IT Strategy Magazine supplement editorial

The analogy is admittedly one that might not be immediately accessible to modern day thinking. But that doesn’t stop Paul Cope, sales manager at Coventry-based Production Modelling, from using it.

In short, he says, “you wouldn’t use logarithm tables or a slide rule to perform complex arithmetic calculations, so why use your MRP system or spreadsheets to plan your factory?”

Countless companies still do both, of course. And in the process, insists Cope, they’re missing out on significant opportunities to improve customer due-date performance, capacity utilisation, and work-in-progress levels.

So what’s the alternative? An Advanced Planning and Scheduling (APS) system, such as Production Modelling’s Orchestrate provides a means of planning and scheduling that reflects the reality imposed by constraints and resources on the factory floor, and actively constructs schedules so as to maximise their utilisation, while simultaneously optimising customer due date performance.

The result? Well, look no further than Production Modelling’s customer Jiffy Packaging. Based in Winsford, Cheshire, the business realised that not only was its traditional planning process inefficient in terms of the number of people required to carry it out, but that it was leaving significant optimisation opportunities untapped.

And just a few months into the implementation process, it’s now becoming clear how significant those opportunities are, reports Jiffy’s IT director Gary Kempster.

“We can re-plan during the day—which we couldn’t before—and we’re achieving higher utilisation levels and much better sequencing,” he says. “We’re expecting at least a 10% increase in uptime, and the overall gains are going to be worth a six-figure sum giving an excellent return on investment.”

None of which, it must be said, comes as a surprise to Production Modelling’s Cope.

“Traditional MRP-based scheduling logic works on the basis of infinite capacity,” he notes. “As an order comes in, it drops in to a weekly or monthly ‘bucket’ of work, and management have to figure out how best to achieve it. It’s not so much planning and scheduling as a simple statement of what must be achieved—without providing any help in achieving it.”

While a good APS system in contrast, most definitely provides that assistance.

“Orchestrate says: here’s the existing order book and workload, here’s the available manpower and capacity, and here are times when capacity isn’t available due to various constraints like planned maintenance,” explains Cope. “It then constructs a schedule that takes all those factors into account. Trying to factor in all that information with spreadsheets—or in people’s heads—is time consuming, difficult, error-prone, and rarely results in an optimal solution.”

Plus, of course, some APS systems like Orchestrate permit manufacturers to run ‘what if’ scenarios, in order to see the impact of schedule changes on deliveries, or capacity utilisation.

A factory might choose to run with smaller batches sizes, for instance, in order to satisfy urgently-required customer demand. Or combine batches, in order to improve machine utilisation and thus create additional capacity. Or re-configure manning and overtime arrangements, in order to meet a sudden spike in demand.