The Up To Date Styrofoam Made More Friendly

Do you know about Styrofoam ?  can you find some produc of styrofom? We can find a styrofom in fastfood restaurant like KFC, MCd , Hokben , etc. Usually it use as food and drink container.Nowadays, siencetist has found an uptodate technology of styrofom.
All this time we often avoids the use of Styrofoam because it beliefs as an unfriendly product and needs 1000 years to be loose. But with up to date technology, Styrofoam can be loose in 4 years only. The Oxodegradable Polystyrene is the first friendly food container in Indonesia.
The use of polystyrene, likely known as Styrofoam, now renew with an added substance named Oxium. It makes polystyrene become oxodegradable characterized and can be loose (recycle) faster, in 4 years only. Besides it is green label certified, this oxodegradable polystyrene has been proven as a BPOM regulated food container. “Nowadays  oxodegradable polystyrene box implicated as a friendly product in a fastfood restaurant,” Sugianto Tandio said, CEO PT Tirta Marta Indonesia, Tuesday (26/4/2011)
He thought that this innovation showed Indonesian people has high awareness of environment attention. And it is getting higher. “With a high varied innovation, Oxium as the pioneer of friendly technology proudly played a role and contributed to preserve environment and also re-green  our earth,” .
The advantage of oxium : make recyceling siklus faster and can reduce the risk of cancer and tumor.  This innovation has launched and appreciatade by Indonesia Solid Waste Association (InSWA).
From the presentation above I can conclude that styrofom is not a harmful product if we add oxium to make it safer  and become more friendly to our invorenment .And I suggest you to take more care about what are we consume , one of the best is using styrofom with oxium added.

artikel Robohnya Citybank

Robohnya Citybank berawal dari kesalahan dalam pengelolaan SDM,lebih tepatnya adalah kegagalan succession planning, dalam hal ini adalah pemilihan CEO yang kurang berkompeten.CEO yang terpilih(Sandy Weill )bukan merupakan CEO yang tangguh, juga bukan sosok yang visioner, yang mampu membaca arah strategi perbankan global masa depan.Sandy weill merupakan pemimpin yang otoriter,karena itulah banyak orang yang hengkang lantaran tidak betah dengan gaya kepemimpinanya.
Selain itu Sandy Weill melakukan kesalahan yang cukup fatal,dengan memilih orang untuk menggantikan kedudukanya berdasarkan system “like-dislike” yaitu dengan memilih Charles Prince,yang merupakan kepala bagian hukum,yang tidak memiliki latar perbankan yang kuat, Dan, pada tahun 2007 lalu, Citibank mengalami kredit macet perumahan yang membikinnyabangkrut. Dan Citibank harus kehilangan uang sebesar Rp 160 trilyun. Harga sahamnya hancur berantakan, dari sebesar $ 57 turun ke angka $ 20 – membuat para pemegang sahamnya harus kehilangan market value sebesar Rp 1,400 trilyun .Dan Prince pun segera dipecat.

Masalah utama robohnya Citybank adalah, mutu CEO mereka yang kurang handal.Serta pemilihan pemimpin yang mementingkan unsure subjectif daripada unsure objectif yang sangat berpengaruh terhadap pengelolaan SDM di Citybank.
Memang harus diakui banyak dalam organisasi lebih banyak mengangkat seseorang seperti dengan sistim kroni atau juga dengan system”like-dislike”,serta tidak memperhatikan kemampuanya.Dalam Jangka pendek mungkin tidak terlalu berpengaruh tetapi dalam jangka panjang sebuah organisasi bisa dipastikan akan mengalami kemunduran jika pemimpinnya kurang berkompeten .
Jika organisasi belum lah memiliki proses dan kultur yang excelent, mungkin sosok CEOlah yang dapat membuat organisasi itu berkibar, atau malah terjerembab.

BENCHMARKING APPLICHEM

1.  How would you measure the productivity at a plant and perform a fair comparison of the performance of Applichem's six plants?

We assume that the 'Number of People at Each Operation at Each Plant' means 'number of people for each product type at each plant'. Therefore the product variety difference among different plants should already be taken into consideration in Exhibit 3.

