Sorry, no posts matched your criteria.
Hi Sismanity!
Do you know why the joke often comes up, “production says push, sales says sell to where?” Because behind that joke lies a real, systemic trade-off. Let’s unpack it.
Conflicts between production and other functions, particularly supply chain and sales, often arise because system design choices force trade-offs. Here are five key trade-offs that often lead to “disagreements” between production and supply chain, plus an analysis of how the Manufacturing Systems Lab can quantify and teach them.
Production tends to favor line stability and large batches for efficiency; sales demand high product availability. Holding high inventory improves service levels but increases holding costs and the risk of obsolescence. In the lab, experiments simulate reorder policies and batch sizes on small models, measuring the trade-off between fill rate and inventory cost [1].
Accelerating throughput often requires overtime, faster machines, or buffers. This increases costs. Sales wants shorter lead times; production wants cost efficiency. In the lab, conduct takt time and line balancing studies, calculating the cost per unit across multiple throughput scenarios to determine the optimal operating threshold [2].
Centralized production lowers unit costs through scale, but increases lead times and supply chain risk; decentralization increases responsiveness but increases costs. Labs can use digital twins to simulate factory networks with location, lead time, and transportation cost parameters, then analyze total landed cost versus service level [3].
Strict quality inspections reduce defects but slow production. Sales want speed, but production must maintain quality and avoid recalls. In the lab, run an inspection intensity vs. throughput trade-off experiment, recording the reject rate, rework time, and total cost of quality.
How can the Manufacturing Systems Laboratory help resolve this “disagreement”?
Conflicts between production and sales are often not about who is at fault, but rather about system architecture choices and KPI priorities. The Manufacturing Systems Lab can be a safe space to test policies, assess trade-offs, and train students to become mediators who understand technical and business trade-offs. With data and simulations, “disagreements” can be transformed into productive discussions for systemic solutions.
[1] M. Christopher, “The Triple-A Supply Chain,” Harvard Business Review, Oct. 2004, https://hbr.org/2004/10/the-triple-a-supply-chain.
[2] McKinsey & Company, “Capturing the true value of Industry 4.0,” https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/operations/our-insights/capturing-the-true-value-of-industry-four-point-zero.
[3] L. Alfaro et al., “Global Supply Chains: The Looming ‘Great Reallocation’,” Harvard Business School, 2023, https://www.hbs.edu/.
[4] Gartner, “Supply Chain Management overview,” https://www.gartner.com/en/supply-chain.
Writer: Mohammad Hilmi Hidayatullah
Editor: Brian Arga Prasidio Putra
Check out the full news on our social media:
– Website: https://www.its.ac.id/tindustri/laboratorium-sistem-manufaktur/ – Instagram: @sismanity – Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/company/manufacturing-systems-laboratory-dtsi-its/ – Youtube: SISMANITY ITS