A Satisfactory Alternative To Utilitarianism Proposals Philosophy Essay

A Satisfactory Alternative To Utilitarianism Proposals Philosophy Essay A Theory of Justice by John Rawls presents a vastly more viable, workable, systematic, and satisfactory alternative to Utilitarianism proposals as a moral theory. While Utilitarianism attempts to spread benefits and burdens across society with the goal of maximizing utility, A Theory of Justice establishes the two first principles which ensure that each member of society first have access to basic liberties and secondly allows for social and economic inequalities to exist provided society is structured so as to benefit those who are the least well off. Additionally, Rawls Original Position and veil of ignorance ensures that individuals will not set up society so as to give themselves a greater advantage, but rather will have an incentive to set up scheme of justice which treats all members of society fairly as they do not have the information through wich they could, with any degree of certainty, stack the deck in their favor. In contrast with utilitarianism Rawls assumes that justic e not utility is the overriding factor in creation of a good society. Additionally, Rawls principles are ones that free and rational persons would accept under the original position with a veil of ignorance limiting individuals from creating an unfair advantage from the outset. Social contract theory is superior to utilitarianism precisely because it affords each person equal rights to the most extensive basic liberty in alignment with others in society whereas utility as an aim boasts no such ability. FIRST PRINCIPLES The difference principle is the idea that actions taken in society should improve the expectations of the least advantaged members of society. However it shapes this in the lens of mutual advantage, or as I like to think of it, a tide raises all boats. Ultimately both persons are better off. Rawls states that Inequality in expectation is permissible only if lowering it would make the working class even more worse off. With this in play, Greater expectations allowed to entrepreneurs encourages them to do things which raise the long term prospects of laboring class. The difference principle in effect takes a small aspect of utility and applies it, in a different way to the least well off. DISTINCTION BETWEEN PERSONS Perhaps Rawls greatest critique of Utilitarianism is in regards to the distinction of persons. Utilitarianism can only claim to protect individual rights in so much as the single paramount aim of utility achieves this through maximizes utility. As will be notes later, utility is a horrible tool for achieving this aim. A Theory of Justice  is Rawlss creation with the goal to create a philosophy of justice that provides more satisfaction in the quest for a system which aptly preserves justice and individual liberties. His first two principles achieve this and are as follows: The first is that each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive basic liberty compatible with a similar liberty for others. The second is that Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that: a) they are to be of the greatest benefit to the least-advantaged members of society (the difference principle). b) offices and positions must be open to everyone under conditions of  fair equality of opportunity From this ordering, equal liberty is first and foremost secured, folled by a more satisfactory social safety net that allows for economic advantage of some over others in so long as it benefits the least well off. Transitioning from this basis which respects the distinction of persons, Rawls begins his attacks on Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism in a misled effort, takes the logic that a single individual would rationally make to maximize the benefits and minimize burdens, and tries to apply them to society as a whole. You cannot apply the cost and benefit logic made by one person to the collective of persons society wide. Rawls contends that this lends itself to situations where there is neglect for the separateness of persons in favor adding up the total happiness and is prone to the violation of basic rights and liberties, which in his view are paramount. While it is perfectly logical for an individual to strive for maximum happiness for themselves, utilitarian theory is flawed in its attempts to apply these concepts to society as a whole. Social contract theory, in a vastly better way provides protection for individuals. Rawls uses examples such as Slavery and Suppression of free speech to show how, conceivably, the suppression of ones rights could be allowed under utilitarianism. For example, suppose a society was built of a strong majority of people, whos entire income was based upon the silence or labor of another class. Were this class of people to be given freedom of speech or rights to vote or freedom from forces labor, the entire society would collapse, resulting in a near complete depletion of utility for the whole. Under the principles of utilitarianism this liberation should not happen. In the quest to maximize   utility for all citizens other members of society must necessarily be denied any meaningful right or liberties to prop up the whole. Rawls sets up what he calls the the impartial  spectator to illustrate this. This individual feels the wants and needs of all in society. From this all knowing snap shot, this person determines the best way to maximize utility overall.  