Unit 4
FROM: Alexis Finley, Operations Manager
DATE: April 6, 2020
SUBJECT: Scheduling Methodology Evaluation Matrix
Background
Kibby and Strand are currently facing challenges at the front end of the operational process, such as 1) marketing is promising delivery dates to customers too quickly; and 2) production may not be able to make those dates.
Purpose
The objective of this report is to analyze the operations department by identifying a scheduling plan that will help the production department in fulfilling contracts in a timely manner. Kibby and Strand have missed deadlines by implementing a schedule that does not uphold to traditional standards of performance, which has caused our reputation to suffer and expenses to increase more than necessary by using expedited shipping as a means to get our products to our customers before the due date. Priority rules are simple heuristics used to select the order in which the jobs will be processed, and the most common forms are (Stevenson, 2017):
First come, first served (FCFS) – Jobs are processed in the order in which they arrive at a machine or work center. Schedule production based on when the product is being ordered by the customer. If there are different products with different manufacturing times and deadlines, this can end up being less effective for meeting deadlines (Berg, 2016).
Shortest processing time (SPT) – Jobs are processed according to processing time at a machine or work center, shortest job first. This method is considered faster if the products that are being produce are identical since it saves time in having to alternate between difficult and easy pieces.
Earliest due date (EDD) – Jobs are processed according to due date, earliest due date first. Businesses that specialize in one product with varying shipping deadlines would prefer this method.
Critical ratio (CR) – Jobs are processed according to smallest ratio of time remaining until due date to processing time remaining.
Slack per operation (S/O) – Jobs are processed according to average slack time (time until due date minus remaining time to process). Compute by dividing slack time by number of remaining operations, including the current one.
Rush – Emergency or preferred customers first.
Recommendation
Kibby and Strand should consider the Earliest Due Date (EDD) approach since it directly addresses due dates and minimizes tardiness of products to their customers. The Bidding and Contracts department can make bids with our customers that will fit with the scheduling matrix without overwhelming the employees with too much production. As the company focuses on completing contracts with the earliest due date and setting timeframes such as latest shipping date, will allow one week if any errors were to arrive. As long as the receiving and production department communicate with what types of materials are needed will make the assembly line move smoothly.
Attachment: Scheduling Methodology Evaluation Matrix of 2020
Scheduling Methodology Evaluation Matrix
|
Order Number |
Client |
Quantity |
Order Date |
Latest Shipping Date |
Delivery Due Date |
Priority |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Order Number |
Client |
Quantity |
Order Date |
Latest Shipping Date |
Delivery Due Date |
Priority |
|
9 |
Serenditpity Designs |
275 |
|
2 weeks |
4 weeks |
1 |
|
1 |
Stallion Apparel |
500 |
|
5 weeks |
7 weeks |
2 |
|
6 |
Gold Button |
300 |
|
6 weeks |
8 weeks |
3 |
|
3 |
Burgundy Fashion |
150 |
|
8 weeks |
10 weeks |
4 |
|
7 |
Perfect Mountain |
150 |
|
10 weeks |
12 weeks |
5 |
|
8 |
Shield |
1000 |
|
11 weeks |
13 weeks |
6 |
|
4 |
Down Under |
225 |
|
12 weeks |
14 weeks |
7 |
|
5 |
Ecowolf |
325 |
|
12 weeks |
14 weeks |
8 |
|
2 |
Taffys |
250 |
|
13 weeks |
15 weeks |
9 |
References
Berg, M. (2016, October 26). Types of Operations Scheduling. Retrieved April 6, 2020, from https://smallbusiness.chron.com/types-operations-scheduling-66263.html
Stevenson, W. J. (2017). Operations Management (13th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.