Early and silent cinema,cinema attractions Essay

Early and silent cinema,cinema attractions - Essay Example The reason for this choice is to show the gradual development of the filmy trends towards modernism. Both the films being silent motion pictures do not have any dialogue. So the actors’ dexterity is the main thing, which made them successful. The Kiss was one of the most popular movies in its genre in the end of the 19th century. This film concentrated more on romance than anything else. It was a challenging job for the director William Heise to make a romantic motion picture where dialogues were not possible to appear. Released in the year 1896, just as the name shows, this was the first film, which showed an onscreen kissing sequence. There were, however, alternative titles given to this film. They were like â€Å"The Mary Irwin Kiss†, â€Å"The Rice Irwin Kiss† and â€Å"The Widow Jones†. All these titles were mainly used in the United States of America where the connoisseurs appreciated the film. John McNally was a playwright who had an earlier work called â€Å"The Widow Jones†. Now this was where the idea of The Kiss was made. The kissing scene is actually said to be the last of McNally’s drama. This work of art is one of the first vaudeville performances transformed into a film. There was no well-knitted plot in this film as such. All it involved was just a kiss. A couple kisses – and this is where the film starts as well as it ends. Rice and Irwin were two popular stage personalities of the late 19th century and they were the only two people who performed in this movie. Kissing on the screen was something, which raised a great hue and cry wherever it was released. Moreover, some viewers were also excited to see a couple kissing on each other’s lip as this was perhaps the first erotic approach made in the world of motion pictures. There were even some controversies regarding the sequence as it was taken to be pornographic as ‘kissing†™ was made public. (Heise, 2008) Voyage à   travers limpossible, Le on the other hand, was a film which involved

Rise And Fall Of Military Rule

Rise And Fall Of Military Rule Militarism was the dominant force in the politics of Latin America in recent history. The rise of military rule in twentieth century Latin America has, to a large extent, shaped the political life of the nations in the region and also produced literature on this form of authoritarianism known as bureaucratic authoritarianism. These authoritarian regimes were unparalleled in their brutality and suppression of civil society and political movements. The bureaucratic authoritarian regime was the predominant political trend in Latin America during the mid 1960s which began with the Brazilian coup of 1964, Argentina in 1966 and 1976, Chile and Uruguay in 1973. This essay begins with the military intervention from earlier years (1930) which will be distinguished from the succession of coups that began with Brazil in 1964, and then treats the factors that brings about military rule in the region, the rise and decline of military dictatorship in Latin America with focus on Brazil, Chile and Argentina. The kind of regimes the military puts up, the reasons behind their fall with particular emphasis and evidence on the fact that military rule is bad for development in the region and the possibility of a comeback of military dictatorship in the 21st century Latin America will also be highlighted. It is pertinent to distinguish the succession of coups that began with brazil in 1964 from earlier interventions between 1930 and 1964.The military frequently intervened in national politics after 1929 the Brazilian military acted as arbitrator in domestic conflicts in 1930, 1937 and 1945.The Argentine militaries overthrew the radicals in 1930, the conservatives in 1943, and Juan Domingo Peron in 1955 (Wynia, 1990).In later years, they interfered occasionally to subdue dictatorial presidents and help set up democratic governments as it happened in Venezuela in 1945 and 1958. Military rule was temporary during this period, Latin America armies engaged in breakthrough coups targeted at replacing one group of civilian leaders with another preferred with the use of their weapons. In contrast, the generals who took over after 1964 came to stay. There are several reasons as to why the military constantly intervenes in the politics of Latin America, professional military officers in the 1960s and 1970s blamed the poor conditions in Latin America on the corruption of civilian politicians and the institutions of liberal democracy, they concluded that economic development and political stability could only be achieved with the establishment of long term military rule. Economic crisis prompted military interventions in that they could result in popular unrest which could provoke disorder; the governments inability to control the situation is a basis for military coups. The military was also motivated to create a more orderly political process distinct from what they were used to in the past of which they themselves contributed to with all the periodic coups. They were determined to create a new political order which they did with the use of force. Military intervention in Latin America is also influenced by foreign governments who use local armies to defend and uphold their interest as at when due. Conspiracies involving foreign agents are covertly organised like the Chilean coup of 1973 of which Allende was overthrown and eventually killed and General Pinochet assumed president fully supported by US authorities (Livingstone, 2009). Revelations from the US senate investigations proved how foreign agents can trigger military interventions. The fact is that military intervention really made no difference in the economic development in the region nor did it bring to an end political unrest rather, resistance began to grow as many became affected, dissidents were either jailed or killed and many people began to disappear, so was the situation of things after the military took over the political life in Latin America. The military of Brazil in 1964 adopted the national security doctrine which states that the nations interest supersedes that of the individual, citizens are mandated to do everything