In doing this, the spectator may give certain groups higher priority over others due to the constraints of maximizing utility.  Thus Rawls argues that potentially very little care will go toward the individual whose rights and freedoms could conceivably be neglected because  they make up a minority or insignificant factor in the overarching goal to maximize societies utility. From here, he states that Utilitarianism does not  take seriously the distinction between persons..  Rawls asserts that his theory is an improvement from this since a theory of justice takes all person into account. The utilitarian response to this is of course that it is precisely by the focus upon achieving utility and would thereby argue that utility is best achieved when individual rights are protected. However, in contrast with Rawls second principle, the utilitarian idea does not particularly care what the spread of utility is across people. It may well be that utility is best served when all members of society are provided equal rights, but Rawls point is that there are compelling examples of where this could be completely untrue(e.g. Slavery). EQUILIBRIUM The concept of equilibrium also very important in Rawls overall theory and the sustenance of the original position. If a departure from this situation sets in motion tendencies which restore it, the equilibrium is stable. What he means by this is since the agreement is freely struck between individuals and it provides the best situation for all parties involved within this system, there is a built in check on any activity threatening the system. Since the system maximizes individual interests, provided they are consistent with the rights and freedom of others, the majority of individuals will be benefiting from the system and will work to maintain it. In a way this is reminiscent of utilitarianism. While utility is not being directly calculated, by everyone playing by the rules, it is of maximum benefit to all involved. Essentially, his failsafe measure to preserve the Original Position is everyones desire to maximize his or her own utility. Responsibility Another appeal for the theory of justice is its upholding of personal responsibility and that dynamic between society and individuals. While under his first principles, society is charged with ensuring liberties the flip side to this is that with this as a starting point, each individual is responsible for his or her life plan and choices as well as the consequences that emanate from them. A default on life plans, does not bring about legitimate grounds for compensation by society. Conversely, if a member succeeds well beyond those around them, this merit based achievement and wealth/happiness disparity is allowable, provided it benefit the least well off in society. In society owes the individual only to uphold the first principles, from there, unlike utilitarianism there is a sort of empowerment of the individual. VEIL Rawls states that for this system to work, all citizens must see themselves as   being behind a veil of ignorance.  Ã‚  By this he means that all deciding parties   in establishing the guidelines of justice (all citizens) must see themselves as   equal to everyone paying no mind to there economic situation or anything else   that they could keep in mind to negotiate a better situation to those qualities.  For example, someone who will become wealthy would not be made aware of this due to the veil, and therefore would not attempt to set up the tax code so as to benefit him over others. The individual has an incentive to do this as he or she may end up with the bad end of the deal when all the cards are laid on the table. This sets up a vastly more fair system than utilitarianism can provide. With utilitarianism, a majority could very easily take a look at the way this will play out, and shift them to be in their favor, and this would be allowed should it maximize the total utility. Another weak area for utilitarianism is in regards to what Rawls asserts in his statement that even where laws and institutions are unjust, it is often better that they should be consistently applied. In this way those subject tot them at least know what is demanded and they can try to protect themselves accordingly. Expectations are critical. It is important that even if the law is unjust, that it is consistent and clear. The situation that arises out of an unjust and inconsistent law, is that you have a populace unable to shield themselves or judge what their behavior should be to avoid punishment. Utilitarianism, by its very nature offers no such similar consistency since its goal is not justice, but rather utility. It is possible that randomly, one act or another could be made illegal or taxed with the known result that it will increase utility. Of course the counter claim to this is that maximizing utility leads to justice, but again there are countless examples where this would be untrue. I find in solidarity with Rawls in that justice is better served in the contractarian system over the utilitarian system. If the utilitarian system aims to simply have the most happiness spread to the most people possible, where is the justice for those who fall between the cracks of this system and are sacrificed as a necessary evil to the happiness of the many? Additionally, the idea that one injustice will compensate for the other, which on the surface, seems to be what utilitarianism promotes I find no basis in human reasoning. Under the veil of ignorance this would never be allowed. His concept