Is a finite capacity planning not sufficient for reaching the TOC-goals?

A finite capacity planning creates some useful information but the typical DBR or SDBR techniques, which are the basis for TOC-decisions, are mostly not available. For reaching the TOC objectives immunization against real-life instability is needed, which is not part of the regular finite capacity logic.

Is the APS – solution better?

Theoretically it is not impossible to get good results with an APS, but there are some very critical necessary conditions that must be fulfilled like: APS needs correct data, which is seldom the case; It also needs an environment that is sufficiently stable during the planning horizon, which is not at all our current reality, and it also needs coherent optimization criteria.
In practice most trials have failed because one or more of the necessary conditions cannot be fulfilled.

Is C&DS another ERP-system?

No, C&DS is not doing ERP-jobs like: accounting, invoicing, payments, maintaining customer and vendor databases etc… C&DS is focusing on decision support for operations, which means that in most cases C&DS gets the available ERP-data in order to avoid double inputs.

We do not have correct data in our ERP, shouldn’t we work on that issue before doing anything else?

Operations data like times-per-part, set-uptime and scrap-rates are changing all the time but reality learns that it is sufficient to have good-enough data for the critical resources. In the start-up phase the POOGI-module is used for monitoring where data have to be corrected and where not. This is another advantage of the embedded focusing techniques.

We have buffers in our production so, why don’t we get the results?

Buffer management needs buffers on very specific locations and certainly not on each and every resource. The first function of buffers is to protect throughput, but this is not sufficient: the right views and signals are essential for steering the flow and synchronizing all decisions.

We already have continuous improvement programs, so why do we need POOGI?

The difference is FOCUS. The embedded diagnosis tool may reveal constraints with different nature: lack of capacity, skills, missing parts, quality issues or procedures. We need to know what is the impact of the common causes on our throughput or inventories: this is what POOGI supports.

How long does it take before reaching the first results?

The first results are reached after 3 to 5 months after technical installation if and only if at the same time the necessary know-how transfer and on-the-job training has been done. Installing software without the adapted implementation support has been proven to be a recipe for failure.

Note:  This list is not yet complete. Feel free to send your specific questions.