Tuesday, October 1, 2019
A Look At Eliyahu Goldratt’s Theory of Constraints Essay
Abstract            The Theory of Constraints was devised by Eli Goldratt. It states that in every organization there is a constraint that slows down its performance.            This paper will delve on the Theory of Constraints of Eli Goldratt.  A Look At Eliyahu Goldratt’s Theory of Constraints            The Theory of Constraint is a management philosophy originally developed by Eliyahu Goldratt and discussed in his book, The Goal. The basic concept behind the theory is that a chain will always have its weakest connection. In any organization or any complicated system for that matter, there will only be one component of that system that will restrict its capacity to attain its objectives. In order for such system to have any significant progress, the constraint must be located and the entire system must be manipulated with it in consideration (Thomas Group, n.d). Application of the Theory of Constraint            According to the Theory of Constraints, profit-oriented organizations should have at least one constraint that hinders the system from achieving improved performance in connection with its goal. The Theory of Constraints is founded on the premise that the rate of income generation is restricted by at least a single constraining process. Only by enhancing the throughput during bottleneck will the overall process be improved (Mahapatra & Sahu, 2006).            In summary, the main components of the Theory of Constraints are: Complex systems should have at least one constraint otherwise it would be earning unlimited income. Constraint, therefore, is defined as anything that restricts the system from improving its performance compared to its goal (Mahapatra & Sahu, 2006). Constraints provide systems with an opportunity to develop and improve (Mahapatra & Sahu, 2006) Theory of Constraint versus Lean Manufacturing            Lean manufacturing is a concept that is often compared with Goldratt’s Theory of Constraint. Lean manufacturing was derived from the successful method being used by Japanese car maker Toyota. The method received international acclaim through the Womack & Jones book The Machine That Changed The World. Lean manufacturing is focused on elimination of waste (Moore, 1998).            While TOC and Lean have varying principles, there are certain areas wherein the two philosophies have a commonality (Moore, 1998). In both lean and TOC, the perception of the customer as value is critical. In Lean manufacturing, it is the customer who determines value. In TOC, there is no throughput until the payment for a certain product has been cleared by the bank (Moore, 1998). Lean and TOC both acknowledge the fact that the ultimate goal of any organization is to convert inventory into throughput(Moore, 1998) TOC and lean underscores the importance of flow throughout the system. Both philosophies believes that the flow plays an important role in the system (Moore, 1998). For both TOC and lean manufacturing, the pull of the market dictates the needs for manufacturing. In lean marketing, manufacturing of goods or services will not take place unless there is a demand for it by the customer. In TOC, the pull is the driving force behind the Drum-Buffer-Rope method (Moore, 1998). Lean manufacturing and TOC drives the workers to aspire for perfection or improving their efforts. The role of the workers in the improvement of the system cannot be discounted (Moore, 1998). During the past 25 years, there were three TOC paradigms that were developed namely logistics, global performance measures, and thinking processes. Recently, Boyd and Gupta changed these paradigms into decision making, performance measurement, and organizational mindset (Moss, 2007). The Logistics Paradigm            The logistics paradigm was derived from the scheduling program called Optimized Production Technology (OPT) which has nine rules (Mahapatra & Sahu, 2006): Flow should be balanced rather than capacity The utilization level of non-bottleneck resources is not dependent on its potential but on other constraints within the system Use and activation of a resource are not synonymous to each other One hour lost during the bottleneck translates to an hour lost for the entire system An hour lost at a non-bottleneck is just minor Bottlenecks determine throughput and inventory The transfer batch may not, and in most instances, should not be the same with the process batch. The process batch should vary, not constant Schedules should be determined without looking at all the constraints at the same time. Lead times are the outcomes of a schedule and cannot be determined in advance The Major Steps in the Logistics Paradigm Identifying the constraint. These may involve physical barriers such as physical or managerial (Mahapatra & Sahu, 2006). Exploiting the constraint by increasing utilization and efficiency. For instance, physical constraint can be utilized by making it as effective as possible (Mahapatra & Sahu, 2006). Subordinating all other processes to the constraint process. This implies that other aspects of the system must support the total effectiveness of the constraint. If the resources that are not causing the constraint are utilized beyond their productivity level, they will not increase the throughput but increase unwanted inventory (Mahapatra & Sahu, 2006) Elevating the constraint. If the present constraints are the most crucial elements of the system, implementing rigorous improvement measures will enhance its performance. Improved performance leads to better realization of the potentials of the nonconstraint resources which would lead to an improvement in the overall performance of the system (Mahapatra & Sahu, 2006) Rinse and repeat (Mahapatra & Sahu, 2006). The implementation of the logistical paradigm is best exemplified in the drum-buffer-rope methodology. There are three concepts worth explaining in this method. The drum refers to the pace at which the constraints operate. The rope establishes the communication between the critical control chains to ensure that they are synchronized. The buffer is the strategically positioned inventory to safeguard the output of the system from that differences that may take place within the system (Mahapatra & Sahu, 2006). The drum-buffer-rope technique is a simplified version of its predecessor the Optimized Production Technology (OPT) and the newer Advanced Planning and Scheduling Systems (APS), which are utilized in firms engaged in manufacturing and production (Mahapatra & Sahu, 2006). Using the Drum-Buffer-Rope method leads to the synchronization of resources as well as the utilization of materials in an organization. It is worth knowing that resources and materials are used only in a degree that would lead to the capacity of the organization to attain their throughput (Mahapatra & Sahu, 2006).            