Bottleneck Reduction at The Shoes Production Line
using Theory of Constraints Approach
Endang Prasetyaningsih, Citra Awalia Deferinanda, Reni Amaranti
Industrial Engineering Program Study
Universitas Islam Bandung
Bandung, Indonesia
endangpras@gmail.com, citraawalia9@gmail.com, reniamaranti2709@gmail.com
Abstract— This paper deals with an imbalance problem in
a shoes company that produces the upper and bottom soles at
two production lines, and then they are assembled at the
assembly line. The imbalance is caused by bottlenecks at the
one site of the production lines. It occur waste of waiting at the
next process, i.e. the assembly line. It impacts the production
target cannot be met, while throughput cannot be maximized.
In this paper, the bottlenecks are managed by Theory of
Constraints (TOC) approach that adopt linear programming
to optimize the production planning, and adopt the Drum
Buffer Rope (DBR) to control the flow of production. The
buffers are determined by considering the output gap between
the two production lines. This paper also proposes 3 solution
alternatives to meet the production target. The main goal of
this research is the implementation of Theory of Constraints
concepts to reduce imbalance problem at the bottleneck work
stations. The result shows that application of DBR as well as
the three alternatives of proposed overtime based on the
optimal production rate can reduce the problem of imbalance
between upper and outsole at the shoe production lines from
18.96% to 4.28%.
Keywords— capacity constraint, Drum Buffer Rope, Linear
Programming, time buffer
I. INTRODUCTION
A shoes company produces upper and outsole (bottom)
at two different production lines. If these two production
lines have imbalance problem, it creates work in process at
the next process, i.e. assembly line. Therefore, it is necessary
to eliminate the imbalance problem in order to cut the work
in process.
This study is motivated by a practical situation of
imbalance problem of PT X, a shoes manufacturer located in
Bandung, Indonesia. The imbalance problem is caused by
bottlenecks at the one site of the production lines. The
bottleneck can restrict the production rate, so that it can be a
constraint. However, if the constraint is managed properly,
the production line will flow smoothly. In this paper, Theory
of Constraints is adopted to manage the bottlenecks in order
to reduce the imbalance of the production lines of upper and
bottom. Finally, the production target can be achieved.
Theory of constraints can be interpreted as a philosophy
of continuous improvement that focuses on identifying and
setting constraints to achieve company goals [1].
Improvement based on Theory of Constraints consists of five
steps in [2], are as follows:
Step 1 : Identify (or choose) the system constraint.
978-1-7281-5192-2/19/$31.00 ©2019 IEEE
170
Step 2 : Decide how to exploit the system constraint.
Step 3 : Subordinate all other decisions to the above. If it
is desired to improve the performance of the
system to a level higher than possible with the
current constraint, then it must be
Step 4: Elevate the system constraint. This step can
change the constraint or the decisions on how to
exploit the constraint. Hence, go to Step 5.
Step 5: If, in Step 4, the constraint is broken, then go
back to Step 1. Don’t let inertia become the
constraint.
The Theory of Constraints concepts have drawn attention
by researchers. Review of the Theory of Constraints
evolution literature has been carried out by [3] which
provides five eras; the optimized product technology era, the
goal era, the haystack syndrome era, the it’s not luck era and
the critical chain era. Implement the five steps of Theory of
Constraints can present productivity gains and a change in
the organizational culture in less than a year the productive
process [4]. A combination of Theory of Constraints and
Lean tools allow to demonstrate the successful application of
the model in the footwear industry with a reduction in non-
value-added time and inventory [5]. A dynamic bottleneck
can be eliminated by applying Goldratt and Cox’s Theory of
