Characteristics and Study of Make-To-Stock and Make-To-Availability Production Strategy Using Simulation Modelling

• Autorzy: Olga Ciechańska , Cezary Szwed
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Make-To-Stock (MTS) and Make-To-Order (MTO) are the two traditional strategies in production management. In the case of the MTS there is a growing demand for a new approach, which is called Make-To-Availability (MTA) strategy. The paper characterizes and compares the MTS and MTA strategies. The comparative analysis based, among others, on computational experiments carried out in a computer program developed in Microsoft Visual Studio 2017 Environment was presented. The models have been prepared for both strategies with the same assumptions: external conditions (market demand) and internal conditions (structure of the production process). The investigation of how the strategies respond to various scenarios of demand intensity was done. The simulation models were prepared and validated for the case of the production line in one of the industrial automation company. The research shows that the use of the MTA strategy in the majority of cases gives much better results than the use of the MTS strategy due to the minimization of storage costs and the costs of non-fulfillment of the customers' demand. The directions for further research were also presented. (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Production strategy; Simulation modelling

PL

Strategia produkcji; Modelowanie symulacyjne

• Czasopismo: Management and Production Engineering Review
• Rocznik: 2020
• Tom: 11
• Numer: nr 4
• Strony: 68--80

Twórcy

autor

Olga Ciechańska

• Warsaw University of Technology, Poland

autor

Cezary Szwed

• Warsaw University of Technology, Poland

Bibliografia

• Coyle J.J., Bardi E.J., Langley Jr. C.J., Logistics management, PWE, Warszawa, 2002.
• Chopra S., Meindl P., Supply chain management: strategy, planning and operation, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall, pp. 52-53, 2010.
• Gudehus T., Kotzab H., Comprehensive Logistics, Springer, London New York, pp. 251-252, 2009.
• Zhang Kim, Springer, Cai, Yu, Dynamic pooling of make-to-stock and make-to-order operations, Int. J., Production Economics, 144, 44-56, 2013.
• Youssef K.H., Delft Ch., Dallery Y., Efficient scheduling rules in a combined make-to-stock and make-to-order manufacturing system, Annals of Operations Research, 126, 103-134, 2004.
• Waters D., Operations Management. Producing Goods and Services, Prentice Hall, England, 2002.
• Schragenheim E., Managing make-to-stock and the concept of make-to-availability, [in:] Cox J.F., Schleier J.G., Theory of constraints handbook, New York: McGraw Hill, pp. 239-264, 2010.
• Fahimnia B., Pournader M., Siemsen E., Bendoly E., Wang C., Behavioral operations and supply chain management - A review and literature mapping, Decision Sciences, 50, 6, 1127-1183, 2019.
• Perera N., Fahimnia B., Tokar T., Inventory and ordering decisions: a systematic review on research driven through behavioral experiments, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 2020, Published online: 02.06.2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-05-2019-0339.
• Morikawa K., Takahashi K., Hirotani D., Make-tostock policies for a multistage serial system under a make-to-order production environment, International Journal of Production Economics, 147, 30-37, 2014.
• Scott C., Lundgren H., Thompson P., Guide To Supply Chain Management, Springer, London New York, pp. 24-26, 2011.
• Brewer A.M., Button K.J., Hensher D.A., Handbook of logistics and supply-chain management, Pergamon, Amsterdam, pp. 199-203, 2001.
• Christou I.T., Quantitative methods in supply chain management. Models and Algorithms, London: Springer Verlag, pp. 294-296, 2012.
• Yamazaki T., Shida K., Kanazawa T., An approach to establishing a method for calculating inventory, International Journal of Production Research, 54, 8, 2320-2331, 2016.
• Mangan J., Lalwani Ch., Javadpour T., Global Logistics and Supply Chain Management, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, pp. 63-64, 2012.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.24425/mper.2020.136121