Perencanaan dan Pengendalian Produksi

MASTER PRODUCTION
SCHEDULING (MPS)
Source : Jacobs et al. Manufacturing Planning and Control for Supply
Chain Management. US: McGraw-Hill Professional, 2011.
References
n Jacobs, F. Robert; Berry, William; Whybark, D. Clay; and
Vollmann, Thomas. Manufacturing Planning and Control for
Supply Chain Management. US: McGraw-Hill Professional,
2011. (wajib)
n Fogarty et al., Production and Inventory Management, South-
Western Publishing Co., Cincinnati, 1991
Outline
n The Master Production Scheduling (MPS) Activity

- Linkages to Other Company Activities

n MPS Techniques

- The Question of Feasibility

- Order Promising and ATP
- Consuming the Forecast
n Planning in an ATO Environment

- Managing Using a Two-Level MPS

- MPS Stability
n Concluding Principles
Master Production Scheduling Activity
n MPS is the disaggregated version of the sales and operations plan.

n A statement of production not a statement of demand.

n States which end items or product options (the quantity and the
timing) manufacturing will build in the future.

n Provides the basis for making good use of manufacturing resources,

making customer delivery promises, resolving trade-offs between
sales and manufacturing, and attaining the firm’s strategic objecives.

n Stated in end-item terms, some average end item, product modules

or options, or specific customer orders.

n End item à Bill of Material; Product Family, ATO à Planning Bill of

Material
 n MPS drives all engine activities and
Linkages to Other Company subsequently the back-end systems.
Activities
n Major ERP vendors have a MPS module

n Customer booked orders from Demand

management are provided to MPS to
coordinate product availability with
customer requirements.
n The sum of the detailed MPS quantities
must aways equal the whole as defined
by the Sales and operations planning.
n RCCP provides rough evaluation of
potential capacity problems with a
particular MPS.
n MPS provides the input (gross
requirement) data to MRP system.
n The basis for key interfunctional trade-
offs.
n Cash flows and profits can be better
Source : Jacobs et al. Manufacturing Planning and Control for Supply
forecast by basing the estimates on
Chain Management. US: McGraw-Hill Professional, 2011. planned production output specified in
the MPS.
MPS Techniques (1)

n Fig 5.2. Beginning on-hand inv= 20, MPS = 10 (level strategy).

n PAB = Beginning OHI + MPS - Forecast.

MPS Techniques (2)

n Fig 5.3. MPS lot size = 30, SS= 5

MPS Techniques (3)

n Fig 5.4. MPS is a rolling schedule that requires updating the

record to so the MPS reflects actual current conditions.
n Fig 5.4 shows the situations at the start of the second period. The
PAB reflects these changes. Forecast has also been updated.
n The increase in demand has created some problems (PAB < 5) that
need to be solved.
The Question of Feasibility

n Fig 5.5. The revision solves the problem of PAB but puts focus in the question of
feasibility. Does the company have the capacity to immediately produce a batch that
was originally scheduled for period 3? Is material available to meet this schedule? Etc.

n The MPS should be buffered from overreaction, with changes made only when
essential.

n Before making revisions from the plan (e.g changing/multiplying the lot size,
expediting the order), check the feasibility of the changes with available capacity
in the shop floor and the availability of the material.
Order Promising and Available-to-Promise (ATP) (1)

The following is a step-by-step process for calculating the MPS including ATP calculations:

1. Calculate projected available inventory.

Projected available inventory = Previously available inventory + Master production schedule -
Maximum between Forecast or Actual orders

Ex. Period 2 à 15 + 0 – 5 = 10

Projected available inventory = Projected available balance

Calculate for every period in the planning horizon.
Order Promising and Available-to-Promise (ATP) (2)

2. ATP calculations (discrete logic).

For the first period:

ATP = On-hand + MPS - Sum of the orders until the next MPS
= 20 + 0 – (5 + 3) = 12

For each period when a subsequent MPS occurs:

ATP = MPS- Sum of the orders until the next MPS = 30 – (2 + 0 + 0) = 28
Order Promising and Available-to-Promise (ATP) (3)

3. ATP calculations (cumulative logic).

For the first period:

ATP = On-hand + MPS - Sum of the orders until the next MPS = 20 + 0 – (5 + 3) = 12

For each period when a subsequent MPS occurs:

ATP = Previous ATP + MPS - Sum of the order until the next MPS
= 12 + 30 – (2 + 0 + 0) = 40
Consuming the forecast (1)
Consuming the forecast (2)

n ATP3 = MPS – Sum of the orders until the next MPS

ATP3 = 30 – [(2+15) + 0 + 10 +35] = -32

n PAB5 = 10 – 15 = -5 ; PAB6 = -5 – 35 = -40

n ATP3, PAB5 , and PAB7 have negative values àupdate

Consuming the forecast (3) – Discrete ATP

For the first period,

ATP2 = 15 + 0 – (3+5) = 7

For each period when a subsequent MPS occurs,

ATP3 = 30 – [(2 + 15) + 0] = 13
ATP5 = 30 – 10 = 20
ATP6 = 30 – 35 = -5
 Consuming the forecast (4) – Cummulative ATP

For the first period,

ATP2 = 15 + 0 – (3+5) = 7

For each period when a subsequent MPS occurs,

ATP3 = 7 + 30 – [(2 + 15) + 0] = 20
ATP5 = 20 + 30 – 10 = 40
ATP6 = 40 + 30 – 35 = 35
Planning in an ATO Environment (1)
§ A few number of modular
options can be combined to
make a unique end item
wanted by a customer.
§ The two-level MPS:
synchronize two parallel
production systems.
§ The first system is designed
to produce the components
and options.
§ The second system is
designed to put together a
product from the options
selected by each customer.
Planning in an ATO Environment (2)
n Bill of Material (BOM): Specifies the ingredients required to make each part
number or assembly in the system.

n A special type of BOM, The Planning BOM is useful for MPS management.

n The Planning BOM: BOM for different final products (models) in a family with
different components in one table (Ex. Table 4.6)

n Super bill describes the the related options or modules that make up the
average end item.

n The super bill is as much a marketing tool as a manufacturing tool. With it,
instead of forecasting and controlling individual modules, the forecast is now
stated in terms of total average units, with attention given to percentage
breakdowns—to the single-level super bill of materials—and to managing
module inventories by using available-to-promise logic on a day-to-day
basis as actual customer orders are booked
Fogarty et al., Production and Inventory Management, South-Western Publishing Co., Cincinnati, 1991
 Planning in an ATO Environment: The Super Bill (1)

The Garden Till Company makes

Rototiller in the following options:
n Horsepower: 3HP, 4HP, 5HP.

n Drive train: Chain, Gear.

n Brand name: Taylor, Garden Till,

Original Equipment Manufacturer
(OEM).
n The total number of end item
buildable units is 18 (3 × 2 × 3).
n Fig 5.12 Using this artificial end item
for an average 4-horsepower tiller,
only one forecast is needed from
marketing.

Source : Jacobs et al. Manufacturing Planning and Control for Supply Chain Management. US: McGraw-Hill Professional, 2011.
Planning in an ATO Environment: The Super Bill (2)

n No safety stock is shown for the

common parts. This means
protection is provided for
product mix variances but not
for variances in the overall MPS
quantity of 4-horsepower tillers.
n A commitment to an MPS
quantity for the super bill means
exactly that number of common
parts will be needed.
Planning in an ATO Environment: The Super Bill (3)

n If 1,000 four-horsepower super bills

were entered, the bill of materials
would call for 1,000 common-parts
modules, 600 gear options, 400
chain options, 400 Taylor options,
500 Garden Till options, and 100
OEM options. The safety stocks
allow shipments to customers to vary
from the usages specified by the bill
of materials percentage.
n Although 600 of the 1,000 four-
horsepower tillers are expected to be
finished with thegear drive option, as
many as 750 can be promised
because of the safety stock. Similar
flexibility exists for all other options.
n To accept a customer order, the
available-to-promise logic must be
applied to each option in the order,
meaning it’s necessary to check each
of the affected modules.
Managing using a Two-Level MPS: using Discrete Calculations (1)

n a Two-Level MPS. Before an order is

promised, key components are
guaranteed to be available. The
technique allows the use of available-to-
promise logic at both the component
level and at the final assembly level in
the bill of materials.
n Garden Till Company focuses on two
models of 4-horsepower tillers, the
branded Taylor product and the OEM
product.
n The company plans to sell 100 units per
week and that these will be assembled
to order.
n The company expects 40 percent of the
demand to be the Taylor brand and 10
percent will be OEM.
n The other 50 percent are sold as
options in other bundled products.

