Case: “Frumherji, Ltd., Reykjavik” by Brynja Thorbjornsdottir and Karen A. Brown (in your Harvard Business
School Press course pack)
1. Summarize the existing vehicle inspection process at Frumherji, Ltd. Identify its purpose and
performance objectives and how it relates to organizational goals (in other words: “What is the process
meant to achieve?”). Cite evidence from the case to support your analysis.
Approximately 1 to 2 pages (10%)
2. Identify those parts of the process that you believe cause major problems. State why you believe they
cause problems and what problems you believe they cause. Provide arguments and/or evidence from the
case for this.
Ensure that you clearly justify what the major problems to the process are. Do not focus on a single
issue, there are many present in this case. Also, do not try to attempt to list all problems. Recognize that
some problems are more severe or more fundamental or more critical than others.
You should attempt to find a few major root causes of the many problem symptoms. You may find the
material for the classes on process analysis and improvement useful, but you are not be limited to that
material only.
Rank or prioritize the problems/root causes by their severity or importance and briefly justify your rank
order.
Cite evidence from the report to support your analysis and to support your ranking/prioritization. Your
answer should be more than a simple list of things the case already mentions but demonstrate some
analysis/deeper thinking.
Approximately 2 to 3 pages (15%)
3. Recommend the most important changes to the process that addresses the problems of the vehicle
inspection process. Describe each recommended change, state which problem it addresses and describe
how it solves the problem Each change recommendation should directly address one or more of the
identified root causes in the previous question. Change recommendations should be realistic and
implementable in a reasonable time and with reasonable resources. Change recommendations should be
detailed and specific.
Not all change recommendations will necessarily show up in the process flow model (Question 4). Some
may be organizational, or concern the information flow in the process. This is perfectly fine as long as
the change recommendations are described and justified well.
This step is critical to the success of your paper. If you do not recommend the proper changes it will be
difficult for your new process to be logical. To do this you have to ensure you properly identify the
major problems and that your changes will fix these problems. You may find the material for the classes
on process analysis and improvement useful, but you are not be limited to that material only.
Since these are your own recommendations, you do not need to cite evidence from the case.
Approximately 2 to 3 pages (15%).
Identify any requirements for IT support for your changed vehicle inspection process. i.e. what new
systems or new capabilities for existing systems may be necessary to make your changed process
happen?
Citing and Evidence:
Make sure you substantiate your arguments and assertions with evidence and examples from the case.
It is not necessary that you formally cite sources or have a bibliography. However, in your report you must
provide evidence to support any argument or assertion that you make by quoting from the case or providing a
page reference to the case or both.