At 12:17 PM 6/30/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Our friend Preston Smith wrote:
>
>>So that you are comparing apples to apples, it is best to reduce all costs
>>and benefits to profit terms, which will help you communicate with
>>management. There will be some very soft items, such as environmental
>>effects, that you may have to just list, but try to estimate these
>>quantitatively too.
>
>Preston:
>
>Even some of the environmental issues are quantifiable.
>
>Some as part of the installation cost - Need ventilation fan, scrubbers, etc.
>Installation cost = $####.##
>
>Some as part of disposing the scrap and waste material - $#.##/pound where
the
>number pounds disposed of is a direct proportion of the materials used.
>
>There will be additional tracking time for the additional materials but this
>may already be in the general overhead, especially if you are already having
>to recycle or track industrial wastes.
>
>The EPA type permits can also be costed. The state and federal agencies can
>tell you up front what the permit costs will be.
>
>
>Are their any other cost I have missed?
>
>Niel Leon - CDS,inc.
>
Neil,
You are quite right on these costs, and you have listed several of them. My
view is that there may always be additional more subjective costs. For
example, will other highly qualified employees choose not to work in the
building due to the hazardous substances, even though you have the fans,
etc., thus reducing the quality of your work force.
My point is not to ignore any subjective costs initially because you do not
know how to quantify them. Get them on paper first, then do your best to
put them in proper perspective so that you can answer the questions when
they come.
Regards,
Preston Smith CMC
New Product Dynamics tel: +1 (503) 248-0900
Portland, Oregon USA fax: +1 (503) 294-1192
For more information about the rp-ml, see http://ltk.hut.fi/rp-ml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jun 05 2001 - 22:46:06 EEST