Research Article Theoretical Foundations of Efficiently Organizing Production …downloads.hindawi.com/archive/2014/513190.pdf · 2019-07-31 · Research Article Theoretical Foundations

Research ArticleTheoretical Foundations of Efficiently OrganizingProduction Processes Using the Example of CombiningOrganizational Forms of Component Manufacture andInternal Transport

Anne-Katrin Schroeder1 Theodor Nebl1 and Christian Mainzinger2

1 Institute of Production Management University of Rostock Ulmenstraszlige 69 18057 Rostock Germany2Departmental Branch Federal Police Federal University of Applied Administrative SciencesRatzeburger Landstraszlige 4 23562 Lubeck Germany

Correspondence should be addressed to Anne-Katrin Schroeder schroederakhotmailcom

Received 6 February 2014 Revised 3 September 2014 Accepted 16 September 2014 Published 22 October 2014

Academic Editor Yoonho Seo

Copyright copy 2014 Anne-Katrin Schroeder et alThis is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons AttributionLicense which permits unrestricted use distribution and reproduction in any medium provided the original work is properlycited

This paper examines the problemof efficient production processes organization down to subprocesses levels Subtasks of productionwithin subprocesses necessitate a specific set of requirements for production organization Through particular features and theirrespective characteristics these requirements are further systemized and described as process types The main manufacturingprocess ldquocomponent manufacturerdquo and its connected production support service ldquointernal transportrdquo have been chosen asexamples to show relevant organizational principles and forms From this baseline and together with a decision algorithmselected organizational options and a combination thereof shall lead to theoretically optimized solutions which meet all predefinedrequirements A multilevel organizational alignment model lays out interdependencies of combined process type-orientedorganizational formsMethods of comparative organizational profile analysis in support of reengineering approaches are systemizedand further developed towards resulting organizational adaptations

1 Introduction and Methodical Approach

Implementation of production programs necessitates tasksplitting As a result subtasks and subprocesses are createdthen leading to technical and organizational specializationsin order to solve the tasks effectively and efficiently Thisbrings out the question of which specific subtasks have tobe addressed in the respective subprocesses Once subtasksare defined requirement profiles can be derived and sub-sequently categorized in general process types For each ofsuch process types the decision has to be made concerninghow the concrete realization of subtasks can be organizedwithin the respective subprocesses Therefore organizationalability profiles have to be developed which also need tobe closely linked to the corresponding requirement profilesThis approach forces the value added main manufacturing

processes (component manufacture and assembly) as wellas the production support services to be integrated into theorganizational design

The example of component manufacture (as part of themain manufacturing processes) and internal transport (aspart of the production support services) shall be used todescribe resulting theoretical organizational principles andthe design of organizational forms In addition considera-tions are made related to combination variants of organi-zational principles and organizational forms of componentmanufacture and internal transport including the respectiveability profiles these combinations have Furthermore a com-parative profile analysis of process typersquos requirements andthe abilities of combined organizational forms of componentmanufacture and internal transport is conducted based onwhich precise organizational solutions in accordance with

Hindawi Publishing CorporationJournal of Industrial EngineeringVolume 2014 Article ID 513190 27 pageshttpdxdoiorg1011552014513190

2 Journal of Industrial Engineering

Identification oftheoretical relevant organiza-

tional principals (OP) andorganizational forms (OF) of

component manufacture (CM)



internal transport (IT)

Profile comparisontheoretical-actual

subprocessesprocess types

requirementability profileOP OF

Analysis of ability profiles

Specification of process types (PT) through

requirement profiles

Generalizations of connections between

bull RP-process type and

bull AP-organizational form

Identification of requirement profiles (RP)

of differentiated production programs for manufacturing

processes and their organization

Analysis of requirement profiles

Task splitting and organization of production subprocessesproduction program (FP)

Subtasks

Subprocesses

Organization of subprocesses

1

2 3

4 5

8 9Reengineering

Level model Selection of reengineering design options

DecisionLinking process types and

corresponding organizational principles and forms ofcomponent manufacture

DecisionLinking organizational

principles and forms ofinternal transport and

corresponding component manufacture respectively

6

7

Combined organizational solutions

For requirement profiles of each process type

RP

AP

Requirement profile

Ability profile

PT FP Process typeFinished product

OF Organizational form

OP Organizational principle CM

IT

Component manufacture

Internal transport

RP1 RPnmiddot middot middotRP1

RP1

RPn

RPn

middot middot middot



PT1

PT1

PTn

PTn


OPCM OFCM

OPCM OFCM

OPCM OFCM

OPIT OFIT

OPIT OFIT

Figure 1 Methodical approach

specific requirement profiles can be identified as well asefficiency expectations in the subtasks of production pro-cesses Linkages and interdependencies are generalized in amultilevel model

Based on the approaches described above the fit equi-tability of the subprocesses and organizational forms inrelation to the modified production tasks are revised througha comparative analysis The results of this comparison bringout necessary measures for reorganization as part of reengi-neering and provides for efficient production processes

The methodical approach is illustrated in Figure 1

2 Theoretical Frameworks of ProductionProcesses Organization

Frese et al [1] postulate that there is no uniform view onthe term ldquoorganizationrdquo However Scheibler [2] for exampledefines organization in a rather generic way as a goal-oriented design of systems For Grochla [3] organization is agoal-oriented structure of elements which are connectedwitheach other in a specific way For the purposes of this papersuch a generic understanding of organization shall sufficebecause the focus is very specifically on efficient productionprocess organization

For efficient realization of tasks a system as a whole hasto be divided through a pragmatic and creative approachinto subsystems on the basis of a microanalysis [4 5]aiming at addressing subtasks within the subprocesses thathave been created for this purpose [6] Furthermore it isobvious that a system has to be structured through differentlevels of hierarchy (ldquoOrganisationsstrukturrdquo [7] and ldquoformale

Strukturrdquo [8]) to be able to design coherent processes Thisthen defines division of labor and specialization [4]

The depth and width of organizing the subprocessesimpact for instance on subsystems of selected functionalareas Implementation of such core processes is very centralfor the success of a company [4] Because organization ispart of process management it especially focuses on coreprocesses of production

Bea and Schweitzer [4] define the following criteria toidentify core processes

(i) high importance for

(a) problem-solving or satisfaction of external andinternal customers

(b) core competencies of the company(c) product quality(d) reliability of production

(ii) high cost-intensity and capital lockup(iii) long duration of processes

These criteria show that the production process is a coreprocessTherefore systematic structuring of aswell as specificorganizational designs for all subprocesses of production pro-cesses in the context of their interaction for execution of tasksis necessary It is believed that company process as a whole aswell as individual core processes can be further broken downinto nearly indefinite numbers of steps [4] All subprocesseshave to be identified to a point where production processesfor the manufacturing of components assemblies and fin-ished products take place at their lowest level of line organs

Journal of Industrial Engineering 3

within their respective functional production area [5] Thisis where the main manufacturing processesmdashcomponentmanufacture and assemblymdashoccur and value is added pluswhere the production support services are relevant Theseservices include for example internal transport internalstorage maintenance and information management Theyare used for spatial and temporal transformation of workitems as backup for capacity as needed and task executioncontrol

Objects of organizational arrangements in these subpro-cesses are

(i) production tasks (or subtasks as a result of division oflabor) of the production program

(ii) potential factors of production in terms of man-power and assetswhich realize the production processthrough their capacity

(iii) the repetitive factor material that is purposefullychanged by the action of the potential factors ofproduction to produce components and finishedproducts (see also [9])

With productivity being the overall aim the interaction ofmanpower assets andmaterials has to be organized in accor-dance with the subprocesses of production [10] Therefore itis necessary tomatch the dynamically changing requirementsof production programs and its derived subtasks from thetechnical and organizational point of view Finding the bestcombination of elements is the mission of organization [11]The combination of elementary factors of production has tobe organized in away that a spatial framework for the solutionof production tasks is established and that the timing of theprocessing of work items and their transformation in themanufacturing process can be defined

The spatial framework is usually linked to a static ele-mentary factor of the subprocesses in question Very oftenthis is the asset This also raises the question of the techni-caltechnological and capacitive realization of organizationalsolutions of subprocesses levels of mechanization as well asautomation resulting from task splitting and specialization ofthe production tasks that have to be solved [12]The temporalframework is determined by possible variants of passingcomponents from one work station to another along thetechnological processing or assembling sequence of spatiallydeployed assets as well as through the capacity requirementof each working cycle at each work station

Spatial transformation of work items is done by internaltransportTherefore the spatial framework is used to arrangethe set-up of assets and where manpower realizes workingoperations [9] Temporal transformation of work items aim-ing at bridging intervals in the progress of manufacturing orcross-overs to other organizational units of the subprocessesare typically resolved by internal storage

Growing uncertainty regarding the development andcomplexity of business environment [12 13] becomes notice-able for example through

(i) product type development(ii) production technology development

(iii) changes in requirement and demand or

(iv) shortage of resources

This leads to the fact of shorter product life cycles aswell as dynamic changes in production programs subse-quently leading to process dynamics It forces a companyto respond with process developments which can easilyadapt to the changed requirements This applies not onlyto technicaltechnological adjustments but particularly tochanges of organization [4] and is for instance realizedthrough innovation strategies as a ldquospecial kind of changerdquo[12]

Considering aspects of economic efficiency focus onorganization of the main manufacturing processes alone asdone in the past is not enough This approach must becomplemented by the organization of involved productionsupport services Without these services the manufacturingprocess does not function From an organizational point ofview manufacturing processes and production support ser-vices have to be treated holistically together with seamlesslyfitting combinations of the same in order to find requirementbased solutions for optimized economic results

On one hand the design of such combination variantsof production organization requires the identification of allrelevant (theoretical) organizational principles and formsof the main manufacturing processes together with theirproduction support services whilst on the other hand arequirement-oriented selection and combination of the afore-mentioned principles and forms of organization is neededOrganization as a tool has to meet various requirements [4]which have to bemet by the production program and derivedsubtasks in structured subprocesses

The following features have critical influence on the taskswhich have to be solved [14]

(i) the quantity aspect and therefore the number ofidentical products that have to be produced

(ii) the type of order placement for products by diversecustomers

(iii) the level of standardization of the products that haveto be produced

(iv) the structure of the products that have to be produced

(v) the proportion of externally procured product com-ponents

These features form a set of requirements and theyimpactmdashinter aliamdashon the organizational design in terms offlexibility and continuity The flexibility of an organizationalform is a precondition to meet different or changing require-ment profiles within the production processes without theneed to change the organizational form

The term flexibility finds a considerable number ofdefinitions and theoretical deliberations revolving aroundit (eg [15ndash20]) In our opinion flexibility can be definedas the ability to adapt production in relation to changingmarkets [21] From this perspective quantity and qualitydifferentiations are needed


Quantitative flexibility can be understood as the ability toadjust production to volume changes of uniformed producttypes This is relevant for

(i) changes and adaptations of capacity utilization(ii) mobilization of capacity reserves

Qualitative flexibility in turn is the ability to adjust pro-duction to changing product typesThis relates to capabilitiesof the production process in terms of

(i) alternative utilisation of repetition factors(ii) alternative utilisation of potential factors(iii) activation of alternative combinations of elementary

factors

The essential precondition for flexibility is the abilityof an organizational form to realize varying technologicalprocessing sequences The two most relevant dimensionsare product flexibility and volume flexibility ([15] see otherflexibility dimensions in [16]) In this paper continuity ischaracterized as the ability of uninterrupted processing ofwork items in themanufacturing process If customers acceptstandardized products then fixed continuous productionsystems are useful In order to remain competitive increas-ingly flexible technologies are necessary [12]

The complete set of requirements for the organizationof subprocesses of production determines the requirementprofile On the one hand existing organizational forms ofproduction processes can be subject to a critical appraisalbased on this set of requirements whilst on the other handsuch set of requirements provide orientation for practicalorganization Ultimately it is always about assessing the targeteffectiveness (efficiency) of alternative organizational forms[4] and about the identification of the best organizationalvariant for the solution of specific production tasks so thatstandard procedures can be determined in order to ensuremaximum efficiency [4]

The organization of value added production subprocesses

(i) provides the basic organizational structure (after tasksplitting) that leads to the formation of necessarysubprocesses with their respective posts [6] anddepartments [5]

(ii) createswithin each subprocess the specific proceduresand ways in which the relevant elementary factorsof production (manpower assets and materials) canbe combined from a spatial temporal and technicalperspective This configuration approach brings outthe organizational form of the particular subprocess[22]

The organizational forms of production support servicestake effect in this structure and they support the value addedprocesses The selection and design of their organizationalprinciples and forms takes place downstream to the orga-nization of the main manufacturing processes This meansthat the organization of the main manufacturing processesdetermines the organizational principles and organizationalforms of production support services

Each organizational form of the main manufacturingprocesses and the production support services is shaped bythe combination of spatial temporal and technical orga-nizational principles [21ndash28] Based on the ability profilesof organizational principles and organizational forms ofall involved subprocesses combined solutions have to befound and formed which fit the requirement profiles ofcomponents modules and component classes best [29] Inthis paper the term ldquocomponent classrdquo is used for (single)components which fall into one category with constructiveandor technological similarities which allow treating thesecomponents equally in the manufacturing process

3 Requirement Profiles for ComponentClasses in Differentiated Process Types

What follows goes into the details of classifications andrequirement profiles on micro-organizational levels How-ever a company must have a much wider (contextual)competitive strategy (eg [30 31]) from which subsequentoperational solutions such are then derived For the purposeof this paper the production program is the starting point todetermine tasks to be solved and task splitting Varying typesof customers define their specific needs and demands Thisresults in (a) heterogeneous versus homogeneous sales andproduction programs and (b) diverse versus uniformed prod-uct types with varying production quantities that may alsoinclude a strong customer focus versus ldquocustomer distancerdquo

31 Features for Process Type Characteristics The require-ment profile is particularly set through output-orientedfeatures starting with the products to be obtained andthe production programs which are then followed by themanufacturing and procurement process [32] From output-oriented features of the requirement profile throughputand input-oriented features are derived However it mustbe observed that individual features can be assigned toseveral areas of the macrostructure An overview of relevantfeatures and its characteristics gives themorphological box inFigure 2

Central to features and their characteristicsmdashwhich spec-ify requirements of the organizationally envisaged produc-tion tasks of manufacturing processesmdashis the production type[29] which is closely linked to the other features as well

The production type brings out the quantity aspect ofidentical products of the production program as well as thevariant diversity of the offered basic products This results inhomogeneous (one product with a large quantity and a largevariant diversity) versus heterogeneous production programs(many different product types with different quantities todifferent product types with a quantity of down to only oneas well as a very limited variant diversity) In this regard theenvisaged finished product is examined

Subject to the quantity of identical primary products twocategories have to be looked at (a) individual and small seriesproduction of heterogeneous programs and (b) series andmass type production of homogeneous programs The firstcategory (individual production small series production)


Features Feature characteristics

Production type

Level of product standardization

Structure of products

Type of order placement

Multipart complex products

MCP

Multipart simple products

MSP

Minor-part products

MPP

Contract productionCoP

Mixed productionMiP

Warehouse productionWaP

Small series production

SSPMass production

MP

External procurement insignificant

EPI

External procurement on a limited scale

EPL

External procurement mostlyEPM

Customer-individual products

CIP

Customer-individualized

productsCZP

Customer-anonymous

standard products with supplier

specific variantsCAPsv

Customer-anonymous

standard products without variants

CAPwv

Ratio of external procurement

Individual production

IPType production

TP

Figure 2 Features and feature characteristics leading to differentiated process types (based on [14 29])

relates to mostly customized products (essentially deter-mined by the client configuration and ordered accordingly)which are produced in very small quantities whilst category(b) relates to series productionwith both large quantity and adistinct variant diversity which then provides for customer-individualized products (customer chooses from possiblevariants which are provided by the producer) [29]

A third category (type production) relates to large quan-tities of customer-anonymous standard products with verylimited variant diversity The manufacturer provides basicproducts which are in terms of construction and technologyall nearly identical with only very few product variants suchas color ormaterials being usedThe customer is not involvedin the formation of variants and production He chooses hisproduct variant by purchase (eg on the retail market)

In mass production (fourth category) large quantitiesof customer-anonymous standard products are producedwithout any variations

In principle the aforementioned speaks for the needto have flexible andor continuous manufacturing processeswhich must be met by the production organization

The production type is closely connected to two furtherrelevant features with impact on the manufacturing processand its organization namely (a) type of order placement and(b) level of product standardization

Both features factor a particular customer perspectiveinto the respective considerations Standardization levelsare interdependent with gradations of specific customerrequirements ranging from fully standardized products toindividually customized products something which at thesame time also affects issues of product variant diversity

Type of order placement varies between contract produc-tion at one end and warehouse production at the other endContract production is triggered by individual customerswith their individually customized products [29] These

products are typically actualized in individual production inexceptional cases also in small series production Warehouseproduction includes large quantities of largely customer-anonymous products with an either limited variant diversity(type production) or no variants (mass production)

Customer individualization approaches in series pro-duction often integrate both customer-anonymous andcustomer-individualized process elements into the manufac-turing process and thus combine flexibility and continuity[29] Customer individualization of production programswith small quantities sets the basis for special process orga-nization allowing for flexibility whilst in contrast to thatcustomer anonymity of programs with large quantities ofeach product type requires an organizational design of theprocesses that primarily aim at ensuring continuity

Elevated levels of product individualization increase thenumber of variants in homogeneous production programsand reduce the quantity of products in heterogeneous pro-duction programs towards individual production In contrastto that production of customer-anonymous standard prod-ucts allows for quantities that move up towards type or massproduction

Once again and applicable for both aforementionedfeatures the finished product is the key reference Theproduction type the type of order placement and the levelof standardization determine not only the quantity but alsothe variant diversity of finished products

The fourth feature is the structure of a product Thisperspective brings a shift of focus from the finished product(primary requirement) to single product components andmodules (secondary requirement) It identifies the diversityand number of components contained in a product of theproduction programand thus defines the product complexityThe aggregation of all product components with largely iden-tical constructional andor technological and organizational


demands in the process of component manufacture (egrequired manufacturing methods technological processingsequence capacity requirement for each work station andcomponent flow) creates the basis for the establishment ofspecific component classes and task splitting

Regardless of the number and diversity of the finishedproducts component classes of the secondary requirementultimately determine the specific requirement profiles of theorganizational subprocesses

To address issues related to component classesrsquo taskscore processes are brought into a hierarchical order with anincreasing level of detail In doing that main processes areanalyzed and divided into subprocesses operations and pro-cess steps [4] Each component class has its own requirementprofile which forms the basis for technical specialization andthe design of organizational ability profiles for each subareaof production

Requirements for the organizational design of subpro-cesses of components within the same class are usuallyidentical For component classes with differentiated require-ment profiles different subprocesses must be designed andorganized This applies only to those component classeswhich ensure a high level of capacity utilization of thosesubprocesses Component classes without their own sub-processes must be produced within subprocesses that havebeen created for other component classes This results inspecial requirements regarding flexibility and capacity of suchsubprocesses

The fifth feature ratio of external procurement of productcomponents is derived from the structure of the productThisfeature affects the organizational design in terms of continuityandor flexibility

The manufacturer must decide which program compo-nentsmodules are fabricated internally (ldquomakerdquo) or boughtexternally from a third party (ldquobuyrdquo) Thinking in termsof a continuum in between the poles ldquomakerdquo and ldquobuyrdquoleaning towards ldquomakerdquo will result in an increase in manu-facturing a (greater) variety of components and a focus onflexibility Leaning towards ldquobuyrdquo will reduce complexity andldquomanufacturing depthrdquo as well as the variety of componentsThis creates an opportunity for a company to focus on corecompetencies and align its production processes in order tomeet increasing demands for continuity through a reductionof manufacturing depth

32 Requirement Profiles of Process Types All features andfeature characteristics discussed define quantity and variantdiversity of production programs [28] and they requireprocess designs which ultimately if brought to the extremelead to the consequence to choose between continuity andflexibility Efficient production solutions will have to factorthis into the organizational design of subprocesses

Each feature has differentiated feature characteristicsThis reveals the scope and diversity of requirements forthe organizational process design of a production programBased on these features and their substantive links Figure 3presents a general framework for requirement profiles Spe-cific requirement profiles can be generated from variouscombinations of feature characteristics

The features of process typesmdashproduction type typeof order placement and level of product standardizationmdashresult in requirements for production organization As canbe seen in our model these features relate to primaryrequirements (in terms of finished products) but they areespecially identifiable through quantity variant diversity andcustomer orientation

The structure of a product as well as the ratio of externalprocurement of product components are features resultingin requirements for production organization that are initiallydetermined by the secondary requirements (thus in terms ofcomponents and modules) These features then further pointto components and their component classes

The characteristics of the process types requirements forproduction organization are directed at the

(i) constructional andor technological similarity ofcomponent parts

(ii) necessary manufacturing methods(iii) direction of production flow in connection with the

technological processing sequence as well as(iv) required capacity and the respective rate of utiliza-

tion

Production programs (and their requirements) with thecharacteristics of the above discussed features are eventuallyaiming at organizational solutions which have their centerof gravity in continuous or flexible production settings Therealization of such production settings must be based onorganizational principles and forms which have the respec-tive ability profiles

33 Feature Combinations and Relating Process Types Dif-ferent combinations of features and feature characteristicslead to the identification of theoretically and practically rele-vant process types In addition the exclusion of practicallyirrelevant or unacceptable combinations is critical for theformation of process types Figure 2 showed the principalmechanisms

In order to create process types combinations of featureswhich are characteristic for small- and medium-sized enter-prises (SME) are used This is based on identified interde-pendencies of selected featuresThe number of combinations(119911) results from 119911 = 119898

1lowast 1198982lowast sdot sdot sdot lowast 119898

119899with119898 = number of

possible characteristics per feature and 119899=number of features[33]

Features and feature characteristics have been taken froma research project in which 60 companies in the metalwork-ing industry in Mecklenburg-West Pomerania participated[34] The respective interdependencies matrix [14] can beseen in Table 1

In order to bring together the high number of resultingbasic cases with process types suitable for organizationalpurposes a cluster analysis is required For the clustering ofnominal-scaled featuresmdashdetermined as shown in the mor-phological box (see Figure 2)mdashthe hierarchic agglomerative


Flexibility

Quantity

Continuity

High Medium Low

Low

Small

Small

High

High

HighMedium

MediumMedium





Production type

Features to identify process types

Economically not reasonable areaEconomically reasonable area

Requirement profile

Primary requirement ofidentical products (FP)- Quantity- Variant diversity- Customer reference

bull Individualbull Individualizedbull Anonymous products

Secondary requirement (UP) for- Components- Component classes

bull Constructive andor technological resemblance

bull Needed manufac-turing method

bull Direction of production flow

bull Technological production flow

bull Needed capacity and its utilization

Demand for flexibility resp continuity

Organizational realization through - SOP- TOP- OF

UP Unfinished productFP Finished productOF Organizational formSOP Spatial organizational principle

TOP Temporal organizational principle

Varia

nt di

versi

ty

Figure 3 General requirements for the organization of production processes (based on [14 28])

approach (Ward-method) seems particularly suitable for this(see [14] and annex 2 in [14]) This method allows filteringout homogenous yet distinctive groups Subsequently suchdefined groups lead to specific requirements for the configu-ration of the production organization

As a result four typical combination variants have beenidentified and referred to as process types [14 35] Eachprocess type has its specific requirement profile (see Figure 4)A different approach with equal results can be found in theldquoAachener PPS-Modelrdquo [36]

Research related to the metalworking industry inMecklenburg-West Pomerania [34] has shown that in small-and medium-sized enterprises (SME) process type 1 (82[14]) is predominantly represented in comparison with types2ndash4 (6 each)

The morphological box shows that a shift of combinedfeature characteristics towards the right side of the box resultsin a categorization away from process type 1 to process types2ndash4

34 Production Organization and Process Types The fol-lowing correlations between the four process types andorganization of production can be derived

(i) The features which define the requirement profile ofprocess type 1 stand for small quantities of identicalproducts (individual production) with high variantdiversity and customer individuality which has to besecured by highly flexible manufacturing processes Itcan be expected that not only is capacity utilizationhighly variable but also elements of componentclasses may need different manufacturing methods ina varying technological processing sequence [22 37ndash41]

(ii) The features which define the requirement profile ofprocess type 2 stand for small quantities of identicalproducts (series production) with a relatively high


Table 1 Interdependencies matrix of features and feature characteristics [14]

Structure of products Type of order placement Production type Ratio of external procurementMCP MSP MPP CoP MiP WaP IP SP MP EPI EPL EPM

Level of productstandardization

CIP X X X X X X XCZP X X X X X X X X XCAPSV X X X X X X X X X X XCAPWV X X X X X X X X

Structure ofproducts

MCP mdash mdash mdash X X X X X X X XMSP mdash mdash mdash X X X X X X X X XMPP mdash mdash mdash X X X X X X X X

Type of orderplacement

CoP mdash mdash mdash mdash mdash mdash X X X X XMiP mdash mdash mdash mdash mdash mdash X X X X XWaP mdash mdash mdash mdash mdash mdash X X X X X

Production typeIP mdash mdash mdash mdash mdash mdash mdash mdash mdash X XSP mdash mdash mdash mdash mdash mdash mdash mdash mdash X X XMP mdash mdash mdash mdash mdash mdash mdash mdash mdash X X

CIP customer-individual products CAPSV customer-anonymous standard products with supplier specific variants CAPWV customer-anonymous standardproducts without variants CZP customer-individualized products EPI external procurement insignificant EPL external procurement on a limited scaleEPM external procurement mostly MCP multi-part complex products MPP minor-part products MSP multi-part simple products CoP contractproduction MiP mixed production WaP warehouse production IP individual production MP mass production SP series production X combination istheoretically meaningfulpractically relevant



Production typeType of order placementLevel of product standardization


TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 1

MiP Mixed productionEPL External procurement on a limited scale

MPP Minor-part products

EPM External procurement mostlyEPI External procurement insignificant

SSP Small series production

CZP Customer-individualized products

IP Individual productionWaP Warehouse production

CIP Customer-individual productsMP Mass production

TP Type production

CAPsv CoP Contract production

MSP Multipart simple productsMCP Multipart complex products

IP SSP

CAPsvCZP



Production typeType of order placementLevel of productstandardization


TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 2

IP SSP

CAPsvCZP





TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 3

IP SSP

CAPsvCZP





TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 4

IP SSP

CAPsvCZP

IP

CoP

CIP

EPI

MCP MS

SSP

MiP

MCP MSP

EPL

CACZP

TP

CAPsv

WaP

MPP

EPL

MPP

WaP

MP

CAPwv

EPM

CAPwv Customer-anonymous standard products without variantsCustomer-anonymous standard products with supplier specific variants

Figure 4 General features for the representation of different requirement profiles of process types (based on [14 29])


Quantity

Varian

t dive

rsity

LowMediumHighFlexibility

Medium

MediumMedium

LowContinuity

High

Small

Small High

High

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3

Figure 5 Positioning process types (based on [14 28])

variant diversity and distinct customer individualiza-tionThis should lead to a flexiblemanufacturing pro-cess design though it may include to some extent alsocontinuous manufacturing process elements whilstcapacity utilization levels are fluctuating A variety ofmanufacturingmethods together with a varying tech-nological processing sequencemay become necessary[22 37 42 43]

(iii) The features which define the requirement profile ofprocess type 3 stand for large quantities of identicalproducts (type production) with a relatively small andcustomer-anonymous variant diversity in a mostlycontinuous manufacturing process Capacity utiliza-tion is relatively constant Components within com-ponent classes regularly require identical manufac-turing methods in the same technological processingsequence where individual work stations may be leftout (skipping individual work stations) [22 37 38 41ndash43]

(iv) The features which define the requirement profile ofprocess type 4 are very large quantities of identicalproducts (mass production) with a small customer-anonymous variant diversity in a highly continuousmanufacturing process Capacity utilization is largelyconstant Components within component classesrequire identical manufacturing methods in the sametechnological processing sequence going through allwork stations as needed (without skipping individualwork stations) [22 37ndash43]

The above described impact of process types and produc-tion organization is further illustrated by Figure 5

The position of the process types in the above chart pointstoward their requirements for the organization of productionHereafter the question arises how the demands for flexibilityor continuity of process types can be reconciled with therespective needs in terms of quantities and variant diversity

The intended categories of technological processingsequences are the connecting link between the requirementprofiles of component classes within selected process typeson the one hand and the organization of production withinrelevant subprocesses on the other hand The technologicalprocessing sequence is task-oriented and it specifies thesequential arrangement of a production line with its spatiallyarranged work stations and manpower

With regard to the factor of (product types) flexibility theconfiguration of varying technological processing sequences

is a requirement of critical importance Within this approachevery production task (production lot or components percomponent class) runs on an individual ldquocourserdquo through thespatially arranged stationary assets and manpower Howeverthe one decisive and integrative criterion is not the ldquocourserdquoof a production task as such but the manufacturing methodsrequired for all production tasks

Turning to the factor of continuity the creation ofidentical technological processing sequences is essential Pro-duction orders pass through the arranged stationary assetsand manpower on identical ldquocoursesrdquo (regardless whether allstationary assets along the production line are needed in anyone manufacturing process or not) An integrated approachrequires bringing together the simultaneous realization oftwo criteria (a) direction of production flow and (b) man-ufacturing methods

As a result from these findings and the issue of com-bination of feature characteristics of the process types inthe morphological box (see Figure 4) it is believed thatthe specific requirements for the production organizationcan only be determined after component classes have beendefined Types of process-related component classes arespecified by the following features (see Table 2)

From a perspective of production organization an effi-cient production is conditional to mainly two factors (a)usage of differentiated technological requirements of processtypes and their component classes and (b) application ofspecificmdashand coordinatedmdashspatial and temporal organiza-tional principles in whatever combination required Thisequally applies for both organization of the main manu-facturing processes and organization of production supportservices

4 Ability Profiles of Organizational Principlesand FormsmdashA Theoretical Analysis

This chapter shall explain the (theoretical) relevance oforganizational principles and organizational forms of themain manufacturing process ldquocomponent manufacturerdquo andits transport processes together with their ability profiles Inaddition how differentiated combinations of organizationalprinciples result in corresponding organizational forms willbe explained This will then end up in (theoretically) orga-nizational concepts with distinct ability profiles for variousrequirement profiles of the respective process types

41 Organization of the Main Manufacturing ProcessldquoComponent Manufacturerdquo The organization of the mainmanufacturing process ldquocomponent manufacturerdquo isdetermined by spatial temporal and technical organizationalprinciples and organizational forms [22 44 45]

411 Spatial Organizational Principle of Component Manu-facture The spatial organizational principle of componentmanufacture defines the spatial arrangement of work stations(assets) in the manufacturing process [46] We distinguishthe shop principle from the product principle with the group


Table 2 Specific features of different process types

Features Process type 1 Process type 2 Process type 3 Process type 4Number of componentsper lot Small Small High Very high

Variant diversity High Relatively high Relatively small SmallCustomer reference Customer individual Customer individualized Customer anonymous Customer anonymousTechnologicalresemblance ofcomponents

High High High Identical components

Constructive resemblanceof components Restrictive Restrictive High Identical components

Needed manufacturingmethods

Variety of differentmanufacturingmethods

Limited number ofdifferent manufacturingmethods

Mostly all identicalmanufacturingmethods

Identicalmanufacturingmethods

Direction of productionflow Varying Varying Identical Identical

Technological processingsequence Varying Varying Identical with skipping Identical without

skippingCapacity requirement ofcomponents per workingcycle

Extremely fluctuating Fluctuating Extensively constant Constant

Capacity utilization Extremely fluctuating Fluctuating Extensivelyconsistently high Consistently high

FlexibilitycontinuityDemand for flexibilityfirst then demand forcontinuity

Demand for flexibilityfirst then demand forcontinuity

Demand for continuityfirst then demand forflexibility

Demand forcontinuity first thendemand for flexibility

principle the serial principle and the single user principle asspatial organizational principles [22 47]

The following paragraphs explain spatial organizationalprinciples and their interconnected ability profiles

(i) The shop principle (procedural principle) is charac-terized by the fact that all assets which belong tothe same manufacturing method are summarizedspatially in one workshop It is perfect for customizedmultiple complex products which are manufacturedin small quantities but with a great variant diversityin individual production or small series productionwith a relatively low external purchase of componentsContract production builds the core of this kind ofproduction The shop principle is closely connectedwith a varying technological processing sequencewhich ensures high flexibility in product types

(ii) The group principle can be looked at as transientform or a cross-over from the shop principle to theproduct principle Assets of different manufactur-ing methods are locally concentrated The specificarrangement depends on the production work flowfor the component classes Compared with the shopprinciple a significant reduction of variant diversitycan be observed together with increased quantitiesof identical products The respective type of orderplacement works on the basis of contract andorwarehouse production settings The group principlecontributes to high flexibility through varying tech-nological processing sequences

(iii) The serial principle is characterized by the fact thatall assets which are required for the production of asmall component assortment are spatially centralizedand arranged in such a manner that production oper-ations required for all components are carried out inan identical and repetitive manufacturing sequenceApplying this principle is predestinated for standardproducts without variants respectively with vendor-specific variants of the product that are classified asmultiple simple or multiple complex products Suchproducts are produced in large quantities throughtype ormass productionThe type of order placementtends towards warehouse production with substantialexternal purchase of components The requirementprofile is closely linkedwith an identical technologicalprocessing sequence for production tasks that can beexecuted with or without skipping of work stationsA high degree of continuity has priority over distinctflexibility

(iv) The single user principle ensures high continuity aswell as distinct flexibility Its limitation lies in thetechnical ability to integrate various manufacturingmethods in one work station Pending the integrationoptions of possible manufacturing methods eitheridentical andor varying technological processingsequence can be applied

412 Temporal Organizational Principle of ComponentManu-facture The temporal organizational principle of component


manufacture determines the systemof physicalmovements ofcomponents in batch production during the manufacturingprocess (see [48]) It is further determined by the config-uration of the technological cycle Temporal organizationalprinciples with and without passing on of components haveto be distinguished

The flow of components (passing on components) can beframed in a serial parallel or combined progression [22 4647]

The following paragraphs describe temporal principlesand interconnected ability profiles as they relate to thecreation of organizational forms

(i) In serial progressions complete lots get transportedalong a varying technological processing sequencefrom one work station to another upon completionComponents of the lot have a constructional andortechnological similarity The combined componentsthat make a lot belong to different finished productswhich have to be produced in small quantities incontract production Each lot has its specific routethrough the setting of work stations of an organi-zational unit The direction of production flow ofeach lot is different This procedure corresponds withthe need for flexibility in product types By movingcomplete lots through the production line the numberof single transport actions between work stationsis reduced The length of transport routes naturallydepends on the spatial organizational principle inwhich the variants of passing on components arerealized When applying the shop principle longerroutes are necessary Contrary to that shorter routesare possible if the group principle is applied Pro-duction process delays of components which havepassed one work station may occur (laytimes) untilthe next work station is ready to receive the compo-nent respectively until the transport gets startedThecomponent processing at each work station is carriedout without interruption The serial progression andthe shop and group principles are closely related andshow interdependencies

(ii) In parallel progressions usually single components ofa production lot are routed through the productionline configuration which by comparison with serialprogression shortens the duration of the technolog-ical cycle (and consequently the expected throughputtime) The construction of product components assuch and the engineering sequencing of productcomponents of a particular lot remain identicalSingle product components find themselves in thesame finished products and they are produced inlarge quantities Usually warehouse production canbe assumed The technological processing sequenceand the direction of production flow are equal forall components of the same lot With this being sothe parallel progression fulfills especially the require-ment for process continuity If at least nearly equalprocessing times per work station are achievableseparate transport operations of the components of

each lot can be realized If the processing times atwork stations differ product components have tobe mainly moved further through the productionline configuration in sublots Diverging processingdurations in relation to consecutive working cyclescan lead to production disruptions (downtimes andwaiting times)The parallel progression and the serialprinciple are closely related and show interdependen-cies

(iii) Combined progressions (also referred to as ldquohybridconfigurationsrdquo [49]) consist of elements of the serialand parallel progression They can be used for sim-ilar configurations as the parallel progression Theplanning assumption is that processing durationssignificantly differ Therefore transport of productcomponents takes place in transport lots of varyingsizes Identical technological processing sequencesare preferable in such configurations as it allowsskipping work stations (that are unnecessary for aparticular lot) Downtimes and waiting times at workstations can be avoided but laytimes are inevitableCombined progressions are closely related and inter-connected with the serial principle

(iv) The principle without passing on components is linkedwith the single user principle Any type of productioncomponent can be processed under this principleif technical feasibility and integrated manufacturingmethods are provided accordingly Any type of prod-uct component can be processed under this principle

413 Classical and Modern Organizational Forms of Compo-nentManufacture A classical organizational form of compo-nent manufacture is comprised of a combination of spatialand temporal organizational principles (see Figure 6) [22 46]They are divided in primary and derivative (also possible)organizational forms and those which have no theoreticaland practical relevance The derivative organizational formsshould only be used in exceptional cases of the corporatepractice In comparison with the primary organizationalforms it is expected that they realize significantly worseeconomic outcomes

This paper focuses on primary organizational forms Ingeneral organizational forms bring out specific abilities interms of flexibility and continuityThe respective correlationsare provided in Figure 7

Modern organizational forms add technical organiza-tional principles of component manufacture to combinedspatial and temporal organizational principles Such organi-zational forms are based on classical organizational forms ofcomponent manufacture with integrated technical measuresat various levels of sophistication [48] in terms of mecha-nization and automation of engineering subsystems in theengineering system [22] which extends to and is inclusive ofprocessing transport storage and handling systems [28]

In Section 3 of this paper five features and featurecharacteristics of process types were explained and putinto context To further support the selection of technicalorganizational principles for the envisaged organizational


Single user manufacturing

Continuous production line

Object specialized

manufacturing series

Object specialized

manufacturing section

Shop manufacturing

Product principle

Group principle

Serial principle

Shop principle Single user

principle

Without passing on components

With

pas

sing

on co

mpo

nent

s

Parallel progression

Serial progression

Combined progression

Spatial organizational principle of component manufacture Temporal organizational principle of component manufacture

No relevant possible combination

Primary (theoretical and practical relevant) organizational form of component manufacture Derivative (possible) organizational form of component manufacture

SOPCM

SOPCM

TOPCM

TOPCM

Figure 6 Classical organizational forms of component manufacture (based on [22])

998833 Flexibility

998833C

ontin

uity



Object specialized


Object specialized


Shop manufacturing

998833998833998833

998833998833998833

Figure 7 Potentials in flexibility and continuity of classical organi-zational forms [22]

design three additional process features need to be collatedto the aforementioned five These three features are

(i) qualification levels of the employees

(ii) degree of automation of the manufacturing processes[50]

(iii) degree of specialization of the assets [24]

Complex production tasks are determined by contin-uously changing and diverse working operations in het-erogeneous production programs with significant flexibilityelements They require from a process automation perspec-tive manual andor mechanized production processes whichare executed by highly qualified employees operating all-purposes machines

Homogeneous production programs with constant repe-titions of nearly identical working operations and high outputquantities allow for less qualified staff and machines with ahigh specialization Such a work force has to only execute alimited number of specificwork operations in at least partiallyor even fully automated manufacturing processes

The ideal classical organizational solution needs toencompass requirement profiles and process type-relatedtechnical solutions at the appropriate level of applied tech-nological sophistication In this regard the selection of anorganizational solutionwill depend on the envisaged produc-tion tasks (quantity variant diversity) and subsequently theresulting consequences in terms of flexibility and continuityin the manufacturing process [22] The various automationpotentials that are shown in Figure 8 further illustrate therelevant correlations

A key distinguishing feature of modern organizationalforms of component manufacture is their ability to providefor flexibility and continuity in the production processFlexibility and continuity are influenced by (a) automationof work operations and (b) technical realization of onestop component manufacturing Technology driven modern


CSM

SM

FMS

FCPL

CPL

ICPL

OMSr

SUM

MC

OMSc

Shop principle

Groupprinciple

Serialprinciple

Single user principle

Serial progression




With passing on components

Product principle

Classical organizational forms of component manufacture Modern organizational forms of component manufacture SM Shop manufacturing CSM Continuous shop manufacturingOMSc Object specialized manufacturing section FMS Flexible manufacturing systemOMSr Object specialized manufacturing series FCPL Flexible continuous production line CPL Continuous production line ICPL Inelastic continuous production lineSUM Single user manufacturing MC Machining centerCM Component manufacture

Mechanized

Semiautomated

Fully automated

Leve

ls of

tech

nolo

gica

l sop

histi

catio

n

Spatial organizational principle of CM

Technical organizational principle of CM

Temporal organizational principle of CM

Figure 8 Classical and modern organizational forms of component manufacture (based on [22])

organizational forms have the ability to diffuse the conflictbetween continuity and flexibility

A literature review shows extensive discussions regardingflexibility and continuity of production processes Under theterm flexible automation (eg [51ndash57]) a relatively equalorientation towards both process characteristics finds pref-erence The specific setting of the production organization isessential for an either (more) flexible or continuous produc-tion flow The requirement profile of the respective processtype determines which organizational principles and formsmust be used to the greatest extent possible in accordancewith correlating ability profiles

As a result of their specific features and feature character-istics (see Figure 2) process type 1 predominately supportsflexibility whilst process type 4 does so regarding continuityImprovements in continuity usually lead to a reduction offlexibility and vice versa Process types 2 and 3 give evidenceto this

Process type 2 can be regarded as an advancement of pro-cess type 1 Its flexibility decreases because of limited numbersof manufacturing methodsmdashwhich encompass productionof fewer component classesmdashby comparison with processtype 1 Its continuity increases because of the reduction of

production process delays caused by spatial proximity ofmachines and work stations

Process type 3 can be looked at as a precursor of processtype 4 and its organization Its continuity decreases as aresult of a reduced production sequence This reduction iscaused by the need to cover a wider spectrum of products andvariants which makes it necessary to skip work stations in anotherwise similar technological processing sequence At thesame time however qualitative flexibility increases withmoreproduct options and variants

Demand for (more) flexibility in production processesnormally implies that the work force requires a broaderqualification profile with specific skillsets and capabilitiesContinuity in production processes usually leads to anincreased level of specialized mechanizationautomation ofproduction systems Extremely high levels of flexibility resultin low levels of consistency and vice versa Combinedorganizational solutions containing significant flexibility andcontinuity components in one single context will lead to asituation where both of these parameters will be at the farend from the possible optimum Modern tailored to suitorganizational forms benefit from a specific choice of tech-nical organizational principles thus optimizing flexibility