possible to protect the nation. A succession of authoritarian regimes governed Brazil from 1964 to 1985. The military overthrew the Goulart government which was having difficulties controlling the state of the economy which had deteriorated rapidly in 1962 and 1963.The Brazilian generals created a regime in which they would govern the nation as leaders of the armed forces rather than hand power over to a single officer who would eventually become a one man dictator. However there was the need to elect one amongst them to serve as chief executive to enhance orderliness and also to prove to the public that someone was in charge. General Castello Branco was immediately elected as the new president by congress and served until 1967.during his regime, inflation was reduced but not as expected, his government was still unable to achieve economic stabilization. (Wynia, 1990) President Artur Costa e Silva was the next military president to rule from 1967-1969, his authoritarian government used dictatorial measures to achieve its idea of rapid economic development. General Ernesto Geisel assumed presidency in 1974 after Costa e Silva suffered a debilitating stroke in 1969 and years of guerrilla movements. Thereafter president Joao Figueiredo took over in 1979 and ruled until 1985.During this era of military rule in Brazil, political activists and dissidents were jailed as well as anyone who contended with the authoritarian rule. The military interdicted labour movements, political parties and student organisations, civilians had no say whatsoever. On the economic scene, the implementation of structural adjustment programs aimed at controlling inflation actually achieved a certain measure of success and rapid economic growth thereafter causing the military to brag of performing a miracle when in actual fact it was just a case of the military being in the right place at the right time. Wynia (1990) states that what propelled Brazil to speedy economic growth was mainly the combination of foreign and state investments supplemented by domestic private efforts in commerce and agriculture. the use of authoritarian rule to enforce harsh austerity only made the plights of the peasants worse, the miracle began to fade, inflation had risen to over a 100 percent, foreign debts mounted reaching $80 billion in 1982 also the world recession in 1981 and 1982 depressed the value of Brazilian exports (Skidmore and Smith, 2005). This period marked the beginning of the decline of military regime in Brazil. The Argentine military assumed power in June 1966 with the intention of a revolution after the removal of president Illia from office. Three successive army generals attempted to rehabilitate the country politically and economically. General Juan Carlos Ongania took over presidency and considered his regime irrevocable stating repeatedly that there would be no elections for a long time. Ongania made some economic progress by opening the mining industry to foreigners and slowing down price increases, however, his regime was more of the technocrat than the politician. He repressed the national labor movement and jailed its leaders, there was rising resentment throughout the country and in a bid to put an end to it, the military ousted Ongania from office and General Roberto Livingston was named president (Fernandez, 1973). General Livingstons leadership was not any better despite all his political promise of Argentina returning to democratic normalcy. By March 1971, Argentines became openly dissatisfied at the economic and political crisis, the military stepped in once again, removed Livingston and General Lanusse was named president. Lanusse intention was to achieve a new political order and opted for a relegalization of political parties, he took even a greater gamble by allowing Peron return to presidency. The military returned after the Peronista government of 1973 and fell apart with the death of Peron a year later, Isabel his wife and successor could neither hold the government together. General Jorge Rafael Videla took over in March 1976 and launched a vicious campaign dirty war against the opposition, guerrilla movements were on the rise seeking the overthrow of the government and the installation of a socialist regime along Marxist-Leninist lines. The junta embarked on an all out war against its opposition, there were the desaparecidos, those who disappeared and were never heard of (Skidmore and Smith, 2005).The dictatorship affected society in Argentina, people lived in fear and the economy suffered. Videla handed over presidency to General Roberto Viola in 1981; Viola was replaced by Army commander-in-chief general Leopoldo Galtieri who went to war over the Falkland/Malvinas Island with Britain. The British defeated and humiliated the Argentines and also blocked European trade with Argentina for three months to punish Galtieri economically, the Argentine economy went from bad to worse. In 1983, there was a transition from military to civilian government with radical party candidate Raul Alfonsin emerging as president. The new regime was committed to prosecute military officers involved in the killing or disappearance of more than 10,000 people. Nine military commanders-in-chief were charged for crimes committed and sentenced to prison.No other Latin America government had dared prosecute its officers for crimes committed during a military regime (Skidmore and Smith, 2005) The government of General Augusto Pinochet seized power on September 11, 1973 by overthrowing the elected government of socialist president Salvador Allende (Arturo, 1984). The Chilean coup of 1973 was justified by the new military government as necessary to restore order, avoid class warfare and salvage the economy, the government set out to impose on Chile a bureaucratic authoritarian regime. The first four years of the junta brought about terrible human rights abuses, thousands of civilians linked with the Popular Unity parties were murdered, tortured, jailed, brutalized or exiled. International organisations and the Roman Catholic Church condemned the widespread violations of human rights in Chile and as such, the church came into constant conflict with the junta. General Pinochet emerged dominant figure; his government