Constraints, i.e. capacity enhancements to increase
productivity [6]. The potential implementation of the Theory
of Constraints concepts in the management of distribution to
improve the logistic performance has been studied by [7, 8
and 9]. The implementation of Theory of Constraints for
project management to improve the timeliness of order
delivery, communication and standardization of processes
related to order delivery has been studied by [10]. The main
goal of this research is the implementation of Theory of
Constraints concepts to reduce imbalance problem at the
bottleneck work stations.
II. PROBLEM DEFINITION
There are 2 production lines used to produce upper shoes
on one line and outsole (bottom) shoes on the other line. The
upper manufacturing process consists of cutting, preparation
of materials and sewing, while the bottom manufacturing
process consists of rolling kneader, cutting outsole, pressing,
trimming and soldering, and sizing. The upper and the
outsole are then assembled into shoes at assembly line.
Each process is defined as a work station as seen at Table
I. There are 4 kinds of shoes product, i.e. man, women,
junior and child shoes. Table II shows demand and
contribution for each shoes, while Table III shows the (standard time, equal to (25)(8)(60)(60) /(41.098) = 17,520
standard time and the conversion factor for each shoes at unit/month. In the similar way, the available capacity for
each work station. each machine of the production process is shown in Fig. 1.
If we assume that there are 25 workdays/month, 8 The total available capacity of cutting work station is
hours/day, and 3 shifts/day, then the available capacity for determined by multiplying of the available capacity for each
each work station is determined as follows: machine, the number of machine and the number of
shift/day. Thus, the total available capacity of cutting work
Available capacity = (available time)/(standard time) (1) station is (17,520 unit/machine)(2 machines)(3 shift/day) =
105,120 unit.
Refer to Fig. 1, it can be seen that the upper production
TABLE I. WORKS STATIONS AND NUMBER OF MACHINES rate is lower than the outsole. This problem creates work in
Shoes Work Station Number of process at the assembly line. It indicates a constraint in the
parts machine upper production line. According to [11], constraints are
Upper Cutting 2 every element that prevents a system from achieving its goals
Preparation 3 of making more money. Therefore, the constraint must be
Sewing 4 managed properly so that it can increase throughput, which is
Outsole Rolling kneader 1 the result of selling finished products. In this study, the
(bottom) Cutting 2
constraint is managed by the Theory of Constraints
Pressing 4
Soldering and 2 approach, defined as a strategic technique that helps
Trimming companies improve the critical success factors [12].
Sizing 2
III. RESULTS
TABLE II. DEMAND AND CONTRIBUTION
The following descriptions are the results and discussion
Kind of Contribution Demand of the research that has been done.
Shoes (Rupiah/pair) (unit)
A. Step 1: Identifying the constraint
Men 55,000 24,008
Women 52,000 21,950 Capacity of a specific work station is chosen to be a
Junior 50,000 48,946 constraint, because we focus to study at the production
Child 32,000 10,196 operation [2]. Refer to Fig. 1, identification the constraint is
focused at the upper production line, because its production
TABLE III. STANDARD TIMES AND CONVERSION FACTOR rate is lower than the outsole (bottom) production rate.
Identifying the constraint starts from calculating machine
Standard
Work
Shoes time
Conversion load, and then compare the machine load for each resource
Station factor with the available time for the same period [4]. The machine
(second)
Man 40.154 0.977 load is determined by the following equation:
Woman 41.098 1
Cutting
Junior 37.388 0.91
Child 35.954 0.875 Load (%) = (demand)/(available capacity) (2)
Man 75.012 0.999
Woman 75.028 1
Preparation
Junior 73.978 0.986
Child 69.83 0.931
Man 168.624 0.978
Woman 172.4 1
Sewing
Junior 157.652 0.914
Child 155.644 0.903