Flexibility

Con

tinui

ty

Flexible manufacturing

system

Inelastic continuous

production lineFlexible

continuous production line

Machining center

Continuous shop

manufacturing

998833

998833

998833998833998833

998833998833998833

Figure 9 Potentials in flexibility and continuity of modern organi-zational forms (based on [21])

and continuity of the process in accordance with particularstrategic technical and operational requirements

In the context of integrated manufacturing methodscontinuous shop manufacturing (CSM) flexible manufac-turing systems (FMS) and the machining center (MC) arecontributing to high flexibility but when compared withcontinuous production lines they are naturally less effectivewith regard to continuity characteristics [22] Sectional objectspecialized manufacturing and shopmanufacturing form thebasis for modern organizational forms ldquocontinuous shopmanufacturingrdquo and ldquoflexible manufacturing systemsrdquo whichare highly flexible though limited with regard to continuityFlexible continuous production lines (FCPL) which are par-ticularly focused on quantity flexibility and less focused onproduct type flexibility have their strong point in continuityInelastic continuous production lines (ICPL) have the highestdegree of continuity with little quantitative flexibility andinsignificant flexibility in product types (see Figure 9)

Traditionally such problems are discussed under the termldquoDedicated Manufacturing Linesrdquo (DML) [13] or ldquoDedicatedManufacturing Systemrdquo (DMS) [20] but the respective dis-cussions seem to not includemdashor are at least not explicitenough in relation tomdashconsiderations revolving around com-binations of spatial temporal and technical organizationalprinciples as they have been described above Only this allowsfor more differentiated approaches to optimum organiza-tional solutions and their subsequent practical applicationin terms of required hard- and software to ensure effectiveand efficient production capacity and flexibility (eg [58])Equally the development of ldquoFlexible Manufacturing Sys-temsrdquo (FMS) [59] ldquoReconfigurable Manufacturing Systemsrdquo(RMS) [20 60 61] and Agile Manufacturing Systems (AMS)[62] or further variations of such systems (eg ldquoCellularManufacturing Systemsrdquo (CMS) [63]) needs to be foundedon and informed by defined basic organizational principlesfrom the outset

Understanding the theory of organizational forms ofcomponent manufacture can inform process- and require-ment profile-related decision making

42 Organization of the Production Support Service ldquoInternalTransportrdquo Production support services are vital for core

production operations and associated managerial steeringand control functions [4] for example production assetsmaintenance and preservation More information regardingservices can be found in [64ndash73] Additional informationrelated to industrial services can be obtained from sources[74ndash90]

Internal production logistics is also an essential produc-tion support service for the production process Interfacesare between (a) procurement logistics and incoming goodsstore and (b) end product storage and distribution logisticsKey components of internal logistics are internal storageand internal transport (also referred to as material handlingsystem (MHS) [91 92])

For the purpose of this paper internal transport realizesthe spatial transformation of elementary factors of produc-tion in the operational performance process [23 48] Centralto this issue is the raw material or the work item used(if stationary potential factors of production assumed) Inwork-sharing production systems the physical movement ofthe elementary factor ldquomaterialrdquo from work station to workstation is by its nature an essential production support serviceorganized in accordance with the technological processingsequence

Production support services can be described as com-plementary immaterial production provisions from indus-trial companies which have positioned themselves in closeproximity to manufacturing Such services can be viewedas enablers for the main manufacturing processes Theycontribute to high productivity through an effective andefficient production process Production support servicescan be systemized in accordance with (a) their respectiveoperational areas in which they function (b) their organiza-tional relation with relevant production factors and (c) theirparticular proximity to manufacturing (see also [64 93 94])

In furtherance of one key subject matter of this papernamely organization of the main manufacturing processldquocomponent manufacturerdquo and organization of the pro-duction support service ldquointernal transportrdquo the followingprinciple considerations and contextual issues are stated

Organizing in generalmdashwhich of course also includesthe organization of production processesmdashis task and outputof the dispositive production factor organization and forthis reason a production support service This is inclusiveof a task-oriented design of spatial and temporal organi-zational principles applied in the main manufacturing pro-cessessubprocesses The objective is to attune organizationalknow how (ability profiles) to the requirement profiles ofproduction programs which then lead to a correspondingfactory layout Based on such fundamental deliberations(amongst many others though) ultimately a correspondingfactory layout can be developed which in a very advancedformat has been examined in detail by Wiendahl et al usingthe example of the Modine Wackersdorf GmbH that wasawarded ldquobest assemblyrdquo in Germany 2006 [95 96]

Internal transport is an elementary factor-oriented pro-duction support service It contributes indirectly to the addedvalue of the main manufacturing processes for which it is anindispensable precondition (as also stated by Chittratanawatand Noble [97] although with another focus) Organizing


Characteristics of internal transport

Varying delivery points varying routing

Fixed delivery pointsfixed routing

Fixed delivery pointsvarying routingLink principles

Nondirectional transport principle

NTP

Concatenated transport principle

CTP

Direction variabletransport principle

VTP

Direct transport principle

DTP

Nondirectional oriented Directional oriented

SOPIT

Figure 10 Spatial organizational principles of internal transport ([23] based on [21])

the internal transport is in two ways a production supportservicemdashboth from an organizational perspective and fromthe transport perspective as such It includes the design ofspatial and temporal organizational principles and organi-zational forms of internal transport which take place in theorganizational forms of the main manufacturing processesincluding movements to and from temporary storage Inour model material management and logistics serve asa provider of such production support services Demandfor such services is defined by the process owner or aninternal customer In this context thework item (componentmodule or material) can be looked at as an external factor

Options for the organizational design of internal trans-port are considered below As stated before the organiza-tional forms of internal transport as well as the classicalorganizational forms of component manufacture need tobe based on spatial and temporal organizational principlesTheir different combinations bring out various organizationaloptions to be further examined

421 Spatial Organizational Principle of Internal TransportThe applied spatial organizational principle of internal trans-port determines the direction of internal transport It isfurther determined by the specific routing along deliverypoints We distinguish between directed and nondirectedtransports In this context production tasks provide referencefor such transport related considerations

Froma spatial point of view itmakes sense to differentiatebetween transports with either fixed or varying deliverypoints with a fixed or varying routing respectively If therouting is fixed the (fixed) delivery points get passed bythe production tasks in an identical sequence Specific routeconnections in between delivery points need to be installedIn case of varying routings the delivery points get passed by anindividual design of transport processes in accordance witha varying sequence Flexible route connections in betweendelivery points need to be installed [23] Even though thecombinations of possible variants of routings and deliverypoints result in four potential interconnections of spatiallink principles for internal transport only three spatial linkprinciples remain because by logic the grouping of varyingrouting and fixed delivery points is irrelevant

Together with these spatial link principles and theirunderlying characteristics the spatial organizational princi-ples of internal transport also address the directive or nondi-rective nature of the transport solution Figure 10 furtherillustrates how these aspects interrelate

Organizational design options which are based on spatialorganizational principles of internal transport in connectionwith associated ability profiles can be generalized as follows[23]

(i) The nondirectional spatial transport principle (NTP)is applied where production tasks involve varyingdelivery points (work stations) in a task specific andvarying routing without a general routing directionAs a rule there are only a limited number of deliverypoints at the production site along the task specifictransport routing This is typical for heterogeneousproduction programs

(ii) The direction variable spatial transport principle (VTP)applies in a setting where production tasks areexecuted along fixed delivery points of the transportsystem yet in a varying routing as dictated by therespective individual production step and without ageneral routing direction Typically delivery pointsof the transport system are located at the productionsite and along the task specific transport routes of theproduction tasks

(iii) Object specialized spatial organizational principles ofcomponent manufacture are based on homogeneousproduction programs with large quantities of identi-cal products Such conditions are predestined to alsoapply direct (DTP) and concatenated transport princi-ples (CTP) Usually the same technological process-ing sequence without skipping work stations occursin the concatenated transport principle Where thedirect transport principle is applied different pro-cessing times and identical technological processingsequences are possible However skipping of workstations remains possible

422 TemporalOrganizational Principle of Internal TransportThe temporal organizational principle of internal transport


Nondirectional lot transport

NLT

Direction variable lot transport

VLT

Nondirectional partial lot transport

NPL

Direction variable partial lot transport

VPL

Direct partial lot transport

DPL

Direct component transport

DCT

VTP

DTP

CTPConcatenated

partial lot transportCPL

Concatenated component transport

CCT

Dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTPN

ondi

rect

iona

l or

ient

ed

Primary organizational form of internal transportDerivative organizational form of internal transportNo relevant possible combination

SOPITTOPIT SoPIT CbPIT PaPIT

Figure 11 Organizational forms of internal transport (based on [23])

defines method and timing of the movements of items fromwork station to work station in the manufacturing processThe respective cardinal variant of the temporal transportprocess relates to that [23] In accordance with the tem-poral organizational principles of the main manufacturingprocesses the internal transport process connects relatedproduction steps within the chosen division of labor schemeThus temporal organizational principles of component man-ufacture and internal transport are a direct interface betweenmain manufacturing and service processes [23]

423 Organizational Forms of Internal Transport Organiza-tional forms of internal transport consist of combinations ofspatial organizational principles and temporal organizationalprinciples [23] From the presented spatial and temporalorganizational principles twelve theoretically possible orga-nizational forms of internal transport can be derived (seeFigure 11) The analysis of the practicability of these twelveorganizational forms leads to the distinction of (a) primaryand (b) derivative organizational forms but (c) also tosome organizational forms without practical relevance be itbecause they lack technical technological andor economicefficiency [23 98]

Primary organizational forms of internal transport pri-marily support transport operations as such and will belooked at in more detail [99] Derivative organizationalforms replace primary organizational forms in cases wheretransport problems have to be addressed under specificoperational conditions in praxis for example splitting oroverlapping of production lots or methods to enhance thetransport utilization ratio [23] The organizational formsof internal transport have pending their respective spatial

and temporal structures varying continuity and flexibilitypotentials (see Figure 12)

Organizational forms of internal transport with highflexibility potential show tendentiously low continuity whilstorganizational forms with high continuity usually show lowflexibility potential

5 Combinations of OrganizationalSolutions for Process Types

The analysis and characteristic of requirement profiles ofall process types and ability profiles of theoretically relevantorganizational principles and forms are the basis to answerthe question which organizational form fits best to whichprocess type

The assumption is that an efficient organization of aproduction process for each process type can only be achievedby a combination of coordinated organizational principlesand forms of the respective main manufacturing processesand production support services This theoretical approachwill be investigated for the interaction of the organizationof component manufacture and internal transport (acknowl-edging the fact though that this covers only a limited range ofall operational options and combinations thereof)

Resulting selection and correlation issues have aca-demictheoretical as well as practical business relevance

Two problems show the academictheoretical relevance

(i) The first problem is the correlation between (a) the-oretically relevant options of classical organizationalprinciples and organizational forms of componentmanufacture and (b) the respective process typestogether with their requirement profiles


VTP

DTP

CTPDire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTP

Non

dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

ULT

RLT

GTT

CCT

DPL

VLT

NLT

Continuity

Flex

ibili

ty

SOPIT

TOPIT SoPIT CbPIT PaPIT

998833998833998833

998833998833998833

998833

998833

Figure 12 Potentials in flexibility and continuity of organizational forms of the internal transport ([23] based on [27])

(ii) The second problem is the correlation between (a)organizational principles and forms of internal trans-port and (b) classical andor modern organizationalprinciples and organizational forms of componentmanufacture

An understanding of the practical business relevancerequires a comparison between the reference (target) orga-nizational settings of a company with the existing organi-zational settings which then leads to a new organizationaldesign of a reengineered (reorganized) solution

51 Linking Process Types and Corresponding OrganizationalForms of Component Manufacture Each identified processtype has its specific requirement profile which needs tobe aligned with the respective ability profile of the orga-nizational setting Analysis is required to determine whichorganizational principles and forms of component man-ufacture embrace ability profiles thatmdashfrom an efficiencyperspectivemdashbest fit the respective requirement profiles Insupport of such analysis the following decision algorithm hasbeen developed It starts with the specifics of the productionprogram which subsequently determines the process type(see Figure 13(a))

The specific requirement profiles (see Table 2) are definedby (a) the similarity of components within their componentclasses (b) the manufacturing methods that are used formanufacturing (c) the required direction of the productionflow (d) the capacity utilization potentials of particular assetsand (e) the proportionality of time requirements for workingcycles All this leads to distinctive typical guiding principles

(i) flexibility through procedure specialization(ii) flexibility through object specialization(iii) continuity through object specialization(iv) distinct continuity through object specialization

In furtherance to this three additional results of relevanceare (a) options of technological processing sequences (b)corresponding spatial and temporal organizational princi-ples and (c) organizational forms of componentmanufacturebased on combinations of (b) (see Figure 13(b))

The scheme consolidates process types and their require-ment profiles with classical organizational forms of compo-nent manufacture which are inclusive of aligned and suitableability profiles

Specifics regarding single user manufacturing (andmachining center) [22] and series production [29] should notbe discussed at this point

Classical organizational forms and related modern orga-nizational forms follow identical spatial and temporal orga-nizational principles and thus a separate analysis of thecorrelation of process types and modern organizationalforms of component manufacture is not needed The attri-bution of modern organizational forms in the algorithm (seeFigure 13(b)) follows this principle

52 Linking Organizational Principles and Forms of Inter-nal Transport and Corresponding Component ManufactureRespectively The assignment of organizational forms of themain manufacturing process ldquocomponent manufacturerdquo tocorresponding process types is a primary decision whilstthe selection and assignment of organizational forms of pro-duction support servicesmdashin this case internal transportmdashwith respect to the organizational forms of componentmanufacture is a secondary decision

Spatial organizational principles of component manufac-ture determine the spatial arrangement of all work stationswhich need to be covered by internal transport Temporalorganizational principles of component manufacture deter-mine the way of passing on work items from work station towork station in accordance with the technological processingsequence Temporal organizational principles of internaltransport determine the operationalization of transports


Does a parts class exist

with the requirement profile

PT 1

Start

Process type 1bull Heterogeneous

customer-individual PP without repeat of production process

Is the production process of the

production type repeated

Does a distinctive variant

diversity of PP exist

Is the length of the production phase defined

Yes

No

No

No

Process type 2 bull Heterogeneous

customer-individualized PP with a distinctive

variant diversity

Process type 3

bull Homogeneous customer-anonymous PP with a

limited variant diversity

Yes

Yes

Process type 4 bull Homogeneous customer-

anonymous PP with normally one production type without a defined

planning horizon



PT 2



PT 3

Does aparts class exist


PT 4

No

No

No

No

Yes

YesANumber of components

per lot very little

Number of components per lot little

Yes Number of components per lot high

Number of components per lot very high

Yes

B

C

PT Process typePP Production program

Parts classes with requirement

1ndash4 do not existprofiles PT

(a)

Are the

of component class constructive technological

similar

Do all

of component class need the same manufacturing

methods

Is the

the production flow of components of the component class identical

Do all

of component class need all available

assets of the subrange

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NoA

Components are constructivetechno-

logical alike

Components need different

manufacturing methods

Components have varying directions of

production flow

No

No

No

Yes

No

Demand for flexibility by procedure

specialization

SMCSM

Demand for flexibility by

transfer to object specialization

OSMScFMS

Demand for distinctive

continuity by object

specialization

CPLICPL

Demand for continuity by

object specialization

OSMSrFCPL

Stop

PT 1

PT 2

PT 3

PT 4

B

Capacity requirement consis-

tently high

Yes

C

vtPS Varying technological processing sequencestPS ws

stPS os Same technological processing sequence without skippingPT Process typeSOP Spatial organizational principleTOP Temporal organizational principle

ShP Shop principle

SoP Serial progressionGrP Group principlePaP Parallel progressionCbP Combined progression

SiP Serial principle

SM Shop manufacturing CSM Continuous shop manufacturingOSMSc Object specialized manufacturing section FMS Flexible manufacturing systemOSMSr Object specialized manufacturing series FCPL Flexible continuous production line CPL Continuous production line ICPL Inelastic continuous production line

Extremely fluctuating capacity

requirement

Designing vtPS

ShP

SoP

DesigningstPS ws

DesigningstPS os

No

Is the time needed

per working cycle proportional

No

Yes

SOP+

TOP

+

GrP

SoP

SiP

CbP

SiP

PaP

+

+

+

components

direction of

components

components

OFc

OFm

Same technological processing sequence with skipping

Classical organization forms (OFc) of component manufacture Modern organization forms (OFm) of component manufacture

(b)

Figure 13 (a) Algorithm to link process types and organizational principles and forms of component manufacture (part 1) (b) Algorithm tolink process types and organizational principles and forms of component manufacture (part 2)


It can be also concluded that temporal organizational prin-ciples of component manufacture and those of internaltransport are in this context identical and can be equallyapplied for organizational purposes

Each organizational form of component manufacturehas its inherent organizational principle Taking into con-sideration the applied technological processing sequence acoherent analysis supports the determination which spatialorganizational principle is best suitable to be applied for therespective task (ormdashwith an equal resultmdashwhich temporalorganizational principle of internal transport is identicalwith the temporal organizational principle of componentmanufacture)

A combination of the identified spatial and temporalorganizational principles of internal transport determines theorganizational form of internal transport Subsequently thisaspect of organization has to be then combined with theorganizational form of component manufacture

All organizational forms of componentmanufacture havethe following correlations with organizational forms of inter-nal transport (see Figure 14)

Combinations related to single user manufacturing orthe machining center and transport organization have beenexcluded since they are irrelevant due to lack of transportrequirements

53 Organizational Alignment Based on the marketing andproduction programs the need for task splitting makessubprocesses necessary in order to address specific subtasksThese subtasks have pending the relevant process typerequirement profiles that can also be understood as a tasksetting for the design of production organizationHence pro-cess type-oriented combined organizational solutions have tobe found that are best suited to integrate ability profiles withrequirement profiles

Figure 15 summarizes requirement profiles of the fourprocess types mentioned above It also displays the combi-nation variants of organizing component manufacture andinternal transport each with their ability profiles and theirspecific relevance for the corresponding process type

To illustrate the complexity of combined organizationalsolutions a multilevel model has been developed in which allrelevant organizational principles and organizational formsof the main manufacturing processes and also productionsupport services can be classified in accordance with theircorresponding specific process type (see Figure 16)

Process types are the starting pointThey are classified by(partly conflicting) dimensions of quantity variant diversitycontinuity and flexibilityMoreover they point at the require-ment profiles which need to be factored into the organiza-tional approach In addition they also dictate the conditionsof the design of the organizational setting They are finallypositioned into various levels after further differentiationswere made between component manufacture and internaltransport all based on relevant organizational principles andforms Figure 16 illustrates the interdependency in a graphicalform

The vertical projections point out those combinationsthat from a component manufacture and internal transportperspective represent the most efficient solution of pro-duction organization Combinations which deviate from thevertical projection are possible and under certain circum-stances they may provide for a viable option [101] Howevereconomic losses have to be expected (also discussed forFMS by Sujono and Lashkari [102]) because in such casesrequirement profiles are not congruent with the respectiveability profiles

Going beyond the main focus of this paper (organizationof componentmanufacture and internal transport) combinedsolutions can be inclusive of additional organizational fieldssuch as (a) the main manufacturing process assembly [26]and (b) the production support services internal storage [23]maintenance [27 104] and information management [24] aswell as others as deemed necessary

The vertical projections of combinations are not only oftheoretical relevance but should also guide practical orga-nizational solutions Corporate practicemdashmore often thannotmdashdeviates from such theoretically ideal solutions whichgive ground for reengineering (reorganizing) approaches[105ndash107]

Schreyogg and Sydow [108] have examined in a muchbroader sense the general implications for organization the-ory with regard to what we believe to some extent narrowsdown to the fundamental struggle between organizationalstability and flexibility in changing business environmentstriggering adaptationmeasures and the resulting dilemmas inmany different ways from there In principle they advocatefor ldquo[sdot sdot sdot ] concern for countervailing processes and themastering of contradictory or even paradoxical requirementsin organizations [sdot sdot sdot ]rdquo [108] In furtherance to this theybelieve that ldquoThis refocusing would boil down to the needto build a new process-based organizational theory whichelaborates on the contradictory requirements systematicallyas well as mastering themrdquo [108] This paper zooms veryspecifically on production organization processes and it isbelieved that even on this by comparison with Schreyoggand Sydow microlevel some of the fundamental thoughtsthey have laid out resonate with what our organizationalframeworks are able to provide

6 Implications and Directionsfor Future Research

61 Profile ComparisonmdashReengineering Approach Economicsurvival and sustainable competitiveness of a companyrequire constant monitoring and reviews of production pro-cesses (and subprocesses) and their respective organizationalformsThe ability to adapt to changing production tasks withoptimum economic efficiency is the reference

Such a review is based on profile comparison Two aspectsare compared (a) organizational requirement profiles ofcomponent classesrsquo production and their respective subpro-cesses and (b) organizational ability profiles of all relevant


SiP

SOP CM

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CTP

ShP GrP

NTP VTP DTP

NLT VLT

DPL

CPLICPL

CCT

SoP

CbP

PaP

SiP

CM Component manufactureIT Internal transport

CPL Continuous production lineOSMSc Object specialized manufacturing sectionOSMSr Object specialized manufacturing seriesSM Shop manufacturing

CSM Continuous shop manufacturingFCPL Flexible continuous production lineFMS Flexible manufacturing systemICPL Inelastic continuous production line TOP Temporal organizational principle