was a one-man dictatorship with the rest of the junta under his command. He made himself commander in chief of the military and chief executive of the state, Pinochet alone commanded power. Caistor (2006) reveals Pinochets use of brutal force to impose order on the country in a reign of terror that killed more than 3,000 Chileans and thousands tortured or forced to live in exile abroad. The United States under the Carter administration criticised Pinochet for the 1976 assassination of Orlando Letelier, the former Chilean ambassador to the US under the Allende regime. On the economic front, Skidmore and Smith (2005) states that civilian technocrats known as the Chicago boys introduced significant changes in the economic policy. They reasoned that what restricted Chiles economic growth was the governments intervention in the economy which results to reduced competition, artificially increased wages that leads to inflation. The ec onomic boom proved to be short-lived, there was an economic crisis by the end of 1981, exports and foreign credit fell sharply, unemployment soared to 30 percent, real wages fell and GNP dropped 13 percent in the same year. (Edgardo, 1986) General Pinochet stepped down in March 1998 after seventeen years as a military dictator; he was arrested in London in October 1998 at the request of a Spanish magistrate to prosecute him for human rights violation of Spanish citizens. The periods of protracted military rule in Latin America failed to bring about enduring economic recovery or re-ordering the Civilian political system which were some of the reasons why the military claimed to have intervened in the politics of the region. They have proved unable to cope with crisis on the economic front, bereft of ideas once an initial policy has turned sour (Cammack, 1985). In essence, military rule can be argued to be bad for development as it does not produce durable solutions to political and economic issues. Its interest is more of selfish purpose is and always ready to shut down any opposition with the use of force, the people have no say whatsoever. The twenty first century augurs very well for Latin America societies with the decline of military rule. Finer (1976) provides an explanation as to why these military regimes fall from power. He states that the military suffers from two crippling political weaknesses: their technical inability to administer and their lack of legitimacy to rule. The failure of the armed forces to establish legitimacy affected their downfall, legitimacy is necessary because a government cannot adequately rule by using force alone. However, this does not mean that a regime cannot rule without legitimacy, but as Finer implied, the threat of physical compulsion is not an efficient, i.e. an economical, way of securing obedience. (Finer, 1976:16). Futhermore, rule by force alone will eventually be challenged by anyone strong enough to try, this explains the fact that military coups are often always followed by a succession of counter coups The decline of military rule in Latin America can also be associated to the fact that the generals were not properly prepared for the task, their education hardly offered any preparation for the reorganization of complex economic and social institutions. Military regime seems to follow a similar direction in the region, starting boldly with achieving economic stabilization which eventually declines as a result of economic crisis or social and political reconstruction. However, the military of Latin America may be out but definitely not down. It is rather utopian to say the military have abdicated from politics for good because recent coups though short-lived prove otherwise. On the 28th of June 2009, president Zelaya of Honduras was ousted in a military coup because the left- wing leader was seeking a change in the constitution to allow him stand for re-election; arrested in his pyjamas, he was sent into exile in Costa Rica. According to the Guardian (2009), Zelaya described his arrest as a coup and kidnapping. Similarly, short-lived coups in Ecuador and Venezuela shows that the military still has a hold of political affairs. The Ecuadorian coup of January 2000 saw President Jamil Mahud deposed by Ecuadors Indians with the support of military leaders. Also, in 2002 there was a brief seizure of power when Venezuelas Chavez was ousted by the military and detained at an army base. Interestingly, a recent edition of US magazine Newsweek, predicts that this year 2010 will see the fall of Venezuelas Chavez following a coup. In my opinion, the Chavez coup predictions is wishful thinking, the Obama administration will never duplicate what they did in Honduras. A civil war will break out if Chavez is ousted and a war against Venezuela implies a war against Ecuador, Cuba, Bolivia, Nicaragua and possibly Brazil and Argentina; knowing that if Venezuelas leader is taken out by the US, they will be next. Furthermore, in November 2009 Paraguayan president Fernando Lugo in an attempt to avoid being removed from office via a coup, fired his military chiefs and vowed that he would not be forced out of office before the end of his tenure in 2013. As aforementioned, there is no guarantee that the military will not leave their barracks once again and get involved in political affairs although it cannot be compared to the 20th century when military rule was dominant in Latin America. However, the military is acquiring new roles both nationally and internationally; many of the regions armed forces have become overwhelmingly internationalized providing humanitarian assistance, security and stability needed to ensure political, social and economic development (Ross, 2004) Conclusion The role of the military in 20th century Latin America caused more harm than good; military intervention really made no difference in improving the economy rather resistance began to grow as people became affected by military dictatorship which constantly violated human rights. However, there is the potential for military coups in Latin America today but the risk of their intervention is reduced because of its legacy of the past. Ideally, the role of the military is to provide security and stability rather than harbour political ambitions.

