Crack the Case. D. Ohrvall
.pdfKryptonite Toys & Parts |
I |
Pack: 003 page 7 of 24
Interviewer Fact Sheet
Case Question: Kryptonite Toys & Parts (KTP), a $250M manufacturer of handheld game components, has Case Question: Kryptonite Toys & Parts (KTP), a $250M manufacturer of handheld game components, has
recently received complaints from several long-time customers. The customers are having trouble nailing down recently received complaints from several long-time customers. The customers are having trouble nailing down
consistent global prices with Kryptonite. When one KTP location promises a favorable price, other KTP consistent global prices with Kryptonite. When one KTP location promises a favorable price, other KTP
manufacturing locations will not support the price. From the customers’ perspective, KTP is acting more like a manufacturing locations wi l not support the price. From the customers’ perspective, KTP is acting more like a
consortium of different companies than a unified global entity. KTP’s management has reviewed the problem, consortium of different companies than a unified global entity. KTP’s management has reviewed the problem,
but does not have a clear solution. Several executives believe the problem stems from the company’s internal but does not have a clear solution. Several executives believe the problem stems from the company’s internal
transfer pricing policies. How would you dissect this problem? What solutions can you offer management? transfer pricing policies. How would you dissect this problem? What solutions can you offer management?
A Few Tips from David
A Few Tips from David
•This case pulls together several interesting elements: basic accounting through the deal sheets, historic policy review due to a changing global climate, and policy enforcement. Most candidates will piece together the transfer pricing transaction flow but struggle with the dollar impact (the “so what?”).
IntroIntroFactsFacts
(Tell(Te lthetheCandidateCandidateififAsked)Asked)
•Locations: Kryptonite has divided the world into four major regions: North America (NAM), Latin America (LAM), Europe (EU) and Asia Pacific (AP)
•Manufacturing: Most electronic parts are made in LAM and AP because of low labor and cheap raw materials. They are sold to manufacturers who use the parts to make finished handheld products.
•Shipping: Some parts are shipped to various customer facilities in NAM and EU and then put into finished handheld products.
•Distribution: Some KTP parts are sold to distributors or outsourced assemblers.
Deal Sheets: Sales people in every region fill out “deal sheets” for a potential sale. The sheet captures overall margin for the deal and whether or not it should be approved. Historic policy requires every deal to generate “net 15%” (net margin) by region.
KeyKeyInsightsInsights
(Do(DoNotNotTellTe lthetheCandidate)Candidate)
•Net 15 policy is hurting the company: By requiring that every region involved in a deal must achieve a net 15% profit on the transaction, many deals are being eliminated that could benefit the company overall.
•Decentralized decision making: Present decision making is decentralized which is the one of the root causes of why poor decisions are being made. Centralized decision making should help promote deals that benefit the whole company and not just one region.
•Regional profitability and culture – If changes are made to the net 15% policy, some regions will look less profitable than they do today (because a deal might benefit one region and the total company but not another region). As a result, credits or some new, internal accounting system must be developed. Culturally, the regional leaders may bristle at the thought of their region being seen as less profitable and be hard to sway toward a new system.
On-Track Indicators |
Off-Track Indicators |
Focuses on data first – looks to understand why certain deals were killed and what the root cause is
Pulls together insights – ties the fact that each region must achieve net 15% on every deal as a root cause
Thinks realistically – understands that changing deal approval policy and internal accounting policy will be difficult to implement
Misses the transfer pricing point – drives toward organizational behavior first
Misunderstands the deal sheets – fails to integrate the accounting of both regions to create a global view
Forgets about implementation issues –
After making a recommendation, you must determine how to implement it. Discuss the challenges KTP will face.