CbP Combined progressionPaP Parallel progressionSoP Serial progression

SOP Spatial organizational principleCTP Concatenated transport principleDTP Direction transport principleGrP Group principleNTP Nondirectional transport principleShP Shop principleSiP Serial principleVTP Direction variable transport principle

Organizational forms of internal transportCCT Concatenated component transportDPL Direct partial lot transportNLT Nondirectional lot transportVLT Direction variable lot transport

TOP C

M

SOPIT

SOPIT

TOP I

T

CbPIT

PaPIT

Classical organization forms (OFc) of component manufacture

Modern organization forms (OFm) of component manufacture

Figure 14 Interdependencies of organizational principles and forms of component manufacture and internal transport (based on [21 23 2529 99 100])

subprocesses of a company It is then diagnosed whether ornot the existing subprocesses and their corresponding orga-nizational solutions are efficiently able to support changingproduction programs and resulting new requirements forproduction organization

Profile comparison is particularly relevant because

(i) existing organizational settings and their underly-ing organizational principles and forms have beendesigned in accordance with their ability profiles and


IP

MP

OrganizationalSM OSMSr CPL SUMOSMSc

CSM FCPL ICPL MCFMS

1

4 Small High stPS Low

High Low High vtPS

Variant diversity

Continu-ity

Flexibi-lity

stPS Same technological processing sequence vtPS Varying technological processing sequence

IP Individual productionMP Mass productionSSP Small series productionTP Type production

3

2

Medium- small

High-medium

High- medium

Medium- low

Medium- low

High- medium

DPL CCTVLT

Requirement profiles

QuantityProcess type

Organizational ability profiles

NLT

TP

SSP

Process type

mdash

OFCM(c)

OFCM(m)

OFIT

form

Figure 15 Connection between requirement profiles of process types and organizational forms (based on [22])

in support of the respective requirement profileswhich were based on a former (now outdated) pro-duction program

(ii) existing organizational settings with their specificability profiles had not been optimally adjusted to therespective requirement profiles

(iii) it cannot be expected that existing organizationalsettings with their ability profiles optimally fit in withthe requirement profiles of production tasks that arethe result of dynamic program developments

(iv) changing production programs can lead to the factthat for new component classes with their respec-tive requirement profiles make the creation of newsubprocesses with appropriate ability profiles of theorganizational setting necessary

(v) after program changes production tasks becomeirrelevant for existing subprocesses and are notreplaced by new production tasks

As a result of profile comparison relevant reengineeringtasks are identified in support of a new organizational settingThe aim is that measures are taken which as much aspossible adapt ability profiles of an organizational setting torequirement profilesThis in turn requires general changes ofthe existing organizational setting

Figure 17 highlights the algorithm of profile comparisonwhich leads to the identification of the reengineering remit interms of production related organizational settings

Four principle resulting scenarios can be expected

Variant 1 Identification of remaining gratuitous subpro-cesses after new program development Reengineering shall

eliminate such subprocesses It requires disinvesting anddischarging labor in the affected areas

Variant 2 Absence of an appropriate subprocess for the pro-duction of a component class in the company Reengineeringshall bring out and organize a new subprocess in a way thatit meets the requirement profile of the component class inquestion

Variant 3 Projected and existing subprocesses match andequally so the respective requirement and ability profilesof the organizational setting of production In this caseno adaptations through reengineering are needed In someinstances level adaptations of technological principles adeeper integration of production support services andimproved qualifications of the work force should be consid-ered

Variant 4 Projected and existing subprocesses match butrequirement profiles and ability profiles of the organizationalsetting are not optimally attuned This results in reengi-neering tasks related to changes of spatial and temporalorganizational principles

Selected reengineering design options of identified vari-ants are shown in more depth in Figure 18 Usually suchoptions are closely linked with complex solutions relatedto asset management (but also material management andhuman resources) and they require various strategy optionsfor asset modernization [101 109]

Through profile comparison identified resulting variantsand therefrom deducted design options of reengineeringpraxis-oriented solutions can be developed

In as much as it is believed that fine tuning productionprocess does contribute to the overall success of a companywe are also absolutely clear about the fact that operationalmeasures at this (micro-) organizational level must feed into


Classical and modern organizational forms of component manufacture

Requirements on designing production organization

(derived from requirement profiles of production programs for each

process type)

Quant

ity

Spatial organizational principles of component

manufacture

Temporal organizational principles of component

manufacture

Organizational forms of internal transport

Spatial organizational principles of internal

transport

Temporal organizational principles of internal

transport

NDTP

CTPDTP

DVTP

ShP

SiPSiP

GrP

SoP

PaPCbP

SoPVari

ant d

iversi

ty


CCTDPLT

NDLTDVLT

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3

Medium

MediumMedium

Low

Small

Small

ContinuityHigh

High

High

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CPLICPL

Abili

ty p

rofil

esof

com

bine

d or

gani

zatio

nal f

orm

sRe

quire

men

t pro

files

and

proc

ess t

ypes

CCT Concatenated component transportDPLT Direct partial lot transportDVLT Direction variable lot transportNDLT Nondirectional lot transport

CTP Concatenated transport principleDTP Direct transport principleDVTP Direction variable transport principleNDTP Nondirectional transport principle

CPL Continuous production line CSM Continuous shop manufacturingFCPL Flexible continuous production lineFMS Flexible manufacturing systemICPL Inelastic continuous production lineOSMSc Object specialized manufacturing sectionOSMSr Object specialized manufacturing seriesSM Shop manufacturing


GrP Group principleSiP Serial principleShP Shop principle

SoPIT

SoPIT

CbPIT

PaPIT

Figure 16 Multilevel organizational alignment model (based on [23 28 29 103])

to a much wider and less technical strategic approach tosecure strategic success of a company In furtherance to thisMc Kinlay and Starkey state that ldquoin market situations wherethe flexibility and responsiveness of work organizations iscrucial to competitive advantage successful change strategiescannot be premised on the simplicities of the structure-strategy paradigmrdquo [110]

62 Suggestions for Future Research Ourmultilevel organiza-tional alignment model for production process types brings

together a multitude of principle factors related interdepen-dencies and combinations thereof in order to generate theo-retical ldquorawmaterialrdquomdashStep 1mdashleading to conceptual optionsfor organizational solutions (DMS RMS FMS AMS)mdashStep 2mdashwhich can define practical applications of realorganizational configurations with the respective hard- andsoftwaremdashStep 3 Our findings suggest that further progressin designing manufacture systems of whatever nature maybenefit from knowledge relatable to Step 1 We zoomed intothe very basics of production subprocesses of component


Start

Is there acomponent class

of production program for an existing

subprocess in thecompany

Is there subprocess in the company for the

production of the component

Yes

No

No

Yes

PSS Production support service

There does not exist an adequate subprocess in the company to produce

the component class

Reengineering tasknew subprocess with its

organizational form where ability profile meets requirement profile

Projected subprocessexisting subprocess

requirement profile ability profile

Projected subprocess existing subprocess

requirement profilene ability profile

RP for SOP AP of existing SOP

No reengineering task to design SOP necessary

RP for SOPne AP of existing SOP

Irrelevant

RP for TOPne AP of existing TOP

RP Requirement profile

AP Ability profileOF Organizational form

SOP Spatial organizational principle

Yes


No

Alignment of AP of OF and RP of component

class is necessary

Yes

Yes

No

No

Variant 2

Reengineering taskchange spatial organiza-tional principle of subprocess

Variant 4 (part 1)

Reengineering taskchange temporal organi-zational principle of subprocess

Variant 4 ( part 2)

Reengineering taskelimination of

subprocess through disinvest and discharge of labor

Variant 1

Stop

No reengineering tasksbut adaptions of technolo-gical principles deeper integration of PSS or qualification of work force may be possible

Variant 3

class

a relevant ≙

≙

≙

≙

Does the RP of

matchexisting OF

and the AP ofcomponent class

Does the RP ofcomponent class forSOP and the AP of

existing SOPmatch

Does the RP ofcomponent class forTOP and the AP of

existing TOPmatch

Figure 17 Reengineering tasks in organizational settings of production

manufacture (as part of the main manufacturing processes)and internal transport (as part of the production supportservices) with the respective requirement profiles and fourcorrelating production process types When the require-ments for production processes change organizational gapsin response to such changes in production demands aresystem-wise closed by corresponding organizational abilityprofiles that are based on further categorized organizationalprinciples (eg spatial temporal and technical) and forms(eg classical modern primary and derivative) There arethree directions into which what has been presented can befurther develop andor additional research is required

First on the current system level the model is completeand has the ability to provide raw material for organizational

solutions as described above Thus it can be replicatedinto other closely linked fields of principle organizationalrelevance for example internal storage maintenance infor-mation system and quality management

Second by combining the various organizational modelsan ldquoall-inclusiverdquo multilevel organizational alignment modelshould be developed which would provide for even morecomplex solutions for organizational problemsThe challengewill be to integrate the specific ability profiles of each segmentwithout compromising the overall validity and practicalfeasibility of such an advanced model

Third the predominantly theoretical approach of ourresearchmdashwhich at its core aims at providing a betterunderstanding of fundamental principles of production


Results of profile comparison

Variant 3

Design options of reengineering

(A) No measures to design organizational principles and formsof the main manufac-turing processes

Alternatively(B) Improvement of

combined organiza-tional solutions (main manufacturing processes and production support services)

(C) Rationalization measuresbull Qualification of the

work forcebull Integration of

technological organizational principles

bull Ensuring available capacity

(D) Strategycompletely simple plant renewal

Variant 2

(A) Placement ofproduction tasks in other existing subprocesses with high flexibilitybull Capacity adjustment bull Improvement of

assetrsquos condition(B) Outsourcing of

component class(C) Organization of a

new subprocessbull Investment in assetsbull Qualification of the

work forcebull Designing spatial

temporal andor technological organizational principles

bull Designing organizational forms

(D) Strategycompletely advanced plant renewal

Variant 4

(A) Rationalization through reengineeringbull Change towards

object specialization SOP SiPTOP CbP PaPTOP changing levels of technicalsophistications

bull Change towards procedure specia-lizationSOP ShP GrPTOP SoPTOP changing levels of technicalsophistications

(B) Consequences for asset managementbull Old OP OF-

strategyincompletely reduced plant renewal

bull New OP OF-strategycompletely advanced plant renewal

Variant 1

(A) Cooperation with third party

(B) Disinvestment ofthe unuseable

bull Discharge or transfer of labor

bull Selection or transfer of assets

(C) Strategyincompletely reduced plant renewal

subprocess

Figure 18 Selected design options for resulting reengineering variants

organizationmdashneeds to be closer linked to and further testedagainst the current production organizational system devel-opment theory and praxis (eg DMS FMS CMS etc)

7 Summary

The corporate world is constantly under pressure to adapt tomanifold new challenges Finding optimum organizationalsolutions is a vital aspect for any company to maintain andextend its competitiveness Methodology-wise deductivethinking as well as theoretical conceptualization has beenchosen as a starting point to systematically refine pertinentterms principles processes interdependencies and com-binations of organizationally relevant factors for efficientproduction

One factor of fundamental importance is an in-depthanalytical understanding of differentiated requirement pro-files of production programs and corresponding processtypes We have systemized such requirement profiles andlinked them to four corresponding process types

Building on this and using the examples of ldquocomponentmanufacturerdquo and its related production support serviceldquointernal transportrdquo resulting organizational options togetherwith their respective ability profiles are laid out Potentialorganizational options and their applicability are further ana-lyzed in light of production programs requirements and their

respective manufacturing processorganization A complexmultilevel organizational alignment model (see Figure 16)brings together through what we call ldquoorganizational align-mentrdquo all interdependencies and correlations between pro-cess types related organizational principlesforms predefinedrequirements and shows resulting (theoretically) optimizedorganizational solutions

In furtherance to this comparative analysis of organiza-tional requirement and ability profiles lead to an efficiency-based choice of organizational solutions The productionaspects ldquocomponent manufacturerdquo and ldquointernal transportrdquohave been chosen as examples to explain the underlyingtheory Reengineering approaches were systematized andsubsequently developed towards (potentially) resulting orga-nizational adaptations

Decisions for organizational solutions in relation torequirement profilesmust be informed by theoretical analysisas well as feasibility considerations concerning organizationalprinciples and organizational forms of manufacturing sub-processes within the parameters of their respective abilityprofiles

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interestsregarding the publication of this paper


References

[1] E Frese M Graumann and L Theuvsen Grundlagen derOrganisation Entscheidungsorientiertes Konzept der Organisa-tionsgestaltung Gabler Wiesbaden Germany 2012

[2] A Scheibler Unternehmungs-Organisation Lehrbuch furStudium und Praxis Gabler Wiesbaden Germany 1974

[3] E Grochla Unternehmungsorganisation WestdeutscherOpladen Germany 1981

[4] F X Bea andM SchweitzerAllgemeine BetriebswirtschaftslehreBand 2 Fuhrung UVK Verlagsgesellschaft mbH KonstanzGermany 2011

[5] K Olfert Organisation Kiehl Ludwigshafen Germany 2009[6] E Kosiol Organisation der Unternehmung Gabler Wiesbaden

Germany 1976[7] G Schreyogg Organisation Grundlagen Moderner Organisa-

tionsgestaltung Gabler Wiesbaden Germany 2008[8] W Mayrhofer M Meyer and S Titscher Eds Praxis der

Organisationsanalyse Anwendungsfelder und Methoden Facul-tas Vienna Austria 2010

[9] M Schweitzer Industriebetriebslehre DasWirtschaften in Indus-trieunternehmungen Vahlen Munchen Germany 1990

[10] E Gutenberg Grundlagen der Betriebswirtschaftslehre Band 1Die Produktion Springer Berlin Germany 1957

[11] P A SteinbuchOrganisation Kiehl LudwigshafenmGermany1990

[12] S P Robbins Organisation der Unternehmung PearsonStudium Munchen Germany 2001

[13] Y Koren U Heisel F Jovane et al ldquoReconfigurable manufac-turing systemsrdquo CIRP AnnalsmdashManufacturing Technology vol48 no 2 pp 527ndash540 1999

[14] C Zopff Informationsmanagement in Kleinen und Mittel-groszligen Unternehmen (KMU) Unternehmenstypologie undGestaltungsansatz am Beispiel des Auftragsdurchlaufs derMetallverarbeitenden Industrie Shaker Aachen Germany2005

[15] T Cox Jr ldquoToward the measurement of manufacturing flexibil-ityrdquo Production and Inventory Management Journal vol 30 no1 pp 68ndash72 1989

[16] L L Koste and M K Malhotra ldquoTheoretical framework foranalyzing the dimensions of manufacturing flexibilityrdquo Journalof Operations Management vol 18 no 1 pp 75ndash93 1999

[17] F A G Kempf Flexibilitatsorientierte ProduktionssystememdashModulare Gestaltung Einfuhrung und Nutzung Produktion-stechnische Berichte aus dem FBK Band 07 Universitat Kaiser-slautern Kaiserslautern Germany 2010

[18] D Gupta and J A Buzacott ldquoA framework for understandingflexibility of manufacturing systemsrdquo Journal of ManufacturingSystems vol 8 no 2 pp 89ndash97 1989

[19] O S Yilmaz and R P Davis ldquoFlexible manufacturing sys-tems Characteristics and assessmentrdquo Engineering Manage-ment International vol 4 no 3 pp 209ndash212 1987

[20] H A ElMaraghy ldquoFlexible and reconfigurable manufacturingsystems paradigmsrdquo International Journal of Flexible Manufac-turing Systems vol 17 no 4 pp 261ndash276 2005

[21] T Nebl Produktionswirtschaft Oldenbourg Munchen Ger-many 2011

[22] T Nebl Production Management Oldenbourg Munchen Ger-many 2002

[23] RDrewsOrganisationsformen der Produktionslogistik Konzep-tionelle Gestaltung und Analyse der Wechselbeziehungen zuden Organisationsformen der Teilefertigung Shaker AachenGermany 2006

[24] G Grytsch Organisationsformen des Informationsmanage-ments Theoretische Grundlagen Organisationsprinzipien undGestaltungsansatze Shaker Aachen Germany 2011

[25] K Heinsberg Systematisierung der theoretischen Grundlageneiner wirtschaftlichen Lagerorganisation Shaker Aachen Ger-many 2004

[26] T Petersen Organisationsformen der Montage Shaker AachenGermany 2005

[27] P Runge Die Gestaltung der Organisationsformen der Instand-haltung unter besonderer Beachtung ihrer Abhangigkeit vonden Organisationsformen der Telefertigung Shaker AachenGermany 2000

[28] K Silberbach Der Einfluszlig Organisatorischer und TechnischerGestaltungskriterien auf die Bildung von Organisationsformender Teilefertigung Shaker Aachen Germany 1997

[29] I Teichner Organisation der kundenindividuellen Massenpro-duktion Shaker Aachen Germany 2012

[30] M E Porter Competitive Strategy Techniques for AnalysingIndustries and CompetitorsThe Free Press NewYork NY USA1980

[31] M T Sweeney ldquoTowards a unified theory of strategic manu-facturing managementrdquo International Journal of Operations ampProduction Management vol 11 no 8 pp 6ndash22 1991

[32] T Nebi ldquoOrganisationsformen der Teilefertigungrdquo ZWFZeitschrift fuer Wirtschaftlichen Fabrikbetrieb vol 102 no 11pp 717ndash722 2007

[33] K KieliszekComputer Aided Selling UnternehmenstypologischeMarktanalyse Gabler Wiesbaden Germany 1994

[34] T Nebl and A Dikow Produktivitatsmanagement TheoretischeGrundlagen methodische Instrumentarien Analyseergebnisseund Praxiserfahrungen zur Produktivitatssteigerung in Pro-duzierenden Unternehmen Hanser Munchen Germany 2004

[35] C Zopff and T Nebl ldquoInformation management for the real-ization of carrying out orders in small and mid size companies(KMU)rdquoZWFZeitschrift furWirtschaftlichen Fabrikbetrieb vol101 no 6 pp 338ndash343 2006

[36] G Schuh and V Stich Produktionsplanung und-SteuerungGrundlagen der PPS Springer Berlin Germany 2012

[37] H Gienke R Kampf and R Kampf Handbuch ProduktionInnovatives Produktionsmanagement Organisation KonzepteControlling Hanser Munich Germany 2007

[38] C-G Grundig Fabrikplanung PlanungssystematikmdashMeth-odemdashAnwendungen Hanser Munchen Germany 2009

[39] K-P Kistner and M Steven Produktionsplanung PhysicaHeidelberg Germany 2001

[40] R Wenzel G Fischer G Metze and P Nieszlig Industriebe-triebslehre Das Management des Produktionsbetriebs LeipzigMunchen Germany 2001

[41] G Zapfel Taktisches Produktions-Management OldenbourgMunchen Germany 2000

[42] G Schuh Produktionsplanung und -Steuerung GrundlagenGestaltung und Konzepte Springer Berlin Germany 2006

[43] H-J Warnecke Der Produktionsbetrieb 2 Produktion Produk-tionssicherung Springer Berlin Germany 1995

[44] S Poenicke Beurteilung und Auswahl alternativer Gestal-tungsvarianten von Organisationsformen der TeilefertigungShaker Aachen Germany 2000


[45] H SchmigallaMethoden zur Optimalen MaschinenanordnungVEB Verlag Technik Berlin Germany 1969

[46] J Neumann S Hasselbach H Klinger G Richter and W HSieber Okonomie der Produktionsdurchfuhrung DieWirtschaftBerlin Germany 1984

[47] H Arnold H Borchert and J Schmidt Der Produktionsprozeszligim Industriebetrieb Die Wirtschaft Berlin Germany 1975

[48] H-K Reuter Fertigungsformen im Maschinenbau Ein Beitragzur Systematisierung und Auswahl Druck als ManuskriptWismar Germany 1979

[49] Y Koren S J Hu and T W Weber ldquoImpact of manufac-turing system configuration on performancerdquo CIRP AnnalsmdashManufacturing Technology vol 47 no 1 pp 369ndash370 1998

[50] A-K Schroder Qualitatsmanagement in kleinen und mit-tleren Unternehmen (KMU)mdashBedeutung von Techniken desQualitatsmanagement fur die Losung von QualitatsproblemenShaker Aachen Germany 2006

[51] G Schmidt CAM Algorithmen und Decision Support fur dieFertigungssteuerung Springer Berlin Germany 1989

[52] P S Adler ldquoManaging flexible automationrdquo California Manage-ment Review vol 30 no 3 pp 34ndash56 1980

[53] G C Cainarca M G Colombo and S Mariotti ldquoAn evolu-tionary pattern of innovation diffusion The case of flexibleautomationrdquo Research Policy vol 18 no 2 pp 59ndash86 1989

[54] G K Hutchinson and J R Holland ldquoThe economic value offlexible automationrdquo Journal of Manufacturing Systems vol 1no 2 pp 215ndash228 1982

[55] F Jovane Y Koren and C R Boer ldquoPresent and future offlexible automation towards new paradigmsrdquo CIRP AnnalsManufacturing Technology vol 52 no 2 pp 543ndash560 2003

[56] R Parthasarthy and S P Sethi ldquoThe impact of flexible automa-tion on business strategy and organizational structurerdquo TheAcademy of Management Review vol 17 no 1 pp 86ndash111 1992

[57] J D Goldhar ldquoWhat flexible automation means to your busi-nessrdquoModern Material Handling vol 39 no 7 pp 63ndash65 1984

[58] R Buitenhek B Baynat and Y Dallery ldquoProduction capacityof flexible manufacturing systems with fixed production ratiosrdquoInternational Journal of Flexible Manufacturing Systems vol 14no 3 pp 203ndash225 2002