of democratic equality is an alternative to utilitarianism which is vastly more appealing. He goes on to claim that the reason for the predominance of utilitarianism is due to the vast amount of well refined and impressive writings on the subject. He notes that the great writers for this system were social theorists and economists first and foremost and secondly worked to hash out theories in their writings with which to support and fine turn their beliefs. Throughout the 19th and 20th century there was near monopoly of thought from the major philosophical theorist in support of utilitarianism. I tend to agree with Rawls in his assertion that these theories received a very secluded amount of scrutiny toward Utilitarianisms weak points. While the positives of the system were well distributed and known, the skeptical voices were given a less widespread audience. I also agree with Rawls in his belief that their must be an alternative option available to people and that pointing out the flaws of utilitarians isnt enough. A choice must be given and is given in A Theory of Justice.. It is never enough to simply sit back and point the finger in a critique. Rather, an alternative must and is provided by Rawls. Rawls also defeats utilitarianism in the battle for a balance between liberty and equality. Under his first principles, liberty is adequately served in that he understands that there will always arises a disparity of wealth within society, but then with his second principle he establishes a check upon the trampling of the lowest in society. In Rawls view, this is fair due to the veil and essential aspect is the securing of basic liberties for all as in his first principle. In contrast however, when utility becomes the be all end all to be achieved in a society, you end up in a system that will result in the complete disregard for individual differences and desires. CONCLUSION Despite the huge differences between utilitarianism and the social contract system which Rawls supports, both theories have the same aims. Both attempt to put its actors onto an even playing field, but go about different ways in trying to achieve this. It seems clear that A Theory of Justice gives us a vastly more satisfactory alternative to Utilitarianism. A Theory of Justice establishes the two first principles which provide for basic liberties and secondly allows for individual success in society and inequalities to exist provided the and increase in inequality would benefit those who are the least well off. The veil of ignorance also lays out an incentive for fairness. In essence, Rawls appears to have better grasp upon the basic motivation and nature of human beings. He shows this in his emphasis on individual differences within society and his acceptance of the values of justice, not utility as the measure of a good society.

EMF Radiation: Serious Health Hazard for People Essay -- Technology, E

Technology changes everything in this world. Our life has become more convenient and more efficiency which benefits by these new technology. But during this time, some people have considered about some risks of these technologies. EMF radiation is one of them. People have argued for a long time that whether EMF radiation really poses health hazard or not. I insist that EMF radiation is harmful for people’s health and particularly to young children. This opinion can be well proved by all the information I have searched and more people should know about this. First, it’s important to know what EMF radiation is. The full name of EMF is Electromagnetic fields. It’s a kind of area that we may be involved into every time we watching TV, using cell phone, turning on a light switch or using an electric appliance. EMF is a generic term of force generated by magnetic fields or electrical charges. Sometimes, EMF can be considered as a kind of radiation when release energy. When we use some electric appliances, the electromagnetic waves of these appliances will change periodically and produce enough energy to cause ionization. As we all known, ionization can dislodge orbiting electrons from atoms or break bonds which hold molecules together and then producing ions or charged particles. During this process, the production of ions or ionization in our tissues may cause direct damage to cells and cause other health risks. So EMF radiation is also called ionizing radiation. (DCMNR, 2005) This conception maybe a little bit confusing, but i t’s easy to find out that EMF really produces some extra electrons or magnetic field which we have never seen before. So scientists began to do some experiments to figure out that whether EMF has health hazar... ... kind of radiation does mobile phone product. The World Health Organization (WHO) definite the EMF radiation standard as a kind of limitation from electronic devices or of human exposure time from all kind of devices. (WHO, 2006) The exposure standard is basic standard of personal protection in maximum levels. So the EMF can be variety and uncertain. No matter the opponents aware or not, just provide for a rainy day. Technology is a double-edged sword. It can provide us convenient while it may affect our health at the same time. Fortunately, some kind of technology such like EMF radiation has been proved to be harmful and people can prevent it from now on. From my study I am sure that EMF radiation can poses a health hazard for people especially for children and teenagers. All people who really care about their health and their children should know this fact.

