| Course | MT296 Supply Chain Management Applications |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 8 |
| Paper type | Facility location analysis |
| Length | About 870 words, 6 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | BS in Business Administration |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for MT296 Unit 8
Thirteen Miles From Fort Wayne, Recommended for Toledo: A Unit 8 Facility Location Analysis for a Western Cold Store
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
MT296: Supply Chain Management Applications
Unit 8 Facility Location Analysis
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The pierogi maker, its customers, volumes, rates and scores are composite and illustrative; distances are straight-line distances between city coordinates multiplied by 1.2 for road circuity; the sources cited are real.
The Question
The company ships frozen pierogi from its Buffalo plant to six Midwest grocery distribution centers. Shipping each order directly from Buffalo is slow and expensive for smaller loads, so the company plans to rent space in a public cold storage warehouse in the region, receive full truckloads from Buffalo there and deliver to customers from it. The question is where.
The Customers
Chicago: 96,000 cases a year
Detroit: 58,000
Indianapolis: 44,000
Columbus: 42,000
Cincinnati: 38,000
Grand Rapids: 31,000
Total: 309,000 cases
Center of Gravity
The center of gravity method finds the location that minimizes volume-weighted distance to customers by averaging their coordinates, each weighted by its volume. Using each city's latitude and longitude, the weighted average falls at about 41.17 degrees north and 85.35 degrees west, in northeastern Indiana, roughly thirteen miles from Fort Wayne. Chicago's large volume pulls the center west.
Jacobs and Chase (2020) describe the center of gravity as a starting point for location decisions, useful for narrowing the search but limited because it ignores the actual road network, the costs at candidate sites and, as here, flows into the facility.
Three Candidates
Three cities with public cold storage capacity were compared: Fort Wayne, nearest the center of gravity; Toledo, closer to Buffalo and Detroit; and Lima, between the two.
Transportation Cost
Outbound cost is calculated as straight-line distance from the candidate to each customer, times 1.2 to allow for road circuity, times each customer's volume, at $0.0031 per case-mile, a rate for multi-stop refrigerated delivery. Inbound cost is the distance from Buffalo to the candidate, times 1.2, times the full 309,000 cases, at $0.0014 per case-mile, a lower rate because inbound moves in full truckloads.
Fort Wayne: outbound $153,668; inbound $179,018; total $332,686
Lima: outbound $167,093; inbound $159,435; total $326,529
Toledo: outbound $179,037; inbound $131,294; total $310,332
Fort Wayne is cheapest outbound, as the center of gravity predicts, but it is the farthest of the three from Buffalo, so its inbound cost is highest. Every case must travel from Buffalo to the warehouse before it travels anywhere else. Toledo is about 92 miles closer to Buffalo than Fort Wayne, and that saving on 309,000 cases outweighs its longer outbound runs. Toledo is about $22,354 a year cheaper than Fort Wayne and $16,197 cheaper than Lima.
The center of gravity measured where the customers are and forgot where the product comes from.
Delivery Times
Cost is not the only measure customers notice. From Toledo, the nearest customer, Detroit, is about 70 road miles away and the farthest, Chicago, about 290, so every customer can be reached within a day's drive under federal driving-hour limits. From Fort Wayne, Chicago is closer but Detroit and Columbus are farther, and the longest run is similar. Neither site changes the chain's delivery appointments, so service does not favor either location. That leaves cost and the factor rating to decide.
How Sensitive Is the Answer to the Rates?
The result depends on the ratio of outbound to inbound rates. Fort Wayne would overtake Toledo only if the outbound rate nearly doubled, to about $0.0058 per case-mile with inbound unchanged, or if the inbound truckload rate fell by about half, to roughly $0.0007. Neither change is likely, so Toledo stays cheaper under any plausible quote. Firm quotes from carriers serving each candidate should still be obtained before signing.
Factor Rating
Transportation cost is not the only consideration; Chopra (2019) lists infrastructure, labor and risk among the factors that shape facility decisions. A factor rating gives each city a score of 1 to 10 against four criteria, each with a weight.
Cold storage availability and rate, 35 percent: Toledo 8, Fort Wayne 7, Lima 6
Highway access, 25 percent: Toledo 9, Fort Wayne 8, Lima 6
Labor and operating cost, 20 percent: Toledo 7, Fort Wayne 8, Lima 8
Weather and disruption risk, 20 percent: all three 7
Weighted scores: Toledo 7.85, Fort Wayne 7.45, Lima 6.60. Toledo's position on two interstates and its larger supply of public cold storage give it the edge, though Fort Wayne's lower labor cost narrows the gap. The factor rating agrees with the cost analysis.
Limits
Straight-line distances times 1.2 approximate road miles; actual mileage could change the totals by a few percent, and the Toledo advantage is large enough to survive that. Volumes are this year's; if Chicago grows faster than the others, the outbound advantage of a western site would rise. Ballou (2004) notes that location decisions should be tested against plausible changes in demand before a long-term commitment.
Recommendation
The company should lease cold storage in Toledo, with a contract term of three years so the decision can be revisited if Chicago's share grows. The analysis should be rerun with actual road miles and the warehouse's quoted handling rates before signing.