[59] M Kaighobadi and K Venkatesh ldquoFlexible manufacturingsystems an overviewrdquo International Journal of Operations andProduction Management vol 14 no 4 pp 26ndash49 1994

[60] M G Mehrabi A G Ulsoy and Y Koren ldquoReconfigurablemanufacturing systems key to future manufacturingrdquo Journalof Intelligent Manufacturing vol 11 no 4 pp 403ndash419 2000

[61] M G Mehrabi A G Ulsoy Y Koren and P Heytler ldquoTrendsand perspectives in flexible and reconfigurable manufacturingsystemsrdquo Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing vol 13 no 2 pp135ndash146 2002

[62] M R Abdi and A W Labib ldquoA design strategy for reconfig-urable manufacturing systems (RMSs) using analytical hierar-chical process (AHP) a case studyrdquo International Journal ofProduction Research vol 41 no 10 pp 2273ndash2299 2003

[63] S Nain and R M Belokar ldquoRestructuring of manufacturingprocess using matrix method a case studyrdquo in Proceedings ofthe World Congress on Engineering and Computer Science vol2 San Francisco Calif USA October 2012

[64] L L Berry and A ParasuramanMarketing Services Competingthrough Quality Maxwell Macmillan International New YorkNY USA 1991

[65] H Corsten and R GossingerDienstleistungsmanagement Old-enbourg Munchen Germany 2007

[66] S FlieszligDienstleistungsmanagement Kundenintegration Gestal-ten und Steuern Gabler Wiesbaden Germany 2009

[67] C Gronroos Service Management and Marketing John Wileyamp Sons Chichester UK 2007

[68] R F Lusch and S L Vargo The Service-Dominant Logic ofMarketing M E Sharpe New York NY USA 2006

[69] R Maleri and U FrietzscheGrundlagen der Dienstleistungspro-duktion Springer Berlin Germany 2008

[70] H Meffert and M Bruhn Dienstleistungsmarketing Grund-lagenmdashKonzeptemdashMethoden Gabler Wiesbaden Germany2009

[71] AMeyer ldquoDienstleistungs-marketingrdquo inHandbuchDienstleis-tungs-Marketing Band 1 A Meyer Ed pp 3ndash22 Schaffer-Poeschel Stuttgart Germany 1998

[72] F Scheuch Dienstleistungsmarketing Vahlen Munich Ger-many 2002

[73] V A Zeithaml M J Bitner and D D Gremler ServicesMarketing McGraw-Hill Boston Mass USA 2009

[74] H Albach Dienstleistungen in der Modernen Industriege-sellschaft Beck Munchen Germany 1989

[75] H Albach ldquoDienstleistungsunternehmen in DeutschlandrdquoZeitschrift fur Betriebswirtschaft vol 59 pp 397ndash420 1989

[76] M Bruhn ldquoMarkteinfuhrung von dienstleistungenmdashvom pro-totyp zum marktfahigen produktrdquo in Service EngineeringmdashEntwicklung und Gestaltung innovativer Dienstleistungen H-JBullinger and A-W Scheer Eds pp 227ndash248 Springer BerlinGermany 2003

[77] W H Engelhardt and M Reckenfelderbaumer ldquoIndustriellesservice-managementrdquo in Markt- und ProduktmanagementmdashDie Instrumente des Business-to-Business-Marketing MKleinaltenkamp W Plinke F Jacob and A Sollner Eds pp209ndash317 Gabler Wiesbaden Germany 2006

[78] C Gill Architektur fur das Service Engineering zur Entwicklungvon technischen Dienstleistungen Shaker Aachen Germany2003

[79] W Gruhler Dienstleistungsbestimmter Strukturwandel in Deut-schen Industrieunternehmen Deutscher Instituts Koln Ger-many 1990

[80] W Gruhler ldquoGesamtwirtschaftliche bedeutung und einzelwirt-schaftlicher stellenwert industrieller dienstleistungenrdquo in Indus-trielle Dienstleistungen H Simon Ed pp 23ndash40 Schaffer-Poeschel Stuttgart Germany 1993

[81] J Kuster Systembundelung technischer Dienstleistungen ShakerAachen Germany 2004

[82] S M Labe and F N Stolpmann ldquoDienst am Kunden totalrdquoAbsatzwirtschaft vol 36 pp 22ndash34 1993

[83] V Liestmann Gestaltung von Dienstleistungsfamilien in Analo-gie zur Gestaltung von Produktfamilien im MaschinenbauShaker Aachen Germany 2004

[84] G Neckermann and H Wessels ldquoDienstleistungsangebot desMaschinenbausrdquo Zeitschrift fur Betriebswirtschaft vol 62 pp521ndash538 1992

[85] G Schuh and G Gudergan ldquoInnovationsfahigkeit indus-trieller dienstleistungen in organisationsformen jenseits derhierarchie eine empirische analyserdquo in Forum Dienstleis-tungsmanagementmdashWertschopfungsprozesse bei Dienstleistun-gen M Bruhn and B Stauss Eds pp 192ndash214 Gabler Wies-baden Germany 2007


[86] W Sihn R Proksch and F Lehmann ldquoProduktbegleit-ende Dienstleistungen unter der LupemdashWas Kunden wirklichwollen Ergebnisse einer Studie des Fraunhofer Instituts furProduktionstechnik und Automatisierungrdquo Service Today vol14 no 6 pp 38ndash40 2000

[87] H Simon ldquoIndustrielle dienstleistungen und wettbewerb-sstrategierdquo in Industrielle Dienstleistungen H Simon Ed pp3ndash22 Schaffer-Poeschel Stuttgart Germany 1993

[88] B Stauss ldquoBedeutung und realisierungsgrad des total qual-ity management im industriellen servicerdquo in Dienstleistung-smarketingmdashEine Bestandsaufnahme E M Thelen and G BMairamhof Eds pp 203ndash230 Peter Lang Frankfurt Germany1993

[89] H Wildemann Die Modulare FabrikmdashKundennahe Produk-tion durch Fertigungssegmentierung TCW Transfer-CentrumMunich Germany 1988

[90] T L Wilson and F E Smith ldquoBusiness services 1982ndash1992mdashgrowth industry characteristics financial performancerdquo Indus-trial Marketing Management vol 25 no 2 pp 163ndash171 1996

[91] J A Buzacott and D D Yao ldquoFlexible manufacturing systemsa review of analytical modelsrdquoManagement Science vol 32 no7 pp 890ndash905 1986

[92] P Karande and S Chakraborty ldquoMaterial handling equipmentselection using weighted utility additive theoryrdquo Journal ofIndustrial Engineering vol 2013 Article ID 268708 9 pages2013

[93] N Thebud Fertigungsnahe Industrielle Dienstleistungen Ratio-nalisierungspotenzial fur die Produktionsorganisation in KMUShaker Aachen Germany 2007

[94] H Wildemann Anlagenproduktivitat Leitfaden zur Steigerungder Anlageneffizienz TCW-Transfer-Centrum Munchen Ger-many 1997

[95] M Busch ldquoSynergetic factory planning project with an exampleof the automotive supplier industryrdquo in Proceedings of the 6thGerman Symposium Factory Planning Factories for the GlobalCompetition Ludwigsburg Germany 2005

[96] H-P Wiendahl H A ElMaraghy P Nyhuis et al ldquoChangeablemanufacturingmdashclassification design and operationrdquo CIRPAnnalsmdashManufacturing Technology vol 56 no 2 pp 783ndash8092007

[97] S Chittratanawat and J S Noble ldquoAn integrated approachfor facility layout PD location and material handling systemdesignrdquo International Journal of Production Research vol 37 no3 pp 683ndash706 1999

[98] R Drews and T Nebl ldquoOrganisation des fertigungsnahenindustriellen dienstleistungsprozesses innerbetrieblicher trans-portrdquo Zeitschrift fur Wirtschaftlichen Fabrikbetrieb vol 103 no3 pp 133ndash139 2008

[99] R Drews ldquoDie Organisationsformen der Produktionslogistikrdquoin 50 Jahre produktionswirtschaftliche Forschung und LehreG Albrecht A-K Schroder and I Wegner Eds pp 29ndash45Festschrift Oldenbourg Munchen Germany 2009

[100] R Drews and T Nebl ldquoOrganisation des fertigungsna-hen industriellen Dienstleistungsprozesses innerbetrieblicheLagerungrdquo Zeitschrift fur Wirtschaftlichen Fabrikbetrieb vol103 no 1-2 pp 31ndash36 2008

[101] T Nebl and A-K Schroeder ldquoUnderstanding the interde-pendencies of quality problems and productivityrdquo The TQMJournal vol 23 no 5 pp 480ndash495 2011

[102] S Sujono and R S Lashkari ldquoA multi-objective model ofoperation allocation and material handling system selection in

FMSdesignrdquo International Journal of Production Economics vol105 no 1 pp 116ndash133 2007

[103] T Nebl and I Teichner ldquoEinflusse der produktionsorgani-sation auf die produktivitat von unternehmen am beispielder kundenindividuellen massenproduktionrdquo in Proceedings ofthe 1st International Scientific-Practical ConferencemdashEconomicsand Management K Tenekedschiew Ed Business and PublicSectors in the EconomicCrisismdashProblems and Perspectives pp278ndash284 Technische Universitat Varna 2010

[104] FMaaserOrganisationsformen der InstandhaltungTheoretischeGrundlagen Organisationsprinzipien und GestaltungsansatzeShaker Aachen Germany 2014

[105] M Hammer and J Champy Reengineering the Corporation AManifesto for Business Revolution HarperBusiness New YorkNY USA 1993

[106] K Lohr Innovationsmanagement fur WirtschaftsingenieureOldenbourg Munchen Germany 2013

[107] A Picot H M Dietl and E Franck Organisation Eineokonomische Perspektive Schaffer-Poeschel Stuttgart Ger-many 2008

[108] G Schreyogg and J Sydow ldquoOrganizing for fluidity Dilemmasof new organizational formsrdquo Organization Science vol 21 no6 pp 1251ndash1262 2010

[109] TNebl andH PruszligAnlagenwirtschaft OldenbourgMunchenGermany 2006

[110] A Mc Kinlay and K Starkey ldquoCompetitive strategies andorganizational changerdquo Organization Studies vol 9 no 4 pp555ndash571 1988

International Journal of

AerospaceEngineeringHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

RoboticsJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014


Active and Passive Electronic Components

Control Scienceand Engineering

Journal of



RotatingMachinery


Hindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom

Journal ofEngineeringVolume 2014

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration


Civil EngineeringAdvances in

Acoustics and VibrationAdvances in



Electrical and Computer Engineering

Journal of

Advances inOptoElectronics


Volume 2014

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

SensorsJournal of


Modelling amp Simulation in EngineeringHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014


Chemical EngineeringInternational Journal of Antennas and

Propagation




Navigation and Observation



DistributedSensor Networks





component manufacture (CM)



internal transport (IT)

Profile comparisontheoretical-actual

subprocessesprocess types

requirementability profileOP OF

Analysis of ability profiles

Specification of process types (PT) through

requirement profiles

Generalizations of connections between

bull RP-process type and

bull AP-organizational form

Identification of requirement profiles (RP)

of differentiated production programs for manufacturing

processes and their organization

Analysis of requirement profiles

Task splitting and organization of production subprocessesproduction program (FP)

Subtasks

Subprocesses

Organization of subprocesses

1

2 3

4 5

8 9Reengineering

Level model Selection of reengineering design options

DecisionLinking process types and

corresponding organizational principles and forms ofcomponent manufacture

DecisionLinking organizational

principles and forms ofinternal transport and

corresponding component manufacture respectively

6

7

Combined organizational solutions

For requirement profiles of each process type

RP

AP

Requirement profile

Ability profile

PT FP Process typeFinished product

OF Organizational form

OP Organizational principle CM

IT

Component manufacture

Internal transport

RP1 RPnmiddot middot middotRP1

RP1

RPn

RPn




PT1

PT1

PTn

PTn


OPCM OFCM

OPCM OFCM

OPCM OFCM

OPIT OFIT

OPIT OFIT

Figure 1 Methodical approach

specific requirement profiles can be identified as well asefficiency expectations in the subtasks of production pro-cesses Linkages and interdependencies are generalized in amultilevel model

Based on the approaches described above the fit equi-tability of the subprocesses and organizational forms inrelation to the modified production tasks are revised througha comparative analysis The results of this comparison bringout necessary measures for reorganization as part of reengi-neering and provides for efficient production processes

The methodical approach is illustrated in Figure 1

2 Theoretical Frameworks of ProductionProcesses Organization

Frese et al [1] postulate that there is no uniform view onthe term ldquoorganizationrdquo However Scheibler [2] for exampledefines organization in a rather generic way as a goal-oriented design of systems For Grochla [3] organization is agoal-oriented structure of elements which are connectedwitheach other in a specific way For the purposes of this papersuch a generic understanding of organization shall sufficebecause the focus is very specifically on efficient productionprocess organization

For efficient realization of tasks a system as a whole hasto be divided through a pragmatic and creative approachinto subsystems on the basis of a microanalysis [4 5]aiming at addressing subtasks within the subprocesses thathave been created for this purpose [6] Furthermore it isobvious that a system has to be structured through differentlevels of hierarchy (ldquoOrganisationsstrukturrdquo [7] and ldquoformale

Strukturrdquo [8]) to be able to design coherent processes Thisthen defines division of labor and specialization [4]

The depth and width of organizing the subprocessesimpact for instance on subsystems of selected functionalareas Implementation of such core processes is very centralfor the success of a company [4] Because organization ispart of process management it especially focuses on coreprocesses of production

Bea and Schweitzer [4] define the following criteria toidentify core processes

(i) high importance for

(a) problem-solving or satisfaction of external andinternal customers

(b) core competencies of the company(c) product quality(d) reliability of production

(ii) high cost-intensity and capital lockup(iii) long duration of processes

These criteria show that the production process is a coreprocessTherefore systematic structuring of aswell as specificorganizational designs for all subprocesses of production pro-cesses in the context of their interaction for execution of tasksis necessary It is believed that company process as a whole aswell as individual core processes can be further broken downinto nearly indefinite numbers of steps [4] All subprocesseshave to be identified to a point where production processesfor the manufacturing of components assemblies and fin-ished products take place at their lowest level of line organs






























factors
















Production type





MCP


MSP

Minor-part products

MPP


Mixed productionMiP



SSPMass production

MP


EPI


EPL



CIP


productsCZP

Customer-anonymous



Customer-anonymous


CAPwv



IPType production

TP





























tion










Flexibility

Quantity

Continuity

High Medium Low

Low

Small

Small

High

High

HighMedium

MediumMedium





Production type



Requirement profile













Varia

nt di

versi

ty
























TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 1








TP Type production



IP SSP

CAPsvCZP





TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 2

IP SSP

CAPsvCZP





TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 3

IP SSP

CAPsvCZP





TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 4

IP SSP

CAPsvCZP

IP

CoP

CIP

EPI

MCP MS

SSP

MiP

MCP MSP

EPL

CACZP

TP

CAPsv

WaP

MPP

EPL

MPP

WaP

MP

CAPwv

EPM




Quantity

Varian

t dive

rsity


Medium

MediumMedium

LowContinuity

High

Small

Small High

High

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3




























































Object specialized


Object specialized


Shop manufacturing

Product principle

Group principle

Serial principle


principle


With

pas

sing

on co

mpo

nent

s


Serial progression





SOPCM

SOPCM

TOPCM

TOPCM


998833 Flexibility

998833C

ontin

uity



Object specialized


Object specialized


Shop manufacturing

998833998833998833

998833998833998833











CSM

SM

FMS

FCPL

CPL

ICPL

OMSr

SUM

MC

OMSc

Shop principle

Groupprinciple

Serialprinciple


Serial progression





Product principle


Mechanized

Semiautomated

Fully automated

Leve

ls of

tech

nolo

gica

l sop

histi

catio

n













Flexibility

Con

tinui

ty


system




Machining center

Continuous shop

manufacturing

998833

998833

998833998833998833

998833998833998833




















NTP


CTP


VTP


DTP


SOPIT














NLT


VLT


NPL


VPL


DPL


DCT

VTP

DTP

CTPConcatenated



CCT

Dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTPN

ondi

rect

iona

l or

ient

ed
















VTP

DTP

CTPDire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTP

Non

dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

ULT

RLT

GTT

CCT

DPL

VLT

NLT

Continuity

Flex

ibili

ty

SOPIT


998833998833998833

998833998833998833

998833

998833
















PT 1

Start








Yes

No

No

No



variant diversity

Process type 3



Yes

Yes



planning horizon



PT 2



PT 3



PT 4

No

No

No

No

Yes


per lot very little




Yes

B

C




(a)

Are the


similar

Do all


methods

Is the


Do all



Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NoA


logical alike




production flow

No

No

No

Yes

No


specialization

SMCSM



OSMScFMS



specialization

CPLICPL



OSMSrFCPL

Stop

PT 1

PT 2

PT 3

PT 4

B


tently high

Yes

C



ShP Shop principle





requirement

Designing vtPS

ShP

SoP

DesigningstPS ws

DesigningstPS os

No

Is the time needed


No

Yes

SOP+

TOP

+

GrP

SoP

SiP

CbP

SiP

PaP

+

+

+

components

direction of

components

components

OFc

OFm



(b)




















SiP

SOP CM

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CTP

ShP GrP

NTP VTP DTP

NLT VLT

DPL

CPLICPL

CCT

SoP

CbP

PaP

SiP







TOP C

M

SOPIT

SOPIT

TOP I

T

CbPIT

PaPIT








IP

MP


CSM FCPL ICPL MCFMS

1


High Low High vtPS

Variant diversity

Continu-ity

Flexibi-lity



3

2

Medium- small

High-medium

High- medium

Medium- low

Medium- low

High- medium

DPL CCTVLT




NLT

TP

SSP

Process type

mdash

OFCM(c)

OFCM(m)

OFIT

form






















process type)

Quant

ity


manufacture


manufacture



transport


transport

NDTP

CTPDTP

DVTP

ShP

SiPSiP

GrP

SoP

PaPCbP

SoPVari

ant d

iversi

ty


CCTDPLT

NDLTDVLT

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3

Medium

MediumMedium

Low

Small

Small

ContinuityHigh

High

High

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CPLICPL

Abili

ty p

rofil

esof

com

bine

d or

gani

zatio

nal f

orm

sRe

quire

men

t pro

files

and

proc

ess t

ypes






SoPIT

SoPIT

CbPIT

PaPIT






Start






Yes

No

No

Yes



the component class










Irrelevant





Yes


No


class is necessary

Yes

Yes

No

No

Variant 2


Variant 4 (part 1)


Variant 4 ( part 2)



Variant 1

Stop


Variant 3

class

a relevant ≙

≙

≙

≙

Does the RP of

matchexisting OF



existing SOPmatch


existing TOPmatch









Variant 3










Variant 2









Variant 4







Variant 1






subprocess



7 Summary










References




















































































































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation






































factors
















Production type





MCP


MSP

Minor-part products

MPP


Mixed productionMiP



SSPMass production

MP


EPI


EPL



CIP


productsCZP

Customer-anonymous



Customer-anonymous


CAPwv



IPType production

TP





























tion










Flexibility

Quantity

Continuity

High Medium Low

Low

Small

Small

High

High

HighMedium

MediumMedium





Production type



Requirement profile













Varia

nt di

versi

ty
























TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 1








TP Type production



IP SSP

CAPsvCZP





TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 2

IP SSP

CAPsvCZP





TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 3

IP SSP

CAPsvCZP





TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 4

IP SSP

CAPsvCZP

IP

CoP

CIP

EPI

MCP MS

SSP

MiP

MCP MSP

EPL

CACZP

TP

CAPsv

WaP

MPP

EPL

MPP

WaP

MP

CAPwv

EPM




Quantity

Varian

t dive

rsity


Medium

MediumMedium

LowContinuity

High

Small

Small High

High

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3




























































Object specialized


Object specialized


Shop manufacturing

Product principle

Group principle

Serial principle


principle


With

pas

sing

on co

mpo

nent

s


Serial progression





SOPCM

SOPCM

TOPCM

TOPCM


998833 Flexibility

998833C

ontin

uity



Object specialized


Object specialized


Shop manufacturing

998833998833998833

998833998833998833











CSM

SM

FMS

FCPL

CPL

ICPL

OMSr

SUM

MC

OMSc

Shop principle

Groupprinciple

Serialprinciple


Serial progression





Product principle


Mechanized

Semiautomated

Fully automated

Leve

ls of

tech

nolo

gica

l sop

histi

catio

n













Flexibility

Con

tinui

ty


system




Machining center

Continuous shop

manufacturing

998833

998833

998833998833998833

998833998833998833




















NTP


CTP


VTP


DTP


SOPIT














NLT


VLT


NPL


VPL


DPL


DCT

VTP

DTP

CTPConcatenated



CCT

Dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTPN

ondi

rect

iona

l or

ient

ed
















VTP

DTP

CTPDire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTP

Non

dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

ULT

RLT

GTT

CCT

DPL

VLT

NLT

Continuity

Flex

ibili

ty

SOPIT


998833998833998833

998833998833998833

998833

998833
















PT 1

Start








Yes

No

No

No



variant diversity

Process type 3



Yes

Yes



planning horizon



PT 2



PT 3



PT 4

No

No

No

No

Yes


per lot very little




Yes

B

C




(a)