Not Just for Laughs: Remembering the Porter Essay -- essays research p

Macbeth is one of William Shakespeare's most famous plays-a story of murder, betrayal, and uninhibited ambition. After proving himself in war, the titular character is rewarded by Duncan and given the title Thane of Cawdor. Unsatisfied with his new position, Macbeth (partially due to temptations from the witches and his wife) decides to assassinate King Duncan and claim the throne for himself.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The Porter scene in Macbeth occurs at the beginning of Act 2, Scene 3, just after Macbeth's offstage murder of Duncan. The Porter is the keeper of the Gate at Inverness Castle, and he occupies the stage while Macbeth, who hears the knocking at the end of the second scene, wishes that that the knocking could bring Duncan back to life (II.ii.88-89). Though the Porter scene is only 40 lines, it is quite memorable and also one of the most debated scenes in Shakespeare. The Porter is a special character; he speaks in prose rather than verse. His scene is also notable because it is a dividing point in the play. After his scene, Macbeth's thirst for power worsens, and his wife becomes more and more mentally unstable.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The Porter imagines himself as keeper of the Gate to Hell. It is a suitable analogy, as he is the porter of a castle which holds a great, ambitious evil that will soon send a nation to war. He imagines himself admitting three men into his castle: a farmer, an equivocator (a Jesuit priest), and a tailor. The farmer hangs himself â€Å"in the expectation of plenty,† the equivocator equivocates, and the tailor cheats his customers by using generic hose instead of high-quality French hose. The Porter also remarks that the castle is â€Å"too cold for Hell,† perhaps implying Macbeth's inherent evil and sinister lust for power.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The scene also advances the themes of equivocation and deceptive appearances. Each of the men mentioned by the Porter has somehow equivocated, and the Porter later speaks of alcohol and sex with Lennox and Macduff. He tells the men that such things are catalysts for equivocation. Drink, the Porter says, â€Å"equivocates him in a sleep, and giving him the lie, leaves him,† meaning that drink creates a false illusion of sexual pleasure in a dream (II.ii.34-35). His dialogue, while humorous, reinforces some of the broader themes of the play. There are numerous scholarly ar... ...nces to Hell are Christian, the idea of Macduff as a Christ-like figure is also Christian. Though I say the Nicene Creed every Sunday at church, the idea of Macduff â€Å"descending into Hell† never occurred to me. If anything, he simply seemed nothing more than Duncan's loyal servant. I never made the connection to the end of the play, when Macduff brings about Macbeth's downfall. It is an expansion on Shakespeare's use of Christianity in the play. Macduff found Malcolm and an army to defeat Macbeth at the court of Edward I, a man believed to have the power to cure people with the touch of his hands. The Church provided redemption for Scotland, and by associating Macduff with a Christ-like figure, this motif is continued.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The Porter scene is not as simple as it appears. A close, scholarly analysis produces a scene that is more layered than originally thought. Scholars of earlier centuries ignored the scene because of its seemingly crude, prose style; however, it becomes obvious that without the scene, Macbeth loses some of its thematic significance. Works Cited Harcourt, John B. 1961. â€Å"I Pray You, Remember the Porter.† Shakespeare Quarterly 12: 393-402.

Comparison of Indirect Cost Multipliers for Vehicle Manufacturing Essay

Disclaimer This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor The University of Chicago, nor any of their employees or officers, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of document authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof, Argonne National Laboratory, or The University of Chicago. COMPARISON OF INDIRECT COST MULTIPLIERS FOR VEHICLE MANUFACTURING INTRODUCTION In the process of manufacturing and selling vehicles, a manufacturer incurs certain costs. Among these costs are those incurred directly as a part of manufacturing operations and those incurred indirectly in the processes of manufacturing and selling. The indirect costs may be productionrelated, such as R&D and engineering; business-related, such as corporate staff salaries and pensions; or retail-sales-related, such as dealer support and marketing. These indirect costs are recovered by allocating them to each vehicle. Under a stable, high-volume production process, the allocation of these indirect costs can be approximated as multipliers (or factors) applied to the direct cost of manufacturing. A manufacturer usually allocates indirect costs to finished vehicles according to a corporation-specific pricing strategy. Because the volumes of sales and production vary widely by model within a corporation, the internal corporate percent allocation of various accounting categories (such as profit or corporate overhead) can vary widely among individual models. Approaches also vary across corporations. For our purposes, an average value is