Sears Auto Center Read Case 13.3, Sears Auto Center. Answer the following questions and submit your answers to the instructor. § Incentive systems are common in many retail businesses. How is the system at Sears Auto Centers different from those employed elsewhere? Was it well-designed? What changes would you have recommended? § Sears claimed that the quotas were based on averages, so they also served as a check on whether advisers were doing their job. Is there anything wrong with this use? §How could the mechanics’ compensation scheme encourage them to recommend unnecessary repairs? (Note: As long as there were enough repairs to keep mechanics busy, there was no incentive to recommend unnecessary repairs, but if business was slow, then the mechanics’ wages would be lower. Also, the mechanics might be able to work more quickly if they performed unnecessary work on a car that was already being repaired.) § Should a part be replaced only if it has already failed? Was Sears justified in a policy of replacing a part if it was likely to fail? Can such a policy be implemented ethically? (Note: suppose the advisers had explained the policy to customers and given them the choice of which policy to be followed in the repair of their cars. Would this have made a difference?) A brief introduction. a. Tell VERY briefly the key points to consider in the description of the case. Call this, identification of key issues. b. Analyze carefully the situation. Use analytic tools such as business, decision making, strategic analysis models, if useful. I am not enamored of the old style SWOT or SWOTT or TOWS analysis models. They end to be vague, forced, and uninteresting. c. Generate some alternative approaches to handle the situation. One of the key items of a good decision making process is generating alternatives. Whether is done via brainstorming, or thumping your own forehead against the wall, do it. d. Recommend the "best" approach, the one that will account for most of the facts and considerations with the most congenial likely outcomes. You can arrive here by a lot of paths. One is the standard cost/benefit analysis, a feature of Utilitarianism, but also useful in case analysis whether or not you use the utilitarian ethical way. One is the deontological principle of universalization. Another is a solid situation analysis (coming in a future week’s lectures). e. Support, justify, "sell," the "best" approach. Give well supported, documented, “reasoned reasons” why this is not only the analysis we should accept, but why it is better than other competing analyses. f. State final conclusions. And call for implementation. Without an implementation plan we do have nice hot air to lift some balloons. g. Use numerical analysis whenever you can in order to support your claims. This is not always appropriate, but a little number magic helps to sell in a business or even not-for-profit organizational situation. h. Integrate relevant text models whenever appropriate in order to anchor your analyses. i. Include a list of sources. You should also use parenthetical citations in the body of the text where appropriate. j. Your goals are: 1. to do an excellent case analysis, identifying and addressing key issues. 2. to demonstrate clear command of the issues, the text and readings, the considerations for resolving the case. 3. to integrate learning, make connections, and share your insights with the class. 4. to support successfully the position you take concerning the resolution of the issues. ENJOY! You MUST have at least one ethical theory applied well in the analysis; I recommend either utilitarianism or deontology (Kantian ethics) present in your analysis. Each case study is worth 7 points – a LOT of points. Make sure that your work is at least Have at least 2 or 3 outside sources in addition to the textbook. Please do NOT use Question-Answer format. Write these as papers. We are in a graduate course, not an undergraduate course. Thanks.