| Course | MT435 Operations Management |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 4 |
| Paper type | Capacity plan |
| 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 MT435 Unit 4
Outsource Now, Add a Shift at 44 a Day: An MT435 Unit 4 Capacity Plan for a Finishing Shortfall
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
MT435: Operations Management
Unit 4 Capacity Plan
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
Pacolet Bunk & Loft, its demand forecast and all three options' costs are composite estimates; the sources cited are real.
The Shortfall and the Forecast
The spray booth produces about 30.6 beds a day, as Unit 3 showed. Demand is about 38 beds a day now and, on the sales team's forecast, rises in steps: 41 a day in the second half of this year, 44 in the first half of next year and 46 in the second half. The daily shortfall grows from 7.4 beds to 10.4, 13.4 and 15.4, or from about 1,850 beds a year to about 3,850 at the annual rates.
Each unmet bed costs about $265 in lost contribution, so leaving the gap open is the most expensive option of all: about $490,000 a year at today's demand.
Option 1: A Second Finishing Shift
A sprayer and a prep worker would run the booth from 3:30 to 11:30 p.m. At $24 and $19 an hour for 2,000 hours each, with a 10 percent shift differential and benefits at 30 percent of pay, labor comes to about $122,980. Supervision coverage, energy and booth consumables add about $35,508. The total is about $158,488 a year, and it is almost entirely fixed: the shift costs the same whether it sprays 7 beds or 30.
A second shift doubles booth output to about 61.2 beds a day, enough for the whole forecast. Test assembly, at about 56 beds a day on one shift, would then become the next constraint, but only above the forecast's peak of 46.
Option 2: A Second Booth
A second booth costs about $212,000 installed. Annualized at 8 percent over ten years, that is about $31,594 a year. Two staff to run it add about $111,800, energy about $22,680 and the storage space it displaces about $15,000, for a total of about $181,074 a year. The county's air permit for a new booth takes about six months, so the booth could not help until the second half of this year at the earliest.
Option 3: Outsourcing Overflow
A finishing shop 22 miles away will spray overflow beds at $41 each, plus about $24,440 a year in trucking. This cost is mostly variable. At today's shortfall of 1,850 beds, it comes to about $100,290 a year. At 2,600 beds it is about $131,040, at 3,350 about $161,790 and at 3,850 about $182,290.
The Options Across the Forecast
At 38 beds a day, outsourcing costs about $100,290, the second shift $158,488 and the second booth $181,074, if it were available. At 41 a day, outsourcing costs about $131,040 against the same fixed figures. At 44 a day, outsourcing rises to about $161,790, now above the second shift. At 46 a day, outsourcing reaches about $182,290, the most expensive of the three.
Outsourcing and the second shift cost the same at a shortfall of about 3,269 beds a year, about 13.1 beds a day, which corresponds to demand of about 43.7 beds a day.
The option cheapest this year becomes the dearest by the end of next year, which only a table across the forecast can show.
Why the Second Booth Does Not Win
The second booth costs more than the second shift at every demand level in the forecast, because it adds a second fixed staff and the capital cost while the existing booth sits idle at night. It would make sense only if demand rose beyond what two shifts on one booth could finish, about 61 beds a day, or if the shop could not staff an evening shift. Olhager et al. (2001) describe this choice between adding capacity in large steps or in smaller, more flexible increments, and here the flexible increment is cheaper.
Risks and Non-Cost Factors
Outsourcing adds about two days of lead time and a quality risk: the outside finisher must match Pacolet's white paint and stain colors, and a mismatch between a frame finished in house and a ladder finished outside would be visible. The plan therefore sends whole beds, never parts of one, to the outside shop, and inspects the first lots. The second shift brings its own risks: recruiting a skilled evening sprayer and supervising quality without the day team. Slack and Brandon-Jones (2019) note that capacity decisions should weigh such effects on quality and dependability, not only cost.
The Plan
Outsource overflow starting this month, sending complete beds to the outside finisher, and inspect the first three lots. Begin recruiting for a second finishing shift in the second half of this year, so it can start when demand passes about 44 beds a day early next year. At that point, end outsourcing. Review the forecast each quarter; if demand stays below 44, keep outsourcing.
The plan also depends on what Unit 10 finds. If the booth's own output can be raised, the shortfall shrinks and the switching point moves later. Hopp and Spearman (2011) emphasize that the cheapest capacity is often what can be recovered at the constraint before any is bought.
References
Hopp, W. J., & Spearman, M. L. (2011). Factory physics (3rd ed.). Waveland Press.
Olhager, J., Rudberg, M., & Wikner, J. (2001). Long-term capacity management: Linking the perspectives from manufacturing strategy and sales and operations planning. International Journal of Production Economics, 69(2), 215-225. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(99)00098-5
Slack, N., & Brandon-Jones, A. (2019). Operations management (9th ed.). Pearson.
