1<!DOCTYPE html>
2
3Anonymous
4/bestp
5/bestp/domrep.nsf
67A809D7604236D30852571C00050E318
8
9
10
11
12
13
140
15
16
17/bestp/domrep.nsf/products/raw-material-and-packaging-cost-and-productivity-benchmarks?opendocument
18
19opendocument
2018.97.9.171
21
22
23www.best-in-class.com
24/bestp/domrep.nsf
25DB




» Products & Services » » Business Operations » Manufacturing

Raw Material and Packaging Cost and Productivity Benchmarks

DB Image

ID: 4916


Features:

Metrics, Graphics


Pages/Slides: 11


Published: Pre-2019


Delivery Format: Online PDF Document


 

License Options:


Buy Now

 

919-403-0251

  • STUDY OVERVIEW
  • BENCHMARK CLASS
  • SPECIAL OFFER
Non-members: Click here to sign-up for a complimentary tour of
"Raw Material and Packaging Cost and Productivity Benchmarks"


STUDY OVERVIEW
As energy and commodity costs continue to rise, manufacturing companies have looked to their supply chains to find additional means to reduce raw material and packaging material costs. Many companies have already picked the low-hanging fruit in supply chain savings -- such as economies of scale and consolidating sourcing -- and are therefore in search of other cost reduction measures.

This study explores how leading manufacturing companies achieve productivity gains through system approaches and innovations that reduce raw material and packaging material costs. Manufacturing executives can use the metrics in this document to see how they stack up against other companies' key cost, productivity and operational benchmark metrics. They can then do a gap analysis and identify their own areas of improvement.

KEY TOPIC AND METRIC AREAS
Each metric is reported separately or segmented into three groups based on total revenue in U.S. dollars: 1) less than $1 billion, 2) between $1-15 billion, and 3) over $15 billion.

  • Defining Productivity: Percent (of Benchmark Partners) Including Various Factors as Part of Their Definition of Productivity:
  • Material and Packaging Costs Metric: Percent Expecting Raw Material & Packaging Costs as Percentage of Total Revenue to Remain the Same in 2006 as it Was in 2005
  • Cost Savings: Average Percentage of Annual Savings in Cost of Goods Sold (COGS)
  • Distribution of Total Savings in COGS (e.g., Raw Material, Packaging, etc.)
  • Delivering Productivity Goals: Percent Giving Responsibility for Delivering Productivity Goals to Various Teams or Areas
  • Measuring Productivity: Percent Measuring Productivity by Various Teams or Areas
  • Achieving Productivity Targets: Ranking of Activities to Achieve Productivity Targets
  • Research and Development Resource Deployment: Percent Deploying R&D Resources to Achieve Productivity Targets by Various Teams or Areas
  • Research and Development Resource Allocation: Percent of R&D Resources to Allocated to Productivity, Growth, Quality and Maintenance

METHODOLOGY
This research originated from a Best Practices, LLC research and consulting project. It was conducted for a client and was based on surveys with executives and senior managers from 17 leading manufacturing companies.

Industries Profiled:
Manufacturing; Consumer Products; Chemical; Energy


Companies Profiled:
Benjamin Moore; BRK Brands; 3 MAJ; Cadbury Schweppes; Speedline Technologies; CNH Global; Bird's Eye Foods; Kellogg Company; Stoner Inc.; Hershey Foods Corp.; Future Pipe Ltd.; Swift and Company; Jose Maria Fonseca; ALSTOM; British Petroleum; Kraft Foods; Unilever

If you purchase Best Practice Database document(s), you will have 30 days from the date of purchase to apply some or all of the cost of the document(s) toward the cost of a Full Access Individual, Pharma, Group or University Membership. Write us at DatabaseTeam@bestpracticesllc.com or call David Guinn at 919-767-9179 if you have any questions.