constructed, by means of a generic representative method, for vehicle models produced at high volume. To accomplish this, staff at Argonne National Laboratory’s (ANL’s) Center for Transportation Research analyzed the conventional vehicle cost structure and developed indirect cost multipliers for passenger vehicles. This memorandum summarizes the results of an effort to compare and put on a common basis the cost multipliers used in ANL’s electric and hybrid electric vehicle cost estimation procedures with those resulting from two other methodologies. One of the two compared methodologies is derived from a 1996 presentation by Dr. Chris Borroni-Bird of Chrysler Corporation, the other is by Energy and Environmental Analysis, Inc. (EEA), as described in a 1995 report by the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA), Congress of the United States. The cost multipliers are used for scaling the component costs to retail prices. ANL METHODOLOGY The ANL methodology described here is based on an analysis concerned with electric vehicle production and operating costs (Cuenca et al. 2000; Vyas et al. 1998). The analysis evaluated the cost structure for conventional vehicle manufacturing and retailing and assigned shares of the manufacturer’s suggested retail price (MSRP) to various cost contributors. Multipliers developed from the ANL methodology are applied to the manufacturing cost of an individual component in order to scale the component cost to the retail price. Several cost contributors are included in the methodology, as summarized in Table 1. Some of the vehicle components for electric and hybrid electric vehicles would be procured from outside suppliers. This assumption is applied to electric drive components, excluding the battery; the vehicle manufacturer would produce the rest. Thus, two cost multipliers, one for the components manufactured internally and the other for outsourced components, are necessary to estimate the price of electric and hybrid electric vehicles. Outside suppliers would incur some of the costs normally borne by the vehicle manufacturer. In the ANL methodology, we assume that the costs of â€Å"Warranty,† â€Å"R&D/Engineering,† and â€Å"Depreciation and Amortization† are borne by the Page 1 suppliers of outsourced components. The outside suppliers would include these costs in their prices. The following two cost multipliers are computed by using â€Å"Cost of Manufacture† as the base: Cost multiplier for components manufactured internally = 100/50 = 2. 00. Cost multiplier for outsourced components = 100/(50 + 6. 5 + 5. 5 + 5) = 1. 50. Table 1 Contributors to Manufacturer’s Suggested Retail Price in ANL Methodology Cost Category Cost Contributor Relative to Share of Cost of Vehicle MSRP Manufacturing (%) Vehicle Manufacturing Cost of Manufacture 1. 00 50. 0 Production Overhead Warranty 0. 10 5. 0 R&D/Engineering 0. 13 6. 5 Depreciation and Amortization 0. 11 5. 5 Corporate Overhead Corporate Overhead, Retirement and 0. 14 7. 0 Health Selling Distribution, Marketing, Dealer 0. 47 23. 5 Support, and Dealer Discount Sum of Costs 1. 95 97. 5 Profit Profit 0. 05 2. 5 Total Contribution to 2. 00 100. 0 MSRP METHODOLOGY DERIVED FROM BORRONI-BIRD PRESENTATION In his presentation, entitled â€Å"Automotive Fuel Cell Requirements,† at the 1996 Automotive Technology Development Customers’ Coordination Meeting, Borroni-Bird included charts on the â€Å"Typical American Automobile: Price/Cost Breakdown. † The charts provided a graphical breakdown of vehicle price, showing cost contributors and profit. We used the charts to arrive at percentage shares of vehicle price by various contributors. Table 2 shows the resulting allocation. Page 2 Table 2 Price/Cost Breakdown Based on Borroni-Bird Presentation Cost Category Cost Contributor a Vehicle Manufacturing Fixed Cost Selling Sum of Costs Profit MSRP a Material Cost Assembly Labor and Other Manufacturing a Costs Transportation/Warranty Amortization and Depreciation, Engineering R&D, Pension and Health Care, Advertising, and Overhead Price Discounts Dealer Markup Automobile Profit. Relative to Cost of Vehicle Manufacturing 0. 87 0. 13 0. 09 0. 44 Share of MSRP (%) 42. 5 6. 5 4. 5 21. 5 0. 10 0. 36 1. 99 0. 06 2. 05 5. 0 17. 5 97. 5 2. 5 100. 0 These two contributors are scaled to sum to 1 in the third column, as in Table 1. In his presentation, Borroni-Bird did not evaluate the treatment of in-house or outsourced components. His methodology does not lend itself to easy computation of cost multipliers comparable with those in the ANL methodology, unless we make a few assumptions. We have assumed that â€Å"Material Cost,† taken together with â€Å"Assembly Labor and Other Manufacturing Costs,† would form the â€Å"Vehicle Manufacturing† base for the in-house components. The costs of â€Å"Transportation/Warranty,† â€Å"Amortization and Depreciation,† and â€Å"Engineering R&D† would be borne by the suppliers of outsourced components. However, â€Å"Amortization and Depreciation† and â€Å"Engineering R&D† costs were merged with â€Å"Pension and Health Care,† â€Å"Advertising,† and â€Å"Overhead† costs by Borroni-Bird. We assumed that half of the costs under this category would be borne by the suppliers of outsourced components. Our assumptions led to the following cost multipliers: Cost multiplier for components manufactured internally = 100/(42. 5 + 6. 5) = 2. 