Electoral college Essay

Who’s voting for the president? Not you. We live in a society where your vote doesn’t directly count during a presidential election. This is due to an antiquated system called the electoral college. The electoral college (EC) was founded in 1787. The founding fathers set up the system so that the president is chosen indirectly. This was done so that â€Å"popular passion,† wouldn’t factor in as much. Basically they didn’t want presidential campaigns to become purely advertisement campaigns. (third party times) But there are a few serious flaws in the electoral college that need to be dealt with. For example, the well known Democratic motto â€Å"one man, one vote,† (which means every vote counts) doesn’t apply to presidential elections because of the EC. The electoral college makes it possible for a candidate who wins the popular vote of the people to lose the presidency. (electoral college) This has happened exactly 3 times in the pas t. Once in 1876, and once in 1888, and most recently during the 2000 elections. President Bush lost the popular vote to candidate Al Gore by over 500,000 votes. Bush still won the presidency because Florida (a key state in elections) had a last minute change in the electoral votes. This threw the entire state into a republican vote. â€Å"On two other occasions (1800 and 1824), the House of Representatives 2 picked the president when nobody won an electoral-college majority. Thomas Jefferson once described this circumstance as ‘the most dangerous blot on our Constitution.’ † (electoral college) Lawrence P. Longley and Neal R. Pierce, two experts on the electoral college and Harvard teachers, agree wholeheartedly with Jefferson’s statement. They know full well the weaknesses of the EC. They did some calculations to illustrate this point further. Californians have over two times as much voting power as do people in Montana because of the population differences. Even worse than that is, if even a few votes change in some key states it can change the whole outcome of an election. e.g. the 2000 Florida elections. There have been 22 razor close elections in our history one of which was † the 1960 race between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon–if 8,971 votes in Illinois and Missouri had switched from Kennedy to Nixon that year, the result would have been an electoral college deadlock.† (electoral college) Longley and Peirce argue that â€Å"it’s only a matter of time before it breaks down completely. The President of the United States is elected indirectly by the electoral college — an archaic and quirky system that threatens every four years to overturn popular will.† (electoral college) To top it all off, the people we choose to vote for the president aren’t even required to keep their pledges. â€Å"In 24 states and the district of Columbia, electors are 3 not bound by any state law or regulation that they vote for the states popular vote winner.† (civic values) For example in 1988 an elector pledged to Michael Dukakis changed his pledge to Lloyd Bentsen. Also it happened in 1976 when an elector pledged to Gerald Ford voted for Ronald Reagan instead. These are just a few of the instances involving â€Å"faithless electors† a term used for electors who change their pledge. The question is what do we do about these problems? The answer is simple, we change the EC. (civic values) There are three basic plans for changing the way the EC works. The first is called the proportional method. This particular option hasn’t been researched as much as the others. Basically if a candidate receives 58 percent of the popular vote then they also receive 58 percent of the electoral vote. This reflects popular will and lets the electors keep their jobs. The problem with this method is that it would require support from every state. (election reform) The second is the plan to abolish the electoral college completely. This is a very simple plan which is becoming increasingly popular. If you were to eliminate the EC it would better reflect th e popular vote, get rid of the possibility of â€Å"faithless electors,† and it might increase voter turnout. (election reform) In order to get rid of the EC entirely you would need two thirds of the house of Representatives and the Senate and 38 states to agree that it needs to be changed. 4 and though abolishing the EC is fast becoming a popular idea (especially since the 2000 elections) there is still not enough support for the idea. The harsh reality is that there probably will never be enough support. This is because the very people who’s jobs depend on the existence of the electoral college are the ones making a substantial amount of the decision whether or not to keep it. (civic values) Luckily there’s a solution. Instead of getting rid of the electoral college just alter it a little bit. The third plan is called the District Method. This could be a good option, because instead of having the entire state swing towards one political party for the electoral vote, now a state could be divided into smaller parts . This would better represent the popular vote and therefore the people. Another reason that the District Method may work is that you don’t need a constitutional amendment. Even if only a few states adopted this method it would be effective. Also it’s a good compromise . The electoral college is still in play, so supporters of it wouldn’t protest. In addition the people would have more of a say in who their president is . And that’s what really matters. (election reform) Now you can see that the popular vote, which our country was founded on as a democracy , can be thwarted to fit the whims of the electoral college. Our basic rights of choosing the people who govern us do not apply in the case of presidential elections which are the most important elections. This cannot stand. When our forefathers wrote the constitution, the United States was much 5 smaller and the people were better represented because they were in smaller groups. That isn’t the case today. Things have changed and we as a society must change with the times. If not, any self appointed dictator could pay or persuade him or herself into power with potentially detrimental results. Make your vote count. Petition to change the electoral college. 6 Work Cited Page â€Å"Electoral College.† Web News: Product reviews. 11/9/2003. Harvard Electoral College Experts. Dec. 2000 http://www.webdesk.com/electoral-college/ Third Party Times. The Electoral College System. 1992, League of Womens Voters of California Education fund. http://www.ksg.harvard.edu./case/3pt/electoral.html Electionreform.org. 2001. Election Reform. http://www.electionreform.org.ERMain/priorities/ec/reform.htm Civic-Values State Lawmakers Mull Electoral College. Nov.2000. http://civic.net/civic-values.archive/200011/msg00181.html