The available capacity of cutting machine is then

determined as (workdays/month(working hours/day)/

171
 Fig. 1 Production process

Demand shown at Table I are still in each kind of shoes, Exploitation the constraint means that the performance of
so that they cannot be added directly. It is needed to convert the system should be maximized [2]. The management must
the unit as aggregate unit, by multiplying demand for each focus on maximizing the constraint. In this study, preparation
kind of shoes and its conversion factor. Calculation of the and sewing machines are constraints that should produce at
converted demand at cutting work station is shown at Table their maximum capacity, in such a way maximize
IV. In a similar way, demand for each work station can be throughput.
seen at Table IV.
Linear programming is then adopted to optimize the
production rate. The objective is to maximize throughput,
TABLE IV. CONVERTED DEMAND FOR CUTTING WORK STATION subject to machine load for each work station does not
(AGGREGATE) exceed the available capacity, and production for each kind
Kind of Demand Conversion Converted Demand of shoes do not exceed the demand, but greater than the
Shoes (unit) Factor (aggregate) minimum production rate. The equations of the linear
Man 24,008 0.977 23,457 programming can be expressed as equations below.
Women 21,950 1.000 21,950
Junior 48,946 0.910 44,528 Objective function:
Child 10,196 0.875 8,920 Maximize
Total 98,855
Z = 55,000 X1 + 52,000 X2 + 50,000 X3 + 32,000 X4 (3)
In a similar way, the converted demand for each work
station is shown at column 2 of Table V. A bottleneck is then Subject to:
treated as a constraint, when machine load shows a higher
value than the availability of the resource. Table V shows 0.977 X1 + X2 + 0.910 X3 + 0.875 X4 ≤ 105120 (4)
status for each work station at the production process. Refer
to Table V, the bottlenecks are preparation and sewing work
stations. Fig. 2 shows the position of the bottlenecks.
0.999 X1+ X2 + 0.986 X3+ 0.931 X4 ≤ 86373 (5)

TABLE V. IDENTIFYING THE CONSTRAINT

Work Converted Available Load Status 0.978 X1 + X2 + 0.914 X3+ 0.903 X4 ≤ 50124 (6)
station Demand Capacity (%)
(aggregate) (unit)
Cutting 98,855 105,120 94.04 Non- X1 ≤ 23,483 (7)
bottleneck
Preparation 103,704 86,373 120.07 Bottleneck
Sewing 99,398 50,124 198.30 Bottleneck
X2 ≤ 21,950 (8)
B. Step 2: Exploitation the constraint