05. Cost multiplier for outsourced components = 100/(42. 5 + 6. 5 + 4. 5 + 10. 75) = 1. 56. These cost multipliers are very similar to those computed with the ANL methodology. Comparison of ANL and Borroni-Bird Methodologies The information from Tables 1 and 2 is shown in terms of cost categories in Table 3. Both methodologies use vehicle manufacturing cost as the base and add other costs to it. The share of MSRP attributable to â€Å"Vehicle Manufacturing† is 50% in the ANL methodology, compared with 49% in the Borroni-Bird Methodology. Borroni-Bird combined several cost contributors under â€Å"Fixed Cost. † These contributors include (see Table 2) â€Å"Amortization and Depreciation,† â€Å"Engineering R&D,† â€Å"Pension and Health Care,† â€Å"Advertising,† and â€Å"Overhead. † Except for the inclusion of â€Å"Advertising,† â€Å"Production Overhead† and â€Å"Corporate Overhead† in the ANL methodology can be combined to form an equivalent category. ANL’s total of 24% by production Page 3 and corporate overheads is slightly lower than the total of 26% by Borroni-Bird. The ANL category of â€Å"Selling,† which includes â€Å"Distribution,† â€Å"Marketing,† â€Å"Dealer Support,† and â€Å"Dealer Discount,† is broader than that of â€Å"Price Discounts† and â€Å"Dealer Markup† specified by BorroniBird, and this category’s contribution is understandably slightly higher in the ANL methodology. The share of MSRP by â€Å"Profit† is the same in both methodologies. The absolute differences, computed as ANL value minus Borroni-Bird value, are 1% for â€Å"Vehicle Manufacturing,† –2% for â€Å"Fixed Cost,† and 1% for â€Å"Selling† cost. Table 3 Comparison of Vehicle Price/Cost Allocation by ANL and Borroni-Bird Methodologies ANL Methodology Cost Contributor or Category Vehicle Manufacturing Production Overhead Corporate Overhead Selling Sum of Costs Profit MSRP EEA METHODOLOGY The methodology of Energy and Environmental Analysis is summarized in the OTA report OTAETI-638, entitled Advanced Automotive Technology: Visions of a Super-Efficient Family Car, published in September 1995. The values of some cost contributors are not listed in the report. Moreover, depreciation, amortization, and tooling expenses are assumed to be case-specific and therefore must be computed for each case. In order to make the EEA and ANL methodologies comparable, some assumptions were necessary. These assumptions are described in the summary below. The EEA cost equations can be simplified as follows: Cost of Manufacture = Division Cost ? [1 + Division Overhead] Manufacturer Cost = [Cost of Manufacture + Assembly Labor + Assembly Overhead] ? [1 + Manufacturing Overhead + Manufacturing Profit] + Engineering Expense + Tooling Expense + Facilities Expense Retail Price Equivalent = Manufacturer Cost ? [1 + Dealer Margin] Borroni-Bird Methodology Share of Cost Contributor or Category Share of MSRP (%) MSRP (%) 50. 0 Vehicle Manufacturing 49. 0 17. 0 Fixed Cost 26. 0 7. 0 23. 5 Selling 22. 5 97. 5 Sum of Costs 97. 5 2. 5 Automobile Profit 2. 5 100. 0 MSRP 100. 0 Page 4 The report lists the following values for overhead, profit, and dealer margin: Division Overhead = Supplier Overhead = 0. 20 (We assume that division and supplier overheads are equal; only the supplier overhead is given in the report. ) Manufacturing Overhead = 0. 25 Manufacturing Profit = 0. 20 Dealer Margin = 0. 25 Because the documentation in the OTA report does not provide values for â€Å"Assembly Labor,† â€Å"Assembly Overhead,† â€Å"Engineering Expense,† â€Å"Tooling Expense,† and â€Å"Facilities Expense,† cost multipliers cannot be computed directly from these data. The â€Å"Assembly Labor† and â€Å"Assembly Overhead† share of MSRP is 6. 5% in Borroni-Bird’s presentation. The engineering, tooling, and facilities expenses can be taken as the sum of â€Å"R&D/Engineering† and â€Å"Depreciation and Amortization† from the ANL methodology, at 12% of the MSRP. In deriving the division cost and price relationship below, we use the term Retail Price Equivalent (RPE) from the OTA report instead of MSRP. The RPE can be computed as follows: RPE = = = {[Division Cost ? 1. 2 + 0. 065 RPE] ? 1. 45 + 0. 12 RPE} ? 1. 25 Division Cost ? 2. 175 + 0. 268 RPE Division Cost ? 2. 175/(1 – 0. 268) = Division Cost ? 2. 97 Putting ANL and EEA Methodologies on a Common Basis As it was described in the OTA report, the EEA methodology did not provide enough data to compute the cost multipliers. We assumed some cost shares to be the same between the EEA, Borroni-Bird, and ANL methodologies while developing the above relationship between Division Cost and RPE. The EEA methodology is based on the material and labor costs of a division of the vehicle manufacturer, with other costs added on. The ANL methodology evaluates an assembled vehicle, using the vehicle manufacturing cost as the base cost. The ANL methodology also assigns additional costs to the outsourced components, whereas the treatment of such components is not clear in the EEA methodology. We have attempted to develop a common basis for the ANL and EEA methodologies by assigning shares of the final vehicle price, RPE in the EEA methodology, to individual cost categories similar to those listed in Table 1. Table 4 presents such a summary for the EEA methodology. Three cost contributors, â€Å"Division Cost,† â€Å"Division Overhead,† and â€Å"Assembly Labor and Overhead,† are combined under the â€Å"Vehicle Manufacturing† category. Two cost contributors, â€Å"Manufacturing Overhead† and â€Å"Engineering, Tooling, and Facilities Expenses,† combine to form the â€Å"Overhead† category. The â€Å"Dealer Margin† in the EEA methodology represents a factor applied to all manufacturer costs and profit. We assumed that this factor represents all costs of selling the vehicle. Although the profit is computed at the manufacturing level by EEA, we moved the profit to the bottom of the table to be consistent with prior tables. The cost allocation in Table 4 allows us to compute the in-house components cost multiplier as follows: Cost multiplier for in-house components = 100/(33. 