Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

APICS Exam CPIM-Part-2 Topic 1 Question 18 Discussion

Actual exam question for APICS's CPIM-Part-2 exam
Question #: 18
Topic #: 1
[All CPIM-Part-2 Questions]

Collaborative planning, forecasting, and replenishment (CPFR) typically would be most effective for a:

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: B

A fishbone diagram, also known as a cause-and-effect diagram or an Ishikawa diagram, is a tool for identifying and analyzing the possible causes of a problem or an effect. It is often used in quality management to find the root causes of defects or errors. A fishbone diagram has a main branch that represents the problem or effect, and several sub-branches that represent the categories of causes, such as people, processes, equipment, materials, environment, etc. Each category can have further sub-branches that represent more specific causes. A fishbone diagram would help a service organization determine the source of a quality-of-service issue by allowing them to visualize and organize the potential factors that contribute to the problem and identify the most likely cause.Reference: CPIM Part 2 Exam Content Manual, Domain 8: Manage Quality, Continuous Improvement, and Technology, Section 8.1: Quality Management Concepts and Tools, p. 59-60.


Contribute your Thoughts:

Jules
19 days ago
Option D? More like option 'Duh'! With all those suppliers, CPFR is the only way to keep that supply chain from falling apart.
upvoted 0 times
...
Arlyne
26 days ago
D all the way! Imagine trying to coordinate all those suppliers without CPFR - it would be a nightmare! This is a no-brainer.
upvoted 0 times
...
Arthur
27 days ago
Option C seems a bit too specific, and A doesn't really fit the description of CPFR. I'm gonna go with D, it just makes the most sense to me.
upvoted 0 times
Ernie
2 days ago
D makes sense because of the large number of suppliers involved.
upvoted 0 times
...
Christoper
13 days ago
I think D is the most logical choice as well.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tonja
20 days ago
I agree, D does seem like the best option for CPFR.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Svetlana
1 months ago
I'm torn between B and D, but I'm leaning towards D. Managing a large number of suppliers seems like the perfect scenario for CPFR to shine.
upvoted 0 times
...
Emily
2 months ago
Hmm, I think option D is the way to go. A company with a large number of geographically dispersed suppliers would definitely benefit from CPFR to streamline their supply chain.
upvoted 0 times
Lizbeth
18 days ago
I think option C could also benefit from CPFR. It would help manage inventory and demand for a large retailer.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lizbeth
20 days ago
I agree, option D makes sense. CPFR would help coordinate all those suppliers efficiently.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Ozell
2 months ago
I disagree. I believe CPFR would be more effective for a company that has a large number of geographically dispersed suppliers.
upvoted 0 times
...
Arthur
2 months ago
I agree with Jerlene. Having a mix of major and smaller customers would benefit from collaborative planning and forecasting.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jerlene
2 months ago
I think CPFR would be most effective for a distributor with a few major customers and many smaller customers.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel