Discussion Paper On The Daktronics Case

July 29, 2021

Discussion Paper on the Daktronics Case

Table of Contents

Order ID# 45178248544XXTG457	Plagiarism Level: 0-0.5%	Writer Classification: PhD competent
Style: APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago	Delivery: Minimum 3 Hours	Revision: Permitted
Sources: 4-6	Course Level: Masters/University College	Guarantee Status: 96-99%

Instructions

Discussion Paper on the Daktronics Case

Before answering the questions below, you must first view the video and read the case’s 25 pages.

https://1drv.ms/u/s!AvhhchZnUsfelB6JcghxjVKHjITA?e=xhPuV4&e=xhPuV4&e=xhPuV4&e=xhPuV4&e=xhPuV4&e=xhPuV4&e=xhPuV4&e=xhPuV4&e=x

After you’ve finished reading and analyzing the Daktronics case, you’ll need to answer the following questions:

1. What was the declared purpose of Daktronics’ lean manufacturing strategy, and do you think the program was successful?
2. At Daktronics, some employees began to wonder if lean approaches could be applied to non-manufacturing areas like offices. Do you think their approach to lean manufacturing can be replicated at Daktronics? Give at least five reasons to back up your claim.
3. What particular advise would you provide Daktronics if you were a consultant with knowledge of the Toyota Production System’s four rules to help them enhance their lean manufacturing implementation?

If it is properly replied in excellent quality and to the exact specifications as requested in the video, I will place additional orders. 🙂

RUBRIC

Excellent Quality

95-100%

Introduction

45-41 points

The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.

Literature Support

91-84 points

The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.

Methodology

58-53 points

Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.

Average Score

50-85%

40-38 points

More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.

83-76 points

Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.

52-49 points

Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.

Poor Quality

0-45%

37-1 points

The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.

75-1 points

Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.

48-1 points

There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met