Ch 03 Student Krajewski

download Ch 03 Student Krajewski

of 26

Transcript of Ch 03 Student Krajewski

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    1/26

    3 1Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

    Process Strategy

    3

    For Operations M anagement, 9e byKrajewski/Ritzman/Malhotra 2010 Pearson Education

    Homework Ch. 3: 2, 3, 5

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    2/26

    3 2Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

    Proc ess St rateg y

    Principles of process strategy1. Make choices that fit the situation and that

    make sense together, that have a closes t ra tegic f i t

    2. Individual processes are the building blocksthat eventually create the firms whole supplychain

    3. Management must pay particular attention tothe interfaces between processes

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    3/26

    3 3Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

    A Process View

    External environment

    Information onperformance

    Internal and externalcustomers

    Processes andoperations

    1

    2

    3

    4

    5

    Inputs Workers Managers Equipment Facilities Materials Land Energy

    Outputs Goods Services

    Figure 1.2

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    4/26

    3 4Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

    The Su pp ly Chain View

    Support Processes

    E x

    t e r n a

    l s u p p

    l i e r s E

    x t er n

    al

    c u s t om

    er s

    Supplierrelationshipprocess

    New

    service/productdevelopment

    Orderfulfillmentprocess

    Customerrelationshipmanagement

    Figure 1.4

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    5/26

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    6/26

    3 6Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

    Proc ess St rateg y Decis ion s

    Figure 3.1 Major Decisions for

    Effective Processes

    Process Structure Customer-contract position

    (services) Product-process position

    (manufacturing) Layout

    Resource Flexibility Specialized Enlarged

    Customer Involvement Low involvement High involvement

    Effective ProcessDesign

    Strategy for Change

    Process reengineering Process improvement

    Capital Intensity Low automation High automation

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    7/263 7Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

    1.a. Serv ice Pro cess Struc tu r in g

    Front off ice

    Hybr id off ice

    Back off ice

    Less customer contact and customization

    L e s s p r o c e s s e s

    d i v e r g e n c e a n

    d m o r e

    l i n e

    f l o w s (1) (2) (3)High interaction with Some interaction with Low interaction with

    customers, highly customers, standard customers, standardizedcustomized service services with some options services

    ProcessCharacteristics

    (1)Flexible flows with

    Individualprocesses

    (2)Flexible flows withsome dominantpaths, withsome exceptions

    to how workperformed

    (3)Line flows, routinework same with allcustomers

    Figure 3.2 Customer-Contact Matrix for Service Processes

    High-End HomeDesign

    IBM/Dell

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    8/263 8

    Serv ice Proc ess St ruc tur ing

    Front, Hybrid, or Back?Bank TellerFinancial PlanningTax Service

    ExpediaBarber/SalonEmployee PayrollMonthly bank statementsCar wash

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    9/263 9Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

    1.b . Manu factu r ing Process St ruc tur in g

    Continuousprocess

    Jobprocess

    Lineprocess

    Large batchprocess

    Small batchprocess

    (1) (2) (3) (4)Low-volume Multiple products with low Few major High volume, highproducts, made to moderate volumeto customerorder

    ProcessCharacteristics

    (1)Customized process,with flexible andunique sequence of

    tasks

    (2)Disconnected lineflows, moderatelycomplex work

    (3)Connected line, highlyrepetitive work

    (4)Continuous flows

    L e s s c o m p

    l e x

    i t y ,

    l e s s

    d i v e r g e n c e ,

    a n

    d m o r e

    l i n e

    f l o w s

    Less customization and higher volume

    Batch processes

    Figure 3.3 Product-Process Matrix for Processes

    standardization,commodity products

    products,higher vol

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    10/263 10

    Manu fac tur in g Proc ess S truc tur ing

    Job, Batch, Line or Continuous?Uniform productionElectrical productionBen & Jerrys Ice Cream Automobile manufacturingOil refineryAlconAuto repair shop/body shop

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    11/263 11Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

    Layout (page 140 or 100)

    The physical arrangement of human andcapital resourcesAn operation is a group of resourcesperforming all or part of one or moreprocesses

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    12/263 12Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

    Clo seness Matr ix

    There are two absolute requirements forthe new layout1. Education should remain where it is2. Administration should remain where it is

    Closeness FactorsDepartment 1 2 3 4 5 61. Administration 3 6 5 6 102. Social services 8 1 13. Institutions 3 94. Accounting 25. Education 16. Internal audit

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    13/263 13Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

    Develop ing a Bloc k P lan

    EXAMPLE 3.1Develop an acceptable block plan for the Office of BudgetManagement that locates departments with the greatestinteraction as close to each other as possible.

