Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to understand how companies design sales and operations planning (S & OP) contingent on the planning environment (PE). Design/methodology/approach – On the basis of the literature, the paper creates an analytical framework identifying the main constructs related to the PE and S & OP design, which is the basis for gathering and analysing qualitative data from eight cases in the food industry. The findings highlight the relations between S & OP and the PE, and are used for generating three propositions. Findings – Responding to the complex and uncertain PE, the companies set up S & OP on a stock-keeping unit (SKU) level, with the possibility of re-planning and a flexible planning horizon, thus differing from what has generally been suggested in the literature. In addition, the companies are aligning the inputs, activities, and outcomes of the S & OP process to the PE. Particularly important environmental contingencies are uncertainty connected to demand and supply, frequent product launches, and production network complexity. Product-related variables have a lower impact on the S & OP design. Research limitations/implications – The present study is limited to one industry only and a comparison between industries with larger data sets would be valuable in future studies. The study selected cases based on their S & OP maturity; further studies need to explore the effect of the alignment of S & OP and the PE on the planning performance. Originality/value – In the literature, S & OP is presented as a generic process with a strict formal design that is equal for all companies. The study provides insights into how companies adjust S & OP according to the PE.
Literature addressing master production scheduling (MPS) typically focuses on the development of sophisticated MPS methods with the expectation that these methods will result in feasible plans and improved performance. However, empirical evidence showing that sophisticated methods are better than simpler ones remains scarce, and companies have reported difficulties with using sophisticated planning methods. In this study, we therefore investigate how sophisticated MPS methods impact three perception-based performance variables-namely, plan feasibility, inventory turnover rate, and delivery service-while accounting for the complexities of planning environments and MPS maturity. We define six MPS methods, ranging from those that ignore capacity to those exhibiting capacity-constrained planning using optimisation. An analysis of survey data from a sample of Swedish manufacturing companies reveals a significant negative effect of less sophisticated methods compared to highly sophisticated ones in terms of plan feasibility, as well as a significant negative effect of the simplest method in considering available capacity compared to highly sophisticated methods in terms of delivery service. The maturity of the MPS process most significantly impacts all performance measures, whereas planning environment complexity shows only a weak negative impact. Findings also indicate that both MPS process maturity and sophisticated MPS methods mediate the negative performance prompted by complex planning environments. Results thus suggest that sophisticated MPS may generally affect performance both directly and indirectly. Using sophisticated MPS methods reduces the negative effects of complex planning environments and results in more feasible plans irrespective of environment complexity and process maturity.
Purpose. We sought to explore how the context affects successful use of APS systems in S&OP processes, and how individual, technological, and organizational (ITO) dimensions affect this procedure. Design/methodology/approach. This is a qualitative case study of two APS systemsupported S&OP processes. The work aims to generate propositions concerning the relationships among the use of APS system, the context, ITO dimensions, and fulfillment of S&OP aims. Findings. Use of APS systems was especially appropriate in support of S&OP processes in complex planning environments and when S&OP aims were ambitious. ITO dimensions were important influences on successful APS system use in most contexts. APS systems were not considered appropriate when having S&OP processes with ambitious aims and low individual and organisational maturities. Use of APS systems was also inappropriate when the extent of technological maturity was minimal. S&OP processes with ambitious aims, operating within a complex planning environment, are difficult if not impossible to implement without the support of APS systems. Practical implications. Our suggestions on when APS systems should be used in different S&OP environments will be useful to companies implementing or about to implement APS systems. Originality/value. APS systems offer great potential if they are effectively used to support S&OP. The understanding of when to use APS systems to support S&OP is however unexplored.
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to explore what potential benefits may be achieved by using advanced planning and scheduling (APS) systems in the sales and operations planning (S&OP) process.Design/methodology/approachThe paper investigates benefits at the S&OP process level by interviewing APS experts and APS users. Several methods have been used; literature review, Delphi study, and a case study at a company in the chemical industry which uses APS system support in the S&OP process.FindingsThree types of potential benefits were found to be achieved when using APS systems in the S&OP process; benefits concerning decision support, planning efficiency and learning effects. The most common type was decision support benefits according to APS users and APS experts. The results from the case company showed that the benefits perceived in the different S&OP activities differed. In the activities concerning the preparation and generation of delivery plans, the perceived benefits mainly concerned learning effects. In the activities concerning the generation of a production plan, the benefits were foremost found in planning efficiency. In the S&OP meeting decision support benefits were highest valued. The reason for the different results can be explained by the aim of the activity, how APS was used in the activity, the user characteristics and the design of the model and access and quality of planning data.Research limitations/implicationsThe focus of this paper is on potential benefits of APS systems in the S&OP process only, not the costs. It has established a typology of potential benefits. No validation in form of statistical analysis has been done. The empirical analysis is mainly based on findings from a single case study.Practical implicationsThe findings about the types of APS potential will assist companies in understanding the benefits they can expect from its use in the S&OP process. The case study analysis gives further insight into how APS can be employed and what benefits different APS user categories can expect when it is used in an appropriate way.Originality/valueThe knowledge about which benefits that can be achieved when using APS in the S&OP process is quite unexplored. This paper fills some of these gaps.
The purpose of this article is to investigate how the manufacturing process, the shop type and the data quality, i.e. the shop floor characteristics, influence the use of advanced planning and scheduling (APS) systems in production activity and control (PAC). The methodology implemented is a multiple case study at three case companies. Each company has different shop floor characteristics, but all use a scheduling module in an APS system, which supports production scheduling. A theoretical framework is developed suggesting how APS system are used in the PAC activities, and which major aspect to consider. The case analysis shows that the scheduling module in APS system, foremost supports sequencing and dispatching. In particular, the shop type is influenced by the decision of how often the APS runs and what freedom is given to the shop floor. The manufacturing process influences how the dispatch list is created. Contrary to the literature presuming that APS systems are most suitable in job shop processes, it is found that the manufacturing process is not a crucial factor when deciding whether APS systems are an appropriate investment. It is found that the level of data quality needed in the APS system depends to a large extent on how the dispatch list is used. For example, is the dispatch list used as a guideline, not a regulation, the need for accurate data in the module is reduced. This article extends the previous literature concerning APS systems by analysing how APS systems influence PAC as a whole and increase the understanding of the challenges of using APS systems in PAC.
Notice: Changes introduced as a result of publishing processes such as copy-editing and formatting may not be reflected in this document. For a definitive version of this work, please refer to the published source. Please note that access to the published version might require a subscription. Chalmers Publication Library (CPL) offers the possibility of retrieving research publications produced at Chalmers University of Technology. It covers all types of publications: articles, dissertations, licentiate theses, masters theses, conference papers, reports etc. Since 2006 it is the official tool for Chalmers official publication statistics. To ensure that Chalmers research results are disseminated as widely as possible, an Open Access Policy has been adopted. The CPL service is administrated and maintained by Chalmers Library.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.