What the MT435 Unit 4 assignment asks for
Unit 4 asks students to choose how to add capacity to meet forecast demand. Instructors expect the shortfall stated at each step of the forecast and every option priced at each step, since an option cheap at today's demand can be the costliest later. Cost behavior matters: fixed costs stay the same whatever volume they cover, while variable costs rise with it, and the two cross at a computable point. Lead times, such as a permit wait, should be counted, along with non-cost factors like quality and staffing. The cost of doing nothing, measured in lost contribution, frames the decision. The plan should name when to switch options and what would change that timing. A demand forecast, option sheets and a cost-by-demand table are standard.
How the MT 435 Unit 4 example is put together
Opening with the shortfall at each forecast step, the sample prices the cost of leaving it open. Each option gets a section with its costs broken out and its capacity effect, including the next constraint for the second shift and the permit wait for the booth. The options are then compared at each demand step, with the crossover between outsourcing and the second shift computed, under a highlighted line on the cheapest option becoming the dearest. A section explains why the second booth never wins, citing Olhager and colleagues. Risks and non-cost factors follow, with Slack and Brandon-Jones. The plan sets the sequence of actions and ties it to the later booth improvement, citing Hopp and Spearman on recovering capacity before buying it.
Reading the MT435 Unit 4 grading rubric
Capacity plans commonly lose credit by comparing options at one demand level when the case supplies a forecast. An option cheap this year can be the dearest in year two, and a table across demand steps is how that becomes visible. Cost behavior matters as much as cost: papers ignoring which costs are fixed and which vary miss the crossover the decision turns on. Rubrics reward counting lead times such as permits. Credit goes to pricing the cost of doing nothing. Weighing quality and staffing risks alongside cost shows judgment. A plan that names a switching point and a review schedule scores higher than a single choice. Option sheets and a cost-by-demand table support the analysis.
MT435 Unit 4 help from the desk
The most frequent weak capacity plan compares the three options at today's demand and picks the cheapest. Another common error treats a second shift's cost as if it varied with volume, or outsourcing's as if it were fixed. Students often forget the permit or installation lead time, recommending an option that cannot help for months. The cost of lost sales is usually left out, which makes doing nothing look free. Many plans never say when to switch. Before submitting, compute the demand level at which your two cheapest options cost the same. If your recommendation does not mention that level, it has not yet used the forecast.
Get an MT435 Unit 4 example written to your instructions
Demand, current capacity and option costs probably all appear in your Unit 4 materials; forward them together with the assignment wording and grading rubric. A composite plan follows, pricing every option at each demand step, separating fixed from per-unit cost, and stating when to switch. We supply that first custom sample without charge in 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 MT435 papers and BS in Business Administration samples
- MT435 Unit 1: Transformation System Board Post
- MT435 Unit 2: Process Flow Analysis
- MT435 Unit 3: Bottleneck Analysis
- MT435 Unit 5: Job Scheduling Exercise
- MT435 Unit 6: Seminar Reflection
- MT435 Unit 7: Facility Layout Proposal
- MT435 Unit 8: Control Chart Analysis
- MT435 Unit 9: Lean Waste Review
- MT435 Unit 10: Operations Improvement Proposal
- MT434 Unit 4: Distribution Network Analysis
- MT433 Unit 4: Incoterms Trade Terms Analysis
- MT431 Unit 4: Borrower Qualification Worksheet
MT435 Unit 4 questions, answered
How do I compare capacity options with different cost structures?
Put them on the same basis, usually annual cost at each level of demand the case provides. Annualize any equipment purchase over its useful life, with interest if your course covers it. Then look for the demand level where the cheapest option changes. That crossing point is often more useful to a manager than a single recommended option.
Should the plan consider effects on other stations?
Yes. Adding capacity at one step helps only until another step becomes the limit. Check each downstream station's capacity against the new output level and say where the next constraint will appear. A plan doubling one station's output without that check usually overstates the gain, sometimes by a wide margin.
Is outsourcing a legitimate capacity option in an operations course?
Usually it is, especially for overflow that may prove temporary. Price it per unit including transport, and weigh the non-cost factors: longer lead time, quality control and dependence on another firm's schedule. Many sections expect outsourcing to be compared on equal terms with adding shifts or equipment, and your case may supply a quote.
Where can I find a free MT435 Unit 4 sample paper?
This page carries the complete MT435 Unit 4 plan, pricing a second shift, a second booth and outsourcing at each step of a two-year forecast.
When does a second shift become cheaper than outsourcing in the MT435 Unit 4 sample?
When demand passes about 43.7 beds a day, a shortfall of about 3,269 beds a year, where $41 a bed plus trucking overtakes the shift's fixed cost.