Rubric for Classical Techniques

Criteria Level 1 (50–59%) Level 2 (60–69%) Level 3 (70–79%) Level 4 (80–100%)

Analyze economic

Criteria Level 1 (50–59%) Level 2 (60–69%) Level 3 (70–79%) Level 4 (80–100%)

Assess the size of the potential target market for the new venture

Assessment of the size of the potential target market for the new venture demonstrates results of limited research

Assessment of the size of the potential target market for the new venture demonstrates results of some research

Assessment of the size of the potential target market for size of the potential target market for the new venture some use of critical thinking skills

Is able to list differ-ent types of business ownership and provide an outline of each

Is able to compare different types of business ownership

Is able to compare different types of

Criteria Level 1 (50–59%) Level 2 (60–69%) Level 3 (70–79%) Level 4 (80–100%)

Compare levels of service among a va-riety of competing companies

Is able to describe various levels of service for different companies

Is able to describe different aspects of service levels for different companies

Is able to compare levels of service among a variety of competing com-panies

Is able to compare levels of service among a variety of competing reference to type of products reference to type of products

Compares the chan-nels of distribution with thorough reference to type of products

Complete self-assessment and standardized as-sessment tasks

Is able to complete self-assessment and standardized assess-ment tasks with lim-ited understanding

Is able to complete self-assessment and standardized as-sessment tasks with some understanding

Is able to complete self-assessment and standardized assessment tasks with considerable understanding

Is able to complete self-assessment and al-most all of the ancil-lary requirements of

Criteria Level 1 (50–59%) Level 2 (60–69%) Level 3 (70–79%) Level 4 (80–100%)

Is able to explain clearly, how compet-itors affect a market

Is able to explain clearly, how stages in the life cycle of a business demonstrates limited knowledge

Explanation of the stages in the life cycle of a business demonstrates some knowledge

Explanation of the stages in the life cycle of a business demonstrates con-siderable knowledge

Explanation of the stages in the life cycle of a business demonstrates variety of ideas that match your selected entrepreneurial op-portunity

Identify common interview questions

Is able to identify few common inter-view questions

Is able to identify several common interview questions

Is able to identify many common inter-view questions

Is able to iden-tify all or almost all common interview

Criteria Level 1 (50–59%) Level 2 (60–69%) Level 3 (70–79%) Level 4 (80–100%)

Identify factors that affect growth and decline of job sectors

Is able to identify factors that affect growth and decline of job sectors with limited accuracy

Is able to identify factors that affect growth and decline of job sectors with some accuracy

Is able to identify factors that affect growth and decline of job sectors with significant accuracy

Is able to identify factors that affect growth and decline of job sectors with masterful accuracy

Identify ineffective leadership skills

Is able to identify 1–2 ineffective lead-ership skills

Is able to identify 3–4 ineffective lead-ership skills

Is able to identify 5–6 ineffective lead-ership skills

Is able to identify 7–10 ineffective

Is able to identify 7–10 ineffective

Is able to identify a wide variety of and final version of your venture plan that demonstrates limited organization

Produces a revised and final version of your venture plan that demonstrates some organization

Produces a revised and final version of your venture plan that demonstrates good organization

Produces a revised and final version of your venture plan criteria to make a comparison

Often uses criteria to make a comparison

Routinely uses criteria to make a comparison

II. Questions to Ponder

• What are functions? How is value extracted and measured from the function?

• Is there really a homogenous value to a product or service? How does this impact our product or service as a charge to our customers?

• How does benchmarking constructively affect our value engineering activities?

• How does benchmarking impact our product or service requirements?

III. Cost Improvement Scenario A. Situation

A certain vehicle manufacturer has an ongoing cost and weight improvement project. There are annual cost improvement targets associated with this effort, broken down by vehicle discipline; for example, electrical, cab, and chassis.

B. Objective

The objective was to reduce the cost of the vehicle by a defined percentage across the entire vehicle system. Additionally, we had to accomplish a weight reduction assigned by number of pounds.

C. Action

To meet the cost and weight improvement targets, it was decided to have competitor vehicles be brought in for a series of reviews. One vehicle was considered at a single event with a total of three vehicles for the review. The vehicles selected ranged from the largest market share manufacturer, to an ultra low cost vehicle from outside of this company’s immediate market.

The vehicles were brought into a warehouse and disassembled with the constituent parts placed in well-documented areas associated with the appropriate vehicle. To save time, a specialty house was brought in for the disassembly of the vehicles. This company, A2Mac1, provides teardown expertise.

D. Results

The cost improvement targets were met. The use of the ultra-low cost (low-function) Asian vehicle did not provide much fodder for cost improvement. This specific marketplace was not receptive to such a low feature and low specification vehicle.

E. Aftermath

Much can be learned in the actual teardown. Hiring an outside vendor to tear the product down is helpful in terms of hours; however, this comes at the price of losing the knowledge that is obtained from physically performing the teardown by one’s self.

It is one thing to see how the parts go together; it is another to learn by performing the teardown.

Candidates for teardown should be those from which we believe it is possible to learn. In this case, the vehicle had no basis in the marketplace of the company performing the teardown, producing small impetus for cost improvement. Though the vehicle was most assuredly a low-cost version, not much was gleaned to help the local manufacturer to improve their vehicle cost.

IV. Benchmarking