Mattel’s Toy Recalls and Supply Chain Management Essay

This example talks focuses on the event in the year of 2007 when Mattel the prima(p) global playmaker voluntarily recalled its toys from servicemanwide stores. Mattels name is synonymous worldwide for its more or less famous product the Barbie Doll. The recall was ab initio for 83 toys which had excessive claim pigment and soon after 6 more products we recalled which had a design riddle of wee magnets coming dispatch the toys in accession to the use of lead pigments. The lead that was utilize could potentially be toxic for children and the charismatic separate that could come off the toys could potentially be fatal for the digestive outlines of children if ingested. wholly the toys recalled were fabricate in chinaware and in total more than 1.5 million toys were called back. The initial diagnosis was that the main cause of the riddle was Made in China til now the case explores that the root causes for the default were forged designs.Background Mattel & C hina* China had become the leading manufacturer of toys by 2000 * 80 % of toys coming to US were make in China* 65% of Mattel toys were produced in China* or so Chinese toys were make in around 5000 factories located in Guangdon province in China. These factories were majorly owned by Hong KongMattels Supply ChainMattels product fell into two openhanded pailfuls. First was the core products kindred Barbie dolls which exchange through longer periods and the second bucket comprised of the non-core products which comprised of seasonal toys like movie characters. By 2007, more than half of the revenues for Mattel came from core products that were manufactured in Mattel owned excogitatets in china. The be products which were procured from local Chinese licensed vendors. Mattel had an recap program in place for its products. discharge the 5000 products that it used to develop each year, it would every which way smash products by taking them off the payoff line.In come in to show paint to Mattels supply string a vendor had to be a sure one. The complication with this arrangement was that on numerous occasions Mattels result vendors contracted down to former(a) suppliers who in turn contracted to other suppliers and thereof the origin of certain products were difficult to feeling for example the lead paint. Even though Mattel had not allowed its vendors to sub contract to other vendors without its permission, it was not sure how well Mattels suppliers were adhering to this. Ironically, 200 of Mattel quality and vendor arrogance employees were located far away from the production facilities in Hong Kong. As a expert HR practice Mattel had hired a professor with international re put upation for macrocosm a critic of worker interposition to report independently of any malpractices in Mattel. Reasons leading to the event* Pressures on Chinese toy manufactures.Most toy gross revenue were coming from big box stores like Walmart, Target etc. The bu siness lesson of these big retailers revolves around extreme approach pressures. This led to a lot of talk terms with Chinese manufacturers to cut down their costs. At the similar time, the Yuan had appreciated and change magnitude costs of raw materials (such as force out costs) left little room for Chinese manufactures to invest in significantly modernized quality programs.* Manufacturing ProblemsLead in paint was a frequently occurring problem for toy manufacturers. Even though Chinese manufacturers had put processes in place that had checks to avoid having lead in the paints, it was increasingly difficult to supervise the quality of paints* Design ProblemsIn 2007 many toy products had small magnetic parts attached to them which could potentially get complimentary from the toys and then they could be accidently be ingested by the children. These magnets, once inside the digestive body were toxic and could potentially stick unneurotic and harm the intestines. Another des ign problem was that some of the toys were susceptible to being broken. Most of the designs were make outside China and olibanum this was not a manufacturing problem.* Product ravishSome recalls of Mattels products were because of the potential malign by children. There were choking or strangling hazards associated with some of the products that made the products dangerous.Mattels ResponseThe expected impact of Mattels recalls was to the tune of $30 million dollars which was about half of the operating income of that quarter. The media coverage and global attention aggravated the issue. In order to deal with this Mattels response was as follows.* Three point check systemAs the first point check for the lead paint every pile of paint could only be acquired from certified vendors. Second, the carrys for vendors and contractors were made more stricter and random checks were constituted. Thirdly, the unblemished products would be subjected to final checks before they fall out th e customers* Sub contracting policiesMattel reviewed its subcontracting policies to control excessive subcontracting* Purchase of new equipment to keep leadMattel in corporated a plan to purchase more lead detectors* PR & CommunicationsThe company followed a proactive communication strategy to conduct the issue.ConclusionThe consumers reacted strongly to Mattels response. The case elaborates how systemic failures can almost weaken a global leader. Most importantly, the made in china brand scattered significant reputation because of this episode. However, better measures and corporate controls resulted from this event and they eventually transformed the manufacturing world for the better.