172
 Fig. 2 Existing production rate and positon of the bottlenecks
X3 ≤ 44,759
X4 ≤ 9,206
X1, X2, X3, X4 ≥ 4,000
where: X1, X2, X3, and X4 are for man, women, junior and
child shoes, respectively.
Equation (3) shows the objective function. i.e. to
maximize throughput, while (4), (5) and (6) indicate the
capacity constraints of cutting, preparation and sewing
machines, respectively. Equations (7) to (10) are demand
constraint of each kind of shoes, while (11) indicates
minimum production for each shoes.
Calculation is conducted using WinQS 2.0., and the
results shows that the optimum producing rate of man shoes
(X1) is 23,482 pairs, women shoes (X2) is 4,000 pairs, junior
shoes (X3) is 21,268 pairs, and child shoes (X4) is 4,000
pairs. It will give throughput of Rp 2,690,891,000.
C. Step 3: Subordination to the other resources
Subordinate is to make sure that all other resources focus
on performing tasks in such a way that the planned flow
through the constraint is supported [2]. A non-constraint
should produce only what the system constraint allows.
Fig. 3 shows a mapping of the production rate based on
the results of linear programming. In Fig. 3, it can be seen
that there are WIP at the sewing work stations of 996 pairs of
shoes, but it is smaller than before exploiting the bottleneck
of 5916 pairs of shoes (see Fig. 2). The WIP occurs because
of differences between the outputs of the upper production
line of 16,708 pairs of shoes and the outputs of outsole
production line as many as 17,704 pairs of shoes. It also
shows the amount of the outsoles that must wait to be
(9) assembled with the upper. This problem should be solved as
well.
To eliminate the upper and outsole production line
(10) imbalances, the concept of drum buffer rope (DBR) is
applied. The drum considers the constraints in the system
and customer commitments [2]. The process of setting the
(11) drum begins by mapping the production rate for each work
station. The production rate is referred to the result of
calculating the linear programming at the exploitation
constraint phase. The drum is then determined as the work
station with minimum production rate. In our case, the
sewing work station was chosen as a drum to control the
production rhythm.
Meanwhile, other work stations will be bound with rope,
as a communication flow, in order to keep their production
rate in line with the sewing work stations. The rope is a
mechanism that is used to control the flow through the
system by controlling the flow at a small number of control
points [2]. In addition, the buffer is also stored in front of the
bottleneck. In addition, the buffer is also stored in front of
the bottleneck work station to maintain the production is
smooth, free from disruptions.
“The buffer is to provide a significantly higher degree of
reliability in DBR plan that can be accomplished at
significantly lower production lead time. A time buffer
represents the additional lead time allowed, beyond the
required setup and process times, for materials to flow
between two specified points in the product flow” [2].
D. Calculation of Time Buffer
The number of required buffers is determined as follows:
Buffer of the sewing work station
= Required capacity – Available capacity
= 17,704 – 16,708 = 996 pairs
173
 Fig. 3 Positioning of Drum, Buffer and Rope (proposed production rate)
This result can be converted to time unit by multiplying
with the standard time of the sewing work station for women
shoes, i.e. 172.4 second/pair. The result indicates the total
additional working time (overtime) of 2,862 minutes or
about 47.697 hours.
E. Step 4: Elevate the constraints
We propose three alternatives to increase capacity of the
constraint by implementing the overtime so that the
bottleneck will be eliminated. The three alternatives are
described as follows:
1) Alternative #1
Based on the calculation results to balance the number of
upper and outsole, the required overtime is 2,862 minutes in
one month, or 114.48 minutes/day. It means that the
company should implement minimum 1 hours overtime/day
for each machine. This is able to handle the imbalance
between the upper and outsole, because capacity for each
sewing machine increases of to 4,469 pairs of shoes / month.
2) Alternative #2
Consider overtime is 3 hours/day, which is the maximum
overtime currently applied by the company. This means that
to overcome upper and outsole imbalances, the company
should implement overtime along 4 working days. The
adoption of this alternative can increase the capacity of each
sewing work station to 4427 pairs of shoes / month
3) Alternative #3
Consider the smallest capacity of work station in the
outsole (bottom) production line, i.e. press outsole work
station of 24,000 units of capacity. If an alternative overtime
with 3 hours on each working day is applied, the total
capacity of the sewing work station will increase to 22,972
pairs of shoes. If the outsole production line produces a
174
maximum output of 24,000 pairs of shoes, the difference
output between the upper and outsole is around 4.3%.
IV. DISCUSSION
Refer to the results, it is found that there are some
differences between the current conditions and the proposed
improvements (see Table VI).
Table VI shows some differences between demand rate at
the existing condition and at the proposed condition (the
optimal production rate). It shows that if the production rate
is determined by considering the actual capacity without any
additional overtime, the demand cannot be met in order to
maximize throughput. However, when the production rate is
only provided towards meeting demand, it will generate
bottleneck and WIP at the assembly line. Therefore, overtime
is required.
The overtime of proposed condition is shorter than the
existing condition, because the proposed overtimes are
designed by considering capacity requirements and the
accumulation occur at the production line. In addition there
is also a decrease in imbalance between the upper and
outsole in the production line from 18.96% to 4.28%
(alternative #3). This is influenced by the application of the
DBR as well as the alternatives proposed overtime based on
the optimal production rate. This indicates a performance
improvement of bottleneck working station.
In this study, it is shown that implementing DBR at
optimal production rate can reduce imbalances in the upper
and outsole production lines. However, combining DBR and
the proposed overtimes only increase the production rate for
Junior shoes, and they have not been able to meet demand
(see Table VI). Therefore, it is requiered other alternatives so
that the customer demand can be met, for example, creating
another alternative overtime, or adding machines and
operators.
 V. CONCLUSION
The results of calculations and analysis show that the
Theory of Constraints which adopts DBR can be used to
manage bottlenecks as constraints so that bottlenecks can be
reduced. However, combination of Theory of Constraints
and DBR cannot eliminate the imbalance between the two
production lines. It is required overtime to overcome the
imbalance problem.
In this study it is shown that implementation of DBR as
well as the proposed overtime based on the optimal
production rate will reduce the problem of imbalance
between upper and outsole at the shoes production lines from
18.96% to 4.28%.
Nevertheless, further research is required to develop
other patterns of overtime, or to add machines and operators
for increasing the overall capacity of the system.