7 + 6. 7 + 6. 5) = 2. 14 Page 5 To compute the cost multiplier for an outsourced component, one more assumption is necessary. In the ANL methodology, we assumed that the supplier will bear the costs of â€Å"Warranty,† â€Å"R&D Engineering,† and â€Å"Depreciation and Amortization. † However, the EEA methodology does not identify the warranty cost separately. We assumed it to be half of â€Å"Manufacturing Overhead† at 5. 05%. This, with the earlier assumption related to â€Å"Engineering, Tooling, and Facilities Expenses,† led to the following computation: Cost multiplier for outsourced components = 100/(33. 7 + 6. 7 + 6. 5 + 5. 05 + 12) = 1. 56. These multipliers, adapted from our extension of theE EA information on vehicle costs, are very close to those derived from the ANL and Borroni-Bird methodologies. Table 4 Contributors to Retail Price Equivalent in EEA Methodology Cost Category Cost Contributor a Vehicle Manufacturing Overhead Selling Sum of Costs Profit Manufacturing Profit Total Contribution to RPE a Division Cost a Division Overhead Assembly Labor and a Overhead Manufacturing Overhead Engineering, Tooling, and Facilities Expenses Dealer Margin Relative to Cost of Vehicle Manufacturing 0. 72 0. 14 0. 14 0. 22 0. 26 0. 49 1. 97 0. 17 2. 14 Share of RPE (%) 33. 7 6. 7 6. 5 10. 1 12. 0 22. 9 91. 9 8. 1 100. 0 These three cost contributors are scaled to sum to 1 in the third column, as in Table 1. Comparison of ANL and EEA Methodologies The information from Tables 1 and 4 is presented in terms of cost categories in Table 5 for easy comparison. The â€Å"Vehicle Manufacturing† cost share is 46. 9% in the EEA methodology, compared with 50% in the ANL methodology. EEA’s RPE share of 22. 1% by overhead is lower than the ANL value of 24%. The cost of selling is 22. 9% in the EEA methodology, which is close to the ANL value of 23. 5%. The largest difference is in the RPE share by profit, which is 8. 1% in the EEA methodology, more than three times the ANL value of 2. 5%. According to Economic Indicators: The Motor Vehicle’s Role in the U. S. Economy (American Automobile Manufacturers Association 1998), the average net income before taxes for the three domestic manufacturers was 3. 9% during 1994-1997. Aside from vehicle sales, this value (3. 9%) includes income from spare parts sales and vehicle financing. Thus, the profit share appears very high in the EEA methodology. The absolute differences – computed as ANL value minus EEA value – are 3. 1% for component/material cost, 1. 9% for overhead, 0. 6% for selling, and –5. 6% for profit. Page 6 Table 5 Comparison of Price Allocation by ANL and EEA Methodologies ANL Methodology Cost Contributor or Category Vehicle Manufacturing Production Overhead Corporate Overhead Selling Sum of Costs Profit MSRP SUMMARY An attempt to put three methodologies for automobile cost allocation on a common basis is presented in this technical memorandum. This comparison was carried out to verify the reasonableness of the cost multipliers used in ANL’s cost models for electric vehicles and hybrid electric vehicles. When put into a common format, by means of certain assumptions, the three approaches yielded the cost multipliers provided in Table 6. Table 6 Summary of Cost Multipliers Computed on a Common Basis Multiplier for In-House Components Outsourced Components ACKNOWLEDGMENT Funding for the analysis presented here was provided by the Planning and Assessment function of the Office of Transportation Technologies of the U. S. Department of Energy, managed by Dr. Philip Patterson. This technical memorandum is produced under U. S. Government contract No. W-31-109-Eng-38. REFERENCES American Automobile Manufacturers Association, 1998, Economic Indicators: The Motor Vehicle’s Role in the U. S. Economy, Detroit, Mich. Borroni-Bird, C. , 1996, â€Å"Automotive Fuel Cell Requirements,† Proceedings of the 1996 Automotive Technology Development Customers’ Coordination Meeting, U. S. Department of Energy, Office of Transportation Technologies, Washington, D. C. ANL 2. 00 1. 50 Borroni-Bird 2. 05 1. 56 EEA 2. 14 1. 56 EEA Methodology Share of Cost Contributor or Category MSRP (%) 50. 0 Vehicle Manufacturing 17. 0 Overhead 7. 0 23. 5 Selling 97. 5 Sum of Costs 2. 5 Profit 100. 0 RPE Share of RPE (%) 46. 9 22. 1 22. 9 91. 9 8. 1 100. 0 Page 7 Cuenca, R. M. , L. L. Gaines, and A. D. Vyas, 2000, Evaluation of Electric Vehicle Production and Operating Costs, Argonne National Laboratory Report ANL/ESD-41, Argonne, Ill. (to be published). Vyas, A. , R. Cuenca, and L. Gaines, 1998, â€Å"An Assessment of Electric Vehicle Life Cycle Costs to Consumers,† Proceedings of the 1998 Total Life Cycle Conference, SAE International Report P339, Warrendale, Penn. , pp. 161-172.