Purchase additional cases and the book Crack the Case: How to Conquer Your Case Interviews at |
003 - Kryptonite Toys & Parts 7 |
|
www.consultingcase.com. Copyright © 2004 Turtle Hare Media |
||
|
Kryptonite Toys & Parts |
I |
Case at a Glance
Pack: 003 page 8 of 24
|
Typical Case |
|
Interviewer |
|||||||
|
|
Questions & |
||||||||
|
Flow |
|
||||||||
|
|
Comments |
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Present main |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
question. Candidate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
takes notes, asks for a |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
minute, forms a plan and |
|
|
~0:01 min. |
||||||
|
presents it. |
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Answer any basic fact |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
questions. Transfer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
pricing can be confusing |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
so be sure you have |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reviewed the handouts. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is important for the |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Candidate to understand |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the net 15% rule. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
“Tell me more about |
|
||||||
|
Ask for clarification if |
|||||||||
|
|
this area (you choose). |
|
|||||||
|
necessary. Be sure to |
|
What are you thinking |
|
||||||
3 |
make him explain |
|
about here.” or “Tell |
|
||||||
|
anything you do not fully |
|
me how the parts of |
|
||||||
|
understand. |
|
your structure link to |
|
||||||
|
|
|
each other.” |
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Candidate
Questions &
Answers
Candidate takes notes, asks for a minute, forms a plan and presents it.
Look for clear connections between each part of the plan and an understanding of how each part contributes to the whole. Look for solid logic on how this plan will get some answers.
Data &
Answers to
Provide
See Intro Facts on the Interviewer Fact Sheet. Also review potential questions on the Mine for the Answer sheet (p. 21).
No handouts yet. Ask questions about his approach.
|
Guide the discussion |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Handout A, failed |
|
|
through the handouts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
“I would like to |
|
transaction sheet. Say, |
|
|
and additional data. |
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
Optional - “What kind |
|
understand the number |
|
“Here’s an example of a |
||
|
Since this case is about |
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
of ‘bad’ deals that have |
|
deal that did not go |
|||
|
transfer pricing you |
|
of data would you need |
|
|
|||
|
|
|
occurred and measure |
|
through.” Add later, |
|||
|
should expect questions |
|
to best understand the |
|
|
|||
|
|
|
them in some manner. |
|
“Why do you think it |
|||
|
about deals and historical |
|
size of this problem?” |
|
|
|||
|
|
|
Do you have any data on |
|
failed?” and “Do you |
|||
|
transactions. Your goal |
|
|
|
|
|
||
4 |
|
|
|
|
failed transactions?” |
|
think it was a good |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
should be to handout |
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
decision?” |
||
|
both transfer pricing |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
slides and then ask any |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
questions that come up |
|
|
|
|
“Do you have any other |
|
|
|
about the volume of |
|
|
|
|
examples of failed |
|
Handout B and the |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
deals. Additional data is |
|
Optional – “What other |
|
|
|||
|
|
|
deals?” or “Do you have |
|
Additional Facts. |
|||
|
on the next page. |
|
information would you |
|
any information on the |
|
Depending on how the |
|
|
|
|
like?” |
|
volume of deals that go |
|
conversation goes, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
through per year?” |
|
provide this data. |
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
Review the Math Zone data to understand the bottom line impact. |
||||
|
Ask for a |
|
|
Some options going forward include: |
|
|
||
|
recommendation at the |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
• Create a new global pricing review process. This process would ensure that deals |
|||||
5 |
end. Gauge whether it is |
|
|
|||||
|
|
that benefit KTP and exceed net 15% globally are accepted. |
||||||
|
data driven and based on |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
• Develop a new, global accounting system to support the new policy. Through an |
|||||
|
the facts of the case. |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
internal set of accounting “books”, regions share the value of deals equally. This |
|||||
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
approach encourages participation in global deals. |
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase additional cases and the book Crack the Case: How to Conquer Your Case Interviews at |
003 - Kryptonite Toys & Parts 8 |
|
www.consultingcase.com. Copyright © 2004 Turtle Hare Media |
||
|
Kryptonite Toys & Parts |
I |
Handout Guide and Additional Data
Pack: 003 page 9 of 24
Kyoto Japan Plant
Deal Sheet (proposed quotation)
Customer: Hand Glove Toys
Part #: 590234PLU4492
KJP Sales Rep: Shinju Mori
Customer Contact: Roy Headstrong (KTP Indiana)
A |
Per unit costs |
|
|
Units |
|
10,000 |
|
|
Revenue – Transfer Price |
$ |
1.75 |
|
Direct Costs |
$ |
1.12 |
|
Gross Profit |
$ |
0.63 |
|
Gross Profit Margin |
|
36% |
|
Selling and Service |
$ |
0.25 |
|
Admin |
$ |
0.17 |
|
Net Profit |
$ |
0.21 |
|
Net Margin |
|
12.0% |
Indiana USA Plant
Deal Sheet (proposed quotation)
Customer: Hand Glove Toys
Part #: 590234PLU4492
KJP Sales Rep: Roy Headstrong
Manufacturing Contact: Shinju Mori
B |
Per unit costs |
|
|
Units |
|
10,000 |
|
|
Revenue (tp / sales price) |
$ |
4.10 |
|
Direct Costs |
$ |
1.75 |
6/23/0
Gross Profit |
$ |
2.35 |
Gross Profit Margin |
|
57% |
Selling and Service |
$ |
1.05 |
Admin |
$ |
0.44 |
Net Profit |
$ |
0.86 |
Net Margin |
|
21.0% |
Candidate: Do you have any data on failed price quotations?