Project Management Email Individual Paper Essay

With the available information from the previous email regarding the projects of Juniper, Palomino and Stargazer, I feel it is in the company’s best interest to go with the Palomino project moving forward. The reason for not selecting the other two options is because Juniper carries too low of a risk for completion. Stargazer is not worth the high risk of completion and the unfamiliarity of how the final product will be with the customer. The method applied for making this decision was by utilizing the feasibility study. The main purpose of this is because using this project would have to make sense to the company as a whole. Answering all of the questions on Return On Investment (ROI), length of project, risk and overall benefit to Piper Industries. Using the feasibility study for the Juniper and Stargazer projects, it was a basic understanding that previously mentioned material would not be present as with the Palomino model. There are five different phases in project management that involve the  Palomino project and those are (Jacobs & Chase 2011): †¢Project conception and initiation: The main focus of this phase is to ensure the project being presented is realistic and will benefit the company. †¢Project definition and planning: The scope of the project will need an outline so the work which needs to be performed is available. Prioritizing, budgets and timelines are in this phase as well. †¢Project launch or execution: Tasks are assigned and each team is made aware of their responsibilities. †¢Project performance and control: The status and progress will be checked against the actual plan to ensure everything is running smoothly. The project manager will make adjustments as need to keep the original project on target. †¢Project close: Once all tasks are complete and the customer is content with the final product, a lesson learn plan will need to be established†¦ Content: Project Management Recommendation Name: Institution: Date: Dear Ray I duly received your email and we reviewed the three projects with my team. After critical analysis the board felt that the second project on your email (Palomino) was the best project for investment. The risk for completion is average; therefore, it does not put the company at a high risk of losing Dear Mr. Gritsch, Our team wants to thank Piper Industries Corporate vice-president, Wendell Deirelein, for choosing our team to analyze the projects. In the attached document you will find our analysis and recommendation of the Project Proposal that benefits your company. Thank you, Project Manager Project Management Recommendation Project to be Implemented Piper Industries needs a completed project and for it to be generating review within 12 month’s of the Project Management Office’s (PMO) review (University of Phoenix, 2012). The project that fits the company’s  requirements is the Stargazer project. The Stargazer project is efficient and the expectation of the project being completed on time is high. The research and development has already started on the widgets (University of Phoenix, 2012). According to the project descriptions, $450,000 has been spent on the product and they average a total of $575,000 being spent in order to bring the product to the market (University of Phoenix, 2012). Even though the dollar amount spent in this project is high, the return on investment for this project is high; by the third year the product is forecasted to have a return of investments of $750,000 (University of Phoenix, 2012). The product life of this project is forecasted to be 7 years (University of Phoenix, 2012). This product is still not being used, meaning Piper Industries will be the first company to launch the product to the market. By bringing such an innovative product into the marketplace, it can make Piper Industries the leader in the industry (University of Phoenix, 2012). Five Phases According to Stricker (2013), â€Å"Whether a project is large or small, the stages of a project are ultimately the same. Initiate the project, and then move into planning, followed by execution†¦. Project Management Recommendation Piper Industries Corp. wants to make a decision on the appropriate project to invest in based on three recommendations. First, Juniper is an enhancement of a current widget being offered by the company, while Palomino is a new line of widget products including enhancements using existing technology, and Stargazer is a production of completely new widgets, which research and development have already started on. The company assigned our team to analyze the three projects and make recommendations on which project the company should invest in. The recommendation must include our description of the five phases of the project and the key deliverables (project completion date and cost) for each project (University of Phoenix, 2013). The Project Recommendation Based on the break-even analysis for the Juniper project it basically shows the company will not, or barely break-even, during the life cycle of the production of these widgets due to technology advancements causing this product line to become obsolete after three years? It has a cost of $325,000 and Return on Investment only producing $250,000 for the two to three years of production with the third year being the end of life for this product. If the company chooses the Palomino project it will also have a hard time breaking-even and producing revenue streams over the life-time of the production with a 5% margin of error with the seventh year being the end of life for the product. The strength of the economy plays a large determining factor in this forecast due to 5% differential in the life cycle of this product. Palomino will cost $655,000 with the Return of Investment being $450,000 over a five year period with that 5%, plus or minus, margin of error. Profit would then start to be recognized in the sixth and seventh year of the life cy†¦ Thank you for choosing our team to analyze the three projects your company has proposed. After meeting with my team and analyzing the data of the three projects, we have to come to an agreement that the project your company should invest in is the Juniper project. Since your company is currently somewhat familiar with the product involved in this project, it will be more efficient and cost effective to continue the enhancement of this product. There are five phases of the project that must take place in order for the project to be a success. The first phase is the planning phase which includes a product approval and launch of the actual product development process. This also includes a mission statement that includes the target market of the product, business goals, key assumptions and constraints. The second phase is concept development. This phase is focused more on the needs of the target market, alternative product concepts which will need further testing and development. The concept is key in this phase because it describes the form, function and features of the product that are accompanied by a set of specifications and an economic justification for the project (Jacobs, pg. 74). The third phase is design detail which entails the specific parts of the product and all standard parts that are needed  from the supplier. This process also includes drawings and computer files that describe the geometry of each tool, purchased parts and process plans. The fourth phase is testing and refinement. This phase is includes construction and evaluation of multiple versions of the preproduction of the product. This is the time when we would be prototypes in order to determine if the product satisfies customer needs. The final phase is the production ramp-up. The product is made of intended production system. The purpose of the ramp-up is to get the workforce trained and to work out a remaining issues that may arise during the process such as†¦ Dear Mr. Gritsch: In continuation of your email dated February 10, 2014, I have completed analysis of three projects: Juniper, Palomino and Stargazer. The risk levels in Juniper, Palomino, and Stargazer are low, medium, and high respectively. It is in the best interest of Piper Industries Corporation to move forward with the Stargazer project. Stargazer is selected due to its feasibility and risk level. From market feasibility study, some strategic customers have already indicated interest in the product. Therefore, I would recommend that the board invest in the project, Stargazer; particularly because the company has already invested $450,000 and the ROI is very high. In continuation of your email dated February 10, 2014, I have completed analysis of three projects: Juniper, Palomino and Stargazer. The risk levels in Juniper, Palomino, and Stargazer are low, medium, and high respectively. It is in the best interest of Piper Industries Corporation to move forward with the Stargazer project. Stargazer is selected due to its feasibility and risk level. From market feasibility study, some strategic customers have already indicated interest in the product. Therefore, I would recommend that the board invest in the project, Stargazer; particularly because the company has already invested $450,000 and the ROI is very high. In continuation of your email dated February 10, 2014, I have completed analysis of three projects: Juniper, Palomino and Stargazer. The risk levels in Juniper, Palomino, and Stargazer are low, medium, and high respectively. It is in the best interest of Piper Industries Corporation to move forward with the Stargazer project. Stargazer is selected due to its feasibility and risk level. From market feasibility study, some strategic customers have already indicated interest in the product. Therefore, I would recommend that the board invest in the project, Stargazer; particularly because the company has already invested $450,000 and the ROI is very high. Stargazer is selected due to its feasibility and risk level. From market feasibility study, some strategic customers have already indicated interest in the product. Therefore, I would recommend that the board invest in the project, Stargazer; particularly because the company has already invested $450,000 and the ROI is very high. My feasibility study focused on Return on Investment (ROI), length of project, risk level and overall benefit to Piper Industries. See below for the results. Juniper: Return on Investment (ROI): 77% or $250,000 for a period of 2 to 3 years Length of project: Uncertain Risk of completion on time: Low Overall benefit: Enhancement of current product, increased product demand Palomino: Return on Investment (ROI): 69% or $450,000 for a period of 5 years Length of project: 7 Years Risk of completion on time: Medium Overall benefit: New product, use of existing technology, custom part, constant demand Stargazer: Return on Investment (ROI): 278% or $1,600,000 for a period of 3 years Length of project: 7 Years Risk of completion on time: High Overall benefit: Research & Development of a new product, market leader, project recommend that the board invest in the project, Stargazer; particularly because the company has Reference Jacobs, F. R. & Chase, R. (2011). Operations and Supply Chain Management (13th ed.) Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill Irwin.