Rights statement: This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Production Planning and Control on 14/03/2017 available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/09537287.2017.1302102
Accepted author manuscript, 5 MB, PDF document
Available under license: CC BY-NC: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Final published version
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - On the integration of due date setting and order release control
AU - Thurer, Matthias
AU - Land, Martin
AU - Stevenson, Mark
AU - Fredendall, Lawrence
N1 - This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Production Planning and Control on 14/03/2017 available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/09537287.2017.1302102
PY - 2017/5
Y1 - 2017/5
N2 - This paper calls for a paradigm shift in the production control literature away from assuming duedate setting and order release are two independent decision levels. When order release iscontrolled, jobs do not enter the shop floor directly but are retained in a pre-shop pool andreleased to meet certain performance targets. This makes the setting of accurate planned releasedates – the point at which jobs transition from the pool to the shop floor – a key considerationwhen setting due dates. We develop a new approach to estimating planned release dates to beembedded in the Workload Control concept. Our approach is unique as it anticipates the releasedecision as part of the due date setting procedure. This makes a second independent releasedecision superfluous and avoids a major cause of tardiness – deviations between (i) the plannedrelease date used when calculating the delivery time allowance and (ii) the actual, realizedrelease date. Simulation is used to compare the performance of Workload Control using twodecision levels with the new single-level approach where the release decision is anticipated whensetting the due date. Performance improvements are shown to be robust to uncertainty inprocessing time estimates
AB - This paper calls for a paradigm shift in the production control literature away from assuming duedate setting and order release are two independent decision levels. When order release iscontrolled, jobs do not enter the shop floor directly but are retained in a pre-shop pool andreleased to meet certain performance targets. This makes the setting of accurate planned releasedates – the point at which jobs transition from the pool to the shop floor – a key considerationwhen setting due dates. We develop a new approach to estimating planned release dates to beembedded in the Workload Control concept. Our approach is unique as it anticipates the releasedecision as part of the due date setting procedure. This makes a second independent releasedecision superfluous and avoids a major cause of tardiness – deviations between (i) the plannedrelease date used when calculating the delivery time allowance and (ii) the actual, realizedrelease date. Simulation is used to compare the performance of Workload Control using twodecision levels with the new single-level approach where the release decision is anticipated whensetting the due date. Performance improvements are shown to be robust to uncertainty inprocessing time estimates
KW - Due Date Setting
KW - Order Release
KW - Workload Control
KW - Simulation
U2 - 10.1080/09537287.2017.1302102
DO - 10.1080/09537287.2017.1302102
M3 - Journal article
VL - 28
SP - 420
EP - 430
JO - Production Planning and Control
JF - Production Planning and Control
SN - 0953-7287
IS - 5
ER -