de_DE

Uwe Techt (en)

  • Blog
  • Contact

Location, Location, Location

Location, Location, Location

by Uwe Techt / Tuesday, 14 October 2014 / Published in Theory of Constraints

 How to put your project buffers where you really need them

Once upon a time there was an overstretched and under-resourced purchasing department.  The culture was that it was impolite to follow up on ordered parts.  It was easy to divert any enquiries they did make with a brusque “it’s not due for delivery yet, why are you asking?”.  Besides, there were so few people in the purchasing team that they simply couldn’t follow up on everything routinely anyway.
Instead, the team would only begin to follow up orders and parts when the parts did not arrive onsite when they were supposed to. They would follow up on parts only when the Production team complained that the parts were not where they needed them to be.


Imagine what this meant for the company’s project timescales and its delivery due dates!
Well, like all good fairy stories, help was at hand, because the business where this purchasing team worked started to implement a new initiative; a new way of managing all its projects called Critical Chain Project Management, or CCPM for short.
CCPM changes project scheduling so that all projects have a single, combined time buffer at the end of each project, rather than many individual ‘invisible’ buffers built into every project stage.
This enabled the business for the first time to see clearly the impact that the delays in receiving external parts from suppliers were having on its production schedules and shipping dates.
Soon, it became clear that something must be done to address the issue of suppliers delivering vital parts later than originally agreed.
CCPM tells us that where a non-critical project path feeds into the critical path, we need to create a feeder buffer to ensure that any delays to the non-critical path will not impact the critical path.
Each part from an external supplier should have represented a non-critical path.  But when it became overdue, its path became critical.
So the business applied CCPM logic to the situation.  The purchasing department was given visibility of the project plans and when each part needed to be delivered.
Although there was a benefit to delaying the ordering of parts until required (so investment is not made sooner than it needs to be and capital is not tied up unnecessarily) this benefit was far outweighed by the impact on project delivery and shipping dates that late parts could have.
So the purchasing department began to make orders earlier than they previously would have done.  They requested delivery dates that ran three or four weeks in advance of when the part was actually needed on site.  This created a three or four week feeder buffer for each of these non-critical paths.
The purchasing team then had a three week grace period for any late part, during which time they could work hard to maintain the part’s status as a non-critical path.
In this way, the purchasing team was able to reduce the delays to project schedules and shipping dates.  In the process, they also collected a great deal of information about their suppliers.
This information enabled the team to identify the worst offenders.  It gave them ammunition to chase up parts early, negotiate more favourable terms, and even change suppliers in some cases.  One of the important things the Theory of Constraints (TOC) teaches us is that, in many cases, we put too much value on the price of a part and not enough value on the reliability of a supplier – because a 5% discount on a part is quickly absorbed by the cost to the business of a four or five week delay to the project delivery date.
Creating feeder buffers to ensure the non-critical path of a third-party-provided part doesn’t become a critical path – or, worse, a delayed critical path – is a really important way to alleviate the risk and cost to the business.
And the members of the purchasing team?  Well, they all lived happily ever after, of course.  This is a fairy story, after all.

Tagged under: Projectmanagement, Theory of Constraints

What you can read next

The most important thing about TOC is … Focus (Part 1)
Antifragility: be ready for anything
A Short Introduction to the Theory of Constraints

Categories

Recent Posts

  • A Short Introduction to the Theory of Constraints

    A while back, an acquaintance asked me to summa...
  • Bullshit Jobs – What About Bullshit Projects?

    Bullshit Jobs is the title of David Graeber’s b...
  • The Agile Supply Chain

    Staying afloat in today’s market means being fa...
  • Is the OEE (Overall Equipment Efficiency) Metric a good thing?

    At first glance, how can it be bad. After all, ...
  • The Quickest Way to Improved Flow 2: Fixing the right mistakes

    In the first part of this series, we explained ...

Comments

  • Antifragililty and TOC by Uwe Tech | Theory Of ... on Antifragility: be ready for anything

Archive

Tag Cloud

buffer management buffer penetration CCPM change Change Management Company Culture Constraint Corporate Culture Critical Chain Projectmanagement Critical Chain Projektmanagement Customers Decisive Competitive Edge Eli Goldratt Five Focusing Steps Flow Focus Goldratt Guestpost holistic vision Learning from Experience lessons learned Management Management Focus Mulitproject Multi-tasking Multi project Multiproject Management Multitasking production Productivity Increase Projectmanagement Project Management Projects that Flow Psychology QuiStain Rudolf Burkhard Strategies and Tactics Strategy&Tactic Strategy and Tactics system based project management sytem based project management Theory of Constraints time sheets time sheets unnecessary and damaging TOC
  • GET SOCIAL

© 2019 Uwe Techt (Imprint | Privacy Policy)

TOP