therefore Failure rate = 1/26280 hours = 0.0000380517
Equating variable (t) to the likelihood of failure
after 8000 the failure rate of the console will be 
T= 0.0000380517 * 8000 = 0.3044136
T= 1- t(8000)
T= 1 – 0.3044136
T= 0.6955864

From this computation, the likelihood of the console to fail after 8000 hours is 69.5%. However, as with other machines, the probability of failure here is exacerbated by the intensity of using the console. In all likelihood, using the console for fewer hours every day would reduce the wear and tear effect.

The overall equipment effectiveness (OEE) is the ratio of the availability of a machine during production to the work that has been designed for the machine to perform. The most reliable way of calculating OEE is using this formula
OEE= Availability * Performance * Quality

Assuming the following data was received from a machine and we were required to calculate the OEE of that machine
The shift length at work= 490 minutes
Breaks taken at work= 80 minutes
Downtime at work= 55 minutes
Machine cycle time = 1 second
Total production by the machine= 18200
Total defective products from the machine= 425
Using the above figures from the machine, the following computations can be made

Computing the planned production time = shift length – break time = 490 min- 80 min = 410 min
Computing the runtime = 410 min – 55 min = 355 min

Good production = total production – defective products 19200 – 425 =17775

Availability= scheduled run time/planned production time

Availability= 355/410= 0.865

Performance= (machine cycle time * total production)/ ideal runtime
= (1sec * 18200)/ 355 min* 60 sec = 0.8544 = (85.44%)

Quality = good production/total production =17775/18200 =0.9766 = (97.66%)

Calculating the OEE

OEE= Availability * Performance * Quality
OEE= 0.865 * 0.8544 * 0.9766 = 0.7217 = 72.17%

Prioritizing the manufacturing assets. Some of the most critical equipment in manufacturing may fail result in big loses within the company. By giving these machines utmost priority you avoid total loses and improve OEE.

Maximizing the OEE formula. In the company, all the machines should be handled according to the contribution they bring to the company such that high-performance machines are handled with more concern.

Training of the employees. Well trained employees are a big asset to the company where they increase productivity while minimizing downtime. Employee motivation should also be given priority as employees who feel valued cannot leave their work unattended.

Proper care and maintenance of the company machinery and equipment. Performing predictive or preventive maintenance will ensure that the machines serve the company without downtimes.

Lastly, the OEE can be improved tremendously by taking care of the machine operating environment. This can be in form of housekeeping to remove dust, trapped moisture and, fumes which may hinder the functioning of the machine (Dugan 2012).

In this section, the production of gaming consoles will be considered as the final products. As the consoles are produced, each stage presents product defects as discussed.
Stage 1. Assembling console CPUs
The total number of items produced= 800,000
Defective items = 80
Total defects in production= 100

Stage 2 Assembling Console Power supplies
Total items produced = 799,920
Defective items = 200
Total defects during production = 250

Stage 1 Yield defective = 799,920/800,000 = 0.9999 and
Yield defects = 799,900/ 800000= 0.999875

For stage 2 , the computations are:
Yield defective =799,720/799,920 =0.9997
And the yield defects = 799670/799920 = 0.9996

Calculating the Rolled throughput Yield (RTY) we get the following:
RTY defective= 0.9999 * 0.9997= 0.9996
RTY defects = 0.999875 * 0.9996 = 0.99835

From the computation, the defective consoles used in the RTY analysis, imply those that are damaged beyond any salvaging. In retrospect, the consoles with defects acquire them during the manufacturing process and may be returned by quality control personnel to the production manager to rectify the defects to make them fit to use.

The computation of yield defective shows that there is a likelihood that the manufacturing process results in stage 1 results in 0.0001 defectives while in comparison stage 2 results in 0.0003 percent are defective which though minute shows that if close inspection is not paid to the machinery the in production may be having minute damages.
The RTY defective on the other hand, shows that 0.0004 percent of consoles are ending up defective which shows consistency and hence confirms that closer inspection of the manufacturing processes through root cause analysis is necessary.

From the Yield defective and RTY defective, there is consistent deterioration of manufacturing process which is resulting in defective consoles. If this is not identified early enough it may lead to more disastrous defects. One way of identifying the problem is by applying the root cause analysis to pinpoint the exact problem before an escalation of the problem (Ali Naqvi & Fahad 2016).