    150

    100

    63 4

    2 51

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    14/263 14Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

    150

    100

    Develop ing a Bloc k P lan

    Figure 3.5 Proposed Block Plan

    1 5

    a. Departments 1 and 6 close togetherb. Departments 3 and 5 close togetherc. Departments 2 and 3 close together

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    15/263 15Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

    3 15

    2 122 20

    2 16

    2 2

    1 12 6

    3 27

    1 2

    2 2

    Total 112

    Calcu lat ing the WD Sco re

    2 61 61 3

    3 18

    1 5

    2 121 10

    1 8

    1 1

    2 22 6

    1 9

    1 2

    3 3

    Total 82

    Current Plan Proposed PlanDepartment

    PairClosenessFactor ( w )

    Distance(d )

    Weighted-DistanceScore ( w d )

    Distance(d )

    Weighted-DistanceScore ( w d )

    1, 2 3

    1, 3 6

    1, 4 5

    1, 5 61, 6 102, 3 8

    2, 4 1

    2, 5 1

    3, 4 3

    3, 5 9

    4, 5 25, 6 1

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    16/263 16Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

    2. Cus tom er Inv o lvem ent

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    17/263 17Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

    3. Reso u rc e Flexib i l i ty

    A flexible workforce can often requirehigher skills and more training andeducation

    Worker flexibility can help achieve reliablecustomer service and alleviate bottlenecksResource flexibility helps absorb changesin workloadsThe type of workforce may be adjustedusing full-time or part-time workers

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    18/263 18Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

    Reso u rc e Flexib i li ty

    The volume of business may affect the typeof equipment usedBreak-even analysis can be used to

    determine at what volumes changes inequipment should be made

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    19/263 19Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

    B reak-Even A n alys is

    Process 2:Special-purposeequipment

    Process 1:General-purpose

    equipment

    Break-evenquantity

    T o

    t a l c o s

    t ( d o

    l l a r s

    )

    Units per year ( Q )

    F2

    F1

    Figure 3.7 Relationship Between Process Costs and Product Volume

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    20/263 20Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

    A p p l icat ion 3.3

    Q =F m F b c b c m

    BBC is deciding whether to weld bicycle frames manually or topurchase a welding robot. If welded manually, investment costsfor equipment are only $10,000. the per-unit cost of manuallywelding a bicycle frame is $50.00 per frame. On the other hand,a robot capable of performing the same work costs $400,000.robot operating costs including support labor are $20.00 perframe.

    At what volume would BBC be indifferent to these alternativemethods?

    welded manually(Make)

    welded by robot(Buy)

    Fixed costs $10,000 $400,000Variable costs $50 $20

    =$10,000 $400,000

    $20 $50 = 13,000 frames

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    21/263 21Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

    4. Cap ital In tens i ty

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    22/263 22Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

    Strateg ies fo r Chang e

    Process reengineering is the fundamentalrethinking and radical redesign of aprocess to improve performanceCan be successful but it is not simple oreasyThe people who are involved with theprocess each day are the best source ofideas on how to improve itProcess improvement is the systematicstudy of activities and flows of a process tofind ways to improve it

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    23/263 23Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

    Proc ess Reen g ineer ing

    TABLE 3.2 | KEY ELEMENTS OF REENGINEERING

    Element Description

    Critical processes Emphasis on core business processes, normal processimprovement activities can continue with other processes

    Strong leadership Strong leadership from senior executives to overcomeresistance

    Cross-functional teams A team with members from each functional area charged withcarrying out the project

    Information technology Primary enabler of the project as most reengineering projectsinvolve information flows

    Clean-slate philosophy Start with the way the customer wants to deal with the companyand includes internal and external customers

    Process analysis Must understand the current processes throughout theorganization

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    24/26

    3 24Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

    Solved Problem 1

    A defense contractor is evaluating its machine shops currentlayout. Figure 3.11 shows the current layout and the tableshows the closeness matrix for the facility measured as thenumber of trips per day between department pairs. Safety andhealth regulations require departments E and F to remain attheir current locations.

    a. Use trial and error to find a better layoutb. How much better is your layout than the current layout in

    terms of the w d score? Use rectilinear distance.

    Trips Between Departments

    Department A B C D E FA 8 3 9 5

    B 3

    C 8 9

    D 3

    E 3

    F

    E

    A

    B

    C D

    F

    Figure 3.11 Current Layout

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    25/26

    3 25Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

    Solved Problem 1

    SOLUTIONa. In addition to keeping departments E and F at their current

    locations, a good plan would locate the following departmentpairs close to each other: A and E, C and F, A and B, and Cand E. Figure 3.12 was worked out by trial and error andsatisfies all these requirements. Start by placing E and F attheir current locations. Then, because C must be as close aspossible to both E and F, put C between them. Place A belowE, and B next to A. All of the heavy traffic concerns havenow been accommodated.

    Trips Between Departments

    Department A B C D E FA 8 3 9 5

    B 3

    C 8 9

    D 3

    E 3

    F

    E F

    A B

    C

    D

    Figure 3.12 Proposed Layout

  • 8/12/2019 Ch 03 Student Krajewski

    26/26

    Solved Problem 1

    Current Plan Proposed Plan

    DepartmentPair

    Number ofTrips (1) Distance (2)

    w d Score(1) (2) Distance (3)

    w d Score(1) (3)

    A, B 8 2 16 1 8

    A, C 3 1 3 2 6A, E 9 1 9 1 9

    A, F 5 3 15 3 15

    B, D 3 2 6 1 3

    C, E 8 2 16 1 8C, F 9 2 18 1 9

    D, F 3 1 3 1 3

    E, F 3 2 6 2 6w d = 92 w d = 67

    b. The table reveals that the w d score drops from 92 for thecurrent plan to 67 for the revised plan, a 27 percentreduction.