Are the


similar

Do all


methods

Is the


Do all



Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NoA


logical alike




production flow

No

No

No

Yes

No


specialization

SMCSM



OSMScFMS



specialization

CPLICPL



OSMSrFCPL

Stop

PT 1

PT 2

PT 3

PT 4

B


tently high

Yes

C



ShP Shop principle





requirement

Designing vtPS

ShP

SoP

DesigningstPS ws

DesigningstPS os

No

Is the time needed


No

Yes

SOP+

TOP

+

GrP

SoP

SiP

CbP

SiP

PaP

+

+

+

components

direction of

components

components

OFc

OFm



(b)




















SiP

SOP CM

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CTP

ShP GrP

NTP VTP DTP

NLT VLT

DPL

CPLICPL

CCT

SoP

CbP

PaP

SiP







TOP C

M

SOPIT

SOPIT

TOP I

T

CbPIT

PaPIT








IP

MP


CSM FCPL ICPL MCFMS

1


High Low High vtPS

Variant diversity

Continu-ity

Flexibi-lity



3

2

Medium- small

High-medium

High- medium

Medium- low

Medium- low

High- medium

DPL CCTVLT




NLT

TP

SSP

Process type

mdash

OFCM(c)

OFCM(m)

OFIT

form






















process type)

Quant

ity


manufacture


manufacture



transport


transport

NDTP

CTPDTP

DVTP

ShP

SiPSiP

GrP

SoP

PaPCbP

SoPVari

ant d

iversi

ty


CCTDPLT

NDLTDVLT

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3

Medium

MediumMedium

Low

Small

Small

ContinuityHigh

High

High

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CPLICPL

Abili

ty p

rofil

esof

com

bine

d or

gani

zatio

nal f

orm

sRe

quire

men

t pro

files

and

proc

ess t

ypes






SoPIT

SoPIT

CbPIT

PaPIT






Start






Yes

No

No

Yes



the component class










Irrelevant





Yes


No


class is necessary

Yes

Yes

No

No

Variant 2


Variant 4 (part 1)


Variant 4 ( part 2)



Variant 1

Stop


Variant 3

class

a relevant ≙

≙

≙

≙

Does the RP of

matchexisting OF



existing SOPmatch


existing TOPmatch









Variant 3










Variant 2









Variant 4







Variant 1






subprocess



7 Summary










References




















































































































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation














factors
















Production type





MCP


MSP

Minor-part products

MPP


Mixed productionMiP



SSPMass production

MP


EPI


EPL



CIP


productsCZP

Customer-anonymous



Customer-anonymous


CAPwv



IPType production

TP





























tion










Flexibility

Quantity

Continuity

High Medium Low

Low

Small

Small

High

High

HighMedium

MediumMedium





Production type



Requirement profile













Varia

nt di

versi

ty
























TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 1








TP Type production



IP SSP

CAPsvCZP





TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 2

IP SSP

CAPsvCZP





TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 3

IP SSP

CAPsvCZP





TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 4

IP SSP

CAPsvCZP

IP

CoP

CIP

EPI

MCP MS

SSP

MiP

MCP MSP

EPL

CACZP

TP

CAPsv

WaP

MPP

EPL

MPP

WaP

MP

CAPwv

EPM




Quantity

Varian

t dive

rsity


Medium

MediumMedium

LowContinuity

High

Small

Small High

High

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3




























































Object specialized


Object specialized


Shop manufacturing

Product principle

Group principle

Serial principle


principle


With

pas

sing

on co

mpo

nent

s


Serial progression





SOPCM

SOPCM

TOPCM

TOPCM


998833 Flexibility

998833C

ontin

uity



Object specialized


Object specialized


Shop manufacturing

998833998833998833

998833998833998833











CSM

SM

FMS

FCPL

CPL

ICPL

OMSr

SUM

MC

OMSc

Shop principle

Groupprinciple

Serialprinciple


Serial progression





Product principle


Mechanized

Semiautomated

Fully automated

Leve

ls of

tech

nolo

gica

l sop

histi

catio

n













Flexibility

Con

tinui

ty


system




Machining center

Continuous shop

manufacturing

998833

998833

998833998833998833

998833998833998833




















NTP


CTP


VTP


DTP


SOPIT














NLT


VLT


NPL


VPL


DPL


DCT

VTP

DTP

CTPConcatenated



CCT

Dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTPN

ondi

rect

iona

l or

ient

ed
















VTP

DTP

CTPDire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTP

Non

dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

ULT

RLT

GTT

CCT

DPL

VLT

NLT

Continuity

Flex

ibili

ty

SOPIT


998833998833998833

998833998833998833

998833

998833
















PT 1

Start








Yes

No

No

No



variant diversity

Process type 3



Yes

Yes



planning horizon



PT 2



PT 3



PT 4

No

No

No

No

Yes


per lot very little




Yes

B

C




(a)

Are the


similar

Do all


methods

Is the


Do all



Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NoA


logical alike




production flow

No

No

No

Yes

No


specialization

SMCSM



OSMScFMS



specialization

CPLICPL



OSMSrFCPL

Stop

PT 1

PT 2

PT 3

PT 4

B


tently high

Yes

C



ShP Shop principle





requirement

Designing vtPS

ShP

SoP

DesigningstPS ws

DesigningstPS os

No

Is the time needed


No

Yes

SOP+

TOP

+

GrP

SoP

SiP

CbP

SiP

PaP

+

+

+

components

direction of

components

components

OFc

OFm



(b)




















SiP

SOP CM

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CTP

ShP GrP

NTP VTP DTP

NLT VLT

DPL

CPLICPL

CCT

SoP

CbP

PaP

SiP







TOP C

M

SOPIT

SOPIT

TOP I

T

CbPIT

PaPIT








IP

MP


CSM FCPL ICPL MCFMS

1


High Low High vtPS

Variant diversity

Continu-ity

Flexibi-lity



3

2

Medium- small

High-medium

High- medium

Medium- low

Medium- low

High- medium

DPL CCTVLT




NLT

TP

SSP

Process type

mdash

OFCM(c)

OFCM(m)

OFIT

form






















process type)

Quant

ity


manufacture


manufacture



transport


transport

NDTP

CTPDTP

DVTP

ShP

SiPSiP

GrP

SoP

PaPCbP

SoPVari

ant d

iversi

ty


CCTDPLT

NDLTDVLT

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3

Medium

MediumMedium

Low

Small

Small

ContinuityHigh

High

High

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CPLICPL

Abili

ty p

rofil

esof

com

bine

d or

gani

zatio

nal f

orm

sRe

quire

men

t pro

files

and

proc

ess t

ypes






SoPIT

SoPIT

CbPIT

PaPIT






Start






Yes

No

No

Yes



the component class










Irrelevant





Yes


No


class is necessary

Yes

Yes

No

No

Variant 2


Variant 4 (part 1)


Variant 4 ( part 2)



Variant 1

Stop


Variant 3

class

a relevant ≙

≙

≙

≙

Does the RP of

matchexisting OF



existing SOPmatch


existing TOPmatch









Variant 3










Variant 2









Variant 4







Variant 1






subprocess



7 Summary










References




















































































































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation











Production type





MCP


MSP

Minor-part products

MPP


Mixed productionMiP



SSPMass production

MP


EPI


EPL



CIP


productsCZP

Customer-anonymous



Customer-anonymous


CAPwv



IPType production

TP





























tion










Flexibility

Quantity

Continuity

High Medium Low

Low

Small

Small

High

High

HighMedium

MediumMedium





Production type



Requirement profile













Varia

nt di

versi

ty
























TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 1








TP Type production



IP SSP

CAPsvCZP





TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 2

IP SSP

CAPsvCZP





TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 3

IP SSP

CAPsvCZP





TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 4

IP SSP

CAPsvCZP

IP

CoP

CIP

EPI

MCP MS

SSP

MiP

MCP MSP

EPL

CACZP

TP

CAPsv

WaP

MPP

EPL

MPP

WaP

MP

CAPwv

EPM




Quantity

Varian

t dive

rsity


Medium

MediumMedium

LowContinuity

High

Small

Small High

High

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3




























































Object specialized


Object specialized


Shop manufacturing

Product principle

Group principle

Serial principle


principle


With

pas

sing

on co

mpo

nent

s


Serial progression





SOPCM

SOPCM

TOPCM

TOPCM


998833 Flexibility

998833C

ontin

uity



Object specialized


Object specialized


Shop manufacturing

998833998833998833

998833998833998833











CSM

SM

FMS

FCPL

CPL

ICPL

OMSr

SUM

MC

OMSc

Shop principle

Groupprinciple

Serialprinciple


Serial progression





Product principle


Mechanized

Semiautomated

Fully automated

Leve

ls of

tech

nolo

gica

l sop

histi

catio

n













Flexibility

Con

tinui

ty


system




Machining center

Continuous shop

manufacturing

998833

998833

998833998833998833

998833998833998833




















NTP


CTP


VTP


DTP


SOPIT














NLT


VLT


NPL


VPL


DPL


DCT

VTP

DTP

CTPConcatenated



CCT

Dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTPN

ondi

rect

iona

l or

ient

ed
















VTP

DTP

CTPDire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTP

Non

dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

ULT

RLT

GTT

CCT

DPL

VLT

NLT

Continuity

Flex

ibili

ty

SOPIT


998833998833998833

998833998833998833

998833

998833
















PT 1

Start








Yes

No

No

No



variant diversity

Process type 3



Yes

Yes



planning horizon



PT 2



PT 3



PT 4

No

No

No

No

Yes


per lot very little




Yes

B

C




(a)

Are the


similar

Do all


methods

Is the


Do all



Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NoA


logical alike




production flow

No

No

No

Yes

No


specialization

SMCSM



OSMScFMS



specialization

CPLICPL



OSMSrFCPL

Stop

PT 1

PT 2

PT 3

PT 4

B


tently high

Yes

C



ShP Shop principle





requirement

Designing vtPS

ShP

SoP

DesigningstPS ws

DesigningstPS os

No

Is the time needed


No

Yes

SOP+

TOP

+

GrP

SoP

SiP

CbP

SiP

PaP

+

+

+

components

direction of

components

components

OFc

OFm



(b)




















SiP

SOP CM

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CTP

ShP GrP

NTP VTP DTP

NLT VLT

DPL

CPLICPL

CCT

SoP

CbP

PaP

SiP







TOP C

M

SOPIT

SOPIT

TOP I

T

CbPIT

PaPIT








IP

MP


CSM FCPL ICPL MCFMS

1


High Low High vtPS

Variant diversity

Continu-ity

Flexibi-lity



3

2

Medium- small

High-medium

High- medium

Medium- low

Medium- low

High- medium

DPL CCTVLT




NLT

TP

SSP

Process type

mdash

OFCM(c)

OFCM(m)

OFIT

form






















process type)

Quant

ity


manufacture


manufacture



transport


transport

NDTP

CTPDTP

DVTP

ShP

SiPSiP

GrP

SoP

PaPCbP

SoPVari

ant d

iversi

ty


CCTDPLT

NDLTDVLT

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3

Medium

MediumMedium

Low

Small

Small

ContinuityHigh

High

High

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CPLICPL

Abili

ty p

rofil

esof

com

bine

d or

gani

zatio

nal f

orm

sRe

quire

men

t pro

files

and

proc

ess t

ypes






SoPIT

SoPIT

CbPIT

PaPIT






Start






Yes

No

No

Yes



the component class










Irrelevant





Yes


No


class is necessary

Yes

Yes

No

No

Variant 2


Variant 4 (part 1)


Variant 4 ( part 2)



Variant 1

Stop


Variant 3

class

a relevant ≙

≙

≙

≙

Does the RP of

matchexisting OF



existing SOPmatch


existing TOPmatch









Variant 3










Variant 2









Variant 4







Variant 1






subprocess



7 Summary










References




















































































































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation
























tion










Flexibility

Quantity

Continuity

High Medium Low

Low

Small

Small

High

High

HighMedium

MediumMedium





Production type



Requirement profile













Varia

nt di

versi

ty
























TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 1








TP Type production



IP SSP

CAPsvCZP





TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 2

IP SSP

CAPsvCZP





TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 3

IP SSP

CAPsvCZP





TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 4

IP SSP

CAPsvCZP

IP

CoP

CIP

EPI

MCP MS

SSP

MiP

MCP MSP

EPL

CACZP

TP

CAPsv

WaP

MPP

EPL

MPP

WaP

MP

CAPwv

EPM




Quantity

Varian

t dive

rsity


Medium

MediumMedium

LowContinuity

High

Small

Small High

High

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3




























































Object specialized


Object specialized


Shop manufacturing

Product principle

Group principle

Serial principle


principle


With

pas

sing

on co

mpo

nent

s


Serial progression





SOPCM

SOPCM

TOPCM

TOPCM


998833 Flexibility

998833C

ontin

uity



Object specialized


Object specialized


Shop manufacturing

998833998833998833

998833998833998833











CSM

SM

FMS

FCPL

CPL

ICPL

OMSr

SUM

MC

OMSc

Shop principle

Groupprinciple

Serialprinciple


Serial progression





Product principle


Mechanized

Semiautomated

Fully automated

Leve

ls of

tech

nolo

gica

l sop

histi

catio

n













Flexibility

Con

tinui

ty


system




Machining center

Continuous shop

manufacturing

998833

998833

998833998833998833

998833998833998833




















NTP


CTP


VTP


DTP


SOPIT














NLT


VLT


NPL


VPL


DPL


DCT

VTP

DTP

CTPConcatenated



CCT

Dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTPN

ondi

rect

iona

l or

ient

ed
















VTP

DTP

CTPDire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTP

Non

dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

ULT

RLT

GTT

CCT

DPL

VLT

NLT

Continuity

Flex

ibili

ty

SOPIT


998833998833998833

998833998833998833

998833

998833
















PT 1

Start








Yes

No

No

No



variant diversity

Process type 3



Yes

Yes



planning horizon



PT 2



PT 3



PT 4

No

No

No

No

Yes


per lot very little




Yes

B

C




(a)

Are the


similar

Do all


methods

Is the


Do all



Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NoA


logical alike




production flow

No

No

No

Yes

No


specialization

SMCSM



OSMScFMS



specialization

CPLICPL



OSMSrFCPL

Stop

PT 1

PT 2

PT 3

PT 4

B


tently high

Yes

C



ShP Shop principle





requirement

Designing vtPS

ShP

SoP

DesigningstPS ws

DesigningstPS os

No

Is the time needed


No

Yes

SOP+

TOP

+

GrP

SoP

SiP

CbP

SiP

PaP

+

+

+

components

direction of

components

components

OFc

OFm



(b)




















SiP

SOP CM

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CTP

ShP GrP

NTP VTP DTP

NLT VLT

DPL

CPLICPL

CCT

SoP

CbP

PaP

SiP







TOP C

M

SOPIT

SOPIT

TOP I

T

CbPIT

PaPIT








IP

MP


CSM FCPL ICPL MCFMS

1


High Low High vtPS

Variant diversity

Continu-ity

Flexibi-lity



3

2

Medium- small

High-medium

High- medium

Medium- low

Medium- low

High- medium

DPL CCTVLT




NLT

TP

SSP

Process type

mdash

OFCM(c)

OFCM(m)

OFIT

form






















process type)

Quant

ity


manufacture


manufacture



transport


transport

NDTP

CTPDTP

DVTP

ShP

SiPSiP

GrP

SoP

PaPCbP

SoPVari

ant d

iversi

ty


CCTDPLT

NDLTDVLT

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3

Medium

MediumMedium

Low

Small

Small

ContinuityHigh

High

High

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CPLICPL

Abili

ty p

rofil

esof

com

bine

d or

gani

zatio

nal f

orm

sRe

quire

men

t pro

files

and

proc

ess t

ypes






SoPIT

SoPIT

CbPIT

PaPIT






Start






Yes

No

No

Yes



the component class










Irrelevant





Yes


No


class is necessary

Yes

Yes

No

No

Variant 2


Variant 4 (part 1)


Variant 4 ( part 2)



Variant 1

Stop


Variant 3

class

a relevant ≙

≙

≙

≙

Does the RP of

matchexisting OF



existing SOPmatch


existing TOPmatch









Variant 3










Variant 2









Variant 4







Variant 1






subprocess



7 Summary










References




















































































































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation










Flexibility

Quantity

Continuity

High Medium Low

Low

Small

Small

High

High

HighMedium

MediumMedium





Production type



Requirement profile













Varia

nt di

versi

ty
























TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 1








TP Type production



IP SSP

CAPsvCZP





TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 2

IP SSP

CAPsvCZP





TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 3

IP SSP

CAPsvCZP





TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 4

IP SSP

CAPsvCZP

IP

CoP

CIP

EPI

MCP MS

SSP

MiP

MCP MSP

EPL

CACZP

TP

CAPsv

WaP

MPP

EPL

MPP

WaP

MP

CAPwv

EPM




Quantity

Varian

t dive

rsity


Medium

MediumMedium

LowContinuity

High

Small

Small High

High

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3




























































Object specialized


Object specialized


Shop manufacturing

Product principle

Group principle

Serial principle


principle


With

pas

sing

on co

mpo

nent

s


Serial progression





SOPCM

SOPCM

TOPCM

TOPCM


998833 Flexibility

998833C

ontin

uity



Object specialized


Object specialized


Shop manufacturing

998833998833998833

998833998833998833











CSM

SM

FMS

FCPL

CPL

ICPL

OMSr

SUM

MC

OMSc

Shop principle

Groupprinciple

Serialprinciple


Serial progression





Product principle


Mechanized

Semiautomated

Fully automated

Leve

ls of

tech

nolo

gica

l sop

histi

catio

n













Flexibility

Con

tinui

ty


system




Machining center

Continuous shop

manufacturing

998833

998833

998833998833998833

998833998833998833




















NTP


CTP


VTP


DTP


SOPIT














NLT


VLT


NPL


VPL


DPL


DCT

VTP

DTP

CTPConcatenated



CCT

Dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTPN

ondi

rect

iona

l or

ient

ed
















VTP

DTP

CTPDire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTP

Non

dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

ULT

RLT

GTT

CCT

DPL

VLT

NLT

Continuity

Flex

ibili

ty

SOPIT


998833998833998833

998833998833998833

998833

998833
















PT 1

Start








Yes

No

No

No



variant diversity

Process type 3



Yes

Yes



planning horizon



PT 2



PT 3



PT 4

No

No

No

No

Yes


per lot very little




Yes

B

C




(a)

Are the


similar

Do all


methods

Is the


Do all



Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NoA


logical alike




production flow

No

No

No

Yes

No


specialization

SMCSM



OSMScFMS



specialization

CPLICPL



OSMSrFCPL

Stop

PT 1

PT 2

PT 3

PT 4

B


tently high

Yes

C



ShP Shop principle





requirement

Designing vtPS

ShP

SoP

DesigningstPS ws

DesigningstPS os

No

Is the time needed


No

Yes

SOP+

TOP

+

GrP

SoP

SiP

CbP

SiP

PaP

+

+

+

components

direction of

components

components

OFc

OFm



(b)




















SiP

SOP CM

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CTP

ShP GrP

NTP VTP DTP

NLT VLT

DPL

CPLICPL

CCT

SoP

CbP

PaP

SiP







TOP C

M

SOPIT

SOPIT

TOP I

T

CbPIT

PaPIT








IP

MP


CSM FCPL ICPL MCFMS

1


High Low High vtPS

Variant diversity

Continu-ity

Flexibi-lity



3

2

Medium- small

High-medium

High- medium

Medium- low

Medium- low

High- medium

DPL CCTVLT




NLT

TP

SSP

Process type

mdash

OFCM(c)

OFCM(m)

OFIT

form






















process type)

Quant

ity


manufacture


manufacture



transport


transport

NDTP

CTPDTP

DVTP

ShP

SiPSiP

GrP

SoP

PaPCbP

SoPVari

ant d

iversi

ty


CCTDPLT

NDLTDVLT

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3

Medium

MediumMedium

Low

Small

Small

ContinuityHigh

High

High

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CPLICPL

Abili

ty p

rofil

esof

com

bine

d or

gani

zatio

nal f

orm

sRe

quire

men

t pro

files

and

proc

ess t

ypes






SoPIT

SoPIT

CbPIT

PaPIT






Start






Yes

No

No

Yes



the component class










Irrelevant





Yes


No


class is necessary

Yes

Yes

No

No

Variant 2


Variant 4 (part 1)


Variant 4 ( part 2)