The 80 defective Samsung consoles in stage one during CPU assembly may have resulted from poor calibration of one or more of the assembly machines. The root cause analysis will seek to dig deep to find which assembly machine it is and why it was poorly calibrated (Hubbard 2018)
An example of root cause analysis of the above calibration is as depicted
1. Why were 80 consoles defective during the processing stage?
Answer: Because the assembly machine was poorly calibrated
2. Why was the assembly machine poorly calibrated?
Answer: Because the technician fixing the machines left the company?
3. Why did the technician leave the company?
Answer: Because he got another job
4. Why wasn’t there a replacement for his expertise?
Answer: because the training program to fix the machines was aborted
5. Why was the training program aborted?
Answer: because it clashed with a demanding operations schedule.
The root cause analysis depicts a lacuna in the technical department that needs to be fixed as well as have someone on standby to rectify the assembly machines calibration issues at any given time. The root cause analysis has identified is through training which needs to be followed up.

The TOC paradigm acknowledges that in every situation a company maneuvers, there are limiting factors that inhibit the organization from achieving its full potential. In a manufacturing firm, for instance, the constraint could be poor quality products that are being shunned by customers. This limits the firm’s growth and reputation (Barsabu 2014).

Identifying the constraint and effects of the constraint. As depicted the firm has identified that poor quality is a constraint that needs to be addressed because it is causing loss of revenue and much-needed growth (Duggan 2012).

Exploiting the constraint. In this case, the resources required to exploit poor quality include trained staff in quality management, quality control department and effective equipment to identify defective raw materials and processes within the firm. Once this is done, the resources required can be mobilized to address poor quality.

Subordinating the constraint. This can be achieved by ensuring that all resources mobilized in the exploration stage are streamlined to the critical areas of poor quality. The firm can, for instance, include quality processes in every activity they undertake.

Elevating the constraint. In this step, all systems in the organization should be geared towards eliminating poor quality. The firm may make a financial investment in training its human resources and embracing change management to address remnant quality issues.

Repeating the steps through continuous improvement. This will serve to remind the people in the organization that if not constantly addressed, poor quality issues may return back to haunt the organization. Continuous improvement can be rekindled through program exchange within departments in the firm and having routine audits to address poor quality issues as soon as they crop up (Duggan 2012).

Conclusion

This report has focused on the Samsung case study where the company activities, customers, operating localities and distribution channels were explored. Then, the report goes further to design a fictitious console product using the De Bono’s six hat model. The report examines the VSM model and expounds the role of JIT in streamlining supply chain networks.

The report also explores the need to compute inventory reorder levels by calculating and interpreting the role of inventory re-order point, safety stock, and economic order quantity. Other computations covered in the report include OEE with recommendations drawn on how to improve OEE. The report examines the yield defective, yield defect and RTY. Finally, a fictitious constraint has been examined and the role of root cause analysis interrogated.

References

Adamu, I. (2017). Reorder quantities for (Q, R) inventory models. International Mathematical Forum, 12, pp.505-514.

Ali Naqvi, S. and Fahad, M. (2016). Productivity improvement of a manufacturing facility using systematic layout planning. Cogent Engineering, 3(1), pp.8-11.

Antony, J. (2011). Six Sigma vs Lean. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 60(2), pp.185-190.

Azmeh, S. (2014). Asian firms and the restructuring of global value chains. International Business Review, 23(4), pp.708-717.

Barsalou, M. (2014). Root Cause Analysis: A Step-By-Step Guide to Using the Right Tool at the Right Time. Boca Raton: Productivity Press, pp.24-28.

Cao, L. (2014). Business Model Transformation in Moving to a Cross-Channel Retail Strategy: A Case Study. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 18(4), pp.69-96.

Christopher, M. (2016). Logistics and supply chain management. Harlow (England): Pearson, pp.48-52.

Crouch, A., 2008.The competitive mind: a strategy for winning in business, Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons.

Cudney, E. (2011). Using Hoshin Kanri to Improve the Value Stream. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis, pp.22-28.

Curtis, G. and Cobham, D. (2013). Business information systems. Harlow, England: Prentice Hall, Financial Times, pp.26-29.

Daft, R. (2015). Organization Theory & Design. 12th ed. Boston: Cengage Learning, pp.30-68.

De Bono, E. (2017). Six thinking hats. London: Penguin Books, pp.40-42.

