Crocs Case Study
ECCO has a clear vision which the technology aims to serve however, something CROCS lacks. Both firms are unique in that they do a good deal of manufacturing in-house rather than outsourcing everything like some of the other major players in the industry. For CROCS the aim was to provide timely inventory fulfillment for retailers in-season, previously unheard of in the shoe industry. Hoyt points out that they developed a model that allowed them to respond with speed and flexibility to changing demand in the marketplace. They accomplished this by taking over the production of their croslite material, building their own factories in several key global locations and adding warehousing operations to each factory. Since the supply chain available through outsourcing did not provide the model they needed they simply built their own! They built capacity at a rapid pace to keep up with explosive demand and grew revenues in a dramatic fashion along the way. For ECCO, having production in-house is about producing the quality ECCO stands for. They add value in each step of the process, from “cow to shoe” as the company likes to say (Nielson). They own and operate tanneries to ensure their leather is of the best possible quality. Like CROCS, they could not find a supplier to meet their needs so they met them on their own. ECCO still finds ways to take advantage of lower labor costs around the world and has