Variant 1

Stop


Variant 3

class

a relevant ≙

≙

≙

≙

Does the RP of

matchexisting OF



existing SOPmatch


existing TOPmatch









Variant 3










Variant 2









Variant 4







Variant 1






subprocess



7 Summary










References




















































































































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation
























TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 1








TP Type production



IP SSP

CAPsvCZP





TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 2

IP SSP

CAPsvCZP





TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 3

IP SSP

CAPsvCZP





TP MP

CoP MiP WaP

CIP CAPwv

MCP MSP MPP

EPI EPL EPM

Process type 4

IP SSP

CAPsvCZP

IP

CoP

CIP

EPI

MCP MS

SSP

MiP

MCP MSP

EPL

CACZP

TP

CAPsv

WaP

MPP

EPL

MPP

WaP

MP

CAPwv

EPM




Quantity

Varian

t dive

rsity


Medium

MediumMedium

LowContinuity

High

Small

Small High

High

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3




























































Object specialized


Object specialized


Shop manufacturing

Product principle

Group principle

Serial principle


principle


With

pas

sing

on co

mpo

nent

s


Serial progression





SOPCM

SOPCM

TOPCM

TOPCM


998833 Flexibility

998833C

ontin

uity



Object specialized


Object specialized


Shop manufacturing

998833998833998833

998833998833998833











CSM

SM

FMS

FCPL

CPL

ICPL

OMSr

SUM

MC

OMSc

Shop principle

Groupprinciple

Serialprinciple


Serial progression





Product principle


Mechanized

Semiautomated

Fully automated

Leve

ls of

tech

nolo

gica

l sop

histi

catio

n













Flexibility

Con

tinui

ty


system




Machining center

Continuous shop

manufacturing

998833

998833

998833998833998833

998833998833998833




















NTP


CTP


VTP


DTP


SOPIT














NLT


VLT


NPL


VPL


DPL


DCT

VTP

DTP

CTPConcatenated



CCT

Dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTPN

ondi

rect

iona

l or

ient

ed
















VTP

DTP

CTPDire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTP

Non

dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

ULT

RLT

GTT

CCT

DPL

VLT

NLT

Continuity

Flex

ibili

ty

SOPIT


998833998833998833

998833998833998833

998833

998833
















PT 1

Start








Yes

No

No

No



variant diversity

Process type 3



Yes

Yes



planning horizon



PT 2



PT 3



PT 4

No

No

No

No

Yes


per lot very little




Yes

B

C




(a)

Are the


similar

Do all


methods

Is the


Do all



Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NoA


logical alike




production flow

No

No

No

Yes

No


specialization

SMCSM



OSMScFMS



specialization

CPLICPL



OSMSrFCPL

Stop

PT 1

PT 2

PT 3

PT 4

B


tently high

Yes

C



ShP Shop principle





requirement

Designing vtPS

ShP

SoP

DesigningstPS ws

DesigningstPS os

No

Is the time needed


No

Yes

SOP+

TOP

+

GrP

SoP

SiP

CbP

SiP

PaP

+

+

+

components

direction of

components

components

OFc

OFm



(b)




















SiP

SOP CM

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CTP

ShP GrP

NTP VTP DTP

NLT VLT

DPL

CPLICPL

CCT

SoP

CbP

PaP

SiP







TOP C

M

SOPIT

SOPIT

TOP I

T

CbPIT

PaPIT








IP

MP


CSM FCPL ICPL MCFMS

1


High Low High vtPS

Variant diversity

Continu-ity

Flexibi-lity



3

2

Medium- small

High-medium

High- medium

Medium- low

Medium- low

High- medium

DPL CCTVLT




NLT

TP

SSP

Process type

mdash

OFCM(c)

OFCM(m)

OFIT

form






















process type)

Quant

ity


manufacture


manufacture



transport


transport

NDTP

CTPDTP

DVTP

ShP

SiPSiP

GrP

SoP

PaPCbP

SoPVari

ant d

iversi

ty


CCTDPLT

NDLTDVLT

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3

Medium

MediumMedium

Low

Small

Small

ContinuityHigh

High

High

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CPLICPL

Abili

ty p

rofil

esof

com

bine

d or

gani

zatio

nal f

orm

sRe

quire

men

t pro

files

and

proc

ess t

ypes






SoPIT

SoPIT

CbPIT

PaPIT






Start






Yes

No

No

Yes



the component class










Irrelevant





Yes


No


class is necessary

Yes

Yes

No

No

Variant 2


Variant 4 (part 1)


Variant 4 ( part 2)



Variant 1

Stop


Variant 3

class

a relevant ≙

≙

≙

≙

Does the RP of

matchexisting OF



existing SOPmatch


existing TOPmatch









Variant 3










Variant 2









Variant 4







Variant 1






subprocess



7 Summary










References




















































































































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation










Quantity

Varian

t dive

rsity


Medium

MediumMedium

LowContinuity

High

Small

Small High

High

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3




























































Object specialized


Object specialized


Shop manufacturing

Product principle

Group principle

Serial principle


principle


With

pas

sing

on co

mpo

nent

s


Serial progression





SOPCM

SOPCM

TOPCM

TOPCM


998833 Flexibility

998833C

ontin

uity



Object specialized


Object specialized


Shop manufacturing

998833998833998833

998833998833998833











CSM

SM

FMS

FCPL

CPL

ICPL

OMSr

SUM

MC

OMSc

Shop principle

Groupprinciple

Serialprinciple


Serial progression





Product principle


Mechanized

Semiautomated

Fully automated

Leve

ls of

tech

nolo

gica

l sop

histi

catio

n













Flexibility

Con

tinui

ty


system




Machining center

Continuous shop

manufacturing

998833

998833

998833998833998833

998833998833998833




















NTP


CTP


VTP


DTP


SOPIT














NLT


VLT


NPL


VPL


DPL


DCT

VTP

DTP

CTPConcatenated



CCT

Dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTPN

ondi

rect

iona

l or

ient

ed
















VTP

DTP

CTPDire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTP

Non

dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

ULT

RLT

GTT

CCT

DPL

VLT

NLT

Continuity

Flex

ibili

ty

SOPIT


998833998833998833

998833998833998833

998833

998833
















PT 1

Start








Yes

No

No

No



variant diversity

Process type 3



Yes

Yes



planning horizon



PT 2



PT 3



PT 4

No

No

No

No

Yes


per lot very little




Yes

B

C




(a)

Are the


similar

Do all


methods

Is the


Do all



Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NoA


logical alike




production flow

No

No

No

Yes

No


specialization

SMCSM



OSMScFMS



specialization

CPLICPL



OSMSrFCPL

Stop

PT 1

PT 2

PT 3

PT 4

B


tently high

Yes

C



ShP Shop principle





requirement

Designing vtPS

ShP

SoP

DesigningstPS ws

DesigningstPS os

No

Is the time needed


No

Yes

SOP+

TOP

+

GrP

SoP

SiP

CbP

SiP

PaP

+

+

+

components

direction of

components

components

OFc

OFm



(b)




















SiP

SOP CM

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CTP

ShP GrP

NTP VTP DTP

NLT VLT

DPL

CPLICPL

CCT

SoP

CbP

PaP

SiP







TOP C

M

SOPIT

SOPIT

TOP I

T

CbPIT

PaPIT








IP

MP


CSM FCPL ICPL MCFMS

1


High Low High vtPS

Variant diversity

Continu-ity

Flexibi-lity



3

2

Medium- small

High-medium

High- medium

Medium- low

Medium- low

High- medium

DPL CCTVLT




NLT

TP

SSP

Process type

mdash

OFCM(c)

OFCM(m)

OFIT

form






















process type)

Quant

ity


manufacture


manufacture



transport


transport

NDTP

CTPDTP

DVTP

ShP

SiPSiP

GrP

SoP

PaPCbP

SoPVari

ant d

iversi

ty


CCTDPLT

NDLTDVLT

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3

Medium

MediumMedium

Low

Small

Small

ContinuityHigh

High

High

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CPLICPL

Abili

ty p

rofil

esof

com

bine

d or

gani

zatio

nal f

orm

sRe

quire

men

t pro

files

and

proc

ess t

ypes






SoPIT

SoPIT

CbPIT

PaPIT






Start






Yes

No

No

Yes



the component class










Irrelevant





Yes


No


class is necessary

Yes

Yes

No

No

Variant 2


Variant 4 (part 1)


Variant 4 ( part 2)



Variant 1

Stop


Variant 3

class

a relevant ≙

≙

≙

≙

Does the RP of

matchexisting OF



existing SOPmatch


existing TOPmatch









Variant 3










Variant 2









Variant 4







Variant 1






subprocess



7 Summary










References




















































































































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation




















































Object specialized


Object specialized


Shop manufacturing

Product principle

Group principle

Serial principle


principle


With

pas

sing

on co

mpo

nent

s


Serial progression





SOPCM

SOPCM

TOPCM

TOPCM


998833 Flexibility

998833C

ontin

uity



Object specialized


Object specialized


Shop manufacturing

998833998833998833

998833998833998833











CSM

SM

FMS

FCPL

CPL

ICPL

OMSr

SUM

MC

OMSc

Shop principle

Groupprinciple

Serialprinciple


Serial progression





Product principle


Mechanized

Semiautomated

Fully automated

Leve

ls of

tech

nolo

gica

l sop

histi

catio

n













Flexibility

Con

tinui

ty


system




Machining center

Continuous shop

manufacturing

998833

998833

998833998833998833

998833998833998833




















NTP


CTP


VTP


DTP


SOPIT














NLT


VLT


NPL


VPL


DPL


DCT

VTP

DTP

CTPConcatenated



CCT

Dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTPN

ondi

rect

iona

l or

ient

ed
















VTP

DTP

CTPDire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTP

Non

dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

ULT

RLT

GTT

CCT

DPL

VLT

NLT

Continuity

Flex

ibili

ty

SOPIT


998833998833998833

998833998833998833

998833

998833
















PT 1

Start








Yes

No

No

No



variant diversity

Process type 3



Yes

Yes



planning horizon



PT 2



PT 3



PT 4

No

No

No

No

Yes


per lot very little




Yes

B

C




(a)

Are the


similar

Do all


methods

Is the


Do all



Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NoA


logical alike




production flow

No

No

No

Yes

No


specialization

SMCSM



OSMScFMS



specialization

CPLICPL



OSMSrFCPL

Stop

PT 1

PT 2

PT 3

PT 4

B


tently high

Yes

C



ShP Shop principle





requirement

Designing vtPS

ShP

SoP

DesigningstPS ws

DesigningstPS os

No

Is the time needed


No

Yes

SOP+

TOP

+

GrP

SoP

SiP

CbP

SiP

PaP

+

+

+

components

direction of

components

components

OFc

OFm



(b)




















SiP

SOP CM

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CTP

ShP GrP

NTP VTP DTP

NLT VLT

DPL

CPLICPL

CCT

SoP

CbP

PaP

SiP







TOP C

M

SOPIT

SOPIT

TOP I

T

CbPIT

PaPIT








IP

MP


CSM FCPL ICPL MCFMS

1


High Low High vtPS

Variant diversity

Continu-ity

Flexibi-lity



3

2

Medium- small

High-medium

High- medium

Medium- low

Medium- low

High- medium

DPL CCTVLT




NLT

TP

SSP

Process type

mdash

OFCM(c)

OFCM(m)

OFIT

form






















process type)

Quant

ity


manufacture


manufacture



transport


transport

NDTP

CTPDTP

DVTP

ShP

SiPSiP

GrP

SoP

PaPCbP

SoPVari

ant d

iversi

ty


CCTDPLT

NDLTDVLT

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3

Medium

MediumMedium

Low

Small

Small

ContinuityHigh

High

High

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CPLICPL

Abili

ty p

rofil

esof

com

bine

d or

gani

zatio

nal f

orm

sRe

quire

men

t pro

files

and

proc

ess t

ypes






SoPIT

SoPIT

CbPIT

PaPIT






Start






Yes

No

No

Yes



the component class










Irrelevant





Yes


No


class is necessary

Yes

Yes

No

No

Variant 2


Variant 4 (part 1)


Variant 4 ( part 2)



Variant 1

Stop


Variant 3

class

a relevant ≙

≙

≙

≙

Does the RP of

matchexisting OF



existing SOPmatch


existing TOPmatch









Variant 3










Variant 2









Variant 4







Variant 1






subprocess



7 Summary










References




















































































































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation

























Object specialized


Object specialized


Shop manufacturing

Product principle

Group principle

Serial principle


principle


With

pas

sing

on co

mpo

nent

s


Serial progression





SOPCM

SOPCM

TOPCM

TOPCM


998833 Flexibility

998833C

ontin

uity



Object specialized


Object specialized


Shop manufacturing

998833998833998833

998833998833998833











CSM

SM

FMS

FCPL

CPL

ICPL

OMSr

SUM

MC

OMSc

Shop principle

Groupprinciple

Serialprinciple


Serial progression





Product principle


Mechanized

Semiautomated

Fully automated

Leve

ls of

tech

nolo

gica

l sop

histi

catio

n













Flexibility

Con

tinui

ty


system




Machining center

Continuous shop

manufacturing

998833

998833

998833998833998833

998833998833998833




















NTP


CTP


VTP


DTP


SOPIT














NLT


VLT


NPL


VPL


DPL


DCT

VTP

DTP

CTPConcatenated



CCT

Dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTPN

ondi

rect

iona

l or

ient

ed
















VTP

DTP

CTPDire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTP

Non

dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

ULT

RLT

GTT

CCT

DPL

VLT

NLT

Continuity

Flex

ibili

ty

SOPIT


998833998833998833

998833998833998833

998833

998833
















PT 1

Start








Yes

No

No

No



variant diversity

Process type 3



Yes

Yes



planning horizon



PT 2



PT 3



PT 4

No

No

No

No

Yes


per lot very little




Yes

B

C




(a)

Are the


similar

Do all


methods

Is the


Do all



Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NoA


logical alike




production flow

No

No

No

Yes

No


specialization

SMCSM



OSMScFMS



specialization

CPLICPL



OSMSrFCPL

Stop

PT 1

PT 2

PT 3

PT 4

B


tently high

Yes

C



ShP Shop principle





requirement

Designing vtPS

ShP

SoP

DesigningstPS ws

DesigningstPS os

No

Is the time needed


No

Yes

SOP+

TOP

+

GrP

SoP

SiP

CbP

SiP

PaP

+

+

+

components

direction of

components

components

OFc

OFm



(b)




















SiP

SOP CM

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CTP

ShP GrP

NTP VTP DTP

NLT VLT

DPL

CPLICPL

CCT

SoP

CbP

PaP

SiP







TOP C

M

SOPIT

SOPIT

TOP I

T

CbPIT

PaPIT








IP

MP


CSM FCPL ICPL MCFMS

1


High Low High vtPS

Variant diversity

Continu-ity

Flexibi-lity



3

2

Medium- small

High-medium

High- medium

Medium- low

Medium- low

High- medium

DPL CCTVLT




NLT

TP

SSP

Process type

mdash

OFCM(c)

OFCM(m)

OFIT

form






















process type)

Quant

ity


manufacture


manufacture



transport


transport

NDTP

CTPDTP

DVTP

ShP

SiPSiP

GrP

SoP

PaPCbP

SoPVari

ant d

iversi

ty


CCTDPLT

NDLTDVLT

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3

Medium

MediumMedium

Low

Small

Small

ContinuityHigh

High

High

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CPLICPL

Abili

ty p

rofil

esof

com

bine

d or

gani

zatio

nal f

orm

sRe

quire

men

t pro

files

and

proc

ess t

ypes






SoPIT

SoPIT

CbPIT

PaPIT






Start






Yes

No

No

Yes



the component class










Irrelevant





Yes


No


class is necessary

Yes

Yes

No

No

Variant 2


Variant 4 (part 1)


Variant 4 ( part 2)



Variant 1

Stop


Variant 3

class

a relevant ≙

≙

≙

≙

Does the RP of

matchexisting OF



existing SOPmatch


existing TOPmatch









Variant 3










Variant 2









Variant 4







Variant 1






subprocess



7 Summary










References




















































































































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation












Object specialized


Object specialized


Shop manufacturing

Product principle

Group principle

Serial principle


principle


With

pas

sing

on co

mpo

nent

s


Serial progression





SOPCM

SOPCM

TOPCM

TOPCM


998833 Flexibility

998833C

ontin

uity



Object specialized


Object specialized


Shop manufacturing

998833998833998833

998833998833998833











CSM

SM

FMS

FCPL

CPL

ICPL

OMSr

SUM

MC

OMSc

Shop principle

Groupprinciple

Serialprinciple


Serial progression





Product principle


Mechanized

Semiautomated

Fully automated

Leve

ls of

tech

nolo

gica

l sop

histi

catio

n













Flexibility

Con

tinui

ty


system




Machining center

Continuous shop

manufacturing

998833

998833

998833998833998833

998833998833998833




















NTP


CTP


VTP


DTP


SOPIT














NLT


VLT


NPL


VPL


DPL


DCT

VTP

DTP

CTPConcatenated



CCT

Dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTPN

ondi

rect

iona

l or

ient

ed
















VTP

DTP

CTPDire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTP

Non

dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

ULT

RLT

GTT

CCT

DPL

VLT

NLT

Continuity

Flex

ibili

ty

SOPIT


998833998833998833

998833998833998833

998833

998833
















PT 1

Start








Yes

No

No

No



variant diversity

Process type 3



Yes

Yes



planning horizon



PT 2



PT 3



PT 4

No

No

No

No

Yes


per lot very little




Yes

B

C




(a)

Are the


similar

Do all


methods

Is the


Do all



Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NoA


logical alike




production flow

No

No

No

Yes

No


specialization

SMCSM



OSMScFMS



specialization

CPLICPL



OSMSrFCPL

Stop

PT 1

PT 2

PT 3

PT 4

B


tently high

Yes

C



ShP Shop principle





requirement

Designing vtPS

ShP

SoP

DesigningstPS ws

DesigningstPS os

No

Is the time needed


No

Yes

SOP+

TOP

+

GrP

SoP

SiP

CbP

SiP

PaP

+

+

+

components

direction of

components

components

OFc

OFm



(b)




















SiP

SOP CM

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CTP

ShP GrP

NTP VTP DTP

NLT VLT

DPL

CPLICPL

CCT

SoP

CbP

PaP

SiP







TOP C

M

SOPIT

SOPIT

TOP I

T

CbPIT

PaPIT








IP

MP


CSM FCPL ICPL MCFMS

1


High Low High vtPS

Variant diversity

Continu-ity

Flexibi-lity



3

2

Medium- small

High-medium

High- medium

Medium- low

Medium- low

High- medium

DPL CCTVLT




NLT

TP

SSP

Process type

mdash

OFCM(c)

OFCM(m)

OFIT

form






















process type)

Quant

ity


manufacture


manufacture



transport


transport

NDTP

CTPDTP

DVTP

ShP

SiPSiP

GrP

SoP

PaPCbP

SoPVari

ant d

iversi

ty


CCTDPLT

NDLTDVLT

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3

Medium

MediumMedium

Low

Small

Small

ContinuityHigh

High

High

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CPLICPL

Abili

ty p

rofil

esof

com

bine

d or

gani

zatio

nal f

orm

sRe

quire

men

t pro

files

and

proc

ess t

ypes






SoPIT

SoPIT

CbPIT

PaPIT






Start






Yes

No

No

Yes



the component class










Irrelevant





Yes


No


class is necessary

Yes

Yes

No

No

Variant 2


Variant 4 (part 1)


Variant 4 ( part 2)



Variant 1

Stop


Variant 3

class

a relevant ≙

≙

≙

≙

Does the RP of

matchexisting OF



existing SOPmatch


existing TOPmatch









Variant 3










Variant 2









Variant 4







Variant 1






subprocess



7 Summary










References




















































































































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation










CSM

SM

FMS

FCPL

CPL

ICPL

OMSr

SUM

MC

OMSc

Shop principle

Groupprinciple

Serialprinciple


Serial progression





Product principle


Mechanized

Semiautomated

Fully automated

Leve

ls of

tech

nolo

gica

l sop

histi

catio

n













Flexibility

Con

tinui

ty


system




Machining center

Continuous shop

manufacturing

998833

998833

998833998833998833

998833998833998833




















NTP


CTP


VTP


DTP


SOPIT














NLT


VLT


NPL


VPL


DPL


DCT

VTP

DTP

CTPConcatenated



CCT

Dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTPN

ondi

rect

iona

l or

ient

ed
















VTP

DTP

CTPDire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTP

Non

dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

ULT

RLT

GTT

CCT

DPL

VLT

NLT

Continuity

Flex

ibili

ty

SOPIT


998833998833998833

998833998833998833

998833

998833
















PT 1

Start








Yes

No

No

No



variant diversity

Process type 3



Yes

Yes



planning horizon



PT 2



PT 3



PT 4

No

No

No

No

Yes


per lot very little




Yes

B

C




(a)

Are the


similar

Do all


methods

Is the


Do all



Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NoA


logical alike




production flow

No

No

No

Yes

No


specialization

SMCSM



OSMScFMS



specialization

CPLICPL



OSMSrFCPL

Stop

PT 1

PT 2

PT 3

PT 4

B


tently high

Yes

C



ShP Shop principle





requirement

Designing vtPS

ShP

SoP

DesigningstPS ws

DesigningstPS os

No

Is the time needed


No

Yes

SOP+

TOP

+

GrP

SoP

SiP

CbP

SiP

PaP

+

+

+

components

direction of

components

components

OFc

OFm



(b)




















SiP

SOP CM

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CTP

ShP GrP

NTP VTP DTP

NLT VLT

DPL

CPLICPL

CCT

SoP

CbP

PaP

SiP







TOP C

M

SOPIT

SOPIT

TOP I

T

CbPIT

PaPIT








IP

MP


CSM FCPL ICPL MCFMS

1


High Low High vtPS

Variant diversity

Continu-ity

Flexibi-lity



3

2

Medium- small

High-medium

High- medium

Medium- low

Medium- low

High- medium

DPL CCTVLT




NLT

TP

SSP

Process type

mdash

OFCM(c)

OFCM(m)

OFIT

form






















process type)

Quant

ity


manufacture


manufacture



transport


transport

NDTP

CTPDTP

DVTP

ShP

SiPSiP

GrP

SoP

PaPCbP

SoPVari

ant d

iversi

ty


CCTDPLT

NDLTDVLT

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3

Medium

MediumMedium

Low

Small

Small

ContinuityHigh

High

High

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CPLICPL

Abili

ty p

rofil

esof

com

bine

d or

gani

zatio

nal f

orm

sRe

quire

men

t pro

files

and

proc

ess t

ypes






SoPIT

SoPIT

CbPIT

PaPIT






Start






Yes

No

No

Yes



the component class










Irrelevant





Yes


No


class is necessary

Yes

Yes

No

No

Variant 2


Variant 4 (part 1)


