Yam! Brand - David Novak
In my case am going to be assessing the Yam! Brand, Inc. David Novak who was the chief executive officer developed an ambitious plan for a food company he had led eight years. This plan aimed at improving the performance of the company although it had many challenges and problems. The first problem came from multi branding where the company had to continue getting better at building the operating capabilities to successfully run the restaurant. Running the restaurant with different brand created complexity in operating the business. In the past, the company had dedicated its resources to increasing the production of its workers in order to maintain good customer experience (Francis & Amy, 2006).
Another challenge came from the design of the restaurant where they had two different production line. However, this did not achieve any cost synergies. The time which the food was held before selling was a challenge. Different food flavors could not be kept for the same duration of time before they were sold (Francis & Amy, 2006). The last challenge in design emerged when designing customer sitting arrangement. They needed to come up with customer sitting portions that were being determined by the structure of building the restaurants occupied.
The other problem was maintaining the standards of the brands over the year. This halted performance since the restaurant desired to have a common system of measuring performance of the share services. Then all the restaurants had a different way of measuring its CHAMPS score. Those who managed the business had different standards for the food flavors that the company sold (Francis & Amy, 2006). The management had to use a lot of energy and time in order to come up with an agreement on these branding issues.
[...] These are some of the recommendations that would be done but how would the company increase its profit margins from all these? All these solution will lead to the increase in the capital that would be invested. They do not have an equal amount of the capital required. Investing in the technology would be expensive during the buying of the machine. The recurrent costs from the technology would be the maintenance. Acquiring new workers would be more expensive since there will the same recurrent cost of payment. [...]
[...] On the other hand, they would have come up with designs that best suited the location of any restaurant. The company would have assessed the performance of different production line before deciding which would be the best for the company. This would have led to cost synergies (Francis & Amy, 2006). Initially all the restaurants of the company had to have the same appearance when branding proposals were made. The company would have implemented a common structural design and ensure that the Yam Shell they chose as a brand was adopted by the whole company. [...]
[...] The chief executive officer would have requested all the managers to make a proposal for the best flavor of food the company would sell. Then he decide the help management decide the best proposal implement it all the restaurants The other way have been surveying and researching the restaurant high profit margins resulted from brand they sold This would be excluding the location and the number of the customers the hotel had (Francis & Amy, 2006). References Frances, X., F. & Amy, C., E. (2006). Yum! Brands Inc.: A Corporate Do- Over. HBS Case No. 605-083.Harvard University. [...]
[...] The management had to use a lot of energy and time in order to come up with an agreement on these branding issues. The problem with branding would have been solved in different ways. The restaurant would have invested more on the technology that was used in the production of different brands. This means buying machines that they will be using for the branding. The other solution has been employing mores killed workers. This would have increased the productivity of the company. [...]
using our reader.