Introduction
Manufacturing involves sourcing for raw materials, processing, and distribution of end products to existing and potential customers. Such a process implies that time is of the essence and as such, manufacturers must save as much time as possible in the manufacturing process to maximize profits and stay ahead of competitors. In this regard, different manufacturers have different manufacturing systems that assist in reducing the time required between sourcing materials and distribution. This essay looks at and compares synchronous manufacturing, material requirements planning, and just-in-time as some of such systems invented to increase manufacturing velocity.
Comparing and Contrasting
Synchronous manufacturing, material requirements planning, and just-in-time are different types of manufacturing systems whose main aim is reducing the time between the acquisition of raw materials to the production of the end product. They have similarities as well as differences that arise from various aspects of the manufacturing cycle. Regarding work in progress, just-in-time rates very low while material requirements planning rates very high. Synchronous manufacturing rates low. Just-in-time features in continuous flow whereas material requirements planning and synchronous manufacturing feature in customs shops (Chase, Jacobs, & Aquilano, 2006).
Concerning schedule flexibility, just-in-time manufacturing has a level production with a minimum of thirty days. Materials requirement planning gets frozen for thirty days too but can vary from one work station to another. Synchronous manufacturing can be changed every day depending on requirements. The production cycle is very short in just-in-time manufacturing, very long in materials requirement planning, and short in synchronized manufacturing (Chase, Jacobs, & Aquilano, 2006).
Regarding capacity for limits, just-in-time manufacturing endeavors to balance capacity while materials requirement planning is unpredictable since it can begin accurately but turn out to be inaccurate later on and become terrible (Chase, Jacobs, & Aquilano, 2006). Capacity limitations form the basis of synchronous manufacturing. Just-in-time manufacturing requires multi-skilled labor to assist in other areas while both materials requirements planning and synchronous manufacturing require specialized labor in each work station (Chase, Jacobs, & Aquilano, 2006).
Quality control is of great significance in just-in-time and each production unit must ensure that only quality products go through. Just-in-time does not condone poor quality at all (Chase, Jacobs, & Aquilano, 2006). However, quality control in materials requirement planning is wanting since it is haphazard. It is normal to detect defects yet no one becomes responsible. In synchronous manufacturing, manufacturers decide on quality control depending on the importance of a particular product (Chase, Jacobs, & Aquilano, 2006).
Chosen Type of Manufacturing System
Just-in-time manufacturing would apply in the bottling of soft drinks since can get to workstation and machines fill them up and then deliver them to distributors. Coca Cola Company has applied this type of production system with marked success. Canners and packagers are in adjacent workstations and operate through a ‘hole in the wall’ process which involves the continuous supply of required cans to packagers throughout the production.
In this regard, canners, and packagers endeavor to ensure that there is no build-up of stocks in either of the stations by filling up cans on time and delivering finished products to suppliers on time. Also, different workstations rely on data from the market to assist them to know when to increase or decrease production. In times of hot weather, for instance, production goes up due to increased demand for soft drinks.
References
Chase, R. B., Jacobs, F. R., & Aquilano, N. J. (2006). Operations Management for Competitive Advantage. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies.