Today and tomorrow

The tension in manufacturing operations might be described as a tug of war between scheduling for the requirements of today and planning for the possibilities of tomorrow. That's certainly how Pieter Leijten, vice president of Infor's supply chain business, sees it. "If a company focuses on the needs of now, by concentrating on real-time visibility, it is often because there is a lack of [longer range] supply chain planning. Real time is great for fire fighting, but has only limited value when it comes to optimising supply chain operations," he warns. It's hardly a new thought. Indeed, this is arguably the backdrop to much of the effort manufacturers have put themselves to over the years with S&OP (sales and operations planning). However, the analogy does focus the mind on a dilemma. As Leijten says, if you want to optimise the short-term schedule, then it's good to have some visibility of what's coming to hit you, up and down the supply chain as well. Yes, there will still be some variability you have to deal with close to real time – although you would hope your MPS (master production schedule) would handle normal variability – but minimising the surprises is far better than just getting very good at reacting to them. That said, modern APS (advanced planning and scheduling) systems from just about all of the major software companies reflect this reality to varying degrees. And whereas, hitherto, sophisticated systems that attempted to synchronise the separate disciplines of supply chain planning and execution were the preserve of big multi-nationals with deep pockets, today, the technology is widely available for just about all sizes and types of manufacturers. Take Heathrow-based Lufthansa Technik Landing Gear Services (LTLGS), which repairs and overhauls aircraft landing gear, flap tracks, carriages, etc, for many of the world's airline fleets, including Virgin, BA, Air France and Ryanair. Planning and scheduling manager Brett Lambourne makes the point that optimising operations here isn't trivial. An aircraft's landing gear assembly comprises between 1,000 and 3,000 components, and a scheduled overhaul can take anything from 30 to 45 days, since it involves stripping down, inspection, repair, refurbishing, replacement and rebuild. "The complexity comes from having to work to constantly changing customer maintenance schedules, which are further compounded by unscheduled repairs for AOGs [aircraft on ground]," he says. "Also, even though we provide exchange assets, scheduling can be a nightmare. Until the initial stripping and inspection loop has been completed, it's not possible to accurately schedule repairs, machining, manufacturing, plating, testing, fitting, rebuild, etc. And, of course, different elements compete for limited resources." Until the introduction of Production Modelling's Orchestrate APS system in January this year, planning here was performed using multiple spreadsheets, created and maintained by teams in different departments. But none of the spreadsheets were linked and commercial aspects were not part of the planning process – despite the fact that getting the right mix of work through production could have a significant impact on cash flow and profitability. Lambourne was hired for his experience in planning and scheduling, joining LTLGS in December 2012. As part of the system evaluation, he downloaded a free version of Orchestrate from the web and was hooked. "It was an ideal test of the system's capabilities as well as ease of use," he recalls. "In no time at all, I had developed a fully functional personalised demonstration, using our own data, without any need to contact Production Modelling." This, he says, convinced him that the system would easily accommodate the firm's planning and reporting requirements. And because the demo was built using LTLGS's own processes and data, it was also ideal to convince others within the company – which evidently didn't take long. "We went live in my fourth month, including integration with our SQL-based systems, used to produce works orders. Integration with legacy and ERP systems is another of Orchestrate's strengths and, in practice, it took just a matter of hours." Culture change It wasn't all plain sailing: introducing the new system meant a culture change – from independent list-driven processes, owned by departments, to co-ordinated, visual plans and schedules. But Lambourne believes the ease of use and graphic outputs of Orchestrate helped speed that whole process. And the results: "Orchestrate has dramatically cut the time taken in planning and has given us an accurate end-to-end planning view for the first time, helping us to improve productivity. In fact, by June we had cut the time devoted to planning by 20-30% and I confidently predict that improvement to increase to a total of 60%," he states. As for build-to-schedule metrics, those have improved from a historic performance of 70-80% to a current figure of 95%. Also, Lambourne expects that marrying the commercial aspects into production planning will help the company achieve a much more cost-effective mix of work through the facility. And in the meantime, systems integration has already synchronised business processes, eliminated manual data entry – and hence also transcription errors – and improved the all-important customer service. "As a recent example, we were able to accommodate a rush request by re-scheduling another customer's work, with each customer confident of delivery because we were able to show them how completion would be achieved. Again, this is a very visual approach," explains Lambourne. As for the future, he predicts further improvements both internally and externally. Currently, for example, LTLGS uses a PC projector to assist with morning planning meetings, coupled with printouts for the works. But with the new methods bedded in, the firm intends next to install displays around the production bays, to keep schedules live and consistent, with shopfloor feedback. Thereafter, the systems will be rolled out to other facilities around the world. "The company plans common systems in each of our facilities and our next project is to start in August at the Landing Factory in Hamburg, Germany. Next in line will be a visit to Sun Valley, LA, for review of adopting Orchestrate later in the year. Last of all, I believe we will have an opportunity to review the potential of implementing the system at our plant in Beijing, China." Demand and capacity planning Preactor has now been bought by Siemens for an undisclosed sum, adding to the latter's Manufacturing Operations Management (MOM) portfolio. Just prior to its acquisition, though, the APS specialist, which has amassed 4,500 installations around the world since its foundation in 1992, went public with an interesting demand and capacity planning product, dubbed Preactor 400 GMPS (graphical master production scheduler). Mike Novels, former CEO of Preactor, explains that the system, which has been quietly trialled for a year with Mars and Premier Foods, has been designed to solve problems particularly in FMCG companies, by facilitating more effective purchasing of economical quantities of raw materials, plus their timely use. "It complements our detailed scheduling software, and works both in make-to-stock and make-to-order environments, either as a standalone product or linked to ERP systems," he says. For make-to-stock, the software uses current and expected future demands, as well as starting stock quantities and stock control rules to decide how much of each product to make. The resulting manufacturing quantities are then overlaid onto the real resource capacity to produce a capacity-constrained plan, which can be fed back into ERP Meanwhile, for make-to-order, Preactor 400 GMPS instead works in parallel with MRP and is then used to review manufacturing capacity against proposed changes in demand. "For example, it can enable businesses to decide whether their current capacity is adequate, and, if not, the appropriate stage at which to increase capacity," explains Novels.