# Operations Management – Case Analysis: Southwestern University (C)

Southwestern University: (C)*

The popularity of Southwestern University’s football program under its new coach Phil Flamm surged in each of the 5 years since his arrival at the Stephenville, Texas, college. (See Southwestern University: (A) in Chapter 3 and (B) in Chapter 4.) With a football stadium close to maxing out at 54,000 seats and a vocal coach pushing for a new stadium, SWU president Joel Wisner faced some difficult decisions. After a phenomenal upset victory over its archrival, the University of Texas, at the homecoming game in the fall, Dr. Wisner was not as happy as one would think. Instead of ecstatic alumni, students, and faculty, all Wisner heard were complaints. “The lines at the concession stands were too long”; “Parking was harder to find and farther away than in the old days” (that is, before the team won regularly); “Seats weren’t comfortable”; “Traffic was backed up halfway to Dallas”; and on and on. “A college president just can’t win,” muttered Wisner to himself.

At his staff meeting the following Monday, Wisner turned to his VP of administration, Leslie Gardner. “I wish you would take care of these football complaints, Leslie,” he said. “See what the real problems are and let me know how you’ve resolved them.” Gardner wasn’t surprised at the request. “I’ve already got a handle on it, Joel,” she replied. “We’ve been randomly surveying 50 fans per game for the past year to see what’s on their minds. It’s all part of my campuswide TQM effort. Let me tally things up and I’ll get back to you in a week.”

When she returned to her office, Gardner pulled out the file her assistant had compiled (see Table 6.6). “There’s a lot of information here,” she thought.

TABLE 6.6 Fan Satisfaction Survey Results (N=250)(N=250)

A

B

C

D

F

Game Day

A. Parking

90

105

45

5

5

B. Traffic

50

85

48

52

15

C. Seating

45

30

115

35

25

D. Entertainment

160

35

26

10

19

E. Printed Program

66

34

98

22

30

Tickets

A. Pricing

105

104

16

15

10

B. Season Ticket Plans

75

80

54

41

0

Concessions

A. Prices

16

116

58

58

2

B. Selection of Foods

155

60

24

11

0

C. Speed of Service

35

45

46

48

76

Respondents

Alumnus

113

Student

83

Faculty/Staff

16

None of the above

38

Parking a mess

Double the parking attendants

Everything is okay

Too crowded

Seats too narrow

Great food

Phil F. for President!

I smelled drugs being smoked

Seats are like rocks

Not enough cops for traffic

Game starts too late

Hire more traffic cops

Need new band

Great!

More hot dog stands

Seats are all metal

Need skyboxes

Seats stink

Go SWU!

Lines are awful

Seats are uncomfortable

I will pay more for better view

Student dress code needed

I want cushioned seats

Not enough police

Students too rowdy

Parking terrible

Toilets weren’t clean

Not enough handicap spots in lot

Well done, SWU

Put in bigger seats

Friendly ushers

Need better seats

Expand parking lots

Hate the bleacher seats

Hot dogs cold

\$3 for a coffee? No way!

Get some skyboxes

Love the new uniforms

Took an hour to park

Coach is terrific

More water fountains

Better seats

Seats not comfy

Bigger parking lot

I’m too old for bench seats

Cold coffee served at game

My company will buy a skybox—build it!

Programs overpriced

Want softer seats

Beat those Longhorns!

I’ll pay for a skybox

Seats too small

Band was terrific

Love Phil Flamm

Everything is great

Move games to Dallas

No complaints

Dirty bathroom

*This integrated case study runs throughout the text. Other issues facing Southwestern’s football stadium include: (A) Managing the renovation project (Chapter 3); (B) Forecasting game attendance (Chapter 4); (D) Break-even analysis of food services (Supplement 7 Web site); (E) Locating the new stadium (Chapter 8 Web site); (F) Inventory planning of football programs (Chapter 12 Web site); and (G) Scheduling of campus security officers/staff for game days (Chapter 13 Web site).

Discussion Questions

1. Using at least two different quality      tools, analyze the data and present your conclusions.
2. How could the survey have been more      useful?
3. What is the next step?

,���V