Interviewer: Here’s an example of a deal that did not go through in one of KTP’s manufacturing locations.
You Might Ask: Why do you think the deal was rejected?
Main Insight: Every region must achieve 15% net margin on every deal. This deal fell short at 12%.
Candidate got the insight?: |
|
Yes |
|
No |
Candidate: Do you have examples of other deals that did not go through?
Interviewer: Here’s the matching deal sheet on the US side.
You Might Ask: Why do you think the deal was rejected?
Main Insight: Even though the Indiana plant had margin well over 15%, they were denied. It looks like the US tried to get the customer to pay more, but the customer would not.
Candidate got the insight?: |
|
Yes |
|
No |
Additional Facts to Give if Asked
•Number of deals lost to pricing disputes: 322 deals in 2001 2002 is expected to be higher.
•Average revenue per deal: $54,000
•Estimated net profit per deal: 22%
•Recent comments from the Regional Leaders (RL):
“If the European sales guys weren’t so expensive and greedy, we wouldn’t have so many pricing disputes” – Asia Pacific
“Asia is always complaining about price. They just don’t know how hard it is and how expensive it is to scare up business here.” – Europe
“What pricing problem?” – North America
“The heart of this issue is communication. We need more.” – Latin America
Purchase additional cases and the book Crack the Case: How to Conquer Your Case Interviews at |
003 - Kryptonite Toys & Parts 9 |
|
www.consultingcase.com. Copyright © 2004 Turtle Hare Media |
||
|
Kryptonite Toys & Parts |
I |
Pack: 003 page 10 of 24
Math Zone
Recommended Approach
Review the slides
•It is clear that Japan rejected the deal due to margin short-fall. Even though the US plant was well over 15% and could make up Japan’s 3% shortfall (15% - 12%), the deal was cancelled.
Calculate global value to KTP
•Killing deals that could profit the global entity does not make sense. To determine what the margin would be on the global deal, create the following table:
Units |
|
10000 |
Global Revenue |
$ |
4.10 |
Direct Costs |
$ |
1.12 |
Gross Profit |
$ |
2.98 |
Gross Profit Margin |
|
73% |
Selling and Service |
$ |
1.30 |
Admin |
$ |
0.61 |
Net Profit |
$ |
1.07 |
Net Margin |
|
26% |
•From a global perspective, the deal offers a net margin of 26%! Certainly a good deal to pursue.
•Total value of this problem to KTP: $54k (average deal revenue) x 22% (average net margin) x 322 (2001 deals killed) = $3.8M
•$3.8M / ($250 x net 15%) = 10% of total net profit. This is a big issue.
Feedback |
|
Data oriented |
|
Quick to interpret |
|
Collaborative style |
|
Facile with numbers |
|
Questions are specific |
|
Explains gut check |
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Focused, not flustered |
|
Nimble thinker |
|
Ballparks numbers first |
|
|
|
|
|||
Notes: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase additional cases and the book Crack the Case: How to Conquer Your Case Interviews at |
003 - Kryptonite Toys & Parts 10 |
|
www.consultingcase.com. Copyright © 2004 Turtle Hare Media |
||
|