Business Process Reengineering Essay

Whenever we order our drinks at the coffee shops on a daily basis, we are actually triggering a business process. When the waiter at the coffee shop takes the order at our table, he will pass our orders to the kitchen by yelling our orders from one end of the coffee shop to another. Most of the time, the kitchen helper will hear the order and start to prepare. The waiter will then go around taking a few other orders. After he is done with taking orders, he will collect the drinks from the kitchen and serve it to the customers. Customers will then pay up for the drinks. In the event there isn’t enough change for big notes, the waiter will have to go back to the counter to break the notes into smaller variations in order to return the correct amount of change to the customers. In some cases, he might deliver the wrong order as he doesn’t note down the orders in pen and paper, he just passes on the order to the kitchen by shouting. Restaurant scenario Many years down the road, the coffee shop has earned enough to pay for a renovation and overhaul. The boss of the coffee shop has decided to upgrade the coffee shop to a restaurant. He realises that he need to retrain his staff to operate the restaurant as the methods of operating a restaurant differs from the methods of operating the coffee shop. He also realise that he can incorporate some equipment to help him process orders more efficiently. In summary, he needs to change the way the restaurant does things (processes) and how he does things (Method/tools used to carry out the task). The boss has to do a total revamp of the methods and processes of how he was previously used to in the coffee shop. This is what is meant by business process reengineering. In definition, business process is an organizational change in its methods used to redesign an organization to improve efficiency and effectiveness (Mehta, 2011). Reengineering is the organizational change characterized by drastic process transformation. Concepts BPR focus & Objectives In order for companies to operate more efficiently, reduce waste, retain their customers and drive sales, understanding and applying BPR is essential for this change to happen. Firstly, we have to map out the organization’s goals, objectives, primary business function, the people they have and the tools they use. The second objective would be to analyse the current process and redesign/revamp them. By doing so, companies will be able to achieve better ROI and eliminate waste. This will help the company to gain competitive advantage over others in its efficiency and also profits (Muharram, 2007). Perspective of BPR BPR is a framework designed for companies to adopt. This framework helps to optimize processes by making it more streamlined. A good example to explain this point would be the difference between a vertical and cross functional organization. Horizontal organization In a horizontal organization, the customer interacts only with one party but in a vertical structure, customers might have to deal with different departments. Figure 3 shows a customer dealing with his account manager for the application of a loan. In the process, the customer does not need to deal with the different departments involved in the application of a loan. This allows the loan application to be more streamlined (Zigiaris, 2000). A vertical structure is not as efficient as customers will have to deal with several departments to process their requests. In a call centre environment, when the customer logs a call for a IT issue, the calling department will answer his call and log the case. He will then be transferred to the technical department who will assist him with 1st level troubleshooting. In the event he cannot solve the problem, the matter will be escalated to a level 2 support and also a product specialist. After his issue has been resolved, he will be transferred to the payment department where he will pay for the IT services he has used. After making payment, he will receive an email from the feedback department where they will ask the customer for feedback for the case. This slows down the entire process of resolving the problem from end to end. One of the main goal in BPR is to optimize the processes that takes place within the organization and reduce lead time. In order to do so, businesses has to look at its processes from a clean state perspective. For a company to be able to streamline their processes, they have to add value to their customers through their processes. Processes should maintain its ability to add value to customers. For those processes that do not, we can automate them and put the focus on adding value. This will result in higher customer satisfaction, better efficiency, elimination of watse and greater ROI(Park, 2008). BPR Methodologies There are several techniques to business process redesign and reengineering. We will discuss a few in this section. Hammer and Champy A major overhaul in the organization’s process and structure is one of the keys to ensuring that cost is lowered and service quality is being improved. The means of implemeting these is via the use of information technology. Besides reorganization and using IT to power the business, redesigning the work process and optimizing it, helps the organization to reduce time taken, lower costs and improve quality (Rouse, 2009). A Case study of Ford Motor Company Ford used to employ 500 accounts payable staff in the past. These 500 staff are running the tasks of tracking faults between purchase orders, receipts and invoices. After Ford decided to reengineer their process, the number of staff needed reduced from 500 to 125. Their reengineering efforts include: * Creating an online database where all purchase orders issued by the buyers are being captured * Goods are being checked when received. The shipment being sent has to match with that in the database. This allows the staff to check if the goods were actual orders being indented. This system of checking eliminates the need to check for faults between purchase orders. * Goods being received will be marked as received and the database is being updated real-time. (Hammer & Champy, 2000) Perspective of process reengineering by Hammer and Champy 1. Organize around outcomes, not tasks. 2. Identify all the processes in an organization and prioritize them in order of redesign urgency. 3. Integrate information processing work into the real work that produces the information. 4. Treat geographically dispersed resources as though they were centralized. 5. Link parallel activities in the workflow instead of just integrating their results. 6. Put the decision point where the work is performed, and build control into the process. 7. Capture information once and at the source. (Rouse, 2009) The methodology preached by Hammer and Champy clearly reflects what was being discussed in the BPR focus and objectives at the start of this report. Its focus is to eliminate waste and also to focus on deliverables that will add value to customers. In order to do so, IT systems can be employed in order to automate processes which do not add value. This point of automation is being reiterated in the case study of Ford Motors. This concept of rethinking and redesigning the business process radically helps us to improve many areas of the business such as lowering costs, improving customer service, ensure quality is being maintained and speed up the entire workflow.