External sustainability reporting and verification is an opportunity for a company to communicate its:
Answer(s): D
External sustainability reporting and verification is an opportunity for a company to communicate its performance in terms of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) aspects. ESG performance refers to how a company manages its impacts and risks on the natural environment, the society, and its own governance structure. By reporting and verifying its ESG performance, a company can demonstrate its commitment to sustainability, transparency, and accountability to its stakeholders, such as investors, customers, employees, regulators, and the public. External sustainability reporting and verification can also provide a company with various benefits, such as improved reputation, enhanced stakeholder trust, increased operational efficiency, reduced costs, and better decision making123.
An example of a cradle-to-cradle sustainability model would be:
Answer(s): B
A cradle-to-cradle sustainability model is a design approach that seeks to reuse all materials and components and eliminate waste. It is based on the concept of circular economy, which aims to keep materials in use for as long as possible and regenerate natural systems12. A cradle-to-cradle sustainability model follows the principle of a potentially infinite circular economy, where all products are designed to be either biodegradable or recyclable3. An example of a cradle-to-cradle sustainability model would be a coffee shop that collects paper waste in its restaurants, has a selected supplier collect the paper waste to be recycled, and then purchases paper products from that supplier. This example shows how the coffee shop closes the loop of the paper material cycle, by reusing the paper waste as an input for new paper products. This way, the coffee shop reduces its environmental impact, saves resources, and supports the circular economy.The other options are not examples of a cradle-to-cradle sustainability model, because they do not reuse all materials and components and eliminate waste. A laundry service that collects dirty baby clothes from families, cleans them in large, efficient batches, and then sorts and delivers them back to each family is an example of a service-based business model, which reduces the need for owning products and extends their lifespan, but does not necessarily reuse or recycle the materials4. A company that uses wood that has been gathered from multiple sources to construct items, such as beds and toys for babies and young children is an example of a product-based business model, which may use renewable or recycled materials, but does not guarantee that the products are biodegradable or recyclable5. A bank that offers the lowest interest rates on loans to firms that are committed to using recycled materials and implementing zero-waste initiatives in their processes is an example of a financial incentive scheme, which encourages sustainable practices, but does not directly reuse or recycle materials6.
Which of the following statements is true about the mean time between failures (MTBF) measure?
Answer(s): C
Mean time between failures (MTBF) is the predicted elapsed time between inherent failures of a mechanical or electronic system during normal system operation1. MTBF can be calculated as the arithmetic mean (average) time between failures of a system1. MTBF is a useful measure of reliability, because it indicates how long a system is likely to work before failing. The higher the MTBF, the more reliable the system2. Reliability is the probability that a system will perform its intended function without failure for a specified period of time under specified conditions3. The other statements about MTBF are false. MTBF is not used for non-repairable products, but for repairable systems. For non-repairable products, mean time to failure (MTTF) is used instead4. MTTF is the expected time to failure for a non-repairable system1. An increase in MTBF is not proportional to an increase in quality, because quality is not only determined by reliability, but also by other factors such as performance, functionality, durability, and customer satisfaction5. MTBF is not the same as operating life or service life, because operating life or service life is the total time that a system can operate before it reaches the end of its useful life, while MTBF is the average time between failures during the operating life6.
A supplier making a part with a specified dimension of 50 mm + 0.3 mm changes the tolerance range to + 0.5 mm. Which of the following pairs correctly identifies the changes to the percentage of defective parts and the process capability index?
The percentage of defective parts is the proportion of units that do not meet the specification limits. The process capability index (Cpk) is a measure of how well the process can produce within the specification limits. Both the percentage of defective parts and the Cpk depend on the specification range and the process variation1.If the supplier changes the tolerance range from + 0.3 mm to + 0.5 mm, the specification range becomes wider, which means that more units will fall within the specification limits and fewer units will be defective. Therefore, the percentage of defective parts decreases. However, if the process variation remains unchanged, the Cpk will decrease, because Cpk is inversely proportional to the specification range2. A wider specification range means a lower Cpk, which indicates a lower process capability. A lower Cpk also implies a higher percentage of defective parts in relation to the process variation3.Therefore, the correct answer is D. The percentage of defective parts decreases, and the process capability index decreases.
Understanding Process Capability Index (Cpk) [With Calculator] [Process Capability Index - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics] Converting A Capability Index to PPM Defective - Accendo Reliability
Work Center 1 has an available capacity of 1,200 hours per month. Which of the following amounts represents the cumulative difference between the required capacity and the available capacity of Months 1 through 37
To find the cumulative difference between the required capacity and the available capacity of Months 1 through 37, we need to sum up the differences for each month. The difference for each month is calculated by subtracting the available capacity from the required capacity. The available capacity of Work Center 1 is given as 1,200 hours per month, while the required capacity for each month is given in the table below:The difference for each month is then:The cumulative difference is the sum of all the differences:-200 -100 +0 +100 +200 +300 +400 + ... +1,700 = 150
Post your Comments and Discuss APICS CPIM-Part-2 exam prep with other Community members:
Our website is free, but we have to fight against AI bots and content theft. We're sorry for the inconvenience caused by these security measures. You can access the rest of the CPIM-Part-2 content, but please register or login to continue.