Risk Analysis Exercise

### Impacts of a One-Year Import Ban on the United States: A Personal Risk Analysis

Quality Management and Supply Chain Analysis

February 8, 2026

In a globalized economy, supply chains are the lifelines connecting consumers to essential and non-essential goods. The prompt asks us to conduct a risk analysis assuming the United States suddenly cannot import any products for one year, examining effects through a business lens: risks to time, money, and ability to service the customer. Here, “customer” translates to personal quality of life, as disruptions would affect daily routines, financial stability, and well-being. As a resident of Covington, Georgiaa suburban area reliant on imported goods for everything from electronics to foodI would face profound challenges. This scenario mirrors real-world events like the COVID-19 disruptions or trade wars, highlighting vulnerabilities in just-in-time supply chains. Drawing from class discussions on risk management (e.g., FMEAFailure Mode and Effects Analysis), I’ll assess impacts on time, money, and quality of life, prioritizing severity, occurrence, and detection to evaluate overall risk.

The most immediate risk would be to my financial stability (money), as import-dependent industries collapse, leading to job losses and inflation. The U.S. imports about 15-20% of its food, including staples like coffee, bananas, and seafood, plus 80% of electronics and pharmaceuticals (U.S. Census Bureau). In Covington, where manufacturing and logistics jobs (e.g., at nearby warehouses for companies like Amazon or UPS) depend on global parts, unemployment could spike. Personally, if my work in [hypothetical field, e.g., IT consulting or small business] involves imported tools like computers or software components from Asia, I’d face downtime, reducing billable hours and income by 30-50%. Inflation would exacerbate this; domestic alternatives for imported oil (40% from abroad) would drive up gas prices, increasing my commute costs from Covington to Atlanta by $200-300 monthly. In business terms, this is a high-severity risk (score 8/10), with high occurrence probability (9/10) due to limited U.S. production capacity, and low detection (2/10) since alternatives aren’t readily scalable. Mitigation might involve stockpiling or shifting to local suppliers, but short-term, I’d need to cut discretionary spending, risking debt accumulation.

Time risks would manifest in inefficiencies and lost productivity, as daily tasks become more laborious without imported conveniences. For instance, without Chinese-made appliances or Mexican auto parts, repairing my car could take weeks instead of days, forcing me to rearrange schedules or rely on inadequate public transport in rural Georgia. Class concepts like Lean principles highlight waste in waiting times; here, sourcing domestic alternatives for clothing (60% imported) or medications (e.g., active ingredients from India/China) could double shopping or healthcare wait times. As a “shinobi” navigating busy days, this would disrupt work-life balance, potentially adding 2-3 hours daily to errands. In a business analogy, this erodes “service level agreements” with myselfdelaying personal projects or family time. Risk assessment: severity 7/10 (impacts efficiency broadly), occurrence 8/10 (affects routine items), detection 3/10 (hard to predict exact shortages). To cope, I’d prioritize essential tasks, perhaps adopting time-management tools like Kanban boards from class, but overall, it would feel like operating in a pre-globalization era, with compounded stress.

The greatest risk lies in diminished quality of life (analogous to customer service), as the ban erodes access to variety, health, and leisure. Georgia’s agriculture is strong in peanuts and poultry, but lacks tropical fruits or year-round produce, leading to nutritional gapse.g., no avocados or cocoa for chocolate, staples in my diet. Health risks amplify; 90% of U.S. antibiotics and vitamins are imported, so a year-long ban could cause shortages, increasing illness vulnerability in Covington’s humid climate. Leisure suffers too: no new smartphones, video games, or imported wines, limiting entertainment and social connections. From a TQM perspective, this is a failure in meeting “customer” (self) requirements, with cascading effects like mental health strain from scarcity mindset. Risk: severity 9/10 (core well-being at stake), occurrence 9/10 (widespread shortages), detection 4/10 (some stockpiles possible, but not for all). Businesses would pivot to rationing or black markets, but personally, I’d adapt by community gardening or bartering, fostering resilience but at a cost to joy.

In conclusion, a one-year import ban would impose high risks across time, money, and quality of life, with an overall FMEA risk priority number (RPN = severity occurrence detection) averaging 200-300, signaling urgent mitigation needs. This exercise underscores supply chain diversification’s importance, as discussed in classencouraging reshoring or inventory buffers. For me in Covington, it would mean financial caution, time reallocations, and lifestyle simplifications, ultimately highlighting globalization’s double-edged sword: convenience at the price of dependency.

Works Cited

Evans, James R. *Quality and Performance Excellence: Management, Organization, and Strategy*. 8th ed., Cengage, 2017.

U.S. Census Bureau. “U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services.” *Foreign Trade*, 2023, www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/highlights/annual.html.

(Word count: 728; approximately 2.5 pages double-spaced)