Industrial Engineering and Management Systems

Korean Institute of Industrial Engineers (대한산업공학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Component Commonality and Order Matching Rules in Make-to-Forecast Production

  • Received : 2010.04.01
  • Accepted : 2010.07.30
  • Published : 2010.09.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Make-to-forecast production is a way to realize high customization and fast responsiveness. This study firstly investigates the effect of introducing a common component in a make-to-forecast production environment. The common component can eliminate a modification step, which is a major cost component in make-to-forecast production. It is illustrated, however, that introducing a versatile component that merely covers several variants is unattractive, and thus adding values to the common component is inevitable in this environment. Secondly, an order-matching rule under the condition that two partially overlapped delivery lead time intervals exist is proposed. The rule considers the effect of matching orders to units that can cover both intervals. An alternative re-matching rule is also developed and examined. Numerical experiments clarify that the proposed rule generally realizes higher contribution ratio and lower percentages of orphans and rejected orders. The proposed re-matching rule increases the average contribution ratio at the expense of increased orphans and order rejections.

Keywords

References

  1. Akinc, U. and Meredith, J. (2006), Choosing the appropriate capacity for a make-to-forecast production environment using a Markov analysis approach, IIE Transactions, 38, 847-858. https://doi.org/10.1080/07408170600750040
  2. Akinc, U. and Meredith, J. (2009), Modeling the manager's match-or-wait dilemma in a make-to-forecast production situation, Omega, 37, 300-311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2007.01.005
  3. Desai, P., Kekre, S., Radhakrishnan, S., and Srinivasan, K. (2001), Product differentiation and commonality in design: Balancing revenue and cost drivers, Management Science, 47, 37-51. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.47.1.37.10672
  4. McCutcheon, D. M., Raturi, A. S., and Meredith, J. R. (1994), The customization-responsiveness squeeze, Sloan Management Review, Winter, 89-99.
  5. Meredith, J. and Akinc, U. (2007), Characterizing and structuring a new make-to-forecast production strategy, Journal of Operations Management, 25, 623-642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2006.04.006
  6. Raturi, A. S., Meredith, J. R., McCutcheon, D. M., and Camm, J. D. (1990), Coping with the build-to-forecast environment, Journal of Operations Management, 9, 230-249. https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-6963(90)90097-W
  7. Thonemann, U. W. and Brandeau, M. L. (2000), Optimal commonality in component design, Operations Research, 48, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.48.1.1.12445
  8. Van Mieghem, J. A. (2004), Commonality strategies: Value drivers and equivalence with flexible capacity and inventory substitution, Management Science, 50, 419-424. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1030.0197