The problem at Avion Incorporations needs an immediate action plan. It appears as a result of poor and uncoordinated management. Although top managers, Susan and Bill now blame Foster Technologies for the problems faced by Avion, the fact is that they are to blamed for the poor performance and inconveniencies witnessed in the recent past (Douglas D., 2002). As Kevin states, Foster Technologies should not be linked to this problem. Even if it appears that the quality of services rendered by the supplier has deteriorated, it is as a result of the pressure mounted by it by Avon. It has increased its demands which can not be met by the supplier (Furmston, M.P., 2005).
Therefore, the best thing to do is review the terms of the contract between the supplier and Avon Incorporations, as the client. This is because it appears as if Avon has breached them. Despite the fact that it ordered for 2,500 units a month, its clientele has now expanded. As a result, it requires to be supplied with 4,000 units during the same period. Besides, the delivery schedule has been changed from two weeks to ten days. This can not be met by the supplier (Colander, D.C., 2008). Hence, it implies that the management at Avon should resolve this conflict by paying for the damages caused to the supplier. Terminating of the contract before its actual expiry can be unethical practice because it can breach it. Meaning, the two companies should agree on the best thing to do to harmonize their business contracts (McKendrick, E., 2008).
Besides, there should be a proper communication between all the stakeholders of Avon Inc. the kind of explanations given by Kevin indicate that there is a gap I the communication between the two companies. First, the management at Avon failed to communicate the production changed to the suppliers (Koffman, L.E., 2007). On the other hand, they failed to respond to the enquiry letters, memos and phone calls made by the supplier. This was a very great negligence which made it extremely difficult for the two companies to understand one another. In this regard, the company should be very much concerned about its communication with the supplier. It should take the initiative to update it o any change and respond to all the inquiries addressed to them. Had this been done, all the problems would have been amicably resolved (Frederic, R. E., 2002).
I would like to recommend that there should be a proper communication between the two companies. They should always up date one another o the changes made within their structure. Moreover, any correspondence should be promptly addressed before taking an appropriate action. The information system should be reorganized because it forms an integral part of any business organization (Barnett, E.R., 2003). There should be no negligence at any given time because it can adversely affect the performance of the company. If this was done, the company would not be inconvenienced at all. Everything would have been done in a timely manner without any challenge (Jacques, C., 2004). Hence, there is no need to terminate the contract between them. The supplier should not be blamed for anything. After all, Avon Inc. should take responsibility for any inconveniency suffered by Foster Technologies.
References
Barnett, E.R. (2003) Contracts. Aspen Publishers.
Colander, D.C. (2008). Microeconomics (7th Ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Douglas D. (2002). Contract Rights and Civil Rights. Michigan Law Review.
Frederic, R. E. (2002). A Companion to Business Ethics. Massachusetts: Blackwell.
Furmston, M.P. (2005) Cheshire, Fifoot & Furmston's Law of Contract, 15th Edition. OUP:
Oxford University Press.
Jacques, C. (2004). Activist Business Ethics. Boston: Springer.
Koffman, L.E. (2007). The Law of Contract. London: Oxford University Press.
McKendrick, E. (2008) Contract Law - Text, Cases and Materials. Oxford University Press