Since random disruptions are likely in any organization, the drum-buffer-rope method will provide a tool for securing total throughput by using Time Buffers, which contains inventories and safeguards constraint schedules from the impact of disruption at non-constraint resources (Mahapatra & Sahu, 2006).            The process of using time buffers as a mechanism for effective management and improvement of throughput is called buffer management. It provides details based on planned and actual performance and is utilized for checking the inventory of a protected resource as a comparison for actual and planned performance (Mahapatra & Sahu, 2006). Application of the Logistics Paradigm in Service Firms            The logistic paradigm or five step processes is applied to various processes and procedures of a service firm. The advantage of a service firm is that it is used to enhance service time, flow of information, as well as in re-engineering administrative functions (Moss, 2007).            In the military as well as in the medical field, the logistics paradigm is being utilized to generate more sales (Moss, 2007). Drum-Buffer-Rope Method Applied to Manufacturing and Service Firms            The drum-buffer-rope method of scheduling is applicable in both manufacturing and services sector. In the field of manufacturing, the drum-buffer-rope technique is useful in scheduling equipments. For the service sector, DBR is applicable in scheduling personnel within the organization, setting appointments with customers, and forecasting lead-times for customers (Moss, 2007).            According to Schragenheim and Ronen, DBR should be used in determining problems and flaws that will disrupt the flow of the system. There are suggestions that the drum-buffer-rope method should be used in the management of supply chains (Moss, 2007). Global Performance Measures            In the global performance measure of the Theory of Constraints, all company performance efforts are geared towards the objective of earning money now and in the future. In order to accomplish this, there are three things that should be done. First, increase the throughput. Second, reduce inventory. Third, minimize operation costs (Moss, 2007).            Throughput refers to the rate at which the system earns a profit through sales while inventory is the term used to denote the money which the system will invest in buying things which they plan to market and sell. Finally, operational expense which is the money spent by the system in converting inventory to throughput (Moss, 2007).            From these concepts, three global measures have been derived namely net profit, return of investment, and cash flow. Net profit is determined by deducting the operating cost from the throughput. Return of investment or ROI is obtained from the ratio of net profit and inventory. Cash flow, on the other hand, is used as a survival tool. As long as the company has money, they will survive (Moss, 2007).            Most companies prefer to have only a few operational measures since this will provide convenience to the company as far as the assessment of the effects of various decisions (Moss, 2007). The Thinking Process            When it comes to constraints existing in the company, Goldratt identified three important decisions: What to change? What to change to? How to effect the change? In order to provide solutions to these problems, Goldratt devised the thinking process. During the last 10 to 15 years, managerial processes have been at the helm of corporate constraints. This is the purpose of the thinking process (Moss, 2007).            One of the strengths of the Theory of Constraint is that it provides various tools and techniques to help companies solve a certain problem. Although each method can be used separately, they can likewise be integrated in order to better answer problems concerning Consensus and Focus, Construction of a Complete Solution, and Communication and Collaboration. For each process, there are different tools that can be used (Focused Performance, n.d). Consensus and Focus The Current Reality Tree (CRT) is a series of logical steps that describes present situations. The aim of CRT is to come up with a cause-effect relationship among unwanted symptoms as well as core conflicts that the company would like to remove (Focused Performance, n.d). Construction of a Complete Solution The Evaporating Cloud. The evaporating cloud or conflict resolution diagram is a logical tool which aims to determine aspects of conflict that generates non-compromise win-win solutions. While its validity is acknowledged, the purpose of the evaporating cloud is to unearth underlying assumptions which turns out to be invalid (Focused Performance, n.d). While the evaporating cloud is already useful by itself, this tool can be integrated with a CRT since the seemingly difficult problems pointed out in the CRT are often the results of underlying conflict (Focused Performance, n.d). Future Reality Tree. The FRT is an effect-cause-effect logic structure which aims to show how recommended changes would have an impact on reality particularly how and why these proposals are expected to create a positive result. It is a paper-based simulator that assesses the ability of the proposed change to produce the desired outcome. Likewise, it is used to test the propensity of the proposed change to generate new and unwanted outcomes (Focused Performance, n.d).  Communication and Collaboration Negative Branch Reservations.            There are instances when undesirable effects are treated as potential results of a proposal and are often detected by another individual other than the originator of the proposal (Focused Performance, n.d).            With Negative Branch Reservations (NBR), logical expressions are used to address certain reservations through additional actions that would complete the original proposal and cutting down the â€Å"negative branches†from the proposed FRT (Focused Performance, n.d). Prerequisite Tree.            