But the package variety is also an important factor for performing a fair comparison of the performance, since the package variety difference is very big among all the 6 plants. For example, Gary is carrying 80 package sizes while most of the others carrying only 1. Therefore we divide the package labor (in Exhibit 3) by the number of package sizes the plant runs, and calculate the subtotal of direct labor based on it. By this modified calculation, the plant productivity is as shown in table 1.2.

Table 1.1 Direct labor

	Mexico	Canada	Venezuela	Frankfort	Gary	Sunchem
Original package labor in Exhibit 3	10.4	5	6.2	14.6	11.3	2.7
Modified package labor	10.4	5	6.2	14.6	0.14125	1.35

Table 1.2 Productivity

	Mexico	Canda	Venezuela	Frankfort	Gary	Sunchem	average
by direct labor	0.882	0.215	0.318	0.828	0.591	0.278	0.518523
by direct labor-modified	0.882	0.215	0.315	0.828	1.116	0.304	0.610116
by indirect labor	0.691	0.167	0.373	0.945	0.405	0.241	0.47017
by total	0.387	0.094	0.172	0.441	0.240	0.129	0.243886
by total-modified	0.387	0.094	0.171	0.441	0.297	0.134	0.254144

Similarly, for the manufacturing cost, it is unfair to measure using total manufacturing cost which includes the packaging cost. The manufacturing cost before packaging is a more realistic measurement.

2. Why do you think the plant have different productivity?

The productivity depends on the product make-up, equipment efficiency, employee loyalty, improvements, operator technology, national labor rules, product quality etc. The following table summarizes the differences in all aspects among the six plants:

	Product Make-up release-ease / other / packages	Equipment Efficiency	Employee Loyalty	Improve-ment	Operator Technology	National Labor Rules	Product Quality
Mexico	1-6-1	68, dry-78	-	-	ok	-	-
Canda	1-4-1	55	non-union	-	-	-	high
Venezuela	1-1-1	64	-	Bad	low	-	-
Frankfort	2-12-1	71-74, 1961	-	Good	-	-	-
Gary	8-19-80	59-64	excellent	-	-	-	-
Sunchem	1-1-2	57, redesign-69	non- union	best	excellent	severe	high

3. A new cost measurement. Set up a linear program using the demand data, transportation and manufacturing costs and capacities to find the optimal production for Applichem's global network for 1982.

Because there is no technology break-through from 1977-1982, we assume that the manufacturing cost is affected by exchange rate and inflation rate only. The exchange rates and inflation rates vary greatly by country. For example, Mexico has the most dramatic change between 1982 and 1981, while Japan has the lowest overall inflation rate change, and Venezuela has no exchange rate change at all. Since all the plants' equipment setup date and manufacturing starting date are before 1975, the plant's performance (manufacturing cost) should be based on the modified cost eliminating the effect of outside influence out of control of plants (exchange rate and inflation rate). For the 1982 manufacturing, if it was performed in 1977-81, the corresponding cost should be:

year	Mexico	Canda	Venezuela	Frankfort	Gary	Sunchem
1982 (check)	92.63	93.25	112.31	73.34	89.15	149.24
1981	216.7922	91.70873	103.9096	73.29401	86.71935	156.7062
1980	198.4	82.52094	91.30894	78.05058	78.40809	167.4084
1979	162.1102	73.9437	76.06035	82.23734	67.50937	120.3686
1978	137.6809	63.54112	69.66872	74.14891	59.82537	138.1361
1977	118.8233	63.51462	64.82935	63.887	55.66974	114.9789

And the ratio with average cost (among 6 plants) is:

	Mexico	Canda	Venezuela	Frankfort	Gary	Sunchem
1982	0.911234	0.917333	1.104833	0.721472	0.877	1.468127
1981	1.78398	0.75467	0.85507	0.603135	0.713612	1.289533
1980	1.710107	0.711288	0.787036	0.672756	0.675838	1.442975
1979	1.670581	0.762006	0.783818	0.847473	0.695698	1.240424
1978	1.521333	0.70211	0.769819	0.819323	0.661053	1.526362
1977	1.48004	0.791126	0.807502	0.795764	0.693412	1.432156