Dudovskiy, J. (2017). Samsung Business Strategy and Competitive Advantage: effective exploitation of market readership – Research-Methodology. [online] Research-Methodology. Available at: https://research-methodology.net/samsung-business-strategy-competitive-advantage-effective-exploitation-market-readership/ [Accessed 1 Oct. 2018].

Duggan, K. (2012). Creating Mixed Model Value Streams. 2nd ed. New York: CRC Press, pp.7-21.

Ellis, N. (2014). OEE – Learn How to Use It Right. [online] Industry Week. Available at: https://www.industryweek.com/quality/oee-learn-how-use-it-right [Accessed 1 Oct. 2018].

Giri, B. and Sharma, S. (2015). Optimizing a closed-loop supply chain with manufacturing defects and quality dependent return rate. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 35, pp.98-104.

Hamrol, A. (2017). Advances in manufacturing. Cham: Springer, pp.25-26.

Hirano, H. (2009). JIT implementation manual. Boca Raton, Fl.: CRC Press, pp.32-35.

Hubbard, B. (2018). Root Cause Analysis (Overview). [online] Lean Learning Revolution. Available at: https://bobsleanlearning.wordpress.com/2010/09/16/root-cause-analysis-overview/ [Accessed 1 Oct. 2018].

Hugos, M. (2010). Essentials of supply chain management. 2nd ed. Hoboken: Wiley Publishing Inc, pp.34-36.

Jurevicius, O. (2018). Samsung SWOT Analysis (6 Key Strengths in 2018). [online] Strategic Management Insight. Available at: https://www.strategicmanagementinsight.com/swot-analyses/samsung-swot-analysis.html [Accessed 1 Oct. 2018].

Kaur, M. (2017). Six Thinking Hats (STH): An Instructional Strategy to Develop Creative Thinking.Asian International Journal, 11(2), p.221.

Khurum, M., Petersen, K. and Gorschek, T. (2014). Extending value stream mapping through waste definition beyond customer perspective. Journal of Software: Evolution and Process, 26(12), pp.1074-1105.

Lewis, A. (2008). Focus on Strategic Management. Bradford: Emerald Group Pub., pp.28-35.

Mercado, E. (2008). Hands-on inventory management. Boca Raton: Taylor & Francis, pp.12-21.

Meudt, T., Metternich, J. and Abele, E. (2017). Value stream mapping 4.0: A holistic examination of  the value stream and information logistics in production. CIRP Annals, 66(1), pp.413-416.

Morris, R. (2009). The fundamentals of product design. Lausanne: AVA Publishing SA, pp.22-24.

Mrugalska, B. and Tytyk, E. (2015). Quality Control Methods for Product Reliability and Safety.Procedia Manufacturing, 3, pp.5897-5904.

Nisen, M. (2013). Samsung Has A Totally Different Strategy From Apple, And It’s Working Great. [online] Business Insider. Available at: https://www.businessinsider.com/samsung-corporate-strategy-2013-3?IR=T [Accessed 1 Oct. 2018].

Peng, M. (2017). Global Business. Australia: Cengage Learning, pp.24-32.

Porter, M. (2008). Competitive Advantage. 1st ed. New York: Free Press. pp.24-28.

Reuters (2016). How Samsung Tripped on Quality Control in Its Rush to Beat Apple. [online] Fortune. Available at: https://fortune.com/2016/09/06/samsung-apple-galaxy-note-quality/ [Accessed 1 Oct. 2018].

Sai, P. (2018). Business Process: All You Need to Know To Create Business Processes. [online] Kiss Flow. Available at: https://kissflow.com/bpm/business-process/ [Accessed 6 Apr. 2018].

Sharma, S. (2010). Quantitative techniques. Jaipur, India: ABD Publishers, pp.54-67.

Stevenson, W. (2012). Operations management. New York, N.Y.: McGraw-Hill/Irwin, pp.42-26.

Tilley, S. and Rosenblatt, H. (2017). Systems Analysis and Design. 11th ed. Boston: Cengage Learning, pp.13-15.

Uzul?ns, J. (2016). Project Risk Register Analysis Based on the Theoretical Analysis of Project Management Notion of Risk. Economics and Business, 29(1), pp.16-19.

Weng, W., Wei, X. and Fujimura, S. (2012). Dynamic routing strategies for JIT production in hybrid flow shops. Computers & Operations Research, 39(12), pp.3316-3324.

Wilson, L. (2015).How to implement lean manufacturing, New York: McGraw-Hill Education.