Source : Jacobs et al. Manufacturing Planning and Control for Supply

Chain Management. US: McGraw-Hill Professional, 2011.
Managing using a Two-Level MPS: using Discrete Calculations (2)
Source : Jacobs et al. Manufacturing Planning and Control for Supply
Chain Management. US: McGraw-Hill Professional, 2011.
Calculate projected available inventory.
Projected available balance = Previously available
inventory + Master production schedule - Max
(Forecast, Orders).
ATP calculations (discrete logic).
For the first period:
ATP = On-hand + MPS - Sum of the orders until the
next MPS.
For each period when a subsequent MPS occurs:
ATP = MPS- Sum of the orders until the next MPS.
The Garden Till Company sells 4-HP Tillers 100
units/week and will be assembled to order.
The Taylor Brand tiller demand to be 40 % of 4-HP
tiller demand (MPS = 80, SS = 10) and 10 % will
be OEM (MPS = 10, SS= 15).
By doing this at these two levels, they are able to
coordinate the sales of the various models with
our actual assembly schedule. Overall, the two-
level MPS approach helps us align the MPC
process closely to market forces. Products are
planned and controlled in the way they are sold as
opposed to the way they are designed or
manufactured.
Managing using a Two-Level MPS: using Cumulative Calculations
Calculate projected available inventory.
Projected available balance = Previously
available inventory + Master production
schedule - Max (Forecast, Orders).
ATP calculations (cumulative logic).
For the first period:
ATP= On-hand + MPS - Sum of the orders until
the next MPS.
For each period when a subsequent MPS
occurs:
ATP = Previous ATP + MPS - Sum of the order
until the next MPS.
By doing this at these two levels, they are able
to coordinate the sales of the various models
with our actual assembly schedule. Overall, the
two-level MPS approach helps us align the
MPC process closely to market forces. Products
are planned and controlled in the way they are
sold as opposed to the way they are designed
or manufactured.
Source : Jacobs et al. Manufacturing Planning and Control for
Supply Chain Management. US: McGraw-Hill Professional, 2011.
 n Frozen Schedule. This means no changes inside
MPS Stability of eight weeks are possible. A stable MPS
translates into stable component schedules, which
mean improved performance in plant operations.
n Too many changes in the MPS are costly in terms
of reduced productivity. However, too few changes
can lead to poor customer service levels and
increased inventory.
n The objective is to strike a balance where stability
is monitored and managed.
n Time fencing is an extension of the freeze
concept. Many firms set time fences that specify
periods in which various types of change can be
handled .
n Two common fences are the demand fence and
the planning fence.
n The demand fence is the shorter of the two.
Inside the demand fence, the forecast is ignored in
calculating the projected available balance. The
theory is that customer orders—not the forecast—
matter in the near term. Within the demand fence it
is very difficult to change the MPS
n The planning fence indicates the time at which
the master production scheduler should be
Source : Jacobs et al. Manufacturing Planning and Control planning more MPS quantities. Outside the
for Supply Chain Management. US: McGraw-Hill planning fence, changes can be made by the
Professional, 2011.
master production scheduler
Concluding Principles
The master production schedule plays a key role in manufacturing
planning and control systems. The general principles:
1. The MPS unit should reflect the company’s approach to the business
environment in which it operates.
2. The MPS function should use the common ERP database if such a system
is implemented in the firm.
3. Common systems, time-phased processing, and MPS techniques facilitate
effective scheduling regardless of the firm’s environment.
4. Customer order promising should be closely linked to the MPS.
5. Available-to-promise information should be derived from the MPS and
provided to the sales department.
6. A final assembly schedule should be used to convert the anticipated build
schedule into the final build schedule.
7. The master production scheduler must keep the sum of the parts (the MPS)
equal to the whole (the operations plan)
Terima kasih
Churiah Agustini & Daniel Siswanto