Variant 4 ( part 2)



Variant 1

Stop


Variant 3

class

a relevant ≙

≙

≙

≙

Does the RP of

matchexisting OF



existing SOPmatch


existing TOPmatch









Variant 3










Variant 2









Variant 4







Variant 1






subprocess



7 Summary










References




















































































































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation










Flexibility

Con

tinui

ty


system




Machining center

Continuous shop

manufacturing

998833

998833

998833998833998833

998833998833998833




















NTP


CTP


VTP


DTP


SOPIT














NLT


VLT


NPL


VPL


DPL


DCT

VTP

DTP

CTPConcatenated



CCT

Dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTPN

ondi

rect

iona

l or

ient

ed
















VTP

DTP

CTPDire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTP

Non

dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

ULT

RLT

GTT

CCT

DPL

VLT

NLT

Continuity

Flex

ibili

ty

SOPIT


998833998833998833

998833998833998833

998833

998833
















PT 1

Start








Yes

No

No

No



variant diversity

Process type 3



Yes

Yes



planning horizon



PT 2



PT 3



PT 4

No

No

No

No

Yes


per lot very little




Yes

B

C




(a)

Are the


similar

Do all


methods

Is the


Do all



Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NoA


logical alike




production flow

No

No

No

Yes

No


specialization

SMCSM



OSMScFMS



specialization

CPLICPL



OSMSrFCPL

Stop

PT 1

PT 2

PT 3

PT 4

B


tently high

Yes

C



ShP Shop principle





requirement

Designing vtPS

ShP

SoP

DesigningstPS ws

DesigningstPS os

No

Is the time needed


No

Yes

SOP+

TOP

+

GrP

SoP

SiP

CbP

SiP

PaP

+

+

+

components

direction of

components

components

OFc

OFm



(b)




















SiP

SOP CM

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CTP

ShP GrP

NTP VTP DTP

NLT VLT

DPL

CPLICPL

CCT

SoP

CbP

PaP

SiP







TOP C

M

SOPIT

SOPIT

TOP I

T

CbPIT

PaPIT








IP

MP


CSM FCPL ICPL MCFMS

1


High Low High vtPS

Variant diversity

Continu-ity

Flexibi-lity



3

2

Medium- small

High-medium

High- medium

Medium- low

Medium- low

High- medium

DPL CCTVLT




NLT

TP

SSP

Process type

mdash

OFCM(c)

OFCM(m)

OFIT

form






















process type)

Quant

ity


manufacture


manufacture



transport


transport

NDTP

CTPDTP

DVTP

ShP

SiPSiP

GrP

SoP

PaPCbP

SoPVari

ant d

iversi

ty


CCTDPLT

NDLTDVLT

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3

Medium

MediumMedium

Low

Small

Small

ContinuityHigh

High

High

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CPLICPL

Abili

ty p

rofil

esof

com

bine

d or

gani

zatio

nal f

orm

sRe

quire

men

t pro

files

and

proc

ess t

ypes






SoPIT

SoPIT

CbPIT

PaPIT






Start






Yes

No

No

Yes



the component class










Irrelevant





Yes


No


class is necessary

Yes

Yes

No

No

Variant 2


Variant 4 (part 1)


Variant 4 ( part 2)



Variant 1

Stop


Variant 3

class

a relevant ≙

≙

≙

≙

Does the RP of

matchexisting OF



existing SOPmatch


existing TOPmatch









Variant 3










Variant 2









Variant 4







Variant 1






subprocess



7 Summary










References




















































































































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation















NTP


CTP


VTP


DTP


SOPIT














NLT


VLT


NPL


VPL


DPL


DCT

VTP

DTP

CTPConcatenated



CCT

Dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTPN

ondi

rect

iona

l or

ient

ed
















VTP

DTP

CTPDire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTP

Non

dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

ULT

RLT

GTT

CCT

DPL

VLT

NLT

Continuity

Flex

ibili

ty

SOPIT


998833998833998833

998833998833998833

998833

998833
















PT 1

Start








Yes

No

No

No



variant diversity

Process type 3



Yes

Yes



planning horizon



PT 2



PT 3



PT 4

No

No

No

No

Yes


per lot very little




Yes

B

C




(a)

Are the


similar

Do all


methods

Is the


Do all



Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NoA


logical alike




production flow

No

No

No

Yes

No


specialization

SMCSM



OSMScFMS



specialization

CPLICPL



OSMSrFCPL

Stop

PT 1

PT 2

PT 3

PT 4

B


tently high

Yes

C



ShP Shop principle





requirement

Designing vtPS

ShP

SoP

DesigningstPS ws

DesigningstPS os

No

Is the time needed


No

Yes

SOP+

TOP

+

GrP

SoP

SiP

CbP

SiP

PaP

+

+

+

components

direction of

components

components

OFc

OFm



(b)




















SiP

SOP CM

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CTP

ShP GrP

NTP VTP DTP

NLT VLT

DPL

CPLICPL

CCT

SoP

CbP

PaP

SiP







TOP C

M

SOPIT

SOPIT

TOP I

T

CbPIT

PaPIT








IP

MP


CSM FCPL ICPL MCFMS

1


High Low High vtPS

Variant diversity

Continu-ity

Flexibi-lity



3

2

Medium- small

High-medium

High- medium

Medium- low

Medium- low

High- medium

DPL CCTVLT




NLT

TP

SSP

Process type

mdash

OFCM(c)

OFCM(m)

OFIT

form






















process type)

Quant

ity


manufacture


manufacture



transport


transport

NDTP

CTPDTP

DVTP

ShP

SiPSiP

GrP

SoP

PaPCbP

SoPVari

ant d

iversi

ty


CCTDPLT

NDLTDVLT

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3

Medium

MediumMedium

Low

Small

Small

ContinuityHigh

High

High

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CPLICPL

Abili

ty p

rofil

esof

com

bine

d or

gani

zatio

nal f

orm

sRe

quire

men

t pro

files

and

proc

ess t

ypes






SoPIT

SoPIT

CbPIT

PaPIT






Start






Yes

No

No

Yes



the component class










Irrelevant





Yes


No


class is necessary

Yes

Yes

No

No

Variant 2


Variant 4 (part 1)


Variant 4 ( part 2)



Variant 1

Stop


Variant 3

class

a relevant ≙

≙

≙

≙

Does the RP of

matchexisting OF



existing SOPmatch


existing TOPmatch









Variant 3










Variant 2









Variant 4







Variant 1






subprocess



7 Summary










References




















































































































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation











NLT


VLT


NPL


VPL


DPL


DCT

VTP

DTP

CTPConcatenated



CCT

Dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTPN

ondi

rect

iona

l or

ient

ed
















VTP

DTP

CTPDire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTP

Non

dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

ULT

RLT

GTT

CCT

DPL

VLT

NLT

Continuity

Flex

ibili

ty

SOPIT


998833998833998833

998833998833998833

998833

998833
















PT 1

Start








Yes

No

No

No



variant diversity

Process type 3



Yes

Yes



planning horizon



PT 2



PT 3



PT 4

No

No

No

No

Yes


per lot very little




Yes

B

C




(a)

Are the


similar

Do all


methods

Is the


Do all



Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NoA


logical alike




production flow

No

No

No

Yes

No


specialization

SMCSM



OSMScFMS



specialization

CPLICPL



OSMSrFCPL

Stop

PT 1

PT 2

PT 3

PT 4

B


tently high

Yes

C



ShP Shop principle





requirement

Designing vtPS

ShP

SoP

DesigningstPS ws

DesigningstPS os

No

Is the time needed


No

Yes

SOP+

TOP

+

GrP

SoP

SiP

CbP

SiP

PaP

+

+

+

components

direction of

components

components

OFc

OFm



(b)




















SiP

SOP CM

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CTP

ShP GrP

NTP VTP DTP

NLT VLT

DPL

CPLICPL

CCT

SoP

CbP

PaP

SiP







TOP C

M

SOPIT

SOPIT

TOP I

T

CbPIT

PaPIT








IP

MP


CSM FCPL ICPL MCFMS

1


High Low High vtPS

Variant diversity

Continu-ity

Flexibi-lity



3

2

Medium- small

High-medium

High- medium

Medium- low

Medium- low

High- medium

DPL CCTVLT




NLT

TP

SSP

Process type

mdash

OFCM(c)

OFCM(m)

OFIT

form






















process type)

Quant

ity


manufacture


manufacture



transport


transport

NDTP

CTPDTP

DVTP

ShP

SiPSiP

GrP

SoP

PaPCbP

SoPVari

ant d

iversi

ty


CCTDPLT

NDLTDVLT

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3

Medium

MediumMedium

Low

Small

Small

ContinuityHigh

High

High

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CPLICPL

Abili

ty p

rofil

esof

com

bine

d or

gani

zatio

nal f

orm

sRe

quire

men

t pro

files

and

proc

ess t

ypes






SoPIT

SoPIT

CbPIT

PaPIT






Start






Yes

No

No

Yes



the component class










Irrelevant





Yes


No


class is necessary

Yes

Yes

No

No

Variant 2


Variant 4 (part 1)


Variant 4 ( part 2)



Variant 1

Stop


Variant 3

class

a relevant ≙

≙

≙

≙

Does the RP of

matchexisting OF



existing SOPmatch


existing TOPmatch









Variant 3










Variant 2









Variant 4







Variant 1






subprocess



7 Summary










References




















































































































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation










VTP

DTP

CTPDire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

NTP

Non

dire

ctio

nal

orie

nted

ULT

RLT

GTT

CCT

DPL

VLT

NLT

Continuity

Flex

ibili

ty

SOPIT


998833998833998833

998833998833998833

998833

998833
















PT 1

Start








Yes

No

No

No



variant diversity

Process type 3



Yes

Yes



planning horizon



PT 2



PT 3



PT 4

No

No

No

No

Yes


per lot very little




Yes

B

C




(a)

Are the


similar

Do all


methods

Is the


Do all



Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NoA


logical alike




production flow

No

No

No

Yes

No


specialization

SMCSM



OSMScFMS



specialization

CPLICPL



OSMSrFCPL

Stop

PT 1

PT 2

PT 3

PT 4

B


tently high

Yes

C



ShP Shop principle





requirement

Designing vtPS

ShP

SoP

DesigningstPS ws

DesigningstPS os

No

Is the time needed


No

Yes

SOP+

TOP

+

GrP

SoP

SiP

CbP

SiP

PaP

+

+

+

components

direction of

components

components

OFc

OFm



(b)




















SiP

SOP CM

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CTP

ShP GrP

NTP VTP DTP

NLT VLT

DPL

CPLICPL

CCT

SoP

CbP

PaP

SiP







TOP C

M

SOPIT

SOPIT

TOP I

T

CbPIT

PaPIT








IP

MP


CSM FCPL ICPL MCFMS

1


High Low High vtPS

Variant diversity

Continu-ity

Flexibi-lity



3

2

Medium- small

High-medium

High- medium

Medium- low

Medium- low

High- medium

DPL CCTVLT




NLT

TP

SSP

Process type

mdash

OFCM(c)

OFCM(m)

OFIT

form






















process type)

Quant

ity


manufacture


manufacture



transport


transport

NDTP

CTPDTP

DVTP

ShP

SiPSiP

GrP

SoP

PaPCbP

SoPVari

ant d

iversi

ty


CCTDPLT

NDLTDVLT

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3

Medium

MediumMedium

Low

Small

Small

ContinuityHigh

High

High

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CPLICPL

Abili

ty p

rofil

esof

com

bine

d or

gani

zatio

nal f

orm

sRe

quire

men

t pro

files

and

proc

ess t

ypes






SoPIT

SoPIT

CbPIT

PaPIT






Start






Yes

No

No

Yes



the component class










Irrelevant





Yes


No


class is necessary

Yes

Yes

No

No

Variant 2


Variant 4 (part 1)


Variant 4 ( part 2)



Variant 1

Stop


Variant 3

class

a relevant ≙

≙

≙

≙

Does the RP of

matchexisting OF



existing SOPmatch


existing TOPmatch









Variant 3










Variant 2









Variant 4







Variant 1






subprocess



7 Summary










References




















































































































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation












PT 1

Start








Yes

No

No

No



variant diversity

Process type 3



Yes

Yes



planning horizon



PT 2



PT 3



PT 4

No

No

No

No

Yes


per lot very little




Yes

B

C




(a)

Are the


similar

Do all


methods

Is the


Do all



Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NoA


logical alike




production flow

No

No

No

Yes

No


specialization

SMCSM



OSMScFMS



specialization

CPLICPL



OSMSrFCPL

Stop

PT 1

PT 2

PT 3

PT 4

B


tently high

Yes

C



ShP Shop principle





requirement

Designing vtPS

ShP

SoP

DesigningstPS ws

DesigningstPS os

No

Is the time needed


No

Yes

SOP+

TOP

+

GrP

SoP

SiP

CbP

SiP

PaP

+

+

+

components

direction of

components

components

OFc

OFm



(b)




















SiP

SOP CM

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CTP

ShP GrP

NTP VTP DTP

NLT VLT

DPL

CPLICPL

CCT

SoP

CbP

PaP

SiP







TOP C

M

SOPIT

SOPIT

TOP I

T

CbPIT

PaPIT








IP

MP


CSM FCPL ICPL MCFMS

1


High Low High vtPS

Variant diversity

Continu-ity

Flexibi-lity



3

2

Medium- small

High-medium

High- medium

Medium- low

Medium- low

High- medium

DPL CCTVLT




NLT

TP

SSP

Process type

mdash

OFCM(c)

OFCM(m)

OFIT

form






















process type)

Quant

ity


manufacture


manufacture



transport


transport

NDTP

CTPDTP

DVTP

ShP

SiPSiP

GrP

SoP

PaPCbP

SoPVari

ant d

iversi

ty


CCTDPLT

NDLTDVLT

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3

Medium

MediumMedium

Low

Small

Small

ContinuityHigh

High

High

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CPLICPL

Abili

ty p

rofil

esof

com

bine

d or

gani

zatio

nal f

orm

sRe

quire

men

t pro

files

and

proc

ess t

ypes






SoPIT

SoPIT

CbPIT

PaPIT






Start






Yes

No

No

Yes



the component class










Irrelevant





Yes


No


class is necessary

Yes

Yes

No

No

Variant 2


Variant 4 (part 1)


Variant 4 ( part 2)



Variant 1

Stop


Variant 3

class

a relevant ≙

≙

≙

≙

Does the RP of

matchexisting OF



existing SOPmatch


existing TOPmatch









Variant 3










Variant 2









Variant 4







Variant 1






subprocess



7 Summary










References




















































































































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation



























SiP

SOP CM

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CTP

ShP GrP

NTP VTP DTP

NLT VLT

DPL

CPLICPL

CCT

SoP

CbP

PaP

SiP







TOP C

M

SOPIT

SOPIT

TOP I

T

CbPIT

PaPIT








IP

MP


CSM FCPL ICPL MCFMS

1


High Low High vtPS

Variant diversity

Continu-ity

Flexibi-lity



3

2

Medium- small

High-medium

High- medium

Medium- low

Medium- low

High- medium

DPL CCTVLT




NLT

TP

SSP

Process type

mdash

OFCM(c)

OFCM(m)

OFIT

form






















process type)

Quant

ity


manufacture


manufacture



transport


transport

NDTP

CTPDTP

DVTP

ShP

SiPSiP

GrP

SoP

PaPCbP

SoPVari

ant d

iversi

ty


CCTDPLT

NDLTDVLT

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3

Medium

MediumMedium

Low

Small

Small

ContinuityHigh

High

High

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CPLICPL

Abili

ty p

rofil

esof

com

bine

d or

gani

zatio

nal f

orm

sRe

quire

men

t pro

files

and

proc

ess t

ypes






SoPIT

SoPIT

CbPIT

PaPIT






Start






Yes

No

No

Yes



the component class










Irrelevant





Yes


No


class is necessary

Yes

Yes

No

No

Variant 2


Variant 4 (part 1)


Variant 4 ( part 2)



Variant 1

Stop


Variant 3

class

a relevant ≙

≙

≙

≙

Does the RP of

matchexisting OF



existing SOPmatch


existing TOPmatch









Variant 3










Variant 2









Variant 4







Variant 1






subprocess



7 Summary










References




















































































































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation










SiP

SOP CM

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CTP

ShP GrP

NTP VTP DTP

NLT VLT

DPL

CPLICPL

CCT

SoP

CbP

PaP

SiP







TOP C

M

SOPIT

SOPIT

TOP I

T

CbPIT

PaPIT








IP

MP


CSM FCPL ICPL MCFMS

1


High Low High vtPS

Variant diversity

Continu-ity

Flexibi-lity



3

2

Medium- small

High-medium

High- medium

Medium- low

Medium- low

High- medium

DPL CCTVLT




NLT

TP

SSP

Process type

mdash

OFCM(c)

OFCM(m)

OFIT

form






















process type)

Quant

ity


manufacture


manufacture



transport


transport

NDTP

CTPDTP

DVTP

ShP

SiPSiP

GrP

SoP

PaPCbP

SoPVari

ant d

iversi

ty


CCTDPLT

NDLTDVLT

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3

Medium

MediumMedium

Low

Small

Small

ContinuityHigh

High

High

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CPLICPL

Abili

ty p

rofil

esof

com

bine

d or

gani

zatio

nal f

orm

sRe

quire

men

t pro

files

and

proc

ess t

ypes






SoPIT

SoPIT

CbPIT

PaPIT






Start






Yes

No

No

Yes



the component class










Irrelevant





Yes


No


class is necessary

Yes

Yes

No

No

Variant 2


Variant 4 (part 1)


Variant 4 ( part 2)



Variant 1

Stop


Variant 3

class

a relevant ≙

≙

≙

≙

Does the RP of

matchexisting OF



existing SOPmatch


existing TOPmatch









Variant 3










Variant 2









Variant 4







Variant 1






subprocess



7 Summary










References




















































































































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation










IP

MP


CSM FCPL ICPL MCFMS

1


High Low High vtPS

Variant diversity

Continu-ity

Flexibi-lity



3

2

Medium- small

High-medium

High- medium

Medium- low

Medium- low

High- medium

DPL CCTVLT




NLT

TP

SSP

Process type

mdash

OFCM(c)

OFCM(m)

OFIT

form






















process type)

Quant

ity


manufacture


manufacture



transport


transport

NDTP

CTPDTP

DVTP

ShP

SiPSiP

GrP

SoP

PaPCbP

SoPVari

ant d

iversi

ty


CCTDPLT

NDLTDVLT

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3

Medium

MediumMedium

Low

Small

Small

ContinuityHigh

High

High

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CPLICPL

Abili

ty p

rofil

esof

com

bine

d or

gani

zatio

nal f

orm

sRe

quire

men

t pro

files

and

proc

ess t

ypes






SoPIT

SoPIT

CbPIT

PaPIT






Start






Yes

No

No

Yes



the component class










Irrelevant





Yes


No


class is necessary

Yes

Yes

No

No

Variant 2


Variant 4 (part 1)


Variant 4 ( part 2)



Variant 1

Stop


Variant 3

class

a relevant ≙

≙

≙

≙

Does the RP of

matchexisting OF



existing SOPmatch


existing TOPmatch









Variant 3










Variant 2









Variant 4







Variant 1






subprocess



7 Summary










References




















































































































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation













process type)

Quant

ity


manufacture


manufacture



transport


transport

NDTP

CTPDTP

DVTP

ShP

SiPSiP

GrP

SoP

PaPCbP

SoPVari

ant d

iversi

ty


CCTDPLT

NDLTDVLT

PT 1

PT 4

PT 2PT 3

Medium

MediumMedium

Low

Small

Small

ContinuityHigh

High

High

SMCSM

OSMScFMS

OSMSrFCPL

CPLICPL

Abili

ty p

rofil

esof

com

bine

d or

gani

zatio

nal f

orm

sRe

quire

men

t pro

files

and

proc

ess t

ypes






SoPIT

SoPIT

CbPIT

PaPIT






Start






Yes

No

No

Yes



the component class










Irrelevant





Yes


No


class is necessary

Yes

Yes

No

No

Variant 2


Variant 4 (part 1)


Variant 4 ( part 2)



Variant 1

Stop


Variant 3

class

a relevant ≙

≙

≙

≙

Does the RP of

matchexisting OF



existing SOPmatch


existing TOPmatch









Variant 3










Variant 2









Variant 4







Variant 1






subprocess



7 Summary










References




















































































































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation










Start






Yes

No

No

Yes



the component class










Irrelevant





Yes


No


class is necessary

Yes

Yes

No

No

Variant 2


Variant 4 (part 1)


Variant 4 ( part 2)



Variant 1

Stop


Variant 3

class

a relevant ≙

≙

≙

≙

Does the RP of

matchexisting OF



existing SOPmatch


existing TOPmatch









Variant 3










Variant 2









Variant 4







Variant 1






subprocess



7 Summary










References




















































































































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation











Variant 3










Variant 2









Variant 4







Variant 1






subprocess



7 Summary










References




















































































































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation










References




















































































































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation
















































































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation






































RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation











RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation









Research Article Theoretical Foundations of Efficiently Organizing Production …downloads.hindawi.com/archive/2014/513190.pdf · 2019-07-31 · Research Article Theoretical Foundations

Documents