15
Each collection is meticulously planned each season and implemented according to a specific schedule. Suppliers are involved in the product design process from the very beginning. This allows them to plan their production orders and the required human resources early on. The collections are presented and national budgets set at the international sales meeting. The product orders arrive at our warehouses in Switzerland, Germany, the USA and Japan each December/January (for the subsequent summer season) or May-July (for the subsequent winter season) to ensure they can be sent to our retail partners on time. Produktentwicklungsprozess, Bekleidung
2011
2012
2013
Jun Jul Aug Sep Okt Nov Dez Jan Feb M채r Apr Mai Jun Jul Aug Sep Okt nov Dez Jan Feb M채r Produktentwicklung: Kollektion, Design, Prototyping, Sales-Meeting
Sommer 2013
Forecast - Prozess Beschaffungs- und Bestellprozess Preisprozess Vororderprozess Produktionsprozess Auslieferung an den Handel
Incorporation of Monitoring Activities & Procurement Decisions Mammut has incorporated monitoring guidelines, documents and processes in its internal Quality Management System (QMS). The main internal monitoring tools are the supplier register and the corrective actions register. Over the years, the supplier register is used to record which suppliers have undergone audits, the results of these audits and any required follow-up. The corrective actions register is used to record all corrective actions defined as a result of complaints, social audits or FWF verification audits. Responsibilities and deadlines are specified for each corrective action. In 2011-2012, we are drafting internal guidelines to ensure the systematic and transparent handling of corrective actions. At Mammut, responsibility for the systematic monitoring and tracking of corrective actions lies primarily with the procurement department. Approximately 50 percent of one full-time position is devoted to this. Each year, the entire procurement team receives training on the issue of monitoring and fair working conditions. The responsible buyer and the CR Manager meet each month to check the actions and ensure internal coordination. Coherence & Consistency Overall, it is paramount to the FWF that all measures taken are coherent and work together to bring about improvements in working conditions. The FWF checks whether or not this is the case during its annual management system audit (MSA). This involves a close inspection of the monitoring system and internal processes and guidelines of its member companies. The last MSA report (November 2011), certified our very good performance for the third time in a row. The only criticism made by the FWF was the fact that one of our key suppliers (ref. 11071) had refused access to the expert team of auditors. The result was an unsatisfactory coverage rate of 71% instead of the required 90%. Business relations with the supplier in question had been difficult for a long time, with working conditions being just one of many factors. We therefore decided to terminate our business relationship with this supplier by the end of February 2012. Our business relationship with the supplier ref. 12220 was also terminated. In this case, working conditions were a key factor, among other issues. Despite many meetings and discussions, the supplier resisted an audit and was not prepared to implement improvement actions.