References
Ballou, R. H. (2004). Business logistics/supply chain management (5th ed.). Pearson Prentice Hall.
Chopra, S. (2019). Supply chain management: Strategy, planning, and operation (7th ed.). Pearson.
Jacobs, F. R., & Chase, R. B. (2020). Operations and supply chain management (16th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Reading the MT 296 Unit 8 instructions
The eighth unit asks students to choose a location for a facility using quantitative and qualitative methods. Start with the customers or demand points and their volumes, then compute a center of gravity as a starting point. Compare a small set of real candidate sites on transportation cost, including both outbound delivery and inbound supply, since the center of gravity ignores the latter. A factor rating covers costs and conditions the freight model misses, with weights explained. Find how far the freight rates would have to move to change the answer, check delivery times and state the method's limits, such as straight-line distances. Six pages with a customer table and two comparison tables is a common format.
Inside the MT296 Unit 8 example
The analysis states the decision and lists six customers with volumes. The center of gravity is computed from coordinates, with Jacobs and Chase on its limits. Three candidates are introduced. The transport section explains the distance and rate assumptions and splits each total into outbound and inbound, under a margin note, showing Fort Wayne cheapest outbound but costliest overall, with the highlighted line on forgetting where the product comes from. Delivery times show no service difference. Sensitivity finds Fort Wayne overtakes only if outbound rates nearly double. A factor rating with Chopra agrees on Toledo. Limits with Ballou and a recommendation for a three-year lease close it.
Where the points sit in the MT296 Unit 8 rubric
Location analyses are graded on correct use of the center of gravity, a complete cost model, a reasoned factor rating and attention to sensitivity and limits. Computing the center of gravity correctly and then explaining why it is only a starting point shows understanding. Instructors reward cost models that include inbound flows, which students often omit. A factor rating earns credit when weights and scores are explained rather than asserted. Testing how far freight rates would have to move to change the answer demonstrates rigor. Checking service, stating approximations such as circuity factors and recommending terms that allow review show practical judgment. A customer table, two comparison tables and correct citations round out the grade, along with a lease term matched to the uncertainty.
MT296 Unit 8 help: mistakes that cost points
The most frequent error is choosing the center of gravity site without checking inbound transportation. Another is using straight-line distances without a circuity factor or a note about road miles. Some factor ratings use weights that are never justified. Others compare locations that have no suitable facilities. Check each total by recomputing one candidate by hand. Use real coordinates for each city, and say which rate applies to inbound and which to outbound, since the result depends on their ratio. A short note on delivery times shows the cheaper site still serves customers. Send your customer locations and volumes, and a writer can compute the center of gravity, build the cost comparison and test its sensitivity.
Get an MT296 Unit 8 example written to your instructions
Share the Unit 8 customer locations, volumes and candidate sites, plus the prompt and rubric. The sample runs each required method and reconciles them, estimating distances where none are given and counting inbound flows from the supplying plant. Where the case lists factor weights, those are used as given. A free first custom sample comes back within 24-48h. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More MT296 papers and BS in Business Administration samples
- MT296 Unit 1: Discussion Board Post
- MT296 Unit 2: Demand Forecast Exercise
- MT296 Unit 3: Inventory Model Application
- MT296 Unit 4: Safety Stock Calculation
- MT296 Unit 5: Supplier Scorecard
- MT296 Unit 6: Seminar Reflection
- MT296 Unit 7: Transportation Mode Comparison
- MT296 Unit 9: Sales and Operations Plan
- MT296 Unit 10: Applied Supply Chain Report
- MT282 Unit 8: Failure Analysis
- MT281 Unit 8: Change Order Analysis
- MT262 Unit 8: Virtual Conflict Case
- MT260 Unit 8: Conflict and Cohesion Case
MT296 Unit 8 questions, answered
How is a center of gravity calculated?
Multiply each location's coordinates by its volume, sum the results, and divide by total volume, separately for the horizontal and vertical coordinates. Latitude and longitude work for a first pass over a region, or use a grid from your case. The result is a starting area to search, not a site to sign a lease on.
Why include inbound transportation?
A warehouse receives goods as well as ships them. When all stock comes from one plant, inbound distance matters as much as outbound, and ignoring it pulls the answer toward customers and away from supply. Full truckloads inbound usually cost less per case-mile than smaller outbound deliveries, so use separate rates for each direction.
What makes a good factor rating?
Factors that matter to the decision, weights tied to their real importance, and scores based on evidence. Where a factor is already measured in dollars elsewhere in the analysis, such as transport cost, take care not to count it twice or weight it far below its actual cost, which is the trap in this example.
Where can I find a free MT296 Unit 8 sample paper?
Read the whole MT296 Unit 8 facility location analysis here. It computes a center of gravity for six Midwest customers and shows why Toledo beats the nearby Fort Wayne once inbound freight from Buffalo is counted.
Why include inbound transportation in the MT296 Unit 8 sample?
Every case must travel from the Buffalo plant to the cold store before reaching any customer. Fort Wayne is closest to customers but farthest from Buffalo, so its inbound cost outweighs its outbound advantage.