The prerequisite tree or PRT is a logical structure that describes all the barriers to accomplishing a goal as well as the alternative courses of action. The PRT likewise depicts how certain actions when combined with current reality will achieve new and expected results and why these actions would achieve the required outcomes (Focused Performance, n.d).            Categories of Legitimate Reservation            The Categories of Legitimate Reservation is a group of tests used for verifying the cause-effect logic which is at the heart of the Thinking Process. CLRs serve the purpose of scrutinizing and modifying the logical trees (Focused Performance, n.d). The Thinking Process Applied to Manufacturing            The thinking process can be effectively applied to the manufacturing and service sector. For the service sector, the guiding management philosophy should center on improving process. The problem-solving tools of the thinking process provide most of the benefits to the service sector (Moss, 2007). Throughput Accounting            Throughput accounting, which is based on Eli Goldratt’s Theory of Constraints, plays a major role in management decision making. It changes an organization’s view of income recognition as well as costs and profitability. Thus, throughput accounting is responsible for refining the figures used for making decisions which potentially modifies Management Accounting (Goldratt, n.d). Advantages of Throughput Accounting            Using throughput accounting as a measurement and decision making tool, organizations can have the following advantages (Goldratt, n.d): Shift their sales efforts on products that will generate more income Make better decisions on which investment will generate more income Come up with decisions that are determined by real effects on the bottom line Develop a clear understanding of the role of sub-systems in the entire system Make realistic efforts regarding the effectiveness of the entire system relative to the goal of the company which is to gain a profit. Most of the distortions that are present in traditional management accounting can be corrected with throughput accounting. Distortions arise as a result of traditional management accounting using similar measures used in judging an entire system or organization as well as daily decisions by dividing the system into sub-systems and activities (Goldratt, n.d).            Throughput accounting is a substitute to cost accounting. It is not derived from standard costing or Activity-Based Costing. It is not concerned with costing or allocation of costs to products and services but rather as a strategy for maximizing profits. The main objective of throughput accounting is to hasten the velocity at which products are moved in a company by removing bottlenecks (Puthran, 2006).            Throughput accounting helps enhance a company’s profit performance through improved management decisions (Puthran, 2006).            Usually management decisions are based on assessing the impact of proposals on the throughput, investment, and operating expense. In a traditional management accounting, the cost of any proposal is commonly the initial and sometimes the only thing being considered, which results to poor decisions on the part of the management (Puthran, 2006). The Basis of Throughput Accounting            Throughput accounting is based on the fact that there are bottlenecks in organizations. Microsoft Encarta defines bottleneck â€Å"a delay in progress due to one part of the process or system being slower than the others which results to the delay in the overall process.†(Microsoft Encarta) What are the Factors used by throughput accounting in computing income and expenses? Throughput is the rate at which the process or system generate â€Å"goal units.†When the â€Å"goal units†involves money, the throughput is derived by deducting the price of raw materials with the income generated from the sale. However, throughput is only applicable to activities that involves selling products or services. Warehouse manufacturing is not included in throughput accounting (Puthran, 2006). Investment is the money associated with the process or system. It includes inventories, equipments, infrastructure or facilities, and other assets and liabilities (Puthran, 2006). Operating expenses refers to the money which the system uses in purchasing â€Å"goal units.†In the case of tangible products, the operating cost includes all the expenses with the exception of the price of raw materials. Operating expenses includes cost of maintenance, utilities, rental expenses, taxes, payroll, among others (Puthran, 2006).  Conclusion            Eli Goldratt’s Theory of Constraints states that in a complex organization, there will be instances when constraints will slow down the entire process. In order to for the system to achieve its overall performance, the constraint hindering the entire system should be removed from the equation. References Mahapatra, S.S., & Sahu, A (2006 July 27). Application of Theory of Constraints on Scheduling of Drum-Buffer-Rope System. The Apache Jakarta Project. Retrieved August 9 2008 from http://dspace.nitrkl.ac.in:8080/ Moore, R (1998). Theory of Constraints and Lean Manufacturing: Friends or Foes? Chonnam National University. Retrieved August 9 2008 from http://pm.chonnam.ac.kr Moss, H (2007 March 1). Improving Service Quality With The Theory of Constraints. All Business.com. Retrieved August 9 2008 from http://www.allbusiness.com/company-activities-management/operations-customer/5508402-1.html Problem Solving with the TOC Thinking Processes – Consensus, Construction, Communication and Collaboration (n.d). Focused Performance. Retrieved August 9 2008 from http://www.focusedperformance.com/toctp1.html Puthran, S (2006 December 17). Throughput Accounting. Management Accountant. Retrieved August 9 2008 from http://managementaccountant.blogspot.com/2006/12/throughput-accounting.html Theory of Constraints (n.d). Thomas Group. Retrieved August 9 2008 from http://www.thomasgroup.com/enterprise-solutions/tools/theory-of-constraints.aspx Throughput Accounting (n.d). Goldratt. Retrieved August 9 2008 from http://www.goldratt.co.uk/resources/throughput_accounting/index.html Â
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.