TABLE VI. COMPARISON OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS

Proposed condition
Element Existing condition Reguler Regular time + Regular time + Regular time +
time Alternative #1 Alternative #2 Alternative #3
Man 23,482 23,482 23,483 23,483 23,483
Production Woman 21,950 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000
rate Junior 44,759 21,268 28,238 24,666 41,944
Child 9,205 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000
1-3 hour/day
(5 working days) 3 hours/day
1 hour/day 3 hours/day
Overtime (4 working
8-11 hours (Saturday and (5 working days) (5 working days)
days)
Sunday)
Imbalance between
18,96% 4,28% (Alternative #3)
Upper and Outsole

REFERENCES
[1] R. J. Tersine: Principles of Inventory and Materials Management,
PTR Pretice-Hall Inc., New Jersey (1994)
[2] J. F. Coxx III and J. G. Scheier Jr.: Theory of Constraints Handbook,
Mc. Graw Hill, New York (2010)
[3] Z. T. Şimşit , N. S. Günay, and Ö. Vayvay: Theory of Constraints: A
Literature Review, 10th International Strategic Management
Conference, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 150, pp. 930 –
936, ( 2014 )
[4] P. Vargas, L. M. Kipper, A. L. E. Silva, F. L. da Silva, and G. Z.
Kessler: TOC’S Five-Step Cycle: An Approach to Instant Results and
Cultural Change, International Journal of Engineering Research &
Science (IJOER), Vol-3 (10), pp. 1 – 9 (2017)
[5] K. Álvarez, D. Aldas, and J. Reyes: Towards Lean Manufacturing
from Theory of Constraints: A Case Study in Footwear Industry,
International Conference on Industrial Engineering, Management
Science and Application (ICIMSA), Seoul, South Korea, 13-15 June
2017, pp. 1-8, IEEE publisher (2017)
[6] E. Gundogar, M. Sari, and A. H. Kokcam: Dynamic Bottleneck
Elimination in Mattress Manufacturing Line Using Theory of
Constraints, SpringerPlus 5:1276, pp. 1-15 (2016)
[7] T. A. R. Filho, D. A. de J. Pacheco, and I. Pergher: A New Approach
for Decision Making in Distribution Supply Chains: A Theory Of
Constraints Perspective, Int. J. Logistics Systems and Management,
Vol. 25 (2), pp. 266-281 (2016)
[8] Y. Kamada and F. Kojima: Efficient Matching under Distributional
Constraints: Theory and Applications, American Economic Review,
105(1): pp. 67–99 (2015) http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/aer.20101552
[9] V. Šukalová and P. Ceniga: Application of The Theory of Constraints
Instrument in The Enterprise Distribution System, Procedia
Economics and Finance 23 , pp. 134 – 139 (2015)
[10] J. Trojanowska and E. Dostatni: Application Of The Theory Of
Constraints For Project Management, Management and Production
Engineering Review 8 (3), pp.87-95 (2017) DOI: 10.1515/mper-2017-
0031
[11] M. M. Umble and M. L. Srikant: Synchronous Manufacturing-
Principles for World-Class Excellence, The Spectrum Publishing
Company, America (1996)
[12] Blocher, Stout and Cokin: Cost Manajement: a Strategic Emphass,
McGraw-Hill Companies Inc., New York (2010)

175